HomeMy WebLinkAboutVAIL VILLAGE FILING 1 BLOCK 7 LOT 31 LEGALpdfo /a
V;/lq,lz*
/-oi, blk-7
ooitif,r{rlYtErrEroflrE t
Design Review Eoa
o d
ACTIOI{ FORII
Department of Commufl itY Development
75 South Frontage Road, Vail. Colorado E1657
tef: 970.479.21:19 tax:978.479-2452
. web: wrvw.vailgov.tom
Project Name:
Project Descripdon:
Paftlcipants:
Prolect Addrcss:
64 BEAVER DAM ROAD
Legal Descripuon:
Parcel Number:
Comments:
Mofion By:
Seond By:
Vote:
Conditions:
APPUCANT PI.AIII CONSTRUCTION
PO BOX 3367
EAGLE
co 81631
License; 148-8
CONTMCTOR PI-ATH CONSTRUCTION
O5l30l2W7 Phone: 328-5515
PEROT REROOF DRBNumber: DR8070235
FINAL APPROVAL FOR A MINOR ALTEMTION FOR A REROOF FROM CEDAR SHAKES TO
TAMBRITE SLATE, SLATE GREEN
owNER PEROT, H. R. & MARGOT B. O5l30l2W7
PO BOX 269014
PLANO
TX 75026-9014
0sl30l2w7 Phone: 328-5515
PO BOX 3367
EAGLE
co 81631
Llcense: 148-8
64 BEAVER DAM RD VAIL location:
Loh 31 Block: 7 Subdivislon: VAIL ULI-AGE FIUNG 1
2101{71-1300-4
BOARD/STAFF ACTION
ACtiON: STAFFAPR
DaE of ApP|ovalz 05 13012007
Cond:8
tet cNlt No changes b tf1ese plans may be made wittput the written consent of To,vn of
Vail stin ana/or the appropriate rwial committee(s).
Cond:0
(pt-AN): DRB approval does not consdhrte a permlt for building. Please consult with
ioan of Vail Building personnel prlor to consbucdon activiHes.
Cond:201
DRB apprwal shall not beoome valid br 20 days following the date of approwl.
-t\r't lyi;iJ l-rr i^t'-1 $\.t .,\+" qoh, zozl
Planncn Joe Suber
Apptt val of thls project $all hpse and be@me rcH orc (1) year dbring the date
d final apprwal, unless a bulldtng permlt b bgred and @nfuctbn b cornmetred
and ls dlllgently pumled buard ompleflon.
CoruC: 113
All derclopment appllcatbns submltted to the Tcnrn after tln effbcthe date of
Ordlnane 20 Series 2006 $all be sdDject b $e pendlng ernployee tnslng
regulatbns in whabrcr foin they arc llnally adopted; prndded, horever, that if
tie To,vn fails to adopt the perdlng efiiployee houslng tegulatlons by Aprll L5' 2W7,
thb Odlnane shall not apply b $dr developrnent applkafrons.
DRB Fee P.ld: $2o.OO
GSCC l'l.ay 29. O? 12:5?p
tir
9?O o ) 8i+5-?Ol3 P. i
Gcncrul tfonndon:
Alt pdBcts rqulrlng.derlgn revlew must rf,id(c itgotr.l paab rffilng a br|ttfttg tsrnrt rlrPfi
reter tb dr€ stmtfal requlrsnott for tho prttirar ryunl tht A t!$d. An '.pFlc.l|on let
@nnot be .aospted und .Jl dryId Infdm$0 5 tdrd bt ||E. Cilt|nurtty Dovrloprrtit Dof
protcd rrray rlso mld ut ba E{|qH uy ttlc Tfil @ld l|ltor t|le Fhrt|lng rtd Envllo fi€ttE
Octgn nvteu -ptoUi|l hrao |||ilrr UIftl rn|nh b b|||al llt codlldiotr oilr|t'
onq yrrrr ol llrc at ronl
Applicallon f,or Decign Rcview
ElcFfitcit d Co,wlltJtft OorrttsPttEnt
TSSouth Rrrrhg! Rs.4l,U, frtab 816f,
bl: !170.479.24!! . tbq.: gtL.ra*{tt
||t.h firw.ttva!4o.tts
t7 P
€t,
o
\,
o
N tr ,t
(Conm Elgb co. Aessc ct 9/O328-a16.{O lb g : <:t|.ru.}
11__
P|ir tr"OO p qgr fo*c6at dgn lcr
tuf 6nEudl$ ot r ntrr h{dlne cf tmCnbti|{,hr|n dilat rdE qrrrc lhage f rdoed o any
cond|a'rLl hil5ing (llt.fdct 210 ldr|ltbnr |l htcrbr o fa rt*|o?d!trEb hdrlrgr rd * fngroIrnlfts, .
@Ei|) odndng, whdow rdlo.t|s, laloiraplng,rf|imri.{ru,e.
tu mbrds|erto h{*rgl ud.gtE lrnFonrnentr, I
{rllofff, prmng, wlhdun addedr5, lrfibctg&tfl ||ryutnf$*e
16 rrddd b C-E dlrdt rpOrwed by Ptarlng Ddln nai,Uw litftt '
.r:n. Pl€{se
sr; ,r[ Rat'icw .':drt The
t.]:n lnbsirxl.
I r r:i 1y1ggo
.i.:.4tL
.2i,{u)--
locogon of thc Propmll
PhycstAddn€rs:.
palolt'Ilo.:
zonlnlt:
ll.||r.l$) ol Own€(o)!
rt.lllotE Addr€rG
Typstlncvhwrd Fcr!
O Shnri
cl corFepu,.l RrdcnY
tr l|cw Ontirdm
El Additlon
:\
-'' B Mtmr nftgatlolr
- '
,- (muwttnrty/conrncltril)
V
frillnrsAltsratbn
/ Irinote*mlly/duplcx)
B Chiligos b Agprorld F{!r|s .
O 9ep:radorr fqued
*$
nb 6.?
{F50
1300
t250
lro
|a0
tlo te
P,i;l€'tb, or
|r ! rs Ons),|f a;..
?r,rtGfi alnd
Ci ari.
[tr rgs; ;ndl
il;r'f or the
llo.:
'Dn8&
erqcd
YBJ -o zt
ttfll+f*+++*a*++**+****aar*a*+a**+l****'3*********+aaf+a+f++al**f:tal'{'*ltt!|'}'}ataat*taa*tttt+lt
TOWNOFVAIL, COIORADO Satcment
+t't**'t'lr'l'i*'l'}tr**r'|'**|t*l't*'i**r*'|'ti'******llia++t*a*f 'ttf ****+f t{r**f +*a'**a**+****+l++t+++++{'tt*'}
Statenent Nudber: R070000821 Amount: $20.00 05/30/20O7L1:11 AIr{
Palment Method: eash Init: iIS
Notation: $,/Pf,Afg
CONSTRUCTION
Permit No: DR8070235 r!4)e: DFaB-Minor A1t, SFR/DI'P
Parcel No: 2101-071- 1300-4
Site Address: 54 BEAVER DAM RD VAIL
I.,ocaIion: 64 BEA\TER DAIi! ROAD
Total FeeB: $20.00 ThiE Palment: $20.00 Total AIIJ Pnts: $20.00 Balarce: S0.00
ACCOI,]NT ITEM LIST:
Account Code Description
DR OO1OOOO3IL22OO DESIGN RSVIEW FEES
Current Ihlta
20.00
o7--_
I
Present
Chuck Crist
Diana Donovan
Connie t(night
Ludsig Kurz iliu Shearer
Kathy l{arren
llembers Absent
Dalton tfillians
PLANNING AIID ETTIRONUENIAL COI'IIiISSION
APRIL 23, L99O
staff Kristan Prltz
Ton Braun llike l'lolllca
Penny Ferry
Betsy Roeolack
Staff Abeent shelly ltello
and Environnental Connission neeting was called to
p.n. by Diana Donovan, Chairperson.llhe Planning order at 3:2o
ftem No. 1:
Diana Donovan felt there uere soue changes she needed to discuss
with Ton before approving the mi'nutes.
Construction.
Kristan PrLtz exPlained that
iten untll the next neeting.
Amotion to table the rninutes ffon the,lprll 9' 1990 was
made bv Jilo Shearer and seconded by Kathv warren.
VOTE: 6-OINFAVOR
IleLSg. 2.t-
glock 2. Lionsridqe rilincr uo. 3,.
@hinais. Dauehinais-l'toseley
the applicant reguested to table the
ttotion to table the iten untll .Mav 14. 1990 waE nade bv
Kathy warren and seconded bv Jin shearer.
VOTE: 6-OINFAVOR
Iten No. 3:
ttike t{otlica presented the project
saa requesting two seParate iteme:
explainlnE that the
a preliruinary Plan
appllcant for a uaJor
eubdlvielon and a uajor anendnent to sDD No. 16. ltike revlesed
trt"-appi"pifite c"fiiil" relating to the requests found withln
the ueno. fne eiiii-iiconnenaed-approval of _tlre.prellnlnary plan
id" tr,E-slk ueaaowt-.,tlai.tfslon an-d-the anendnent to SDD No' 16
1;lth condltions. --rrrE pi"posir hsfcarll followed the underlying
Resldential Clustei r"-"f"i and Planned Unlt Developnent zoning
origl.nally aPprovea by Eagle County'
rathv warren asked to see ttre prevlous plat th?t had been
il;;;";e-;e ilsttirea snetner Lhe snall- getbacks and roof
oi-"ifra"S"-ma U6en-iaaressed and tlike arplained that all of the
iliiaffi, incfuafng-tfre overtr?n9e, vas rlquLred to be wlttrin ttre
conflnei of the building envelope'
KathyaskediftheGRFAofttreernployeedwelling.unlteuasin addition to the iif"".a GRFA and liXi answered that there would
be no additionar-ciii,-tfr- tnpfoyet unlts sould be included Ln
the te,OOo sg. ft- of GRFA allowed'
Ludwig Kurz felt there uere many positlve.polnt-s-regarding the.
;;il;3.i:--He likI.i-in. i"aulti6n-in denslty. He also liked the -.ir-gt-!nt or the ioad the way it nas ProPosed' in order to
pi"3Jt"" the rneadow area as nuch as possible'
chuckCristaskediftherewouldbeanadditionaltapfee.forthe ;;i;y;;-,tt it "tti iix"--"*prainea that the tap fees vould be up to
the diEcretlon Ji tnlJ-uppEi ragre Varley water-&-sanitation
Distrlct. Ctrucr-aiso aiiea if-a hone that lncluded an enployee
;;i;-;;ia iiquire-;;";;;d-piixrng and !{ike explained that under
surrent regufatiott-ro""tea-parkiig would Lndeea be reguired for
a hone with an emPloYee unit'
Kathy warren aEked what the setbackE were on the previously
approved prat aii-Uii"-""pi.ined that they were approximately the
Eame. Kathy Etaled-lfr"i -ifnc" the eetbacks nere the sarne she
;illi "ppiii" the project-. tn addition' she wished to know how
additionar parxing-roi,ra be handled and Kristan explained that-
there uere no piiiiili"", ior "aaition.l.parking._ Each home had a
number of parrii;';;;;;; ;;qlrr;;- ieratiire 1,o,cnra. AlI required
parkinq nust be 5rr 3ite. xitny conmented that she thought the
iroject nlooked goodrr.
Jim shearer had no najor concerng rith the proJect. He sas also
concerned about trr" piiiing but 11as nore confortable due to the
ti-vlous e:<planation bY Kristan'
Connl.e Knight wished to clarify whether the Dauphinais
Subdlvisior, "rpioiee units werL in additlon to the allosed GRFA
per the sDD. K;i'";;"-;*pi"i"!a that they uere in addition to the
a110wed cRFA ot:;;"-"." -soo uot did not exceed the GRFA that
uould have been ippfiea with the underlying zoning'
o
Dlana coumented that the building envelopes where not all the
sane size, yet the allowed GRFA per envelope Yas the eame
throughout. She guestioned how this worked and lGistan errplained
that the variation in the size of the bullding envelopes would
present no problens building. Chuck Crist asked what the site
coverage was and Xristan explalned that they rere allowed to bulld on essentially the shole slte vith the exception of the
setbacks.
A notion for approval of the prell.ninatrr plan uith
conditions oer the staff memo as follows was nade bv Kathy
l{arren and seconded bv Chuck Crist.
1. The development of each buildLng envelone will conPly
with the rockfalt niticratlon reports Prepared by
Nicholas Larnpiris. Project Geologist, and Donald G.
Pettvgrove. P.8., Project ltanager with Banner
Associates, Inc. Such reports are dated Februarv 23,
the hazard nitiqation for their lot. per the above
narned reports. Ihis restriction shall be noted on the
Final P1at.
VOTE: 6-OINFAVOR
A motion for a reconrrendation to the Town Councll, for
approval of the rnaior arnendnent to soo tlo. 16 lltF the
iollowincr conditions Der the staff neno Vas nade by Kathv
Warren and seconded bv Ludwicr Kurz.
1. That apnroval of the najor anendnent to SDD No. 16 be
EontJnqent uDon pgc approval of the Final PIat for the
subdivision.
1987. February 25. 1987. ilune 12. 1987, ilune 15. 1987.
Dgl!!9'g
3. That no oortions of anv brlilding strall extend over the
Luildinq enveloPe boundariee.
I
VOTE: 6-OTNFAVOR
Iteu No. {:
ltike !1o11!-ca explained that Jin l{orter Yas representing ur. n.
Ross Perot. Jin was appealing the declslon of the etaff
concerning the definition of neite coverage.n The request
before the PEC centered around the Town of VaiI Zoning Code definitions of nsite coveragen and iBuildlnE.r' The applicantrg position was that rrbecause the garage would be totally covered by
exlstlng grades (the site over the garage slll be taken back to
its original grades and landscaped conditione), the garage was
not covering the site.rr The etaff belleved that the garage was
lndeed a building as defined in the code, the garage required new
grading and did not neet existing grades, and did not support the
applicantrs position that the garage should be considered aE a
tlnascape feature. The staff could not support the applicantrs
request and felt the garage should be included as site coverage
as defined in the Townrs zoning code.
Jirn ltorter exptained that he ras not dlsagreeing sLth the
definition of rrbuilding.tr He felt the garage was deflnitely a
building. He vas disagreeing wlth the definition of nsite
coverag-.n He felt the bullding did not cover the sl.te, the site
sas covering the building. He also uiEhed to polnt out tlrat
currently there tras no parking on the slte. If the.appeal were
not granted, the only optlon vould be on-grade parklng and to
canre lnto the site. He showed an elevation of how the cut would
look. Ttre retaining wall would Lncrease 14 to t9 feet. Jin
Btated that regardless of the on-grade parking inplications, the
proposed garage would not cover the site. The slte would cover
ttre-garage. Jiru explained that Dlr. Perot Yas offering to
landicape the area across the street where he presently parked on
the Townrs property. The dlsagreeuent vas the defl'nitlon of isite coverage. rr
Chuck crist asked Mike if, in fact, according to uikere
calculations, the proposed grades vould not be exactly as
exlstJ-ng, raiher iL would be 2r higher and ltlke concurred. ilin
explalneit that they would be Dore than happV !9 b5fng the Erade
la-cr to the originlt neigtrt but he felt that if they were going
Applicant: JLn llorter. for H. RoEs Perot.
I
to conplete the project, they should do it correctly by aaking it
nore aesthetically pleasing.
Kathy l|arren felt she had to agree wlth the staff. She viewed
the project as an earth shelter. siupty because the bullding uas
burled was not Justification for deteninlng Lt not to be eite
coverage. She felt tbat if it sas conpletely below grade rather
than on grade, with an entry, lt sas site coverage.
Jl.n Shearer felt it was site coverage. He did not rant to eet a
precedent and felt lt would be very dangerous and could be costly overall. On the other slde, he felt the Connission had an
obligation to the town of Vail to ensure that proJects ilooked
goodn and felt that the proposal vould look better than Yhat sas
presently there. He felt the project needed a solutlon but that
an exception to the definltlon of site coverage sas not the
appropriate means.
Connie Knight asked what the square footage of the garage sas and
Mike answered 1100 sq. ft. Connie stated that the proposal
brought back to nind the Briner petition to do new constructl'on
underground with a garage bay. This was a setback reguest, but'
she felt it was relevant. Brinerrs request was denied and she
felt she needed to be consistent and deny the Perot
appeal .
Ludwig Kurz stated that in general he agreed wlth Jim Shearer.
The Biiner request was for new constructLon and the Perot
proposal was for an addition to an existing building. Ile did-
tropL to see the proJect acconplished In a uay to provide on-sLte
parking but did not feel the site coverage appeal sas the correct
avenue.
Diana Donovan agreed with Kathy Warren that the garage sas
definitely a building and nust count as site coverage. Stre
suggested that Jirn Morter look for another avenue and Jln asked
if-Oiana was referencing a procedure or design and Diana answered
oboth. n
Discussion centered around clarifying trground levelrr and general
agreeuent was reactred that nground levelrr was that area uhere a
person could drive into the garage.
A motion to deny the apneal and uphold the staff declgign
Der the staff nerno was made by Kathv Warren and seconded bv
Chuck Crist.
VOTE: 5 - O IN FAVOR OF DENIAL OF TTTE APPEAL
Ithlle the applicants for Item No. 5 were setting up vieual aides,
the conmission skipped to Iten No. 6.
Transportation Task Force.Iten No. 6:
Chuck Crist Volunteered for the Task Force.
ften No. 5:
Tom Braun explained that the iten was tabled at the lPPl-i:11!::request after lengthy discussl.on at the PEC's April 9th Deeting.
i;nrb;r-"i-a"=ig" ciranges had been uade in resPonse to conrnents
u"d" UV the planiing Cointssion and the alpllcants had reguested-
;-;;ri'session p;i;; io rtnartzlng the reaEsign. Ton highlighted
design changes is found in the staff nemo'
peter Janar wished to clarify that the t{arriott did I'ntend to
"""ii""" working with the etiff and the Connission. They wished
i" w"iX within ihat was reasonable and neet the-goals and
oU:""ii""i of tne fort. They had taken euggestions fron the last
;;;[il; ina naae-"ha1g"r. tti.Uetieved that they had sincerely
tried to responde to all the lssues'
Ned Gwathrney explained that he had reduced the nass by-noving the
ioJe garaen to -ttre eage to cover the garage and removed 1 floor
f."Efl--uea poiniea oit the changes on the elevation plans ?Td
E".p"i"a tne'ctrang.r-ott the.bef-o_ie and after nodels. Regardlng
lfrE-i"""foring oi'itt" existing ttarriott, the -dpplicant had agreed
io cornrnit to {,he tie-in between the tso buildJ'ngs. and to
eliminate the dari wood color. The lnltlal thought was to flip
the color to be iieht with dark trin. 'lltrey had not connitted to
ttre cotor and were open to suggestions'
Kathy l{arren felt there rfas etill too nuch GRFA and too nany
""it'r. She did like what they dld wlth the nass, houever
aiEfritecturally,-irte tired tha other building better' She was
still not comfortlUfe uith 93t site coverage and- 4? unit/acre.
Itt"-["iiaine= r"ii.="ni"a on.the comparison chart presented in
the staff me.o wLre built prior to zoning.enactnent. lhere were
;;;";;;-arre zonin!-ri=-"t.irged to avoid hlgn aenslty proJe-cts.
Fundamentally, "t6 r." not 6pposed to additional density' but not
so much.
{
In reEponse to Kathyrs opposltion to high density, Jay felt that
the down-zoning was aimed nore at the outlying areas' not the
core areas.
Peter Jamar stated ttrat one To$n of Vail Goal ls to try to
acguire this type of unit, and that the project fit everlt'hing
eIJe except aensity and GRFA. Janar also felt that thls proJect
voutd pump vitality 5.nto Lionshead.
Kathy said that tbey had input from peopte against the-proJect
because they were concerned about the lncrease in density. She
wanted to know if there uas any support for the project. Jay
responded that a hugh nunber of people ln Lionshead suppo4 !tt"conlept. Jay added that he didnrt llke to bring then in during-
this part of the Process. Peter Jaroar pointed out that the Land
Use Plan also supported the proJect.
Discussion of updating the Land Use Ptan followed and Iom eaid
that the docunent was designed to be long-ter:m and revised every
three to five years. Torn also added that regarding the 9oa1s and
policies of the Land Use Plan, it did support this tlpe of
proposal .
Kathy said that she would feel nore confortable If people vere
Uroultrt in who said they were in eupport of_tbe project. Peter
Janai said that they had actually told people to stay away.
Kathy replied that Lhe people could srite letters or siEn a
petition.
Rob Levine said that he presented the idea to hls board and that
they supported the idea ind that they did feel it would add
vitifity-to Lionshead. Kathy said that knowing that did nake a
difference to her.
Kristan said that she nas very glad that the appllcants were not
bringing in lots of people to push for the proJect. It was
inpoitait to look at-the Iand Use PIan and Speclal Development__
Ol'strict criteria and base the decision on that. tfhen the etaff
nakes a decision, they nust base the deciEion-on goals and
policies that ari in ltace. She felt lt was lnportant that the
itanning Conmission ule existlng regrulatiols- and pollcies. Jay
said thit you have responsibiltty to tlre neighbors. He added
that he ai-Cl trave adjacent property ownera give input ald have
cone back with revisions. He felt the project did reflect nany
vlew points.
Connie asked if there waE tnlrthing to evaluate the SDD on and
f.
Kristan responded that there uere nine design crlterl.a. Kristan
added that the staff reconnendation was based on the fact that
the plan was in compliance with all nlne criteria.
Peter Jamar pointed out to Connie that the chart on Page 8 of the
nemo was a conparison and that they were tryl.nE to fall vl.thln
those parameters. Connie replled that she felt there YaB etlU
too much GRFA and she also felt that the destgn ras not as good.
Connie felt that the landlord uas being too greedy and blocklng
sone of their own views. Ned responded that people dld not buy
an assigned unit, they purchaeed a floating unLt. ,flu eald that
he had forgotten to nention that he would llke to aee a aassive planting on the west elevation to hlde part of the parkl.ng
structure.
Diana said she would like to have underlying zoning to utllize
when an applicant, at a later date, asks for other approvals.
She felt that it was essential . She did feel also that the new
design was a great improvenent. Dlana felt that there was no
problem with the density, that the Land Uee PIan stated that you
should add density where sone already exists. Diana wondered
what the Town of Vail was gettLng. She was hoping the Town would
gain more landscaping and nore enployee unlts and she would llke
io see more landscaping on the end toward the blke patb.
Kathy was hoping that part of the top floor could be raoved back
to increase the view frorn Vail Spa. l{ed replied that he could
change the proportion of roomE and could push it back 15r'
Diana felt that it was a negative inpact on the bike path at
present.
Peter Jamar said that there sould be a better nodel at the next
meetLng.
BiIl Burding, attorney rePresenting Vail Spa, felt this Yas a
step in the right direction ttrat the building.was belng pu!!9al
uaci<. He still felt a 58 unit increase vould'lncrease traffic
drarnatically. He added that sith the off-ranp added-plus- the
added traffic to the Marriott, there would be a definlte change
in the neighborhood.
Jay Peterson asked Bill Burdlng lf there were any other concerna
and ltr. Burding responded that there uere not any Dore concerns
and that they ippreciated the applicantrs lnterest. Jay added
that the Town was changing, that shat we aee nor|' ls not Uhat.we
were going to see over the next 10 to 15 years.
Diana stated that she would rather aee the exterlor unit be
enployee units and if you need nore denslty_she rould rather 8ee
It^in-Lionshead than in the Village and would rather eee lt near
the Frontage Road if in Lionshead. Stre felt that if more density
-!
i uas going to be added that this location had nerit. She stated that she felt that Forest road was residential , this was
connercial and that the added density here had less impact than l-f density were added to any other buildlng along Gore Creek.
Kathy felt the southeast corner looked nore llke a notel . She
was concerned about the appearance on ttre uest elevation. She did not want it to look like a parking strrrcture.
Kristan stated that if this was going to go to the Planning
Cornmission on ltay 14, she needed all drawingE and application
naterials in her offlce by April 3oth in the uorning to allow
tine to review.
Kristan questioned the use of an underlying zone district.
Jay suggested High Density Multiple Fanily. Dlana stated that if
underlying zoning was used she did not sant the neno to say that
this proJect did not fit the zone district.
Peter Jamar stated that an SDD does become very specific, and
therefore it night be sinrpler to have uerely an SDD, that hls
personal preference was not to do an underlying.zoning. Tom
reninded thern that if they did not do the bultding they would
have to come back and reapply. Kristan stated that was why she
would like to see some underlying zoning.
Diana felt that anyone could adopt an sDD. She added that lt
would not be smart and that it vould be conplicated to add
underlying zoning now. She would like to do the SDD and tlren add
underllinq zoning. Tom reminded the board that the underlylng
zoning would need to be part of the ordinance. itay stated that
80t oi the site was HDMF. Tom explained that L,arry Eslasithrs
opinion was that exlsting sDD uas not necessary or reguired to
adopt an underlying zoning. Kristan felt that the llst of uses
was the most inrportant part of having underlying zonlng. Ton -said that ttre rest was all detenined througtr review process of
an SDD.
Diana felt that usually the uses on the underlying gruidellnes
were the main issues. Diana said tlrat Ln this partlcular proJect
it doesnrt, but that if they cane back for other requests, I't
night help.
A rnotion to table until llav 14. 1990 was nade bv Kathy
warren and seconded by Jin shearer-
VOTE: 6 - O
The rneeting adjourned at approxinately 6:oo P.n.
9
s
fo: Planning e Environmental Conmission
From: Conmunity Developnent Department
Date: Aprll 23, L99o
RE: An appeal of a decision of the zoning adninistrator,pursuant to Section 18.65.030 of the zoning code, regarding the definition of rrsite coveragerr, (Sections 18.04.040 and
18.04.350 of the zonlng code), specifically as it relates to Lot 31, Block 7, VaiI Vlllage First Filing.Applicant: H. Ross Perot
I. DESCRIPTTON OF TIIE REOUEST
The applicant is the owner of a single fanlly home located at 64 Beaver Dam Road, and has recently presented plans to the conmunity Development Department which entail a naJor
remodel and expansion of the residence. one portion of the
renodel calls for the construction of an attached three-car
garage and entry on the site (presently, there is no covered parking on site). only the north elevation wall, or gtarage entry, would be exposed and visible from Beaver Dam Road.
The roof of the garage would be covered with soil and the
grades would be recontoured to berm up against the sides of
the garage, (see attached site plan and elevations).
The property ls zoned Prinary/secon;itary Residential . Given
the current zoning, as well as the(steep slopes on the lot'
the site coverage for this prpperty is linited to a naxinum of 15t of the total site area.)
Total sLte area : 151681.6 square feet or 0.36 acres
Allowable site Existing aite
Proposed sLte (with garage)
Proposed site (if garage is
coverage
coverage
coverage
coverage*not counted)
*Note: The applicant silI still
coverage, by 35.8 square feet,
count towards site coverage.
2,352.2 square feet or 158
11103.0 square feet or 78
3,498.0 square feet or 22*
2,388 square feet or L5.22
need to decrease site
even if the garage does not
t/'
The reguest before the PEc centers around the Town of Vail
Zoning Code definitions of rrsite coverageil and rrbuildingrr,
which are aa follows:
n18.04.360 SITE COVERAGE - Site coverage means the portion of a site covered by buildlnqs, excluding roof or balcony overhanEs, neasured at the exterior walls or
supporting menbers of the building at glegldlegel".
n18.o4.040 BUILDING - Building Deans any structure
having a roof supported by colunns or walIs, or any
other enclosed structure, for the housing or enclosure of persons, animals, or propertyx.
7 Tllre applicant is appealing
,,/ garage should count towards - definitions.
II. APPLICANTIS RESPONSE
the staff deteminatLon that the site coverage based on the above
Please see the attached letter from Jin Uorter, dated epril
16, 1990, for the applicantrs response.
rrr. gtaELBEgPgs.E
After review of the deflnitions in Section 18.04.o40 and
18.04.360 of the zonl.ng code, the staff believes that the
proposed garage should be included as site coverage.. Ttre
purpose of site coverage is to linit tbe area of a site
;which is covered bv buildings. we believe that the proposed
f/ garage ls indeed a buildingr is defined above. The garage - is a structure which has a roof, and the roof is supported
by walls. The north elevation of the garage reads very
clearly as a garage, or building.
In respect to the definition of site coverage the staff
believes that the building would be constructed gbg:fs--grouns!
level and that the soil placed on the roof of the garage
should not constitute ground level , but only an artificial
recontouring of the siters grades. In addition, rrthe
exterior walls or supporting nenbersn of the building are
clearly vislble at ground level .
The appllcantrs position is that rrbecause our garage wl-ll be
totally covered by existing grades (the site over the garage
will be taken back to its original grades and landscaped conditions), our garage is not coverlng the siterr. In
reviewing the existing grades, compared to the proposed
grades over the garage, the staff has determined that the
grades differ by as nuch as 4r. Generally, the proposed
grades are 2r above the existLng grades.
[/fhe staff does not support the applicantrs position that the
garage should be considered as a landscape feature, as defined in Section 18.O4.2OO, which is as follows:
nlandscaping neans planted areas and plant naterials,
including trees, Bhrubs, lawns, flower beds and ground
cover, together with the core development such as
walks, decks, patios, terraces, water features, and like features not occupying more than 20t of the
landscaped area.rl
Certainly the bermed areas and soil and grasses on the
buiJ.dingrs roof are possible to consider as landscape naterials, however, the proposed building must still be
addressed by using ttre site coverage and buildlng definitions when deterninlng site coverage for the proposal .
The appllcant has drawn some comparlsons with the
underground parking at Bistrop Park. It is true that the
underground parking for Bishop Park was not counted as site coverage. The staff's justlfication for this exclusion from site coverage is due to the fact that the parking is
conpletely underground and that the parking structure is not visible from anlmhere on the site.
7tn surnmary, the staff cannot support the appllcantrs
1 / request. We feel that the garage should be included as site
\/ coverage and that the applicantrs request does not neet the " intent of site coverage, as defined in the Townrs zoning code. We believe that if the applicant feels strongly about this particular garage design, in this location, then the
applicant shoutd proceed with a request for a site coverage
variance.
\!\
n
i^o li fi-r,
b\\d
tl
il :':'s i
5i a a:" -
:i,i.t !
rl a i . ,
I
I
I
{
a
I
l,
I
I rl ,l w[/
I
\
rl',,.t il
,l(
11 i\
l\$,j
1
r (
t:I 1
1
\r
'l]io
'.i t,u
I ' , l,!.l
ll J
\.
i -{- nt,
,
lt
0l .6
o
r, _j
I
-t
o g)
G
o (j)
I
-J I
nl ol ()l
3l
uJl +
-t
o i)
c 6 E (,
al
=
A Ffoiess ona; CorporalLoa
1t::e:: \,aaca^ rr,ve
Cross,3aas ai V.r'
va Co orado 8l6r?
333 .rra 51Ca
MoruenAncnIECTS
April 16, 1990
Ms. Diana Donovan
Chair, Planning and
Environmental Commission
Town of VaiI
75 S. Frontage Rd.VaiI, Co 81658
Ilello Diana,
This letter is to document our appeal of the Community Dev-
elopment Departmentrs recent decision regarding a site cov-
erage issue, at the H. Ross Perot residence at Lot 31,
Block 7, VaiI Village First Filing.
There is currently a small single-family residence on the
property. Because the site climbs at a 45 percent grade
irom eelver DEIm Road, there is No on-site Parking at all.
The Perotts currently must park across the street, in an
ally which is either in the Beaver Dam Road right-of-way,
or is on Tract B, or both.
we are proposing an expansion of the home. Part of the
proposed expansion is a garage which is BURIED TCIIALLY
bnr,ow E1T5TING GRADES, except for the retaining waII which
allows aecess into the garage off of Beaver Dam Road.
Please compare our situation to that of BishoP Park, where
their garlge is covered by existing grades, excePt the
retaining witts which allow access to the garage. Their
garage is not considered to be site coverage.
We feel that because our garage will be totally covered BY
EXISTING GRADES (the site over the garage will be taken
back to its original grades and landscaped conditions), our
garage is not covering the site. Rather, the site is cove'
iing-our garage. consequently, $re neet the definition of
landscaping, Paragraph 18.04.200.
I
We
on
look forward to
Monday, .fune 23.
MonrenAncnrECTs
Pg. 2
resolving this with you at your meeting
AIA
ilRrrr/sJ
cc: H. Ross Perot
ilay Peterson
Waffen Lawrence
. Morter,
lot|t{ OF VAII,
?5 S. FRODTTAGB ROAD
\fAII", C1C |Jr.657
970-479-2L3'J
DEPARII{ENT OF CO[o{UNflY DEVELOFIIEIVT
b{-3(Bt\.- a
U vlr t:tr-
AI.L TIMES NOTE:TEIS PBRTIIIT MUST BB POSTBD ON
PROJECI TITLTE: PEROT REIIODEL
ADD/ALT SFR BUII.D PBRMIT
.IOBSITB AT
Femit
Depts: FIRB
DepL: PIIB WORK
ation. . - :
Parcel No. -:F6ject No.:
54 BE,AVBR DAM RD
210L-071-13 -004
PRrf99-0078
INFIJOOR HEAT REPlNunberWofSDwelling Units: 000
Tonn of Vail Adjusted valuatioa: 8,000
lof crar A9plianc..:lof G.E lpgr:*of ld/P.lI€E 3
Plan ch.ck--->
Inl'.acl,gi.t j,6r>
|rill crll -- -- >
?ot-l Alsulltcd Fcc.--->
tddiLiod|al, loco----'- --->
Tot.l Pcr:rit Pcc_------->
Payionea-------
Btt tf,ca IxrE- - --
al .25
.o0
3.00
-oo
.00
.00
100.00
309.25
309.25
.oo
309 -25
309.25
.oq
Item: 05x00
04/L4/L999
Itsem: 05400
04/L4/L99e
Itsem: 05600
04/14/L999
It,em: 05500
04/L4/L999
FIRE DEPARI!{EITT
CEARLTB ACEiON:
PI'BLIC WORKS
GIARI,IE ACtiON:
BIfILDING DEPARIilENT DePt:
CEARLIB ACTiON: APPR CIIARTIB DAVIS
PI.ANNING DEPARIT{ENT DEPI:
@ARIJIB ACt,lON: APPR N/A
a.t ar.....aa r att tr.-ttlrtatttaa
BUILDIIilG Division:
PLANNITdG Division:
APPR
APPR
N/A
N/A
Diwision:
Division:
t!r'tattttiiatttaaaaartat
rcc|Eaga plgg
.Dd ploc plrn,
aubdivi.idr
FEOi EIOO A|| stoo Pir
iataaar.atlt'ttarattti.atttiatttatatrt.tttt.r.
See page 2 of this DocunenE for any condlt,iona tshat nay apply Eo Ehis peruiL.
DBCIARATIONS
I h.trby .cbonl.dg. tb.ts t h.vr t.rd ts[ir .Elrlic.tior, fillod or.rh ln full tho Infor lbion rcquir.d. eoqtlaEaa ltr
Flra, rnd agre. Eb-E .1I fh. infot!.Lidt pEovid.d.. rrqui!.d l. corrccL. I agr.. !o caply rlLh the lnfd|recloo
to coQly rlth .11 torm ordln|ttc.c .nd at-ec l.rs, .trd to buttd btdd stsructur! eccording !o lhc totn'r zcoing end
cod.., &.i$r r.r.iar .pplornd, Utrifon Buildilg Coda rDd otltB! osdia rc.r of th. Torlr qrylicrblo Ehcr-to.
nIQOESIS lOE nrgPlqrtotro !ttlN.r. aE ,nDE rfllltta-ro0n tplns $r AIt lrcB 8l
TOV/Comm. Dev.
Clean-up Deposit Refund
appfOvgd '"
- Address: 64 BEAVER DAM RD
amount
date
Description:REMO\IB BI{TRAN II
Pilcphcc tnfollaEion: l..t!icted:
t...rrr.-.t.tttt..tt......t.rr FEE SltrI|nRy
EuildiDg-----> 12s-oo nGagurt-Dt Phn Ravt ar- ->
Dnl Fen--------
nrcE.Lio6 F.c_ --_ - --- -- >
Clc|n-UF Dcltoat"i - - -- -- -- >
!O J PEES-----
.rtta a+aratttttaora-aa..ir|raa rrtrti',trtaai
APPI,ICAIST SSAEFFBR CONSTRU TION
P O BOX 373, \fAfL CO 81558
CONTRACTOR SEAEFFER CONSTRUCTION
P O BOX 373, IfAITJ C1) 81658
OYNT{BR PEROT E R & IIARGOT B
L237'7 IIIERIT DR STE 1700, DAI.I,AS TK 75251
899-0063
SEatus- - -: APPROVED
Applied..: o4/L4/L999
Ibsued. - -: o4/L4/a999
Bq)ires - -. LI/LL/L999
Phone:970-845-5555
Pbone:970-845-5656
S.!rd C1!rn-Bp DePoEiC To: GqtIGl Englln Srcln:roll oF cgtrtRtcron ron EruaBLF llID ol|XaE
PAGE 2
********r.l***tt*r*t**************************!r*:l*****!rrr:l*******l**:r**************
COIIDITIONS OF APPRO\TAI
Pea'mit #: 899-0063 as of 04/L5/99 Status: APPRO\IED
***t***************:l*****************t******a****ll*********.l******lt*:r***********
Pemtr Type: ADD/ALT sFR BITILD PERnTT
AlDlicant : SIIAEFFER CONSTRUCTIoN
,.Iob Addreaa: 64 BEAIIER DAItI RD
I,OCAIION: 64 BEA\IER IIAITI RD
Parcel No: 2101-071-13-004
Applied: O4/t4/L999
rssued: O4/L4/L999
*:r*****!r*******ttr*ltt*******!r****t***t***t*t*******t*********tt******************
C1]I[DITIONS
******i*******trtrt*******r!t**rl*******l***t******!t*tia********t***********tr*******
t. TIEI,D TNSPEC:TIONS ARB REQIIIRP TO CIIACK FOR CODE COMPLIAI{CB-
2. SMOKE DFrtscroRs ARE REQITIRBD IN ALI-, BBDROO|TS AND EVBRY STORY
AS PBR S8C.310.5.r. OP Tm 1997 UBC-
SOltf Ol Vtll,, @!(RllrO Rqrrlntrd! ovlgltt l0 !30 ttrtc[|E
8trts.qrt ltd.r: RIC-O503 lDutrt i
Prtrr.nC tlChod! CG Xol|tlon r 52109
9O9.25 O+lLSfgt Lo.Zl
Inits: rtl
P.r[il fo! E99-0063 tlD. ! I-AUIITD rDD/lLT aFn lUIl,D 98
9rrcrl f,o: 2101-0t1-13-00{
gltr lddr.rr: 5a BlllrB DIL RD
toc.cr.on: 6a EEIVER Dlll nD
llri. Pq|!.oc
Tgt l 1.4:
309. 25 Toc.I llL Putr 3
Brlrttc! !
309.25
309.2s
,oo
Accotr* cod. D.acrl,pcLon
Bp 00100003111100 Bor'lDlltc PEnxtl tElg
PP 0O1OOOO31123OO Plrllf CIIECK lllg
llt D2-DBP03 Cl,ElIft P DEPOAII8
rc 00100003112300 rI',E clLL lra9Belld Pll
lrcunt
125.00
81.25
100.00
3. O0
Tq{N OP VAIL
75 S. FROTfTAGIE ROAD
\IArt, @ 81557
970-479-2L39
DBPARIIIEITT OF COMMT'NINT DEVBLOPUBNT
NOIE: TIIIS PERIIIIT l[ItST BB POSTBD
MECEAIIICAL PENMIT
Job Address. . . : 64 BEAVER DAljl RI)
I,OCAEiON. . . ... : 64 BB.AVER DAM RD
Parcel No..... : 2101-071-13-004
lrojecc Number: PRJ99-0078
APPLICTIfT TIHIlts IIATBR PI,ITUBING & HEATING
P O BOX 4290, EAGLB, CO 81631
COIITRAETOR WIIITE WATBR PLIIMBING & BBATING
P o Box 4290, EAGr,B, CCI 81631
OIWER PBROTER&MAR@TB
L2377 MERIT DR STE 1700, DALLAS
Descript,ion:
REPI,Ad B{TRAN INFI,OOR NBAT W/WIRSBO
ON itOBSITts AT AI,L TII'IBS
PermiE *: M99-0025
Status...: ISSIIBD
Applied..: o4/L4/L999
riiued. ..t o4/L4/L999
B:qrires . -. L0/lL/L999
Plrone:
Phone:
11( 75251
ValuaEion:
lof e.. !og.:
970-925-3708
910-926-3708
3, o00. oo
lot td/PrII.c !lit p1.o. Iifotr.ciofr: tt atricc.d! Y lof Or. ttDl i.trc.. !
tart.,atlrarr!rrrttrar.rrrtrrrrtar,'rr.rr.rtltr.,'ratrr.rrtriirr pBB SU|O!|RI rttariatt,rrarrrrr.aa'rttat'l,}ttt.trrtt"tt'tttttt"trt''t'tt'
Irchenicrl---> 60.00 |Ltgu't'nt Pl.tr n'vI'Y--> 'Oo Tot'l c cul'ts'd E es---> 78'oo
91rt! ch.cl---> 15.00 ttIE !c'-----'-'
ttrErtig.Giotr> 'oo lctlAlJ P!rs--*--
,*r. crrr----> 3.oo :il;*';;::--::::::::-: "':33
aa.lrr..raatl,rJrtr.a.r..rr-raaaa.tr.a.+raraatr.araaattatttii.araattaaatatt'laart.rtttaai"'tttttttt l " o""'ttt"rtt"' t ot' tt""t '
IEem: 05100 BuTLDING-DBP.ARIII{EItT --Pept: BIIILDING Division:
6i7T.L tllli-dififlIE eEql-"E- ADDn csenr'rr DAvrs
rEem: os6oo prRB_DBpIiRT!,rENi'--- :._---- --Dept: FIRE Division:
647rtt79t5-sanr,rs AcEion: APPR N/A
CONDITION OF APPRO\IAL
1. FIBLD INsPBqrIoNs AR8 REQIIIRED To cHEcK FOR coDE corrrPLIAIiICB '
r***!l*t!t*****t*:r**t*************r*t*ttt*t**t***:l**!t:t******t****t**************i*
DBCI.ARA'TTONS
t h.rcDtf actlorlc€f, !h.t r h-v! r..d rhla tptrllcatsls. fiuad out tn full th. intotr.Liot! rcqulrrd. cqrl.tad rn rccur'c' PIot
plrn, rod !trt. Ehrg .ll cllr info!:lrclqr ptovldcd er nguir:d i! corrccb ' t rgrc! to cqly rith th' lnforr'tiqr rnd PloE plrn'
to c.-t ly sich .rr toin otdim|tc.. .nd .caE. lerr, rad uo build thl. otructur. rccording Bo rhG Torn'| tosri'g 'nd 'ubdlvitio'r
co&r, at .igrr rvirr rl4rrovrd. unlloxl Bulldlt€ cod. ]id oLb.a ordt nuc.. of utc lortr .pPl icrbl' bh'F to'
oglsrs Fo9 TEDEGIrO|'A $nt& BB !|IDE rEffl-Fom Hog'e
atonfint o! olrtR on c(rrrrcLn Fon HIISB!? rD olltE
I
I
I
tBoH atoo llf 3!0o Pt
m f oF vArt, cbt|oRlm Rqrrintcd ! ol/15199 10:3o gtateunE
rrr !a tl t t rrattJrl a lol t ta 0I r a tr* *
gErg.Ertt NuDb.r ! BEC-05o3 lEor.rnts: 7s.oo o4/L5/99 10.26
Payo.nE fcEhod ! Cl( Nocation: 252{ Inilr .tl|
P.r6it lfo, lt99-O026 TyP.: B-UECH
P.rcel llo: 2101- 071- 13 -004
91t.6 Addlc6g: 64 BEAVER DA}| RD
Location! 54 BBAVER Dt|}, Rt)
]|ECXIIITICAI, PBRXIT
rri trrl|t I *t ttt ** t ttl, tt t t a t t t t a* * t t* a rrr ta * *!r tt tt*at
Togrl F6cE:
this Paldanr 7g.oo locrl tIJ. IrutE:
Balance:
lccount CodG Dcscription
llp oo100003ttL300 uBcErnrcAIJ PBR IT FEBS
PE 00100003112300 PrJ$t CrBCR FBBtt
l{c 00100003112800 rILt, clrL rNltPBcrroN PBE
78. OO
7S. 00
.oo
lDounb
50.00
15. 00
3.OO
ParcetH /?-Lel
-a1 I -9-e+
Building}Q
Legal Descripion:
BUILDING: $
PLIJMBING $
TOWN OF VAILQNSTRUCTION PERMT APTICATION FORM
INT'ORMATION MUSTBE COMPLETE OR IEE APPLICATION WILL BE REJECTTI)
contact the Eagte couw Assessors Office at 976328-8640 for Parcet# P Rsq c{ €o78
Oarc: 4
JobName: Pzftr JobAddress:C+ g6-vv
Electrical ( )tvtechanical S Other ( )
5T'
Subdivision VF iu Vt u-te, e ,Ffline [ "]
owners Name: Roc> Pep:r-Address:Phone#
Architect:Address:Phone#
Description of Job:
workctass: New() Alreration() Additionat() @ orher()
Number of Dwelling Units: /AtC- Number of Accommodation Units: OME
NumberandTypeofFircplaces: casnppriances lrt/A Cast-ogs NA Wood/Pellet
VALUATIONS
PLECTRICAL: S Ct
MECIIAMCAL $
CONTRACTOR INFORMATION
-- ?_- {a4.pyurn;- Ce,
General Contractor: a)lWt >*2c.Pp,ftl.Addressl
Town of Vail Registation No.
Electrical Contractor: Ma*fE
TownofvailRegtsnattonNo. ../ Phorc# - - 37g -
ptumbinsconrractor: v-'rrrz, tt-*lrp wulkF&ES q fir#fl'q mq? - oa1b
Town of Vail Regstration No. I 6 q - P
Mechanicd Contractor:Lto ilC
Town of Vail Registation No. Phone #
FOR OFFICE USE
,,N6
r-ot 3l ntoct<
OTIIER:
TOTAL
$€-$ 8L eo
Phone #
BUILDING:
SIGNATURE:
ZONING:
Yn*"* (qb) t4i-sare aGB
Address: 3
SIGNATURE:
FI ov .o oo
a
E
o
rl.oz ob .o OE
9
H ot
.€8 P"H e8 rla llE c)0
E A
lr
g I I
E{
H
g
i
P
E
E
FI
A
!l E
R
F
E
l.d !l
x o t
E c tJ
t,F 4 tl
o
ta
o (.,
a
o a E .a
ot4 trH
b8 OA on E|
o(o
orB orQ o
EE DD LO HT E<
x E H (
HF.a2 ED -o F,-
at
rr Fl ez
'(D HI H{o I E
lrF HA OD
AI 31 o
o tr
6
I
E H
H E
l.
u o
lr A
Ed to aq|aE
q E IT S EE o ao D E9 (.'(J
o
F.ql o tt
E
Fl 4
h E I E E
A z
B q
a.
I
E o
,l:
rn :
arD o lrl
4a I>
EIt{:to ac'q ro t rx o AAI{
llJ
J
0-
@
z
o
=F
o
.:i;:::
i.H E * r=u i i= E=;t:ii i
=,23'zii !€ E=. a 5r9:. e
? i €;::
i: : : ::;a!id:.: - ?= E
:EE gI l:
Z i i.= i=
E i;i;:eE;:;:Z -t.2 .-€ i
1;, tE zE E i E E:;
:. ;E t i::.i E 5 5 :E!!::;;: !: i?:
)2 o
o +,
o
o\o\
@
F
l-.
an
FI H
H
r'.
u
H
FI
00
H
ut
E
3
z I
U
F
N \o ln .i.
z
oo
c)
I &
la
Ff
z
H (n
t4
(,)
tsl
z
H ut
E-r
z
l.l lrl (1
lJxa
v!-<>x
Qtru >zz ES<
3dz
^<\J YAi-z"Y -zi H.h tsz
al kt \J -<.^FtrZ zbA r{,1 \ -.!<az=IQF-J <%ca
or z
:f-F--r!-<se{*<-F<Y a')li
l-=a l-!Lt Z.^<-y
:-l : r,i ENHU PFfA ri ,., L!tto>
J !4 \.)a>i..{ z { *YV
sEx:lLrr(l
I\>L)-triqh u=x:.,,FYl
TSXF
rl{
F
-e.
-rF
lll
tl{h
H .*,
r+
O.
FR
EN It
-t IF a trt rf-t t
-F5
-l ff-d F
fir
?h.€v
F .a :
--11
19
F\
-a LI t-
-a Et rFt e H H f\
-,\/
l{-l tl
A.{.f a t-l
.fJ rFr
.lJ +t h er rl v
o z
F
G,
IU o-
r\
\o
Or \o
o €
\o <\CN
(r)
(7)
o I \o
@ F\
.n
!r.l
tlJ u-
-
uJ
€Eft9+V)
d6
0tlerlb
c'\
N
&
N
H r-{
=t.]
t-{E
B! €t\rE \.
| 6:1
': Pt d'.1 iiH
t! !-2 OE
2s ;}4 -H 5E dt
uJ
(r
F
F U'z
o
z z
llll zl
FII H EI <l*
ztt'j 4t&Fll ts AI
Ell c)AI D 4&(JFr
aa v)
AH <o
A^g<bx zY.
2
6 !'l
=<
c6 ;_\oE ZH z^
RF]
2 F
2
rL
=
z
F
F
FI
z
I
@
Fq
&
pr
H
H Fl
z H
a
F
.t>lt)
Fl
@ Fr rtl V) \O a
c) <')
F\
EX F{O .
Itl Cq F.]
!do<(^a>
A
z
rd Fl
;o F
o
o/
d tu (J'
(o
a
o
o
o
O
;
=o
E
=l
-i
o
o-
(E
'.q)
q)
E*te '=O.o;i
s bE;
E.e*€*Eg8 E.:9 c
E 6P.E c-o>':P-b :'-;-o
:EPi € >=:c9oF
33;;
E EAR IIEo *OOc
iEoS .: eet $iSE
o- o cl-
SE;.e oidor E*e€
E61i
:E€ H
E6FS
-ecf
*s<_-s€;;ggl:
9 c -o.5
*EFe 6R5o
869 F 9E o -PEg:
rc
uJ z 3 o
uJ 'r
z
E
uJ z 3
II
llJ
F
z
;
@
6l
ftl
R
$'
o\.if -s
fl
5 R
r
GI
F
(f)I P
rn ot .<r F
ac
tl
ra
6l rr
F
.s
N
t\
*fi {,
t
=
IIJ
z
o )
5
:<
uJ -()
z
J
I
F
llJ J
t!
(,z 6
d
J
9 z
o
UJ
=
x
c(
UJ Iu
z
;
u./
uJ E
lo ;
uJ ;
uJ
z o
ul o
F
uJ
l z
|lJ
x
F
uJ o f
<n
UJ
tlJ tL
F
=
UJ o-
F
z
o
=l
E F
UJ J
UJ
z
dl
=
d
2
I (J
uJ
Fl
H
NO|lVn']VA
F]E
B
z
tE
z
H rr ()
&H
an z o
C.)
;
3 zzt-
tr ^ 6z
= r =Y rg oE
aaE z>-()oo9 ()zX
LL<oq i !J-E :! X tr.J aXz
iNC'
N
N
>tr
-I
z
tr
I IL
cc
o-
t
uJ q
F
E
F
\o
r\
uJ E
z
E o o
z
tr
E
uJ F
s
>4
=UJ z
ll tl ll
t z l z Oa FuJ < (.)o<
=H Ru-6o <z
tr z ,.
Oz z-":F
fio 3tr
t!f
=
E
UJ z
()
I F
G
F.
z
F
5 a z
-;
3
i
cc
o
o 3
i<
F l ()
F
JI
i-l
zl
zl
.. >l
IJJ o
LlJ qJ z o L
IIJ (L
z
E
.ir
.L
z
F-
6
I
I
"l zl ;l tl F
uJ 'r
&
z
I
-'l
1l *lil@ -l lr)
P.' --J 3o a
z H
z o
F
Y
UJ
d)
o F
=
H;i
lt oJ')-r
OH 1l
U)z
Fl
lF{
I IuJ IF l@ l6 o -)
HuJ l^F L,z6
E z*
/n :<
=F &
=< r'1
=2*33 E (lu $
---\o THTHLJ
J ."i5 z;7 alF-
-r -": uJ 6il>
HffiE
ts
l!I
o :t{EY E<ol o .!2 E2 e9 rra
=d =>FJF
=lu-E b=o dfi E =*E 65 9 \tr E XO-t x>€::iF cL "i o-i !*
UJ
o F
---
E
=e,
UJ o-z 9 F
C)f E F a z o
C)
I t'l q
H
Fl
t{
z
-)lJ-
J
d]
d1
F o
B trl z v
H ta
F{E
F
r'1 A
ii
=z
d)
-)
&
frf A
ttt
cA
UJ
=z
ts
&:4
=r\.
l'-
CO (\
IJJ
o
X
U7
hl
Fl
o
ts
ts H
H
H
E
=tr
B
E
frl
(n
-s
an llJ
=
!n
rn
I \o
i
Fl H
F
z
H H
t-l
H U)z
t'l h
rrl
rJ)
=t!
tr
I d\c{
FI
o z
ci
llJ
=
u-o
z
'o F
\o !n \o
n1
I !n .s
@
u
u
F
g
o z
o
uJ E
a
t!o z 3
F c tr
o z
o
alt q
tt o z 3 I =e
o z
ti
ttl
J
a
l!
z 3
t-
llJ
lrl
uJ z
=
F
ts
i
E
E
<F
uJ<zE r!F t,l z o ()
<(C)I tr:ti(tsl al
eo z, ts-
=#1Z EO
{x
:iF
=3 Y,z
=8
E;r
=F;o2 t <-><Jn gH I
tt tt a r r at tt a t a t a UNIT ONE a t t t t t aa r a r r t t t t a a
P
R
I
M
A
R
Y
u
N
I
T
o z
L
G
IJJ o
o\
tn
uJ
I.IJ u-
F
E U
N\s \$
o\
fn
I
E
.a
H
4
X
cll
c'r
e^
(\
E
qJ
,Fl <H
t>l
z4 qE
5 d
n
t>l |olt
DE f'l lrt r'HI tz
."f"11 EHF "FH
EH I.r Er FTE t<l<FTH
ru.IH
Flfr Elffi vt | __rl
=t#?IF zla
EIF
ts r p2 F
F{l^
t-E t{t
tr
h
R t.r)
I a
Er |<I
F
E
E.
uJ z 3
UJ I
z
@ rn \o
@
Fl H
t!J Iu o
=I
F
z :N
(7)
f'-
X
q)
-c
o
.9
(!
c
3
t-
o ()o
o il)E o o
o
(!
o
N
o
3
f-
6l E
o,
o o
o)
o
ct
o
(!
g;
'o
o-.!
'i9(,)*Eu E8F cott o:-ql
=xY a6 lvL -.=(t Flc
P:5 - d.o
-EF E'i =c96
35=_E >
EEF
*OO
3eg tqi c .Y_ (u
o. .! o *E:
vrt d Ego -(5C E;:EP b
.\ (E-i;E .c(q!
E 6.E
! --c o o)*Prss -Eit 36>,
c-=ra:E 6: E hie 9Eor OEE !octl
-o(!
I
@ n
c{f\O N
+
c
=
uJ
z
J )
I
UJ
z
J
()
llJ )
IJJ
z I z
-o
=
ul tll
z
tr
uJ E
LlJ c
o
3 g
z
6
UJ
o-
uJ
c l
2
UJ
(J
x
F
llJ a f
tt)
UJ
UJ
tr.-
==E.
uJ
J
F
z
o J
l
J
()
lu
J
uJ
o z 6
=
(L
J
9 z
UJ
E
E1 o
NOrrvn'rv^
ltd
Ic)
IF
tF
l(/)Itrl
gex
*
*r-r zt q<-
F -%
<-{ft z.:IJE ,€
=>c
=lDGl
zz
Fo- 4 :< -t :i-=F;aa z>-
<)z
LL <(
E9 >P
; c.i
z F]
H
z
H F
an
H X
h
F.{-4
a
E
H H
?
o X
Fi
H
tt)
z H F ts
z
F-
IL
CE
f
qJ
€'\
e
Lrl
oa
.J
z
E o o
z o
g.
l!F
=IU z
tl ll tl tl
b z l z Oa
o<
>fi >(I
.+, .i
!4< Z ;i El I l
-ll
l
t 2,
z-"iF
fi(,
3 lrJ OI
ut :J
t!z
9 r F
uJ
F
z
F
5 a z (r
g
s
X X I )fi
I
X
F.:
F
z
F (h
6
z
Y (r
{l
-l
zl
zl
.. >l
ul o
uJ
uJ z o F
t!(L
z o
E o
c'\
(t
,:r
c.)
I
CO
[:
CY)
O
-$
LIJ F
(l)
dl o -z
F L
IJJ
!a
I.IJ
d)
o F
F
Eo HE
> (')
O_N
Y>(J<r>
I
uJ F l+r oE zo
4 .)t'
^3 E
=3
E
==
g
JO Fl o-t! A
!DtrI
= /,-3V tra
b'//'
w^ (-'za < ./,)4
u, -r -s9
E -.-2A
NV
=
=
UJ .L
tL
lu
F
=
E
uJ (L
lt-
llJ o z
o I
F (r I E d
tr
u,l J
F l o
5
IL
ut !)
F
c o
E ct
-9 o
o
=,
.=c t
E
E o l,
AO 1I rr
C!o >E
=i rE
-!*.=€
E
=E
lrJ
o-z 9 F o
E F a z o o J .-i6 1,, \,, =
==3 - i\ -r-
d;=
.J)z
J
zl
ol
Hl
zl g
ol FI
=.1 ol
uJl il
al >l ttl ol
zl
=l ot FI
I
I
I
I
I ol zl
dl
PI -t
il
ttl ol
5l g
Ol rJr FI F
I
F<l l^al o | '-{Bl lo ot I Al \o <l
El q
I Fll
I (.ll
.f,1
Fll
I r-a
AZ
H>cl
CI s 4 <tr Eo
x
H t4 H
=H x E t
g
\t)ln \o rn
I ln -$
@
I pol
J, l c!l
I
I
cil
=.1 ol
Hl JI
<l >l
ttl ol
zl 3l
PI
ol
=.1 ol ull
5l
?l >l
:l ol FI
IY
H
r'1
r:l E
N |\(n
c\l
a t,
uJ
td
H a
rd &
F
UJ
=z
(n
-1
I
,.l
u?l
;l ol <l
FlI |ll HI >l
|l H
z
=tr
z
6
=)
o
E F z
=.r
ltl
=
l-gc.>
=+E
Oz
-rO <F (ts()
IJJ <zE
trt z
()
E,F O
uJ J
()
uJ
E T
O trtrtr
,^g trJo J'-co +)<(o (Jc .-{ .o Jr-o-o cLx <(tJ
l)- tt1 H c:l)r9C,
i=
AL ulp
.o
@ op Ec,
(JH
q-
U)P
U)
(\l
E
i{-
L q)+,+)
(u
.-J
F
t
trl
(5 z,
-J qtr
UP
rr|- O
vo
UJ
Ld z,
lJ rn
(n at @2.
Y=z=oi FE IL uJu Y-H oq)F
F
=cE '.
Ho-t
tr- \ t o!: r^t r+ -\ |n t\a I :<N I e \>t I Yrl rl gur bk Ztf
F
=E,lrl
o-z o F (J
D
E,F a z o ()
:t
+
:L
'l
uJ F
o
d
J
=I
C)
IIJ
=n
(,z
J tr
I F o J
J
d
J *0
$AI
+
e
,-s
'ii =z
lo
G a
d.
'{.
s I
($
|-.ol q -]
an UI
o d
J
=
$l
I (l
I
aL F
c
d
=
J1
JS
*[
a
n
{l {l
=l aEl d
,l rj
e
-$
-{
u
g
an
uJ E
=-
K
tr I s r\
j
o-
-5
F 6
+
J
.t
\..t
il
J
1
=E]
trl
I (! !l
rl g'l
Cs
.l 't
?t $ol
Hl ,l
-.rl V
<l )'ilo ol
zl
FI E =tr
ci
..1
o1
uJl
5l
<l >l ttl ol
zl
=l ol FI
E
tJ-l
ci z
.;
uJ
TL q z 3 o F
=d
o z
o ut
:
>1
lI.l ol
zl
=t q
H
g
o
o ul
crl
Ji
al >l
ttl
zl
3l
9l
ui
UJ
(r
ul z
=o
F
C)
uJ F
-C)
t JO <(F C()ur<zE
trz o ()
J(ts
6P
f;3 Ets J,
2P
=<zE fF d6
(J
6F
=3 i,z
=g
F
HE
o2 <()sl il -, I x .xx
z o9
=e coo
=z =f dP
ntr
(,o zG
95 55 d) tlJ
-',i t d.z <s
tlt L \-/ rl
=o Es g
E,^ <
E=4 BH 9
-F CE
,= ur F
5tr g
=_z 1u :-
E;q E ;39 H
g=P H Et! X O-
Eue r
€tri
ftl
fp **
--E!'
-
I
F
a z
=
z
$i* *l:
T
{
!d e
g
!iE:=
5 () >--E P:s59
H€E:i
gEFIg
sEpei
tr ^ 62 q 5 >e F I oi qroe.z>-o 8e ft t!<(9q i.H6s -R 2
dNO.
zl
.. >l o ul
UJ
uJ z o F
E.
uJ c
z
tr
z
tr
J
f o z
o
J
3
F
|ll
lll o- l!>o
I =lEIel a qlSlEI9 ? btdttrtH
u,l -t
><x .<'
!!
O
".,,1ffi""5";:ilp,",,t
O
75 South Frontage Road
VaiI , Colorado 81557 (303) 479-2L38
Plan analysis based on the 1988 Uniform Building Code
Project Nunber: 81690 Nane: PEROT RESIDENCE
Address: Date: Septenber L2t L99O Contractor: SHAEFFER CONST.
Occupancy: R3,Ml Architect: MORTER ARCHITECTS
Type of Const: V-N Engineer: MONROE
Plans Examiner: I'ICTIAEL WHITAKER
NoTE:The code items listed in this report are not intended to be a complete
listing of all possible code reguirements j-n the 1988 UBc. It is a guide to
selected sections of the code.
Portions of the material contained in this progran are reproduced from the
Uniforrn Buildinq Code ( l-988 edition) with permission of International
Conference of Buildingr officials
SEPARATION
DIRECTION BOUNDARY AREA INCREASE FIRE'PROTECTION
NoRTH Property line 20.0 Feet
EAST Property line 58.0 Feet
SOUTH Property line 16.0 Feet
WEST Property line 26.0 Feet
20.0 Feet
58.0 Feet
16.0 Feet
26.0 Feet
o
Page
OPENING PROTECTION
SOUTH WEST
BRG NON-BRG OPNG BRG NON-BRG OPNG
WALL WALL PROT WALL WALL PROT ohr ohr None Ohr ohr None Ohr Ohr None Ohr Ohr None
The exterior walls may be of COMBUSTIBLE material . Sec.22OL.
None -- No fire protection requirements for openings.
Prot -- openings are to be protected with 3/4 hr fire assemblies.
50? of the area of the wall maximurn. Sec.2203.(b) & Table 5-A
Maxirnum single window size is 84 sq.ft with no dirnension greater than 12 feet. -- Sec. 4306. (h)
NoP -- Openings are not perrnitted in this wal1.* -- These walls may be required to have a parapet wall 3o inches
above the roofing. The parapet wall is reguired to have the same fire rating as the wa1l. See section 1709. for details and exceptions.
AREA !,IIN.LIGHT MIN.VENT NO.EXITS EGRESS
#z
Code review for:Project Id.: PEROT RASIDENCE
Address:
EXTERTOR WALL FIRE RATTNGS AND
Table 17-A & Table 5-A
NORTH EAST
OCC BRG NON-BRG OPNG BRG NON-BRG OPNG
WALL WALL PROT WALL WALL PROT R3 Ohr Ohr None Ohr Ohr None l{l- ohr ohr None ohr ohr None
3 Master bedroom 3 Master bath
3 Loft Bedroom 3 Loft Bathroom 3 Storage room 3 HaIIs, closets, etc.
TOTAL FOR FLOOR 2 Living roon 2 Kitchen 2 Bedroom #l 2 Bedroom #2 2 Recreation Roorc
2 Elevator 2 Halls, closets, etc.
TOTAL FOR FLOOR l- Garage L Furnace room L Bedroom #1 l- Bedroon #2 L Bedroon #3 1 Bedroon #4 1 Storage room
I Hal1s, closets, etc,
TOTAL FOR FLOOR
BUILDING TOTAL
29L
55
202
48
85
2L4
895
511
368
L62
L76
235
56
805
23L3
759
LO2
210
r.85
L80
L76
151
842
2645
5853
29.LO
0.00
20.20
0.00
0. 00
0. 00
51. 10
36.80
L6.20
17.60
23.50
0.00
0. 00
0. 00
0. 00
21. 00
1.8.50
18.00
L7.60
0.00
0.00
1 4.55
2.75
10.10
2.40
o. 00
0.00
25.5s
18.40
8.10
8.80
Ll-.75
0.00
0.00
0. o0
0. o0
10. 50
9.25
9. O0
8.80
0. o0
0. o0
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
t_
1
t_
1
l_
L
2
L
t
L
L
l_
L
t
L
t
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
Page # 3
Code review for:Project Id.: PEROT RESIDENCE
Address:
FOOTNOTES:1) EGRESS - An operable windo\it or door that opens directly to the exterior is required from this roon. The ninimurn clear openable area must rneet the following. -- Sec. 1204.1) The minimum clear height is 24 inches
2) The rnininum clear width is 20 inches
3) The nininum clear area is 5.7 square feet
4) The naximum siIl height is 44 inches 2) The number of exits is based on Tab1e 33-A (Dwellinqs)
3) A rnechanical ventilation system nay be used in in lieu of exterior
openings for ventilation. -- sec. 1205. (c)
5) The reguirenents for 2 exits from the 3rd floor is based on
Sec. 3303. (a) exc. 3.
ROOM DIMENSIONS:
Habitable space shall have a ceiling height of not less than 7 feet 6
inches. Kitchens, halls, bathrooms and toilet compartments may have a
ceiling height of 7 feet neasured to the lowest projection. If the ceiling
is stoping, then the rninimun height is reguired in only L/2 of the area.
--Sec. L207. (a)
Every dwelling unit shall have at least one roon vhich has not less than 120
square feet, of floor area. Other habitable rooms except kitchens shall have
an area of not less than 70 square feet. -- Sec. l-207. (b)
Habitable rooms other than a kitchen shall not be Less than 7 feet in any
dirnension. -- Sec. L2O7. (cl
GLAZING REQUIREI,IENTS :L) A11 glazing in hazardous locations is required to be of safety
glazing material . -- sec. 5406. (d)
2) Note windows and doors in a tub or shower area are reguired to be
safety qlazed regardless of the height above the floor. -- 5406(d) 5.
SMOKE DETECTOR REQUIREI.IENTS:
A snoke detector is reguired on the ceiling or wall at a point centrally
]ocated in the corridor or area giving access to each sleeping area.
sec. 1210. (a) 4.
The srnoke detector is reguired to be wired to the building's power
source. -- Sec. 12L0.(a) 3.
A snoke detector is reguired on all stories. -- Sec. 1210. (a) 4.
If the upper level contains sleeping roon(s), a snoke detector is required
in the ceiling of the upper level close to the stairway.
--sec. L210. (a) 4
o
Page *4
Code review for:
Project Id.: PEROT RESIDENCE
Address:
FIREPI,ACE REQUIRE}TENTS :
MASONRY FIREPI,ACE:1) Fireplace nust be supported by a foundation. -- Sec. 3707. (b)
2) The firebox must be at least 2O inches deep and walls of firebox are to be 10 inches thick. If the lining is of firebrick then the walls
nay be 8 inches thick. -- Sec. 37O7.(c,
3) The roininum clearance to cornbustible material is from the fireplace,
srnoke chamber, and chimney walls is 2 inches. Combustible material nay not be placed within 6 inches of fireplace opening and combustible within 12 inches may not project more than 1/8 inch for each 1 inch of
clearance. -- Sec. 3707. (h)
4) The hearth urust be noncombustible, a minimum of 4 inches thick, and
supported by nonconbustible naterial . The hearth size must be at least:
ff Opening size is: Front extension Side extension
Less than 6 sg.ft.16 inches 8 inches
L2 inches 6 sq.ft. or greater 20 inches
-- Sec. 3707. (k) & (r)
5) chirnney height must be per Table 37-B
OCCUPANCY SEPAR,ATION :
Between the garage and the residence, materials approved for l-hr fire
construction are required on the garage side only and any doors between
the garage and the residence are to be a self-closing L 3/8 inch solid
core door. -- Table 5-B & Sec. 503. (d) ex #3
STAIR REQUIREMENTS:
A stairway in a dwelling must
The maxinum rise of a step is
-- Sec. 3306. (c) exc.#1
Provide a handrail on one side
there is 4 or nore risers. --
be at least 36 inches wide. -- sec. 3305. (b)
I inches and the ninirnum run is 9 inches.
a stairway 34 to 38 inches above the nosing if
sec. 3306. (j)
Provide a guard rail where drop off is greater than 30 inches. Minimun height
=36 inches, naximum opening size = 6 inches. -- sec. L7LL. exc 1
The minirnum headroom is 6 ft.- 8 inches. -- Sec. 3306. (P)
Enclosed usable space under the stairs is required to be protected as required for thr fire-resistive construction. -- sec. 3305. (n)
ATTTC REQUIREI{ENTS:L) Provide an access to all attic areas with a clear height of 30 inches
or more. The niniurun size is 22 inches by 30 inches. There must be 30
inches or more clear height above the access. -- Sec. 3205. (a)
2) Provide ventilation in all attic areas. The net free vent area is to be not less than L square foot for each 15O square feet of attic area.
The vent area may be L/3oO if at least 50t of the required ventilating
area is provided by ventilators located in the upper portion of the attic. The upper ventilators nust be at least 3 feet above the eve or
cornice vents. -- Sec. 3205. (c)
For a 895.0 sq.ft. attic area:
Ratio
L/LsO
L/3OO
Mininum sq.ft. of vent
5.97
2.98
Page # 5
Code review for:Project Id.: PEROT RESIDENCE
Address:
CRAWLSPACE REQUIREMENTS :L) Provide ventilation either by nechanical means or by openings in exterior walls. Opening shall provide a net area of not less than 1 sqluare foot for
each 150 square feet of area in crawl space. Openings shall be distributed
on two opposite sides and be located as close to corners as practical .-- Sec. 25L6. (c) 6. Note: Vent openings may be reduced to 10? of the above if ground surface area i-s covered with an approved vapor barrier and the building official approves.
For a 500.0 sq.ft. crawlspace area:Ratio Miniurun sq.ft. of vent L/L5O 3.33 2) Provide l-8-inch by 24-inch access opening to the crawl space area. Note:
opening may be required to be larger if mechanical equipment is located in the crawl space. -- Sec. 25L6.(cl 2.3) Unless the wood is listed as an approved wood of natural resistance to
decay or treated wood, the ninimum clearance between exposed earth and floor joist is 18 inches. The mininum clearance to beans and girders is is 12 inches. -- Sec. 25L6.(c) 2.
ADDITIONAL REQUIREI'IENTS :
For R3 occupancy
THIS PROJECT WTLL REQUIRE A SITE IMPROVEMENT SURVEY. SUCH SI'RVEY
SHALL BE SUBMITTED AND APPROVED PRIOR TO REQUEST FOR FRAME
INSPECTION.
ALL CRAI,IL SPACES WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL ARE LU'{ITED TO A EARTH TO
STRUCTURAL FI,OOR CEILING HEIGHT OF 5,, BE EARTH FIOOR ONLY, BE
VENTTT.ATED AS PER UBC 25r.5(C)6 WrTH MTNIMtTM ACCESS AS PER UBC
25r.6(C)2 AND MAXTMW ACCESS OF 9 SQ. FT.
ANY BUILDING SITE WITH A SIOPE OF 30 DEGREES OR MORE SHALL REQUIRE AN
ENGINEER DESIGN. SUCH DESIGN SHALL ADDRESS DRAINAGE, SOrL RETAINAGE,
AND STRUCTURAL DESIGN.
EXCAVATION BELOI{ SI,ABS ON GRADE SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED I{ITHOUT PRIOR
APPROVAL.
For Ml- occupancy
SLOPE GARAGE FI,OOR TO ALI.,OW FOR DRAINAGE TO OUTSIDE OR PROVIDE A
FLOOR DRAIN WITH }TITH SAND AND OIL INTERCEPTOR TO DRY WELL OR TO
SEWER. ANY GARAGE FI,OOR DRAIN CONNECTED TO SEWER I.TUST BE APPPROVED
BY UPPER EAGLE VALLEY WATER & SANTTATTON DISTRTCT.
Project Nunber: 81690
Address:
Occupancy: R3,It!1
Type of Const: V-N
Town of VaiI
Connunity Development
75 South Frontage Road
VaiI , Colorado 81657 (303) 479-2L3a
PIan review based on the 1.988 Uniforn Building Code
Name: PEROT RESIDENCE
Date: Septenber L2, L9 Contractor: SIIAEFFER CONST.Archi-tect: I,IORTER ARCHITECTS Engineer: IIfONROE
P1ANS EXaminer: !,TCHAEL WHITAKER
Portions of the naterial contained in this program are reproduced from the
Uniforrn Building Code ( 1988 edition) with permission of International
conference of Building officials
SHEET IDENTITICATION CORRECTION REQUIRED
! 3,4t5 TIfROUGHOUT AII electrical work to be complete to the
requirements of the l-987 National Electrical Code.
2 *tr*,r.****
3,7 CRI{L SPCS
3 l,tECH ROOM
EXT. COVER
This project will require a site irnprovement survey.
Such suryey shall be subrnitted and staff approved prior to a request for frame inspection.
Areas delineated as crawl spaces or nonhabit.
basemnt. shall have less than 5' ht. from earth to structural fJ.oor/ceiling above, a dirt floor only,
be ventilated as per UBc 25L6, with access min. size
as per UBC 2515 and rnaxirnum access size 9 sq. ft.
For heating or hot-water supply boilder applications a floor drain shall be supplied for suitable
disposing of accumulated fluids. ttMC 2LL9.
Exterior surfaces with stucco applications shall be provided with exterj-or netal lath as per UBC 4706 or
as per manufacturers instructions for thin coat applications or synthetic stucco applications.
Glazing in a hazardous location is reguired to be
glazed with safety naterial . -- sec. 5406.
A bathroom is required to have an openable window or
a nechanical ventiLation system. -- Sec. l-205. (c)
In buildings of unusually tight construction (all
new construction within the Town of vail),
combustion air shall be obtained frorn the outside.
Such cornbustion air openings shall be as per IIMC Ch.
6.
6r7
3,4,5
3
DOORS ET AL
BATHS
MECH ROOM
Required corrections for:Project Id: PEROT RESIDENCE
Address:
# SHEET TDENTTFICATION
o
Page
CORRECTTON REQUIRED
#z
92
LO 2,3,4
11 6
L2 3,4,5
13 SUBMIT
14 SUBMIT
15 S-9
GARAGE The garage must be separated from the dwelling by thr fire-resistive construction on the garage side.-- Table 5-B & 503. (d) exc.#3
ELEVATOR The design, construction, and installation of elevators, durabwaiters, escalators and their
hoistways shall be as per the requirements of UBC ch. 51. This lncludes fire-resistance of enclosure
& openings, hoistway ventilation, and vestibule
reqluirements.
ELEVATIONS Unless the lower level is clearly shown as a
basement (6' or less from floor above to grade for
50* of building perimeter), a 3 level dwelling will
reguire 2 means of exiting from the 3rd. level if
3rd. level exceeds 500 sq. ft. UBC 420 & UBC
33O3 (a) .
EI-,EVATOR Elevator shafts which extend through two or nore
floors shall be enclosed in a shaft of one hr. fire
resistive construction. openings (doors) shall be protected by a self-closing assembly with a one hr.rating. (Except doors to outside. ) UBC l-706 (a) (b)
A nechanical drawing shall be provided showing
heating and/or cooling design.
A one-line electrical drawing for each level is
required for this project.
solls RPT. Include a copy of the soils report for the site to
be built on. -- Sec. 2905. (b) & (c)
O Project Application
a ProjectName: fO < o '/ "
Project Description:
Contact Person and
o
Darc Y '/9'76
Phone
Owner, Address and Phone:
-StoS Architect. Address and Phone:
Lesal Description,r-ot j/ , arocx. ? .ritinsV,V;/4no l?t ,zone-
Comments:
Design Review Board
Date 7, /s,?o
Motion by:Atu+
Seconded by:
DISAPPROVAL
22"*/i"Ja "^n-i ,./n Ae:{,
Town Planner
Date:
El Statt Approval
a o
-}AB
ZONE CHECK
FOR
srR, R, R P/S ZONE DTSTRICTS
DATE: JI'ly 16, 1qq0,
T,EGAL DgscRrprroNE-:r- Brock z r11tn9 vail village lst
ADDRESS:
OWNER H- Rnss PFROT
ARCHITECT MnPrEq APcHITECTS
ZONE DISTRICT P/S
PROPOSED USE
IFT SIZE
Height
Total GRFA
Prinary GRrA
Secondary GRFA
Setbacks: Front
Sldes
Rear
Water course
Site Coverage
LandscaPlng
Fence,/Retaining !{all lteights
Parking
Credits: Garage
Mechanical
Airlock
Storage
Zoning:Approvedr/ Di s aPProved
*Includes ProPosed 250
**30%+s1oPe-ChaPter
Allowed
(30) (33)
39 lY + 75O ! 4n6R*
406ff*
Nq
201
15 1
15 I
(30) (50)
(300) (600)
(e00) (1200)
(50) (10o)
(25) (s0)
(2oo) (4oo)
Proposed
Ln67
**/
-)E-r'_J.Lr'
NAr'
Ua*;r*e qin.*|, 2,0-151"-* 1.2\.?O t4 CaL--7al.
PHONE
PHONE ffi - ' ,7C ElnC
4068
n/n
3'1 6'
Jq
,'/
3
,u4
f4^^.
Drive: Slope Pennitted z E?o Slope Actua1 4q'
Environmental/Haz ards :Avalanche t/
Flood Plaln
Slope
Geologic Hazards
GRFA - ord. 36 (ie88);
18.69.050
0rd. 4 (1985)
r.\(ssz(\rs,,,_
100
Date:
/ rs' ts ?6
/\
lr-q /&/ '?'zt'?o t/'-- itl?f)
Project Application
Date 3" 18'?/
Proiect Name:
Project Descriplion:
€g|facrFlrgon and-Phene
Owner, Address and Phone;
Archilect, Address and Phone:
Legal Description: Lot Block , Zone
-
Com ments:
Design Review Board
Date
Motion by:
Seconded by:
APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL
Town Plan ner
Date:j'/>,1t
Staff Approval
m?MAn 15leer
APPLICATION DATE:
DATE OF DRB |IIEETII{G:
ORB APPLICATION
*****TIIIS APPLICATION t.lltt I{OT BE ACCEPTED UNTIL ALL INFOMATION IS SUBIIITT[D***.*
I. PRE-APPLICATION MEETING:
A prc-epplicatlon-mceting-wlth-a plann{ng staff member rs strongly suggest,ed to ' dctermlno lf anv addltloial tnrorf,atton Ts-neeceJl'-ilir applcatioi wiii-ue-acceptea unlcss lt is cornoleiE (rnJst i;;iffi';ii'ii.ili-i.iui"i;;y the zon.ins adnrinjstrator).li^i:.th9 aqqlicint's iesponsrt[iiiiy to make an-a-fpointr.nt wirh the staff to find out about additiona'l submittal requr'rements, preiie note that a cSMpLETE appiica-tion will streanline the-approvai'iro..ss ror.your-p*ji.t by decreasing the numbe:^of condltlons of approvat ihai itte'bne i;iy iiiiriit!.-"irr conditions of approvai must bc resolved before' i uuttatng -piriii' ts lssued.
... A. PROJECT OESCRIPTIOI{:
Request to approve attached revisions inciuding window changes and security
gate revjsion of previously approved single fam.i 1y residence.
B. LOCATIO}I OF PROPOSAL:
Mdress
Legal Description Lot_jL__ B'tock z_ Fil ing Vail Villaqe
Ff rst Fi'! inq Zonlng
c. [A]48 0F APPLICAI{T:
Address tel ephone
D. MI'IE OF APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE:
Address tel ephone 47A -; 1135
€. MI.IE OF O}JIIERS:
Slgnature
Address r^:r7? f,LrF','+ nF{vo q,r{+o 1Ann, ne|rrq, rr- 7q^?o.-. te] ephone tlll],00,
F. ORB FEE: The fce nlll be Paid at the time a bui'l ding permit is rgqussig6.
$ 0-$ lo,00b
$10'001 -$ 50.000
$.50,001 - $ 1s0;oo0
$150,001 - $ .5oo,ooo
$500,001 - $1,000,000 $ over $1,000,000
II'IPORTANT NOTICE RECARDII{G ALL SUSMISSIONS TO THE DRB:
1' In addltion to necting.submittal requirements, the appiicant must stake the siie to lndlcate property i{nes and buliding cdiie"s. -r"!!i that witr be removed should also be inarrla. This woit musi'ue compiiteo'u.io.u the DRts visjrs ihe sl te.
will normally invo'lve two separate,'neer-ings
on at least two meetings for thejr approvai.
.3. People who fa{1 to appear before the Oesign Revjew Board at their schcd,.r,trd meeting and who have not asked for a postponement will be requireo io J.:' republ 'lshed.
' r,z
788- ?00 I
FEE
$ 10.00
$ 25.00
$ 50.00
$100.00
$200.00
$300.00
2, The rcvlcw process for t{B,t BUILDINGS . of the Deslgn Revlew Board, so plan
qfr0;, "', r I,i9gt
A Prclcss onal Ccrpcralion
143 East Nlcadow Dr ve
Crossroads al Vai
Va , Colorado 81657
303,?76 5I 05
MoruenAncnrECTS
Letter of Transmittal
oate 7/pa-a44 /1, /7?/
ro: fu-z af LLil At//. af &.zr-z't--;fi2
./,lh: fV/b flail'a--
Proiect:
,Pzo/ &sr/z---"
h)/, &/araaz
&<:z/aY4
Please tand cncloscd tho tollowing:
Dated
aay'f/t r
Copies Ol
/zaez, rta*/" €/aua-/t o-z,t//tzahnfr-- 4 tt/afuv) .a.dd;7.rr5 a V*-EVr znzt-
bzd-raan FZa t
aall/zt /z^oa
eey' //q r /eaa,
Remarks:
rVtb,
/4sr' €/usa./ra-, r//os,t-or+,-
atz/ets afu),4a=z5 @ ,eas/z--r h-ftztaz-t
*zd ,A-//azaV
&zz.6t4 i //ez>*a-tua2 *thfr.
fZuiS/J-t AS alelera zz2- ft jafuaeZ //+*t.i*n-e<- azt acy't /7 1 Z E.a.
,lz'sA P.FP . a-pp/taa-hza>-u err,/1 l/n I
Er Ve-r* ,z.ar-ds, V/as-u- fr>oc a.tLa,'+z4-
a&i*zirc/ 7a:nz-r a44zsf<Z @s ,4 qa-"u ha-zZ frzq /----s*.-,s Ar rzSTanSeE b
rba2 , Pz{*{.- aa'r a4a-'./' %-V*,-/?,,
a-e. - /,4# pz-f
fu*rr*-, br4//?.2
/V?ae/-/a( M
Q/azlti l/tcazzz-
\
:
li
I
I
tz
io :I iF ;<r>;IJJ iJ
I |rI.
I l.F :I il-iD io
i(n
tl rl
Ir
Llp
tl
II
I fi,'\{i
$l
$ii ll
4::rllI
E*\5
I rl-
l+-r\ttl
l+rd
IR
| ,.'-t--( s *s
Jr KE
$[
-1 |
ll
-LI-fT {nl
f:
s
f
f
$
rl,
{J
\
-J \'t'
$
-i- ---jj
--f;
li -t-;:.1I I I t"-+
ii
il
ir
)
N
ril $.
$i
t
_t
r$
$
I
ul {{(
,t
ul t-
Gl f
t
.s'$
t{
_\i :t
r)
EI I.i-
{'q
@
F
til F
a -J._
*
l-- -
i ti
rl
|--\
I
I
I
t/
c F t:.
t-
$
rl I'
\
J \
F
T\
_t t-{-
;
\
J
6
+'
'i
$
{
t;
J
ql
_l
{
J J
{
\{-\
r-\l'c:
d
$r t
u
$e
l$
*$r\ -i
fo:
FROM:
DATE:
su&IEet:
_r
uEuoBuDsu
Plannlng and Envl-ronnental Conrnissl.on
Conmunity Developnent Department
Uarch lX, l99L
A reques! for a front setback variance for the Perot
residenc'e, Iocated at 64 Beaver Dan Roadr/ Lot 31, Block 7, ValI Village First Filing.
AppIlcant:RoBB Perot
I.DESCRIPTION OT THE VARTAITCE REOUESTED
The appllcant is proposing a front setback variance in order
to explnd a ground level entry, into the residence which is
presently under construction. The variance request, if
approved, would allow for the entry to encroach a maximun of
6 feet into the required 2o' front setback area.
The expanded entry vestibule' as Proposed, would be located
west of the current garage. The proposed entry vestibule
would be located approxinately 6 feet back from the north
face of the garage as it parallels Beaver Dam Road. It
should be noted that the existing 3-car gtarage ls petmitted
to be located in the front eetback area, as the average
grade on the sLte exceeds the required rnininun of 3ot, which
allows garages to be constructed in the front setback.
Architecturally, the design of this nelr' expanded entry
vestibule would natch the structure presently under
construction. The entry vestibule would be enclosed on all
sides. However, the applicant is proposing an open, lron
gate as the front door. Because the front of tbe entry
vestibule would be rropen, rr thl.s proposed vestibule does not
constitute slte coverage, nor does it count as Gross
Residentlal Floor Area (GRFA). ft should be noted for the
record that the Perot residence was given final DRB aPproval
and was issued a building pernit in August of 1990, which
was prior to the amendnent to the Town of vail zoning
regutations, which nodified the definitions of site coverage
and GRFA. The Perot resl-dence wlll be reviewed under the troldtr regulations until a Tco is issued on the structure.
T
II. BACKGROI'ND AND HISTORY
April 23, 1990 - The PEC, by a vote of 5-O, denLed the applicant's appeal of a decislon of the zoning
adninlstrator, regarding the definition of rsite coverage.rl
Dtav 14. 1990 - The PEc, by a vote of 7-O, unanimously
approved a ELte coverage variance request for this site.
The reguest was for 21* eite coverage, which the staff
supported. Hbwever, this was nodified during the PEc
hearing and the PEC subsequently approved a 22.1t sLte
coverage variance. The regueEt was for an addition to the existing structure, which included an attached 3-car garage.
The PEc found that the existing structure and the steep
slopes on the lot created a physical hardship.
:t'fav 16. 1990 - The Deslgn Revlew Board, by a vote of 4-0-1,
granted final deslgn approval for the Perot residence, and 'also approved a request for an additional 250 sq. ft. of
GRFA. The request sas approved with conditlons.
Julv 23, 1990 - The PEc, by a vote of 7-o, unaninously
approved the appllcant's request for a site coverage variance. This variance reguest included the denolLtlon of
tlre existing single fanily home and called for the
construction of a new sinqle family hone, with an attached
3-car garage on the site. The applicant's request was for 2ot site coveralte, (the zoning code allowed a maximun site
coverage of 15t).
Aucrust 15, 1990 - The Design Review Board, by a vote of 4-0,
unanimously approved the applicant's reguest to denolish the existing single fanily residence and to construct a new
residence with an attached 3-car garage on the site. The
applicant's request included the use of the 250 ordinance.
- Aucrust 16. 1990 - The Town of Vail Conmunity Development , Department issued a buildlng permit to allow for the - construction of a nelt single fanily residence on the lot.
III. ZONING ANALYSIS
Tota1 site area - 15,682 sq. ft.
Allowable site coverage - 2'352 sg. ft., or 15t
Existing site coverage - 11154 sg. ft., or 7*
Proposed site coverage - 31159 sg. ft., or 20\
Allowable GRFA - 3,818 sq. ft.
Additional reauest - 250 sa. ft.
Total allonable GRFA - 41058 sq. ft.
constructed GRFA - 4,068 sg. ft.
IV. CONSIDER,ATION OF FAETORS
The staff's oplnion is that the proposed front setback
variance request, if approved, rrould have no significant lnpact upon other existLng or potential
uses and strrrctures ln the vicinity. No existing or
proposed landscaping would need to be nodified in order to allow for the expanded entry vestibule to be
constructed as proposed in the front setback.
The strLct literal interpretation or enforcement of the
In order to ensure unlfornity of treatment of sites in
the general vicinity, it is the staff opinion that the
setbick variance request should not be ipproved. we
believe that the applicant has taken fuII advantage of
the developnent standards for this site, such as GRFA
and site coverage, as well as the allotilance for the
garage to be placed in the front setback area. we are
unable to identify any speclal circumstances or unigue
sl-tuations which exist solely on this property, and
which would allow us to support the applJ-cant's reguest for the front setback variance.
The staff is of the opinion that approval of this
reguested variance would be a grant of special privilege, and we believe that the setback variance
request does not warrant relief fron the strict and llteral interpretation of the zoning code.
The effect of the use on liqht and air, distrLbution of
oublic facilities needs.
A.
B.
c.
v.
The staff finds
no signiflcant
considerations.
FTNDINGS
that the reguested variance vill have
negatlve effect upon any of the above
That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special prlvilege inconsistent with the llnitatlons on other properties classified in the same district.
A.
B.
c.
That the granting of the variance will not be
detrlmental to the public healtb, safety or nelfare, or naterlally lnjurlous to properties or improvenents in
the vicinity.
That the variance iE warranted for one or nore of the
following reaeons:
1. lftre.etrict literal interpretation or enforcement of the speclfled regrulatlon would result in practical dlfflculty or unneceasary physical
hardship lnconsistent vith the objectLves of this title.
2. There are exceptLons or extraordinary
circurnstances or conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply generally
to other properties ln the sane zone.
3. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the
specified regrulation would deprive the applicant of prlvileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the sane district.
STAFF RECOMIIENDATION
The staff reconrnendatl.on on the applicant's reguest for a front setback variance is for a denial . Staff has been
unable to identlfy a physical hardship, and we are of the
opinion that there are no unique or unusual circurnstances that exLst on thiE lot that are not found on other lots in
the general vicinity and within the P,/S zone district.
The staff also believes that, given the extent of this
denolitlon/rebuild construction proJect, the applicant could
have designed this entry vestibule without requesting a front setback variance. l{e believe that access fron the
garage into the naLn reEidence could have been designed in a
manner that htould have allowed an entry vestibule to be
constnrcted wl-thout the need for a setback variance.
The staff does not find that the requested variance neets
any of the fLndinga aa listed in Section IV of this
Demorandum.
v.
;
vl
.il fl,
d
,t rfl
il
F
I
;'fl
I
3l' - J)"I lot -4r -- (- |
1
I
I
i
l"lr
|;r Ir\
xt- .i'-4:.J tEil
\
Existing gate./wal.l
4-u* €',/!\-..<'e \
Ea--,
Proposed locatlon
PROPOSED SECURITY GATE REVISION
| / 1t -- l''-ot
additional 56.25 sq. ft.
u-\
ri
J
ir
t.
t -i
kt
I
tl
i'l tA ;$-,re ":J . -l .n, '' -.tj'1i,,
?. c'a c
' .. ?\rfx.v
, c tJ:f bJ'o
i4, laxe''t 1
location -.il
\1 =z ,r-et . t
l
I
I
I
I
I Ji
lir :
),i
-l l-'. t\)-(tll
\ r'q
,\:-\
.r
i t
t-
\$-
,'- t
)
I
t.
I
ul
nl
J f
-l I (\
i-.I
-A
I
$
h
:.
tl
ti -1
t:
I
i
l:
tl
@
:
:
I
it't.
r9
.l rt
r-F.-
t;
tJ "1 -
J (l
0'
t
)J
-!l lll I
lrl
.t
.L
{\I $rl A
Nr tl,l
Itr
$u(
rn .?
t,
u-
i. rl ilu
,,t
t\!:l
di ti h
.l
t:.i
$
.{
s l.
)r \6
.:s
ti
d
ii,
I
\
rl {
I \
F
1l
I
I
I
iJ a,)rl
r!.!
tiu (l
I a
$
{-
\s
:
't-
ll
1l
E J
\
L i I
I{l t\O I
t{$ |
t$t
o
't
!
i
\
i
I
I
\
I
t
I
I
I
]u
rI rs.
$l
..g
ir
:{r)
Et !.tr
TI
J
-!
.n I
I
-l
.!I
o
|!
b0
I
I
t-
r!rl {t|L
r.l t.
5h : -| |ut t-;t;4l=
H l-.o 6l ,
rl
;l
3l
EI rl
El
I
@
ll t....--i .-a ,l
lr -'r I I r,
--_ \i
tr .0 ---
.!I o
d-r Ii \q TS $y ti.
is ts
rt iu f\
i.
\
\
\
\
\
I
I j
d,F t-;
$
$.&
\
{
I
qi
nl
'(r
I t
1.
'I
'bo ic
l- --rL.th
x
li
t:\
r't .iI -f
r:- $$'l .. -r $d
I
:l
T
trl
$
J
it
0-
I
1
\
.l
q-
tl
t.
{
H
J
rt ul
1 $.\
r$F t *
I
Pl
FILE C0PYr
PI,ANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
March 11, 1991
Present
Chuck Crist
Diana Donovan
Ludwig Kurz
Kathy Langenwalter
Jim Shearer
Gena l{hitten
Absent
Connie Kntght
The rneeting ltas called to order at
Corornission welcorned Gena Whitten as
Connission.
Staff Icistan Pritz
Mike Mollica Jill Kannerer
Andy l(nudtsen shelly Mello
Amber Blecker
2:30PM by Diana the new mernber
Donovan. The of the
1.
2.
This iten was postponed, due to Pete Burnett being called in for jury duty.
a satellite dish in a setback.Applicant: Satellite Receiving Systens
Shelly Mello briefly explained the process of a minor annendment
to a Sop. The approval was per the previous PEC neeting, where
the Connissioners expressed their desire that the dish be placed
at ground level . Shelly elaborated that there would be a brown,
wood fence to natch the building trin and 3 sPruce trees placed
to screen the dish. Additionally, shrubs will be placed on the
south of the dish. Shelly concluded her presentation by stating
that the Design Review Board tras not yet reviewed or approved
this placement, and their approval would be necessary before the
dish couLd be installed. She then called for conment by the
ConnLssl.oners.
Chuck Crist began by asking if the adjacent condominium onners
had been notified. shelly verified that all adjacent propertar
oarners which would be iurp-cted had been notified of this project
over a week before.
Procedurally, Diana Donovan requested clarification fron staff of whether the Connission could discuss this without fomally calling it up. Shelly indicated that if the Conmission infornally agreed with the staffrs approval , no action would be necessary. If, on the other hand, it was apparent that the pEC
was ln disagreenent, the issue should be disCussed by the pEc.
I{hen the public was asked for connent, Irene Westby, nanager of the Talisnan Condoniniuns, asked, for clarification-of the-rocation of the dish. sherly Dterlo indicated the rocation on a site plan and explained the request. Ms. Westby indicated she had no problen with the landscaping, and she didnrt believe the owners would have any difficulty with the entl_re placenent.
since there nas no further pubric connent, Diana Donovan opened Commission comment by stating she had no concerns over the-Iocation, but she did not llke the idea of noving the trees in order to install a fence for screening. Further, Diana conmented that the efforts to screen structures often result in naking thern more obvious. she suggested that the fencing be integrated-with the existing landscaping.
Jin Shearer stated that he liked the plan.
Ludwig Kurz stipulated that he had the same comments as Diana,and that he would like to see the trees remain where they were,as it would be healthier for the trees.
fn concluding the discussion, Diana Donovan stated that the Connl.ssion was ln favor of upholding the staff approval , with a stroncr recornmendation to DRB regarding the integration of the existing landscaping and the proposed fence.
3. A rgqqest to.amend Ofdinance llo. 13. 1983. to establ_ish an additional view cgrrLdor. and to clarifv wording in ttre ordinance. The view to be protected extends fron Frivolous
Sal ,s to the east over the Red Lion Building toward the Gore
Ranae Applicant: Town of Vail
Andy l(nudtsen sumnarized the changes which had been nade since the previous submission of this iten to the Conmission. He indicated that staff had rephotographed the proposed view corridor without clouds surrounding the core Range, per the pECrs
request, and at a height of 5'-2t to better reflect the angle at which an average person would be looking at the view. staif further taped the photo at both the staffrs reconmendation for the boundaries of the corridor and the PEC,s request for the boundaries to better illustrate the specific lines. In addition,on one of the photographs, the proposed post-Christiania
expansion had been taped as a reference point for discussion.
o
Staff presentation vas given by Mike ltolllca. llhe request was to
encroach a maximum of 5 feet lnto ttre front setback of the lot in
order to e:<pand a ground level entrance. ltike lndicated that the
existing three-car garage under constrrrction in the front setback
rraE acceptable Eince the 1ot slope average was over 30t.
After glvlng a brief hlstory of the lot's developnent, Mike
elaborated on the analyeis of the zoning. He stated that the site coverage and GRFA was at the maxlmum allowed for the site.
Regardl-ng the Consideration of Factors, l{ike conveyed that the staff had a difflcult tine with this reguest. Although there
would be a negligible impact on the surrounding neighborhood,Etaff could not determine what site hardstrip existed to warrant
the granting of a variance. Staff believed that Eince the house
bad gone through extensive plan revl.ew and desigm' the entrance
could have been designed vl.thout the need for a variance. As an
exanple, the entry could have been designed in conJunction with
the garage.
Mike reninded the Conmission that in order to Erant the variance,
they nust find the granting of the variance would not be a grant
of -pecial privilege, that the granting woul.d not be detrimental to tle general public, that the strict or literal interpretation of the regrulatlon would result in practical difficulty or.physical hardstrJ.p, that ttrere rtere exceptions or extraordinary
cl.rcunstances applicable to this sl-te which were not generally
found in the sane area, or that the strict interpretatl.on of the
regulation would deprive the applicant of prlvileges enjoyed by
others in the same zone diEtrict. staff believed that the
current variance application did not neet any of these criteria.
In conclusion, staff recomnended denial of the variance request,
aE there waE no finding of hardship or unigue circumstances.
Jirn ltorter, architect for the appllcant was queried by Diana
Donovan of what would be accomplished with the addltion of an
open gate to the entry vestibule. Mr. llorter responded that the
gate was open air with a wrought iron door, but not openable for
eecurity reasons. When Kathy langenwalter asked why the entrance
was being noved, !tr. l,[orter reviewed the changes on the site plan, and said that there were sPecial cLrcrrmstances surrounding
Mr. Perot with life and death consequenceEi. rrThe security
concerns had arl.sen fron a change in sorld events subsequent to
the design of the house.rr This expanded entry sas ? change
requested by Mr. Perot'E security tean, and was believed to be a
problem in the sight area Burrounding the entrance.
11
Kathy Langenwalter quizzed the staff about whether a variance
would be necessary if the wallcway were designed with decorative
netal , but no roof. ltike clarified that there sould need to be a
wall or fence height variance under that circunstance. Mr.
Morter elaborated that walls without a roof would not solve the
security concerns.
Chuck Crist requested infor:nation on what material would be used
on the outside wall. ilin l,lorter said it would be stone.
Jin Shearer asked lf the walkray walls could be sloped or lowered to be more architecturally pleasl.ng. Jin uorter thought that
perhaps the grades next to then nlght be able to be raised.
Turnlng the Conmission's attention to the requirenents necessary for grinting a varJ-ance, Dlana Donovan stated she beLieved that
there was a unJ-que hardship to the owner. She supported the request. However, she felt that if ownership of the house
changed, that the addition should be removed. Gena Whitten said
she did not believe there were enouqh inpacts to warrant a
condition of later renoval . Diana believed that to not require
the later removal would be setting a precedent.
Kathy Langenwalter reiterated that the oldner could not create the
nardsnip. Jirn Shearer elaborated that he felt granting this
variance rnight be a grant of special privilege. chuck crist
errplained tris opinion that if the ownership changed, there would
no longer be a hardship, and that the entry walk should be
removed. Gena thought that the removal should be at Mr. Perot's
exPense.
Diana asked the Connission how they would like a condition of
approval phrased. Mike Mollica requested clarification that the
C-ornnissioh was looking for language that would reguire the
addition to be renoved if Mr. Perot sold the property. Diana
anssered affirmatively, that the expansion should be removed upon
a change of title. JLn Morter requested that the provision be_
expanaea to state that removal of the entry wouLd be required if
the ownership of the property left the fanily. Mr. Perot night
want to visit his children if they were the subseguent oltners.
The same security concerns would exLst as long as the ownership
remained in the Perot fanilY.
Kristan Pritz offered guidance to the Cornnissl.on that if they
wanted to approve the varlance, Lt nould be difficult to reguire
an approved structure to be renoved, but that if the Conrtission
felt the variance was for safety concerns, It would be
appropriate to approve the reguest, and there rtere unusual
ciicunstances on the site, such as the topography and the
Iocation of the garage already encroaching into the setback.
L2
o
Jln Shearer confided his hesitance to set precedent to base a
varLance on securlty concerns, as there could be many in the Town
sho belLeved they had sinilar concerns. Kathy Langenrtalter
expressed her belief that this particular variance was based on
extraordinary circumstances. she wanted to be sensitive to the
ordner as weLl as to the site, and conpared the reguest to one for
an owner with a particular disability. she believed the variance
was for a unique conbinatlon of slte conEtraints and owner
hardshLp, and that if the ownership of the property changed, the
addition should be removed.
Gena llhitten said she did not think that a removal condition
would be necessary. Ludwig Kurz agreed with that opinion.
Neither Chuck Crist or Jfun Shearer had an opinion on the
condition.
Kathy Langenwalter moved that the Cornml-ssion approve the reguest
for a front setback variance for the Perot residence, located at
64 Beaver Dan Road/ Lot 31, Block ?, VaiI Village First Filing,
as subrol.tted, and with the finding that extraordinary circum-
stances are appllcable to this site which does not apply
generally to the other sites in the zone districtr, in that the
garage was located in the front setback of the Property due to
the overall slope of the lot exceeding 30t. Additionally, an
expanded entry/security gate was necessary for this owner. Chuck
Cr-ist seconded the rnotion. Kristan Pritz indicated this would
not be counted as GRFA for the house.
The vote was a unanimous 6-0.
subseguent to the votJ.ng, Diana Donovan indicated she appreciated
the staff's assistance l-n forurulating the wording for the
varJ.ance, even though they had originally recornmended denial.
7.
8.
9.
unit.Applicant: Town of Vail
units as a ConditLonal Use.Applicant: Town of Vail
Public Accornrnodation District' 18.24 - Cornnercial Core 1
District, 18.25 - Comnercial Core 2 District' 18.27,-
Cornmercial Core 3 District. 18.28 - Conmerciel Sgnrice
cen€ei District, 18.29 - Arterial Business District. t4.36 -
Definitions; to add a new definition for affordable housincr
13
10.
Public Use District, and 18.39 - Ski Base/Recreation District; to allow affordable housinq units as a Conditional
Use.Appll.cant: Town of Vail
A recruest to amend Chapter 18.58 of the Municloal Code -
Supplenental Regulations to nrovide speclflc developnent,/
zonLn<r standards for affordable housing units.Applicant: Town of Vail
These four iteus were presented together by uike MoIIica. He
described the changes requested, nanely extrllaining that the
changes were reconmended fron the Town of Vail Affordable Housing
Study as Phase I changes. IIe sunnarized these as being proposed
as conditional uses for differing zoning districts, as well as
defining Affordable Housing Unit (Aru).
The staff reconnendation was that all suggested changes be
approved. Tlpe I units would be allowed as a conditional use in Sf, 2-F, and P/S zone distrLcts. llYpes II and III would be a
conditional use for Residential Cluster, Low Density Mutti-
Fanily, Medium Density Multiple Family, Public Acconmodation,
Cornnercial Core I, Connercial Core II, Conmercial Core III,
Cornmercial Serrrice Center, Arterial Business District, hrblic Use
and Ski Base/Recreation Zone Districts. Staff also recommended
adoption of the definitlon of Affordable Housing Unit as being rra
dwelling unit, with a restricted floor area, that shall be used
for long-ter:m rentals, or ownership, by local employees in the
Upper Eagle Valley (Gore valley, Minturn, Red Cliff, Gilman,
Eagle-vail, and Avon and their surrounding areas) for the
specific pur?ose of housing.rl
Staff also encouraged the adoption of the development standards
for AFUs, Tlpes I, II and III. These development standards would
be in the Zoning Code under Section 18.58.330 and cross-
referenced.
Chuck Crist asked for clarification on the parking requirements,
specifically if an AFU were placed on a P/s lot, would the
enclosed parking be 5 spaces? Kristan responded ttrat yes, there
could be up to 5 spaces, but one enclosed space would be required
to be on the lot. She also clarlfied that there would be no GRFA
credit for the garage. Mike Mollica further explained that the
AFU would have to cone fron existing or available GRFA, but that
the rr25o ordinancerrt after possible revision and reenactment for
this specific purpose, could be used for a portion of the GRFA.
Jim Shearer requested infonnation on what specifically would be
included in a full kitchen. Mike stated that it trould include a
refrigerator, sink, range and/or nicrowave. Mike continued his
explanation of the three tlpes of AFUs. Typg f would consist of
3O-O-7O0 sq. ft., including a bath and full kitchen. Tlpe II is
L4
rK -ULi-LD?,- nrya.4 'a-//lef z4 alln $lrcpuaty oo
ftEC'0FEB 2 8leet
PUBI,IC NOTICE
NoTIcE IS IIEREBY GIVEN that the PLannlng and Envlronmental
Connission of the Town of vall slll hold a public hearing in
accordance wlth Section 18.66.060 of the nuniclpal code of the
Town of Vail on llarch 11, 1991 at 2:OO p.n. in the Town of VaiI
tlunicipal Building. Consideration of:
1. A request for a front setback varlance for the Perot
residence, located at 64 Beaver Dan Roadr/ Lot 31, Block 7,Vail viltage First Filing.Applicants Ross Perot
2. A request for a condLtional uee peruit to errpand the Vail
llountain School , located at 3150 Katsos Ranch Road,/ Lot 12,
Block 2, vail village 12th Flling.Applicant: Vail Mountain School
3.
4.
5.
A request for setback, landscape and site coverage variances
and an exterior alteration to the Lifthouse Lodge at 555
East Lionshead circle,/ I,ot 3, Block 1, Vail Lionshead lst
Fillng.Applicant: Robert T. and Diana Iazier
A request to amend Chapter 18.04 of the Municipal Code -Definitionsi to add new definltions for accessory unit,
affordable housing unit and studlo housing unit.Applicant: Town of Vail
A reguest to amend Chapters 18.10 - Single- Fanily Dlstrict,
18.12 - Tno-FamiJ.y Residentlal Distrlct and 18.13 -
Prirnary/Secondary Residential District to allow accessory
units as a condttional use in the above referenced zone districts.
Appllcant:Town of Vail
6. A request to amend Chapters 18.14 - Residential Cluster Dist;ict, 18.16 - Low Density Muilipie Farnily Disirict,
18.18 - tilediun Density t{uLtiple Fanily District, 18.20 -
High Density !,tultiple Fanily Dlstrict, !.8.22 - Public
Acconmodation oistrict, La.24 - cornmersLal Core 1 District,
18.25 - Commercial Core 2 District, X8.27 - Commercial Core
3 District, 18.28 - Colnmercial Senrice Center District,
L8.29 - Arterial Businesg District and 18.36 - Public Use
Distrlct, 18.39 - ski Base/Recreation District; to allos
deed restrlcted affordable housing units and deed restricted
studio housLng units as a conditional use Ln the above
referenced zone dlstricts.Applicant: Town of Vail
. ttl ltenc tabled trou tbc Febnrary 25, L99I PEC ueetlng agenda.
llhe appllcatl.onr and lnfornatlon about the propoeals are ' available for publle Lnrpcctlon ln tbe conmunlty Developnent
Departuent oftl,ce.
llown of ValI
ComunLty Developnent l!.pafruent
PublLshed Ln the VaIl Tral.l on Febnrary 22, L991.
The lterns below
glvlng a pernlt
Please check off
FI,NAL PLU}IBING
AI, INSPECTION'S
ueed to be couplete
a fl.nal C of 0.
ln the box provlded.
COMPLETED
before
t_--]
DATE:tl FINAI UECHANICAI,
DATE:
IUPROVEUENT SURVEY ,( RESID. NA}IE: PCN'T
ELECTRICAI,
FINAL EUILDING EAST SIDE:$EST SIDE:
TE}TPORARY
CERTIUCATE OF OCCUPAI{CY
DATE:
FILE NAUE:#15b2
//t-.'- "/J */ * W 4 ^ r'c'o'
n;h /tt/'^
rilcoPI
lnwn
75 souih trontage road
vail. colorado 81657
(303) 4792138
(303) 479'2139
otlice of communlty developmenl
March 6, I99L
Jim Morter
Morter Architects
L43 E. Meadow Drive Vail , CO 8L657
Re: Perot Residlence
Dear Jim:
The Town of Vail is in receipt of the Improvement Location Certificate for T,ot 3L, Block 7, VaiJ. Village rirst Filing. Said Improvernent Location Certificate (I.L.C.) was completed by Eagle Va11ey Surveying, fnc. of Eagle-Vail, Colorado. Upon initial review of the I.L.C., the planning staff has raised some questions about the height of Ridge C, whicb is listed at an elevation of 8,2L2.3 ft. on the I.L.C. As you are aware, the building perurit issued for this site indicates a maxinurn ridge elevation of 8,212.0 ft. fnitial review of this f.L.C. would indicate that Ridge C is 4r' over the allowable maximurn ridge height of 33 feet.
In an effort to avoid construction delays on this project, the staff overlayed the f.L.C. with the original topography for the 1ot and has reanalyzed our base elevation under Ridqe a. Based on this additional review, the staff feels courfortable in assigning a base elevation, under Ridge C, of 9,L79.5 feet. This would place the ridge elevation at 32.8 feet in height. It should be noted that the original staff calculation of building height was based upon the site ptan provided by your office. it appears that the topography indicated on this site plan differed slightly fron that shown on the survey. This nay explain the discrepancy in the ridge elevations.
Jin llorter
l{arch 6, 1991
Page 2
The planning staff will now authorize the building departnent to conplete the framing inspectLon for the above-naned property, as we feel that thls property neets the requirernents of the zonLng
code.
ff you should have any guestions or comnents regarding any of the above, please do not hesitate to contact me at 479-2L38.
Sincerely,
kl;A hltu-
Mike uollica
Senior Planner
/ab cc: Kristan Pritz
Tom Cole, I{orter Architects
an Jt iJ Ylr o rr1^ ,it/itli\ .t
A Profess onal Corporation
MoruenAncHrECTS 143 Easl Meadow Drive
Crossroads at Varl
Vail. Colorado 81657
303i 476-5105
Letter of Transmittal
Date:
To.
March 1, 1991
Town of Vail
Department of Cornmunity Development
Attn : Mi ke l|ol'l i ca
Perot Residence
Vai1, Col orado
Prolect:
Please lind enclosed lhe followino:
Copies
Mi ke,
Per our telephone conversation of 03/0I/91 regarding Perot residence
ridge heights taken from the inprovement survey dated 02/27/9L, I
have included a revised ridge detail which effective'ly drops the
overall roof height by 4". As we agreed this will satisfy all
Town of Vail build'ing height requirements. This detail will
only affect ridge "C" on the improvement survey mentioned above.
Please note that Morter Architects finds it very hard to believe that Town of Vail officials can accurately interpolate 2 foot
contours to the nearest 4". Also, base contour elevations should
be agreed on by all parties prior to construction in order to avoid this problem in the future.
Remarks:
Please include this letter in your files.
Thank you,
Ahonas AJo1e, /.l.A,
MORTER ARCHITECTS
\
\
t
I
N
u
R!\,)\s
t
I\-R .r- a. $.
^\ -.\. \r{'\n\Y! / d I.t4'r\ -s \a$$$i N N{..,\ }-N.; 0
-i \ t \\\
\ $ \ r\ -l \\
.\ ,-'t \\
\\a\ t ^t \\
_\ ^l . \ t r \\ \s \ \j ^\ -\\ ^'
if \t- -^ l: \a \- \
\\ -\ rI-\ l\ - X\
\ \t lrr \t
\l-\(NN.
\ ir ira -Itll \!l i'\ \\ \\ l\\ \\\ \'
\\I\
\s \
G I rlt |:(tri
'!*F fr t id; $t d \$ t :I $ iIi* i : $ rt $[ i $ i $[st i
n
\)t t
I
\l
0
$a't-
io
t\
.*t
t
*
o (r
i:I0 ;ul ('$
-r0
-il-
_t r.rl .l
11{tl
tcl S
$$
t$
B"r
I
($[
ttr
Ccl$.rf
t J_-
i 9a'$ql
r-t0
kT(dl- 1 ilh5'
\td$-*,'lt N{c
,l-
'1 0
t- -t ,{HL:X t'II i" i$. IS.
N-{ ii +I rj 15 $"4 i $i
s \
'N
$
\
//s
,e
s
I
d
d_
{,
J
II
F EI o
F z |rI
1rl
\
\
a\
N
N
\
\
J
I'
F
EJ o
F z
lrJ
lrJ (J
o
I
a
$
\\\t
\\
5 J
tL
F
$
:
{
$
:j
j
J
's
$7.. d !! d
i*[t I { iL ri El $[ --$r
c
H rll
(
a
s
-9
d
$
d_!l
0-$llt -J
o
.t-
'.d
$$u!1t
$
[tm[$il
$l
.J
l-
rtl
,S
=0 *u tt
0,
Q rr-i.(. \l {_l
rI -I
{.
zsl
,e
\
)
0
d
d (
a
$,l \t;;\F ,o
I
.ll
1l \)l
0-l \ I ---ll I l.r
,J i
t"l llr l-r.l r
tLl
1.
lu tl!
r,\l
\r
\
ft
J
.C\
rr).t
d'
\fi .l -l
.{LI
\)
.l:
X
e{
rl
_t
rtr
s
I
$l
\t {
rt I
r,,l
.t
.{i
t.
J .L
$
it
s
\+,\
N
b
It
I 1-
s
I
,t
t1
l\l
\(\
(
!.
-o-
$t t)iu
rii-
I
L
I
rl ti
I
l
--- -- I
I
_----- I
H lr
ii
ii
I ll
Ll
-N
I r- --1
g e
.I rF
Gl (J
o
o
?
=,9tr Eo boE;Gl: 'b0e I E oi.
L __:F-. -, i
.2 ttt,x ol.fi 3ir '- rG{' cL 'r\ ol hr iil
I
,,
tl t.
t-l
JI tl=\i {t Il siq (iil
r I'i d\Y
I
t
J
{
\
a \J '_l
t;vq-
l(.-,\
\ ri)
\J t\- --lr
\\
cl t r \\
u
B"t(
{*
H
I
0:F t'
lr-
T
rl.
$
c\
,{.
q
$
t
I
(t /-al /Y I "rl*\ F,:,/ \ll'I i\ lc'\ .ltr \ SI-tt t l'.2
s
z o
I ta
I
EI 4
II F
(J
=4
D I
lrJ tt
o lll (h
o
O.o 4
O.
)$
rI $.
$i
-\l'$
1q
trl 0.rd it I}
Et [-tr
{$
q
$r
i'r)HJO l! \)
l.
U
tL
\
.
u\.J.
-r
T-S s'l .'ir {.' |\-r utJ d-N
,f
.I _t
{
_{
u)r
ff
I
{tl
rt
I
\
\
_l
sl
I 'l-
JI
9l
\\I J _\l
qi
ull
*"1 \l _rtl
\
_t
N-
\Cl
1-
J
l\l IU I
l:-
l{
$
I
s $
I \
t.,t
t-
0
J
I
a
2 o Irl ;F :<
>'uJ
J llr
rF
I F 4 o z
=t o
b0 c
ct F
-(J
F -3
\-,
Ji
Ur,
);uJl
_\ i-.1\h,I l-\,r
,r\; s-
,t +
.t
t-ll
$l ),i
dl
YI $l
"r' I _-t I
-Il ('t,l
0:_ tl )-- |
I rl
,l
rl
l1
LT
s
I
t'I
li
't:t,
'l
I i,
I
I
l!
il
lr .l
.. -lI
$
l!
5 \
a-.
$k'
I
r9
lrl r
lr'r
. c- i-{-l:-l!il
li,,'''T-1 i
.l
d
u
0'
(-
)*ut
\i.i-l .. ul PI
$u(
,$ rrl ri) '9 ,:'r ,I -r
$\r[
.r1
t
\
!.{
d\
(\
l*,
FJ
.{\
t,\
).
t
_l
ul
trl
\
*
tL\
i\\$\I
..t\
ti l
I
I
-D.--
ilI
d *l !-'l
{. t:(
3 i:\
I lr
fIu
d
t'
j
s
t'
f.
.J
t l s
$
-t-
-L
\
N
d
t\
$l s
\l
l
c\('
1-
tl
:tl
._2 L
J
\
L
}
-.l
.I
f
\i u
\
_ri sri {'
i
7-- ,
I
I
l r.r
t'!=
{l}$t\.t'il \t.-t-l{
0-
F
q
sr
,c'l
)io,r rrtb /"'
It?' - t1't
{..
t
fl'\
f -,-.- 1
I i-2*,,.-1
/1 €- ^'.-Y r.
/l
(
--'/'-
Setback line
/
n/.Proposed location rlr
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
___.i:-
I
li';
d
\)
I
;r
..,-r
r)l
!-. F. ;- e= C
. ..?.-+ b^L (4' L-<x**?-
'3',- b'!1>'/ /:tL
GATE REVISION
l / 10 :' 1r-- c. rt
additional 56.25 sq. ft.
INTEP.DEP.qRT}IENTAL REVI EW
DATE S[J3lflTTEO: z. tt. ? t
CCI.i!4ENTS IIEEDED B\ z_4J_
ERIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL:
. FIRE DEPI.RTI.iENT
OATE OI PUBLIC HEARING J. II,? /
Date Reviewed by:
Conments:
POLICE DEPARTI4ENT
Revieued by:
Connerrts:
.
i
0ate
o
pt'ccodtrc ls requlred for lny proJect
irci. ba lcccltrd urltil 3ll lnlonratic.n
t{r.,\ts 0i APPLicAt{r _H. Rogs f e10!
Ae0REss--... 123z-jie.i! Dt: -
Dal l as, TX 75251
Appl icrt f cn 0atr-F,9b1uqrV tl, !Se]
pEC l.ttETtir6 6.11 " March 11' 1991
APPLICI,iIOII TOR A VARIANC'
n$'[FEB 111991
roqucsting e vari0,:cg. 'irrt ,:p1.1 itrLl0tl
is s..,bnittec.
This
wl l'l
P1,9,1; (214)788- 3001
q RiPF,tgftiiA iIyE J i rn l4orter/Warren Lawrence tiAr4E CF
Alni,tss
A|FLICAiiI'5
P.0. Box 1301, Vai i C0' 81658
t'hoitE q4q-0120
,ruu( L ) :12377 Merit Dr.
Dal l as, TX 7525L pir,rrr; (214 ) 788-3001
0, tocATroil 0F PR0P05AL
eooneis ^gpsea-velq'lL3!---
"
-.- -+A;/-L/l%-
t.[,GAL oqscp.lpr!oil toT-,31 alsg]i*7 . .titl-I116 1:!
F- FEE r1o0 P^ts-UIJULcx *J5-73-_ FRo'tr-liqlter lLLeldJesj.-€-.-
Tlt[ FtE ilUST S; PAiD BtFoR: rHE Cctif4uiilTY 0;titl0Pt{Eiti 0alAnIilir'T l] lLL.t'|;Ctii
Y,lui{ ptici'0tAl.
llt. FclR (,1 ) c0Pl15 0r TilE F0LL0|{Iil{: }lusT 3e susrllTi!0:
,. , A l.ilt rTElt :lili:.t[iiT 0f T]ti pR!i I Si :ij: JU,li rli Tn:: ..j:.Rl A.jC;
pri:ril ,1Ti:'ti lrifnr ',:fl" li.rr (T.l1l't,(rrt r|ri'v " '- '
F.' /r I irt of the naiircr of ownsr:; ql .1ll pr'op','r'ty edjlcent [o tlre sr,L.j;;c: iic:e r':/
iilCr.l"Utjitj Pp.JFiRTY EEiilli'J AriD ACPoSS 5llittlS, i:nd iheir mullir''j :cjr,:;"e:.
Th[ AlFLlCAtir l{il-L 85 fir:iFiiiistBLt ioR 00R!.ECi tnii.ilic AD0qIs!is.
:i, j\ pRF,i'rgi-:ia.tlitl clrlfllr.iiil- !iir''r A i'LAlrlilllti STAiF ilt:'13;;i is s'i,ll:i:,1-i -(;'i:::[:]:D
f0 1;ITiniui\ii!FAliY LDi)!TloriAt. Jllti:,RIAiI0i{ lS ittli]!:5. lio ItpiLitriTI,i:i 1l)i.1. i,i
iCitl'Ti! \,riLLSS ll !S tiilPt:;'lri (il'i3T iiiiLUi.lt ALL lTill: rl!Qrjl{i.c.9 el frli ii;'i ;'ir;
iof.i:ir::iTriAii,e). lT Is it:[;i;tir:.qllt''s Ris'i0iislSlt:iY i0 r".rril ,'.'l-.ridj];iii:r-iil
rltiir Tlr! 5TAtjr 1i FIIiD 0UT AllilUT r\DiriTl0llAl. Sl,j3t4lTiri! llEQl'jlni.l'rlhT5.
pllil: ilcIg lhni t rs',li$-! ir.Fi.icAil'.11i 1lr,-l.5T.iEir,rt.iil:: 'tlli,f,in:l;','.ft. i'iila':;::: s:,i'
y(.lLlil iriiil.'!af iiY Dlfar.slll-c*;H6 lir.,,li0ER 0t: coitn!Tl0iis 39 AllAcli t 'ir''r'i :iii i!':','r IiiLl
aiin ll,,iiiirlrl:li;,i'," adliXlSSI0li :,.qY sTli:Ui.ATi. At.i, C0ill,liltlfi:i 0f iri'?li,l1.:,1- t".'))'i 1:i'
c,;l'r,i .lit r:tfr 3;lclia A EiJltDliro Fi:K'llI IS !ssfiD'.
0,,,lNsR (s )pri nt )
. A p|oiessroniil Corporatrorr
fr_
',lJ l rsl \1arnai.)!! Dr ",1 (lro.ssf rild5 at Var
Ve i {lrrlot rrlo i-r'65,/
:Oil l:ii ''l:15
February 1l-, 1991
VARIANCE REQUEST
Perot Residence Lot 31, Block 7, Vail Village First Filing
Nature of the Variance:
The applicant requests a front setback variance allowing a 6'foot maximum encroachment in order to allow the owner's requested security concerns at the lower level front entry.
The regulation relating to this issue is 18.13.060.
This addition is a natural extension of the garage and lower Ievel entry as previously approved by DRB and PEC.
In addition, Mr. Perot requests that his security concerns are not voiced publicly, in lieu of recent world events.
MorueRARcH ITECTS
PUBI,IC NOTICE
NoTIcE Is HEREBy GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental
CornrniFsion of the Town of Vail wlLl hold a public hearing in
accordance with Section L8.56.060 of the municipal code of the
Town of Vail on March 11, 1991 at 2:00 p.n. in the Town of VaiI
Municipal Building. Consideration of:
A request for a front setback variance for the Perot
residence, Iocated at 64 Beaver Darn Road/ Lot 31, Block 7,vail vittage First Filing.Applicant: Ross Perot
A request for a conditional use pernit to expand the vail-
Mountain School , located at 3160 Katsos Ranch Road/ I'ot L2'
Block 2, Vail Village L2th Filing.Applicant: Vail Mountain School
A request for setback, Iandscape and site coverage variances
and an exterior alteration to the Lifthouse Lodge at 555
East Lionshead Circle/ Lot 3, Block 1, Vail Lionshead lst FiIing.Applicant: Robert T. and Diana Lazier
A reguest to amend Chapter 18.04 of the Municipal Code -Definitionsi to add new definitions for accessory unit,
affordabte housing unit and studio housing unit.Applicant: Town of Vail
A request to amend Chapters 1-8.1-0 - Single- Family District,
18.12 - Two-Family Residential District and 18.13 -
Primary/Secondary Residential District to allow accessory units as a conditional use in the above referenced zone districts.Applicant:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Town of Vail
5. A request to amend Chapters 18.r.4 - Residential Cluster District, 18.L6 - Low Density Multiple Fanily DJ"strict,
18.18 - Medium Density Multiple Fanily District, 18.20 -High Density uultiple Family District, La.22 - public
Accommodation District, L8.24 - Conmercial Core 1 District,
L8.26 - Conmercial Core 2 District, La.27 - Commercial Core
3 District, 18.28 - commercial Service Center District,
18.29 - Arterial Business District and 18.35 - Public Use District, 18.39 - ski Base/Recreation District; to allow
deed restricted affordable housing units and deed restricted studio housing units as a conditional use in the above
referenced zone districts.Applicant: Town of Vail
L oo
AU itens tabled fron the Febnrary 25, L99L PEC ueetlng agenda.
The appll.cations and lnfomatlon about the proposalE are
available for public Lnspectlon ln the Connunity llevelopnent
Departnent office.
Town of VaiI
Connunity llevelopnent Department
hrbliEhed ln the Vail Trail on Februarrl 22, 1991.
T 2B F**or<r<y u. Eaa>, ,.)..
OJJ7 pouGL+ +yE. ,grrrz-D+u-a9t T:x. TSzz-r
.
T A1 \,rLl E. cp.^naE4g u. Hsrrva,.t
16g b For<EbT RP.
VatL t Co. ArcSz
\X taoopEt' / E/^r<D,aR/L a.V\ / '-' -' -v--' t'-- (-r
I 2115 urwT tsrL pr<.
GoLDtvN Co, gO+o I
t 4loo
tt CHt=,<r<y
trNGLEtroo7
T'llom*g E.'
14 t LL9 DR.
40. Dot tp
.
NELJTILhJ f: "
N\,r\:^. -"-\ \
t'
,4 {L.l I'La r'uvl .-/.,2/ -V,//u
3o Yf fatc LtNg t
,; LO
'l
.i
;l
:l
. :l
'tl
'l - ri
tl
.l
::
I : :bT
.:
I
'; ..Lor oz .\7Yuorvo4zea1,
FREE9E,,9tontD H.
Hlttl+ouoE , t<a.nt xl H,S?oo E, tTth AvE.
- PENzEK / co, Daza_a
()L,r)t/.vr nuZo V!-or-/'
t ,
DtrtrHRTMtrNTT @F
,EE)MMUNITV DtrVtrL@FMENT
XXXXXXX sArEs AcnoN FoRM XXXXXXX
@sI
EA.
.IOTAL
IUOL'NT
cou. DR/. APPUCAlION lZEtt
scel lsnesls Cash
u;-lf,-i+l 1l:1: r:.1f r:'l
I O( F:*,:EiF,t S fiE44tl
I o( ll:I;:T,l:'H""
; Flttr':ut-ii t+rrd*re'l :' 1r:'iE1' !:rEl
I i.em Faid trmaunt Paid
r;-1 ! BBnfJ 4 I I f, [1 E1 F-1 t:l
THFHr{ V{fLI
\jr-,u r rE::hi*r CHt{i5
| 0000 4|32:r loFf xa,ns NSPECI|ON
'b | 0000 11172
a UCENSES
'EEIS
ot o00o al{t3 .stcn a??ttc,ttt0tr
f ::"'-,'+O
Project Application
Project Name:
. Project Description:
€c'fitrefFt6?Sannftfflrofre
Owner, Address and Phone:
Architect, Address and Phone:
Legal Description: Lot -tt
IJI ,Bloct ? ,p;slnn t// t*, Zone
Comments:
Design'Review Board
Date
' Motion by:
Seconded by:
APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL
Town Planner
MR FtB 1 1gg,A P rofcssronal Corporatrcn
i,13 East i,leadow Drive
Crossroads al Vail
Vai , Colorado 81657
303/476-5105
MonrenAncl ITECTS
Letter of Transmittal
4ea{ *4r'arzd- az/ar/r/
oare F4brzzry a// /?? /
ro: 4a.u - e;l a/ &-*ru--z;r?7 Dz.tz/aV-zz:",f
4rh' rVt& ,4a//t;:u
,,ot"., ftref ,&S lr'z__ztz_
/ai/, bla-ozn
P easc lind oncioscd thr: ioliowrng
Dated
ar/ay'?t
or/zr/rr
Cop es
/ac-t
,/eaaa
?zafuzs
//*n +
2/2/}w
.z-/Zr'r'2'a>z
E/azo/, o*-
a,/a;t'--t
/2/a--? | E/aua*).--,)//zcs*al>-t a-/ fuz--ah /zt(
)//aqfz-.-r;,.,a
a/ ..2-zasfa/# zo7
Bemarks:
rV'r'b I
cc. - 4,4as r% u
QCZae b+ur---7 a-z
Shaz4zz lr=sh c*t:a4-
Arl*rzT. /J;caz- et-
Fj,4f, 7"e av FF.-fl,l
FAo>a? ub, -\wArJ .P?qvt (T
AZtsTf2 SW-lE ^TlO il l 311 |
I
I
'L"rce
c?82.c,-.
frye.+..A8
V' t').t
F p?Lovv
i, -.|.1p.
\f
*)d
td 1'L
s
T
$l
rlar. r,a, - dttd :vzrtiw, - ?^-lP/I -A Al, - bt-Otta7t\!%ffi?f ro;
-PBLLA + Aa17ca Ptl
_.i2frWue
ItIHP,N SE^T \N/6P#Z WLN
-wrilpaw io,>rftarJ e wFaN*zl4
ilo?Tv? .a.PAtJ%fa -7fra7 ?Wtt>+rae"ay'o/ar
\
I
I
/G
i
rI $.
$i
s
r(\$
t
i {(
d
u)
t_
GI f
t-
.s$
F
Ir
r)
Et .trtr
{r
.rl
I lr
ll
I'_ff ll
Ir
| 'l i t-r
-l
-f
!
b
d
h
*i d
i I
l -r
J
0
j
{
"]r
s 0!-
3$
u--r$
!
_t
s-g
f f
\
*,
s-+
+
J
$
$
h
=
cr, J r[ 3 ;l $
$h ni
I
I 't
,.t lr-
r$F
$T *-.
J
t
I
r1
ri --r - 1_t--
1
I
,l-
---1
I
I r
t--
$
I
I
+
FI-F cit f .r
FI
l-rll I rL_!
\
-l s-d
I
o
g
7.
tt!
0-\
--{
ttl -+
-r+-s {.l
i \r
-r
s
-$
I
$+
N-
$
{I
a)
a o
EP
8t$<18
)r$
3tL
\I
I
d\
-\:
i
I
I t
I
I
tI rl iF i)io
i|a
z o I l-
lr|J |rI
li -t.L -il
I
I
1-
I
llr
tt --l r- -{ |
;lF-?
I
I
$
*
t
l
*
-\
K
rd {
*$d- u){tr t$
]T tr
rF*.?+?' i+. ltg far. l'71
o
-,{!-- rJtr.rer. -I!!'TF {;.T,tEr I D'
Project Application
/O , t t.?O
Proiect Name:
Proiect Description:
Contact Person and Phone
Owner, Address and Phone: P n /, u
Architect, Address and Phone: f^^ ( A /
-f 4g-t-,
'3 1 abcx r7 , r,t^s V, n// e /4 , zon" P/5
Com ments:
Legal Description: Lot
Design Review Board
Date
APPBOVAL D ISAPPROVAL
Sum mary:
Town Planner
Darc: /0'/Y.?c)
Staft Approval
A Prolessional Corporalion
'143 East [,4eadow Drive
Crossroads at Vail
Vail, Colorado 81657
303/476-5105
MonTeRARCH TTECTS
RSo0cT1?M
Letter of Transmittal
o^,", ta/to /?a
,', .A/ta ap7//;a
7,zt:z a/ /a-z 'bV;. ;7 h-,-*;Qz Ez ue/@
Proiect:
/z4Df ,&siz:-rn ft-;t, btera-.&
Please find enclosed the fol owing:
Dated Copies
//z//za / ,"/
of
ftats 4 /4?tu /<zc-- /2/a-'/? s
a2; ;r'/ez4- *2V 'u'5;fu'&'
7VP*/6 fry/fu
il--":=-._*"', '-'>rk_q',4:"'.'r,' 'c|FFf4dF:::.S.rsrT-r{FFEpq45jprar"ffi+EtF a-l v
Project Application
Proiect Name:
Proiect Description:
Contact Person arid Phone
owner, Address and phone: H. A o*r P" 4
Architect, Address and Phone:
Legal Deicription: Lot -1 ,ritins l/' t/,?Za- e l4 , ,on" ?/9
Commenls:
Design Review Board
Date
Motion by:
Seconded by:
APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL
Town Planner
Date:?' rz,7o
Staff Approval
A P rofessional Corporalion
'| 43 East Meadow Drive
Crossroads at Vail
Vail. Colorado 81657
303/476-5105
MonrenAncnrECTS
Letter of Transmittal
Date
To:
as r/lz,/?a
Zkz" rlhit Otfl a/b.zor"'--;9
4rtLt : rVt'b rr7o77''"2{-
Oazlaf.-.-t-"f
Proiect:/d,?esib,a-
/aiY, &/aza.Ap
Please find enclosed the f ollowing:
Dalod Copics Of
al/aa/?o 2 Ey/-c-i.- E/ala*'-.s -
Zaat*-ft tpza-z.<-t aadzd- aeTei>4 5+'r7
4Zazz daz 7b Snts rz2'aztr*,-a-A '
Remarks:
..V/,?4,',/ ha-za lhUxZzZ- fl4154 t/ana-hcozs 4s dr/4//
1 f *-:fZ--l ro * .6.,4V/ ) co-f,),-, r/xr, fT. ::?-? .ry o2**1>-a/ trtazraa-'s at ,r/*4f /62,/ . // ao-- ,h;.4-
F/zasc 4a2.. / fi*
****TTHIS APPLICATION I{ILL NOT BE ACCEPTED UNTIL ALL INFORI'TATION
IS SUBMITTED*****
I. PRE-APPLICATION UEETTNG:
A pre-appllcation meetlng wlth a plannJ'ng staff member ls
stiongly suggested to determine If any additional
inforrnalion-is needed. No aoolication will be accepted
unless it ls complete (must include all, itens required bv
ttre zonino iaministratort. It is the applicant's
@ an appointment with the staff to find
out about additional subnittal requirernents. Please note
that a COMPLETE application will streamline the approval
process for your project by decreasing the.nunber of
Londitions of appiovtl that the DRB rnay stipurate' ALL
conditions of alfroval must be resolved before a building
permit is lssued-. Application vrill not be processed
without o$tnerrs Signature.
DRA IPPLICATION
DATE APPLTCATTON RECETVED:
DATE OF DRB MEEIING:
A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:Single FamilY Residence
Jul 16, 1990
B. IPCATION OF PROPOSALs
Address
L,egal Description Lot __31- Block
Subdivision Va i l Vi l l age 1st Zoning P/S
c.
D.
NN{E oF APPLICANT: H. Rols Perot
Mailing Address: 12377 Merit Dr', Suite 1700
Da'l]as. TX 75251 Phone (214) 788-3001 _
NAI'{E OF APPLTCANT'S REPRESENTATIVE:MORTER ARCHITECTS
Mailing Address: 143 E. Meadow Dr.'
vai'l - C0 81657 Phone 476 -5105
E. NAME OF oWNERs: Same as app'l icant
SrGNATURE (A) :
Mailing Address:
Phone
F.
G.
Condoniniun Approval If applicable.
$0 s 10, ooL
$ 50,001
$150, 001
$50O, 001 $ Over
s 10, ooo I 50, OoO
$ . 15o, ooo
$ 5OO, OoO
$1, ooor ooo
$1, O0O, 0oo
DRB FEE: The fbe will be oaid at the time a building
permit is paid for.
VALUATION FEE
s 1o.oo
I 25.00
s s0.00
sloo. oo
9200.00
$30o. oo
(ovER)
/.' -€- FL (J ':il=] o a2'tt xax tL^ I -J t'"rIaiJ/'Q
APPIJCATIOX T6F frii6qABI,E ?E.FJ.TIT
A STRUSn,N,F OT{ A PT'BIJIC
(Plcase tlP6 or prlnt)
amn . ? 24-'fa ., ,,
OWNER OF DROPERTY
NAI-IE OF APPIJICAN!
I
IIO ERDCT OR I{AINTAIN
RIGFI-OF-WlI
Fengc
othcr
Tall IandreaPLnS-L
}DDRESS
LEGAI, DEECRTETTON OF PROPERTY BO BE EEBI'ED|
EI #.:f '1.#ffi"3:3?lliilr;
corner lot Inclde lot
DESCRIPITOX oF ErRUqruRB oR rEsr(Fl INro
rii3"t?*Ili l;Eil fiEii"il"hii#dt;;;;'{Eil;' nEnrrirresl any.otber affected
;;;;;i"il;;;-ii' Ii,r-pio:i"t-?I91 lt: ::lll^:L:+T"nsronad) and
;E;liJIGr'-i"-ii"ii-'E-iitvitlons ilf appltcable)'
Does structure presently exlsf?
Ptopoecd date for connenoencnt of conetruotlon
In qonslderatlon of thl lEguance of a revocabl'e-pennlB for the
etntoture above fiifJJi.ai-Jpprtcant lErees as follottEr
1. Tlrat thc Etructur€ hcreln authorlced on a revoeable perolt
basls r, reiiii;Gc';;iilri;.I;.ri [t : rand. absvc de-Ecrlbed'
z. rhat the e"fiil-i--rrrnrtia "f:!|t!:llll to the tlne or
iiiucture'descrlbed tn thlr aDplrsatlon'
3. That the rpiiilant-atriri n"tfii-ttre rown llancer' or hls dulv
authortzed 5;;;i;-d;;rt-;ili-$,o'I-i' ln' iavanEe if ttre tlnre
for oonnencenent of conetructLon, ln order that prppel
f"Ep"ctf"n llay bc atade ly t-he To'fll'
4. The appllr.r,['ali"ll-tJini6nnlif ar1a hold_hamlesE tbe tloun
of vair, rt.-oiEiI"i", -"di;i;;;"t"d-ti:l-t^fron and aEalnst
aII tiabllity, clalns and Ceiands on.adcount of tnJgra'-I?:3
or danaEe, iilriiil;-*ii4"i.-rrniutlon clalns arislns fron
bodlry rn:"i'li;-i;i;;";i rnlrirvl- slFx"t::r-dlsease' death'
proPcrty rosS'oi danage, oi airi other loss of any Blnd
whbtsoever,-inr6rr-iirse'out of-otr are ln any nanlre!
connected rriii-iipiiElnt; "
-aottvltree
..P"T:":"t to thls
i perml.+., rt ai-Jrr-ihj"ry, rosJ,-or-aanaE-" {t.eaused {n whole
or I'n Part bYr gr ts,el1f1ea't6-Ut caiEed ln tthotr'e or in
pitt rl' the'ict, onleelen, €tlotr prof,esslonal error'
s!.stake, ""iridJi',";;;-;i#t-iiur€ Ei ine aPprlcantr lls
contractor 6i-Euucontractor or. any.aff,leer' enployee'or
represenr"tiu"-Ii-iil;-;dlicint, ils contr_actor or hlE
subconrra..iil -irrS"ippiicint--iet-des to lnveslts1te, handle
respond to,-ina iii-pi'"irrae defefrse for and.iefend tgalnst'
any euoh rf"iiiflir-_9fafut, oi denranOs at the Eole expensE
of the apprfcint.''rne applleint also agrees to bcar aII
orher "*p"n!Il"i;aiii"g-iil;;i;;
lncruaing.court coets and
uttorncylg f,ees, ryhet}ier or-iit'eny -uctr ilautrttyr.Glalns,
or denand= ifr"ged -irC groundtess'- f,a1se' or fraudulent'
I
I
I :tfll,:":: lrrtr to procure and 1-1l19j.- at tts offi, co6t, a pottcv or polrcre* "?-ln=;;d;; enilicil*irJo-rn"urc asarnsr all 'labll-ltv clah=, al"iiiJ-I"a othcr obtlgatlone asguned by the appttiant p"rsua"C-i6-tf,i" paragraph 4.
Applloante further_ fgree^to reteaeE the Iown of Va!,I, tts orrteers, aEenrs 3y_-!ypr;y.lr-iio; di_;A.."ii rrorurty,etalos, deninds, or-act-roni-or iauscE-of aetions whatsoever artstns out of 11y, ginJe.,-rJl"'o;-rlltrv. r;^;ffi appttcant or to the apptt:T!,e pfoi"iif-caused-ly-trre T;*r.of vatt,tts .fflcerE, rsente airc ;gpr6yi;i-rrrrri iiii.ilE rn ualntenance or snow reno""r-iIii"lct6g or rny other :iHi ii: : *":fffr IE:"f1-55y
-# iJi i-piipEit"l'",'aeta,
trhat the pamrt p"v p" rdv6iaa l'henever it re dete'r.ned that the encroachnlg1, ;g;Ii:ifrion, or orher etrucrure constitutes a nursaDce.r-eeetroys.or J.npalrs the uee ot. the rrght-or-ray bv ttre. puirt", -"oilItrtutnE-i-tr"iirt
hazard, or Ene properry upon.r'hrch ttri enc-ioa.nnent, "Siiiittron, or srrucrur€ exlsts, r,s requlrea ioi use uy irri-priiiier or rt rnay be revoked at.any €tuE-foi-iny reason deened eufflclent by the Tom of ValI.
T!l! ttt." appl{cant wlll renove, at bls erqrense, the encroachrnent, obstructlon, or-ltructure rfithtn'ten aaye after reeetvlno :lrl::-:i'di ;i"ca{io"-of-iiri,-permrt.That the applliant agrEes to'nalntaln- any.landscaplng associated with the Encroacrrn.nt- on- the rlght-of_uay.That ln the event. saiO-renr"if'Jt tlre encr6achn€nt, t-a obstnretlon, or shnrctuie-ii-ioi'accompl!.shed wlthln ter.davs, thE Town r1 f-erguy-ailrriliiz.d.to-re'ove EaDe and have rhe rrshr tc eahe an ag6essment-iiirnJt-Ef;I'i"iii"ty .oa ;:i*"lr:n:"iffi:i_or r",ovi-i-Ii ir," eane nanier ae seneral
5.
6.
?.
8,
9.
10.
That tire-appllcant has read and condttions set forth ln speclat eondltlons:
and undergtands aII of the tenos thls appllcatton,
Elgnature (If Jolnt
APFROTIED: I
r(>'-3*Qt..'
Date
Project Application
Date ?,/0,?(
Proiect Namei
Pro,ect Description:
Contact Person and
Owner, Address and Phone:n;sc Brot
Architect, Address and Phone:
ption: Lot j I Btocx r7
Fitins v' l/'/" r. l4 . zone
-
/
Legal Descri
Com ments:
Design Review Board
Date
Motion by:
Seconded by:
D ISAPPROVAL
Summary:
4 r4a
Town Plan ner
7'/o ,? /Date:
Staff Approval
A P rofes slonal Corporalion
143 East fleadolr Dri!c
Cross roads at Vail
Va,l, Colorado B 1657
3C3i476..510s
MonrenAncnrECTS
Letter of Transmittal
l66tg0 dls 0"m
Date:
To:
a8/?a,/?/
.7aa,rt "f/a/ /'A?l ;f A.z.Tz.--r9/,(2z4rz/ryPhi
/+h. r77/b rVa/h'd'
P'oiu'tt
t4'/zTt &Etb.-
&euA tbzo-r,A, /-i/
Piease lind enclosed the following
Datcd C o pies
as/zt/at /,at frqotd 2roTzte/ /Zt'/s / a71'
tl
,deo/6Vsr+--V /*mdsaTzz
4tifu /rr z/%o4zz( *Zz._ p*roszd_ pta--' ,ft,//4 fu.a /rsc't-sy4-, ,'l --%-+'turuQl A /^- i fr</!?-*,A s,h*T b ,aue+u -*24< 69t--< a--n s-///a.7/ea*-- a2"4/ zatft ry f<4s-n7s r/a-rce--nr
\t.-
'l
I
I
I
-l
)
'r- I .:\ -i9
, [ -'r_j
1,,lt,l
(J'\t-
\\-.. c-
I
I I ,f
it:ll"r '! -J ;-,'l rti :
_iJs t
-"'r'a '1 U,-\ji)
\-
{
4
$+
+
'- t
:Ir ;
T
d )lr-rJ
l,'r/
rtJ
\
4
,f
l.
A
I
I
I
.l \{ ro \s
-r{
s s
I
{f)
)l*Jlu
Vu
\--,)'rtr
\\d{..
J
\\
1-
.{
\) -\,i
,t t\
I .t
t !-
{
(
_)
d .t
(\
-t
JrJ tf ]|s
r)
trl
t7-
orh
"il
-\
\y: I
**** r t t **t t at* r r t a t t t I *t t 'r **t * ** t t UNIT ONE
P
R
I
M
A
R
U
N
I
T
tnfn luo221s90 A P roicss cnal Corporation
143 E.rst Mcadow Drivc
Crossroads at Va I
Va l, Colorado B 1657
303i,176 5105
MoruenAncHrEcrs
Letter of Transmittal
Dafc: OBrtZt /qo ro
/aturz al14;t 'h". o" r-, i rV &t a/a7 r-rz-+
.4rh' /Vf4,rAe///2L
''"tn"'En f /Z;az--,a
/ar/, b/ryaza
Plcasc lind enclosed the tollowlng
Dated Cooies Of
a,y'a/eo /7a24" z-zzerg 4z/4t,4// 4f . rtd./iaz4- )b ;,t/actula aCF4.. a/cac/a./c.z qAF4 fr A /ae/Zy'a/6*at,e qtr4 /a6A
/ p/ars ,/slza- & aTTrauzd- Q1 2.4e. e-,4 asy';//o
e rg'cczsftd-
lryrk'
ry ,?4 ltuft /4L-?116.f/a".'acft-<-t b/42. /trr"tkz ; / az-f
/hbc & /az/a*) an s thez/Z rzdz'/va-,muf
/// zt*"ka€ /4'42 a*/cou/4+a--
)rzzz+zsraz'5 4S aher-sn. r* qA*t-
-ne/ **zastry;/F/C+s- A*2/ -4azL
4L/24-c./ dtnzz Hqt Addlfra-zzz//
MoruenAncnrECTS
hfo-t at aazVzuzat e4-ft ' ar/rc1ru *
f,fr..cc.o - EV/$ 4*--r--- fl4oU. /anf V?,L/r-z<-
Sbre-fhrdz>2, 72.(:-rn frtfZ afu- ry Sbck- {";*r{i
t, t,/)h*//-<s-r^- &zah arl7 /*nc4 ha-osz,4u--s
/ltn&s - frt/a tC, 60{?? *-/E &ronzc
)ra/so
aB/ts/ /a
Project Application
s^1" 8'/5'76
ProjectName: fo n o '
Proiect Description:
Contact Person and
owner, Address and phone: !.1. R,e /Lq4
Architect,Addressandphone: \' /4ra 4n 'StOS:
erocx ? ,ru,nnV'Vr%-z I* ,zone-
Comments:
Legal Description: Lot il
Design Review Board
Date t, /s.?o
Motion by:Atu+
Seconded by:
DISAPPROVAL
eJ.Ja ,^-t -( ,lr Ad{,
Town Planner
Date:
E statt Approval
DRB IPPIJICAIION
DATE APPLTCATTON RECEIVED:
DATE OF DRB !,IEETING:
1990
*****THTS APPLTCATION WTLL NOT BE ACCEPTED U}ETIIJ AI'IJ INFORI{ATTON IS SUBMITTED*****
I. PRE-APPLTCATION UEETING:
A. pre-appllcatlon ureetlng vlth a planninE staff nember Le strongly.suggested to deternine il any adaitlonat information is needed. No applicatioir will be accepted
the zoning-administratorl . rf@ responsibility to make an appointroent w-iltr ttre staff to f out about additional subrnittal requirements. please note
to make an appointroent with the staff to fl_nd out about add
A. PROJEST DESCRTPTTON:
that a CO!,IPLETE application will Jtreanline the approval process for your proJect by decreasing the nunrber- of conditions of approval_ thaL the DRB rniy stipulate. ALL conditions.of ap-proval must be resolvel Uef-ore a building permit is issued. Application will not be processed without Owner.s Signature.
Resi dence
B.IPCATION OT PROPOSAL:
Address
Legal Description Lot 31 Block
Subdivision Vai t V'i | |age I st Zoning P/S
c.
D.
NAI!{E OF APPLICANT:
NAI'IE OF APPLICANTTS REPRESENTATIVE:MORTER ARCHITECTS
Mailing Address: 12377 Merit Dr.,Sui te 1700
na11as. TX 75251 Phone (211L7€8-3001
Mailing Address:
Vail. C0 81657 Phone 476-5105
E.NAIIIE OF OWNERS:
SrGNATURE (s) 3
Mailing Address:
Phone
F.
G.
Condoniniun Approval lf applicable.
I i cant
VALUATION
$ o-I 1o,oo1 -
$ 5OrOOl -
$150,001 -
9500,001 -I Over
I 10, ooo $ 50, ooo s . 150,000 I 500r 000
$1, ooo, ooo
sl, 000, ooo
FEE
91O.OO
I25.00 $ 5o.oo
$100. oo
9200.00
$300.00
(ovER)
LIST OF IIATERIAI,S
I,EGAL
STREET
NAI'IE OF PROJECT: Peret Peqidenne
DESCRIPTION:LoTll- BIocK 7 SUBDIVISIoN
-+a.i-l-{jl+aq€{st ADDRESS:
DESCRIPTION OF PRO.'EcT: S'i nqle Fanilv Res'idence
to the Design The following lnformation is
Review Board before a final
A. BUILDING }IATERIALS:
Roof
Siding
Other WaIl Uaterials
Fascia
Soffits
Windows
Window Trin
Doors
Door Trin
Hand or Deck Rails
FIues
Flashings
Chimneys
Trash Enclosures
Greenhouses
other
IANDSCAPING:
required for submittal
approval can be given:
TYPE OF T.IATERIAL
Conc. Tile
COI.oR
Sand
l,.lood
Stucco
Gray-Bei ge
River Rock Stone
r.r ^,r Dark Bronze Llqu
NA
r^rnnrt Match Wi ndows
ei ge
landscaoe Designs BY El'l ison
Botanical Name Cornmon Name ouantitv Size*
NA
linnnp r Coooer
hll
t\l n
B.Narne of Designer:
Phone:
PI.ANT MATERIAIS:
PROPOSED TREES
EXISTING TREES TO
BE REI,IOVED
*Indicate caliper for deciduous trees.
eciduous trees i
trees.
s trees. Minimun caliper for
Indicate height for conj-ferous
ZONE CITECK
FOR
SFR, R, R P/S ZONE DISTRIEIS
l3Eli ffi Brock z Filing vair virase lst
ADDRESS:
OWNER H. Rnss PFR0T
ARCHITECT MnRrEq aaCFITFCTS
ZONE DISTRIET P/S
PROPOSED USE
IOT SIZE
Height
TotAl GRFA
Primary GRFA
Secondary GRFA
Setbacks: Front
Sides
Rear
I{ater Course
Site Coverage
LandscaPlng
Fence/Retaining WaII' Heights
Parking
Credits: Garage
Mechanical
Airlock
storage
Zoning:Approved/DisaPProved
Date:
Staff Signature
*Includes ProPosed 250
**30%+s1ope-Chapter
Flood
Slope
Allowed
(30) (33)
38 t7 + 7So:_4!68L
4 n6R*
201
15 1
15 I
(30) (50)
J.5
(300) (6oo)
(e00) (1200)
(50) (1oo)
(25) (so)
(2oo) (4oo)
Proposed
"t/
-4!i6J-
-JL/'/lq'
-TL<unRiitte ailrry,*l
-Z,D-JS!".+
1.2\,?o
tua t.,la,
7 201
PHONE
PHONE
-
' ' A1C E,|r)E
4058-
n/a
s!1-
t'l L'
a4
t/'^4.
Geologic Hazards OK
GRFA - Ord.
18.69.050
36 (1988); 0rd. 4 (198s)
Qssrdr**
Drive: slope Pernitted t E?o slope Actual
Environrnental/Hazards :Avalanche L/
Plain
/rs.t-s?6> jtsl,I + \
lr-,- /&I '?'zt'?o "/^- jtl?f)
ED;ur 160m
Date of Appl ication_94;y5, 1990
Date of DRB Meeting Rug.iS 1g9O
PRE-APPL ICATION CONFERENCE
A pre-app'lication conference with a member of the p'lanning staff is strongly
encouraged to discuss the provis'ions under which additional GRFA can be added to a site. It should be understood that this ordinance does not assure each property
an^additional 250_square feet of GRFA. Rather, the ordinance allows for gg tb
250 square feet if certain conditions are met.
App'licat_ions for additions under this section will not be accepted unless they are complete. This includes all information required on this ionn as well as-
Design Review Board submittal requirements.
A. PR0JECT DESCRIPTION: Sinste Famitv Residence
B. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL:
Address
FOR
APPLICATION FOR ADDITIONAL GRFA
PROPERTIES IN EXCESS OF ALLOWABLE GRFA
Legal
Zone
C. NAME
Description: Lot-31 Block_L __Fil ing_ygjl_1fl_l_A-qe lsl
District P/S
OF APPLICANT:
Address 12377 Merit pr.. Ste honelz!4Ugg-3oqL
D. NAIVIE OF APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: NORTTR RNCUTTTCTS
Address 143 E. Meado!\l Dr.. V hone__426=i105__
NAI'IE 0F OI'JNER(S): Same as app'licant
Signature(s)
E.
**
Address
F. Fil ing
The following information, in additjon to DRB
required with this submittal:
l. Veriflcation that the unit has received
2. Names and mailing addresses ofradjacent
un'its on the same lot. This informat'ion
Assessor's office.
submittal requ [ements, shall be
a final certificate of
property owners and of is available from the
occupancy.
owners of
Eagle County
3. Condominium association approval (if applicable).
4. Existing floor plan of structure.
G. Your proposal wil'l be reviewed for compliance with Vail's Comprehensive Plan.
$100.00 is
o
APPLICATION
FOR PROPERTiES IT{
Date of Appl ication__i1p6;3* 1996
0ate,of 0R8 Meeting Aprit ra. 1990
A pre-appl lcation conference with a member of the pianning staff is stronolv encouraged to discuss the provls{ons under which aiditionir -inrn iir"i."iijia to a site' It should be uirdersiooo-tnit tniJ ireiniii.-l'ors not assure each proper,an addit{ona'l 250 ssuare reei oi-o[ni.'- nainir, ilrl"d.ii.iri.'liriii"i;, i r['250 squ.are feet if certain .onattionl'are met.
Applications for additlons under thls.section wil't not be accepted unless they are complete. This rnciudei iii iiiii*iitron required on thi;-r;; il',r.ir"l!'DesiEn Reyfew Board submiti"r '-"eqriiin.nt..
A. PR0JECt DESCRIpTIOT{,
B. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL:
Address
ryry / ftltr'z-ra?
aFy'Z,h-hai, //.,/eo
FOR ADOITIONAL GRFA
EXCESS OF ALLO{ABLE GRFA
Legal Description:
Zone 0istrict P/-S
Lot_,,11 _81ock_l_Fi I in9
C. NAiI€ OF APPLICAI{T:
Address 12377 ll
H. Ross
E.
*
D. NAr'rE 0F AppLIcANT's REPRESENTATIVE: ttgrter Architects - James Morter
Address none--42.6:5JQ5---
ilA,tE 0F 0HNER(S);Ross P
Signature(s )
Address I hone_l2.i4_Ilgg JSOL F. Filing Fee of $lOO.OO is requ.ired at ttme of subnitta.l
The folio*'i!g informationr in addition to DRB submittal requirsnents, shall be rcqulred xith thts submitial:
l' Verification that the unit has received a flnal 'certiflcate of occupancy.2' flrnes and mai?ing addresses of':adjacent property gwners and of owners of units on the same 'lot. This lnfoimation'ts-ivi'tt;6i;'rrom-ure Eifii-cJrnty Assessorrs office.
r(21$) 788-3001
Condominlum association approval (lf app'licable).
Exlsting floor plan of structure.
Your proposa'l will be revlewed for conpliance with Vail's Comprehensive plan.
5.
4.
u,
12377 lterit Dri
143 E. tbadow Dri
{
PUBLIC NOTICE
NoTfcE fs HEREBY cIvEN that the Design Review Board of the Town of Vait wi}l hold a public hearlng on August 15, 1990 at 3:00 p.n. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building.
Consideration of:
1. A request for an additional 250 square feet of cross
Residential Floor Area for the Perot residence located at 84
Beaver Dan Road. Lot 31, Block 7, VaiI Village 1st.
applicant: II. RosE Perot
2. A request for a sign variance for Up llhe creek Bar & GriII,
located at 223 core creek Drive. Creekside Building.
Applicant: Peter Stadler
3. A request for a Satellite Dish Antenna for the Oelbaun
residence located at 3907 Lupine Drive. Lot 3, Block 1,
Bighorn lst.
Applicant: Ron Oelbaum
The applications and l-nfornration about the proposals are available in the zoning adnLnistratorrs office during regrular office hours for public inspection.
TOWN OF VAIL
COMMUNITY DEVEI'PMENT
Published in the Vail Trail on July 27, 1990.
x**\ \ rt\r. gtr,1. \-:Lr')\\eN
ri\ \\tql )q\\'ii
\. -\\l
';
.;
.l Lor
;
VI Zb NVy+Ar<r<y u. Eas> J..
O33J poubL+ ,^vE. ,g)t:z- tloo
D+,Lr-,6,!, rx. Tszz-f
l\,4,*,. E . CH^FrEErzg s, / errvEs .et<t,jAK
16,r b F7RE;T I<P.
VAtL t Lo. 01657
Lor z1
hooxtaY , E+rcb,LaJe- d.
I 2715 urftd tst-L pr<.
Goupet .t Co. 8o+o t
tL CHltKt'<Y
trN(2LErJOoP
T4on*g E,
111t-t-9 DR.
40. Dat rP
T Oo \rf fa,o,-tLJ9 ,
.Lor oz \^t ^rvor(>eair, NEutn*il T:
FKEEgt=,,btontD H.
HtttHou>E / r<.*ru xl H.
5?oo E, tTth AvE,v ^\. ^ pENvEK / co. Dozza \s\r*:qr,\ \* tr\, etss.
sr..s.s.es= \ss As ta\$\\.\,-..,
,., . A ^ &- gv*<r4 t:\ \-\tqD . \\f,, A ,r, ba'91' (f -U v*ii*
^\^ioro
'gtun_a_, l"r[ v
I I
'1 - Lj. 70
nfi,e' -,", l"r-(-/..V4-- /'24 ..L"tr*{ 4
/furn--,,/fi */d> a.a\ "/P4^-! h'q Z*Y 4 /"x8
K-4^ - rvr'..;< iln64 .h^&-yrtn- o^ d1 tL& /e-.r'.<
c'/ h'.-\'
,/R
/@ */ ,*ril (
%|ffi r
,1 ,
-Nq
t' I I I a.{-.o '.
earyryi(
?-o
D.rta i,- o\ 4,ft fr(,^.77*\A,;rt4 /a/- -ta" *u .2 /*"Zrd
4,4*rg.,;.a * ""r4*l */Qe v/74-
e,
{t
Present
Chuck Crist
Diana Donovan
Connie loright
Ludwig Kurz
ill.n Shearer
Kathy warren
Dalton lNillLans
PIAI|NING AIID EI{VIRONMENTAL COI,II,IISSTON
iluly 23, 1990
In the interest public hearLng.
Staff Kristan Prltz
lilike !.tolllca
Sheily t{ello
Andy Knudtsen illll Kannerer
Betsy Rosolack
Penny Perry
Susan Scanlan
of tine, rork seesions were held prior to the
Susan Scanlan preaented the proposal as per the staff neno.
285 S. Frontaoe Road West.Appllcant: Amoco corp.
Tom l.tcCurdy, representing the Anoco Corporation, responded to the
issues addressed in the nemo e:<plaining that contamination was
found on the Gateway Eite. However, they dld not yet know the-
extent. After talk-ing with staff, Amoco chose the proposed slte
because it would cause the leaEt hardship for all concerned since
any other location deleted parking spaces. Regarding alternate
methods, the proposed design was the best for the situation. It
was possible they would need larger ttells, however, they had
already allowed for additional apace ln the roon for an
additional air stripper. Amoco originally proposed to use a
portable buJ.lding. He said that etaff had connunl-cated concerns
ttrat a portable bulldlng would not neet deslgm criterla.
negerding the use of the Gateway slte rather than the Alplne
Stindard eite, the present owner did not want them to use the
basement as waa orlglnalty planned. The owner had e:<pressed
concerns of liability and parking.
Chuck Crlst asked how nolsy the systen would be and Tom Uccurdy
explained that the only noise would be genera!9d-Uy a compressor.
ThL conpressor would be withln an enclosed bullding and the
inpact would be nLnirnal . He felt the nolEe from the highway
would be nore obtrusive.
chuck then asked, lf the probleD was uore extensive than
originatly thought, would Anoco have to build another station
elst where? Fron what distance could the wells be punped?
Ton titccurdy explalned the welle could punp up to 2oo-250 feet
away.
Dalton and L,udwlg had no connents.
Diana asked how deep they tested the water and fom McCurdy
errplained they test anlmhere fron 20 to 4or belon the ground
surface.
Diana also asked how nuch water would be processed in 1 day and
fom Mccurdy explained that the systern processed 35 gallon? p9T
uinute. -Oianl was concerned about how the Water and Sanitation
department would handle the sltuation and how Lt would affect the
Toirn,s water supply. Tom ltcCurdy explained that the water would
be dLscharged to the l{ater and sewer pl?nt and the water plant
discharged-to the Townrs streans. He dia not feel that 35
gallons-a minute would affect the sater supply.
Kathy Warren asked Ton Briner, lhe architect for the-proJect, if
they would be able to bern on either side of the building and Tom
staled ttyestr, on the sides but not the front or rear.
Diana felt that the applicant should consider extra insulation to
nitigate the noise. She asked Kristan if this would be an
oppoitunity to clean the island,/area_up and Shelly reml-nded Diana
airi tne bolrd that there is a possibility of a Eidewalk as well.
Tom McQurdy explained that there was an unldentlfied easement and
Diana felt-that it waE an issue that staff could handle and
inforn the board if it would be a problen at the next neeting.
shelly felt that the Town needed to Eee the flnal reports when
they iane out before naking a reconDendatl-on and lloll.DlcCurdy
did;rt feel ttre flnal reports would affect the location of the
building. He felt the present rneeting waE to center around the
aesthetics, noise etc.
chuck crlst asked how the air discharge was done and if it
required stacks. Tom llcQurdy explalned that vents would be used.
Chrick also wanted to know if there would be an odor and Tom
McCurdy e:<plained that the odor sould be no nore than the gas
station itself.
)I
I
Ross Davis, repreaentlng ur. watson, an adJacent owner, felt that
the plans ioo1La good. He waE concerned about Echedullng of the
consiruction. Url Davis suggested that the applicant was asklng
for an unnecesEary setback iiriance from a non existent lot line.
He further suggesled that the lot lines had been vacated via a
1964 condorninLurn map.
Kristan etated that she waa Borry that the proJect had been
affected but felt that the staff could not lgnore the fact ttrat
they had not received a letter of approval from the condonlniun
ass-ocLation. Krlstan added that she felt this waB a civil issue
that the owners needed to resolve before the staff revl,elted the
reguest. She concluded that the staff wished to table until the
Auiust 13th PEc neetlng. Andy invlted Mr. Davis to present nl:
na€erial for further study prLor to the next meetlng. She told
Jin Morter that he could go to the Deslqn Revlew Board for a
conceptual review on Augrust lst if he wished.
A motion to table Iten No. 8 until the Augrust 13', 1990
and Eeconded bv chuck crist
Itot
rtS\t g, A rectuest for a sLte coverage.varial
f- Block ?. vall Villaoe lst Filing, 6'
(.V *ri..r,t, r. nort p.rot
\-
Diana asked the applicant lf the stakes outtining the footprint
of the house were current, and Jin llorter answered rrno.rl
Discussion centered around whether the board was comfortable
enough to proceed though the stakes were not current and it was
decided to proceed.
lll,k Uollica explained that the applicant was requesting a.sl-te -overage varianie to al1ow for the- construction of a new elngle
fanily-hone, with an attached three-car garage. The exislilS -singti faniiy hone on the site ltas proposed to.be demolished, due
to itructura-l concerns with the foundatlon. Given the steep
slopes on the lot, the slte coverage reguirement of the property
was-limited to 15*. Because the slopes exceeded 30t, the
applJ.cant was allowed to locate the garage within the front
sitlack area without a setback variance. Mike reviewed the
hl.story of the proJect, the zoning analysiE, _and the criteria and
flndlnls appticiUte to the proJect. The staff recornnendation was
ror apfrovii. staff berievLd the rot was encumbered with a
physical hardship, due to the extrene Blopes on the eite. staff
13
Road.
also believed that the grantlng of the varlance would not be
detrlmental to the public health, safety or general' welfare of
properties or peraons ln the vlcinlty. For those-reasons, staff
iert tnat it would not be a grant of special privilege to aPprove
the variance request.
Jin ttorter, the architect representing the applicant, explained
that the slte had a hardehlp. Given the opportunity, the
appllcant would prefer to put the garage under the house. In
oieer to do this, the house would have to be Ln the front
setback. As the detailed ptannlng began wlth the previous
proposal , they found lt lnpractlcal to remodel . The current
proposal net aII other requirenents. As ltike lrad stated' they
coula build a carport and lt sould not count as site coverage.ilin polnted out tree locatl.ons and offered to replace any trees
that would not have been renoved by the prevlous plan.
Chuck Crist asked if the area across the street would still be
revegetated as in the previous proposal and Jl.n answered rtyes.rl
Connie Knight asked why the PEc did not review the 250 request
and Kristan explained that the 250 request was not part of the
site coveraqe variance which should be looked at on its own
nerit. .fim Morter stated that if they were not to recelve the
25o request, they would delete a loft bedroon on the top floor
and therefore site coverage would not change.
Jin Shearer \ras concerned about landscaping. He lranted to be
sure that the appllcant would save aa many trees as possible. He
felt that the excavation of the home presented a high risk to
nany of the trees on site.
Jln Morter explained to Jlm Shearer that they had looked at many
different scenarios and the current proposal was the best- The
trees to the northeast of the house would have a big inpact if
removed.
Kathy Warren felt that the applicant should be reguired to
exteisively landscape due to the loss of mature landscaping and
Jin Morter agreed.
Ludwig Kurz felt that the applicant should keep all pogsible . -trees-with the conditlon that any danaged trees be replaced with
nature/substantial trees.
A motion to approve a sLte coveraqe variance Der the staff
neno wlth the fotlowlna conditions was nade bv Kathy Warren
and seconded bv Connie Kniaht.
conditions:
14
The applLcant ptant nature landscaoLn<r throucrhout the
site.
The elte of the exiEtLng structure be taken back to
natural crrade and landEcaoed.
The area across Beaver Dan Road be reveqetated.
VOTE: 7-O IN FAVOR
Krlstan reconmended that trees on the site be photographed and
sl-zee determl.ned before a bulldlng pennit Ls released eo that lf
trees dle due to construction, there sould be agreement on size
and tlpe replacement trees.
Iten No. 10:
1.
2.
3.
as a perrnitted use.Applicant: Dean LLotta
Andy Knudtsen presented the proposal for staff explalning that
the-applicant ias proposing to change the.zoning code to allow a
lrew pub as a uee by right ln the Commercial Senrlce Center zone
district. The request ias to deflne the brev pub uee in the
definition section of the code, llst the uete as a petmltted use
ln the CSC Eection of the code, Ilst the use, with lfunited off
site sales, as a condLtional use ln the csc sectlon of the code,
and includi a paragraph, also ln the CSC section, regarding
operating charlcteiistics. Andy reviewed the backgro-gnd reeearch
tlat had-been done and the applicable criteria and flndings.
The staff recomnendation was for approval of the request.
Andy, at the reguest of Iarry Eskwlth, clarified the difference
betirien on-ELte-consumption, retail saLes for off-eite
consunption, and wholesale sales.
Kristan felt it was important f,or the board to underetand that
the brew pub use was intended to be accessory to a reEtaurant.
Dean L,iotta explained that he was not plannlng on brewlng 9n a.
constant rasis-. He wanted to brew 3 tb 5 times per week (Brewing
took approxfunately ?5 ninutes) and he would llke to be able to
lrew airiing norna-l working hoirrs. If |t becane a probleu |n the_
future, he would be happy-to change the hours of brewing.- He had
been glven a 1OOO barrel a year cap. He stated he would hate to
15
be at 1000 barrels on Decenber 15 and be forced to go 2 weeks
without business. He asked what would happen in that situation?
IGistan explained to Dean, that if he was that close to his cap,
he could come back and requeet a hlgher cap.
Dean felt that the eale to a reetaurant patron that took a 5-pack
hone ehould be consldered on-eite ealee. Krl-stan stated that'
not only restaurant patrons buy beer to take out, but others
sould use the pub as a llguor etore and it vould create
addl.tional traffic.
Diana felt that lf the pub was going to have botlr sales for off-site coneunptlon and wholesales, they should be consldered as two
separate conditLonal useE.
Dean ehowed the board pictures of what the equipnent looked llke
and how lt would be lald out on the slte.
Krietan suggested that if the odor was a problern, the staff
(T.O.V.) could initiate a code change. Dean agreed that he would
conply wlth future odor control ordinances.
Kathy warren suggested that the Lssue be discussed when he cane to the board for a conditional use permLt for off-site eales.
The barrel per vear cap be lncreased to 15oo.
ften No. 3. Permltted Uses--(Gl referenclng operatinq
hours be deleted.
VOTE: 7-O IN FAVOR
Item No. 133
1.
2.
3.
eeoarate cohditional uses.
& AEsociatee.
16
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Planning and Environmental Connission
Connunity Development Department
JuIy 23, 1990
A request for a site
residence on l,ot 31,
64 Beaver Dan Road.Applicant: ll. Ross
coverage varlance for a new
Block 7, VaiJ. Village lst Filing,
Perot
I.DESCRTPTION OF THE VARTANCE REOUESTED
The applicant is lst Filing, which
reguesting a site
construction of a
three-car garage.site is
co
the owner of Lot 31, Block 7' Va5.l Vlllage
is located at 64 Beaver Dam Road. He is
coverage variance to allow for the
new singJ.e fanily hone, with an attached
The exlsting single f?qi_U-@he
existing concrete fron Beaver Dam Road to the residence.
The
the
(the
property
current
average
is zoned Primary/Secondary
zoning, as well as the steep
slopes beneath the
Residential . Given
slopes on the lot structure and
o a maxirnurn of
t the front applicant is allowed
setback area without
use the sloPes to locate the garage within
a setback variance.
Note: If the average slopes on this lot were less than
3ot, then the site coverage restriction would be
increased to 2ot and the garage woul.d not be allowed in
the front setback without a variance.
The appJ.icant has rnade a 25o request and this wlll be
reviewed by the Design Review Board at their August 15, 1990
neeting. ihe proposed residence meets all the other zoning
standards, including GRFA.
The parking requirement for this proposed residence is three
spaces. Because of the slopes on the lot the Town code
reguires one covered parking Epace for each dwetllng unit,
(Section 18.69.050 (K) ) .
on-site will stair eading
II. BACKGROT'ND AND IIISTORY
l,lav 14, 1990 -
approved a slte
Total Site Area:
Allowable Site Coverage:
Existing Site Coverage:
Proposed Site Coverage:
15,682 sq. ft.
21352 sq. ft., or l5{1,154 sq. ft., od7 *''
31159 sg. ft., or 20t
3r818 sq. ft.
_?58 sq. ft.
4,068 sq. ft \4,067 sq. ft-..?
position that the reguested site will have a DgsLlliye inpact on potential uses and structures in
April 23, 1990 - llhe PEC, by a vote of 6-0,.denied the
applicantrs appeal of a declslon of the zoning
adninistrator, regarding the deflnltion of I'site coverage.rl
The PEC, by a vote of 7-0r unaninously
coverage varLance request for thls property.
erager.which the
ed durlng the staff
hear lance.
E-Eeuast sas for an addition to ,plus an attached three-car garage. The PEC found that the
existing etructure and the eteep slopes on the lot created a physlcal hardelrlP.
III. Z9NINGJANAIII9IS
The applicantrs request is to allow a 5t increase in Eite
coverage, or an additional 807 sg. ft. This reEults in a
site coverage of 2Ot.
IV.
Allowable GRFA:Additional request:
Total Allowable:
Proposed GRFA:
CRITERIA AIID FINDINGS
Upon revies of criterla and Findings, Section 19.52.060 of
tire vait Munlcipat Code, the tlepartnent of Connunity
Development reconnends approval of the requested variance
based upon th@:
A. ConsLderatLon of Factors:
1.
the viclnltv.
It ls the staffrs
coverage varlance
other exlsting or
ttre neighborhood.
Parking for this property is currently provided by a emall gravel surface lot innediately north of
Beaver Dan Road (this area is not owned by the applicant). The applicant is proposing to neet the Townrs parking reguirement with the
construstion of a three-car garage located within the boundaries of l.ot 31.consists o ch is
coverage.If
arage u
cov nould be 14.7*.
The proposed garage will bS_-covered lv so$/sod on threl eides aia tfe onty vffi
garage would be the north elevation. crades over the garage will be Eubstantially sinilar to the existing grades, plus or ninus a few feet. The existing graveled, surface parking lot will bE
2.
plan for this area has been proposed (please see the attached site plan).
The alrlrl icant could remove a portion or tha c'arage
which wEifltfEffiease sitE coverage. However, the
able to have all the required parking enclosed to avoid the
view of parked cars and retaining walls. It is also inportant to note that technically, one
covered parking space is required. The covered parking space could be accompllshed by building a carport; however, staff believes a garage will be
more aesthetically pleasing.
The deqree to which relief fron the strict and literal interpretation and enforcernent of a
The Town plannlng staff has historically been
supportive of requests for the addition of covered parking. In this particular situatlon, qiven the
steep qrades of the slte. the etaff believes th-at
v
oca a rea
reque or a vartance.The staff be
the llteEdI--EFFF of the zoning coders definition of site coverage would present a applicant. our rationale is 7 hardship upon the \-s baEed on the fact a that the zon code allows the
IT
of this title without trrant of special privileqe.
area o lots. Conversely, the z
se
3.
The etaff flnds that the reguested varLance will
have no signlflcant negatlve effect upon any of the above considerations. ThE varlance, Lf
approved, shoqld e the flow of tra
Bea need for
!-edestrians to crosa the road to gain accesa to their vehicles.
v.FINDINGS
A.
B.
c.
That the grantl.ng of the variance will not constltute a grant of special privllege inconsistent with the lirnitatlons on other properties claesifled in the sane district.
That the granting of the variance wlll not be
detrirnental to the public health, safety or welfare, or naterially inJurious to propertles or inprovenents in
the vicinity.
That the variance is warranted for one or rnore of the
following reasonss
1. The strict literal interpretation or enforcernent of the speclfied regulation would result in practical dlfficulty or unneceaBary physical
hardship inconsistent with the obJectives of this title.
2. There are exceptlone or extraordinary
circumstances or conditions applicable to the eane slte of the varLance that do not apply generally
to other propertleE in the saDe zone.
3. The strict Lnterpretation or enforcenent of the
speclfied regrulatlon would deprlve the applicant of privlleges enJoyed by the ownerE of other properties ln the sane diEtrict.
VI. STAFF RECOUI{ENDATION
The staff
approval .
recommendation for the
We believe this lot is proposed variance ie for -enlunbered with a PhYslcal
hardshl due to the
eJ.leve e varlance
detrinental to the public lrealth, safety or
of properties or persons in the vicinity.
reasons, staff feels that lt would not be a
privilege to approve the variance reguest.
V A, B, Cl. and C2.
/ ,"-- --:\lti ; ----+L r-i t --.---. _l)
\..r--J
:-\----
\:\l\
-,-' --'--- - --- -:..'-
z o E F
lrJ J lrI
rF
I F 4 o z
z o I F
IIJ J EI
F ttl El
=
Ll
I
tT-
I
I
tl!l--|
4.,:::.:::
u
t C A
t
?c
J t a :
cr
I$
€r t
o o .{
i'--7
I
.t/
I
I I
1.n,r\ ,ll1 1 T1990
KL\.r U .tu'- ' '
DtrFMRTMtrNT @F ,tr@MMUNITV DtrVtrL@FMENT
XTXXEXX .ALEs AcTroN FoRM XXXXXXX
Rt['0 JUi 16 tggo
A Professional Corporation
'| 43 East Meadow Drive
Crossroads at Vail
Vail, Colorado 91657
303/476,5105
MonrenAncHrECTS
Letter of Transmittal
Dare: ez/o /?a
to: fir* n//^i r
/rh,.rA,z /ha///a,_
*")".rh?f ?asdz--*-
/a,/,bt -.ao
Please find enclosed the following
Copies ot
il/A eou-a7o e,a./ca/a7'2r-zS
\u-r,*,t .b le'ts 4e
Remarks: /Z/b Fryny(Wr,
V/zaz .
rEL 3T3'11d-a7La
@ or):1 o():1
Jun. !5 '98 I1-;tB AAAA ilORTER ARCHiTEC"iS
rcqussting a variai:ce. The rppl lcarlon ls suD$l ttcd.
NAI.IE OF APPLiCANI H. Ross Perot
AOORESS 2377 l4erit Dr.
7525t __PH0NE (214) 788-3001
NAI'IS OF AEFLICA|TI' 5 REPRE$ENTAIIVE Jim l4orter/l,larren Lawrence
A0DREss P.0. Box 1301 Va j l 81658
PHoNE q4q-n12o
Dal I as. TX 7525L nunnr (214) 788-3001
ADORESS
IESAL oESCRrpTt0n r0r_-_31_610cK_Z_FrLrt{G 1st
F. A lirt of the namer
iiICLUDIN6 PRCPERTY
ThE APPLICAIIT IJILL
'^ltlilJUr.- r,, i -<f)e."-Fe-E $ioo plrs \OI?_.:!k *--jg1L- Fnoi'r tlprter Archltec s
THS FEE ilUST SE PEiiAETONT THE COY,I,IUI{ITY OEVELOPI\iEtIT OEPARTI,iEIiT HILL ACCEPT
YOUR PR()POSAL.
0f o}{ners of s,ll propcrty adJacEnt to the subjact property
BEI{IN0 AHD ACRosS STRIETS, &r,d their n!{lin0 eddresses.
8T RTSPONSIBLI FOR CORHECT I4AII.INC AOORESSIS.
A pRF-apolll!.Titll coill'lllc,iicz fiirn A pLAtiNlttc STAFF i,lEllBr-n Is STi0rklt-? sUeGEsTsD
T0:cETEp.lllNEIFANY'ADDITIoNAL tl{F0R\lATI0i{ IS tlttD(D, N0 lPpr-tcArtnit Ittr-t. sE
AccEpTEIl uNLtss rT Is cct.lgLETL {i4uiT iiiiLuijE ArL trEf,ts n[QurfiEo By fHe z0$iriG A0litNlSTRAT0R). IT IS iHl APPLJCAIIT'S RESPOIIsIgILITY T0 r'1AKE Alt i1PP0l;,tTilENT HITIi TIE STATF TO FIND OUT ASCUT ADOI.I.IOHAL SUSIIITiAL REqUIREI'tIIITs.
pLsns: Hcig ftAT p. c0lqgrE Appi.icAiloti uilt. sTiiEAr.tLllls llt[ I,i1t:lc",lt. FictSss F,--R
YOUR PRO.]!IT BY DECREAS:N6 TH€ NUNSER OF CONDITiOIiS OF APPRCVAI.. TilliI TIi€ PLiNNING
AIIO Ei\ViROII]4EIri'iAt CO!L\ISSIOIT F.AY STIPULATE. ALL COIIDI?IONS OF APPROYAL I,'IUST SE C0illtli:0 r,lifll iiiF0l'ri A BiJlt0!l{0 FERl4lI tS ISSIIED'.
FQUR (4) COPIES 0F tHE F0LLOt{llG MusT sE suBr,ltTTEO:
,r, A iiqlTTEI SI.{Ti:-iiflT 0F T}lC. pRECtSF iiATURq Oi'Ti1E V,r.RIA|{CE FE!Ug51g,X.qlrn lrr
REGllt.A.T I Cli !NVOL.VE!-1. TUF (rdrcucr.,r r11r.' :.':.1 ;'i;;;,;.t ;:;.
tl
Rrc'oJUN251990
pEC ilEETINC DATE J,tiy 23, 1qgo
APPLICAIION FOR A VARIANCI
s prtcedure ls requlred for any proJect I nct bs lcccpted urltil all infonnrtion
or'lNEP.(i )
III.
Var i ance Reqt-1s-.s1
F er":rt fte.: i derreer
Lc't f,1t Illc,ck 7, Va'iI Villaqe+ F:ir"gt Filirrpl
Nat urtl ,:'f the Vari ance r 20.te 7a
The appl icarrt reqr,rests a *itdcc.vel'age vat'iavic-t:
fr.,:,rrr 15'/. aI1,:wabler tc, Eftlt. The r"enr-rlat ic,r,
i vrvc I vercj i:; I B. e,9. (,5L-t! pafalli'aphs E arrcJ L.
ar
The re I at i,:nsh i p r-, f t ]re nerl tre!:t ed v,al" i ance
t t, c't her' ex i sit i rrg tr,'' pcrt errt i a I Lr$s:s arrd
gtruct tlr"es in tlre vicinitvr
-Iher pr.c,p*,:iar I ccrns;is3tr; trf r.errrovirrq the
ex i=t rrrg 3-st*i"y regidencel rit'rd
c:crrr-."tt"Lrt:t irr5i a rr€+tJ ;$-!itf,.,'"y r'est j. cl€if rr(:an {trr
tlre garrre siter.
Ther'e' are nc, :;tr'r,rct r-tr"eg in th€ vic:ir'ity
that al'e d irect lv af fecttrtJ trv th i g
reqtrest.
-f h.: degFee tc, which relief fr'arn th€r stl^ic:t
{r}. I iter.al irrterr-pt etat i*,rr ancl eln {"c, r" r'eltnel rrt
c,f a speci f ierd reprrlat ic,n i:: neceo;s;lry to
ach ieva' cc'rtrpat ibi I ity arrd uni fernrity ,:rf
treatrrrent an$ng gite:i irr the vicinity or' L<,
att"rin the *b.jeret ives c,l' this t it le withr,qt
grar't r,f special privi lel1e*;
-fhe"r'e ane 4 $itLtationg in whit:rt
hardshi psi a.l'ri cr.eated r'el.rt irrg b '::'devel,rpnrerrt c,f th is parrt ier-tla'. *iite:
a) Sect i(]n 1S. 69. trSO addresrses the
develE,pmtirrt c,f Ic.ts where ther averaqe
glc,pe of the sit€r. . . is in excess3
c,f J()%.UndeF t he:;e r"eig rl l,at i r--,ngr
site c*ver"age is l itrtited bt 151. i::1";
we al'E dealing wibh a nelat"-ttl r rrl trlllt
lc't -.;ize c.f lfi' 6SE square fereto arrd
wer f ace a 45/. s I c, pe t we are r-tnd rt I y
r*estr"icterd in c,ur !3ite cc,ver'aB.i.
b) $e'r:t ic,n .18.69. O5(t erlss stipulertes
nc' r'eqr.rir.ed set lrac:J< f c,r $al'afltnlr'Fy ther inrpl icnt i,:rrt ,:tf this Fat.;rflrta{lh!we f rrrther irrct'easel Llre ""rlrgady re':;trictecj giter t:'tveraqe aI Ir:wanct*:
by placinq tfre gat'arg€rr trt-tt l'rir
habitaFrle
siet b.rc k.
intent of
r-rrrs i ght 1y
area uf
perrali;:€id
in tlre f t'':'n b :r. pace I
l.le "rlea sirnply f*l lc,urirrq tlrt+
parragra pfr L- tr reduc:e
rJr^iverway cuts tc, the npper'
'3 r.ll- s i t e'o ancJ aFe r-trrd u I y
f c,r" dc, i ng sc.,.
c)It was ni'igi.nal ly interncled t*'
i ncc.rrporat e the. eExistirrg st r*r-rct r-r t'e.
intc, the rr€rw desiqn. 'f h i:: iclera
recieverd FEC clnd IIRF apllt"L:'val. irr
Apnil and May trf 1990.
Hc'wt.avel': it has tll"t:v€lrr urrfearsaLlls tc.'
:;alvager and incnr"par"atel the.r exisb ir't-l
gt rr-rct ttr'e+. I L rrt r-tl;t be ngrrr,rve*cl,
lhis netw pnonr,sal rrteaet s *r1l tlre
crite.t^ia crf ther prervic,r"rsly
appt.':'ved strbrrtittal.
Sr+et i c,rr 19. e,g. f)5(t, paragr"aph E st a l e*;
nc' r .:re than 1t.t'l. c,f tlrer site trtay be
ec,veFed by dr"iveurays Et' grtFf;rct..
parking. The at'ea hre al'e asl+ing f,:rr
additic,nal site c:{tver*aFe inclucJt*s!
c,f f-gtneet p.erl<inq. The quest ir,n i:r
encll c.,seci park i rrq &\B p!"npclsic*cJ artd
del:iired by the Trwn ,rf V;*iIt v$.
unene I osed snrface parking arr(J
re'tainirrg wa11s. Nc,te the 4:lr4 sI,:pe
and the degree c,f r-ertarining reqltit'e*d
tn *btain grrrfacs oat'l<inq.
Tlre erf f ect c'f the vani arrce c,rr I i gltt ancl
in i r', distributir,n c,f populat iorrt
t r'anspar.t at i c,rrr traffice faci litie+s;.
r-rt i I it iesr and publ ie safety.
a) There can orrly be pc,sit ive t+f fects
c'n light "rncl air by arl l,::,wirrg thi:r
variarrcer. l^lel are pt'c,pc'si rrq a t*tally
bur"ieacJ rJat'arJ€? in l ieu erf pr'terrt ial
gr-rr.f ace par"kirrg and nrassive retairrirrg
wal ls, whileE rrtaintairring the requit'erd
l arrdsca per ccrve!"a Be,
Thene is n.r etf f eict tln d istri brrt ic,n ,: {"
popr"rlation.
There ig a nn:-'it ive ef fect c,n
tnansJ:c'rtat ian by the t*l i r,ri.rrat i r.,n u-, f
srrrface paPkinpn ancJ by lrnu,virJ inr; c'rt-'
siter parkirrg.
cl )
-t
b)
c)
d) Ther.e is a signif ieant pcrsit ive
ef fect (,rr t!.af f ic: f aci I it ie:;,
e) Ther-e is nc' effeaet trn Llt i I it ies.
f ) There is a pnsit iver erf fect c.,rr pr.rbl ic:
safety, by r.errr':ving the ex ist ing
parking fr.c,n ercr.c,g::i the lrtl-{:et.
r'"o
.;{
J DtrFHRTMtrNT @F t-/ lJ E@MMUNITV DtrVtrL@FMENT
XXXXTXX sALEs AcTroN FoRM XXXXXXX
01 0000 41330 COM. DEV. APPUCATION FEES
1 0000 41540 ZON'NG AND ADDRESS I.IAPS
1 0000 42+1s lrsaa ullrron,, au,u,No co*-
10000 42+i Hiscel I aneous Cash
,'1F-,-,:.'{,-'-tE
[ri+: t4 : I ?r oooo 424i ':':r i 4+ : r J
0l OOOO 4241 F.:FCFiEI # fi4t55t
. IN,IETER IIRL-:HJTEI::T5 '..FFP FEE 1 ooo0 4241 ff*orn* ren,J*rs,J ) rr,.rE1.rj.ls
I 0000 4241 Iten paid Flmount paid
I oooo .4154 fflrtBllE+llf,BElrrfi lFB, gF
f:h.::nq,: re t r_.r rned l 01.0000 4241
1 0000 4237
\t,:u r c.rgh ie r 5T
| 0000 41412 CONTRACTORS UCE}ISES FEES
r 0000 41330
0l 00oo 41413 .SIGN APPLICATION
-,*Fa=--
a Project Application
Date 5- /6.?o
Project Name:
Project Description:
Contact Person and Phone
Owner, Address and Phone:
Architect, Address and Phone:
Legal Description: Lot a(Btocx 7 , rni^eUi! lL'Zs-e lt , zone
-
Com ments:
Depign Review Board
Motion by: /" 'f h,
seconded av L "
y'|.
I
DISAPPROVAL
6 .lL,?o Date
D Statt Approval
a
Wrcte;ffi
rii
ii' .r.rl ai tl tti
li;l,
)
il lii alL-el-, - Er,44 A. -,-,---_.__ _,_ f_71acu_- _EI:ZL_fu?ryr_-lfu22 *_ _
- iii -A/4tu=ke-6e/ry--tu@
ii
----*i h*At-"u' &*e 'oJ-?:7- fu*/4---s--
//lrua -'-nt,t-n >fu4.' fuv**-rrytu -h44tfu - -l--
I
APPLICATIOT{
FOR PROPERTIES TII
FOR ADDIIIOI{AL GRFA
EXCESS OF ALLO{ABLE GRFA
Date of Appl lcatlon_6p411_2_ 19gg
Date of DRB ileeting_,finy ilo, ttto
A pre-appllcatlon conferencc with a mernber of the p'lanning staff is stronolv encourased to discuss the provtsrons unier wnicr abditio.ir-dirn ;;n"i:"lilt to a sita' It should re uhaeriioid-tfial-utis oroininii-ilies not-assure each property rn addiilonal 2s0 sguare teei oi-eiri.'-'nair,ir, ilri-i"Jr.irce al.tows for ug to 250 squ.are faet if iertain conaitions-are met.
Appllcatlons for additlons under thls sectlon wi]l not be accepted unless they are comelete. This includes iit iiiriniiiidn rid"i"ii oi-tiir form as welt as-Deslgn Review Board subnitiit -riqufii,.nt..
A. PR0JECI DESCRIpTlOil,
B, LOCATION OF PROPOSAL:
Address
LeEal Description: tot ,!l_Block_L _Fi l in
Zone District PrlS
C. I{AII€ OF APPLICANT:
Addrass 12377 N r (21$.).788-3001
D. NAt'tE 0F AppLlcANT's REPRESENTATIVE: ,. Uorter Archirects .- Janes Irorter .-Address hone__4z.fuslo5__
E. NAitE 0F OuilER(S);
ffi Slgnature(s)
The folloring'lnfonnatiglr jn addition to DRB submittal requirements, shall be rcqulred rlith thts submittal:
l' Yerlfication that the unlt has received a flnal certificate of occupancy.2. tlames and maillng addresses of:adjacent property owners and of owners of units on the sann lot, This infoforatton'is'iviiti6ii'irom-*ri rigii'cdunty Assessorrs offlce.
3. Condqnlnlum as3ociation approval (lf app.tlcable).4. Existlng floor plan of structure.
G. Your prtposal will be revlewed for compliance with Vail's Comprehensive plan.
NAME OF PROJECT:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
STREET AODRESS:
OESCRIPTION OF P
Roof
Sl di ng
Other t'lall Materials
Fasci a
Soffi ts
l.li ndows
tlindow Trim
Doors
Door Trim
Hand or Deck Rails
Fl ues
Fl ashings
Chimneys
Trash Enclosures
Greenhouses
0ther
B. LANDSCAPING: Name
PLANT MATERIALS:
PROPOSED TREES
Rel ocated
EXISTING TREES TO
8E REMOVED
LIST OF MTERIALS
31 7 Vai 1 Vi I Iage Fip5l
: ree
npw hodrnnm<, o.,n:ndod I ivin+ afea! nncl elevatnf.
Spruce
Filing
(3)
The following lnformation is required for submittal by the applicant to the Oes';n Review
Board before a final approval can be fiven:
A. BUILDING MTERIALS: TYPE OF MATERIAL COLOR
Wood Shi nql es t!e!Ufq-l-
Strrcco Off-Vlhite
\tnne Dry-stack/l4u1ti-color
Unod GraY Reige
Wood GiaY Bei qe
Cl ad Grav Be'i qe
tnloodrclad Grav Beige
of Deslgneri Mnrtpr Archi tpcts phone: a76-q t nE
Botanical Name Common Name ouani tv Si ze*
A Fl
for declduclous trees. Indlci'r,! i,Jht for coni fers ,
/nt''PP)
*lndlcate callper
.
PLANT I'IATERTALS:
(con't)
SHRUBS
EXISTING SHRUES
TO BE REIOVED
GROUND COVERS
,o*l, n.*Comon Name Si ze
--
Type Squc: e Footaqe
s0D Rc-cbod and sod/nati ve orasses
VA Hi gh A'l ti tlde rni., wi th wi] d f I owerq
5 ,600
SEED
TYPE OF
IRRIGATION
TYPE OR METHOD OF
EROSION CONTROL
Automati c
C, oTHER LANDSCAPE FEATURES (retalnlng wal1s, fences, swjruning pools, etc.) Please specify.
PINNNING AI{D SNVIRONIiENTAL COMMISSION
UAY 14, 1990
Present
Chuck Crist
Diana Donovan
Connie Knight
Ludwig Kurz
Jirn Shearer
Kathy Warren
Dalton Wi}lians
Staff Kristan PrLtz
Mike Mollica
Shelly ltello
Betsy Rosolack
Penny Perry
The Planning and Environnental CommisElon neetlng was called to
order at 3:OO p.n. by Diana Donovan, Chairperson.
The site visits took longer than expected, in the interest of
time, the Cornmission skipped the review of the 1041 request and
Iten No. 1 and went directly to Iten No. 2.
Item No. 2: A recruest for a condLtional use pennit to allow for a Bed and Breakfast at Lot 11B, Matterhorn Villaoe Subdivision.Applicant: Iililliarn Clen
Betsy Rosolack explained that the applicant lras reguesting a
conditional use permit to allow for the operatlon of a Bed and
Breakfast in two bedrooms of their Prinary/secondary zone district. The staff found that alt appllcable review criterla
and findings had been satisfactorily net and the reconmendation
was for approval .
Daltonrs najor concern was the trash enclosure and the use of
only 2 trash cans and Mr. Clem responded that they had used 2
cans for many years. Dalton then asked if Mr. Clem would be
willing to reUuitd the enclosure, and ltr. Clem stated that with
bears in the area, the durnpster would have to be constructed of
concrete block to withstand damage.
Discussion then centered around the steep driveway.
A motLon to approve the recruest oer the staff meno was made
bv Connie Kniqht and seconded brr Dalton Willlans.
VOTEs 7-OINFAVOR
The ComrnLssion then discussed the 1041 application scheduled prior to the Public Hearing and then proceeded with ften No. 3.
lthey would go back to Item No. 1, approval of ninutes at the end of the agenda.
Iten No. 3:A reauest for a final plat for a najor subdivision for SDD No. 22. a restdcdi@
Construction.
Kristan Pritz e:<plained that the reguest vas to finalize the
prelirninary plan previously approved unaninously on ltarch 25'
fggo. The Town Engineer had changed the sidewalk location to the
south side of the subdivision road to allow for better drainage.
The staff recomnendation was for approval of the final plat with
conditions as found in the Demo.
Pat DauphinaiE explained that there would no longer be a
detention pond as found in the original proposal . As explained
during the prelirninary plat review, they would be addressing
drainige as rrcomprehensively and extensiveJ-yr! as possible in
conjunctlon with Public Works.
Diana asked who ttre adjacent property owners vere and Pat
responded that the Roost Lodge was to the south and Tract B to
the east was easernents. Pat added that the biggest concern of
the Cornnission during the last meeting was street cuts along
Lionsridge Loop and he did consolidate the nurnber down to 5 at
the Town Council review of the project.
A motion to aporove the Final Plat for a naior subdivision
for SDD No. 22 per the staff neno and conditj.ons ?s follows
was made bv Kathv Warren and seconded bv Chuck Crist.
Conditions:
1. The PEC chalroerson shall sion the plat when the subdivision Inprovements aoreement has been finalized
ind aonroved by the Town encrineer and Town Attornev.
2. The Subdivision Inorovenents aqreement shall provide
the Town of VaiI with sufficient collateral to quarantee construction and installation of their
recruired inorovernents per the Town Enqineer. PEC. and
Comrnunitv DeveloBnent resuirements.
VOTE: 7-OINFAVOR
Item No. 4: A recruest for a final plat for a major subdlvision
Phase III)Appllcant: Brad and Susan Tiossem
ttike l{olllca explained that the surnrey of the Final Plat strowing
the as-built road had not been completed as e:<pected. Therefore
the staff could not reconmend approval , but rather tabling the
item, contrary to the memo. He felt that the Eurvey would ghow
that the road as-built night encroach into the open space tract'
and creg Hall from frublic Works had not given his final approval .
Brad TJossen explained that he had an urgent need to begin
building and that the horne would be going before the Design
Review Board Wednesday. He understood that the lack of a surrrey
would conplicate natters, but asked if it was possible to approve
the project contingent upon the topographic survey.
Mike did not feel comfortable with Bradts request. He felt that
the final plat should be in place at the tine of flnal plat
approval . There should not be contingencies.
Xristan Pritz said that given the clrcumstances that the road is
already built, she felt that it could be possible to approve the
finaL pfat wittr the building envelopes remaining the same as the
pretininary plan and that no changes be nade with site coverage
or GRFA. She felt that the circunstances were very unusual .
A motion to anrorove the final plat for a malor subdivl.sion for SDD No. 16 with the foltowing conditlons was nade bv
Kathv Warren and seconded bv Ludwiq Kurz.
Conditions:
1. The PEC chairperson not sicrn the plat until tbe
Subdivision lrnprovements Aqreernent has been finalized
and aporoved bv the Town Attornev.
2. The Subdivision Inprovements Aoreenent provide the Town
with sufficient collateral to quarantee construction
and Lnstallation of the recruired fire hydrant and
access road construction and pavino.
3. A Final Plat be subrnitted showinq the as-built road
topoqranhv. Anv differences/adiustnents,be, considered
as pirt of the road tract and not the buildino
envelopes.
Finding: Unusual Circunstances ln that the road is
alreadv existincr.
VOTE: 7-OINFAVOR
Item No. 5:
Applieant: H. Ross Perot
Mike llollica explained that the appllcant vag reguesting a site
coverage variance to allos for the constnrctl.on of an attached
three-car garage, and a najor renodel and expansl.on of the
existing reeLdence. Given the current zoning and the steep
slopes on the lot (appx. 45t), the slte coverage requirement for
the-property wae llnited to 15*. staff belleved that the lot was
encunbered sith a physical hardship due to the extrene elopes on
the site and that the granting of the varlance sould not be
detrinental to the public health, safety or general welfare of
properties or persons in the viclnity. The.approval of the
varlance would not be a grant of special prl.vJ.lege. The staff
reconmendation was for apProval .
Kristan stated that it was her belief that the wallnray on the
west side of the site was to be renoved and the area landscaped.
Jin Morter e:<plained additional changes that were made sLnce tbe
application hid been subrnitted. He had enclosed the stairs on
thL east side of the garage ln the Lnterest of security. The
difference took the site coverage fron 21t to 22.1t.
There was general concern of the visual inpact of the present
home, specifically the railings and ligtrts on the wallnray and Jin
lllorter iesponded ttrat tre could reconfigture the walk to include 3
steps and i landing, 3 steps and a landing. This would elininate
the need for railings.
Steve Zorichak, an adjacent property owner expressed his approval
of the proJect to the board by stating that he felt it was a rrvery constructive inprovenent. rl
Ludwig stated that the elinination of the stairs east of the
garage made the aPpearance less intrusLve. lte lLked the change.
chuck Crist wanted to be sure that the applicant intended to
Iandscape the existlng parklng area north of Beaver Dam Road. t
and also wanted to know how big the pull-off for the rnailboxes
would be. Jin answered that the pull-off would be as small as
allowed. The applicant would llke to keep the asphalt down and
landscaping up.
Jin Shearer liked the new proposal better.
connie Icright asked what percentage the additLon request
represented and Dlike answered 1.1t. Connie also wished to know
if-the additionat 250 GRFA request waE rel.ated and Mike e:rplained
that it did not relate to this request.
A recuest for a site coveraqe variance for an
i
Diana explained that she could eupport the proJect because the
hone was already existing. The Connission had always supported
parking in a etnrcture and off tlre road. She llked the solution.
Dlana did want any approval to be contingent upon the staff verifying GRFA figrures.
shearer.
CondltionE:
1. GRFA and Site Coverage be verified by staff.
2. Existinq Concrete Sidewalk be renoved.
3. l{altcwav to buLldLng be reviewed bv the Desicrn Review
Board.
4. Pull-off for nail boxes be kePt to a nininun with the
appllcant workinq closelv with staff on the issue.
5. Remove or bem the fill area bv the nail boxes--to be
reviewed bv the Design Review Board.
VOTE: 7-OINFAVOR
ftem No. 6:
Circle. Lots 4. 7. C. and D. Btock 1. Vail-
Lionshead 3rd Filinq.Applicant: Marriott CorPoration.
Kristan Pritz e:<plained that the applLcant had reguested to table
the iten.
A notion to table the Uarriott pro'lect untll June 11- 199o
was made by Kathv lfarren and seconded bv Jin Shearer.
VOTE: 7-OINFAVOR
A notl.on to apnrove a sl-te coverage variance for Lot 31.
Block 7. VaLl Villaoe ]-Et Flllng wLth the follovin<r conditions uas nade bv l(athv llarren and seconded bv Jinr
5
arnendment to Special Development Dlstrict No. 7
A notl,on to aoprove the ninutes from the April 23, 1990
neetLng as wrLtten was nade bv Chuck Crist and seconded bv Jin Shearer.
VoTE: 7-OTNFAVOR
ftem No. ?: DiecussLon and aopointrnent of PEC menbers to the
ZonLno Code RevisLon Task Force.
Item No. 1: ApBroval of ninutes frorn April 9, 1990 and Aprll 23. L99O meetinqs.
A notion to approve the minuteE fron the Aoril 9, 1990
Jin Shearer.
VOTE: 7-OINPAVOR
Kristan Pritz explained that the PEC will be the task force for
the Zoning Code revielon proJect. She asked for volunteers to be
a workLng group. Kathy warren, Diana Donovan, Dalton Willians
and Jin Shearer Volunteered.
lgCn No._8j_ Appointnent of a PEc nenber to act as a DRB
alternate.
Jin Shearer volunteered to act as alternate to the DRB.
Item No. 9: RemLnder of Discussion with Council on Firenlace
Ordinance Anendment. luesdav Work session. uav
14th.
Kristan explained that nany architects and builders had been
asking for exceptlons to the current ordinance regulations and that staff felt the need to review the ordinance for possible
changes.
ftem No. 10: RevLew and discussion of potential ooen soace
purchases in the West Vail area.
Site visits to potential areas for open space were made earlier
in the day. General discussion of these areas followed. The PEc
was Eupportive of the West Vail parcel purchase. Sone menbers
also recounended that the HUD wirttt property to the east of Vail
Das Schone Shopplng Center be considered for purchase.
The rneetlng was adjourned at approxinately 5:00 p.n.
PUBLIC NOTICE
NorrcE rs IIEF€By crlrBt{ that the planning and Environnentar
connission of the Torn of vail will hold a publlc hearlng in
accordance wl-th section 18.66.060 of the nunl.cipal code of the
Sown of Vail on Uay 14, l99O at 3:OO p.n. in the Town of VaiI
Irlunicipal Buildlng. Consl.deratlon of:
K,
1.
2.
4.
5.
6.
A request for a flnal plat for a najor subdivision for SDD Ng:.1e,, on a portion of parcel A, L',ionrs Ridge Subdivision,Filing No. 2 (The Vatley - phase III)Applicant: Brad and Susan TJossen
A request for an exterior alteration in order to conEtnrct an addition to the Belt Tower Building at 201 Gore Creek Drive.Applicant: Clark Willingban / Bell Tower Associates, Ltd.
A request for a site coverage variance for an addition on L.ot-11, Block 7, Vail Vill_age 1st fillng.Applicant: H. RosE Perot
A reguest to apply High Density Uulti-Fanily zonlng to the Mariott l{ark Resort and for a rnaJor anendneit to Sfecial Development District No. Z (Marrlott Uark) in ordel to add 58 tineshare units and 8 employee housing'units.Applicant: Marriott Corporation.
A reguest for a conditional use pernit to allow for a Bed and Breakfast at L,ot 11B, Matterhorn Village Subdivision.Applicant: Williarn CIeu
A request for a maJor subdivislon, a request for a varlance to the maxinurn height for retaining walls, and a reguest for a variance to the maxinun percent grade for a road, -on a parcel-cornnonly referred to as Spraddle Creek, an approxinate 40 acre parcel located north and last of the Main Vall I-70 interchange and east of the Spraddle Creek Iivery. Conrrencing at the Northeast corner of ttre Southeast l/4 of the Southwest L/4 of Section 5, Township 5 South,
Range 80 West of the 6th Principal lteridlan, belng an Bagle County Brass Cap properly narked and set, wlth all bearl.ngs contained herein being relative to a bearing of S OO 11 t 6Ou E between the Northeast Corrrer of said Southeast L/4 of the Southwest L/4, and the Southeast Corner of said Southeast L/4 of the Southwest L/4 being an Eagle County Braas cap
q.'
properly narked and aett Bald No*,heast Corner of the
soutneast L/4 ot the southweet L/4 belng the Point of
beginning; thence S OO 11r Oon E along tlre-eaet llne of eaid
Soutlreast L/l oC tlre Southweet L/4 of Sectlon 5 a dl'atance of 1320.14 feet to the Southeast Corner tlre said Southeast
L/4 of the Southweat L/4 of Sectl.on 5i thence I 89 'l7r 48rr w
along tlre south llne of eald southeaat L/4 of tlre Southwest
L/4 of Section 5 a dletance of 901.00 feet; tlrenca N 73 481
3in w along InterEtate ?0 Right of ltay llne a dl'etance of
2L4.L2 feet; thence N 65 52r 12i W along eald Rlght ol Bay line a dlstance of 2{1.10 feet to a polnt on the sest llne of sald Southeast l/4 of the Southveet L/4 of Sectl.on 5;
thence N oo 2or 31i lf along the uest llne of said Southeast
L/4 of, the Southueat L/4 of Sectton 5 a dl.etance of 1161.66 feet to the NorthueBt Corner of the Southeaet 1/{ of tbe
Southwest L/4 of Sectl.on 5 belng an Eagle County brace cap
properly narked and get; thence N 89 {1' 12n E along the
north line of said Southeast L/4 of the Southwest 1rl4 of
Section 5 a dlstance of 1331.07 feet to the Polnt of
Beginning. Said real property contalnlng 39.55 acreB, lore
or less.
The appllcations and lnformation about the proposals are
available for publlc lnapection ln the Connunlty DeveloPnent
IrepartDent office.
Town of Vail
Connunlty Development Departnent
Pr.rblietred ln the Vall Trall on Aprll 27 ' 1990.
MoruenAncn
o
ITEC TS
May 14, 1990
Perot Residence Lot 31, Block 7 Vail Village Firsr Filing
Lot Size
Allowab1e GRFA Additional
Total Allowable GRFA
Total from Scheme date 5/14190
A Prolessional
Corporation
143 East Meadow Drive
Crossroads at Vail
Varl, Colorado 81657
303r476-5105
15,682 s.f.
3,919
250
4,059
>€€ g/l,t/z f
Scheme Dated 5/t4/90
Site Coverage
)Previous Scheme Total (Dated 5/3/50)
TO:
FROU:
DATE:
RE:
Planning and Environmental Conmission
Connunity Development Departnent
Uay 14, 1990
A request
on Lot 31,
Dam Road.
Applicant:
for a site coverage variance for an addition
Block 7, Vail Village lst Fl-ling, 64 Beaver
H. Ross Perot
I. DESCRIPTION OF THE VARINICE REOUESTED
The applicant is the owner of a single fanily houe located at 64 Beaver Dan Road, and is reguesting a site coverage
variance to allow for the construction of an attacbed three-car garage, and a major remodel and expansion of the existing residence.
The property is zoned Prinaryr/Secondary Residential . Given the current zoning, as well as the steep slopes on the lot (the average sl.opes beneath the proposed structure and parking area are approximately 458), the site coverage
reguirement for this property is linited to a naxinum of 15t of the total site area. Because the slopes exceed 3ot, the
applicant is allowed to locate the garage within the front
setback area without a setback variance.
Note: If the average elopes on this lot were less than 30t, then the site coverage restrlction would be
increased to 2ot and the garage rrould not be allowed in the front setback nithout a variance.
The applicant has made a 250 request and this will be
reviewed by the Design Review Board at their uay l.6th neeting. The proposed residence meets all zoning standards,
including GRFA.
II. ZONING ANALYSIS
Total Site Area:
Allosable Site Coverage:Existing Site Coverage:
Proposed Site Coverage:
The applicantrs reguest is to
coverage, or 11005.8 sq. ft.
coverage of 21 t.
allow a 6t lncrease in site
This results in a site
1
15,681.5 sq. ft.
1r154.0
3r358.0
III. CRTTERTA AND FINDTNGS
Upon review of Criteria and Findings, Section 18.62.06o of
the Vail ltuniclpal Code, the Departnent of Connunity
Development recornnends approval of the reguested variance
based upon the following factors:
A. Consideration of Factors:
1. The relationshio of the requested variance to
It ls the staffrs position that the reguested site
coveralte variance will have a Eitive inpact on
other existing or potential uses and structures in
the neighborhood.
Parking for this property is currently provided by
a small gravel surface lot irnrnediately north of
Beaver Dam Road (this area is not owned by the applicant). The applicant is proposlng to meet
the Townrs parking requirement with the
construction of a three-car garage located within
the boundaries of Lot 31. The proposed garage
will be covered by soilr/sod on three sides and the
only visible portion of the garage would be the
north elevation. Grades over the garage sill be
substantially sirnilar to the existing grades, plus
or minus 4 feet. The existing graveled, surface
parking lot will be elininated, and a revegetation
and landscaping plan for this area has been
proposed (see attached) .
The applicant could renove a portion of the garage
which would decrease site coverage. However,staffrs opinion is that it is preferable to have
the parking enclosed to avoid the view of parked
cars and retaining walls.
The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interoretation and enforcement of a
specified recrulation is necessarv to achieve conpatibilitv and uniformitv of treatnent anonq
The forrn planning staff has historically been
supportlve of requests for the addition of covered pa-fing. In this particular situation, given the
present siting of the house, and the steep grades,
the garage location and size present a reasonable
reguest for a variance. The staff believes that
the literal enforcement of the zoning coders
definition of site coverage would present a
2.
3.
hardship upon the applicant. This is because on
the one hand, the zoning code pronotes the
constructl.on of garages within the front setback
area of steep lots. And conversely, the zoning
code does not allow for GRFA to be placed vithin the front setback area, or over the garage.
Hence, siting of the residence and garage tends to
be nore spread out over the lot area.
The effect of the recruested variance on licht and air. dLstributlon of nopulation. transportatlon
and traffic facilities. public facilities and utilitles. and nublic safety.
The staff finds that the requested variance wiII
have no significant negative effect upon any of the above considerations. The variance, if
approved, should improve the flow of traffic along
Beaver Dam Road, and will elininate the need for pedestrians to cross the road to gain access to their vehicles.
IV. FINDINGS
A.
B.
c.
That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the lirnitations on other properties classified in the same district.
That the granting of the variance will not be detrinental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvenents in
the vicinity.
That the variance is warranted for one or nore of the
following reasons:
1. The strict literal interpretation or enforcenent of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical
hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title.
2. There are exceptions or extraordinary
circumstances or conditions appLicable to the sane site of the variance that do not apply generally
to other properties in the sane zone.
3. The strict J-nterpretation or enforcenent of the
specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the ownerE of other
properties in the sane district.
V. STAFF RECOUMENDATION
The staff recornrnendation for the propoeed varl-ance Le for
approval . we believe this lot ls encunbered wlth a physical
naiasnip, due to the extrene slopee on the slte. We also
believe that the grantlng of the varlance would not be detrinental to the public health, safety or general welfare of properties or peraonB Ln the vlclnl.ty. For these
reasons, staff feels that it sould not be a grant of epecial prlvilege to approve the variance request.
4/L ^*/"r( 6" '2 " t ?o 2;t1 '-o-A ,
C *;.e( #to- ,{re 'r-i1"4 I ry
C b-,'n ^fu*-4 'k
@ ,a*-5 ,/< /'a.,"r2.rne-1 / ba O
O /H- *rh 4 -"^//
O rp-<.v ryJ + ,-,-(/
. ' ,0t*nYa^4,/f,ftrk -F ,+ u\ /.7&0\ /.7\Lt\a/r*rtov .
@ >rO .{,!1u,J /r.@ .A ,a--,& /4 ^4
/""U-,Crl% t A &-*< X '
\/rv: 1-o
,i, tr|, 11."
,tt
o .-9
o q)
l\.
\\
...\ t a.- =_\\- . ' '...-/
- a1*.4 r- tA U.JW bF'tve '16 Fi
iaa
)r
r ex rsrirB - -
I SPRUCE TREES ( -'-i l----)::.1.-i
HC Tf,(L-
8E BEITOVEO
7A
,-
:80
,
I
-:A
t
at-a
\rl
6RRBGE
o tl
ll
=\ l
-__&t
--^\
lt51
EX IST ING
STRUCTUBE
o I
I
I
I
F------ = -
EAST ETEVATION
-4-:2/-e t.-.o
Y::;s#:f:ffiffi.f*
OK-
oK-
o(.Ft .fu4
OK+
oK-
OK+
o
Kry /4 h "eJ.*/(f-*4
t{, q .b/.
A"^r*-1.<* Row ef ft/^-Zd,
t+-,% tur
WZ4rvL
0(-Kune 6rn* frft ".//J
,3v {
6eFA .',r+-. ,4f &",44
U ,u*.-t, F-2, lrt 17 - t.tr-r,t U*.n*t
A Prolessional Corporation
143 East Nleadow Drive
Crossroads at Vail
Vail, Colorado 81657
303/476-5105
MonTeRARCH TTECTS
Letter of Transmittal
Date: eey'rfto
rc: ftna+4 Ua4?&,.';-,,4 lQuq+
hL:rn;P ,qotua-
Proiect.
,4-ra/ &i'a*'-'a-
/ai/, Cct
Please find enclosed ihe following:
0ated
of/to/to
Copies
2
ot
/tr:tszd- /*ra/seef,z- V /a+.-
/i/2 rzTazf /*e4'^?4 D
Remarks:
n'ans:.ff::::*1,"13,:::::::,?,:onnv
tr
lYl0NlANtR0S BUltDtN0 UNII A
Box 1700
VAIT, COLORADO 8I657
(303)476.5922
Your Rcference
r:i.J, Uf. r:fLl l.J. '..,.J I riE rBt uI ]J-!EE 4IEf aFg JSrf r
D
600 EAST MAIN SIRTET
B0x 2230
ASPEN, C0L0RA00 81611
t303)925.1766
'l
n
507 LINCOTN STREgT
Box 280
STtAlilB0AT SPRINcS, C0t0RAD0 80477
(303)8791611
PREMIUM
t-_5 5.oO _
Q
TOTAI,g S*--
AMOIINT
ADDITIONALCHARGES
COST OF TAX CERTIFICAI'E J SURVEY COgTTt
CC's To;
I
a.
ln
The eftective date of this commitment iu January. 12, . rs\_Z_6 at B log Au.
At which time fee tifle wes vested in:
RAIlitOltD B. BREit{Nm aDd JOYCE lt. BRXNNER, as JoI[t Tenante
SCHEDULE A
1, Policies to be iegued:
(A) Ownere';
E. ROSS PEROT
(B) Mortgagee'r:
yo. 46, 5011 26? ., c
Sheet 1 of 4
COMMITMENT TO INSUBE
"lT"-":1:Il::{itte. Insurance companv, a california coryoration, herein ceued the compeny, for iiil il;;;;;iil;T,h;;c^L - 1.,r -l..t*I"^fl li"o" gl rhe .proposed in*urea nem"a ii s.i"J"rl i, * ;#;;;;;t li .ilru;;i: ;;
ll*ll1".:_. tl:ff."_lp
'_lbiect to the provision" "rCrr,-i"i"r;;; il;"t" i#;iltri;;';ij;iffii;tions shown on the inside of the cover.
AutlrolrraD troRAtul:
owNDn 5-17O. OOO.9O g 267 ^AA MORTGAGE t--_.--"--5_-._
.,- xo. c-rr[F trrv. ..r!-?!
P. @3 ?88 S9?o ?T4 6/@/L99 Pcrot Eroup 15153 The
o
" ffi;|ffi,X,*U " thc Steto of Ooloredo, County or EaBla
IOT Sl,
BL,Ocr 7,
VAIL YIi.LAOE TIBET rILIM}
Itf6, 4dr.tfil Zfr C
Shcct,qt of {SCHEDULE A-Confinued
P.84 "/88 369'/o 2L4 ras/Ei/L934 15:54 Penot Group Ihe
o
No. 46,5gl,p67 c
Sheet 3 of 1 BCHEDULE A-Continued
NEQUIREMENTS
A.
B.
c.
8' The tollowing sr€ the regutremcnts to be complied with prior to the issuance of said policy or policies,Any other instrument recora"o sr,ueeqo"; ii iiir.o*t" tr.irt -"y "pp*i as an exceptjon under schedure B of the poltcv to be isaued..un6t;'h;;is. ,,ot.a, *u dd;;nd;-"rt be recorded in the office of clark and recorder of the county in whictr gaid prrn.iv is loceted.
Release by the PublLc Truatee of Deed or rrugt from Lervrence B. Roblnson aad sra A. Robrneon_for i["-uei-of Arapaboe Nattonal Bank of Boulder ;:"iT;l".tt3e!30i00, daieJ Jui. r , rstn "na 'eco"aeo Jun,-iol-iszz r.o
BelcEee bv the lubrfa.Trustee of_Eqgle county of Deed of Truat fron Ralmond B' Brennet i$ q9i*J-u.-gri'iner rJ"-irre-use of Arapaho. Nrtlonar i3* n Sif io$r3lt3l;3oro3:;a N;;;[;"-i6,'idza ,",o"a"a-noi;,L," rz,
Deed fron Raynon-d E. Brenner and_Joyce M. Bronuer wrth recrtar rn body,fi:rffi::'f"Hf .
aakuowr.edcr;;i ir."t gi,""toie-"""-il"sua'd "no-irirl. to
po. 461 501,267 g
Sheet 4 of 4 SCHEDIJLD B
THE POLICY OR POLICIES TO DE ISSUED HEIIEUNDER WILL NOT INSUITD AGAINST:
1. Eights or claims of parties in possession not ehowrr by the public recordg.
2, Easements, or claims or eagements, not thown lly the public reeords.
9. Discrepancleg, conflicts in boundary linos, shortage in llres, encroachntents, antl any facts whlch a
corr€ct Burvey and inspection of the premises would dieclose and which are not ehown by the puirlic
records,
4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for eervices, labor, or material heretofore or herenfter furnished' iln-
posed by law and not shown by the public records.
6, Taxes due and payable; and any tax, special asse$sments, charge or lien imposed lor water or sewer
Bervlce, or for any other sfiecial taxing district.
6. Uttlfty eaaement es shown on the Plat of eald subdlvlsLon, sald easemor
belng ov'er the Northerly 10 feet of eubJect Property.
\?. Reservatlons eB contalned ln United Btates Patent,
t8. Restrletlona, whlch do not contaln a forleltur€ or reverter clauset
as contalned ln lustrumert recorded August 10, 1962, ln Book 174 at
Page 179.
TI]TFiL P. O5
A P rofessional Corporation
143 East i,leadow Drive
Crossroads at Vail
Vail, Colorado 81657
303/476-5105
MonrenARCHTTECTS
Letter of Transmittal
Date: s/7 /go
To:
Town of Vail
Departrent of Community Development
75 So. Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657 Attn: Mike Mollica Prorecl
Perot Residence
Vail, Colorado
Please fnd enclosed the lollowing:
Copies
5/r/eo I set
5/rl90
Remarks:
Mike - If
4
1
?
Preliminary p'l ans with revisjons in responce to
5/4/90 meet'ing with Tom Cole (l'lorter Architects)
and Mike l4ollica (Town of Vail).
Plans with calculated floor areas
Title report as requesled 5/4/90
Pre'l 'iminary landscape p'l an
you have any additional questions or comments, please call
A. Cole
ARCHITECTS
D
s
\
'\,
I ,\
|.,/
a
\
March
..,...,...8a{ordar.
77
]io, 921,{, $ AEEAn-n' OEED.-To Joinr T.tirnb. -Err\,fot..l Publbhin8 Co.' tf,ll.tG St4ut St!€$L Dehvcr, ColorEdc -&i6
05.'gi.,9E l5 r l9 A
B..oded
Tns DnEo, Mua,- thi, AYi by &,/f4 Rel'l ,$74,TILINC STAUF
betsecn
RAYIdOND E. BREI.INER and JOYCE M. ERE$NER
Husband and l{lfe
"C'.tF" 6unty ot hgle rnd sbte of
Cd.ii.rado, of tha lirat patt. end
Hr-R. PEROT and MARGOT B. PIROT
ott.hc Clty ef Pstlfgultyof Dallas
8otfie, ol tbe eecond Part:
TexaE
WITNESSETE, t.hlt tbe rrdd DA$y of tie first per! lor lnd ia coasider*tioa of the gum ol
Ten Dollars and other good. and v4luable eonsidgra-tL.ons-----:+^9lll$
and other good sld valuable consideradons to the ssiat perty of thc first past in hucd pstd by thc said palttes ol tns
secOnd perr, tbe rcceipt wher€of lg bereby confessed rrrd acleowltdSpd, !s3 83qnt 4 b$gataed, gold rad cotsvcycdl
and by these presents docs gE8rt, bsrgpin, sell, couvcy snd son{it8 o'uto t'he Esid Faftlat ol second pert. their
heire aDd osrigas forever, Dot iD ten8rcy i.u comncn but in jqint tmsrrsy' all the follOw{ng described lot o!
pnrcsl of land, situete, lying r:rd being in tbe CouEly o! Eag 1e and State
of Colorado, to wit:
Lot 31,
Block 7,
VAIL VXI,I.AGE FIRST FILING
TOGETEER witl < *rrd siagular tlle bereditsserts aEd splrErtenarces tleresnto bdolghS' or i.ll snywire
appetaiaing and tle rtversion ard !€sersions, t.eEaiDder lDd naai.nde!:s, !eDt€, lssoe3 Eud lrofts tbereoli and
all tie estat€, right, titlg ihtcrest, cldm and denand $bgtsoever ot the said pslty of the ftlEt part' eltber ia law or
equitt, of, iD sJ}d io tLe rbove b$8$!ed P3t@ia€3, eith tbe hattditarDents md eppurteoancea
To EAVE AND TO EOIJ) thc said prcrnlses abova basSebed eoil described, with the .ppuftcrsnce!, unto thc
arld partie6 of the second patt, their leiw snd essisas fo*ver' Aod tbe e.id Partt ot ttc first !s!t' for himeeu' blc
heira, executors, a:ld sdElElstrators, do€s cove$ant' grsE4 bsrgallt ald ag:r'ee t'o ead wit! t'he said partiea ol the
second part, their hei$ alil Essigls, that Et the ri-e of tbe +'raqlirg ald detivcry of tlese Pres€Bts, be lg sell e&ed
of trbo prenises above conveyed, es of 8ood, $urq petf€cq ebsolut a,ad indefeesible estate ol ilhorit4nca' ln hw' in
fee siEpler ehd h3s good ritht, full pover aad lawfcl tui5ority to grebt, barseis, stll r'!d convey trhc grne i'n aer:Der
fid fort sfore$id, gDit tbat the qsnc are free ald clca,r firrn ell lormer end othe! g"ants' bargsins' sales' liens'
tsxes, assessloarts a,ad arcunbreoces ol n'hstever kinil or na,tule soeveg exCept a1l taxgs and
assessnents for the year 1.976 and subsequeEt years; subiect to
easemeEts, reservatioDs, and restrictions of record'
aod tbe ebove buggiDed preaiset il the quiet asrl peaceable posecssion of the aaid pattiee o! the sccond pslt" tle
aq.tTivo! of thar.r, tbair as.gigos aad t.he heits aail assigas of eqcu ann'ivor. agBbf,t all sld evary 9e?9oa or p€!8olll
tarfr:lly claiaing or to elair'. the wholE or sDy part t$e*of, tie Esid perty of the lirst palt eba[ gEd will WABRANT
AND FoEEVER DEFEND' Tbe sineTlEr number sball inc|ude the plurl, the Slural tfic siagllal sDd the use of ely
sifir !0c|Jultiliny fif
MAR 3t;?6
end State ol
ge$der 8ha[ bc applicsble to sll gtlders.
IN WITNESS WffEBEOF the ssid party of th. fitst Pst! bts hereu to set band cnd gesl t}}e dsy snd yeor
firt ebove rsrittea,
SiSned, Sesled aad Dclivarcd ia the Presonce of
Ra nd E. Brenner, Hugband
a^, c fla'<U4
-.8*.!'.8reaner and iloyce M. Elreuner, Husband and Wife
4/f
IlreaDer,
fio/J 67
\
{.[
'.i
t o- N^..-..lilfr.llz
WANNANTY DEED
STATD OF COI,O
l"'..,CouDty
I horcby certlly thet thh Inrtrurnsnt wes llleal
lor rccord ln rny oflics *1a.....3tA12........dsy of
...... fr ur-12........... .............. . ...., r c. /-6-...,'t
... 1,.1i..........o'"toru......E.tt.,and duly recordsd hr
Fllm No........-..-..,..,, Rcceptlon No-..-.,,"r..--..-.-..-.
.mdr'rrilb-. E, Kre-.... ..
sty . e&t*u)-.fr-Jh . ... f.:: . .D.tr|tt,
v""",s. 1.,,0.4 f-L,..
'fo
t{
o
ol
F
N s
r^1
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE IS IIEREBY GITTEN rhar the Deslgn Review Board of rhe Tol'D of Vall
wt1l hold a publlc hearlng on l{ay 2, L990 at 3:00 p.u. ln the Tootr of
VaIl Mualcipal Bulldlug.
Conslderatlon of:
1. A request for Addltional 250 of Grosg Resldentlal Floor
area for Blghorn Terrace Untt D-7
Appllcant: Kathryo Beoysh
2, A rqqnrt &or
arc.* for lrot
Dia'i{oad. l
lddtGirrusl 25d of Groro Rrctdcotlsl Eleor.l
31, Block 7, Vall Vlllege Lst | 64 Bravrrl
6 Appllcrat! !. loeg Parot :
3. A request for Addltlonal 250
area for Marrlot ark Resort
tloashead Clrcle.
of Groes Reel.deutlal Floor
Unit f687 I 7L4 West
App1lcatrt: Pat and Joeeph Bl11ottl
the appllcatlons aod infornatlon about the proposals are ava11able ln
the zonhg adnlnlstrator's offlce durlng regular offlce hours for pulblc
lnspec t1on.
TOI{N OF VAIL
COMMI'NITY DEVELOP}TENT DEPART!{ENT
'nOff.cnca 1n thc Ve$ Trall oa Aprll 13, 1990.{
SslN uNltrs-u'\
\r=\ b.S b\\=o
\
t*Nf slssrs
S \b \\b. N-
I NTER-OEPARTI'IENTAL REV I EI.I
PROJECT:
DATE SUEHITTEDz S.Z.?o
COI.'d.IENTS NEEDED BY :
ERIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE
OATE OF PUELIC HEARING
",>f. f-A'^
Date
PROPOSAL:
R"""b"l
Pusfrc lfoRKs )
Eevler*ed-by:
comr'ents: ) Va.aln+rr-D.o-1-
h.nu.-b L iJan^--| ,/ Date Revf ewed bv: -- - - --' - /- rjate ' '
6rk Corunents: ','
SlrP
'tu'trl
Revleved by:
Comnerrts:
'
Date
t
'dl, r.
..'. ii
Revle"red by:
Coraents:
Date
ZONE CHECK
FOR
sFR, R, R P/S zoNE DISTRICTS
DATE: Aori I 2. 1990
LEGAL DESIRT-PTION: LOt 3I BIOCK
ADORESS:
Ol,lNER
Fi l ins-ya [-Mlgse Fi rst Fi I ins
ZONE DISTRICT
Height
Total GRFA
Primary GRFA
Secondary GRFA
Setbacks: Front
Sides
Rear
}later Cours e
Site coverase 20%= il3b
Landscap'ing
Fence/Retai ni ng llall Heights
Park i ng
Credi ts: Garage
,
I'lechani cal
Ai r'l ock
S torage
So lar Heat
Dri ve: Sl ope Permitted
Env j ronmen ta I /Ha zards :
Al I olved
(rn)(33)
3818 +250240a8
3818
20'
1C,
15'
( 30)(50)
t",v*=2352f
.502-
2.5
Proposed
33-nAX'
s??s lz f
_0_*
15' (New Construct j on )
l5' (New Con s t ructi on )
311? F a*
ED
+(-
71V
l3rRetai _3.-
\*"/-\/
+r--fi-
/"L
22.o ?o
per
(3oQ)(600)
(soo) ( taqR)
(50)(1oo)
(25) (50)
(an)(4oo)
ning & Garage
Zoning
€6f
aoD
t3plr)
z 87o
-
SloPe Actual 71
Aval anche OK
Flood Plain OK
Sl ope +
tre tl ands a(
Geol ogic Hazards R&$l( ^ OK
Cosments:
r*See application for 250 s.f. additional GRFA
Zoni ng: Approved/ Dj saPProved
0a te:
PROPOSED USE Resi dential ,roi iiie
S ta f-T Si gna ture
lr hRFA f fr" /.a,-/ e'4'?o
MonrenAncn TTECTS
A Prof essional Corporalion
143 Easl [,4eadow Drive
Crossroads at Vail
Vail, Colorado 81657
303/476,5105
Letter of Transmittal %n Cale
Dale:May 1, 1gg0
To:
Mike Mollica
lown ot val I
ProjePerot Resi dence
Please fi'rd e'rcloscd thc following:
Dated
4/L
Remarks:
ol
Site Plan, Floor Plans, Elevatjons
as proposed
Copies
2
t
t41/ LO,t rt) r.l .iJl
APF lg'94 13:3:
r.r.
ADDREsS
PEC I'I€ETING DATE l'lay 14, 1990
PF6E g:
FoAFo , ^.. .r o,.JgC,
variance.'The application
F R OI'I c A l'r ERA Sll0p 0F uFrL
Application 0.,"O APril 16' 1990
APPLICATION FOR A VARIA}ICE
I.'Th_is prncedure {s required fgl any pnoject requasting a uill not be accepted until all infonnatton ls submitted,
A. MHt 0F AppLtCAt{T H. Ross Perot
tZgZT Merit Drive, Sijite 1600
Oalias, TX PHoNE-g)7:-oo1
B.IAME 0F AppLlcAnrs REPRESEilTATIVE l'lorter Architects - 'Janes Morter
.143 E. ltleadow Drive
ADDRESS
Vaii, C0 81657 PH0NE
(303)476-5ios
ADDRESs 12377 l4erit Drive, Suite 1600
Dallas, TX 75230 PHoNEi14)788'39:
D.L09AT!0N oF.PR0P0SAL
AIIORESS
LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOT 3i BLOCK FILING Vail Village First
E. FEE $100
THE FEE IIUST BE PAIO BEFORE THE COHMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT I.IILL ACCEPT
YOUR PROPOSAL.
adjacent to the subject ProPertY
and their mailing addresses.
I'{AILiNG AgDRESSES.
II. A PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE WITII A PLANNING STAFF I'IEMEER IS STRONGLY SUGGESTEO
TO DETERI'IINE IF ANY'ADOITIONAL INFORMATION IS NEEDEO. NO APPLICATION I.JILL 8E
ACCEPTED UNLESS IT IS COMPLETE (I"1U5T INCLUDE ALL ITE}"IS REqUIRED BY THE ZOt(ING
ADHINISTRAToR), tT IS THE APPLICANTTS RESpof{SIBItITY T0 r'rAKE AN APP0INTr.lEt{T
[rTH THE SJAFF T0 FINo oUT A80UT AoDITI0NAL SUEMITTAL REqUiREHENTS.
PLEASE HOiE MT A COJ.IFLETE APPLiCAIION HILL ST;?ACiiLIi\iA Titg T,PPIICVI,L PROCTSS FOR
YOUR PROJECT gY OECTilSI_NE THE NU''IBER OF
'ONDITIONS
OF APPROVAL THAT THg PLAIIIIIIIG
A,\D ENVIRONI'IEI{TAL COI4M1SSION MAY STIPULATE. ALL COXDITIONS OF APPROVAL I',IUsT BE
Col'lPLtE0 l.lITH BEFoRE A BulL0lNG PtRl'llT IS ISSUE-0. ! ' : i
ITI. TOUR (4) COPIES OF THE FOLLOHING I.IUST 8E SUBHITTEO:
A. A T{RITTEN 5TATEI'IEI|T OF THE PRECISE fiNTUNE OF THE VARIAIICE REQUESIEO AI{O TI|E
REGULATIOII IIIVOLYED. THE 5TATTI-ITI{T HI,|ST ALSO AOORESS;
t. The relatlonsblp of the reqsestildi'rthinc. L'bttt.r exlrtftg br poteatfcl
. uses and structures ln the vlclnlty;;l , ,'I .i :
eiforcirenc of a specified regulatldn lt necesstry to achleve cqlrlbf lf t
and unifomiCy of treafiteot anong sites ln the ytclnliy or to lttrln tlE.r:.
objectives of this title without grant of special privilege'
' 0vER'
. ,.. r,4",q llt {r3r .,ttGtttlt-
F A list of the nanes
INCLUDING PROPTRTY
THT APPLJCANT I.IILL
of owners of all property
EEHIND AND ACROSS STREETS,gE RESPOilSIBLE FOR CORRECT
2,
Vanianee Request
Frerot Residence
Lot 31, Fl.aek 7, Vai I Vi I lage Fir.st Fi I irrq
Nature c,f the Vari ance;
The appl icant reqnests a site ccverBge variance fronr 15* al lowable tn aSl(. The regulat ion involved is 18.69. O5O.' paragFaphs E and L.
1. The relat ionship of the r.equested variance tc, other exi6ting o!" potential uses and structunes in the vicinity!
The praject corrsists trf an existing 3-BtoFy residence, approximately 30 feet above street level, with nc direct vrhieular access. The proposal consiste
of adding additianal bedrooms and Iiving ar€ras along with a 4*car garage and elevatcr access from street level to
I iving levels.
There are no gtnuctures in the vicinity that are direct ly affected by this request.
e. The degree te which relief from the strict o!. literal interpretat ion and enftrrcement sf a specified regr.rlatic,n is necessary to achieve compatibility and uni formity of treatment smong siteg in the vicinity or to attain the objectiveg of this title without grant tlf special pnivi lege:
There are 4 situat ions in which
hardsh ips arE! cr.eated relatirrg to
develcpnrent of this part icular site:
a) Eiect ion 18. 69. OFC) addr.egses the
development of lots where the average
slop€ of the site . . . is in excess
of 3Ot. Under these negulat ions,
site coverage is limited to l5t{. As
we are dealing with a near-minimum lot si ze c,f 15, 68? squa! Er feet, arrd
we face a 45/. slc'pe, we are unduly restrieted in our site coveFaqe.
b) Sect ion 18.63. O5O also stipulates nc required setback for garages.
By the implieation of this paragraph,
we fnrther incneage the already restricted site ctrvel.agel al lowance,by placing the gar.age, but no
habitable space, in the front
setback. We are simply fcrllawing the interrt sf paragr.aph L to l.educe nnsightly dr^iveway cuts tcr the upper aFea of trur site, and ar€r unduly
penal i zed for doinE so.
e) In order. to create a unified design,
and fctllowing Desi gn Review guide
Iines of one structure, we have
incorporated the exist ing structure into the new design.Due to the lccat ionn height, and confi gurat ion of the existing str"ucture, r.fe are reqlrired tc, increase site coverage instead of height violations. Note that zarring allows the amount c.f GRFA
pr oposed. l,'le are facing an allowable
sitnat ion in Gne ar€ra sf the zorring ondinanee, (GRFA, ) and restricted to
do so by cther areas of the
ord i nanee.
d) Seetion 18.69.CrSO.n paragraph E states
n$ mctFsl than l0:a of the site may be cc'vered by driveways ar 6Ltrftsce parking. The area He are askinq for addit ional site ccver^age includes off-street parking, The quest ion is enclosed parking as proposed arrd desired by the Tswn of Vail, vs.une'nclc.sed surface parking and retaining walLs. Note the 45/ slope
and the degnee of r etaining required
to obtain eurface park i ng.
3. The effect af the variance on light and air., dietribution of populat ion,trarrsportat ion, traffice faci l it ies,
ut i I it ies, and publ ic safety.
a) There can only be posit ive effects
on light arrd ail by allowing this
varianee. l^re are prapcsing a totally
buried qaFage in lieu of potent ial
surface parking and maggive retaining
waIle, while maintaining the required
landscape ctrvprage.
o
b) There is no effect on distribution of populat ion.
c) There is a positive effeet on transportation by the elimination of surfaee parking, and by providing on- .eite parking.
d) There is a signifieant poritive effect sn traffie faeilitiee.
e) There is no effect on utilitiee.
f) There is a positive effect on publie
safety.
o
":ld I DEFMRTMtrNT @F .tr@MMUNITV DtrVtrL@FMENT
XXXXXXX tALEs AcTloN FoRM XXXXXXX
01 0000 41J30 COM. DEV. APPUCATION FEES
1 0000 41540 ZONING AND ADDRESS MAPS
1 0000 42415 1988 UNIFORII BUTLDING CODE
1 0000 424.R r6ee ilNtFoRLl PLUM8INo cooE
1 0000 42t
10000 42 lliscel laneous Cash
fi5*ff?r?0
--_:jil__
Rereipt * 64b962
X.:=or:j_# EH. # EBBs64iI f.r. H. PEFJL]T ,.rlF,p rir
Hm,f,un t tende re,J i I ,lrl. Er3
IteD paid Hoount paid
EI BffgE4I3f,F&F€I
1[8. sE
f,h.:n,3e r-etr-rrne,J i E. Sff
]-HRl,_rl< \/o|.f
L,rr_,u r c.:Ehi*r 5T
10000 42.
)0
| 0000 42.
1 0000 411
00
01.0000 4i
25
10000 12
1 0000 4i
1 0000 4'
r 0000 4
SIGN APPLICATION
20.00
0r 00oo 41413
cOuMENTs: Peso{ Rcsilvt"e .- 2.5lo anlr
lw1ffiyc,*r"r.D
PUBLIC NOTICE
NoTfCE IS HEREBY GfVEN that the Planning and Environmental
Corumission of the Town of Vail will hold a public hearing Ln
accordance with Section 18.66.060 of the nunicipal code of the
Town of Val-l on Uay 14, 1990 at 3:00 p.rn. in the Town of VaLl
Municipal Bultding. ConsideratLon of:
A request for a flnal plat for a major subdivislon for SDD No. 16, on a portion of Parcel A, Lionrs Ridge Subdivision,Filing No. 2 (The Valley - Phase rII)Applicant: Brad and susan Tjossem
A request for an exterior alteration in order to construct
an addition to the Bel1 Tower Buitding at 201 Gore Creek
Drive.Applicant: Clark willinghan,/ Bell Toner Associates, Ltd.
A request for a site coverage variance for an addition on Lot 31, Block 7, Vail Village 1st Filing.Applicant: H. Ross Perot
A request to apply High Density Multi-Fanily zoning to the t{ariott l,lark Resort and for a najor anendment to Special
Developnent District No. 7 (Marriott Uark) in order to add
58 tineshare units and I enployee housing units.Appllcant: Marriott Corporation.
A reguest for a conditional use pertuit to allow for a Bed
and Breakfast at Lot 11B, ltatterhorn Village Subdivision.Applicant: Williarn Clen
A request for a maJor subdlvlsion, a request for a variance to the maxinum height for retaining walls, and a request for a variance to the maximum percent grade for a road, on a parcel conmonly referred to as spraddle Creek, an
approximate 40 acre parcel located north and east of the
Main Vail I-70 interchange and east of the Spraddle Creek livery. Commencing at the Northeast corner of the Southeast
L/4 of the Southtrest L/4 of Section 5, fownship 5 South,
Range 8o West of the 6th Principal Meridian, being an Eagle
County Brass cap properly narked and set, with a1l bearlngs
contained herein being relative to a bearing of S 0o 11 | Oon
E between the Northeast corner of said Southeast L/4 of t}le
Southwest I/4, and the Southeast Corner of said Southeast L/4 ot the Southwest L/4 being an Eagle County Brass cap
a
1.
2.
K'
4.
5.
6.
t
properly narked and sett said Northeast corner of the
southeast L/4 ot the Southwest L/4 belng the Point of
beginning; thence s oo 11r oorr E along the east line of said
Southeast L/4 of the Southweet L/4 of Section 5 a distance of 1320.14 feet to the Southeast Corner the said Southeast
L/4 of the Southwest L/4 of Section 5r thence S 89 47r 48rr w
along the south line of sald Southeast L/4 of the Southwest l/4 of Section 5 a distance of 901.00 feet; thence N 73 48r
32rr l{ along Interstate 70 Right of way line a distance of
2L4.L2 feet; thence N 66 52t L2n H along said Right of Way line a distance of 24L.10 feet to a polnt on the west line of said Southeast L/4 ot the SouthweEt L/4 of Sectlon 5;
thence N OO 2Or 31n W along the west line of said Southeast L/4 of the Southwest L/4 of Section 5 a distance of 1161.66 feet to the Northwest Corner of the Southeast 1,/4 of the
Southwest L/4 ot Section 5 being an Eagle County brass cap properly narked and seti thence N 89 41' L2" E along the north line of said Southeast L/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of
Section 5 a distance of 1331.07 feet to the Point of
Beginning. Said real property contalning 39.55 acres, nore or less.
The applications and infornation
available for publlc inspection
Departnent office.
about the proposals are
ln the Conmunity Development
Town of Vail
Connunity Development Departnent
Published in the Vail Trail on ApriL 27, 1990.
I
PI.AT{NING AND ENVIRONIiENTAL COI,II.IISSION
APRrL 23, L99O
Present
Chuck Crist
Diana Donovan
Connie fhight
Ludwig Kurz Jin Shearer
Kathy lfarren
Mernbers Absent
Dalton Willians
Staff
KriEtan Pritz
Ton Braun
Mike Dtollica
Penny Pcfry
Betsy Rosolack
Staff Absent shelly uello
The Plannlng and Environmental conmission neeting was called to
order at 3:2o p.m. by Diana Donovan, Chairperson.
ftem No. 1: ApprovaL of ninutes fron April 9, 1990 neeting.
Diana Donovan felt there were sone changes she needed to discuss with Ton before approving the minutes.
A notion to table the ninutes fron the April 9, 1990 was
made bv Jim Shearer and seconded bv Kathv Warren.
VOTE: 5-OINFAVOR
Iten No. 2: A recruest for a final plat for a naior subdlvision
and for SDD No. 22, a resubdivision of Lots 1-19,
Block 2, Llonsrid<re Fi-linq No. 3.Applicant: Pat Dauphinais, Dauphinais-l{oselev
Construction.
Kristan Pritz explained that the applicant requested to table the iten until the next meeting.
ltotion to table the ltem until Mav 14, 1990 was nade bv
Kathy Warren and seconded bv Jin Shearer.
VOTE: 6-OINFAVOR
Iten No. 3: A reauest for a najor subdivision and for a maior
anendnent to sDD No. 16 on a Dortion of Parcel A,
Lionrs Ridqe Subdivision' Filinq No. 2 (the Vallev
- Phase IIII Applicant: Brad and Susan Tiossem
Uike llollica presented the project explalning that the applicant
was reguesting two separate itens: a prelininary plan for a naJor
,
subdlvision and a naJor amendment to sDD No. 16. llike reviewed
the appropriate criteria relatlng to the reguests found within
the nerno. The staff reconmended approval of the prelinlnary plan
for the EIk lteadows subdivieion and the amendrnent to SDD No. 16
with conditions. The proposal basically followed the underlying
Resldential Cluster zoning and Planned Unlt Developnent zoning
originally approved by Eagle County.
Kathy warren asked to see the previous Plat that had been
approved and inquired whether the small setbacks and roof
overhangs had been addressed and ltike explained that aII of the
building, including the overhangs' wae reguired to be within the
confines of the buitding envelope.
Kathy asked if the GnFA of the enployee dwelling units was in
addition to the allowed GRFA and Mike answered that there would
be no additional GRFA, the enployee unlts would be included ln
the 16,000 sq. ft. of GRFA allowed.
Ludwig Kurz felt there were many positive points regarding the
proposal . He liked the reduction ln density. He also liked the
lfignnent of the road the way it was proposed, in order to
preserve the meadow area as nuch as possible.
chuck Crist asked if there woutd be an additional tap fee for the
employee unit and llike explained that the tap fees would.be up to
the d-iscretion of the upper Eagle Valley l{ater & sanltation
District. Chuck also asked if a hone that included an employee
unit would require covered parking and Mike explained that under
current regulations covered parking would indeed be required for
a hone with an ernploYee unit.
Kathy Warren asked what the setbacks uere on the previously
approved plat and Mike explained that they were approxinately the
eine. Kathy stated that since the setbacks were the sarne she
could approve the project. In addition, she sished to know how
additionll parking would be handled and Kristan explained that
there nere no provisions for additional parking. Each hone had a
nunber of parking spaces reguired relating to GRFA. All required
parking must be on site. Kathy connented that ehe thought the
project rrlooked goodrr.
Jin Strearer had no rnaJor concerna with the project. He was also
concerned about the parking but was Dore comfortable due to the
previous explanation bY Kristan.
Connie Knight wished to clarify whether the Dauphinais
SubdiviEion enployee units were ln addition to the allowed GRFA
per the SDD. xristan e4rtained that they were in addition to the
lllowed GRFA of the new sDD but did not exceed the GRFA that
would have been applied with the underlying zoning-
Diana comnented that tbe building envelopes where not all the
same size, yet the allowed GRFA per enveloPe uas the Eame
throughout. She questioned how this worked and Kristan explained
that the variation in the size of the building envelopes would
present no problens building. Ctruck crlst asked what the site
coverage was and Kristan e:<plained that they were allowed to build on essentially the whole site with the exception of the
setbacks.
A notion for approval of the preliminary nlan wlth
conditions per the staff memo as follows was nade bv Kathv
Warren and seconded bv Chuck Crist.
Pettygrove, P.8., Project ltanaqer with Banner
Associates. Inc. Such renorts are dated February 23.
1987, February 25. 1987. tune 12. 1987. June 15. 1987'Julv 22, 1987 and March 12, 1990, and will be keDt on file in the Town's Conmunitv Developrnent offices. Each individual lot owner will be responsible for conpleting
the hazard rnitigation for their lot' per the above
narned reports. This restriction shall be noted on the Final Plat.
VOTE: 6-OINFAVOR
A motion for a recommendation to the Town Council for
approval of the maior arnendurent to SDD No. 16 with the
followinq conditions per the staff neno was nade by Kathv
Warren and seconded bv Ludwig Kurz.
That approval of the maior anendnent to SDD No. 16 be
continqent upon PEC approval of the Final Plat for the
subdivision.
That the develooer construct a minimum of one emDlovee
dwellincr unit, and that said enplorree dwellinq unit be
Eg!!og
3. That no portions of anv buildinq shall extend over the
buildino envelooe boundaries.
1.
2.
a part of either the first or second building petmlt
for the rcroject. All enplovee dwellinq units shall
neet the criteria listed in Section V,B'2 of the staff
VOTE: 5-OTNFAVOR
t{ike llollica explained that Jin }lorter sas representing }tr. H.
Ross Perot. ilim was appealLng the decision of the staff
concerning the definitlon of ilsLte coverage.n The reguest
before the PEC centered around the Town of Vall Zonlng Code deflnitions of rrsite coveragetr and trBuilding.t The appllcantre position was that ilbecause the garage would be totally covered by exlsting grades (the site over the garage sill be taken back to Lts orlginal grades and landscaped conditlone), the garage was
not covering the site.i The staff belleved that the garage was
indeed a bullding as defined Ln the code, the garage reguired new
grading and did not neet existing grades, and did not support the
appllcantrs position that ttre garage should be consl.dered as a
landscape feature. The staff could not support the appllcantrs
requeat and felt the garage should be lncluded as site coverage
as defined in the Townrs zoning code.
ill.m l.torter explained that he was not dleagreelng wlth the deflnition of rrbuilding.rr He felt the garage raE deflnltely a bullding. He nas disagreeing wlth the deflnitlon of xslte
coverage.rr He felt the bulldJ,nE did not cover the slte, the site
was covering the building. He also rished to pol-nt out that
currently there was no parking on the slte. ff the appeal were
not granted, the onty optlon would be on-grade parking and to
carr/e lnto the site. He showed an elevatlon of how the cut would
look. The retaining wall rould lncreaEe 14 to 19 feet. irin
stated that regardless of the on-grade parklng inpllcations, the
proposed garage would not cover tlre site. Ttre eLte would cover -tbe-garage. Jirn explalned that Mr. Perot was offering to
landscape the area across the Etreet where he presently parked on
the Townrs property. The dlsaEreenent raE the deflnltlon of ieite coverage. rl
Chuck Crist aEked ltike if, J.n fact, according to t{lkers
calculations, the propoeed gradee rould not be exactly as
exleting, rather it would be 2r hlgher and ltike concurred. Jln
explalned that they would be nore than happy to bring the grade
UaLf to the originat height but he felt that I'f they vere golng
to complete the project, they should do it correctly by naking it
more aesthetically pleasing.
Kathy lfarren felt she had to agree with the Etaff. She viewed
the project as an earth shelter. Sinply becauEe the building was
buried was not Justification for deter:nining lt not to be site
coverage. She felt that if it sas completely below grade rather
than on grade, with an entry, it sas site coverage.
Jim Shearer felt it was site coverage. lle did not want to set a
precedent and felt it would be very dangerous and could be costly overall. on the other side, he felt the Connission had an
obligation to the Town of VaiI to ensure that projects nlooked
goodrr and felt that the proposal would look better than what was
presently there. He felt the proJect needed a solution but that
an exception to the definition of site coverage was not the
appropriate means.
Connie Knight asked what the sqluare footage of the garage was and llike answered 1L00 sq. ft. Connie stated that the proposal
brought back to nind ttre Briner petition to do new construction
underground with a garage bay. This was a setback reguest, but,
she felt it was relevant. Brinerrs reguest was denied and she felt she needed to be consistent and deny the Perot
appeal .
Ludwig Kurz stated that in generat he agreed with Jin Shearer.
The Briner reguest was for new construction and the Perot
proposal was for an addition to an existing building. He dld
hope to see the project acconplished in a way to provide on-sLte parking but did not feel the site coverage appeal was the correct
avenue.
Diana Donovan agreed with Kathy Warren that tbe garage was definitely a building and must count as site coverage. She
suggested ttrat Jin Morter look for another avenue and Jl-m asked if Diana was referencing a procedure or design and Diana answered trboth. n
Discussion centered around clarifying rtground levelrr and general
agreenent was reached that rrground levelfi was that area where a
person could drive into the garage.
A motion to denv the appeal and uphold the staff decision per the staff ureno was nade by Kathv Warren and seconded by
Chuck Crist.
5 were setting up visual aldes,
6.
l{hile the applicants for the Connission skipped to Iten No.
Item No.
A
Iten No. 6:
Chuck Crist volunteered for the Task Force.
Item No. 5:
ToD Braun explained that the item was tabled at the applicantrs
iecrulst aftei lengthy discussion at the PEC|E April 9th neetLng.
l-i"rU"r of Aesigi cianges had been nade in response to conments
r"a"-UV the planiing Co'nTission.and the applicants had reques!9d-
i-r"ri'session prioi to finalizing the redesigm. Ton highlighted
design changes ls found in the staff memo'
peter Jamar wished to clarify that the Marrlott did intend to
;;ai";; working with the stlft and the Connission. They wished
a;;;;i within ihat was reasonabre and neet the.goals and
"li""ii""s of the Tonn. They had taken sugge_etions from the last
r"6if"g and made changes. tl-e.uetieved that they had sJ.ncerely
tried €o responde to a1l the issues'
Ned cwath!0ey explained that he had reduced the nass by-noving the
roof qarden to the edge to cover the garage and renoved 1 floor
i.".f]--pea pointea orit the changes on the elevation plans q1d
c"rpi.ea tne'cfrang"= ott the.bef_oie and after models. Rggarding -itre-iecoforing of the existing t{arriott, t}9_?ppffcant had agreed
to-conntt to ftre tie-in between the tro bulldings_ and to
etininate the dark wood color. The initial thought was to fllp
int cofor to be light with dark trln. They had not corunitted to
ine cotor and were open to suggestione'
Kathv warren felt there was etlll too nuch GRFA and too nany
;f;;. -in" did like what they dld wlth the nass, however
iicfrftecturally, she liked the other building better. She was
"iiff not cornf6rtable with 93* site coverage and.47 unit/acre'
tn"-f"ifaings reliestntea on,the comparison chart presented in
the staff meroo wire built prlor to zoning.enactnent. There were
;;;=;;;-;he zoning was chairged to avoid hJ.gh denslty proJects.
f""air""tally, "n6 was not 6pposed to additlonal density, but not
so nuch.
at iat
I F---------11 @ 4'23 ?a lEc
iti * fA ae '*,J* 'r--. -'
;i ^ -**/-J), *2 I'i gf *^44 <- : 0t*-t, M'^ V^r;.*l C4r*rJr- il1 ,14-f 4 \a-, vvzAiA4&""./,/*"
fr tr -k t4 -qr"rt.e a,*'4e \a^ ?-- J7'Kd/6
W=- Kd) d f l< /,^,J
1,1 t t
I u4<-" c-o
rl - -
'I
I
'';
i
:
.';
To: Planning e Environmental Connission
From: Connunlty Developnent Departnent
Date: lpril 23, L99O
RE: An appeal of a decision of the zoning adnlnistrator,pursuant to Section 18.66.030 of the zonl-ng code, regarding the definition of I'site coveragerr, (Sections 18.04.040 and
18.04.360 of the zoning code), specifical-ly as it relates to Lot 31, Block 7, Vail ViIIage First Filing.Applicant! H. Ross Perot
I. DESCRIPTION OF THE REOUEST
The applicant is the owner of a sJ.ngle fanlly hone located at 64 Beaver Dam Road, and has recently presented plans to the Conmunity Development Departnent which entail a naJor renodel and expansion of the residence. One portion of the
renodel calls for the construction of an attached three-car
garage and entry on the site (presently, there l-s no covered parking on site). only the north elevation wall, or garage entry, would be exposed and visible from Beaver Dan Road.
The roof of the garage would be covered with soil and the grades would be recontoured to berm up against the sides of the garage, (see attached site plan and elevations).
The property is zoned Prinary/Secondary Residential. Given the current zoning, as well as the steep slopes on tbe lot,the site coverage for this property is linited to a naximum of 15* of the total site area.
Total site area
Allowable site coverage Existing site coverage
Proposed site coverage (with garage)
Proposed site coverage*(if garage is not counted)
*Note: The appllcant wiII still
coverage, by 35.8 sguare feet,
count towards site coverage.
3 151681.6 square feet or 0.36 acres
. 21352.2 sguare feet or 15t : 1,103.0 Bquare feet or 7t
z 31498.0 aguare feet or 22t
21388 aguare feet or L5.2t
need to decrease site
even if the garage does not
The request before the PEC centers around the Town of Vail
Zoning Code def initions of rrsite coveragerr and I'buildingrr,
which are as follows:
r18.04.360 SITE COVERAGE - Site Coverage neans the portion of a site covered by buildinqs, excluding roof or balcony overhangs, Deasured at the exterior walls or
supporting mernbers of the building at ground leve1rr.
'r18.04.o40 BUILDING - Building means any structure
having a roof supported by columns or walls, or any
other enclosed structure, for the housing or enclosure
of persons, animals, or propertyrr.
The applicant is appealing the staff deternination that the
garage should count towards eite coverage based on the above definitions.
II. APPLICANTIS RESPONSE
Please see the attached letter fron Jin Morter, dated April
16, 1990, for the applicantrs response.
IIT. STAFF RESPONSE
After review of
L8.04.360 of the
proposed garage
purpoge of elte
the definitions in Section 18.04.040 and
zoning code, the staff believes that the
should be included as site coverage. The
coverage ls to linit the area of a site
which lE . I{e believe that the proposed
garage is indeed a buildingr Els defined above. The garage
is a structure which has a roof, and the roof is supported
by watls. The north elevation of the garage reads very clearly as a garage, or building.
In respect to the definition of site coverage the staff
believes that the bullding sould be constmcted gbgYelgegng!
level and that the soil placed on the roof of the garage
should not constitute ground level, but only an artificial
recontouring of the siters grades. In addition' rrthe
exterior walls or supporting nenbersil of the building are
clearly visible at ground level.
The applicantrs position is that rrbecause our garage will be
totatly covered by existing grades (the site over the garage
will be taken back to its original grades and landscaped
conditions), our garage is not covering the siterr. In
reviewing the existing grades, compared to the proposed
grades over the garage, the staff has deternined that the
grades differ by as much as 4r. Generally, the proposed
grades are 2r above the existing grades.
The staff does not support the applicantrs position that the
garage should be considered aE a landscape feature, as defined in Section 18.04.200, whlch is as follows:
ilandscaping neans planted areas and plant naterials,
including trees, ehrubs, lanms, flower beds and ground
cover, together with the core developrnent such as walks, decks, patios, terraces, sater features, and Iike features not occupying more than 20t of the
landscaped area.rl
Certainly the bermed areas and soil and grasses on the buildingrs roof are possible to consider as landscape materials, however, the proposed building nust still be
addressed by using the slte covera€te and building definitions vhen determining site coverage for the proposal.
The applicant has drawn Eome comparisons with the
underground parking at Bishop Park. It le true that the
underground parking for Bishop Park sas not counted as site
coverage. The staff's justification for thls exclusion from site coverage is due to the fact that the parking is
conpletely underground and that the parking structure is not visible fron anlmhere on the site.
In summary, the staff cannot support tbe applicantrs request. I{e feel. that the garage should be included as site
coverage and that the applicantts reguest does not meet the intent of site coverage, as deflned in the Townrs zoning code. We believe that if the applicant feels strongly about this particular garage design, ln this location, then the
applicant should proceed with a request for a site coverage
variance.
I
{l \
n
,,t..
I
I t
/ .1.!
i',+*
t(
r!-xl:'ss:
5i a;:' '
:fi.r!
il a i . ,
q,
OI a1
:q
tlt
II
tl -g
lt
,. /0, I
lh/,
'$t'-nrf','j'w
1 I
{t-
T
ri
r)ifr
t\.. I t_l ;\\p
s
.t J )
I
t
t i ii
t,
{rl
A
'ti
i"l
,,i
ii \fi
/
I
I
\
i a - ,rr,lE
It
I l.l.
ldt t:ia
I
[._i
'r
o)al t!
.!(9
_l I
nl ol rll
9l tdl s
-i (,
c o E I o
E
I
I I
I
I
I +\,,
AP.oiesso^;Co'i,.,a:o- t
MoTUTRARCH ITECTS
April 1.5, 1990
Ms. Diana Donovan
Chair, Planning and
Environmental Commission
Town of Vail
75 S. Frontage Rd.Vail, CO 81658
HeIIo Diana,
This letter is to document our appeal of the Community Dev-
elopment Department's recent decision regarding a site cov-
erage issue, at the H. Ross Perot residence at tot 31'
Block 7, VaiI Village First Filing.
There is currently a small single-family residence on the property. Because the site climbs at a 45 Percent grade
irom Beaver Dam Road, there is NO on-site parking at all .
The Perotts currently must park across the street, in an
ally which is either in the Beaver Dam Road right-of-way,
or is on Tract B, or both.
We are proposing an expansion of the home. Part of the
proposed expansion is a garage which is BITRIED TOTALLY
Sel-,ow EXISTING GRADES, except for the retaining wall which
allows access into the garage off of Beaver Dam Road.
Please compare our situation to that of Bishop Park, where
their garage is covered by existing grades, except the
ret,aini;g walls which allow access to the garage. Their
garage is not considered to be site coverage.
We feel that because our garage will be totally covered BY
EXISTING GRADES (the site over the garage will be taken
back to its original grades and landscaped conditions), our
garage is not covering the site. Rather, the site is cove-
iing-our garage. consequently, $te meet the definition of
landscaping, Paragraph 18. 04. 200.
,:
I MonrrnAncnIECTS
Pg. 2
l{e look fonrard to reeolving thls with you at your meeting
on Monday, .fune 23.
JRM/SJ
cc: H. RoEs Perot
Jay Peterson l{arren Lawrence
I
.jr*DtrFMRTMtrNT @F tr@MMUNITV DtrVtrL@FMENT
XXXXXXX ToLEs AcTroN FoRM XXXXXXX
01 0000 41330 COM. DEV. APPUCATION FEES
01 0000 41s40 ZONING AND ADDRESS MAPS
1 0000 42+1s 1988 UNIFORII BUILDING CODE
r 0000 42415 1988 UNIFOR}.I PLUI,{BING CODE
1 0000 42415 .1988 UNIFOR}I MECHANTCAL CODE
01 0000 4241s 1988 UNIFOR}I RRE CCDE
'f 0000 42415 1987 NATIONAL EI-ECTRICAL CODE
1 0000 42415 OTHER CODE BOOKS
1 0000 41548 E PRTNTS (M\IARS)
01.0000 42+12 xERox coPtES ./ sruores
1 0000 42371 ENALry FEES / RE-INsPEcT.IoN
1 0000 41322 OFF HOURS INSPECTION FE
CoNTRACTORS UCENSES fEES
1 0000 41330
ol 00oo 41413 .SIGN APPLICATION
0ct.9'g, 9.42 TER RRCHITECTS TA- 3A3-4?647tO
* Fr) Po--
c^tcwttrotr ,l/Elltl D^tt
-
cl{EcKlo tY -/O'?-%
ilro_RoAil & ASSOC|ATEi, tilG Conlultlil 3t?uctur.l Endnirn - tol North Srrcrdc SutE 300
l/^^ (
coLoR Do sPRtNog, coroRADo-iogo:t
,J F-nn o
tcD|@!y's115ja1
Oct. 9'9i 9:zB @ I{FTER ffi{tTECTS fa- 3a3-47ffi71',P.3
MORCAil r AsSoCnrE8, tilG.
Goarulthl trructurj Enflrrn
101 Nor{r Cucrdr Suitr 30O
coroRADo sPRrNGs. @toRloo 80!,03 cfllcrlD av
- P-rC G:"(U I
.***.--.4 *-L---
c^Lct t^Tlo tY
tr!ra@bl'ca,r'|, lr.tr
CTORGE SHAEFFER mgs
^,,?.,6$go
P.O. Box 373
Vail, Colorado 81658
(303) 84s-s6s5
August 16, 1990
Mr. Gary Murrain
Town of Vai l
Bui'l ding Department
75 S. Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657
Dear Gary:
Enclosed are 2 copies of pians for the Perot residence remodel
a1 ong with a completed buiIding permit appl ication. These plans
were approved by the Design Review Board yesterday, 8/15/90.
Our company is starting the demolition of t,he new house as we
d'i scussed earlier. A demol ition permit has been i ssued and with that permit we also plan to start the excavation of the new home.
f{e willnot pour any concrete on the project untilthe building permit or at least a foundation permit'i s rejeased from your
offi ce.
Should the bui lding permit not be released for some unknown reason, it will be our responsibility to restore the site back to a natural state.
Si ncerel y,
George Shaeffer Construction Company
fur?*'*
Rob Fawcett
Project Manager
RFlsd'l
cc: Mr. & Mrs. Perot
Warren Lawrence
Jim Morter
Tom Cole
Dennis Thompson
George Shaeffer
tNs c ilor.r REeuEsT
TOWN OF VAIL .\-fr\
,t:l .. {:tl READY'FOR
LOCATION:
CALLER
THUR @ PECTION:
BUILDING:PL
tr
tr
tr
cl
tr
tr
UMBING:
tr
tr
tr
tr
tr
tr
tr
FOOTINGS / STEEL UNDERGROUND
ROUGH / D.W.V.
ROUGH / WATER
FOUNDATION / STEEL
FRAMING
ROOF & SHEER
PLYWOOD NAILING GAS PIPING
INSULATION POOL / H. TUB
SHEETROCK NAIL
tr FINAL tr FINAL
ELECTRICAL:MECHANICAL:
(.
tr
B
tr
TEMP. POWEF O HEATING
ROUGH tr
tr
tr
EXHAUST HOODS
CONDUIT SUPPLY AIR
O FINAL tr FINAL
APPROVE 11 tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
CORRECTIONS:
INSPECTOR
Hsb?
tEsrllG-.{
t-l,
-rt
q
DATE '
D -t-nve \Q{ot
PERMIT NUM ER OF PROJECT
REQUEST
VAIL
JOB N
CALLER
TUES
BUILDING:
o FooT|NGS/STEEL r fr UNDEBGROUND
qFouNDATroru zsreel@ tr RoucH / D.w.v.
tr ROUGH/WATEB
ROOF & SHEER
PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
INSULATION tr POOL / H. TUB
SHEETROCK NAIL
tr FINAL
ELE
trT
trF
trC
tr
tr HEATING TEMP. POWER
ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
tr FINAL
tr APPROVED
CORRECTIONS:
ISAPPROVED |qnerruseecroN REeur RED
,o'r= ?,,r7*,Q) rNSPEcroR
' ;;''. - l--
'1 5uz- J
PERMIT NUMBER OF PROJECT
no'. '4 ll1 JoB NAME -fur"/-l TOWN oF VAIL
KLLLdJ tu('\--
READY FOR
LOCATION:
il"r,o"REOUEST INS I
tyc-@
T).,-.), r 4VrnntumatNc:
FOOTINGS / STEEL 2/ Li- 1-' t' \/
\//L
?\ \* tr UNDERGROUND
t-l
tr
tr
tr
D
tr
tr
FOUNDATION / STEEL ROUGH / D,W.V.
ROUGH / WATER FRAMING
ROOF & SHEER
PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
INSULATION
SHEETROCK
tr POOL / H. TUB
tr FINAL
MECHANICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER tr HEATING
tr ROUGH - tr EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
tr FINAL tr FINAL
flrnenoveo tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
CORRECTTONS:
oor= ?'/f *2 a rNSPEcroR
rNs CTION REQUEST
OWN OF VAIL
CALLER
WED 6;D'*'READY FOR
LOCATION:
i.
BUILDING:PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V,
tr ROUGH / WATER
TINGS / STEEL
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
tr FRAMING
- ROOF & SHEER u PLYwooD NATLTNG O GAS PIPING
E INSULATION POOL / H. TUB
tr SHEETROCK NAIL
tr FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER tr HEATING
tr ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
tr FINAL
tr APPROVED
CORRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
DATE INSPECTOR
ffis{oP
4la'z- e
PEBMIT NUMBER OF PROJECT
oor, /-/f- 2a JoB NAME
READY FOR
LOCATION:
INSPECTION:MON
CALLER
''-t:\ruES a wEp-/ THUR
rnrs#cnoN REQUEST
VAIL TOWN OF
FRI
BUILDING:
n -/ PLUMBING:
(roorrrucs / srEEr "ftga o uNDERGRouND
tr
tr
tr
tr
tr
c
FOUNDATION / STEEL tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH / WATER FRAMING
ROOF & SHEEB
PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
-INSULATION N POOL / H. TUB
SHEETROCK NAIL
tr FINAL tr FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER
MECHANIGAL:
O HEATING
tr ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
tr SUPPLY AIR
tr FINAL tr FINAL
!rneenoveo
CORRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
INSPECTOR
tNs CTION
oor, 41Z1
,^) t r\ TOWN OF
/', r ut R*-.t.1^ ^-.-
REQUEST
VAIL PERMIT NUMBER OF PROJECT
JOB NAME
CALLER
READY FOR INSPECTION:MON TUES WED
LOCATION:i ),,
APPROVED tr DISAPPROVED
THUR AM PM
O REINSPECTION REQUIRED
BUILDING:
,/\n...rr-\.--
s.f6orrr.rcs/ srEEL \ \-rV \ \ Vt t u !-PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH i D.W.V.
fI ROUGH / WATER
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
tr FRAMING
,- ROOF & SHEEB
" PLYWooD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION I
D
tr
EI
POOL / H. TUB
tr
o
SHEETROCK NAIL
tr FINAL FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
O TEMP. POWER
MECHANICAL:
tr HEATING
D
tr
tr
ROUGH N EXHAUST HOODS
CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIF
O FINAL
tr
tr FINAL
CORRECTIONS:
INSPECTOR
ntfrsnop
._[ 5vL
PERMIT NUMBER OF PBOJECT
DATE
READY FOR
LOCATION:
INSPECTION:
lNs
z, it-
CTION
TOWN OF
,. r'. i -*a.Tt'5"r{';15+ :..}1lr }tifl
REQUEST
VAIL
YRppnoveo tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEI
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
tr FBAMING
- ROOF & SHEER _ PLYWOOD NAILING
tr INSULATION
-
tr SHE4TROCK NAIL
/ , lL -, . , , . t, U .-"E \L-e-XXt \ r) \ W ry+r{Au)€v6-d/tr FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER
tr ROUGH
tr CONDUIT
t-l
r-r Etat A I tr FINAL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGBOUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH / WATER
tr GAS PIPING
tr POOL / H. TUB
tr
tr
tr
tr
tr
FINAL
MECHANICAL:
tr HEATING
tr EXHAUST HOODS
tr SUPPLY AIR
FINAL
CORRECTIONS:
Or
INSPECTOR
niFsH@
INS Q:ua 'f 1-
"'!r
PECTION REQI'EST
PERMI
DATE
T NUMBER OF
r"l3o
PROJECT
JOB NAME
INSPECT M
QALLER
TUES READY FOR
LOCATION:
L
APPROVED tr DISAPPROVED .-u 'p RElNsPEcTloN REQUTRED
BUILDING:
[toorrr.rcs / srEEL tr uNDERGR.rro"6:
't-
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL D ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH / WATER tr FRAMING
r-r ROOF & SHEEB " PLYWOOD NAILING E GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION tr POOL / H. TUB I
tr SHEETROCK NAIL
E-
tr FINAL tr FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
D TEMP. POWER
MEGHANICAL:
D HEATING
D ROUGH O EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT
n
.. r-t D SUPPLY AIR
n
tr FINAL tr FINAL
CORREQT,IONS:
DATE INSPECTOF
PERMIT NUMBER OF PROJECT
' Y-r--.'
r^rsilctoN TOWN OF
REQUEST
VAIL
DATE tl JOB NAME
CALLER
TUES READY FOR INSPECTION:MON
LOCATION:
WED
BUILDING:
O FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
D UNDERGROUND
uNDATIoN / srEEL Vi:u G\ /fl F/r-. tr RoucH i D.w.v.
FRAMING tr ROUGH / WATER
ROOF & SHEEB
PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
INSULATION tr POOL / H. TUB
SHEETROCK NAIL
tr FINAL O FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER
MECHANICAL:
O HEATING
ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
CONDUIT D SUPPLY AIR
tr FINAL
APPROVED
CORRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
ar
/ v't4-
INSPECT
REQUEST
VAIL
IN
DATE
READY FOR
LOCATION:
CALLER
TUES THUR *tre
'.". \
\sor I
PERMIT
EEATITTN f Et I lvll
\ TOWN OF
INSPECTI
NUMBER OF
BUILDING:PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
O ROUGH / D,W.V,
E ROUGH / WATER
O FOOTINGS / STEEL
OUNDATION / STEEL
FRAMING
D
tr
o
o
tr
ROOF & SHEER
PLYWOOD NAILING
INSUTATION
SHEETROCK
tr POOL / H. TUB
D FINAL
*tr TEMP1 POWER O HEATING
D EXHAUST HOODS
CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
tr FINAL O FINAL
tr DISAPPROVED D REINSPECTION REQUIRED
CORBECTIONS:
o^rE //-/(r"-qO rNSpEcroR
Ftffi*e
JOB NAME
tNs TION
OWN OF
' fi.'.F YYr , lY" ;nt:sr.rirrvfl
REQUEST
VAIL
"{
-,
READY FOR INSPECTION:
LOCATION:
AM PM
(, 1
/lat .)( ...
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH / WATEd
tr FOUNDATION i STEEL
tr FRAMING
- ROOF & SHEER ' PLYWOOD NAILIN O GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION tr
tr
POOL / H. TUB
NAIL
tr FiNAL tr FINAL
MECHANIGAL:
tr HEATING
tr ROUGH D EXHAUST HOODS
O SUPPLY AIR
tr FINAL D FINAL
Xnppnoveo
CORRECTIONS:
O DISAPPROVED D REINSPECTION REQUIRED
oo_, /- 4- g r INSPECTOR
Priftsxop
'tE :TlswtFElr\''-T*ryJryt!}1s4lE*rE
tNs REOUEST
].pEpnt
DATE
OWN OF VAIL
INSPECTION:
JOB NAME
MON
CALLER
TUES WED READY FOR
LOCATION:
M
BUILDING:PLUMBINGT
tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH / WATER
O FOOTINGS / STEEL
tr FRAMING
n ROOF & SHEER " PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION tr POOL / H. TUB
tr SHEETROCK NAIL
tr FINAL tr FINAL
ELE
trT
trF
trC
tr_
tr HEATING
ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
O SUPPLY AIR
tr FINAL
tr APPROVED
COBRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REOUIRd
oarc /-4-f/ rNSPEcroR h, * <
'
tl.,/' /Y "--) /.,.,| -/u
PERMIT NUMBER PF PRgJECT
,^r= I f tj ftlJoB NAME
drr\
)
READY FOR INSPECTION:THUR
LOCATION:4-'']---|
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH / WATER
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
tr FRAMING
,_ ROOF & SHEER " PLYWooD NATLTNG T Kot PTPTNG -
tr INSULATION tr POOL / H. TUB
tr SHEETROCK NAIL
tr FINAL tr FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWEH
MECHANICAL:
E] HEATING
SUPPLY AIR
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED )Ffneenoveo
CORRECTIONS:
ome /-"/f -INSPECTOR
(/t-(p )-
PERMIT NUMBER OF PROJECT
olle /')\''?/JOB NAME
READY FOR
LOCATION:
INSPECTI
APPROVED
THUR FRI
REQUEST
VAIL
AM PM
rNstcnoN TOWN OF
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION BEQUIRED
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH / WATER
FOUNDATION / STEEL
o
tr
FRAMING
ROOF & SHEER
PTYWOOD NAILING tr
tr
tr
tr
tr
GAS PIPING
POOL / H. TUB
tr
{
u FINAL
tr
ELECTRICAL:MECHANICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER D HEATING
tr ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
O CONDUIT O SUPPLY AIR
tr FINAL tr FINAL
CORRECTIONS:
oerc /' r,f P,,/ ' rNSPEcroR
':
. ::jg:Tr'.j . fl"i # mlstsjr
INSPECTION REQUEST
VAIL uo.** o'
o"@ 4;
'1L.
a
READY FOR INSPECT]ON:
LOCATION:
FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
IruNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
D ROUGH / WATER
tr
tr
D
tr
tr
tr
ROOF & SHEER
PLYWOOD NAILING T] GAS PIPING
tr FINAL
ELECTRIGAL: I
tr TEMP. POWER
MECHANICAL:
tr HEATING
D ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
E CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
APPROVED
CORRECTIONS:
o ndlhspecroN REeuTRED
I
oo* l-Ze-91 rNSpEcroR
' - .: a:-l;--:-;--
\. t
\\\,\ -
PERMIT NUMBER OF PRO-JECT 'NstcnoN TOWN OF
REQUES
VAIL
T
A e\-\-
DATE (-/- \\ JoB NAME
CALLER
TUES WED THUR READY FOR IN
LOCATION:
I
I t/
i .'!
BUILDING:
O FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
U UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH / WATER
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
tr FRAMING
- ROOF & SHEER
" PtYWooD NAtutNG tr GAS PIPING
O INSULATION D
tr
n
POOL / H. TUB
tr SHEETROCK NAIL
n
tr FINAL O FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER
MECHANICAL:
O HEATING
tr ROUGH tr
tr \I q
J\
tr
EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT
tr
tr FINAL
XAPPRovED
CORRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
INSPECTOR
JOB NAME
CALLER
INSPECTI M9N TUES WEP THUR
rNs#ctoN REeuEsr
PERMIT NUMBER OF P€OJECT fu \xi \.\\TOWN OF VAIL
DATE
READY FOR
LOCATION:..".(, i
AM g_)
BUILDING:
tr FQOTINGS / STEEL
PL
tr
tr
tr
o
tr
n
UMBING:
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
UNDERGROUND
ROUGH / D.W.V.
ROUGH / WATER O FRAMING
- ROOF & SHEER u ptvwooo NATLTNG GAS PIPING
EI INSULATION POOL / H. TUB
tr SHEETROCK NAIL
n
tr FINAL tr FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
T] TEMP. POWER
MECHANICAL:
tr HEATING
tr EXHAUST HOODS
SUPPLY AIR
tr FINAL tr FINAL
PRovED €")tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
CORRECTIONS:
DATE 3--j2 ^ 7/INSPECTOR
REQUEST
' ' ;-fr" '
rNsttoN TOWN OF VAIL
AM €D THUR FRI
DATE
READY FOR
LOCATION:
INSPECTION:
Pr!MBTNG:' l)
O UNDERGROUND
D FOUNDATION / STEEL
O FRAMING oucH / *otr* ( i' ,? ,ASPIPTNGW ROOF & SHEER
PLYWOOD NAILING
INSULATION D POOIL / H. TUB
SHEETROCK NAIL
O FINAL
GTRICAL:,MEGHANIGAL:
o
tr
tr
tr
tr
O HEATING
ROUGH Q EXHAUST HOODS
CONDUIT O SUPPLY AIR
tr FINAL
)d*neenoveo
CORRECTIONS:
tr,HEINSPECTION REQUIRED
oo-,, 4-/- t/ rNSPEcroR
,//r - 1 v>u d-
, -. PERMIT NUMBER OF PROJECT
"l oRre 3')1-7t JOB NAME
READY FOR
LOCATION:
,;i
INSPECTI
TOWN OF V
WED THUR FRI
/ 'i7..Ltl ), ,4rl,r_S-Gs'(e
BUILDING:
tr POOTTNGS / ST€EL
PLUMBING:
tr FOUNDAITON / STEEL
I
tr
tr
tr
tr
o
1
UNDERGROUND
ROUGH / D.W.V,
ROUGH / WATER
4 p rnnn,trruc
,L ROOF & SH GAS PIPING " PLYWOOD NAILING
tr INSULATION
tr SHEETROCK
n:
POOL / H. TUB
NAI.L TJ
tr
tr FINAL tr FINAL I
ELECTRICAL: , t MECHANICAL:,f
i
tr rEMP. r6Wenl=,E HEATING
tr ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT
f']
O SUPPLY AIR
tr
tr FINAL tr FINAL
tr DISAPPROVED IR APPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
CORRECTIONS:
*SFsrop
I llr / -l
-L/ \
',/
J
TOWN OF
REQUEST
VAIL PEBMIT NUMBER OF PROJECT
DATE
READY FOR
LOCATION:
INSPECTI
JOB NAME
THUR FRI
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
tr BOUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH / WATER
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
tr FRAMING
r-r ROOF & SHEER " PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION
tr SHEETROCK
tr POOL / H, TUB
NAIL tr
tr
tr T] FINAL FINAL
ELECTRIGAL:
tr TEMP. POWE
MECHANICAL:
tr HEATING
ROUGH F EXHAUST HOODS
tr
tr
tr
CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
FINAL
tr
tr FINAL
lE/appnovao
CORRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION BEQUIRED
,/-Dp;,E 7-J- '// tNSpEcroR /
t/<t.a Y )U ,J--
i-l*
U
INSPECTION
TOWN OF
REQUEST
VAIL PERMIT NUMBER OF PROJECT
I
JOB NAME DATE (/ / '/,
READY FOR
LOCATION:
CALLER
TUES
tr DISAPPBOVED
WED ,THUR
n-' ., a'
a
U.rppnovEo
.CORRECTIONS:
tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
BUlLDING:
N FOOTINGS / STEEL
D FOUNDATION / STEE-
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
D ROUGH / D,W.V.
tr FRAMING tr ROUGH i WATER
- BOOFA SHEER " PLYWOOD NAIL tr GAS PIPING
V-tttsuurtorrt
{tr SHEETROCK
I
tr POOL / H. TUB
INSPECTOR
\sru,\ O
READY FOR
LOCATION:
lN
,*r!"toN r r TOWN OF
REQUEST
VAIL T
JOB NAME -1 \
CALLER . \
TUFS WED T
\\
\.MON
tr FOOTJNGS / STEEL .-a,ffik,ffi#.,il
BUILDING:PLUMBING:
D UNDERGROUND
tr
-
FRAMING
D ROUGH /
tr ROUGH /
tr GAS PIPI
o PooL / H.
D.W.V.
WATER
ROOF & SHEER
PLYWOOD NAILING NG
O INSULATION TUB
o
o FINAL
tr
tr FINAL
ELEGTRICAL:MECHANICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER tr HEATING
tr
o
tr
tr
ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
FINAL tr FINAL
[eeenoveo
CORRECTIONS:
O DISAPPROVED O REINSPECTION REQUIRED
/ ' -
r''> ./oerc 4-"5 -7/ lNSPEcroR