The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLIA ZNEIMER GENERAL LEGAL.pdfRECEIPT - The Town of Vail . DATE I{i" 506:}6 RECETVED FROM " '] i -- iiz ADDRESS DOLLARS $ I I I I t I I I I t I t t Permit Numbers HOW PAID-Cash-Check- BY Police Receipt Numbers Torn of Vai l I}l CIET$ER RECf,IFT *r* IIATET 1/05/00 el REtfiPT: ffi260 IESCRIPTI$I OTY SOIilT TP 1T slGl{ trpLIcATIil{ I |a0.e0 $p cfi JO+l ilILSSfi{ sls{ APpLICnTIST I f18.00 rsP cK Jtlil NrLs$n TS{}€R IFTCIL cK stTe f3s.m DATE: Llffilfit TIIIE: ll:01:46 T0Tfl_ trfcl(t38.m ffiTI{T TENDERED I38. M TIS'I( YflJ Ft}R YflJR PAYE{T! t I I I I t I I I I I I I I I I I I I t T T I nment Town of Vail nt of Communily Development 75 S. Frontage Road Vail, CO 8t657 ,f neceipt ruo. 5:CrL'iL" o^t"---J--L- 4 rJ&. checks payable to the TOWN OF VAIL Account No.hem No. Code #Cost Each Total 001 0000 314 1110 Zoninq and Address Maps zA $5.00 001 0000 314 1112 Uniform Buildinq Code - 1997 - Volume 1&2 utt eqn aE 001 0000 3141112 Uniform Building Code - 1997 - Volume 3 $s7.20 001 0000 314 1112 International Plumbinq Code - 1997 $36.00 001 0000 3141112 International Mechanical Code-1998 cB ' $35.00 001 0000 314 1112 Uniform Mechanical Code - 1997 $3s.60 001 0000 314 1112 UniForm Fire Code ttt $36.00 001 0000 314 1112 National Electrical Code lJl'$37.00 001 0000 314 1112 Abatement of Danqerous Bldq.'s 1997 001 0000 314 1112 Model Energy Code - 1 995 $10.00 001 0000 314 1112 Analvsis of Revisions to 1997 Uniform Codes $12.75 001 0000 314 1112 Other Code Eooks tJu 001 0000 314 1211 Blue Prints/Mylar Copy Fees ET $7.00 001 00003.141111 Xerox Copies XC $0.25 001 0000314 1111 Lionshead Master Plan ($1.80/$1 .60)MS $40.00 001 00003141111 Studies, Master Plans, etc.MS 001 0000 315 3000 Penalty Fees/Re-lnspectjons PN 001 0000 311 2300 Plan Review Re-check Fee ($40/per hour)PF 001 0000 315 2000 Off Hours Inspection Fees OH 001 0000 312 3000 Contractors License Fees 00t 0000 312 4000 Sign Application Fee SP $20.00 l-c . L.il 001 0000 312 4000 Additional Siqn Application Fee SP t\ .( 0 I .ai) 001 0000 311 2200 Design Review Board Fee (Pre-paid)DR 001 0000 315 3000 Building lnvestigation Fee PN 00r 0000 240 3300 Developer lmprovemenl Agreemerf Deposil D2- DEPl 0 001 0000 312 1000 Restaurant License fee (TOV)RL 001 0000 230 2000 Spec. Assess.-Restaurant Fee to co.Dept.Rev.SA '001 0000 201 1000 Taxable @ 4.5ol" (State) - Tax pavable tr '001 0000 310 1100 Taxable @ 4.0% (Town) - Retail sales Tax Other/Misc. -MS 001 0000 311 2500 PEC APPLICATION FEES 001 0000 s11 2500 Additional GRFA - "250'PV $200.00 001 0000 311 2s00 Conditional Use Permit PV $200.00 001 0000 311 2s00 Exterior Alteration - Less than 1 00 sq. ft.PV $200.00 001 000031r 2500 Exterior Alteration - More than 100 sq. ft.p\/$500.00 001 0000 311 2500 Special Development District - NEW PV $1.s00.00 001 0000 311 2500 Special Development District - Maior Amend PV s1,000.00 001 00003112500 Special Development District - Minor Amend PV $200.00 001 00003112500 Subdivision Fees PV 001 0000 31 1 2s00 Variance D\/s250.00 001 0000 31 1 2500 Zonino Code Amendments PV $2s0.00 Re-Zoninq PV $200.00 001 0000 319 3100 G reenstar Program Other -MS ToTAL: b?\ ca Comments: Gash _ Money Order #check #Received by: Al/, , F:/Evervone/Forr s/Salesacl.exe f;,xra-' Tii-err. u10t99 7..,,'-,*-r- /f; l,*,-A Present Greg Amsden Jeff Bowen Chuck Crist Diana Donovan Kathy Langenwalter Dalton Williams Gena Whitten Applicant: Planner: PI.ANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION August 10, 1992 Vail Recreation District ke Mollica Staff Kristan Pritz Mike Mollica Andy Knudlsen Tim Devlin Shelly Mello Starting at approximately 1:00 p.m. a work session was held to ss the Police Building. The publi)xneeting was called to crder at 2:25 p.m. by Chai rson Diana Donovan. for a determination ot the parking requi nt for the proposed Booth Falls Filing.Par 3 Go e, located on Tract A, Vail Village 1. Kristan Pritz anno at 7:00 p.m. She ced that there would be general public meeting on August 20th that comments at t s meeting be kept to a minimum if they did not concern issue so other items on the agenda could be addressed. Diana Don reiterated the PEC was here to discuss parking, but that other comments would noted.Mollica went into the backoround of the propefi. DRB does need to project, but this meeting is being held to determine the number of parki to be required for the course. Jim Morter, an analysis of the parking space need, as did architect lor the starter shack, has the staff. Mike Mollica reviewed the parking spaces. He also mentioned done, which came up with a need for 24 the project will be reviewed after one year to see whether any more spaces will ne . Jim Morter of Morter Architects, the architect for the starter house up approximately the same number of spaces, but used a different asked where handicapped parking fit in. Jim Morter said two han spaces were planned, and these were included in the numbers earlier. \palton Williams suggested that we lay out now the spaces that be needed after year. Jim Morter said that that had been done. Greg said we should look fqr maximum need for parking. Jetf Bowen questioned Jim r's statement thal the\ parking area would not be used in the winter time. He responded that lhis is a request from the residents. Dalton Williams said that the lot might be used by people who drive to the road and then tiake the bus into town. Mike Mollica read two letters received by the Town from area residents. After being questioned about whether the course would be revenue-producing, Rob Robinson, Director of the Vail Recreation District said that the Vail Golf Course is, as will this course be after approximately 7 years. Diana Donovan asked about traffic safety issues.Pritz responded that these are to be reviewed by the Design Review Board. Jiln Morter said that the Public Works Department will also review the iratlic safety issues\The environmental issues will be addressed by the Recreation District at the AugustYOth meeting. Greg Amsden said that awale1 quality study is currently being done f\ the town of Vail and the Vail Golf Cour/e is being studied which may relate to theFar 3 Golf Course I \/ resoonded. if there was any public input, andfhe following people Rob Ford, a resident of Bald Mountain Road said that wint/r parking for bus riders could be a problem as the buses are already overcrowded. He said you have to get on the bus going eastbound in order to eventually get to Vail. Tim Musko, an East Vail resident, agreed with the use of the bus. He said there,{vere no solid numbers. He also believes the parking will be an eyesore, but bermsimight help. He wanted to know if an environmental study had been done. He he has 150 signatures of people who are opposed to the co,urse. He said that,he was not aware of the previous public meetings that were held on question. ln nse to that statement, Bob Robinson said the Rec. District ran$120.00 worth qt ads. Kristan added that the meeting on the 20th is being facili by the Tow/r of Vail and notices will be sent to adjacent property owners. She that thF District might want to run some more ads and the Town will talk to sotne of the reporters about getting an article in lhe papers. Tom Krebs thought the ssue all about money. He felt everything is being paved and irrigated. Tom stal he liked life in the valley the way it is. He thought open space should be kept doesn't think this is an appropriaie use of public money. Evie Knott ot 2645 ntain Road claimed she did not receive notification of earlier meetings. She was rned about the number ol parking spaces and is opposed to the project. Sl2Q thought someone should check the Eagle- Vail Par-3 Golf Course for the number o She was also very concerned about safety and wanted a decision on the to be tabled until after the August 20 meeting, Peter Schaefer of 2650 Bal Mou n Road had several concerns. He purchased his house because of the n and he believed the parking and a sludy had been done on whelher traffic are pretty bad now. He to know , and he there is a need for a par-3 golf around the golf course and the ed the safety of the houses going down 70. Greg Amsden talked about z Kristan Pritz that a lease for the golf course had not yet been signed, and some issues have\been raised regarding the environmental impacts and they will be the 20th meeting. Gail Malloy mentioned that all recreationa/parking in Eagle-Vail is itq the Battle Mountain High School parking lot. Rob Ford/asked Diana Donovan whether she was privately involved in fighting the golf cpurse and she answered that she was not. Herman Stauffer thought that the proJect should be blessed today. Colleen McCarthy said that the issue today is parking that il a major portion of the community is opposed, that the project would be withdrawn. Jim Morter again reiterated that we are today dealing -2- with parking. He also mentioned that the Eagle-Vail Par-3 course does not have a parking lot and askqd the Planning Commission to keep an open mind. Sonny Caster parKtng lot ano asKqo Ine Flannlng L.,ommlsslon Io Keep arl open trllll(J. DoIlIly L.,a; of Bald Mountain Ho\d, who represented six other residents, is for the proje6t. He . ,\ , -- rt-!-also mentioned that h'e had received every single notice that was sent out on this project. Gail Malloy, aYesident of Manns Banch Road, was very concerned about the parking if the lot were to \be plowed. She did not think it was currently I pre$y piece of oropertv now and there remained 500,000 acres of wilderness just a slort distance property now and there r 500,000 acres of wilderness just a away. Dalton Williams asked if the Fire Department needs a plowed responded that a fire lane world be fine. Nancy Lipsky second Sonny Caster said. She statedJhat at the last meeting, a majo everything that of the people was a very natural area,for the project. She stated that the plans for the golf course wanted 24 spaces plus two hand spaces, and-the capability to expand to 30. Chuck Grist requested that the c$urse \e heavily berrned and the parking closed in the winter. Greg Amsden wanted to plan fo\28-30 cars, with an additional 6-8 for expansion. He favored berming and h landscaping. Dalton Williams wanted 23- was in favor of planning for the 24 spaces plus the handicapped spaces expansion and also berming. He said that tie intersection is bad and maybe some work should be done to improve it. Jeff and Gena Whitten agreed with the previous comments. Greg Amsden talked and going off the road. He believed major the liability to cars being hit by a ball ity coverage was needed for an event like that. Diana Donovan wanted 24 spaces two handicapped spaces, and six GailMalloy additional spaces to be designed for later use. Qreg Amsden said that if the parking lot is full and people start parking on Bald Mount{in Road, something will need to be done. Kristan Pritz mentioned that agreement Chuck Crist be made with Vail Mountain School if overflow parking is to know when play will start. Jim Morter was not sure. Dick pdiley, landscape itect for the course, thought they would get grading and sod in this fall, making tle course playable for the fall of 1993 or mid-summer 1994.vie Knott wanted to if 30 spaces could be staked before the August 20 meetitig so people could see whte the parking lot would be. lt was agreed that this wasy' good idea. Access to lhe lo\ would be from Bald Mountain Fload. The total of the project is 14 acres.Langenwalter made a motion to determine the parking requirement to be 24 and two handicapped spaces, with a capability to expand to 30, based on a revidrlv 1-year after opening of the course. Gena Whitten seconded the motion. A vote taken and the motion passed unanimously. A request for an amendment to an approved development plan to allow the shifting of the building envelopes at The Valley, Phase lV/1700 Block of Butfehr Creek Road. Applicant: Ed Zneimer Planner: Andy Knudtsen -3- ,.i!\ a ., xi., ) \ ii L"' ''1i3"*'" Andy Knudtsen went over the changes made from two weeks ago. He specitically identified the trees to be preserved around the building envelopes. He said the envelopes were shitted approximately 10 feet out in the meadow, the driveways had been redesigned, and the distance from the house to the road was now acceptable. There was a concern about retaining walls and the road bend. Diana Donovan , [. - questioned the requirements of the passing area on the road. Mr. Zneimer wanted to 1l i".'.,r1 , know if the Commission would convey lhis to the Fire Department. The Commission h l{ l'-' concluded that the passing area should be deleted from the design. The Board fell 2: strongly about bench . Mr. Zneimer wanted to know if this meant there should nevei be any cutling. Greg Amsden proposed revised language _-lbat included the phrase "in a reasonable fashion.' Diana Donovan said they wanted f fin to add some trees to the west of the entrance and weslof the folm_er pond site Mr. Zneimer saiO ne wittCo at ne c Uut j,:ti'i, that there may be some instances where he would need more than one 6-foot wall. f ,"J '."1, He also requested permission from the Commission to construct.en!ryl94uleg-9lrniiarL { "'l"t"u to those on e Road. The Commissi . Zneimel by saying professional and helpful everyone on the Committee and staff has been. Dalton Williams moved to approve the development plan with the changes noted by Andy Knudtsen. Jeff Bowen seconded and the motion was unanimously approved, with the following conditions: 1.,, ' Prior to the issuance ol any building permits on envelopes 4 through 7, the ' applicant shall submit a metes and bounds legal description for each of the approved building envelopes. These legal descriptions shall reflect the staking and site plan presented to the Planning Commission on August 10, 1992. 2., The trees identified in this memo, which were used to determine the location of the building envelope boundaries, may not be destroyed during the development of each envelope. lf a tree is destroyed, the applicant shall replace it with another tree or trees which provide a similar amount of screening. The DRB shall determine a practlcal and reasonable number and species needed in order to achieve the same effect. Please see site plan dated August 7, 1992 for location of trees. 3. The applicant shall provide detailed survey and architectural drawings at the time of development showing that the retaining walls needed tor the driveways to enter on the sides of the envelopes do not exceed 6 feel. Any proposed solution which would require retaining of more than one 6{oot high wall shall not be allowed unless a reasonable amount of landscaping is added to the disturbed area around the driveway. 4. The applicant shall be required to design the homes in this phase benching the structure into the hillside In a reasonable fashlon in order to prevent excessive regrading or retaining behind the homes. nR ,,t$tl, ((', L 1.' t lL " r rQ )a 5.The applicant has agreed to planlfour coniferous and eleven aspen in front of the driveway for building envelope 5..l )." U -4- I Jr ' , !. .v \ a-l t",,1 , '.\l,'lrr 6. The applicant shall plant clusters of trees by the entrance of the development and west of the former Pond site. 7. The Planning and Environmental Commission strongly recommends that the Town not require a "pull-out" for cars to pass, located approximately between envelopes 5 and 6. A request for front and side setback variances in order to construct an addition at 898 Red Sandstone Circle/Lot 7, Block 3, Vail Village 9th Filing. Applicant: Paul and Janet Testwuide Planner: Tim Devlin Tim Devlin gave a quick overview of this request. A variance had been approved several years ago, but has expired. The applicant now wants a S{oot side and a 3- foot front setback variance for construction of a garage and entry/kitchen addition. The applicant is well under on GRFA and site coverage. Staff recommends approval of the S{eet front and s-feet side setback variances, with conditions that one foot taken up by stone face on a portion of the north and west facades, and a portion of the asphalt parking pad be removed and the area landscaped. Diana Donovan said the only question was where the asphalt should be removed. One of the nearby property owners, the Hochtls at 890 Red Sandstone Circle, recommend approval. Gena Whitten had a reservation about granting variances, but this is okay as it is tastefully designed and the location of the house warranted some flexibility. Generally, the asphalt not in front of the new parking garage will be removed and landscaped. Jeff Bowen moved that a side and front setback variance be approved with the stipulation that asphalt be removed to the east and west of the garage that is not used for access to the garage and the area shall be landscaped and tht 1 ft. of the variance was to allow for the stone. The motion was seconded by Chuck Crist and unanimously approved by the Committee. A request for a conditional use permit to allow an addition and roof top mechanical to the Vail Valley Medical Center located at 181 West Meadow Drive/Lots E & F, Vail Village 2nd Filing. Applicant: Vail Valley Medical Center, represented by Dan Feeney Planner: Shelly Mello Shelly outlined the major issues. The VVMC wants an 880 sq. ft addition; the temporary trailer and satellite dish have been removed from the request. There will also be additional roof-top mechanical, which will not exceed the height of the existing mechanical. Parking is one of the major issues on this site. With this addition, the VVMC now has a surplus of five parking spaces. Staff recommends approval with one condition - they would like to see the barrier fence and revegetation of the streambank on the west installed prior to the release ot a temporary certificate of occupancy for the project. This will improve and insure the condition of the stream bank. Dan Feeney, representing the VVMC agreed with these provisions and also agreed to reconsider the proposed facade materials and bring them to the DRB. Jeff Bowen wanted to know if there is a set time for the leaming lab to move. The answer was no, 3. 4. -5- but it will be moved eventually. He then asked that when that parking space becomes available, wilt it be a problem to terminate the lot 10 parking. Dan feeney stated that the VVMC has contingency plans when that happens. They know that sometime in the future they will lose the lot 1O parking spaces. Dalton Williams had a concern about the parking on Town properly. Someday someone at lhe Town may take those spaces away. Will the hospital be able to aecommodate the loss? Dalton Williams went on to request a bus stop right in front of the hospital. The VVMC representatives stated that thii has been discussed in the past, but that there are many problems. Kristan Pritz said she would bring it up with Public Works. Diana Donovan wanted it noted in the record that any time the lease was cancelled the applicant would have to provide the the 10 parking spaces on site. Jeff Bowen asked what rent was being paid. The VVMC representative responded that it was $10.00 per year and that the WMC has paid for existing lighting, security, and paving, etc., which exists in return for the ability to use the parking. Kathy Langenwalter moved to approve the request for a conditional use permit with the condition that the stream landscaping and barrier be put in within 30 days of the issuance of a building permit and that the WMC will be required to provide alternative parking to lot 10 with their next expansion. Chuck Crist seconded the motion, and the request was unanimously approved. 5. Notification to the Planning and Environmental Commission concerning a minor amendment to SDD #4 - Cascade Village Area A, Cosgrifl Parcel/The Cascades, generally located south of Millrace Condominiums and west of The Westin Resort. Vail, to allow an expansion to a building footprint not to exceed 5 feet' Applicant: East West Partners, represented by Ned Gwathmey Planner: Shelly Mello Dalton Williams expressed concern about the parking situation on Westhaven Drive, which is being driven by the closure of level 3 of the Cascade Village Parking Structure. Kristan Pritz responded that she is planning to discuss the issue with the Town Council on this matter. Dalton Williams leels we should put pressure on all the developments in SDD4 to resolve the parking problem. Gena Whitten said that we should not put pressure on only one person to solve this problem. Jetf Bowen said the Committee should go ahead and approve this, but something should be done in the future. Kathy Langenwalter thought it inappropriate to not approve this request due to the parking issue. She asked if the PEC could send a letter to property owners stating the concerns about approving anything in that SDD with the current parking problems. Kristan Pritz said something needs to be done and the staff is working on the issue. Chuck Crist moved to support the staff decision with the condition that the staff draft a letter to the Town Council on behalf of the PEC discussing their concerns, which was seconded by Greg Amsden and unanimously approved. A motion was made by Kathy Langenwalter and seconded by Chuck Crist to table and withdraw the remaining items on the agenda. -6- ^ll.lu t 1'r'{ i 'i \, v\ I MEMORANDUM $tr\a't- Planning and Environmental Commission Community Development Department Augr.rst 10, 1992 A request for an amendment to an approved development plan to allow the shifting of the building envelopes al The Valley, Phase lVl17O0 Block of Butfehr Creek Fload. Applicant: Ed Zneimer Planner: Andy Knudtsen . .1. fj TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: lt. BACKGROUND On November 12, 1990, the Planning and Environmental Commission approved the development plan for Phase Vl of The Valley. This was a modification from an Eagle County approval which allowed 42 units and T1,150 sq. ft. of GHFA. The Town of Vail approvalallowed thirteen primary/secondary homes (26 units) and 65,900 sq. ft. of GRFA. lf built, eacfi secondary unit will be required to be a deed-restricled caretaker unit. Six of the building envelopes were located north of Buffehr Creek Road and seven were located on the south side. Three single family residences have been developed at this time on the south side. DESCRIPTION OF THE REOUEST Ed Zneimer, the developer and applicant, would like to adjust the location of the remaining four envelopes south of Buffehr Creek Road. He believes that by shifting the envelopes, the remaining homes to be constructed will be less visible and will be located in a more environmentally sensitive manner. The cunent application involves: . Shifting building envelopes 4, 5, 6 and 7 to the west;. Shifting the buiEing envelopes to the south, out of he meadow and partially into the trees;. Revising the location of the road so that it is closer to he homes; . Redesigning the road so that it requires less fill to construct. RECENT MODIFICATIONS Since the work session, the applicant has dropped his lequest to expand the building envelope size. He has also revised the building envelope locations to preserve stands of trees that border the envelopes. Below is an analysis of the factors used lo determine the locations of each site of each building envelope. Some of the general assumptions used in adjusting the site plan since the work session are as follows: ilt. 1. 2- 5. 6. 3. 4. Bullding envelope size will not be more than 4,500 sq. fl The shapes of the building envelopes are nol identical rectangles, but are altered to reflect stands of trees adjacent to lhe envelopes. There are several clusters of trees around the building envelopes which will be preserved. Building envelope 4 has a cluster ol six pines on the east side, two aspen on the north side, and three pines on he west side. Buikling envelope 5' has a cluster of six aspen and Mo pines on lhe northeast comer and one large atipen on the norh side of the envelope that will be preserved. Building envelope 6 has a cluster ol trees on the northeast comer around which the building envelope has been notched. There are approximately fifteen trees in this cluster that will be preserved. Also, there is one large pine on the west side of the envelope that will be preserved. Finally, building envelope 7 has two large pines on the east side, which were used to set the boundary ol that envelope. These, too, will be preserved. lf, during he process of constuclion, any of these trees are destroyed, the applicant has agreed to replace them with as many trees as are needed to provide the same effect. The DRB will determine the size, number and species of the trees to be planted. Please see the attached site plan for locations of these trees. Envelopes were shifted approximately 10 feet out in front of the toe of the slope in an etfort to balance impacts to the meadow and forested hillside. A shared driveway has been designed for building envelopes 4 and 5, as well as buiEing envelopes 6 and 7. The driveways have been identified at his time and it is generally understood what trees will be cut down in order to accommodate the driveways. In each case, they have been designed to approach he building envelope from the side. The separation between the house and the road (as measured at the mid-point of he envelope) ranges trom 47 to 42 to 29 feet for envelopes 4, 5, and 5, respectively. At the work session on July 27, he PEC said that a separalion between he road and the homes of approximately 35 feet would be acceptable. Road width will be maintained at 14 feet for most of the road. The Fire Department has requested that an 18 foot wide 'pull-out' be planned for the middle of the driveway between envelopes 5 and 6. This would allow two cars to pass in this area. STAFF ANALYSIS Staff believes that the applicant has situated the envelopes in the best localions possible. Given he size of the envelopes and the amount of GRFA previously approved, the mass and bulk of the homes will be significant. However, staff believes that these locations mitigate the mass and bulk as much as possible. tv. -2- ,lr \)\rr \;' t',' \v I '\' After walking the site with the applicant, staff believes that the retaining wall heighls required for this development are reasonable. For envelopes 4, 6 and 7, it is apparent from walking the site thal one retaining wall (six feet or less) is probably all that will be needed. The cunent survey was done with approximately 3 feet of snow on the ground, and he applicant has requested the surveyor to reshoot the areas where the driveways will approach the garages. Once this detailed information is provided, the applicant believes that the survey information will b€ more accurate and will show hat walls greater than 6 feet are not needed. Statf would like to have this assumption be made a condition of approval. lf he revised topography and architectural drav,rings show that more retaining is needed than what one 6-foot wall can provide, staff believes the applicant must add a significant amount of landscaping to the disturbed areas. The applicant has agreed to plant 4 coniferous tsees and 11 aspen in he arsa around the driveway for building envelope 5. Andher condition of approval that staff believes is approptiate is to require the applicant to survey the approved envelopes and provida a metes and bounds legal description for them. Staff believes that his should be done for envelopes 4 through 7 prior to the issuance of any building permit for this phase. Another issue which was discussed during the PEC meeting was 'benching in" each of the homes into the hillside. This style of development minimizes the amount ol excavation and scaning on the hillside behind the homes. The applicant has used this concept for building envelope 3 and is planning to use it for his next house. He believes that using this style is critical in order to make he development fit into the hillside. He is not interested in having this as a condition, however, in an effort to provide future architects with flexibility lor their designs. The staff believes this concept should be a condition of approval in order to make sure the homes impact the hillside as little as possible. lf possible, staff would like to see the applicant design the road with a bend in it. We believe this may help the road fit better with the meadow. The Fire Deparfnent may have standards regarding this and the road engineer may also have certain requirements. lf possible, staff would like the applicant to coordinate the changes in the road design wih staff so that it has a more natural shape. In general, staff believes the applicant has been responsive to the concerns of the Planning and Environmental Commission, as well as the Town staff. The applicant is no longer pursuing an increased size of the envelope and has worked diligently to find the best site for each of the envelopes. Statf believes that the trees that have been identified to be preserved are signilicant and will improve lhe appearance of The Valley development. RECOMMENDATION Statf recommends that the Planning and Environmential Commission approve the request to amend the development plan for The Valley, Phase Vl, with the following conditions: v. -3- L /( L- LL' l.,/ | a' .-F ,r,n'r' F ,r.,t ' /t I t, (<1" I .. ''cl c.' to enter on the sides of the envelopes do not exoeed 6 feet. Any propoqd<a- solution which would require retaining greater than one 6{oot high wall@ not be allowed, unless a sigrni{ieantgmount of landscaping is added to the L- disturbed area around the driveurbh -- ,.*. *+=A+.=jbxF u' '" 1.Pfur to he issuance of any building permits on envd@es 4 through 7, lhe applicant shallsubmit a metes and bounds tegal d6scrhtion for eacfi of the approved bulkling envelopes. These legal desciiptions shall reflect the staking and site plan presented to the Planning Corilnission on August 10, 1992. The trees identified in this memo, which *ere used to determine the location of the building envelope boundaries, may,not be destroyed dudng the development of each envelope. It a troe is destoyed, the applicant shall replace it with another tree or tsees which provide a similar amount of screenir€. The DRB shall determine the number, qF3dad species needed in order to achieve the same effect. Please see site plan dated August 7, 1992 for location ol Eees. The applicant shall provide detailed survey and architectural drawings at the time of development showing that the retaining walls needed for the driveways '- . 2. 3. 4. 5. 41" K The applicant shall be-required to design the homes in his phase benching fie structure into the hillside in order to prevent excessive regrading or retaining behindthe hOmeS. L,^ .. .!t\1.t,u1{. /r.t lt,,\ I The applicant has agreed to planlfour coniferous and eleven aspen in front of the driveway for building envelope 5. /t a' ,t', i),,-, ,- j,,.t\ ..t., t/ n, t 'i. ,'I ,/' ,/.r.., / zt,r,t f .1 ,--, t-/'l - /' ,.1,, i 9/r/ /J. / l.) / z. ,) ,t , .,1 --L..11.< z\,/\07i,./.i I I ) -r4 / /2,/ 1 /'i.. ./,/ / 7 .t I / /,,, /ltl l -) lt i\/ '-- l-)n /'/*' .-1- .l l,:lr )- [,\ -+ ii,l ,/ /,.-_ (,.,/ ,/ /1. --L -.- . "r'.*,' (__ C- A*- 'l ^.;,1 cloacttncnoo\zrE&rer ,,', ,-, 7.) ,<.t- ''\ :r. ; L r1 i I !r1 , tt !iE igiF :lr E I SS , .l ;;r r I 88 '1 ;; i;;: ? I 88 : 3g i;: r 'o, ll ill ,ll *lll t T a!.E-E _s d i I I ! ;if I 'l ) This is a list of the outstanding ides for the Valley, Phase VI, and a summary of the positions which the PEC stated during the worksession on July 27. l) Keep road at 14 feet. Work with PW and Fire Dept. on revised conhguration of driveways. Confirm with them that their original approval at 14 fe€t is still OK. '/ 2) Building envelope size: no bigger than 4500 sq. ft. Could the shapes vary slightly to accommodate certain trees? 3) Building envelopes should be defined by the stands of evergreens on either side of the envelope. Aspens are not as important. 4) Move envelopes 5,6, and 7 ten feet out in front of the toe of the slope. 4 can stay where it is because the slope is less steep. Moving 7 down will requiring filling the hole/pond. 5) Driveways/approach: design 4 and 5 so that they share a driveway. Entering from the side or front is acceptable. Identify, 1q, where the driveways will approach the envelopes. 6) Driveways/ength: 35'is OK - 7) Other: Plant trees west of pond. Double check on need for pond for drainage retention. What kind of plantings are allowable in meadow?y' Double check that memo said 50 x X).w.e- 'Do we need to add a condition of apploval to require that all construction be. "benched in" to the hillside? 8) Require that all envelopes be tied down with meets and bounds legals. 9) Timing: I ll Must have new drawing of driveways and road by Monday Aug 3. t\ic 1 / " lt "( t' Must have drawing showing envelopes by Wed. Aug. 5. Will walk site with Ed on Monday Aug 3 to tag trees and define envelopes. Will review drawing with PW and Fire in Interdepartmental on Wed. Aug 5th. Will write next memo on Wed. Aug 5th. for the PEC meeting on the l0th. q,Ar ,kp,t, 1o a'/ t MEMOFANDUM Planning and Environmental Commission Community Development Department ,.un Ziltt,vv&-, 1'\,..:,a.:'t '' : I h,l- t lAt (*hr,t, 3+T't tl Wi'hrq rnt FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: August 10, 1992 A request for an amendment to an approved development plan to allow fie shiftng of the building envelopes at The Valley, Phase lV/1700 Block of Buffehr Creek Road. Applicant: Ed Zneimer Planner: Andy Knudtsen BACKGROUND On November 12, 1990, the Planning and Environmental Commission approved the development plan for Phase Vl of The Valley. This was a modificaiion from an Eagle County approval which allowed 42 units andTl,150 sq. ft. of GRFA'#Tpwn of Vail-. , , approval allowed thirteen primary/secondary homes (26 unib) an(SS,SOO *;tr.f-.1 ?tl" I GRFA. lf built, each secondary unit will be required to be a deed)Esfictd aretakerffip, J{ltvyJ unit. Six of the building envelopes were located north of Butfehr Creek Fload and lbt tttttt seven were located on the south side. Three single family residences have been ' .i.,' "r,-,, ,,.,.i developed at this time on the south side. ''(uz\YttL4t'I DESCFIPTION OF THE REOUEST Ed Zneimer, the developer and applicant, would like to adjust the location of the remaining four envelopes south of Buffehr Creek Boad. He believes that by shifting the envelopes, the remaining homes to be constructed will be less visible and will be located in a more environmentally sensitive manner. The cunent application involves: . Shifting building envelopes 4, 5, 6 and 7 to the west;. Shifting the building envelopes to the south, out of the meadow and partially into the trees;. Bevising the location of the road so that it is closer to the homes;. Redesigning the road so that it requires less fill to construct. FECENT MODIFICATIONS Since the work session, the applicant has dropp€d his request to expand the building envelope size. He has also revised the building envelope locations to preserve stands of trees that border the envelopes. Below is an analysis of the factors used to determine the locations of each site of each building envelope. Some of the general assumptions used in adjusting the site plan since he work session are as follows: | -.-,11 i 1r,-, )i, - i Wtl w h t.' 1.Building envelope size will not be more than 4,500 sq. ft The shapes of the building envelopes are not idendcal rectangles, but are altered to reflect stianG of fees adjacent to the envelopes. There are several clusters of trees around he building envelopes which will be preserved. Building envelope 4 has a cluster of six pines on the east side, two aspen on the norft side, and three pines on fte west side. Buildng envelope 5 has a cluster of six aspen and two pines on the norheast comer and one large aspen on the norft side of the envelope hat will be preserved. Building envelope 6 has a cluster of trees on fte northeast comer around which the building envelope has been notched. There are approximately fifteen trees in this ctuster fiat will be preserved. Also, here is one large pine on he west side of the envelope that will be preserved. Finally, buiHing envelope 7 has two large pines on the east side, which were used to set the boundary of ftat envelope. These, too, will be preserved. lf, during he process ol constltction, any of these trees are destroyed, the applicant has agreed to replace them with as many trees as are needed to provide he same effect. The DRB will determine the size, number and species ol the trees to be planted. Please see the attached site plan for locations of these trees. Envelopes were shifted approximately 10 feet out in front of the toe of the slope in an effort to balance impacts to the meadow and forested hillside. A shared driveway has been designed for building envelopes 4 and 5, as well as building envelopes 6 and 7. The drivewala have been identified at his time and it is generally understood what lrees will be cut down in order to accornmodate the driveways. In each case, they hrye been designed to approach the building envelope from the slie. The separation between the house and the road (as measured at the midfoint of the envelope) ranges trom 47 to 42 to 29 feet for envelopes 4, 5, and 6, respectively. At the work session on July 27, lhe PEC said that a separation between the road and the homes of approximately 35 feet would be acceptabte. Road width will be maintained at 14 feet lor most of the road. The Fire Department has requested that an 18 foot wide 'pulFout' be planned for the middle of the driveway between envelopes 5 and 6. This would allow two cars to pass in this area. STAFF ANALYSIS Staff believes that the applicant has situated the envelopes in the best locations possible. Given the size of the envelopes and he amount of GRFA previously approved, the mass and bulk of the homes will be significant. However, staff believes that these locations mitigate the mass and bulk as much as possible. 3. 4. 5. 6. tv. -z- ).' ,!\:.,\i- After walking the site with the applicant, staff believes that he retaining wall heights required for this development are reasonable. For envelopes 4, 6 and 7, it is apparent from walking the site that one retaining wall (six feet or less) is probably all that will be needed. The cunent survey was done with approximately 3 feet of snow on the ground, and he applicant has reguested the surveyor to reshoot the areas where the driveways will approach the garages. Once this detailed information is provided, the applicant believes that the survey information will be more accurate and will shor fiat walls greater than 6 feet are not needed. Staff would like to have this assumption be made a condition of approval. lf he revised hpography and architectural drarings show that more retaining is needed than what one 6-foot wall can provide, stafi believes fre applicant must add a significant amount of landscaping to the disturbecl areas. The applicant has agreed to plant 4 coniferous fees and 11 aspen in the area around the driveway lor building envelope 5. Another conditon of approval that staft believes is appropriate is to require the applicant to survey the approved envelopes and provide a metes and bounds legal description for them. Staff believes that his should be done for envelopes 4 through 7 prior to the issuance of any building permit for this phase. Another issue which was discussed during the PEC meeting was 'benching in'each of the homes into the hillside. This style of development minimizes the arnount of excavation and scaning on the hillside behind the homes. The applicant has used this concept for building envelope 3 and is planning to use it for his next house. He believes that using this style is critical in order to make the development fit into the hillside. He is not interested in having this as a condition, however, in an effort to provide tuture architects with flexibility for their designs. The staff believes this concept should be a condition of aporoval in order to make sure the homes impact the hillside as little as possible. lf possible, staff would like to see the applicant design the road widr a bend in it. We believe this may help the road fit better wift the meadow. The Fire Departnent may have standards regarding this and the road engineer may also have certain requirements. lf possible, staff would like the applicant to coordinate he changes in the road design with staff so that it has a more natural shape. ln general, staff believes the applicant has been responsive to the concerns of he Flanning and Environmental Commission, as well as the Town staff. The applicant is no longer pursuing an increased size of the envelope and has worked diligently to find lhe best site tor each of the envelopes. Staff believes that he trees that have been identified to be preserved are signilicant and will improve the appearance of The Valley development. RECOMMENOATION Staff recommends that the Planning and Environmental Commission approve the request to amend the development plan for The Valley, Phase Vl, with the following conditions: ,h + 'X' :+'' \" '' 'l,'li ', , ^';"' V. -\t- ,l!.1 l .zE 1. 2- i.'- I Prior to lhe issuance of any building permits on envelopes 4 through 7, the applicant shall submit a metes and bounds legal d€scriplion for each of the approved building envelopes. These legal de*riptions shall retlect the staking and site plan presented to the Planning Commission on August 10, 1992. The trees'rdentilied in this memo, whictt lrvere used to determine the locdion of the building envelope boundaries, may not be destroyed dudng $e development of each envelope. lf a bee is destroyed, the applicant shall replace it wilh anoiher tree or trees which provide a similar arnount of screening. The DRB shall determine the number, slcdrd species needed in order to achieve the same effect Please see site plan chbd August 7,'1992 for location of tees. The applicant shall provide detailed survey and architectural drawings at the time of development showing that the retaining walls needed for the driveways./-s to enter on the sides of the envelopes do not exceed 6 feet. Any grogo .*44'.,' - j solution which would require retaining greater than one 6-foot high wallFtrdl not be allowed, unless a slgfl+f,€a*€mount of landscaping is added to the }-' disturbed area around the drivew\arr- ,r-*+ "uaL--sc.{ a (-{<- fie applicant shall belequired to design the homes in ftis phase benching he struclure into the hillside,ihTrder to prevent exgesqive rggrading or retaining behind the homes. L i',u ," ,-ralr']t r fL- f't-r-'11 ;"\ The applicant has agreed to plan{our conilerous and eleven aspen in front of the driveway for building envelope 5. ti:. 3. 4. q .)*-t ,1 "././ ?F - / <2.\_ :"<t i,J,,: ,....L.-y,.1 L- J;rr.,.- a) r?-{ ,.,---l ",^t,-*/ I t jtuj- '-l- L ,. 4 ,!- .. .-- .'!'|. i -/./.j ;. X.,- ./:,', \ 1 t /.; -.- '-ri t _--,, .--. ' .,\i {3r, ,.i,r, \ f "*#. ,., ",y' t '--:,: . / ! ,.'-i .4- i ),/1 -i i -*i ,. l 't -4" o-i .i1 :.,S)z,--;*. dDdnranoguralmer ./ ^ :tr' ^ 1 It,) /-/:'-'Q L ' :: "t-'/ ";d L- i. I 6 i+ :ll ! ::E I I 88 't ;: i:zz. rE9 t .l iizt 2 I r8 a rr i::: Trl Itl iil ill : l "lil fl llt s l J i t I I I { 't T I TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: a MEMORANDUM Planning and Environmental Commission Community Development Department July 27,1992 A request for a work session for an amendment to an approved rrovalsnsll plan to allow the shifting of the building envelopes at \fflhase lV/1700 Block ol Buflehr Creek Road.rG==;-:_-_-,." F[!ffi. _P'tanner: Anoy Knuolsen I. BACKGROUND On rffiffilhe Planning and Environmental Commission approved the development plan for Phasg Vl of the Vallea=.'This was a modification from an Eagle County approv'atwhich allowe6flfin;s andat[Eh. ft. of GRFA. The Town of Vaitap[roval ait6weo 13 primary/secondary homes finitsianoffBq. ft. of GRFA. tf built, each secondary unit will be required to be a deed restricted carelaker unit. Six of the building envelopes were located north of Buffehr Creek Road and 7 were located on the south side. Three single family residences have been developed at this time on the south side. II. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST Ed Zneimer, the developer and applicant, would like to adjust the location of the remaining lour envelopes soufr of Buffehr Creek Road. He believes thal by shifting the envelopes, fie homes that would be constructed will be less visible and be located in a more environmentally sensitive manner. The current application is to shift building envelopes{nllfnto the west. In addition dfa- building envelope locations towards he forested hillside. The revised road would be approximatelyffi,ffieet in front of the new building envelopes. Cunently, the road is approvedtobe|ocated20to35feetinfrontofthes8buildingenve|opes't#ht III. STAFF ANALYSIS Stafl believes that the effort to shift the proposed development out of he meadow and into the trees will reduce the impact of the mass and bulk of these homes. However, staff believes (l (( (-',-' a that the new locations of the envelopes could be adjusteO to minimize the loss of trees. For example, near envelopes 4 and 5, tirere are 'tFin the tree line which could f l-. accommodate development. By locating the propos€d homes within these pockets, and \,/ maintaining the existing mature vegetation on either side, staff believes the amount of screening around the homes would be increased. Also, staff believes that bringing the homes out in front of the toe of the slope would be beneficial. There is a tradeoff between preserving the meadow and preserving the hillside. Staff believes that a balance between these two could ba struck by locating the homes at least o Stat|isa|soconcernedaboutheffi'Webe|ievethatbilngingheroad'! closertothehomeswi||preservemoreoffieexistingmeadow.Webetievethata|EtnJ4'".\ separation between the iront ot the building envelope and the road is Ore best possible- G/- ,(A'i focation. In the development immediately to he east, devetoped by Bradley losem, fie road | -,. |,lu is actualfy closer to the building envelopes than 20 feet. Staff betieves that 20 feet of 'ff ' r)ks separation is reasonable as it would allow a car to be parked between the structJre and the road. G,Last|y,staf'isconcernedaboutbui|ding#itwrapsaroundthehit|sideata relatively high elevation. We would like to see this envelope brought down off the hillside so that the lower part of the valley can be preserved in as natural a state as possible. The applicant is willing to work with staffs suggestions for building envelopes 5, 6 and 7. He prefers to not shift envelope #4 into the near-by 'pocket' as he believes it would create a building site immediately adjacent to he Intersection of the lower and upper roads for the subdivision and Buffehr Creek Road. He is also concemed about the separation between structures. The table below shows he separation between envelopes under ths different scenarios. Staff believes that the separations that result from locating ths envelopes within the 'pockets" are not substantially less than what was originally approved. Additionally, we believe that the gap between the 3 existing homes and the remaining 4 will help break up the regularity and mass of the development along Butfehr Creek Road. Distances Between Buildino Envelooes Space Between Building Envelopes 314 11-12-90 Approved Plan Applicant's Prooosal Staff's Recommendation 145' 60' 80' 80' 75', 90' 75' 65' 60' 70' 95' 4t5 5/6 6n 100' I a a Staff betieves that there if "Vfting fre envelopes in an eflort to reduce the visibility ol Ure proposed homes. We believe that the new locations should be adiusted to be more tv. sensltlve to existing stanG of tees. We believe that thls would help the appearance of the valley, both to the neighborhood as well as to the overall site planning for the development. Although the distrances between stuctures would be reduced somgwhat, staft believes that the benefits of preserving tre stands of trees around these hoqqs wlEl Staff would re@mmend that the ue to wotk issues and a refined plan to PEC at the next hearing. I ,,orl /.,r-, ,.{tu.. /.o,h L.Lz.-u/1,<_ #.o 77-----7-/l/f ,/a / 1 --1/=/ /-27'12 ,i/L LLl 9f.._ c / a-J 4't'27 t?4ot'-'q- ,/r,t /,.. /*.( t /"'t-/ t;-'/Y. c../// zL-< A 5zz 7 ,/o, {n,-,*^,./. ///41\ 6xty(.t.J 4r'<-J "l-" / 4 ) crPEclrcltos\z{E[tER.7r 3 I .+utW'"7 / /zct ,-u.-/ 6 a/u /r)Lz /'-') /''^nt{^ t"'<' 4r.*e- fl^j io,' n'l e*/;l [:'* /",-[. .^r'-,1r+.< -._ ,1/n,1 _ t_u.{ ,/a *:=.,x ,.s, /1., y' -<-( Y,J y\2. 4..J/ < J /,-2-rs,a< ,,/ \ ,'/--'a,/\ /L., / I t \\N\\N \{-.-i] I !l I N N ffi H iffi H M I .,. It i5 6t tg TE N I I tl lll tl 'rl 'l 0- sEt ERi gii N CA o g ac F{6 ^E$E;F F-e R$E BH3 t-t ,-,t A H c) Cg a)?1 F (- +----r-r N \\ N N Z'\ \r.-J \/r ,a \,i.- ii 6 t tl :X ; i.zi a 98 :; I' li !t el IH t,t t '! s rgg ! r. "i Jrl i*: I N\. ilr ttl *r{ ,fl| -, i f,ll !? lll s lil ill *t{ fi Jt. I b I 7 t 6 (t o u) o L. E CB ct>()A o (l) o b0 tr =s 'o o u)o a o l.{a (\l o\o\ e{o\o\ f-N h F{ fa H h (.) GI a)F\ F-t li !i € Cg o lr , J (: r'1p! '],'i 't Q' k tr \,, ,tl t ,1tr,, .1 I \./ . ," t, '" i.:: L* f7',r,, [, '" 1'' ''i il i3e I rr g;== (d..I I t.t l i9 -f.. ia -d* I :t -) ._ .., 'i 89 .:. :: .rr 1l E-, i\ i:.ii # a ot '-- ia I 4{ l,: '. cr)c) o o) o bo € N+.O\o C}\ u) FrA - -at f\ cc e{F 5E t_, cr.) H h (.) (g C) F ' ../-) 1::':'7 ,,X O* -b"^r% WT^,Arn PUBLIC NOTICE session for a PEC determination of he parking requirement for Falls Par 3 Golfcourse, located on Tract A, Vail Village l3th Filing. minutes 16 seconds West and along the Section 6 72.75 the East tine of said Applicant: Planner: NOTICE lS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town ol Vailrtlill hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 18.66.060 of the Municipat Code ol tla Tgyn of Vail on August 10, 1992, at 2O0 p.m. in the Town of Vail Municipat Buitding. Consideration of: 1.A request for a the proposed Applicant: V Recreation District Planner:Mollica 2. A request for a for a conditional use permit an addition to the Municipal Building to the Vail Police Department,at 75 South Frontage Road West (at the described below: of the existing Municipal ), and as legally A part of ths 1/4 of Section 6, T 5 South, Range 80 West of the Sixth Principal County ol State of Colorado, more particularly descdbed as Section 6, thence North at the Southeast corner of said degrees East line of said Southeast Southeast 1/4 of said 75 feet to a point, said point being 110.00 teet northeasterly trom the dy right-of-way line of U.S. Highway No. 6 as measured at right angles ; thence North 79 degrees 46 minutes 1i seconds West and along a to said southerly right-oFway line 145.50 feet to The True ng; thence North 16 degrees 08 minutes 47 seconds East thence North 68 degrees 08 minutes 35 seconG West 428.70 hence 66 degrees 01 minutes 29 seconds West 152.57 feet;South 27 42 minutes 40 seconds West 192.66 feet; thencs 52 degrees minutes 50 seconds East 36.32 feet to a point, said being 110.00 feet from said South right-of-way line of U.S.No.6 as right angles thereto; thencs South 79 degrees 46 11 seconds East along a line parallel to said South right of way Except fiat 585.56 feet to The True of Beginnirq. County, conveyed to he Board County Commissioners ol Eagle the Department of Highways,of Colorado by rule'and order recorded 5, 1971 in Book 219 al 441. bwn of Vail Mike Mollica A requ€st for lront and side setback variances in order to Red Sandstone CircleAot 7, Btock g, Vail Village 9th Filing.Applicant: Paul and Janet Testwuide Planner: Tim Devtin 3.an additlon at 898 4.A request for a conditional satellite dish to he VailValley standards of Section 18.58.320 to 181 West Meadow Drive/Lob E Applicant: VailValley Planner: Shelly it to allow addition, temporary trailers, and a and a request for a variance from he satellite dishes for the VVMC, located at 2nd Filing. by Dan Feeney 5. 6. A request for an amendment to an approved development plan to allow the shifting ol the building envelopes at The valley, Phase lv/l700 Btock of Buffehr creek Road. Applicant: Ed Zneimer Planner: Andy Knudtsen A request for a major amendment to SDD #4 Cascade Village to amend the development plan for the waterford parcel located al 127s westhaven Drive and as legally described as: That part of the sw 1/4 NE 1/4, section 12, Township 5 south, Ftange 91 west of the sixth Principal Meridian, Town of vail, Eagle county, colorado, described as follows: Beginning al a point on the'southerly right-of'way line of Interstate Highway No. 70 whence an iron pin with a pla\tic cap marking the center of said Section 12 bears s 33'10'19'w 1447.03 teet; tlfence along said southly right-of-way lin€ two courses 1) N 52'50'29'E 229.66 tset 2) N 74'38'17' E 160.70 feet; thencs departing said southerly rigrht-oFway line N 88"45'57' E 139.93 feet; thence s 40"45'14" W 94.32 feet;thence S 18'18'36'W 54.08 feet;thence S 01"21'36. W 205.02 feet; thence S 12'07'36f W 110.25 feet; thence S 28.28'96. W 164.4g feet; thence N 40 o17'04' W 211.?6 feet; thence N 49"42'56, E 97.90 leet; thence N 37o09'31'W 95.59 feet;tldnce S 52.50'29'W SS.10 feet;thence 69.49 feet along the arc of a non-tangent cury6 to the left having a radius ol 65.00 teet, a centrat angle of 61o14'42'and a chordjhat bears N 58o 55'53' W 66.22 feet; thence N g7'Og'91. W 118.50 feet ro The T/ue Point of Beginning, county of Eagte, state ot colorado. Applicant: MECM Enterprises represented by Eustaquio Cortina Planner: Shelly Mello 7.Appeal of stafl interpretation ol Section 18.58.300 Town of Vail Municipal Code.Appellant Bob Kandell Planner: Selback from watercourse of the 8.A request for a variance to Section 18.58.320 to allow satellite dish antennas to b€ located at The Wren and Apollo Park Condominiums. T Filingl44? and 500 Frontage Hoad East. Applicant: Wren and Apollo Gondominium Planner: Tim Devlin D, Vail Village sth b(4 2s5D3r*7i*+tz4*'"'"4' a ?as'r t(.s6-r-9; cbl ffu,Y^, co z/6{{ .zlro^, fu- 4gL u)'-//w"-/'tl D4' A requesl to modify the landscaping plan associated with $e previously approved exterior alteration proposal for the Slifer Building, 230 Bridge StreeUPart of Lots B and C, Lot 5, VailVillage First Filing. Applicant Rod and Beth Slifer Plannen Tim Devlin The applicalions and informaUon about the proposals are available lor public revlew in lhe Community Developmenl Departm€nt ofiica. Town of Vail Community Development Department Published ln the VailTrail on July 24, 1992. /) ry,o\q ^w*Ld 75 Soutb Frontage Rotil Yail, Colorado 816J7 101 -479 -21 1 I / 47 9-21 1 9 July 9, 1992 Mt. Ed Zneimer Zneimer Company P.O. Box 305 Minturn, CO 81645 D ePartment of Community Dcaelopment RE: The Valley Phase Vl Dear Ed: Welcome back ftom the Bahamasl Atter talking with you on July 8th on the telephone, I thought it would be helpful for me to outline the dates for the public hearings. The PEC meets July 27th, August 1oth and August 24th. The DRB meets August 5th, August 19th and September 2nd. As I'm sure you are aware, the PEC must give final approval before the DRB can give their final approval. I believe your request for The Valley will require a minimum of two hearings at PEC. At DRB, a conceptual review may be helpful but is not necessary. At this time I believe that we should plan on PEC hearings on July 27th and August 10th. This would allow you to go to DRB on August 19th for final approval. I look forward to working with you on the ideas that we have discussed and I am sure from working with you in the past, that you share the goal of preserving the natural character of The Valley. Thank you for your cooperalion on this project and please let me know how I can assist you in this effort. Sincerely, 4.r)ft*3{'*./r*\ Andy Kiti'dtsen Town Planner )I I.ITER - DEPARD,IENTAL REVIEW DAIE SUBMITIED: COMMENTS I'IEEI}ED BRIEF NESCRIPIION t Dt -s h) (f PUBLIC \fORKS BY OF THE OPOSAI.: ,rr5 t,,a t lae+/or*2 RevierverJ b;:Dote: Cornrnen ts: al t- "/i i t. ' /::i'ttl 4 7ar'' ,"{* l/t L' tD7 n? '\r - lv,u) .4c,i ,t'17,' 7,&/-{y'J 7 ,J,5 /g-r 7c t,v- ,, ,,)yYtr /". {;, r Zo'-o 'frkr: ryg.rxt,r$ ltt,lltl laf Qr/t, P5 P+r/r*< . ., a, I {\ | '-a t I f l aa -s h;# 6x;ti\ (*r,-,4"-" PUBLIC\ryORKS . rl tl \, , .t Revierverl t:v (=1f E4 V14'Il n^r^. (,rlc,zl/ qz II.IIEF - DEPART},IENTAL REVIEW DAIE SUEilINED COMMENTS NEEI)M BY BRIEF OESCRIPnoN oF THE PR0FDSAL Reviervetf b5:, (=1f e?- VI't'|y| gtr.. Corn rn en ls: U 3. 5/oys ,f{.f nl, lse,/c-n7 a,-l/// { /*/h* h)ov l/ t.rt"t e / rl / 1)/ u y'+' 'l^ )l 4, r\-tl,1 ) ;. *LJ h LuoL 4 lretriorts a f1r':vc) tnol *'7 6rnb- Tttn Nlz,n 7*. h* t t) "^ u '€ s ' L % fu p--'rl,,.t. ,l , .,|2':.2 n, _s" -L, t),-"-t fu I.'-L -<-* ca^,)tlc. )l ".-^ f'- L-L 4 L.- -/ h;> ; l^' ' ; 11 ,*4 ,.i /.r J/,./ir. r. /t' ':"" t"' O . 5/ a7<s t^2 4tW laf Qra ?. 15 lat*fr< r a I t-1l -,. '-n l*, a 'J rf I IN]ER - DEPART},IENTAL RE\4EW DA]E zuBI,IIT]ED COMMENTS NEMED BY BRIEF BESCRIPTION OF Cornrnen ls: 0a/ fiz/e. d lat*fr< I ,.\ .. r, ,.Ai t t* =, *t '''l t !". .\,. ^ \. ,: \i f .t fr' b.. \ tq tp p-t'+ 'r I ilo T 1 ",'',',, .i-, to \:!'da ,,"'**1 ,f' tt t U. ** -\ , t 'y.,r"r r + *.r-'*\ 1" i "l$\qi,'trt,-. s-A- lF- '-. \5f,it "\ a TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE I // ., .'' BOUNDARTES r- This procedure is_reguired for any a.enrrnent to the zoning or for a reguest for -a district b-oundary cf,ung. A. NAI4E or pETTTT9NER eqIIleD zNttMFF ADDRESS ?.O. U)/- kZ, , M TNTLTFF1 5eplfgpcre.r€rt ) ?4ql-l.6F, co. t|jc..@(^tlArtrDJ Zl\-Elf.ref- , ft& ADDRESS 7 o.wx , ltt[cruBr..)pHoNE O97'4tot D. LOCATTON OF PROPOSAL ADDRESS LoT + (Ttr+scT 4 , LIA zilElt'{G€- S-uBPtwsra--t PETITION FORM FOR AI4END}TENT -oR REQT'EST FOR A CITANGE IN DISTRICT /t / t )z/' ,-' ,/ - '7./ ordinance t pEoNE Aa7+l4.l PaoNn42L,,q757 c. E. IEGAL, DESCRIPTIoN l"t Uf""k tifturq r / ,-/FEE $200.00 , pArD L" /h- /E- .' /f7c't', 1:"( 2;y*, #.\--T--- /-,/ F- A list of the names of owners of alr property ad,jacent to the subject property, and their nailing addresses. ApJAc4-\T YYsWF+r o1^lrlep W ftE A*Ed\le , B- NAME oF pErrrroNER's REpREsellrarrve_Er4iT-A!{1AFcd fitq ADDREss F- o.aor ryLll t v"*lu NAME 0F 0|.JNE{ (print or t ,r"*oruJl l*".r,t{a (0vER) ' Petition form ror aml to zonins ord or n"qo""tAr change in lofi!!"i"" II. Four (4) copies of the following information: A- The petition sharl include a sunra:ry of the proposed revision of the regulations, or a complete dEscription oi tf," pi"J"r"a changes in district bor:ndari6s and a nap- i"aiciiing-tfi3-Existing and- proposed district borurdaries_. Applicant m,rst subnit rritten and/or graphic oaterials stating the reasons for i'equest. IfI. Time Requirernents IV. the-PLanning and Environrnental cossnission meets on the 2nd and 4th Itlondays of each rnonlh, A-petition with the necessary accollpanying material nust be submitted four weelcs prior to the date ot-trrl-nJet-i1g- Followins the- planning a',a Enviroirment"i c"mii;i;.;Jii";;='all amendments to the zonin!_ordinance or district bounait-;fi;;must go to the Town Cor.rncil for final action. Your proposal will be reviewed for compliance with vail,s comprehensive plan. '. ':. l: - -: ieVl If this application reguires a separate review by any local' State or Federal agency other than the Town of Vail. the application fee sha1l be increased by $200.00. ExanPles of such review, may include' but are note limited to: Colorado Department of Eighway Access Permits, Army CorPs of Engineers 4 04. etc . The applicant shall be responsj-ble for paying any publishing fees which are in excess of 50* of the application fee. lf, at the aPPlicant's request, any matter is postponed for hearing, causing the matter to be re-published, then. the entire fee for such re-publication shall be paid by the applicant. Applications deemed by the Connnunity Development DePartment to have significant design. land use or othe! issues which may have a significant impact on the cormnunity may reguire review by consultants other than town stlft. Should a determinatj-on be made by the town staff that an outside consultant j-s needed to review any application' the Community Development may hire an outside consuftant, it shall estimate the amount of money nelessary to Pay him or her and this amount sha1l be forwarded to the Town by -ttre ipp:-icant at the time he files his application with the Corununity Development DePartment. Upon completion of the review of the appU.cation by the consul-tantr &oY of the funds forwarded by tlte app:_icant for patrment of the consultant which have not been paid to the c-o-nsult.ant shall-be returned to the applicant, Expenses incurred by the Town in excess of the amount forwarded by the applicant shalf be paid to the Town by the applicant within 30 days of notification by the Town. Lrt {s v Cse +pt }xs?B +str- N I THE ZNEIMER COMPANY, INC. P6t Officc Box 305 MINTURN, COLORADO 8 1645 Tel. (303) 82?4101 Fax (303) 827-5644 ,11 Edward J. Zneimer, Ph.D. Prcsident June 12, L992 To!.rn of Vail Dear Sir/Madame: This request is being nade to move the Lot #4 building envelope, Lia Zneirner subdivision, Buffehr Creek Road, VaiI,in excess of fifteen feet to the south of the previously approved envelope. The reason for this reguest is as foLl-ows: Original siting was beleived to be a compromise between retaining as much open meadow feeling as possible and recognizing difficulty of construction on steeper terrain on the south perimiter of the subdivision. Upon completing construction of the houses on building envelopes L, 2 and 3, it was observed that the slope of proposed building envelope #4 couLd tolerate movement of the house further into the tree 1ine, thereby creating more open space for the meadoh/. Both expense and delay are associated with this request for change, but they are gladly incurred, on my part, in order to fine-tune and improve upon the previously approved plan. f believe that this improvement (along with a sinilar request for buildi-ng envelopes 5 thru 7 to be submitted upon survey completion) is more consistent with our rnutual wish to see a final product that is an enhancement to the Vail Valley and a source of pride to the connunity. Sincerely, Edward J. Zneimer President, The Zneimer company, Inc. General Partner, Buffehr Creek Partners .TO\YN OF VAIL ,\.-A)lE D EPARTI{E\T OF CO J\f ivlT'\ITY D EVELO P}IENT S.\LES ACTION FORM p; Zr ]'it\-G AID A I) DR ESS \f.afs 0l 0000 d2{ l5 rl\IIE/-fO\< AIiIT nl\,'a l_n,-lF 0l 00c0 .121 r 5 ;^'*;;;-^'"*'; 0l 0000 -+2.J I 5 Lt\'lFcR-\,1 }fl:cll.A]\lC,ll. CODE 0 t 0000 "1?.i I 5 I utrpon"v FrRE ccDE Si6.YJ 0t 0000 42115 01 0000 424i5 I O-I'HFR ciODE EO1.,KS I lrartot','.',L EL!,t ti.icAl- coDE 0t 0000 {14r2 I coNTR.\c-l'oRs I lc[-\':;Ls F]lls oi oooo ,1l3irl I Ot"LEl{ F}'g-s 01 0000.4141,1 I slct{ A}:'PI-:C.^\'i-]0N i:!.F- 0l CO00dl{13 lr\DDfl iOil.i,l-.91{..'N'\(-rE F!-.i:l (s1.00 i'}Eil SQ.F-T.l 0r 00c0.r24r0 llrc .rn r PRcn i. I DC:.-.\ lt'rN 0l 0tr,00 4 l33l lPF.ia FAll) DF-SI.,N RF.vIEw SOARD i"EE 01 0000 ,*r6,LE!- t a FIL E COPY 75 south ftonlage road vall, colorado 81657 (3fir) 479'?138 (303) 479'2139 offlce ot community dweloPment .fanuary 2, 1992 Kathy Tange First Bank of Avon P.O. Drawer 52'1 0 Avon, Colorado 81-620 RE: IITTER OE CREDIT FOR TSE IIAI.LEY PEASE VI Dear Kathy: Attached to this letter is the original letter of credit for Ed Znei-mer. I am sorry that j.t wasn't included in the December 19th l-etter I sent you. Please call me if you have any guestions. I can be reached at 479-2t38. "ffig,/*"/tr*t Andy Knudtsen Town PLanner \1rd =l:!D,,, Engineering Consultants 290i:l South College Avenue Fod { )oll rs Colorado f10525 :103,:r26-4955 FAX t0l1 :t2ri 497l \'2.\' l- 3 , l- !) 9 " Mr. Ed Zneimer P.O. Box L075 Vail, CO 81658 RE: FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT FOR THE VALLEY - PHASE VI Dear Ed: The purpose of this letter is to present the final drainage design for The Valley project in West Vai1. The VaIIey project site is located along Lions Ridge Loop just east of Buffehr Creek Road as shown on Figure 1. The proposed. project consists of thirteen single family residential sites on approximately 15 acres. The terrain in this area consists of a sloping valley of 8 percent traversing east to west with a ridge to the south and a mountainside to the north. The vegetation j.s made up of wild meadolr grasses and scrub brush, and pine trees along thc ridge to the south. The existing drainage paths include a borrow ditch along the north edge of Lions Ridge Loop and a vaguely defined drainage swale south of Lions Ridge Loop along the rneadow botton. offsite drainage flows enter the site frorn three sub-basins (refer to Figure l-). Offsite drainage flows from Sub-basins 81 and 83 enter the site from the east and south and are collected and conveyed by the natural swale along the meadow bottorn. The offsite drainage fLov,rs from Sub-basin 82 enter the site frorn the north and are diverted by the borrow ditch along Lions Ridge Loop. The drainage approach taken for the hydrologic analysis was to utilj.ze the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) TR-55 rnethod. The SCS fR-55 method was used to compute runoff quantities from the 10, 25,and 100 year storn events for each sub-basin. The LOO year storm event was used in evaluating the <lrainage throughout the site.Curve numbers used in the analysis were established based on soil type, vegetati-on, and weighing the pervious and impervious areas of each sub-basin including the proposed developrnent. Olher otflces l)enver 303'778 ,':138. Var 303,1/ti 6340 . Colorado SprnOs 719 598 4107. Longrrronl 303 678 958.1 The results of the L00 year hydrologic analysis show that runoff from Sub-basin 82 was 35 cubic feet per second (cfs) and the cornbined runoff from Sub-basins Bi. and 83 was 7g cfs. The calculations and computer results of this analysis are attached. The 35 cfs from Sub-basin 82 was assumed to be diverted. and conveyed by the borrow ditch, thus reducing the total amount of flow being conveyed by the swale along the meadow bottom. Some improvernent of the existing borrow ditch may be required to cairy these f1ows. The offsite flows from sub-basins BL and BZ will be diverted at the east property line to flow along the north side of the proposed roadway. Small flows generated on the ridge to the south of the roadway can be transferred to the north side of the road via a series of cross road culvert pipes. The newly created channer running adjacent to the north side of the proposed road will then convey the Loo year ftow of 29 cfs frorn east to west and away frorn proposed building sites. rt is projected that flow velocities at buildout will be approximately fO.S fps as compared to existing calculated velocities of approxinately 3.6 fps. Natural grasses should be reestablished in the channel as soon as possible. Recent history of the site does not indicate any problem with flooding or erosion and the grasses appear to provide adequate control . rf the developer reestabrishes the grasses as quickry as possible, installs the hay bale erosion controls shown on the plans and is willing to run the risk of having to repair any dirnage created by storn occurrence prior to the vegetation root systerns being established, there may not be a need for further rnitigltion. There is a possibirity that erosion will occur before the grasses have time to adequately rnature. Due to this possibility, there are three alternatives that may be considered: A grass-lined channeL with a series of rip-rap lined drop structures. The drop structures would be irnplemented to control erosion and channel flow velocities. A rip-rap lined channel that would traverse along the entire project. The rip-rap would also control erosion and channel flow velocities. A grass-lined channel with an erosion control natting (such as Mirafi or Enkamat). This alternative would allov,natural vegetation to occur and also provide erosion control . 1. 2. 3. We trust that this letter will address the drainage issues posed by this development. Should you have any guestions or require furthei follow-up on this project, please contact us. Sincerely, RBD, Inc. -4e42€St€iven C. Birdsa1l Project Engineer cc: Kent Rose 046l-005I .4LO/scb 4 L0-002A Stan MyerslJ P.E.Project Mairager i H F E I $ s = EIF E 2 s zl1 EEE IO zz gR IY C, u EJI :U o I I {r-'n *8i ;i*t-O.r f;z rf, !- o m ll B:--_o o :liE)* Engineering Consultants ".,r", _2,J,_q(. _ __ It r -- - JoBNo 'il>-'-\]\l o"o.recr -i\' t lt,!l-q 'y-, caLcuLArroNS FoR ts (r!e3i.::j:_lA:!_ urog sv r"' e41 , !of*"rr"*ro sy - oarE -- sxeer \ or _ 9L1;,\ \' @ Aet-^ -- 4d v'4 l \,i fr.'-.t p.. trq Pu. b9' L/'J - J* l. O.Dl l.r?/t.Lr, ; / -:,t) o:' '/i) rrs | "- ;d-r!.!. Scs h*,Jual ?-^--.:./i", ftur". =tACr ) 1,rv r'- F\, ' 4::itc. - O /) J..> ,: ' ' l\L{qsrN -1- ; t\9.1) Ae._aA = U4 e-. c0 ': ?o ,. --f, -- r /,1 -/' l\a'tt: Tc tlAg L19a6(1) ---:^f. i:-l rr,r..r:, \ ./,\J:!tt: < \-Lr,,J9 YQ-or, = f\-s'Dg (4. r-- ) .-) , Ol v { , r,r-c.io, ir .r rr ,. y'+ 3 f,.O J44s/ q = e7 /,7stc +n tld-lF oD tf e.1..f P o F [n d +. l '-ra ^ zt L.:,-r G l r;r1J S f< \ l)(16 Lf.,)p. AtrA. 4Nl : * -f. -iJe. YO 6r, u 4.,66t', '10 Vu, f ty'rl. - 72-d?>/--, _, t _, ") *U/5.5 $8Js + a61>s = o..u , /,+3se-, I tBoD/e 7B)s' O.J/7 S8. s z< c). o )s' 4rk o. o / /Ja- = CQ,/te O.J) /44 /h= B) .riLL Rr + 93 Be Di o(-Ls:cp Ry -f\re ?--np -' d;11 Be (unu/2neg =l=lD*Engineering Consultants -.zz"Jz 7L)O (Z) /uttZt,..7J 4- -Fttfe2lJ:c'.F./ar'/- //+caz5a' J :: 33 " 6Z.Za- a-/114, / *'af ? a/2.: a H9/_, -- ./.22 -oo ..4d -- 3-3 6 ' (.E qurr.- 8?o/- /C) q a)uFZa 7 letz'..Far r zt 3 .-s3 o..' a- 7at - O ftz - .4., .,/5. - 7aJ --./,3 (,:) t /,2 - ,'-,: -- t.3D / /,2 f.4 oaJf ,otzl (r-) -- 2,2!' ": ,qz -- o.3 ( 2 .75 -'; a' .'. ? /(- -- o,J- Ft'1 rzz y'../<>2,-: a 1 zl /-/i (.crq . 80 r- //) => '{" - a , ? ,(a.r:'€.*/3o r' V.*, * 2.2s---o,f-z.z ,4r-l t 2' '/{ cuew _E11j22zz JoB No t4,42 - ac2L paoteq **' 11411! r+;1--ct\LcuL,ftoNsFoR z?.2. ' :?,,7 - --1/-- ul'oeetfu!- o,lreS- t)2cxecxeD By - DATE - s nzgr --l - or 2- (ss") -- 7- a3 Jrrto 70 36 "' 244 F-S- ,Jy'; -- 2.,/s/2.2)- -- o's7 < /''3 a/\ lF ata/r 2- 3d" '_{.r.zzf /.*/?/s,-C ttL/c.//.(S .t / r#F'./4/A)A.tC F-J=tzr' s<-. /aa /..4,/1t' af./"t r:f ,T 4t f' /zA'.:r;/rt'(' lt ?t/ .//A{;f 2F ft/azt.lvr4 i<4'o'4./' fr{4s:/t.ttv'l 29 .-4i ehktl -./%z/s--f JoeNo /,.C - a1l=- CALCULATIONS FOR {t.z a.,:.:i -: Engineering Consultants MAD€ ey<ar-.' oot e.2::!:filigecxeo By- DATE --sx:er 2 or ?-- a2 :l!lD*CL|ENT .7.y'€/ !'a 2. ,.- 72//,? /,4/r/4zt'a2 ..''z/Li4,4z'72' Fza/Zt .D{toVF e.F .F}/Ar.._t _n Q'- fl rA Z ' 2tl S . S'.J2o o''' VV. o-O3s- I ,<r.- // e.y -7O --{aa,?.- "*- /o -- 2 (}.os ^r- 2.aJ-'erz:o //Z:V -- -) -- ziza %z (z.or):8, / r./ < ,r/r. /O/<- ===*  66.10 69.6 ( 70 ) , aultJ< ?R-55 Version: u.O"Zt, 13154ooo13 TR-55 TABUI,AR HYDROGRAPH I'IETHOD Type II Distribution (24 hr. Duration Storrn) Executed: OL-22-L99L O9223244 Watershed file: --> B:WVAL]-OOR.WSD Hydrograph file: --> B:WVAL]00R.HYD WEST VAIL - THE VALLEY - PHASE VI JOB # ALO-AOZ scB 0t-21-91, t-00 YR REVISED >>>> Input Parameters Used to Compute Hydrograph <<<< Page 1 subarea AREA cN Tc 'r rt precip. I Runoff Ta/p Description (acres) (hrs) (hrs) (in) | (in) input/used B1 B2 B3 L09 . 30 69 . 0 0. 10 0. 10 2.40 58.80 70.O o.10 0.00 2.40 66. 10 70. 0 0. 20 0.00 2 .40 0.38 .37 .30 0.41- .36 .30 0.41 .36 .30 * Travel- tirne from subarea outfall to composite watershed outfatl point.Total area : 234.2O acres or O.3659 sq.rni Peak discharge = 99 cfs >>>> Conputer Modifications of Input parameters <<<<< Input Values Rounded Values Ia/p Subarea Tc !t Tt Tc * Tt Interpolated la/p Description (hr) (hr) (hr) (hr) (yeslNo) Messages B1 DZ B3 0.1O 0.10 ** ** No O. l_0 0. 00 ** ** No O.2O 0.00 ** ** No * Travel tine from subarea outfall to composite watershed outfall point.** Tc & Tt are available in the hydrograph tables. ":v '' guick TR-55 Version: 5.44 S/N: 13I54OOO13 Page 2 TR-55 TABUI,AR HYDROGRAPH METHOD Type II Distribution (24 hr. Duration Storrn) Executed: OL-22-L99L 091.23t44 Watershed file: --> B:WVALIOOR.WSD Hydrograph file: --> B:$ruAl,lOOR.HYD WEST VAIL - THE VALLEY - PHASE VI JOB # 410-002 scB 0t-21-91 , L00 YR REVISED >>>> Summary of Subarea Tines to peak <<<< Peak Discharge at Tine to Peak at Composite Outfall Composite Outfall Subarea (cfs)(hrs) BL 82 B3 49- 35 30-- L2.2 L2.L L2.2 Composite Watershed 99 L2.2 Quick TR-55 Version: 5. a 44 Page 3 S/N:1315400013 TR-55 TABULAR HYDROGRAPH METHOD Type II Distribution (24 hr. Duration Storn) Executed: OL-22-L991 09 223:44 Watershed file: --> B:wvAI,looR.wsD Hydrograph file: --> B:WVAL],OOR.HyD WEST VAIIJ - THE VALLEY - PIIASE VI JOB # 4l_0-002 scB 0t-21-91, 100 YR REVTSED Composite Hydrograph Surnmary (cfs) Subarea Description l-L. 0 11. 3 hr hr 11.6 11.9 l-2.0 hr hr hr L2.L hr L2.2 hr L2.3 I2.4 hr hr 27 35 z3 49 20 30 39 s 2T 22 6 I2 2L I 0L 06 o2 0 0 o 0 0 0 B1 DZ B3 TotaI (cfs)40 58 99 85 35 Subarea Description 12.5 hr L2.6 hr L2.7 hr 12 .8 hr 13 .0 hr L3.2 hr t3.4 hr 13.6 13.8 hr hr a 4 2 5 3 3 5 3 3 6 3 4 I 4 5 9 4 6 l5 6 8 lJ l- bz B3 11 5 7 TotaL (cfs)1_ t_11 t_3 L7 19 23 29 ) ituick TR-55 Version: 5. o 44 S/N: L3L54O0013 Page 4 TR-55 TABUI.,AR HYDROGRAPH METHOD Type II Distribution (24 t:.r. Duration Storm) Executed: O)--22-L99L 09 t23i44 Watershed file: --> B:WVAL]-OOR.WSD llydrograph file: --> B:WVALLOOR.HYD WEST VAIL - THE VALLEV - PHASE VI JOB # 410-002 scB 0l_-2L-9L, L00 YR REVISED Conposite Hydrograph Sunmary (cfs) Subarea Descript j-on 14.0 14.3 hr hr ]-4.6 L5.0 15.5 hr hr hr 15.o hr 16.5 hr 17.0 t7 .5 hr hr 2 t- 1 z 1 1 2 1 1 2 I I 3 1 2 33 22 22 3 2 2 4 2 2 B2 DJ TotaI (cfs) subarea Description 18. 0 hr 19. 0 hr 20. 0 hr 22.O 26.O hr hr 0 0 0 L 1 1 t_ t_I 2 L l_ 2 l_ l_ B1 b2 B3 Total (cfs) Quick TR-55 Version: 5.44 S/N: L3t-5400013 Page 5 TR-55 TABUI.AR HYDROGRAPH METHOD Type II Distribution (24 h.r. Duration Storn) Executed: OL-22-L991. 09 t23t44 Watershed file: --> B:WVAL]OOR.WSD Hydrograph file: --> B:WVALI_0oR.HyD WEST VAII-J . THE VALI,EY - PHASE VI JOB # 410-002 scB 0t-21-91, L00 YR REVTSED Tine (hrs)Flow (cf s) Tine (hrs) FIow (cfs) 11. 0 1l_. 1 tL.2 lt-. 3 LL.4 l_l_.5 1l_. 6 tr.7 tl-. I l_1. 9 12.0 L2.L L2.2 L2.3 L2.4 L2.5 L2.6 L2.7 J,2.8 L2.9 1_3.0 13. L L3.2 13.3 L3 .4 13.5 13.6 L3.7 1.3 .8 13 .9 14 .0 l_4. L L4.2 14.3 L4 .4 14.5 L4 .6 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 3 6 9 36 85 99 68 40 29 23 l_9 L7 l_5 13 t2 t1 l_L t_ 1_ 10 9 9 9 8 I 8 7 7 7 14.8 L4.9 15. 0 15. 1 L5.2 15.3 15. 4 15. 5 l_5. 6 15.7 15. I 15. 9 16. 0 16. l_ L6.2 16. 3 16.4 t6. 5 16. 6 L6.7 16.8 15. 9 L7.O 17. 1 L7.2 L7.3 L7.4 1,7.5 L7.6 L7.7 1,7.8 L7.9 18. 0 18. 1 L8.2 L8. 3 18.4 7 7 1 7 6 6 6 6 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4-. 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 t Quick TR-55 Page 6 Version: 5.44 S/N. l-3L540OOt-3 TR-55 TABUI,AR HYDROGRAPH METHOD Type II Distribution (24 hr. Duration Storm) Executedr OI-22-L99L 09223 144 Watershed file: --> B:WVALIOOR.WSD Hydrograph file: --> B:WVAL1OOR.HYD WEST VAIL - THE VALIJEY - PHASE VT JOB + 410-002 scB 0t_-21--91_, 100 YR REVISED Tine (hrs1 Flow (cf s) Tirne (hrs) Flow (efs) t_8. 6 18 .7 18 .8 r-8 .9 l_9. 0 19.1 r_9. 2 t_9.3 L9 .4 19.5 r.9.6 19 .7 19.8 19 .9 20. o 20. 1 20.2 20.3 20 .4 20. 5 20 .6 20.7 20.8 20.9 2L.O 21. L 2L.2 2L.3 2L.4 2I.5 2L.6 2t.7 2L.8 2L.9 22.O 22.L 22.2 22.3 22 .4 22.5 22.6 22.7 22 .8 22.9 23.O 23.L 23.2 23.3 23 .4 23.5 23 .6 23.7 23.8 23.9 24.0 24.L 24.2 24.3 24 .4 24,5 24 .6 24.7 24.8 24.9 25.O 25. I 25.2 25.3 25.4 25.5 25.6 25.7 25.8 25.9 3 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 t_I L 1 I 1 t_ t r-.t l- I l_ 0 o 0 o 0 o I li.L r, l,f li ,.,; tJyi Hocrrsre'or. Srnew & Srne'uss. P. C. ATTORNEYS ANO COUNSELLORS AT LAW MARK J, RUBIN JORDAN HOCHSTAOT GEORGE M. STRAW RICHARD S. STRAU SS 2O43 YORK STREET DENVER, COLORADO 8O2O5 TELEPHONE: (303) 329- 9222 TELEFAX: (303) 333 -7127 HON. CHARLES A. FRIEDMAN OF COUNSEL April 26, l99L Town of Vail Planning and Environnental Commissj.on Attention: Andy Knudtsen 75 South Frontage Road Vail , Colorado 83-657 Re: The Valley, Phase VI (rtBuffehr Creektr) Dear Mr. Knudtsen: Edward Zneimerrs Buffehr Creek Subdivision is moving rapidly with Lots 12 and 13 expected to be platted and under construction in the near future. I understand that Lindsey/Nilsson Development Conpany has subnitted plans to the DRB for its proposed construction on Lots 12 and 1"3. Mr. Zneimer has advised ne that he is currently surveying the two Lots and the interior building envelopes plus the private Road fron Buffehr Creek to service the seven L,,ots on the south side of the subdivision. The criteria for this subdivision are found at the pEC meeting of October 22, 1990 and the Departnent of Cornrnunity Development neeting of Novenber 12, 1990. As you reqalf, this subdivision was originally in the County and has now been revised by the Town of Vail (the rtTown"). The subdivision is proceeding under Chapter L7.25 (Single Farnily Subdivisions) of the Town of Vail Code. Lots 12 and 13 will each be platted subseguent to the foundation for each dwelling being poured. Under L7.Z5.O3O B.the covenants need to be reviewed and are to be recorded by the Department of Cornmunity Development together with the plat (L7.25. 1-l-0) . fn addition, the private Road needs to be addressed and my comnentary on both matters is enclosed. Town of VaiI April 26, 1-991- Paqe 2 DECLARATION OF PROTECTTVE COVENANTS My version of the Covenants I intend to record on the two Lots is enclosed. The Covenants were created from the two aforesaid meetings, and the concepts and reguirements set forth in the minutes. I would appreciate the review by the Town for compliance with the ninutes and any other suggestions it rnight have with respect to the Covenants. As a side note, ny client Edward Zneimer, asked rne why these Covenants are not rnore exhaustive. I advised him of the following: (i) the failure of the previous covenants upon the real estate; (ii) the issues such covenants bring to the property over the many years of their existence; (iii) the fact that the homes being constructed upon these Lots are very expensivei and (iv) the owners of such dwellings can be expected to use good judgnent and good taste with respect to their property subsequent to the construction of the approved hornes. Therefore, the Covenants are short and address on)-y the rnatters of concern to the Town and Mr. Zneirner to preserve the integrity of the subdivision. I have not created an Association but have provided that the eventual 1-3 Lot Owners may create one if they are so inclined. A1so, as per Mr. Esgwithts request, I have provided that the Town may enforce the covenants too. The rropen Spacerl will remaj-n owned by the individual owners, but maintained by these Owners as per the Town requirernents i.e., undisturbed. The legals are not attached yet as these documents are for review and conmentary. NONEXCLUSIVE EASEMENT DEED FOR PRIVATE ROAD AND UTILITIES The Road from Buffehr Creek servicing the seven Lots the south side of the subdivision is a private road. Enclosed rny version of the covenants that will control both the Road Easenent and the underlying Utility Easement. This double easenent will provide access to the public way from the two Lots and eventually all seven lots. In addition, a utility easement has been created to always provide all l-,ot owners with the ability to access utilities. However, the actual needed utilities are being put in place during construction of the Private Road and any additional utility easernents wil-I be created at that tine. Further, I have reserved the right to place utilities across ltopen Spacerr with the intention of providing access for utilities to Lot owners in three ways: (l-) existinq on is Town of Vail April 26, 1991 Page 3 utilities and easements that wilL be placed in service on the seven Lotsi (2) the utility easement in the Road which also services all seven Lots and within which I expect rnost of the actual utilities will be placed; and (3) the reserved right as a third lrback uprr to assure that future utilities can be l-ocated in the Open Space to service the subdivision as needed in the future. The balance of the English is devoted to the rrhows and whysrr of the parties relationship with this real estate and taking care of the Road. The Exhibit 2 is not attached as I donrt yet know the Iegals for the Road. In summary and to be in cornpliance with the Ordinance,these documents are presented to you for preliminary review and comment. Any input or needs not addressed or which you desire to be addressed will be appreciated. T have also forwarded the docurnents to Land Title and Lindsey/Nilsson for their review and any input they rnight desire. Subsequent to the review, I wil1 prepare the finals for inclusion in the package to be recorded as soon as possible after pouring of the foundations. Thank you for your considerations. Very truly yours, HOCHSTADT, STRAW & STRAUSS, P.C. l\l ,,,,, Straw GMS/1c Encl-osures cci Ed Zneimer ({Enclosures) John F. Nilsson, Lindsey/Nilsson Development Company (w/Enclosures) Les Key, Land Title Guarantee Conpany (w/EncJ_osures) Itt )i1,''u1t George M. GMS -M5\026\cov. A !- FIL E 75 3oulh lrontage road vall, colorado 81657 (303) 479'2138 (303) 479-2139 offlce of community development December 19, 1991 Kathy Tange First Bank ol Avon P.O. Drawer 5270 Avon. Colorado 81620 BE: LETTER OF CREDIT FOR THE VALLEY PHASE vl Dear Kathy: Attached to this letter is the original letter of credit for Ed Zneimer. I have talked to him about all the improvements which the letter of credit insured and understand that he will be responsible for revegetation next spring as well as any erosion control that is needed. Other than these two items, all the public improvements have been installed. Please call me if you have any questions. I can be reached at 479-2138. Sincerely, i / /i-.-- / iLn '7 1..<'^l J 'i '''t' Andy Knudtsen Town Planner \lrd cc: Ed Zneimer c0Py ',i:i DEVELOPER IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 29th day of August, 1991, by and among Buffehr Creek Partnership (hereinafter called the "Developer"), and the TOWN OF VAIL (hereinafter called the 'Town"), and the FirslBank of Avon (hereinafter called the 'Bank"). WHEREAS, the Developer, as a condition of approval of the Lia Zneimer Subdivision, wishes to enter into a Developer lmprovement Agreement; and WHEREAS, the Developer is obligated to provide security or collateral sufficient in the judgment of the Town to make reasonable provisions for completion of certain improvements set forth below; and WHEREAS, the Bank has agreed to hold the cash escrow account on terms and conditions as set forth herein. WHEREAS, the Developer wishes to provide collateral to guarantee performance of this agreement, including construction of the above-referenced improvements by means of the following: Developer agrees to provide the Town with an irrevocable letter of credit in a dollar amount as set lorth below, such cash letter of credit shall provide security for the following: IMPFIOVEMENT 1. Six-inch Class 6 road base $ 5,640.00 2. Three-inch asphalt mat 1 1,970.00 3. . Revegetation 2,000.00 4, Rip rap headwall 2,500.00 5. Erosion control 1,040.00 6. 1/3 mobilizalion 1,250.00 Totat: $24.400.00 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the following mutual covenants and agreements, the Developer and the Town agree as follows: 1. The Developer agrees, at its sole cost and expenses, to furnish all equipment and material necessary lo perform and complete, on or before December 1, 1991. The Developer shall complete, in a good workmanlike manner, all improvements as listed above, in accordance with all plans and specifications filed in the oflice of the Community Development Depadment, the Town of Vail, and to do all work incidental thereto according to and in compliance with the following: a. Such other designs, drawings, maps, specifications, sketches, and other matter submitted by the Developer to be approved by any ol the above-referenced governmental entities. All said work shall be done under the inspection of, and to the satisfaction of, the Town Engineer, the Town Building Official, or other official from the Town of Vail, as affec'ted by special districts or service districts, as their respective interest may appeat, and shall not be deemed complete until approved and accepted as completed by the Town of Vail Community Development Department and Public Works Department. 2. The total estimated cost ol said work and improvements is the sum of $24,400.00. To secure and guarantee performance of its obligations as set forth herein, the Developer agrees to provide security and collateral as follows: An inevocable letter of credit from the Bank in the amount of $24,400.00, on a form acceptable to the Town Attorney, shall provide the security for the improvements set torth above if there is a default under the Agreement by Developer. 3. The Developer may at any time substitute the collateral originally set forth above for another form ol collateral acceptable to the Town to guarantee the faithful completion of those improvements referred to herein and the performance of the terms of this Agreement. Such acceptance by the Town of alternative collateral shall be at the Town's sole discretion. 4. The Town shall not, nor shall any officer or employee thereof, be liable or responsible for any accident, loss or damage happening or occurring to the work specified in this Agreement prior to the completion and acceptance of the same, nor shall the Town, nor any otficer or employee thereof, be liable for any persons or property injured by reason of the nature of said work, but all ol said liabilities shall and are hereby assumed by the Developer. The Developer hereby agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Town, and any of its officers, agents and employees against any losses, claims, damages, or liabilities to which the Town or any ol its officers, agents or employees may become subject to, insofar as any such losses, claims, damages or liabilities (or actions in respect thereof) that arise out of or are based upon any performance by the Developer hereunder; and the Developer shall reimburse the Town for any and all legal or other expenses reasonably incurred by the Town in connection with investigating or detending any such loss, claim, damage, liability or action. This indemnity provision shall be in addition to any other liability which the Developer may nave. 5. lt is mutually agreed that the Developer may apply to the Town and the Town shall authorize for partial release of the collateral deposited with the Bank for each category of improvement at such time as such improvements are conslructed in compliance with all plans and specifications as referenced hereunder and accepted by the Town. 6. lf the Town determines that any of such improvements as contemplated hereunder are not constructed in compliance with the plans and specifications set forth herein, it shall furnish the Developer a list of specific deficiencies and shall be entitled to continue to withhold collateral to insure such compliance. lf the Town determines that the Developer will not construct any or all of the improvements in accordance with all of the specifications and time tables as set forth herein, the Town may give the Developer written notice and unless such improvements are completed by the dates as set forth above or within a reasonable period after such date if weather does not permit the completion of such improvements, the Town may withdraw from the funds as may be necessary to complete the unfinished improvements. 7. The Developer warrants all work and material for a period of. one year after acceptance of all work referred to in this Agreement by the Town if such work is located on Town of Vail or road right-of'way. 8. The parties hereto mutually agree that this Agreement may be amended lrom time to time, provided that such amendments be in writing and executed by all parties hereto' g. This agreement shall be enforceable against the Developer provided, however, that in the event the Developer sells or transfers all of the subdivision as shown on the plat, the obligations of the Developer under this agreemenl may be assumed by the purchaser ol the suMivision, and the Developer shall have no further obligations hereunder. lt is agreed, however, that no such assumption ot these obligations shall be effective unless the Town gives its prior approval to such assumption, following an investigation of the financial condition of lhe purchaser. r -l ,_ Dated the day and year first above written. \ '! ' \ \ t\ / L \ (; t\ STATE OF COLORADO COUNTY OF EAGLE ss. '-,\( i -t L The torlggoing Developer lgprovemel.t Agre_ement was acknowledged before me this day ot ll I ,.. t. ,',.t* , t6:!Oy (.[ - <i nc , ",-,^ Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: / /' 1 - c,', (Signatures continue on page 4) 7^L L \L!. LrL (Signatures continued from page 3) srATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. couNTYoF EAGLE ) FIBSTBANK OF AVON .,, n ,Th. jotts.oing Developer. lgprovemeq! AgreemenLwes acknowledged before me this -)_J_dayol (.lti,,t'-, t- ,19\llby J*n,<-t. J->.-,-;, < Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: I /- / - e.l STATE OF COLORADO COUNTY OF EAGLE -$lYo"v ot ss. The foregojng Developer lmproveme4g Agreement w4s acknowledged before me this , 1eg by Witness my hand and officialseal. My commission expires: Pameta A. Brandmeyer, Notary ftJblic iHrl f, ilill'l?ii!''il,t ta', l8lg TILE hwn 75 south trontage road vail. colorado 81557 (303) 47$,2138 (303) 47S2139 October 24, 1991 Ms. Denise Davis Vice President FirstBank of Avon P.O. Drawer 5270 Avon, CO 81620 otfice of communily development Re: Partial Release of Letter of Credit for Lea Zneimer Subdlvlsion Dear Ms. Davis: As of the date of this letter, the Town of Vail has verified that the roadway and drainage improvements which have been installed in the Lea Zneimer SuMivision comply with the requirements of the approved plan. The items which have been completed total $19,610. Because the work has been completed, the funds associated with these items may be released. Please retain the balance of the funds from the original amount until the rest of the work is completed and Town staff verifies that the work meets the Town standards. The remaining items include the riprap headwall ($2,500), the erosion control ($1,040) and a third of the mobilization ($1 ,250). These items total $4,790. The attached sheet shows a list of the improvements and the corresponding amount of money required to complete them. I have included the Developer Agreement and the Letter of Credit with this letter for your information. Thank you for your cooperation in this effort. Town Planner /ab Enclosures cc: Ed Zneimer COPY Lofilo's EXCAVATIoN e zuASTING l]'lo. hlLone ffittl :I rlunr 2{ r Edxrrd J. P.Er Eox tlln turn r ?21-+LaL Attnt Ed t99l lneiner 305 Eo, dl6tl' '- 'iggl CFEEI(. to provlde the il:q f fol lpwrng oto rtefi iia. ls" c.l*1.F. tiulvrrt . lD" F.E.S'. !6rt C.F|.P. Culvnrt tlEr TIE VA-LEY FHfiEE Vl ' Et^FFEln Lonq'r ExEava tlon Inc. lr Plecsad proporat for tht abovl ProJect' TMT I}.IELTIDED FHfiAE I I DEECRIPTTT}I l. -Plrer lfid Brqb 2. -Btttp & gtockPilc toProil ouAf{. utP ? ro(to.oo 2.oo 8.30 1?. OO z5.OO l7.oo 200.oo 39.oo h4,o2 -?"rorarc' "t1fota - A4,ll/T e-r&? 'slE I L.S,7lo c.Y. 1600 c.Y. f,rD-C.l5r '1P. 125 L,F. 93 L.F. 6 E.A. l?o 1.,F.D{t,.tc9 Flp-Fep fdr 36" outltt Flp-FrP Hrednel I lx lrlcter S:rvlcrg 6r' Flrs Hvdrrnt AEEeoblY Erorlon Eon tro I l'loblllratton l"' Arphal t net ?o c.Y. s0.o0 I EA. ?r3OO'Oo 9C| L.F. 30.50 t EA. u r75o.QO 6l EA. 16.00 I L.B, ' 3'73O.OO glf,-:gt"TN. 4?.OO PTIAEE T IO AL i. i.l l#l .i.rnor -t I I loF2 * . -z-hs?lr;nofi,iltee Tlf ' fter'an'g Fttso'?n'o {eenwr-7 tlatPt' -ron4 Jh" /""'' t I I PIt Hilml . Aw[@..b81@ r @10'f${f,4 P.O tc ll . Slttlt cdus Ol0f I t$l C8*l6zf 6r.^, 1 ,: ,- I ( EA-rk {;, "C'.1[4 zftl-ztst I '.. ' rorFr- t 2rooo.ooTlS t I,4?O,OQ ?y't '"'iffi33'[ao1*i 5tl?P.OO?t i I,6ll.oo'?'r,t l.zoo.oo P/t r lrlao.oo r/r t 600,00 ?fF . t . i,1il.[6 " -N"*t 3 t 465.OO?rf t 2,73O.OO?lr r r l.o40.oo i J:zso.oo?ltth) r$ + I +i-,.476'reie- ?r?tt! * * aor635.OO t1i,&a? -:' ,)., {'., ( tT OF AVON\ t BA]K 00rl !v BEAVER oREEK BLVD. PO. DRAWER 5270 AVON, COLORAOO 81620 303-949-0100 Date: Amount : Nunber I Expj.ration Date : August 29, L99I $24,400.00 865477 8 Decernber 1, 1991 Town of Vail P.0. Box 100 Val1 , C0 81658 Gentlemen: trle heteby open our lrrevocable Letter of Credit in your favor available by your drafts drawn on the FirstBank of Avon, 0011 West Beaver Creek Boulevard" P.0. Drawer 5270, Avon, C0 81620, at sight for any sum not exceeding the total of TWENTY-FOUR THOUSAND FOIJR HIJNDRED AND N0/100 DOLLARS ($24,400.00), for the account of Buffehr Creek Partners, a Colorado Linited PartnershiD. Each draft must bear upon its face the clause "Drawn under Letter of Credit 1f8654778, dated August 29, L99I, of FlrstBank of Avon". Each draft must be acconpanied by a statement executed by the Town Manager stating che following: Buffehr Creek Partners has not completed the construction of the inprovements in the Lia Zne1:rl.et Subdj.vislon, Filing No. I, Town of Vailr County of Eagle, pursuan! to the approved plans and the Subdivision Agreement". We hereby agree that drafts drar,m under and in compliance lsith the terns of the Letter of Credit r^rilI be duly honored if presented to FirstBank of Avon on or before December I, 1991. /l n /i Sinqht'elY ' .i : t!tii,:,l 1,1 ,n i 'A /.AVt/f /rtln I //, .'l / -v, /L.ir /u'l ,i / \Denise Davis ' Vice President DDD/j 1w The printed portion of this forn approved by the colorado Reat LAND rlrtE GUARANTEE CO,!PA]{Y 108 S. FROITIAGE M UEST vAt [, c0 81657 Estrte Cdmlssion (ss- 60-7,71) STATEMENT OF SETTLEMENT SEf,JLR,IS Lr' f2, LtA A{EIMR. StJBDn"rSrON REPRESEIITI }IG TITTE I IISURA||CE cofiP^|tY Or l|l NIESOTA PROPRTY ADIRESS BUFFETIR CRF:F'& PARINRS, A @IORAM LIMTTED PARINERSHTP SELLM, BJYER DH/E[OH{E!II, I}rc,, A @IORAm SETILEMET.II IIryIE Ar.rqusE 27, L99L BIE OF PRORlrlIIAn AuqrEt 27, ]-'99L debit ca€dit OONIRAET SAIJS FRTCE. MCRIGAGE PAYOEF. flI3SItsANK OF A\rcIT TqIT.E INSIIRANCE. ('{NMS rcLTCY REOORD RELEASE. CIIHER RECORDIIG(S) :. UCE RETjEASE TNGS UJE FOR. L99L, 8724 TAI( PRORAIICTI FOR. L99L, 238 mYS e L.O732 TRANSTE TN(. SIJRI/EY. EAGI.JE V}LLEY BROKER.'S Fffi. CL6I}{G FE.. ROAD ESCROW . I.OIGS EXCA\N$I}TG . flocltsrAfn, sIRAw AND SIRAUSS . PATN.INI TO P(]BLTC SERIITCE . ET.ESIRIC 1 30, 000 . 00 2L,0o0. oo 313.00 18. OO Lo.00 452.76 255.42 650.00 585.25 77,OO0.OO 50.00 25,250. O0 49,445.25 2,LLB.24 6,045.00 6,600.OO The sbove figures do not inctude sales or use tsxes on personal property. APPROVED AND ACCEPTED Seller PARINERSTtrP SeIler a..IEIl4El CQMPAIiIY, nitc-, @NRAL PARINM A FIDRTM, @RFCIRATT@}TD Seller seUer SUBIENAI^S Balance due to Seller IQrIAIS *** L29,494.92 13O,OOO.00 505.08 l_3o,000.o0 1.30,000.00 REAL ESTAIE m{PAtIY, t-. ESCROT.{# L7 23LV . t7 23LV vL723t OCI']MflMENI# FORI| |lO, 4 ( COr'lPUrER ) ZNenugR Cot*,tPANY, . , i.l r,;-: ill t I INC. Poct Offlcc Bo:< 3O5 MnrrunN, Cot-oRADo 8 I 645 Tcl. (303) 827-4lol F* (3O3, 827 -5641 August 22, 199'l Andy Knudtsen Community Develop. Dept. Staff Town of VaiI 75 South Frontage Road VaiI, CO 81657 Dear Andy: P1ease find enclosed a descrlption of those items which I anticipate will be incomplete at the time of sub- division from The Valley Phase VI, Buffehr Creek, to the Lia Zneimer Subdivision, Buffehr Creek; therefore, escrovt for the incomplete items would be as follows: I THE Edward J. Zneimct, Ph,D' Presidcnt 'l 2 3 4 5 6 Six inch Class 5 road base Three inch asphalt mat Re-vegetation Rip rap headwall Erosion control 1/3 mobilization Total P1ease advise if you have any concerns. Enc: Longt s Excavation Bid $ 5,540.00 'l i ,970.00 2,000.00 2, 500. 00 1 , 040. 00 1r250.00 $24,400. 00 EJZ lhs .\.1" €e g EgEEgEF €g E ti $E ig$$EEE igFEFiEg ig€g*gegg=, ifiig fif fis se' H 9i erg g B,=g E EEt E s'- g C)3Pg fi qqqer gR88S (o-or- o- ro- ( l(l-6lNr (a- $ o .D *e ef; e$s Et EeeFf J J 8 l=l.t< ]I l-lz to l= I E at,o A.Ir|o t EI A H I ;o F ; FOle)+U') wl r$i v - f, E F tr lr tr rn o A rLI o - F.z o u u =lz rt5 ol I o 3s gE o z BUFFEHR .REEK nr"=*, : I ' ","lror*?36t?1*u IL23 82-l69/1021 t/tc $?/ 73a7.A? ,"OO0O?8 ?1?Q.,' 2?/ r'00I I a:lilr-i{: l0 e L0 LEqor:o50 5llor. o t ::: ::::::: ::::::: :]:::: :::j:':: .:.,. r:lr: TOWN OF VAIL DEPARTMENT OF COMMI.INITY DEVELOPMENT SALES ACTION FORM DATE: ,:.I1EM, 0l 0000 41330 COM. DEV. APPLICATION FEES 0l 0000 41540 ZOMNC AND ADDRESS MAPS $s.00 0l 0000 42415 TJNIFORM BIJILDING CODE $50.00 01000042415 TJNIFORM PLUMBING CODE $36.00 0l 000042415 I]NIFORM MECHAMCAL CODE $32.00 01 000042415 UNIFORM FIRE CODE $36.00 0l 0000 42415 NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE $30.00 0l m0042415 OTHER CODE BOOKS 0l 000041548 BLIJE PRI}.ITS (MYLARS)$7.00 0l 000042412 )GROX COPIES /STIJDIES $0.25 01 0000 4237t PENALTY FEES / RE-INSPECTIONS 01 w0 42322 OFF HOURS INSPECTION FEES 0l m00 41412 CONTRACTORS LICENSES FEES 0l 000041330 OTHER FEES 0l 000041413 SICN APPLICATION FEE $20.00 0l 0000 o I Date-Recete O" the conmunity ,,.qft\Development -Departnent: t{' APPIJICITTOT IOR SITTGLE FAI{ILT AI'BDIVIAIOT CEAFIER L7.25 YIIL I{ITNICIPAIJ CODE {:*^i3"ll}if*"1 **' s' n'e're c rz Ea< p,lrztzuzS: MATLTNG toopg,ss Fo6 3o ( bauuftsrz,t/ , ao ?/b4 9 pnorrs-t-21-'//D-L PROPERTY Bu Crzee<-.U B. OMIER'A SIGIIATURE UAILING ADDRESS PHONE ru4/,ltt co ktu4 - K6dt<eOotel/ D. E. 1. afu"l:4,0^, fu'' ,./ ,'- c. d. a. V b. f. A description of all survey monuments, both found and set' wfti.n raik the boundaries of the subdivision, and a a"="tiption of alL nonurnents used in conducting the survey' ;;;;;a-ferirneter per cororado statutes' Bwo perineter monunents shall be istablished as major control nonunents' the materials which shall be determined by the town engineer. c.IPCATION OF PROPOSAL:L/,t-tmUl Sv€bl vtston/ STREET ADDRESS Fiaceu A ,, Lto,vettto&b Jv4olttlSPVl 1=ttt,t"t4 fuo, L IPT -\ t I v.v'- BrpcK_suBDrvrsroN FILING APPLICATION FEE $10O. OO MATERIAIS TO BE SUBMITTED: rrArD-/sO,&- cHEcK # ///b Trro nylar copies and one paper coPYr of the subdivision plat shall be subnitted to the Departnent of Cornmunity DevelopDent. The plat shall include the following: The final plat shall be drawn by a registered surrreyor in India ink, or other substantial solution, on a reproducible medium (preferabty rnylar) with dirnension of twenty-four by thirty-six inches and shall be at a scale of one hundred feet to one inch or iarger with margins oi one an<i one-haii to two inches on the teft and one-half inch on all other sides. Accurate dimensions to the nearest one-hundredth of a foot for all lines, angles and curves used to describe boundaries, streets, setbacks, alleysr easements, structures, areas to be reserved or dedicated for public or conmon uses and other important features. All curves shal1 be circular arcs and shall be defined by the radius, central ang1e, are scored distances and bearing. .A11 dinensions, bo€h linear and angular, are to be deternined by an accurate control survey in the field which must balance and close within a linit of one in ten thousand. North arrow and graphic sca1e. A systematic identification of all existing and proposed Uuilaings, units, lots, blocks, and names for all streets. An identification of the streets, alleys, PaJkF. an4 q.tber public areas or fac j't i.t j.e+ as $het*T: on-tnc Fla+-t ano a d.edication ttrereol-i"'{i- pubS.ic use. an identificatj-on cf the easenents as shown on Lhe plat and a grant tlrereof to in" p"Ufic use. Areas reserved for future public acguisition shall also be shown on the plat' A written survey description of the area including the total -"r".9" to the lreirest -appropriate significant figrure' fhe ;;;;;;" of each rot or plicel shall be shown in this manner as well. 9. /:. y' k. r/t r' "/ h. a statefrt by the land surv"yor "faining how bearing iuu. - was dete-rmined. A certificate by the registered land surveyor as outlined in Chapter L7.32 of this title as to the accuracy of the survey and p1at, and that the survey was performed by hin in accordance with Colorado Revised Statutes L973, Title 38, Article 51. A certificate by an att_of[ey admitted to pragtice in the State of Colorado, ortcorporate title insurer, that the owner(s) of record deaft*inc -to Ehe public tire public right-of-way, areas or facilities as shown thereon are the onners thereof in fee simple, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances except as noted. The proper forn for filing of the plat with the Eagle County clerk and recorder. Certificate of dedication and ownership. Should the certificate of dedication and ownership provide for a dedication of land or improvements to the pubJ-ic' all beneficiaries of deeds of trust and mortgage holders on saj.d real property will be required to sign the certificate of dedication and ownership in addition to tbe fee sirnple oltner thereof. rn. Signature of owner. A\f The plat nust contain the fo}fo$lng statement: frFor zoning purposes, the lots created by tflis subdivision are to be treated as one lot with no more than lgts dwelling units allowed on the conbined area of the-*€ lots.rr The staternent shall be rnodified to indicate the number d( units and lots proposed. \ *ru"A copy of the declarations bnilr/or covenants relating to the t. .v'',... ( subdivision, which shall assure the maintenqnce of any-cqqllqon areas which mav be created. The covenants shall run with the Giaana 6hall=Ee-In a forn suitable for recording with the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder. 3. Schedules A and B of a title report. APPROVAL PROCESS, REVIEW CRTTERIA The burden of proof shall rest with the applicant to show that the subdivision cornplies with the zoning ordinance with resPect to building location and other aspects of the structure and ground, with the original plat as approved by the Design Review Board of the Town and the accurateness and integrity of the survey data found on the plat. Upon receiving two copies of a complete subnittal along with palment of the appropriate fee, the zoning adninistrator shall route one copy of the site nap to the town engineer for his review. The zoning adrninistrator sha}l then conduct this review concurrently. The town engineer shall review the subnittal and return comnents and noiifications to the zoning adruinistrator who shall transmit the approval , disapproval or approval with nodifications of the plat witfrin fourteen days to the applicant. The zoning adninistrator shal1 sign the plat if approved or reguire nodifications on the plat for apfroval br eeny =l-p='ov.'i e.ro to inconsistencies with the originally apprc';ei pJ.a;i cr failurc tc nake .:ther :req':ireC p-cdif j-ear.ions of ihe plat. G. FILING AND RECORDTNG The Department of community Development will record the plat and any related covenants with the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder. Fees for recording shall be paid by the applicant. The Cornrnunity Development Departrnent will retain one mylar copy of the plat for their records and will record the remaining nylar copy. 2. F. If this applicatlon requlres a sepalate revLew by any local, State or Federal agency other than the Town of Vailr. the application fee shall be increased-by $200.00. Exanples of such review, may include, but a13e note limited to: Colorado Department of Blghway Access Permits, Army Corps of Engineers 404, etc. The appllcant shall be responsible for paying any publishing fees which are in excess of 50t of the application fee. If, at the apPficant's lequest, any matter is postponed for hearing, causing the matter to be ;g-published. then, the entire fee for such re-publication shall be paid by the applicant. Applications deemed by the Comnrunity Develop.ment .DePartment to have significant design. land use o! other igsues which gaY have a eignificant lmpact on the comnunity may requile revlew by consultants other than town staff. Should a determination be made by Eire town staff that an outsicie consultant is needed to review any aPplication, the Community Development may hire an outside consuftant, it shal1 estimate the amount of money necessary to pay him or her and this amount shall be forwarded to the Town by -tfre ippfi.cant at the time he files his application with the Community Development DePartment. Upon completion -of the revj.ew of the applicati.on by the consultant, aDY of the funds forwarded by tlte aiiticant for paynent of the consultant which have not been paid to the consultant sha1l be returned to the applicant. Expenses incurred by the Town in excess of the amount forwarded by the aPplicant shall be paid to the Town by the applicant within 30 days of notiflcation by the Town. I ruo Au'l'Tt*t INTER-DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW J,r.,{*,.*-'i 6;d //.r/- J--,1 /< r --Z--a'' t\ Cl*r-^r-ra \tc,t^, ; ,.<rc 6Is"" ."r. -h bFl ,^rn;.r- | lo ,c,-? f t.r^^ ,l Z) Cmr^-rrf TL g.--e Z*r 'T cA (D 4 c Fa S S p.^ot €>, ,.T-, I );t r":^t s',.4 a{ Pe4enrl F aelr<,< }, pe,p.-j J*xF,pen 3t^""*0") L* (- 4f. L c-.-i R . o -.. ,, . t/, ..,. --., .. --.),1. /- / /lk/rlacy'.qa-'lA A--'t^,"- ,.,, ft, N . )' w..0--11 r So--tl''t-", ,( "-'a ( *''o S.aSDr t,>it..', ,) S tt"f.t'ot, E jot,t( f,<ol Sl',u/rl /t Stt'l7t o6*€ h5.o3 l*r , FIRE DEPARTMENT Reviewed by:Date: Conments: Date: RECREATION DEPARTIIIENT PROJECT: DATE SUBI-iITTED: -6--2- DATE F PUBLIC COI.II{ENTS NEEDED BY3 Irrttla.[ll"E ll Ip IIEE LrE u pr. _4:J- BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL: PUBLIC WORKS RevJ.ewed by: conments: Date: Reviewed by: Conmenta: revleed 3/LL/9L Date: o STATE OF COLORADO COUNTY OF EAGLE OFFICE OF THE TREASURER o CERTIFICATE OF TAXES DUE 17t€.3 LAND TITLE OUARANTEE COI.IPANY BOX 357 VAIL CT] S1658 STATUS: 7' d38.33 t?o. 96 DUE ADVERTISING; PENALTIESI MISC: TAX LIEN SALES OF DEUNOUENT TAX SPECIAL /,/ o. oo o. oo o. oo 7,8.29.2? .tqf p" "^s'tu^@ &4 ', cuAi[ t'53r?= 'o. ,J 6' rf),,. ntT PARCELNO.: OOO87?4 ASSESSEO TO: BUFFEHR CREEK PARTNERS P. O. BtrX 2e,27 AVON, CO St6eo CURRENTTAX 71 638.33 rAX DUE: /fq) ASSESSMENTS FEE FOF ISSUING THIS CEHTIFICATE $ AMOUNTS REFLECTED ARE VALID ONLY UNTIL . o7f3t/9t i oo r:rr.NO AL HAND AIID SEAL LONG'S EXCAVATION & Paul Long President BLASTING INC. June 24, 19?I Edward J. Zneimer P.E}; Box 3O5 Minturnr Co. 81645 A2714toL Attn: Ed RE:VALLEY PHASE VI, BUFFEHR trREEK' Long'5 Excavation Inc. is pleased to provide the following bid item prEposal for the above Project' THE WORK INCLUDED PHASE 13 DESCRIPTION r' t. Clear and 6rub t 2. Strip & Stockpile toPsoil 1 3. Embankment C.LP. 4. 5" Class 6 Roadbase /3. 4" Sanitary Services' PVC ,,6. 15" C.H.P' Culvert ,,7. 15" F.E.S, g8. 36" C. M. P. Culvert ,.9.,.36" F,E.S. y LO. Rip-Rap for 36" outlet 4 ll. Rip-RaP Headwa I I -, 12. 1" Nater Services v 13.6" Fire HYdr:ant AssemblY y 14. Erosion Control . 13. Mobilizatlon 15. q" AsPhalt mat '| 770 1600 470 r25 95 6 720 2 20 1 90 1 65 1 253 OUAN- UlP PHASE I TOTAL L.S. 2TOOO.OO tr. Y, 2. OO c. Y. B. 50 TN, 12.OO L.F. 25.OO L. F. 17. OO E,A. 200.oo L.F. 3B.OO E.A. 700.oo c,Y. 30.oo EA. 2,5OO. OO ... L.F. 38.50 EA. 2,730.OO EA. 16.00 L.S. 3,750.OO TN. 42.OO TOTAL $ 2,OOO.OO E 1 ,42O. OO $ 13,600.OO $ 5,54O.OO !t 3r1Z5.OO $ 1,615.OO :F 1r2OO.OO $ 4r55O.OO E 1 ,4OO. OO $ 600.()0 I215OO.OO rF 3r465.OO I2,75O.OO 91rO4O.OO $ 3i75o.OO 911,97O.OO $ 60r655.OO e.,v*b .r"P''_r{b I t y ry y-r"t# r"., fe,,,..t *,,r., i w( =5?.\\r,-t 1tlPLo t1 .\TS I tlo p.O. Box 894 . Avon, Colorado 81620 . (303) 949.168? P.O. Box /tO r Stedlng, Colorado 80751 . (3{B) 522'1627 1o l\-^rb I ct,1+s PAFE 1 OF 2 p',.&^{, 1ch"$ {ra ' 'i{lt.' f'\ or4 9'/ a/ ' Buffehr creek partners, a cororado lirnited partnership,Grantor, for the consideration of Ten Dolrars and other good anb.'valuabre consideration,.in trand paid, hereby selrs and. c6nveys an undivided and nonexclusi-ve one sevent]n (L/1j interest, as tenant in conmon, in and to the Road and Utility Easement legally described on the Plat attactred hereto and incorporated treiein ry reference, to the Grantee(s) narned in the warranty Deed conveyinq the Lot. The Easements granted by this Easenent Deed are for-the benefit of, and appurtenant to the Lot, described on said.warranty Deed. The covenants set forth below shalr run with the I-,ot and the Easement and be binding upon the Grantees and their heirs, personal representatives and assigns. ARTICLE ]- THE ROAD EASE!{ENT PREFATORY DEFINITION A Declaration of protective Covenants was recorded with the Prat of the Lot to which this Easement is appurtenant. The Article 1, Generar Provisions and the Definitions, at Article 2 of the Protective covenants, are incorporated into this Easement by reference. Specific Definitions for the Road and Utility Easernent l-. Road, in addition to the plat legal description of the Easement, means the physical structure constructed Uy the crantor upon the Easement to provide access to the Lot and the terrns and provisions set forth herein. 2. Utilities means the electrical , water, gas,telephone, cable and any other such item now, or in the iuture,generalry considered t,o be a I'utiri-tyrl necessary for the use and occupation of the Lot or other Lots in the project and either buried in the ground under the surface of the Road or open space,in the surface of the Road or affixed above the surface- of tle Road or Open Space. 3. Tenant in Common or Cotenant rneans any Owner of a Lot served by the Easernent. rt is anticipated that seven Lots till l: served by this Easement and each Lot Owner will own a L/7 undivided interest in the Road Easernent and the utility Easernent. ARTTCLE 2 UTILITY EASEMENT l_. Each Lot Owner and his successors and assigns is granted a nonexclusive perpetual Utility Easenent over, across, ?bove, upon, and under the Road Easement for ingress and egressand utility services to his Lot. The Roadway and the Utility Easement is for the benefit of, and appurtenant to, each Lot and may not be subdivid.ed or severed fron the Lot. 2. Each Lot Owner nay use the Utility Easernent for the use and benefit of the L,ot for the installation, repair, remova).,pr restoration of utilities, including cable televiiion and any future l-nventions or devices that become utilities to service the Lot. ARTTCLE 3 PURPOSE OF ROADWAY AND TI{E UTILITY EASEMENT . The purpose of the perpetual Roadway Easement and the ptirity Easement is for a nonexclusive access drive and roadwav and general utility easenent to exj-st fron the public way at Bxffehr Creek Road (the Pub1ic Way) to provide nonexclusive private access to the seven Lots located within phases One and Two and for the use and benefit of the owners thereof. rDriveway purposesrr as used in this Agreenent rneans use thereof by vehicles, persons on foot, horsebacl< or other tlpes of wheeled vehicles or any other conveyance now or in the future used for the rnovement of persons and property. Emergency vehicles'suctr as fire trucks and very heavy vehicles such as moving vans, trash haulers and constructi-on 'Pguipnent may use the Road for (1) ordinary course of business novementi (2) so long as their use of the Easement does not damage the Road or (3) so long as the owner benefitted from such use.pays for the damage to the Road surface caused by such equipnent. fn the event that steel tracked eguipnent and vehicles rcith load linits in excess of 50,OOO GVWrs ire-perrnitted by an Owner of a Lot to use the Road, in such event al1 danages ind subsequent costs of repair caused to the Road by the uie of such qguipnent shall- be the soLe cost and expense of the Owner permj-tting such use. The Utility Easement is for ttre installation of any needed utilities, both before and after construction of the Road,to the Lots and as det,erarined by any Owner of a tenant in connon interest in the Easement. Any Ownei may, by further gonveyancing, grant fron time to tine, inteiests in his interest in tEe Utility Easement to utility companies to service the Lot and it is agreed pursuant to this Agreement and by the tenant in conmon owners that a generar quitclain of the utility Easenent in -f3vo-r of .utility providers and for servicing the Lots is granted.hbreby without ?uitrrer conveyancing. surje6t to Lne rules and regulations.of the utility providers, no owner may deny any other owner tbe right to I'tap into' or rttie intor existing utirities serving a Lot or Lots so long as suctr ovmer does noi inpair the sbrvice to the existing Owners or increase the costs to such - Osrners. ARTTCLE 4 COVENANT THAT OPERATTON OF EASEIT{ENT NOT INTERFERE WITH IOTS The Owners of the Lots shall use and operate the Ehsement and Road herein granted and the reserrred rights in such al manner that the operation thereof will in no v/ay hinder or pFevent the proper and reasonable use and enjoynent of all of the Owners of the Lots. No cotenant shall place fences, obstructions,blrricades or other structures on or across any portion of the Fasenent or Road, including parking, which will prevent or inpede tfe flow of pedestrian and vehicurar traffic as intended excelt fbr tenporary periods required for maintenance or initial construction of the Road or utilities or reconstruction or utility rnaintenanse or to prevent the Easenent and Road from becoming a public way. All Owners subject portions of the Road such as driveways located upon their attractive condition at aLl of the Road. to this Agreeurent sha1l uaintain any access points, parking areas, and L,ots in grood, useable, and tines and at least to the standards ARTICLE 5 EXPENSES TO BE SHARED I - Except as otherwise set forth herein, the parties agree that aLl costs and expenses of the Easement slrarl be- shared al fpllows: The owner oi each platted Lot shall contribute tjTth of the cost. Until all seven Lots have been platted and conv-eyed by tfe Grantor, the owners of the Platted Lots shaLl each pay tfreir-pforata fraction of the costs; i.e., (a) in the event Lots 1, 2 and 3 are Platted in 1991, each Lot Owner shall pay t/3 of the cpsts and (b) if Lot 4 is platted in L992, each Lot Owner shall pay L/4 of the costs. In the event that (t) any owner thereafter dbtenrines to install in the Utility Easenent underground or overhead utility services or takes any other action that danages or destroys the surface or support of the Road and which action ls undertaken for ttre sole benefit of such owner, in such case arr costs and extrlenses of such work incruding restoration of the Road surface, stral-l be at the benefitted partyrs sole cost and expense and (2) if any owner exceeds the l0ad'Linits on the Road as set forth above and such activities cause unreasonable wear _ and'tear to the surface of the Road such party shall be responsible for the cost attributable to the deterioration to the Road caused by such activities in excess of reasonable wear and tear. ARTICLE 6 MAINTENANCE AND REPAIRS OF ROAD EASEMENT DEFINED The repairs and maj.ntenance to be undertaken and performed under this Agreement by the Olsners with respect Road Easement shall include the fotlowing which listing is intended to be exclusive: to tbe not I. The Easement shal_l be repaired., maintained,and replaced to the same standard, and in confornity with, the standards estabrished and used to create and surface the Road pursuant to Town of VaiI, Colorado required stand.ards for a Private Street supporting the then cuirent traffic load. The expense of such work shall be apportioned by the parti-es as set ,forth above. 2. Repairs, maintenance and restoration of the Road sha]l include fiiling of chuckholes, snow removal , salt placement, regrading, resurfacing with blacktop or concrete and such other necessary work as is reasonabry required. to naintain the Road in a safe, attractive manner and in Confornance with any governmentar regulations or requirenents governing the Easement. ARTICLE 7 LIMITS OF LTABILITY Owners of each Lot, proportionately hereto agree,above, to bear the costs and extrlenses of repairs,and naintenance of the Road authorized by thern or as f ol-Iows: i L. Such costs and expenses shall not exceed, in the aggregate, the sum of gZrOOo.0O the first year subsequent to construction of the road by Declarant unless a greater sfn is autlrorized in writing by the owners of the Lots reguired to bear the costs by this Agreenent. The aforesaid sum is to increase each year by 10t, not compounded, and assessuents rBay exceed such nunber so long' as they are spread out over the nuurbei of years ngcessary to meet the naximum sum test. The .as set forth restoration, needed and as 2.. Resurfacing, blacktop, and other capital i-mprovements required to rnaintain the Road in a first class condition for its intended purposes shall not be subject to the linitation set forth above. However, capital improvenents deternined to be performed shall be set forth to the other cotenants in formar budgets, bids and otherr,rise documented and whic-h shall be presented to the other Owners at least four (4)-months prior to the conmencement of any capital improvenent. Any owner required to contribute to the cost of a capital improvemenl may contest in Eagle District Court the (t) need for the capital irnprovement; and (2) the cost of the capital improvernent. ine party adjudicat,ed to have acted in good faith and consistent with the purposes and intends of this Agreement sha1l be awarded aII of its costs and attorney fees for such a hearing. ARTICIJE 8 DESIGNATTON OF OWNER The Grantor is hereby irrevocably designated as the agent for the Owner(s) of the Easeinent to contract for and oversee the repairs, rnaintenance, restoration, and improvements authorized under this Agreement with respect to the Road. The Grantor.nray, in writing, assign, in whole or in part, (l_) the aforesaid rights and duties to the Town of VaiI; (2) ttie'aforesaid-rights and duties to any owner of a Lotj (3) a Manager authorized by colorado Real Estate law to manage real'estate ia broker) enqaged to manage the Road and the Easeruent; or (4) the Homeownerrs Association created pursuant to this Decraration.such an assignment sharl relieve the crantor of liabirity under this Agreement so long as the assigned. owner assumes and. agrees to perform the duties set forth herein. The assignrnent and acceptance of the assignrnent shall be evidenced by a written agreement executed by the parties with reference to this Articre and recorded with the Clerk and Recorder of Eagle County,Colorado. AlI utilities shall be placed in the Utility Easement by the providers thereof acting for the Owner to be benefitted .thereby. Such Owner shatL pronptly pay for all costs and ctrarges of such utirity providers and indennify and hord harrnless tbe other Owners therefrom. No Owner is authorized or granted any right to act as an agent of any other Owner and subject such other owners interest in the Easement to any claims. ARTICLE 9 COMPENSATION OF GFANTOR The Grantor shall not be compensated for acting as a Manager for the Road but it may engage a ltanager to perforrn its duties hereunder and the Managerrs total yearry compensation for 5 acting as the agent for the Owners shall not exceed the greater of $500.00 or l-0? of the yearly gross or budgeted assessnents or such other amount as mutually agreed upon between the owners of the Lots. such conpensation is not to be incruded in the ownersl llability specified in Section 7 hereof. No bond shall be required of the Agent. aovexceueNr H#ANo nxpnNsng The Manager may require the Owners of the L,,ots to advance their percentage share for the Road, as set forth above,of reasonably expected expenses or to create a sinking fund and hold tbe funds in a segregated trust account for use by the Manager in paying the costs and expenses authorized and incurred under this Agreernent. As the Manager requires add.itional funds fron time to tirne to pay the costs and expenses authorized and incurred. under this Agreenent for the Road, each owner shalt deposit his percentage share of the suns required, subject to the lirnit,s of liability under this Agreement, in the Managerrs trust account within one (L) month of receipt of notice from the Manager that such funds are reguired. In the event that anlr Owner fails to pay the reguired amount within one (l-) month of the Manager requesting the same in writing, such amounts shalt becone ttrereafter due and payable,bear interest at the rate of 24* per annum, include a late fee of $fOO,OO, and rnay be colLected by suit against the defautting party by any of the other owner(s),the Homeownerrs Association or the Manager for the owners and which suit darnages sharr incrude costs and reasonable attorney fees for collection of the Assessments. The interest earned and late fee sharl be paid over by tle Manager to the non-defaulting Owners, prorata, as liguidated damages and not as a penal_ty. In addition, any cotenant against whom a judgment has been obtained pursuant to this Article nay be denied by the other . owners, via the obtaining of an injunction, the right of use of the Road until the judgment has been satisfied. This right nay be enforced by obtaining an injunction against the judgtrent debtor owner and those taking through or under hin (the judgirnent debtor owner expressly waiving any requirement of the other Owners to obtain a bond if reguiied by such a proceeding) from the Eagle County District Court, Colorado and aLl costs and expenses, including r-asonable attorney fees,shall be added to the existing judg:nent against the owner for obtaining and enforcing such an order. The other owners are expressly released frorn any liability whatsoever to the debtor owner and those taking through or under hirn with respect to the denial of such Olrners use of the Road. Such debtor/ cotenant/Owner shall indennify and hold hanrless the other cotenant/Olrners fron any clairn of danage fron any party asserting a right to use the Road on account of such parties feglf relationships with the debtor/cotenant Owner. _ | ARTICT.,E l_1 ACCOI'NTING BY MANAGER The Manager shall furnish to the Owners of tbe Lots wnitten reports of naintenance and repairs undertaken, costs and.expenses incurred, and recej.pts for tbe palruent of costs and e$)enses at Ieast once per year. ARTTCLE ].2 NOTICES I Any notice or report required under this Agreement shall be sent to the parties and the Manager at their last known address, at the address they have directed or at the address lrlsted for such Owner of the Property ln the Office of the Treasurer of Eagle County, Colorado. Any required notice shall be made by regular nail, properly addressed, and postage prepaid. Frorn time to t,irne, but at not rnore than five year j-ntervals, the Owners, the Manager or the Homeownerrs igsociation, shall file with the Clerk and Recorder of Eagle Cbgnty, colorado a general Notice executed and acknowledg-O by a!-I of the Owners an Estoppel Notice advising at least the folrowing_and such other inforrnation as the owners nay desire to make public: (1) the names, addresses and fractional interest owned of the Easement by each of the Owners; (2) any outstanding anounts owed by any Owner on account of this Agreernentt and (3)the current Managers name, address and telephone number. The Iltanager shall provide such information, in writing, to any Otrner or interested party, within ten (10) days, upon the reguest of an Orfner, for a fee to be deternined by the Owners. I prnso*lr, rNruny Rr'ffi oa'aen r,raerr.*v .l - Any liability of the Manager or Owners for personal injury to any worlmen enrployed to construct the Road or make rppairs to the Road under this Agreement, or to third persons, as well as any liability of the Owners for danage to the property of the Managef, or any such r,irorloen, or of any third person, as a result of or arising out of construction, repairs, rnaintenance,ahd restoration to the Road under this Agreernent shall be borne ap betveen the Owners in the sane fractions as they bear the cgsts and expenses of such repairs, maintenance, and restoration. 7 The Manager shall have the affirnative duty to provide, or have provided, worloanrs compensation insuiance,builders risk insurance and other Like insurance to insure io the owners reasonably adeguate insurance proceeds and the defense of any clains. The preniums for such insurance shal1 be apportioned between the Owners as set forth herein. Any_ liability for the installation and repair of utirities shall be the sole responsibi.Iity of the oi"rner being benefited and it shaLl indennify and bold-ha:::uless the other parties from any tort or contrabtual claims, including rnechanicrs liens, as a result of such activities The Lot, Ownerrs shall each keep and nraintain general riability insurance upon their respective Lots includin{ the Eb'sement as.an appurtenance in an amount and terms to be agreed,upon from tirne to time by the Owners but not less than $1r0001000.00 lor a single occurrence and each party shalt pay tF"lI own premium for such l_iability protection. Slch part! - sharr cause his insurance company to agree to not subrolate-to any claims rnade under the policy against the other owneilsl . ARTfCLE 14 INDEI,INITY The Owners agtree to indernnify and hold harrnless the other ownef? against all liability for injury to hinself or {aqage to his Lot_ when such injury or daurige shalr result from,arise out of, or be attributable to any naintenance, repair, or restoration of utilities or to the Road undertaken pursuant to this Agreenent. ARTICLE ].5 REAL PROPERTY TAl(ATroN ., - _ - -Any real property taxes assessed against the Easenent shal1 be divided between aI1 of the Lot Owneis as per their prorata fractional ownership of the Easement. rf Elgle county does not assess the Easement as a separate taxation-parcel , -each owner shalI tinely pay all rear estate taxes assessed against his Lot. ARTICLE ]-6 EASEMENT TO RUN WTTH LOT The Easenent shall run with the L,ot, and shall be appurtenant tlrereto, a burden and benefit to the Lot and any other Lots serviced by the Easenent, and shall be binding on and sharl inure to the benefit of the Grantor, the owners ani their heirs, successors, or assigns. Unless agreed to by all of the owners or as othenrise set forth herein, no cotenant owner may 8 (1) sever or convey its interest in the Easement separate and apart f,ron the conveyance of its Lot; (2) or subdivLde its interest in the Easenent,. or (3) or subdivide the Utility Easement fron the Road Easenenti and (4) any lien or encunbrance against a Lot shall also automaticatly incluOe tlre Owners undivided cotenant interest in the Eaienent. The cotenancy title held by each.of the Lot owners in the Easeuent shall not ierge with. their title to their tot, No party rnay relieve itself oi rlautrity hereunder by non use of trre naseient or abandonment of same. It is understood and agreed that the Easement purposes, objectives and intents are: (1) the Road is to be used and occupl-ed to the maximum extent possible and consistent with good traffic planning and traffic flowt (2) untess consented to by aII Owners of the Easement, the costs of the Easement are to be divided egually among the seven Lot Owners and (3) that util-ities sharl be generally praced in the utility Easement which is dedicated to the use and enJoyrnent of the utility providers who shall be responsibre and liabre for tbeir actions within the utility Easement and pursuant to the cornmon and statutory raws of contract and tort. ARTICTJE 1.7 NO PARTNERSHIP OR JOINT VENTI]RE This Easement to the Owners of the seven Lots as lenants in common does not create, and is not intended to create,a partnership or other joint venture between the osrners of the Lots and no third party beneficiary relationship with any party has been created or intended unless specifically set forlh-herein. ARTICLE 18 LTTTGATION fn the event of any litigation with respect to this AEreenent, it is agreed that a1I such litigation shall be held e*clusively in Eagle County, Colorado, District Court and the .court sharr award to the prevailing Lot owner or or{ners alr costs and reasonable attorney fees incurred. ARTICI.,E 19 HOMEOWNER I S ASSOCTATTON AND GENERAL I'TATTERS L. Ihe Grantor reserves the right to assign anil convey arly duty or obligation of the Grantor (except payment of the Grantorrs prorata fractionaL share of the Road costs until all Lots have been conveyed) or the Lot Owners set forth in this Easement to the Buffehr creek Homeownerts Association, a colorado 9 not for profit corporation that is, or nay be forned, by the Grantor or the Owners. Z. The Ownerrs may, upon a najority vote of the Lot o!'rners, assign and. convey any duty and obrigation of the owners set forth in this Easement to the Buffehr Creek Homeownerrs Association so long as the ownerrs rernain liable for their - prorata fractional share of the Road costs. 3. The obligations created by this Easement Agreenent rnay be enforsed by the Grantor, any onner of a Lot or interested party, or the Town of VaiI , Colorado. | 4. The Grantor reserves the right to amend, nodify,revoke or supplement these Easement Covenants, without the perroission of any Lot owner or those clairning by, through or under hin (a) so long as the Road Easement right of access and cost sharing fraction is not effected and utirity Easenent right of access not effected, or (b) until the Grantor has conveyed arl qf its prorata fractional- interests in the Easement. which-ever event occurs first. This Agreement is to be 1iberally construed to carry out the intends and purposes of the Road and the utirity Easeirent as set forth herein. 5. The liability of the Grantor hereund.er is the .construction of the Road and utilities as per the requirernents of the Town of vail. rt is further understooa tuat Grantor or other dntities may construct dwellings upon the Exhibit A Real Estate apd that their construction activities will invoLve the movernent of heavy nachinery and equiprnent over the Road. such parties use of the Road for dwelling construction shalr not be subject to the use Restrictions of this Easement or such parties riable for wear and tear of the Road unless such Use is griissly negligent or intentionally damaging to the Road and, in suc[ event, such party shalr be responsibre to repair the Road to the standard if sirch - damage had not occurred. . 6. In the event that the plats of Lots 4, 3, 2 and L do not contain an Easement that also services the pranned Lots z, 61 and 5, the Grantor, when Lots 7, 6 and 5 are platted, shall (ai deed a L/7t-lr interest in this Easement to each of the ordnerrs of'the three Lotsi and (b) deed a L/zt\ interest in the Lots 5, 6 and 7 Easement to be created to each of the owners of the four Lots appurtenant to this Easement. The Lot 5, 6 and 7 Easernent shall be subjected to these covenants and cannot be subdivid.ed or sgparated fron thj.s Easernent it being the intent of the crantor 10 I I that the Easement be treated, as seven Lots and subject to these a single Easenent senricing Covenants. the Witness the hand of the crantor this , 1991_. BI'FFEHR CPSEK PARTNERS, a ] Colorado lirnited partnership B9: Zneimer Company, fnc., ceneral partner Edward Zneimer, President day of Colorado Partner, STATE OF COLORADO County of ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE I.IE, this day of +--.-, 1991, by Buffehr Creek Partners, a IfuritedlartneiEEip, by Zneiner company, Inc., ceneral bj,Edward Zneimer, its Presl-dent. Notary Public explres: C : \pp50\zne imer\easene. nt z f3\easernent. 072 oE/ o4/ eL ss. eonlo].ssl0n 11 DEcLrRErrolr oF "&*hot PRorEcrrvE covENAN,ls . +7fb L covENAlITs, coNDrrroNg AIID REsrRrcrrolrs FoR '/?rx, TEE I.,IA ZNEIMER SUBDIVISION L,OT ATIACSED TO TEE PI.AT OF trOT PREPARED PURSI'ANI ITO c.R.8. 38-51-100.3 ET. SEQ.(MINIUIru STANDARDg FOR IIIITD 8URV-EY8 AND PLATS) RECORDED PURSUETflT TO c.R.s.38-35-109 (INSTRUUENTS AI'FECTING TITIJE TO REAI PROPERTY TO BE RECORDED) PARTY OWNING TITLE TO IJOT8 BUFFEER CREEK PARTNERS, A COIJORADO LI!,TIIED PARTNERSEIP BY: ZNEII.TER COUPA}IY, INC., GENERAII PARTNER BY: EDWARD Z}TEIMER, PRESIDENT TO t[HOt! IT UAY CONCERN Buffehr Creek Partners, a Colorado lirnited partnership,]-s the owner (hereinafter referred to as the rrO\rirneril or the rrDeclaranttt) of the real estate,(hereinafter referred to as the rrl,ot") depicted and legally described on the pLat of the above referenced Lot, Lia Zneirner Subdivision, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. ARTTCLE 1 GENERAL PROVISTONS The Declarant is the owner and developer of the ReaI Estate described on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Exhibit A (commonly known as rrThe Valley, Phase !Ir!) has been approved by the Town of Vail , Department ot conmunity Deveroprnent, Planning and Environnentar connission on October 22, 1990, for subdl_vision into l_3 Lots pursuant to VaiI Oqdinance L7.25.0i.0 et. seg. (Single Farnily subdivisions). The Exhibit A Real Estate was previously approved by EqVle County, Colorado (prior to incorporation of the Exhibit t Rdar Estate into the Town of vait) as a pranned unit Developruent. Wtien the Exhibit A ReaL Estate was annexed. into the Town,Residential Cluster zoning was appJ.ied to the Exhibit A ieal Eqtate. The subdivision, as now approved by the Town of VaiJ_,incorporates Planned unit Development and cluster subdivlsion concepts. Except for the Lot (and anv subsecruent Lots specifiqallv referenced! the renainder of the Exhibit A Real Estate is not beinq subiected to these protective covenants. The Exhibit A Real Estate is required to be sequentially subdivided into 13 Lots via three phases designated. phase one (being seven Lots designated East-Lots 1, Z ana 3 and phase Two (being four Lots designated West-Lots 4,5,6 and 7) and phase Three (being six Lots designated 13, L2, 11, 10, 9 and B) phases 1 and 2 are located south of Buffehr Creek Road; phase 3 is located north of Buffehr Creek Road. .Appurtenant to each Lot in phase One and Two, each person or entity taking title to a Lot frorn the Owner has also been granted an undivided one seventh (r/7th) interest, as a tenant in common, in and to the Private Road Easement (hereinafter referred to as the "Road" ) which sha11 provide access to the Owners of Lols 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 and 1 fron their Lot to the public \^/ay on Buffehr creek Road. The undivided and nonexclusive tenant i-n common interest in the Road sha1l be appurtenant to each Lot,shall-be inseparable from each Lot; and, the Easement crossing an ownerr s Lot, sharl not cause a merger of the Easement into the Lot ownerrs fee estate. Any severance or further subdivision of the Road Easement from a Lot shalI be nu1I and void. ARTICLE 2 DEFINITIONS 1. rrOwnerrr.Ineans any person, corporation, partnership,joint venture, Iimited partnership, Iimited Iiability company'or any other entity hoJ_ding record title to the Lot. 2. rlPlatrr neans an Inprovement Survey plat as defined by C.R.S. 38-5L-1-00.3 and Ordinance 17.Og.130. 3. rrLotrr means the real estate legally described on the PIat together with the undivided one seventh (L/7tln]' interest as tenants in cornnon ownership of the Road and as defined as a tf Private Streetlr in Ordinanc'e !7.09.120. 4. ItBuilding.Enveloperr neans the area shown and defined on the PIat of the Lot and being approximately 45OO square feet. .-'-- ;=-==-./].A,t\, l'.,*\' ,7\ l,L'J"" Ll- .'ro A ' )"\ 5. nRoadrr means the private Road Easement s Phases L and 2, Lots 7, 6, S, 4,3, 2 and L to the public iav on Buffehr creek Road and as defined by ordinance L7.ob.rzo. tire \\Private Road Easement regal description is attached to the plat V and defines the rights and obligations of the Lot owner with ,l respect to the Road. ,y'' 6. ItPrinary/Second.ary Residential Dwel1ingr means any Dwelling constructed pursuanl to Vail Ordinance fe.fS.ofO. 7. trBuilding" shall mean any structure having a roof supported by corumns or walls, or any other enclosed structure for_the housing or enclosure of persons, animals or property (Ordinance 17. 08. 055) . 8. ttOrdinancerr means the ordinances of the Town of Vail,Colorado as enacted on the date of this Declaration and as thereafter arnended. AII definitions contained within the ordinances are incorporated into this Declaration by reference. 9. rrOpen Spacerr neans all of the real estate located within a Lot except the real estate located hrithin a euirding Envelope. l-0. ttProject" shal1 mean the real estate described on Exhibit A, the 13 Lots created from the Real Estate and the Dwellings constructed, or to be constructed, upon the Lots. 11. rrHoneownerrs Association" means Buffehr Creek Homeownerrs Association, a col-orado not for profit corporation,that nay be forrned by the Decrarant or the Lot ownerrs to perform the ownersr duties and obrigations under this Decraration ind enforce the Declaration. ARTICLE 3 PRTMARY,/SECONDARY RESTDENTIAL DWELLTNGS L. In the event a prirnary/Secondary Residential Dwelling (unit) i-s constructed within the Bui)-ding Envelope upon the tot] a. the Secondary (Caretaker) Unit shall not be soId,transferred or conveyed separately from the primary unit for a period of not more than twenty years and the rife of Trent Ruder from ttre date that the Certificate of Occupancy is issued for said secondary unit; and, subdivided or convey-d separate from ttre Primary owelling and any atternpted subdivision shall be null and void. b. The Secondary Dwelling Unit shall not be leased 9r_rented.for any period of less than thirty consecutive days,i{nd that if it.shall be rented it sharl be rented onry to tlnints rriho are full-time employees in the Upper Eagle VaLley. The Upper Eagle v€lley sha1l be deened to include tlre Gore vaLLey, uintir-rn,Red Cliff, Gilrnan, Eag1e-Vai)- and Avon and their surroundlng l5gai. _ A full-tine employee is a person who works an average of thirty hours per week, and c. The Secondary Dvrelling Unit shall not be divided j,into any forrn of tiue-shares, interval ownership or fractional fee. ARTICIJE 4 BUILDING ENVELOPE AIl Buildings shall be constructed and located Building Envelope and shaLl not encroach upon the Open 2. A Building Envelope nay be nodified with the approval gf the Vail Design Review Board based upon detailed review-of an jrndividual architectural and site plan for a Dwelring unit. The Qesign Review Board shall find that the rnodification to anv Building Envelope does not substantially result in any negitive ilmpacts upon the Lot, adjoining, Lots or have any adverse impact upon required geologic hazard considerations. If an association of home owners within the project is modificatj.on of a Building Envelope shall also the rules and regulations adopted by the Association. 4. Any nodification of the Building Envelope shall not dxceed 15 feet in length andr/or width and, in no case, shall any Building be built in the 20 foot setbacks shown on the approved developrnent p1an. 1.within the Space. .i J. !'ormed, any conforn to 'l constructed 2. ARTTCLE 5 OPEN SPACE No fences or domestic style landseaping shall be or permitted in the Open Space. Open space shaLl be preserrred in its natural state. 3. Real Estate within i:nnediatety contigruous to the with sod lawns and fences but sheds, nay be erected outside the Building Envelope and BuiLding Envelope nay be rrinprovedtl no Buildings, including fencing and of the Building Envelope. 4. The Declarant, and for its heirs, assigns, and designees, RESERVES the right, at any tirne and from tirne to time,to designate and create utility easements and install utilities within the Open Space as designated on the plat of the Lot for the use and enjoyment of the Owners of the Exhibit A Real Estate.The liability of the Declarant for exercising of this reserved. fiSht shall not exceed the cost of returning the Open Space to its natural condition as required by this Declaration. This reserved right rny be assigned by the Declarant to the Buffehr Creek Homeownerrs Association or atl of the Owners of the Proj ect. ARTICLE 6 HOMEOWNERIS ASSOCTATION AND GENERAL MATTERS l-. The Declarant reserves the right to assign and convey any duty or obligation of the Declarant or the Owners set forth in this Declaration to the Buffehr creek Homeolrnerrs Association,a Colorado not for profit corporation that is, or may be formed,by the Declarant or the Os/ners as provided for herein. 2. The Ownerrs nay, upon a najority vote of the Lot Owners, . assign and convey the enforcement of any duty and obligation of the Owners set forth in ttris Agre-nent to the Buffehr Creek Homeownerrs Assooiation. Witness the hand of the Declarant this 3. This Declaration nay be enforced by the Declarant, any Owner of a Lot or interested party, or the Town of Vai1,Colorado. 4. These Protective Covenants, with the exception of those defining the Secondary DweJ_lings, Building Envelope and Open Space, shal-l expire on Decenber 31, 2021 unless renewed by a tnajority of the Lot Owners then subject to these Covenants recording with the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder, Colorado, an instrument executed by then extending such covenants for a period of time to not exceed 50 years. 5. The Declarant reserves the right to anrend, nodify,revoke or supplement these Covenants, without tbe penrissj.on of any Lot ordner or those clairuing by, through or under hin (a) so llong as the Building Envelope and open Space and Dwelling i3 not affected or (b) until the year 2ooo or such time as the Decrarant has conveyed all of its interest in the Exhibit A ReaI Estate,vthichever event occurs first. 1001 day of BPTFEHR CREEK PARTNERS, al Colorado linited partnership By: Zneimer Company, Inc,, General partner By:-i' SBATE OF coIoRADO )) ss.Countv of l I acrorowl-,EDcED TO BEFORE ME, this _ day'of April, 1991,blr Buffehr Creelc partners, a Colorado IIn:[Eed partneiship, by Zneirner conpany, rnc,, Generar partner, by Edwird zneinei, ii.s President. Notary PubLic Mf conmission expires: *i-*tr,,rt,,"'prot.coy zf5\t iasport.cov orl,we, l I i i I I I i I I I I I i I'1RY 3@ '97 A8:4A HOCHSTHD IlocRsreor, Stnaw & Stnruss,p.C. ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW "."ffi:.:lXHJ:'"T,o"TELEPHON E: (303) 3a9_9a2a TELEFAX: (303) 333-7te7 Buffehr Creek Partners, Ltd.Attention: Zneimer Company, Inc.Attention: Edward Zneiner, preEident Hochstadt, straw and Strauss, p.C. George M. Straw Buffehr Creek Subdlvision our File No. 90 s 11022 May 29, 1"991 FAX (L)827-5644 TET o P.z/tl MARK J. RUBIN JORDAN HOCHSTAO? G EORGE M. STRAW RICHARO S. S1RAUSS HON. CHARLES A. FRIEDMAN OF COUNSEL TO: FROM: REi DATE: VIA: This Menorandun is written the erninent start up of (a) the Road single fanily subdivision of Lots 11,construction of hornes on two Lots by by Buffehr Creek partners. I will start with a review of the present status of the subdivision and nove into the issues being- presented on a current basis. At the outset, please note thit-the existing situation is very conmon in Vail: a trenendous desire to construct roads, utilities, and dwelllngs arr at the same tirne sinply due to the very short building s6ason that is available.The luxury availabre in rnirder clinates of constructing the infrastructure and then the hones in a lockstep fashioi is onry available in vail if tirning is not inportant aira a developer cin afford to construct the infrastructurL one sumner and wail to the folJ.owing sunner to construct hornes. such a procedure has brought down nany a vait developer due to interest alcumulation and otfrer carrying costs and the ephenerar deruand of the Vail rnarket. Uy analysis will be based upon the vail ordinances, the PEc Minutes of octobet 22, l-990 and the pEc report of Novernber L2, t99O. 1. Buffehr Creek Subdivision Buffehr Creek Subdivision was origlnally phase VI of The ValJ-ey Subdivision and uas zoned as a pl.anned Unit Deveropment. The Valley subdivision hras annexd€rom-Eaqre County into the Town of-Vail and granted " kt""!gl l""id which is ttre Townrs version of a planned unit Develo-frn-5nil:-Ffrer concept provided for wide planning flexibility- by the to you ln anticipation of and Utilities; (b) the 12 and 13 i and (e) the Lindsey/Nilsson and one Lot I NRY 3A '91 @:4e HoCHST ET fl- 333-712?RDT o P.3/LL developer,/owner and. the. property wae prevJ,ouery approved by Eagle County for the construction of cz condonlntun intis. Buffehr creek partners purchased the property based upon what r believe to be an accurate perceptlon-tirat tnrE.property Ls one :f,-ft:. last large, ueairtlt"i ;e unaevetopea parcers. rernaining ln the town oi Vail and the htghest and best Isg_o_f the property is for.larEe, elngle fanili dwefffng-Buffehr creek partnera deliberitery ciused trrt'pioperty to be dowrr-zoned fron condoninium units io 13 1ze ii ciretaker unitE are incruded in the dwerling constructtori) -"i"gi--tanfly uni[s with the additional 0ption 6r provtding i',rcirilarer unlt$?:l:i:!ilg-gf.rll" Tr.ain dwerltn! and . iuJn il;ii;; aparrnenr lncorporated into the unit for use by a caretaker/ernlroyee reguired to be working in Vail. Due to the unlque history of the Lionsridge parcel,Buffehr creek partners was given uy trre rown two-ot€ioil-;r;i,respect to its subdivision or tne Froperty: (ii ;'conprete pratted subdivisiolr- gT (2) proceealni, oire rot'ai a tine, under !lr:,ginsre raniry subdivrsio-n ordinanci oi-viii.--rn. rarteE optlon was chosen.by Buffehr creek partnerE for two reasona: (x)pranning frexlbiLityr and (?) -the cogt and tine iiane (surnner of 1991 construction.being denanded by buyers) i"euiieo to have a conplete subdivision approved by the town. The Singre Farnily subdivieion ordJ.nance, (chapter L7.25 of vailrs ordLnance) because tts prrnary G; ;; a'adveripn-r,i -- tool is for ,in-firrs' of existrn| and irevlousry prated and devetoped rots, has an unusual pr5vreioi-in"i-req"ii".-ite---foundation of the approved dweliing to rrave-1e""'pc"r.{fJo trre Town knoss that the extra dwerring-has been pra-eh"-on tiio-roi -- exactly as approved) prior to appioval of ttrl-ilnar prat of,the r€t. Because the lots on the rloperty are ver:r large ino-wiiiiout an existing dwerring to contend with.'tnis reqiiiern6nt- se.,hr--'--unnecessary but the Town requires ttrit ttre proicedure le-"ortrira ,;;trith as called for in the o;dinance. r constder. this regurrenent one nore elenent of, work,in a series of efforts, on ariy Lot that nust precede actuar physically construction of a dw"rii"f-"u"r,-ur-iiir t"str, -- sulxfeys, {tovernnental planning and approvals and archl_teiturar work _performed ro, neet- the _re{uireneiris oi-itrt- v.ii -pe=iqn-R""iew Board and to obtaln a Buildinj eernit. 2. NRy 3B '9! A8|44 HocHsrSET fl- 333-71e?P.4/t1. 1 f { 3. Inportant Legal Isaue,g The issues I nentlon ln this letter are raised and . discuEsed because they are the result of the sinurtaneous need to construct the Road and utilltLes and the three hones at the sane tine. a. Wananties The first issue belng addreesed ls that of warranties-both as to cornpretion of the construction and repair work after the construction. The Road and the Utillties arE private; 1.e.the Road is really a comnon driveway from Buffehr breek Road that just-happens to service nore than one rot and the entlre Road,utilities and dwelling constructlon could be covered under one bullding permit. Because the Road is private, the sale of each Lot will include- the sale of z/7 rs of thE Road to Lindsey/Nilsson and L/7 to Buffehr creek partners. seguentiarly, when tIrL lots,with houses constructed upon them, are -resold t6 ultimate purchasers, the Road is, again, Just another ingredient of the total package being sold to the end purchaser; 1.e., a large house with a cornmon driveway to guffehr Creek Road. The issue, because of the double stepped sale, is what,i{ any' warranty will the urtinate buyers of tirl homes have? An rrin betueenrr issue is what, if any, wlrranty, wlll Lindsey/NiIsson and Zneiner have wittr respe6i to the Road? tty solution is as followE: I understand that a contract will be let for the Road to service Lots 10, 11, 12 and 13 and installation of utirities for these r.ots whicir plinning is consistent with the Townrs dlrectives as to the phases of developnent. one contract is for grading/cut and fill and the second for surfacing consisting of road base and lnstarlatlon of the Utilities. If possible, I suggest that the Road only be created and roadbase placed on the surface untiL the heaiy construction trucks cease using the Road and the finat suiface dress of bracktop be applied in septenber, 1991. since Lot 10 is crose to the Road ilTtr, the barance of the Road to the three other Lots will not be danaged when Lot l0 is constructed upon. The se comp I eted con st ruct i on_ coDt fg_c. -t_e__.ghou I d be yarrantea'to EEEAa nai_Eii_Ite._fer"t fgasElone yearEorn cdrnFfetlon luoti: you wirr-neea to i-ego€iate tlesElt-a?rantleg with-the'E'cintractors but one year is a veil standard warranty). A like warranty shourd be extended froin Buffehr creek Partners to Lindsey/Nilsson and zneimer. Finally,Lindseyr/Nilsson and Zneiner will-extend their warrantles, as P.5,,11 developers (note habitation upon a that their is always new dwelling) to the an lrnptied warranty of end purchasers. rnou1l_lly-securlty be put up ro insure these warranties subseguent to tJiir-coirpreiion-o;'il;' Road and utilities? The answer 1= r,n6,, ie lnaer Cir.-tiuiitional rules of construction the,i."y"l?p.t contiactually "iu"al-iv lts work but the onrv tronev wlrhherd,--ir-ii-"rr, it-6rJ"iili-.1 rhe end purchaser is ror punchrisi ii;*;. .rrri i.JJin"iJ.rhat rhe construction is-complete, tfr.-wa*a1tf----------------es-run-.ti-tne concept of "how lonqtr should th;-;ilpili.i-yo51.""i"ni"rpi ierore ordlnary wear and tear starts to ei.oaJ-man made construction. should^any Gvglrj, -, uJrlili'",fi to. insure that rhe Road and ut'iliries are c6n"tlnEt*Ef, fi" oppoled to ;ii;. comprerion warranties) as required? in. ;i"r.i'i"-ig.in-iiJ" (but i gualified) and is -discuss"a"i.i"". b. fnfrastructure Construction The second issue is the sinultaneous construction bv Buffehr creek partners of the piivate noaa ano lie utirities that service the Lor. - r note-t""i"i'itut tn"-noii-iJru. ls rearlv nininar in thar tne cui-aii iiir'creates^the Road; the gravei ana blacktop only rnake"_"-urooitr-"iifu"". tf access-ls the issue,then the cut and. tirr wiri-."rpi.t" *r..t-piJii.i. The rear issue is utilitles that_mu"t ["-uiJiliii a. trre ioi-iin"" "", without power, water and sewer, there lr-no sareauie ;;;;;. ( ,\ ^rur,tt tn" !ils].. yalilr subdlvi-sion ordinance, at d*"'L7' 2s' o4o, recruires-that aurierrr-creex-piriniis-conp:.y witn 17. 15. 250 "Guirul:":. ;i.-c.iii#ion. ana Maintenance of rnprovements" ' Ar the n""tt-oi-init "ecti;;-i:";;" sub-issue of what are "rnprovenentsil ana a-reJai"s-oi-[i. 6iaiil.".es revears there are reillv two xinos-oi iiiror.r"r,t", (1.) those to be $;:t;:';: Ii#l:"3;:li"iif iir'if;o=. orherwise-ieierrnined by the 'private streetr is defined at._17.08.170 ana the Road neets both the rrArr and ',g', ig6ff,jlrgl: rrrnprovenents,r do not seen to be definedi however,- iirie.?10. bv-t;iiiJ.ir.n provides that rrrnprovenents.'' 1." u"it irr"". to bg dedicated to the Town and other; i'e" wharevei il ;;i;i.on the prrvaie-property which would include the noad "na ln.-jielling structures. r.e orun" lr)7i133'3g""frllir::"'" can be round at Nunber e, pase MAY 3E 'e1 08:48 HocHSrSEr A_ 333-71a? rrPrior to the issuance of a certiflcate of occupancy or a tenporary certificate of occupancy, the applicant (ruffihr - creek Partners) ehall construct alr funprovenrents (rny'enphaeie)fron Buffehr Creek Road to the unlt under construdt-lonnl The PEC Minutes at Nunbere 1 and 4, page 1g set forth the subdivision requlrements (not the dwelllng prans) Buffehr creek Partners nust eompry with for a butldins permtt to be obtained. The language quoted above is opera{,iiE after the building pernit has Lssued and no TCors cln issue untll the rrnprovemente are conplete whlch is consistent with the entlre section of construction ordinances nhich are to insure to the buying publlc that a totally conplete and operative house will be conveyed. I think it is clear ln thie context that the Road l_s being consldered a pEc deternlned rmprovenent and the next sentence helps fill out the concepta: $If occ.upancy (rry enphasls and which would require at 191"t a Tco) is requested prior to the instatration (r uitleve this means also conpletion) of any inprovenents, the appricant must escrow r-25t of the construction Lost prior-to the-town issuing a c.o. or a T.c.o. fnprovenents i; this case shall ilglla: landscaping, wa1l conslruction, roads, arainage -in- utllitles (certain other pEc provlslons discuis rands6apinf and walls for Lots 1-6 and none are required on these four -tot61 .,r A fair reading of the pEC would suggest to ne that no bond is necessary with respect to construction or the Road and Utilities unless, and until, a TCO is being requested. How does this pEC rullng square wlth Ordinances. L7 .25. o4o states that "the requir6rnent for the guarantee, which r interpret to be the above referenced, guarantee 51 125t wirt conply nith 17.16.250. 17.1.6.250 ls to guarantee the construction and rnaintenance of nrc reguired rnprovementsi i.e., the Road and utirities. t?.L6.27o specificilty interprets ihls provision by discussing the irnportant issue to-the roirn being thl conpletioi.of rnprovements that will be dedicated to the T6wn and tire one P.6,/LL a j t-I I year lrarranty for Town dedicated fnprovenents. What about Inprovenents that will not be dedicated to the Town such as the Road and utilities? As nentioned above, r donrt believe that any rtafter constructionr warranty is required by the Town at 17.16.250 specifically addresses thal issue-only rfrY 3gt '91 88;58 HG|6T ET A- 333-71e?RDT o P.7/tL wittr respect to those fmprovenentE that the llown wltl end up owning (and taking care of). Is a bond necessary for the Road and Utilities? No.Renenberi-ng.that thrg Eubdlvielon 1g an unuEual case and slngte Lots are belng developed, I offer th€ following connentary: (a.) Nunber 9 of the pEC ilinuteE Is clear that a TCO wlll not Lssue for a dwelllng unttl ttre Inprovenents are constructedi howevel, if a Tco ls deelred prior to conpletlon of the hprovenents, then 125* of the rernainlng construct-ion cost (not the 100t carted for public rnprovenenti ln 17.16.2s0) nust be posted wlth the Town. (b. ) [his PEC directlve ls consistent wlth the fact that the Road is really a private conmon drivenay and therefore just one nore of the nany ispects of constructioi that nust be conpreted before a Tco wirr iEsue. lhe purpose of a Tco is to insure to the end user that, in fact, th6 ai'elfinq hag been conpleted to the ninirnal state required by the Town to be a rrstand alonerr and functioning honCi l.e.r-all the necesgltles such as road or driveway accesE to the public way, utilitles,roof, walls, bathroons, water, heat and lights aii in place, to code and the house can be llved in, arbeit-vlthout thJretti ano whistles of walI to waII carpet and fancy ftght fixtureE. - (c.) 17.16.250 aleo setE forth that rNo bullding pernft_or certiflcate of occupancy shall be issued wlthln ihe subdivision if eaid agreenent (to-buird the Road and utirities)iE in default (rny enphasis) until the deficlencles are corrected (i.e., you didntt build or conplete the Road, no TCO unttl the 125t bond is put up to gruarant-e the conpletlon of construction). , (d.) What happens if you don't have the Road and utilitieE in before a Tcb is called for? Then you wiLl have to post 125t of the estinated cost to complete the Road and Utilities so the TCO can issue. (e.) Assuning all tining goes as planned (not nore than one nonth for the Road and utllities to be put in except a final Road surface) the dwelLing should be neariirg cornpletlin in September and, if one-dwelling needs a TCO, you witt hlve to put up the 125* of the bid cost of the finat surlace of the Road ind which courd werl be held over to the folrowlng sprlng lf it is too cold to lay asphalt. I I NRy 3a '91 A8:s2 HocHsrc ET RL ss3-7127 P.e/t t c. Practlcallty I do not believe you need to bond either the Road or l\-the utilities until a TCo iE carled for. r donrt berleve vou ll need to warrant the Road or Utllltleg after constructlon. - ')Howaver, both itens need addresEEd and r have arreacly Eet forth that I believe Buffehr Creek should warrant to tindElyr/Nilsson (and it and Buffehr Creek Partners to the end purchael-rs1 the Road and utilities against labor and materiars for one year fron TCO. A construction lender nay be unconfortabre knowing that its funds are golng to be used to Luifd the house but not tie Road and Utllitles whlch are to be bullt by Buffehr creek Partners. The construction lender has no contract with Buffehr creek Partners and its loan depends on the Road and utirlties being constructed. Therefore, I donrt believe that construction loans witl issue without some tlpe of security to guarantee the construction of the Road and utlritiee. The Town nay also be unconfortable without at least sorne protection for this issue even though it doesnrt have to issue a TCo. Therefore, r believe you wilr need to insure conpretion of the construction via soroe nechanlsrn. r suggest that the construction bid amounts be placed, when obtained fron Lindsey/Nilsson, in a trust account (perhaps with Bank of Avon or Land rltre and wrth the Town belng lnvolved) to be drawn down to pay the contractors as the Road ind utilities are constructed. I an suggesting a standard construction contract with a 10t holdback and the onry twist being that the funds cone from the-Lindsey/Nilsson purchase and be praced at closing, in the full construction contract anount, iir an escrovt account to insure two points: (1) that the full amount of necessary.funds are available; and (2) that they be drawn down as construction progresses. Assuming a one nonth Ltrting cycle, the work should be conpleted and with a single pay to the-Rold and Utifity Contractor. The final 10t held until-the Road and utilities are complete and whatever amount is needed for final Road dressing also be withheld. In sumnary, a construction lenderrs concerns with regard to the completion of the prlvate Road and utillties will be alleviated by the cuarantee that wirr be posted by Buffehr Creek Partners. MAY 3@ '9r B8rs4 HocHsU Er q_ $3-712? 4. Reouired Covenants and private Road under the s_ingle Fanlry subdlvlelon rures and pursuant to the Deeign Revlew- Board- requllenente for the propertyl certain covenantg muet attach to the rpt and be euperior to any ioans.rn additio!, the acceaE Road is private and covenants iust be placed against the Road, and supirior to all roans, to lnsure use, rnaintenance and repair obrigations and dutles between the ovners of the seven r.,ots approved for the south slde of Buffehr Creek Road. r . By retter of Aprll 26, LssL to valt I providea an.\ dtn ,Town with the covenants upon th€ ibt and the covenint"-witn--- \'r J respect to the private Road. r have not yet recelvecl any \ S connentary on these matters but expect they wilr be satiSfactory l as r included in the covenants arl-of the inatteis lr;;i;;;it---' I requested by the planning and Envlronrnental coronisiion and the Town attorney. I intend to ask you to consider one change. In that y9y al? only going to be building the Road to the iour Iots at thls trne, f want. to _c!ange- the percentages of payment (not ownershlp) t9 4'ths (with the sulfehr cr6ek parinlrs pidir"e up the unsubdivided rglTttr Lot) until the weet slde of tile trTx-1r,bts 7, 8 and 9) are subdivided and conetructed upon. 5. Procedures The following is how r envision the entlre deveropnent of the Lot to proceed (sone of the steps have already been - approved. or perforrned) : a. The Iot size and the Building Envelope size are agreed !o ly Buffehr creek partners and l,indsey/Nilsson and surveyed to create a ptat Map as requlred in !nb-s+ns\e Faniry Subdivision ordinance. ,(t*";g b. The private Road and utitity'e#entE are surveyed and drawn upon a map of the property for iisuat understanaing.' c. The-Town preapproves the plat and approves the Road and construction design oe the house. d. The Road and Utillty construction conmenced and a ;buildlng perrntt issued for the "oirrirucii;;-;;-'*";;;;; :"- fo6fu'l e. The foundatlon J"s poured, forrne kj$'"a th.--- (f following day, the foundation sunreyed-and drawn onto the plat aaa-'r a 22 NAY 30 '91 A8:56,HocHsTf Er AL s' The forl0wing are recorded rn the following order: (r* ,.o i. rhe plat then the covenanrs upon rhe plar 0llfr. the Road. li. The Road easenent and then the covenants uponl, of triil and ,,ii.lti' Title insurance can lssue after comrretr@ ^h iv. Buffehr creek partners deed to I * Lindsey,zNilsson the r.ot ana ili-ienant in-cornrnon interest in the llafirl Private Road Easenent. *" \'\"ruN\,r J'r'r'cr€''t rn Ene , f , v' Encurnbrances against the Lot, Road and utir.itv I Easengnt arg released. !vv' '\\'gg qrr\' vurrr-A 6rr^vi. The construction render loan go of record..V 0 vii. Any acgulsition loan go of record. I $^tt t o,rce(9 a-tJ J*[n fll 6r ,Pot. p-[ ur,t' 0'\ ,'fA ?ld. th:- Town give ite finat eign off, of the lt to the title conpany tor re6ordatlon. f. eloslng occur and, at closing,suggested be placed Ln escrow. viii. Construction of the house is conpleted. ix. The house is sold. to a thlrd party by deed fron L/N to the party. x. The construction loan and acqulsition loan is paid off or released. praced ot ,."or}l' The permanent loan of the buyer, if any, is *ii' -Any- funds left ln the construction Escrow be returned to Buffehr creak partners when the noaa-ina utirities are conplete. r ' *{ t (t'\ kr-' !.J 6. Other fsgues Another-natter that nright cone up is the igsue of GRFA.r once had.quite a_strange situaiion with i ""uai"rrion carred casotar vatr (r had nothins to aJ-witii-iii.-aliliipr"ntl and the Plat Uap and deliver the Guarantee I have r"fiY @ ,91 68:58 Thank you, GMS/ad Enclosures gms$.t7\secur07t. Itr NIay 29, 799L ET fl_ 333-?1e7 *'T P.t7/1' deveroper, Dean Knoxr.gav€ away all of the GRFA before the raet lot was sord to ny client. He had an expenslve picnic ar.a-,rnitr the Town relented. ff the Torrn is concerned about thls tlpe of Lsaue, ny solution is as follows: a. The plat, each tlne a L,ot ie subdividEd fron the entire parcel, vill arso contaln a second sheet tnat wiir Ehow the entlre eubdivision, the plat under questlon such aE r,oi ri,and the balance of the unsubdlvlded subdivislon wlth a notattoir 91 thle portion of the ptat of the renalnlng GRFA avatrarie.--rrre GRFA for each unit is )cnown when the foundaflon ls poured so the lssue can be calculated each tlme with """tainIy.-b. This procedure wi}l reguire Buffehr creek and the Town to_be-sure, each tine a tot is Jubdivided, to d,eternine how nuch GRFA ts reft and nake a notatton as to thi sane so, when the last rpt is subdivided, the renainlng cRFA wilr be used'up oi - - sone left over. :-7.2s.o3o contenplaies this type ot piociauie. c. Conceptually, the ldea lE a 13 plece Jtg saw puzzle that, when alr Lots and cnrA are accounted foi, wiri 6ncorapiJ----the entire resubdivision of the Lionsrldge sunitvieion. Uy letter is long but only because I have gone lnto great detail with regard to issues that are very staidard in any subdivision but this transactlon hae the issues'r have nentionei with srightly different tsists that you need to be aware of. When you have had a chance to digest thls letter,please advise and r will answer any other {uestions you have and meet or connunlcate with the Town ind r.ancl rttre to irelp iinaiize and conplete 13 successful single lot subdivislons. Very truly yours, HOCHS?ADT, STRAW & STRAUSS, P.C. George l,t. Straw 10 ,t To! FRO}T: DATE: SURTECT: Planning and Environmental Coumission Departnent of Coromunity Developnent The two najor changes since the work applicant reconfigtured the road plan intersection on Buffehr Creek Road session are that the so that there is a single staff encouraged the applicant to rnaintain the option for caretaker units in the developroent with the lntent of creating some enployee trousing. At this time, the applicant will consider allowing the units as long as the GRFA for the caretaker is not deducted fron the available GRFA for each envelope presented at the worl< session. a:ltrg?t::f Additional GRFA nay be added to the caretaker fron the arnount allocated to the prinary dwelling unit if it is not used for the prinary unlt; however, no caretaker unit shall exceed 12oo squlre feet. I{ith this approval , no caretaker units will be oQ coPr November L2, L99O A request for approval of a maJor change to the existing development approval for the Valley' Phase VI .Applicant: Edward Zneiner I. TNTRODUCTTOil The Planning and Environmental Conmission (PEC) reviewed the developnent proposal for The Valley, Phase VI ln a work session on Septeurber 10, 1990. Fron that meeting, it was aPparent that the reductlon in dwelling units (from 42 to 26) and the reduction in GRFA (fron 77,LsO to 65,900 sg. ft.) rnade the project much better than the previous approval . The PEc did have significant concerns, including preservation of the neadow and the iropact of the retalning walts. Those iterns, among others, are discussed below. Staff wanted to point out that this review process is unique from nost proJects which the PEc reviews. The review is a requirement of the annexation ordinance, which did not include any specific criteria or standards which the project nust meet. Because this ls not a Special Developrnent District (sDD), the only evaluation criterl.a to be used is to compare the existing, approved plan to the proposed one. The ordinance has been attached to this memo as Exhibit A. -. { r6quired and none may be built. The reason the Town is not requiring the applicant to build a certain nurnber of these units is because the applicant is not reguesting an SDD, variance, or another review which the Town could condition the approval with a reguirement to build units. II.BACXGROI'IID This revlew is a request for approval of a nodification to the existing developrnent plan for Phase vI of The valley. The original plan was approved as a PUD by Eagle county in the fall of 1980. That plan inctuded 42 townhouses with a total GRFA of 't7 rLsO sq. ft. The plan call.ed for three clusters of units with a group of recreation anenltles (tennis courts, swinrning pool, trails, etc.). when the property was annexed by the Town of Vail, a provision of the annexatLon ordinance reguired that any najor urodification to the County approved plan would require PEc approval . In that same ordinance, Residential Cluster (Rc) zoning was applied to this property. Under the annexation ordinance, all standards not addressed by the Eagle County approved plan nust meet RC zoning reguirements. fn 1981, a developer proposed a revised site plan which the PEC approved. The amended plan naintained all 42 dwelling units as well as the GRFA approved by the county and the scheme of attached, clustered townhouses. Though that plan ltas never built, it ls still vatid and could be built today after the appllcant received updated Design Review Board (DRB) approvals. Both the 1980 and l98L plans are attached at the end of this memo as Exhibits B and C so the board can compare the 1981 plan, which is buildable, to the proposed one. III. PROJECT DESCRIPTTON At this time, the applicant is proposing 13 detached single fanily homes, each which rnay have a secondary unit. This creates a total of 26 units. The caretaker units wilL be deed restricted so that they cannot be sold separately fron the prinary residences. In addition, they must neet all the requirements for an ernployee unit listed in the Prinaryr/Secondary section of the zoning code (section 18.13.080 (B)). of the 13 buildings, six will be located north of Buffehr creek Road on the south facing slopet and seven wiII be located across Buffehr Creek Road in the meadow at the base of the forested slope (see attached site plan). The development has been divided into three phases. The first two phases are the east and west clusters (respectively) on the south side of Buffehr Creek Road. The third and last will be the six tromes on the north side of the road. The structures in phase one (LotE 1I-13) wiII each have approxinately 3500 square feet of grosa reeidential floor area (GRFA). Each house in phase two (Lots 7-10) and phase three (Iots 1-6) l'ill have approxinately 4500 Bquare feet of GRFA. ThLe results in a total GRFA of 55,500 EqJuare feet. In addition to thLs amount, 101400 square feet of G.R,FA (800 x 13) nay be used for caretaker unl,ts. Conbinlng the GRFA frorn the prLuary unlts wlth any caretaker units results in a possible total of 65,900 square feet. The developer is proposing a Tyrolean style of architecture, but has the optlon to vary that ln the future. No subdivision plat is proposed at this tine as the PEc approval l-s only for the revl.sions in the development plan--a requirenent of annexation. The owner would most likely proceed with a single fanily subdivlsion followtng developnent plan approval . rY.zolflxc aNtr,YgrS The analysis compares the proposal to the most recent PEC approval and the RC Zone District. The RC standards apply for other development standards per the annexation ordinance. 1981 PEC Approval Current Proposal 2L.45 acres 33 ft. maximun 55,500 sg. ft. 65,90O sg. ft.* 26* t.2 DUs/acretc Rc zoning 2L.45 acres 33 ft. naxinurn 59,895 sq. ft. 29.9 6 DUst/acte maxirnum Site Arear 21.45 acres Height: tlpical unit 32 ft. GRFA: 77,L5O sq. ft. DUs: 42 Density: 2 DUs/acre *Inc1udes 13 caretaker units v. aTtFP cototENTg llfD lltAr,v8ra A. Site Plan: The proposed site plan ls a maJor inprovenent to the prevLously approved plan as the iupacts have been significantly reduced. The biggest difference is the change in the nurober of dwelling unlts and decrease of GRFA. Thls ptan has 16 fewer units than the previous ptan. The developnent w111 appear less dense and will have fewer inpacts sLnce the design has been changed from attached dwelllng units to single fanil.y homes. The land prevJ.ously devoted for guest parking, tennls courts, and a swlnming pool for the condoniniun compJ-ex nill now be left in its natural state. Lastly, the current proposal has 21550 eq. ft. less GRFA than the previous plan. t.Buildinq envelooes: The proposal uses building envelopes to identify the locatl.on of each house. The envelopes are not proposed to be platted. There will be approxinately 4o to 80 feet between each building envelope. Since the PEc work session' the dpplicant has enlarged the envelopes to approxinately 50 by 9o and has decided that each envelope wlll be adequate for all of the future construction without developing standards for encroachments into the open apace. AIl roof eaves, porches, decks, etc. will be contained within the buildLng envelope. Though the envelopes have been designed to accorumodate all of the future construction, the 'applicant would like to set up a Process which will attow changes, lf needed. The appllcant has proposed the following language whLctr wiII allow some flexibility for the siting of the houses. The criteria listed belor.r wlll be used by the DRB to approve any roodifications to the envelopes. ilBuilding envelopes indicated upon the approved site plan may be nodified with approval of the DRB based upon detailed review of an individual architectural and site plan for an individual dwelllng unit. The DRB shall find that the nodification to any building envelope does not substantially result ln any negative impacts upon the site, adjoining property, or have any adverse inpact upon required geologic hazard consideratLons. If an associatl-on of home oirners within the project is formed, any nodification of a building envelope shall also conforil to the rules and regulations adopted by t he association. AnY nod-ification shall not exceed 15 feet and in no case shall any structure be buitt in the 20 foot setbacks shown on the approved development Plan.rl 2.ODen sDace: The applicant has conmltted to preserrring all the areas outside the bulldlng envelopes as open apace. The area between the prlvate roads and Buffehr Creek Road rrill be further restricted with tbls approval so that no fences or donest5.c-style Iandscaping will be allowed. The areas wlll be preserrred ln the natural state that exists today. The devel-oper will be responsible for naintaining this area until the development is subdivided and, through that process, a lroroe owners association or other body is created to take over the responslbtfity. The spaces iunediately around the bulldlng envelopes may be rrimprovedrr with sod lawns and fences, but no structureE. Trails: The hiklngr/nountain bike trail, located on the northwest portion of the site, runs through building envelopes L and 5. It goes frorn Buffehr Creek Road north to Red and White Mountain. Ttre Forest serrrise agrees that the eurrent alignnent has not been established long enough to be recognized legally and will take responsibility to relocate it along the creek. The new alignrnent wlll be on public land. The Sorest Senrice plans to do the constructl.on in the summer of 199L, which is prlor to the time which the applicant plans to construct this phase of the development. Comparison to Elk Meadows The PEc commented that thls proJect should be designed more along the lines of EIk t{eadows, the SDD adJacent to the site to the east. Staff believes there are several reasons why the ttro sites are different and deserrre different solutions. l--There is a dedicated utility easement that runs through the valley, located approxinately parallel to Buffehr Creek Road. The area between the road and this utility easenent varLes. In Phase VI , Buffehr Creek Road winde in and out, leaving only one building envelope between the road and the eaEenent. In Elk lleadows, the road cuts to the north, leaving adeguate roon for four of the five buildings. 3. B. 2--The slope fron the road to the ueadow is nuch steeper in Elk Meadoss. The approved design works nuch better on a steep slope because the houses can be tucked Lnto the slope. Even if the Elk Meadolds style of site planning couLd be done for Phase VI , the end result nay not be an iuprovenent because the houses would stick up higher and be more visible. 3--The rock fall hazard is more severe on the Ellc lleadows slte requlring nore nitigatlon. By placlng the houses ln the slope, internal nltigation nas all that was needed. 4--Bhrough the sDD prosess, the Elk lt[eadows site plan was approved with a three foot setback fron Buffehr Creek Road right-of-way. By allowing the setback encroachment, enough room for the construction was created. S--By ptacing the hones on the far side of the neadohr, the meadow that Ls preserved will be visible to the public. require The conditions of approval for this request that it be preserved in a natural state. c.Roads, walls and Drainaqe The road configuration has been revised since the work session eo that both access roads intersect Buffehr Creek Road at the sarne location. The roads will be private roads. The slopes range fron 7.0 percent to 8,6 percent, with the driveway to lot 4 at 10 percent. The Townrs subdivision regulations aLlow private roads to reach 9.o percent slope without requiring a variance. The driveway to Lot four will reguire an approval from the Town Engineer (with a_possible. treltinq requirement), but does not require a variance. The walls needed for the upper road do not exceed 6 feet in height. A five foot high cut wal.l is proposed fron the intersection approxirnately half the distance up the access road. fron tfrat point, a five foot high fill waII vill be installed for the rest of the distance. Near the end of the road, in addltion to the fill vall, another six foot high cut wall will be needed. See plans and sections attached to this neno. The valls will be constructed with interlocking precast concrete blocks, sinilar to those approved for Spraddle Creek. Texture, shape, and color wilL be deternined by the DRB. Iandscaping will be reguired to soften the appearance of the walls. The planting plan should D. include frequent groupings above and below the walls that breakup the nass. DRB witl give final approval to the planting plan. On the lower portion of the development, no salls will be needed. FlIl w111 be added to the neadow, ranging fron two feet at the east end to eight feet at the west end. The appllcants orlgLnally proposed a typical road sectl,on of XB feet with two 2 foot wide shoulders or gutters. In order to proceed with thls developnent approval , the appllcants have expanded the section to 22 teet- wlth 2 foot grutters or shoulders. Plann!.ng staff generally supports less asphalt. If Fire Departnent and Public Works concerns can be addressed, the applicant nay apply for a variance to the subdivlsion standards for a reduced road width. In that case, staff w111 brlng the varLance request to the PEC for thelr review at a later date. Drainage wlll be accomrnodated with curb and giutter for the upper road. Swales vill handle the drainage on the lower rgad. One drainage easement will be required to convey the drainage off slte to Buffehr creek. No detention pond will be built, sLnce it was not reconnended in the drainage study. staff believes that the proposed infrastructure is reasonable. The walls do not reguire variances since no portJ.on of the walls will exceed six feet ln height.Staff supporta the road grades and wldths, since they rneet the code reguirenents. Hazards The only hazard shown on the Town maps is high severity rock fall. A final report by Arthur Mears states that the houses befow Buffebr Creek Road will be adequately protected wlth the nett road and drainage swales which witf le conetructed for phase one. fhe prelininary rock fall etudy used for the work eession indicated that a bern would be requlred in the meadow to protect the Lower houses. This Is no longer the case. llears relconmended an optLonal bem, but also said the swaLe for the road would be adeguate protection. There are only two houses above Buffehr Creek Road whl.ch need nltigation (butlding envelopes 3 and 4). trhe lleara report states that these structures can be protected wittr a six foot high rock fall fence or by E. internal nitlgation within the north facing walls.Staff believes that the internal rnitlgation will preser:ve the natural character of The valley nuch better than a fence located on the slope above the homes. The aBpllcant has pointed out that the drawing from the llears report showlng the internal nitigation precludes north faclng winiows for the first two and possibly the third floors (See extribit D). One possible solution is to zig zag the floor plans, installing east and vest facing windows which will allow light lnto the roons on the north side of the two houses. Staff believes that thls architectural constraint Ls reasonable, given the alternative of an unsl.ghtly, 33o foot long fence. Density The proposed density, assuming every secondary unit would be buitt, is approximately two thirds of the previous approval and less than what RC zoning would allow. The GRFA wilf be approxinately two thirds of the previous approval (a change from 7?'150 sq. ft. to 55r5OO sg. ft.) and is also under the RC naximuu.Staffts opLnion is that the proposal is clearly a reduction in irnpacts from the previous approval and is a much better solution for the developnent of the site. Architecturat guidelines The applicant plans to build Tyrolean style homes, but rrould tike to leave the arehitectural decisions to the DRB and does not intend to draw up any guidelines at this tirne. The Torrn tlFically requires specific plans, like architectural guidelines, in SDD reviews. But since this review Is a fulflllment of an annexation requirenent and is not an SDD, staff can support the position of the applicant. Phasing plans Staff believes that the longer portions of this site remain as meadow, the better. To achieve that goal ,staff reconmends ttrat one phase be conpleted before another is begun. The inprovements that will be constructed in each phase include the houses, drainage facilities, roads, utilities, and landscapLng. These inprovenents rnust be conpleted in each phase prior to construetion starting in another phase. The Lnprovernents nust be buitt frorn Buffehr creelc Road to any unit under construction prior to the lssuance of any Certifl.cate of OccuPancy or Tenporary certificate 9. G. of occupancy. If occupancy Is requested prior to the installatLon of any Lnprovenents, the applicant uust escrov 125* of the construction costs prior to the Town lssulng a T.c.o. The applicant nay adhere to the plan descrlbed above for phasing and financial giuarantees or nay, tbrough a strbdivtsion proceas, choose to conply with the etricter regrulations on financial gTuarantees. At a ninimun, the regulrenente of this approval rnust be follorred. H. FLre Departnent concerns Fire departnent concerns include the turn around area in the cul-de-sacs and the access to lot 4. The turn around areas appear to be adequate, but aE a conditlon of approval , the Fire Departrnent will need to see engineeiing drawlngs of the cul-de-sacs showing that each roeet the nLninum turning distances. The concerns regarding lot 4 are that the driveway is too steep for a fire truck to clinb, resulting in excessive diEtance fron the fire truck location to all points on the periroeter of the building. The applicant has options, including sprlnkling the buitdLng, to ueet the flre code. Ensuring adequate fire protection for lot four wlll be another condition of approval . vr. eoNctu8roN Staff supports the developrnent plan because it results in less density and a better site plan than the 1981 aPproval . Though there will be a significant loss of meadow from what exists today, staff believes that there wlII be nore meadow when this developrnent is built out than what would have been Left with the previous approval . Therefore, planning staff reconmends approval of this developnent plan with the following conditions: r) Prior to the Tottn approving any bullding per:nits for thls development, the appticant shall provide to the Fire Department: a-- engineerlng drawings showing adequate turning distances for each of the cul-de-sacs, and b-- a nltigation ptan for lot 4, which may include sprinkllng, which neets the Fire Departnent regulrements. 2) Except for the area within buLldlng envelopes 5 and 6, the appl.icant shall restrict the open spaces between the access 3) 4) s) 6) 7l roads and Buffehr Creek Road so that no structures (lncluding fences, sheds, or accessory buil.dings) shall be built ln this area. In addition, no landscaping shal.I be planted in the area that Ls inconsistent with the existing native landscaping. The applicant ahall deslgn all driveways so that the sinplest, most dlrect means of access to the site is provided. Drlveways that wind up the hiLlside to gain elevation shall not be approved. Prior to the issuance of bullding pernits, the applicant shal} dedicate a drainage easement to the Town of VaiI which neets the standards of the Publlc l{orks departnent. Prior to Lssuance of certificate of occupancies or tenporary certifl-cate of occupangles for building envelopes 1 through 6, the applicant shall lnstall the proposed landscaping to nitlgate the appearance of the walls. In additlon, the appll.cant nust provide a flnancial guarantee to the Town for the period of two winters to be used for landscape replacernent. Prior to issuance of building permits for building envelopes 3 or 4, the applicant shall subnit plans strowing that the proposed buildlng neets the internal rnitigation requirenents of the Mearrs report dated Septenber, L990. The applicant has the option of including a caretaker unit within each structure, not to exceed 1200 square feet of GRFA. The units must cornply with Section L8.13.080 (B). Up to 4OO aquare feet of unused GRFA from the primary unit may be transferred to the caretaker unit. 8) The applicant shall design all retaining walls located in the front yard setback with terracing so that none exceed three feet in height. 10 \E I tl lr t b Elf r,! Il Hli Il li $ a o F , \o N: o .rC t u a "Ei EHE -t l 5 3 t l z Fl A FT H l{u) o ro \s \t" t t B { I I I I 3.49.38.1 8l I ir I i t. .A z F FT v2 EXAIBIT A i -;-qi1 i:'., ,. .'..;: t ,, 1 c.i.l:l i,i tl I '| I :..:,. 1 ,,./ 'ji,i'.,i "" i .-". i---- ORDINANCE NO. 13 (Se!1es of 1981 )75 s. ttontaqa raad vail. col,)ri,(ro 6!557 officc oi to'.rn c:cik I j I AN OBDINANCE IMPOSL\G ZONING DIS?RICTS ON CEBTAIN DtrVELOPYENTS AND PARCELS OF PROPENTY IN TEE RECENILY ANNEXID WEST VAIL AREA; ACCEPTING PRIOR APPROVALS Or. TEE EAGLE COIINTY COMI,fISSIONERS BILATING TEERETO ; SPECII'yING AIIENDIIEMI PBOCEDUBES ;SETTING FORTS CONDITIONS RELATING TEtrRETO; AUENDING TAE OTFICIAL ZONING MAP FOR TES TOslr OF VAIL: AND SETTING FORTE DETAILS IN REI,ATION TEEAETO. TIEEREAS, the town of Vail, Colorado, receutly s.nnexed the West Vall area, Coutrty of Eagle, State of Coloredo, effectlve on Decenber 31, 1980; aDd I{SEnEAS, Chapter 18.58 of th€ Uunlcipel Code of, the Town of Va11 sets forth procedures fof the idpositioa of zoulng districts oD recently a[nexed a!ea,a; aDd trEEBEAS, Sectlo! 31-12-115 (s) C.R.S, 1973, as aarended, requJ.res the TosD to bllug the levly annexed ltest Vall area under lts zonlng ordiDance witbln nhety (90) days alter the effective dete of said aDDexatioD; and TEEREAS, because of certaln actloDs takeD by and approvals of the Eagle County CoEmlssloners relatlng to the rtthlu speclfled propertles the Town Council ls of the oplDloD tbat tbe zoliDg designatlou tor these areas should lecognize 6aid approvale and conditlons; ebd WEEREAS, the PlatrEiEg atrd EBvironnental Cooolssloa of the Toq'D of Vall bas consldeled tbe zoulng to be lmposed ou the newly annexed Xest Vall lrea at s publlc heerllg and bas Eade a recoEmeudatl,on relatlng thereto, to tbe To$tr gouBcil; 4nd !IEEEA!., tbe Town Councll conslders thet it ls 10 tbe lnterest of the publlc health, aatety and reLlare to so zon€ sald property; NOf,, IEEBETORE, BE IT OBDAINED BY TEE TOIff COIJNCIL OT Ts TC'W}I OF VAIL, TIAT: Scctlon 1, Procedures fulfllled. TbE procedures to:r the detetElnation of the zonlng dlstrlcts to be lnposed ou the trew1y ennexed llest Vall alea as set forth in Chapter 18.68 of the Vatl Uunicipal Code heve been fulf1l1ed. !-()l Lrulls (Jl. ltle lre\\r\ -llrlese(l r|L's! \ !rr.l ill(:.r. Pursuant to Chapter 18.68 of the Vall [lunlcipal Code' the properties described iD subsections e, f,, g, h & I below are a portj.oD ol the Test Vatt area aDDe:.ed to the Town tbrough tbe enactment of Ordinance No. 43, Sel1es of 1980, of the Town of Vail, Colorado, effective on tbe tblrty-firEt day of Decembet, 1980, and hereby zoned as follorvs: &. The developments and parcels of property speci.f led below ln Subsections e, t, E, h & i sball be developed ln accordalce with the prlor agreeEent approrals and actions of the Eagle County Coflnissioners as the agleelDeuts, approvals and actloDs le1ate to each development or parcel of property. b- Tbe docunents and insttu.EeDts relatlng to tbe prior county approvals, actions and agreements are presently oD flle in the Departnent of comrunity DevelopBent of tbe Town of Vail aDd said epprovals, actioDs and agreemeDts are bereby accepted aud approved by the To\v! of Vail. c. All bulldings for whicb a building permit has Dot been issued, oD th€ effective date of the annexatlon of lvest Va11 sba1l comply wj'th Design Reviem Criteria of the Ve1l trluaiclpal Code prior to the issuaDce of a bulldiDg perDit. d. Tbe Cotrmulity Development Departnent may issue steff approvals for minor cbanges lD site deslgn or other Elnor aspects of the plan for any of the specified developments o! palcels. These proposed changes Eay be approved as preseDted, approved witb conditions or denled by tbe Staff wlth an appeal sithiD 10 days of the Staff declslon to the Plauaiug aud EttviroBmeEtsl Coflnission. For najor changes' sucb as a re-desiga of a DaJor part of the site, changes as use' denslty cotltrol, helgbt or otbe! developmeDt st8ndards, I PlatllDg and EnvirouDeltal CoEtlission review should be requiled. The procedure for ebenges sba1l be in accordaqce rlth Chapter 18.66 of tbe Vall Uuulclpal Code. e. Tbe tolloeing developments and patcels of property sba11 be subj ect to the terms of thls ordiBance: (1) The Va11ey, Ptrases 1 througb 6. (2) spruce Creek Toenhouses. (3) .\leadow Cleek Condoniniums. I (4) Vall' InlerDountain Swim and Tennis Club- (5) Brlar Patcb, Lots G-2, G-5 and G-6 LioDsrldge Subdlvision Flling No' 2' (6) Casa Del Sol Condorolnlums ' Fo! any zonhg purpose beyond the Eagle County Cotrmissioners' approvals' agreeEetrts or actions, the developnents and parcels of propelty specified iu tbls subsectioD (e) shall be zoDed Besidential Cluster (RC). t. Llonslldge Subdlvi6io!, Filing No. 4' sball be subJect to the terfis of thls ordinaDce. For a,ny zonlng Purpose beyond the Eagle County Co@ia6ionefa' approval, agreement or action, this parcel of property 6ha11 be zoued Siagle faroily Zone Distrlct (SfR) trlth & special pro- visl.on that an eoployee uDit (as aleJlDed aDd restricted iD section 18.13.08C of tbe vall llunlclpal Code) wi.ll be subJect to applovals as per Section 18.13.080. The seconilary uoit tDay not exceed one third of the total cross ResldeDtial floor Area ( GRIA) allowed ou tbe 1ot as per tbe single Fanily zobe Di.strict Density coDtrol (sectloD 18.10.09o of the Vail lduniclpal Code) aad Greenbelt & Natural Open Space (GNOS). E. Lot G-4, Llonslidge Subdj.visloD, Iiling No. 2' hes beer th€ subJect ot litlgetioh i! tbe Distllct Coult of Eagle Couuty, aDd a' CqJrt older has beeD issued regarding tbe developsettt of thls propefty' The TowD bas fulther epproved BesoLutlon #5 of 1981 in regard to a subse- queLt agreetlleat with the orae!. Tbe ResideDtlal C]uster (BC) Zone Di6trict w111 be the appLicable zone on thls property to gulde the future developroent of tbe parcel, wolkLng witbln tbe bounds set by tbe Court Order aDd Besolution No. 5, Series of 1981. b. Btock 1O, Vail tntermouDtaln subdivision aDd the glliott Rauch Subdlvlsio!, Eball be subJect to tbe te:ms oJ tbis ordlDance. Ior any zoDlDSi purpose beyond tbe Eagle County Cor@lsaloDels' approval, agree- tltent or actLoD, Block 10 and the Ell1ott Ranch, sha11 be zoned Prturary/ gecondary Dlstrlct. lots 8, 15 & 16 of Block 10, ValI llternouDtaln' Ehall be zoned Greeabelt & Natulal Open Space (GNOS). 1. Vall Comons, valI Des ShoBe fl1ing No' 4' sball be subJect to tbe telDr of tbls ordlnaDce. !o! any zonlng pulPose beyond tbe E&g1e Coulty Connlsalouet|s' egreeBent, approval or actlon! vall Commons shatl be zoned Couterclal core III (CCIII). v I i ( I Section 3, As plovj,ded in Sectlon 18.08.030 of the Vail uniclpal Code, the zoning edDlnLstrator is heleby dilected to promptly rlodify and a&end the Offlcial ZoniDg llap to lDdlcate the zoning specified hereln- SectloD 4. If any part, sectlon subsectlon, sentence, clause or phras€ of thls ordluarce ls for any regson beld to be 1nvaIid, such declslon sball not affect tbe validity of the remainiDg portioas of this ordi.[ance, and tbe Tosn Council- beleby declares lt would have passed this ordinance, and each partr section, sub-section, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regald1ess of the fact that any oDe o! nore parts, sectloD$, subsections, seDteDces, elauses or pblases be decla.red invalid. Section 5. Tbe Council hereby states that tbls ordinaDce 1s uecessary for the protectioE of the public bealth, safety and welfare. INTBODUCED, BEAD Oil TIRST READING, APPROVED AND ORDERSD PUBLISHED ONCE IN rULL, thi.s 3ral day of Marcb, 1981, aDd a publlc hearlng oD thts ordiDance shal1 be held at tbe legula! neeting of the Town Councll of the ?own of Va1l, Cololado, on the 17th day of March, 1981 , at 7:30 p.n. in the Municipal Buildiug of the Town of Vail. ATTEST: II{TRODUCTD, READ, BY TITIJ ONLY fiarcb 1?, APPROVED ON SECOND 1981. READING AND ORDEBID PUBLISEED ATTEST: l,/7 /../,/-'/ { . 5 rr- , . ',' -. '.'. ,.' ., ':... .'.,i{,r4,-u:}'ria-s{ri;&*iriaiit*lb EXtrIBIT D tE8 ooo .noo tttt Ft ?{ (rl t{ c{ tl )o A7 TII \!t ( \ Rock \ TraJectozy \.k-o-+ .i.) Flexlble' Frane ot' SrnaII rocks fl"rffi wffiF; EIGI'RE ?. Rockfall lnotectlon at u3ht11 walle of houeeE on LotE. J anil 4. :RocIcfaII Drotectlon barrler shoulit conslst of, unconsolldat€(l' coatrne- {ratnea, *e11-dra1ned. grarrel anil. enall rocke that nlII absorb rock ilourentun. DesXgrr. helght (6.: ft) le baseil on l@ exceedence gobablllty at locatlon plus d.eslgn roclc radtue. r.i:ii -,r a. -in ^ \ & \ I a \r-. 1 { n t H H H X t. \it .:..r'.I"r\n.' l l' I t r, t, \I t t ;. \il '..+ \t\i\ $\\\ Nr ,,1 , ^"1 \$ $\ t.y t $, frl '1, A'i \ \l\ r \"-t \ \\t. j\ ,6t69 12 lrlzotrs j ..rlii jl il lllr i1, E{ng ,&N+to DL4!ee Departnent of r wl.ca L Service wnlte River National Forest Holy Ctoss Ranger D:ist rict P.0. Box 190 rn. Colotado Reply to: 7720 Date: October 23, L99O Andy Knudsen Conrnunity Planning, Town of Vail 75 S. Frontage Road Vail, Co 87657 Dear Mr. Knudsen: On Septenber 5, 1990, Tin Granthan of ny staff, net with Ed Zneiner, at the Lionsridge Subilivision in West Vail-. The purpose of the neeting Tras to look at the current location of the Buffehr Creek Trail in relationship to the private P rope rty. The l-anclline location work conpJ-eted by a Forest Service survey cren thi6 past suruner, verifies that the lower portion of the trail is currently on private property owned by Ed Zneirser. A buildi-ng 1ot on the west end of the subdivision lies directly over the current trail location. Ed has indicated a willingness to provide the Forest Service with a trail- easement across hie Property if the trail is relocated and closed to motorized use. Since the area is in a dispersed aotorized recreational. ruanagement area, closing the trail to notorized use would be in confLict nith the Forest P1an. Moving the trail can be acconplished fairly easily though. By shifting the trail to the rcest aod following the Buffehr Creek drainage, the l-ower segment of trail can be noved back onto National Forest Systeo lands and traiJ. alignnent inproved. A sna1l segment of the trail stil-l crosses the northwest corner of Edrs property and a trail easenent from Ed needs to be pursued. According to Ed, building in the subdi.vision will- start on the east end anal progress to the lrest. Because there is not an innediate need to tlove the trail' the work will be delayed until the sunner of t99L which will a11ow some time to plan for it. I TJG Caring for th6 Land and Serving People FS-620G'28 (7€a) \ o F I[- E COPY PIANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COI,TMISSION October 22, L99O Present Chuck Crist Diana Donovan Connie l(night Ludwlg Kurz Jira Shearer Kathy warren Dalton Willians The neeting was called to Staff Kristan Pritz Mike Mollica Jill Kamnerer She1ly Mello Andy Knudtsen Betsy Rosolack Penny Perry order by Diana Donovan, chairperson. Diana of the Dave felt had a con Dave those the pubLic appropriateness comment. Kristan that she wanted to allow tirne for tti brnphasized what Diana had said about being the consideration of the rezoning e properties to Mediun Density Multi-lalned that the Mountain BeIl site was presen ture/open Space. She explained that Medium Densi€y zoning would allow 18 units per acre. The VaiI He Prinary/Secondary.both properties to e Pedotto properties $tere zoned cant was reguesting the rezoning of ity Multi-farnily. Kristan wanted the public and the bo rezoning reguests in explained that in the to evaluate the appropriateness of the ationship to surrounding land uses. She Use Plan, the Mountain Bell site land use designation was rlc se. The other two sites were designated Mediun nsity ti-family land use. Kristan pointed out that the back 6f the sta rnemo contained a conparative density analysis/of adjacent p perties for each of the sites. The neeting of the audi then opened to lic comrnent. The first member to speak was Dave pin fron Larkspur Lane. asked Lynn Fritzlen if she issues were vague.ict of interest by being n the Council and also being the proj architect. Kristan exPla that Lynn would not be able to ote as a Council person on th issue. Dave was bd about the number of cars gene ted by the proposed Pedo o site development. He estirnated e proJect would 9en ate a denand of about 70 cars and he elt that the hborhood would not be able to handfe additional traffic. was also concerned about, the appearance lained that the board lras ad zonings reguested and she invi e a few comments explain audience to speak. Shq priority of the mee guests for each of ify. Kristan zoned Agri cars. f parking areas for tt BilI Pierce. representing the applicant, said the developer had now reduced the number of unit fron 45 to 39 units at the Pedotto site. nlrmber of units per s would have only 2 ries and less than 35 ting Prinary/Secondary lots and 14 units of 2000 sg. ft. each could be constructed.Lynn felt that under the be developed with less erage than would occur if proposed development, the property woul GRFA, more landscaping and less site co 14 Primary/Secondary units were develo ed on the site. I o \Lynn Frit?len explained that the maximum building would be 6 and some of the build units. The buildings would be 2 to 3 s ft. high. She stated that under the exi zoning, the site could be platted into 7 Dave Chapin wanted to make sure the T doubling the number of people in the realized they would be and asked whether or services. ea not the Town would Jean Reed, a prope be prepared to d 1e against the increased have the neighborhood asked for tine to get si other property owners fel perhaps Stephens Park be owner in the a a, explained that those ad lived in In rrnountain for a while were ole neighborh od up to vail standards. She e not agains the rezoning but were asked for the opportunitY to ity. sh ture and me Iess dense. she al.so a petition to show how the . She uggested solutions such as for this housing. Dalton asked Jean if she w erned with the proposed project or if she only wanted single density, architecture, clust fanily homes constructed on dotto site. Jean replied that the fewer additionat units ad to the neighborhood the better. rception of affordable housing ained that they could be rnanY Dalton felt that most persons' was simply condominiurns. He things, such as single familY s. Jean responded her objection was to the rezoning. Bill Pierce stated that the v two bedroon units and he show another single-faniLy hone. ority of the structures were gle farnily hone attached to \ed the size of the proposed buildings to the Camelot eco ones and\.said the proposed buildings were rnuch smaller. Bill also compared the Pitk n Creek Park projAct densitY which Bighorn Lodge proJect and the was 18.8 units per acre, t ensity. The proposed Pedotto site units per acre. 2 property owners who \trying to bring the w said area residents w Faessler proposal project project density would be L tlLEcoPY PEc Minutes Lo/22/90 Meeting Connie lGight asked necessary to install y the applicant did not feel it was andscaping. Kathy answered that the be sufficientty landsca applicant felt the plaqters would already bd due to the Red Lion'addition landscaping requirements. Jin Shearer felt he would I ke to see sone type of planting. Diana Donovan felt the front \of the building would be landscaping because the Red Lio Chuck Crist and Dalton agreed wi a. Dalton felt that the Red Lion shoul be responsible for the planters. attractive than the hardscape not feel the applicant sttould t existed presently. reguired to install should be doing the ftu...rotj ,Vt.t!. more she did additional planting. Connie lhight asked and Diana responded Iandscape the area. tion was to felt the Red clude the landscaping why the that th on was obligated to Connie Knight inquired in guestion was covered to whether or not la prn9 y the Red Lionrs expa ion and planting the area Kristan trees answered it was, howev , the Red Lion would be and shrubs, but no fI Itern No. 5: A request for a na'ior chanqe to existinq development plan approval. for the Vallev' Phase VI . Applicant: Edward Zneiner Andy Knudtsen, in response to the boardrs request at the previous work sessJ-on, pointed out the major differences between the Valley Phase vI and Elk Meadows. A section of the staff memo was devoted to this analysis. Andy also gave a brief background of the proposal and a description of the project. The staff reconmendation was for approval with conditlons since the development plan resuLted in less density and a better site plan than the 1981 approval. 15 PEC Minutes Lo/22/so Meeting Peter Janar, representing the applicant, stated that the major change was the access to the southern units due to safety/sight concerns. other changes included the clarification and preservation of the valley and neadol^I. He felt that Mr. Zneirner should be applauded for down zoning. The one Lssue they wished to discuss with the board was the hazard mitigation. Until such tine aE the architecture was chosen for the units, they asked that the nitigation rnethod, whether it be a wall or internal, be left to the DRB. They could live with the condition but would prefer to have it left to the DRB. Jin Shearer asked why the north cul de sac ended up west of unit 1. Peter Jamar responded that they felt it might push the lot up the hill too far. Jin Shearer felt that, if it was possible, he would like to see the cu1 de sac moved east a little. He also wanted to see sorne trees in the area between the north and south streets. Andy explained that there uas a guestion as to what would and would not grow. Jirn stated he would be content to see pines and asPen. Kristan explained that staffls position was to avoid a manicured look. Jin Shearer stated that, in general , he was in favor of the proposal . He liked the revised entrance points for aesthetic and safety reasons. Jin asked if there was a letter fron the Forestry Service regarding the relocation of the trail. Andy Knudtsen explained to Jirn that the Forest Service had agreed through phone conversations but that he did not possess a letter. Jiur stated that he would feel more comfortable if the Town had a letter in their possession. Kathy Warren felt that condition No. 7 found in the nemo was confusing and needed to be reworded. Peter agreed with Kathy. He felt the wording lvas nisleading but the intent htas there. Kathy warren agreed with Jirn shearer that a letter from the Forest Service was needed and Andy explained that they did try to get the letter, they just did not have enough +-ime. Peter ilamar explained that the Forest Service had clearly indicated they understood they nust move the trail. Actually they were looking forward to rnoving it. He stated that the applicant would furnish a letter frorn the Forest Service. 15 PEC ltinutes Lo/22/90 Meeting Jirn Shearer asked if the applicant would have to bulld up the lower accesa and Kent Rose, engineer for the applicant, explained that they did a cross section which showed that 3 ta 3-L/2 feet of fill would bring the slope to 4 to 58. Chuct( Crist felt that his soncerns had been answered. Dalton conrmented that the project looked nice. He was afraid the walls night scar the land a little. He liked Jinrs suggestion of planting bethreen the north access road and Bueffer Creek Road. Ludwig Kurz also agreed wlth Jin regardlng the plantings. Regarding phasing, Ludh'ig asked if Mr. zneimer would do the whoLe proj ect. ur. Zneimer answered that his intent was to build the whole proJect. l Ludwlg asked Mr. Zneirner what would haPpen if sorneone lvanted to ':1 purchase a lot in another phase. Mr. Zneiner explained.that they ]were looking at different market alternatives such as right of first refusals. the botton line was that a perspective purchaser would have to wait if the desired lot was in a fater phase. Peter Jamar commented that the phasing rdas covered under the conditions of approval . At present, the property was not l subdivided. The condition would be to finish the inprovenents ]before a C.O. or T.C.O. was issued or to escror{ 1258 of the cost of inprovements. l Connie lhight asked staff why the board was not asking for enployee housing. Kristan explained that the development was within standards, was down zoning and r'tas not an sDD. Connie stated that she ]iked the roads but was not sure of the difference between cut and fill walls and Kent explained the difference to her. connie cornmented that she would rather see internal nitigation rather than rock fatl fencing. Kathy felt that the caretaker units should be deed restricted and Kristan and Andy explained that the code section referred to in the meno referred to the deed restrictions. Mr. Zneimer stated ttrat there may be nelt rnethods of hazard nitlgation that would be sensitive to the land. He asked for the opportunity to corne back. L7 PEC Minutes LO/22/9O Meeting Diana atso felt ttrat native vegetation should be required on the upside of the Valley Road. A motion to approve the request for a najor change to the existinq devel.oprnent approval for the Valley. Phase Vf. with the following conditions was made bv Kathy l.larren and secgnded bv Chuck Crist. Conditions: (!he ltens ln bold were changee or eddltions uadle by tbe board to the staff ueno) Fire DeDartnent: a-- engineerinq drarrringrs showing adequate turning distances for each of the cul-de-sacs, and b-- a mitiqation plan for lot 4, which may include sprinklinq, which neets the Fire Department requirements. Except for the area uithin buildinq envelopes 5 and 6, the applicant shall rgs;trict the open spaces between the access roads jnd Buffehr Creek Road so that no structures Lincluding fences. sheds. or accessorv buildinqs) shalL be built in this area. In addition, no landscapincr shall be-planted in the area that is inconsistent with the existinq native landscaping. The applicant shall deslqn all drivewavs so that the sinplest. most direct means of access to the site is provided. Drivewavs that wind up the hillside to gain elevation shall not be approved. Prior to the issuance of building pennits. the app.licant shall dedicate a drainaqe easement, final drainaqe report, and ginal road engiiregring to the Town of Vail which rneets the standards of the Public Works departrnent. Prior to issuance of certificate of occupancies or tenporary certificate of occupucies for building walls. fn addition- the applicant must Provide a financial cruarantee to the Town for the period of two winters to be used for landscape rePlacernegt. o 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1g PEC Minutes Lo/22/9o Meeting 6. Prior to issuance of building pernits for building envelopes 3 or 4. the applicant shall submlt plans showing that the proposed building meets the internal mitioation reSuirenents of the Mears report dated seDtember, 1990. cnr'slops tor the caretaher unlt. The units nust complv with Section 18.13.080 (B). Up to 400 square feet of unused GRFA frorn the primary unit nay be transferred to the caretaker unit, horever, no caretaker unlt sball exceed 1200 Bq. ft. The applicant shall design all retaininq walls located in the front yard setback with terracinq so that none exceed three feet in height. Prior to the issuance of a certlficate of oecupancy or a tenporarv certificate of oecupancy, the anpliqant shall construct aII inprovenents fron Buffer creex Roaal to the unit under construction. If occupancy is recruested prior to the iustatlation of anv lnprovEmenta, tlre appllcant nust escrow 125* of the constructlon cost prior to tbe Town iseuing a c.o. or T.C.o. Inprovenents ln this case shall lnclude landscapinq, rall construction, roads' dral.nage. andl utillties, 10. Prlor to the lgsuance of anv bullding Darnits for this developnent, the applicant shall Provlde a letter fron the Forest Service guaranteeinq the reconstruction of the traLl that crosses this DroDertv. 11. Prior to the Lssuance of c.o.rs or t.c.O.rs for buildlincr envelopes 5 anO 5. tlre apI,llcant ehall plant a denselv vegeta,ted elope of landsaaPiuq betweeg tbose --'.-.--=--constructf on if tes an 4 -" landsaaplng shall extend lron tb€ copstruotion ar€a all c the way east to the lntersectlon of, the upner ser\rlce roaal and Eueffer creek Road. shearer fett that there shoul.d be flexibiflty to sborten the de sac on the upper road, to show less asphalt. Ttre applicant has the option of includlnq a caretaker unit within each structure uglnq an additl.onal 800 gcr. ft. of GRFA to the anount allocated to eacb bulldlncl 7. 8. 9. Jin cuI u. PEC t'linutes Lo/22/90 Meeting lpended copdtltlon: L2. Ibs apt'lLelnt has tlr€ optlon to rsdua€ tha l,ellqtb of tbe upper road and looate the cul de gac lurther to the eagt. VOTE: 7-O IN FAVOR Item No. 6!A recruest for setback variances in order to construct additions to the Christiania Lodqe located at 356 Hansen Ranch Road, Lot D, Block 2 Vail Villacre 1st Filino.Applicant: Paul R. Johnston A request for off-street surface narking at the [Holv Cross parcel .rr Applicant: Vail Associates A recruest for a variance to allow a satellite dish in the Gore Creek 50 | setback and a recruest for a floodplain nodification on Lot 3, Block 1, Bighorn lst addition. 3907 Lupine Drive.Applicant: Ron Oelbaurn Itern No. 7 : Item No. 8: A motion to table itens 6 and 7 to November 12, 19L0 and item Sjndefinite1y was rnade bv Chuck Crist and seconded by Jim Shearer VOTE! 7-O IN FAVOR 20 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBTECT: prannins and Environmentar "o*,r":*on FlLt CuPy Department of Community Development October 22, 1990 A request for approval of a major existing development approval for Applicant: Edward Zneimer change to the the Valley, Phase VI . I. TNTRODUCTION The Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) reviewed the development proposal for The Valley, Phase VI in a work session on Septenber l-0, L99O. Fron that rneeting, it was apparent that the reduction in dwelling units (frorn 42 to 26) and the reduction in GRFA (from 77,LsO to 65,900 sq. ft.) rnade the project much better than the previous approval . The PEC did have significant concerns, including preservation of the meadow and the irnpact of the retaining wal1-s. Those items, among others, are discussed below. Staff wanted to point out that this review process is unique frorn nost projects which the PEC reviews. The review is a requirement of the annexation ordinance, which did not include any specific criteria or standards which the project must meet. Because this is not a Special Developnent District (SDD), the only evaluation criteria to be used is to compare the existing, approved plan to the proposed one. The ordinance has been attached to this rnerno as Exhibit A. The two major changes since the work session are that the applicant reconfigured the road plan so that there is a single intersection on Buffehr Creek Road and the applicant proposed to delete all secondary units from the development. Staff encouraged the applicant to maintain the option for caretaker units in the developrnent with the intent of creating sorne ernployee housing. At this time, the applicant will consider allowing the units as long as the GRFA for the caretaker is not deducted from the available GRFA for each envelope presented at the work session. By allowing 800 square feet of GRFA to be used strictly for a caretaker unit, the totat GRFA for the project becomes 65,900 square feet, still LI ,255 square feet less than the existing approval . Additional GRFA may be added to the caretaker frorn the amount allocated to the primary dwelling unit if it is not used for the primary unit; ho!'rever, no caretaker unit shall exceed 1-200 sguare feet. With this approval, no caretaker units will be *-r1*.'J 1"\n I * '' required and none may be buiLt. The reason the Town is not requiring the applicant to build a certaLn nurnber of these units is because the applicant is not requesting an SDD, variance, or another revl.ew whlch the Town could condition the approval with a requirenent to build units. II.BACXGROT'ND This review is a reguest for approval of a nodification to the existing development plan for Phase VI of The Valley. The original plan was approved as a PUD by Eagle County in the fall of L980. That plan included 42 tovrnhouses with a total GRFA of 77 tIsO sq. ft, The plan called for three clusters of units with a group of recreation arnenities (tennis courts, swirnnring pool ,trails, etc.). When the property was annexed by the Town of Vail , a provision of the annexation ordinance required that any maJor nodification to the County approved plan would require PEC approval. In that same ordinance, Residential Cluster (RC) zoning was applied to this property, Under the annexation ordinance, all standards not addressed by the Eagle County approved plan must meet RC zoning requirements. fn 198L, a developer proposed a revised site plan whicb the PEC approved. The amended plan maintained all. 42 dwelling units as well as the GRFA approved by the County and the scherne of attached, clustered townhouses. Though that plan was never built, it is still valid and could be built today after the applicant received updated Design Review Board (DRB) approvals. Both the L980 and 1981 plans are attached at the end of this merno as Exhibits B and C so the board can compare the l-98L plan, which is buildable, to the proposed one. III. PRo|'ECT DESCRTPITON At this tine, the applicant is proposing 13 detached single farnily hones, each which may have a secondary unit. This creates a total of 26 units. The caretaker units will be deed restricted so tbat they cannot be sold separately from the prinary residences, In addition, they must rneet all the requirernents for an employee unit }isted in the Prinary/Secondary section of the Zoning code (Section 18.13.080 (B)). of the l-3 buildings, six will be located north of Buffehr Creelc Road on the south facing slope; and seven will be located across Buffehr Creek Road in the meadow at the base of the forested slope (see attached site plan) . The development has been divided into three phases. The first two phases are the east and west clusters (respectively) on the south side of Buffehr Creek Road, The third and last will be the six hornes on the north side of the road. Tbe structures Ln phase one (Lots l-1-13) will each have approximately 35OO square feet of gross residential floor area (GRFA). Each house in phase two (Lots 7-10) and phase three (L,ots 1-5) will have approxinately 4500 square feet of GRFA. This results in a total GRFA of 55,500 sqluare feet. In addition to this amount, 10,400 square feet of GRFA (800 x 13) nay be used for caretaker units. Conbining the GRFA fron the priurary units with any caretaker units resuLts in a possible total of 651900 square feet. The developer is proposing a Tyrolean style of architecture, but has the option to vary that in the future. No subdivisLon plat is proposed at this tirue as the PEC approval is only for the revisions in the development plan--a requirement of annexation, The owner would nost likely proceed with a single farnily subdivision following development plan approval . rv.ZONING AIIAI.YSIS The analysis cornpares the proposal approval and the RC Zone District.other development standards per the to the most recent PEC The RC standards apply for annexation ordinance. l-98L PEC Approval Current Proposal 2l .45 acres 33 ft. maximun 55,500 sq. ft. 65r900 sq. ft.* 26Jc 1.2 DUs/acre't RC Zoninq 2L,45 acres 33 ft. maxirnum 59,895 sq. ft. 29.9 6 DUs/acre naximum Site Area: 'eight: GRFA: DUS: Density: *fncludes 2L.45 acres typical unit 32 ft. 77,L5O sq. ft. 42 2 Dus/acre L3 caretaker units V. STAFF COUilENTS AND $TAI.YSI8 A. Site Plan: The proposed site plan is a rnajor irnprovement to the previously approved plan as the inpacts have been significantly reduced. The biggest difference is the change ln the nurnber of dwelling unlts and decrease of GRFA. This plan has 16 fewer units than the previous plan. The development will appear less dense and will t. have fewer impacts since the design has been changed from attached dwelling units to single family hornes. The land previously devoted for guest parking, tennis courts, and a swimning pool for the condominium complex will now be left in its natural state. Lastly, the current proposal has 21550 sq. ft. less GRFA than the previ.ous plan. Buildinq envelopes: The proposal uses building envelopes to identify the location of each house. The envelopes are not proposed to be platted. There will be approxirnately 40 to 80 feet between each building envelope. Since the PEC work session, the applicant has enlarged the enveJ-opes to approximately 50 by 90 and has decided that each envelope will be adequate for aII of the future construction without developing standards for encroachments into the open space. A11 roof eaves, porches, decks, etc. will be contained within the buitding envelope. Though the enveLopes have been designed to accommodate all of the future construction, the applicant would like to set up a process which will allohr changes, if needed. The applicant has proposed the fol-Iowing language which wilL a1low some flexibility for the siting of the houses. The criteria listed below will be used by the DRB to approve any nodifications to the envelopes. rrBuilding envelopes indicated upon the approved site plan may be modified with approval of the DRB based upon detailed revi-ew of an individual architectural and site plan for an individual dwelling unit. The DRB shall find that the rnodification to any building envelope does not substantially result in any negative impacts upon the site,adjoining property, or have any adverse irnpact upon required geologic hazard considerations. If an association of home oldners within the project is formed, any nodification of. a building envelope shall also conform to the rules and regulations adopted by t he association. Any modification shall not exceed 15 feet and in no case shall any structure be built in the 2O foot setbacks shown on the approved development plan. tl 2.Open space: The applicant has comnitted to preserving all the areas outside the building envelopes as open spaee. The area bethreen the private roads and Buffehr Creek Road wilt be further restricted with this approval so that no fences or donestic-style landscaping will be allowed. The areas will be preserved in the natural state that exists today. The developer wiII be responsible for naintaining this area until the development is subdivided and,through that process, a hone owners association or other body is created to take over the responsibility. The spaces innediately around the building envelopes nay be rrimprovedrr with sod Iawns and fences, but no structures. Trails: The hiking/nountain bike trail, located on the northwest portion of the site, runs through buitding envelopes 1 and 5. It goes from Buffehr Creek Road north to Red and White Mountain. The Forest Service agrees that the current alignment has not been established long enough to be recognized legally and will take responsibility to relocate it along the creek. The new alignment will be on public land. The Forest Service plans to do the construction in the sunmer of 1.991-,which is prior to the tirne which the applicant plans to construct this phase of the developrnent. Comparison to Elk Meadows The PEC commented that this project should be designed more along the lines of Elk Meadows, the SDD adjacent to the site to the east. Staff believes there are several reasons why the two sites are different and deserve different solutions. l--There is a dedicated utility easernent that runs through the valley, located approxinately parallel to Buffehr Creek Road. The area between the road and this utility easement varies. In Phase VI , Buffehr Creek Road winds in and out, Ieaving only one building envelope between the road and the easement. In Elk Dteadows, the road cuts to the north, leaving adeguate room for four of the five buildings. 3. B. 2--The slope from the road to the meadow is nuch steeper in Elk Meadorils. The approved design works uruch better on a steep slope because the houses can be tucked into the slope. Even if the Elk Meadows style of site planning could be done for Phase Vf, the end result may not be an irnprovernent because the houses would stick up higher and be rnore visible. 3--The rock fall hazard is rnore severe on the Elk Meadows site reguiring more uritigation. By placing the houses in the slope, internal uritigation was all that was needed. 4--Through the SDD process, the Elk Dleadoh/s site plan was approved with a three foot setback frorn Buffehr Creek Road right-of-way. By allowing the setback encroachment, enough room for the construction was created. s--By placing the homes on the far side of the neadow,the meadow that is preserved wil.l be visible to the public. The conditions of approval for this reguest require that it be preserved in a natural state. C. Roads, Walls and Drainaqe The road configuration has been revised since the work sesslon so that both access roads intersect Buffehr Creek Road at the same locatLon. The roads will be private roads. The slopes range frorn 7.0 percent to 8.6 percent, with the driveway to lot 4 at l-O percent. The Townrs subdivision regulations allow private roads to reach 9.0 percent slope without requiring a variance. The driveway to lot four will require an approval frorn the Town Engineer (with a possibJ.e heating reguirement), but does not reguire a variance. The walls needed for the upper road do not exceed 5 feet in height. A five foot high sut waIl is proposed fron the intersection approximately half the distance up the access road. Frorn that point, a five foot high fill wall wiII be installed for the rest of the distance. Near the end of the road, in addition to the fill wall, another six foot high cut wall will be needed. See plans and sections attached to this memo. The walls will be constructed with interlocking precast concrete blocks, similar to those approved for Spraddle Creek. Texture, shape, and color will be deterroined by the DRB. Landscaping will be required to soften the appearance of the walls. The planting plan should include frequent groupings above and below the walls that breakup the mass. DRB will give final approval to the planting plan. On the lower portion of the development, no walls will be needed. Fill will be added to the meadow, ranging from two feet at the east end to eight feet at the west end. The applicants originally proposed a typical road section of L8 feet with two 2 foot wide shoulders or gutters. In order to proceed wlth this developrnent approval , the applicants have expanded the section to 22 feet with 2 foot gutters or shoulders. Planning staff generally supports less asphalt. If Fire Department and Public Works concerns can be addressed,the applicant may apply for a variance to the subdivision standards for a reduced road width.that case, staff will bring the variance request PEC for their review at a later date. IN to the D. Drainage will be accomrnodated with curb and gutter for the upper road. Swales will handle the drainage on the Iower road. One drainage easement will be required to convey the drainage off site to Buffehr Creek. No detention pond will be built, since it was not reconmended in the drainage study. Staff believes that the proposed infrastructure is reasonable. The wa1ls do not require variances since no portion of the walls will exceed six feet in height.Staff supports the road grades and widths, since they neet the code requirements. Hazards The only hazard shown on the Tordn rnaps is high severity rock fall. A final report by Arthur Mears states that the houses below Buffehr Creek Road will be adequately protected with the new road and drainage swales which will be constructed for phase one. The preliminary rock falI study used for the work session indicated that a berm would be required in the rneadow to protect the lower houses. This is no longer the case. Mears recommended an optional berm, but also said the swale for the road would be adequate protection. There are only two houses above Buffehr Creek Road which need nltigation (building envelopes 3 and 4). The Mears report states that these structures can be protected with a six foot high rock faII fence or by E. internal nitigation within the north facing walls.Staff believes that the internal mitigation will preserve the natural character of The Valley rnuch better than a fence located on the slope above the trornes. The applicant has pointed out that the drawlng frorn the Itlears report showing the internal nitigation precludes north faeing windows for the first two and possibly the third floors (See exhibit D). One possible solution is to zig zag the floor plans, installing east and west facing rdindows whlch will allow light into the rooms on the north side of the two houses. Staff believes that this architectural constraint is reasonable. given the alternative of an unsightly, 330 foot long fence. Density The proposed density, assuming every secondary unit would be built, is approxinately two thirds of the prevJ-ous approval and less than what Rc zoning would allow. The GRFA will be approxirnately two thirds of the previous approval (a change from 77rl-50 sg. ft. to 65,900 sg, ft.) and is also under the RC maximurn.Staff's opinion is that the proposal is clearly a reduction in impacts fron the previous approval and is a much better solution for the development of the site. ArchitecturaL quidelines The applicant plans to build Tyrolean style homes, but would like to leave the architectural desisions to the DRB and does not intend to draw up any guidelines at this tine. The Town typically requires specific pJ.ans,Iike architectural guidelines, in SDD reviews. But since this review is a fulfillrnent of an annexation requirement and is not an SDD, staff can support the position of the applicant. Phasing plans Staff befieves that the longer portions of this site remain as meadow, the better. To achieve that goal ,staff resornmends that one phase be conpleted before another is begun. The inprovenents that will be constructed in each phase include the houses, drainage facilities, roads, utilities, and landscaping. These improvements must be conpleted in each phase prior to construction starting in another phase. The Lmprovements must be buiLt fron Buffehr creek Road to any unit under construction prior to the issuance of any Certificate of occupancy or Tenporary Certificate F. G. of occupancy. If occupancy is requested prior installation of any inprovements, the applicant escrow 125* of the construction costs prior to issuing a T.c.O. to the must the Town H. The applicant may adhere to the plan described above for phasing and financial guarantees or nay, through a subdivision process, choose to cornply with the stricter regulations on financial guarantees. At a minimum, the requirernents of this approval must be followed. Fire DeDartment concerns Fire department concerns include the turn around area in the cul-de-sacs and the access to lot 4. The turn around areas appear to be adeguate, but as a condition of approval , the Fire Department will need to see engineering drawings of the cul-de-sacs showing that each meet the ninirnurn turning distances. The concerns regtarding lot 4 are that the driveway is too steep for a fire truck to clinb, resulting in excessive distance from the fire truck location to all points on the perimeter of the building. The applicant has options, including sprinkling the building, to meet the fire code. Ensuring adeguate fire protection for lot four will be another condition of approval . CONCIJUSION vr. Staff supports the development plan because it results in less density and a better site plan than the L981 approval . Though there will be a significant Loss of meadow frorn what exists today, staff believes that there will be nore rneadow when this developrnent is built out than what would have been left with the previous approval . Therefore, planning staff recommends approval of this development plan with the following conditions:(BoId tlpe Ls changes nade by PEC at neeting) L) Prior to the Town approving any building penoits for this development, the appJ.icant shall provide to the Fire Department: a-- engineering drawings showing adeguate turning distances for each of the cul-de-sacs, and b-- a nitigation plan for lot 4, which may include sprinkling, which meets the Fire Departroent reguirenents. 2',)Except for the area within building envelopes 5 and 6, the applicant shall restrict the open spaces bettreen the access roads and Buffehr Creek Road so that no structures (including fences, sheds, or accessory buildings) shall be built in this area. In addition, no landscaping shall be planted in the area t\rat is inconsistent with the existing nativelandscaping. /e;-':-..,. : . :: The applicant shall design all drive!'rays so that the sinplest, most direct means of access to the site is provided. Driveways that wind up the hillside to gain elevation shall not be approved. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall dedicate a drainage easenent, final drainage report, and final road engineering to the Town of Vail which meets the standards of the Public Works department. Prior to issuance of certificate of occupancies or ternporary certificate of occupancies for building envelopes 1 through 6, the applicant shal] instatt the proposed landscaping to rnitigate the appearance of the walls. In addition, the applicant must provide a financial guarantee to the Town for the period of two winters to be used for landscape replacement. Prior to issuance of building permits for building envelopes 3 or 4, the applicant shall submit plans showing that the proposed building meets the internaf nitigation requirenents of the Mearrs report dated September, 1990. The applicant has the option of including a caretaker unit within each structure using an additioDal 8OO sq. ft. of GRFA to the amount allosated to eacb building envelope for the caretaker unit. The units must comply with Section 18.L3.080 (B). Up to 400 square feet of unused GRFA from the prinary unit rnay be transferred to the caretaker unit, however, no caretaker unit shall exseed 1200 sq. ft. '3) 4',) 5) 6) 7') 8) The applicant shall design all retaining walls located in the front yard setback with terracing so that none exceed three feet in height. 9) Prior to tbe issuance of a certificate of occupancy or a tenporary certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall construct all inprovements frou Buffer Creek Road to tbe unit under construction. If occupancy is requested prior to the Lnstallation of any improvements, the applicant must escrow 125t of the construction cost prior to the Town issulng a C.O. or T.C.O. fmprovements La this cage shall Lnclude landscaping, wall construction, roads, draLnage, and utilities. 10 10)Prl.or to the lsguance of any bullding per:uits for this developnent, tbe appllcant aball provide a letter frou the Forest SerrrLee guaranteeing the reconstructl,on ot the trail that erosaeg tble property. 11) Prior to the Lgeuance of C.O.rs or T.C.O.te for bulldlng envelopes 5 and 6, the appllcant gball plant a densely vegetat€al slopc of landgcaping betneen tbose coaetructioa glteg and Buffar Cr€eh noad. TbLs lanAscaplug gball ertend fron tbe colstructLon area all tbe yay €ast to the interssction. Lzl The rppllcant has tbe optl,on to reduaE the lengtb of tbe upper road aad locate the cul de eac furtber to tbe east. L1 o / c+7 ft'*,rt, fh_ 6,-11 '7 4 n.,/.b ^th ui4rj /'q uft-?r/.,\,Q CZVzr ydl*t* o o Conditions: r.) Prior to the Town approving any building permits for this development, the applicant shall provide to the Fire Departrnent: a-- engineering drawings showing adeguate turning distances for each of the cul-de-sacs, and b-- a nitigation plan for lot 4, which may include sprinkling, which meets the Fire Departnent requirements. 2) Except for the area within building envelopes 5 and 5, the applicant shall restrict the open spaces between the access roads and Buffehr Creek Road so that no structures (including fences, sheds, or accessory buildings) shall be built in this area. rn addition, no landscaping sha1l be planted in the area that is inconsistent with the existing native landscaping. 3) The applicant shall design all driveways so that the simplest, most direct means of access to the site is provided. Driveways that wind up the hillside to gain elevation shall not be approved. 4) Prior to the issuance of buitding permits,the applicant shall dedicate a drainage easement, provide a final drainage report, and final road engineering to the Town of Vail which meets the standards of the Public Works departnent. 5) Prior to issuance of certificate of occupancies or tenporary certLficate of occupancies for building envelopes L through 6, the applicant shall install the proposed Iandscaping to rnitigate the appearance of the walls. fn addition, the applicant must provide a financial guarantee to the Town for the period of two winters to be used for landscape replacernent. 6) Prior to issuance of building pernits for building envelopes 3 or 4, the applicant shall subnit plans showing that the proposed butlding neets the internal rnitigation requirenents of the Mearrs report dated September, 1990. D 7) The applicant has the option of including a caretaker unit within each structure, using an additonal 800 sq. ft. of GRFA to the amount allocated for eaclr building envelope for the caretaker unit. The units must courply with Section 18.13.080 (B). Up to 4oo sguare feet of unused GRFA fron the prirnary unit rnay be transferred to the caretaker unit. however, no caretaker unl-t shall exceed 1200 sq. ft. 8) The applicant shall design all retaining walls located in the front yard setback with terracing so that none exceed three feet in height. 9) Prlor to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or a ternporary certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall construct al1 improvements from Buffer Creek Road to the unit under construction. ff occupancy is requested prior to the installation of any improvernents, the applicant rnust escrow 1258 of the construction costs prior to the Town issuing a C.O. or T.C.O. Improvements in the case shall include landscaping, wall construction, roads, drainage, and utilities. 10) Prior to the issuance of any building perrnits for this development, the applicant sha1l provide a letter from the Forest Service guaranteeing the relocation of the trail that crosses this property. 11) Prior to the issuance of C.O. rs or T.C.O.rs for building envelopes 5 and 6, the applicant shall plant a densely vegetated slope of Iandscaping between those construction sites and Buffer CReek Road. This landscaping shall extend fronr the construction area all the way to the east to the intersection. Lz) The applicant has the option to reduce the Iength of tbe upper road and locate the cul de sac further to the east. INTER-DEPARTMENTAIJ REVIEW PRO.]ECT: DATE SUBMIT'IED. /{//?t DATE COMMENTS NEEDED BY:a .(."',-.b- BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PRoPoSAL: /S /_z*) $ Fl 's . >? €n6zwo..,wa Jaou, L"{i-< & cd}a.,-rL PUBLTC WORKS --1/ .zz< c- G"- /. f--oQp".r fi..".-^l l-^u<*f r.rRE pEpARrMENr.-- ), t{- L* -7 A /J 4 ak ? Revlewed by: Comments: Reviewed by: Comments: POIJICE DEPARTMENT Reviewed by: Comments: RECREATION DEPARTMENT Reviewed by: Cornnents: "-l w^/-,la---- c-^21 ..-x- ,'//- 7cr4-L/-s14. Date: Date: Date: Date: t PUBLIC NorrCE ' NorrcE rs HEREBftTvEN that the Plannirrg "r,aQrr.rironnental Commlssion of the Town of vail will hold a public trearlng Ln accordance with Section 18.65.060 of the rnunicipal code of the Tosn of Vail on October 22, L99O at 2:o0 p.E. ln the Torrn of Vail Munieipal Building. ConsideratLon of: A request for a conditional use petnit ln order to sell beer at wholesale and to sell beer for off-site consr:nption at 143 E. Meadow Drive, Lot P, Block 5D, Vall Vill.age 1st Filing.Applicant: First Brewery of Vail/Dean Llotta A reguest for a for a naJor change to exlsting developnent approval for the valley, Phase VI . k0''l\\< icant: Ederard Zneiner A request for a site coverage variance and an exterior afteration in the Conmercial Core I in order to allow construction of an airlock entry at the Szechwan Lion Restaurant, 304 Bridge Street, Lot H, Block 5A' Vail village 1st Filing. TK Applicant: John S. Ho/Szecltwan Lion Restaurant 4. A reguest for off-street surface parking at the "Holy cross FA1\A parcelrr described as follows: A tract of ground in the wE l/4 of Section t2, Tornsbip 5 Sourhr'Range El lJesr of the 5th Principal Heridian, lying wirhiu Ehat parcel cooveyed !o the Holy Cross Eleclric Association, Inc. by deed recorded at Receprion No.ll5t28 on January 12, 1981, in the rccords of Eaglc Councy, Colorado, described as: Conurenc.ing at the NE corner of said Section 12; thcnce South 88el9'29" lles!, along the north line of said HE ll4, a disrancc of 43.! feer to lhe incersecrion of che prolongacion of the cisr line of caid parcel; lhence South 0'01r33'r East,r along said prolongationr 318.2 feet so the northeas! corner of said parcel shich is the poinc of beginning; thence Souch 0'0lt33I East, along eaid cast line, 222.11 fcec to the southeasE corner of said parcel; lhence northeesEcrly across aaid parcel through the follouing four courges: l) North 28'36rl9x Wesr, 53.06 feer, 2) North 38'12t34r'9est, 81.46 feec, 3) North 50'48'25'9est, 68.68 feet, end 4) South 79'49r04" llest, 121.45 fecc to the northnest corner of eald parccl; rh€ncr northeaalerly along the norrh llne of eaid parccl phich is g non-lsngent (a radial to said norlhee8t corner bears North 22'39'28" lJest), 2715 foor radius cuntc concave southerly, 264.28 feet (central angle equals 5.34,3E") ro rhe point of beginning. This tract, as described, conlains 151940 squer! fee!, or 0.3d6 acres, oorc or lcss. Applicant: Vail Associates AK E ..{3. \: ril$ A request for denslty and setback variances Ln order to 5 K construct additions to the Christiania Lodge located at 356 Hansen Ranch Road, Lot D, Block 2 VaiI Village lst Filing. Applicant: PauI R. ,fohnston 5. 6.iJ?:5$ih"s:I;;"::i:1;f.:t: "")ns propertv for Mountain 8e11 site described as a tract of land in the South Half, of the Southeast Quarter, Section 6, Township 5 South, Range 80 West of the 5th Principal-lteridian, Eagle County, Colorado, nore particularly described as foLlows: lrginning rr | ?otn! lr,i:-fr'r dfrg'te ' r i ctrtraci ot :' 586.60 lcct f?o6 tlta Sorliaa3t Scrra? of S.ctlon 6. ?orrrilt 5 :. soutl. lrngc 80 itrct of Ll. 6tf ltlac{trl l.?lrlt.tr b!!!3 '.!r '!ru. tolnt of br3ln::!si: aito lalog I tolnt oi tha lo?tla"lt ,',tlqltt-of-lrt of lntcr:trtt 703 ttlrc! E 00"?8'16' I rlo!9 !1...Erit lllc ot rrfd s.ctlon 6 | dltt.tc! ol 6i3.10 fltt: tiriar I Egczt.?I. L r dls:!nc! ot Zg2t.16 tra! to r tolrr oa-lia trrt rouiairr ilnc of viiilpotito-ritit Ftttng; thlne. 5 0000t'12' E rlone tald E.3t loundrrt tlrr: dt3lrncr cf 35i.?: frrt to I golni oa a curw. :tld csrrr rlto Dalng on the licr:t.rlt tllht'.-of-ht ol lnt.rstrtr 70i !tcrc? rlorg 3.id io.il?/lt rlgl!..t. I.t o; ti. follorl'r1 ! co3r3.t: lJ r-dts:racr ot 2!1.!3 t.!t rlbn: tltt rrc ot a c{rte to !tt! tlght. 3lld c'Jtvc irvln9 I ccalirl rnqlc ot 0:056'18'. r rrdl||: gt 3990.0 tlt:. rtd,r c!o"tl riiitng r igo:t'loi i r olitittc et 2o.-6t fu!:;.'l: sicii'9gl -^I r cli:rncr qf ?11.80 tca?: ]] ll !tlo55'50' E I clrt.nc. gt ll9.7c ?.lti-ii-S-igtSe;ii:-i r-ciitrice of-aAr..o fcrt: 5l s 6eoss'3!' ! r ilsirncr n, :01.?! f!.:i t: 5 i.:!:l'35' I r dlttrnc! of iOi.iO rltt:7) S F3036,29.'3 i dtr:rnrc of 3..'i5.30 r.e::.ll !-ii653 ; ii :'t' j i rJ i.iie-it io6. io i.. r to.t'" tr.re- Foi.* c+ i:lilli^i,'ti:'l' lif.",?f;iT" jii;j.::;' il.l:'i;.lll;l' il$'n. bf ZtS. f9 r:9. fll.C ot "?co,c In ii!G cfficr of Cl.'l .'td fucordcr of tlgi: Coun!t. cnls'34'. Pedotto Site d.escribed as A parcel of land in the sw l/4 of Section 14, Township 5 South, Range 81 West of the 6th Principal lteridian, more particularly described as fol-lows:'lrqlnnlnq et r mlnt vhcncE a brart qrP tet !o! a it[n.rr iorncr ]or thr ilcrt .l/{ of rrld Sectlon ll bcrrt.N 29.rOr5l. lo?r.08 tcc!, thcnca N 71.05r19' f fO'fC tcett thcnc$ :81.62 lec! oiong thc rrc ol I cuirn to tho-tlqht vhlch rrc tubtrnd: r ehord bcrrlnE t igrtar30. ! lil,?6 l..lr thancc g ??.t0tll' E 62,71 imtl thoncc t{?.1! lcet rlong th€ lrc of r curv€ to itrq iofi uhlch .rc lubtendr r-cherdt beertng N 86'J6rl?r t ll9.60 !ce!t thcncc N ?Or5lr55' E 105.59 feeLr thcncc !{.10 lact rlonE th. !!c of . curva to the rlght t'hlch rrc lubtondr I Ehord bcrrlng I {7'a0'3?'E la.?0 feet, urcnco s l.l'25'51" H ll0.3l fe€tt thence 3 6E'l3r0I' X t20.00 footr thcnca I 19107'05' H 50.00 feQti th.nce t ??rl8'll'H I0O,te lcetr thence s 10n53'33'lf t6.lB trell thcncr N 87'{0r06' l{ l3?.?2 fect: thencc ll llr5lrtl' E 130,00 fect to tho polnt of beginnlng, corrLqinlng 2.5005 l€lcrr norc or lcss. gaerlng frorn G.L.o. Record for south L/2 of ccctlon Itnc bctvccn Scctlona l,l-13. Oberlohr Site, Lots 5-13, Vail lleights Filing No.l. SK a. b.\K s\<c. The applications and information about the proposals are avallable for public inspection in the Conrounity Developnent Departnent office. Town of Vail Conmunity DeveLopnent Departnent Published in the Vail Trail on october 5, 1990. I J PETER JAMAR ASSOCIATES, INC. PLANNING. DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS. BESEARCI.i TO: FROU: DATE: RE: IIEUORANDI,I'! TOWN PI,ANNER SUBMITTAL INFORMATION FOR PEC REVIEW OF VALI,EY PHASE SIX PI.A}I REVISION As yourve reguested ree are providing you with additional inforrnation regarding our application for a plan revision to the current approved developnent plan for the Valley Phase Six. The following describes the Lnfomation being subuitted and respond,s to your questions regarding certain aspects of the project. 1. Revised Development Plan. The Development PIan has been slightly revised since the PEC revieued the project in a work session on September l-0. The revLsions have been nade in order to respond to both the PEC questions and cornments and staff reguests. The revisions to the plan reflect a consolidation of tbe access points i.nto one location upon the site. The two acceas drives are nord located across the road frorn each other and this change is in accordance with the PEC conments regardlng access. As in the previous plan these two curb cuts reflect a reduction from the three curb cuts approved for the current plan in effect. A second change in the Developnent Plan is the shifting of the building envelope for Unit #4 slightly to the west in order to shorten the driveway access for this hone. This is in response to Town of Vail Fire Departrnent concerns. The nurnber of dwelling units has been reduced from the previous proposal due to the elinination of the nine caretaker units. rhe density nos proposed is t3 single family units with a total naximum GRFA of 55,500 (4500 sq.ft. maximum in unitE 1-10 and 3500 sq.ft. maximum in units 11-13). Thle reflects a reduction of 29 units and 2L,65O sqluare feet from the cunent approved plan. Suite 308, Vail National Bank Building 108 South Frontage Road West . Vail, Colorado 81657 . {303) 476-7154 ANDY KNUDTSEN, PETER JN,TAR ocToBER 8, 1990 "\:r - lr. ', i. 'r-z ..'*' \!/t ..i- ,i*' "Yo $l 2 4. Memorandurn October 8, 1990 Page 2 2. Phasing - Phasing is anticipated to remain as previously described with hones L0-13 constructed in phase onef 7-9 in phase two, and l--6 in phase three. Road Profiles and Sections - RBD Engineering has prepared road sections and profiles indicating road grades and retai-ning waII heights. These have been attached for your review. Drainage Report - A drainage study has been prepared by RBD and is attached for your review. In accordance with Section 17.2a.330.K of the Town of VaiI Subdivision Regulations, on site facilities will be designed to accommodate the 25 year frequency storm runoff. 5.Rockfall- Studv The Rockfall Mitigation Design Art Mears has been Specifications study cornpleted by attached for your review. 6. Building Envelopes - The areas indicated as !'Typical Building Locationsrr on the plan should be treated as building envelopes and utilized for review purposes as each proposed home or group of homes go through the Design Review process. trBuilding Envelope" in this case is meant to mean the boundaries upon the site within which single family hones rnay be constructed. The areas outside the building envelopes___qre inteadc4--tq.., remain as open spaced and landscape&jrhe-re iate.) It is intended that these are large enough that any roof overhangs,building envelopes are large enough that porches, balconies, etc. should not need to encroach into the area outside the building envelope. Hohrever the intent is that the plan should remain flexible so that if deemed appropriate by the Town of Vail Design Review Board minor adjustnents to buildinq locations could be made during the architecturaL review process for each hone. It is also likely that private covenants would also be adopted governing the project and contain rules and regulations regarding approval of any building envelope rnodifications. fn response to the concern regarding the open space area between Buffehr Creek Road and the lower access drive, the property owner has indicated that he witl commit to this area being left as open space. If the project goes through the Single Fanily Subdivision process (chapter L7.25, it some point and this area is divided into separate ownerships, related covenants to be recorded will incLude l{emorandum october 8, 1990 Page 3 provisions that this area renain as open space and will be kept in a condition that is consistent. In other words, each lot olrner woul-d not be aLlowed to inplement their own landscape design on separate pieces of this area. We are Ln total agreement wlth the PEc on thls point and feel strongly about it. Architectural Design. we agree that the architectural style or character of Lndividual hones to be constructed should be governed by the normal design revielt process. l{hile we have not selected any retaining wall material or sol-or at this tine I would suggest that this be reviewed at a time nhen the first hone or hones within Phase Three of the project (upper side of the road) are presented to DRB. I believe that this covers the itens vhich we have discussed.please Iet me know if you have any questions or need additional information. T lssttt W sf-c c ,174 4-( sE"<B \_-_- *t-rya '"- @'{ilL -------tf UL,t,,I 4 "^5'*,rtA \ J(' 5 i,,",r l,".ri<n'J N tv44 uvL r--fi SL.r -"-/l;L vl C*l ,l qy,Dr,,f 1\ t I "1Lt<1 rl ltl x'-' "l 1, vr^4.'r'r F"ruf /tt. 4MLqt afh-atf *t tl v , ?V-t"-+t 'atl+rcW," . Drta r-.rr-,,/.^ z v*.-- ' jP.<<: fu44*-'<j--l L Lrfza/(f.rZ J42c.r-a(t- 6y^"t /-uo,*-.rl? ,'Ltu A*,,, Stt ft il ra^; h\ "- ffevt c\\ t )/{ ^It,l ,)tcrr&r<-,\"f.+rrJ u,' lrn .. lfivt a 8,.:U,---- g--.L^"-- #=ry ;XA.I oK? v- /, ov.,.4, s,fiL1J* 74* "..-t(g1- -s4 Ca+"-t;f J.^d*t/Lto/- .4,,".tf /- fr,*t- {t. rt"n-t-,ntl ./- r \ /*.*q.* ?+".*rl e/- .'*'tP\ e:lflL ;/" 4o] ,t - [-n\^qe E rr*,^Ar'- Engineedng Consultants 953 So. Frontage Rd. West, Suite 201 Vail. Colorado 81657 303t476.6340 october 8, 1990 Mr. Ed Zneimer P. O. Box 1075 Vail, CO 81558 RE: PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE THE VALLEY-PHASE VI Dear Ed: Please accept this as a proposed development, The REPORT preliminary drainage report for your Va11ey, Phase VI . The vaIley, Phase vI is located along Buffehr creek Road in the Town of Vail as shown on Figure 1. The proposed project consists of thirteen singre family residential- rots o.t ipproximatery 2g acres. The terrain in this area consists of a stoping valley of approximately I percent traversing east to west with-a low iidge to the south and a higher mountainside to the north. The vegiti-tion is made up of primarily evergreens on the ridge to the Jouth and meadow grasses, brush and deciduous trees on the mountainside to the north. The existing drainage paths incLude a borrow ditch along the north edge of Buffehr criek-Road and a wide swale south of Buffehr Creek Roatl along the meadow bottom. offsite drainage enters the site from three sub baslns as shown on Figure L. Flows from sub-basins Bl and 83 enter the site frorn the east and south and are collecLed and coveyed by the natural swale -along the meadow bottom. Flows fron sul-basln 82 enter the site from the north and are directed arong the Buffer creek Road borrow ditch. The approach taken for the hydrologic analysis was to utirlze the soil conservation service (scs) TR-ss mltnoa. This method was used to compute runoff guantlties for the 10, ?s and 100 year storm events for each sub basln. Curve numbers gsed in the analysis were estabrished based on soir type, vesifiiion ;;d weighing the pervious and inpervious areas ii eacn iub basin in-cluding the proposed deveLopment. Other Otfices: Fort Collln8, Colorado 303/226-4955 . Colorado Springs, Colorado 719/59E4107 . Longmont, Colorado 303/678.9584 Results of the are summar ized SUB BASIN B1 B2 B3 compos i t watershed hydtologic analysis for the various as follows I storm events ].0 YR 6cfs 5cfs 4cfs 14c fs 25 YR 14c fs 12c fs 9cfs 3lcfs 1OO YR 49cfs 3 5cfs 3 0cfs 9 9cfs As per the subdivision Regulations, section 17 .2a.330 Drainage criteria. K.Drainage, the 25 year storm event ririrl be used. The flows calculated for sub-basin 82 are assumed to be directed by the Buffehr creek Road borrow ditch and some improvement of this existinq ditch may be required. 2, An erosion contror rnatting such as Miiafi or Enkamat may be required in certain reaches of the proposed channel. The flows cal-culated through the 1ow meadow area south of Buffehr\creek Road can be accomodated in a swale along the north side of L the proposed development roadway. The most pricticar solution ap- lf pears to be a grass-Iined channel configured as shown in riguie/ I Further evaruation wilr be done during finat design but it is :,safe to say that this approach will conviy onsite 5nd offsite,.i drainage flows through the proposed projEct consistent with the.,'criteria spelled out in the Town- of vair subdivision Regulations.,;. Very truly yours, RBD, fNc.,1(a Kent R. Rose, p.E. Project Manager ,/ InA I \ *N -t#Tn . {n'i- l'ttrt^)'{ $ o o o ol tl ------------- rz ru o .F L o. o. =z5 roJ EES d8H I!JF ii{,1r,,, i(irrff iirili)i) u / :'\i l\i'j , :r), 4 r.. - _l ,H z::-----.-< ffii,:,(1 KN Nl:w N.\_-Z 'W: N ft i( tt --.-l ,i )r \\ Ne)\,N fis 1\\N,l/r{ xl. \., .a.,"itNx\'N-':)\\'\I E o ==tr Ht -z or 3HE mA u a E 5l f; 2 f; fr 'fl8;3 iN r\,1\)I \r'i.)'l;'il =l!lD*Engineering Consultants ".,.*, i:trIFJi4E-/'""*o.1/0OOl ,ro,,tc, ..VA|J- Ey f/t/tI.!.l.1tl cor-cur-r.o* sroa DRA/l'lAQ E MADEAY- --DAT€, , - CHECXEOAY OATE _ , ,--SH€€T-OF - a s t' a \r/) $\ R K l: \.1 $\ ir\ l-l '<: fv L,tl \-t ^-- R\(\ \l.l \a\ C\ \.1 xs \ l.{ :::.kl .\ \D >\ q l)\l tr) \r \ s .\ (l lr.1 -'\- -l t/) v) k CI ) I I l 50 .4 ,'l i0 20 -.1 ti r' t0 E i a ; q. ? E E, Figure 3 -1. --Average 'vElocltt llr FIET pEn sEcoND velocities for estimating overland flow. s c lo 20 556-l's '(?s travel tine for Proj ect v\JLlllt.)' Subt,itle Subarea THE VALLEY - PHASE VI EAGLE B1 TR-55 CURVE NUMBER COMPUTATION VERSIoN 1.11 User: TMO Date: 09-26-90 State: CO Checked: Date: Hydrologic SolI croup COVERDESCRTP?ION A B C D Acres (CN) OTHER AGRICULTURAL I,ANDS Pasture, grassland or range fair _ IO9. (69) total Area (by Hydrologlc Soil Group)109 SUBAREA: Bt TorAL DRATNAGE AREA: Log Acres wETcHTED cuRvE NuMBER:69 Drni aa{. vv qr I '-J Subtitle Subarea THE VALLEY - PHASE VT EAGLE B2 TR-55 CURVE NUMBER COMPUTATION VERSION 1.11 User: TMO Date: 09-26-90 State: CO Checked: Date: Hydrologic SolL Group COVERDESCRIPTION A B C D -_---_-__:::::_l:1 FULLY DEvELopED URBAN AREAS (veg Estab.)Irnpervious Areas Paved parking lots, roofs, driveways - O.50(98) Streets and roads Paved; open ditches (wrzright-of-way) - O.7S(Ag) _ OTHER AGRTCULTURAI., LANDS Pasture, grassland or range fair Total Area (by Hydrologic Soil Group) - 57.s(6e) SUBAREA: 82 TorAL DRATNAGE AREA: 58.75 Acres WETGHTED cuRvE NTIMBER:7o o 5 CURVE THE VALLEY . PHASE VI EAGLE State: CO TR-5 NUMBER COMPUTATION VERSTON 1.11 Date:09-26-90 Date: Proj ect vvultl'.J Subtitle Subarea User: TMo Checked: COVER DESCRIPTION Hydrologic Soil Group BCD '\ Aea- /.rrr\.rL,J_ sp \\-l\,, FULLY DEVELoPED URBAN AREAS (Veg Estab.)Impervious Areas Paved parking lots, roofs, driveways Streets and roads Pavedi open ditches (flright-of_way) 0.60(e8) - o.so (8e) - OTHER AGRICULTURAL Pasture, grassland I,ANDS or range fair 64.7 (6e) Tota1 Area (by ltydroJ_ogic Soil Group)66. I SUBAREA: 83 TOTAIJ DRAINAGE AREA: 65.I AcTes WEIGHTED CURVE NI'MBER! 7o Quick TR-55 Versl_on: 4.03 S/N; STOIOgZs WEST VAIL - TI{E VALLEY - PHASE VI .toB # 410_00r TMO 9/LB/9o CALCUTATED O9-26-1990 Ogt27.57 DISK FILE : B:9IVAIL41o.GPD Drainage Area (acres)Runoff Curve Number (CN)Tine of ConcentrationrTc ifrrsl Rainfall Distribution (iyp"i pond and sr4/arnp Areas ' ?*l' Frequency (years)Rainfall, p, 24-hr (in) 234 .2 70 0.21 II 0 Storm #1 10 1.6 0.857 0.536 352 0. 11 1 nn 0.3659 sq.rni. 0.0 acres Storn #2 25 2.O A Q R? 616 n l nn -0.164 7 84 .862 z. +o5 -0.623 68j-.923 516 Storn #3 InitiaL Abstraction,ralp Ratio Unit Discharge, * qu Runoff, 0 (in) Ia (in) (csm/in) 100 2.4 0.857 U. Jf, / ofJ 0.41_ 1. 00 Pond & Swamp Adjustment Factor PEAK DISCHARGE, qp (cfs) 14 54 9g Sunnary of Cornputations for qu ta/p # r c0 #1 al ! r Lz!I gu (csn) #r ra/p #z c0 #z nl !.llz c2 #z qu (csm) #z r, qu (csn) n Rnn -n nr.t 352.180 4. ZUJ -u, 5t-b -n n r 2 352.180 J5Z 0.100 2 .553 -u. bI3 -0.164 /.J1.doz 0.300 2 .455 -v. oz5 68L.923 653 rnterpolated for cornputed ralp ratio (between r?/.p #r & ralp s2)rf conputed ralp exqeeds ra/p' rinits,'bounding-iiilrt for ra/p is used. 2 ros(qg). = cO + (.c} I loS(Tc) ) + ( cz * (Log(Tc)) )qp (cfs) - qu(csn) * area(dq.;i.y *'9(in.) ';-ri;a & swanp Adj.) Quick TR-55 Version: 4.03 S/N: gZOlOg?5 page I of 6 TR-55 TABUI,AR HYDROGRAPH IMTHOD Type II Distribution (24 }rr. Duration Storrn) Executed: 09-26-1990 OZ : SS: 54 watershed File --> B:wvArl-,loo.l{sD Hydrograph File --> B:I{vrooour.HVD WEST VATL - ?HE VAIJLEV - PHASE VI JOB # 410-001 rMo 9/24/90 100 vR REVTSED >>>> Input parameters Used to Cornpute Hydrograph <<<< "^:::?::?^- AREA cN rc ,r rt precip. I Runoff ra/p r^,'-r\rr, (acres) (hrs) (hrs) (in)- i fi"l inputTirsea 81 109.30 69.0 o.1o o.1O 2,4O | 0.38 ,37 .30 82 58. 80 70. O o. 10 o. oo 2,4O I o. 41 .36 .30 83 65.10 ?O.o o.2o o.oo ;'.;o i ;:;i :;; :;; * Travel tirne frorn-:yb1l:1 0utfa11-to composite watershed outfall point.Total area = 234.20 acres or 0.3659 sq.rni Peak dlscharge = 99 cfs >>>>computerModificationsofInputParameters<<<<< Input Values Rounded VaLues la/p subarea Tc * Tt Tc 'r ?t rnt,erpolated ha/p floer-ri r.+.i ax /hr\ irhr\ /hr\ /hr\\r1! / [rrr, \rr! / \rr+, (YeS/NO) MeSSageS Bl 0. t2 O. lO O. tO O. 10 No B2 O. 10 O. 0O ** ** No B3 O .22 O. OO O.2O O. OO No * Travel time fron subarea outfall to composite watershed outfall point.*t Tc & Tt are available in the hydrograph'tables. .2uick lR-55 Version: 4.03 S/N: S7O1OSZ5 page 2 of 6 TR-55 TABULAR HYDROGRAPH MEIHOD Type rI Dlstrlbution (24 hr. Duration Storn) Executed: 09-26-1990 07:55:54 watershed Fire --> B:wvArLloo.wsD Hydrogrilh File --> B:wvrooour.HyD WEST VAIIJ . THE VALLEY . PHASE VI JOB # 4t0-001 rMo 9/24/90 100 YR REVISED >>>> Sunnary of Subarea Tlmes to peak <<<< Subarea Tirne to peak at Peak Discharge Composite Outfall (cfs)(hrs ) Itr DZ tf,J 49 L2.2 35 l2.l 30 L2.2 Composite Watershed 99 LZ r Z Quick TR-55 Version: 4.0 o 3S /N:87010875 Page 3 of 6 TR-55 TABUIJIR HYDROGRAPH METHOD Tlpe II Dlstrlbutlon (24 b,r. Duration Storn) watershed File --' B,*+i;1133."rBe-26-1eeo."g;3iitfiile --> B:wvrooour.HyD WEST VAII, - THE VALLEY - PHASE VI JOB # 410-001 rtqo 9/24/90 100 YR REVISED Composite Hydrograph Sumnary (cfs) Subarea tl.O I1.3 It.6 II.9 t2.O 12.1 :.,2,2 12.3 L2.4 f)ccnri n{. i;.r.r ss,re! r!./eJ.(Jrr hf hf hf h1. hf hr h1. h1. hf 81 0001727493s22 82ooo62:- 352086 83ooo2823302:L2 Tnf:1 /^€^ \J.v!-c[r lulsJ 0 0 0 g 36 95 gg 6g 40 Subarea 12.S :.2.G t2,7 12.8 13.0 I3.2 13.4 13.6 13.8 Dp<r.ri n* i ^-r1,ur.,rr hr hr hr hr hr hr hr hr hr 81 15 11 9865544 82654433322 83876543333 Tnlr'l I d+-\r \J r-c!-,- \u!s/, 29 23 19 17 13 11 11 9 9 Quick TR-s5 Version: 4.03 S/N: g?OIOB75 TR.55 TABUI,AR HYDROGRAPS METHOD Tlnpe II Distribution (24 hr. Duration Storm) warershed File --, B,*+;;ll;3:,r"3e-26-'eeo.ril;:;;tii1e --> Page 4 of 6 B:WVl0oOU?.HyD WEST VAIL - THE VALLEY - PHASE VI JOB # 410-001 Er'to 9/24/9a too yR REVISED Conposite Hydrograph Surnnary (cfs)- - -;;;;;";--------;;:;---;;:;---;;:;---;;:;---;;:;---;;:;---;;:;---,;:;---i;:;- Description hr hr hr hr hr hr hr hr hr 81 433332222 8222221_1111 8322222L111 Total(cfs) I 7 7 7 6 4 4 4 4 Subarea 1B.O l9.O 2O.O 22.0 26.0 Description hr hr hr hr hr B1 22110 82 11110 ljrllllo Total(cfs) 4 4 3 3 O o Quick TR-55 Version:4.03 S/N: g70l-0875 TR-55 TABUIJAR HYDROGRAPH METHOD Type II Distribution (24 hr. Duration Storm) Executed! 09-2G-1990 OZ:55: 54 WEST VATL - ?HE VAI,I,EY . PHASE VT JOB # 410-001 TMO 9/24/90 100 YR REVTSED Page 5 of 6 Hydrograph File --> B:WV1O0OUT.HyD Watershed File B: WAILIOO. WSD 'r'tme (hrs)Flow (cfs)Ti:ne (hrs)Flow (cfs) 'l 1 n 'tI I 11 IJ-. J ''| 1 a 't1 e 'II 1 II. O LZ .l) L4. J. LZ, . Z L' . J t2 .4 12.5 La, . o LZ. I LZ .6 LZ.! 12 n 12 | LJ . 2 'l 'l "13.4 13.6 IJ . I 1"J.6 IJ.:, 14.0 14.1 L4 .2 14.3 14.4 14 .5 14. 6 't, -, 0 0 U 0 n 0 0 6 9 36 85 68 40 z3 23 19 I7 15 t3 L2 11 11 t1 10 9 Y t' 8 8 7 7 7 7 7 14.8 14.9 15. 0 15. l_ 15. 2 1R .r 15. 4 15. 5 15. 6 r5.7 15. I 'tc o 16. 0 16. I L6.2 16. 3 16.4 .IA E 16. 6 L6.7 16. I 16,9 1? n 17. 1 t7.2 t7.3 I7 ,4 L7 ,6 L7.7 17. 8 J.7,9 18. 0 18. I 18. 2 L8. 3 18. 4 18. 5 7 1 7 6 R A 5 5 4 4 i 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Quick TR-55 Versionl 4.03 S/N: g701oBZ5 TR-55 EABULAR HYDROGRAPII METHOD Type II Dlstribution (24 hr. Duration Storn) Executed: 09-25-l_990 07:95:54 WEST VATL - THE VAIJIJEY - PHASE VI JoB # 4t-0-00I Tt"to 9/24/90 100 YR REV]SED Page 5 of 6 Hydrograph File --> B;VrVIooOUT.HyD Watershed File B:WVAIL1o0.WsD Tine (hrs)Flow ( cfs)Tine (hrs)Flow ( cfs) 18. 6 18.8 18.9 19.0 19. 1 19.2 19. 3 L9.4 19.5 19. 5 L>. t 19. 8 ''| o o ZU. U 20. I 20 .2 20 .3 20 .4 20.5 20 .6 20 .8 20 .9 ZLtU aL. L 2r.2 2r.3 2l.. 4 zL.5 2t.6 4L. t 21. 8 2r.9 22. O 22.L 22.2 22.3 22 .4 zz.5 zz. o 22.7 zz .6 22.9 23.0 23. L 23,2 23.3 23 .4 23,5 23 .6 23.7 23.8 23.9 24.3 24 ,4 24 .5 24.6 24.7 24.8 24.9 25. O 25. I 25.2 25.3 25,4 1,5.4 25.6 zD. / 25.8 25.9 Quick TR-55 Version:4.03 s/N: 870L087S TR-55 TABUIAR HYDROGRAPH METI{OD ?l?e rI pistribution (24 hr. Duration Storm) Executed: O9-26-L990 071.54.35 Page 1 of 5 Watershed File B:WVAIL25Y.WSD Hydrograph Flt_e --> B:WV2SYOUT.HyD WEST VAIL - THE VALIEY - PHASE VI JOB # 410-001 Ttno 9/24/90 25 yR REVTSED >>>> fnput parameters Used to Conpute Hydrograph <<<< subarea AREA cN Tc * Tt precip. I Runoff l:a/p Description (acres) (hrs) (hrs) (ht^ i ir;t inputTisea B1 DZ DJ 109.30 69.0 o.1o o.1o 2.OO 58.80 70.o o.1o o.0o 2.oo 65. 10 70.0 o.2o 0. oo 2 . oo o,22 .45 .50 '0.24 .43 .50 o.24 .43 .50 * Travel tirne frorn subarea outfall to composite watershed outfall point.Total area = 234.20 acres or 0.3659 so.mi Peak discharge = 3I cfs >>>> Computer Modifications of fnput parameters <<<<< Input VaLues Rounded Values Ta/p "":::?::i^- r. * rr rc * rr rnrerpolared ra,/p uE-!.rr rp\-rvr, (hr) (hr) (hr) (hr) (ye;/No) Messages IJ I. I]J 0. 12 0. 10 0.10 0.00 0. l-0 0. 10 ** **No No No 0.00 0.20 0. 00 * Travel tirne from subarea outfall to cornposite watershed outfall point.** Tc & Tt are available in the bydrograph tables. o Quick TR-55 Versl-on: 4.03 S/N: 8ZOIO8ZS page 2 of G TR-55 TABUI-,,AR HYDROGRAPH METHOD Type II Distribution (24 hr. Duration Storn) Executed: O9-26-L990 07:.54:35 watershed File --> B!wvArl,2sy.wsD Hydrograph Fire --> B:wv2syour.HyD WEST VAIL - THE VALLEY - PHASE VT JOB # 4r0-00r Tl4O 9/24/90 25 YR REVTSED >>>> Sumnary of subarea Tirnes to peak <<<< Time to Peak at subarea n""* ?:;:harse ""'n""tl:"f'trurr 6Z I5-1 14 Iz.L 12 12.1 9 L2.2 Cornposite Watershed 31 Quick TR-55 Version:4.03 S/N: 8701-0875 TR-55 TABUI,AR TIYDROGRAPI{ METHOD Type II Dlstribution (24 hr. Duratlon Storm) Executed: 09-26-1990 07:54 ! 35 Page 3 of 6 Watershed File B ! WAIL25Y.WSD Hydrograph FiIe --> B:WV25YOUT.HyD WEST VAIL . THE VALLEY - PHASE VT JOB # 410-001 Tlno 9/24/90 25 YR REVISED Cornposite Hydrograph Sunmary (cfs) Subarea Description 11.0 11.3 11.6 11.9 12.0 rz,t L2.2 L2.3 L2.4 hr hr hr hr hr hr hr hr hr 81 oo0o2t4L4ro7 82oooo2],2844 83ooooo298; Total(cfs) o o o o 428 31 22 16 subarea 12.5 L2.6 L2.7 12.8 13.0 :..3.2 L3.4 L3.5 13.8 flocnri nf i a-us-\,! rt.,srLrrr hr hr hr hr hr hr hr hr hr B1 655443333 82333222222 83543332222 Total (cfs)14 t2 11 99777? Quick TR-ss Version: 4.03 s/N: B7O1OB7S page 4 of 5 TR.55 TABUIJAR HYDROGRAPH METHOD Type II DlEtrlbution (24 })r. Duratlon Storm) warershed Fire --> B:fiffili;i:rs0e-26-1ee;rrili:;;t3rr. --> B:wv25your.rryD WEST VAIL . THE VALI-,IEY - PHASE VI JOB # 410-001 Tt(O 9/24/90 25 YR REVISED Cornposite Hydrograph Sunrnary (cfs) "":::?::?^- 14.o 14.3 14.6 ls.o Is.5 16.0 l_6.5 17.0 17.5 ssrD\/r- rpr.J-\.rrr hf hf hf hf hf bf hf hf hf Br322222222 82 1]-ttllt1l 83221111111 rnn+=1 /^a^\rlrLdr [crs, 6 S 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Subarea 1B.O 19.0 2O.O 22.0 26.0 Daenri n+ .i ^-,res\,r. J_p Lr.urr hr hr hr hr hr 81 11110 82 11110 83 11110 Tnir'l lF€-\J.\rLclr turs,t 3 3 3 3 O Watershed Fite B: WVAIL2 5Y . llSD Quick TR-55 Version:4.03 S/N: 87010878 TR-55 TABUIAR HYDROGRAPH METHOD Type II Distributlon (24 hr. Duration Stonn) Executed: 09-2G-1990 07:54:35 WEST VAIL . THE VALLEY - PHASE VI JOB # 410-001 Ttqo 9/24/90 25 yR REVTSED Page 5 of, 6 Hydrograph File --> B:WV2SYOUT.HYD Tirne (hrs ) F1o\,t (cfs)Tine (hrs)Flow (cfs) 11 n 11. I 11. 2 11. 3 11. 4 11. 5 11. 6 11. 7 11. 8 1l_. 9 12.0 )_4. L LZ. Z 12.3 t2,4 12.5 12.6 rz.6 12.9 13.0 13.1 13.2 13.3 13.4 'l? a 1,1 ? 13.8 l_3.9 14. 0 14. 1 L4.2 14. 3 14.4 14. 5 14. 6 t4.7 A A 4 A A A 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 zo 31 16 I4 I2 11 I I 7 7 7 7 7 6 6 6 3 5 c 4 4 4 r4.8 14.9 ''| E a.\ ls. I 15. 2 15. 4 15. 5 15. 6 15. I 15.9 l_o. u 16. 1 t6,2 16. 3 16. 4 J"b. 5 r5. 5 16.7 J.O.U l_6.9 I7. 0 17. I L7.2 L7 ,3 L7.4 r7.5 L7.6 I7.7 17.8 r7,9 18. 0 18. I 18.2 18.3 18.4 18.5 Quick TR-55 Version:4.03 S/N: 87010875 TR-55 TABULAR HYDROGRAPH METHOD Type II Distributlon (24 br. Duration Storm) Executed: 09-26-1990 07:54: 3S WEST VAII.,, - THE VALLEY - PHASE VI JOB # 410-001 TMO 9/24/90 25 YR REVISED Page 6 of 5 Hydrograph File --> B:WV2sYOUT.HYD Watershed File B: wvAIL2 5Y . WSD Time (hrs)Flow (cfs)Tine (hrs1 Flow (cfs) 18. 6 18.7 Ir5 .6 18. 9 10 n L>.2 19.3 19.4 19.5 19.5 10 a L>.Y 20.0 20.3 20 ,4 zv .5 20 .6 20.8 20 .9 21.0 21.1 2I.2 2L.3 2L.4 2I.5 2L.6 2L.7 2L.8 2L.9 4Z.V 22.L 44. Z 22.3 22.4 22.5 22 .6 22.7 22.8 22.9 23 .0 23. t 23.2 23.3 23 .4 23.5 zJ. o 23,7 23.8 4J.y 24 ,0 24. 1 24.2 24.3 24.4 24.5 24 .6 24.7 24.8 24.9 25.0 25.1 25,2 45. J 25.4 25.5 25.6 43. I 25.8 25.9 J I 3 2 3 3 J 3 ? -' J 3 3 3 3 I 3 3 3 3 2 ? I ? 3 Quick TR-ss Version:4.0 o J5 i/N:870I0875 Page I of 6 TR-55 TABULAR HYDROGRAPH METHOD Type II Distribution (24 hr. Duration Storrn) Executed: 09-26-1990 07:53 | OB watershed Fil-e --> B:wVArlloy.wsD Hydrograph File --> B:wvtoyour.HyD WEST VAIL - THE VALLEY - PHASE VI JoB # 410-001 !t{o 9/24/90 10 YR REVISED >>>> fnput paraneters Used to Compute Hydrograph <<<< "":::?::?^* AREA cN rc ,r rr precip. I Runoff ra/p .L1,ur.,,r (acres) (hrs) (hrs) (in) i (inl input/Lsed BI DZ l no ?n 69.0 0.10 0.10 1.50 58.80 70.0 0.10 0.oo 1.50 66.t0 70.0 0.20 o.o0 1.50 0. 09 .56 . s0 0. It .54 .50 0. Ll .54 .50 * Travel time frorn subarea outfall to composite watershed outf,all point.Total area = 234,2O acres or 0.3659 sq.mi Peak discharge = 14 cfs >>>> Computer Modificat,ions of Input parameters <<<<<-------:-- Input Values Rounded Values la/p "":::?::?^* r" ,, rr rc ,r rt rnrerpoiated ra/p usD!,r. rr, Lr.,rr (hr) (hr) (hr) (hr) (yeilNo) Messages ;;---------------;:;;----;t;;-----;:;;----;:;;-------;;-----;;;;;;;-;;;;-,-:;- 82 O. 10 O. O0 ** **:.:: :.yy " ** No Computed ta/p > .s rJr o.2Z 0. 00 0.20 O. OO No Comiuted Ia'/; > .s - ; -;;;;;i-;i;; - ;;;;-;;;;;;;-;;;iil;-;;ilr; ;;;=;;-;;;;;ii-il;:** Tc & Tt are available in the hydrograph-tables. Quick TR-55 Version: 4.03 SrzN: 87O1OBZ5 page 2 of G TR-55 TABUIJAR HYDROGRAPH METHOD ?ype fI Distribution (24 hr. Duration Storrn) Executed: 09-26-1990 07:53: OB watershed File --> B:vIVArLloy.wsD Eydrograph Flle --> B:Ifvloyour.HyD WEST VAIL - THE VALLEY - PHASE Vr JOB # 410-001 TVIO 9/24/90 10 YR REVISED )>>> Surnmary of Subarea Tines to peak <<<< Tine to peak at subarea n"'* ?:;:harse "o*n""ff;i"!ote.rr B1 E2 T'J 6 5 4 t2.t LZ. L LZ. Z Cornposite Watershed 14 rz. z Quick TR-55 Version: 4.03 S/N: 87OIO8?5 page 3 of 6 TR-55 TABUI,AR HYDROGRAPH METHOD Type II DistrLbution (24 hr. Duration Storn) Executed: 09-26-1990 O?: 53: 08 watershed File --> B:wVArl,roy.wsD Hyd.rograph File --> Brwvloyour.HyD WEST VAIL . THE VALLEY - PHASE VI JOB # 410-001 \MO 9/24/90 10 yR REVTSED Conposite Hydrograph Sunnary (cfs) Subarea 11.O 11.3 1I.G 11.9 12.O 12.I IZ.2 LZ,3 :a2.4 Doqeri n{- i r.n rlur-vrr hr hr hr hr hr hr hr hr hr B1 o o o o 1 5 6 4 3 82ooooL5422 83ooooo1443 lrrr# .1 |a€^\rur-clr- (ursJ 0 0 0 0 2 12 L4 IO g subarea 12.S 12.6 t2.7 L2. g 13. O L3,Z 13.4 13.6 L3. g Description hr hr hr hr hr hr hr hr hr 81 322221111 822l1r11r11 83222111111 Total(cfs) 7 S S 4 4 3 3 3 3 Quick TR-55 Version:4.03 S/N: 8Z0rOB75 TR-55 TABULAR HYDROGRAPH MEIHOD Type II Distribution (24 hr. Duration Storm) Executed: 09-26-1990 07:53: og Page 4 of 6 Watershed File B: WVAIU.OY. WsD Hydrograph File --> BfWVIOYOUT.HyD WEST VAIIJ - THE VALLEY - PTIASE VT JoB # 410_001 TNIO 9/24/90 I0 YR REVISED Cornposite Hydrograph Surunary (cfs) "-:::?::?^* 14.o 14.3 14.6 Is.o ls.s 16.o 16.s 17.o t7.s ,J.'D\-r- rll Lrc:n hr hr hr hr hr hr hr hr hr Bl 111111111 82 I 1 I 1. 1 o o o o 83t_lIllrooo r|^f .I /a€-\r\rLcrr((jrsr33333211I Subarea l_8.0 I9.O 2O.O 2Z.O 26.0 I)acnr-i n+ i a-,.,esur r1,. Lr-err hf hf hf hf hf 81 l1ooo 82ooooo 83ooooo Tnt-r'l /nfa\{vLcrr \s!l;J I 1 O O O Watershed File B: WVAILlOY. WSD Page 5 of 5 Hydrograph File --> B:WV1oYOUT.lIyD Quick TR-55 Version:4.03 s/N: 8701087s TR-55 TABUI,AR IIYDROGRAPH METHOD Type II Distribution (24 hr. Duration Storrn) Executed! o9-26-1990 07:53: 08 WEST VAIL - THE VALLEY - PHASE VI JOB # 4Lo_00r Trrto 9/24/90 10 YR REVISED 'r']-me (hrs)Flow (cfs)Tine (hrs) Flow (cfs) 'l 1 n 11. 1 11. 2 11. 3 11. 4 11. 6 11. 7 11. I LL. J L2.0 LZ . L LZ. Z LZ. J t2.4 12 .5 L2 .6 LZ. I 12.8 LZ.) 13.0 1? 'r LJ. Z 1? "13.4 t3 .5 13.6 13.? 13.8 13.9 14. 0 14.1 L4.2 14.3 L4 .4 14. 5 14.6 ]-4.7 3 J ? J J J 2 z 2 2 t 1 1 1 I I t 'l 1 I l_ 1 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 I 1 I 0 U 0 n 0 0 U 0 0 t2 10 7 5 4 4 4 J 3 3 ? J 3 3 3 J 3 3 J J 3 3 3 14.8 -L.*. v 1q n 'lR 1 L5.2 15. 3 'lE , 15. 5 15. 6 J.O.U 16. 1 ]-6.2 16. 4 16. 5 16. 6 L6.7 16.8 16.9 17.1 L7.2 11 1 17.5 L7.6 L7.7 17.8 L7,e 18.0 18. L 18.2 18.3 18.4 18.5 Watershed FiIe B:WAILL0Y.WSD Page 6 of 5 Hydrograph File --> B:9IVlOYOUT.HYD Quick TR-55 Version:4.03 S/N: 87010875 TR-55 TABULAR HYDROGRAPH METHOD type II Distribution (24 hr. Duration Stonn) Executed: O9-26-1990 OZ:53: Og WEST VAIL - BHE VALLEY - PHASE VT JOB # 410-001 TMO 9/24/90 10 YR REVTSED 'r't_me (hrs)rroti'(cfs)Tine (hrs)! I OIII (cfs) 18.5 L.J. T L8.8 18.9 19. O 19. 1 LJ. Z 19.3 19.4 19.5 L9.7 19.8 10 0 20.o 20. I 20.2 20 .3 20.4 20.5 20 .6 20.7 20.8 20.9 4L.V 2t.I 2r.2 2L.3 2t.4 zl.a 2].6 2r.7 2r.8 2L,9 22.O 22.L 44. Z zz. J 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t I I 1 1 'l I 1 1 I 0 0 0 n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 ,4 zz.5 zz. o 22,7 zz.6 22.9 23.0 23,r 4J, Z 23,3 23 .4 23,5 23 .5 zJ. I 23.8 23.9 24.O 24.I 24.2 24,3 24 .4 24,5 24 .6 24.7 24.8 24.9 25, O 2s. I 25,2 25,3 25.4 z5.a 25.6 29. I 25.8 25.9 FI,ANNING AND ENVIRONIifENTAI.. COI.TUISSION Septenber 10, 1990 Present Chuck Crist Diana Donovan Connj-e Knight Ludwig Kurz Jim Shearer Kathy Warren Members Absent Da1ton lrlillians Staff Kristan Pritz Mike Mollica Jill Kammerer shelly Mello Andy Knudtsen Betsy Rosolack \$ session on the Valley, Phase VI was held prior to the earrng. development approval for the Valley, Phase Vf..Applicant: Edward Zneirner This work session followed a site visit to the Va1ley, Phase VI .Peter Janar representing the applicant and Edward Zneimer, the applicant were present. Diana Donovan asked about building envelopes and Peter ilamar said that he felt it was wise to keep some flexibility on the building envelopes at thj"s tirne. He lsas cornfortable with some kind of Town review if there were going to be changes to the envelopes. At present the envelopes were approxirnately 50 ft. x 80 ft. and the GRFA was between 3500 sq. ft. and 4500 sq. ft. Chuck asked about encroaching into the trees and Ed Zneirner replied that in nany cases trees cane up to the edge of the building envelope. Chuck then asked about the width of the road and the meadow. Peter Jamar said that a private road could be LB ft. wide. Andy commented that the Fire Department had a 20 ft. minirnurn width for roads and the Public Works Departnent a 22 ft. urinirnun width. Ludwig was concerned about the engineering that would be done on the retaining wa1l heights and the road cuts. Kent Rose, engineer for the project, said that he looked at 6 ft. naximurn heights for less than l-00 ft. in length for a retaining wall. He said that also there would be wing walls for individuaL driveways. PEC Minutes 9/Lo/90 Meeting Kathy Warren expressed concern about the access to the upper road. She wanted a more accurate study to show the road cuts and the access to Lot No. 4. She felt that the project needed architectural guidelines regarding overhangs, decks, patios etc.in respect to building envelopes. Peter Jamar replied that they may pursue a single family subdivision as they could sell off one unit at a tine. Kathy Warren asked if they wanted to have an entrance statement and Ed Zneimer replied that they nust first solve many conplicated issues involving the Forest Service. Peter reminded the group that there used to be a sign for the Valley at the entrance. Peter added that with down zoning the area had become a more quality living area. Kathy wanted to know if the subdivision should be identified with a name and an entry statement. She also felt that the landscaping should be discussed at the Design Review Board level with each building olsner. In dealing with envelopes, she wanted to rnake it clear who was responsible for rnaintenance. She also said that the staff had talked about rock hazard, and she wanted to see which lots this irnpacted and how this would be handled. Jim Shearer asked if the term, fiopen space'r was synonymous with the terrn, rrcommon areatr and Peter Jamar replied that it wasntt realIy. someone could not come back to build on open space. Jirn then said that with regard to the access cut on the upper lots, he felt that they would be getting into the hazard area. He also was concerned about not being able to see up and down the S curve fron the intersections and wondered if they considered moving the intersection more to the center of the property. Connie wanted to see less length of road, but she was encouraged with the down zoning. Diana was also concerned about the roads. She wondered how the open space could be maintained as open space when people use part of the open space as their individual lots. IGistan said that she thought the intent was to keep the area as natural as possible. Perhaps it would be good to create smaller envelopes or designate the open areas. Kathy warren said she would like to see open space labeled as open sPace, PEC Minutes 9/Lo/90 Meeting Peter Jamar replied that there hras a little bit of inconsistency of the zoning code. A single farrily hone could be built on a 4Ot slope, but to subdivide lots for a sing'Ie fanily subdivision they could not count the 40t slope as part of the 12,500 sq. ft. that is reguired for a single farnity Iot. Kristan said that the single family subdivision was to al-Iow for ownership. Peter pointed out that the snallest lot in this subdivision was a L/2 acre. Kristan said that they do not necessarily have to create ]ots of L2,5oo without a 408 slope in a single fanily subdivision process. Diana was pleased to see that they were working on noving the Forest Service trail and Peter Jamar responded that it was really the Forest Servicers responsibility to rnove the trail . The Forest Service was currently trespassing. Andy pointed out that the Forest Service said that a realignment would be nade. They are looking to do it with possible volunteer help next spring. He added that depending on the amount of time the trial has been used, it rnay not be a trespassing situation. He would do additional research. Diana wanted to make sure that the roads and walls could be done within the rules. She said the hazard nitigation must be shown as well. Some of the meadow rnay disappear. Andy asked how the Board felt about the tenporary access through the meadow. Diana felt that only through the narrordest point could they access the meadow and then it nust be revegetated, or she would rather not see the access used at aII. Diana did not see the value of putting the houses into the tree Iine. She wanted to see them nearer the road as they were situated in Elk Meadows. Kristan explained why they felt it was better to put the }rouses into the hillside in the Elk Meadows subdivision. one reason was that at Elk Meadows the meadow was narrower and more of the neadow could be preserved if the houses were built into the hillside. The second reason was that the rockfall was nore severe and large berrns or uaLls coul.d be avoided by using the hillside as a barrier to protect against rockfall. The lot line was also closer to tbe road than on Phase Vf which allowed the PEC Minutes 9/LO/90 Meeting houses to be built into the north hillside while still preserrring the meadow. On Phase VI , both the property line being further to the south and the utility easement tend to push possible housing sites into the center of the neadow or into the southern hillside. Staff prefers the houses being situated into the hillside which will preserve more of the neadow. Diana felt she needed to be convinced. She wanted to make sure there would be some meadow left when they were done. Peter Jamar compared the netr project to the originalJ.y approved plan and impressed upon the board that they were reducing the density. He said that they were trying to preserve the meadow. Diana asked that they do whatever they could to preserve the rneadow such as pulling the road back farther. Peter replied that the impaet on this new proposal was less than the one that was previously approved, but said that perhaps they could shorten the driveways to the hornes. Peter replied that they would continue to look at the projectrs site planning. Jiru Shearer wondered if units 7 , 8, and 9 could be pushed further back and Ed replied that the houses were cut back as far as they could move them. Ludwig agreed with Kathy in the siting of the whole project and asked for sensitivity with regard to the neadow. The board had no further comnents and the public meeting was called to order by Diana Donovan, Chairperson at 2:45 p.n. ftern No.L: Discussion of Ted Kindel Park Site. Ted Kindel was a former llayor of the Town of Vail and a plaque had been made for hin by Joe Staufer and cordon Brittan. The Public Works Departnent, represented by Todd Oppenheiner wanted to discuss possible sites with the Planning Commission. Todd listed various sites, so far, that Public Works had considered. The first was the Intermountain pool site which had been nade into a small neighborhood park. The second was the Willow Circle area. The third was the existing ski museurn. The ski nuseum would be moving into the parking structure next year TO: FROM: DATE: Planning and Environmental commission Department of Conmunity Development Septenber 10, 1990 DNAPr SUBJECT: A request under Ordinance 13, Series of L98l-, for a redesign of The Valley, Phase VI .Applicant: Edward Zneiner I. BICtrGROUND AND PRO'IECT DESCRIPTION This application is a request to rnodify the developrnent plan for Phase VI of The Valley. The original. plan was approved as a PUD in the County in the fall of L980. Later, when the property was annexed, a provision of the annexation ordinance required that any major nodification to the county approved plan would require Planning and Environrnental Comrnission (PEC) approval. fn L981, a developer proposed a reconfigured site plan which the PEC approved. The slightly reconfigured plan naintained aIL 42 dwelling units that were approved in the county as well as the scheme of attached, clustered townhouses. That plan was never bui1t. At this time, the applicant is proposing a completely different type of development: l-3 detached single family homes, nine which will have caretaker units. of the 13 buildings, six will be located north of Buffehr Creek Road on the steep south facing slope, and seven will be located across Buffehr Creek Road in the rneadow at the base of the heavily forested north facing slope (see site plan). The developnent has been divided into three phases. The first two are the east and west clusters (respectively) on the south side of Buffehr Creek Road. The third and last will the be the six homes on the north side of the road. The structures in phase one will each have approxirnately 25oo square feet of gross residential floor area (GRFA). In phase two, the structures will have approxinately 3000, and phase three will have structures with about 3500 square feet of GRFA. At this time, the developer is proposing a Tyrolian style of architecture. No subdivision is proposed at this time as this is only a developrnent plan approval, fulfilling a requirement of annexation. rI. ZONTNG ANAI.Y8T8 Because this development has been approved at higher densities than the current zoning, the development statistics from that t pran are more rerevant rhan the requirements or the0"RAf T cluster zoning the Town placed on the annexed. Below are the statistics on most recent approval site area. 2L.45 acres height: typical unit 321 GRFA: 77,L5O sguare feet dwelling units: 42 density: 2 d.u. per acre fII. SIAFF COUI.iENT8 AND ANALY8IE Site Plan The proposed site plan, in a number of ways, is an improvement to the previous plan as the impacts have been reduced significantly. overall, the plan is similar to earlier subnittals as the development will be located on the southern end of the site, leaving the steeper slopes undeveloped. The distribution of dwelling units is also similar as there are about one third on the north side of Buffehr Creek Road and two thirds on the south side. The last aspect that the site plans share in common is the access plan as both the general configuration and the length of roads are approximately the sane. The biggest difference is the change in the number of dwelling units. This ptan has 20 fewer than the previous one, and nine of those will be caretaker units. The development will appear less dense and will appear to have fewer irnpacts since the scheme has been changed frorn attached dwelling units to single family hones. The tand devoted for guest parking, tennis courts, and a swimrninq pool for the condoniniun conplex witl now be left in its natural state. Buildinq envelopes The proposal uses building envelopes to identify the Location of each house. There will be approximately L25 feet between each structure. The building envelopes are larger tban the buitding footprints will actually be. A discussion item for PEC is the level of specificity needed at this tine for the location of the buildings. Are the proposed building envelopes specific enough? Can the applicant expand outside the property when it was the proposal: current proposal 2L.45 acres 33 t rnaximum approx. 40,000 sq. ft. 22 l- d.u. per acre DF] AFT envelopes as shown? Open space The plan for the remaining space on the site is also an issue which PEC comment is needed. The Tohrn assumes that the portions of the site on the steep slopes on either side of the development will be designated as open space and wiII be unbuildable without PEC approval. Does the PEC want other spaces designated as open space? For example, the space between the access road and Buffehr Creek Road will be left undeveloped. Trails Related to open space is the Forest Service trial that is located on the site at this tine. The applicant has pointed out that a better Location for the trail would be along the creek. This appears to be reasonable; however, forest service comrnents are needed prior to a final decision. Staff needs PEC comment on the responsibility of the applicant for constructing the reLocated trail. Roads and drainaqe The access plan is a significant improvement to the previous plan as the curb cuts onto Buffehr Creek Road have been reduced to one intersection. The applicant has said that eight percent grades are the maximurn that will be built. Engineering tras not been done for the work session, but it is clear that retaining wa11s wilt be needed on the upper portion of the developrnent. Engineering drawings will be prepared for the September 24 PEC neeting, including grading plans showing the road grades, road sections, and the proposed driveway grades to the building envelopes. fn addition to the information pertaining to roads, a drainage study must be completed for both historic and developed flows for both the 25 and l-00 year storms. Hazards The only hazard sho!'rn on the Town maps is high severity rock fall. A report by Arthur Mears states that the houses below Buffehr Creek Road can be adequately protected with a three foot high berm located in the open space between tbe access road and Buffehr Creek Road. Houses above Buffehr Creek Road can be protected with a six foot high rock faII fence of by specially reinforcing the lower six feet of the back walls of each building needing protection. Before final PEC review, an updated rock fall study must be subnitted. The revised study rnust address the specific standards stated in the Zoning Code. Density tF - lf r-. /ill /PlnE?tLUU tnjIr U The proposed density is approxirnately half of the previous approval . The GRFA will be just over half of the previous approval. Wood burning fireplaces will be cut by two thirds as only the primarv dwellinq units will have fire places. Staff,s opinion is that the proposal is clearly a reduction in irnpacts from the previous approval . Architectural guidel ines Recently, the Town has approved projects with architectural guidelines for different kinds of reviews. The Val1ey, Phase _which is located adjacent to this site to the east, has detaited guidelines. This is expected as it is an SDD. Another recent project is the Ledges, which also has guidelines. The Ledges, though, was only a single family subdivision. Spraddle Creek is another subdivision which has guidelines. There appears precedent for guidelines on projects that have not been sDDs. The applicant would like to leave the architectural considerations to the Design Review Board (DRB). The PEC should deterrnine if this will be a requirernent at this tirne or if it should be handled later by DRB. Subdivision plans At this time, the development plan is the only document that will be approved. The applicant is considering the options he has for subdivision. Either he could do a single fanily subdivision as each house is built or he could do a rnajor subdivision prior to the construction process. Maior Subdivision @sion wouLd require a rezoning to a zone that bases 1ot sizes on total area. The existing Residential Cluster (RC) zone has a rninimurn lot size which must be rnade up of buildable area, not total area. As much of the site is 40 percent sl-ope or greater, that area cannot be considered buildable. As a result, the RC zoning will not allow a subdivision for this development plan. Single Farnily Subdivision The applicant may choose to do a single fanily subdivision because it does not require a rezoning. However, the subnittal reguirements for engineering wiII be the same for this developnent plan as for a najor subdivision. Financial guarantees for the improvements will. be required as each phase is platted and built out. Phasinq Staff needs a determination by the PEC regarding phasing. Staff's thinking is that the longer that portions of this site remain as rneadow, the better. DMAFT Along those lines, we believe that one phase shouLd be conpleted before another is begun. If the PEc considers this to be a requirement, then the applicant will show the phasing plan as part of the final approval. Fire Department concerns Fire department concerns are linited to the length of the driveway for lot !. The applicant will satisfy the Fire Department standards prior to the final hearing on this project. Comments from engineering have been incorporated into the comnents above. V. CONCLUSION Staff supports the development plan. We believe that the reurainJ-ng issues can be resolved. We need PEC comments on the specific points raised in the memo to give direction to the applicant prior to the final hearing. Staff is ptanning to bringr this back to the PEc for final approval September 24, 1990. TO: FROM: DATE: SU&'ECT: f tte , cp,f Planning and Environnental Commission Department of Conrnunity Developroent Septernber 10, 1990 A request for a work session for a naJor change to existing developnent approval for the valley, Phase VI .Applicant: Edward Zneimer I. BACKGROT'T{D This application is a reguest to nodify the development plan for Phase VI of The VaIIey. The original plan was approved as a PUD by Eagle County in the faLl of l-980. That plan included 42 townhouses with a total GRFA of 77L5o sq. ft. The plan called for three clusters of units with a group of recreation amenities (tennis courts, swinning pool , trails, etc.). Later, when the property was annexed by the Town of Vail , a provision of the annexation ordlnance required that any najor nodification to the County approved plan would reguire Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) approval . In that sane ordinance (which is attached to this memo), Residential- Cluster (RC) zoning was applied to this property. Under the annexation ordinance, all standards not addressed by the Eagle County apProved plan rnust neet RC zonJ.ng reguirements. fn 1981-, a developer proposed a reconfigured site plan which the PEC approved. The arnended plan maintained all 42 dwelling units as well as the GRFA approved by the County and the scheme of attached, clustered townhouses. Though that plan was never built, it is still valid and could be built today after the applicant received updated DRB approvals. II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION At this time, the applicant is proposing a completely different type of development: 13 detached sincrle fanlly hones. nine of which will have caretaker units. This creates a total of 22 units of these, 9 are caretaker units. The caretaker units witl be deed restricted so that cannot be sold separately froro the prirnary residences (the restriction wlll not linit the use of tbe units to employees of the Upper Eagle valley). Of the 13 buildlngs, six wlll be located north of Buffehr creek Road on the south facing slopei and seven will be located across Buffehr Creek Road in the rneadow at the base of the forested slope (see attached site plan). The development has been divided into three phases. The flrst two phases are the east and Idest clusters (respectively) on the south side of Buffehr Creek Road. The third and last wlll the be the six homes on the north side of the road. The structures in phase one (Lots 1X-13) will each have approxirnately 3500 square feet of gross resldential floor area (GRFA). Each house in phase two (I-,ots 7-10) and phase three (Lots 1-6) will bave approximately 45OO square feet of GRFA. This results in a total GRFA of 55,500 square feet. This total Lncludes the GRFA in the caretaker units. The developer is proposlng a Tyrolean style of architecture. No subdivision plat is proposed at this tine as the PEc approval is only for the revLsions in the devetoprnent plan--a reguirement of annexation. The owner would nost likely proceed with a najor subdivision following developnent plan approval. rrr.ZONING lNAIJYgfg The analysis compares the proposal to the most recent PEC approval and the Rc zone District. The Rc standards apply for other development standards per the annexation ordinance. L981 PEc Approval current Proposal 2L.45 acres 33 ft. maximum 55,500 sg. ft. 22t 1.02 Dus,/acre Rc zonlnq 2L.45 acres 33 ft. maxinum 59,895 sq. ft. 29.9 5 Dus/acre naxinun Site Areaz 2L.45 acres Height: tlpical unit 32 ft. GRFA: 77,L5O sg. ft. DUs: 42 Density: 2 DUs/acre :tlncludes 9 caretaker units rY. STIFF COI{IdENTS I}ID INAI,YsI8 A. Site Plan: The proposed slte plan is an improvernent to the previously approved plan as the inpacts have been significantly reduced. overall, the plan is similar to eailier eubmittals ae the development wlII be Located along the road, leaving the steeper slopes undeveloped. The dlstrlbutlon of dwelling units is also similar as ,l; there are about one third of the units on the north side of Buffehr Creek Road and two thirds of the units on the south side. The last aspect that both site plans share in conmon is the access plan. The general road configuration and the length of roads are similar. The blggest difference is the change in the number of dwelling units. This plan has 20 fewer units than the previouer plan. The development will appear less dense and will have fewer inpacts since the deslgn has been changed from attached dwelling units to single fanily homes. Additionally, the land previously devoted for guest parking, tennis courts, and a swimrning pool for the condorninium complex will now be left in its natural state. The current proposal has 21650 sq. ft. less GRFA than the previous plan. 1. Buildinq envelopes: The proposal uses building envelopes to identify the location of each house. The envelopes are not proposed to be platted. There will be approxLnateJ.y 80 feet between each bullding envelope. The building envelopes are larger than the actual building footprints. A discussion iten for PEC is the level of specificity needed at this time for the location of the buildings. Are the proposed building envelopes speciflc enough? Should any construction outside of the envelope be allowed? Open space: The Townrs understanding is that the portions of the site on the steep slopes on either side of the developnent will be designated as open space and will be unbuildabLe without PEC approval . Does the PEC want other spaces designated as open space? An example is the space between the access road and Buffehr Creek Road on the southeastern part of the site. Trails: A hiking/mountaln bike trail, located on the northnest portion of the site, runs through building envelopes 1 and 5. It goes from Buffehr Creek Road north to Red and White ltountain. The applicant has pointed out that a better location for the trait would be along Buffehr Creek. This appears to be reasonable and the Forest Senrice concursi however, Forest Servl.ce comrdents on all ll ."Y ,. ',r 'i vljt ).) \ t,, I 2. 3. B. the detaile are needed prior to a final decision.Staff needs PEC coument on the responsibility of the applicant for constructing the relocated trail. Roads and drainacre one inprovenent fron the prevlous approval to the access plan ls that the nunber of curb cuts on Buffehr Creek Road has been reduced from 3 to 2. trhe Town Engineer has expressed concern that the sight distance around the lower intersectJ.on may be inadequate given the cunres and slope of Buffehr Creek Road. The applicant has proposed eight percent maximum grades for the roads. Engineerlng has not been done for this work sessLon, but lt is clear that retaining walls will be needed on the upper portion of the development. Engineering drawings will be prepared for the Septenber 24, L990 PEC neeting, including plans showing the road grades, road sections, retaining waII heights, and the proposed driveway grades to the building envelopes. In addition to the infornation pertaining to roads, a draJ.nage study must be conpleted for historic and developed flows for both the 25 and 100 year storms. Hazards The only hazard shown on the Town maps is high severity rock fall. A report by Arthur Mears states that the houses below Buffehr Creek Road can be adeguately protected with a three foot high berm located in the open space between the access road and Buffehr Creek Road. Houses above Buffehr Creek Road needing nitigation can be protected with a sLx foot high rock faII fence or by specifJ-c relnforcement for the lower six feet of the nortlr walls of each buildlng. Before final PEC review, an updated rock fall study nust be subnitted. The revised study rnust address the speclfic standards stated in the Zoning Code. Densitv The proposed density ls approxinately one half of the previous approval and three fourths of what RC zoning would aIlow. The GRFA will be approxinately two thirds of the previous approval (a change fron 771150 sg. ft.to 55,500 sq. ft.). Staffrs opinion is that the proposal is clearly a reduction in inpacts from the prevlous approval . c. D. E. Architectural quidelines Low density residential proJects llke The valley, Phase IfI (EIk Ueadons SDD) and Spraddle Creek (as proposed) have archl-tectural guidellnes. In this case, the applicant intends to have a tyrolean style developrnent yet would llke to have the option to use other styles if so desired. As a result, the applicant would like to leave the architectural considerations for each unit to the Design Review Board (DRB). The PEC should deternine if guidelines for this subdivision are necessary. Staff opinion is that some general guidelines may be appropriate, but because it is not an sDD, specific details in an architectural program are not appropriate. F. Phasino/SubdivisLon plans At this tirne, the devetopnent plan is the only docurnent that will be approved. Phasing is an issue which PEC comment is needed because it pertains to the development plan. subdivision, in relation to this review, is rnerely a legal process which will be carried out one way or another in the future. Below, staff bas outlined the options for subdividing as an infornational iten to the Connission; however, it is the phasing issue which is the one which the PEc should consider and give conment on. 1. Phasinq Staff believes that the longer portions of this site remain as meadow, the better. Along those Iines, we reconrnend that one phase be coupleted before another Ls begun. ff the PEC agrees and considers this to be appropriate, then the applicant will show the phaslng plan as part of the final approval . The requirements triggered by the phasing will be drainage, roads, utilities, and possibly site landscaping. These improvernents must be conpleted in each phase prior to construction starting in another phase. The improvernents must be built fron Buffehr Creek Road to any unit under construction prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy or TemPorary Certificate of occupancy. If occupancy is requested prior to the installation of any irnprovenents, the appllcant nust escrow 125t of the construction costs prior to the Town issuing a T.c.o. 2.Uaior Subdivision: One of the optlons the applicant has is a major subdivision. This would probably reguire a rezonlng to a zone district that bases lot sizes on total area. The existing Residential Cluster (Rc) zone dlstrict has a mininum lot size of 15rOOo square feet, 8oo0 of which must be nade up of buildable area. As much of this site ls 40 percent slope or greater, that area cannot be considered bulldable. As a result, the RC zoning will probably not allow a standard subdivision for this developnent plan without a lot eize variance or special developnent district, similar to Elk Meadows. Sinqle Fanilv Subdivision: This ls an option which the applicant may choose to do because it does not reguire a rezoning. Fire Department concerns Fire department concerns are linited to the length of the driveway for Lot 4 and possibly the length of the dead end drive through the meadow. The applicant wilL satisfy the Fire Departnent standards prior to the final hearing on this project. comments fron the Public Works Departnent have been incorporated into the paragraphs above. CONCLUSION 3. G. vr. staff supports the development plan because the plan results in Less density and better site plannlng. we believe that the remaining issues can be resolved. We need PEc comments on the specific points raised in the memo to give direction to the applicant prior to the final hearing. The project is scbeduled to-be heard at the Septenber 24, L99o PEc neeting for final approval . .4 \.*.i'1.'|" o \ ORDINANCE NO. 13 (Serles of 19 81)75 s. frorrtaqc road vail, colori,(:o til557 olfice ci totJn clurk AN ONDINANCE IMPOSING ZONING DISTRICTS ON CERTAIN DEVELOP}IENTS AND PARCELS OF PROPERTY IN THE RECENTLY ANNEXED ITEST VAIL AREA; ACCEPTING PBIOR APPBOVALS OF TIIE EAGLE COUNTY CO}IMISSIONERS RELATING THERETO i SPECI!'YING AITENDMENT PROCEDURES; SETTING TORTH CONDITIONS REIJIT ING THERETO; AMENDING TIIE OFFICIAL ZONING UAP fOR TtlE TOWN OF VAIL: AND SETTING FOBTH DETAILS IN RELJITION THERETO. TFEREAS, the town of Vall, Coloredo, r6cently annexed tbe llest ValI area, County ol Eagle, Stat€ of Colorado, €flectlve on December 31, 1980; and lfIEREAg, Chapter 18.68 of the lluniclpal Code of the Town of Valt aets {orth procedure€ for the lsposl,tlon of zoDing dlstrlcts oD receDtly alDexed areas; and THEREAS, Sectlon 31-12-115 (s) C.R.S, 1973, aE anended, regulree tbe Toen to brlng the newly annexed lYe€t Vall erea under lta zonlng ordlnance witbln ntnety (90) days after the ellectlve date of sald annexatlon; ard IIHEREAS, because of celtain actlonE taken by and approvals of tbe Eegle County Cmmissloners !€latlng to the wlthln Epeclfled propertiee the Tofln Council 16 of th€ oplnlon thst the zonlng deslgnatlon for these areae Ebould recoguize 6aid approvals and coDdltlons; rnd f,EEBEAS, the Plannlng and Envlronmental Commlsslon of the Town ol Vall baa coD8idered the zonlng to be inpoeed on ttre newly annexed Ieat va1l srea at a publ1c hearlng and has nade e. recooroendatlon telatlng thereto, to the Town Councll; and @.EEAI, th€ Tosn Councll conElderE that lt 18 ltr the hterest ol tbe publlc bealth, Batety and welfare to so zone Eeld propelty; NOW, TSEBEFONE, BE IT ORDAINED BI TgE TO'IIN COI'NCIL OF TUE TO1IN OF VAIL, IBAT: Eectlon 1. Procedures Fulfllled. Tbe Dlocedur€a tor tb€ dstenDlnetlon of the zoDlng dlstrlcts to be lnposed on the lewly annexed Test vall aree as aet forth tn Chrpter lE.68 ot the VaiI llunlclpal Cod€ have been fulfilled. i. H, *1 lu b z .t t a b $|.t r\. '\ li. ' i.'. 5 2 5 .. \: -8, , Eiu , \b a l|,| a o' 'o o a 3 Pureuent to Cbapt€r 18.68 of the ValI Uunlclpal Code, the propertles deecrl,bed ln Eubsectlons e, f' 8, h & I below are E portlon of the lest Vall area aDnexed to the Town tbrough the enactnent of Ordlnance No. 43, Serles of 1980, of the Town of Vail, Colorado, effectlve on tbe thlrty-ttrat day of Deoember, 1980' and her€by zoned as follorvs: &, The developnenta rDd parcels of property epecllied below in SubBectlons e, t, g, h & 1 sbell be developed ln eccordance wlth the prl,or agr€enent approv&I8 and actlons of the Eagle County Commlssloners aa th€ agreeraetta, approvals and actloDs telate to each develoPment or parcel ot propelty. b. The documentE end LB6trumente lelatlng to the prlo! county rpprovala, actlons and agreenentB ar€ presently on flle lo the Depertnent of Cotrmunlty Development of the Town of Vall and sald approvale, actlons and agleem€nts lre bereby accepted and epproved by the Town of V411, c. All butldinSis for $hlch a bulldlng permit has not been issued, on the effectlve dste of the ennexatlon of West Vall 5ha11 comply wlth Deslgn Revlew Criterla of the Vall llunlclpal cod€ Prlor to the lssu&nc€ of a bullding pertllt. d. The Coonunlty Development Departtn€nt may lasue staff approvals tor olnor chaug€a ln alte design or other Elnor aapects of the plen for any of tb€ speclfled developnelts or parcels. These proposed changes Eay be approved rE preaented, approved $ith condltlons o! denled by the Stalf wltb on appeel rlthln 10 days of the statf declslon to the Plannllg aDal EnvlronEental coronlsslon . ..For neJ or changes , 6uch as I re-dealgn ot e maJor part ot the Blte, cbange8 &8 use' denslty \qtt| dp coDttol. belgbt or otber d€velopD€Dt atanderda, e Plennlng and 1",*tWtf Euvlroamertrl Cmlaalo! r€vlem Ehould b€ requlred. The procedut" " drn tor chrnges abrll bc l! lccoralanco tlth Chapte! 18.66 of the VelI f ' IuuJ.alpal Code. €. fhe follo trg development6 and parcele of property 6he11 be subJ€ct to th€ t€rna ot thlB ordlnance: (1) Ibe Yelley, Phases 1 through 6. (2, Spruc€ Creek To*[houses. (3) llerdow Creek Condonl.nlurns. -2- ..o '( e I (4) Vall Intermountain Swlm and Tennls Club. (5) Bliar Patch, Lots G-2, G-5 and G-6 ' Llonsridge Subdlvlslon Flling No. 2. (6) Casa DeI Sol Condomlnluns. For any zoning purpose beyond the Eagle County CoEmlssloners' approvcls, Egreent€Dtg or actlons, the developments and percels of property speclfled in thle EubEection (e) shal] be zoned Resldential Cluste! (RC). t. Llonsrldge Subdlvlslon, Flllng No. 4, shatl be subJect to tbe terns ot thls ordlnance. For any zoning pulpose beyond the Eagle County Comni.saioners' approval , egteement or actlon, thls parcel of ptoperty ehal]. be roned Slngle Fanlly Zone D16t!1ct (SFR) wlth E speclal pro- vl.slon that an employee unlt (as definecl and restricted 1n Sectlon 18.13.08 of the Vall lluniclpal Code) wlll be EubJect to approvals es per Sectlon 18.13.O8O. The Becondary unlt may not exceed one thlrd of the totaL Gross Resldentlal Floor Area (GBFA) allowed on the lot as per the Slngle Pa.nlly Zone Dlstrl.ct Denslty Control (Sectlon 18.10.090 of the ValI UuDlclpel Code) aDd Greenbelt & Natulal Open SpEc€ (GNOS). C. Lot G-4, Llonsrldgd Subdlvlslon, Flllng No. 2, has been th€ subJect of litiSction ln the Dlattlct Court of Eagl,e CouDty, and a Corrt order ha€ been issued regarding the development of this property, The Tosn has further approved Resolutlon #5 of 1981 ln regard to a subse- quent agreement wlth the owter. The Resldentlal Cluster (RC) Zone Dl8trlct TlU be the 4pplicible zone on thls property to gulde the future developnent of tbe parcel , working wlthln the bounds set by the Court Older and Resolutlon No, 5, Serles of 1981. h. Block 10, Vall Internountaln Subdlvlslon End the Elllott Ranclt Subdlvlslon, ahall be subJect to the terms of tbis ordlnance. For any zoniDg Irurpoae beyond the Eagle County Conunlssloners' approval, agree- ment or actlon, Block 10 and the Elllott Ranch, ehall be zoned Prl.mary/ Secotrdary Dlstllct. tots 8, 15 & 16 of Block 10, ValI Intermountaln, rball be zoned Gleenbelt & Natural Open Space (GNOS). 1. Yail Conmons, Vatl Des Shone Flllng No. 4, shal1 be subJect to the terms of tbls ordinence. For any zonlng purpoae beyond the Eagle County Conrolsaloners' agreement, approval oD actlon, Vail Conmons Eball be zotred Cormerclal Core III (CCIII). -3- o a I ( , Sectlon 3. A8 provrd€d 1n sectlon 18.09.030 0f the veil ttunlclpar code, the zonlng adnlnlatretor re hereby dr,rected to prornptly nodlfy and amend th€ officlar Zonl.ng llap to l.ldlcate the zonlng speclfled herein. Sectlon rl. Il any part, sectlon aubsectlon, Bentence, cla,use or phrase of thls ordlnsDce la for any rea60n held to be lnvarld, such decrsron shall not affect tbe vrlldlty of the reEalDlng portlone of thiB ordlnance, and the Town Councll hereby declares lt would bave passed thls ordlnance, 'ad eech part, aection, 'ub-section, sentence, clauae or phra.se thereof, regardlesa of the ract that rny one or nore parta, sectl.ns, subsectl.ns, aenteDces, clauses or phraa€B be declared invalr.d. SectLon 5. The counctl hereby states that th16 .rdlnance rs n€cessery for the protectlon ot tbe publlc healtb, aafety End welfere. TNTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST NEADING, APPNOVED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL, this 3rd day ot ltarch, 1981, and a publlc hearlng on this ordinence shall be held at the regular meetlng of tbe Town Council of the To n of Vall, Colorado, on the 1?th day of ltarch, 1981 , at ?:30 p.m. ln the ltunlclpal Building of the Town of Vall. ATTEST: II{?RoDUCED, SEAD, BY TITI.,E ONLY ltarch 1?, SDCOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISIIDD APPBOVED ON 1981. ATIE$T: -4- TOs FROIi!guBitEcT: I.IEUORANDUI'l September 10, L990 PlannLng and EuvironmeDtal Counission Conuunity Developnent Departnent A request to amend a previously approved developrnent plan for The VaIIey, Phase VI . Applicant: Background and Proiect Description This application is a request to nodify the developrnent plan for Phase VI of The Valley. The original plan was approved as a PUD in the County. When it was annexed, a provision of the annexation ordinance reguired that any najor rnodification to the county approved plans would require Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) approval. In L9_., a developer brought in a proposal to reduce the approved nunber of dwelling units from 48 to 42. That plan was never built, however, and at this tine, the applicant is proposing to further reduce the number of dwelling units Lo 2L. The project is nade up of L3 buildings. Five will be single fanily residences and eight will be single farnily with a caretaker unit. six will be located north of Bueffer creek Road, with the remainder on the south (see site plan). The development has been divided into three phases, as shown below: In phase one, the structures wiLl have approximately 2500 square feet of gross residential floor area (GFRA). In phase two, the structures wiII have approxinately 3000, and phase three wilI have structures with about 3500 sguare feet of GRFA. At this time, the developer is proposing a Tyrolian style of architecture. No subdivision is proposed at this time. The developers are planning to do a single farnily subdivision later, after the foundations for the buildings have been poured. In Section II below, staff has analyzed the issues which do not need any further application material . In Section IIr, staff has outlined the issues which need further study and more subrnittal infornation (engineering drawings) . ,,/\.r'\ r-//\6//\ .-J .s September 5, 1990 Mr. Peter Jamar Peter Janar Associates Vail National Bank Building Suite 308 L08 South Frontage Road West Vail, CO 81657 RE: The Valley, Phase VI Dear Peter: f enjoyed neeting with you out on the Valley Phase vI site. It seems that Ed Zneimer has several good ideas about how to do a high quality developrnent on the property. At this time the Town needs the following itens prior to the final hearing with PEC: 1. An updated rockfall study. 2. A plan showing phasing. 3. A plan showing the allowable GRFA for each building site. 4. Identified building locations. I understand you do not want to commit to building envelopes at this tirne because you need flexibility in the future. I suggest you add a note to the plans, specifying the amount of variation from the drawn building envelopes that will be allowed in the future. 5. A plan locating the nitigation berm and the choice of mitigation for the homes above Buffher Creek Road. 6. A general concept of the architectural guidelines for the development. You may want to present a very general concept. staff has decided that we wilt rely on the PEC to determine the final level of detail needed for the architecture. The adjacent Tjossern development, for example, has a high level of detail. The ledges in East Vail also does. The first is an SDD, the second is a single farnily subdivision. other subdivisions, as you have mentioned, do not have standards for architecture. Given the variety of solutions, staff believes the PEc is the appropriate body to determine what is needed. For the PEC meeting Septernber 24, L99O I the Town will need drawings showing the road grades and road sections. In addition, the town needs plans showing drainage patters, both existing and proposed, any proposed improvenents, and driveway grades to t1,*o' PETER JA},[AR LEETER, PAGE 2 building envelopes. Lastly, a drainage study nust be completed for both historic and developed flows for both the 25 and l-00 year storms. For the work session, the PEc nill need to see proposed slopes of the roads. At the work session, the PEC will be discussing the subdivision plans for the site. Consider the pros and cons of the two kinds of subdivisions and which you will likely do. I realize that the PEC is not approving a subdivision; however,they will probably want to know shich direction you will head. Sincerely, Andy Knudtsen Town Planner AKlpp (n) !€Pec, )Parc/ n)a / ; CCI'I4ENTS I|EEDED B\ z Ae 6 L(JT zi, / ? ? o BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL: W-J AntPa\1^ /3 .u..) L-rr'"'. Sx,-:lll b-sidt "/ W. cv-l P6a/, Et-ue* a\ tL an-*l. Pa.ostctz-Jffi - l*tlqf D.ATE SLJil,tlTTEo: t - tt-t a PUBLIC }IORKS P.evier,red'by: Con:i,ents: . DATE oF puBLtc HEARTNG ,-/o-7d ot/\ l/^t *.rt{ $r, tll".,',p,4*t,/ ^N c"_.41i. -&1t. PJ.o+, c--4 ,n pt(4 a-,u,,f'/ ott4n'rV. .d"/, /d'"dft'4 ' i) fi.1."r-; , u"- a ?c, <- ; ^^ i : .. Jz7 -.- te-l k:*7- -'l*,"^n v'*k""'-{''j- l'o'. t-r--: -n.'.fedh V.-k",..,{,r,,- lo,*::f:k ,=,) ftr uJ,rJ.u.-. c"Ls_. ,1,_-,LJ ?\"r*fir,r[;ffit;r ,-* fc"-A-u-.-) o..-- \ I -. ,\.,){ U di,*'*y p?*lcrns ' rr*r o?ir.tihit vvt')s .t ')iu,.. dr;.re\,uc.?+ a,,,,.&s Reviewed by:- Date U U Coments: 4l .--,-r.r -L_l alr L,ou la POLICE DEPARTI4ENT ,L:.,-l Ll a.-('A-ss 4- Mz4. i- Uu.L[ b-e-!--'L Jl"- 5.+ c- pr; u*k +t b'b J.--..-!. ll/Ltc<- C-l i) 2*"1 u2 Mz)1 +^ ;uz-{ tn 5-.b!;-;i;o,t . orL b) Dwt--y C.o ""n' i tr-z> plLl rl dt Date Revieved by: Connents: -\ | I r.r . ll lrRrL qxt. Uf.'[- 1;-e2 RECi:iATiOIt DiPARTI.::NT Revla'aed by: Co:-.;"entS: I l4z; n1 . clae-a a ><- )/T .v lo,* e4 V/";w ,-{ '?fu.*'ej4__ ;{e, J-.J' orJ - 41- g!n.--'n*y " -r)+ ir:"..r .;.;.-, -i: ,.::. r: ..tr . *.. , ;.:;...-.::;: *!*,-,1 DECIJARATION OF PROTECTIVE COVENANTS covENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS FOR THE LIA ZNEIMER SUBDIVISION I.',oT ATTACHED TO TITE PLAT OF LOT PREPARED PURSUANT TO c.R.s. 38-s1-0o.3 ET. SEQ. (!{INTII{UT.T STANDARDS FOR LAND SURVEYS AND PI.,ATS) RECORDED PURSUANT TO c.R.s.38-35-109 (INSTRUUENTS ATFECTING TITLE TO REAL PROPERTY TO BE RECORDED) PARTY OWNING TITLE TO I.,,OT: BUFI'EHR CREEK PARTNERS, A COLORADO LIMITED PARTNERSHIP BY: ZNEI}I8R COMPANY, INC., GEMRAIJ PARTNER BY: EDWARD ZNETMER, PRESIDENT TO WHOM IT I{AY CONCERN Buffehr Creek Partners, a Colorado linited partnership, is the owner (hereinafter referred to as the rrOwnerrr or the rrDeclarantrr) of the real estate (hereinafter referred to rrl-,otrr) depicted and legally descri-bed on the pl-at of Lot Lia Zneimer Subdivision, attached hereto and incorporated.by reference. as the herein ARTICLE 1 GENERAL PROVISTONS The Declarant is the owner and developer of the Real Estate described on Exhibit 1 attached hereto and j_ncorporated herein by reference. Exhi-bit 1 (commonly known as rThe Va11ey, Phase VIrr) has been approved by the Town of Vail, Departnent of Cornmunity Development, Planning and Environmental Commission on October 22, l-990, for subdivision into 13 Lots pursuant to Vail Ordinance L7.25.010 et. seq. (Single Farnily Subdivisions). The Exhlbit L Real_ Estate was previously approved by Eagle County, Colorado (prior to incorporation of the Exhibit 1 ReaI Estate into the Town of Vail) as a Planned Unit Development. When the Exhibit l- ReaI Estate was annexed into the Town,Residential Cluster zoning was applied to the Exhibit 1 ReaI Estate. The subdivision, as now approved by the Town of Vai1,incorporates Planned Unit Development and Cluster Subdivision concepES. These Protective Covenants, which are and shall run only with the attachett plat and Real Estate described thereon,are stated and intended by tbe Owner to set forth and Lnsure that the Town of VaiI approved concepts, recruirecl covenants and other rnatters are understood and complLed lrith bv all subsequent omers of the Lot. Except for the Lot (and anv Eubsequent Lots specificallv referenced) the renainder of the Exhibit 1 Real Estate is not beinq subiected to these Protective Covenants. The Exhibit 1- Real Estate is required to be seguentially subdivided into l-3 Lots via three Phases designated Phase One (being seven Lots designated East-Lots l-Lt 12 and l-3 and Phase Two (being four Lots designated West-Lots 7 , 8, 9 and 1-O) and Phase Three (being six Lots designated 1-, 2,3, 4,5, and 6) Phases L and 2 are located south of Buffehr Creek Road; phase 3 is located north of Buffehr Creek Road. Exhibit L(a) Real estate is all real estate vrithin the Project south of the Buffehr Creek Road (Phases One and Two);Exhibit L(b) Real Estate is all real estate within the project north of the Buffehr Creek Road (Phase Three) . Appurtenant to each Lot in Phase One and Two, each person or entity taking title to a Lot frorn ttre Owner has also been granted an undivided one seventh (L/7Eh) interest, as a tenant in common, in and to the Private Road Easenen! (hereinafter referred to as the |tRoadtt) which shall provide access to the Owners of Lots 7, 8, 9, IO, 11, l-2, and l-3 from their Lot to the public way on Buffehr Creek Road. The undivided and nonexclusive tenant in common interest in the Road shall be appurtenant to each Lot,shall be inseparable from each Lot; and, the Easement crossing an Ownerrs Lot, sha1l not, cause a merg'er of the Easement into the Lot Ownerrs fee estate. Any severance or further subdivision of the Road Easement from a Lot shall be null and void. ARTICLE 2 DEFTNITTONS l-. ItOwnerrr means any person, corporation, partnership,joint venture, linited partnership, lirnited liability company or any other entity holding record title to the Lot. 2. rrPlatrr means an Improvement Survey plat as defined by C.R.S. 38-51-L00.3 and Ordinance L7.08.130. 3. rrl,otrt means the real estate lega11y described on the Plat together with the undivided one seventh (L/7t!;r) interest as tenants in common ownership of the Road and as defined as a rrPrivate Streettr in Ordinance l-7 . 08 . 120. 4. ttBuilding Envelopett means the area shown and defined on the Plat of the Lot and being approximately 45OO square feet. 5. nRoadrr means the Private Road Easement Phases L and 2, Lots 7, 8, 9, 10, Ll-, l-2 and l-3 to on Buffehr Creek Road and as defined by Ordinance Private Road Easenent was recorded oD _,at Pagfe of the records of the Clerk and Eagle County, Colorado and defines the rights and the Lot Owner with respect to the Road. 6. ItPrimary/Secondary Residential DweLling'rr means any Dwelling constructed pursuant to Vail Ordinance l-g.l-3.010. 7. ItBuildingrt shall mean any structure having a roof supported by columns or walls, or any other enclosed structure for the housing or enclosure of persons, animals or property (Ordinance l-7.08 .055) . 8. rrordinancerr means the ordinances of the Town of Vail,colorado as enacted on the date of this Declaration and as thereafter arnended. A11 definitions contained within the ordinances are incorporated into this Declaration by reference. 9. rropen Spacerr means all of the real estate located within a Lot but not real estate located within a Building Envelope. 10. trProjecttr shall mean the reaL estate described on Exhibit 1, the l-3 Lots created from the Real Estate and the Dwellings constructed, or to be constructed, upon the Lots. 1L. rrHomeownerrs Association,i tneans Buffehr Creek Homeownerts Association, a Colorado not for profit corporation,that may be formed by the Declarant or the Lot Owner's to perform the ownersr duties and otc-ligations under this Declaration and.enforce the Declaration. ARTICLE 3 PRIMARY/ SECONDARY RESIDENTIAIJ DWELIJINGS l-. In the event a Primary/Secondary nesidential Dwelling (Unit) is constructed within the Building Envelope upon the Lot, a. the Secondary Unit shall not be sold, transferred or conveyed separately frorn the Primary Unit for a period of not servrcl,ng the public way l-7 . 08.l-70. The L99L, in Book Recorder of obligations of more than twenty years and the life of Trent Ruder from the date that the Certificate of occupancy is issued for said secondary unit; and, subdivided or conveyed separate from the Prinary Dwelling and any atternpted subdivi-sion shall be nuII and void. b. The Secondary Dwelling Unit shall not be leased or rented for any period of less than thirty consecutive days, and that if it shall be rented it shall be rented only to tenants who are fuIl-time employees in the Upper Eagle Valley. The Upper Eagle Valley shall be deemed to include the Gore Val}ey, Minturn, Red C1iff, Gilman, Eagle-Vail and Avon and their surrounding areas. A full-tj-me employee is a person who works an average of thirty hours per week, and c. The Secondary Dwelling Unit shall not be divided into any forrn of time-shares, interval ownership or fractional fee. ARTICLE 4 BUILDING ENVELOPE L. A11 Buildings sha11 be constructed and l-ocated within the Building Envelope and shall not encroach upon the Open Space. 2, A Building Envelope may be rnodified with the approval of the VaiI Design Review Board based upon detailed review of an individual architectural and site plan for a Dwelling Unit. The Design Review Board sha1l find that the modification to any Building Envelope does not substantially result in any negative irnpacts upon the Lot, adjoining Lots or have any adverse inpact upon required geologic hazard considerations. 3. If an association of home owners within the project is formed, any modification of a Building Envelope shal1 also conform to the rules and regulations adopted by the Association. 4. Any modification of the Building EnveJ.ope sha11 not exceed l-5 feet in length and/or width and, in no case, shaI1 any Building be built in the 20 foot setbacks shown on the approved developrnent p1an. ARTICLE 5 OPEN SPACE 1. No fences or domestic style landscaping shall be constructed or perrnitted in the Open Space. 2. Open Space shal1 be preserved in its natural state. 3. However, ReaI Estate within the Building Envelope and inrnediately contiguous to the Building Envelope may be rrimprovgdrr with sod lawns and fences but no Buildings, including fencing and sheds, may be erected outside of the Building Envelope. 4. The Declarant, and for its heirs, assigns, and designees, RESERVES the right, at any time and from time to time,to designate and create utility easements and install Utilities within the Open Space as designated on the Plat of the Lot for the use and enjolanent of the Owners of the Exhibit 1 ReaI Estate.The l-iabil-ity of the Declarant for exercising of this reserved right shall not exceed the cost of returning the Open Space to its natural condition as reguired by this Declaration. This reserved right my be assigned by the Declarant to the Buffehr Creek Honeownerrs Association or all of the Owners of the Proj ect. ARTICLE 6 HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION AND GENERAL MATTERS 1. The Declarant reserves the right to assign and convey any duty or obligation of the Declarant or the Owners set forth in this Declaration to the Buffehr Creek Homeownerts Association,a Colorado not for profit corporation that is, or may be formed,by the Declarant or the O\^/ners as provided for herein. 2. The Ownerrs may, upon a rnajority vote of the Lot Owners, assign and convey the enforcement of any duty and obligation of the Owners set forth in this Agreement to the Buffehr Creek Homeownerrs Association. 3. This Declaration rnay be enforced by the Declarant, any Owner of a Lot or interested party, or the Town of Vai1, Colorado. 4. These Protective Covenants, with the exception of those defining the Secondary Dwellings, Building Envelope and Open Space, shall expire on December 3l_, 2021 unless renewed by a najority of the Lot Owners then subject to these Covenants recording with the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder, Colorado, an instrument executed by thern extending such Covenants for a period of tine to not exceed 50 years. 5. The Declarant reserves the right to amend, nodify,revoke or supplement these Covenants, without the permission of any Lot Owner or those claining by, through or under hin (a) so Iong as the guilding Envelope and Open Space and Dwelling is not affected or (b) until the year 2000 or such tine as the Declarant has conveyed all of its interest in the Exhibit 1Real Estate, whichever event occurs first. Witness the hand of the Declarant this day of , L99l_. BUFFEHR CREEK PARTNERS,a Colorado linited partnership By: Zneimer Company, Inc., General Partner By: Edward Zneimer, President STATE OF COLORADO ss. County of ACKNOWLEDGED TO BEFORE ME, this _ day of _.t99L, by Buffehr Creek Partners, a Colorado linited partnership, by Zneirner Company, Inc., General Partner, by Edward Zneimer, its President. Notary Public My cornmission expires: GMS-M6\019\t iazprot.cov 4t25t91 nl,'."-, -.-r.sft oisclf;il,+j.' lri."]".I_ls *+u r NONEXCI.,USIVE EASE}IENT DEED FOR PRIVATE NOAD A}ID UTIIJITIES Buffehr Creek Partners, a Colorado linited partnership,Grantor, for the consideration of Ten Dollars and other good and valuable consideration, in hand paid, hereby se1ls and conveys an undivided and nonexclusive one seventh (L/7) interest, as tenant in cornrnon, in and to the Road and Utility Easement legally described herein on Exhibit 2, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, to the Grantees naned in the Warranty Deedl to which this Easement Deed are attached. The Easements granted by this Easement Deed are for the benefit of, and appurtenant to the Lot, described on said Warranty Deed. The covenants set forth below shall run with the Easernent and be binding upon the crantees and their heirs, personal representatives and assigns. ARTICLE ]. THE ROAD EASEMENT PREFATORY DEFINITION A Declaration of Protective Covenants was recorded with the warranty Deed conveying the Lot to which this Easernent is appurtenant. The Article 1-, General Provisions and the Definitions, at Article 2 of the Protective Covenants, are incorporated into this Easement by reference. Specific Definitions for the Road and Utility Easernent L. Road, in addition to the Exhibit 2 legal description of the Easement, means the physical structure constructed by the Grantor upon the Easement to provide access to the Lot and the terms and provisions set forth herein. 2. Utilities means the electrical, water, gas, telephone,cable and any other such itern now, or in the future, generally considered to be a ]tutilityrl necessary for the use and occupation of the Lot or other Lots in the Project and either buried in the ground under the surface of the Road or Open Space, in the surface of the Road or affixed above the surface of the Road or Open Space. 3. Tenant in Cornmon or Cotenant means any Owner of a Lot served by the Easement. It is anticipated that seven Lots will be served by this Easement and each Lot Owner will own l-/7 undivided interest in the Road Easement and the Utility Easement. ARTICLE 2 UTILITY EASEMENT 1. Each Lot Owner and his successors and assigns is granted a nonexclusive perpetual Utility Easement over, across,above, upon, and under the Road Easement for ingress and egress and utility services to his Lot. The Roadway and the Utility Easernent is for the benefit of, and appurtenant to, each Lot and may not be subdivided or severed frorn the Lot. 2. Each Lot Ohrner may use the Utility Easement for the use and benefit of the Lot for the installation, repair, removal,or restoration of utilities, including cable television and any future inventions or devices that become utilities to service the T^+ ARTICI.,,E 3 PURPOSE OF ROADWAY AND THE UTILITY EASEMENT The purpose of the perpetual Roadway Easement and the Utility Easement is for a nonexclusive access drive and roadway and general util-ity easement to exist from the public way at Buffehr Creek Road (the Public way) to provide nonexclusive private access to the seven Lots located within Phases One and Two and for the use and benefit of the Owners thereof. rrDriveway purposesrr as used in this Agreement means use thereof by vehicles, persons on foot, horseback or other types of wheeled vehicles or any other conveyance now or in the future used for the movernent of persons and property. Emergency vehicles such as fire trucks and very heavy vehicles such a.s moving vans, trash haulers and eonstruction eguiprnent may use the Road for (l-) ordinary course of business movement; (2) so long as their use of the Easement does not damage the Road or (3) so long as the Owner benefitted from such use pays for the damage to the Road surface caused by such eguiprnent. In the event that steel tracked equipment and vehicles with load linits in excess of 50,OOO GVWrs are permitted by an Owner of a Lot to use the Road, in such event all danages and subseguent costs of repair caused to the Road by the use of such equipment shall be the sole cost and expense of the Owner permitting such use. The Utility Easernent is for the installation of any needed utilities, both before and after construction of the Road, to the Lots and as determined by any Owner of a tenant in comnon interest in the Easement. Any Owner may, by further conveyancing, grant fron time to tirne, interests in his interest in the Utitity Easement to utility companies to service the Lot and it is agreed pursuant to this Agreenent and by the tenant in conmon Or,irners that a general quitclaim of the Utifity Easenent in favor of utility providers and for servicing the Lots is granted hereby without further conveyancing. Subject to the rules and regulations of the utility providers, no O\,rner may deny any other Owner the right to tttap intorr or rltie intotr existing utilities serving a Lot or Lots so long as such Ohrner does not inpair the service to the existing owners or increase the costs to such Owners. ARTICLE 4 COVENANT THAT OPERATION OF EASEII{ENT NOT INTERFERE WTTH LOTS The Owners of the l-,ots shall use and operate the Easement and Road herein granted and the reserved rights in such a manner that the operation thereof will in no way hinder or prevent the proper and reasonable use and enjoyment of all of the Owners of the Lots. No cotenant shall place fences, obstructions, barricades or other structures on or across any portion of the Easement or Road, including parking, which wiII prevent or impede the flow of pedestrian and vehicular traffic as intended except for temporary periods required for maintenance or initial construction of the Road or utilities or reconstruction or utility maintenance or to prevent the Easement and Road from becoming a public way. A11 Owners subject to this Agreement shal1 maintain any portions of the Road such as access points, parking areas, and driveways located upon their Lots in good, useable, and attracti.ve condition at all tirnes and at least to the stand.ards of the Road. ARTICLE 5 EXPENSES TO BE SHARED Except as otherh/ise set forth herein, the parties agree that all costs and expenses sha11 be shared as follows: The Owner of each Lot shal1 contribute L/7Eh of the cost. Until all seven Lots have been conveyed by the Grantor, the crantor sha11 pay the fraction of the costs not paid by the Lot owners. In the event that (l-) any Owner thereafter deterrnines to install in the Utility Easement underground or overhead utility services or takes any other action that danages or destroys the surface or support of the Road and which action is undertaken for the sole benefit of such Owner, in such case all costs and expenses of such work including restoration of the Road surface, shall be at the benefitted partyrs sole cost and expense and (2) if any Owner exceeds the load lirnits on the Road as set forth above and such activities cause unreasonable wear and tear to the surface of the Road such party shall be responsible for the cost attributabte to the deterioration to the Road caused by such activities in excess of reasonable wear and tear. ARTICLE 6 MAINTENANCE AND REPAIRS OF ROAD EASEMENT DEFTNED The repairs and rnaintenance to be undertaken and perforrued under this Agreement by the Owners with respect to the Road Easement shall include the following which listing is not intended to be exclusive: l; The Easement sha11 be repaired, maintained, and replaced to the same standard, and in confonnity Lrith, the standards established and used to create and surface the Road pursuant to Town of Vail , Colorado reguired standards for a Private Street supporting the then current traffic load. The expense of such work shall be apportioned by the parties as set forth above. 2. Repairs, rnaintenance and restoration of the Road sha1l include filling of chuckholes, snow removal , salt placement, regrading, resurfacing with blacktop or concrete and such other necessary work as is reasonably reguired to rnaintain the Road in a safe, attractive rnanner and in conformance with any governmental regulations or reguirements governing the Easement. ARTTCLE 7 LIMITS OF LIABILITY The Owners of each Lot, proportionately hereto agree, as set forth above, to bear the costs and expenses of repairs,restoration, and rnaintenance of the Road authorized by thern or as needed and as follows: 1. Such costs and expenses sha1l not exceed, in the aggregate, the sun of $7r000.00 the first year subsequent to construction of the road by Declarant unless a greater sun is authorized in writing by the Owners of the Lots required to bear the costs by this Agreement. The aforesaid sum is to increase each year by 10?, not cornpounded, and assessments may exceed such number so long as they are spread out over the number of years necessary to rneet the naxirnum sum test. 2. Resurfacing, blacktop, and other capital improvements required to maintain the Road in a first class condition for its intended purposes shal-l not be subject to the linitation set forth above. However, capital inprovements deternined to be perforrned shall be set forth to the other cotenants in formal budgets, bids and otherwise documented and which shall be presented to the other Owners at least four (4) months prior to the conmencement of any capital irnprovement. Any Owner reguired to contribute to the cost of a capital inprovemenl may contest in Eag1e District Court the (1) need for the capital irnprovenent; and (2) the cost of the capital irnprovernent. tfre party adjudicated to have acted in good faith and consistent !,rith the purposes and intends of this Agreement shall be awarded all of its costs and attorney fees for such a hearing. ARTICLE 8 DESIGNATION OF OWNER The crantor is hereby irrevocably designated as the agent for the O!,rner(s) of the Easernent to contract for and oversee the repairs, maintenance, restoration, and improvements authorized under this Agreement with respect to the Road. The crantor may,in writing, assign, in whole or in part, (L) the aforesaid rights and duties to the Town of Vail; (2) the aforesaid rights and duties to any Owner of a Lot; (3) a Manager authorized by Colorado Real Estate law to rnanage real estate (a broker) engaged to manage the Road and the Easenent; or (4) the Homeownerrs Association created pursuant to this Declaration. Such an assignment shalt relieve the Grantor of liability under this Agreement so long as the assigned Owner assunes and agrees to perforrn the duties set forth herein. The assignment and. acceptance of the assignment shall be evidenced by a written agreernent executed by the parties with reference to this Article and recorded with the Clerk and Recorder of Eagle County, Colorado. AII utilities shall be placed in the Utility Easernent by the providers thereof acting for the Owner to be benefitted thereby. Such Owner sha11 pronptly pay for all costs and cbarges of such utility providers and indennify and hold harmless the other Owners therefrorn. No Owner is authorized or granted any right to act as an agent of any other Owner and subject such other Owners interest in the Easenent to any claj-ms. ARTICLE 9 COMPENSATION OF GRANTOR The Grantor shall not be compensated for acting as a Manager for the Road but it nay engage a Manager to perforn its duties hereunder and the Managerts total yearly compensation for acting as the agent for the Owners shatl not exceed the greater of 5500.00 or 104 of the yearly gross or budgeted assessments or such other amount as mutually agreed upon between the Owners of the Lots. Such compensation is not to be included in the Ownersr liability specified in Section 7 hereof. No bond shaLl be required of the Agent. ARTICLE 10 ADVANCEMENT OF COSTS AND EXPENSES The Manager nay require the Owners of the Lots to advance their percentage share for the Road, as set forth above, of reasonably expected expenses or to create a sinking fund and hold the funds in a segregated trust account for use by the Manager in paying the costs and expenses authorized and incurred under this Agreement. As the Manager reguires additionaL funds from tine to tine to pay the costs and expenses authorized and incurred under this Agreement for the Road, each Owner sha11 deposit his percentage share of the sums required, subject to the lirnits of liability under this Agreeruent, in the Managerrs trust account within one (L) nonth of receipt of notice from the Manager that such funds are required. In the event that any Owner fails to pay the reguired amount within one (L) month of the Manager reguesting the same in writing, such amounts shall become thereafter due and payable, bear interest at the rate of 242 per annum, include a late fee of $l-00.00, and may be collected by suit against the defaulting party by any of the other Owner(s),the Homeownerrs Association or the Manager for the Owners and which suit danages sha1l inelude costs and reasonable attorney fees for collection of the Assessments. The interest earned and late fee shaII be paid over by the Manager to the non-defaulting Owners, prorata, as liquidated damages and not as a penalty. In addition, any cotenant against whom a judgment has been obtained pursuant to this Article may be denied by the other Owners, via the obtaining of an injunction, the right of use of the Road until the judgrnent has been satisfied. This right may be enforced by obtaining an injunction against the judgrroent debtor Owner and those taking through or under hin (the judgrnent debtor Owner expressly waivj-ng any reguirement of the other Owners to obtain a bond j-f required by such a proceeding) from the Eagle County District Court, Colorado and all costs and expenses, including reasonable attorney fees,sha1l be added to the existing judgment against the Owner for obtaining and enforcing such an order. The other Owners are expressly reLeased from any liability whatsoever to the debtor Owner and those taking through or under hirn with respect to the denial of such Owners use of the Road. Such debtorT cotenant/Owner shall indemnify and hold harnless the other cotenant/Owners from any claim of danage from any party asserting a rigtlt to use the Road on account of such parties legif reLationships with the debtor/cotenant Owner. ARTICLE ]-]- ACCOUNTING BY MANAGER The Manager shal1 furnish to the Owners of the Lots written reports of maintenance and repairs undertaken, costs and. expenses incurred, and receipts for the payment of costs and expenses at least gnce per year. ART]CLE ]-2 NOTICES Any notice or report required under this Agreernent shall be sent to the parties and the lilanager at their last known address, at the address they have directed or at the address listed for such owner of the Property in the office of the Treasurer of Eagle County, Colorado. Any reguired notice shall be made by regular rnail, properly addressed, and postage prepaid. From time to time, but not rnore than five year intervals,the owners, the Manager or the Homeownerts Association, sha}l file with the clerk and Recorder of Eag1e county, Colorado a general Notice executed and acknowledged by aII of tbe Owners an Estoppel Notice advising at least the following and such other infornation as the Owners may desire to make publie: (1) the names, addresses and fractional interest owned of the Easement by each of the Owners; (2) any outstanding arnounts owed by any Owner on account of this Agreement; and (3) the current Managers name, address and telephone number. The Manager shall provide such information, in writing, to any owner or interested party, within ten (10) days, upon the request of an Owner, for a fee to be determined by the Owners. ARTICI,E 1-3 PERSONAL INJURY AND PROPERTY DAMAGE LIABTLITY Any Liability of the Manager or Owners for personal injury to any workmen employed to construct the Road or make repairs to the Road under this Agreement, or to third persons, as well as any liability of the Owners for damage to the property of the Manager, or any such rrorkrnen, or of any third personf as a result of or arising out of construction, repairs, maintenance, and restoration to the Road under this Agreement shall be borne as between the Owners in the same fractions as they bear the costs and expenses of such repairs, maintenance, and restoration. The Manager shall have the affinnative duty to provide,or have provided, workmanrs compensation insurance, builders risk insurance and other like insurance to insure to the Owners reasonably adequate insurance proceeds and the defense of any claims. The premiums for such insurance shal-I be apportioned between the Owners as set forth herein. Any liability for the installation and repair of utilities shal1 be the sole responsibility of the owner being benefited and it sha1l indernnify and hold harmless the other parties from any tort or contractual claims, inctuding rnechanicrs Iiens, as a result of such activities. The Lot Ownerrs shall each keep and naintain general liability j.nsurance upon their respective Lots insluding the, Easement as an appurtenance in an amount and terms to be agreed upon from tine to tirne by the Owners but not less than $L1000,000.00 for a single occurrence and each party shall pay their own premium for such liability protection. Each party shall cause his insurance company to agree to not subrogate to any claims made under the policy against the otber Owner(s). ARTICLE ]-4 INDEMNITY The Owners agree to indemnify and hold harroless the other Owners against all liability for injury to hinself or damage to his Lot when such injury or damage shal1 result from, arise out of, or be attributable to any maintenance, repair, or restoration of utilities or to the Road undertaken pursuant to this Agreement. ARTICLE ]-5 REAL PROPERTY TAXATTON Any real property taxes assessed against the Easement sha11 be divided between all of the Lot Owners as per their prorata fractional ownership of the Easement. ff Eagle County does not assess the Easement as a separate taxation parcel, each Owner shall tirnely pay all real estate taxes assessed against his Lot. ARTICLE ]-6 EASEMENT TO RUN WITH LOT The Easernent shalL run with the Lot, and shalt be appurtenant thereto, a burden and benefit to the Lot and any other Lots serviced by the Easement, and shall be binding on and shall inure to the benefit of the Grantor, the Owners and their heirs, successors, or assigns. Unless agreed to by all of the Owners or as otherwise set forth herein, no cotenant owner nay (1) sever or convey its interest in the Easernent separate and apart frorn the conveyance of its Lot; (2) or subdivide its interest in the Easement; or (3) or subdivide the Utility Easement from the Road Easement; and (4) any lien or encumbrance against a Lot sha1l also automatically include the Owners undivided cotenant interest in the Easement. The cotenancy title held by each.of the Lot Owners in the Easenent shall_ not merge with their title to their Lrot. No party nay relieve itself of liability hereunder by non use of the Easenent or abandonment of same.ft is understood and agreed that the Easement purposes,objectives and intents are: (L) the Road is to be used and occupied to the maximum extent possible and consistent with good traffic planning and traffic flow; (2) unless consented to by all Owners of the Easement, the costs of the Easement are to be divided equally among the seven Lot Owners and (3) that utilities shall be generally placed in the Utility Easement which is dedicated to the use and enjoynent of the utility providers who shall be responsible and 1iab1e for their actions within the Utility Easement and pursuant to the common and statutory laws of contract and tort. ARTTCLE ].7 NO PARTNERSHIP OR JOINT VENTURE This Easement to the Owners of the seven Lots as tenants in common does not create, and is not intended to create, a partnership or other joint venture between the Owners of the Lots and no third party beneficiary relationship with any party has been created or intended unless specifically set forth herein. ARTICI-,,E 18 LITIGATION In the event of any litigation with respect to this Agreement, it is agreed that alL such litigation shal1 be held exclusively in Eagle County, Colorado, District Court and the Court sha1l award to the prevailing Lot Owner or Owners all costs and reasonable attornev fees incurred. ARTICLE 19 HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION AND GENERAL MATTERS 1. The crantor reserves the right to assign and convey any duty or obligation of the Grantor (except payment of the Grantorls prorata fractional share of the Road costs until all Lots have been conveyed) or the Lot Owners set forth in this Easement to the Buffehr Creek Homeownerrs Association, a Colorado not for profit corporation that is, or nay be formed, by the Grantor or the Owners. 2. The Ownerts may, upon a rnajority vote of the Lot Owners, assign and convey any duty and obligation of the Owners set forth in this Easement to the Buffehr Creek Homeownerrs Association so long as the ownerts remain liable for their prorata fractional share of the Road costs. 3. The obligations created by this Easement Agreernent rnay be enforced by the Grantor, any Owner of a Lot or interested party, or the Town of Vail, Colorado. 4. The crantor reserves the right to arnend, nodify,revoke or supplement these Easement Covenants, without the pennission of any Lot owner or those clairning by, through or under hin (a) so long as the Road Easernent right of access and cost sharing fraction is not effected and Utility Easenent right of access not effected, or (b) until the Grantor has conveyed all o of its prorata fractional interests in the Exhibit 2 Easement, whichever event occurs first. This Agreement is to be liberally construed to carry out the intends and purposes of the Road and the Utility Easement as set forth herein. Witness the hand of the Grantor this , l_991. day of BUFFEHR CREEK PARTNERS, a Colorado limited partnership By: Zneimer Company, Inc., General Partner By: Edward Zneimer, President STATE OF COLORADO ss. County of ACKNOWLEDGED BEFoRE ME, this _ day of @in}';},,lI'fiEl'EHn:i;:*':li}"EIi:']'";}:ffi::,by Edward Zneimer, its President. Notary Pub1ic My cornnission expires: Gl.lS-116\01 9\ t i azprot. cov 4t25t91 10 l.lfz*za ROCKFAtrL !.{TTTGATTON THE VALIJEY, PHASE DESTGN SPECTFICATTONS vI, VAIL, coLoRADO PrepaEed For t{r. Efl Zneiner Prepared By Arthur I. Mears, p.E., Inc. GunnJ-son, Colorado Septernber, 1990 .1 OBiIECTIVES AND LIUITATIONS This alarysis of rockfarr lnitigation techniques and perforrnance specifications of rnitigation design was reguested by Mr. Ed Zneimer and has the following objectives: a. Calculation of design rockfall bounce heights,velocities, and momentum at three locations requiring rockfall nitigation design; b. Calculations of the failure probabilities of rock-fall defenses at various locations, and c. Specification of the locations, sizes, and possible forns of rockfall protection. The concldsions and. recomnendations of this report are site specific, therefore they may not apply at other sites. Further-more, any substantial changes to building positions from those shown on Figure 5 of this report may invalidate the recommenda-tions of this study. Sorne of the conclusions of thls study and the application of the Colorado Rockfall Sinulation Prograrn (CRSP) depend on observa-tions and field measurements rnade on June 21,, 1ggo. These observations were reported in the f.Rockfall Hazard Analysis, The Valley, Phase VI , VaiL, Colorado,rr submitted to Mr. Ed Zneimer on June 25, 1990 APPLfCATION OF rrCRgPrr AND ROCXFAI,L DESfcN PARAI'|EIERS Rockfall mitigation design requires information about rock size and mass, rockfall velocity, and rockfall bounce heights at the position of the rnitigation device. These design parameters are determined by field observations and through application of the GRSP cornputer model, a stocastic rnoder that outputs a statisticar distribution of rock behavior at positions along the rockfall path. Design rock sl-ze, rockfall source locati5n, slope inclina-tion, and ground hardness and roughness nust be measured and estirnated in order to apply cRSp. Design rock size was d.eter-rnined to be a 2-foot diarneter rock during the field inspection of June 21. During the field work the rockfall source locations were located, the slopes of the rnost likely rockfall paths were surveyed, and the ground roughness and hardness were estimated.Historic (and pre-historic) rockfall runout distances were also napped and used to calibrate roughness and hardness.. Tbree analysis positions were considered for rnitigation and used in the CRSP application: (A) a possible catching:fence locati.on 6O feet above building envelopes 3 and 4, (B) the uphlll walls of buildings 3 and 4, and (C) a possible berm location near the bottom of the valley. These positions are shown in Figure 5.Definitions of rockfall bounce heights and velocities are defined diagrarnrnatically in Figure 1. The statistical distribution of rockfall bounce treights and velocities at each of the three mitigation positions are sumnarized on Figures 2, 3, and 4. The bounce height.and.velocity distributions are given as rexcee- dencerr probabirilies, theiefore the probabiri€y that a randorn rockfall event wirr exceed a given vilue has blen shown on these graphs. For exampre' the bounce-height graph on Figure z i"di:- 9_ates a 252 probability that bounce rreight wilt exceed 4 feet at the fence tocation but only a 10? prouaiitity that it wiri-e""""a 6.5 feet. Velocity.probabirities have been Sirnirarly d.etermined-and graphed. The distributions shown resutt frorn rOb simurated 2-foot diarneter rockfarl events along the paths determined in the field survey. The computer printouti for tne roo rockfarl sirnulations at ""glt.analysis-position are given in appendices A -c, at the end of this report. rt must be 6rnphasized that the probabilill.".given in Figures 2, 3, and a afply to the 2_foot qrameter "design'r rock onry. srnaller rocks wilr also rolr down the slope, but wirl attain lesser velocities and bounce heights;rnany srnal] rockfarrs wirr stop on the upper slopes and not reach the proposed building locations. Rockfalr^design specifications are based on the 10g exceedance probabilities shown in Figures 2, 3, and 4. This means that Lhere exists one chance in ten that'the design rockfarr event will exceed rnitigation_ design capacity, tniJ -i.s-a reasonably conservative appioach becauie tnl design rocxtiir event is expected onry once in severar decades ind when this rare event does occur there is a 9o? chance the rnitigation wlrr worr. of course, an even greater lever of protection can be achieved bv rnsrstrng on a srnaller exceedence probability. 3 ROCKFAIJIJ MITIGATION FOR BUIIJDINGS 3 AND 4 v,h n*l"'J? Two forms of externar rockfalr defenses have been considered for protection of thesg-ty9 building sites! (A) a "itexibre-po"t;--fence, and (B) rockfall-wa1l bairiers. N,- tl Pnh+zt ,;l I lCr,tit The_flexible-post fence courd be rocated as shown by line A - A :l_lig"I: -9, lpproxirnately 6o feet north of the Uuiiaings. - rence qesrgn parameters, based on the 103 exceedance probability are:bounce height : 6.S_feet; velocity = 37 ftlsec. Fence height.therefore, nust be 7.5 feet (rneasired verticallyl , and is 6quif to the bounce height_(6.5 feet) prus the rocr rlaius (1.0 feet).The fence will stop 2-foot diarneter rocks or wiLl reduce their speed so they will not cause damage. The_fence posts (at.approxirnatery 3O-foot intervars) consist of a bundle of cables (sirnilar to 3/sn or L/2x guy wiresi encased in 4rt. diameter garvanized steel tubing (rigur6 .6). A sect,ion of the cabLe bundle approximately 12'r to ie,i long is'open and arlowed to flex upon impact- The rock momentun, theieforel i= oir"ipated gradually as the fence bends downsrope at inpact, instantineou=inpact forces are reduced, and massiire, expeirsive structures are avoided. FLEXTBLE-POST FENCE Arthough these fences are not in widespread use, prototypes have been tested extensivery !v.tne colorado Highway DLpartrnent and have been very successfur in stopping rockialli nitinated "oit,I"" 1 7-5-high fence is $60 - glOO per foot of fence length. A 330-foot long fence as shown in Figure 5 wourd cost appr5ximately $201000 to 9331000. The fences are not mass produced at the present time. Raw materials wourd need to be purchased and assembled at the site. (B) ROCKFALL WALL BARRTERS Rockfall-wall barriers would erirninate structural darnage from the design (Lo?-probability) rockfatr event if built on th6 uphill sides of buildings 3 and 4 (Figures 5 and 7). These barriers must be 6.5 feet high (5.5-foot bounce treigirt plus 1.0-foot rock radius) . They shourd conej-st of steer frarnes Lovered with coarse wire rnesh and firled with unconsolidated gravel and small rocks.The structures should be approxinately z-ieet thick. pre-fabri-cated rrGabionrr baskets, in common use arong highways, could be substituted. simirar to the flexibre-post-fen6es &iscussed above, the rock momenturn will be dissipated by the barrier and darnage to the wall eliminated. construction and installation of the rockfarl-wal] barriers could be done rocally. protection of buiLdings 3 and 4 wourd require an estimated 70 feet of length and a voiume of 45 yd3 per uuira-ing. costs would depend upon rocar construction costs and the cost and transport,ation of the unconsoLidated gravel fill rnateri-al. As noted above, Gabion rock-filted basketi cou1d be substi-tuted. Local cost for these baskets, which should naintain the height requirements, have not been d.etermined. BUILDTNG-WALL REINFORCEMENT A third alternative form of protection for buirdings 3 and 4 is to allow rockfarr impact with the uphitt building walLs and design internar walr structurar rhernLers to resisi, rock inpact.As in the above systems trAr and ItB, n the najor construction erements in the buirding (beams, cross-bracing, etc), must absorb rockfarr monentum. For frexibLe construction] structural deflec-tion must be considered in_conputing the irnpact i-rce, n.Equating the boulder kinetic energy-with woik expended in bending deflection yields the relationship p: (M v2 K),.r,(1) where M is boulder mass (69L/32.2 = 2L.5 lbs-ft/secz1 , V is velocity_(36 ftlsec at t0? probability level lrigure 3l), and K ]s a sttffness fact,ors. For a sirnpJ.e bean, K = 48 F-I/L3,(2) where Er is beam stiffness and L is beam rength. The reration-ships expressed in (1) and (2) indicate that"fiexibre stiuciuiar mernbers are more efficient in resisting impact than stiff ones.The actual expression for stiffness, xi wiir probably be differ-ent than (2), depending on structurar-engineeiing delairs. rn general, rockfall protection at buifdings 3 and 4 nust a. avoid windows within the l_ower 6.5 feet;b. assure structural elernents can resist pi and c. assure rocks wilr not penetrate wa1ls between the beams. The additionar cost for reinforcing the buirding walls witl depend on structural-engineering and architectuial details which wiLl becorne known in final desifin. of the 3 structural-rnitigation-options discussed in this section,only the flexible-post fence wirl prevent rocks from reaching the buildings. The other two options lrockfall-wall barriers and building-warr reinforcement) obviously alrow rockfarr impact with the building and rvould also artow rocks to rorl between the buildings and across Lions Ridge Loop. The residual risk to persons in the area, therefore, is rarg"r with the latter two rnitigat,ion.options. Even this residuai risk is srnall, however,because rnajor rockfalls are expected to occur only once every few years or less, thus the probability of encounter wittr a p..='on who rnay be outside and exposed jusl when the rockfar-r oclurs is very small. { ROCKFALIJ I,IITIGATTON FOR BUIIJDINGS 9 - 13 Buildings 9 - 13 are rocated across the flat varrey floor, near the southern lirnit of rockfall potential (Figure 5). No rocks which couLd be clearly identifiea witn tnd s6urce ourcrop on the hilr could be founa_at tne proposed buirding locations, 'and the GRSP sinuration indicated that- onry 35? ot €ne rocxs rolred as far as the buildings. The sirnulated rocks that did reach the buildings were rolling (not bouncing above tne giound), with typical.rorling verocities of approiirnatety zo illsec or less _(Appendix c) . Rockfall events oi tnis chaiacter tourd dent the rower part of building siding, but wourd not endanger the struc-ture or-its occupants. F.urthermore, such major events are expected only once every decade or longer. - Because rockfall energies will be small at tion, therefore the fill bank on the north subdivision road, located directly north of stop alrnost all rocks. rn rny opii.rion, this nitigation. the nid-valley loca-side of the proposed Lots 9 - 13, will road is sufficient Additional structurar mitigation for these rare, relativery low-energy rockfalr events is not recommended unless occupants of these buildings demand cornplete protection from rocktlll. rf suc! conplete protection is desired, it can be attained by building a 3-foot high rockfalr barrier near the center of the varley, as located on Figure 5 and diagrarnmed on Figure B. The rockfall barrier _shown on Figure g consists of a rei.aining wall with a vertical face toward the rockfall direction consis[ing ot rairroad ties or sirnilar weather-treated timber of large "roi,section. These ties should be braced on the uphi11 siie with steer fence posts driven into the ground at approxirnatery 4-foot intervars, and shourd be filred on the downhiii side. tiis will stop the l0?-probability rockfall event (Figure 4), which has a bounce height of 1.2 feet and a velocity of 26 ft/sec. 5 SCALING: REI,IOVAIJ OF ROCKFALIJ SOURCE This type of rockfalt nitigation is sornetimes used where obvious,active rockfalr source areas can be identified and removal of rocks can crearly reduce the hazard. Removal of alr the roose rocks could be completed above the proposed subdivision, probabry within 10 - r-5 man-days of work. rield observations of the bedrock outcroppings and lower slopes indicate that rnost of the loose rock could probably be removea Uy blasting and/or prying rocks roose and forcing them to rorl down the "Iope.' rrltiic-contror on the Lions Ridge Loop road. wourd obvioully be required during scaling. Arthough scaring would reduce rockfall risk to an acceptable revel imrnediately after the work is cornpleted, it is n6t a permanent sol-ution at this location. rn time, the normar weath-ering process will produce additional source material and the rockfall hazard wilt gradualry increase with tirne. with the houses in prace, additional s-aling to reduce the rockfarl hazard could not be completed. Report subrnitted by, CdL,^,1 v4tau Arthur f. Mears, p.E. 9a lra gl ooo |aoo tlttt cr ar c.{ c{ c{ a{ 6 FIGURE 1. DefinLtlons of veloctty and bounce height at the anal-ysis point. The statlstlcal tllstrtbution of these values are compUted. by the CRSP rockfall rnodel and are shorm for 100 sinulatecl rockfalls of 2-foot diameter rocks at 3 d.lfferent slope positions in Flgures z, ), ano, +. FFF ooo rat00 Fct !tttrt clt{c.{ cr c.t cl Eft Itr +tH q0 c) C)o d o o bo a BOUNCE I{EIGHT ' (ruscu l,oclrrou) 50 75 too% of exceed.lng bounce height 25 Probabil-ity a +qr >:+d OJU o o c( !i bn J20 a x Jaft/s 02550?5 Probablllty of exceed.lng veloclty Exceedance probabiJ-lttes for bounce helghts and velocitl-es d.lameter rock at posslbJ-e fence locatlon, approxinrately 60 IO FIGURE 2. of 2-foot I qr + hI)..{ c) o o o o b0 {) l_0ft |rt gl uI ooo {!oo -ol !t rt rt at f.t c{ Gt tt c.l )o /-< t-t Probabllity of exceeding bounce L0v7 height 4o Sott / 025 Probablllty Exceedance probabllitles dianeter rock at possible 50 75 of exceeding veloclty for bounce belghts and hoose locatlons at Lots ?n aJ- +)qr + o o t20 J4 o o cq tr bo .el 3ro A FIGURE 3, of Z-foot LoW velocltles J and 4. .L) FFF |r|u,|ll ooo {too F(l Foart eita ?{ ot ct ol |r| {rl )o /-< III qi + h0 o)o o F o o b0 a o 5tt ) 2 I 0 25 ProbabiLlty 50 75 rcM of exceedlng bounce helght 4oft/s o 25 50 ?5 t\V" Probablllty of exceedlng veJ-oclty FrcuRE 4. Exceedance probablllttes for bounce helghts and velocltles at berrn l-ocatlon ln val-}ey botton to protect Lots 9 - 13. 30 2Q +J q{ >t + o FI o o o H b0 o) BOIJNE.E HEIGTITS (rmu r,ocarrou) .E -\12 -6v .895 I I t t-I a \ \I I I i RIDG ZtE +' 2 lN ao' Scale: l"=S0' !.4\ S-. I Y - l'r !-+ -_r ----\_._r--\ =>F\---tJ-- t/tf{ lgoL' :-=-_-=z c7 I l- ,L -a ta 7 urflun\ n o0 Lm L.lrY EASET'fElfr 16'A/0. FrcuRE 5. Ftexibre-post rockfalr fence l-ocated. 60 feet uphilr of burld.lngs 3 and 4. Exposed. cable near base of'fence posts enable fence to flex upon rock irnpact and. reduce forces on structure nenbers and. founclations. Deslgn fence helghl (?.5 ft) ls basecl oii tw exceed.ence probablrrty at location plus deslgn rock radius (f.O ft). 000 ntoo rtelt c.a c{ t{c{ c,{ (rr )o A;TI: h 4" dlaneter galvanlzed steel tube 12" - 18" Bund1e or 3/8" or !/2" steel cable o-px / FFF srr||rl ooo ratc'0 Fcl 9r'rt 6t c{ al t{ t{ c{ Rock 'I raJecrory \:'=\-o-Energy-absorblng Barrler House Requiring hotection Small rocks ';:,:.?ip.'!d io:6!.iii !';;._:-l.i'-.g6 i,?F ifs63',it Wfi,#fi o'9.Yoooitl''{!iu:a ?.rge;s 6 r'h -, 1.*F $.r- i ( \ FIGURE ?. Rockfal] proteetl-on at uphiJ-l wal1s of houses on Lots 3 and4. Bockfall- protection barrier should consist of unconsolldated, coarse-grained., rell-dralneil. gravel and. snall rocks that wll_l_ absorb rock monenturn. Destgn. helght (6.1 ft) ls basecl on l@ exceed.ence probablllty at locatlon plus cleslgn rock rad.lus. E I FFF I EEE rnoo Fal | :t: a.t c{ c{ l6i FIGURE 8. 0ptional rockfall barrler to protect units 9 - 13. Vertical uphill- tr""'ifrtiof railroad. ties or simllar rnaterial and. ls braced. .with vertical fenee posts at a spaclng of 4 feet. &Ien1!!53. fl output for deslgn of flexlbJ-|ost rockfaLl fence l-ocatecl 50 feet above buiLdlneis 3 ancl l+. CT]LORADCI ROCKFALL SIPIULATIBN PROGRAI,I FILE NAIIE \rockEite\zneimer.3 ROEI{ STATISTICS 691 LE SFHERICAL REEI{ 1 FT RADIUS NUMEER trF CELLS .11 NUMBER OF ROEI.{S 1OO 'ANALYSIS POSITION ?OO INITIAL Y ZONE 475 TO 485 INITIAL X VELOCITY 1 FTISEC INITIAL Y VELOtrITY -1 FTISEC TANGENTIAL SURFACE COEFFICIENT CELL + ROUEHNESS 1 2 J 4 5 6 7 B 9 10 11 1.5 .5 1.5 1.5 I E ? T .3 ? .8 .E .B .B .B .B .85 .?3 ctq Flq aEi NORMAL COEFFICiENT RESTITUTION .3 .3 .3 't ? .3 .35 .4? '{q Tq BE6INNIN6 X'Y Qr47Q 76 , 410 BE , 4r)B 118 , 385 199 , 3J2 2BB , !85 377 , ?57 r92 , ?44 4il6 , 244 446 , ?36 546 , 233 ENDINE XrY 76 , 4LO EB , 4OB 118 , 385 L9? , 332 ?BB , 285 377 , ?3? 39? , ?44 426 , ?44 446 , 23& 546 , 233 587 , 234 -re"EflsF sst 4 FTI5EC -10. 54 f, FEET 11 FEET 29198 FT LB DISTRIEUTION HEI6HT te\znei mer. 3- TY TY TY r,r,BL{_,(,vELotr r TY )Ntr.ILfN I HEI6HT C ENERGY ANALYSIS FOiNT BCIUNEE BEUNCE HEIEHT 11 10 9 E ,7 6 5 4 J T I 60 ?o 30 IS FOINT VELECITY #EF,,,EIF,F,,FF , ,28r -t5 ____.--j_-,S FREOUENE ANALY5 t t t t tt t ttrt tt ttttEt{t rl ITY g (1 Frllinl) IO FFEEIUENCY 64 5{44 3 d rE ? 4 rt L $tEt ttttt r 4, I VELtrC 4,-, N '74 1-4-. 4 d-l +-1 c-r +-r ^d- 1 d-8 + tt r52 40 DISTRIBUTIEN rtt t t tt r ttttrtt tt tt tt{tttttttt tt ttttttttttt tttt {tttttttttt ttEttttttt 793 5?1 489 ! \rotrkEi te\zneimer. S . BtrUNtrE HEIEHT GRAPH 7 195 HORI ZENTAL DiEiTANCE 2?3 E t {t t t t t F TE t{rt tt tt tt tt tt NC L E t t r t t L H TqT APH ET ttt ttt LLL ttt ttt ttt trt 9s DI GRA E t L t t r t tEt t t frtrt t{rtttttt tttfttrft tEttttttI [[f"F'rf 'rt tttttttr{ 97 HOR I ZO VELOC r t t t t E t t 7 TE tt tt ET CE TE tt tt s VELOCITY 65C 61 {37c 53C 494 45d 41 4 t 37 4 ttt .r3 4 tEEt ?? .N rrttt 25 4t t t t I E ?1 4{ttttr L7 4tttttt 13 4rttttt o t t rtt rtI ttt {rtt ttttt Etttt FILE NAPIE BOUNCE HEI6HT t?4 11 4 10 {94 BC 74 h4 5C 44 3d tc L4 o 587 587 19 TAL TYE NT IT ttt tttttt tttttttt tttttEtttt ttttttttttt ttttttttttttt 489 TTEE tttt ttEt tttt E{tt Ettr tttt tttt 91 r t t t f t t L E E E L t L t t t t E E t t I t r t t t o FILE NAME: \roc[,:site\zneimer. S MAXIMUN AVERAGE STANDARD AVERAEE MAXIT,IUM CELL * VELBCITY VELOEITY DEVIATION BOUNCE_ BEI]NCE (FTlsEtr) (FTISEC) VELOEITY F|EIEFIT (FT) HEIEHT (FT) I 4E 27 9.88 2 10 3 44 18 7.92 L-t 3 {4?239.6227 t 5? 33 LA.47 2 10 5 59. ?3 11.51 1 ?6 55 ?6 A.45' I 4 7 srl 31 6.69 I 5 E} 41 ?3 6.?8 (:J 1 146?86.506 10 24 10 &.95 () I 11 1J 7 0 0 0 X INTERVAL ROCI(S STOFFED 15 I 1 1.I 1 1 1 1 t t 1- 1 1 1 1 5 5 7 12 B 11 4 E J 1 1 ;!ffruuRsY outPut tor d.esign of roe |)Il-DaJEt_er waII ar buildings COLCIRADO ROtrHFALL SIMULATION FRO6RAI'4 FILE NAME \rocksite\zneirner.Z ROCI{ STATISTItrS 691 LB SPHERICAL ROCI{ NUMBER OF CELL5 NUMBER OF ROCI{S ANALYSIS FOSITION , INiTIAL Y ZONE INITIAL X VELf]EITY INITIAL Y VELOCITY FT RADIUS 11 100 ?'60 475 T0 485 1 FTISEC -1 FTISEC TANEENTIAL trtrEFFICIENT .E B B B B B B5 9? E5 B5 85 frrt I tL 1 E--\ 4 6 7 B ? 10 ll SURFACE ROUEHNESS 1.5 t 1.5 1.5 I Ei .T { -" .5 .3 NORI,IAI- trOEFFICIENT RESTITUTION .l T ? ? ? T .4? .J3 BEEINNING XnY or47Q 7b , 410 8E , 4OB 118 , 3S5 19? , 332 3BB , ?85 377 , 25?, 372 , ?44 426 , 244 446 , 236 546 , 233 ENDING X'Y 76r4t EBr40 118 , 3 t c)c) ':g !-' ?FIFI 377r? '?ct,l .:r \J rt- | ! 4?6r2 446r2 546r2 r=Fl7 .) I FILE NAPIE: \rocksite\zneirner.?. ANALYSIS POINT I4AXIPIUM VELOCITY AVERAEE VELOtrITY T,I I NI T,IUI'I VELOC I TY STANDARD DEVIATION (VELCICITY) AVERAEE BOUNCE HEIEHT . MAXII,IUI'I BBUNtrE HEIGHT MAXIMUF4 I(INETIC ENEREY BOUNCE HEICHT ?4 8C 7+64 54 44 3d 7C t4 o + -3 -l -g a . , . . X=' t6Ct ,.Y=. 3OO 52 FTlSEtr "3 FTISEC 4 FTISEC 10.45 .g t- E-tr I 9 FEET 29198 FT LE ANALYSIS FOINT BOIJNCE HEIGHT DISTRIBUTION N.12 (I LL (16 tolltrg)-10 ?o FREBUENCY 50 40 30 60 FREtrUENCY 74 6C 5{44 34 ?48 L 4t ttttt t TE rttt ETET ttt tt E t EtE ttt t tE tttttttttttt E E EEET ET tttttttt, {{ tr 28 ANALYSIS FOINT VELBtrITY DISTRIBUTItrN t rt {r 52 VELOCITY . ..'; ..'.,1 '.. ., 'l. ta, '' FILE NAl,lE: \rocksi te\znei mer. ? ...BOUNEE . , .BOUNCE HEIEHT 6RAPH HEIGHT L24 11 4 10 4 tt 9 4 EE ttt tt. rt E B d EEt , .tttEE{tIt rttEtt 7 ,f ttrt t Ettttttttttt{ttttt . 6 4 EtttttEEEttttttttrtttttEtrtE 5 4 tttrrtttttttErtr|ttttEtE|tE[ tt t 4 4 tttttttEtEtEttttttttt{ttttttEttttr tt rf 3 4 tttttttttttt{tttEtEtttEttEEtttttttEIttE tr 2 4trttcttttttEtttttErtttEtttEttttr{EtEtttE tttE L 4ttttttEtEEtttttrttttttt{ttttttEtttttEttt rtttttcEtE o 97 1?5 253 5?L 4E? 587 HORIZONTAL DISTANtrE VELOCITY EFAPH VELOC ITY 654 61 4 t 37 4 tt {5f, 4 tt tttE E ttt f 41 4 t rttttttt rttrt { EEt 45 ,t EE EtttttttttEtEt{tttEttEEftttEtt rt 41 4 t ttrtttttttttIrE{ttttrEtttttttcEtttttEttt 37 + ttttttttttEEttttttttEtEttEtttttttttttttttrt 33 4 ttttttEtttttttttttttttttttrtEtEtttEtEtttrtttttt 3e 4 EtEtttrtttttttttttttttttttEttEEttEtttttEEtEtttttEEt 25 4tttttttEtttctttEtEttEEtEtEttEttttttt{tt{ttttttttttcEtt 31 4(ttttttttcttttttEEttEEtttttttttttrtEtrttttttttttEtEtEEEt t7 4 E t t E t t t E t t t t t t t t r t t t t t t t t t r t c t t t t t t { t t t r t t t E t t { r E t t E t t t t t 13 4tttttttttttttttEttttt{ttttEtEtttEttttttttttttrttttttttttttt o ?7 195 293 391 489 587 HCIRIZONTAL DISTANCE FILE NAt'lE: \rocl';site\zneimer.2 HAX I NUFI AVERA6E CELL * VELOCITY VELOCITY (FTl5Etr)(FTlSEC} X INTERVAL ROCtr:5 STOFFED 10 'ia 7 10 ? + 1 6 .l o 27 1B ?f, ?f, 2f, t6 3l t3 2B 7 4B 44 49 52 59 5f, 41 46 24 13 1 3 3 4 6 ,7 B ? 1(l 11 STANDARD DEVIATIOI{ VELtrCITY 9. EB 7.97 ?. 6? 14.47 11 Ei 8.45 6. 69 6.98 6.5 6. ?5 o AVEFA6E BEUNCE HEIGHT (FT) 2 o 3 ? 1 1 o (] 0 o MAX IPIUPI EOUNtrE HEI6HT (FT} O TO l(J FEET 1O TO 30 FEET ?A TO 3CI FEET f,O TO 40 FEET 60 TCI 7$ FEET /r) tu tJrJ rtr.Bl E(} TO 90 FEET 130 TO 150 FEET 140 TO 150 FEET 15O TO 160 FEET ITCI TO 18O FEET tc,rl To 110 FEET 24O TE 35(] FEET ?60 TO 77O FEET 37C} TO 3SO FEET TBO TO 39O FEET 4B(r TO 49C! FEET 4?Cr TO 50(l FEET 50() TO 510 FEET 510 TO 53O FEET 5?O TO sEO FEET 53O TO 54O FEET 540 To 55c, FEET 55O TCI 560 FEET 560 TO 57O FEET 57O TO sBD FEET 5BO TCI 59C' FEET {E I t 1 I I ? I I .t 1 Ei E 7 1.1 EI 11 - B .T t I CRseftlut for tlesign of rockfall Uler for protectlon of COLORADO ROEI{FALL SII,IULATiON FRtrERAI-{ t3, Appendlx C. buildlngs p - NAIIE \roc tlsi te\r nei mer . 1 STAT I5T IC5 LB SF.HERICAL ROC}{ 1 FT RADIUS NUI"IFER OF CELL5 . 13 NUr'1BER OF ROCtr.S lclr_)ANALY5IS FOSlTION 34A INITIAL Y ZONE 55O TO 560 iNiTIAL X VELOCITY T FT,/SEC INiTIAL Y VELOEITY _T FTISEC ROCIi 6?1 EEEINNIN6 ENDINE X,Y XNY tl 545 44.512 44'. E13 ?2.; 421^S9 i 473 lJl r '*.rE lf,l. . 448 !0(l ; j99 ?Cx] : f,99 zES . 347 285 : 547 =45 ; 315 345 : 315 558 : 31f,358 : 313 43:) a 18?43r : ?Br 44S : 268 448 : 168 481 : E6B 481 : ?68 519 ; ?57 51? : 357 586 : ?51 586 ; 251 b44 ',, 351 . .:, .Y -Y ?.t .42 [1 .B .8 ;El c) .B .B '1 .85 .93 Elq .85 EELL +T I ?Y 4 6 '7 c'I 10 l1 1? 1.J TANEENTIAL NOFMAL -SURFAEE COEFFICIENT COEFFICIENT ROUEHNESS RESTITUTION BtrUNCE HEIEHT X= 54tlt Y= 255 35 FTIFEC ?5 FTI5EC 1EI FT/sEC 3.8 C' FEET T trFtrT is:IE' Fr LB DISTRIEUTION EOUNCE ANALYSIS FDINT HEIEHT N'35 ?4 t o-' , ,, {) (23 rrlt I nS ) 10 2t-t FREOUENCY 60 50 30 40 FFEIIUENEY ANALYSIS POINT VELOCITY DISTRIEUTION 64t 5 4 tt 4 4 ttt 3 d t ttEtt t ? 4t tt ttttttr 1 +f rt ttEtttr t t 1E 16 35 VELOtrITY \rocksite\zneimer.l At'lEr FTI l: hI FOUNCE ncI(.:H I t4 tf,13 11 10 I t-.1 7 6 5 4 f,? .I BOUNCE HEI6HT GRAFH r E ttt t tttt t tt rt {tttt f tt{ttt t tttttt t tttttE t t tttttt ttttrf ttt{ttrtrltttt ttt{ttttttcttt 3tt 4 t {t L t L t r t t L t t t 1 L t t L t t L t t c t t r f E 4 4 4 4 d + 4 4 4t 4 Et 4 tttt 4t t t r t 4t t t t E 4tttEt CI VELOf,ITY 6?4 584 544 5(l 4 4&4 t? 4 _t-c_l 38 4 tttt 54 4 trtttt .lQ 4 rtttttI ?6 4tttttttt 22 4tttftttE 1B 4Ittttttt 14 4ttttrEtt o tt 556 &44 d44 ?9 4 DIST ANtrE ERAF.H t fiE*t tortol VELOEITY r tEttE t tttEttttttt trrrttttttttt tttrtttttttttttt Etttttrttttttttt tEtttttttttttEEt :].J6 TT ttttEtt tEtttttt EtEttttt tttttttt ttEttttt t{tttttt tttttftt 4 f t t t t tt {ttt {trE {ttt rEtt tttt tttt tttE tEtt ErIt ttt ttt trt t{t ttr ttt ttt ttt ttt trt Q7 ?14 HORIZONTAL DISTANCE 2:3? STANDARD DEVIATION VELOCITY r4AX I I'lUM FOUNCE HEIEHT (FT) a AVERAEE EOUNCE HEIEHT (FT) 5 B 13 10 11 6-.l 5 1t 2 t Ct FILE NAl,lE: \rr:ck:site\eneimer, 1 I"IAX I I,IUM AVERAEE CELL * VELOCITY VELOCITY (FTISEC). (FTI5EC) INTERVAL 8.41 10. f,7 10.97 11. ()1 11.59 13. A"?.61 6. 08 5.4f,+. J./3.61 4.38 4,95 I 2 .l ? 1 o .:. 0 0 rl c, ?(t 24 ?B ?9 ?5 21 1E ?7 36 ?2 28 ?1 9 l.t 3 4 q A B I t ,-t 11 13 13 ROtrI{S STtrFFED x (:) T 1t-) EO 50 4 2 1 1 ? 1 1 4 1 1 ?2 I ?3 2 4 h 4 t I 6 '" o TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO TO \/alIarr Ph:<a TTT Owner:Susan L- Tjossem P.O. Box 2975 Vail, co 81657 Val1ey Phase V Lots 1 and 2 Owner: Merv Lapin 232 West Meadow Drive vail CO 81657 ' g4A, Tract A Owner:Town of Vail Tract A, Lionsridqe Filinq #3 Owner: Town of VaiL Adiacent Property to West Owner: ?:,,' as*r"!*I-;qX!'w L cter^io-c\, ei" 8u al S -f o-) t rnitJ states Forest s"""i";=--., t\"dLb e^ca-\ Qc\^-if-\ \^"J.^^"J Q.c I B'l. \no '- Q^^",' _-J L ( 6.,,^ -l &\ YE W q'" -ljl ",, (- ,. A./n'w'l ' &, ({-.*,2 nn "r^lq-"r--, F.: Bl 6'((J- ,&r,'1 lllt''"';/^PUBLTC NorrcE { t+ NoTICE IS HERXBY GMN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 18.66.060 of the nrunicipal code of the Town of Vail on Septenber 10, 1990 at 2:00 p.n. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building. Consideration of: l-. A request for an amendment to the approved access plan for Lots 5 and 6, Block 7, Vail Village Lst Filing, 146 and l-26 Forest Road.Applicant: Ron Byrne 2. A request for a work session on the sonnenalp redeveloprnent and proposed Special Development District at 20 Vail Road,Part of Lot L, Block 5-8, Vail Village J.st Filing.Applicant: sonnenalp Properties, Inc. 3. A request for a conditional use permit in order to construct a renediation system at the Vail Anoco Service Station, 934 s. Frontage Road. Legal Description as follows: A PART OF THE NEl/4 NE:|/+ OF SECTTON 12, TOWNSHTP 5 SouTH, MNGE 8l WEST 0F THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIOIAN. OESCRT'BEO AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNINC AT THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE EAST LINE OF SAIO SECTION 12 WITH THE SOUTHERLY RICHT_OF-WAY LINE OF U.S. HIGHWAY NO.5, SAIO POrr.TT BEING 634.I5 FETT SOUTHERLY FROM THE NORTHFAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION I2: THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHERLY RICHT-OF_WAY LINE OF SAID HIGHWAY, A DISIANCE OF 240 FEfr, MORE OR LESS. TO A POTNI ON THE EAST Hlcll WAIER BANK OF RED SANDSTONE CREEK: THENCE SOUTHERLY. ALONC THE SINUOUSITIES OF SAID EAST HIGH WATER EANK' 2OO FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO ITS INTERSECTION W|IH THE NORTH HIGH WATER EANK OF GORE CREEK; THENCE EASTERLY, ALONG THE SINUOUSIITES OF THE NORTH HIGH,WAIER BANK OF GORE CREEK. 245 FETT, MORE OR LESS, TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 12: THENCE NORTHERLY, ALONC SAID EAST LINE, I60 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE POINT OF BECINNING. Applicant: Chevron U.s.A., fnc 4. A request for a minor subdivision on portions of Lots 7 and 8, Block 5, Vail village 7th Filing, ]-t07 E. Vail Valley Dri-ve,Applicant: Thonas Rader 5. A request for an exterior alteration and a landscape variance on Block 5c, vail Village 1st Filing, 225 [.ra]l Street.Applicant: American Angler/American Ski Exchange 6. A request for an exterior alteration in order to construct a 30 sq. ft. expansion on Lot L, Block 1-, Vail Lionshead 3rd Filing, 6l-0 w. Lionshead Circle.Applicant: Landmark-vaiL Condominium Association 7. A request for a rnajor change to existing deveJ-opment approval for the Val1ey, Phase VI . Applicant:Edward Zneiner 8.:,::lF:"4:5Hii:l'?Lli; ?' iII 3;:ff'iliti:1":' Floor Residential District density controlt L8.10.OSO Single Fanily District density controli L8.L2.09O E\do Faarily Residential District density control andr l-8.13.080 Prinary/Secondary District density control , of the Municipal code.Applicant: Town of Vail A request to amend sections 18.04,35O--definition of site coveragei 1-8.09.OgO--Hitlside Residential District site coveragei l-8.10.110--single Fanily District site coveragei 1-8.L2. 11O--Two Fanily District site coverage; 18.13.090-- Prirnary Secondary District site coveraget 18.14.1-10--Residential Cluster District site coveragle; 18.16.110--Lott Denslty Resi.dential District site coveragei 18.18.110-- Medinm Density ResidentLal site coveragei L8.20.110--Iligh Density Residential District site coverage,' L8.22. 110-- Pubtic Accomroodation District site coverage; L8.24. 150-- Comnrsasi.l Core I District site coveraget 18.26.LzO-- Counercial core If District site coveraget 18.27.09o-- Cornrnercial Core III site coveraqe; 18.28.l2O--Connercial Service Center District site coverage; t8.29.090--Arterial Business District site coveragei 18.30.110--Heavy Service District site coveragei 18.32.1-10--Agricultural and open Space District site coverage and; i.8.39.19O--Ski Base/Recreation District site coverage, of the Municipal Code.Applicant: Town of Vail A request to anend section 18.52.160--off Street Parking and Loading Exemptions, of the Municipal Code. Applicant: Town of Vail 9. 10. The applications and.available for publ-ic Departnent office. Town of Vail Cornrounity Developnent Published in the Vail infornation about the proposals are inspection in the Comnunity Development Departnent Trail on August 24, L99O. PUBLTC NOTICE NOTICE fS IIEREBY Gf\rEN that the Planning and Environmental Coumission of the Town of VaiI. will hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 15.66.060 of the nunicipal code of the "Town of Vail on Septenbet 24, 1990 at 3:00 p.n. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building. Consideratj.on of: 1. A request for a variance to allow a satellite dish in the Gore Creek 50 t setback and a request for a floodplain nodification on Lot 3, Block 1, Bighorn 1st addition, 3907 Lupine Drive.Applicant: Ron oelbaun 2. A reguest for a height variance for Unit E-6, Crossroads, 141 East Meadow Drive, Lot P, Block 5D, Vail Village lst Filing.Applicant: H. Willian smith, Jr. 3. A reguest for an exterior alteration for Vaj.1 Mountaineering in the Be1l Tower Building, 201 core Creek Drive, Part of Tract A, Block 58, Vail Village l-st Filing.Applicant: AxeI l{ilhelnson 4. A reguest for a najor amendment to SDD No. 4, Coldstream Condominir:ms in order to arnend Sections L8.46.090 (B) density, 18.45.100 (B) floor area, 18.46.22o employee housing and 18.46.230 time requirements to convert an existing racquetball facility into an ernployee housing unit, manaqement office, Iaundry and owner storage area at Lot 53 Glen Lyon Subdivision, L476 Westhaven Drive.Applicant: Coldstrean Condominium Association. 5. A request for a najor change to existing development approval for the Valley, Phase Vf.Applicant: Edward Zneirner \il \t^' \* 6. A request fot a conditional use permit, a strea:l setback variance and a side setback variance in order to constmct a renediation systeu at the Vail Anoco Ser,rice Station, 934 S. Frontagie Road. Legal Description as fqllons: A PART OF "AeNil/+ Net/+ OF sEcnoN 12. rOwNsHlP 5 SqqGi. R!YG-a--8-!-.1!E!r0F tn-E sD(.r'Fl CRrnCrpnL MAlohN.'oESCitgED AS FOII.OWS: 8€CINNINC. AT Tlia PCtNf 0F lNTetsefitoN 0F n{E e,qsi-UxE cF sito s€cnoN rz wtIH IHE scuTHeRLy Rrc?{r-0F-"vAY UNE qF_ us- HIGHWAY il€t 6. iCIO PAINT A'NG 6J4.I5 FECI'sOUTI{ER.Y ffiCM THE NORTHE{S? CTRN€R-OI.:IO S€CTION 12: rHgXcg wES-reLy ALCNG THE SOUTHEiLY RIGHI-OF-WAY UN€ 0F sJo HlGtiWAY. A oFrANcg 0F iid'iifi.-ycag oR Lgss, ro r porNi brq n+e Arsr HrcH wArel aANK 0F R€D 9rNoSTaNE c.€3; ixiNci-sbusalLY. ALoNc nrE gruuouslnEs oF sAlo e!.si Hlc,{ tYAi-cR EANK'. 200 rea.-uCne OR LESS, lO lrs NTETSECTION-WIrH THe NORTH HlCi{ ?AIER SANK_oF_GORE C?Elq rxENe etSEiLY. ALONG IltE SittUOuS;rtES OF IH€ NCRIH Hlc.{.we;-c,a- A4NI -0f GoRE CREEK, Z+5 f-.t'. UCRE OR LESS. fO rts NTERSECTION wrn{ n{E EA5T Ult€ 0F_9{O-5qCnCil 12: THENC€ Nc,q;r{LRLy. ALON.6 SAr0 tA5.r UNE. 16o FEI-r, MORf, CR gi)=. T0 IHE PoINT 0F BEclNNrNc. Applicant: Chevron It.s.A., Inc. fhe applications and available for public Departnent office. Town of Vail : CoromunitY Developuent . P,:blished in the Vail info:mation about the proposals are inspection in the coununity Development Department Trail on SepteDber 7, 1990. I. ol "".,J1i"..August 14, L990 PETITION FORM FOR AIq,ENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE .oR RIOUEST FOR A CHANGE IN DISTRICT BOUNDARIES This procedure is_reguired for any amend.ment to the zoning ordinance or for a request for a district b6undary change A. NAI'1E OF PETITIONER Edward J. Zneimer ADDRXSS Box 1075, Vail, co 81658 PHONE 827-4LOL B. NAME OF PETITIONER'S REPRESENTATIVE PEtEr JAMAr ASSOCiAEES. INC. ADDRESS l0B S. Fronrage Road i^resr , +2O4, Vail, CO g1657 pHONE 476-7Ls4 c. D. NAME 0F OWNER (print or type) NCNB Texas National Bank SIGNATURE ADDRESS 1201 Main Sr., llrh Floor.Dal las, TX 75201 pHONE 2I4-sIB-443 E. F. r , A part of Parcel A, Lion's FEE $IOO.0O PAID 5l(l,t,'-, Ridge Subd.ivision, Filing No. 2. A List of the names of owners of all property adjacent to the subject property, and their mailing addresses. Attent ion: @=i!.l.t 52-,*2,'- /\4.y'4</-c,,.! LOCATTON OF pRoposAr *':1, o-r";,L;;,''l';".".:,"|,'.:.,,-,u.,,*.,.o^, ADDRESS 1701, 1706 , 1726 Buffehr Creek Road LEGAL DESCRTPTToN!-oI block filinq The vatley-phase Six (O\/ER ) ' petition rorm ror Amen.lF""t"e ord or Requesr rlfr"n. ir uoii3lri." II. Four (4) copies of the foJ_lowing information: A. The petition shall include a sununary of the proposed revision of the regulations, or a,complete d.-escription oi the proposed changes in district boundarils and a map inaiciiing-tir. !*i"ti"g and- proposed district boundaries. Applicant nust submit written and./ot graphic naterials stat.ing the reasons for iiquest. fII. Time Reguirements The Planning and Environmental Commission meets on the 2nd and 4th Mondays of eaqh month. A petition wittr the necess"iv-u""trpanying material- must be submitted four weeks prior to the date of the meet-ing' Following the Planning ana inviioiirnental cornmission meeting,all amendments to the zoning ordinance or district Uounairy change must go to the Town Council for final action IV.Your proposal will be reviewed for compliance wjth Vail,s Comprehensive plan. a t9 PETER JAMAR ASSOCIATES, INC. PLANNING. DEVELOPMENTANALYSIS RESEARCH August 13, L990 Kristan Pritz Director of Conmunity Development Town of VaiI 75 S. Frontage Road vaiL, co 81657 Dear Kristan: fn accordance with Section ld. of Ordinance 13 of i.981- I an suburitting revised developnent plan for review by the planning and Environmental Cornmission for the Valley phase VI property. The current plans approved by the Town of Vail reflect a total of i€. T)-q current proposal is to rrdown-zonerr single fanily residences as indicated -upon the attachet conctptual siie ptan. Units _Le through i9 would be strictly single fanily and units L through ? would be single fanily with a ncaretaker,' GIIE allowed. Please review the attached plan and let ne know if you have any guestions. As I understand the process the project wilt be required to go through the Design Revierr process at which time the architecture and landscape plans will be reviewed as well as all of the fic site development Lssues. , AICP Pe PJ:ne Enclosure . Ph',tr (t nrr^^*,. tt L":IJY f'ft:L 'k ""-t 7*'e . P, 4?* 6|rt . br." -Lt ,.n ff f sVaa d;*a.kt. 'it 7rX u*k[rlL ,rl k{v1 , n4r,Al r.lor/r {-n.* tburtc. tlu Wl h l,'1.. tlt [t/l ttata. Suite 308. Varl Natronal Bank Buildinq 108 South Frontage Boad west . vail, colorado 8t65/ . (303) 4t6./t54 ,, 'dt"ryJ {L "r'''^^t*o . ,v*tr (,rttro pt^,w, M , 4t2l nAr*l d u&l A'#* -vu{ J I a 4 fr "v^,4 l-d u=l frJ( AJ-4 J I /"/ns tr( auo"tco.4 - n/q ' twl )u/rr4,J -t.ra*Ar*a, I ' f,t\-lb' ' 6ftd/i\/fuoduoy. "-.,--,,--,/ { t;k ..,-.a. 1i.,: (t*^ (a./. - \ &ona,u,4f 4 hr;lr{* p(, (clte. . -W S*l /--- a( fl'n hn *':nr+ * pa*, ;,^,t-rarc*t.thtr f^:7 tJ? ' /l/,rJ h"4;/ / f'za'ea ,tr&?'r( Sad .7 e I NTER- DEPARTI'IENTAL REV I EI.I PP.OJECT: D.qTE SIJSI4ITTED: E .IZ-I O CCI''.!',ENTS IIEEDED BY z _@87' BRIEF DESCRIPTTON OF THE PROPOSAL: OF PUBLIC HEARTNG "-/O-?A . DATE /? 70 W-J Antporl) /3 .rt^) Lov*u. s,* "/Crr.-l b/, S+t*-+ ".r\PUBLIC UORKS Reviened by:Date Conr,ents: . FIRE DEPI.RTI.iENT Reviewed by: Coments: POLICE DEPARTI4ENT S;> rL ,^>i tl Lt arr-*1. .,r^ ,/l* *-r+{ .q., .+Lc..P. 4,-t, /alfb.4t. J'tr. Plc"+, c--4 ,-._- sltA a-,r^.,/r / V' 7 a'ah*4. -d"/, , 7di"a at 4 Date Revieved by: Corrirents: Date '{t' .i? RECi:iATi OIt DEPARTI'::NT Revle'aed by: Co:;"ents: Date t/rz/rp a ils.n .IMt ._- - , .rrlt AUO 2 B 19U I I{TER.DEPARTI.IENTAL REV I El.l PP.OJ ECT: OATE S'JiI{ITTED: E - II-e o PUBLIC IIORKS CCl."i.tENTS IIEEDED B\: *a 6 UJT zl, / ? ? o BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL: W-J PruPav^ /3 .1.o1) L.,i'*a, sidt "/ BW* e..-l pdo/, s<-u+ar anq. . DATE OF PUELIC HEARING '-/O-7O ,.;i tl ta an-11.. Sfu ft. o.^ tL *.rtt {rt ,}t-Ap.4*t,/.*.*lt. J"/e. P.eviewed by: Conrients: Date Ric"+, c*zl n^- pff{ a-^.., 7 ",oA[.' .4"/, /dL t i C' t/y'17' 'vz</,r / 'rch4 0ate Conments: , ) ./l:t'zu- \ , -/ ---7 L) /i-a /' 3) /+z( I ", /r-* 7 ,, n,,,;- {/ F o-',Fo (et7;tl c k s t rl/n" '-" '" '''u-*, Date I 'tl r. .i-: REC;:ETTIOTI DEPARTI.::NT Revlewed by: Co;;ents: FI RE DEPP.RTI.iENT evleweo Dy: 4/ 'u.tz--"-/ 4 z; z'":7.".''-- t7 /, /_- g POLICE DEPARTI.IENT Revieved by: Connerrts: Date This procedure is reguired for or for a reguest for a distric Irffl eetition) rc Sf ef no PETITION FORI',I FOR AI4ENDMENT To THE ZONING ORDIN .oR REQIJEST FOR A CHANGE IN DISTRICT BOTJNDARIES I. A list of the names of owners of subject property, and their mailing all property adjacent to the addresses. any amendment to the zoning ordinance change -l'LL,,\t,7u E 1r*-, <K psgpnt'Z'1 \\c 1 ADDNSS H'NE q TL -7 tfLl c. NAME 0F 0WNER (print or type) f*rf+ foftet"lA rrlaf W fga{R SIGNATURE NDreSS PHONE D. I,OCATION OF PROPOSAI ADDRSSS LEGAI DESCRTPTTON 10t bl0ck titins vrdLzY (wt 91tr F. E.FEE $100.00 PAID - / \l b A. NAI{E OF PETITIONER ,r..-l ADDRESS X lt .'l-' ' 1 B.NAT,T,E OF PETITIONERIS RXPRESENTATIVE Petition form for *Jao Zoning Ord or Request t pc.Je 2 change in boundaries II. Four (4) eopies of the following information: A. The petition shall inctude a sunmary of the proposed revision of the regulations, or a complete dLscription oi tfr" pioposea changes in district boundari6s and a map inai.aii"g-tf,l-E"i"ti"g and proposed district boundaries. Applicint nust subnit Hritten and/or graphic naterials stating the reasons for iiquest. IfI. Time Requirements The Planning and Environmental conmission meets on the Znd and 4th Mondays of each month. A petition with the necessary accompanying naterial must be submitted four weeks prior to the hate of'the meet-ing. Folrowing the- Planning and Enviroirmental Conmission-neeling,all amendments to the zoning ordinance or district bounaary-ct-rrg"must 90 to the Town Cor:ncil for final action. IV' Your proposal will be reviewed for compfiance with Vajlts Comprehens.ive plan. l $t LAND NCNB TEXAS NATTONAL BANK THE VALLEY ,j6rron PR.PERTTE' /DELTVER IN VArL RUNS ,, ,o " Representing June L5, 1990 Our Order. VL5426 BUYER/OWNER: ZNEII{ER SELLER: ADDRESS: HOCHSTADT, STRjAW ET AL FAX# 333-7127 2033 YORK DENVER, CO 80205 1 Attn: GEORGE STRAI{ CI.OSER Attn: GAIL AttN: JOHN NILSSON COPIES Attn: GUARANTEE Title Insurance Cornpany of THANK YOU FOR YOUR ORDER coMPANYf rNC. SnPANY Minnesota PTCKED UP FOR DELTVERY A},T P!.7 MINNESOTA TITIE !\ 5.14C W'ra Road Srirta :a: Arvad:, CO 80002 '1?l D2A) 3300 5c F:'r"e' i..:. - r.' i,: A" ro.n, aC 8.ral i .1 /51-r336 2J25 Cer,.' 3'..:l S; l: iiri ts; -lie., CC S' r-;i 2r,,C Ncrl . r. ::i;, F C Bo.x !.:,; j flrecLen ridge, ata) 3C421 453 -.:z t 5l2 'l/ .:ca Caslle Rock. CO 80104 688-6363 102 South Te ion 5u iie I 00 Colorado Sprir,qs, CO 8090 3 63 4-4821 CommitmentTo Insure Issued thnughthe 0ffi8 of: : ^. t _ :{r Derr,er lO t02 I 7 3:, 13311 ?.82 | i rlncder' :- : lC{) leri rc , Ji) 8023l 7 5 0-.12 2 i ?1,,:l llcr ,,n :. ',. I '.1.-j 4-. ,i-r53 l:0I i,1. i, A,!-.; -: ')fij t:. -. i.r.,r -c iJ S.r lre 150 !i.; e.,,.id, CO t0li2 770.9595 3o'",3 So. Yr:e -, te Su iie 255 D.:r;er. CO 80237 i94 2a J7 108 710 Kipling Street Suire 202 Lakewood, CO 80215 232-31I I 3 6C9 So. Wadsworlh Su ite 1 l5 Lakervood, CO 802 35 98E.8550 19i90 E; sl Nloin Streel Su rle 105 Pa'ic-r, CO 801 34 84l-49C0 lC8 S;r,tr, F.:n:r:a R:ad V/. P.O 3cx .3 j 7 Vail, CO 81658 476-22)1 /700 E. Ara pe noe Road Suire 150 Er,gre.'ood, CO 8Cl 12 7 7 4,9 596 LAT{D TITLE GLIARANTEE COfUPANY South Fronrage Road W. r. \-r. oox Jfl Vell, CO 81657 476.2251 LA]ID TITLE ALTA - charges - ALTA Ohrner Policy -.TOTAL-- With your remittance please ITl,!ENT A Application No. VL5426 For fnfornation OnIy THE VALLEY $1 ,ot5.o0 $1,, 0t-5. 00 refer to V1.5426. Co"n SCHEDULE l-. Effective Date: June 08, 1990 at 8:00 A.M. 2. Policy to be issued, and proposed Insured: I'ALTAn Owner I s Policy 9370, OOO. OO Form 8-1970 (Anended 10-17-70) Proposed fnsured: ZNEIMER COMPANY, INC. 3. The estate or interest in the rand described or referred to in this Conmitnent, and covered herein is: A Fee SimpJ-e 4. Title to the estate or interest covered herein is at the effective date hereof vested in: NCNB TEXAS NATIONAL BANK 5. The land referred to in this Couunitnent is described as follows: A PART OF PARCEL A, LroN's RrDGE SUBDTVTSTON, FTLTNG NO. 2 A SUBDIVTSTON RECORDED TN THE OFFICE OF TH8 EAGLE COUNTY,coroRADo' CLERK AND RECORDER, sArD PART oF PARCEL A BEING MORE PARTICUI..ARLY DESCRTBED As FoLIows I BEGTNNING AT AN EXTSTING BRASS CAP MONI'I,IENT MARKTNG THE NORTIIWEST coRNER oF SECTION 12' TOWNSHIP 5 soUTH, RANGE SL wEsT oF THE SrXTH pRrNcrpAL MERTDTAN, THENCE SOUTH 01 DEGREES 35 MINUTES 59 SECONDS I{EST 1385.52 FEET, AI0NG THE WEST LrNE OF SATD PARCEL A AND SAID SECTION 12, TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAy LINE OF LIONTS RIDGE LOOP, THENCE THE FOLITWING TWO COURSES ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE: (1) SOUTH 2]. DEGREES 50 I4INUTES 26 SECONDS EAST zo.9I FEET' (2) AN ARC DTSTANCE OF PAGE 1. ALTAAoMMITMENT SCHEDULE Application No. Vt5426 1l_L.09 FEET ALONG A t_30.00 FooT RADIUS CURVE TO THE RIGHT, SAID CURVE HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 48 DEGREES 57 MINUTES 40 SECONDS AND A CHORD WHICH BEARS SOUTH 02 DEGREES 38 UTNUTES 24 SECONDS WEST ]-07.74 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF sArD pARCEr.,, A, THENCE THE FOLTOWTNG THREE COURSES AT.ONG SAID BOUNDARY LINE: (1) NORTH 66 DEGREES 15 MTNUTES 0O SECONDS EAST 532.96 FEET' (2) NoRTH 74 DEGREES 45 MINUTES 00 SECoNDS EAST 430.00 FEET; (3) NoRTH 68 DEGREES L5 I,IINUTES 00 SECONDS EAST 670.00 FEET, THENCE DEPARTING SAID SoUTHERLY LINE, NoRTH 44 DEGREES 59 Ir{INUTES 1-8 SECONDS WEST 80.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH ?6 DEGREES 47 MINUTES 59 SECONDS WEST 382.54 FEET; THENCE soUTH 72 DEGREES 26 MINUTES 42 SECONDS wEsT 35.00 FEET' THENCE NoRTH 11 DEGREES 59 MTNUTES 06 SECONDS WEST 1023.39 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL A AND SAID sEcTIoN ].2' THENCE souTH 88 DEGREES t9 MTNUTES 4l- SECONDS WEST 814.59 FEET, AIONG SATD NORTHERLY LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, SUBJECT TO TIIE FOLIFWING EXCEPTION: EXCEPTION! A PART OF LIONIS RIDGE I.ooP RoAD RTGHT oF wAY, DEDICATED IN EAGLE COUNTY, COLoRADO ON SAID LIONIS RTDGE SUBDMSION, FTLING NO. 2 FINAL PLAT. A STRIP OF LAND 70 FEET IN WIDTH AND LYING 35 FEET ON EACH SIDE OF A CENTERLINE THAT IS I,TORE PARTICUI.ARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLI,OWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE I,IEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 12, WHENCE THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 12 BEARS NORTH O]- DEGREES 35 I'{INUTES 59 sEcoNDs EAST 1280.79 FEET DTSTANT; THENCE AN ARc DTSTANCE oF 33.74 FEET ATJONG A loo.oo FooT RADrus CURVE To THE RrcHT, sArD cuRvE tlAvrNG A CENTRAL ANGLE oF l-9 DEGREES l-9 MTNUTES 48 sEcoNDs' AND A cHoRD THAT BEARS NORTH 6L DEGREES 21 MTNUTES 45 sEcoNDs EAsr 33.59 FEET; THENCE NoRTH 7t DEGREES 01 MTNUTES 39 SECONDS EAST 30.54 FEET' THENCE AN ARc DISTANCE OF 89.29 F'EET AIONG A 204.63 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE LEFT,sArD cuRvE HAVTNG A CENTRAr., ANGLE oF 24 DEGREES 59 MTNUTES 5t MTNUTES, AND A cHoRD THAT BEARS NORTH 58 DEGREES 31 MTNUTES 44 sEcoNDs EAsr 88.57 FEET; THENCE NoRTH 46 DEGREES 01 IITNUTES 48 SECONDS EAST 2]-4.02 FEET' THENCE AN ARC DISTANCE OF 91.29 FEET Ar.oNG THE ARc oF A L36'42 FEET RADrus cuRvE To rHE RrcHT, sArD CURVE HAVTNG A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 38 DEGREES 20 MINUTES 27 sEcoNDs, AND A cHoRD THAT BEARS NORTH 65 DEGREES L2 MTNUTES 02 SECONDS EAST 89.59 FEET,. THENCE NORTH 84 DEGREES 22 MINUTES 15 SECONDS EAST 112.67 FEET' THENCE AN ARc DTSTANCE oF 173.68 FEET AIONG A 440.74 FooT RADTUS CURVE To THE LEFT, sArD cuRvE HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 22 DEGREES 34 I,IINUTES 41 SECONDS AND A CHORD THAT BEARS NORTH 73 DEGREES 04 MTNUTES 55 SECONDS EAST 172.56 FEET' THENCE NORTH 6]. DEGREES 47 I'{INUTES 34 SECONDS EAST 46.67 FEET' THENCE AN ARC DTSTANCE OF 96.22 FEET ALONG A ]-36.4]- FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE RIGHT, SAID CURVE HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 40 DEGREES 24 MINUTES 52 sEcoNDs' AND A cHoRD THAT BEARS NORTH 82 DEGREES OO MINUTES OO SECONDS EAST 94.24 FEET; THENCE SOUTH ]AGE 2 ALTAOoM!,rrrMENr SCHEDULE A Applieation No. VL5426 77 DEGREES 47 !,TNUTES 34 MINUTES EAST 68.12 FEET' THENCE AN ARc DISTANCE OF 108.73 FEET ALONG A 154.85 FOOT RADIUS CI'RVE TO THE LEFT, SAID CURVE HAVTNG A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 40 DEGREES 13 It{rNUTEs 58 sEcoNDs, AND A cHoRD THAT BEARS NORTH 82 DEGREES 05 I'IINUTES 57 SECONDS EAST 106.51 FEET' THENCE NoRTH 6]. DEGREES 58 !{rNUTEs 28 sEcoNDs EAST 1oo.2o FEET, To THE PorNT oF TERMTNUS, WHENCE THE SATD NORTHWEST CORNER OT SECTION 12 BEARS NORTH 48 DEGREES 52 MINUTES 32 SECONDS WEST 1335.09 FEET. )AGE A L r AOc o !t !t r r H E N T SCHEDULE B-1 (Requirenents) Appllcation No, VLs426 The following are the reguirenents to be cornplied with: L. Payment to or for the account of the grantors or nortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be-insured. 2, Proper instrunent(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record, to-wit: 3. EVTDENCE SATTSFACTORY TO THE COMPANY THAT NCNB TEXAS NATTONAL BANK IS AN ENTITY CAPABI,E OF CONVEYTNG TITLE TO SUB'ECT PROPERTY. 4. EVTDENCE SATTSFACTORY TO THE COMPANY rHAT ZNETMER COMPANY, rNc. rs AN ENTITY CAPABLE OF ACQUIRING TITLE TO SUR'ECT PROPERTY. 5. EVTDENCE SATTSFACTORY TO THE COl,tpANy tHAT THE TERMS, CONDrrroNs AND PROVISIONS OF THE TOWN OF VAIL TRANSFER TAX HAVE BEEN SATISFIED. 6. I{ARRANTY DEED FRol,t NCNB TExAs NATroNAr, BANK To zNEruER coMpANy,INC. CONVEYTNG SU&TECT PROPERTY. THE COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDERS OFFTCE REQUIRES RETURN ADDRESSES ON DOCUMENTS SENT FOR RECORDTNG! ! PAGE 4 ALTAQOMMITIT{ENT SCHEDULE B-2 (Exceptions)Application No. VL5426 The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: L. Standard Exceptions L through 5 printed on the cover sheet. 6. Taxes and assessments not yet due or payable and special assessnents not yet certified to the Treasurerrs office. 7. Any unpaid taxes or assessnents against said land. 8. Liens for unpaid water and sewer charges, if any. RTGHT OF PROPRIETOR OF A VEIN OR LODE TO EXTRACT AND REMOVE HIS ORE THEREFROM SHOULD THE SAI'{E BE FOUND TO PENETRATE OR INTERSECT THE PREMTSES AS RESERVED IN UNITED STATES PATENT RECORDED August 16, l-909, IN BOOK 48 AT PAGE 542. 10. RTGHT OF I{AY FOR DITCHES OR CANALS CONSTRUCTED BY THE AUTHORITY OF THE UNITED STATES AS RESERVED rN UNITED STATES PATENT RECORDED Aug'ust 16, IgOg,rN BOOK 48 AT PAGE 542. ].]-. RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS, WHICH DO NOT CONTAIN A FORFEITURE OR REVERTER CI"AUSE, BUT OMITTfNG RESTRICTIONS, IF ANY, BASED ON RACE, COLOR, RELfcfON,oR NATIONAL ORIGIN, AS CONTAINED IN INSTRLJMENT RECORDED September 20, L972,rN BooK 225 AT PAGE 443 AND As AI.IENDED IN INSTRWENT RECORDED Septenber 29,L972, IN BOOK 225 Af PAGE 555 AND AS AMENDED IN INSTRIJMENT RECORDED ,tanuary 22, L974, fN BOOK 233 AT PAGE 53 AND AS AI'|ENDED IN INSTRIJMENT RECORDED JULY L, L983 rN BOOK 362 AT PAGE 804. ].2. UTILITY EASEMENTS 20 FEET IN WIDTH, 10 FEET ON EACH SIDE OF ALL INTERIOR I.OT LINES AND A 15 FOOT UTILITY EASEMENT AIONG AND ABUTTTNG ALL EXTERTOR L,OT LINES AS RESERVED ON THE PI"AT Ol' LION'S RIDGE SUBDMSION, FfLING NO. 2. ].3. AGREEI.TENT BETWEEN TAYVEL ENVIRONMENTAL I,AND COMPANY AND MOUNTAIN STATES TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH COMPANY RECORDED SEPTEI'{BER 27, 7.973 IN BOOK 231 AT PAGE 291,. 14. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISTONS OF PI,ANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PI,AN AND DECI"ARATION OF PROTECTM COVENANTS RECORDED March 27, l-980 IN BOOK 3oO AT PAGE 758 AND RE-RECORDED APRrL 10, 1980 rN BooK 3oL AT PAGE 4L5. 9. PAGE ALrAQoMMrruENr SCHEDULE B-2 (Exceptions) ].5. EASEMENT AS GRANTED TO LION'S I{ATER AND SANITATION DISTRICT 323 AT PAGE 505. 16. UTITITY EASEMENT AS SHOWN ON Application No. VL54Z6 RIDGE WATER DISTRICT AND VAIL VILI"AGE WEST IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED MAy 22, 1981 IN BOOK ELDORADO ENGINEERING COMPANY SURVEY DATED JUNE L3, 1973. 17. EASEMENTS, RESERVATIONS AND RECORDED PI"AT OF LIONS RTDGE RESTRICTIONS AS SHOT{N OR RESERVED ON THE SUBDMSTON, FILING NO. 2. l.) .7 AGE /. ROCKFAIJIJ IIAZARD VAIJIJEY, PIIASE VI, ANAI.YSIS VAIIJ, COIJORADO Preparedl For r,lr. ia zneiner Prepared By Arthur I. Mears, P,8., Inc. Gunnison, Colorado June 25, L990 1 OBi'8C[IVE8 AND IJIUITATIONg This report on potential rockfall hazard at The Val1ey, phase VI ,was requested by Mr. Ed zneimer and has the forlowing objectives: a. Identification of rockfall source areas and roll-out dlstances in the area of potential developmentl b. application of the Colorado Rockfal] SimuLation Program (CRSP) to predict rockfall rolL-out distances,vel-ocities, and bounce heights at various positions; c. Discussion of the rockfall risk; and d. Discussion of general rockfall nitigation nethods that could be applied to protect certain buiJ.ding sites. The anarysLs and recommendations are site-specific. Therefore the recommendations nay not apply to other Locations. Further-more' any substantia] changes to buirding positions fron those shown on Figure 1 nay invaridate the reconmendations of this study. 2 ROCKFAI,IJ HAZARD AND SITE DEVELOPT{ENT The rockfalr-hazard areas and the approxinate positions of 12 buirdings are shown on Figure 1. rne ruiroing-posltions r{rere scaled fron the Peter Jamar Associates, rnc. tonceptua.r rand-use plan as nodified by Mr. Ed Zneiner on June 20. ThL rockfall source areas, where rocks become detached and begin the downsrope motlon, are rocated approxirnately 500 feet north of the Lions Ridge Loop Road at 8,e50-to-g,55-o feet elevation within sandstone outcroppings of the Mlnturn Formation, Arttrough rockfarr is not a frequent probren, the source areas are active and rnany roose rocks up to approxinately 2 feet in diane-ter are perched in metastable equiribriurn within and berow the source-area outcroppings. Major rockfalr events certainly do not occur annuarry, but substantial rockfarrs that cross the Loop Road can be expected roughly once per decade, approxinately.-During the past decades rockfall hls occasioirariy occurred and rolled beyond the center of the field at the botlon of the varley. some events have reached approxinately to the forest on the southern edge.of the property where sone birildings wlll be located. Inspection of the source area and the rocki in the field suggest a rock diameter of 2 feet shourd be used in rock-fall analysis and nitigation. Therefore, 2-foot radius, spheri-cal rocks were used in the cRSp rockfarr sinulation discus-sed in Sectlon 3 of this report. Larger rocks have been excavated during construction of the Loop Road. but these large bouLders do not appear to be of rockfalt origin. 3 nEAUIJIA Or ROCXFATL STUUIJATTON (AppLrcATrolr oF cRSp) The cororado Rockfall sirnuration program (cRsp) is a research cornputer program recently developed by the colorado Highway Department.to predict rockfall- velocities, bounce neights, and roll-out distances. fnis was applied to The Valley pioieit to provide an estLuate of rockfall verocities and uouilci h6ights at the proposed buildlng locations. The cornputer program ra/as applied as follows: a. First the rockfall roll-out distance in the field was observed and recorded to provide an end point for a real rockfall event. b. Second the slope was subdivided into segrnents of constant slope, roughness, and hardness by iield nea-surements; and c. The CRSP nodel was applied on 2 profiles on the slope and forced to provide a ilmeanrr roll-out distance corresponding with the field measurenents. The slope profiles are shown on the topographic map (Figure 1j. The- foll-owing conclusions result from apprication of cRSp and analysis of the field observations: a. Rockfall can reach buildings 8, 9, lo, 11, and 12,but 2-foot dianeter rocks will-be rotiing'(not bounc-'ing) at a velocity of 10 f,eet/sec or Lesi it tfre build-ings. These rocks could be stopped by building a bern or vertical barrier 3 feet high near Lhe centei of the field, possibly on the north iide of the proposed access road. However, rockfall protection is not a high priority here because eventl are infreguent (pos-rlPfy once per decade), velocities at.the biilclind'sites will be_noderate, and substantiaL danage to buildings wiLl not occur. b. nockfall vill also reach buildings 3, 4, and 5,which are located at the 9.300-foot tevei on the rritrs-lope. l{ean rockfall velocity here is 25 feet/sec with bounce heights ranging fron 1-to-6 feet. These 3 buildings should be protected because the design rock-fall event can produce kinetic energy of ZL,OOO ft-lbs and nay.produce substantial danage io tne ulniff wal1s.Protection can be achieved by initalting a lockfall fence above the building or by specially reinforcing tlre lower 6 feet of the back building walls. t{itigi-tion design detalls are beyond the siope of this aialy-sis, but are feasible at this location. c.__Buildings 1, 2,6, and 7 are not affected by rock-falI. .l TNCRBA8E rlt ROCKFATJTJ EAZARD AT A REsur.T oF DEI/ErJopttENT Because the proposed deveropment wirr bring an increased number of people into this rockfall area, the oveiarr risk wirL increase in proportion to the larger number of persons exposed. Furttrer-morer there exists some smalJ. probabirity that the persons one wishes to protect may not be in a safe location when a rockfarr occurs. An additional and related hazard increase will occur on the L,ions Ridge Loop Road because the probability of a car hitting a falren rock (or a rock hitting a rnovin! car) will also increase as a result of larger traffic volumes. Arthough the potential hazard increase should be understood and accepted by area residents, all rockfall. risks are small when compared to rockfatt danger we nornally accept without question at other locations, such as in Glenwood Canyon, for exarnple.Area residents can reduce the snall risk even further thi:ough education about the rockfalr process. such education is re6om- mended. Report subnitted by, UWLuQ. w4let, Arthur I. Mears, p.E. NA Pfi4.sr t.ti ""9, il,r/ i UNPL4TTFO /" et ;/ i/ t "/i --/06, FTGURE I e>"---- 9:'f 3"a I'E uE 4 i?>a ji<'; i^Si :-<' s66 15'00'w 532.96 s7++ s , o-brT q_ (,r- 5 '?fe.f, *""ff, *k.*A.T. o 0\ a frt dsso { N7 c 'ffi',,n +go.oo s58'15',00''lt 670.00 V ) lnwn n l|fll 75 south lronlage road Yail, colorado 81657 (303) 476-7000 offlce of communlty development lia rch 29, l9B5 i4r. iJi ke Irvine vloociward & Associ ates 12900 Preston Road Suite 1000 Dal las, Texas 75231 Dear Mr. Irv'ine, I have encloseci for your information copies of the zoning code, Design Rev.iew Guidel ines, and Design Rev'i ew Procedures and Instructions. iou requested infornntion for a parcel of ground referred-to as Phase VI. parcel A, Lionsr.idge fi1lng #2. I am assunning you are referring to phase VI of the "vittey Deve)opment". As,you may be aware, this parcel has approval for forty two dwelling units. Any_re-design of this upp.ouLa development !1 an would require approval by the Town. Provided ybl ttuy w.i thin existing zoning,-this approval wou'l d more than likely 6e limjieo to the Design Revjew goard. However, I would encourage you to contact me with any inforr,nation concerning this re-design so a cjetermination can be made as to whether or not this project.would require adcjitional review by the P1 anning and Environmental Conrnissjon. please cjo not hesitate to call me w.i th any questions you may have. S incerely,-/-\.Ir '"./ Torn Braun Town Planner TBl rme Encl . ttli -?r9€ "-'?'&1r I tl Project Application r'ry'€J Proiect Name: ProjectDescriPtion: l# Owner Address and Phone: Ve*rvJNL o^," ll-l'+-8+ vrj Mfi + lL{(. F*raU1-t Architect Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Filing r*t* w- "-rE-vtLLer" Zoning Approved: Design Review Board \. =9\d'' ;: \ r,s"Motion by: Seconded by: --APPROVAL '-'.-. DISAPPROVAL -...._: :-: () Summary: .:*- -t I 1t-..- | ,."1,..1r*r..--\, {., l, Chief Building Official Zoning Administrator lnwn n 75 south lronlage road vril, colorado 81657 (303) 476-7000 February .|6, .|984 offlce of communlly devclopmenl Mr. John Nilsson Bridge Street Real Estate 286 Bridge Street Vail, Colorado 8,l657 Re: Va11ey Phase VI Dear John: 0n February'l 5, the Design Review Board approved a one year "extension of approval" for the Va1 1ey Phase VI. The approval period will end on February .|5, 1985. Approval is for ll units and recreation facilities with the following conditions: - Caliper of deciduous trees shall be 2" rather than .|.5" proposed in landscape p1an. Any further questions can be directed to me at 476-7000. 5i ncere'ly, /T*R=""--------' THOMAS A BMUN Town Planner TAB: bpr luwn n llal 75 south fronlage rd. Yall, colorado 81657 (303) 476-7000 department of community development RE: DRB Submittal of 11-3-82 November 5, 1982 Duane Piper l.lheel er-Pi per Archi tects 1973 North Frontage Rd. West Vai'l , Co'lorado 81657 Dear Duane: 0n November 3, 1982 the Design Review the "Enclave." Approval was for phase recreational structures as numbered in Board renewed their approval of I, the first eleven units and a site plan dated 11-3-82. Si ncerely, ./)VL-''t J'im Sayre Town Planner JS:df &7- box 1(X) vail, colorado 81657 {3031 476-5613 February 22, 1982 John Wheeler 1973 N. Frontage Rd. West Vai'l , Colorado 81657 Dear John: 0n February 17, 1982, the of the Enclave's Recration and the removal of one of approval does not include Si ncerely, department of community development RE: DRB Submittal of 2-17-82 Design Review Board approved the relocation Bu'i 1ding, the de'letion of retaining wal ls the two proposed tennjs courts. Thjs the nature of the roof material. A//i!4'.r-P l7L--f-// Jim Sayre Town Pl anner JS: df o Project Appllcation Project Name: Proiect Description: Lesal Descriptio "'r^ f't\bSLJ,W Commenls: ?rLrxa Filing LfrA c"€ €T;lr Ntn16 Zone - IU-S i lN/aL- t1c F.t 4j! t--1 .NE.- Design Review Board z' Motion by: Seconded by:J6 r.tl-/tA DISAPPROVAL €- rs 4bt74t4 FtP,!.<- Summary:PPEJv4t-//-) <-(-vOE E statt Approval Project Appllcation Project Name: Proiect Description: Contact Person and Phone Owner. Address and Phone: Archit€ct, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot rLsff € ( eO tut) /N (- * tl ut-) tT */ r"f7"e4), /0N sot)'rq ,;IOE OF A)AA uNtr #S ON Ptt)t l o4r6a Motion by:/,arzl<*u Seconded by: APPROVAL l/glo Design Review Board /,"'/rrt"- S DISAPPROVAL 4^O / 4s fn rr..l Summary: Date: Town Planner El statt Approval . '.t rl ....1 ,'.i.1 | ..,'' fl^l"lli ulj I'lio,JLU'l I I,EGAL DISCIIIPTION: LoT 'BLOCK DESCRIPTIO}i OF PROJICT Fascia Soffits l{indows Window Trirn Iloors Door Trin Hand or Deck Rails Flues Flashings Chinneys irash Enclosures Greenhouses other MNab w{,y,b ttal bY the aPPlicant to the Design Rcview njr)hz"!f'^^r L: *"^lf,s oJ tr.rfu;-Q, The -following infornation is required for sub can be given:Board bcfore a final aPProval A. BUILDING I''IATERIALS Roof Siding Other Wall Materials lVoe of Material Color ' O*tqvwt Zoo D(YoA v".r"_ls including t t,,{lr I I.'irlg Materia Connon \r"i I'TATERIALS :'t I tative, Larly'scaf ical Name PLA}.IT (Vege tsotan B. Name 3o t9 lt/ 4 I 'lltc fcrl lrrr..'in1i inf<rnn;rt iort i r; llourd bclorr: a L.i.traI irpprov;r I A. lll,ll,t,liit; l.1A'll:tllAl,S Roof Siding Othcr l'jall Materials rctltti ,.(:tl l'or :;ulI;ritt;rl by thc al}|lit':rrrl to thc l)cs jl:|| lt,.\,i,..t c;rrr bc Iliv(:n: (blor Fascia Soffits l{indows l{indow Trim Iloors Door Trin Hand or'Deck Rails Flues Flashings Chirnney's Trash Enclosures GreeDhous es Other B. LANDSCAPING Name of Des'igner: PI.ANT MATERIALS TREES VTSED_ La^tDSCAi€ Botanical Name Corrnon Name Quantity FtId-ryN Yt'q- 16 ff tl ?2 fr 16 tt to dp.tgULW g 64ul tt % y:tlr lf rf 4E F' .--,/lbtzf625t;rr 7V r'2,, WCMW_ Size lz-tt I I btz 92-. -1a-#_ 8-lol Jbtz-' -bro'lz-r>'(i,*> -e:uL. )Y?: 4L - I1'rt r: r' iu I SHRUBS -YE-t@JlLLtotl a5_ €w./z- /a'-/z' GROUND ' fnlrrD( s00 SEED TYPE OF IRRIMTION e $ferWu+^---l2l O ../ |sQUAk'uu,hfl/.3 {'*12' "fu_ 4., squARE FooTAGE 4@ . S 'f, u., F4-2ro - lg.Q.. sQuARE FoorAcE lAlfff S.F. rts"'6-^ "ul I W=r*kn zc*is xoT ,4 VED qEas- I L-/ i:: t TYPE oR METHoD l, OF EROSION CONTROL ' 3,( 0ther Landscape Features (retaining wal'ls, fences, swimming pools, etc.) P'lease specify. o luwn 75 south lrontage road vall, colorado 81657 (303) 476-7000 Republic NationaL Bank Dallas, Texas Re: Dear Sirs: This letter is to confirtn that The Enclave Phase IV) consists of the following types 1) rrAtr unit 1701 square feet U rrBt" unit 2050 square feet 3) I'BZ'| unit 1877 square feet Septenber 8, 1981 The Valley Phase VI (formerly The Valley of units: The first phase approved by the Town uf Vail consists of 4 'rAtl rmits, 3 trB1 unitsr and it, "i,r" units, and recreation facilities. If you have ar; ,-.::estions, please contact me, box l(X) vail, cotorado 81657 (303) 476-5613 August 10' 1981 John llhee'ler 1973 N. Frontage Rd. West Vaj'1, Co'lorado 81657 department of community dwelopment DRB Submittal of 8-5-81 The Valley - Phase VI Dear John: At the August 5 meeting of the Design Revjew Board, your submittal was given-final approval . Approva'l was for the remainder of Phase- I, Units 6-12, (not roof materia'l ) with the following stipulations: suOmit roof material at DRB meeting as soon as possible for review' redwood band substituted for stucco on southwest portion of tennis court, poo'l area as noted on P1ans."*ffi6'-[*- Peter Jamar Town Planner PJ:df Ll.t;i.1, l.t I !lili ilill):\ (rj'j $r -rt"- vlilf,c,( i;iIolr:;:rl lon i', It l-itr.r I :r1r1llr,rvlr I il.t 'l l;ll l i\.1,1; l {'rilIi l'i'(l t;ur lrt: {'< r i' Ii .i v t:rr :l U l);:, rl (it; io r: l'ia 1 I ivlatcri a1s h'ascia Soffits Windovrs l{in dor.r 'l'ri m I)oo rs Door Trin Hand or'Deck Rai 1s F lucs Fl ashi ngs Chi:nue,v s Trash [nc ] osures Gre cltirous e.s 0ther' B. LANDSCAPING Name of Designer: Phone : PLANT MATTRIALS Botanical Name TREES Size t tz-tt'Ee' 6-lot Jbte-t 8-tot lZ.,>t (d'c*) !9=tzt6t".*q -e:uL. 9- ? 4 -ttu^l Y4*-lt fl Cde.[9l'tLW- fc\u N % RoEA /4 WCMW_ Quanti ty F ?2 t6 b lo +17 u 4-#_aa F Common Name ff l, SHRUBS _YEI.t-aU IptU^olJ_ ),Y/ ctl'. -€r*./o'qrau/zl .> GROUND' COVERS SOD SEED TYPE OF IRRIGATION o SqUARI SQUARE hlr4,6*e,l NY 4?altQ Ctvt*?no - l?,Q. rypE Wt42 ?LauegZWED) sQUARE FooTAGE lO{fD S.f (n',s{ fera.urruuf) ftS"r6 ^ oul t hxr,t*ta r€€ls ruoT r{ SEPD eEas- ) TYPE oR METH.D I OF EROSION CONTROL 4. I >. 1 ?, C. 0ther Landscape Features (retaining wa1ls, fences, swimming pools, etc.) please specify. 1,.,;i:, tl ll,,:,111 til: , 7kew.6lz t. Iri t. ' lT W f lL t/^lrTs f fe-f"*errs. ; i:t',,1' :i t,)jl | .r , I It j'i tr:r | :r p;r 1 r,1;3 1 1. ,,. i1\'l l:llli\1,:; l',';tl I Nlutclia1s i,,,.1 Jol :li,i,rlt,l lrr: llivt : _D-.lt: l:l' ll,i l i :,_l i ir,' iilr, j i, .r ii i o tirc l)c::; i .,it ll, r, i r.l.; (,olor Fasci a Sof f i.t.s l'f i n dovrs lVindovr I'r'im I)oors Door Trirn Hand or. Deck Rai1s Flues F 1a sh ings Ch innel's Trash Elclosur:cs Grccnlro'.rs cs 0ther: B. LANDSCAPING Name of Designer: phone : Wr\ 2r/,56P on Name PLANT MATERIALS --_F Botanical-ffafitr TREES Si ze I 12-t5' Wtz' t 8: lo' lvtzr 6rr ws'lo-tzl '&-tol 7 E^lam4 tfWcf- Vi{lA#A^l @ +. c2LuE- WreL c6b. lMf- 0uanti ty l?- 7o L2 b _T? tu -6- 43 ttu l?,L tt _+f _ I aI-. 3 3 Gftl,-. &lYtdLzffitl -N*l-;*,Fr &vtku{b xw DrY-t"tT- ?o1t,l{t-nu->- rJuxtrffr S(tprnz q4vte_t@+(_ I SHRUBS CA-'. Gli0irNl.J CTV I RS SOD SEED TYPE OF I RRi GAT ION Wtu ,,,iJtFoorAGi: Jfu-- WWNT',\F '' e' sQuAREFooTAGE +oo. TYPE RE FOOTAGE $tL NsNwdD ffiffi.t TYPE OR METHOD OF EROSION CONTROL C. Other Landscape Features (retaining wal't s, fences, swimmjng pools, etc.) Please specify. It', 1lrl) | r1 l q I,EGAL DiISCRIPI'I0N: LOT BLOCK FILING DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT t l,ul,'{ S The following inforrnation is Board before a final approval A. BUII,DiNGI'IATERIALS Roof Siding Other l"tal I iYaterial s Fasc ia. Soffit s Windows Window Trin lJoors Door Trim Hand or Deck Ralls F lues Flashings Chimneys Trash Eliclosures Greenhous e s Other '' . tr .,.'l PLANTII{TERIAI.S fN i (Vcgctar ivc, Ler$jhcap Botanical Name trrrf.it^..Q.ci.e^1a. Lt YP,'*1,!f'^^r required for sub can be given: ttai by the alpplicant to the Design Review Color f/Pe .of Matgrial ' f)t r q tt41 7Po aAEVAlU,l* - -Nam"F-r.t- __wez J J; ,,h tt. , i \.- "rr' - f l'{at erial s -incltrCing T.r.'c;-:-"', Corunon Name Ground Cover) Size t lo-_?' Shrubs, and Quant i';v 3o avx4^La lFfg*l p? t- VASI 5BL fu-_N,vzseE4 Lb $D{F€=-tr $-e4 T tl :,;.i;1.*;]:/,!.fif !'; ,,\.J 1;,1,1i1i11,$! 1,,;'111,'., \. '' ' C. O'fiIL,R LANDSCAPI] t:I]41'UIII:S (Retaining Wal1s, Fences, Swinrning Pools, etc.) Please specify. rj,irirfii#,I ;i',$ V,l.l,r til,iti.,} NAME OF PROJECT LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOT BLOCK A. Building Considerations Prelin. Final Approval Approval Bldg location on site Bldg Configuration Appropriateness with Neighborhood Height Mass Roof Forns Use of ltaterials Choice of Color Energy Efficiency B. Site Consideration FILING Cgnment s Disturbance of Natural Features Snow Renoval Access onto Site Vehicular and Pedes- trian circulation Landscapj-ng Plan Grading & Drainage Erosion Control Irrigation Systen Exterior t,ighting Retaining I\'a11s Accessory Structures C. Miscellaneous Consi.derations D.Othcr Connent s FINAL APPROVAI. Dat c Signaturc UTILITY LOCATION VERIFICATION SUBDIVISION The V: lI ev Phase V1 JOB NNE rh. v3llev ph€". V1 tm BtocK FILING ADDRESS The location of utilities, whether they be main trunk lines or Proposed lines, nust be approved and verified by the foltowing utilities for the acconPanying site Plan. Authorized Signature Let t er Date Mountain Bell l{estern Slope Gas Public Senrice Conrpany Holy Cross Electric Assoc. Vail Cable T.V. Upper Eagle Valley Water and Sanitation District n/a n/a Letter NOTE: These verifications do not relieve the contractor of his responsibiLity to obtain a street cut permlt fron the Town of Vail, Departnent of Public Works and to obtain utility locations before digging in any public right- of-way or easement in the Town of Vail. .A' building Pernit is not a street cut pernit. A street cut pernit nust be obtained separately. This fonn is to verify service availablity and location. This should be used in conjunction with preparing your utility plan and scheduling installations. Tli Project Application -,r'.ll/{{ ':- *-,a"i *-8, Proiect Name: t\. t l! i;,, t, Proiect Description: Contact Person and Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: "rtt,a€*Legal Description: t-ot i' - ,et rf ocK _ ' .l / ....1,,. r.^-i.(, ,,\ Co mments: Design Review Board Date Motion by: Seconded by: . -,r14.'. r lNt<C' UN /T' APPROVAL CN (n, itt411,16s',1 cr. {)/4.367 DISAPPROVAL c -{z t-c fr-iof /'ia,/l )'":;r?-: //L Summary: J z tl M,IS^ iD, /vo / -t r!-'f , El statt Approval Project Application Proiect Name: Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lol Com menls: ,="^" f0-{), Design Review Board {/^/qL-_ ApPRovAL /,/r7J t - I DISAPPROVAL ENGINEERlIIG CiIICI( L]ST subdivision'r,,.]n,rW t Lot Vtl- Bl ock Fil ing 1. Submittal Items (A) Topo Map (B) Siie Plan (c) utility Pian (D) Ti tl e lleport (E) Subdjvision Agreenent Engi neeri ng Re_qui rentents (Acceptable) (Not Acccptable) \/ _Dea/Nec'q_-- . ---J--ta (if applicab1e) 2. (A) Culvert Size glze. +frP€(B) Dri ver,ra;r Grade -@7-fraxi-[trctuat1@ 3. Source of Utilities (A) (B) (c) (D) fF) (r) 4. Conrn ilectri c Gas Se'rler llai.er Tel eplrcrii, T. V. ents: C C ,+r^rq6g--fu.-B-@-5.. Approved: tt Di saoproved : -7/ /f /A I -------- j------- _W^_C.-J^.^*---Deparinri:rri of l'ubl i c llorks Eil I Andrci.'s E ENGINTTRING CHICK IiST aL Subdivision Lot B]ock Fi I'ing t6peRt0LG 1. Submittal Items (Acceptab'le) (not Acccptab'le) greenent (A) Topo Map (B) Sjte Plan (c) utjf ity Plan (D) Ti tl e lleport ([) Subdivision A (A (B (c (n (F (F ('if applicah'le) 2. EOgineering Requirements (A) Cu'lvert size ?a '' 18''(B) Dri ver'ray Grade 187-Ta).i-mctu;n < e 3. Source of Utilities El ectri c uct 5 Selrer l,later Tel epliorie T. V. 4. Coitr;nents : Approved: Di sapprot,ed: H Dffirrnrt:lrd of BilI Andrci.'s ANl) UNVIlt0lJltll:l.i'li\l, (:(li'lillSS I y, July 13, l9Bl :J: ll0 P.il. ON o Approval of minutcs of .Junc 22, L981 . A requcst for a sctback vrr-i..rncc to nake I r-:1;lr I an cxi:;ting brrilding which cllcroirclrcs 4r jnto thc sidc sctback on 5010 lllL.i n Gor:c l)rivc rvh j.ch is part of an unplattcd parccl in lliiihorn, tj.llcd Sundial, Phase lI. Applicant: ['cttltcl Construction lulanagcntcnt' Iltc. Appeal of adnrinistrative dccision concerning the colol of a residence on Lot 20, Potlto Patch. Applicant: Jonine and J.J. Collins. 4. Rcqucst to table density variance application for lot 12, Block A7, Casolar Vail II at 1l0I Vail View Drive. Applicants: Jean and Jancs ["J. McDonald, Jean Catoe, et al . S, A request for anendnent in accordancc r,rith Scctions 18.66.1I0 through 18.66.160 to the zoning ordinance froin Residential Cltrstcr to Residential. Prinary/ Sc:coltdary in ordcr to build a residential unit together rvith a caretakerrs unit. Applicant: Doyle llopkins. 6. A ninor subdivision request to vacate a 1ot line betr'reen lots A-1 and A-2, Lionsridge Filing #1. Applicant: AAV Linited Partnership. 2. 5. ., 8. 9. A request for an extcrior alteration and urder Section 18,26.045 orr lot 4, Block I to add 3,950 square feet of office space and a reqrrest for a variencc to Section :f 1:::l'.:j:-:.; :l: ha1.f thc parking uitltin Vail Associates. A request for an extcrior altcration and modification ill Comrnercial Corc I under scction ls.24.065 on Tl'acts A, B, C, Block 5c, Vail Village lst Fil-ing, 174 East Gor.e Creek Drive, the Lodge at Vail , in order to add a 618 sqrtal'e foot tcstaurant aclclition and a retl'actable glitss enclosure over the existing swimming pool ' Appl icant: - Lodge Properties, Inc' A request for approval to replat Highland lleadotls, lots 26-42, the Highlar,d park Special Devltopment District 11. Tire apploval is requested to.al.lot'i. net'r r-oad d;dications artcl vacatiolrs and 1ot I ine rcrno'ral s. This is a naj or sub- di'ision requestbd under Chapter I7.04 of thc Vail l'lunicipal Code. Applicant: Surr Teclr i'uiiJvrs. Inc. 10. A retpest for a variancr-- to Section 18.14.090 of the Vail l.ltrnicipal Codc to allor,r t5e applicrnt to inclrrdu' f lood pllill arca in calculating al lorvablc tltrnsitl in detc nining thc nurnbcr of units nl lot'c'd on the sitc of thc Intermountit jrl Srr'i rn arrrl Tcnnis Clrrb, un ruplltttt'tl pltrcc'l in Vail Intcrruountain Subdivis j.un. Thc appl icants ilr.c thc lntc'r'nroutlt:rin Swin :rnil I'ennis Clull who ttish to cot)strnct 2 additional units ovcr thc pre'viotts apPr.ovll b1' Eaglc County. rnodification in Corunercial Core LI, , Vail Lionsltead lst Filing, to the Lionshead Gondola Building, I I . 26 , 1 50 to '*ilive the requircntcn t: the rnain building. Applicant:o A rcqucst undcr Or:dinance 13, Scrics of l9Sl , for-Thc Valley, Phase 6 for wr jor' t'c'vi5ioits to irtl itIl)t'()vcd sit(-' Platl . l'hc p.oposal is to rc_dcsigir thc builclirrli loc:rtlt)rls itttd ttrtit dcsigtrs. along with a porti;n of ilc r.outl luyott!. lhtlr;t.v I'roP1'1'1lss l)ar'l.rrclship of IJallas. 11. Publishcr.l in thc'Vlil Trrtil July lo' ll)sl PEc -s- ?/1F Stan Cole added that l/3 of their total land was affected by the flood plain' Dick Ryan felt that this was simply a circunstance. Gerry White felt strongly that a flood plain situation was not one upon which to srTl a variance. Discussion foilowed concerning whether or not the flood plain was a hardship' Jin moved and Scott seconded to deny the variance lequest. The vote was 4-0 in favor of denial . Gerry white rerninded them that they had l0 days in which to appeal to council. 11.est under Ordinance 13, Series o{ 19J!for hase 6 or najor revisions to an approved site P1an.unit designsn along wi a portion to re- of the design road the building locations and layout. Appl icant: MurraY Properties PartnershiP of Dal las. Peter Patten showed the model and site plan' John ltlheeler, representing the appl icant answeled questions. He explained that the cul de sacs were large^io acconynodate laige vehicles. Jin Morgan expressed concern about cut and fills being largely visible. He wanted to rnake certain the inpact was downplayed so ihat the- units didntt Sive a wall-like facade. Gerry felt thal tire tennis courts were alnost necessary to soften and add interest' Scott vranted to know what will happen when this project went into DRB if the DRB decideil there was too rnuch visual inpact, and Dick replied that that was the reason the DRB was invited on the field trip, however, the DRB could still suggest changes. Dr. steinberg asked if it were possible to narrow the road, and was iold it llras necessary to have then that width to accornnodate large vehicles.. 'I'he clustering and redesigning of the building locations were discussed ' Jim moved and scott seconded to aPProve the revisions. The vote was 3-0 rith Duane abstaining, in favor of approval of the site plan' Scott rnoved and Duane seconded that the meeting be adjourned at 6:45 p'm' f MEI,IORANDUM TO: Planning and Environnental Conmission FROM: DePartnent of Corrunrn ity Developnent/Peter Patten DATE: JulY 8' 1981 RE:Arequestunderordirrance13,Seriesoflg8l,forare-designofThe Valleyn Phase VI, a county-aPProved plan now applying for nra j or changes' BACKGROUND TheValley'PhaseVIwasapPlove<lbyEaglecountyinthefalloflg80.The prr:".; f,lri received approiirnately a year of detailed review by Eagle County planning connission, iii-ty connissioners, county -p1a11ing staff, Town of vail iri;id and Environmental Corunissiono and Town of Vail planning staff ' t.--proi""ty is ,pp"o.r.a ro" 42 units alld 77,150 square feet of GRFA. Ttre parcel is a difficult one to develop, because the -entire site contains land which is environnentaiiy sensitive. No-rih of the road is a dry, steep hillside, while south of the ,o.J',i, the beautiful, unique r"19gy backed to the south by a very densety r"g"iri"a pine forest,ott u rtu"p hillside. Because of these constraints, tire parlei-t,., Lr,a"tgone vigorous reviewso and it is difficult to achj-eve " .onr"nr*, "ton g .orntissioneis, developers ar,d planners as to the "best" r.tay to place buildings on the site' The property has now changed halr{s, and the new owner wishes to revise the plans ;;;pi;;;it: r will'tri"iii-o"t1ine_ the najor characteristics of the orisinal approval and the ,,"ru-t"opor"l and then distuss the prirnary differences in the two Plans ' ORIGINALLY APPROVED PLAN TheCountyapprovedplanconsistedof-sclustelsofrrnits.,oneclusteronthe ;;;";-hiiirih'u t. thi north of Lions Ridge Loop of 18 units and two clusters of 12 units each located on the meadow and in the lower slope of the trees' Proposedwere3cul-de-sacroads,onecuttingintothesteepbankonthenorth sicle of the road wnich the county required detailed engineering plans for, and. two in the meadow r;;; ;;;.t;ing off of a cornrnon road intersecting with Lionsridge Loop, Theanenitiespackageincludedaswirmingpoolacabana.neaTthepoolandtwo tennis courts, focai"d-on the westerly "Inltut'of units in the rneadow' Also' a detailed landscaping ptan was a Part of the approval , as were the engineerinS drawings. This plan achieved the objectives of one road-cut for the rneadow off of Lionsridge Loop and tight clust."s ol units to preserve neadow area. The plan did locate sorDe units at the toe of the slope of the pine forest hillside, but preserved meadow as the benefit. The hilllide units were a point of contention, as,the Townarguedthatunitsshouldnotbelocatedin40%slopeareas.TheEagle vatley Phase vr O?r, 8, 1e81 O Qounty Planning Cornmission felt that PUD zoning allowed the flexibi.lity to allow ih. 40'a slope regulation to be overlooked. Thus, after nany meetings and a yeart s tine, the plan was aPploved by the county, and ihe Town feit that lone of our Teguests were being met. the components of the approval were the site plans, unit floor plans, landscaping plan and the engiirlering drawings. The-developrnent regulations (height, setbacks, etc') for the project were dictated by the proposal itself' NEWLY PROPOSED PROJECT The new site plan retains basically the sarne road arrangenent and unit layouts for the hillside units. There renains 18 units on the hillside with the road ersentirrry the sane design. The lower portion of the site is totatly revised' lhe western-most cluster iontains 5 rmits with the tennis courts and recreation facilities (pool, hot tub and recreation building) separating this cluster fron the Test of the meadow units. There are 2 road cuts in this proposal off ot' Lionsridge Loop servici.ng the rneadow units, One road accesses the 5 unit cluster on the ,"rt .nd the parking spaces for the two tennis courts and recreation facilities. The othir road s"rlrg' the other two areas of units in the meadow' The units on the lower part of the site are sited away frorn the pine forest tree line and the to" oi that slope. They are Placed alnost entilely on the flatrneadow.Besidestherowof-Sunitsonthewest'thereisagroupingof 12 units to the east of the tennis courts and anothet group of 7 units to the extxene east of the site. PRGJECT COMPARISON The recreation facilities in the new proposal are slightly moTe substaniial with the inclusion of a recreation builiing and a hot tub (the two tennis courts are retained). However, approxirnately the same location has been chosen for ihe tacitities. The new pioposaf does not include a road to the south of the tennis courts cut into the hillside, as did the county-approved plan. The layout of the units in the meadow is somewhat Inore spread out in the new p"oposar as opposed to the tight clusters in the other plan. The nel Plan intloduces ".rothe. road cut to the rneadow, as opposed to the one in the previous plan' The new proposal also includes a 3 cluster neadow plan as opposed to the 2 cluSt'ers in the County plan. As nentioned earlier, the hillside units remain basically the sane in both Plans. RECOMMENDATION The Department of Connr.rn i ty Developnent recomrnends approval of the revised site ptan for The Valley, Phase VI. Againn the site has so nany environnentally iensitive areas that the placement of the units is a subjective judgerrrent. This plan preserves nost of the dense tree line and steeP toe slope where the ^neadow in""tr'the ridge, This puts rnore units into the neadow area, but the Staff has Valley Phase VI O-O JuIv 8, 1e81 worked with the applicant toward preserving as much meadow as is feasible within the confines of tire new plan. A good job of meadow prcservation and overall site sensitivity is reflected in this plan, The applicant is providing the same anount of parkirg spaces as the previous plan, and this should be adequate (or more than enough)-foi the needs of the project. We do feel a very tholough Iiesign Review Board review will be a necessity to insure the visual integrity of the project, specificatly the deep cut to get the upper road in and the screening of the isphaft in the meadow. One suggestion the staff would rnake is to bring a tightei cluster to the central neadow grouping of units on the western end of those units. There appears to be an excessive amount of asphalt at that end, and it should be tigirtened if vehicular rnaneuverab i l ity can be naintained. Petit 1 Date o FO zonrnlonprNANcE PETITION FORM R AMENDI"IENT TO THE OR REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN DISTRICT BOI'NDARIES This procedure is reguired for any amendment to the zoning ordinance or foi a request for a distriet boundary change A. NA}IE OF PETITIONER PHONE PestTa C,/a^Vx I. B. c. ADDRESS NAME OF ADDRESS s0ffe- 515 PETITIONER' S REPR.ESENTATIVE 41? tl,. ftq,V:v* W, ttx,L, ea. &W1 pHoNE+7L'l.664 AUTHORIZATION OF PROPERTY OWNER SIGNATURE ADDRESS D.LOCATION OF PROPOSAI, PHONE ADDRESS LEGAI, DESCRIPTION $I00.00 plus .18+ for each property owner to be notified.I P4 tlrf ]I FFF ) r. A list subject of the names of owners of all property adjacent to the property, and their rnailing addresses. J Onn: Here are the narnes of the adjacenE property owners in The Valley (lle rrni rag e )Valley Associates, Ltd, , /a .e.le-++m-gr:-r=lfllrfi 4o =Antl " A^o&te allab''ru4 Vail, Co 81657 {83, a) ''ia'a Lrb'4 Ut4'' Uor!, eob. 8r6sz Northwestern Life I ns,t ra irc e Co r:.,/n Lion Ridge l-860 Lincoln S treet Suite 13tr0 Derr,rq1, go 80295 Tir,: :heck arnount should be for 100.36 ($100 + iii.: fo: ea:r.r srano) MrY PETITION FO mowss 1413 t{.ffiTMD, w,L,b.&67 puoNn4TA-16H. o RIVI retilr ""t" h-h-4 C,/a" 2x PHONE //7/., ](@ FOR AI4ENDIIENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE *ou"3i ro* P<st 7a A CIIANGE IN DISTRICT BOUNDARTES I. This procedure is required. for any amendment to the zoning ordinance or for a request for a district boundary change A. NAI{E OF PETITIONER ADDRESS PHONE D. 15 B. NArrE OF PETITIONERTS REPRESENTATIVE C. AUTHORIZATI SIGNATURE ADDRESS LOCATION OF PROPOSAL F. ADDRESS LEGAI DESCRIPTION lot - FEE $f00,00 plus 18+ for eac A list of the names of owners of subject property, and their mailing filin Property owner to be all property adjacent addresses. notified. to the ^-. - Page 2 -petition form for *..rlo Zoning ord or Request ! chanse in boundaries II.(4) copies of the following information:{A. The Petition shall of the regulations, changes in district and proPo terial s stating the reasons for request' III. Time Requirements ThePlanningandEnvironmentalCommissionrneetsonthe2ndand4th Mondays or -6aEt month. e pJiitiil;iilt the necessary accompanying material must be subnitted ;;;--;";is prior to the date of the meet- ing. foffoii.rs-tfre pi-nning-;"a.rnvirorunental Conunission meeting, aII amendments to the zonini ordinance or district boundary change must go t"-lil" ro*" c"'-cil for final action' Four A.proposed the existing written and/ or a O O := -C O \-r\ C) o-o i C) C) O -C 7 7 I o o ? o t\It A o o o v N !o F o 0 !l L I 0 0 i t o il F o x 0 ! tt I 0 ! !I 0 g 0 o l tl, C 0 g r- 3 |!g 0 c o N o F June 23, 1981 Department of Cornnrunity Development Town of Vail Vail, CO 8L657 ATTENTION: Peter Patton Gentlemen Please include the 42-unit project known as phase VI of the Valley on the July 13, 1981 meeting of P.E.C. The revlew is speclfic to design changes in major areas as provided by Ordinance 13, 1981 Series. Thank you. JLI{/cib oo The Valley Adjacent Property Otrners Parcel E Northwestern National Life Insurance Conpany c/o Lionsridge 1860 Lincoln Street, Suite 1300 Denver, Co 80295 o; Blm USFS Proiect APPlication { Proiect t'tame: The Vall.Y / Pha-;e Vl !+'z unLt Cotdo*itit* Pto jutE t/ Ruttt.l Proiect DescriPtlon: Owner Address and Phone: 476-1600 !,Iheeler Pi er Arc[L'ci!g5 Architect Address and Phone: 47 6-1664 Legal Description: Lot W -nesiCential Cluster ._Spesi Zone'. Zoning APProved: t Design Review $qard .)lhasz. RA./- '^A-1rrrLt1'+/; DISAPPROVAL NN Dale: Prolecr Appticatio"{t The Valley / Phase VI 5lL8l87 Proiect Name: Project Description:42 unit Condomlnl-um Prolect w/ Recreatlon Facllltles owner Address and phon€: lturray/Ntlsson 476-1-600 Archit€ct Address and phone: Wheeler Plper ArchtE6cts 476-7664 Legal Doscription: Lot 'l l Residential ClusEer Zone'. Zoning Approved: I [ .-* li Deslgn Revlew Board 6>84 - ffu.<flLfrna'"2 DISAPPROVAL 9/V/ za-l ,'1 ' ,/l . // t Motion by: /l/An'a ty'a(-rle.s*t azzzl)iL a-n/ 72 WIRNLk,zt )_ /l'--€Chiet ryflFing ottici?\ )l dZ /rLoutzt - /0 07( 94 box l0O Yail. colorado 81657 F03) 476-5613 department of community development TO: FROM: DATE: RE: MEMORANDUM EAGLE COUNTY PLANNiNG COMMISSIONERS TOI,II\I OF VAIL, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT' PETER PATTEN t'rlay 7, 'l 980 FILEN0.SU-]14-80-P3,|THEVALLEYPHASEVIPRELIMINARYPLAT{ we have had an opoortunity to review the revised plans.for Phase vI oi tfr" Valley. i,le suppori the general layout of the site, p'lan with iir"-lirtiiUuiion ot ihi units ii three c'l-usters, one on the hi'lls.ide and two in the meadow. An underlying quest'ion that stjll rema'ins is: I'li'l 't the county a11ow unlii to "Ue 6ujtt upon very steep slopes? A related question would Ue, -Cun the proposba HittiiO" tine hbla 18 units where one consjders the restrictions with the steep s1 opes? our position on th-is is that 40% or thereabouts, depending-.upon topobraphic accuracy, ihouta be where.the line is drawn. lle basical-'ly tii"'no'*ujoi-proul-erirs-*iit tor" of the hil'lside units being located irn ifopes 6f ai"ound 4Oy":f des'igned.with environmental considerations' iii*eu"i,-according to-itre topogiaphic nrap submitted there is a mjnimum of two units tocatea-in ireii-of bOZ s1oie. The extenfof the steep slopes cannot be determined because the contours are not carried through the UuiiO:ng footpr.ints. 51 opes much- over 40%,begin to present severe developirent rbstrictions ind the Town wou'ld recomrend against units being constructed in these areas- Previous concerns of ours have been well addressed for the most part. The downhill elevation of the units a'long Hil'lside Lane-have been iufsiiotiuf'ly reduced'in height. Potential snow remova'l prob'lems on Hillside Lane has been solved. Number of total units has been reOucea by five. However, the request of a single access off of f_ioniiiag! Loop for both meadow clusters is not shown on the revised ;i;;i. ilu cont.inue our emphasis upon this as we see no real need for lwo roaa cuts there. A fiiral minor concern is the size of the pnoposed iennis courts. To make these courts playable, standards. indicate the need for twice as *";h-r;;-between the Lack ience and the basel ine and ihe side fence and the doubles sideline. Re-siting of the courts or going to a single court shou'ld be looked at. ot The Va'lley Phase VI 5-7-80 Page Two In conc'l usion, we feel the site plan and the new landscaping plan are generally wel 1 done. The developer and architect have dennnstrated high qua'ljty work in the Town of Vai1 and we fee'l they wi] 'l continue in that regard. lJe do fee'l , on the other hand' that the over 40% slope areas should remain open and there should be only one road cut entering the meadow. Richard nya$ Di rector A. 'Peter ,Patten Jr Town Planner fr REQUEST A, Narne of Applicant THE VALLEY VENTURE.'a Colorado general partnership and Propert.y Owner Address P.O. Box 2210,, Vail, Colorado . 81658 Phone--3A9-5J.20- THE THREE ASSOCIATES, LTD., a general , INC. , its general partner, g "J <r- {' ' r- 'r'1j---1- Vail Colorado 81658 Phone 949-5720 e part of Parcel A, Lions Ridge Filing No Date a''t -'{l APPLICATION FORM FOR A SUBDIVISION Appl icant I s Representative P.0. Box 22L0, Vail, Colorado 81658 JAMES MORGAN B. c. D. Nane of Address Phone 949-5720 Authori zation partner, BY: Sig,nature BY:-t Jz '*=l' f... i^ Address P .0. of PropertY Owner THREE ASSOCIATES Location Lot of Proposal Block (,( E. lblrl Fil ing Fee $100 plus 184 for each property owner to be notified. A list of the names of ou|ners of all Property adjacent to the subject property and their rnailing addresses. Tlpe of Sribdivision: (check one) Irtajor (involving urore than 4 lots) X /.' Minor (involving 4 or feuer lodl) GROUSE GI.E VAIL CONDOMINIUM MAP Duplex (sptitting a duplex stnrcture and/or lot) H. procedures for major and minor subdivisions are as aefi.nea in the Town of Vail Subdivision Regulations on Pages 9 through ?0. I, Duplex subdivision require5 the sane information as a rninor subdivision with the requirement that the following statement nust appear on the plat before receiving Tor+n of Vai I approval: For zoning or other land-use regulations of the Town of Vail, the tNo Parccls crcated by this subdivision are deened to be one lot. No rnore than one txo-f anil;r residence shall be a1 lowed on the conrbined areas of the tl.'o parcels. Allorieble Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) for the two-farnily residence shall be calculated using the combined area of the two parcels. J. Timc Requircments: l'{ajor and minor subdivisions must be approved by thc Planning and Environmcntal Cornrnission. The PEC mects on thc 2nd and 4th llonda;'s of crch nonth. An appl ication with thc neccssar)' accompenying matcrial must bc subnritted four (4) ueeks prior to the date of tirc nrectinS,. F. G. Project Application //,". 5/T/tr'Z //t/ Project Name: Project Description: Contacl Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Block Filing Zone - Comments: Design Review Board Motion by: Seconded by: APPROVAL DISAPPBOVAL 1.,-)(,{:11t;41 (;,''a=1; 17/ 6 f ,r'€- ,{; :,1/i / t.l t';.,f D statt Approval COMMITMENT TO INSURE This commitment was produced and issued through the office of LANDTITLE GUARAIITEE COMPANY P. O, BOX 367, 108 SO. FRONTAGE ROAD WEST, VAIL, COLORADO 81657 Talephonc liJ{J,Sl 47 6 -2251 {p counh'risn.d: f*"r^e*- g H_*__ Vrlldrtlns Ottlc.r Representing: frrue Ir.rsuner,rce florvrearuv or [ff rrur.rESorA nrBlarcrS --ru-r"#h@ ',{roleu8rs pezuoqlne raqlo ro recggo Surleprp,r e ,{q pauErsralunor ueq^r prp^ eq 01 'V oppeqcs w u,roqs elsp ot{t uo sraJUJo pozlroqtne I1np stl fq paxuJs olunereq aq ol pas pue aut?u eterodroc s1I pasnec seq elossuutn 3o ,{uudtuo3 atuernsul anll 'JO:IUAHA1 SSANIftt NI 'lueulruluoJ slql ,{q pereaoc uoeraql etuSlrou.r ro lsaralu ro elslse oql onTBA roJ procer 3o sarmbcu pe:nsur pesodord or# awp eq1 o1 roud lnq Jooroq etrpp e lcoJJo aql ol luenbesqns Eu1gru11e .to spJocoj c11qnd aq1 ur Eurreadde lsrg 'polperc ',{ue Jr'srellEur reqlo Jo srulslo esra ps 'sacuuqutniue 'sueq 's}ceJe(J 'S 'sprocer cgqnd eql i(q ul\oqs lou puu ^\BI fq pasodu4 'peqsgrnJ .reueereq ro sroJolareql leua]Bru io roqul 'saor res roJ 'uo1 e ol lqiu ro 'uaq {uy 'V 'sprocar c11qnd aql ,(q u,noqs lou eru qrr.qa pu? esoltslp pFo^r ses[uard eq13o uollcadsuy puu i(aiuns lcerroc ? r{cJq,l\ s13q Iuu puu 'slueurqceorcua 'eere ur atelroqs'sarn1 .,{repunoq q sltluuot 'setcuudercslq 't, 'sprocer c11qnd oql i(q ul\oqs lou'sluouasue Jo sturelc Jo Jsluatuas?g 'Z 'sprocar c{qnd aql {q uA\oqs 1ou uonsassod u1 satpud go suplo ro slqEyg 'I :Eupno11o3 eql ol lcafqns osJB s! luaulltuuloC slql 'ol p.rJoJoJ e,roqu atere,ro3 uorJ suorsnlJxg pue suor1e1nd11g puE suorllpuoJ eql q peq?luoc srolleu er{l ol uorttpp? uI 'luaurlururoc sJql So suors;,rord oql ol lJergns erE Pu? uo pfi?q aq lsnu luaullruruoJ slql i(q pera,roc uoeraql atetlrotu ar{l Jo snl?ls aql ro $eJolu! Jo alElse oql ol 0ll!l eql Jo snl?ls eql Jo lno Sursgu duuduro3 eql Nu!?E? SuJq i(su ro e,ruq ,(eu parnsul pasodord aql lsql uoflre Jo s1q3t: ro suollcs ro uotlce ^uV 't 'ureraq paulporu ,(lsserdxa se ldacxa luaulluruoC slql Jo ued ? epsu pue oruoraJal{q pelu.rodrocul ,(qareq aru qorq^r poJnsul pasodoJd oql Jo ro^q q JoJ pellnu .uroc sarcglod .ro i(cqod ;o ruroJ arll Jo ateraao3 uror; suo$nlf,xt aql pu? suoll?lndtlg pue suotlrpuoC eql puE suotst^otd trnmsut ar{t ol Felqns sr i(lrpqun qrns pue roJ pallruuoc sorcllod ro {c11od aqt roJ V elnpaqcs q pelBls lunou? aql paecxe {ltgqeq qcns IIBrls lue e ou ul 'tuaulluruoS slql {q pare or uoaraql ateElrou.r to lsaraln ro olslse tql etsarc lo attnbce o1 (r) ro 'g elnpol{Js 14 u,rrorg suoJldeoxa al?unullo o1 (q) ro goaraq sluaruarnbar oqt qll/r {ldruoc o1 (E) IIUEJ pooE ut Euqelrapun ut uoorar{ acuell -ar q parrntu! ssol lEnlr? ro3 ,(po pu? .roJ pallrururoc salcrlod ro ,{c11od Jo urroJ aql u! po.rnsul Jo uolllt4Jop eql rePun Papnlc -ur saprad qrns pu? parnsul pmodord pauruu aqt ot ,(po aq IIEqs luaulnuuroJ stql rapun ,{ueduo3 aqt 3o ,{1ryqei1 '€, 'suor1e1ndr1g pup suorllpuoJ asaql Jo t qde.rtered ol luensrnd parrntur flsnoprerd ,(1J1qeg uror;,(uedruo3 eql o olor lou II?qs luaupuerus qtns lnq ',(ySurproccu lueutruuoJ stql Jo g elnpeqcs puatuu i(zur uoltdo st1 1u {uuduro3 aql'roll?u roqlo Jo rulelc asra pB'aruerqurnrua 'ue[ 'lcaJtp qcns,{uu Jo gSpal,noul pnllz sattnbce asuir -raqto ,(ueduro3 aql JI Jo '{u?dtuoJ agl ol atpal,uoul qcns osoltstp ll?qs parnsul pasodord aqt;1 'a8pa1'toul qlns esoltslp os ol parnsul pasodo:d eqt go arngey {q pacrpnlard sr i(ueduro3 aql lualxa lgl ol uoareq acu?llar Jo lce ,{uu uro.ry Eutllnsar eSeuep ro ssol Iuu ro; i(trpqeu uro{ palallol aq geqs {uuduloJ eql '8ullu^r ur ,(ueduo3 aq} ol eipal^roq qtns asolcslp ol IIEJ ll?qs pue 'Joersq I gFpoqrs u u roqs esoql wrll Jaqlo luslulfruuroc sT-ql /iq para ot uoareql a8e8lrou ro lseralu Jo el?lse aql SullcoJJe ,oll?ut reglo ro urlBlc a6J3 pe'orusrqunsua 'uell 'l.e;ep i(ue 3o aEpal,nrou:1 pnlre sarrnbcu to sBq pamsul pesodord aqt31 'z 'luaulnrlsu i(lgnc6 rer{lo ro 'paap lsntl 'lsnrl Jo paep apnlcrn IIEqs 'urersq pesn uaq,n i.aEuElroru,, urel aqtr 'l 'fuuduro3 ar{r Jo llnsJ eql lou q saltJlod ro ,(cqod qrns enssr ol ernlleJ aql leqt pap$ord 'srncco lsllJ ra^aqcIq,n 'anssl lleqs roJ pellruruoc sarcqod ro i(c11od aqt uaq^\ ro Joareq ol?p a^rlraJJa oql ralJ? sqluoru xrs aleur.urol puu aspec lpqs ropuno.raq suorl .uE;1qo puu ig;pqu11 11u pup etuBrnsu olln Jo serclod .ro,(c11od qtns Jo aruEnssr aq1 o1 ,{:eup41ard st luatultruruoC srqJ 'luaueso.ropua luanbasqns i(q ro luaurllruuoJ slql Jo etuenssr er{t Jo ourll aql lE raqlla'{upduo3 aqt ,(q goeraq V elnper{rs tn peuesur uaaq o sq JoJ p3llnuurot sarcllod ro ,ic11od eq13o lunourB aql pu? parnsul pasodord aql Jo ,(lrruapr eql uoq \ FJuo e,rnre;;a aq [rqs luaulpuutoJ slqJ ';oeraq suollelndlls puE suorUpuoJ oql ol puu g pw V salnpaqts go suoysl,tord ar{t ol tcafqns fls :roJoloql satreqc pue srunquard aqg go 1uaur,(ed uodn 'y alnpaqcs ul ol parJaJar JO peqlJrsep pusl eql uI i(qoraq para,roc lserelq Io elslso 3ql Jo aetstlrour ro rolr^\o sE 'v alnpaqcs ul pausu pa.rnsul paodord ar{l Jo ro^u3 u 'V alnpaqJs u paunuepr ss 'eousrnsu! alllr Jo soltllod ro {c11od sll anssr ol slnuuor i(qaraq 'uotgeraprsuoc alqsnp^ e ro3 '{uudruo3 aq} pollec ulereq 'uope.rodror ?losauull4l s 'VIOSANNII^I JO INVdWOJ AJNVU1SNI A'IJ,II sloseuurlll 'rllodeeuulw lo Aueduroc lcols e '^eu 0t6! 'lN3tfltwtloc Notrvtcossv 311|l oNv'l Nvctu3]ltv tg/z A z89Z r.r.JroJ l ll oo ALTA GOIIIIIT}IENT st{EI}t[_E A A,|Pl icrtton No. VOOO?6O!-2 Fon Infornrtlon Onlv - Charrcr - Ourner Pol lcv iZO.OO Lsndcr Pol lcv i3,532.S9 T*x Ccrtlf. f5.OO --TOTAL-- i3,5S7.88 l{ith vour rcnittrnce rlease r*fer to VOOO26OI-?. 1. Effectivs Ortet APRIL ?8, 1981 et SIOO A.l.l. 2. Pol lcler to bc lgrucd' lnd proposcd fnrursdr "{|LTA" Ourncrs't Pol isv 11' 4UO, OOO. OO Forrn B-197O (Ancnded lO-17-7Ol Proporsd Insur.edr THE I'IURRAY PftCTPERTIE$ PAftTIWR$HIP OF DALLAS, A Srnarrl PrtnerrhLp uALfAx Lqan Pol lcv l\YTA Revicion) Prsroscd Insurcdr REFUBLIC NATIONAL BANK t2,360rOOO.OO 3. Thc ertete or. lntarect tn thc lrnd dorcnibcd sn ncfcnnrd to ln thlr Connltrrent rnd cevlrcd heraln lcr A FEE 4. Titla to the crtrtc or iotcrcat cpvrrrd hcncln ir rt thc cffcctlva datc hercof vcrttd lnr EDGfiR A. S}IITH .'IR., TRUSTSE 5. The lrnd r€frrrcd to tn thlr Comttnrnt lr dcrcnibcd u folloucr A PART T}F PARC€L A, LIO{"8 RIIF€ SUEDIVI6IOT{, FILII{O T{O. 2, A SITBDIVI8ION RECORIED IN T}I5 CIFFICE OF T}€ EAfl.E Bfl,IIIITYI COLORADO' CLEfil( S{D RECORIER, AAID PANT OF PARC€L A EI}{I HORE PARTICTJLARLY ESCRIBED A$ Ffi.LOI#II BEGIITNIIII3 AT trI EXTSTIhIO MA$$ CAP }IO{IX,'IENT I1AH(IiS T}E NORT}ftIE6T CORI{ER OF SECTIOT{ t2, Tfl{N8}IIF ! S{I['TH, RANAE 8I UE$T tr T}E 6TH PRINCIPfl. T*RIDIA}I' TI#iICE S OI ffiOREE8 35 OO c o l'l l.l SCIIEDULE TIIENT Arrl lcrtlon No. VOOO26OI-2 itIMrTEg SP S€C${DS $l 1385,!2 FEET, ALOMI Tt{E HEST LINE OF SAID PAftCEL A ANO SAID SECTION 12, TO A FOINT OIII TIIE EASTENLY RIi:I{T-ffi-I"IAY LII{E OF LIOI{"S RIDSE LOOPI II{EI{CE THE FOLLE.IIT€ TIM C&JR6EE ALONS SAID RI6HT-tr-T{AY LI}IEI ( 1) S 2T ggSREE$ 50 }IINUTES 26 EgCtrlDS E 20.tt FEETT (2) AN ARC DISTAT{CE OF tt1,O9 FEET &O[,tO A I3O.OO FMT RADIUS CIAVE TO T}IE RIOI{T, SAID CI.|FT'E tnVINS A CEHTRAL At{gLE OF 4g I}EBREES $7 I.IIi{,JTEE 40 SECONDS, AND A C}NRO ${ICH BEARS g 02 DE{}REE6 38 llIl[,TE$ 24 SECOilDS 1.r 107.74 FEETr TO A POTNT Ol{ THE $OUTI{gfU,Y LINE OF SAID PARC€L AI THE]€E TIE FOLLO}IIiftI TTffiE COURSE$ AI-ONS $AID ffruTl#RLY Llt'lEr ( I ) N 66 DE8R€ES 15 tllltf,rTE8 OO SECONDS E ss2.96 FEETf (2) N 74 0E8nEC8 45 hIMJTg$ OO gECOI{DS E 430.OO FEETf (3) N 6g DESNEES T5 '.IINUTES OO SECSH&8 E 670.00 FEET' THENCE r XHPARTI}.I{I SAID AflJTHERLY LINET N 44 DEBREEA 39 ilINUTEA TA BSCOIDS T,I AO.OO FEETI TI.ENCE $ 76 EEGREES i}7 T'IITT.|TEE $9 SECONDE H 302.54 FEETI THENCE I 72 DEAREES 26 tttNUTgS 42 SSCSIIII$ bl g5.OO FEETI TflENgE N tl mGREES 59 IIINUTE$ 06 $9ct}il86 t, 1023.3? FEETT TO A POII{T Oil TT€ NCATF€RLY LIIE OF SAID PARCEL A AND SAID $€CTION Izt THEISS S ts8 IIEBFEES 19 TIIMJTES 4I SECONDS T.I 8T4.59 FEET, ALONO $AID NOflTHERLY LINE TO THE FOINT ff BESINNINO. 8U8.JECT TO THE FOLLfl,IINS EICEPTIONI EXCEFTIOT'II A PART OF LION'$ RIDGE LOOP ROAD RIgllT-OF-tfAY' ffiDICATED II-{ €ACLE COLO{TY. COLORABO Ofi EAIO LIOH/S RIIF€ zu8IIIVISICII.I, FILI}IO N{I. 2 FIhIfIL PLAT. A STRIF OF LAND CO}.ITAINII{O I.876 AERES, T{ORE OR LE$ST 70 FEET IN I{IDTH ANN LYIT{I SU FEET EACH SIDE OF A C€NTERLINE THAT I$ T'IOFE FARTICULARLY NEGCRIBED A$ FOLLOT{SI BESINNIHS AT A POINT ON THE I.I€ST LI}IE OF SAID SECTIS{ 12, I.II{SISE THE NORTHT"'E$T CORT.IER OF $AID 6ECTIOT'I I2 BEARS N C,T D€OREES 35 }IINUTES 59 9€CfitlOS g 128t}.79 FEET DISTAtifTt Tl*El{CE Af'l ARC DISTATSE OF 3t1.74 FEET ALSNG A IOO.OO FOOT RADIUS CUFVE TO THE RtrgHT, SAIB CIJRVE }iAVINS A CENTRAL ANALE OF 19 DEOREES 19 I,IIM',TE8 4S SECONNS, AND A CI{ORII THAT BEARS N 6I DEoREES 2I I{INUTE$ /TS 6ECONDS E 93.!18 FEETI THENCE N 7l D€BREEB Ol l.lllil{JTE8 39 BECOHDS E 30.54 FEETT THS}.ICE AN ARC NISTANqE OF'89.28 FEET ALONG A 204.63 RADIUS CI.'T\JE TO TI{g LEFT, SAID CUR\flA HAVIIS A CENTRAL AT.IOLE OF 2{ IECREE$ 59 }t!}ruTg3 fT SECOIIIDST AITID A CHORD THAT E€AR6 N 58 DEEREES 3I ITINT,TEs 14 SECT}T$IS E 98.s7 FEET| TI€NCE N 46 oESREES 01 fttIMrTEA {A 8€C&{BS E 2t4.O2 FEETI THENCE AN /iRC DIATANEE OF 9T.?? FEET il-si|8 TI.€ ARC OF A 136,+2 RADIUS Ctffi/E TO THE FI6HT, SAIO CUfwE IiAVINO A C€}{TRAL tr\ELE OF 38 IIGGFEEB 20 I'IIMJTES 27 gECOf'lDSr Al{D A O{nD THAT Effi& N 66 IEEnESS t2 f'tItd'rTES 02 SEBtIttDs E 89.S? FEETT n€NCE H 84 ItgOftEES 22 ltrNuTES t5 gEgoflDs E ltu.&7 FEET' Tl€trcg Ail Anc BISTAI€E oF 173.68 FEET H-OiF A 440,74 FOOT R|I]IU8 CURVE Tg T]E LEFT, 8AIDSTFVE HAVIIIE A CEHTRAL AT.IB.E tr 22 IEGRGES AI }IINruTES 4I EECOT{D8' ff{D A CHORD THAT ffiARS N 73 D€0REEE 04 tIINt TEB 5$ ffiC{}nlDg E 172.56 FEETf T}€l'lCE H 6I I}EOREES 47 I1IHUTEE 34 9EC0iISS E 46.67 FEETI TITET{CE ATI AFC DISTAf{CS OF 96.22 FE€T 6T-fi{O A 136.4T FOOT fiADII.'8 CUNTIE TO THE RI8HT, SAID CI.|RT'E }HVINA A CEII|TRAI- AIIEI.E OF +O IECREES 2I I'Iifl.'TE8 52 SECONDS' AND A CHORD T}HT BEffiS N A2 DEI}REES OO TIII{.JTEE OO 6€CqtII}6 E 94.24 FEETT TIEilCE $ 77 DEgffiES 47 ltIt{JTE8 3+ 6ECtr{D8 E 68.12 FEETf TTEI.ICE AN ffiC DI6TA}SE gF 1O€.7E FEET ALONO A IS{.8S FTXIT RAI}IUE of ALTA I A oo oo oo ALTA CO}I'1 IT}IEHT SCHEIILI-E A Apl icrtlon No. VOOO26O!-2 CURVE TO THE LEFT, SATO CURVE HAVINO A CET{TRAL trfi-E gF /IO NEOREEE 13 ilIN.JTE8 3A SECONDS, ff{D A C}MRB THAT BEAR6 '.I 82 DEGREES 05 I,IIMJTES S7 S€CONDB E 106.5I FEET' THE}ICE N 6I I}EBREES $8 'IINUTES 28 SECO}IIT8 E IOO.2O FEET, TO TTE FOINT OF TERI{IMJ8' IIHENCE THE SAID NffiTHI.I€ST CORNER OF SECTIS{ 12 BEARS N 48 DECREES S? ITINT.|TES 32 SECON0g X 1336,09 FEET. oo IO ALTA COHI'IITIIENT sil€fi.s-E B-r (Rcqulrcncntrl Aprllcrtloo No. VOOO26O!-2 The follqulnt rne thr rsqulrrncntc to bc conrllrd srtthl t. Favrrcnt to sr for thc eccount of tha rntntorg or mortrarons of thr full considcrqtlon for thc ertrtc on lntcrrtt to bc lnrunsd. 2. Proren lnstruncnt(tl crcqtinr thr ertrto or intercrt to bt lnruncd uurt be exccutcd rnd dulv ftled for rccordr to-srltr 3. TRADE NAIIE AFFIDAVIT FOR THE TIJRRAY PROPSRTIES PARTNER$HIP OF DALLAST A SEHSRAL PARTNERSHIF BI$gLosINB THE NAI'IES trtD ADBRE$SEA OF ALL T}E PARTNERg THERETO. 4. I"IAFRANTY DEED FROI.I EDGAR A. STtITH "TI., TRUSTEE TO T},F MNNRY FROP€RTIES PART}|ERSHIP OF DALLAS' A Oancrel Prtncrthte COtIV€Yll.lO zuBJECT PRFERTY. 5, DEED OF TRUST FRO}T THE IIURRAY PROP€FTIEg PffiTT{ERSHIP OF DALLA$, A Gcnoral Pentnerrhtp TO THE FUBLIC TRUSTSE OF EAOLE Cfl.SlTY FOR Tt{g t,SE OF REPUBLIC NATIOf.TAL FAT$( TO $ECURE THE $UI4 OF 12,g60,000.00. oo ALTA COHf,lITl.lEt{T sH€Dtr-E B-2 (Excrrtlonrl Appllcrtton No. VOOO26OI-2 The psllcy or rolicisr to bc lrrued tltlll conteln exscptionr to tha follouinr unless thc rcm? arc dispoced of to thc satlrfectlon of thc Corpanvr t. $trndard Excrptlonr I throunh 5 prlnted on thc covar thcet. 6- Taxot and aascrsficntg not vet duc or prveblc tnd rrccial etacrlncntg not vct crrtificd to thc Trresurer"r offlce. 7. Anv unpald taxer or aEscrrrmentc estingt srtd lrnd. 8. Lienr for unpeid urtcr and rcurcr. chenlcs' lf rny. P. RSSTRICTIVE COVSNANTS UIHICI{ DO NOT COHTAIN A FOEFEITIfrE OR REVENTER SLAU6E, AS Ctr{TAINED IN IN$TRI'I,IENT RECORSEO SEPTE}IBCR 2OT 1972 IN BBTT( 22S AT FA6E 4IS3, ff{D RECCIRDED SEFTEIIESR 2?, 1972 It.I BOOK 2ZC AT PACE 565, AND A}IENDED FY IN$TRU}1EhIT RECORIED JAiII'ARY 22,1t7{ IN S00K 233 AT PA6g S3. rO. UTILITY EASEI.IENTS 20 FEET IN }IIDTH, 10 FEET ON EACH gID€ OF ALL INTERIOR LOT LINES AND A TS FOOT UTILITY EASET.IEHT ALOI.IO AND AzuTTINS ALL EXTERIOfi LOT LINE6 AS RESERVED tr{ THE PLAT 8F Llt}ltl/$ RID$E zuBDIVISIONT FILIT{O NO. 2. TT. AOREE}'IENT EETSIEEN TAYVEL ENVIRON}IENTPil. LAND COT.PAiIY AI{D IIOUNTAtrN STATES TELEP}NNE AND TELEORAFH COI'IPANY RECCIRDED gEPTETTBER 27, T'73 IN BOOK ?31 AT FA6E ?9I. 12. TERT'I$' PRCIVI$ION$ AND CONDITIOHS CS'TTAITIIED It{ PLANNED LB$IT IIEVELOPI{ENT PLAN AND DECLARATIOH OF PROTECTIVE COV€}SNTS RECCIRDED IIARCH 27' r?8O IN BOOK 3OO AT FASE 7gg trilB RE-BECffiDSD AFRIL 10, tggo rN BooK sol AT PAOE 415. I3. RISHT OF PROPRIETOR OF A VEIN OR LODE TO EXTRACT END REMOVE HI8 ORE TI{EREFRS.I SHOULD TH€ 8AT.IE BE FOUND TO F€NETRATE ffi INTERSECT TI{g Ff,EIIISEA A$ RESERVED IN UNITED STATES PATENT tr REOCIRD IT{ INATRLFIENT RECORDAO AU6U$T 16, 1909 lH BOOK 48 AT PAOE 642. I4. RIOHTT OF I.IAY FOR DITC}E$ OR CANALS CTT\tsTRISTED gY TT|E AUT}[}RI'Y tr THE UNITEII $TATE6. AA RS$SRVE! IN UNITED STATSA PATET{T RECORXED ATSTJgT 16, T?O?, IN EOOK 48 AT PASE 842. oo LAND TITLE GUARA}ITEE COMPAIIV 3665 Cherry Creek North Drive Denver, CO 80209 321.r880 13693 East lliff Avenue Denver, CO 80232 7514336 8333 Greenwood Boulevard Denver, CO 80221 427-9353 3110 S. Wadsworth Boulevard Suite 102 Denver, CO 80227 988-8650 830 Kipling Street Lakewood, CO 80215 232-3111 P. O. Box 2280 Breckenridge, CO 80424 453-2255 303 South Cascade Colorado Springs, CO 80903 6344821 1211 Main Avenue Durango, CO 81301 247-5860 P. O. Box 357 108 So. Frontage Road West Vail, GO 81657 476.2251 3600 S. Yoremite. Suite 350 Denver, CO 80237 7754220 650.17th Strost Denver, CO 80202 629-7329 9725 E. Hampden, Suits 103 Denver, CO 80237 750€,424 l COMMITMENT TO,INSURE This commitment was produced and issued through the office of LAND TITLE GIJARANTEE COMPA}IY P. O. BOX 367. 108 SO. FRONTAGE ROAD WEST, VAIL, COLORADO 8T657 Telephono lil)gl 476.2251 tltl. ln$rnJrc. Comprny ot Mlnn rotr h . rubrldtrty ol Mlnnior. Tltla FlnancLl Corpor*lon. NASOAO Symbot - MTIT. frTddett W Gonrparrg.,--. analti lpal u no I bu il il i n { protl uo l* April 27, 1982 Wheeler Piper Architects Box 3129 Vai'l , Co] orado 8.l657 Attn: Duane Piper RE: The Enclave Vail, Colorado Dear Duane, Pursuant to our phone conversation of April 26, with Tom Blackwood, President of Architectural 1982, I spoke Engi neeri ng Products. The A.E.P. metal roofing system in a low gloss Duranar 200 finish would be available for the project should you request it charcoal gray above referenced Si ncere ly,?;;*-fu -/ James Riddell I I I 59Ol South Quebec Street. Englewood, Colorodo SOlll .(3O3) 773-8071 I I H I I I t I I I I t box-{O$ 75 S. Frontage vail, colorado 81657 (3031 4?€€€4a 476-7000 department of community development llarch 20, 1981 John Thouras P.0,696 Vail, Colorado 8I657 Dear John, AsP Irn sending you notification of the recently passed zoning for On Tbesday, March 17, 1981, the Town Council passed on second reading Ordinance 13, Series of 1981 . This ordinance (enctosed) stipulated that all of The Valley, phases I through 6, would be zoned Residential Clusier. The ordinance also says that any and all approvals and agreenents given by Eagle County renain in effect. These approvals are on file in the Corununity Developnent Department. The file contains the informat ion we have discussed previously in our neetings and correspondence. The nain part of agreernent affecting you is that The valley, Phase VI will be allowed a rnaxinun of 42 dwelling units ana 77,150 square feet of Gross Residential Floor Area (GRIA). Also, note that the Ordinance will require the project to be approved by the Tor.nrs Design Review Board before a building peilnit can be issued. Please let ne know if I can be of any further help on this. Irn available to noeet with you if you wish. rely,i.l A,P Sen ior Pl anner APP: bpr Peter Patten . Senrot Plann€t Departmenl ol Communlty Oevelopmenl t.-l , \ i ORDINANCB NO. 13 (Series of 1-981) AN ORDINANCE IMPOSING ZONING DISTRICTS ON CERTAIN DEVELOPI{ENTS AND PARCELS OF PROPERTY IN THE RECBNTLY ANNEXED I'/EST VAIL AREA; ACCEPTING PRIOR APPROVALS OF TIIB BAGLE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS RELATING THERBTO; SPECIFYING AIIENDMENT PROCDDURES; SETTING FORTH CONDITIONS RELATING THERETO; AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP FOR THE TOWN OF VAIL: AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN RELATION THERETO. UEEIIAS, the town of Vai1, Colorado, recently annexed the West Vail area, County of Eag1e, State of Colorado, effective on December 31, 1980; and \YHEREAS, Chapter 18.68 of the Municipal Code of the Town of vail sets forth procedures for the imposition of zoning districts on recently annexed areas; and WHEREAS, Section 31-12-115 (s) C.R.S, 1923, as amended, requires the Town to bring the newly annexed lliest vail area under its zoning ordinance within ninety (9o) days after the effective date of said annexation; and WHEREAS, because of certain actions taken by and approvals of the Eagle County Commissioners rela.ting to the within specified properties the Town Council is of the opinion that the zoning designation for these areas should recognize said approvals and conditions; and IVHEREAS, the Planning and Envlronmental commission of the Town of vail has considered the zoning to be imposed. on the newly annexed. YJest vail area at a public hearing and has made a recommendation relating thereto, to the Town Council; and WHEREAS, the Town council considers that it is in the interest of the public health, safety and. welfare to so zone sa.id property; NoIY, THEREFoRE, BE IT oBDAINED BY THE ToI{N coUNcIL oF THE TotvN OF VAIL, THAT: The procedures for the determination of the imposed on the newly annexed West Vail area 18.68 of the Vail llunicipal Code have been zoning districts to be as set forth in Chapter fulfilled. Section 1. Procedures Fulfilled. \ Section 2. F5iTT6iE-ot Imposition of Zoning District on Certain Parcels and the newl annexed IVes t VaiI area. Pursuant to Chapter 18.68 of the Vail l{unicipal Code, the properties described j-n subsections e, f, g, h & i below are a portion of the West VaiI area annexed to the Town through the enactment of Ordi-nance No. 43, Series of 1980, of the Town of Vail, Colorado, effective on the thirty-first day of December, 1980, and hereby zoned as follolvs: a, The developments and parcels of property specified below in Subsections e, f, g, h & i shall be derreloped in accord.ance with the prj-or agreement approvals and actions of the Ilagle County Commissioners as the agreements, approvals and actions relate to each development or parcel of property. b. The documents and instruments relating to the prior county approvals, actions and agreements are presently on file in the Department of Community Development of the Town of VaiI and said approvals, actions and agreements are hereby accepted and approved by the Town of Vai1. c. All buildings for which a building permit has not been lssued, on the effecti-ve date of the annexation of lfest Vail sha1l comply rvith Design Revi.ew Criteria of the Vail Itlunicipal Code prior to the issuance of a buildi-ng permi,t. d. The Community Development Department may issue staff approvals for mj,nor changes in site design or other mi-nor aspects of the plan for any of the specified developments or parcels. These proposed changes may be approved as presented, approved rvith conditions or denied by the Staff with an appeal within 1O days of the Staff decision to the Planning and Environmental Commi-ssion. For major changes, such as a re-design of a maJor part of the site, changes as use, density \./!1,,'l' control, height or other development standards, a planning and ,",i'.\Ff, Environmental corunission review should be required. The procedure t' ,.r\ ., for changes sha11 be in accordanee with chapter 18.66 of the Vail r Munlclpal Code. e. The following developments and parcels of property shall be subject to the terms of this ordinance: (1) The Valley, Phases 1 through 6. (2) Spruce Creek Torvnhouses. (3) Meadorv Creek Condominiums. -2- (4) VaiI Intermountain Swim and Tennis Club. (5) Briar Patch, Lots G-2, G-5 and G-6 L,ionsridge Subdivis j.on FiIing No. 2. (6) Casa De1 So1 Condominiums. For any zonj-ng purpose beyond the Bagle County Commissioners' approvals, agreements or actions, the developments and parcels of property specified in this subsection (e) shall be zoned Residential Cluster (RC). f. Lionsridge Subdivision, Filing No. 4, sha11 be subject to the terms of this ordinance. For any zoning purpose beyond the Eagle county Commissionerst approval , agreement or action, thi.s parcel of property shal1 be zoned Single Family Zone District (SFR) with a speciral pro- vision that an employee unit (as defined and restrlcted in Section 18.13.08C of the vail l{uni-cipal code) will be subject to approval-s as per section 18.13.080. The secondary unit may not exceed one third of the total Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) allowed on the 1ot as per the single Family Zone District Density control (section 18.10.09o of the Vail Municipal Code) and Greenbelt & Natural Open Space (GNOS). g. Lot G-4, Lionsridge Subdivisi-on, filing No. 2, has been the subject of litigation in the District court of Eagle county, and a cqrrt order has been issued regarding the development of this property. The Town has further approved Resolution #5 of 1g81 in regard to a subse- quent agreement with the owner. The Residential cluster (RC) Zone District will be the applicable zone on this property to guide the future deveropment of the parcel, working within the bounds set by the Court Order and Resolution No, 5, Series of 1981, h. Block 10, VaiI Intermountain Subdivision and the Elliott Ranch subdivision, shal1 be subject to the terms of this ord.inance. tr'or any zoning purpose beyond the [agle county commissioners, approval, agree- ment or action, Block 10 and the Elriott Ranch, shall be zoned primary/ secondary District. Lots 8, 15 & 16 of Block 10, vail rntermountain, sha1l be zoned Greenbelt & Natural Open Space (GNOS). i. Vail Commons, Vail Das Shone Fi. ling No. 4, sha11 be subject to the terms of this ordinance. Tor any zoning purpose beyond the Eagle county commissioners' agreement, approval on actlon, vail commons sha1l be zoned Commercial Core III (CCIII). -3- I Section 3. As provided in administrator Zoning Map to Section 4. INTRODUCED, READ, BY TITLE ONLY March L7, SDCOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHUD Section 18.08.030 of the Vail illunicipal Code, the zoning is hereby directed to promptly modify and amend the official indicate the zoning specified herein, rf any part, secti-on subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance, and the Town council hereby declares it wourd have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, sub-section, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, secti_ons, subsectlons, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 5. The council hereby states that this ordinance is necessary for the protection of the public health, safety and weffare. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED oNcE rN FULL, this 3rd day of lr{arch, 1991, and a public hearing on this ordinance sha11 be helcl at the regular meeting of t5e Town Council of the Town of vaiI, colorado, on the lzth day of March, 1gg1 , at 7:30 p.m. in the Municipal Buildlng of the Town of Vai1. ATTEST: APPROVED ON 1981. / ATTEST: -4- EAGrE COUNTY a Corrnun ity Devel opment P.0. Box I79 EAGLE, COLORADO 81631 TELEPHONE 303/328-73t I BOARO OF COUNTY coMMtSStoNER5 Ext 241 AOMINISTRATION Ext 241 ANIMAL SHELTER 949-4292 A55E550 R Ext 202 BUILDING IN I NSPECT IO N Ext 226 ot 229 CLERK & RECORDER E\t 2l7 COUNTY ATTORNEY Ext 242 ENGINEER Ext 235 ENVIRONMENTAL H EALTH Ext 238 EXTENSION AGENT Ext 247 LIBRARY i:xr lJ5 PUBLIC HEALTH Eagle Ext 252 Vail 476-5844 PLAN N I NG Exl 226 or 229 PURCHASING/ PERSONNEL Ext 245 ROAO & BRIDGE Ext 257 SHERI FF Eagle Ext 2l I Basalt 927-3244 Gilman 827-5751 5OCIAL SERV ICES 328-6328 TREASURER Ext 201 June 26, 1980 Vail Investments P.0. Box 696 Vail, Colorado 8.l657 Re; File No. Su-]14-80-P3 The ValleY Phase 6 At their meeting of June 25, 1980, the Board of County Commjssioners approved your preliminary plan for 42 units with the condition that all intersection radii be 30' unless spec'i fically waived by the County Engineer. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Respectful'ly yours , wl/-c,--.a-) fro rti /.t* Thomas Boni Assistant Director of Planning TBIJ h cc: Board of County tommissioners o N -i- 6 7lt lsr I I 4 APP ?:1 @AlN ONE 6?AE 'ft-'f wEg-r LOT NORTH #LE l" =lo' o o (owrlo wf \\cor"flNg UftAW) TA M E Ul I I I I \1, \./ NOFTH aaue T'.b' (lr* T (rter wr \ \coMlhri lfittw/ VLJ - ROAD OFF5TBE€T 'ARKINE EBP.€, rFl :'i __l I --_l I TO I I t- I l_ I t-- - I __J F L- I C€ENJ I ?AF,KJNE u??ffi \EWL PANKINE IY ,\6r Bt( I I -r-- ENTTRY- te -r .1 lt OPEN PARKING \rv 1D f --%'Tft.iF, t&l'l.t___Zo'--------k Jr lq .\1 Ir I lE3 lb' Io (\sd cow\Ev PA6KINE [\"-tl h"[N"r Dgt'.i-- fr,;oAt.l 'l I l>g'rl W+ .a.E'c.€--L4ac#, HIDDI..E LE\/F;L &{eReQ FAFKINC' ENTRY o r-lz !--lO'TYe -J 2o *l --] I --.1 I --J lo L_ r-l6 !- 1'o I fu- U 2/} { q ') q € t- Lc^deK @,tffiw 1TARKNe 'nt Snowdon and Hopkins o Architects 201 Gore Crerek Drive P. O. Box 1998 Vail, Colorado 303 47e2201 81657 DESTGN OUIDELTNES - THE VALLEY PHASE 6 l As shown on Drawings prepared by snowdon and Hopkins - Architects, El Dorado Engineering company and sivertson and Associates dated June 15, 1980. The valIey Phase 6 is a Planned Development on approximately 28 acres of land on the north and sout,h of LlonsRidge Loop road at t,he western portion of Parcel A LionsRidge Subdivision, fl:_ing No. 2, Eagle County, Colorado. The DevelopmenL consists of 42-dwelllng units of TT,200 square feet(GRFA), The units are to be clustered in three groupings, Group One is located north of LionsRidge Loop along a new road designated HilLside Drive. and conLains I8 unils(one A unit e1875 s.f., nine B unlts @ 1g25s.f.,one D unit @ 2150 s.f., and five E units @ 1650 s.f., and two F units @ 1750 s.f.). Group Two is located south of LionsRidge Loop at the eastern porLion of the property along a new road designated Upper Meadow Drive, and contains 12 units(three A units@ 1825 s.f,, six B units @ lgzj s.f., and three D units @ 2150 s.f.), Group Three is located soutkr of LionsRidge Loop at the weslern portion of the property along a new road desig_nated Lower Drive and contains 12 units(four A units @ 1975 i,f.,five B units @ 1825 s.f., two C units @ 1600 s.f., and one D unit @ 2150 s,f. ), and the recreationsl amenities package(lwo tennis courts, an 800 s.f. swimming pool , a 100 s.f. jacuzzi,and a 150 s.f. bath house with covered cabana. Rtt units will be provided with two parking spaces per unit (covered)and one-half parking space per unit(uncovered) on site.The following Design Covenants(as shown on the Drawings)wit1 be followed: Maximum Lot Coverage: Building - 15%(developable land) A11 other irnpervious materials - Maximum Floor Area Ratio: 0.065 : 1 .0 ( total land ) .04% ( total land ) 2O%(developable 7 .05%( Lotsl DESICN GUIDELINES - THE VALLEY PHASE 6 (page Z) : I.Setbacks: 12.5 feet from all property Llnes l= 35 feet from the centeifinl of all public LlonsRidge Loop). Hillside Drive;Upp;;Drive(no setback required) are privite be maintained by the Developmenr.. roads(70: n.0.W.and Lower Meadow roads and wi]l Maxlmum Building Height:35 feet(as administered by the Eagle county zoning Depart_ment as per Eagle County Zonlng F6solution'29) Density i - 5.j3 Dwelling Units per Developable acre(g.2 acres) Minimum Distance BeLween BuiLdinss: l!\ l6ol- Parking: 2.5 spaces per Dwelling Unit Landscaping and Revegetation shar.l -comply "ith D"""ings prepared by sivertson and Associates dated June rb,rsao is a m:.nimum standard. A11 site work and road layout shall comply-with Drawings pre_pared by Eldorado Engineering dared ,luiE ig ,- iS'eo. I I t I NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING COUNTY OF EAGLE, COLORADO Notice is Hereby Given that the Eagle will hold a Public Hearing on 25 June accordance rvith Section 10.04 of the Hearing will include the fol'lorving: County Board of County Commissioners 1980, beginning at 9:00 A.M. in Eagle County Zoning Resolution. Said F'ile No. Su-114-80-P3 - The Valley Phase 6 Request: Change to the original PUD Location: The Val ley PUD, l,lestern Tract This Hearing sha11 be held in the Commissioners Meet'ing Room #103, McDonald Building, 550 Broadway, Eagle, Colorado. Persons being affected by a decision on this request are in'vited to make comments to the Board by appearing at the hearing, or by submitting written statements 'in person or by mail thru the Planning Department. Further information may be obtained or comments submitted by contacting the Eagle County Department of Community Development, 550 Broadway, Eag1e, Colorado Phone 328-7311 - P. 0. Box 179. by: Johnnette Phil I ips County Clerk and Recorder o ,l' Snowdon and Hopkins r Architects 201 GorE Creek Drive 303 47F2201 81657 P. O. Box 1998 Vall, Colorado DES]CN GUIDELINES - THE VALLEY PHASE 6 I As shown on Drawings prepared by Snowdon and Hopkins - Architecls, El Dorado Engineering Company and Sivertson and Associates dated June 15, 1980. The Valley Phase 6 is a Planned Development on approximately 28 acres of land on the north and south of LionsRidge Loop road at Lhe western portion of Parcel A LionsRidge Subdivision, Filing No. 2, Eagle County, Colorado. The Development consisis of 42 dwelling units of 77 r200 square feet(GRFA). The units are to be clustered in three groupings. Group One is located north of LionsRidge Loop along a new road designated Hillside Drive, and contai-ns 18 units(one A unit @1875 s.f., nine B units @ 1825s.f., one D unit @ 2150 s.f., and five E units @ 1650 s.f., and two F units @1750 s.f.), Group Two is located south of LlonsRidge Loop at the easLern portion of the property along a new road designated Upper Meadow Drive, and contains 12 units(three A uni.ts@ 1875 s.f., six B units @ 1825 s.f., and three D units @ 2150 s.f.). Group Three is located south of LionsRidge Loop at the western portion of the property along a new road desig- nated Lower Drive and contalns 12 units(four A units @ 1875 s.f.,fi.ve B units @ 1825 s.f., two C units @ 1600 s.f,, and one D unit @ 2150 s.f. ), and the recreationsl amenities packa6ge(two tennis courts, an 800 s.f. swimming pool, a 100 s.f. Tacuzzi,and a 150 s.f. bath house with covered cabana. A11 units will be provided wi-th two parking spaces per unit (covered)and one-half parking space per unit(uncovered) on site. The following Design Covenants(as shown on lhe Drawlngs)wi11 be followed: Maximum Lot Coverage: Bullding - 15"/, ( developable land ) .04"/" ( total land ) AI1 other inpervious materials - 20%(developable) ,05%(tots1) Maximum Floor Area Ratio; 0.065 ; 1 .0 (tota1 land ) DESICN GUIDELINES - THE VALLEY PHASE 6 (page 2) l Setbacks: i, 12.5 feet fron all property lines _'.35 feet from the centerline of all public roads(70! n.0.W. LlonsRidge Loop). Hillslde Drive,Upper and Lower Meadow Drive(no setback required) are private roads and will be maintained by the Development. Maximum Building Hei.rght : 35 feet(as administered by the Eagte County Zoning Depart- ment as per Eagle County Zoning Resolution 79 ) Density: - 5.13 Dwelllng Units per Developable acre(8.2 acres) Minimum Distance Between BulldinEs: 1F fcpi Parking i 2.5 spaces per Dwelling Unit Landscaping and Revegetation shall comply rith D"u"ings prepared by Sivertson and Associates dated June 15,1980 as a minlmum sLandard, All site work and road layout sha]l comply with Drawlngs pre- pared by Eldorado Engineering rtated June 15, 1980. F,AGLE COT'NTY Community Development D n Rnv 17Q rAd lE. c'tiCoHAoo arosr TELEPHONE 303/328-731| BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Ext 241 ADMINISTRATTON Ext 241 14 May 1980 Va11ey Enterprise Col orado Re: Notice of Public Hearing Board of County Cornmissioners 9 June 1980 25 June 1980 ,t/ Please pub'l ish the attached Notice of Public Hearing as a Legal Notice in the 22 tlay 1980 publication of your paper. Please bill and send affidavit of publication to this office. ANIMAL SHELTER 949-4292 A55E5SO R Ext 202 BU ILD ING IN INSPECTION Ext 226 ot 229 CLERK & RECORDER Ext 217 CO U NTY ATTO R N EY Ext 242 ENG INEER Ext 236 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Ext 238 EXTENSION AG ENT Ext 247 LIBRARY Ext 255 PUBLIC HEALTH Eagle Ext 252 Vail 476-5844 PLANNING Exl 226 or 229 PURCHASING/ PERSONNEL Ext 245 ROAD & BRIDGE Ext 257 SHERIFF Eagle Ext 2l I Basalt 927-3244 Gilman 827-575l SOCIAL SERVICES 324-6324 TREASURER Ext 201 Thank you -t: /-:;2,/-.-"-1./- K/therine Peterson 0ffice Manager Eagl e Eagl e, 8]631 \r'i- 'i NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING COUNTY OF EAGLE. COLORADO Notice is Hereby Given that the Eagle County Board of County Commissioners will hold a Public Hearing on 25 June 1980n beginning at 9:00 A.M. in accordance with Section 10.04 of the Eagle County Zoning Resolution. Said Hearing will include the following: File No. Zc-128-80 - Thonson, Yeike, Hesseltine Request: Zone Chanqe frorn Resource to Rural Residential Location: Parcel ttlo. i, as described in the Kelly subdivis'ion Exemption plat Recorded in Book 273 at Page 960, Drawer K, l4ap Case "2" of the real property records of Eaole County, Colorado. 1510 Eby Creek Road, approximately l and 1/2 miles north of the Eaole I-70 Exit on Eby Creek Road. File No. Su-114-80-P3 - The Valley Phase 6 Request: Change to the original PUD Location: The Valley PUD, Western Tract This Hearing sha'l I be held jn the Commissioners Meeting Room #103, McDonald Building, 550 Broadway, Eag1e, Colorado. Persons being affected by a decision on this request are invited to make comments to the Board by appeart'ng at the hearing, or by submitt'ing written statements in person or by mail thru the Planning Department. Further inforrnation nay be obtained or comments submitted by contacting the Eagle County Department of Community Development, 550 Broadway, Eagle, Colorado Phone 328-7311 - P. 0. Box 179. by: Johnnette Phillips County Clerk and Recorder snbtHcorrNtrY Community Development P.0. Box 179 EAGLE, COLORADO 81631 TELEPHoNE s03/328-73tr 14 May 1gg0 BOARD OF COUNTY coMMrSstoNERs Ext 241 AOMINISTRATION Ext24l The Vair rrair ANTMALSHELTER P. 0. Box 10 s4s'42e2 vail, colorado 81657 ASSESS0 R Ext 202 BUILDING IN I N5PECT IO N Ext 226 or 229 CLERK& Re: llotice of Public Hearing RECORDER ^ - , ,. ^Ext2l7 Board of County Cormissioners 25 June 1980 COUNTY ATTORNEY Ext 242 ENGINEER Ext236 Please publish the attached Notice of Public Hearing as EN'IR.NMENTAL a Legal llotice in the 22 t4ay 1980 publicatjon of your HEALTH paper. Ext 238 EXrENsroN Please bill and send affidavit of publication to this office. AGENT Ext 247 LIBRARY Ext 255 PUBLIC HEALTH Eagle Ext 252 vail 475-s844 Thank yOu PLANNTNG ./ ,/7 Ext 226 or 229 r'\ -'/ .. ,/-J'--,.r . ''<-''/- ' puRcHAsf NG/ ff e.--/./t-. L.z-'-<-,r ,/-r.ZTt-r---,PERSoNNEL Kdtherine Petefson Ext245 0ffice Manaqer ROAD & AR IDG E Ext 257 SHERIFF Eaqle Ext 2l I ea;alt 927-3?44 Gilman 827-575l SOCIAL SERVICES 328-6328 TREASURER Ext 20 | EAGTE COUNTY Community Development P.0. Box .l79 EAGLE, COLORADO 81631 TELEPHONE 303/328.73 | I BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Ext 241 ADMINISTRATION Ext 241 ANIMAL SHELTER 949-4292 A55ESSO R Ext 202 BUILDING IN I NSPECT IO N ExI 2?6 or 2Zg CLER K & RECO RDER Ext 2l 7 COUNTY ATTO RNEY Ext 242 ENGINEER Ext 236 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Ext 238 EXTEN S IO N AG ENT Ext 247 LIBRARY Ext 255 PUBLIC HEALTH Eagle Ext 252 Vail 476-5844 PLANNING Ext 226 or 229 PURCHASTNG/ PERSONNEL Ext 245 ROAD & BRIDGE Exl ?57 5HERIFF Eag le Ext 2l I Baszlt 927-3244 GiIman 827-5751 SOCIAL SERV ICES 328.6328 TREASURER Ext 201 May 8, '1980 John Thomas Vail Investments & Dev., Ltd. P.0. Box 696 Vail, Colorado 81 657 Re: Fi le No. Su-114-79-P The Valley - Phase VI At their meeting of May 7, the Planning Commission recommended approval of your preliminary p1an. This recommendation will be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners on June 25, 1980. The following are concerns of the staff which r^Je hope you will consider: I ) Engineering drawing or retainaqe.2) Single access point for units on south side of road.3) Thirty (30) foot curb radius at all intersec- t ions. The size and number of units are acceptable to the staff.I apologize for the inconvenience with regard to the 3ingle access po'int. Additional study of that road sjnce we first reviewed thjs plan in the fall has led us to believe that two points of intersectjon should be avojded. Please sub-mit a P.U.D. quide to clearly identify the land use restric- t'ions to run with this project. The public notice required by 1aw for a major revisjon to a P.D. is 30 days. This is r^rhy the Board of County Commjssioners will not be able to hear your preliminary plan until June 25. If you have any guestions! please contact this office. Resgectfu'l 1y yours, ./,.'<-/, / 4 ,/rn- / f"ltt'rt ^i-a't /C)t'ra^'/ Thomas Boni Assistant Director of Pianning TB/J h cc: Board of County Commissioners Craig Snowden I a il I ti. box lfl) vail, colorado 81657 (3031 476-5613 department of community development TO: FROM: DATE: RE: MEMORANDUM EAGLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSIONERS TObIN OF VAIL, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, PETER PATTEN May 7, 1980 FILE NO. SU-]'I4-80-P3, THE VALLEY PHASE V] PRELIMINARY PLAN We have had an opportunity to review the revised p'l ans for Phase VI of the Val1ey. We support the general layout of the site plan with the distribution of the units in three clusters, one on the hillside and two in the meadow. An underlying question that still remains'is: l^h'11 the County a11ow unjts to be built upon very steep s'l opes? A re'lated question would be: Can the proposed Hillside Lane hold 18 units where one considers the restrictions with the steep slopes? Our position on this is that 40% or thereabouts, depending upon topographic accuracy, shou'l d be where the line is drawn. l,'le basical'ly have no major problems with some of the hillside units being located on slopes of around 40% if designed with environmental considerations. However, according to the topographic map submitted there is a minimum of two units located in areas of 50% slope. The extenf,of the steep slopes cannot be determjned because the contours are not camied through the building footprints. S'lopes much over 40% begin to present severe development restrictions and the Town would recomnend against units being constructed in these areas. Previous concerns of ours have been well addressed for the most part. The downhil'l elevation of the units along Hi'l'lside Lane have been substantial'ly reduced in height. Potentia'l snow removal problems on Hil'l side Lane has been solved. Nurber of total units has been reduced by five. However, the request of a single access off of Lionsridge Loop for both meadow clusters is not shown on the revised p1ans. We continue our emphasis upon this as vle see no rea'l need for two road cuts there. A final minor concern is the size of the proposed tennis courts. To make these courts p1ayab1e, standards indicate the need for twice as much room between the back fence and the base'l ine and the side fence and the doubles side'l ine. Re-siting of the courts or going to a single court should be looked at. o VI The Valley Phase 5-7-80 Page Two In conc'l usion, we fee'l the site plan and the new landscap.ing plan are generally we'l I done. The deve1 oper and architect have demonstrated high quality work in the Town of Vail and we fee'l they wi1'l continue in that regard. l{e do feel , on the other hand,that the over 40% slope areas should remain open and there should be only one road cut enterjng the meadow. D"-Ltk- Richard nyaN Di rector A. 'Peter Patten Town Planner A' (! 6 \o @ 9. :>Y"8 +O ra -E'o 0ll 3.F dr EX od ia N6'o-5o 09; tt .,! (D(D Er<EE DtO trQ. A-a :-o (D () A' ut>9.€E3 zv4 i, :' ts . =t!xr0?E(n;.- a\ tg 6it= Xr ia Itg i-i. .!Or <I x6 E.rY ot!Fll (hc i:(D gr (t a ,; (D! a Fs \C x'g T15 + q'; (DJ o9o' EH3 R.E g ;s a p F't FEE 3o'8 =< q [: E E=n qEg, HEA -:v { +g 5EE =';' O ,o< *sg r sF fid6-' ct o o () A' o (D { ,; tx t(D lar' l(! lci , ls IF lo. t3. t- I(D l>r l='oa t ?te El tt i+l )a H.l x fltl0a Elr ot*.,'l(ti o l:r '5la -| llt olR di?5l.D Cll6 ,16 Eftr rlE F.H rE 5r :,t'2lz xto sE F$ F.r/S' ql6- =l x OlL,rrl c plq lJlcl gl=.olL 8la 't< : to 9l{ 0Q t= TIr' EIF]*le NI o lat E.16 0q .D .D gEEi g i'gEilFii#$ii i'FFBg rga BEF€Fesiii?iFiliEaFgrIB irgr griaa'lii sIg FEef,FgE -lig giElE iEi Eig gEiEEEF rF; +e"Eq+ F3F 9F: rn f)m r?| rI o -E'xa --h b.vt s h E G _F|\fita hj> :-); 5co : crr F. CC] i- 2 |- z (t z .; 2 o :! F.: oil 3e fD \e F (t,I (h. ?* =F l8 -r; 5 ho c, ( (( (( ( '9 - \o O o gE .Dt9 -: < -,3 =-l <tt .= !!= "o A o (.) N 6 IJ z -g*Ii giigggElggIa rggggggliilg a lE aaiisBEei;isig piFFFEi$l il iFEiEF'lFili,g Eli'gi[Fg 3i ig-aui -iafll I E+i aE-[- ='ar = r- i+gF9$i FEggFgE P >o i5.o oEl dsD Pa99 H EF a:'i; ?iH =E rF r*g gH -F' AA6;O6 SEEE*5 EEdS;ga ;teeE p f i'H F[ s girsEF 3*E:5 F 1a* r* ir ii'Y o,or69 ':!!F CJ X=C)Crrts EER o !.,: 4J y/-ct (a si9g (c ^ Or ;.=,/)E Eq!|.. l.sF6 9:oE =>l EEI:6 s2i 5 !; ';:;: *!()-X E(, d Ai " o otZ .9a-: aTsE - t =;i==-z=:!, 3424 a EE |EF,-; ? € i: i AEs;Ei iE;Ei "i5EE:.EgrgE;:$ b E'E i E; E SE *Eii;;irE:rsE :; E;Eiii rs:e: r;;t!$it Xre;ga i3!EgIiE;Nii;I -?::Ei:iE€E:E:F Ei E 3!€ E eqfl $if i Eg;H:€E€!EF€ii: ?Aqa g:- Ai E { r:; i fi s' E;cg; [* * Iege ! 3Ei;3 Ea= =; iz *EEE9i=j:;E e. xtrF z . ;E 9E €F€E ggF i!;i $ i€ q ;E; *s!; g;Ea,€i; *;58 Ei EEEi;E; E5:E #i igEi };;. €;;: ?F g:Ha;3:F8-€=E ss;iiE;igi fa E::, si *$Eg i5i$E; i€fu t. *l- () loJ : I c\0 r- l'- >a IEE Fe :1 do g'fi clo b0q ga oo .Te qJtr 9.; H,6 q9 sl E -t 9 ool*-trtF Flz X l/1 -E l(, 9lu cJ-'i E x q) (n ol al {Jl (!1 >l (5l xl {.)l I :il I EI (l)l -l I a '=;ggEii#Ei! i IgiigEiiggigEg .gflHEEiF!siEgE: EgiE;Eiliiii;E,i 2 E;iEi !E:? iF iEf qr u€?E ;g ;r?"i: i-€$P tEe E.giEE !EEE !E= =sIEE; ;:gF .E gF = i E l: s l g€* g , I E!._-)..* 6-d 9 E ;g=;;;:E €iiaEgi+ igiE}:f'iEEgEI!€E;€E!!i€?Er;c;::;a;:EE6;; i'=zzz: i= ziillt+ t" oo @ { ':--\{ P=* z Zit L : ?x = ^ i:. - e:5 E ;s-3 E e4g : Ei'; :EE; R H9"h E !€5 :' i5E t Y-dTt E --C X cE E 9.1 d (g --F !: I ,n ts.'o c -;.: : i;tr EEF 8 .=93 E isE. F E8€.E iiiloo ; E-z'.eEE 9 o., tr tr u ., c-c - *E cE.== u2 jo-i-'-, ^F= -'-;-rsR.e gFgi l.l E'Fal-i3F* e= E*rE 3 ':-.! * - c:9 !., L ssEi;;i;!FEr :9iEHEF;i5h' l'g3ET !* gt{E: :;Fti,? ; E;i{; Et;.HaFeE€.:;j,i=i;oiY=;o.zti I H3fiH99.E€gEH-3d eqP'a 9 U ,, l'- ? '" ^r F I E f=HRF EEr n (J r< 4 Gl L.l F .='J- @ o\ i :'!6 iP'dg 2 qE l€;i,iz ;:sf g 4i sisH:2E a=Zzi e g: :i: EE ; r = :?iZE i": i=E g! 4 2i ]4?ii z i= ;Eiz 2 ; l= :1;=: E:E EEf .:;" rE E !E rgr ai ?-€s;::;;u Et *a€ s!€F€ 2 G;;i ii€==ii i;*€rEit Ei.|"E 4t==zx :FxE' zii E;zgi E; ;; e: E it t€ ii?*: i!!E =1E:z=7i i;Eii lZZ L izirzzt:*1i t_iZE= 2E=z 'zi Ae ii| ill::E'r t==;tZ;, i !r7 t Ez zZttjE1i.xli tt;1lzltzi i, iZ:-=2 ";ziiti zZzizz =-riA i'til=:iilii iii 'i;vii3i i;E ,;1_=it;1=i==r.v?i?i==1tlii;a=*4, a7=? Z? 3 i Z :!21;"r riz15; : s: e E = j'j' |E;=i=' i ii; :€ x€ i€! i - Eg ; oE Y i: > tr =' E !., O C!AT SEEn ;" 'E* lE x '12 o13^=cd !+ otr;:j J E E,s =E =- ;q,(!i,9 :E;;bo= - th o =ior .9",- ia i6 a;5i EY ote?n ;; E37.= ,! E€E:S; E - i-c,7 =.9 b 9 .11 E c <) 2 =!? riiS Z2 3Lz't ii i=7i )i =-J+,EE 1=c t g € = c -J= 1'z zi==i =^7 lit.1=; -: =, /-7.a=t 2 .: tf, - -= i: =>a't13, - j,= '<I v ::: -z==1:?= ( {. ( ( ( € .aie= == i izi zzLz? ?1 7 a:7 17,-v-.= .a* 1 a.l; Eaiii 3: a etE i;Eii;;E 7, :;i tiiir:licicEii s i EEi€ d; gEiEIi i FiEiE FE EiiiiEE,EIEgElig gss5i$g3i3ffigsE3*' : j iz=z?1=2=i=2i?. = - 22Z,_.-;) f i,-==:; "Z==:.=?7iE=-=7"i7 : iz--=!i:j=_!j=l:a :-=t3,====:=.a!..=:=-: z=z-i=i,Zai!i:=z i :;i==:==ii2j:1 Zt i :l=2:=--.J=-= a.J-; - l7=:i:i-?'-1i?=-z'- aar=.-'==i'=--C-=r ? "' i:i!!i=3t!!1yi!: -- =11a"1' " )'=E3:'='-: -?=--;==i!ZZZIgTt:= ;i';;2!i;:+-ai:€i = a :.:'-4-.== t;='.=.!3 --i r.12=i;E,iiAZi= =;f i1:=ii?"7::Ei€€ti'= i=iz=:1e;€'Er=E:3 = sEirl;eEEteE:5 al I 5E8gE=-ao'r:"co:-c!i rbI'zEc:EgfisgiXgH I aia;u*ar:itEf.Agi!*" f, s i;=e:;=:HE?iE;!EEEH q q =-E!Efit*tsHi33s;EFEi€<E < H'o'3 q: i H F <:;E:F 9l a<s i srrEgg-eiEHEtEs- i I I I I I I ^l 0al o\l -l FI 1l 'l \ol (ul b4 D rxl o 5 !t \c'o aFnEEuai*s ;€r=iisgHF EF?ggiigig $aiFgilE'F$ iH;fr$f iE f,rT€[3 $g FIl+ggig N-cLv (D -a t5 (, 9r t9 Fl o o cl z ufigf[?FgsescifrftgF ;stBsEHa ;EoF*;9tb EE$eFe-igig$Fala CiglgE g Fa FlBiifl i'EEs*Ei$ifigg* E*g'EFgEF[lEi1i si sE s F$ g$g FflF fgF .s+3 f a cLH r+* 6'-r b'al.asi#ii7#,5s"H =9,sob-9',9€ Aq? fle Lg 3'fi Ee H ee € 9 f.5'@ 5'q I i.?'E p.;'5 'Fil I1"- x3 qE gFi;i; Fgii iEFaSg:;f; segaFaa;Fr A:F;39'''fXE.I d -- d *E 5 ,rI gaFr=e,93dd' E 11H z?Zfi : g;;gH;sr s P: F=-9' I E 6 -= '1 : H,E; "a F - y; o g,'.'-i =TilE P*F CT iF' 0'io e @ Aa, - ='R ; -g ! =x X o H p gFJ -:!L :?< FE s ii a H - =-='i'il' 8.9'F p o=l e *F aFi brE = E_'8. 5g ?< ( ( ( ( ( ( =. \o 6 o 0a o r s $ $'E ii 3.:* 6 g I o-or6 eEFaZ PexF"36-r-J 6.6' ^ X trr <;q 5s ^. a) !1 -.F -'ir A,< =.Al Hfr =3 OJ E. J F.! a i'-iiv E8 EtE -Y="gF 3g{rJd=' Y8r'(D_(D -;I.l]i.}ut !r er 3.!?orP B6*D' =E F&A na-.drl F.(! "oat='aP 7 $r'r '-. f.>f'aD k >3 I g> Fl .l! € F: =;l!?J4 sE >E D)< r'br N5 u) 0a 8r o 0e A ieiil$iH'F*igl A3:HEEg EgE;A aigF t*F aEqii i};EE[i flFF3€F+:Fs*; +;geF F:4=i3 aEe[g iE? FB 5&"'g:;'"a;f 1g sFsFF FBE 8-g' *9.?3.H sti a; :EE:E.8eE- r'H 0aF-ds. ieE +E x?;ce lgiigsliiglgligglgi liE1'i[EFuggiiFF agl a rggs giEE[iE*Fir[ar s =g;EEg€ iEiEc; EEg+eE 5 - J' o- q) .::qrJcor) Fiiiti€ ;OE::FE ltgEiai iE 6* Fg; E E .d.= ; E ll ll' fti5g EEi I EEifi Egiig: fF *€ rll il r;;fFu eE= ; fus* 'BEF€€ Ei "ail-il $gff4Er'€e ;'+€i€*,EE€+E! E, s I il ' il .ielEegfgig jE$FiiigggFi€i E; E $ il il $ffgi3fffgi,;ffi;lti iInie* ifui s ri l g''F€;EEigFiiEfiEilFi'$EEE**i$i'* ;.s O) .5 -6Q -E ^-E a\a rBR *r-q) hr l\r --rQ VJ s ats A \o o LU i-.l.j O '! \-o gsggIig Eii iig gFFii iEgs giiggii gii iiisiig;s SggF Ei!fffi ;i;cs,*ii='s* *iisFc ;;$$gEf, E; ${flifisiigi, i F fE€g q) .) o0 (u o a) ?o. F lEl r I r-l tjJt a IAIE I .I E t$ s tFt -lI.!lS -c E.E 6l u'.-! oi :lltr $lE qr|!{:!r x rrl ;i 3l ,- 9lra .€ lb ool9) o irE 5l€tal E 2t- 4t.I slE t60 (u q) E] '-l ol *l =l B o (J (,) rt)() d J' o0 oo P sl .=.E E Esf *ql cg"'a xs: : o.x=,9 P€ 'aie E tr E .e €:3i 96 E E g ?6 c ior ET H " F 5: fi 3':ifi E:E F; E i":i: EE:c|.: X o e8 :€E ,r4 itrx i.Q=38.6'q! \,, ' ll) -3;aR d^b€ Ee'.: HIE h,Rz 6.9 > g g s tg fr i Fg o q () --:-g .gg tDa ho > rlt cr(l) (aO, !oo otr .EN oo ll c.r -r' E 00 c, p9 oi\ o Q.: o IeX |Il.)-o'i p qr(v:.:>=e!q:() x=ooY 'tlio a a'a EER 6 c-";9= I3 €;€t FCfr- c6-6Eg 9;uE =>r ?itr''i-r\c -(6 !2i o o!- o.);..t€€ *Ed;f J-:9.' .93-d ; qp 5 rv cv1 '- X !.) o o (u x (u o0 o F z U) O ,q (I) q) <d !) rt) oo (D bo 60 c, (h (u oo € (,) al -t HI b0 d (! a) r$ '!t (l) (! (u X (u q) IEEgEiii,iEiEi iEiEell;€EiE? t sEigEs;Ei€:i€; € E3!EEiEEi ,i fiEss:F;iig;E ! $iEiEE!EEgIigE srgEi€;g;iiiie; i x ri ieii;iij€*ii EE?iE issE r6e €li€E iEiE :E: =E;gE; iifi .E EE = I t Ee l i Fet t' : Ei E? ;;sie- E,irgE E:g ;;x.r Slg fiEFi arg E$ssii:!sggfft:l EsjEttiEErEEE6E; ;t#;gE:f*:EI;E?g f- (u o{) oo o\ oo o\j =s.-..- ' ;EEEEi ;:i:iI E! sEEf IEEEE AEX'JEh iEr,,*E -:E€i;; rE!E:i I 5::.!r;: €:c H; ;: ss*?;i nt;;;. iii{iEig:EilF €; E;i:F ti !r E*i;iit€EEg€i!: Y:.d'iP-:f-E=t1;!:; E; *;E g:it * ;e ea u EE;;E EF; : :E -E E€€ €38 Fa l: E iEE fE: !i!i Ei:g lif iff€ =E€Ei':ii **'*f; t:ui c€E ?i ;; Ei ;;;E [;: E; E:El,si.E; *Eoni-.-.-* g:a;;igfiis€=r F? :ss: t€ p; i a , ri, E; EE:! i:iE E E !i!E 5 EEE iE€3: *g geg ; ;l: :-353 ; tES I -..|-.oSl .b' Fso;, .E -= () !.| .,'n':.. rJ 5E:. S H^o"F e DF: 'E Hgii '- FE; E =Ftr E -gt.' .e -Ejg .E -'.'E 6 E3." <:E*E g '6h8 .*si I H3€-,E iElee ;, si.EEE E3=€ !3E6=F *;'FE {EigEi:q$a: c!'!I'"-?- i J.B's€ €: eTiei e ;;!;; 5 E i 5 i E r €.9'=:EegeNaEc ;F:EH:E;EfiE:- L-"'tr 5 9,= tr.= (g 9E8g::E E9*HI = .)r E:FE+5:iEEBE .dbFgEUE U8.z'''- c.9 EI=31 5!s!i;s I i E? 3;.8 s u'i I 9;E,993;,-5-EH'F-'.=-^.:1 6r' =-.qF I 6 r'= d x;tr 9.9 -i b 9L7)(q-l-.=(i|- t :r$ c 1o,B g i 35 3i:1 o* I F F 6; sg g! I'H ;iE SEEE;.o-_='= 60; -. € dJ'= - p E fi :E: Ii T TE 3EE: g (, ; (! ''- >\l! o o : Hg lEEHi q*5 iB;5E E;€ €EE:: g Eg : E:;E ;;,8 8E5"1 i'E s !E €gt a!?;.8 r€EIFEH g*E.E=!igEc €E f €E s;E€E 5 &,U. E5'oE 7 :;;: ERt;9a E:*;; :i*'z E+;E st;9ii :*;i; fiE: s:Eg iEffi: t3i;€ Ei; = F ;: *'i;ii E EfE: ;:g a ;fEist€!uru csEBE EE. nE EE:; E€ EEf;i iE:iE HgE, Fi EEi:giiiEsi EiiE€Ei€;E EE E;;E; a;i;;i ;;;:E i,= *;.:'-. ;E-atg9I :;i;s:EE HHi fFi E$EFi;gEfg 55i gi€g; ;E;;ii, 5il Fli +ii; E-- *s;?e" nsEE€€ E€lgiggEi; o-c Y i: > tr :' LoJOd E: ?=an or d F- >.)T F EE g ! 3E Ee;x S: ;-gE =E E€;3 ev) 6.= 5 e -c9 ota?,^;F Ege.! ; i E-Ar !:-.()i-O E "i ; = i_c2 :.9bP !< tr !? I c H! frE;E EY- i E3.'"Y; 3a EE }; E gF> ;E Fc 6 g Y S ^ tr o:ga J nt.E'r ;5 zlaEF:E! .;;: Ei i <-3o!9-.S< EE HES 3 E (u @ i s3a€: :e : ;:* ?#r#E ;r B e;E , gEEi; !i ; E IE EgEiii;i€EiEii ar;+::;riFiii5 ESEiE'i,ilrerir; ff =ffiigig3i|;!E=EI i €!E!;:;eFEEiE:E :g5EE€3;f;iEit; : sE ;5E: E Ect i;E g - iggi?iFIiiiEi5ii 2ii::r!;*s;:E*:I .:E zzl:,tE::EEi ; A f;;;iiiigsiiE;i i#c !.) E q) q) oo =c)!rE or. d={ ol I I l I I I I I ol €l o\l :l 'cl qi fl -l bol st oo o oo b0 sEEEiii3;EEsls EiigiEiifi:iii ; igiggc;E* c' iEEl : i I FE H= EEiiiiieE egiqisFt'EEigEgi; ffrll;iiEurr:s:; rE E;aigigf;s;!i;fisiE { EaEgE ti eiE ; €€:gi :: *ei g-Ei:EEgi,iEF ::li**Fi?gTiii ,gEEEE{FEgEEiiE illI:iil'sigfi:iiu L L2 .=lsO u 9.E cYP nE q,; ('-o t= (g ooi X cd;'5!rd 'a2" (, - !.,-? x .=tra BdE *Eo #x-'ii6k 5g X 9u qq; -.o a9 .3 =.: b d-l .= o0 I o- c F tr!';2 ..- .Il (J '-6-9 b: ., o) {., oo F-l-.o:..dEiri Zg:AH :/::-AJtr ilfi$s: -g q) q), oE o9 .=(!.q c)(,c.PO cl" a)>,.c (\'rr ut=gr iq }JG| or 0) Ev => ^F g.b E 2.2 'q HEg rc -<a-^I:5 Se b :;E :E p 3tE -6e g r:EgEF 6t) E ;;rI E F : !Ee; E; EiEffiEI;{: i ; E9# g 35 6 5 F.*.9 q.l 6i *,H uE*€ Eg?;i;83: €8EeifigE,s €$ + i;gi-i t gEf;sHE E: a,E* E€'1 :lA8s; 3: E ei Ee g=,FssE EE * EI Eu E Ei!n5; E; P !H 5E.E i:f Eli E[ 5 tE 9*r g :rEg:; gi F 6i t*!'! ;IE.:9i 'o= rr aqr '=c,o ,i EEE€tE ig fi tEE:EA ; ?Ers!: E; F Este#E :^ggiEIE efr f eFi$:a Fig;is:; 5* E e€i:!g ,;i $;?€iE sF : s ;E !i€iH; iE;eie E.e : . E.E{=t p FS$q3Eeie gI tEe.E!:€;:cE]Eg:g!Esc t5fi3s*:I EiE EEgI;5;Fs ii:EtiEee €g I EE EEE!eE€ArE EEiE E€f Fi iE A.dti ES 85n,IbF H.s i'414 =.E EE ;tE EEE .3f ^6^15 gE"E ,fia t'Js2 Poc o o :J : 5 > : ,, o. tF J (, >' : * ii rd :i 6': 6 ;.9 €2'E =R7 :ost7 F; HPH IE;?; :E1''-€a :l ct :;IJ !.t X: .!' EH :;E E+T€:.E il: Ep c;3 P il; tJ p a'J-E'-4i.9 o != I b: 5 l='= € :b 5'S ,! f Fr;eg;l-CHe 3 c <si+.= 949?ii ^*-9aJ;.9i gFgHEsg;E.E I d_e gt E H** I c., o. aJ E =r ,. -- : " o €-=!3EE,3El? 5H.q+:'=F€F^F E:frFsE2y#'- EIEEi ;f;:Ei s€ ; E 6?g.a r.rl fJ :l frl :l 0)ol I I I I I o o \+.- EAGTE COUNTY o Community Development TELEPHONE 303/328-731I EAh'Lg;cbtohfoo rturt BOARD OF COUNTY coMMrsstoNERs Ext 241 AOMINISTRATION Ext 241 ANIMAL SHELTER 949-4292 A55ESSO R Ext 2Oz BUILDING IN I NSPECT IO N Ext 226 or 229 CLER K & RECORDER Ext 2l 7 COUNTY ATTO R N EY Ext 242 ENGINEER Ext 236 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Ext 238 EXTEN SI O N AG ENT Ext 247 LIBRARY E.XI ZfJ PUBLIC HEALTH Eagle Ext 252 Vail 476.5844 PLAN N I NG Ext 226 or 229 PURCHASING/ PERSONNEL Ext 245 ROAD & BR IDG E Ext 257 SHERIFF Eao le Ext 2l I Baialt 927 -3244 Gilman 827-575 | SOCIAL SERVICES 328-6328 TREASURER Ext 20 | 22 April 1980 \ Mr. John Thomas Vail Investments and 1 Development Ltd. P. 0. Box 696 Vail, Colorado 8.|657 Re: File No.Su-114-80-P3 The Valley Phase At thejr meeting on 16 April 1980, the Eagle County Planning Cormission tabled, at the applicant's request, the preliminary plan for The Valley Phase 6 to their 7 May 1980 meeting. If you have any questions, please contact thjs office. Assistant Director of P'l anning TBlkp -/./:-.*-"-, & D ApriI L4, 1980 Mr. Tom Boni !ag1e County Planning Department Box 179 Eagle, Colorado 81631 Dear Tom: Pursuant to our phone conversation of this morning, rye afg hereby fgquesting to be taken off the agenia for the Apri I 16, 1980 Pl anni ng Commj ssioners - meeti ng. At this time we would like to be put on the agenda for the May 7, 1980 meeting. ShouId you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Si ncerely, VAIL INVESTMENTS & OEVELOPMENT, LTD. ^/)A FU-p.9Lr"rca-+ B. Thomas Ll x 696 Bb Vail, Colorado 81657 (303) 476-0250 Vail Investments evelopment, Ltd. RECIIVfD ApR i J t:jBO DePt ol Flannirr,a ! !;ys1- tagle, County, Coio. Box 386 Eagle, Colorado 81631 I,larch 2?, l-960 Terr11l thil;ht, Eagle Co'rnt;' Planner ',6 Eat'Ie Count;r Plarrning Dept. 3ox 179 EagJe, Colorado 8163l- rerrLLl.: The $no",'den ar:d Hopkils. shetch plan request',.ras subrnitted to the Eafjle County Soil Conservation district for revielv and corrpnt. r,'Ie have no colments on this nropos a1 . Sincerel;'r, Bud Geiee, President ,t,-i-l;'j ' :iJ lirn rsiit] DBpt. of pi:nnrnq 4. gg.{s1 ftglqr County, coto. 3 r- -E " E o E5 d d (D a, .c -Ed o .c L ctrF .rJ crr d -c ioo rD !Ee=<lLr6aro E-CrO-(\l €g) = o (u jr +, i! L E ,- .c('E FC +€tr+86'FcP : 6d:q,-: I c > d U ;E:= : ;C !- tN g.5P .- !.- o or! > .J c F +j ct.- .! rg <f 40 .+ro ! rio rtL ('foo qo'- rD 'a oq- 4 ' (J ro o Pes > -a .F.., .t:J .F c] ,_ o o 0, .6 5 =f -oo.F x ,E r. .o!(Dxc 6>j aJo .o f ro{r}L : o,r-.4 ur Jcvd >F 5cEo.- 3 q!>*opoo rl,| 4oe+J o.r(,{J9- 6:E o L o c o qJ ao c, .p 'F aJ ru F rD .or a a o!,'-r.- r- b u .r, o F1r r\- o r+,c\l lgo! 4, ujo o d 6J.166!0 c'(o tdq- o)oP {J.E o o o o> o*q- >oC'elo cJoor t tr.- -./ \ ooq-o5uo, ou! o oJ|'/r c6E o c r! : o ! (J ! .- o ! 6-!.roo6-FhcJqe!or.!6c-Jc.c-oo +i o. lr l! O - O- {lJ<t d Ct x OO € O.; c'.D o oood.-o.Fq- o a.r € (,(uodo(Jo- 6.- t'-.) \o 1J(, loe -<:h q--F hO L E-c .-q- .FeC t oLa.o o raoo-oFE.- !o! -o c >\'4 (u ,-oF SFcry xo,c|-rJsqrn€ -oroJc xl-Fc .J <o.c9 .oF 0, co.PiJ! ouru E -o ll)o o (J Or i- I EO o L O.l O OJF Q o q C J (o (U c () L 5 O O E L L L 9- (J (u! O FcdEaJcr.!-(v xcutr - r.rvE '^ .-oc.E-..,q, oxE E.Fdoo EooL EoFav qrOC'E E 3* Eq- oc! EtlF(J o,, O Eodlro toi6.e-J+r(J dJrolo oFo o fooo o!- L-o o 0'-0-!6 E: La N(J. .o()L(J (J OE! O O(l OO!.FO)... OJ 5.rJ(r' (u.P J(u t o- C=.oO'o) '.. nr... !>'trOrr-or.<EdlraFN(r 'lj!o 'dl! dcoca o1r (J raEForar !)4ru! g-c o F ov F = qr -r.-up torf- c! c oJ.F c-c\ 0',5 cnEPo..o .-!o.-.. -rr6 t.. txer\ .-..F.F (DlL c 6.-.DOrs- F.Fdtc -!l'F o-! c -.-ru4E .g o(\l- c >r o >Lcod o>(J.Foq (/)>6e.o .->Loo .JF da! oo xF oF €'Fc o,'-'- q'-('.lr 6oir (D! 4J{J.F OlF LP.- .E'O d Oe (JE, 6 O.rr }.o.po,o P-o.- '! q- -o o- (D c.P -o.F (J r€ L.d.F d d a SEyE d a -E E ao oE-E o!TEoFFEO f 6<.-cE u 6t- -= lgoFF-E pFcCC = rrJ aJ{J !/) ca o, ! F > o lL c! o r!.- er "P..-E ,F.."E. ,3.."Ee ,e.."tE ,e..'E -;..*3E .o.Poc laroE E o E oro | 1, c! o o <Eoo o ceo.- o <) cEu >tO o..=d0, @..>oor.F co.'f o0, @..:r(\r ru @..5F0, @'.=.6-(U @!o>ca rpo cal- i|Jo d lrJo4d r.po e(a co6!o Oor6r -dL--ro oJ s,dq- c, (o (u ohrF-< N o) orctF F- o ci!q- .r o o oG (o srzFs F:rJ c, (F 9 -:rl. orr-€ - rg.Fq- - laa atF F t-! . Lrr FcocDd L t o(JL,,6 l- | cru-6 | ooEis I su>rr-€E0rdu!o EaJdu.P: E oJ d.-{J Eor!op ={r'!3r!Ec.6rd ul.!ci6t/) o (rc6d(/)r.- 6.zcolLv) v1e,@-.)./) iroor5 = .1 -.! ETE F ,'E Ear.: d -e..€ E P z z, == E P E .:5U AE I o G Pi , -;3 E o = ..!'a- - 3 <!C) cro .Fo -o.rr L>,O .E IF I- J o o oq- L L O.P ! J aa o .P o,c.J o@o, (, = L aD aD -< o @o < -c! F o lvro o se--E r>\ FlU.6d E (JU .- o OF (u ! o r, o d+r >octct Ea ir ;.: or,r- 6 ,6 -o p.r < O o t = 'EF ! OJ- . a o! oE rl .. ot z.-€(,>r- .P iO o !o-> dFq- o,?e..=. Ei -..=3.= 35=ii 3-.3 ."o 3 F g9'3€=t 3B -(roF Odl!I o 6,- o .+rF1- Ed@ Ercao O-O o<ao (=).- L:=q-l -)@ (=t=F t= @ (= l- @ (= t=r lf-z =)(=a) v/o zu J g dx l. o z E r !^ ord Cn- L!-dt 65 UO q'e -.! o o< <= 4ro r- c) c,(, > r.o (ur -op =.lr e 3 g - 3.9 E I 6 >( E >|lE5 qJF EOOr){e o o' .F L-r l!F !- E (^r,LrJ= tD ! .' . 'E (r o oi-N d, o63ts:6E o .FP i'EC rq -., ! q-= 3l . -.55t,3 Ore o.F/, o o o'- 5 >4 (Lr is.F ..F.e - ! '- L cD4q: . crlgl (, ! Q o rJ+r 0, r! o,.F oo >'.- -.- orL-.orE>,i e;E.$rE 3*iE.gI RFiE€eEEs* j _ !r4 o+rp b 3 be3i.: a E?q 3' E;.39 38 o - r 3 <<P ot !!o.c'oL o crlra r, EC ,r F,! !!! oE .c.o..._f .o''5rro, 5tELYro @c-385-€.: i :'3 33.9 PE B;i 3 -.:. 2 .r .€otr 4>, o > r I .o [l o >! rr o o.r -:95,E- !9 -E:EC€-i.' F:'*5*.9 cJ 6-e! !? o> E ,! r.= r.]at .- d e -9 _* s! E'E.? e:Es:E;;s.EE:EH*E :."3=jP"3'i -E- q €.-- o or >!d 3-r.F?"io3it-'' EE P b Pt-"5: g 39 d o 6,.- .- .- 5-3; EEf iE 3i; e'i;'= 3.tref,;€fE<€ i"idi,id.j z 3 Eo Or-Oh atr .lr o dE o nr €,r . -c 6, E o co,.co,oc!OL 1J > .- (., = -O EE A L O '.pEOCC'6 ir cr 's F ol> .o5 3 = cEaj .- o^ .- @ O < (u o'c o I 3 - ru oJq-E.ro o..-.li .r ! (u cF >\ L o,E'-: e c - o oo 'oro u3 o o s:r!Lq/44 d @oc ('E, c -oo .J =? o 3rruo.pp L o I E.F.F E o r+- t F O (u r!.'5 =-o l,.P 'l'l.'!.cc',O.F > c, <r oJ .P.J E c, q, oi ru =o! F €.F 0J or= >! -o.. . 5 F o loa - ->-oc<i-Lo rF e o o (' o l!.P+, qro.F o rol ! o)a (,- .JodlU(J o ll|J do dpr!=r cl.- =.- .F O, c, > E <ul> .J c|.C E .u.P d, E o.r E.|J id OJ O(uE 5. A- .28 3,8 zi E j oe= 3 tc po !.- 4 (J(u.. :c !,OJ t{ |! 4t tr- < } .F + (1, lU c.}r E.tr. (t|- ug .tt E oEtr- o.F s'('or >r i{ o- .-'- F - .- <: O O c|.o d c:- rr- o.p r{-rJ f ., t6 Z at >rO_ O.- E c| o 1.,'+_ !E--s :d o Otr|6oa)ci<u o o6 | 'o >, '! c E.- c >\-s o! dc <rP d l: 0, O.- P A a-.- th O c, vt .p 0, ! 4,FF E'-rJ o cD H EF.F.r or!.r, f > l!€ c L l.- oE.F q, o d o.o.lr , aJ c!rlF>F! r cno (J EE.c ,! or r 6 o-.o to, '4.- u o - 0,tup L.J FE,sc .'tL 0, I!E.JL," - E L f oJo-t.. E O 6r OP E.P O !,, o'-l!OE tl ,E rl,rrjald oc|.FZtcO 30 € c{ ro{r (J E ru(uo @1..(F 5.F ! (D.O orJ LF (ud.P+, rl+J o c' o . . . tE .a! 5<E'*Eb :lr-;3-*- 3fi*.""E9.:ct!:u > Fl- (Jr. l. q_ c E.D.Fq_'FGC- rtsdu 0,,d(uo,6cD rn!oJ :t(ULdo .ccr!c,LoJqo .J v1 |Jt) |/,leFcc, rj F.ro-6q-5uP . .l .(J<l<oo(J zl at 30, c 'Eiat d :: '€ RSb'r"38 = t- box lfi! vail, colorado 81657 (303) 476-5613 February 20, 1980 department of community development Eagle County Plannfug Corrnissioners Box 850 Eag1e, CO 81631 Re: File No. SU-114080-P3 (The Va11ey VI) Dear Planning Ccnrnissioners: The Torvn of Vail has reviqred the Va11ey Phase VI and supports the inproverents the applicant has made m the proposal. Hovever, certain refinsrents must be made pri-or to full s-rpport fron the Tom. Ttre design of the project creates iaherent deficiencies in the road systan. Ttre long roads with with rniniral setbacks will create stow renpval problens. Ttre roadruays will not be up to subdivision re- quirenrents as a result they will be private which produces a wtrole series of short and long term problerns. A single access to the neadow frcrn LionsRidge loop ha.s not been adopted by the developer. Ttris would reduce street quts and a11ow rpre clustering of the units thus opening up larger e)<panses of the readov'r. Ttre recreational anrenities are cranped and the size of the tennis court is substandard rakilg it virtually unplayable. The sta-ff feels that the u:lits should be further reduced in size and/or nunbers. Ho/rever, we support the decision to place a ceililg on the floor area. Si-ncerely,-z 2.--4- /a;q-,-- z-\ Dick Ryan Director 1 FREDERICK S. OTTO .JAY K. PETERSO N WILLIAM J. POST Otro, Pnrnnsow & Posr ATTOBNEYS AT I,3.W POST O FFICE BOX 3t49 varl, ooLoBADo 81657 February 20, 1980 RE: VAIL NAIIONAL EAN X EUILD'NG (3O3) 476-OO9? EAC LE'VAIL PRO FE55IO NAL BUILDING {303) 949,53eO FR EO ERIC '( O. GREEN OF COUNSEL Eagle County Department of Planning and Development P. 0. Box 179 Vail, Colorado 81657 ATTN: Mr. Tom Boni File No. Su-114-80-P3 - Tlie Valley Phase 6 - Preliminary Plan review for 47 units on-the l'iestern TracL of the Valley PD Gentlernen: . -Our client, Valley Associates, Ltd. (the "partnership',),is the present owner o'f that certain real-property in fagie' ' C-oun_t_yt-Colorado, commonly known as the Vailey. ttat pait of the valley known as Pl.'ase-6 is presently under contract for sale_to Edger srnith-, who is the- applicant through t4essrs. sheehan and Thomas in the above captioned-freliminaty pi"tt review. It is our understanding that the Valley pD as a wiiole lr.as been allocated a total fross floor area" ratLo of 200,000 square feet at buildout and-further has been limited to a total number of dwelling units at buildout of Srrnits. By our calcr,lations, the total square /""/r4 of gross floor area that slould be proportionately allocaEed to phase 6 i." 01,438 square feet based on the 47 units requested in Phase 6 being- approximately 30.7 percent of the total 153 units allowed and therefore -the proportionate 30.7 percent of the total 200,000 square feet of gross floor area'being 6L,43g square feet. , At the present time, tlle Partnership plans to voluntarily decrease the total number of dwelling uniti to be constructed in that part of the valley PD other than phase 6 from the 106 (153 - 47) units allowed to a reduced total of 92 units. with such_decrease, the Palfnershiq,believes it shall only need 134,000 square feet of gross floor area and, therefoie, is noE opposed_to Elr.e CounEy-of Eagle allocating a maximum of 66,000 square feet of gross fLoor area to phase*6. Eaele CountY DePartment of Flanning and Development FebruarY 20, 1980 Page 2 The Partnership plans to convey Phase 6 to Mr. Srnith subject to restrictions on gross floor area equal to the amount of such footage allocated by the County to Phase 6,but in no evenE to exceed 66,000 square feet. In order to coordinate our plans, we hereby request on behalf of our clients, the ParLnership, that the County of Eagle restrict and allocate to Phase 6 a gross square foot.age floor area at buildout not to exceed 66,000 square feet and that the remaining 134,000 square feet of allocabIe floor area be reserved and allocated for the Valley PD other than Phase 6. If you should have any quesEions concerning this matter,please confacE me. Thank you for your assistance. Very truly yours, 'a|,;ffiffi William J. Post WJP/sd cc: Pet,er Kalkus Ilocrrsrenr, Srn.tw & D,lvrs, P. ATTORNEYS ANO CCIUN!;ELLC|RS AT LAv\. SUITE 12II UNITEO EANK CENTER ITOO BROADWAY Duxvan, Gor.one.Do aozeo C. JOROAN HOCHSTADT GEORGE M. STFAW M Ic:HAE L A. DAVIS itgcf,;',iD ,':-.1; I lg80 iiriJt. gl j,l3rlr)liig & Deyel. lagte, County, Colo. February 1, 1980 30 plus 3 on 28 15 6 townhomes, 4 duplexes 47 L44 allowable in TELEPHONE E39.sEOg AREA COOE 3O3 east side 3 duplexes, 1 single the phases is as RICHARO S. STRAUSS Mr. Tom Boni Eagle Count.y Commissionerrs Office P. O. Box 850 Eagle, Colorado 81631 Re: The Vallev Dear Tom: - Thank you for returning my telephone caII this morninq. with that the total feet. 'r'ne as follows: Phase regard to "The Valley" you have advised me buildable square footage is 200,000 square six phases are configured from my information Units I 2 4 5 6 I 2 3 4 5 6 Total Units: The square footage follows: Phase 42 ,0oo 33,7L4 17,600 24,900 15,000 66 ,000 200;1fa Mr. Tom Boni Page 2 February 1, 1980 I also understand of Phase 6 are attempting to an increase of 6r000 square must be deducted from other o that the prospective purchasers obtain 72,000 sguare feet or feet and, if alIowed, the 6,000 unbuilt units. Please advise as to the above propositions. Thank you for your assistance. Yours truly. GMS,zlkr cc: Stuart Canada Rodney Wood Warren Hamer EAGLE G nnterofff,ee nnemnoremdumn I o: Memo to File Subject: The Valley P.U.D. From:Flle No.:Date: January 25, l9B0 l0 a 't0 b 7c 3d (r 370) (r 040) (r305) (r 487 ) 144 Max Number Units 30 units 37 696 = Phase I ?n .|00 = Phase I.I-A 8a t4 b 4c 2d 30 33,714 = Phase II ( r 370) 28 3 8 C (2200)17 600 = Phase V t0 @ (2,000) 3 @ (rt4oo) 1 @ (600) Primary Secondary Caretaker 24,800 square ft. = Phase IV 14 20,000 4,200 600 2-{800 ll7,9l0 Total Sq. Footage of Phase I - IV 82,090 Remaining 72,000 Promised to Phase VI '10,090 Promi sed to Phase I I I EAGTE COI.'NTY Office of Cornrnunity Development EAGLE, COLORADO 81631 TELEPHONE 303/328-731| BOARD OF COUNTY coMMtssloNERS Ext 241 ADMINISTRATION Ext 241 ANIMAL SHELTER 949-4292 AS5E550 R Ext 202 BUILDING IN INSPECTION Exl 226 or 229 CLERK & RECORDER Exl 2l7 COUNTY ATTORNEY Ext 242 ENG I NEER Ext 236 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Ext 238 EXTENSION AG ENT efi 247 LIBRARY Ext 255 PUBLIC HEALTH Eagle Ext 252 V ail 476-5844 PLA N N ING Exl 226 or 229 PURCHASING/ PERSONNEL Ext 245 ROAD & BRIOGE Ext 257 January .|8, l9B0 Snowden-Hopk i ns P.0. Box .l998 Vail, Colorado 81657 Re: File No. Su-ll4-80-P-3 - Valtey #6 At their January 16 meet'ing the Planning Commission tabled your prelt'minary plan to February 20. The applfcant should further address; (l) The engjneeiing questions re-lated to the project. (2) Revegetation blin.' Landscapinq should be completed prior to sale of units.'(3) Centril - location for swim and tennis facilities. Recreational amenities should be tied to the entire Va11ey. The Planning Commission directed the staff to further delineate the total: square footage of space originally approved in the Va11ey. The remaining development to occur 'in the Va11ey should not exceed its relative share in this total amount. If you have any questions, please contact this office. S i ncerely, Thomas A. Boni Assistant Director of Pl ann'i ng SHER IFF Eagle Ext 2l I Earalt 927-3?44 Gilman E27-5751 SOCIAL SERV ICES 328.6328 TREASURER Ext 20 | luwn n o llal box 100 vail, colorado 81657 (303) 476-s613 January .|6, .l980 department of community development Eagle County P1 anning Cormissioners Eagle County Court House Box .l79 Eag1e, C0 8.|631 Re: The Va'l1ey Dear Planning Cormissioners : The Town of Vail P1 anning Cormissioners are extremely concerned about the increased floor area of proposed developemnts in The Va'l 'l ey. The Town applauds the efforts of the developers to decrease the total number of units. However, these reductions have been matched by jncreases in f'l oor area that probably result in an overal 1 gain in f'l oor area. 0riginal Proposals inferred .l80 units of 1000 square feet to 1500 square feet. After more recent study, the number of units was reduced to'l 50, and current proposals indicate .|43 units in the Va1 1ey. However, these units are to be up to 3000 square feet with many of the units in excess of 2000 square feet. We request that the P'l anning Commissioners review this problem carefully and request they consider the folIowing proposals; a ceiling be estab'l ished which forces all units to be under2000square feet or that the units proposed for Phases V and VI be reduced. The Ridge (Phase IV) as currently proposed does not appear to be a problem. l,le feel this problen js extremely serious and that a comprehensive so1 ution should be sought. l.'le trust that an equitable solution can be reached and we welcome any ideas which you would like to review with us. Sincerely,-v--._L7s__ Dick RYan < I Di rector ^. .:lqJ lmn box 100 vail, colorado 81657 (303) 476-5613 January .|6, .|980 department of community development Eagle County P1 anning Commissjoners Eagle County Court House Box .|79 Eag'le, C0 81 63.| Re: File No. SU-I14080-P3 (The Valley VI) Dear Planning Commiss joners : The Town of Vaj'l Planning Connission opposes the Prel'iminary Plan for the Va11ey Phase VI . However, after discussions wjth the developer and architect, we feel an amendable design can be developed if the number and/or size of the proposed unjts is reduced. This sjte is extreme'ly d'iffjcult to deal with due to its steep topography and the need to preserve its inherent beauty. Among the problems encountered in the current p1 an are parking, snow storage, the'l 5 foot street cut, the tennis courts and the 50 foot high wa'l 1 shown on the e1 evation. No building should take p1 ace on s'l opes over 40% and any units placed on the hillside should be stepped into the slope and lowered. Thjs hillside design does preserve the v'iew corridorfor vehicles coming up Buffer Creek Road and this concept should be preserved. A single access to the meadow should be investigated. AII of the recreational amenities should be clustered toqether and the units should be pulled closer together. Clearly, this plan has some favorable ideas and we trust the deve'l opers will continue to treat the site with care. However, the Town does not feel that the lot can handle 47 large units and the developer should give serious consideration to reducing the magnitude of the proposa'l . The Town 'l ooks forward to working with the developer and architect on this plan. Sincerely,2":z4L_ Dick Ryan\ Di rector l)tlt:!1ii'f/rt'lY i)l-l,,i'l Cl ll..:Cl.( l-lSI' O o Oolnr-r-r'::nts l:ilc lrir r rr rl.ror-*__-_ I ilr: JJ "'i rr: )ilp'x @*lu"'*,w - Datc llccc ivccl Acijaccrrt t)rc:lort ies and orA,rl -a l'i-r ani r:.:j:::.es.=-s '7 Ccnicur lir:,o:; a Proc,:rl\/ siC;ccJ l:la;rs a1,J rc::o:'is [:oc Paici -t I Nttrr rl-r'.:r of [Jr.,,ll I irrrl I lrriIc 2.I'J.ri if ic:rtion t<> u\ rc:.r l-cwr-rs l- ::ircl il '..; rv,r \, [r I i-, t q N o r t h lr r ro,. j .,_ S :jih:__l]! te, alll_gc ni:::i_tf]: :,,:.: pogl-j:':r'.',, I i r-rc: s; ( ltroi:e / i y a'csc r- i pt i cn ) 9 S ilcc'. , lol, . antl blocl< ( li: 10 Area arrcJ use cf cach loi tl Siies fcr cublic us.:: (C+cicatc:j '\,/I I i':) a' v r-j L tz.Conrn-rcn ooon soace Propc:;ed let-r:i t-tse br+ al<oc',,,,r-r cv ar,te 1A Pro;icscd tci'r:rs fcr- nl;:lic fac;li:ics Prc;-'csi-'d ccvs;tants (b;'ief C:::i-icticr^,) t/i Staicrr-,ent ci nead 41 rrEffccts" sii:i:nient b.,, all 18.Vic ir-ti'..',, s!<ctcn rla fi- G ec lo:;v 23.Soils zl \/ r-'.r.r t r{ inn zl-\a/ilc'liie n.7 \V i lci ir: .a' I GraclinS plan Cross S,:.ctior-rs (roa.c1:, b'-rilCi:rr sii: .:, ?cr-.:1t zo-S t rc:ci r>lerr arC r,-rof ilcs zt -Qtnlani"_!,!!ii'i_ scAoel decllcaHc,,t {i^e p ro4cc}i ort ,t -, -z/-f,.4.=.f...4-*- r f i ,"',-' t" ll . I l. ..r-..,t r'r! RICHARD D. LAMM GovERNon JOHN W, ROLO Director COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 715STATE CENTENNIAL BUILDING - 13' 3 SHEBMAN STREET DENVEB, COLOFADO 80203 PHONE 1303) 839-2611 ii[Ci1lV[D .Jili,j rj,i iStJU oept. ol ptannlng & Dlvel. Ir8lo, Cou[ty, Coto. January 16, 1980 Mr. Terrill Knioht Eagle County Defiartment of Planning & Development Box 179 Eagle, Colorado Bl63l Dear Mr. Knight:RE: SU-'l l4-80-P3 THE VALLEY PHASE VI We have reviewed the data submitted by Snowdon and Hopkins regarding this Preliminary Plan and have no objection to this application if the recommendations of Chen and Associates are followed. JLH/SP cc: Land Use Commission Yours tru1y, v-$fffyA. Engrneerl ng {/fu Hynes / Geol og'i st GEOLOGY SToRY oF THE PAST. . . KEY To THE FUTURE 'a o o @ q) lo @ r.6 r+ ctt ob C3 q7 (r E o.- tlt o 5ro u,o o s {b o fic) Fti vrz 6;lu o.E, U' '-8 (,'O E,=ul?UJtr z,J 6o 7 [i \\ ZuJ GZ = r.r,8? (9tt z]4 =qJ !t6 L|l z(? ;(1 z- uJ o ct E,o t)J tr.l 2s F JX a8 8ci -.-d rlanuary 8, 1980 Mr. Jim Collins Local Government Consultants 445 Union Blvd. - Suite 123 Denver, C0 80228 RE: The Valley, Phase 6, Preliminary Plan D ear l4r. Col I ins : I have finished reviewing the preliminary plan for Phase 6, as submitted by Snowdon and Hopkins. After review of the material there is only one item of concern. That item deals with easements and djstances between the water'l ines, sewer'l ines and the buildings. The distance between buildings is 25 feet from one side of the street to the other. This is combined with the required easements for twenty (20') feet (with ten (10) feet each side of water or sewer lines) and a horizonta'l distance of ten (10) feet between water ljne and sewer 'l ine, Al 1 of these distances would require a minimum road or ease- ment tvidth of thirty (30). (See Drawing) ./O'/o' U47['7 Z//YE To try to fit these constraints in foot width gets to be complex. The to the sewer Jine to make anything water line must be eighteen inches RECE}NE-I) .iiiiq'; \Yuu '^ [ DeveL u-5ii,''8llilii,;"'. water line must be moved closer fit. llhen this is done, the (18") above the sewer line, or Mr. ,lim Collins Page Two January 8, 1980 the sewer line must be encased to prevent any leakage. Therefore,at the following locations the water line needs to be moved over to give at least 8 -'10 feet from the building to the water line. l. Hillside Lane - Road Stationing - 2+00 - 3+30: move water line feet from back of curb, and encase sewer ]ine. B-10 Road Stationing - 3+30 - 5 + 64.16: move water line B - 10 feet from back of curb. Vertical distance between water line and sewer line, making encasing of sewer line unnecessary. 2, Lower Meadow Lane - RoaLS!elionltq*:1199._:_885.: move water jine 8 - l0 from ffi1tne. 3. Upper Meadow Lane - Road Stationinq - 2+50 - 3+78.83r move water line B - l0 sewer line. Also, the final plat should show a twenty (20) foot easement from Lions Ridge Loop up to Hillside tank, instead of the fourteen foot as shown. This concludes rry comments at this time. I do feel that these problems can be addressed during final design, therefore, the preliminary plan could proceed on to final plan as far as the water system is concerned. BD/jlw ../ xc: Tom Boniv Craig Snowdon Inter-Mountain Engineering rra. JMS:cjn cc: John Amato ilim Collins .f 5m Bailey BOX NO. C-1OO Craig Snowden AVON, CO 81620 949-5072 DENVER 893-1531 M. Spanel :?EC['J'\IED jiiit 1i ig8_0. Dspt. of Plrnning & Drvel.. t4gl9. C.ouflty. Cdo.Jar.uary 7, 1980 Mr. Terrifl Knight Eagle County Department of Planning & Development Box I79 Eagle, Colorado 81631 Re: Your File No. Su-114-80-p3, The VaIIey phase VI Dear Terrill: We represent the Upper Eagte Valley Sanitation District, which suppries sanitary sewer service to the above referenced property. rt is our understandinq that this development wirl consist of 47 units on a 32 acre parcel-. I{e have reviewed the preliminary utility plans and have no problems with the concepts presented. The District presentl-y has a trunk line running afong the val-ley froor and it shoufd be ade-quate to handle ther additional flows from thj.s development. The developer shourd be aware that the district, at the developerrs e:lpense, now designs and constructs all main rine extensions und.er $50'000 in construction costs. From the preliminary plans it appears that this project may faI1 within this regulation. The District presently has excess capacity in its vrastewater treat-ment facility and has begun construction on an expansion that will- more than double its present size. Accordingly, upon payment of proper rap fees and compliance with district rul-es and regulations, the District can and wj-lI provide service to this property. If f can be of any further assistance, please calI. Very trul\/ yours, SANITATION DISTRICT Engine ering, the District 1420 VANCE STREET LAKEWOOD, CO 80215 Phone: 232-0158 Vice Pres ident Box 386 Eagle, Colorado 81631 Jarmary l+, ]-93/c Terrill- Knight, e.gfu C*r,ty Planner $ Eagle County Planning Dept. Box l-79 Eag1e, Colorado 81631 TerriJ-1: ?he Valley Phase VI preli-r,unary plan was subrnitted to the Eagle County Soil Consenratlon District for revig,",.' and comrent. As noted in the subn:itted plan, rrnelri aspen and vegetationtr rrill be plaeed at cerlain areas of the de.,relopment. i.le vlou1d reconrrend that the developers provide more detaj-l-ed inforr,ration relative to the landscaplng and revegetatlon plan jn srch fo rms as species to be planted, amcunts of each specles to be planted, time of plantrng, need for nnrlching as r^rell as the need for fertilization. Sincelely, -tl I I {I a.*(-,&;** Bud Gates, Presi"dent COTORAOO DEPARTMETT OF HEAITH 12IO EAST IITH AVENUE , DENVER,COLORADO 80290 . PHONE 320.8333 Frank Traylor, M.D., Executive Director DATE: SUBJECT: TO: December 27, 197 9 NON.STATE ASSISTANCE REVIEW A}ID COMMENTS TerriTT Knight EagTe Countg Planning Box 1,7 9 Eag7e, CO ii rlilv[D Otc r I 1979 Dept. ot Planning & Devel .Eagl€, Counry, Colo.87637 PROJECT TI1LE! ?he VaTteg, phase VI, ?rle #,9u-tl,4-gT-p3 STATE IDENTIFIER: N/A COMI4ENTS i (Due Januarg 76, 79e0) Aj,t PoTTuxion Control: The effect ofasing7edeve7opmentofthissize^@netot,a7ait quaTitg 7eve7 in the area. The cumul:ative effect of numetous tleveTopments of tltis size is of concern. Activities during t.he normal constxuction plrase such as earxh-moving are reTativeTg short in duration and can be effectivelg controTTed bg vatious measures. The sarne js not true for xlle ongoing air guaLitg impacts such as reenxzainment of dust and. ilitx ftom both paved and unpaved roails, direct automobiTe emj.ssjons , and. emissjons fron fiteplaces. Ihese emissjons adC\ed to sjniTar ernjssjons for other deveTopments, coupTed with the unique mexeoroTogg of mountain communities mag have a considerabLe air quaLitg inpact. This has been seen in a num-ber of areas , incLuding Aspen anil vair. The air qualitg impacts of a singTe subdivision cannot be deaJ.t with effectivelg ftom the state level.rt is Local governments who must weigh tE;-A unul;liv e enrzjronmenxa1 im-pact of growth and deveJ.opment in Tight of Tocal needs and desires and overaTT envitonmental standards. In a number of oui comments (Colorow at squav creek, June 22, 7979), we have pointeil out the basic sources of poTTution from subdivision deveTopment and sone conttol measures which can be used- our commenxs would be the same fot ang majot (over 25 actes)deveTopment. Furthermore ' our concetns for cumuLative inpacts, especiaJJg with tespect to auto-reLated emissions, continue to grow. Nane,Title Micki Barnes. SOC-3, Jan 79 EAGTE COT.|NTY Community Development P.0. Box 179 EAGLE, COLORADO 81631 TELEPHONE 303/328-731I BOARD OF COUNTY coMMt55toNERS Ext 241 ADMINISTRATION Ext 241 ANIMAL SHELTER 949-429? ASSESSO R Ext 202 BUILOING IN INSPECT ION Ext 226 or 229 CLERK & RECOR DER Ext 2l7 COUNTY ATTO R N EY Ext 242 ENG tNEEi Ext 236 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Ext 238 EXTEN S IO N AGENT Exl 247 LIBRARY Ext 255 PUBLIC HEALTH Eagle Ext 252 Vail 476-5844 PLAN N I NG Ext 226 or 229 PURCHASING/ PERSONNEL Ext 245 ROAD & BRIDGE Ext ?57 SHERI FF Eaqle Ext 2l I Balalr 927-3244 Gilman 827-575 | 50crAL SERVICES 328-5328 TREASURER Ext 201 21 December 1979 Snowden-Hopki ns 201 Gore Creek Drive P.0. Box 1998 Vail, Colorado 81657 Re: l^lestern Val'l ey At the Development Review meeting, the fo] iowing comments were made concerning your project: r- 1. Geology of the hillside to the south of Lions f, -f-niage Loop Road dips to the north.,li I 'l !. Show foundation and design information of units *- cuttinq into the hillside of Lower Meadow Lane. 3. Recreation amenities should be centra'l ized. PUD shou'l d uni fy devel opment i n the Va'l I ey. 4. Structures are excessively 'l arge. Original Va1 1ey units ranged in size from 950 - 1500 sguare feet. Both stabjlity and open space is sacrificed with increased mass. 5. Land Use Regulat'ions should relate directly to buildings proposed. 6. Redraw cross section through cul de sac north of Lions Ridge Loop. 7. tlo decks are allowed 'i n easements. _--.-"...-8. Contrjbution to upgrad'i ng of Lions Ridge Loop Road :':i*s iS neCeSSary. 9. How is drainage to be handled from slopes behind buildings? If you have any questions, please feel free to contact this offjce. .---i -'# ,.2 //)/4 /_-L-----*/ W Thomas Boni Asst. Director of Planninq TBladj RICHARD O LAMM Govcrnor IerIs A. Stata Danielson Engineor DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES Oepartmenl ot Natutal Resoutces 1313 Sherman Str€et. Room 618 Oenv€r. Cotorado 80203 Adminisrrarion (303) 839.358r Gfound Waror (3031 ei$9582 December 20, lg79 Mr'. TennilJ- I(night, Director Eagle County Depantment of Planning 6 Development P.0. Box 179 Eagle, C0 81631- Re: The Valley phase VI File No. Su-114-80-p3 Dea:: Mr. Ioight : This is to acknowl-edge neceipt of p'eliminary plan rnatenial for" the above :referenced subdivision. The Lionrs Ridge water District has been designated as the sounce of waten and a lette:: of comrnitment for. senvice has been submitted. rnfonmation avairable in oun fires indicates that the Dist::ict has sufficient water avairable to serve this develoDment.and we necommend appr"oval. of The Valley phase VI. Ve?y t ruJ-y yours, ilt a. &",,-Hal D. Simpson, Chief Waten Management Branch HDS/cDv/pj 1 cc: Lee Enewold, Div. Eng. Land Use Commission RECI]\.',''r uL\r 1..! lt/V nAnt ^f Pl)r. rr ', Op\rnl Eagle, County, colo. EAGLE COI.JEU'flY DEPAR?MENT OE Box 779 EAGLE, COLORADO BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 3ZB-6809 ADMINISTRATION JZat-oq / + ANIMAL SHELTER 949.4292 ASSESSO R 328.6593 BUILDING INSPECTION 328-6339 CLERK & RECO RD E R Eaqle 328-63 77 Baiall 927 -3244 CO U NTY ATTORNEY 328-6674 ENG INEE R 526.O J J ,/ ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 324-7 7 18 EXTENSION AGENT 32 8.6 3 70 LIBRARY PUBLIC HEALTH Eaqle 328-659 4 Vail 476.5844 PLAN N I NG 328.6338 ROAD & BRIDGE 328-6591 SHERIFF Eaqle 328-661I Baialt 927 -3244 Gilman 82 7-5 75 | 50c I AL SERVICES 328-6328 TREASURER 328-6376 JZ6-/ Jtt 81631 r9z9 12 December RE: File No. Su-114-80-P3 The Valley Phase VI AppLrcANT: Vail Investments P. 0. Box 696 Vail, Colorado 8.l657 Encl-osed herewith is a copg of an applicatian and pTan submitted to the EagLe Countg PTanning 66nvni53i6n for review and recommendation at their regiuTat meeting on 16 January 1980 In accord.ance with C-R..S. 706-2-9, 706-2-33 and f05-2-34 ' f963, as afiended and EagTe countg Subdivision ReguTations ' Section 3-05 and 3.07, as amended effective 7 August 7976' gou a:re requited to reeeive the p7an, and gou have 35 dags from date maiTed within which to respond or the pTan wi77 be deemed to have been apptoved bg gour agencA' The Pl-anninq Conunission woul-d sincetelg appreciate gout co(nnents unld t."o*"ndatjons a few dags prjor to the meeting date. If gou desire additionaT information or time, please advise this office in writing' Thank gou vetg much,tu&//rJlzill xnisht / o Erglc CcuntY, Colo.rllo cL.rrilc'r'E ut "',ti"Tntf .n..,'* *",u" ,"' /*- /,4-/z - /Z Ccrtrfi!-.'s Signiture : \;l I AoeJicaliohs.erered lo: .-/ 1. Cotor3co G-$tolicol Survey --7 ?. coro. oepartrrent or Heattn -7 3. corcrodo stare Eiginee. --7 4. Elrre county s1.'tarrr'! ---. s. Eiere county EnJ,ne€r -/ 6. Holy cros3 Ele.trlc Ass'r'l 2. Pl3nning qepresa.irtive 3. Sc.,ool Oistrict RElJ 4. B?3alt waier Consv. Cisl. 5. Sasalt Rurar Fi.e Oist. D. {rolications id Eagle-B.ush C.eek to Ed,/6rds: t, Town of E39le 2- E.tgle Sanit3tio^ District 3. Colorado Oivision of V/ildlife 4. U.S. Forest Servi:e 5. Eegle Varley Teleohone co. 6- Aocky Mtn. Naiur3l Gas 7. School Oistri.t RE5CJ =. edla.ecie "ll-:3..|::=gi+. -at u- u.=. soit ccnsorvation Servic€G,a.olicatio^s in UFpe. Eegle vallev: 1. Town oi lvliniurn '/ 9. U.S- Bureau or La d vlanaEe-€dt 10, Cotorrdo Aiver Wate. Consv. Oi5t. 11. Civ- ot Water Aesou.ces S.Acclications in Sasalt Area: 1. Town of Sasalt 2. Towh of Red Clift 3. Upper Eagle Velley Sen. Disl. ,1, Eagle-Vail Mevo Cistrict 5. Othe. Dist. (.o.e at present tirre) 6. Schc.l Oistrict S=:CJ 7. Colorad. Division cf wilclife 9. U-S. Fo.esi Service 9. Mtn. gell Tsteonone Co. 1C. Public Servi.e Co. of Colo. ll. l.lt. Sopri5 50il Conservatlon a.A.olicairons in Gypsum Afea: Vail Villege lvesl '?are. g Sa^. Lions ai3Es Water , ,,,-,,,; -;. ,;-:, ., = 'r--J /r- 6. Sasalt water ald Sanii3tion Cist. 7. Colorec5 Oivision of wildiiis 8.. U -s. Foresl Se.vice 9. Molntain Bell ielepnone Co. 1O- Rocky l"1tn- Natural Gas 1. Tolvn of Gypsudl 2. EaEle Ccu.ty Airpo.t AuthoritY 3. Colorado givision of Wilcili;'a 4. U. S. Forest Service 5. Ea3le Valley Teleoho.e Co. 6, Rocky Mtn. Naiural Gas ._r!. ---J:.-J--* -* 2..-. r'.--1,'^ H.accticaiGis in Gore Valley - Voil ,qrea: i l- '1. westeri Sloce Ges )---:7 2. rown or va,t :=-'' - --7 ./ 6. Vail lnte.rr.o'Jol3in wata. 7, Vail S:nitatioo Oist. ----rZu. schoor oistrict RE:.J -/ 9. Colorado Oivision ot Witdlife ,-/tO. U ,s - Forest Servic" -1- rr. Mtr. 3et ie,e.nc.e ci. -.2' tZ. Pjbl'L Scrvi.e Cc. of Colo. ,-/ 13. uFrer Eagle valleY S.r'. 7. S...ol Oist.ict c=:lJ i. q::rJm i,ri:rr'c^ ;irtiic: 5.=:Er,_::.:r-:.- : r. ua I oroco 1. S,:r_.cot Distr;ct R;:'lJ 3. Uli F...:: S-r,i.. (=;ll.) 4. US -o.cst Sarv'c) (r"ii';ruri) 5. ea'Je Vattcf T.l-:cnor'e Co. 6. Ya.npa V:lley 6lec!.ic l;.Ori:r Ai;e^cie5 (wherc .:ppr.prirt.)-'\\ 1. Cola.adc Ctpr. or rli'jhv/n:/3 \_-/ I '/ z. c"to. crJt? Fo/c jt s..jrvtt! EAGLE COUNTY Eogle, Colorodo OFFICIAL RECEIPT AMOUNT ITEM Buildino Permit Fee Application For Subdivision Zone Chan Conditional Use Special Use Variance Aooeal Fee Code: (Buildi (Zon in Total Received All items are received for collection no.payment of any item. (Subd ivision CHECK Ne 592? only and be cancelled for SNowD_oN alq HoSts ARCHITECTS -Gore Creek Drive P. O. Box 1998 vArL, coLoRADO 81657 (303) 476-220r LtrTTR OF TRANSNNITTAL TO 20r GENTLEMEN: WE tr tr ARE SENDING Shop drawings Copy of letter YOU E( Attached I fi Prints D Change order Under separate cover via E Plans tr "*'lzl I /"74 1""""" Vllz ^nE.o,r frtn Emt Fltrts; /r - Tha /a,/{a,r I fu/tnawnra Flan / the following items: D Samples E Specitications coPt Es DATE NO.DESCRIPTION h h/lrH b iril'furtnua tulriu*r,//aat Vr tLtilirt /0 ttlflhfu4tvt' i4trn nt*wy/r 'tria'u+ 4e tliir*(t/iilrt*tr-'"" 'irq -/ I I I THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked E For approval ! Fo, yorr u." p. As requested 0 For review and comment o tr FOR BIDS DUE below: ! Approved D Approved E Returned as submitted as noted for corrections tr U tr Resubmit-copies for approval Submit -copies for distribution Return-corrected prints 19- tr PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS FOFra 2aG2 - Ayd.Df. ftoi lFEEl te.|l!,rA,lrl,-0l|6|t, aacloauraa arc nol aa notcd, kindly notity ur at orca. ISOI GRAND AVENUE P. O. DRAWER 250 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 6160I November 30, 1979 Mr. Tom Boni Assistant Director of Planning Eagle County Planning Developnent P. 0. Box 'lZ9 Eagle, Colorado 81531 { Re: The Valley, Phase Vf, Lions Ridge Subdivision, Filing No. 2 \ Dear Mr. Boni: Be it known that the above mentioned properties are within the certified service area of Holy Cross Electric Association, Inc. Be it further known that Holy Cross Electric Association, Inc. has existing a singre-phase underground power line which is located near the above men-tioned project. The power line is 141400 volts and is capable of providing the necessary power for your development, subject to the tariffs, rules, and regulations on file with the Public Utilities Conrnission of the SLate of Colorado, and to appropriate contractual arrangernents with HoIy Cross Electric Association, fnc. It will be the developerts responsibi.lity to exlend, enLarge or alter the existing power line to the desired locatlons within the above nen-tioned property. (\ -f you desire any furfher information, prease feel free to contact ne aL 949-5g92. Sincerely , HoLy cnoss ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION, INC. Cd tluokoq ,(r **) Ted Huskey, Staking Engineer HOLY CROSSCLECTRIC ASSOCIATION, INC. AREA CODE 303 945 . 5491 945 - 6056 a 303 47S2201 61657 (' ( Snowdon and Hopkins r Architects 201 GoreGreek Drlw P.O. Box1998 Vail, Colorado 30 Novenber 1979 l'lr. Tom Boni Assistant Director of Planning Eagle County Planning Department P. O. Box 179 Eagle, Colorado 81631 Dear Mr. Bonl, l{e are submitting Preliminary Plan requirements for The va11ey - phase vt. Th5.s inforrnation is supp3.ementar to the informatlon subnitted for sketch plan approval to Eagle County in September 1979. consistent with the intentions of the county, the architectual site plan shows 47 units in 3 clusters. The cluster groupings are to be phased construction witb the lower valley units built first, And new private roads are shown on _the drawings. Ue have attempted to cornply with subdivision regulatlons to Eagle County artlcle 4.02.01 preliminary plan as closely as possible, prelininary plan Requirements . 4,02 conplies with requirenents for a subdivision rot area of more than 5 acres 4.02.A1 a. conplies b. on drawilgs c. on drawings d, on drawi.ngs e. on drawings f. 1' on drawings as submitted by El Dorado Engineering Company - Consulting Enginlers, Glenwood Springsl Colorado ( Z. on drawings as submitted by El Dorado Engineering \ Company 3. i.n reports submitted by Chen & Associates, Inc.Consulting Engineers, GLenwood Springs, CotoraOo 4. on drawlngs as-submitted by Snowdon and Hopkins _Anchitects, Vail , Colorado 5. in reports submitted by Chen & Associates, Inc. 6. in letter from Teey L. Wattles dated May 31 , jglg g. on drawings h. not applicable (\ i. none j. approxirnately 29 acres k. 1. The Valley _ phase 6 2' under conbract from va11ey Associates: vail rnvestments &Development Ltd.p. O. Box 696 Vai1, Colorado 91657 Snowdon and Hopkins _ Architects 201 Gore Creek Drive Val_l , Colorado 91657 El-Dorado Engineering Company 823 Blake Avenue P. O. Box 669 Gl.enwood Springs, Colorado g1601 3. tfest and North: . Bureau of Land Management East: Valley Associates P. 0. Box 915 Vai1, Colorado 81657 South: Town of Vail P. O. Box 100 Vai1, Colorado e1657 5. 30.222 acres approximately 29,02 acres - conmon space 'L42- 1.2 acres divided anong 9Lbo{nrtr6[5d units (see site plans ) attached 4. ( 4.02.02 4.02.03 4.02.04 6. none 7. in letter from Snowdon and Hopkins - Architects 8. 1n letter from Snowdon & Hopkins - Architects 1. snowdon and Hopkins - Architects has reviewed all adjacent properfies and this proposal has no adverse impact. on drawings as subrnitted by EI Dorado Engineering Company in reports submitted by Chen & Associates, Inc. in reports submitted by Chen & Associates in report from Robert L. Howland in letter from Kris Moser in letLen from Terry L. Wattles on drawings subnitted by El Dorado Englnerring Company on drawings submiLted by El Dorado Engineering Company on drawi-ngs submitLed by El Dorado Engineering Company on drawings submitted by El Dorado Engineering Company on drawings subnitted by El Dorado Engineering Company on drawings submitted by E1 Dorado Engineering Company in letters from Tecl Huskey, Holy cross Electric Association, rnc. e. I la d. a. b. c. d. b. 4.02.05 c. o & Bill Holland, Mountain BeII d. in letter from George Swanson, Town of Vail Fire Protection District 4.02.06 on drawings subraitted by Snowdon and Hopkins - Architects Sincerely, A ,-' ./1 t UA4?MtWl Craig Snowdon Snowdon and Hopkins ( (, lnttn box too r vail, colorado 8ro5z r 3o3.4r6.56r November 28, 1979 ( Terre'll Knight Eagle County Planning Director Eagle, Colorado Dear Terrell, I have reviewed "The Valley" and Fire Protection 81631 preliminary plans for Phase 6 find no problems with access Equi pment. of for Singerely, 4'.R"t Chief, Vail Fire Protection District GNS/rme VaaL, Colorado November AB, Lg79 Snswdon & Bo:r l99B Ilopkins Vall, Colorado 81557 To Whom It I'Iay Concerns Following is the jnforrnation requested on our ability to provide telephone service at phase 6 of the Va11ey.. llountain BeIl is a erflic lltility, subject to regulation by the colorado hrblic utilities connr-lsiion "id tir" Feddral conm'iLications coranission- Telephone facilities have not been extendea to tne tT9ivlaual sites, nor can any conrmittment be made as to r*ren the'rci-ll be available. &rbension of our plant into this area depends on numerous factors,such as our capital- requirements and abiiity to raise ""p:.I"r.This r'ro'f-d also-depend on the availabiLity Lr r.rrpoir""-aila-"oppri_eu,potentlal use of the facilities, and the economic feasibir.itr ii -'- providfug the service. If addltional jlJornation is needed, please ca:l:- 9l$_bSSS. Tours truly, EAGTE COUNTY O EAGLE. COLORADO 81631 TELEPHONE 303/328-73 | | BOARD OF COUNTY coMMrssroNERS Ext 241 ADMINI5TRATION Ext 241 ANIMAL SHELTER 949-4292 ASSESSO R Ext 202 BUILDING IN INSPECT I O N Ext 226 or 229 CLER K & RECOROER Ext 217 COUNTY ATTO R N EY Ext 242 ENGINEER Ext 236 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Ext 238 EXTENSION AGENT ExI 247 LIBRARY Ext 255 PUBLIC HEALTH Eagle Ext 252 Vail 476-5844 PLANNING Exl 226 or 229 PU RCHASING/ PERSONNEL Ext 245 ROAD & BRIDGE Exi 257 SHERIFF Eaqle Ext 2l I Basalt 927-3244 cilman 827-5751 SOCIAL SERV ICES 328.6328 TREASURER Ext 20 | 0ctober 9, L979 Berridge Associates % P.0. Box 2941 .Vail, Colorado 81657 RE: File No. Su-114-79 The Valley #6 At their meeting of 0ctober 3, i979, the Pl anning Commission had the following comments with regard to your sketch p1 an submittal for 47 units: 1) Upon closer examination the sjze of the cuts required may be excessive. Please provide detail at preliminary p1an. 2) Avoid building on slopes in acces of 40%. 3) Investigate drainage. 4) Large units are a problem in a constrained build-site. Reduce their size and provide architectural drawing at preliminary plan. 5) C1 ustering is approved. This recommendation will be presented to the Board of County Commissioners at their meeting of October 24, 1979, beginning at 9:00 a.m., 550 Broadway, Eagle Colorado. If you have offi ce. Respectfully you any questions, Please call this Thomas Boni Asst. Director of Planninq f S t -=___ EAGLE COUNTY o Department of Planning and !evelopment P. 0. Box 179 EAGLE, COLORADO 81631 TELEPHONE 303/328.73 | | BOARD OF COUNTY co MM tssto N E Rs Ext 241 ADMINISTRATION Ext 241 ANIMAL SHELTER 949-4292 ASSESSOR Ext 2O2 BUILDING IN I N SPECT IO N Ext 226 or 229 CLERK & RECORDER Ext 217 COUNTY ATTORNEY Ext 242 ENGINEER Ext 236 ENVIRONMENTAL H EA LTH Ext 238 EXTENSION AG ENT Ext 247 LIBRARY Ext 255 PUBLIC HEALTH Eagle Ext 252 Va il 476-5844 PLAN N I NG Ext 226 o( 229 PURCHASING/ PE RSONNEL Ext 245 ROAD & ARIDGE Ext 257 5HER IFF Ea gle Ext 2l I Basalt 927-3244 Gilman 82 7.5 751 sOCIAL SERVICES 328.6328 TREASURER Ext 201 21 September 1979 Cunningham Construction Jim Cunningham P. 0. Box 418 Vail, Colorado 8.l657 Dear Mr. Cunninqham: This letter concerns the status of Phase VI of The Valley PD, Based on a revised sketch plan presented to the Board of County Conmissioners on April 25, 1979, 46 units have been allocated to this tract of The Va11ey. This allotment of units pre-supposes a building plan which meets county approval . Development plans for Phase VI can aim at a maximum of 46 units. However, a1 I plans are subject to County approval and the overall density may be reduced. I would suggest that development of this area proceed through a sketch plan-preliminary plan-fina1 plat process. If I can anstder any questions, please call, Respectful ly yours, ;4-- Thomas Boni Assistant Director of Planning TB/kp P.S. Revised sketch plan approved the original plans for this April 25, 7979 effectively cancelled area as shown by TayvelI Associates.