HomeMy WebLinkAboutVAIL VILLAGE FILING 12 BLOCK 2 LOT 1 BOOTH FALLS MOUNTAIN TOWNHOMES ROCK FALL MITIGATION LEGAL.pdfD I
BOOTHFALLS
MOUNTAIN
TOWNHOMES
ROCKFALL MITIGATION
1gg7 -2002
2101 -023-02-001
GENERAL
INFORMATION
tr Variance tr Sign Variance tr Rezoning tr Major Subdivision tr Minor Subdivlsion tr Special Development Disbict D MajorAmendmentb an SDD E Minor Amendment b an SDD
tr Zoning Code Amendment
Dscription of the'Request:
I nooOptain modificaUon tr' Amendment_ to a ^Dqvel 'yTy'")r^/r'L
Application for Review by the
Planning and Environmental Commission
Departrnent of Community Development
75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657
tel: 970.479.2L39 fax: 970.479.2452
web: www.ci.vail.co.us
General Information:
Thls applicauon is br any project requiring approval ftom the Planning and Environrnental Commisslon' Phase reEr
to thd
'subrnittat requironen-B br the particular appmval that b requEted. An application fur Planning and
Envircnmental Comniission Gview cannot be accepted until all required tnfurnaUon is received by the Cornmunlty
Development Department. The project may also need to be reviewed by the Town Council and/or the Design
Review Board.
Type of Application and Fee:
$2so . $200
$200
91000 + $20/lot
$2s0
$ls00
$1000
$200
$2s0
tr Condluonal Use Permit
tr Employee Housing UniWYPe:-tr Bed and BreakFast tr Major Exterior Alteration ln Vail Village
tr Minor Exterior Alteratbn in Vail Village
tr Major Exterbr Alteration in Uorshead tr Mapr Exterior Alteration in the PA District
$200
No Fee
$200
$s00
$200
$s00
7 ?oe
Location of the Proposal: Lot: [ 2 Block: 2 'Subdivision:
Physical Address:
Parcel No.:
rfn'OZ4J.tZ:Z-- 2' t a t O35 /.
(Contact Eagle Co. Assessor at 970-328-8540 for fr*?Jk.t
Zoning:
Name(s) of Owner(s):
Orner(s) Signature(s):
Name of Applicant:
Maaling Address:
PLEASE SUBMIT THIS APPUCATION, ALL SUBMTTTAL REQUIREMENTS
AND THE FEE TO THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT,
75 SOUTH FROMTAGE ROAD, VAIL, COLORADO 81657.
I
Planning and Environmental Commission
ACTION FORM
Departnent of Community Development
75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657
tel: 970.479.2139 fax: 970.479.2452
web: www.ci.vail.co.us
Project Name: Hazard Map Amend. Booth Fall PEC Number: PEC020004
Project Description:
Amend hazard map from High Severity Rockfall to Rockfall Hazard with approved mitigation
Partacipants!
OWNER PRAWDZIK, STEPHEN D. O2|0U2O02 Phone:
15965 W ELLSWORTH PL
GOLDEN CO
80401
License:
APPLICANT PMWDZIK, STEPHEN D. 0210t12002 Phone: 303-898-0398
15965 W ELLSWORTH PL
GOLDEN CO
Boothfalls Homeowners Assoc
Box 356 Vail 80401
License:
ProjectAddress: 3094 BOOTH FALLS CTVAIL Location:
Legal Description: Lot: 1 Block 2 Subdivlslon: BOOTH FALLS MTN HOMES
Parcel Number: 210102302016
Comments: Complete inspection & maint. agreement
BOARD/STAFF ACTION
Motion By: John Schoofiedl Action: APPROVED
Second By: Doug Cahill
Vote: 5-0-1 DateofApproval: 08/30/2002
Conditions:
Cond:8
(PLAN): No changes to these plans may be made without the written consent of Town of
Vail staff and/or the appropriate review committee(s).
Planner: PEC Fee Paid: $0.00
Questions? Call J elanning Staff at 47g-2L38
Request for a Change in District Boundaries
(Rezoning)
Submittal Requirements
GENERAL INFORJTIATION
A request for a change in district boundaries nny be initiated by the Town Council, by the Planning and
Environmental Commission, by petition of any resident or property owner in the Town, or by the
Administrator.
SUBMITTAL REOUIREMENTS
{ neflz $2O0.OO
{ Anstof the ownerc of all properties within the boundaries of the area to be rezoned or changed
and the property adjacent thereto. The owners' list shall include the name of all owners, their
addresses, and a general description ofthe property owned by each.
/Sictmped addressed envelopes and a list of the names and mailing addresses of all property
owners within or adjacent to the boundaries of the area to be rezoned or changed. The owners' list
shall include a general description of the property owned by each. The applicant is responsible for
conect names and mailing addrses. This information is available from the Eagle County Assessor's
office,
o/ tetter of approval from a condominium association or joint owner, if applicable
ian alF nranacanl ahrnaac in rlic}rlr* lryl rlrA;..i* // ' ,- I / A complete description of proposed changes in distrlct boundaries. (See pfevious f a6- ,V Amap Indicating the existing and proposed district boundaries (3 copies)
d Maps must also be submitted in 8.5" x ll" reduced format. These are required for the
Planning and Environmental Commission members' information packeb.
o Additional Material: The Administrator and/or PEC may require the submission of additional plans,
drawings, specifications, samples and other materials if deemed necessary to properly evaluate the
proposal.
PRE.APPUCATION CONFERENCE
A pre-application conference with a planning staff member is strongly encouraged. No application will be
accepted unless it is complete. It is the applicant's responsibility b make an appointment with the staff
to determine submittal requirements.
TIME R.EOUIREMENNi
The Planning and Environmental Commission meeb on the 2nd and 4th Mondays of each month. A
complete application form and all accompanying material (as described above) must be accepted by the
Community Development Department by the appropriate submithl date, which is a minimum of four (4)
weeks prior to the date of the PEC public hearing. Incomplete applications (as determined by the
planning statr) will not be accepted.
ADDMONALR,EVIEW
A. If this appliotion requires separate review by any local, State or Federal agency other than the Town
of Vail, the application fee shall be increased by $200.00. Enmples of such review, may include, but
are not limited to: Colorado DeparUnent of Highway Access Permib, Army Corps of Engineers 404,
etc.
B. The applicant shall be responsible for paying any publishing fees which are in excess of 50% of the
application fee, It at the applicant's request, any matter is postponed for hearing, causing the
matter to be re-published, then, the entire fee for such re-publication shall be paid by the applicant.
C. Applications deemed by the Community Development Department to have design, land use or other
issues which may have a significant impact on the community may require review by consultants in
addiUon b Town stafr. Should a determination be made by the Town staff that an outside consutbnt
is needed, the Community Development Department may hire the consultant. The Department shall
estimate the arpunt of money necessary to pay the consultant and this amount shall be fonryarded
to the Town by the applicant at the time of filing an application. Expenses incuned by the Town in
o<cess of the amount forurarded by the applicant shall be paid b the Town by the applicant within 30
days of notification by the Town. Any ercess funds will be returned to the applicant upon review
completion.
Pleose notc thot only complete app&cations will he accepted. All of the required information must be
submitud in order for the application to be deemed complete
JOINT PROPERTY OWNER
WRITTEI{ APPR.OVAL TETTER
8a.14,f" I ls rl
tToflEotDAcfS I, (print name a joint owner of property located at (address/legal
3oqLl
description)
provide this letter as written approval of the plans dated t which have
been submitted to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for the proposed improvemenb
to be completed at the address noted above. I understand that the proposed improvemenb include:
I further understand that minor modificaUons may be made to the plans over the course of the reMew
process to ensure compliance with the Town's applicable codes and regulations.
It
t lzr loz-(Date) ' '
Pnu)zi k
o o
(,*tl wo?
rto!*nte
1
oJnl
1t vr JzC -s -k-
*******+++**********+*******{.+++************++,ft**************+****f***+*t * * * ****++*+* +**** *
TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO Statement
* *** *'t*****f +** * **'i *'* {r'i****** ** *** **********+++l* *** * * * * * t * * ** + + * + * i ** * + + * * * * **** ++f+*******
Statements Number: R000001939 Amormt: $200.00 02/OL/2OO2O9z12 AItl
Payment Method: Check Init: iIAR
Notation: 2643 / Booth FaLls Home-Owners POB 3592 Vail
Permit. No: PEC020004 Type: PEC - Generic
Parcel No: 2IO1O23O2OL6
Site Address: 3094 BooTH FAL,LS CT VAIL
Locat ion :
Total FeeE: $200.00
Thia Payment: $200.00 Total AIrL PmtE: $200.00
Balance: 50.00
***'t*******************+*++*t*****+*{r*****+****+*****************+*+******{+****d.******t ** ++
ACCOUNT ITEM LIST:
Account Code Description Current Pmts
PV OO1OOOO31125OO PEC APPLICAT]ON FEES 200 .00
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Att a c h m en t E c o n ta i n s N ct t1:i ::, :f:;;?!i:,
MEMORANDUM
Planning and Environmental Commission
Department of Community Development
March 1 1,2002
Request to modify the rockfall hazard maps to show approved mitigation for the
Booth Falls Townhomes located at 3094 Booth Falls CourULot 1, Block 2, Vail
Village 12th Filing.
Applicant: Booth Falls Condominium Association represented by Steve
Prawdzik
Russell Forrest Staff:
ll.
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST
The Booth Falls Homeowners Association is requesting that the Town of Vail amend its
hazard maps to show that approved mitigation exists for the high severity rockfall hazard
area that exists on this property (see attachment A). The Association completed the
construction of a rockfall mitigation wall in November of 2001. This wall was designed to
mitigate the high severity rockfall hazard present on the site. An engineer and the
Colorado Geological Survey has concluded that the wall will effectively protect the
property from reasonably foreseeable rockfall hazards (see Attachment C).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the mitigation constructed by the Booth Fall Homeowners
Association. Qualified expert input from an independent engineer and the Colorado
Geological Survey confirms that the wall was constructed to design and will be effective
protecting the property identified in attachment A from reasonably foreseeable rockfall
hazards without increasing the rockfall hazard on other private or public property. The
Planning and Environmental Commission shall make the following findings:
. There is clear and convincing evidence that the information contained in the site-
specific geologic investigation is reliable.
. Based on expert input the mitigation will help protect inhabitants and their property
from reasonably foreseeable Rockfall events.
r Based on reliable expert input there is no increase in the hazard to other property or
structures, or to public buildings, roads, streets, rights of way, easements, utilities or
facilities.
f :\everyoneVussvnemosVockmmem2
il1.ROLES OF BOARDS
Town Council: To approve or deny mitigation status for the area shown in attachment A,
The Town Council would need to approve a resolution to amend the rockfall hazard map.
Planninq and Environmental Commission: The role of the PEC is to make a
recommendation to the Town Council on whether to approve a mitigation for the Booth
Falls Townhomes based on the criteria mentioned below.
BACKGROUND
The Booth Falls Townhomes are located in the Vail Village 12th Filing, which was platted
in the Town of Vail in 1972. The Town of Vail issued building permits for Units 1-3 on
March 27 , 1973. Today, there are a total of 1 8 units in the complex. In 1 984,
Schmueser and Associates Inc. prepared the Official Rockfall Hazard maps that were
adopted by the Town of Vail. These maps indicate that the Booth Falls Townhomes are
in a high severity rockfall hazard area along with development to the southeast of the
Townhomes.
In 1989 and 1990 after several rockfall incidents, a rockfall berm was created and
financed through a local improvement district in the boothfalls neighborhood. This berm
was not extended to the west to protect the Booth Falls Townhomes because of the
proximity of the Forest Service Wilderness Area Boundary.
On March 26, 1997, a 20' x I' piece of the rock face broke off the rock band above the
Booth Falls Townhomes. Units 14, 1 5, 16 were impacted by several large rocks. The
largest rock went through the wall of Unit 14 and pushed a bed through the 1st floor and
into the basement area. On March 27.1997, staff met a USFS team and Jonathon
White of the Golorado State Geological Survey to determine the risk of additional rockfall
incidents. Through further site investigation and an analysis done by the Colorado
Geofogical Survey, it was determined that the area was in a high rockfall hazard area
which means rockfall incidents is likely. lt should also be noted that rockfall incidents can
occur at any time in the year. Rockfall incidents, unlike debris flow or snow avalanches,
are not limited to one season.
On May 6th, '1997 a Council worksession was held to review a report prepared by the
Colorado Geological Survey and to determine what should be done to mitigate the
hazard. Council directed staff to assist the Homeowners Association in determining a
cost for mitigation. On July 7th, 1997, another worksession was held with Council to
determine how this mitigation should be funded and the process for completing the
design and construction of the wall. lt was decided that the homeowners would finance
the construction of the wall themselves. The Town committed up to $20,000 to assist
with the design of the wall. Staff also prepared an Environmental lmpact Report that
evaluated the impacts of the proposed mitigation.
An engineering company, AKS Engineering, was reiained by the Homeowners
Association to design the wall. In 1998, Yenter Company and the Colorado Geological
Survey reviewed and approved the design. After receiving Town Council, PEC , and DRB
approval the three walls were constructed in 200'l by Yenter Company. The following is
lv.
f :Everyonevussvnemosvockmmem2
a sequence of events that resulted in the construction of the rockfall mitigation wall.
1) November lOih 1997: PEC reviewed and approved the Environmental lmpact
Report for the rockfall mitigation wall.
2) December gth 1997: Council reviewed and approved of proposed mitigation.
Since this project used Town of Vail land (which the TOV acquired from the
USFS in 1997), the Town Council had to approve the use on Town of Vail land for
this mitigation.
3) December 17n, 1997: The DRB reviewed and approved the conceptual plans for
the walls.
4) 1998-2001 :The Town approved a design in 1997 that involved two walls. Then in
1998 the Town approved a new design involving three walls that further improved
the effectiveness of the mitigation. This design came from Yenter Company
(Geotechnical construction and engineering firm). The DRB approval for the
1998 design lapsed and was re-approved by the DRB on August 15, 2001.
5) August 21"\ 2OO2 Town Council approved of an easement on Town property to
allow for construction of the wall.
The wall has now been constructed and the Homeowners are now requesting a hearing
with the Planning and Environmental Commission and the Town Council to present
documentation from a qualified engineer and the State Geological Survey that the wall
was constructed in accordance with the approved plans and to request a modification to
the Town hazard maps. lf this request is made and approved by the Town Council, the
Homeowners Association property would still be identified in a rockfall hazard area, but
the maps would indicate that approved mitigation exists for the site and would refer to the
site specific report. lt should be noted that 100% mitigation of a natural hazard is in most
cases, not possible. Please see Disclaimer of Liability in section 12-21-9 (Attachment
D).
V. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS FOR HAZARD MAP CHANGE
Specific criteria for amending the Master Hazard Plans are not provided in the code.
However, the purpose statement ol 12-21 and provisions for providing mitigation for
development specified in section 12-21-15-C.1 do provide criteria for a decision to
amend the hazard master plan. The following are the recommended criteria for making
an amendment to the hazard plans:
o That the mitigation supports the purpose statement of section 12-21 which states in
part "The purpose of this Chapter is to help protect the inhabitants of the Town from
dangers relating to development of flood plains, avalanche paths, steep slopes and
geologically sensitive areas...."
Staff Response: Based on the review of the mitigation by qualified professionals the
mitigation will help protect the inhabitants of the Town from dangers relating to
f :bveryonevussVnemosVockmmem2
geologically sensitive areas.
. That the corrective engineering or engineered construction or other mitigation or
alternations can be accomplished to reduce the danger to the public health and
safety to property to a reasonable level.
Staff Response: Based on the engineering design of the wall and the review of the
wall construction by qualified engineers, staff believes that the rockfall hazard is
reasonably mitigated. The Colorado Geological Survey concluded the wall will
provide a level of protection that is "in some respects, superior to the ditch and berm
configuration to the east."
. Such mitigation does not increase the hazard to other property or structures or to
public buildings, roads, streets, rights of way, easements, utilities or facilities.
Staff Response: Based on reliable engineering input the mitigation will not impact
other property or structures, or public buildings, roads, streets, rights of way,
easements. utilities or facilities.
. The applicant must establish by clear and convincing evidence that the information
contained in the site specific geological investigation is reliable.
Staff Response: The Colorado Geological Survey is the agency responsible for
identifying and helping to develop mitigation for geological hazards in the State of
Colorado. John White who provided direction on the design and who provided a
letter verifying the effectiveness of the mitigation is a Senior Project Engineer
Geologist with the Colorado Geologic Survey. He has over 20 years of experience
working in geological sensitive areas. Yenter Company was involved in hazard
mitigation in numerous project around the State including Glenwood Canyon. Staff
believes that the individuals involved in the design and construction of the mitigation
are experts in their field and have provided reliable information.
Attachment A: Mitigated Area
Attachment B: Proximity Map & Aerial Map showing hazard area
Attachment C: Letters from Colorado Geological Survey and Engineer
Attachment D: Hazard Regulations
f :bveryonevussvnemosvockmmem2
Attachment A
Mitigated Area
f:\everyone\russVnemos\rockmmem2
03/L3/02 14:43 FAx 970 524 s802 IflHIlE SURVEYING
AREA MTIGATED BY ROCK FAII" MITICATION BARRIER WALL
LOCATED IN LOT I, BLOCK 2, VAIL VILLAGE TWELFTH FILING AND
LOT l, SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 5 SOLrr4 RANGE t0 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M-
Eagle County, Colo,rado
I
Area mitigstpd by roclc fatl mitigetion barier wall located in Lot I, Block 2, Vail Village Twcllth Filiry
md in Loi I, Section 2, Tornoship 5 South, Rmgc 80 West of 0re 6th Principal Meridian, more I
prticulrly dcscribed as follows:
Begirudng at the southerly corncr of said Lot l, Block 2, Vail Village Twclflt Filing on the right-of-way
line of Bootb Fdls Court;
thenco along the southwesterty boundary of said l,ot I , Block 2 along a non-tangent curvc to the lcft '
havinga radius of 261.14 feet, a central agle of 16"38'05". an arc lengdr of 75.82 fca aod a long chonrl
of75.55 fect bcariag
N. 49.49'56 W.;
thencc N. 58'09'13" W. 60.97 fect along said sorlhwestcrly bounday;
thence along said soufrwesterly boundary along a curve to the left hnring a radirs of 33 1 . 16 fect, a ccntral
angfe of 30051'12", an ac length of 178.33 fcct, md a log chord of 176.18 fcet bearing N, 73"34'50"
W.;
thence along said soutbwesterly boundary along a c rv€ to thc right having t radius of 25.00 fccg a ccntral
anglo of 79"38'36', an rc lcngth of 34.75 foc{ and a long chord of 32.02 fcct bearhg N. 49|o I l'28" W.;[
thenco lcaving said southwcsterly boundary N. 35o0 3'27" E. 276.30 fcct: t
thcncc S. 54"5 l'33" E. 32.82 ftat;
thcocc S. 66"14'27" E. 38.07 foct;
thcnce S. 61o35'05" E. 38.19 lbct;
the,ncc N. 40058'18" E. 45.25 fcr,r;
thencc S. 49o57'15'E. 195.85 fcct:
rhencc N. 44o30'54'E. 12.27 feet:
thenir S.45"04'38" E.38.24 fer/ii
thencc S. 38'40'4t" E. 42.58 feot;
thcnce S. 28"22'49" E. 47.95 fcr/;;
thencc S. 61o37'l l- W. 89.57 feet to the southaly boundry of said Lot l, Block 2;
thence N. 89o4 t '46" W . 27 .42 feet dong said southerly boutdary;
theocc€. 48"28'49'W. 147.80 foet along said southerly bourdry to the poinr of beginning.
Mrch 13,2002
M. Darrell Whirc
Registerod Land Survcyor 933?
PO Box ll5
Gypsum, CO 81637
@oz
J
t
$
u3/LJ/02 14:4J f.'M 970 9002 524
a IIUITE SURVEYING laoJ
o-o ()ts
E+o fi*tt=
(L ES=
-o-t d
EEr
3.E =6i8
E+*x),;
o
E
-Y c)o l-
_o
!ll).
SE
_lz', ='F r-tr.9
a-r O r-6 o c .!, o q'.=Eo 6.9 E:cE
r-7
(!qh
(J (o .Jr Fs6il E
HIa i 1 d-e$ P
LrJ f /\ !
E:st i
ao s
t
."t
\=-',\ h 'Fie*'f;q
9 RBRiR
rr I n r.[
{ar--rd
$
't^
-I o |fI
+'@
:r -RR z.-
I r
C)
,*
3E E,
;*Eiar
al*;
z.o F
(J
:J >J
-{=
,:(r
- lrl
:<E ()E o<EE'
'tui - 3 9- p-
A'P 5.i
o-t no <n 'rr C!
Est:lrl .r: O aa oJ
o,
dt l.)
.Q
.#
ld
()o -|n
lr
to v,
N o
q)
at)
lrJ
F (\+
(o
@ v,
d q'
ci n
UJ
FI It
()
+
'o tn w
ao- rt
-@rt ;na;
t,Ot;.r [ |
EtsJ
I
:it a- fr-;rt EB -g:
E;-lrJ
Zttl =o
_(\l
= ?\l bg {- c{z,m
I -o
'O'tt -ao
00F do +'(tN|.l
Itl
El- )
(o r)b rl
<rt N
ll
b*o[S wvl o
35
rt
o+z\
P-
UJ
@ +'o-+Et
brI?..tN U'*
Attachment B
Proximity Map/Aerial Photo
f :bveryonevussVnemosVockmmsm2
o o
Booth Fall Rock Fall Hazard
Approved Mitigation
Tom Botrdary
gSdividms
Cicre qeek
Paneb
Appwed Mitigdior
High Set erfty R@kfdl
l/bdiun Se\rerity Rodddl
N
Attachment C
Letters from Engineers and Colorado Geological Survey
With Mitigation Design
f:bveryoneVussvnemosVockmmem2
12(1e78) S 4)
12.21.3: MASTER HAZARD PLANS:
The Town Manager shall formulate and develop master hazard plans for the Town. Said hazard plans shall be
based on engineering studies and shall indicate lhe location of known flood plains, avalanche and geological
hazard zones of influence, known red and blue avalanche and geological hazard areas, and forty percent
(40%) slope areas. ln addition, the plans may show any other information or data deemed lo be desirable by
the Town Manager. Maximum citizen participation during the formulation of the master hazard plans as well
as olher phases of the information implementation of the hazard studies and regulations, shall be
encouraged. The purpose of the master hazard plans is to identiry-and alleviate present and future problems
created by the construction of improvements in the hazard areas within the Town by means of presenting in
an orderly fashion the general data and information which are essential to the understanding of the
relationship between the hazards and improvements located within said areas. The master hazard plans may
be altered from time to time to conform with new information or existing conditions. (Ord. 12(1978) S 4)
12-21-4: APPROVAL OF MASTER PLANS:
The master hazard plans shall not be considered to be official hazard master plans of the Town until and
unless the Town Council adopts the same, by motion. No substantial modification of the master hazard plan
shall be made unless it is first approved by the Town Council in a similar manner. As soon as the master
hazard plans are adopted, or portions thereof are adopted, a copy of it shall be placed on file in the office of
the Town Clerk, where it may be inspected by any interested party during normal business hours. (Ord.
12(1s78) S 4)
1 2-21 -5: TOWN MANAGER ACCUMULATE I NFORMATION:
The Town Manager, with the advice and approval of the Planning and Environmental Commission, shall
conlinue to study and accumulate information as to hazard areas. When additional information is available, it
shall be reviewed by the Planning and Environmental Commission and added to lhe master hazard plans.
(ord. 12(1e78) S 4)
12-21-6: SUPPLEMENTAL STUDIES BY APPLICANT:
lf an application is made to build in an identified avalanche hazard zone of influence or modification to the
flood plain, the Administrator may require the applicant to conduct supplemental studies as specified in this
Chapter. The information submitted by the applicant following completion of said studies shall be viewed by
the Town staff and the Planning and Environmental Commission and may be added to the master hazard
plans. (Ord. 12(1978) S 4)
12-21 -8: I NTERPRETATION:
The provisions of this Chapter shall be deemed to be minimum requirements. Nothing herein shall impair the
obligations of or inlerfere with private agreements in excess of the minimum requirements. Where this
Chapter imposes a restriction different from that imposed by other applicable provisions of law, contract, or
deed, the more restrictive provision shall control. (Ord.5(1985) g 3)
12-21-9: DISCLAIMER OF LIABILITY:
This Chapter is based on scientific and engineering considerations which are continually being developed.
Compliance with the provisions herein cannot insure freedom from risk to life, safety or property. This Section
shall not create liability on the part of the Town or any officer or employee thereof for any damage that may
result from reliance on this Chapter, or any administrative decision laMully made hereunder. The designation
of certain areas as hazard areas or geologically sensitive areas pursuant to maps incorporated into this
Section does not imply in any way that areas not so designated are free from all risk to life, safety or property.
(ord. 5(1e85) $ a)
12-21 -1 0: DEVELOPMENT R ESTRICTED:
A. No structure shall be built in any flood hazard zone or red avalanche hazard area. No structure shall be built
on a slope of forty percent (40%) or greater except in Single-Family Residential, Two-Family Residential,
f :bveryonevussvnemosVockmmem2 l0
or Two-Family Primary/Secondary Residential Zone Districts. The term "slructure" as used in this Section
does not include recreational structures that are intended for seasonal use, not including residential use.
B. Structures may be built in blue avalanche hazard areas provided that proper mitigating measures have
been taken.
C. The Administrator may require any applicant or person desiring to build in an avalanche hazard zone of
influence to submit a definitive study of the hazard area in which the applicant proposes to build if the
Town's master hazard plan does not contain sufficient information to determine if the proposed location is
in a red hazard or blue hazard area. The requirement for additional information and study shall be done in
accord with Chapter 12 of this Title.
D. The Administrator may require any applicant or person desiring to build in an identified blue avalanche
hazard zone to submit additional information or reports as to whether or not improvements are required to
mitigate against lhe possible hazard. lf mitigation is required, said information and report should specify
the improvements proposed therefor. The required information and reporls shall be done in accordance
with Chapter 12 of this Title.
E. The Administrator may require any applicant or person desiring to modify the flood plain by fill,
conslruction, channelization, grading, or other similar changes, to submit for review an environmental
impact statement in accordance with Chapter 12 of this Title, to establish that the work will not adversely
affect adjacent properties, or increase the quantity or velocity of flood waters. (Ord. 16(1 983) $ 1 : Ord.
12(1978) S 4)
12-21-14.. RESTRICTIONS IN SPECIFIC ZONES ON EXCESSIVE SLOPES:
The following additional special restrictions or requirements shall apply to development on any lot in a hillside
residential, single-family residential, two-family residential or two-family primary/secondary residential zone
district where the average slope ofthe site beneath the exisling or proposed struclure and parking area is in
excess of thirty percent (30%):
A. A soil and foundation investigation, prepared by and bearing the seal of a registered professional
engineer shall be required.
B. Foundations must be designated and bear the seal of a registered professional engineer.
C. A topographic survey prepared by a registered surveyor, with contour intervals of not more than two feet
(2'), shall be required.
D. Structures must be designed by a licensed architect.
E. Site coverage as it pertains to this chapler, as permitted by sections 12-6A-9, 12-68-9, 12-6C-9 and
12-6D-9 of this title, is amended as follows:
1 . Not more than fifteen percent (15%) of the site area may be covered by buildings, except in conjunction
with a type I employee housing unit in accordance with chapter 13 of this title, in which case not more than
twenty percent (20%) of the site area may be covered by buildings; and
2. Not more than ten percent (10%) ofthe total site area may be covered by driveways and surface
parking.
F. A site grading and drainage plan shall be required.
G. A detailed plan of retaining walls or cuts and fills in excess of five feet (5') shall be required.
H. A detailed revegetation plan must be submitted.
l. The administrator may require an environmental impact report as provided in section 12-12-2 of this title.
J. A minimum of one covered parking space shall be provided for each dwelling unit.
f :\everyonevussvnemosvockmmem2 1l
K. Setbacks, as they apply to lhis chapter, as required by sections 12-6A-6, 12-68-6, 12-6C-6 and 12-6D-6
of this title, are amended as follows: there shall be no required front setback for garages, except as may
be required by the design review board. Garages located in the front setback, as provided for in this
section, shall be limited to one story in height (not to exceed 10 feet) with the addition of a pitched or flat
roof and subject to review and approval by the design review board.
L. Retaining walls up to six feet (6') in height may be permitted in the setback by the design review board
when associated with a permitted garage as referenced in subsection K of this section. (Ord. 5(2001) g
3: Ord.2(1995) $ 1: Ord. 13(1994) S 1)
12-21-15: RESTRICTIONS lN GEOLOGICALLY SENSITIVE AREAS:
A. Maps Adopted: The following maps are hereby adopted as the official maps of the town, identifying areas
of geologic sensitivity:
1. The debris flow and debris avalanche hazard analysis map prepared by Arthur l. Mears, P.E., Inc., and
dated November 1984.
2. The rockfall map prepared by Schmueser and Associates, Inc., and dated November Zg,1gB4.
3. All areas within the boundaries of the geologic hazards map, figure 3, prepared by Lincoln Devore
Engineers, Geologists and dated August 16, 1982.
B. Investigation:
1. In any area located within the boundaries of the Lincoln DeVore map, or in any area identified as a
debris flow or debris avalanche area by the Mears map, or in any area identified as a rock fall area by the
Schmueser map, no initial application for a building permit, grading permit or major or minor subdivision
shall be approved until a site specific geologic investigation is complete. For the purpose ofthis section,
a site specitic geologic investigation shall be deemed a detailed geologic investigation which is
applicable to each respective site. All reports and studies required by this section shall be prepared by a
"professional geologist", as defined by Colorado Revised Statutes section 34-1-01, as amended, or a
"registered professional engineer'', as defined by Colorado Revised Statutes section 12-25-102, as
amended, under the direction of and at the expense of the owner/applicant and submitted to the
Department of Community Development.
2. The extent of the site-specific ecologic investigation required shall be determined by the geologist or
engineer \ rho is responsible for the investigation; however, the investigation shall be of sufficient
thoroughness and accuracy to allow such expert to certify to the following:
a. For all structures other than single-family, duplex and primary/secondary dwellings, and "accessory
uses" thereto as defined in Section 12-6C4 of this Code:
(1) Whether the geologic conditions are such that the site can or cannot be developed for the
specific structure or use proposed without corrective engineering or engineered construction, or
other mitigation or alterations.
(2) Whether corrective engineering or engineered construction, or other mitigation or alteralions can
or cannot be accomplished to reduce the danger to the public health, safety or to property due to
problems related to geologic sensitivity to a reasonable level, and not increase the hazard to other
properties or structures, or to public buildings, rights of way, roads, streets, easements, utilities or
facilities or other properties of construction.
b. For single-family, duplex and primary/secondary dwellings, and "accessory uses" thereto as defined
in Section 12-6C-4 of this Title, the site-specific geologic investigation shall certify to the following:
(1) Whether the site can be developed for the specific structure or use proposed without corrective
engineering or engineered construction or other mitigation or alterations; or
(2) That the site is a geologically sensitive area but development will not increase the hazard to
other property or structures, or to public buildings, rights ofway, roads, streets, easements, utilities
f :\everyoneVuss\rnemos\rockmmem2 t2
or facilities or other properties of any kind.
C. Development Plan Or Building Permit: Following the complelion of the site-specific geological
investigation and its review by the Department of Community Development, a development plan may be
approved or a building permit may be issued as follows:
1. For all structures other than single-family, duplex and primary/secondary dwellings, and "accessory
uses" thereto as defined in Section 12-6C-4 of this Title.
a. lf the conclusion of the engineer or geologist performing the investigation is that the site can be
developed for the specific structure or activity proposed without corrective engineering or engineered
construction or other mitigation or alterations, the subdivision plan or building permit or grading permit
may be approved without conditions relating to the mitigation of the areas of geologic sensitivity.
b. lf the finding of the engineer or geologist performing the geologic investigation is that the site is a
geologically sensitive area, but that corrective engineering or engineered construclion or olher
mitigation or alterations can be accomplished to reduce the danger to the public health and safety or to
property to a reasonable level, and such mitigation does not increase the hazard to other property or
structures, or to public buildings, roads, streets, rights of way, easements, utilities or facilities, approval
of lhe development plan and/or the issuance of the building or grading permit shall be conditional and
contingent upon approval of plans for corrective engineering and engineered construction or other
litigation or alterations as set forth in this Title.
c. lf the conclusion of the geologist or engineer performing the site-specific geologic investigation is
that the site cannot be developed for the structure or use proposed because the danger posed by the
geologically sensitive area cannol be reduced or mitigated to a reasonable level, the subdivision plan
or building permit or grading permit shall be denied.
2. For single-family, duplex, and primary/secondary dwellings, and "accessory uses" thereto as deflned in
Section 12-6C-4 of this Title:
a. lf the conclusion of ihe engineer or the geologist performing the investigation is that the site can be
developed for the specific struclure or use proposed without corrective engineering or engineered
construction or other mitigation or alterations, or that the site is a geologically sensitive area, bul will
not increase the hazard to other property or structures or to public buildings, roads, streets, rights of
way, easements, utilities or facilities, a grading permit or building permit may be issued.
b. lf the finding of the engineer or geologist performing the site specific geologic investigation is that
the site is a geologically sensitive area, but that corrective engineering or engineered construction or
other mitigation or alterations can be accomplished so that there is no increased hazard to other
property or structures, or to public buildings, roads, streets, rights of way, easements, utilities or
facilities, the issuance of a building or grading permit shall be conditional and contingent upon
approval of plans for corrective engineering or engineered construction or other mitigation or
alterations as set forth in this Section.
c. lf the conclusion of the geologisl or engineer performing the site-specific geologic investigation is
that the site cannot be developed for the structure proposed because the danger posed by the
geologically sensitive area cannot be reduced or mitigated so that the hazard to other properties or
struclures will not increase from the present level or the hazard to public buildings, roads, streets, rights
of way, easements, utilities and facilities will not increase from the present level, then the building
permit or grading permit shall be denied.
D. Construction Requirements: The following requirements shall pertain to the construction of any building or
structure to be built in an identified or designated area of geologic sensitivity and which requires
corrective engineering or engineered construction or other mitigation or alterations to reduce the danger
to public health and safety orto property due to such problems as set forth in subsections C1b or C2b
aoove.
1. The certified site specific reports and plans required by this subsection shall be prepared by each
engineer and geologist as applicable to their area of expertise and specialty and shall certify that:
f :bveryonevussvnemosvockmmem2 l3
a. Adequate base data as may be pertinent has been provided.
b. Said base data is utilized in the design and planning of the proposed project or structure.
c. Design and construction procedures derived from said base data are execuled.
d. Design and construction will reduce danger to the public health, safety or property due to geologic
sensitivity to a reasonable level.
2. No certificate of occupancy, temporary or permanent, shall be issued until the following have been
approved by the Department of Community Development or its authodzed representatives:
a. Inspection and certification by the Town Building Official and the engineer or geologist who
prepared the plans and specifications that the work was properly performed in accordance with the
plans and specifications.
b. lf the engineer, geologist, or Building Official of the Town finds that the work is not being done in
accordance with the approved plans and specifications, the discrepancy shall be reported immediately
in writing to the contractor and to the Department of Community Development. Recommendations for
corrective measures, if necessary, shall also be submitted.
c. All geologic reports prepared under this Section shall be signed by and prepared by or under the
responsible direction of "professional geologists" as defined by Colorado Revised Statutes section
34-1-201 , as amended. Such professional geologist shall be experienced and competent in the
geologic specialty required to meet the objectives of this Chapter. Such professional geologist shall be
responsible for certification of all geologic maps and reports prepared by him/her under his/her
responsible direction as specified in this Section. All engineering reports required by this Section shall
be done by a "registered professional engineer" as defined by Colorado Revised Slatutes section
12-25-102, as amended.
E. Existing Uses Continued; Exceptions: Existing use of land, structures or premises which are not in
conformity with the provisions of this regulation may be continued, except for the following:
1. No building permit will be issued for the exterior expansion, alteration or addition to existing structures
in geologically sensitive areas except for windows, skylights and other similar minor alterations unless the
requirements of subsections B through D of this Section are complied with.
2. Struclures existing on the effective date hereof which are damaged or d'estroyed may be reconstructed
without compliance to this Seclion as long as said structure complies with other applicable ordinances
and is constructed to substantially the same dimensions as existed prior to damage or destruction,
unless given approval by the Town to alter the design.
F. Notice Requirements: In order to provide reasonable notice to the public of the problems related to
geologically sensitive areas, the following notice regulations and requirements are hereby adopted for all
real property and structures located in geologically sensitive areas:
1 . All subdivision plats recorded after the effective date hereof shall identify and designate each lot and
block, or portions thereof, located within any geologically sensitive area, togelher with applicable
sub-zone designations, by a stamp or writing in a manner providing reasonable notice to interested
oarties.
2. All plans submitted after the effective date hereof with the building permit application for property within
said areas shall be stamped by the applicant "Geologically Sensitive Area" logether with the applicable
zone designation.
3. Prior to the issuance of any building permit for construction within the geologically sensitive areas, the
owner shall submit a written, signed and notarized affidavit certifoing acknowledgement of receiving
personal notice of the fact that said building or structure is in an area of geologic sensitivity and notice of
the studies conducted to date with regard thereto.
4. AII owners, lessors or agents who rent, lease or sublet any structure or premises within an area of
f :bveryonevussVnemosVockmmem2 t4
geologic sensitivity shall provide the tenant, lessee or subtenant with written notice that said property is
located within said area prior to any lease being entered into or occupancy, whichever occurs first, if said
rental lease or sublease will extend into the period of April 1 through July 1 ofany year.
5. Each and every real estate agent, sales person and broker, and each and every private party who
offers for sale or shows a parcel of real estate and/or structure for sale within said area of geologic
sensitivity, shall provide the prospective purchaser, with written notice that said real property and/or
slructure is located within said area of geologic sensitivity. Furthermore, written notice shall be made in
all instances prior to the execution of any sales documents and shall state that this Section and the
itudies and maps referred to in this Section are available for public inspeclion at the office of the
Department of Community Development and that said maps, studies and this Section should be
reviewed prior to any party entering into any agreement or contract with regard thereto.
G. Disputes; Procedure: In any case where a person wishes to dispute the designation of any property as a
geologically sensitive area by one of the maps and studies adopted by this Section, the following
procedures shall be followed:
1. A written application shall be filed with the Departmenl of Community Development requesting such a
hearing and providing a supporling site-specific geologic investigation.
2. A hearing shall be set on a date a minimum of thirty (30) days after the application has been filed to
allow for a staff review.
3. At the hearing before the Town Council, the applicanl shall be given a reasonable opportunity to
present his/her case and submit technical and geologic evidence to support his/her claim. lf the
site-specific geologic investigation establishes by clear and convincing evidence that the property should
not be designated as a geologically sensitive area, the Town Council shall direct the Department of
Community Development to amend the map appropriately.
H. Additions To Maps: In any case where a person wishes to have one of the official maps adopted by this
Title amended lo notate more detailed site-specific information is available, the following procedure shall
be followed:
1. A wriften application shall be filed with the Department of Community Development requesting such a
hearing and providing a supporting site-specific aeologic investigation.
2. A hearing shall be set on a date not less than thirty (30) days after the application has been filed nor
more than sixty (60) days to allow for a staff review.
3. lf the applicant establishes at the hearing by clear and convincing evidence that the information
contained in the site-specific geologic investigation is reliable, the Town Council shall direct the
Department of Community Development to keep a copy of said site-specific investigation on file in the
Department of Community Development and available to the general public and shall further direct the
Department of Community Development to notate the appropriate official map adopted by this Chapter
so that it indicates that said site-specific investigation is on file with the Department of Community
Development. (Ord,20(1985) $ 1:Ord.5(1985) S 5)
f :bveryonevussvnemos\rockmmem2 l5
lv.
5) August 21s\ 2002'. Town Council approved of an easement on Town property to
allow for construction of the wall.
The wall has now been constructed and the Homeowners are now requesting a hearing
with the Planning and Environmental Commission and the Town Council to present
documentation from a qualified engineer and the State Geological Survey that the wall
was constructed in accordance with the approved plans and to request a modification to
the Town hazard maps. lf this request is made and approved by the Town Council, the
Homeowners Association property would still be identified in a rockfall hazard area, but
the maps would indicate that approved mitigation exists for the site and would refer to the
site specific report. lt should be noted that 100% mitigation of a natural hazard is in most
cases, not possible. Please see Disclaimer of Liability in section 12-21-9 (Attachment
D).
CRITERIA AND FINDINGS FOR HMARD PLAN CHANGE
Specific criteria for amending the Master Hazard Plans are not provided in the code.
However, the purpose statement ol 12-21 and provisions for providing mitigation for
development specified in section 12-21-15-C.1 do provide criteria for a decision to
amend the hazard master plan. The following are the recommended criteria for making
an amendment to the hazard plans:
That the corrective engineering or engineered construction or other mitigation or
alternations can be accomplished to reduce the danger to the public health and
safety to property to a reasonable level.
Staff Resoonse: Based on the engineering design of the wall and the review of the
wall construction by qualifled engineers, staff believes that the rockfall hazard is
reasonably mitigated.
Such mitigation does not increase the hazard to other property or structures or to
public buildings, roads, streets, rights of way, easements, utilities or facilities.
Staff Response: Based on reliable engineering input the mitigation will not impact
other property or structures, or public buildings, roads, streets, rights of way,
easements, utilities or facilities.
The applicant must establish by clear and convincing evidence that the information
contained in the site speciflc geological investigati tonisreffiF-
Statf Response: The Colorado Geological Survey is the{agency responsible for
identifying and helping to develop mitigation for geological hazards in the State of
Colorado. John White who provided direction on the design and who provided a
letter verifying the effectiveness of the mitigation is a Senior Project Engineer
Geologist with the Colorado Geologic Survey. He has over 20 years of experience
working in geological sensitive areas. Yenter Company was involved in hazard
mitigation in numerous projec{around the State including Glenwood Canyon. Staff
believes that the individuals irfuolved in thr design and construction of the mitigation
f :\everyonevussvnemos\rockmmem2
Attachment E
t:\everyonevussvnemos\rockmmem2 16
!'l{AR-12-2002 03:l0Pll FR0lFColorado
5*'.r,
turutt
COTORADO CEOTOGICAL SURVEY
Division o[ Minerals and Geology
Dopa.unent of Natural Resourccs
1313 Sherman strceL Roorn 7ts
PrnverColoredo 80203
Phone: t303) 865-261 I
FAX; (303) 566-2a61
su_98_0004
Mrr.ehL2,20Qz
Iv[r. Russell Forrcst
Senior Environnratal Planner
Town ofVail
75 SouthFrontageRoad
Vail, CO 81657
RE: Review of Rockfall Mitigation for Booth Falls Condominiums.
Eill Owtrr.
gortrr|or
DEPARTMENTOF
NANJRAL
RESOURCES
GreX E Walcher
Ercsvtir.c O[lc€bt
Mich.el B. Long
Oivilbt Dircclq
Vickl Cow.n
strt. Ccolotirl
and Didclot
Dear Russ:
The cGS was requested by you to provide some additional comments on rhe completed
rockfall mitigation at the Booth Crcek Condomi'riums in the Town of Vail. At your earlier
rcquett, I inspectcd rhc rockfall mitigation structures on October 22, 200Iafter corsbucrion was
completed last fall and serit comments to you in a lefter dated Novcmber 9, 2001.
A qucstion arose conceming any potential impacts to adjaccni owners from the
Dwing my site inspection
ely impact adjaceat
water rank. There sh<iuld
be sufficient room rc stockpile the mow against the foot of the wesrern wall if the water tank
road ueeds plowing for access during the winter.
Also dre issue of mainteriance and inspection of the smrcturcs was raised. The
mechanically stabilized earth impact walls arc basically maintenance-free. One concern l raised
last fall was Potential for sloughing or slumping of soil into the catchmeut zone from the bare cut
slopes. If not cleaned out, the soil accumulation could effectively reduce the wall height. Thc
cut slopes behind the walls (re-vegetated and stabilized as resmmended) should be inspected
every spring or after an unusually hcavy prccipiration eveut. The barrier walls should also bc
inspected after any rockfall impacts. Crushed ponions of the wall facing aftcr impact should be
quickly repaired. Yonrx Companies can provide guidance on rccommended repair recbniques
for the wall facing.
o The only other type of failure of the system that could arise is a bcaring faiture ofthel
native soils that the impact barrier wall is founded on. If tilting or sagging ofportions of thel
1 '/
IIAR-ll-200? 03:l0Pll FR0ll-Col orado GrlElical Survrr 303868218 |T-0t1 P.003/003 F-50s
walls is observed, the homeowner's association should inforn Yenter Companies and rcguire
their stsfrto inspect thc structure. Slight undufations slong tbe lengh of the walls by dift€rsnrial
settlerneht will not effect the performanae of the strucfiues. While m unlikely scenario, advsrse
tilting of the structures could be more problemaric.
Inspectim of the walls and satchmcnt zone behind should be pat of a nomal
maintenancc iteo of tbe condominium grouuds by rhe homeowners association- I do not believe
this astion needs to be couducted by oity stalf udess distress of thc wall paallel ro thc watcr tmk
access rcad is observed, which could possibly affect the roadway. Agan, I bclicve it is vcry
unlikely that tbis would occur.
Enclosed u'ith this letter is a copy of the original roclchll assessmenr rqpon the CGS
prepared after ttre March 26, 1997 rockfall cvent If you have atry questions, please contact this
office at (303) 866-3551 or e-mail: ionathan.while@state.co.us
Sincelely,
Jonathan L. lVhite
Engineering Geologist
.IfEHTER
Mr. Russell Forrest
Senior Environment Planner
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
RE: Booth Falls Rockfall Mitigation Project Completion
Supplement to letter dated October 25, 2OOl
Dear Mr, Forrest;
Yenter Companies has substantially completed the Booth Falls Rockfall
Mitigation Project.
Landform grading and barrier heights selected for this project meet rockfall
mitigation design criteria developed by the Colorado Depaftment of
Transportation as presented in its computer program, Colorado Rockfall
simulation Program (CRSP). Barrier design follows full scale barrier tests oy
CDOT and the Colorado Geological Suryey.
This grading and barrier configuration will contain rocks conforming to the
maximum probable rock size as determined by the CGS and probable
velocities and trajectories as determined by CRSP.
The construdion of these walls for the purpose of rockfalt
mitigation has not increased the rockfall hazard to adjaent
propefties.
A 6 foot high fence has been placed on the tops of the barriers to contain
small rock fragments as an additional safety precaution. There are no
established design criteria for this fence, nor are there guidelines on required
strength and height.
Attached are As-Constructed cross sections for each of the three barriers and
a map showing their locations relative to property boundaries. This project
was constructed in substantial compliance with the plans and specifications.
Sincerely,
Albert C. Ruckman, P. E.
7/r/o
20300 W. Highway 72, Awada, CO 80007 .3031279-4458. Fax3031279-0908 . www.yenter.com
RESOLUTION No.2
Series ot 2002
A RESOLUTION TO MODIFY THE ROCKFALL HAZARD MAPS TO SHOW
APPROVED MITIGATION FOR THE BOOTH FALLS TOWNHOMES LOCATED AT
3094 BOOTH FALLS COURT/LOT 1, BLOCK 2, VAIL VILLAGE 12TH FILING.
WHEREAS, Lot 1, Block 2 Vail Village 12th Filling is in a High Severity Rockfall
Hazard as detailed in the Schmueser and Associates Inc Rockfall study.
WHEREAS, a rock fall mitigation wall was completed in 2001 to protect the
residents and property on Lot 1, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing.
WHEREAS, the design for the rockfall mitigation was approved by the Colorado
Geological Survey and a qualified engineer and determined that the mitigation would
effectively protect the property from reasonably foreseeable rockfall hazards
WHEREAS, the mitigation wall was inspected by the Colorado Geological Survey
after construction was completed and the wall was found to be constructed to the
approved plans.
' WHEREAS, the mitigation will not adversely impact other private or public
property or improvements.
WHEREAS, this mitigation supports the purpose of Chapter 12-12-21-l which is
to "help protect the inhabitants of the Town from dangers relating to development of
flood plains, avalanche paths, steep slopes and geologically sensitive areas.'
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Town Council of the Town of Vail,
Colorado;
That the area in attachment A be identified as having approved mitigation on the
Town of Vail Rockfall Hazard Map.
INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 19h day of March,
2002.
Ludwig Kuz, Mayor, Town of Vail
Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk, Town of Vail
l{0V-00-2001 ll:56All FR0lFCulorado Gfical Survrr
COLORADO GEOIOGICAI SURVFY
oivi5ion of Mijpralr lnd Gcology
DeDanment of Naturol Resourc6
131 I sh€rman Sreet, Rdom 715
Dcrvcr, Colorado 00201
Pho^cr (303! 066-261I
FAX: (1031 5662461
Novernber 9,2001
Idr. Russell Forrest
Senior Environme,ntal Planner
Town of Vail
75 South Frontagc Road
Vail, CO 81657
3038562{6r T-?36 P.001/002 F-738
STA|E OF COLORADO
Bill O,.,enr
@vqrro
DEPARTMENTOF
NATI.IRAL
RESOURCES
Grrg E. Wrkhcr
Er€cuivc Oi.rtld
Michrcl B. Lo.E
Oivirion Di'tc!o?
vi.ki Cohrart
Strtc Geolo8irr
arld DirEdgr
RE Review of Yerter Compenies Rocldall lVlitigation Impact Barrier for Booth Falls
Coudominiums.
Dear Mr. Forrest:
At yoru request ia our phone discussion last month, the Colorado Geological Stwey has
reviewsd the inertial barrier wall for the Booth Falls Condominium complo( constucted by
Yemer Companies- The CGS conducted a site inve$igation of the project on October 22.2001.
Two geotextile-reinforced soil walls were complaed at that timc of our inspection so we did not
havc an opportrmity to obsef,vc the actual wall construclion. While internal aspects of the wall
coDstrugtion are unlcnown to us, it apPears that lhe wall geomefry conforms to the desip as
submitrcd by Yenter Companies. A desip eleoent thar was missing at the hme of our
inspection was the fsnce that Yenrcr proposed for the top of the wall. Mr. Barrett sssured me
that the fqrce was still planned and would be instdled as sooD as tbe fence confractor was
available.
This system will provide a lwel of protection that is, in some aspccts, superior to the
dirch end bcrm configruation for the properties to the east. Once the fence is installcd at thc top
of the wall, thc wall constucdon will basically conform to the Yentcr plan details and will have
the wall geoneFy thar conficrm to the r€conrDendations this offtcc felt was necessary for
effccrive rocldall mitigetion of rhis sitc.
Tbe only coscern we have at this point is the rcvegetation of the cut slope bertrind the
barricr. If Ieft in its curent condition, nmof may causo crosion and minor slumping of soil into
the rock catcbment area The cut slope should be seeded and some bpe of erosion control
matting (ECM) or turf rcinforcemeut matting (fRM) should be staked to the slope.
Post-iFFaxNote 7671 F,,lqlrr lf"$".> a
ilR"rr= €-n'*-+'!F-*Fa,.. tPh'.Ie
co,rocet. U4i t co' L6 s
Phonc ***'toR 966'?Sf FnrHp Lfi4-flSL Fax {
t
I
I
fr
I
T
I
4r ([)))
NEHSION
BtASllllG
cownAcr
ELASING
ffiwcEs
I
I
I
I
t
I
l
I
I
wFslmil
VBRANON
sm4trsrs
!
I
I
October 25,2007
Mr. Russell Forrest
Senior Environment planner
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
RE: Booth Falls Rockfalt Mitigation'project Comptetion
Dear Mr. Forrest;
Yenter companies has substantially completed the Booth Falls Rockfall
Mitigation Projeci.
Landform grading and barrier heights selected for this project meet
rockfall mitigation design criteria developed by the Cotorado
Department of Transportation as presented in its computer program,
colorado Rockfall simulation Program (cRSp). Barrier design foltows
full scale barrier tests by CDOT and the Colorado Geological Suruey.
This grading and barrier configuration will contain rocks conforming to
the maximum probable rock size as determined by the CGS and
probable velocities and trajectories as determined by CRSp
A 6 foot high fence has been placed on the tops of the barriers to
contain small rock fragments as an additional safety precaution. There
are no established design criteria for this fence, nor are there
guidelines on required strength and height.
Attached are As-Constructed cross sections for each of the three
barriers and a map showing their locations relative to property
boundaries. This project was constructed in substantial compliance
with the plans and specifications.
Sincerely,
a4.-tq FJ*-
Albeft C. Ruckman, P. E.
tt/rf/at
20300 W. Highway 72, Awada, CO 80007 .3031279-4458. Fax gOg/279-Og0B. www.yenter.com
'"-*r*,,,,',;;;' ,*,",i,.,.* c.orolr ,1,""""i""'""'
--
;;;;,""""' Ur-r,, p.ooz/0oz F-r37
Ti^e Yenter QemF:lies rockfall protection impact barrier constucted at tlre Booth Falls
Condominiums is an excellent desip and will provide Ore level of rodrfall protection the
condominiuns so desperately need there. If youhave any questions please contact tbis offrce at
(3 03) 866-35 5 I or e-mail: ionathan'white@sarc.co-us
SincerelY,
B- Barrctt, Yenter Companies, fax only
Noe, CGS
Critical Landslide File
Senior Engincering Geologist
1
I N0V-09.?001 lt :53AM FRotFCotorado Geo
i I
lSurvey 303865246 |T-235 P.001/002 F-731
STATE OF COLORADO
coloRAoo GsoroctcAr. suRvEY
Oivision of Min€ral! and Geolog!,
Oepanment of NarurEl Rerources
13I3 Shorman Strec! Roorn 7'l 5
Denver, Colorado 80201
Phone: (3ol) 856-2611
FAXr (303) 066-2461
Nove.nber 9,2001 gill OwsF!
Covc<ror
DEPARTMENTOF
NAIURAL
RESOURCES
C,eE E. wnlcAe/
Exc<utivc Oire<to,
Mi.lu.l 8. LonE
Dlvlrion Oi.ccto.
Vicki Cowr.r
Statc Crolo8iir
and OirEcror
Mr. Russell Forrest
Senior Environmental Planner
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
RE:Review of Yenter Companies Rockfell Mitigation Impact Barrier for Booth Falls
Coudominiums.
Dear Mr. Forrest:
At your request in our phone discussioa last month, the Colorado Geological Survey has
reviewed the iacrtial barrier wall for the Booth Falls Condominium complex construcred by
Yenter Companies. The CGS conducted a site investigation of the project on October 22,2001.
Two geotextile-reinforced soil walls were completed at that time of our inspection so we did not
have au opportuniry to observe the acfual wall constmction. While intemal aspects of the wall
constuction are t'nlcnown to us, it appears that the wall geometry conforms to the desigo as
submitted by Yenter Compz"iss. A design element that was missing at the dme of our
inspection was the fence tJrat Yenter proposed for the top of ttre wall. Mr. Barrett assured me
that the fence was still planned and would be installed as soon as the fence contactor was
available.
This system witl provide a level of protection that is, in some aspecrs, superior to the
dirch and berm conf.guration for the propcrties to the east. Once tre fence is installed at the top
of the wall, the wall constnrction will basically conform to the Yenter plan details and will have
the wall geonetry that conform to the rocommendations this of6ce felt was necessary for
effective rockfall mitigadon of thjs site.
The only concern we have at this point is the revegetation of the cut slope behind the
barrier. If left in its current condition, runolf may cause erosion and minor slumpi-ng of soil into
the rock catcbment area. The cut slope should be seeded and some tJp€ of erosion control
matting (ECM) or turf reinforcement matling (tRM) should be staked to the slope.
D.i<tJF Fax Note 7671 dr,"j-ffi|", l-"Eqjl
t" B'S-Ges=$--F-'HtIJ*-
ajaFy.y^Lz_.r-;co Clos
tnonn n3A3 94.35-s I Phone s
Fer #F'Ba3 gX1-ffi--
d !T
!466
t6 -!"'
9fr rt-! 6E;f,i,iFiH-FEsEsSF
;iiEqE;
F'.Hf3'H
gE;i;;E
rriElse
I
q
Zl
d
iii
iii
Ili
t
I
I
iiui
lliilr
*
I
I
i
!
I I
I t I I
I a i"I
I I
;I
a
I
I t t I I I
a
I
I
I I
t
I !.!!it
FI
ik
t!
Ft
!,)
.J
+.l
(,
I
E
I I t I t t
F I
I
?
Ctl
EI lr{
3l
zl
ql
o
CB
C)g
h
t{
C)
L{t<
CO
/r|\
a a
c)t-{!F)
t-{ 'o tu
Fi
FI r!E
q.l
OJ tn
||
p
E
=e
ss*.E FS iEs ; d.E H+i * q- -E;a F rl=.E s E:9 : e3E
aA
A.E Ae
bF Fr .Y # UE J E.E 3 ZA
E
9.s! E gE .., E
EE El *"E
EE El r EHs
3.8 €IE -{H3 g"€ El r 5a'IE ''g; .cli !***i EE EIR EEh-gE
;t jE 5lH rEgE$F
t2
E
qt
e)IE
o ()
u)
e
E tl'
ct
-,i R f>
F
O=L(,8Pd?
o
^l
5EE*0adE<
O z
a
LIJ z
o_
v.L!F z
LLI
tuh-
Pnrject Enginccring Gcologist
B. Barrett, Ycntcr Cotnpnnles, firx only
W.P, Rogcls, COS
File
Ftft coLo_SURV.se3a9a2l
Br|qh I'rlb irtl dcri|rr tcvi'v. fulE 2
' Thc 'l own of Vnil must tirkc Ineasurcs lo insure that rhc rockfall protection tyslcm,
wlr(ln cotrslt'rtctetl, tltrCs nrlt dcviatC fronr the ptans, sJrer:iliCatirrns, Artd our rccOmntgxl litrns
witlrout prior apprtrval.
ln cotrclusion, tlre CCS br:liuvcs thot tltc Ycnt',"r fqn,rpcnies design for rockfnll prorcction at
the Booth l'olls (londruniniunrr is an cxccltcnt dr,'sign .ud will nlso providc rockfall protection th€
Rrrth (lrcck Contlonriuirtnt.l so d!:s1)cralcly ncccl. l!'you, of any othcr corrccrrrcd or inlclcrtcd party
havc any questions plcnsc contact this rrlfiec at (3(ll)894.2167.
Sinccrcly,
cc:
sEP-2r-94 o4 :€'2 AFI coLo_. suRv.ot
STA|E CFCCLO|(ADC
corol^oo crot.c|6tc^] SunvIY
l)rvr\irlrr ul M;'!'r;llr ;rtxl (,rrrul)!
Drtt.rrtnrrrrt r,{ NJh,r.ll NBvx tr r'
I l1 1 qh{.n,,r \rhr1!. ({x'm J'|:'
Dr.'avlr, (irlrrr.rtlo il)?ll I
I'hr)rlc I ,0 l) N'1, Jb | |
rAI ( ltrir0(rL l4(,r
Scp(rrrrhrr 21. l99E
Mr lt rssell Forr sst
Senior llnviroumcnllrl l)loturcr
'[own rrf Vail
75 Suutlr Frontngc Rt,.r.,l
Vail, C:O I1657
A lochctt
clccrl-our z(}rtc. itt
l)t'tnlr.TMrN l (Jf
NATURAL
I\.['SC)TJRCES
| !rnr- i t'rhlr !l
Rt:: Rsvicw of Ycntcr (lontprnicl Rockfnll Mitignlion Aftcrnatlvc for Dooth Flllr
Contlominlunrs.
Dcnr Mr. Ijorrcst:
At tfic rcqucst ol'tlrc 'l'orvn of Vcil. tlrc (irhrrndo .Gr'oklgical Srtrvcy has rs-viewecl th,-'
rltcrnativc dcsign ftrr rockllll flote'ctiun for thc Brroth lrllls ('onrtr.rrniniunt cortlplex pruvidcd by
Ycntcr C'onlpauir.:s. Wc concur rryitlr Mr. lJnuclt's lnc\tinlcnt tltlt tltcir wull will provide tlle rnntc
lcvt l of prgrcctiorr tr'r lhc llooth ('reck Corrr'lontiniuuts irs lhc rtriginal A KS design. In ccnain ffpeets,
ltch 1rs tj1g ncgativ(. brncr of thc iuq:ract sidc ol tlrr.'wr.rll iul(l thc sptrry lttlcc on the k)p of thc wal[,
itis.ilfirctirbclct,,,,,rrccol5clvillivedsrsign. ltflppr.,lrs(bul tlrcwall gcontcttic5gsnfi)3tnt9 lhe
ninirnunr rr,.rllirLrplgllts this ofl'icc l'clt was nece$slry firl cll'cctive rockfall nlitigittiun ol'this site.
LIpqn rcvicw of thr,. dcsign of tlrc prtrtcction systL-tn faxc(l tcr tt'ris rrfficc by Ycntcr Comnanics,
wt, lr.lvr.. tlrr; sa6rc rpinqr srrnccrr6 lts st01'd iu nty oliginal Nr)vr)lltrct 2(r,1991 rtsview lcncr. Thosc
c(rnccrtrs :md recoolr'nctttlitt irrns irre I isled bt:low:
Unlcss Ycltcr Conrparrics trtvc extcrrdcd thc ll foot wall to inrprovt' lhc two woll's
overlip, lhc l2 foot higtr rvall should rctuin its full h('iEhI as il txtcn(ln l(t thc scrnvicc roud.
'ltrc tir:red rcdttclion lt lhc wail cnd crcilttrs thc pttniiol t'or trotrnding rtlcks tr'r possibly
hounc.. ov(r thc r€(ttrc('d wnll hr:ight portirll, ond tniss thc cntl ttf tltc E frrot wnll'
Thc Ycntcr rtolcs indicxtc tlut thc gradirrg nl'thr scrvicc rod is still plirnnccl i!1 f;ont
of thc t tint high wull. Thul is.srill roqrrircd unlss lhc wnll height is inr:rcascd, os expllincd
in thc Novr'ttttrcr 20. 1997 rcvicw L'llr"t,
g;rle
liunt
should hc innatlcd t(r prevelll unfiuthotiz€(l vchiclc occcss in10 lhc
()t'thc it)lpicr w ll,
Fo3lll' Fer Noic
Attacbrent D: Letter from Colorado Geological Survey
l{0Y-00-?001 ll:56tI FROFColondo
fqical
Survrr t098682{6r
I
T-236 P.002/002 F-730
Tho Yenter Companies rockfall protectiorr imJract barri* constnrc'ted at the Booth Falls
CmAorniniuos is an crccellent desigu and will pmvide lhe lwcl ofrockfall pmtcctio'n the
condominiqns so dcspaately need there. If youbave any questionspleasc contaa this olfice at
(303) 866-3551 or e-mail: jonathan'white(Dstate.co'rs
Sincerely,
B. Barret, Yenta Compauies, fax only
Noc, CGS
Critical I,andslide File
Scnior Engiaeeriag Cr€ologist
ATTACHMENT D
Hazard Regulations
12-21-|i PURPOSE:
The purpose of this Chapter is to help protect the inhabitants of the Town from dangers relating to
development of flood plains, avalanche paths, steep slopes and geologically sensitive areas; to regulate the
use of land areas which may be subject to flooding and avalanche or which may be geologically sensitive;
and further to regulate development on steep slopes; lo protect the economic and property values ofthe
Town, to protecl the aesthetic and recreational values and natural resources of the Town, which are
sometimes associated with flood plains, avalanche areas and areas of geological sensitivity and slopes; to
minimize damage to public facilities and utilities and minimize the need for relief in cleanup operalions; to
give notice to the public of certain areas within the Town where flood plains, avalanche areas and areas of
geologic sensitivity exist; and to promote the general public health, safety and welfare. (Ord. 5(1985) $ 1:
ord. 12(1978) S a)
12-21-2: DEFINITIONS:
For the purposes of this Chapter, the words contained in this Section are defined as follows:
BLUE HAZARD AVALANCHE AREA: An area impacted by a snow producing a total static and dynamic
pressure less than six hundred (600) pounds per square foot on a flat surface normal to the flow and/or a
return interval in excess of twenty tive (25) years.
FLOOD HAZARD ZONE: That area covered by the base flood. The base flood area is any numbered A, AO,
AH, or area of 1oo-year shallow flooding indicated on the Flood Insurance Rate Map, associated work maps,
and Flood Insurance Study. The flood hazard zone is also any area indicated as "flood plain" as defined by
the Gore Creek Flood Plain Information Report, 1975, as designated in Section 12-21-11 of this Chapter.
FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY: The official report provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency
that includes flood profiles and water surface elevation ofthe base flood.
GEOLOGICALLY SENSITIVE AREA: An area within the Town of Vail which may be subject to rock falls, mud
flows, debris flows, debris avalanches, and unstable soil, slopes or rocks.
RED HAZARD AVALANCHE AREA: dny area impacted by a snow avalanche producing a total static and
dynamic pressure in excess of six hundred (600) pounds per square foot on a flat surface normal to the flow
and/or a return interval of less than twenty five (25) years.
SLOPE: "Slope" is as defined in Section 12-2-2 of this Title.
SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENT: Any repair, reconstruction, or improvement of a structure, the cost of which
equals or exceeds fifty percent (50%) of the market value ofthe structure. Market value shall be determined
by a qualified assessor designated by the Administrator. The markel value of a structure is determined either:
A. Before the improvement or repair is started; or
B. lf the structure has been damaged and is being reslored, before the damage occurred. For the
purposes of this definition "substantial improvement" is considered lo occur when the first alteration of
any wall, ceiling, floor, or other slruclural part of the building commences, whether or not that alteration
affects the external dimensions ofthe struclure. The term does not, however, include any project for
improvement of a structure to comply with existing State or local health, sanitary, or safety code
specifications which are solely necessary to assure safe living conditions.
ZONE OF INFLUENCE: Any area in a potential avalanche hazard zone where detailed information is not
currently available but which may be impacted by said hazard. These zones of influence shall be designated
on the appropriate maps of the Administrator of the Town. (Ord. 5(1985) $ 2: Ord. 16(1983) $ 1: Ord.
9 f :\everyongvussVnemosVockmmem2
o
Attachment A
Legal Description for
AREA MITIGATED BY ROCK FALL MITIGATION BARRIER WALL
LOCATED IN LOT 1, BLOCK 2, VAIL VILLAGE TWELFTH FILING AND
LOT 1, SECTTON 2, TOWNSH|P 5 SOUTH, RANGE 80 WEST OF THE 6TH p.M.
Eagle County, Colorado
Area rnitigated by rock fall nritigation barrier wall located in Lot l, Block 2, vail village 'twelfth Filing and in Lot l, Section 2, Township 5 south, Range 80 west of the 6th principal
Meridian, more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the southerly comer of said Lot 1, Block 2, Vail Village Twelfth Filing on the right-
of-way lirre of Booth Falls Court;
tlrence along the southwesterly boundary of said Lot I, Block 2 along a non-tangent curve to tlre
left lraving a radius of26l.l4 feet, a central angle of 16"38'05", an arc length of75.82 feet and a
Iong clrord of75.55 feet bearing
N. 49"49'56 W.;
thence N. 58'09'13" W. 60.97 feet along said southwesterly boundary;
thence along said southwesterly boundary along a curve to the left having a radius of33 1,16 feet,
a cerrtral angle of 30"51' 12", an arc length of 178.33 feet, and a long clrord of 176. I 8 feet bearing
N. 73"34'50" W.;
theuce along said southwesterly boundary along a curve to tlre riglrt having a radius of 25.00 feet,
a cerrtral angle of 79o38'36", an arc length of 34.75 feet, and a long chord of 32.02 feet bearing
N. 49'11'28" W.;
therrce leaving said southwesterly boundary N . 35008'27" E.276.30 feet;
thence S. 54"51 '33" E. 32.82 feet;
thence S. 66o14'2'1" E. 38.07 feet;
thence S. 6l'35'05" E. 38.19 feet;
tlrence N. 40o58'18" E.46.25 feet:
thence S. 49"57'15" E. 195.85 feet;
thence N. 44"30'54" E. 12.27 feet;
thence S. 45o04'38" E. 38.24 feet;
thence S. 38'40'48" E.42.58 feet;
tfrence S. 28"22'49" E. 47 .95 feet;
thence S. 61"37'11" W. 89.57 feet to the southerly boundary of said Lot l, Block 2;
thence N. 89"41'46" W . 27 .42 feer along said southerly boundary;
thence s. 48"28'49" w. 147.80 feet along said southerly boundary to the point ofbeginning.
March 13,2002
M. Danell White
Registered Land Surveyor 9337
PO Box 115
Gypsurn, CO 81637
ROCKFALL IIAZARD ASSESSMENT AT BOOTH FALLS
CONDOMINIUMS
AI\D PROPOSED IIdITIGATION
prepared for
The Town of Vail, Colorado
by
Jonathan L. White
Colorado Geological Suwey
l3l3 Sherman Street" Room 715
Denver, CO 80203
ph. (303) 894-2167
fax (303) 894-2174 I
I
I
I
I
l
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
CONTENTS
Introduction
March 26,1997 Rockfall Event
Hazard Assessment
Rockfall Mitigation Options
Rockfall Analysis and Design Criteria
Recommendations
Current and Future Actions
Appendix A. Booth Creek Rockfall Hazard Arca
by Bruce K. Stover
Appendix B. Rockfall Mitigation
by Jonathan L. White
List of Figures and Photos:
Booth Crcck Rocldall RepoG Pagc I
Page
2
2
Figure #1
Figure #2
Photo #1
Photo #2
Photo #3
Photo t#4
Photo li5
Site map and location of March 26,1997 rockfall.
Screen dump of CRSP slope profile
Booth Creek rockfall source arrea
Top Cliffrockfall source area
Close-up of top cliffsource area
Location of pioposed mitigation at Condos
Lower cliffabove district to be monitored
I
I
l
I
I
I
t
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
"** ,"* *kfau Rcpo4 Pase 2
INTRODUCTION
The Colorado Geological Suwey has assisted the Town of Vail in assessment of the rockfall
hazard at Booth Creek since May 1983, when a severe rockfall event occurred there. Since then the
town and property owners in Vail Village Filing l2 formed 4 Geologic Hazard Abatement District
(GIIAD). The Disfiict has mitigated much of the hazard by the constnrction of a ditch and berm on
the slope above the residential area As far as the Survey lnows, the ditch and berm configuration
has been 100% effective forrocks that continually fall from the cliffs of the Mintum Formation. On
March 26, 1997, another very serious, potentially lethal, rockfall occurred that incuned substantial
damage to the Booth Falls Condominiums that exists to tle west of the GHAD and outside the
protection envelope provided by the ditch and berm. Under the auspices of the Critical Geologic
Hazards Response Program and our concerns expressed in earlier involvement, the CGS can assist
the Town of Vail in assessment of the hazard that the condominiums bear, options for mitigation for
that portion of slope west of the ditch and berm terminus, and design criteria for said mitigation
systems. Included in this report are two appendices. Appendix A, Booth Creek Rocldall Hazard
Area by Bruce Stover, is a report on the general geology, geomorphology, and the mechanism of
rockfall for the Booth Creek site. Appendix B, Rocldall Mitigation, is a short paper on types of
rockfall mitigation systems that are available.
THE MARCH26,I997 ROCIGALL EVENT
At I l:20 p.m., a ledge of Mintnm Forrnation limestone atthe highest exposed outcrop of the
upper cliff, just below the exposure of glacial till, failed similarly to that shown in Figure 3 of
Appendix A. The ledge dimensions that detached and toppled is roughly 20'x 8'x 8'. As it fell, it
impacted and broke additional rock blocks from outcrops below. The rock mass broke apart as it
tumbled down the cliff. As it fell down the slope, the rock fragments randornly fanned out such that
the path of the rockfall formed a swath more than 500 feet across where they came to rest. See
Figure #l of this report. The location of the rockfall source is shown by arrow in Photo # 1 and#Z
and the scar easily seen in Photo #3.
Approximately one third of the swath of rolling rocks were retained by the ditch and berm.
See Figure #1. The remaining two-thirds of the event came to rest scattered around the
condominiums, The condo stucfures received three rock impacts and several near misses- Rock
sizes ranged from 2 to 5t feet in average diarneter. Surrounding the condos several items were also
damaged or destroyed, (i.e., small haul trailer, trampoline frame, small wooden deck and chafus,
wood walkway). Of the tbree impacts, one was minor and the other two major. The minor impact
was from a -3 foot diameter rock that obviously had slowed almost to a stop upon impacting ttre
westemmost condo structure. The rock came to rest, ominously so, next to a large boulder from an
eaflier rockfall. A major impact, also about 34 feet in diameter at high velocity, had jus missed the
ditch and berm catchment. The rock impacted and smashed the comer of the eastemmost condo,
snapped offthe side balcony support, and destoyed atrampoline frame along its path before coming
to rest in the subdivision below. The third and worst impact was a 5* foot block that broadsided the
easternmost condo. Sufficient rock velocity enabled the boulder to smash through the outside wall,
interior walls, and the floor, finally being caught in the crawlspace below. Luckily the resident,
whose bedroom this rock smashed throug[ was not home at the time of the rockfall.
I
t
Bootll Creek Rockt'all Report, Pagr
I
Booth Creek Rockfall Hazard Area
Vail, Colorado
Areal extent of rockfall impacts from
1 l:20 pm, 3126197 event.
Rockfall Source: Limestone bed at highest
point of upper cliff. See companion photos
in report. Location not shown on town GIS
map.
i one inch = 200 feet
.r The berm was 100% effective for that
I portion of the 3126197 event that fell into ic
15t1.2
6f.o.6 |Xl
Jisure
#1.
alJl6 |
I
I
)
I
t
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
Booth Falls Rockihll Report, page 4
The CGS made an initial inspection of the site Thursday, March27,l997. Our pretiminary
assessment was that it appeared that the ledge broke away relatively clean and the hazard risk in no
greater or less than the day before the rockfall; which is to say that rockfall can occur from this
source area anytime. It was on our preliminary inspection of the ditch and berm where we
discovered that an earlier rockfall event occurred, either earlier this year or sometime after the town
last cleaned the ditch out. Several rocks (<4 foot diameter) had fallen and, by lithology, could be
differentiated from the March 26 event (sandstone vs. limestone). This rocKall occurred without
anyone's knowledge because the entire event was contained within the ditch and berm. Friday,
March 28, 1997 anaeial recormaissance was conducted of the source area and while the preliminary
assessment has not changed, we reiterate that rockfall of similar magnifude will continue at this
site. During this inspection we did see several loose rocks on the slopes and rock features with
questionable long-term stability.
HAZARD ASSESSMENT
In a ranking ofa rockfall hazard the parzrmeters zue source area, a steep acceleration zone,
proximity of structures to both, and history of rockfall impacts. In two aspects the condominium
location is worse than most of the special district to the east because the upper cliff is more fully
exposed at this location (it is mostly soil covered to the east) and the slope between and below the
cliffs steepen where the slope curves around into Booth Creek Valley. See Photo #l and Figure #1
map in Appendix A. !n.rrF. . .
The main source area
for Booth Falls
Condominiums is the upper
cliff. The exposed, lower
cliff of sandstone reduces in
height as it trends to the
northwest. Photo #l and a
close-up photo #2 show the
extent of the upper cliff
where it is not soil covered.
They reveal a benchy cliffo
beds of limestone, thin shales,
and minor sandstone. It is the
dense, hard, gray limestone
that creates the largest
rockfall boulders in the Booth
Creek area. The report by B.
Stover in Appendix A
provides fuither in-depth
discussion on the source areas. Photos #l and#2 also show the exposed shale slope, between the
cliffs, steepening to the left. The general lack of soil and vegetation suggests that this slope is harder
and smoother, compared with the right. A further close-up, Photo #3, reveals limestone blocks,
pedestals, and ledges, defined by the crisscrossingjoint pattern, being undermined by the quicker-
Photo #1. Booth Creek rockfall source area. Note enlargement of upper cliff
exposure and conesponding rockfall source area, northwest ofthe ditch and
berm terminus.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
Boorh Falls Rockfall Report. page 5
eroding interbedded shale partings. Also in Photo #3 are several slumped and isolated limestone
blocks on the rock slope that have not yet falien. The history of reported rockfall events at Booth
Creek and the physical nature of the slope merits our assessment that, Booth Falls Condominiums
is in a severe rockfall hazardous area,
Photo #2- Top cliff rockfall source area. white anow marks location of March 26, lg9'. rockfall.
$:".
Photo #3. close-up aerial view of source area. Note ledgy appearance with joint defined blocks
undennined by eroding shale panings. White anow A marks scar liom March 26. 1997 rockfall. White
arrow B marks rock pedcstal that rvas hit by rockfall and may be destablized. Note loose blocks, rnarked
by black anows.
Rock
Weieht
Rock
Size
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Booth Fa.lls Rocldall R€poft, Page 6
ROCKFALL MITIGATION OPTIONS
Appendix B contains most of the recognized forms of rockfall mitigation and protection
devices commonly used. Rockfall mitigation is divided into two types: stabilization ofthe rock mass
at the source area to prevent rocks from falling; and rockfall protection systems that acknowledge
that rocks will fall but structures or public areas are protected from the impacts. At the Booth Creek
site stabilization ofthe rock mass at the source area is not being contemplated for several reasons.
They include:
l. The soruce area is in the USFS Eagles Nest Wildemess Area;
2. Source area stabilization at this site would need to cover a large area, be labor intensive,
require technical rock climbing skills, and helicopters for mobilization that would make the
project cost prohibitively high;
3. Source area stabilization consbuction activity would present unacceptable risks that rock
could be inadvertently knocked down, by workers or equipment, onto the residential areas.
Rockfall protection systems that will be considered at this site are ditch and berm
configurations and impact barrier wall systems. Fences will not be considered because they can have
high maintenance cost and generally cannot withstand high impact forces without being destoyed.
ROCKFALL ANALYSIS And DESIGN CRITERIA
Proper analysis of the hazard for design purposes requires accurate slope geometry and a
determination of appropriate rockfall sizes. Forthe slope geomety we used information gained from
our earlier investigation for the special distict mitigation, the Town of Vail GIS 1:2400 scale maps,
photos, and the USGS l:24,000 scale map. For the rockfall size using the maximum size boulder
that is found on site would be prudent. We used the Colorado Rockfall Simulation Progam (CRSP)
ver. 3.0a for our analysis. Four to seven foot diameter boulders were modeled, and weight was
calculated using the unit weight of limestone. The analysis seemed to bear out observable results
of rockfall in the area. Bounce heights were highest on the cliffs and at the transition to the lower,
softer slopes the rocks begin just to roll. The critical design factor is the high impact energies
developed by these larger rocks. A screen dump is shown on Figtre#2 of the CRSP program slope
profile. An analysis point was chosen 30 feet upslope from the condominiums where the slope
breaks to a grade of 40o/o to 50%o. In modeling rockfall with CRSP we arrived at the following
bounce heights, impact kinetic energies (K.E), and velocities at this analysis point.
Bounce K.E.(max.) K.E.(avg.)Vel.(max.) Vel-(avg.)
ft. ftlbs . ft.lbs ff:/sec ft/sec
4' sphere
5' sphere
6' sphere
7' sphere
4'x7' cyl.
5'x6' cyl.
6'x6' cyl.
6'x7' cyl.
5058
9878
17069
27106
13272
11775
25600
30000
3.0 1,000,000 2.r r,900,000 2.0 3,000,000 r.7 4,600,000 |.7 2,500,000 1.9 3,600,000 1.9 4,900,000
t.8 5,700,000
800,000 98 83
1,400,000 95 8t
2,300,000 96 78
3,300,000 89 74
1,700,000 93 74
2,400,000 94 76
3,500,000 89 '74
3,700,000 90 72
Booth Falls Rockfall Repon, Page 7
Figure 2. Screen dump of CRSP program of Booth Creek-west side. Analysis point arrow is 30 feet above
condominiums. Horizontal and vertical are not at the same scale.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommendations and design criteria are based on modeled rolling rocks
analyzed at 30 feet upslope from the condominiums, so are only valid at that point on the slope.
Mitigation design should not only insure that rockfall is contained but also the impact structure
remains sound and does not require costly reconstruction afterwards. The CGS recommends that
design criteria for mitigation at the condominiums should be capable to withstand and retain a worst
case scenario, which is believed to be a boulder in the 6 to 7 foot diameter range. An examination
ofthe source area, the most recent rockfall, and earlier research done by Stover and Cannon for work
the CGS did in 1988 seems to confirm this scenario. That translates to a rolling rock with an impact
force of 5,000,000 ft-lbs at the analysis point. Besides withstanding the impact force the mitigation
system would need to prevent any rock that encounters it from climbing and overtopping, or
bouncing over. The impact face should be vertical and have an effective height that prevents
overtopping. Design height will be specific to siting of the structr.ue. At the analysis point it should
be no less than 12. These design parameters do not take into account smaller rock fragments that
separate from larger boulders. During inspection of the site following the March 26, 7997 event
there was evidence of smaller rocks snapping off the tops of Aspen trees, 25 feet high, near the
condos. These rock fragments do not reflect actual bounce heights but display the high rotational
velocity of the rock and the centrifugal force acting on fragments as they detach. Options to mitigate
these highly random rock fragments are limited to moving the protection system farther up the slope
(which will change design criteria) or constructing a low capacity rockfall fence at the top of the
berm or wall.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
Booth Falls Rockfall ReDort. pase 8
Only a stout protection
system can be designed at the
criteria stated above. Both
ditch and berm systems and
inertial impact barriers, or a
combination of both, can be
dcsigned for the site and be cost
effective. No rockfall fence on
the market can probably
withstand the impact forces that
are being contemplated. The
rockfall protection must be
designed to begin at the road
and extend to the southeast to a
point where sufficient overlap
exists with the existing berm
above, a length no less than 350
feet. Rocks that skirt the edge
ofthe top berm must be caught
by the lower. See Photo #4. At
the high impact velocities and
conesponding impact forces both ditch and berm and reinforced impact walls will need to be
carefully designed. In a ditch and berm option a careful look will be needed to determine whether
the berm of only compacted soil will have the strength to withstand these forces. The earthen berm
may need to be reinforced with geotextiles. A rockfall impact barrier or earth wall will need to be
reinforced with geotextiles in lifts of 8-12 inches and have a width no less than 10 feet. We
recommend that the Town of Vail retain the CGS for review of the mitigation design and our
approval be a condition for design acceptance by the town.
CIIRRENT AND FUTURE ACTIONS
Adverse or highly variable weather prevented the CGS from doing a site inspection of the
source area immediately after the March 26 event. Later this spring we plan to conduct this site
inspection where the failure occurred and examine those impacted rock features below that may be
of questionable stability. During ow aerial inspection we also found a rock feature above the special
district ditch and berm that may require long term monitoring. See Photo #5. While we believe this
feature will not be a threat for many years it bears watching because of its size. If this feature were
to fail the vohrme of the fall would quickly overwhelm the capacity of the ditch and overtop it. We
will provide the Town of Vail a supplemental report based on our f,reld studies later this summer.
For the interim. residents of Booth Falls Condominiums who are concerned about their safety
can take precautions to lesscn their exposure to rockfall hazards. As stated the larger rocks are
basicallv rolling when they reach the condos. The safest area in these condos presently is the top
floor on the side facing downhill. The worst case rockfall impact can put a big hole through a
Photo #4. Location of proposed impact barrier or berm site. Note
accumulation ofrocks in existing ditch. The largest are 5 feet in diameter.
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
t
I
t
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
Booth Falls Rockfall Report, Page 9
Photo #5. Lower sandstone cliff above district ditch and berm. The CGS will visit this
feature this spring and install movement gauges for future monitoring.
structure and possibly condemn it, but probably will not tear it down. Our advice to residents is that
they not establish living areas where they spend the bulk of their time, such as bedrooms and the
sitting areas of living rooms, against the exterior wall that faces upslope. Bedrooms shouid be
moved upstairs and/or beds placed against the wall facing dorvnhill. Do not place beds directly in
front of, or below, windows that face uphill. The Home Owners Association and Town of Vail
should act quickly so that these structures are protected from the next rockfali of similar masnitude.
t
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
t
T
I
I
APPENDIX A
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
T
I
T
t
I
I
t
I
T
I
t
Boors Cnnpr Rocrmr,r, Ilaann AREA
Broce K. Stover
Colorado Geological Survey, 1313 Sherman Street, Room715, Dem'er, C0 80203
Rcsidcoccs sinratcd u thc basc ofthc ralleywall at thc nouth
of Booth Gc€t in Vail Vallcy arc crpccd to varriry dcgrccs of
roctdall hazard (Frgurc 1). Ile hazard ranges fron hm to
Dodcf,ate for structurcs ncar thc limits of the runout zonc o thc
hazard sas thus aot idcntifcd priu to dcvelopocot
In tho years since tbc odginal bazard ilvesdgadon sas coo-
ductd sercral nce signiEcant roddall events harp occured;
boulden havc dcstrolrcd tinber patic and logr€tahhgwals'
Tho tocm of Vail ald aficctcd propcrty wacf,s arc crrrcrt'
$pursuing a mcans aad framcryork for adninisteringdccrge ald
constnrction of protectivc rocKall structues atrd batders in a!
attcmpt to safeguard thc residentid area
Geologr of RoeJdrll Sourtc Artas
sandstone beds about 12 m thick rcsting on a weah fssilg rapid-
ly eroding black to
promincnt joint sets
combine to scparate
visible from thc valley beloyr. Above the saudstoni is a soft, fri-
able coarse sandy congtomeratic bed I m thick which weathers
to a smooth rounded ledge and continually undercuts a 0.6 to 1
ra thi* dcnsc, bud grry limcstone Eit rcsling abotE iL The
limcstocbjointcd sothatsrbangular blocb (5r.6x1 n) coo-
tinuously dctach frm tts bcd atd fal oE the slorping difi cdgc.
lacsc lincstmc ffi ac cmnolyimrohrcd in the roqc ftc-
qucutty reorring cmnts tbat can oftcn causc dapage to struc-
turcs in thc ruout zoa
A thic& sbab udt bctstco thc uppcr aad lowcr dift has
srcarhcrcdbac& to a68 pcrccntdopc.Ttc sbale is soft' dayey'
aadsho*scvirieaceoeiocatizcdstippageadsoallslopefailures
or arc rcstirg rGar pofots of initial biha
Above this soft aodiDg shalc is a thictcr cJifi-forming unit of
thc Robinson Lincstona This bcd of deose, harrd' gray linc-
stone nrics ftom 15 o 10 n tliclr h thc study arca ald is thc
sourcc for thc largcst rocldall bouldcrs cncountercd in thc
nuout zora Thc lincstoc bouldcn'that detael froa the clifi
arc quitc resistant and tcnd not to breat up or shancr on their
*ay dornslopc, Thc targest boutdcrs fourd in thc runout zonc
appcar to bc dcrivcd fron this uppcr diE'fmning limcstone.
acating pedcstal-lilc blods cfrich ctteltraly topplc off their
pcrctras.lte linestooc isjointed such that blods approrimate-
ly3 nxl2mxl2 m arc scparatcd fron the clifi and tilt out-
qard tonnrd the difi cdge. Thiuer beds withia the lirncstonc
cliff producc oore stabby bloc.ks that, if rct tiirncd onto thcir
cdges by chancc during thc initial fa[ renain flat-sidc do*l on
tbe ste,cp slopcs-
An eroding slope io glaci"l till rasts directly above thc cliff-
forming upper limc,*one in the nortbcrn Part of the study area.
Tbc croding slopc periodically shcds smoot\ rounded granitic
boulders which tumble down the cliff into the runout zone.
Other areas oftbis till farther east along the diff appear rclativc-
ly stablg and are not actively shedding largc rods to the slopes
bclow.
proxinately9,450 ft-
cD-
n)
ontothe
zone pcriodically detac"h from the difi and free fall
aad bound domslopc and ofr the lowcr cliff. Most
rocks do not shatter, but renain as htact aP
proxinately 8 by 5 ft (25 by 15 m) limestone
boulden which arc capable of reaching the fartbest
limits of the runout zone. (Figure 4)
Eroding uppcr till slope - Glacial till resting on top
of the uppcr cliff shcds routrdcd granitic boulden
D)
E)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
I-rgpr€ 1. Lo€don map of soily arta, scalg 124'0fl)
\
I
I
I
t
I
I
t
I
t
I
t
I
I
I
t
T
t
I
I
--/aesoEfiTtAL sr"ucTrnEs
8OT.|LDERS N
Ritrqrr zollE
GLTdAT TILL
{i ?;:
I,P?ER
r_FsroraE ct.FF
?;':E
*gglTALL SOT'RCE AREA
T.EDGE
.:.-.-tj
lf!ft.-\ ^e,ffi].{.ffi S IfDSTO1{G \ m )f6t4)4:.-+ ++r'.t =;-,;j-rt---
CN.IFFS
uxvEn '/rwE t E
sHAr..E
@LU fltH ot{
ACCELEnAmfl - -&=--; -- --:--::t-a-;;.a--:::--;-- -i--,i--; J--;=
RUNOUT ZotIE
ngo"r 2. Geologk rliagrrm of conpoond roclr&ll slopes h shdy ena. Dram to scab wi& no rcrdcal cmftuadoo' No0c dip of
sEata tonrd rzlleY.
=j-,:ajj5,=5_:=---'F;F;j:=:---
domslope urtich roll and hll ofithc cliF<. This dl
slopc is considercd to bc a part of thc uPper source
arca-
Rocldall Mcclanisns
of Gorc Creek in the study area- Thesc faaors iadudc ioint pat-
terns, difiercntial weathering ofvariors rock typcs, dip of srat4
ald thc slopc of cliffs and acccleration zoncs-
Joindng and Difiercnttrrl Weatherlng of OilI Facrs
Oncc a slab has dctachcd from the scdimentary bed' it bcgi6 to
creep outwards owitrg to gravity and frost wedging in the joins.
The joins widen with time, and are often wedged farther aPail
by trcc roots, atrd smaller rock that fall isto the crack formed
bythcjoiun (Figure3)
ger adjaccnt u$table parts of thc diff to fall as *cll
Dip ofSbata anrl ToPograPhY
Ttc dip of the roct lcdges makiag up the sourcc arca also
contributes to rockfdl dong diffs ia the study area- The strata
in thc two cliffs dip approrimately 15 dcgrees into tbe tzllcy'
r bouldcrs on the ledgcs to
of thc 16 m vertical clifi.
their bcds byjoiating and
weatbcring creep down toward tbe nalley along thasc dippmg
be&ock surfaces (Figurc 5)- Rounded glacial cobbles and gravel
t:ii':
ItsrrG3.To'fDlhg$ebftlbtScgoca1hl6"1g6co-tnn6or.a lXftrafralrtathcrlryo($ftsDab bcgluto !ld.r.ot
nrsslrc Of faoq d.DqI. Jobfr oDrn ril! rftLD {bc to dopc ctccp ud foct Gddr& SDrhgF lssoc hon contact bcocath dIE
3.Unrfumtdrycodlp3l.Jobtrildclal{arcrc&pr!o'ncltyroelhrrodrs,causlryshbtotlltoutrn'd,s.4. Slsbfalsfron clitr
facc 66to *ceqrOo dopc* hfgbg rton ortdyllg to.tt 5. SLb toppla enil shatfcr:' shortrlng taDout toDG belol with
bouldcq ald cqlclry xrdltrhce to codoo.
I
I
I
I
t
T
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
Ilgure 4. Limcstone stabs rtsdng oD ftaL shalc ptdcstalst
uppcr clilf soucc ana.
Ffuurc 5. Slopc rrtep causlng llnestore blocls to nove dorn
bcddbg plarcs aurl ofr lortr dlff edga Blocls are genentty 2
fr x 3 ft- Thts ncchanlsn ls responsible for frequent rocl( fals
h thc sbrdy arta.
?::
':---, =--?,;:==
LE
t
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
T
T
I
I
I
T
T
I
I
o
ROCKFALL
ao|ruvtr
rffir
ttgure6. Physlcal diEeracos bctrccurocldalaldglada[tdcpcltcdDoldcrrh moutzooaRoddallbosftlcrsartdlll@c
or sandstone' lhilc gladal bouldcrs are mostf nurdcd gr.lllc or Drfrno4hlc [thologb. No0c that soll dsts b.tov m&ll
bold.rrr trtlh lt b rDccot b.rcdh drdd boldcrc.
DEPRESSIO}I
tN sotL
GRANITIC BOULDERS PITIED
WEATIfRED
SURFACE
It't TILL
SOIL PFOFILE
slougb down dolg the dip slopcs ad oreotually fall into opcn
crac&s forned Sioints, wdgiry dab6 fartb€r eart
Thc glaciatedvalg6of GorcandBooth Cree&sbothpcscss
rclatively f,at bouos and stccp rcadywrtical sidcs. Tbc slopcs
are so stcep tlat once a bouldcr or slab topplcs fron thc aiff\
it usuatty cauot cmc to rcst Etil it rcactcs tbc lo*rr fooalopcs
of thc rralley *zll Aa cxanioation of tbc rurout zooc sho*s that
large bould€rs ard slabs havc tradlcd mto ald acrs pdts of
the vzlley floor duc to the treoendous moncntun tbcy aoquirc
in the aelcratim zma
Factors TiigFrirg Rotralls
Moct of thc roctdalls rcportcd in rhi( arca aPpeat' to bc re-
lated to altcrnating frcczc-thaw coaditiols. Brcnts harc oc-
currcd at n'ght in winrcr, sp'ring ald hq aftcr warm days of
melting harre introduccd runofi into johts aad fracturcs Upon
freeziog the icc e.pads in thc cra& suffcicntly to topple aa
urstable blocls Somc cvents barc also occtrrcd on the othcr side
of the cyclg as sunshinc tha*s the 6oeca cliffs, rclcasing a
precariously perched bloct or boulder.
Hazard Classilicadou ald Zonatlon
The rockfall hazard associated with gcologic and
topographic conditions and the proximity of duelling as
dcssibed aborc is considercd to be severe. Tle majority of large
boulders found anong structurcs h thc runout zooc havc hllcn
from thc clilfs. Ficld study indicates tbat the qucstion is not,
"Will sigEificant roctfall occur?", but rathcr, 'What is thc rcsr-
rcuce interyal bctween signfficant rockfall events?",
Acceleration slopes are so ste€p aud smooth that rock
trawrsing them arc frce to deflcct aad skittcr latcrally ia any
OLDER ROCKFALL BOULDER FRESH
NO DEPRESSIOII
BOULDER
HCOT(i| TEXT
DtscoLotATpIS
EDGES EX?OsCD
dirccfio radiatiog fro6 hc point ofinitial fall Thc pattcm c
traicctcy a girco bouldcr c@ld follow is so unpcdicdlc tbat
It b impraaical to dclircatc individual bazard aocs bccd o
tDc fiyfcal oditions of rarbus scgncotr of tic diEhccs. Ir
thc prcscot situation, hazard zoocs arc ncc practically relatcd
to haizolat.dista$cfiomthcsourccarcas, mcsbrthEarry
cqcricnchg a snalcr probability of bcfug cocompasscd by a
givcacrcotTtis ap'Fo€ctyicldsanappruinatclyradflalsaics
of zocs radiadry out from thc sourcc arca; thc mor! seeGrc
ba&sc dftuslydccst totnc dift Itsbould bcpohtcd
oEt, hoxrcrrr, tbat any uca within thc cxcot of thc ronc ac
is dicd o smo dcgpc of rocldal haard.
BarardZmc Ddlncadoo
Varyi"g degrcas of roctdall hazard scncrity caa bc ap
prorinated by cxaniration of thc aaturc and pcitios of
borldcn and slabe in tlc nrnout zona Eacl largE bon|rlcc was
exanincd to dcterninc scveral factors vfiic.h wrc uscd to ag
pruinatc thc crlcat of tbc ruout zonc, 6ad esrinrerc 1f,6 rinc
spans sbcc cach roc.Ifall boulder cane to rest Thcsc hctqs
arq,
1) Whaher or aot a boulder was of rocldall cfin or
dadillydcpodtcd
Wbethcr or not a roclfall bouldcr *zs rcsting udis-
turbcd in its orighal pcitioa or had bcco Eortd by
hunal activities.
llephpical naturc of rudisturbcd rocldallboldccs
with respect to basal contacg (rcsting on srfacc, cm-
bcddc{ partiatly corrcrd ac) and lichc4 mcq
and wcathering patterns on eJeoscd surfaccs
The comparative sizc distributioos of boldcrs
sithin 1[s run691 z6ag.
Rockfall Versus Glacial Origin of
In order to determinc the €tccnt of the rockfdl runout zone,
it is nccessary to determine Yfiether boulden en@untered
belowthe cliffs in Vail Village have fallcn from one of the source
areas and come to rcst on tbe surfacg or if tbeywere Eansported
in occnc glacia-
tio thc ctraracter
of bouHers fouad cnbcdded in rmdisturbcd glacid dcposits
with the limestone and sandstone bouldcrs derived fron the
cliffs (Frgurc 6). Glacially dcpositcd boulders arc mostly
roundcd to subrounded snooth granite or EetaEorphic rocks
whic.b are inb€dd€d in the surrormdinggfacial deposits Thc ex-
posed mrfaces of thcsc boulders are alnost totally covered with
iichens and -ots. ite hear' lichen corrcr and other well
developed sruface rocl weathcring featurcs sucb as pis-and
etched relief of individual nincral grains' nrggost that thcse
bouldcrs haw bccn in placc for Z) to'10 thousand years Tbe gla-
duc to thc fact that the ody sourcc uea stcrc valcy glaciers
of largc bouldcrs of rocffall origir and detcrminc thc ap
prorinate limits of the runout zona
DisturtertYer$s Unilisturtcd Roddrlt Boollcrs
reliabla
go
aaa,iooay th"Qs and ticben growth p"n"'og if -y, -" io' I
consistent with the prescot orientations of the boulders, indicat-
I
bccnpushed s ofteu leave trails.or a
marks whcre the ground creatilg I
a small bcrm of their basal edges' r
UDdistu$ed roddall boulders do not sbow fresh gouges or
scrapes, hawconsistentlichen and mossgrowthpanerng do uot I
shoursoil discolorationsontheirsides or tops, aad are often sur- l
rounded by young bushes, aspcn trces, or natural vcgetatioq
I
torest in their clitrs
Factons Used ,"tt-"' I
of Major RocJdrlt E\rcDts
Certain characteristics cfribited by uadisturbea
'ocfAaU I
bouldcrs and slabs iu tbe nmout zone, srggest approxinate or
rclative time spals sincc theY
a roug! csimate of thc
failure cvpnts. The contad madc
suggests how loug the roc& has
tioa- As tbe length of timc
into thc ground, ald sloPe vasb'
will aa t6 fll h arormd the base of the roc'k with soil materials'
I
dircdty a*.
trecs th .*t tu*l
bencarh thc cdgcs of such a roc.k
Older rocks also harc more consistent lichen grovnh pancns
tbal receotly noncd rocts rvhich bave dctachcd from the-"lttrl
Recentlynond rocls maypossess difrerentially weatlered sur- |
I
dismloration and crcatc a aew uaiform srrfai:e color on the roch l
Distribution of Rocldall Evcnts
F-xaminatiot of the sourc€ area and rurout zorre rcwtlt th"l
two basic typcs of rocldall cncns tate place in thc study area'r
Thc 6rst atrd Eost conmoq involvcs soaller iadividual boulders
lcoerAty in the (05 x 1 n) size range yhi$-detach fr-o{
i"an""t"tyU"a" aad eventu lv fall from the clilfs These falfl
commonlyinrchrc seraral boulders, many of which are set ia ne
tion afteibcing struct by thc initial falling rock * O*
|
o
Boulders
I
I
t
I
I
t
I
I
I
T
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
rninor rockfall is common, and bascd ou crqunination of thc
runout zoqe and cliffs aborrc, can be cxp€ded to occur eecry otre
to thee years. This is the tlpe of rockfall which occurred in the
reported cvents ofMay 1983, January 1986, ard September 198i/,
damaging several structures. Many rockfall eyents go uD-
reported unless eignifiqat d^megc to structures occrrrs.
The second type of rocldall is much less frequent, bu of far
greater danger and destructive potcatial It involraes massivc slab
failures of the clifi faccs, alongjoints u,hich libcrate largc (a5 x
6 n) slabs aad (L5 x 15 m) limcstoae boulders, shocrerhg then
onto the acoeleration slopes bclw. Tbe noc roclfall of this nag-
uitude will drnost certainly result in extensive dam.ge ot
d*truction to structure in thc nrnout zonc bclos.
An imprecise prclininary qstimatc of rccorrencc intcruls for
thcse large slabfailurc cvcnts, bascd on cxamination of the
source arca and undisturbcd roddall boulders in thc nnout
zone, is ou thc order of ,10 to m
'ears.
Iarge boulders sct in
motion during thesc cnents can travcl tbrougb tbc ruaout zoe
as far as the naximum probable linit" An cstimatc of the last oc-
omcoce of this tlpe of crrcnt, bascd on the freshcst, undisturbcd
roctfall bouldcr in thc nraout zonq and weathcring pancrls on
15s clifrc, is on the ordcr of40 to 60 years ago.
Potcntial Solutions to Roddall Bazards
the feasibility of protcctiw structures and o,thcr prarcntivc
measurcs wcre evaluatcd during thc study.
Snaller boulders comno,nly falling off thc lwrr difi could
probably be arcstcd by protccliw structurcs built mr the
lowcr acceleration zooc (m propcrty withi! tlc planal srb-
divisioo The stnrcurcs mu* be capable of abaorbing thc cncr-
gics of one tonbouldcrs tmrelilgat 50 nph, andwldprobab-
ly involve energr abcorbing naterials held within timber o roclt
critSing Maintcnarcsof thesructureswouldbcaccessarycach
time a boulder is so'ppcd, since the encrg dissipation will
rlrrnage or deform that part of tbc structure invohtEd. It is
probably not feasible to build an arnoring wall or othcr typc of
sructure which attcnpts to arr€st the boulden throng! dgid
strengt\ due to thc cxtrenely high momentun rocls gain
througb tbe acccleration zone. Tte unpredictablc patbs ald pat-
terns followed by rocts skincring down slope matcs it di$crilt
to determhe the bcst places to sitc tle protective structures
One approach would be to coDstruct individual protective struc-
tures for """5 6uilding within the nrnout zone. Alternatively, a
<ingle large structure above thc subdivision might provide as
much protection and create lcss overall disturbance to the area.
The structure would have to bc carefully desigped ard con-
stnrcted to be fr"6 iftrining aad to prcrreEt adrrcrse snow or ice
accuhulations from forming above the protcaive barrier. Siting
a community type protective structurc appears to bc feasiblc if
bascd on tbe detailed siting studies which would bc lccessary to
detcrmine thc most suitable location In cither casc, csts for
thesc structurcs are estimated to bc on the order of 0.75 to one
milion do[ars, and could bc higber. Unfortruately' thcsc struc'
turcs would do little to prevcnt largcr bouldcn or slabs dcrirrcd
throWh toppliag failures from dcstroying structurcs in the
rurout zonc. Tbc cneryics posscsscd by such slaba or boulders
arc simply too great to contain within the rcstricted spacc avzil'
able betwccn thc source arcas and cxising residenccs
Rnrnnnncns
Mcarg A.L, 19?9, Colorado snos-aralarche area studics and
guidclines for analanchc-hazard plaaniag: Colorado
Gcological SurvEySpccial Publicatiou 7, f,14 p.
Robinson, CS, aad Associatc'sr Gcological CoDsultants' 1915,
Geologic hazard maps for cwironmcotal and land'usc plaa-
ning Eagle Couaty, Colorado.
Rogcrg W.P, et al- ilta, Guidclincs and criteria for i&utfi-
cation and laad-use conrols of gcologic hazard and mincral
resourcc arcas Colorado Geological Suwey Special
Publicatiou6, 146p.
Shelto'n,D.C, 194, Rocldalt rariables which determire the
hazard Unpublished reporg Oolorado Gcotogical Sur€'y
Geologic hazard filc'g De,nver, C.olorado.
Tvetq Ogden, ard Invcring TS, lfi, Geologtof the Min-
turn l5minute Quadranglc, Eaglc and Summit Couaties,
C-olorado: US. Gcologicat Sunrty Professional Papcr 956,
96 p.
I
I
I
I
T
t
t
I
TD
I
I
I
t
I
t
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX B
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
T
I
I
t
I
t
I
I
I
I
t
O Ro.KFALL l\trrrcATrt
Jonathan L. White
Colorado Geologicd Survey
INTRODUCIION
Rockfall is a geologic hazard that is catastrophic
iD nature. For the most part it is viewed as a nui-
sance by highway maintenance personnel wbo
are rcquired to clean the debris off the roadway
and periodically clean out the fallen rocks with-
in the roadside ditches. Wben rockf,all occurs in
populated areas or areas frequented by people,
lethal accidents can occur.
In general, roclfall occurs where there is.
source of rock and a slope. Within the rock
mass, discontinuities (bedding planes, joints,
fractures, etc.) are locations where rock is prone
to move, and ultimately, fail. Depending on the
spatial orientation of these planes of weakness,
failures occur when the driving forces, those
forces that cause movement, exceed the resisting
forces. The slope must have a gradient steep
enough that rocks, once detached from bedrock,
catr move and accelerate down the slope by slid-
ing, falling, rolling, and/or bouncing. Where the
frequency of natural rockfall events are consid-
ered unacceptable for an area of proposed or
current use, and avoidance is not an option,
there are techniques of mitigation that are avail-
able to either reduce rockfall rates and Prevent
rocks from falling, or to protect strucftres or
areas of use from the threat.
There have been important techaologicd
advancements in rocldall analysis and mitigation
techniques in the last several years. They
include rocldall sirnulation software, rock
mechanics softwarc, aod rcsearch and develop
ment in new, innovative mitigation techniques.
This paper emphasizes mitigation techniques.
. Therc are. many factols that influence a
selection and design of a mitigation system to
reduce or eliminate a rocKall hazard. They
include:
I . The rock source (lithology, strength, struc-
ture, and weatherability) and expected re-
sultant fallen rock geometry (size and shaPe);
2. Stope geometry (topography);
3. Slope material characteristics (slope surface
roughness, softness, whether vegetated or
basen);
4. Proximity of the structure requiring Protec-
tion to source area and rocldall nrn-out zone;
5. Level of required rockfall protection (the
acceptable degree of risk);
6. Cost of the various mitigation options (con-
struction, project management, and design);
7. Constnrctability (mobilization dfficulties,
eEripment access, and other constraints);
8. Future maintenance costs.
For any public or private land use proposal,
in steep sloping areas, the geologic hazard
investigation should initially recognize those
physical factors listed above. If rockfall has
been identified as a hazard then a detailed rock-
fall hazard analysis is warranted. The conclusion
of such analyses, in addition to the determina-
tion of the factors above, must include:
1. An accurate dercrmination of anticipated
risk and frequency of rocldall at the loca-
tion of the proposed land use, and;
2. Site specific calculations of the velocities,
bounding heights, and impact forces for the
range of anticipated rockfall events.
Once all physical characteristics and calcu-
lated falling rock dynamics are determined then
the appropriate engineering and desigl can be
completed for mitigation of the rocKall threat-
ROCKRALL MITIGATION
TECHNIQUES
The available techniques in effective prevention
and mitigation of roclfall, fall into two cate-
gories. One is stabilization of the rock mass at
the source to prevent or rcduce roclfall occur-
rcnces. The other is the acceptrttss that haz-
ardouS rocKall will occur, but wi$ the place-
ment of protective devices to shield structures,
or public areas, from the threat of impact. There
is a third category that, while not a form of miti-
gation, is a method that can diminish the cata-
strophic nature of rockfall. It is rocKall waming
and instrumentation systems. Systems, electrical
and mechanical, that either will indicate that a
rocKall event is imminent, or has just occurred.
Stabilization and Reinforcement
Techniques that require in-situ or surficial treat-
ments of the slope to induce additional snbility
to the exposed rock mass are termed rock and/or
slope stabilization and rcinforcement. Stabiliza-
tion can be accomplished by any combination of
the following: removing unstable rock features,
reducing the driving forces that contribute to
instability and ultirnate failure, and./or incrcasing
the resisting forces (friction or shear strength).
1. ge-ling (hand scaling, mechanical scal-
ing, and fin blasting)- 5saling is the
removal of loose and potentially unstable
rock from a slope. On slopes of poor rock
conditions scaling is generally viewed as a
continual mainteuance procedure because
the loose rock removed exposes the rock
underneath to furtber weathering'
2. Reduce slope grade. Layiag a slope back
can prevent rocks from falling from a
source area
3. Dewater or dnin rock slope to reduce
water pore pressures. The installation of
drainage holes in rock can reduce the pore
pressrue in rock fractures-{ne of the dri-
ving forces mentioned above.
4. Rock dowels. Rock dowels are steel rods
that are grouted in holes drilled in rock'
generally across ajoint or fracture in the
rock of unfavorable orientation- It is a pas-
sive system in which loading or stressing of
the dowel occurs ooly if the rock moves
(slides) along thejoint plane. (See Figure
r.)
5. Roc.kbolts Rockbolts are installed much
like dowels but are usually loaded or
stressed, which imparts a compressive force
on the rock. The loading of the steel rod
during the installation increases the shear
strength of the joint or fracturc and pre-
vents movement, reinforcing the exposed
rock mass. There are wide varieties of rock-
bolts, including mechanical, groute4 and
binary epoxy resin systems.
6. St€el strapping. Steel smPPing, also called
mine strapping, is a strip of steel that
bridges between offset rockbolts or dowels
to supPort the rock mass between them.
7. Anchored wire mesh or cable nets. Fence
wire or, depending on loading criteria,
cable nets are draped on a rock slope and
anchored to the rock mass by the bearing
plates ofrock dowels or rock bolts. The
anchor pattem is set so that the wire mesh
or cable nets are.in continuous contact with
the rock face so that there is complete con-
finement of the loose rock material. (See
Figure 2.)
I
I
I
I
T
t
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Fipre 2. Anchored mesh or nets.
Figure 1. Rockbbtb ad dowels"
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
8. Shotcret€. Shotcrete is the sp'rayed applica-
tion by compressed air of concrete on rock
or rocky soil slopes forreinforcement and
coDrrinrnent. Shotcrcre applications can be
stnengthened by the addition of nylon or
steel fibers to the coDcrete mixture, or the
placement of a wire grid on the rock slope
pnor to application. Weep holes are usually
drilled into the shotcrete to ensure that the
contained material is ftee draining. (See
Figure 3.)
Figure 3. Shotcretc.
9. Buttresses. Butte.sses are used wherc over-
hanging or undermined rock features
become potentially unstable and re4uire
passive restainL Brttesses can be con-
stnrcted from many qaes of marcrial- For
coDcrete buttresses, rock dowels are gener-
ally installed into surrounding comPetent
rock to anchor the buttess in place. (See
Figure 4.)
l0.Cable lashings. Cable lashilg is the wrap-
ping ofhigh capacity cables around a
potentially unstable rock feature. The
cables are then attached to anchors (rock
dowels) installed in adjacent competent
rock. (See Figure 5.)
ll.Ground Anctrors. Ground anchors are
generally used to prevent large, potential
landslide-type failures in heavily weathered,
fractured rock and rocky soils. Their
installation requires ftg ddlling of deep
holes and the gouting of thick bundles of
high-strength wire stan4 which are attached
to large load-bearing panels and then shessed
(pulled) to a desired tc,nsional load and
locked off.
Figure 5. Cable lashing.
Rocldall hotection Devices
When stabilization of rock slopes is not practical
aod suffrcient room exists, protective devices or
struchrres can be constnrcted to shield areas from
roclf,all impact
1. Fences. RocKall fences come in a variety of
sryles and capacities. They tend to become
less effective and are damaged if not
destoyed by larger rocKall events. (See
Figure 6.)
Figure 4. Anc.horcd concrete buttresg
Eartben berms. Berms are elongarcd
mormds of fill, commonly used in associa-
tion with dirches to increase the effective
height and catchment of the protection
device. (See Figurc 7.)
Hangingfences, nets, and other attenua-
tion devices. h welldefined rocldall chutes
in steeper rock slope areas it is possible to
anchor cables to span the chute and hang
fence mesh, cable nening, or rock asenua-
tion elements. Rocks that roll and bouncc
down the chutc impact these devices, which
attenuates (reduces) the rock velocity. (See
Figure 9.)
I
I
t
I
I
t
I
I
t
I
I
Ftgure 6. RocKall fcnce.
2. Ditctres. Dirches excavated into slopes can
provide excellent rocKall protection. Care is
needed in analysis and desiga to insurc that
bounding rocks cannot span the ditch width.
(See Figure 7.)
3. lmpaci barriers and walls. Impact barrier
and walls can be made from many types of
materid, from fill mechanically stabilized by
geotextiles, rock gabion baskets, timber,
steel, concrete, or even haybales. Higbway
departnenB comnonly use Jersey barriers
on roadsides to cotrtain smaller falling rock
in the ditch. The inertial systems, able to
absorb the forces of momenntm of the mov-
ing rock, have higher capacities, without
costly impact darnage, compared to more
rigid systems. (See Figure 8-)
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
Figure 8. Mechanically stabilized bacHll barrier.
re@\
Figure 7. Rocldal ditch anil bero.
I
I
t
t
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
t
I
t
t
t
I
Figure 9. Tire impact attenuator.
6. Draped mesh or netting. Draped mesh is
similar to the stabilization technique
androred mesh but is only attached to the
rock slope at the top. Rocks from the slope
are still able to fail but the mesh drape keeps
the rock fragment next to the slope where
they safety "dribble" out below to a catch-
rJnt ditch or accumulate as small denital
fans. (See Figure 10.)
Figurc 10. Draped mesh.
7. Rocksbeds and tunnels. Rock sheds and
tunnels are mentioned here only because
they are used mostly for transPortation corri-
dors. They have little or no application in
most types of land use.
AVOIDANCE-
THE lOO PERCENT SOLUTION
Therc is one more mitigation method that is nei-
ther a stabilization/reinforcement system nor pro-
tection system. It is strongly recornrnended at
locations where rocKall hazards ,re very severe,
and/or risks very high. Mitigation designs pre
posed in zuch areas may not afford the necessary
level of protection. Bear in mind that no rockfall
mitigation is 10O percent guaranteed, even in
mild rockfall hazard zones. Avoidance is excel-
lent mitigation and must be considercd where cir-
cu.mstances warrant. Any professional in rocldall
analysis and mitigation (as with any geologic
hazard) must, at times, inform developers, plan-
ners, and the public that a proposed land use is
incompatible with the site conditions.
SUGGESTED READING
Federal Highway Administration, 1989, Rock
slopes: design, excavation" and stabilization:
Rrblication FIIWA-TS-89-045, pepared by
Golder and Associates, Seaule, Washington,
funded by the Federal Highway Adminis-
uation, U.S. Departrnent of Transportation:
Mclran, Virginia Research, Development,
and Technology, Turner-Fairbank Highway
Research Centea [373] P.
Federal Highway Administration, 1 994, Rockfall
hazard mitigation methods, particiPant work-
book hrblication FTIWA-SA-93-085, pre-
pared for the Federal Highivay Administra-
tion, U.S. Deparunent of Transportation
Publication by SM International Resources,
Inc.: Washington, D.C., National Highway
Institute ffiI Course 13219), [357] p.
Hambley, D.F., ed., 1991, Association of
Engineering Geologists, 34th annual meet-
ing, Chicago, Illinois, Sept. 29-Oct. 4, 1991,
Proceedings, national symposiur4 highway
and railroad sloPe maintenance: Association
of Engineering Geologists, 1 80 p.
Hoek" EveG and Bray, John' 1981, Rock slope
angineerhg, (rev.3rd ed.): London, U.K., The
Institution of Mining and Metallurgy, 358 p.
Pfeiffer, T.J., et al., 1995, Colorado rocKall simu-
lation program, ve-rsion 3.0a: Colorado
Depafirnent of Transportation hrblication
CDOT:DTD-ED3-CSM-89-28. Available
from: Colorado Geological Survey Miscell-
aneous Inforsration Series 39, diskette, 60 p.
t OF DO STAfE
COLORADO CEOLOGICAT SURVEY
Division of Minerals and Ceology
DeDartment of Natural Resources
1313 Sherman Street, Room 715
Denver, Colorado 80203
Phone: (303) 866-2611
FAX: (303) 866-246l
March12,2002
Mr. Russell Forrest
Senior Enviroffnental Planner
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail. CO 81657
-stJ-98-O004
-i t'.. 5 ^ 7' ,.',ir1
DEPARTMENTOF NAIURAI
RESOTIRCES
Bill Owens
Governor
Greg E. Walcher
Executive Director
Michael B. Long
Division Director
Vicki Cowart
State Ceolotist
and Director
RE: Review of Rockfall Mitigation for Booth Falls Condominiums.
Dear Russ:
The CGS was requested by you to provide some additional comments on the completed
rockfall mitigation at the Booth Creek Condominiums in the Town of Vail. At your earlier
request, I inspected the rockfall mitigation structures on October 22,2001after construction was
completed last fall and sent cornments to you in a letter dated November 9, 2001.
A question arose concerning any potential impacts to adjacent owners from the
construction of the inertial banier walls designed for rockfall impact. During my site inspection
last fall I did not note any way in which these structures would adversely impact adjacent
owners, except for a remote possibility to the access road to the Town water tank. There should
be sufficient room to stockpile the snow against the foot of the westem wall if the water tank
road needs plowing for access during the winter.
Also the issue of maintenance and inspection of the structures was raised. The
mechanically stabilized earth impact walls are basically maintenance-free. One concem I raised
last fall was potential for sloughing or slumping of soil into the catchment zone from the bare cut
slopes. If not cleaned out, the soil accumulation could effectively reduce the wall height. The
cut slopes behind the walls (re-vegetated and stabilized as recommended) should be inspected
every spring or after an unusually heavy precipitation event. The ba:rier walls should also be
inspected after any rockfall impacts. Crushed portions of the wall facing after impact should be
quickly repaired. Yenter Companies can provide guidance on recommended repair techniques
for the wall facing.
The only other type offailure ofthe system that could arise is a bearing failure ofthe
native soils that the impact barrier wall is founded on. If tilting or sagging of portions of the
walls is observed, the homeowner's association should inform Yenter Companies and require
their staff to inspect the structure. Slight undulations along the length of the walls by differential
settlement will not effect the performance of the structures. While an unlikely scenario, adverse
tilting of the structures could be more problematic.
Inspection of the walls and catchment zone behind should be part of a normal
maintenance item of the condominium grounds by the homeowners association. I do not believe
this action needs to be conducted by city staffunless distress ofthe wall parallel to the water tank
access road is observed, which could possibly affect the roadway. Again, I believe it is very
unlikely that this would occur.
Enclosed with this letter is a copy of the original rockfall assessment report the CGS
prepared after the March26,1997 rockfall event. If you have any questions, please contact this
office at (303) 866-3551 or e-mail: ionathary/h{e@state.co.us
Sincerely,
Jonathan L. White
Engineering Geologist
nborsrA',,,r tor"oJtRs DrRECroRy 0r-2002 Urr*Iy oJTr'
UNTT #2
UNTT #I
UNIT #3
UNIT #4
UNIT #5
TINIT #6
UNIT #7
Catherine & Michael Boone
7266 S. Boulder Road
Boulder, CO 80303
Nitzi & Pat Rabin
P.O. Box I137
Brewster, MA 02631
Libby Bortr
l0 Lindenwood Dr.
Littleton, CO 80120
Susan & Tom Talbot
P.O. Box 1631
Vail, CO 81658
Nancy Gladstone
I l7 Old Farm
Pleasantville, NY 10570
Steve Gladstone
171 Place Road East
Hinesburg, VT. 05461
Susan & Gary Rubin
5599 Nelson Road
Longmont, CO 80503
Susan & Joel Fritz
P.O. Box 356
Vail, CO 81658
Barbara & Fred Pundsack
8 Sedgwick Drive
Englewood, CO 801l0
H:303499-2434
F:303415-0344
Yul:970476-1047
E-Mail: ktboon@aol.com
H: 508-896-9537
F: 508-896-7540
Vail: 970-476-1550
E-Mail: rabin@sprintmail.com
H:303-795-8246
W & F: 303-798-l I l0
Yatl:970476-2674
E-Mail: lboru@aol.com
H:970476-2574
W:970-479-2257
H: 914-769-5155
H:802-482-4829
E-Mail: szg@together.net
H:303-772-2207
W:303-774-0075
F: 303-774-0069
Yail:97047640O6
E-Mail: grmbin@earthlinknet
H: 970-476-5843
F:970476-4008
E-Mail: uptown@veil.net
H:303-761-5296
W: 303-762-0054
Yul 970476-0642
E-Mail: fredp2S@aol.com
UNIT #8
T]NIT #9
Unit #10
Judy & Bob Cowen
4 Sky Mountain Drive
Rogers, AK72756
Jo Johns
733 Lakeway Drive
El Paso. TX79932
Tammy & John Nordstrand
3094BoothfallsRd. #ll
Vail, CO 81657
Lisa & Craig Ambler
7l2l S. Fillmore Circle
Littleton CO 80122
Gerry Greven
Summer: P.O. Box 3577
Vail, CO 81658
H: 970-926-8880
Bobbie & Don Gunderson
2120 Lakeshore Drive
Micigan Ciry, nI 46360-1548
Steve Prawdzik
15965 W. Ellsworth Place
Golden CO 80401
Greg Conway
P.O.Box2729
Avon. CO E1620
H & F: 501-636-4456
YuL970476-3843
E-Mail: bobnj udy@yahoo.com
H:915-584-7394
F: 915-584-7388
Cell:915-241-6642
Yul:970-476-13lO
E-Mail: jjelptx@aol.com
H:970479-8451
970479-8452
E-Mail: vailjohn@aol.com
H:303-741-5425
W:303-831-4673
Cell: 303-818-7133
Yul:970479-2953
E-Mail: craig@sga3d.com
Winter: 42035 N. Crooked Stick Drive
Anthem, AZ 85086
H:623-551-8244
F:623-551-1306
H: 219-879-0418
Yul:9704764317
H:303-279-5705
W: 303-573-0222 (Xro7)
F:303-573-0922
Yail:970479-5168
Cell: 303-898-0398
E-Mail : skivail@attbi.com
H&F:970477-2881
W:970-3764581
Cell: 970-376-4581
E-Mail: giconway@compuserre.com
I.]NTT #TT
LINTT #I2
{JNTT #I4
UNTT #I5
UNIT #16
UNTT #T7
UNIT #T8
I'NIT #T9 Judic & Jcrrie Eckclbergcr
1998 Oak Leaflane
Grecnwood Village, CO 80121
H:3O3-797-2367
W:303-7%-7555
Cell: 303-919-5114
Vail:97047G11t5
E-Mail: cckclbage@qwcrtnct
'Eagle County AJoin ttX (roter*f o*g&ffl"rt
Assessor Property Detail
Account No:Rflt9066
District: SCl03
Parcel Nb: 210102303001
Owner Name/Addrcss
ADAIR, KATHERINE D. & JOHN -GHARRIW.
DORIA. & CHRISTOPHERT.
3035 BOOTH FALLS RD
vArL, co,81657
Situs Address
Street No. Dir No#
003035
Street Narne Suffix
BOOTH FALLS RD
Condo Name
Condo Unit
Subdivision
Name
VAILVILLAGE FILING 13
Block Lot
Values
Land Actual Land Assessed
't11,320 10,190
lmprv Actual lmprv Assessed
43,760
478,230
Sales
Book Page Receptior# Doc Fee
0712 0821
Sales Date Sale Pdce
59.00
11n1p,6 590,000
Sibling Account Number
WD
12
Menu
http://www.eagle-county.com./assessor/displayRec.cfm?accountNeR009066&reclistPtr:1 ll29lo2
Eagle County Page I of I
Assessor Property Detail
Account No:R009122
Distsict SC103
Parcel Nb: 210102303002
Owner Name/Address
KATZ, MARTIN J. - KATZ-CANN, MARGARET E.
1035 PEARL ST 5TH FL
BOULDER, CO, 80302
Situs AddEss
Street No. Dir No#
003031
Street Name Suffix
BOOTH FALLS RD
Condo Name
Condo Unit
Subdivision
Name
VAILVILI-AGE FILING 13
Values
Land Actual Land Assessed
202,400 18,520
lmprv Actual lmpw Assessed
43.750
47E,10Q
Sales
Book Page Reception# Doc Fee
0450 0865 25.00
Sales Date Sale Price
250.000
0El29A6
't3
Menu
http://www.eagle+ounty.com/assessor/displayRec.cfm?accountNeRO09l22&reclistPn:l l/29loz
Eagle CountY
Account No:R008892
District SC103
Parcel Nb: 210102303008
Owner NamelAddress
LINAFELTER, RODNEY L.
E2 GLENMOOR PL
ENGLEWOOD, CO,80110
Situs Address
Street No. Dir No#
003025
Street Name Suffix
BOOTH FALLS RD
Condo Name
Condo Unit
Subdivision
Name
VAILVILTAGE FILING 13
Land Assessed
9,260
lmprv Assessed
54,540
Reception# Doc Fee
645562 7E.s0
Sale Price
785,000
Page I ofl
Assessor ProPerty Detail
Values
Land Actual
101,200
lmprv Actual
596,120
Sales
Book Page
Sales Date
0123/98
Sibling Account Number
WD
Lot
14
Menu
http://www.eagle-county.com/assessor/displayRec.cfm?accountNFRo08892&reclistPtrl rn9l02
E:igle County Page I ofl
Assessor Property Detail
Account No:R008E91
Distic.t SC103
Parcel Nb: 210102303009
Owner Name/Address
MCCORTilICK, JOSEPH B. & SUSAN P. JT
173 W FM 802
BROWNSVTLLE, D( 78520-9148
Situs Address
Street No. Dir No#
A
003025
Street Name Suffix
BOOTH FALLS RD
Condo Name
Condo Unit
SubdMsion
Name
VAILVILI.AGE FILING 13
Block Lot
Values
Land Actual Land Assessed
101,200 9,260
lmprv Actual lmpru Assessed
44,000
4E0.E20
Sales
Book Page
Sales Date
08nu9E
Reception# Doc Fee
R667866 45.30
Sale Price
453,000
Sibling Account Number
l/vD
14
Menu >>
http://www.eagle{ounty.com/assessor/displayRec.cfm?accountNeROo88gl&reclistPtrl 1n9rc2
Eagle County Page I of I
Assessor Property Detail
Account No:R007535
Distict SC103
Parcel Nb: 210102301020
Owner Name/Addrcss
CAULKINS FAMILY PTNSHP
l600,BROADWAY 14OO
DENVER, CO,80202
Situs Address
Street No. Dir No#
003080
Street Name Suffir
BOOTH FALLS CT
Condo Name
Condo Unit
Subdivision
Name
VAILVILI.AGE FILING 12
Block Lot
Land Assessed
5E,700
lmprv Assessed
Values
Land Actual
202,400
lmpw Actual
Sales
Book Page Reception# Doc Fee
Sales Date Sale Price
10
Menu
http://www.eagle-county.com/assessor/displayRec.cfm?accountNeR00753S&recl-istPtr:l v29t02
ilagle County Page I of I
Account No:R009939
District SC103
Parcel Nb: 210102301039
Owner Name/Address
COBB, JAMES T., JR & RUTH M.
1319 S DOVvr{rNG ST
DENVER, CO. EO21O
Situs Address
Street No. Dir No#
003090
Street Name Sufix
BOOTH FALLS CT
Condo Name
Condo Unit
Subdtulslon
Name
VAIL VILI.AGE FILING 12
Block Lot
Assessor Property Detail
Values
Land Actual
101,200
lmprv Actual
433,180
Sales
Book Page
Sales Date
01/11198
Land Assessed
9,260
lmprv Assessed
39,640
Reception# Doc Fee
R6E3E24 40.00
Sale Price
400,000
Sibling Account Number
WD
Menu
http://www.eagle-county.com/assessor/displayRec.cfm?accountNo--RO09939&reclistPtr-l ln9l02
Ebgle County Page 1 of I
Account No:R009938
District SC103
Parcel Nb: 210102301040
Owner Name/Address
WURTS, JOHN S,
11 CEDAR t t/
coNcoRD, MA,01742
" Situs Address
Street No. Dir No#
003080
Street Name Suffir
BOOTH FALLS CT
Condo Name
Condo Unit
Subdivision
Name
VAILVILI.AGE FILING 12
Block Lot
Assessor Property Detail
VClues
Land Actual Land Assessed
101,200 9,260
lmpw Actual lmpru Assessed
65.150
711 .990
Sales
Book Page Reception# Doc Fee
0437 0303 0.00
Sales Date Sale Pdce
390.000
o2n7t86
Menu
http://www.eagle-county,com/assessor/displayRec.cfm?accountNo--R009938&reclistPtr:l tn9l02
Edgle County Page I of I
Assessor Property Detail
Account No:R007404
District: SC103
Parcef Nb: 210102301022
Owner Name/Address
BENNETT, JOHN B.
C/O GORE CREEK PROPERTIES
PO BOX 1666
vAtL, co,81657
Situs Address
Street No. Dir No#
003100
Street Name Suffix
BOOTH
FALLS
Condo Name
Condo Unit
Subdivision
Name
VAILVILI.AGE FILING 12
Block Lot
Values
Land Actual Land Assessed
202,100 18,520
lmprv Acfual lmpru Assessed
46,690
s10,300
Sales
Book Page
Sales Date
ffi/01/98
Reception# Doc Fee
R658429 53.00
Sale Price
530,000
Sibling Account Number
wt)
Menu
http://www.eagle{ounty.com/assessor/displayRec.cfm?accountNeR00?4O4&reclistPtrl 1n9rc2
Eagle County Page I of 1
Account No:R010238
Distict SC103
Parcel Nb: 210102301038
Owner Name/Addrcss
JOHNSTON, ROY A.
3135 BOOTH FALLS CT
vAtL, co,81657
Situs Address
Street No. Dir No#
0031 15
Street Name Suffix
BOOTH FALLS CT
Condo Name
Gondo Unit
Subdivision
Name
VAILVILI.AGE FILING 12
Block Lot
Assessor Property Detail
Values
Land Actual Land Assessed
101,200 9,260
lmprv Actual lmpw Assessed
45,910
501,710
Sales
Book Page Reception# Doc Fee
0576 0842 27.00
Sales Date Sale Price
270.000
o4n?n2
Sibling Account Number
vvD
<< Menu >>
http://www.eagle-county.com/assessor/displayRec.cfm?accountNrROl0238&r€cl.istPh':4 rn9t02
33
Sz
E i I I
I
N
z
J
LL
u,
)J
O .'i N>
Hq <F
6=Er Fro zz
!f,
I
l't t
I I
E
l|. ,rrr MAY AFFE.T "or^ ,*ort"
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE lS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of
Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 12-3-6 of the Municipal Code of the
Town of Vail on March 11, 2002, at 2:00 P.M. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building. ln
consideration of:
A request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for an Early Learning Center and a request for
development plan review to construct Employee Housing within the Housing Zone District and
setting forth details in regards thereto, located at the site known as "Mountain Bell"/an unplatted
piece of property, located at 160 N. Frontage Rd./to be platted as Lot 1, Middle Creek
subdivision.
Applicant:
Planner:
Vail Local Housing Authority, represented by Odell Architects
Allison Ochs
A request for a final review of a text amendment to Title 12, Chapter 3, Administration and
Enforcement, of the Vail Town Code, to establish criteria for consideration for text
amendments to the Vail Town Code, Title 12, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: George Ruther
A request for a Major Amendment to Special Development District #35, Austria Haus, to amend
an existing condition of approval prohibiting the operation of restaurants within the special
development district, and setting forth details in regard thereto, located at 242 E. Meadow
Drive/Part of Tract B, Block 58, Vail Village '1" Filing.
Applicant: Johannes Faessler
Planner: George Ruther
A request for a worksession to discuss planning issues and studies that should be
recommended to the Town Council for action.
Plan ner:Russ Forrest
A request for a variance from Sections 12-6C-6 (Setbacks) & 12-6C-9 (Site Coverage), Vail
Town Code, to allow for the construction of a Type I Employee Housing Unit, located at 4166
Columbine Drive/Lot 18, Bighorn Subdivision.
Applicant: Timothy Parks
Planner: George Ruther
A request for a variance from Section 12-6H-6 (Setbacks), Vail Town Code, to allow for the
remodel of Vail Townhouses, Units 2A & 2C,located at 303 Gore Creek Drive, Lot 2, Block 5,
Vail Village 1"t Filing.
Applicant: Vickie Pearson, represented by Pam Hopkins Planner: George Ruther
j
A request for a minorcunOilon of Lot 2, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Sdohd Filing (Evergreen
Lodge) and Lot F, Vail Village Second Filing (Medical Center); a request to rezone a portion of
Lot 2, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Second Filing (Evergreen Lodge) from Special Development
District No. 14 to Lionshead Mixed Use 1; a request to rezone a portion of Lot 2, Block 1, Vail
Lionshead Second Filing (Evergreen Lodge) from Special Development District No. 14 to
General Use; a request to rezone a portion of Lot F, Vail Village Second Filing (Medical Center)
from General Use to Lionshead Mixed Use 'l ; and a request to amend the study area defined in
the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan and setting forth details in regards thereto, located
at 250 S. Frontage Rd. West I Lot 2, Block 1, Vail Lionshead 2nd Filing and 181 South Frontage
Road West / Lots E and F, Vail Village Second Filing.
Applicant: Evergreen Hotel and the Vail Valley Medical Center Planner: Allison Ochs
A request for a rezoning from High Density Multiple Family (HDMF) to Lionshead Mixed Use -1 (LMU-1), to allow for the redevelopment of the Lodge at Lionshead, located at 380 E.
Lionshead Circle/Lot 7, Block 't , Vail Lionshead 1"'Filing.
Applicant: Lodge at Lionshead, represented by Jeff Bailey.Planner: George Ruther
A request for an amendment to the Boothfalls Homeowners Association Rockfall Hazard Map,
t Boothfalls Townhomes, 3094 Boothfalls
tion Planner: Russ Forrest
A request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for an ATM machine, located at The Club, 304
Bridge StreeVlot H, Block 5A, Vail Village 1't Filing.
Applicant: The Club Planner: Bill Gibson
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during
regular office hours in the project planner's office, located at the Town of Vail Community
Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend project orientation
and the site visits that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development
Department. Please call 479-2138 for information.
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24-hour notification. Please call 479-
2356, Telephone for the Hearing lmpaired, for information.
Community Development Department
Published February 22,2OO2 in the Vail Daily.
il. ,r.r MAY AFFE.T
"ou*
,*ort"
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE lS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of
Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 12-3-6 of the Municipal Code of the
TownofVail onFebruary25,2002,at2:00P.M.intheTownofVail Municipal Building. In
consideration of:
A request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for an Early Learning Center and a request for
development plan review to construct Employee Housing within the Housing Zone District and
setting forth details in regards thereto, located at the site known as "Mountaln Bell"/an unplatted
piece of property, located at 160 N. Frontage Rd./to be platted as Lot 1, Middle Creek
subdivision.
Applicant; Vail Local Housing Authority, represented by Odell Architects Planner: Allison Ochs
A request for a final review of a text amendment to Title 12, Chapter 3, Administration and
Enforcement, of the Vail Town Code, to establish criteria for consideration for text
amendments to the Vail Town Code, Title 12, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: George Ruther
A request for a Major Amendment to Special Development District #35, Austria Haus, to amend
an existing condition of approval prohibiting the operation of restaurants within the special
development district, and setting forth details in regard thereto, located at 242 E. Meadow
Drive/Part of Tract B, Block 58, Vail Village 1"' Filing.
Applicant: Johannes Faessler
Planner: George Ruther
lr-A r"qr"st for a worksession to discuss planning issues and studies that should be
{recommended to the Town Council for action.n Planner: Russ Forrest
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during
regular office hours in the project planner's office, located at the Town of Vail Community
Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend project orientation
and the site visits that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development
Deoartment. Please call 479-2138 for information.
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24-hour notification. Please call 479-
2356, Telephone for the Hearing lmpaired, for information.
Community Development Department
Published February 8, 2OOZ in the Vail Daily.
D epartment of C ommun i ty Deve I opmen t
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2138
MX 970-479-2452
www.ci.vail.co.us
December 11.2001
Steve Prawdzik
15965 W Ellsworth Pl
Golden Co 80401
Dear Steve:
This letter is to inform you that all the conditions for approval for the rock fall wall
mitigation building permit have been met except for landscaping. We have obtained a
bond for that landscaping and we anticipate that the landscaping will be complete as
approved by the DRB prior July 1"t of 2002. The next step that you can now apply for
is to modify our rock fall hazard map to show that the Townhomes now have approved
mitigation. This will involve PEC review and approval via an ordinance by the Town
Council.
Please call me if you have any questions at 479-2146.
Russell Forrest
Director of Community Development
{S *"n"""o r^r",
ll0v-df-2001 ll:53Alt FROIFColorado ceofat Suruev 303866216 |T-235 P D0t/002 F-731
sTAfE OF COLORADO
COLORAOO GEOI.OGICAT SURVEY
Oivision of Minerals and Ceology
Oepedment of Narural Rcsources
l3l3 Shorman Streel Room 715
Denver, Colorado 80203
Phone: (303) 856-261 1
FAX: (303) 866-2a61
Nove,nber 9,2001
DEPARTMENTOF NAIIJRAI
RESOURCES
Bill Owan!
Go"c*.
CreE E. wolch./
Excqrtivc Oirecrot
Mi.luel g. Lon6
Dlvlsion Dirc<to.
vicki Coh,r(
SEtc C(rolog;st
aFd Oircctor
RE
Mr. Russell Forrest
Senior Envirorunental Planner
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
Rcview of Yenter Companies Rockfall Mitigation Impact Barrier for Booth Fatls
Condominiums-
Dear Mr. Forrest:
At your request in our phone discussion last month, the Colorado Geological Survey has
reviewed 0re inertial barrier wall for tle Booth Falls Condominium complex constructed by
Yenter Companies. The CGS conducted a site investigation of the project on October 22,2001.
Two geotextile-reinforced soil walls were completed at that tirne of ou inspcction so we did not
have an opportuniry to obsewe the actual wall construction. While internal aspects of the wall
consuucdon 2rs rrnknown to us, it appea$ that the wall geometry conforms to the dcsign as
submitted by Yenter Compznies. A desiga element that was missing at the time of our
inspectiou was rtrc fence tfiat Yenter proposed for the top of &e wall. Mr. Barrett assured me
rhat the fence was still planned and would be installed as sooD as the fence contactor was
available.
This system will provide a level of protection that is, in some aspects, superior to the
dftch and berm conliguration for the properties to the east. Once the fcnce is installed at the top
of the wall, the wall conslruction will basically conform to the Yenter plan details and will trave
the wall geonetry that conform to the recommendations this ofEce felt was necessary for
effective rockfall mitigation of this site.
The only concorn we have at this point is the rcvegetation of the cut slope bebind the
barrier. If left in its current condition, runoff may cause erosion and minor slumping of soil into
the rock catchment af,ea. The cut slope should be seeded and some t5pe of erosion control
mafting (ECM) or turf reinforcement Eaning C[RM) should be staked to the slope.
o^-r-lrr Fax Note 7671 il.,Gt"rlult-e
ilBaS Bei=A-t'"'"ffiJ"-
coJoept.Vd..<-@'C,ag
^ont
n3rJ g6.E! L
-Plrone f
FEr I *3o3 e"t3--ffi
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
l
l
il
I
t
I
RecsJ'wed: 11 I g/o1
iOV:09-200t ll :SrlAM FR0lFColorado Cef cat Survev
3()3 2 /g (.,rlos;
303866?46 |
age z
T-235 P.002/002 F-737
3(.)38(l('24(t1 o
TLe Yenter Comp;aies rockfall protection impact barrier constructed at the Booth Falls
Condominilms is an excellent design and will provide the level of rockfall protection the
"sa4esilirrms
so desperately need there. If you have any questious Please contact this office at
(303) 866-3 55 I or e-mail: ionathan.white@srate.co-us
SincerelY,
cc: B. Barett, Yenter Companies, fax only
Noe, CGS
Critical Landslide File
Senior Engineering Geologist
I
I
I
I
I
ailfinAcr
lt&flWA
sfll4CfS
fillogt
HNMINT
ffir&Es
;--7
tt\f ,J_I ,
,TE$Bil
VMfrNN
sffilur9rs
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
il
I
I
I
I
I
I
Y'EruTFR
October 25,200I
Mr. Russell Forrest
Senior Environment planner
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
RE: Booth Falls RocKall Mitigation'project Completion
Dear Mr. Forrest;
Yenter companies has substantially completed the Booth Falls Rockfall
Mitigation Project.
Landform grading and barrier heights selected for this project meet
rockfall mitigation design criteria developed by the Colorado
Depaftment of Transportation as presented in its computer program,
Colorado Rockfall Simulation Program (CRSP). Barrier design follows
full scale barrier tests by CDOT and the Colorado Geological Survey.
This grading and barrier configuration will contain rocks conforming to
the maximum probable rock size as determined by the CGS and
probable velocities and trajectories as determined by CRSp
A 6 foot high fence has been placed on the tops of the barriers to
contain small rock fragments as an additional safety precaution. There
are no established design criteria for this fence, nor are there
guidelines on required strength and height.
Attached are As-Constructed cross sections for each of the three
barriers and a map showing their locations relative to property
boundaries. This project was constructed in substantial compliance
with the plans and specifications.
Sincerely,
aaV<-z'q AJ-'
Albeft C. Ruckman, P. E,
1r/rf/e1
20300 W. Highway 72, Awada, CO 80007 .3031279-4458. Fax 303/279-0908 . www.yenter.com
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
)
)
)
JOB N0 01- 202
T: VV12L- 1 DWG
I
FOIJND US DEP] OF IN]FRIOR ERASS CAP
I
rasEMENr rrNE ---l
ftw
1/4 coR sEc 2. r s s. R 60 rv
I 6--
FOUNO US OEPT OF INIERIOR 1/4. ALUMINUM cAP 4.29' EASTERLY OF LOT I PROP COR
@i o
l j;
l-'' 1 .Fr
ta
\,ro
o a = 79t8'J6'
R - 25.00
T - 20.85',_-Peon1
\
A : JO5l'12'
R = J3l.l6'
L = 34.75
CH= N4911'28-w
32.02 1
r = 91,38'
L : r78.JJ'
cH= N73!4 sO-V{
r 76.r 8
A = 16 38'05'
\"a R = 261.14'T: J8-lA
CH= N49'49 56-w
75 55'
t
",
.a'42---,0
* :
<j-
offio
IMPROVEMENT LOCATION CERTIFICATE
ROCK FALL MITIGATION BARRIER WALL LOCATION
LOT 1. VAIL VILLAGE TWELFIH FILING AND
FOREST SERVICE LAND IN SEC 2.
TOWISHIP 5 SOUIH, RANGE 80 WEST
Eogle County, Colorodo
uqgl lhe described premises by imp.ovements on ony odFining premises, except os i;dicoted, ond thot there is no opporent evidence or sign of ony eosement crossing or burdening ony port of stid porcet, except os noted.-
o INoICATES SET ALUMTNUM CAP LS 9JJ7 10fu ruorclres wALL ANo HEtcHT AT coRNER
WHITE SUR\€YNG
P. O. Box 115
Glpsum, CO 816J7
(970) s24-962J
BEARING BASE:
S. 89'24'1J" E- between US Dept of Int Bross Cop ot the W 1/4 Cone( ond 31/4' Aluminum Coo on the center line of S 2, T 5 S, R 80 W of 6th pM.
NOTE:
The purpose of this lmprovement Locotion
Certificote is to show only the locotion of
the rock foll mitiqotion borrie. ryoll.
o o
STA|E OF COLOIUDO
COTORADO CEOTOGICAT SURVEY
Division of Minerals and Ccology
Department ()i Ndtural Rcsources
I3l3 Sherman Street, Room 71,5
Denver, Colorado 80203
Phone: (303) 866-2611
FAX: (303) 1166 2461
November 9,2001
Mr. Russell Forrest
Senior Envi romnental P lanner
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
DEPARIMENT OF NAIURAI
RESOI.IRCES
Bill Owens
Covernor
Cret E. walcher
Exccutive Director
Michael B. LonS
Division Direclor
Vicki Cowdrt
sta(e CcoloBist
and Director
RE:Review of Yenter Companies Rockfall Mitigation Impact Barrier for Booth Falls
Condominiums.
Dcar Mr. Forrest:
At your requcst in our phone discussion last month, the Colorado Geological Survey has
rcviewed the inertial barrier wall for the Booth Falls Condominium complex constructcd by
Yerrter Ciompanies. The CGS conducted a site investigation of the project on October 22,2001 .
Two geotextile-reinforced soil walls wcre completed at that time of our inspection so we did not
have an opportunity to observe the actual wall construction. While internal aspects of the wall
construction are unknown to us, it appcars that the wall geometry conforms to thc design as
submitted by Ycnter Companies. A design element that was missing at the timc of our
inspection was the f.ence that Yentcr proposed for the top of the wall. Mr. Barrett assured me
thal the fencc was still planned and would be installed as soon as the fence conrracror was
available.
This system will provide a level of protection that is, in some aspects, superior to the
ditch and berm configuration for the propcrties to the east. Once the fence is installed at the top
of the wall, the wall constntction will basically conform to thc Yenter plan details and will have
the wall geometry that conform to thc recommendations this office felt was necessary for
effective rockfall mitigation of this site.
Thc only concem we have at this point is the revegetation of the cut slope behind the
barrier. If left in its currcnt condition, runoff rnay cause erosion ar.rd minor slumping of soil into
thc rock catchment area. The cut slope should be seeded and somc type of erosion control
matting (ECM) or turf rcinforcement matting (TRM) should be staked to the slope.
J
The Yenter Companies rockfall protection impact banier conshucted at the Booth Falls
Condominiums is an excellent design and will provide the level of rockfall protection the
condominiums so desperately need there. If you have any questions please contact this office at
(303) 866-3 5 5 I or e-mail: js44[an.w!fog@ta@.co.us
Sincerely,
B. Barrett, Yenter Companies, fax only
Noe, CGS
Critical Landslide File
Senior Engineering Geologist
/o; /, co
0,/. 2ar
From Land Title Fri 17 Aug 2001 LL:16:33 Alitl tr)T P4eLofT
t "'
?*.Q- F
f5dd\4--p"!\s
LrdlitleG.rate@rsv tt.srclmustnErrilt{
Drte: 0t-l7-mot
Propcrty Addresr:
Our Order Number: V(ZtYYllt
lrlrs t AND 3, SFfTION 2, TOW\|SHIP 5 SOrmI, n NGE t0 WFST
II)WNtrYAIL
75 s. Fn(ttT (fr nD.
v^tr.' m 6a7
AID I,YNNE CAMIBEIJ,
PlnNr: t0471.2t3t
Fg: tlll4i!l-*2
SertVb (brdedr.
ffiJtfl
From Lard Title Fri 17 Aug 2001 Lt:16:33 All IDT P4e2of7
Lad'litleG.rdeOrryDt
lo,Ro{rrcls
Dete:0t-17-2001
Propcrty Address:
Our Ordcr Numhcr: VCnS$Il
LOrS 1 AND 3, STICTION 2, TOVyNSIilP 5 SOIJTIT, RANGE t0 WEST
Buyer/Borrower:
TOBE DEIERMN\MD
Seller/Orvner:
T(NT'N OI. VAII., A MI]MCIPAI, CORFORATIO\I
Ifyou hevc any inquirics or requlre lurlher r*sistance, pler.ie contad one of the numb,erc bclow:
For Clcing Asslstonce:For Tltle Asslstance:
Vdl Tlt|e Dept
IftrcnBlgp
lot s. FRoNTAGE RD. W. #i100
P.O. BOX 357
VAIL, (n fl657
Pttlolrr., Y|O-{|(FZZSI
Fnz fin-476-4534
DMdl: kHg;s@lgc.com
Need a map or dlrectlons for your upcomlng closlng? Check out l.rnd Tltle's web slte ot wwrv.llgc.com
for dircctions to any of our 40 ollicc locatlons.
EIIMATECFTIIIEE
Alla (hvnes Pollcy 10-17-92
TqA $o. o0
tor dtAgr THAI{K Y(xI FOR YOUN ORI}ERI
From Land Title Fri 17 Aug 2001 11:16:33 Al itDT Page 3 of 7
(ldcqo Tllle Imrmcc Conprry
ALTA COMMITMENT
Our Order No. Vcns4n
Schcdule A CusL Ref.:
Property Addrcss:
r,oTS r AND 3, SBCTIONI 2, TO\ryNSIIP 5 SOUTTT, RANGE t0 WEST
l. El?ectlve Dltc! Aqgust OZ, 2l)01 at 5:00 P,lW
2. Pollcy to be Issued, nrd Propased Insured:
"AI.jTA" OwrrcCs Polka 1O-17-YL
Progrsed ll|sutd:
TO BE DETERMINEI)
3. The estslc or Inlercst In lhe lsnd descrlbed or referrr{ to ln lhls Commltment end covercd lFrcln ls:
A Fee Slmfle
4. fillc lo lhe eslale or inlercst coyer€d hcrcin is rt the elTccdve dete hereof Yested in:
TOWN OF VA[, A IIIIIINICIPAL CORFORAfiON
5. The lard rcferr€d to in thts Commltment is descrlbed s.s folhws:
Ir)rS I AND 3, SBCTION 2, TOWNSIilp 5 SOIITII, RANGE E0 VyEST OF TrrE 6TrI PRINCIPAL
MERIDIAN, COIINTY (F Fj GLq STATEOF C(N,ORADO.
NOIT: TTIE FTNAL POI.I(Y D(ES NOT M ANY WAY GITARANTF,E OR INS[TRR TIIE DIMENSIONS
OF TTTE ABOVE DRSCRMFJD IAND, TITE I,FIIAL DRS(RIPTION LS DERIVED FROM TIIR CIIAIN OF
TITI,E AND ONI,Y AN ACCJI]RATE ST]RVEY CAN DETERMII\E TIIE DIMFJIISIONS
From Land Title Fri 17 Aug 2001 11:16:33 All IDT Pqe4ofl
AI,TA COMMITMENT
Sclednle R - Secdon I
(Requlrcrnents) Our Order No. v<ZtlWl
The rollowlng arc the requirrments to be comPli€d with!
Itcm (o) PrFrEnt !o or Jor tlE ecormt of llrc grxfrols or trEllgsgors ol th tull co|L{lderrfon for Ur es@ or
ffirqst to he lmrtd.
Itcm (b) hoper InsEunren(s) crtadlg lhe eshb or Inbrtst to hr Insued Im|st he execued rnd duly llled for rccod,
b-rviC
fhrn (c) PqWrrn[ of dl taxes, clurges or csessrm{s lcvicd ad assessed agdmt tlr sr*fcct prcndses wllch ate thre
and pryaHc.
Ihrrr (O Adddoml r€qircnErrtB, ll any dlsclased bclow:
TIIIS C.OMMITMTX\T [S FOR INFORMATIOI\I (NI.Y. AND NO FOlrtr WII,I, BE I.qq'EI)
PT]RSI'ANT IIF,RET(I
From Land Title Fri 17 Aug 2001 A[:16:33 Af ilDT Page 5 of 7
AI,TA COMMTTMENT
Scl*dieB-Secdon2
(Exceptions) Our Order No. VenYYn
The pollcy or pollcies to bc issued wlll contsln exceptions to the folhwlng rmless lh€ sanre are disPoscd
of to the satls]lctlon ol lhe Company:
L RgHs or cldrr of Ferties in possesslon mt shown hy the Ft lic recotds.
L FseltEnls, or cldnrs of esen*rls, mt shown by llrc ptHlc recods.
3. I)lscrtpmdes, codllcb in horndary llrn, sho@e In arca, cncmachrntg rd ury facs wldch I correct surey std
ir|spcc0on of llrc p|trdses wodd dlschse end wldch ue mt showrr by the p$lic rccotds.
4. Any lleq or rlght to a lierq for scnlccs, labor or nntcdd drretolort or |rrcdlcr furislrcd, lnryrscd tty lw and
mt slnwrr try tle prHlc rccnr{s.
5. I)efects, ller , etEttrrtErces, rdvcFe dslnB or otlmr nmts, lt ury, crcded, lltst apeclrg In OE FIh[c rccords or
stfHrg sr*requent to lh efTecdve dde lercot hil p|or to frre dete lh proposed lmurcd acqircs o[ ncord Jor
vahrc lh GstBte or l errst or rmrtgrge lhreon covc'rtd tty dds CormiEmrf.
6. Thxcs or speclal &ssessnrnLs whlch erc mt shown &s exlsllrg llerrs by tlrc ptHlc rtcotd*
7- Ilcns tor unpdd wtrr rd .scwer clug€s, lf my.
t. In eddlllon, 0r owrrf s policy wlll be sutt€ct !o 0e nuffig, ll my, md in Sccdon 1 ot Sdedule R tEreof.
9. RIGIIT OF WAY FOR DITC:IJRS OR CANAIS C{'NSTRT]CTF';D RY TIIE AIJTIIORITY OF TITE
INITRD STATFS AS RF^SERVBD TN IJNITED STATES PATBNT RECORDT{D DDCII:DMI'R 19,
t9t, IN B(X)K746 AT P GE t92, IINDF.R RE(X{PTTON NO. 642&i5.
lo A RIGIIT oF wAY, F()R NON-MOTORIT,ED TRAFFIC (xrllJ, ovER TIIE EXISTING TRAIL
(TRAII. NO.. 20il) OVER AND A(n(}qS r,OT I, SRCTION 2, TIIE F: SEMENT BEING l0
FF,ET IN WIDTII, I,YTNG EQUAI,I,Y (N F,ACTI SIDE OF TIIE (frNTF,RI,INE AS CRF,ITTED BY
I,NITED STATTS PATTNT RECORDED DE(BTVTBER 19, T997 IN B(NK 7iI6 AT PAGE E!'A
RECFPTIO:{ N(} 642E36.
I I. (I)VIIIANAT RF{;ARDING VYETIANI}S, AFTECTING II)T I, SECTION 2, AS DTSICRIBED IN
I]NITED STATED PATFNT RIi)CORDT:D DT]CE}IBF,R, 19, IgYI IN B(X)K746 AT PAGE t92,
I,NDER RF,CT"PTTON N(} 642&15.
12. TRRNIS, CONDMONS AI\D PROVISIONS OF ANNEXATION OF SIIBIEC:T PROMRTY TO TIIE
TOW\ OF VAIL RECORDED MAY 15. I9EO IN B(X)K 302 AT PAGE t5Z
From Land Title Fri 17 Aug 2001. 11:16:33 Altl MDT Page 6 of 7
I,AND TITI,E GUARANTEE COMPANY
DISCI,OSURE STATEMENTS
Nob: Prffitnnt lo CRS 10-11-12!,, mlice ls hrcby given lleE
A) The suficct rcat pmpe]tt nny be locahd In a special tudrg distsict
B) A C-Gnincotc o[ Tues DlE llslirE each tmirg jrisdcdon nqJr be obtdrpd fmm tlE Corr*y
Tltestnds xll[dzd rgeil
C) The infomndon ltgadrg specil dtslr"lcts ord Orc botnddcs otsrh dsHcts ney be oblained fmrn
the Rorrd of Cour*y Conndsslor*rq the Courty Clcd( sd Recodcr, or llt Co|'ty ,tss€ssor.
Noh: Effecdve Scptcmber 1, 199, CRS 30- 10-4{16 rtqrircs $ar a[ documnts reccived for rcordirg or filltg
In tlrc clcr* ard recode/s omce slnll conlCn e top mflEln ol er le6t om lmh rd f, lofg rlght md tnltom
rmrgin of at lest orrc lqlf ol en lrrclr The cler* and rccodfr nny rcfrrse !o rccord or ffle erry docurnt lM
do€s I3t cor onq except llnf, Oe rcqrnrurrrnf for dE top nnrgln s|r8|l mt TPfy to docurrcnts ushg fomE
on vldch sFct lt povld for rtcording or llllrg infonmdon at ltn bp mtgln o[ tlp docrrrnnt
Nolc: Colorrdo DMslon of lrr$nrre Regulafom 3-$1, Panqr4h C of Ardde V[ rcqdtl.s tlnt 'Tveql
dfle endty slnll lr resporrslble lor dl nallcrs wlich ay4er of rccnord Flor b llt tirm of rccordrg
wlEnever lh dde endty contrs oE G'lqslrB sd is rcsF||slHc for ttcotdrE or nlitB of legsl
docurnnLs rcsulfhg lrom lhe Oarcgcdon wHch was c'lqsed". Prcvided lhd tad Tltle Gtru*ee
Cornpny conducts lhc closlrg of llrc imurcd Eusection urd ls respomlHe for rtcordlg lhe
lcgal doc|nrnfs from lh tansecdor\ excepon nmber 5 wlll mt ryear on tlrc (hmey's fitle
fullcy rrd th I-enfurs Pollcy wltn is$Ed.
Note: Amnnndve rrclqnlc's llen potettlon lor OE (hrEr may tr evsllatrlc (tj{cally by delcdon
of Exccflion no. 4 of Schcdulc B, Section 2 ol lhe Conrrltrr frcm lhe Owrrc/s Pollcy to hc
lsnrd) upon conSimce wllh tlt followir4 cotdidons:
A) TtE lmd d€scrlbed in ScHrle A of fds corrrltne mst tE a slryle fendly rcsldcrre which
inclrdcs a cordominium or townhowe ur t
B) No ldmr or nutc.risls h{ve been ft.nrtshed tty nrcclEnlcs or nntft{d-ntn lor prloses ol
cortstsrrcflon on lhe land describcd in ScHule A of ll{s Conrrtfrrr{ vlthin lhe Fct 6 r|mr l|s.
C) Tfrc Crn?any musl rccelvc m eroFiflr dlidevlt lldelmlfyry lhe Corrpoly qnlnst u}nled
nEchfidc's ard ndrrhl-ncn's liers.
D) Tlrc Conpeny nflst rrcciye pyru|t ol lhe ryroFlotc Fmiu|r
E) It O*re lm been corstrrdon, llrpmvenrnts or nlf,jor ttpd|s ltrdc aken on OE pmperty to he pnhesed
wilhin slx nmn0$ prlor !o th Dab of lhc Conrnitsrrcnt rhe rcqircnrrfs to obtaln coverqe
for rmrtcorded llers will lnclude: disclosure of c.ertein conshrction irfomndon; finrnclal irforrnadon
s to tlrc seller, tr hdlder rd or lhc contrabE FyrIEnt ot tlp qropriufe prmiun fidly
cxecrrlcd Irdcnnity Agrrcenrerxs satlsfecbry to llrc conpry, and, oty eddiliornl rcqdntrrc s
&s nuy b€ nece$sory aflcr m exendmflon of Ur sfonesrld Infonrqdon tty tlrc ComFry-
No covenge wlll be glven uder ery cincurnsbnces for labor or nrderlal for whlch lhc lrtrutd
hs co nrled lororryrttd to Fy.
Notc: P||Iflrurt !o CRS l0-ll-123, mlice ls lrcreby giveru
A) That therc Ls rccoded evldcrre tH a rnlmral estntf hrr tren severtd, lesed, or olhcrwlse
conveyd fmm th srrfae esbtc srd tlat lherc is a.subErlial llkcllhood het a Olrd Ferty
holds son: or rll Intcrest ln oll, ges, olhcr nftnrels, or Seolhcfiml e|ErHl ln tE prtflty; sd
B) Thd.srrh nlmral eshtc mry forclde lhe rlgtr b enter rd use OE FDFlty witlreut OE
surfre owrrc/s Perndsslon
ThLs mlice ryflies to o\ymCs policy connnltrnnls contdrdrg a mlmnl severurce lmts|'ner
cxceplion, or excepliom, in Schedule B, Secdon 2.
Nothirg hcrcln contrlned rvlll bc dcemed to obliptc 0re corpmy to povlde rry of llt coverryes
rcferrd to hrcin rnless llrc ebove conddors ne fully satlslled-
Eot! D[UognE
From Land Title Fri 17 Aug 2001 11:16:33 AM MDT Page 7 of 7
JOINT NOTICE OF PRIVACY POLICI
Ftddity Nadonal Flnancial Group of Componlcr/Chicago fitlc Insurance Company and
Land fitle Guarantce Compony
July l, 2IXll
lhel we seBe. 'Itis Privrcr' ltlrften|ent provldes thf,t etdemdo
SbftnE fmm dn|e to dnie conststentif,llh epdlceHe privsca Inrs.
In the counse of our brrslness, we mry collect Personel Informatlon about you ftrom tbe followlng sourcesl
r Fmm adlcdom or olls forrns we ncclve lmm you or your authotted reprnsentadve;t Fmm yirir mnsllom wltj or fmm fte servlces hehg prfonrtd try, u, ou afllllf,Ls, or olltrs;f, Frorn 6rr Interrrct web sltrs;t Frcm tlrc g.rHlc rccords nraliluimd by govenurnhl erides llrrt we ellhr obtain drccljy fmm llnse
endtlcs, oi fmm our alllllaEs or o0rcts; ard * Frrm comrrrrcr or otltr rcportirg agerrles.
Our Pollcles Regardlng lhe Pnotectlon of the Conlidentlallty and Securlty of Your Pensonal Infonmtlon
We nulrtaln drvsical. elccbonic ud mcedud uuulhodzrd
rccess or lnlrirsion tic llndt access tri tlrc ltrso h rccss In
conrrcc'lion wllh provldhg pmdrcts or scrvlce.s to you or fo
Our Pollclcs end Practicre.s Regardtng thc Sharlng of Your Perconal Information
We rmy sfterc yorr Fersoml lrfonrdion wifh orr olliliales, sudr s lnsrrrcc conpi€s, qents, and otlrcr nd
estle slulenrf, sewicc pmvidcrs- We dso nry disclme y6rr Fersorsl lnforrrnliori:
; Sl!m*J*HhT#j,TJ,"l"HSiHmr* ororher
I to otlE|s wilh whom we enfcr hto jolnt rr|8rlietiry qir€etffnts for products orseMccs Oqt we hllcve you
IIEy find of inbrcst
In addldon, wc wlll dl.sclose rtf Rslon' wlrcn we fl€ re.plrtd
Iw tf,ry to do so. or when we sclose yotrr Fesoml
lfifonmdon wl*:n othelwlse e, whch dlsclosure ls needed
b erfoIce otr rlgils rlslrB n or rcladonsldP wllh you.
(}E oF tll! lmp{rilf|l ltspomllllitics of sonr of ou dliliahd conprie.s is lo rtcord docrlrnls in lhe FHlc
domdn Such-dmurrnts nray conhin your Persornl Infonncdon
Right to Access Your Personrl Informatlon and Ability to Correct Errors Or Request Cltangcs Or Delcllon
lhd or$
law, !o
All reqrrcsts sEHttrd !o llF Ftdclity Nallonal Fimncial Glorp of Conprdes/Cllf crgo Tille h|su:rrcc Cortpny
shull li In wdtllg, srd dcllvcrcd to drc followltg ddre r
Irrc.
Smh Bertmr, CA 931l0
Multlple Products or Servlcrs
Il we pnvldc yorr wllh rmm llron om nnsdd pmdrrct or seryl(e, you rqr rccelve nrorc Olsl orE FlYo(y mdce
flnm is- Wc ap oglzc for my Incorwerlerre lms nuy c se you-
For ERnt. FSJ.Cf,I
EASEMENT AGREEMENT
THIS EASEMENT AGREEMENT is made and entered into this _day of September,
200l,by and between TI{E TOWN OF VAIL, a Colorado municipal corporation ("@),
whose address is 75 S. Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657, and BOOTH FALLS
HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, a Colorado nonprofit corporation ("GranteC'), whose
address is 3094 Booth Falls Court, Vail, Colorado 81657.
This Easement Agreement is made and entered into in contemplation of the following
facts and circumstances:
A. Grantor is the owner of certain real property located in Eagle County, Colorado,
which is more particularly described on the EbibilA attached hereto and incorporated herein by
this reference (the "E4!@!9I8").
B. Grantee is a homeowners' association with regard to a condominium development
in Eagle County, Colorado commonly known as "Booth Falls Condominiums", which is more
particularly described on the Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference
ithe "BenefitterlfgqStfl"). The Benefitted Property is adjacent to the Easement Property.
C. Grantee desires to construct multiple rock fall mitigation barriers on the Easement
Properfy as shown in Exhibit C for the purpose of protecting the Benefitted Properly, and
Grantoi desires to grant Grantee an easement on the Easement Property for such purpose, on the
terms and conditions herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, FOR AND IN CONSIDERATION OF Ten Dollars ($10.00) and
other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency ofwhich are hereby
acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:
l. Subject to the terms, conditions, reservations and restrictions set forth herein,
Grantor hereby grants, assigns and sets over to Grantee an exclusive perpetual appurtenant
easement to conitruct, install, plant, maintain, replace, enlarge, reconstruct, improve, inspect,
repair and remove rock fall mitigation barriers, trees, rocks and ground cover, at Grantee's sole
cost and expense, for the purposi ofprotecting the Benefitted Property from rock fall and related
hazards, aS may from timi to time be useful to, or required by, Grantee, under, through and
across the Easement Property. Grantee shall be solely responsible for all expenses associated
with the exercise of its righti hereunder, except that Grantor shall remove, at its sole cost and
expense, all rock fall and-other debris which may from time to time be collected behind such
ro"t fdi -itigation barriers; and Grantor shall undertake and complete such removal at such
times as are riasonably necessary to ensure the proper operation and firnction ofthe rock fall
barriers.
2. Grantor covenants and agrees (a) that it shall not erect or place, nor shall it dlow
or permit any other person or enfity to erect or place, any pelmanent building, strucnlre,
imp.ouement, tree or fence on anyportion of the Easement Property, and (b) that Grantor shall
beliable for their removal if any such items are so placed or erected, and Grantor shall, at
Grantor's sole expense, promptiy remove any such items so placed or erected on any portion of
the Easement Property. Grantor further covenants and agrees that it shall not diminish the
ground cover over any portion ofthe Easement Property.
3. After the initial rock fall baniers are constructed, any removal of and any and all
alterations to such barriers shall be subject to all applicable ordinances and regulafions ofthe
Town of Vail and to formal approval from the Town of Vail. With regard to the exercise of any
ofany ofits rights hereunder, Grantee hereby covenants and agrees ttrat it shall indemniff and
hold Grantor harmless from and against any and all claims, actions (at law or in equity),
demands, liabilities, costs and expenses arising from any damage or injury to person or property
resulting from Grantee's exercise of any of its rights hereunder or from any negligence or willfirl
misconduct of Grantee, its agents or contractors, including without limitation any and all costs
and reasonable attorney's fees (of attorney's selected by Grantor) which are incuned by Grantor
in connection with any of the foregoing.
4. Grantor shall have the unrestricted use and enjoyment ofthe Easement Property,
provided that such use shall not interfere with any of the Grantee's uses of the Easement
Property as set forth herein.
5. The easement granted herein and created hereby is and shall be appurtenant to the
Benefitted Property, with the Benefitted Property being the dominant estate and with the
Easement Property being the servient estate. All provisions and terms of this Easement
Agreement, iniluding the benefits and burdens hereof, shall run with the land and shall be
Uinding upon and inure to the benefit ofthe parties hereto and their respective, heirs, successors
and assigns.
6. This Easement Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of
which shall constitute an original, and all ofwhich when taken together shall constitute one and
the same instrument.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigred have executed this Easement Agreement on
the day and year fust written above.
GRANTOR:
TOWN OF VAIL,
a Colorado mruricipal corporation
GRANTEE:
BOOTH FALLS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION'
a Colorado nonprofit corPoration
Susan Fritz
President
By:
bbertW. McL
ATTEST:
coLTNrY or
-ohT&- 4*
STATE OF COLORADO
, r*L
The forgoing instrument was acknowledged before me this -ffiay of September,200l
by Robert W. Mclaurin as the Town Manager of the Town of Vail, bir behalf of the Town of
Vail. State of Colorado.
expires: C/ , {, 2ODL I
./ v LoREtEtD0l,tAt*Dsot{,
)
) ss.
)
The forgoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
-
day of September,Z00l
by Susan Fritz, as the President of Booth Falls Homeowners Association, on behalf of the
corporation.
Witness mv hand and offrcial seal.
mv hand and offrcial seal.
COUNTY OF
STATE OF COLORADO
Notary Public
My commission expires:
|_0jgmlssioq e,earea Jrry 5ffi
75S. FrontageBoai V*, dO gffiSi
a---
ryulultl9
cornmrsslon
s$ue*\
$dT,-i.9
EXHIBIT A
TO EASEMENT AGREEMENT
@asement Property)
A parcel of land Norttr of and adjacent to a part of Lot l, Block 2, Vail Village, Twelfth
Filing, County of Eagle, State of Colorado, more particularly described as follows:
An easement across Government Lot l, Section 2, Township 5 South, Range 80 West of
the Sixth Principal Meridian, County of Eagle, State of Colorado; said easement being more
particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the Northeast Corner of said Lot l; thence N89E24'13"W,42.85 feet
to a point on the Northerly Borurdary of said Lot I, which is the TRUE POINT
OF BEGINNING; thence N00El8'14'8, 150.00 feet; thence N89E24'13'W,
534.12 feet; thence S00EI8'14'W, 150.00 feet to the Northwesterly Comer of
said Lot 1; thence S89E24'13'E,534.12 feet along the Northerly Boundary of said
Lot I and along the East-West Centerline of said Section 2 to the TRUE POINT
OF BEGINNING.
EXHIBIT B
TO EASEMENTAGREEMENT
(Benefitted Property)
A part of Lot l, Block 2, Vai4 Village, Twelfth Filing, County of Eagle, State of
Colorado, more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the Northeast Comer of Said Lot 1; thence N89E24'13'W,42.85 feet to a
point on the Northerly Boundary of said Lot l, which is the TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING; thence S00E18'14"V/, 188.12 feet to a point on the Southerly Boundary of
said Lot l; thence N89E4I'46'W, 96.75 feet; thence S48E28'49'W, 147.80 feet to a point
on a curye; thence 75.81 feet along the arc of a curve to the left, said curve having a
radius of 261.14 feet and a long chord N49E49'56'W, 75.55 feet; thence N58E09'l3uW,
60.97 feet to a point of curvature; thence 178.33 feet along t}re arc of a curve to the left,
said curve having a radius of 331.16 feet and a chord N73E34'50'W,176.18 feet to a
point of curvatue; thence 34.76 feet along the arc of a curve to the right, said curve
having a radius of 25.00 feet and a chord N49Ell'28'W, 32.02 feet; thence
N09EI9'56'W, 141.37 feet to the Northwesterly Comer of said Lot 1; thence
S89E24'13"E,534.12 feet along the Northerly Boundary of said Lot 1 and along the East-
West Centerline of said Section 2 to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, said part
containing 106,386.34 square feet or2.442 Acres more or less.
o
EXHIBIT C
TO EASEMENT AGREEMENT
c
E
fl E
F
e'
E=8e
fi
P
*8f;
Bf=GtE o-dd
rtd/-
t
I
I t
I
ur ld ...lia i n=a I HeE tHrt6
e5E r!>
2'a E
EF -aE
Hi - gfr 6:q
=B
E 83 Pq'
HsB .-92
=iiio t/t i:t ()
o
ORDINANCE NO.23
SERIES OF 2OO1
AN ORDINAIICE AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYAIICE OF AN EASEMENT TO THE
BOOTH FALLS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION TO CONSTRUCT A ROCKFALL
MITIGATION WALL ON A PORTION OF PARCEL F, VAIL VILLAGE I2TH FILING
owNED BY THE TOWI\ OF VArL AND, MORE FULLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
A parcel of land North of and adjacent to a part of Lot l, Block 2 Vail Village Twelfth
Filing, County of Eagle, State of Colorado more particularly described as:
Beginning at the Northeast Comer of said Lot 1; thence N89024'12'W,42.85 feet
to a point on the Northerly Boundary of said Lot l, which is the TRUE POINT
OF BEGINNING; thence N000 18'14'E, 150.00 feet; thence N890 24'l3-W,
534.12 feet; thence S00u 18'14"W, 150.00 feet to the Northwesterly Comer of
said Lot l; thence 5890 24'13'E ,534.12 feet along the Nonherly Boundary of
said Lot I and along the East-West Centerline of said Section 2 to the TRUE
POINT OF BEGINNING.
WHEREAS, the Town of Vail is the owner of certain property known as a the Portion of
Parcel F, Vail Village l2m filing.
WHEREAS, this property was acquired by the Town of Vail from the U.S Forrest
Service through a Land Exchange without deed restriction concerning use or transfer; and
WHEREAS the property located on 3094 Booth Falls Road is located in a severe rockfall
hazardand there has been a history ofrockfall damage to that property.
WHEREAS the creation of a rockfall mitigation wall is critical to help protect the safety
of the inhabitants of 3094 Booth Falls Road and to reduce the risk of property damage to that
property
WHEREAS the State of Colorado Geological Suwey has provided a letter which
concludes that this wall is "an excellent design" and *will provide rockfall protection for the
Booth Falls Town Homes:
WHEREAS the Town of Vail Desigrr Review Board approved the design on August l5th,
2001.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COI.JNCIL TTIE TOWN OF
VAIL. COLORADO that:
l. The Town Council hereby approves an easement on the propefi for the purpose of
constructing a Rockfall Mitigation Wall.
2. The Town Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute an easement to allow
the construction of said wall to the Booth Falls Homeowners Association.
3. Ifany part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase ofthis ordinance is for
any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity ofthe remaining portions
o
ofthis ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance,
and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless ofthe fact that
any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid.
4. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code
of the Town of Vail as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued,
any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution
commenced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the
provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not
revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated
herein.
5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent
herewith are repealed to the extend only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be
construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution, or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore
repealed.
INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL
ON FIRST READING this lst day of August,2}Dl, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the
Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado.
Ludwig Kurz, Mayor
ATTEST:
lnrelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISTIED
this 4th day of September, 2001.
Ludwig Kurz, Mayor
ATTEST:
Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
Design Review Board
ACTION FORM
Department of Community Development
75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657
tel: 970.479.2139 fax: 970.479.2452
web: wwwci.vail.co.us
Boothfalls Townhomes DRB ]{umben DRB020287
Common Element - Parking lot addition and repair and landscape rocKall mitigation wall
APPUCANT Steve Prawdzik 08127 12002 Phone: 303-898-0398
3094 Boothfalls Rd #17
Vail, CO
Skivail@attbi.com 81657
License:
OWNER BOONE, CATHERINE S. & MICHAE09/20/2001 Phone:
7256 S BOULDER RD
BOULDER CO
80303
Prorect Name:
Project Description:
Pafticipants:
ProjectAddress: 3094 BOOTH FALLS CTVAIL
Boothfalls Homeowners Assoc
LocaUon:
Legal Description:
Parcel Number:
Comments:
Lot: 1 Block 2 Subdivision: BooTH FALLS MTN HOMES \).,--\\),t\c.2.- tA (-\
210102302001
BOARD/STAFF ACTION
Motion By: Woldrich
Second By: Rodgers
Vote: 4-0
Gonditlons:
Action: APPROVED
Date of Approvalz LLlo6l2002
Cond:8
(P|-AN): No changes to these plans may be made without the written consent of Town of
Vail staff and/or the appropriate review committee(s).
Cond: 0
(P|-AN): DRB approval does not constitute a permit for building. Please consult with
Town of Vail Buildlng personnel prior to construction activities.
Cond: CON0005950
1. That an additional 12 trees be planted along the east side of the property,
subject to staff review with the neighbor and appllcant, prior to the issuance of a
building permit.
2. That the existing trees from the toe of the lot will be replaced if removed.
3. That there be no parking pole lights on the southeast side ofthe parking lots.
Planner Allison Ochs DRB Fee Paid: $25O.OO
General Information:
All projects requiring design review must receive approval prior to submitting a building permit application. Please
refer to the submittal requirements for the particular approval that is requested. An application for Design Review
cannot be accepted until all requlred information is received by the Community Development Department. The
project may also need to be reviewed by the Town Council and/or the Planning and Environmental Commission.
Design review approval lapses unless a bullding permit is issued and construction commences wlthin
one year of the apprcval.
ption of Request:
Location of the Proposal:
Physical Address:
(Contact Eagle Co. Assessor at970-328-8640 for parcel no.)
Zoning:
Name(s) of Owner(s):
Owner(s) Signature(s):
Name of Applicant:ztk
Department of Community Development
75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657
tel: 970.479.2t39 faxi 970.479.2452
web: www.ci.vail.co,us
$50 Plus 91,00 per square foot of toial sign area,
No Fee
$650 For construction of a new building or demo/rebuild.
$300 For an addition where square footage is added to any residential or
commercial building (includes 250 additions & interior convemions),
$250 For minor changes to buildings and site lmprovements, such as,
reroofing, painting, window additions, landscaping, fences and
retaining walls, etc.
$20 For mlnor changes to buildlngs and slte improvements, such as,
reroofing, painting, window additions, landscaping, fences and
retaining walls, etc.$20 For revisions to plans already approvea uv pranrBEe&ldrEg
Design Review Board.
No Fee
Application for Design Review
Mailing Address:
Mailing Address:
E-mail Addfess:
Type of Review and Fee:
tr Signs
E Conceotual Review
New Con struction
Addition
Minor Alteration
(m ulti-family/commercial)
Minor Alteration
(single-family/duplex)
Changes to Approved Plans
Separatlon Request
tr
tr
4
D
tr
F;'8ff* u?Jil'''
Application Date:
Planner:
i!6 FAr 30$67$09 T/g LICETING
ilt s/*/"=
Submittal
drstamped survey of property u/ Landscape plan
E--_? _ S/ Civil/Siteplans -o. TitleReport(SectionB)
Suruey/Site Plan Review Checklist
Depaftment of Community Development
75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657
tel: 970.479.2139 taxi 970.479.2452
web: www.ci.vail,co.us
xThis checklt'st must be submitted prior tu Public Works review of a proposed development
ProjectAddress: 3o11 ba*hlalls KOad
d Surveyor's wet stamp and signature y' Date of survey / North arrow
including bearings, distances and curve
information.
V' Lot Size o Buildable Area (excludes red hazard
avalanche, slopes greater than 40ol0, and
floodplain)
Site Plan Requirements:
/ Environmental Hazards (ie. rockfall, debris
flow, avalanche, wetlands, floodplain, soils)s Watercourse setbacks (if applicable)a Trees
oz tabeled easements (i.e, drainage, utility,
pedestrian, etc...)t' Topography
D _ Utility locations d Rdiacent roadways labeled and edge of
asphalt for both sides of the roadway shown
for a minimum of 250' in either direction
from propefi.
L Access (check all)d Driveway type and finished surface are shown on the site plan.
. t' Unheated o Heated (portion in ROW in a separate zone)t' Snow storage areas are shown on the site plan within property boundaries (300/o of driveway area if
. unheated; 100/o of driveway area if C All driveway grades, dimensions, ra noted on the site plan and conform to Development
,, Standards, p, 11. Steepest Section de (not the average grade):_
f Parking spaces and turning radii are noted on site plan and conform to Development Standards,
pp.12&14
IL Construction Site (check all)u Location of all utilities and meter pits are shown on the site plan,
t'/ Limits of disturbance construction fencing is shown on the site plan.
d I am aware that approved Staging and Construction Traffic Control Plans, as per the Manual of
Uniform Traffic Control Devices, will be necessary prior to construction.
ra/ I am aware that a Revocable Right of Way Permit will be required prior to construction.
Page 11 of LZllZlO7l02
nppri."nt, SteVe PfawalZik phoneNumber:.-\oJ-818 4318
SurveV Relquirementi:
III. Drainage (check all that apply)tr The required Valley Pan is shown on the site plan as per Development Standards, p. 12. t o (Note: Valley pan must not be heated)o 4 Foot Concrete Pan o 8 Foot Concrete Pan o/ Positive and adequate drainage is maintained at all times within the proposed site.a Culverts have been provided and are labeled and dimensioned on the site plan.
o A Hydraulic report has been provided. (As requested byTown Engineer)
IV. Erosion Control (Check all that apply)o Disturbance area is greater than one half acre.
tr/, A separate Erosion Control Plan has been professionally engineered and PE stamped,
0/ Less than one half acre has been disturbed, and proper erosion control devices are shown on the site
plan.
V. Floodplain (check all that apply)tr The project lies within or adjacent to a 100 year Floodplain.' -. er- 100 year Fltiojl,i.lir, i! siir.ivrr .,rr'tire site piarr,i' - ' Et A Floodplain'study has been provided;'(Required'if floodplain is within construction limits or as
requested by Town Engineer)o The project does not lie within or adjacent to a 100 year Floodplain
VI. Geological/Environmental Hazards (check all that apply)tr The project lies within a Geologic/Environmental Hazard area. (See Development Standards, p. 20)
a / A Hazard Report has been provided
d The pQect does not lie within a Geologic/Environmental Hazard area.
VII. Grading (check all that apply)
d, Existing and proposed grades/contours are provided on the site plan.
d All disturbed areas have been returned to a 2:1 grade.
rr/ All disturbed areas not returned to 2:1 grade have been Professionally Engineered with slope
protection and/or stable soils, PE stamped details are provided within plans.
o Only existing contours are shown on the site plan, there is no proposed grading.
VIII. Parking (check all)t' All residential and commercial parking spaces conform to the Development Standards, pp. 12&15.
IX, Retaining Walls (check all that apply)/ All retaining walls conform to the standards in the Development Standards, p. 19.d All retaining walls and combination walls over 4 feet have been Professionally Engineered and a PE
stamped detail has been provided within the plans y' All retaining walls are shown on the site plan, with labeled top and bottom of wall elevations and type
of wall construction.
o No retaining walls are required for this project.
X. Sight Distance (check all that apply)o Proper sight distance has been attained and shown on site plan as per Development Standards, p.12.
o Proper sight distance has not been attained. Explanation why:
Additional Comments
Please provide any additional comments that pertain to Public Works Review.
Page 12 ot Lzlo2l07lOZ
I. SUBMITTALREOUIREMENTS
,/d, Stamped topographic suruey*, if applicable
67Site and Grading Plan, if applicable*F.5 ( ' t-anCscape P!an, !f applicel-''!e* : i.
MINOR EXTERIOR ALTERATIONS
TO BUILDINGS AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
General fnformation:
This application is required for proposals involving minor exterior alterations and/or site improvements,
Proposals to add landscaping do not require DRB approval unless they involve the addition of patios,
water features, grading, or the addition of retaining walls.
. a Photos or drawings which clearly convey existing conditlonslk tr Photos or drawings which clearly convey the proposed building or site alteration(s)*
D _ Exterior color and material samples and specifications.y' Ugnting Plan* and Cut-sheet(s) for proposed fixtures, ifapplicable o Written approval from a condominium association or joint owner, if applicable u The Administrator and/or DRB may require the submission of additional plans, drawings,
specifications, samples and other materials (including a model) if deemed necessary to
determine whether a project will comply with Design Guidelines or if the intent of the
proposal is not clearly indicated.
Please submit three (3) copies of the malerials noted with an asterisk (*),
rveyor
a excludes red hazard avalanche, slopes greater
. than 40olo, and floodplain)
{ tles to existing benchmark, either USGS landmark or sewer inveft. This information must be
clearly stated on the survey d Propefi boundaries to the nearest hundredth (.01) of a foot accuracy. Distances and
bearings and a basis of bearing must be shown. Show existing pins or monuments found
,and their relations corner,
d, Show right of way cluding bearings, distances and curve information.
D/ Indicate all easem subdivision plat and rgcorded against the property as
indicated in the title report. List any easement restrictions. L N oN E)
o/ Spot Elevations at the edge of asphalt, along the street frontage of the property at twenty-
five foot intervals (25'), and a minimum of one spot elevations on either side of the lot.q Topographic conditions at two foot contour intervals q/ Existing trees or groups of trees having trunks with diameters of 4" or more, as measured
from a point one foot above grade.
o Rock outcroppings and other significant natural features (large boulders, intermittent
/ streams, etc.).
ca. All existing improvements (including foundation walls, roof overhangs, building overhangs,
etc.).s/ Enuironmental Hazards (ie. rockfall, debris flow, avalanche, wQtlands, floodplain, soils)
Page3of Ly(Oy/O7(OZ (rrt'le ' nffGArED lrf.Efr)
o Watercourse setbacks, if applicable (show centerline and edge of stream or creek in addition
to the required stream or creak setback) , )
o Show all utility meter locations, including any pedestals on site or in the right-of-way
adjacent to the site. Exact location of existing utility sources and proposed service lines from
their source to the structure. Utilities to include:
Cable W Sewer Gas Telephone Water Electric
a ,8ize and type of drainage culverts, swales, etc,
d Adjacent roadways labeled and edge ofasphalt for both sides ofthe roadway shown for a
minimum of 250'in either direction from property.
Site and Grading Plan:d Scale of L"=20'or larger d Property and setback lines
D - Existing and proposed easements ' { - lxisting and p;opl:cC g;alc:
o/ Existing and proposed laycut cf buildings and other'structures including decks, patios, fences
and walls. Indicate the foundation with a dashed line and the roof edge with a solid line.o All proposed roof ridge lines with proposed ridge elevations. Indicate existing and proposed
grades shown underneath all roof lines. This will be used to calculate building height.
arl Proposed driveways, including percent slope and spot elevations at the property line, garage
slab and as necessary along the centerline of the driveway to accurately reflect grade.
tr A 4' wide unheated concrete pan at the edge of asphalt for driveways that exit the street in
an uphill direction,tr Locations of all utilities including existing sources and proposed service lines from sources to
the structures./ Proposed surface drainage on and off-site.D Location of landscaped areas.q/ Location of limits of disturbance fencing
y'_ Location of all required parking spaces
u/ Snow storage areas,o Proposed dumpster location and detail of dumpster enclosure.
u- Retaining walls with proposed elevations at top and bottom of walls. A detailed cross-section
and elevation drawings shall be provided on the plan or separate sheet. Stamped
engineering drawings are required for walls between 4' and 6'feet in height.
tr Delineate areas to be phased and appropriate timing, if applicable
Landscape Plan:d Tscale of 1" = 20' or larger y' Landscape plan must be drawn at the same scale as the site plan.
t' Location of existing trees, 4" diameter or larger. Indicate trees to remain, to be relocated
(including new location), and to be removed. Large stands of trees may be shown (as
,,bubble) if the strand is not being affected by the proposed improvements and grading.
{snaicate all existing ground cover and shrubs.( Detailed legend, listing the type and size (caliper for deciduous trees, height for conifers,
gallon size for shrubs and height for foundation shrubs) of all the existing and proposed plant
material including ground cover,tr Delineate critical root zones for existing trees in close proximity to site grading and
construction,/ Indicate the location of all proposed plantings.
- o The location and type of existing and proposed watering systems to be employed in caring
for plant material following its installation.
Page 4 of 12102107102
/u/ Existing and proposed contour lines. Retaining walls shall be included with the top of wall
and the bottom of wall elevations noted.
Lighting Plan:
B"/lndicate type, location and number of fixtures.
V )nclude height above grade, lumens output, luminous area t' Rttach a cut sheet for each proposed fixture.
II, REPAINT PROPOSALS
For all proposals to repaint existing buildings, the following supplemental information is required:
q Color chip or color sample including the manufacturer name and color number(s)o Architectural elevation drawings which clearly indicate the location of proposed colors (ie.
siding, stucco, window trim, doors, fascia, soffits, etc.) The following is an example:
Page 5 of I2lO2l07l02
PROPOSED MATERIAIS
Tvoe of Material Color Buildino Materials
Roof
Siding
Other Wall Materials
Fascia
- . Sofflts
Windows
Window Trim
Doors
Door Trim
L"4 * Deck Rails
Flues
Flashing
Chimneys
Trash Enclosures
Greenhouses
Retaining Walls
Exterior Lighting
other SiJer^la t ks
NouJ
keyolrr. Blrck - nsa'
Seo u+h€+
concrele Nal"n I
Notes:
Please specify the manufacturer's name, the color name and number and attach a color chip.
Page 6 of L2l02lOT02
PROPOSED TREES
AND SHRUBS
PROPOSED LANDSCAPING
Botanical Name Common Name Ouantitv Size
S" .+r"rT, '+"X
EXISTING TREES
TO BE REMOVED
Minimum Requirements for Landscaping:
GROUND COVER
soD
SEED
IRRIGATION
ryPE OF EROSION CONTROL
Deciduous Trees - 2" Caliper
Coniferous Trees - 5'in height
Shrubs - 5 Gal.
Square Footaqe Tvpe
tnP-er^ ^c,r/l N^-,rlrl ar." "^ly)
Please specify other landscape features (i.e. retaining walls, fences, swimming pools, etc.)
Page 7 of L2l02lO7l02
UTILITY LOCATION VERIFICATION
This form is to verify service availability and location for new construction and should be used in
conjunction with preparing your utility plan and scheduling installations. The location and availability of
utilities, whether they are main trunk lines or proposed lines, must be approved and verified by the
following utilities for the accompanying site plan.
Authorized Sionature Date
QWEST
970.384.0238 (tel)
97038a.0257 (fax)
Contact: Jason Sharp
EXCEL HIGH PRESSURE GAS
970.262.4077 (tel)
Contact: Brian Sulzer
HOLY CROSS ELECTRIC ASSOC
970.949.5892 (tel)
970.949.4566 (fax)
Contact: Ted Husky
EXCEL ENERGY
970.262.4024 (tel)
970.262.4038 (fax)
Contact; Kit Bogart
EAGLE RIVER WATER & SANTTATION
DISTRICTX
970.476.7480 (tet)
970.476.4089 (fax)
Contact: Fred Haslee
AT&T BROADBAND
970.949.1224 x 112 (tel)
970.949.9138 (fax)
Contact: Floyd Salazar
*Please provide a site plan, floor plan, and elevations when obtaining approval from the Eagle River Water
& Sanitation District. Fire flow needs must be addressed.
NOTES:
1, If the utility verification form has signatures from each of the utility companies, and no comments
are made directly on the form, the Town will presume that there are no problems and the
development can proceed.
2. lf a utility company has concerns with the proposed construction, the utility representative shall
note directly on the utility verification form that there is a problem which needs to be resolved.
The issue should then be detailed in an attached letter to the Town of Vail. However, please keep
in mind that it is the responsibility of the utility company and the applicant to resolve identifled
problems.
3. These verifications do not relieve the contractor of the responsibility to obtain a Public Way Permit
from the Department of Public Works at the Town of Vail. Utilitv locations must be obtained before
digging in any public right-of-way or easement within the Town of Vail. A buildino oermit is not a
Public Wav oermit and must be obtained seoaratelv.
Page 8 of L2l02l07l02
on the World Wide Web at For a new B-: ; - ---::i.--
residential development, the application dea view Board
neanng.
NOTES TO ALL APPLICANTS
.L
Pre-application Meetinq
A pre-application meeting with Town of Vail staff is encouraged. The purpose of a pre-application
meeting is to identify any critical issues pertaining to the applicant's proposal and to determine the
appropriate development review process for an application. In many cases, the pre-application meeting
helps to expedite the development review process as critical issues are identified and dealt with in the
preliminary stages. A pre-application meeting may be scheduled by contacting Judy Rodriguez at
970.479.2L28 or irodriguez@ci.vail.co.us
Time Reouirements
The Design Review Board meets on the 1st and 3rd Wednesdays of each month. A complete application
form and all accompanying material must be accepted by the Community Development Department prior
to application deadlines. A schedule of DRB meetings and associated application deadlines may be found
Review Criteria
The proposal will be reviewed for compliance with the Design Guidelines as set forth in Title 12, (Zoning
Regulations) and Ttle 14 (Development Standards) of the Town of Vail Municipal Code.
Reguirements for prooerties located in hazard areas
If a property is located in or adjacent to a mapped hazard area (i.e. snow avalanche, rockfall, debris flow,
floodplain, wetland, poor soils, etc.), the Community Development Department may require a site-specific
geological investigation. If a site-specific Aeological investigation determines that the subject property is
located in a geologically sensitive area, the property owner(s) must sign an affidavit recognizing the
hazard repoft prior to the issuance of a building permit. Applicants are strongly encouraged to consult
with Community Development staff prior to submitting a DRB application to determine the relationship of
the property to all mapped hazards.
Required Plan Sheet Format
For all surveys, site plans, landscape plans and other site improvement plans, all of the following must be
snown.
1. Plan sheet size must be 24"x 36". For large projects, larger plan size may be allowed.
2. Scale. The minimum scale is 1"=20', All plans must be at the same scale.
3. Graohic bar scale.
4. North arrow.
5, Title block, project name, project address and legal description.
6. Indication of plan preparerf address and phone number.
7. Dates of original plan preparation and all revision dates.
8. Vicinity map or location map at a scale of 1"=1,000' or larger.
9. Sheet labels and numbers,
10. A border with a minimum left side margin of 1.5".
11. Names of all adjacent roadways.
12. Plan legend.
Page 9 of L2102107102
Desion Review Board Meetino Requirements
For new construction and additions, the applicant must stake and tape the project site to irldicate.
propefi lines, proposed buildings and building corners. All trees to be removed must be taped. The
applicant must ensure that staking done during the winter is not buried by snow. All site tapings and
staking must be completed prior to the day of the DRB meeting.
The applicant, or their representative shall be present at the Design Review Board Hearing, Applicants
who fail to appear before the Design Review Board on their scheduled meeting date and who have not
asked in advance that discussion on their item be postponed, will have their items removed from the DRB
agenda until such time as the item has been republished.
If the DRB approves the application with conditions or modifications, all conditions of approval must be
resolved prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Staff Approval
I --- L^- - .-- -r-ar\ - -,r ----.--..-I ll(j r\Uli/llrlSrtqlui (U /lrL,rlutjl L,l L,rE i"/id|lrlllrg )l4rlrrl lirut lCVluir (lirr OPPrvVg L,sJlgrr r\eviCvv sPPriLsL'v..J,
approve with certain modifications, de ny.the application, or refer the applicotion to the Design Review
Board for a decision. All staff approvals are reviewed by the Design Review Board and any staff decision
is subject to final approval by the DRB.
Additional Review and Fees
If this application requires a separate review by any local, state or Federal agency other than the Town of
Vail, the application fee shall be increased by $200.00. Examples of such review, may include, but are
not limited to: Colorado Department of Highway Access Permits, Army Corps of Engineers 404, etc.
The applicant shall be responsible for paying any publishing fees in excess of 500/o of the application fee.
If, at the applicant's request, any matter is postponed for hearing, causing the matter to be re-published,
then the entire fee for such re-publication shall be paid by the applicant.
Applications deemed by the Community Development Department to have design, land use or other
issues, which may have a significant impact on the community, may require review by external
consultants in addition to Town staff. Should a determination be made by Town staff that an external
consultant is needed, the Community Development Department may hire the consultant, The
Department shall estimate the amount of money necessary to pay the consultant and this amount shall
be forwarded to the Town by the applicant at the time of filing an application. The applicant shall pay
expenses incurred by the Town in excess of the amount forwarded by the application to the Town within
30 days of notification by the Town. Any excess funds will be returned to the applicant upon review
completion.
Page 10 ot L2/02107102
l,
f'uut LvToFF wn tN*tRE
A*f Univcrse Colleefiorr
?o *,+I fi\cL | . Ha li Je
ta'f s. lumens )
Color: DacK Brvazc
4'
J
L*IGHI N G DETAI L
$'. x 1" o'D' hl'n Polc
erec+cric,r j eonduif
fr.cotl LoaereE
N15
no^ lueL{I
6uuapro uaqm uoqelonb srql ol ralar asea;6 lluo slpualeu pa)srl oqt r0l sr uorlelonb srq.L (8
'slprlred 0u posn aq lsnur atonb alalduro) pabueqt I pLo^ saulo)aq uortplonb stql (1
'ales l0 suorlrpuol puB sL1]lal prepuets s,ralnDprnupLLl aql 0l ililqns aJp suoltetonb llv (g
J0 alpp j0 s^pp 081 Lrqlr/r^ luau.rdrqs pup 'Lr0rtptonb lo alpp urorJ s,{ep 0€toj ult|J arp si)ud (s
u dJdq pJ,lt)00s a!rM'iaqro ssalJl sJxpl
olqe)rldde r0'uolellelsur \eqsrurt lEDads 3asn] 'leualeuL ateds'sduel apnpullou op sarud (t
uraraq pauoads asrMraqto sselun'uoualrsrp s,ralnDelnupu aqt tp,CH.t %02 trets pldeU" to
,,OH.t %02 llPlS luPrsul prepuel5 fu]snpu1,, se palddns aq lleqs lselleq luarsaron|l )ruo4lell (€I plrtddns aq llrM
'urareq parlDaos osrMraql0 ssalun uorlelonb
pelleq due;- 1 nu '0ulqrtrMs la^al-a 6u6'tl0^ 0Zl - uralaq as^ laqto partDads sso un (Z
'parnbar arp srseilpq atdrllnur 1
,pue abellor 6urt1*^ ,, alo,ro#ll:'ll j:l:lql]iyili('
.[Nn0nv # DOIVIV]
rOul/ qlrv ,{ueduol
u0rlP)0'l ol
u or'6 u r1q 6 rlq tu qaM
zz60 €1s t0€ xel
zaaj ELs t0€ lel
t0208 0pP.rolo) 1a^u3c
pr P^elnog raad5 77gg
s I lv I I o s s v
9NrrH9tl H/lAl
Mollol ol sa6ed
aureN qor
uorlelon0 ]0 alec I
I uo!lelonb
UCL
I Melal halide r i 1PS lamps
150 to 400 watts
I Optics rotatc on 90" centers
FOUR LIGHT PATTERNS
Oplional flat tentpered glass /ens on the
UCM (FTG option).
PS latnps
I Optics rotate on 90" centers
TO ceramrc metal halide
lar|ps can Oe used to lnsure
oolor accLrfacy and consistency.
Electronic ballasts are also
availablc to improve lamp color
stability.
Optional flat lempered ligltlly diffused
g/ass /ens on the UCM (FLD option)
o
I i;t.;'i i),!,i: ;..1.: i I ir ,:iii ii
Four horizontal reflector systems are
available for the Medium and Large
scale Universe fixtures.
FOUR LIGHT PATTERNS
These provide maximum flexibility to
precisely illuminate pedestrian areas,
elraa+a ^nd ^^m^loia nr^ia.+ eilo
lighting The horizontal re-
f lo.i.rr e\/cfarn ic
available in four
light distributions
for maximum effi-
^i^^^., ^^..1 ^.^(/rsr ru y or ru vr v-
cise placement of
the light, The reflector
linhl trcsnrsq iq climinaled with
the use of an optional factory installed
house side shield.
OPTIONAL LDL LENS
When direct viewing of the reflector
or a low mounting height is present, an
optional LDL lightly diffused lens is
available to greatly reduce the bright
ness from the lamp and reflector,
TYI'E J
i' l t ( ) ti t, l l:. i ) i t. ) l ), lt t i rl l t ! t. t 1 l )ti l ll lC "r]
I t
The Universe Coller;tion@ is an aes-
thetic solution to the lask of proper
lighting around the perimeter of a build
ing. Egress ligl rting ct-rdes require an
illuminated path lor Occupants to get a
safe distancc ftom the building. In con
junction with the proper circuitry, the
followirrg options car-r be implenrenterl
to provide cgress lighting. The rrediurr
and large scale fixtures have three
emergency lighting options availablc::
1. QHS-The quartz restrike option
uscs an clectronrc conlroller lo eno!gile
a qrarlz lamp, providirrg illurnination
while the HID lamp ts stafted or restored to
full brightrress. For refk;ctor nrodels c>nly.
2, QL -An auxiliary quartz lam6l sock
a' ie \^/irl.d f^:r ao^:rrirta ar _, llerqcncy
power oircuit For rcflector modcls only.
3. lt -85 Induction Lamp, For lhe
rnediurn and large scale fixtures with
the opral acrylic lens optics (OAL).
4. lL-105 Induclion L arrrp. For thc
large scale {ixtures - UCL with the opal
acrylic lens optics (OAl ).
I I it i u . \-,/ lvl t.' l"J
WND 4
Cast frame with a diffused
acrylic lens
8.7 5" /225MM DrAN4ETER
4.17"/105MM HrcH
Cast rings with a difiused
acrylic lens
.1 2"/305MM DTAMETER
4.4"/1 .1OMM HrcFl
VERTICAL SLATS
Cast frame with a diffused
acrylic lens
8.75" /225MM DTAMETER
4.17"/105MM HrcH
LUM
Fclnc lit ar:n,lic rinns
with a difiused acrylic lens
1 2"/305MM DTAMETER
4.4"/1 1oMM H|GH
-Colord inner lens option,
see p. 25.
24 ARCHITECTURAL AREA LIGHTING
SR
VSL
S
,.,O ft s L {:: {}hi t)a r:{rrI
20"/50BMM DTAMETER
6.5"/1 65MM f crJ
BEL BELL SHADE
24" /61OMM DTAMFT ER
8"/205MM F[cH
FLARED SHADE
22" /56OMM DrAMErErl
6"/1 50vr,r Htct-t
STR STRAIGHT SHADE
24"/61OMM DTAMETER
4,5"/1 1 sMM HrcH
FLR
H2
H4
H5
ryPE 2 REFLECTOR
ryPE 3 REFLECTOR
ryPE 4 REFLECTOR
TYPE 5 BEFLECTOR
Reflector with cast door and
standard sag glass lens
OPTIONS FOR
REFLECTOR OPr/CS
FTG FLAT GLASS LENS
HSS
FLAT GLASS WITH
LDL FINISH
HOUSE SIDE
SHIELD FACTORY
INSTALLED
ROCK GUARD
OAL OPAL ACRYLIC LENS
FLD
8"/205vv DTAMETER
9"/230vv) HroH
MAXIMLJM 10O wens nn
GR5 ryPE 5 REFLECTOR
Glass Refractor
6.5"/165MM DTAMETEF
6"/1 50MN/ H|GH
S C U ttr,i)rY:ffisE
20.3 in
515 mm
PCVS Curved arm, fits over 3" pole.
55in
140 mm
PSTS Straight arm, fits over 3" pole.
* 0O L r: c r't'0 i.J
PCW Twin curved arms, fits over 4" pole.
PSTT Twin straight arms, fits over 4" pole.
60 mm
13 25 ul
340 mm
14.3 in I --------------lt{
365 nrm
WAL ER
WCV Wall mount
curved arm
WST Wall mount with
straight arm
PMS Pendant mount
mount with 48" stem
fits over a standard
octagonal J box.
Remote ballast required.
SBE Pendant
mount with 48"
stem and surface
mounted ballast
enclosure
ARCHITECTURAL AREA LIGHTING 2'I
.UCM Lj t:.i 1 a L::. ru, *, 't:(");lt
ballast. Use medium base, clear ED-
1 7 lamps.
TOMH
70 watt metal halide multitap ballast
120/208/240/27 7 volt. Use medium
base, clear ED-1 7 lamps.
70MHT6
70 watt metal halide multitap ballast
120/277 volt. Uses a G 12 base, clear
T-6 ceramrc MH lamp.
lOOMH
1 00 watt metal halide multitap ballast
120/2OB/24O/27 7 volt. Use medium
base, clear ED-1 7 lamps,
1sOMH
1 50 watt metal halide multitap ballast
12O/2O8/24O/27 7 volt. Use medium
base, clear ED-1 7 lamps.
.t 50MHT6
150 watt metal halide multitap ballast
120/208/240/277 volt. Uses a G12
base, clear T-6 ceramic MH lamp.
175MH
175 watt metal halide multitap ballast
120/208/240/27 7 volt. Use medium
base, clear ED-l 7 lamps.
sOHPS
50 watt high pressure sodium
ballasl 120/277 volt. Use medium
TOHPS
70 watt high pressure sodium
ballast 120/208/240/277 volt. Use
medium base, clear ED 17 lamps.
l OOHPS '100 watt high pressure sodium
ballast 120/208/240/277 volt. Use
medium base, clear ED 1 7 lamps.
150HPS
1 50 watt high pressure sodium
ballast 120/208/240/277 volt. Use
medium base, clear ED-17 lamps.
tL-85
85 watt, Phillips lnduction Lamp sys-
tem with transformer. Specify 120,
208, 24O o( 277 voll.
All ballasts are factory wired for 277
volts.
Lamps not included.
LUMINOUS R'NG COLORS
lnternal lens can be added for color
on the ring edges when illuminated.
BL BLUE
RD RED
GRN GREEN
MG MAGENTA
Standard AAL colors are provided
at no extra charge.
RAL and custom matched colors
are available upon request.
DGN
DAHK GREFN
GALV
GALVANIZfD
VGR
VEBDF GHEEN
CRT MAL
CON|EN MATTE
ALUMlNUM
HOOD FINISHES
All styles of hoods are available in
the matching fixture color, stainless
steel or natural copper finishes.
The natural copper and stainless
steel hoods are unfinished to
develop a patina over time. Alr
hoods {or OAL and GR3/5 optics
have the underside finished in high
reflectance white.
STS
S A NLESS
STI ft
POST TOP MOUNT
L and GR3/5 optic options
'1,"
A:"{:1
Arms are on page 32-37
Poles are on page 38-43
only. Not available for reflector
models. Slips over a 4"/100 MM
pole. Secured with 6 stainless steel
set screws.
N a
18.25 in
465mm
metal halide 120/277 voll
WHT
WHITE
BLK
BTACK
__l
QRS Quartz restrike controller
and socket lor af-4 mini-cand
halogen lamp, maximum 150 watt,
HID only. Reflector models only.
QL Socket for a T-4 mini-cand
halogen lamp, Must bre field wired
to a separate 120 volt circuit.
Maximum 150 watt, Reflector
models only,
347 120/240/347 volt ballast
for HID lamp/ballast. 347 volt only
for 50 watt HPS.
PMS Pendant mount with
48" /1220 mm and canopy with
swivel. Stem and canopy painted
white.
EB70 Electronic ballast for 70
watt metal halide lamps. Specify
12O or 277 volt. lmproves color
rendition and lamp stability.
EB1 50 Electronic ballast for 1 50
watt metal halide lamps. Specify
12O or 277 volt. lmproves color
rendition and lamp stability.
ARCHITECTURAL AREA LIGHTING 25
f,t U I t_t)
WND 4
Cast frame with a diffused
acrylic lens
12"/3O5vv DTAMETER
5.25"/135vv srcn
SR SOLID BINGS
VSL
Cast rings with a diffused
acrylic lens
15.75"/400MM DTAMETER
5"/125MM H|GH
S
Cast frame with a diffused
acrylic lens
1 2"/305MM DTAMET ER
5,25"/135MM HrcH
LUM LUMINOUS RINGS
Edge lit acrylic rings
with a ditfused acrylic lens
15.75"/40OMM DTAMETER
5"/125MM H|GH
.Colored inner lens option,
see p. 29.
28 ABCHITECTUFAL AREA LIGHTING
O,'F1,[::.li
ANG ANGLED SHADE
30"/760vr*,t DTATvFTER
9.65"/245MM HrGH
BEL BELL SHADE
30"/760vv DTAMETER
I 0"/255MM HIGH
FLR FLARED SHADE
32"/8.1OMM D|AMFI ER
9.12"/230MM HlcH
NOTE: STRAIGHT SHADE
(STR) NOT AVAILABLE
(:) () ,,4 [: {; T
TYPE 2 REFLECTOR
ryPE 3 BEFLECTOR
ryPE 4 REFLECTOR
ryPE 5 REFLECTOR
OPTIONS FOR
REFLECTOR OPTICS
FLD FLAT GLASS WITH
LDL FINISH
HSS HOUSE SIDE
SHIELD FACTORY
INSTALLED
NOTE:
SAG GLASS NOT AVAILABLE
OAL OPAL ACRYLIC LENS
12"/305N4M DTAMETER
1 3"/33OMM HrcH
MAnIMUM 25O wATfs HID
NOTE: GLASS REFLECTOR
(GR) NOT AVAILABLE
4,)t '1,
H2
H3
H4
H5
a
.r i';
A1 3.0 2.1
4" ROUND Numinum Pole
PR4 4H10-125 10'l3.1M 1 1 .8
PR4 4R12-125 26 1z',/3,7M 98
PR4 4R16-125 33 16'/4.9M 64
PR4 4R10-226 36 1 0'l3,1M
PR4 4R12-226 42 12'/3.7M 18.2 15.4 12.7 99
PR4 4R14-226 49 1 4' / 4.3M 1A 7 12.4 10.2
PR4 4R16-226 16'/4.9M 12.5 10.4
BOLT CIFICLE: 7"/180MM; BASE DIAMETEF: 9"/230vv
BOLTS ARE %' X 21" (16vv X 535vnr)
BOLTS ARE ,'/,' X 24' (1gMM X 61OMM) lor OAH of 16'l4.9vr
5" ROUND Alurninum Pole
srE^Dy wrND-- f-GLrsr F oTOF (l 3)
70t91 8IJ,1104 90t117 100/130
PRs 5R10-188 48 10'i3.1M 26,0 20.8 16.0 12.6
PRs 5R12-188 55 12'/3.7M 22..5 17.2 13.2 10.5
BASE POLE-WALL WT OAH
PR5 5H14-188 61 14'/4.3M 1A,2 13.5 10.5 8.2
PRs 5R16-188 68 16'/4,9M 14.5 11.0 8.5 6.6
PR5 5R18-188 75 18'/5.5M 12.O 9.0 6.8 5.2
20'16.1M LB 7.4 5.5 4.O
PRs 5R12-250 67 12'/3.7M 27.O 22.7 18.8 15.5
14'/4.3M 24.5 20.4 16.7 13.7
PRs 5R16-250 B5 16'/4,9M 21 .8 18.0 14.8 1 1 .5
BOLT CIRCLE: 1 0"/255mm BASE DIAMETER : 1 2.5" /32Or,r,tl
BOLTS ARE %' X 21' (16MM X 535MM) for OAH of 1 4'l14.3M or less
BOLTS ARE 31" X 24' (1gMr,/ X 61OMM) for OAH ot 16'/4.9ut
srEAoY wrND.--i T-GLrsr FAcroR (l 3)
70191 80/19 90t117
14.3 12.O 9.6
100/130
2x4inch
reinforced
hand hole
PB4 & PR5
no hand hole
available on
the PR3
5.2 65 B6
5.0 6.6 82
PR4 4R14-125 14',/4.3M 79 39 52 66
30 41 53
22.2 18,5 15.0 12.O
anchor bolt
projection L
3.5 in
grout unoer
12.0 in
305 mm
I
I
Y
80
63 83
bolt circle:
4 locations
WARNING: Fixture mLtst be grounded tn
accardance with local codes or the National
Electic Code. Failure to do so fitay result in
serioLs personal injury.
CAUTION: Poles should never be erecled
wilhout the lLtminaire installed. Warranly is
voided if the pole is erected without the
luminaie.
Decorative poles are found on page.s 42 & 43.
.18'/5.5M 18.9 15,5 12.2 9.7
PRs 5R20-188
PRs 5R14-250
PF5 5R18-250
PBs 5R20-250 102 20'/6.1r/' 16.4 13,6 10,9 8.2
o
3 ROUND Aluminum Pole fo
BASE POLE-WALL
PR3 4R8-125
WT OAH
1 5 8'/2.4r,t
PR3 4R10-125 18 '10'/3.1 M 56
BOLT CIRCLE: 7"/1BOMM
BASE D|A|\4ETER : 9" / 23OMM
BOLTS ARE '% X 21' (1 6vl,t X 535vv)
BASE POLE-WALL
PR4 488-125
WT OAH
13 8'/2.4M
r UCS only
STEADY wlND_ -l f-GUsr l_acT.P (1 3)
70rc1 80/104 g0t117 100n30
7.9 5.9 4.3 3.4
4f Al:( )ll I LC | 1)l1A\- At tt:.?^ L tfirll lN{J
CATALOG NUMBERS
SINGLE ASSEMBLY FOR 4" O.D. POLE, 12"ARM
o
iJ I'j lV E lifii:r CO L-i E C T | 0 N
I rr,tr, 24 or soin
f- arm length
ML banner arms are clamshell designs for
4"/100MM oH 5"/125MM diameter poles, The
banner arms are easrly added or removed
from the pole, The breakaway coupling is
designed to fail before over-stressing the pole.
An internal. stainless steel cable keeps the
arm attached to the pole assembly.
The tailure point for the coupling is affected
by the banner type, pole height and vertical
location of the banner on the pole. The load-
ing is also affected by securing the banner at
the top only, or the top and bottom. Contact
the factory lor the maximum banner size rec-
ommended for your applcation.
BBS4-12
BB54-18 SINGI E ASSEMBLY FOR 4' O,D. POLE, 18'ARM
BB54-24 SINGLE ASSEMBLY FOR 4" O.D. POLE, 24'ARM
BBS4-30 SINGLE ASSEMBLY FOR 4" O.D. POLE, 3O'ARM
BBS5-12 SINGLE ASSEMBLY FOR 5' O,D, POLE, 12"ARIM
BBS5.18 SINGLE ASSEMBLY FOR 5" O,D, POLE, 18"ARM
BBS5-24 SINGLE ASSEMBLY FOR 5' O.D. POLE, 24"ARM
BBS5-30 SINGLE ASSEMBLY FOR 5' O.D. POLE. 3O"ARM
BBD4.12 TWIN ASSEMBLY FOR 4'O.D, POLE, 12"ARMS (2)
BBD4-18 TWIN ASSEMBLY FOR 4"O.D, POLE, 18"ARMS (2)
BBD4.24 TWIN ASSEMBLY FOR 4'O.D. POLE, 24"ARMS (2)
BBD4-30 TWIN ASSEMBLY FOR 4' O.D. POLE, 3O"AFMS (2)
BBDs-12 TWIN ASSEMBLY FOR 5" O.D. POLE, 12'ARMS (2)
BBD5.18 TW|N ASSEMBLY FOF 5'O.D. POLE, l8"ARMS (2)
BBD5-24 TWIN ASSEMBLY FOR 5" O,D, POLE, 24'ARMS (2)
BBD5-30 TWIN ASSEMBLY FOF 5'O.D. POLE, 3O"ARMS (2)
ARCHITECTURAL AFEA LICHTINC 39
* * *'l******* * ++** *** * *** ******* t *t*+ *+ *{.* ** * ** **+* +*** * ****{.*** * **** ***+*+++** * * ** * * ***+ +++**
TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO Statement
t'rr,t'N.**+t****+++* * +**!* * **!** **+**** * ***** *{.*** * *** t ** ** * *'** * t *******+++ *** ** **** ** *,r. * *****t*+ *
Stsatement Number 3 R000002974 Amount: $250.00 OB/27/200204227 ptl
Payment Method: Check Init: iIAR
Notation: 2708 Booth
Fa1ls Home - Owners
Permit No: DRB02028? T)4)e: DRB-Minor AIE,, Conrn/Multi
Parcel No: 210102 3 01017
SiTe Address: 3094 BOOTH FAJ,I,S RD VAIL
Location: Boothfalls Homeowners AsEoc
Total Fees: $250.00
This Payment: $250.00 Total Al,L Erntg: $250.00
Balance: $0 - 00
* * * * + + + + + * * *** * * * * * ****+**t**** **** **:!** ********+****** ******f +*+t+ **'** ****** **++ +*i* + * ** * **
ACCOI]NT ITEM LIST:
Account Code DescriDtion Current Pmts
DR OO1OOOO31122OO DESIGN REVIE|,I FEES 250.00
o o
IFur-t\((
''r.. I 4 \)ravre Johnstorr Nitl be altevtvv
d
1^e- nne-utin3 Odo&( lG'Zoot OTnd'^3
4i^,a- Wyf<;'-l+ p\alrS lot Con*vvc*ton ol
boo$ [6lls ^wn-"
(ue"^l Pavk-ivt3d) She wr'll
e (pl^e-s3 Cpyl.-e-,^n S to NerdS AOW rttal{ \/YfwS
cuYrc)^+ dtpem SYow'
lfrtnnv- 'P't,
Drarrto W**
Status:
I Approved
lf
GOuntturulrY DEVELoPMENT Rounruc Fonna
n Approved with conditions fr Denied
Routed To:Tom Kassmel, PW
Date Routed:09/05/02
Rbuted By:Allison Ochs
Date Due:09t09t02
Description of work:parking area and retaining walls
Address:3094 Booth Falls Rd
LeEal:Lot: l1 lBlock:2 Subdivision: I vailvillase 12th
Gomments:Date Reviewed: 9-5-02
Need additional review bv Fire
Please submit a stam
Wall #4 has a point on it oreater than 6', olease modifu not to exceed 6'.
behind MSE Wall #4 on the west end needs to be sliqhtlv modified. not to exceed 2:1.
The drive aisle within the new east lot must meet the TOV standards ot 24'in width as per page
15 of the Develooment Standards Handbook.
BOOTHFALLS HOMEOWNERS ASSN
PO ROX 156
VAIL, CO. 81658
October 26. 2OO2
Allison Ochs, AICP
Town of Vail, Dept. Comm. Dev.
75 S. Frontage Road
Vail, CO. 81557
RE: Boothfalls Townhomes,
Response to DRB comments.
Dcar Allison,
The Boothfalls Homeowner's Assn., wishes to respond to tf:e concerns of thc DRB.
Along with this letter are revised plans that I wish to submit and have revicwed at t}re next
DRB meeting.
In addition to this, I would likc to add t}e following cornments in resporse to their
concerns:
1 . A comprehensive landscape plan of the effccted area is included on sheet 9 of 9 . We
have indicated the trecs to be removed and their size. We have not shown any proposed
trces because we plan on limiting our area of disturbance to just beyond the bottom of the
boulder wall and lcave as many cxisting trces as possible. There will be no place to add
trecs because the remaining undisturbcd areas will already bc heavily trccd. Additionally,
based on our expericnce with the rock fall mitigation walls, previous build on our property,
once you excavate a teed hillside, tlre next year you get an cxplosion ofnew aspen growth,
which will inqeasc the densifr of the remaining rec bufier.
2. We will include basic repair of thc trash enclosure, including repaint ind repair of
trim and siding as needcd.
3. I'm not sure what is meant by 'alternative blocks for retaining walls" Our plans
alrcady show tlut we intend to use a keystone block in lieu ofa flat face block tJrat was used
on the rock fall walls. The plans also show t}at these will be the same color block as was
previously approved by TOV and DRB for use on the rock fall walls.
4. We have already minimized t'ee removal as much as possible. The new rec line will
be right up to the base of the boulder wall. It is our desire and intent to keep as many of the
existing asp€n frees as possible to maintain a visual buller for ourselves and our neighbors.
5. We havc spent a year and a half and over 925,000 in landscape architect and
engineering consulting fees to address this exact issue. We bave looked at altcrnative
placements of the parking on our property as well as different conffgurations on t]rc east area
of our complex. The solution as submifted locates the lot in the flattest part of our land,
thus reducing the amount of cut and fill, as well as reducing the height of t-he two walls, thus
minimizing the overall amorurt of sitc disturbance. Other con-ffgurations tlnt we lookcd at
cither required higher walls or tlree wall instead of two. A third wall would also increasc
the area of disturbance. This location also pulls the parking lot thc furthest off our property
line, thus maximizing the remaining amount of buffcr zone, Please notc that the bottom of
the boulder wall is more than 60 ft. Iiom Booth Falls Court and the area in between tle two
is heavily need and well within the town's requirement as set forth in the TOV
Devclopment Standards Handbook.
As for the size of thc proposed parking improvements, we already have reduced t}le size
of the parking lot by eliminating visitor parking spots from the plans cntirely and moving
two spots down to the Ent-y l,ot. The submitted plans are in the smallest conffguration that
will leld the two spaces per unit tlnt we are entided to by our Deeds. We need to create a
minimum of 8 new spaces in the East l,ot in order to meet our needs.
I would also like to use this forum to go ahead and address the concerns of Ms. Johnson,
our neighbor on Booth Falls Court. We have already gone to the maximum extent possible
in locating thc proposed parking lot as far from her as possible. The bottom of the boulder
wall, and area of disturbance, is more than sixty feet from Booth Falls Court. (Pleasc note
on sheet 9 of 9 of the included plans that we are not as close to her as she perceives because
her driveway signilicandy encoaches onto our property. Please note on your site visit the
location of the propcrty corncr that w e had markcd by a professional surveyor) . The
distance llom the bottom of the wall to her attached garage is over 100 ft. and we have
maintained as much as a Eee bulfer as we c:tn, This is certainly a much greater sctback
distance than was approved for the VMS project.
The other possible objection is ttrat our proposal would alfcct her vicw. In response to
this concern, I would Iike to contend dnt she has no view from her house of the effected
area. Her garage faccs the disturbed area not the house. The only windows from her house
are to the wooded area to the north and to her front yard and tJre street to the south. There
are no windows in her home that look out to tJre west.
I would also like to point out the added beneftts of this project:
t . We have many of the same issues in East Vail, and in our complex, that the Town is
Fying to address with the Lionshead Redevelopment, "tired" inventory. The TOV and DRB
should be highly supportive of any HOA that steps forward to improve the quality of their
property.
2. We arc adding parking! The ten addition spaccs created on our property mearx the
potential for l0 fewer cars competing for the lirnitcd parking at Vail Village and Lionshead
parking structures or on the frontage road by virtue of the fact that most of our residents and
guests take the bus to town during ski season. The TOV and DRB should be supportive of
any HOA that steps forward to add parking, thus reducing the demand for town parking.
, 3. The Bootlfalls Homeowners feel we have embarked on a very arnbitious project. We
hare set the specific goal to bring our homes up to the current, and more complex TOV
development standards. We are rcplacing a very ugly tie retaining wall tlnt is visible to our
neighbors and our guests using the Booth Falls Trail Head and that is greater than 5' in
height. We are bringing our lighting syst€m into compliance with crrrent sandards by
instaling fuU cutoff Iuminarie s. We are bringing our snow storage areas into compliance
with current standards.
4. We arc also improving access for the fire departnent and other emergency services.
Tom Talbot, TOV wild-lands firc ofEcer, and a resident of ours, has told us that if any of the
upper three buildings of our complex were to be involved in a wildftrc, they would probably
choose not to defend these building due to inaccessibility. The addition of the East l,ot, with
it's 24' wide driveway, will allow a much improved access to these buildings for ffre and
emergency services.
We feel that this is good project. We are Fying to improve the appearance, quality,
livability and value of our complex. Any "tiredt complex like ours that is attempting to
improve the quality, compliance and appearance of their property should be encowaged to
do so and receive the support of TOV and DRB. We reqpecdully request that you approve
this project based on the resubmitted plans.
Sincerely,
Susan Fritz
President
Boothfalls Homeowners Assn
Steve Prawdzik
Vice President
BootMalls Homeowners Assn.
Skivail@"attbi . com
+79-5168
o
Deparlment of'Community Development
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2138
FAX 970-479-2452
www.ci.vail.co.us
September 9,2002
Steve Prawdzik
3094 Boothfalls Rd. #17
Vail, CO 81657
RE: Boothfalls Townhomes, located at 3094 Boothfalls Rd. / Lot 1, Block 2, Vail Village
12'Filing.
Dear Steve,
The Community Development Department has reviewed your application for the parking
area addition at Boothfalls Townhomes. located at 3094 Boothfalls Rd. / Lot 1. Block 2.
Vail Village 12'n Filing. The following comments and concerns must be addressed prior
to final Design Review Board approval:
1. Please indicate the location of all existing and proposed fire hydrants.2. Please submit a stamped survey of the property.3. Retaining wall #4 exceeds 6 ft. Please adjust and revise.4. The grading behind retaining wall#4 exceeds 2:1. Please adjust and revise.5. The drive within the new east lot must beet the Town of Vail standards of 24
ft. in width. Please adjust and revise.6. No encroachment into the 20 ft. setback is permitted (any further than exists.)
Please adjust and revise,
All of the above comments and concerns must be met to staff's satisfaction prior to final
Design Review Board approval. Please submit all revisions to the Community
Development Department as soon as possible. Should you have any questions, please
do not hesitate to contact me at 97047 9-2369 or via email at aochs@ci.vail.co.us.
Planner ll
Town of Vail
{s rrn"uor rr*
September 17,2002
.Allisou Ochs. AICP
Planner II
Town of Vail
75 SouthFrontageRoad
Vail. CO 81657
cc: Steve Prawdzik, Booth Falls Town Homes HOA
RE: Booth Falls Town Homes. lrnprovement Plans
Dear Ms. Ochs:
The following changes have been made to the Booth Falls Town Homes Improvement Plans
in response to comments from the Town of Vail made September 9,2002
l. Existing fire hydrants have been located and shown on the plans.
2 A stamped survey performed by Darrell White is being submitted with the
J
improvement plans.
MSE wall lf4 has been relabeled as MSE wall #5 and lowered to a height of less than
six feet.
Grading behind MSE wall #5 has been set to 2:1.
The drive within the east lot has been widened to 24 feet.
The ngw entry lot has been moved so as to no longer encroach on the 2O-foot setback.
gchelbrink, P.E., P.L.S.
BENCHMARK ENGINEERING SERVICES
llO,Box4619 Batlc, Colorado 81631-4619 (970) 32ll-2111 FAX: p70) 328-211.1
5'r,
D epartment of C ommun i ty D eve I opme nt
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-21 38
FAX 970-479-2452
www.ci.vail.co.us
October 4,2002
Steve Prawdzik
3094 Boothfalls Rd. #17
Vail, CO 81657
Fax: 479-5168
RE: Boothfalls Townhomes, located at 3094 Boothfalls Rd. / Lot 1, Block 2, Vail Village
12th Filing.
Dear Steve,
The Design Review Board conceptually reviewed the plans for the parking areas at
Boothfafls Townhomes on October 2,2002. The following were their comments and
concerns:
1. Need to see comprehensive landscape plan, including the number and size of
trees to be removed, number and size of trees proposed.
2. Need to include basic repair and maintenance of trash enclosure.
3. Look at alternative blocks for the retaining walls.
4. Minimize trees removal.
5. Reconsider size and location of parking lot to minimize site disturbance.
Please submit all revisions to the Community Development Department prior to the
Design Review Board meeting on October 16,2002. All revisions must be received no
later than noon on October 14,2002. Should you have any questions, please do not
hesitate to contact me at970-479-2369 or via email at aochs@ci.vail.co.us.
Allison Ochs, AICP
Planner ll
Town of Vail
{,7 *"*"'o'^"'
b*lJ-
frl
=r-r-
+(n
z I
(D o c r-I rn 7
=f-t-:
8:
-le
i
I
sl
i
I
I
I
I
1
a rrl
=r t-
:h
N
z a
a rrl
=r-r-
+(,J
f!
E
o
t8
E
i.'". (o'
no)
(\-
V
DBNCHD|iUUI tlNGtNtiDrUNG sBllvlftis
PO BOX 46t9
?75 CHAMBERS AVENUE. B2OI
EACLE, COLOMDO EI63I
97G328-21I l FAX 970-128-21l3
RICHARD J. MICCHELBRINK, III P,E, & P,L S.
TREE LOCATIONS
RETAINING WALL DESIGN
BOOTHFALLS TOWN HOMES
VAIL, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
i(
t
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 3l aav ol hu
By and among fu+$(llt l{apa.ffr M(her inafter called the'Devel
DEVELOPER IMPROVEMENT AGREEIUIENT
,20r',L
ef), and the TOWN
OF VAIL (hereinafter called the'Town').
Developer agrees to establish a cash deposit with the Town of Vail in a dollar amount
ot $_&t_€&. oo (125o/o of the total cost of the work shown below) to provide security
for the following:
IMPROVEMENT
Attach a copy of the estimated bid.
WHEREASIhe Developer, as a condition of approval of the
plans, dated ? / Z n ,20PJ, wishes to enter into a Develc
u/
and
WI-IEREAS, the Developer is obligated to provide security or collateral sufficient in the
judgement of the Town to make reasonable provisions for completion of certain improvements set
forth below; and
WHEREAS, the Developer wishes to provide cotlateral to guarantee performance of this
Agreement, including construction of the above-referenced improvements by means of the
following:
Developer lmprovement Agreement;
WAIL\DATA\cdev\FORMS\D|A Cash.doc Page 1of4
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the following mutual covenants and agreements,
the Developer and the Town agree as follows:
1. The Developer agrees, at the sole cost and expenses, to furnish all equipment and
material necessary to perform and complete all improvements, on or before
The Developer shall complete, in a good workmanlike manner, all improvements as
listed above, in accordance with all plans and specifications filed in the office of the Community
Development Department, the Town of Vail, and to do allwork incidentalthereto according to and
in compliance with the following:
a. Such other designs, drawings, maps, specifications, sketches, and other matter
submitted by the Developerto be approved by any of the above-referenced
governmental entities. All said work shatl be done under the inspection of {d. t9
the satisfaction of, the Town Engineer, the Town Building Official, or other official
from the Town of Vail, as affected by special districts or service districts, as their
respective interest may appear, and shall not be deemed complete until approved
and accepted as completed by the Town of Vail community Development
Department and Public Works Department.
2. To secure and guarantee performance of its obligations as set forth herein, the
Developer agrees to provide security and collateral as follows:
A cash deposit account in the amount ol$2AS@AP-to be held by the
Town, as escrow agenl, shall provide the securi$ for the improvements set forth
above if there is a default under the Agreement by Developer.
3. The Developer may at any time substitute the collateral originally set forth above
for another form or collateial acceptable to the Town to guarantee the faithful completion of those
improvements refened to herein and the performance of the terms of this Agreement. Such
acceptance by the Town of alternative collateral shall be at the Town's sole discretion.
4. The Town shall not, nor shall any officer or employee thereof, be liable or
responsible for any accident, loss or damage happening or occurring to the work specified in this
Agieement prior tb the completion and acceptance of the same, nor shall theTown, nor any
ofricer or employee thereof, be liable for any percons or property injured by reason of the nature
of said work, bui all of said liabilities shall and are hereby assumed by the Developer'
The Developer hereby agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Town, and any of its
officers, agents anb emptoy6eJagainst any los6es, claims, damages, or liabilities to which the
Town or any of its officers, agents or employe
losses, claims, damages or liabilities (or actions
upon any performance by the Developer hereun
for any and all legal or other expenses reaso
investigating or defending any such loss, clai
provision shall be in addition to any other liability which the Developer my have.
5. lt is mutually agreed that the Developer may apply to thaTown and the Town shall
authorize for partial release-of the collateral deposited with the Town for eacfr category of
improvement it sucn fime as such improvements are constructed in compliance with all plans
and specifications as referenced hereunder and accepted by the Town. Under no condition will
\\VAIL\DATA\cdev\FORMS\DlA Cash.doc Page 2 ol 4
the amount of the collateral that is being held be reduced below the amount nec€ssary to
complete such improvements.
6. lf the Town determines, at its sole discretion, that any of the improvements
contemplated hereunder are not constructed in compliance with the plans and specifications set
forth in this Agreement on or before the date set forth in Paragraph 2, the Town may, but shall not
be required, to complete the unfinished.
lf the costs of completing the work exceed the amount of the deposit, the excess, together
with interest at twelve perbent (1Zo/o) per annum, shall be a lien against the property and ryt-aY pe
collected by civil suit or may G certiiieO to the treasurer of Eagle County to be collected in the
same manner as delinqueni ad valorem taxes levied against such property. lf the permit holder
fails or refuses to complete the cleanup and landscaping, as defined in this chapter, such failure
or refusal shall be considered a violation of the Zoning Code.
7. The Developer wanants all work and material for a period of one year_after
acceptance of all work refened to in this Agreement by the Town if such work is located on Town
of Vait property or within Town of Vail right-of-way pursuant to Section 8'3-1.
8. The parties hereto mutually agree that this Agreement may be amended from time
to time, provided that such amendments be in writing and executed by all parties hereto.
\\vAILu)ATA\Gdev\FORMS\Dl,A Cash.doc Page 3 of 4
Dated the day and year first above
STATE OF COLORADO
COUNTY OF EAGLE
2no3
)
)ss.
)
3r
Witness my hand and official seal.
My commission expires:
The foregoing,Developer lmprovement Agreement was acknowledged before me this
5 | day ot ,ht| ,z\O-Lby .a
Witness my hand and official seal.
My commission expires
STATE OF COLORADO
COUNW OF EAGLE
\\vAIL\DATA\CdeV\FORMS\DIA Cash.doc Pag6 4 of4
.Sent Ey;. YENTEB CoilPANIES;
2{130{l w, Higtway 12
Ar€da,@mfl)7
Phone Gor, 27}-1456
Far (303) 279O(nO
Russ Fon€Bt
30327S0908;
FruIE Chet EHer
(970147s2452 Prtr.r 3
U!.6 8,f24n0f)1
R.: Boohfalb Rock-fal MitQation
tr Urgfif E For Rrview 0 Pteere Gorrnrnt tr ilm fcdt tr Plcrr. R.eFL
a Gommg r:
Russ.
To fullow are the qrote$ prwired to Steve Praidzik for |he abovF nent*med prqed. Ste\,t askf,l mo
io forward lhem to yu.r.
Chet
C." ", .rtH,ltul,'rlj o"u",o 0."n,
75 S, Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
a
I
r"r", &ao(LrR'{r U<,-.oo.^lt* c.r
Address:
Project:_.
Account No.
Tom of Uail r+r ttrETffiR RECEIPT ++r mIE: 9/0{/0t el RECEIPT: Cett6g{
001 0000 314 11 q
B
!O.UU
$50.9s
$60.65
$36.00
$35.00
$35.60
$36.00
$42.60
qo oE
$10.00
$12.75
$7.00
$0.25
$40.00
001 0000 314 11
001 0000 314 11
001 0000 314 11
001 0000 314 11 ffitfiT lp lil
tEsm.se fl) cx
B
B
001 0000 314 11
001 0000 314 11 0(r
rut-
e516 B
B 001 0000 314 11
001 0000314 11
001 0000 314 11
001 0000 314 11
001 0000 314 11
001 0000 314 12
001 0000 314 11
UTTECffi fiNGru
IR{ER DETAIL ct{ e6t6 fE?5e8.m ;B
iF
,lS
IS
,N
)F
)H
lsP
IIflTE: 9/01/01
TIITfl. O€TX
ffiEilT ]B{DERE)001 0000 314 11
001 0000 314 1 1
001 0000 315 3c
001 0000 311 2:
001 0000 315 2(
001 0000 312 3(
TIE: 9r?3:57
taasm.fr
ta5m.0s
T}HI( YIII FtlR YIIJR PflIF{T!
offiionree $20.00
;
;
;
;
a
;
;
i
001 0000 312 4000 lAdditional Sign Application Fee SP
001 0000 3112200 Design Review Board Fee (Pre-paid)DR
001 0000 315 3000 Building Investigation Fee PN
001 0000 240 3300 Develop€r lmprcvem€nt Agreemoni Deposil D2-DEP10
Restaurant License fee (TOV)
AD -L-'L-Stn."n 001 0000 312 1000 RL
001 0000 230 2000 Assess.-Reslaurant Fee lo Co.Deot.Rev.SA
'001 0000 201 1000 Tax*le @.1.4o/o lstatel - Tax TP
-001 0000 3101100 Taxabl€ @ 4.0% lTownl - Retail Sales Tax n
Other/Misc. -MS
001 0000 311 2500 PEC APPLICATION FEES
001 0000 311 2500 Additional GRFA - '250"PV $200.00
001 0000 311 2500 Conditional Use Permit PV $200.00
001 0000 311 2500 Exterior Alteration - Less than 100 so. ft.PV $200.00
001 0000 311 2500 Extenor Atleration - More than 100 sq. ft.PV $500.00
001 0000 311 2500 Special Development District - NEW PV $1,500.00
001 0000 311 2500 Special Development Dislrict - Maior Amend PV $1,000.00
001 0000 311 2500 Special Development District - Minor Amend PV $200.00
001 0000 311 2500 SuMivision Fees PV
001 0000 311 2500 Variance PV $250.00
001 0000 311 2500 Zoning Code Amendments PV $250.00
Re-Zoning PV $200.00
001 0000 319 3100 Greenstar Program
Other -MS
TOTAL:
co ^"n'"' trq.(€ Q4 lo)o-a-Q
Cash _ Money Order #chec.# Zb I b Received bvrL<_
&'cce7t
{,; L
1?J2012000
4r I c s\
t
A A
f
/a
rt.
\
g
*+'
Eg
\^rr
T tt
5e J
; r:_
$;x2 oz .o OE
?
oZ .o o<J
fl
!q
E.
E o t qt
E o
Er 9
I
?
o
ctf,N
U
B t{o
E
g
FI
p
o ti
EI
FT
E.
l. ro "zH
tr (,, lC OU FHF
Qq|4 zo
!ac (,40
c ltl z
E :ET
E:ol
Id era oq oo
AF zz
EO qE
g
F.
FF ,z ED EO F=
r, Ei az |(p 'o F|E
q|I
ts
f. Ei EZ U,D
RE E4
E
E.
!q
x
FI
z o
F
H Fts E(J
z lil
AI Eq o (,E ET EO a ao
U(J
Er
U
E
E o
v
fr
tr
q|o
E
t:
:
@D
d6 E>a FET.cd o
ao I EO !cc o
o o !i:
E F5*
UEgE Edss
- -: -y i;€;
u }j'.s, ,.:-o 2=',\ 4 \2^ ''
+a65 cEE E 6rt3F G(U-=
-F2iD E,P 6 A LJ': b -C :9:!3 A.i3 b
€gAq
4!-:(2 C!= '::-s I tsx q * r b-
I
s
trJ
n tl tl llr-l t il.l I'ltl I lt l nH l'.ll.l UU
iiiii @:g Eg€
Ld
I
o o
2
b
To:
From:
Date:
Subject
VailTown Council 4t I
Staff: Russ Forrest
August 21,2001
Ordinance 23: Request to grant an easem
Homeowners Association to build a Roc
Property
l.REQUEST
The Boothfalls Homeowners Association is requesting an easement on a portion
of Parcel F, Vail Village 12h Filing. This is a parcel of land acquired by the Town
from the U.S. Forest Service in the 1997 USFS/TOV land exchange. The sole
purpose of this easement is to allow the Boothfalls Homeowners Association to
construct a rock fall mitigation. This mitigation was supported by the Vail Town
Council in 1996 and has been approved by the DRB on three different occasions.
ROCKFALL HAZARD
The Booth Falls Townhomes are located in a high severity rockfall hazard. Large
rocks have fallen and created damage to the property. In the spring of 1996,
large rocks hit several of the units and one large rock came through the bedroom
of one of the units at 11:00 p.m.. The Colorado Geological Survey was called in
to evaluate the risk of future rocKall incidents. Their conclusion was that there
was a very high risk of serious rock fall incidents in the future and mitigation was
needed to protect life and property. There is currently a rockfall berm on Town
Property that protects the properties to the east of this property.
BACKGROUND:
ln 1996, The Boothfalls homeowners requested that the Town assist in the
design of rocKall mitigation for their property. The Town assisted financially by
engaging engineers and soliciting the input of the Colorado State Geological
Survey to develop a mitigation plan. Alternative technologies were evaluated
such as nets, ditches, and walls. The development of a wall was proposed as
the best technology for this site. The Town approved a design in 1996 that
involved two walls. Then in 1998 the Town approved a design involving three
walls that further improved the effectiveness of the mitigation. The DRB approval
for the 1998 design lapsed and was re-approved by the DRB on August 1 5'
2001 . The Homeowners would like to now immediately move fonlrrard with the
construction of the wall that requires using a small area of Town Land (See
attachment A).
2.
5.
EASEMENT TERTIS
The attached easement still needs to be reviewed by legal counsel and additional
input will be availabb to the Council on the August 2lstmeeting. This
agreement allows the association to build the wall at their expense on the land
shown on Attachment A. Over half of the wall is located on association land.
However the westem two walls are located on Town land. The Association
would be responsible for maintaining the walls. However, the Town would be
responsible for removing large rocks when they fall and are trapped on the uphill
side of the wall. This arangement and the use of Town land was verbally
approved by the Town Gouncil in 1996.
STAFF RECOMENDATION
This plan has been approved by the DRB on three occasions and by the Town
Council in 1996 (See Attachments B & C). Staff believes that this is the best
design to protect life and safety and the Town has utilized Town land in the past
for hazard mitigation. Staff recommends approval of Ordinance 23 that would
authorize the Town Manager to execute an easement to facilitate the
construction of this wall.
Attachment A: Site Plan & Hazard Map
Attachment B: Profile of Wall
Attachment C: Landscape Plan
Attachment D: Letter from Colorado Geological Survey
Attachment E: Ordinance 23
Attachment F: Draft easement language
F:lCDEV\COUNClLltEtOSl0l\BOOTHFALLSROGKFALLSZI.DOG
3E
F{
F{
cl rJ
u)
+J
0,1 E
o .!
{J
=
Ui trj
z.
(L
o
E.
LJ F z t!
tl,-q
E;;g
B
!:nIo
EEEe
H;
Ae o;i
H=E PoF
HH6
aE F EO<L>
2YJ0 fi 9 o 5i ;F3 nH fuJo Hf foQ
E E= EE;
q)
o a
1"*/
ORDINAIICE NO.23
SERIES OF 2OO1
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE COITVEYANCE OF AN EASEMENT TO THE
BOOTHFALLS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION TO CONSTRUCT A ROCKX'ALL
MITTcATIoN wALL oN A poRTIoN oF pARcEL F, vAIL vILLAGE tzm tr'Ir-,rNG
OWNED BY THE TOW}I OI'VAIL AI\D. MORE FULLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
A parcel of land North of and adjacent to a part of Lot l, Block 2 Vail Village Twelfth
Filing, County of Eagle, State of Colorado more particularly described as:
Beginning at the Northeast Corner of said Lot I ; thence N8902 4'l2"W ,42.85 feet
to a point on the Northerly Boundary of said Lot 1, which is the TRUE POINT
OF BEGINNING; thence N000 I 8' 14'E, I 50.00 feet; thence N890 24'l3-W ,
534.12 feet; thence S00u l8'14"W, 150.00 feet to the Northwesterly Comer of
said Lot 1; thence 5890 24'13-E ,534.12 feet along the Nonherly Boundary of
said Lot I and along the East-West Centerline of said Section 2 to the TRUE
POINT OF BEGINNING.
WHEREAS, the Town of Vail is the owner of certain property known as a the Portion of
Parcel F, Vail Village 12tr Filing.
WHEREAS, this property was acquired by the Town of Vail from the U.S Forrest
Service through a Land Exchange without deed restriction conceming use or transfer; and
WHEREAS the property located on 3094 Booth Falls Road is located in a severe rockfall
hazard and there has been a history of rockfall damage to that property.
WHEREAS the creation of a rockfall mitigation wall is critical to help protect the safety
of the inhabitants of 3094 Booth Falls Road and to reduce the risk of property damage to that
property
WHEREAS the State of Colorado Geological Survey has provided a letter which
concludes that this wall is "an excellent design" and'\vill provide rockfall protection for the
Booth Falls Town Homes;
WHEREAS the Town of Vail Design Review Board approved the design on August 15tr,
2001.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL THE TOWN OF
VAIL, COLORADO that:
1. The Town Council hereby approves an easement on the property for the purpose of
constucting a Rockfall Mitigation Wall.
2. The Town Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute an easement with the
Booth Falls Homeowners Association to allow the construction of said wall on a portion of
Parcel F, Vail Village l2s Filing.
3. Ifany part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase ofthis ordinance is for
any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions
ofthis ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance,
and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless ofthe fact that
any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid.
4. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code
of the Town of Vail as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued,
any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution
commenced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the
provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not
revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unJess expressly stated
herein.
5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent
herewith are repealed to the extend only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be
construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution, or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore
repealed.
INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL
ON FIRST READING this 21st day of August,200l, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of
the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado.
Ludwig Kurz, Mayor
ATTEST:
Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
READ ANDAPPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED
this 4th day of September, 2001.
Ludwig Kurz, Mayor
ATTEST:
Lorelei Donaldson- Tovun Clerk
*{'.r'
t \\ili
AUG. -06' ol (MON) l5: 20
Au9-O6-Ol OI r eE,P
P. OO4
P.O4
EASEMENT AGREEMDNT
Tltls ISASIiMBNT A(IREEMENT is tnsdc $nd cntcred ioto this
-
day ofAugust, 2001.
by ud bctwecn THE TOWN Olt VAII+ r Colorado mtnicipal csPorstion ("G9141@")' whore
rddresr ir urd BOOTH FAI,LS HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIAT|ON, r C;olorado nonprofit corporrtioo (*G;;dbc'), whosa address ie
Ttia Eacemonl Agrutarcnt ic rude and ontcrcd into in contcmplation of the following ficte
8nd cirsumst8ncd$:
A Grrntor ir thc owncr of certain renl propcrty locrtod in Eagle County, Coloradq
whidr is more paniorlady doscribed on tho Edlbit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
rdercnco (thc "Ealcmcnl-EnUcrtf").
E, (hantcc is a homcownctrs' asso{iation with rcgard to o condominium devdopmont in
Eqglo Coudy, Colondo connonly knowu as *Booth Falls Coodominiums", whic,lr is morc
partiodrdy dccibed on tho Erhibit B attechod horeto and incorporated herein by this referencc (thc
"Eslg06fd-ft0Dclg'), Thc Boncfrttod Proporty is edjrcent to ths Ersement ProPeny.
C, Grantec dcsircs to construct multipl€ rock frll mitigltion barriers on the Easemeltt
Proportyforthc prrpoee of protecting thoBenefittcd Ptoperty, and Grantor dcsires togrant Grantcc
m casamcnt on thc Eascmcnt Propcrtyfur urch purposg on thc tcrm$ end conditions hereiu,
NOw' TI{EREFORE, FORAND IN CONSIDERATION OF Ten Dollars ($ t0.00) and othor
pod and valuable considratixl the recaipt and wfficiancy of which aro huelry acloowledged, the
partier rgrco ar follows:
l. Subjcct to the termq conditions, resenrrtionsand restrictions ret frrth hercin, Grantor
her*y gfrnts, asrigne rnd scts ovrcr to Granteo an Fxclusive pe'petud sppurtcnEnt @sement io
consruct. install. plant maintoin, replacg enlarge, raxrn$ruct, improvc. inspcct, rcpair and remove
rcct< fall mitiggtio[ barrisrs, lreoq rucks and ground cover, at Grantsc'r solc cott rnd orpcnrg for
thc purporc of protecting tho Benefitted Property from rock firll urd rclated hazards, an may from
timcto tbm be useful to, or required by. Graotcc, undcr, through and *sross the F.ascmcnt Propcny
Ghantec shall bc rctcly rcpoasible for all cxpenses ascrcictcd with thc cxcrcisc of its rightc
hcrcundor, oltcopt thf,l Grrilor cball rEmovq at itc role cost and o<pcnsq all rock fall and other debris
which may llom timc ro time bc collectcd bchind nrch rock fbll mitigadon berriers; ud Grantor rhall
undertrko and completc sucfi rcrnovrl lt srrch tirucs as aro reasonably rrecessaqr to enHrrc thc propc
opcction urd function of the rock fall bsriers.
2. Grantor covenrntr and ryrccs (a) thfi it s[rll not ctnc{ or place, nor shalt it allow or
pcrmit ary otb€r pctson or artity to crcal or placo, any porftrmnt building, ttructu rc. improvemcnt,
troo or fkrco on any pofiion of thc Easemsnt Property, and (b) that Crrcrtor shell bc liablo tbr their
remoral if nrry euch itcrnr lrc eo ptaced or erecte4 mrj Gru{or chall. rt Grantor's solo expcnse,
pmmptly rcmot/E any ruch itcnr so placed or crected on ony porlion of rhe Easemont Propcrty.
I
Attachnent P: Draft easenent language
AUG. _06.0r(MON) t5j2l
Aug-oci-ol ('1 : ?9F
P. OO5
P. OE
Grurtq lbrths cov€Elnt$ atd rgrc6 thrt it sldl not dimirti*h thc ground covcr ovcr rny portioo of
the Eamment Propmy.
X. With roprd lo lhc cxrcirc of any of any of its rights hcrqrdcr. Grantec herchy
corrcnuntu rnd sgreer lhBt it rtrall indcmni& utd hold Oranlor harmlegr from and against any ard all
slgims, Bc{ionr (d lrw or in equity), demrnd$ liabiliticq costr end cxpcnrce arising Sorn any damage
or iryury to pcrton or proporty rcoultiag ftom Graates'g oxociro of eny of ite rightr hoerrnder or
from any ncgligauce or wiltflrl misconduc't of Grqntee, its rgcnts or contnston, including without
limitatim any and dt cortr rnd ttuonable lttorndr fccs (of anoracy's solectcd by Grantor) which
arc inerrrcd by Gnntor in connsction with uty of tho forogoing.
4. Gnnlor rhrll hrw thc unrcstricted usc and crfoymcnt of lhc Eas€rnert Propcrty,
providcd that iuch usc shrll not intqfao with any of thc Cnantc€'! uscs of tho Easomcnt Property
m rst forth hcroin.
5, Thc cr.sonml gradcd hssin and cre$sd hereby is and shsll bc appurtenant to tho
Bcncfincd Propcrty, with the Benef,ttod Property bcing tho dominant cstltc 8od with rhe Erroment
Plopofiy b€iry tlrc scnisrt ortatc. All provirions and tcrms of thic Easommt Agroetnat, induding
tho boncfitc ard burdcnr trcrmf. chall run with lho land and shlll bo binding upon and inurc to ih€
beftfit of the partier hseto and lhoir rospcclive, heirs, suoeqrion aud assips.
6. Thic Earern€nt Agreerncnt moy be orocuted in rnultiplc counlcrpa^rts. oach of which
chnll constitute an original, urd all of u ch when nken 109€ther shall coustitute one and the ramc
instrumctrt.
IN WITNESS WHEREOR thc undcrsigred hrve orcuted this Easement Agrccment on rhc
dey and year fust writterr rbovc.
GRANTOR:
TOWNOFVAtl4
a Colondo municipal corporrtion
GSANTEE:
BOCItlIFALLS HOMEOWNERS A.SSOCTATION,
a Colorulo mnproft corporation
lh:_.
By:By:
Itr:
AUC. _06'Ol (MONI r3.21
Aug-OCi-Ol OI r sOP o
P- 006
P. 06
COTJNTYOF
) sr,
STATEoFCOLORADO )
Thc forgoing ilstrumetlt wes scJoowledged bebre ne rhis
-
day of
2001by as the
Vail, on bchrlf of the Town.
Witncss my hlrd and offcisl Essl,
No{aryPublic
My commisrion cxpircr:
COI'NTYOF
) rs.
STATEOFCOIJORADO )
flro forgdng in$runrnt wrs rcknowlcdgcd beforc nc thie
-
day of
as thc
of thc Town of
of Booth Fallu Homeownen 2001by
Asrochtiou on bcltdf of tho corporalion.
Witneus nry hard rnd officiat roal.
My commiuion cxpiro:
NotaryPubllc
AUG. -06'Ol (MoN) l3:21 P- O07
P.O7 Aug-O6-ol OI:3OP O
EXrrlnIT A
TOEASEMENTAGREEMENT
(Erramont lhopcrty)
A porccl of land Nortlr of rnd adjrcent to s Jrsrt of Lot l, Block 2. Vail Villrge, Tweltl
Filfng. County ofE€lc, Statc of Colorador morc partieilarly dcsoibed rs foltowr:
Boginning at the Northoact Conrer of said L.t l; thcocs N89o24't3'W. 42.85 feot to a point
on thc Nonhcly Boundary of cqid Lot I, which ir ths TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
thotccNOo'l&l4iE, t50.00 hcqthonccN89"24l3"W,534.l2 foct;thencc S00"l8l4nW,
I 50.00 fccr to tho Northwcstaly Comcr of uaid lot l; thqrce 389"24'13"8. 534, 12 fect
rlong thc Northmly Boundery of said Lot I and along tho East-West Centsline of said
Section2 to thcTRI]EPOINT OF BEGINNING
AUG. -06' or (MONI l3:22
Aug-O6-Ol Ol:SOP
P. OO8
P-OA
ET'HIEIT B
TI}EASEMSNTAGREEMEN'I
(Boncfilted lropcrry)
A pui of ktt l, Otock 2, Vail Vi[age Twelfih Filing County ofF.aglq smle of Colorgdo,
morc paniorlarly dcccdbed ar follows:
Beginnilg at the Northcast corner of said Lar l ; thacc N89 o24'l
3 nw, 42, 85 fect to e poinr
on the Northorly Eorrndary of srid Lot l, which is thc TRUE POINT oF BEGINNING;
thcncc S00" t8'14\il, 188. 12 f*t to a point on the SouthcdyBoundary ofsaid Int ll rhonee
Nll9o4l46'rW 9d.75 feetl thence s48'2849"w t47.80 fcct to a point on a orrve; thcncc
75.II footrbngthcucofrcurvctothotcft,ssidcurvehavingaradiusof26|.t4footand
I long shord N49'4956'W, 75.55 fc6t; thcncc N58!00?13'rW, 60.97 fcct to s point of
curvf,tulq ftmcs 178-33 foct along thc rrc of a curvc to ths lotl, said curvo hnving a radius
of3lI,16ftotandgahordN73o34'50uw, l76.IIfcotloapointofcurvaturc;thence3f,76
ftct along lho src ofa curue to thedgbt, scid curve having a radius of25.00 feet and r chord
N49oll?trw.32.02Eet;thcnceN09"l9'j6"w l4r,3TfoortotftcNorthwcsrcdycomer
of said lot l; thencc S80'24'l3nE, 534. 12 fest clong tbo Northcrty Boundary of caid t ot t
rnd alongthc Easr-W$t Centerlircofsaid Section2 ro rh€ TRUEPoINTOFBEGINNINC.
raid part aontsidng 104386,34 squarc fcct or 2.442 Acrcs nrore or lcsg.
I I
U
Board Design Review
ACTION FORM
Deparunent of Community Development
75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colora& 81657
teli 970.4n.2139 tax: 97 0.479.2452
web: www.ci.vail.co.us
Prcject Name: Boothfalls RocKall Wall DRB Number: DR8010259
Project Description:
CONSTRUCT A ROCK FALL MMGATION WALL
Partacapants:
OWNER BOOTH FATIS HOMEOWNERS ASSOC0S/15/2001 Phone:
C/O SUSAN FRI1Z
PO BOX 356
VAIL CO 81658
License:
APPUCANT YENTERCOMPANIES,INC. 08/15/2001 Phone:303-279-'1458
2O3OO STATE HIGHWAY 72
ARVADA, CO
80007
License:
CONTRACTOR YENTER COMPANIES' INc' 08/15/2001 Phone:
2O3OO STATE HIGHWAY 72
ARVADA, CO
80007
License: llzFB
Project Address: 3ff)4 BOOTH FALLS RD VAIL Location:
3094 BOOTH FALLS RD ABOVE BOOTH FALLS TH l1-
legal Descriptionl lot:J23lock;,26ubdivision: VAIL VILLAGE RUNG 12
Parcel t{umber: 210102301017
Commentt:
BOAR.D/STAFF ACTION
Motion By: Andy Blumetti Action: APPROVED
Second By: Bill Pierce
Vote: 5-0 Date of ApProval: 08/20/2ffi1
Conditions:
Cond: I
(PLAN): No changes to these plans may be made without the written consent of Town of
Vail staff and/or the appropriate review committee(s).
@nd:0
(PLAN): DRB approval does not constitute a permit for building. Please consult with
Town of Vail Building personnel prior to construction activities.
Cond: CONffi049'18
Cond: CON0fiX{149
er
Irrigation shall be provided to new vegetation and disturbed areas.
Cond: CON0004950
Requires easement approval by Town Council
Cond: CON0(M951
All Evergreens shall have a min height of 6-8 feet
Cond: CON0004952
Tofture portion of the wall should face downhill (towards townhomes)
Gond: CON@0,1953
Fence shouH be dark bmwn as approved at Red Sandstone Soccer Field'
Cond: CON0004954
Drainage from wall needs to connect to Booth creek (culverts will be needed)
Cond: CON0004955
Need letter from Engineer staung that the 1.5-1 slope is stable and will not fail
prior to vegetation being estnblbhed.
Planner: DRB Fee Paid: $20'00
(""-, /o * (/t /r /,Vu,ry'-
Q".lhz cor/-)ur 1257a '/ 1h2 cerF
o( i^^ r/ , -/''7 ^^ /
iok,^, 7^'^/ o"k'lt
rf o",7tan / b'ntY-I
.J
F.o El$f{Il.
Za --o .-tr
to
e..9
qc-
8480---,-
4d "--"/g4 rt
8460 -----
..\-."-'"'
B\l"
^ --'/q6AU
c!s-@
trl
F]
c)'gv)
oo L)
E A
U
o
oa
od
(r)-a\
.\o t)(rr-(o
OrO 9]-
(\s
LO
s
qcb
\
./,'
o g
t,.)
o
a
O
@
(f)
a
E
f,c
t
E
E
5r :
Fi,g
E.
tlin
?^9,
UJ At (D
g=a
Hs K
tsB6
e5E 'tL 2es
ni ir€
"t iiq
u1 =H# E:8 , E? EE3
(,
;*l=
=E =8
o z
LrJ (,
LrJ
-J
J o E F z o (J
z.o 6 o u rd
I
E-r o Et ol
EI ET
VA -o
tT1 J
L)a
(J
FF
F.
0l o
L-,
r^)
(a\
+
N
z
.-. F >J ('sl s -.
Ct'l
\.=b g=
O(J uu \J (A
00
\-
-N
(,
z.(\;dg s.t
C\I
^r ^ LJ
EO gLJ r3a
\
Rri
N
\
F-'
\\
OOCCC\>.-(o()<--|.r) E1 +++++N 0O0O0O0O0O N P C\t
\a
\
\
\
(OtJ)=i +={-$00 00 00
-a\l \\
\-
a-)
\-
a-)
(a)
=l-
-N
LJ
=a;
-H v><s -o
c.J
\f=b g=
ECI (Y trJ \3q
\
\N tri
\
\J
E-,
\\
\_J \_J \___.,/ \_J \ -./ L__-./O)oO>-(O()=f =i-*+<.++00 00 00 00 00 00
\
\-
\
\
I
II
Ei,i
liiu
{E
{F
.J
E-. o lsl C\l
tsl hl
ZA -ct
trl J
C)a
c)
E ()
*
s-
-N
\-
tl
L-,
O
\\-/
<.-
N
€
=!<z \)?s.o \+\*=hgF ECJ euJ \3 (4
S l{
S r\]
N N C-r
\q
i\
!\
\
I
fu,i
liiu
{E
{F
+J
ErO EI Ol
EI ktl
ZA
-ct
N
\-
00
tl
=i-
r-)
N
r-l z at (\;v><s r-
\r.\i=anq=bl ! Jr- i r-tr)-{gH<
a
()
t*l
&(J
\
\S \l
\\'
E\
l\\
=i=
\-
-r\l L\
.\
a)
-
t{ t
-
<--
t)
nl \\
r-)
A-CCCCCC = /_T\ Oc t---.- (O t-()s i \-_-/ \J r ar () *- =j- i-- $ +a{ UPa s-- oc oo oc oo oo oo +=
r\\ t!H \]F tt(J uu \t ta
\
h]
N r{
N P e-r
A:\
- C O) OO t'-.- (O LO LJ-)()<-<-++<-oo oo oo oo co co co
\
\
\
\
I
H. !
EE,H
a_
llin
ffi 4
{
q1
le \4X z2 sf,11.E;F v2:xx ; d,J hs!
,'J)r,9-o
E EF '6a-n ; o.5 gi Y
q
&t
C .E
I
E .9 q,
-
.g
(J
c)
LrJ
c tr .E
B
g
cl q o
..t 9
.gl E flt
€; :
=c O EE e Q-b E UE 9 (J'6 6
<oE C)RE o'I ol P=EA
d €
EA 3s g HE $r
E E.E Fl fisE
E€fiIEEgg*-gE
El
g Efi$s?n
HEE s]g nEEg$gg
0
=c o (,
E
0.)
(J
I o-
E o (J
o o c E.E gE o
=-c -9 o o-.s
o)o
ID Lr-
J ()o E
t-l G
C)ofl g h +)\/
t{(D
ofl
H
GI
m a 0 (I)
L{+)t-{o
tr{
la
EI c ,-I 6l c)rtr .-I (D e 0
2+
Hi
E4
H
Er,a
sEiu
\
Rso1-olay'
Application for Design Review
Department of Community Development
75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81557
tel: 970.479.2139 faxi 970.479.2452
web: www.ci.vail.co.us
General Information:
This application is br any project requirirE Design Review approval. Any project requiring design review must
receive approvdl prior to submitting a building permit application. Please refrr to the submittal requirements br the particular apffoval that is requested. An application for Design Review cannot be accepted until a require<l
information is received by the Community De/elopment Departnent. The project may also need b be reviewed by
the Town Council and/or the Planning and Environmental Commission. Design Review Board approval lapsei
unless a building permit is issued and construction commences within one year of the approval,
Location of the Proposal: LoI 12 Block: Z Subdivision:
Physical Address:
Parcel No,: 2 lOt oe-Sn I o I Z- {contact Eagle Co. Assessor at 970-328-8540 for parcel no.)
Zonins: I f''f/\ F
Name(s) of Owner(s):
Mailing Addrqss:
Owner(s) Signature(s):
Name of Applicant:
Mailing Address:Samc
Type of Review and Fee:
E New Constuction tr Addition
{ Minor Alteration
Phone:
$200 For construction of a new building or demo/rebuild.
$50 For an addition where square footage is added b any residential or
--\ commercial building (includes 250 add
/$20 ) For minor changes b buildings anC \:r' reroofing, painting, window additio
retaining walb, etc.
revisions to plans already approved by Planning Staff tr the
gn Review Board
ON, ALL SUBMMAL REQUIREMENTS
RTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT,
E ROAD, VAIL, COLOMDO 81657,
AUG. -06'0r (MON) r5: l9
Ar|9-C|6-(ll Ol !Z8|P
P. OOI
P. Ol
Jcrrlc F. Eckclbcrycr
JcfiJockou
EC,KELBERCTJR & JACKSON, LLC
5575 DTC Pnrkway, Suitc I 18
Gruenwood Villagc, Colorado E0l I I
(303)-79G7555
TELETA X (.103) 796-7333
e-mail addressos:
ockclbcrgcr(flttsr,\fEst, ftt
jqi ack xrn(@uswest. net
TELEX_T&INSI4TlltAL-
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
PAGES:
fi)MMI":NTS:S@e.
pfcasc contEct lconctte at (303) 796-7555 ifyou do not rc{ieive a comptete truxmittal.
CONFTIIEN'I'IAI. NOTTT]CATION
PLI':ASE BE AWAED TIIAT 'THTS IS A COMIDENTTAL DOCUMENT
WHICII MAY BN SUB'EC'T TO A1'I'ORNI:Y/CLTENT PRIVILEGE" IT IS
INTTNDED ONLY X1OR TFT: USE OF TIIE INDIVIDUAL OR EF'TITY
AAOVI; I F' YOU HAVE SECETVED'I'TI IS COMMUMCATION IN ERRO&
PT-.EASE NOTITY US EY TELEPHONE, AND MAIL IUD VT:RSION YOU
BECEIVED TO US. lr YOU ARE NOTTHE PROPERRECIPIEN'I'' YOU
AIIE HEREBYN(}TIrISD TTIA'I ANY DISflI)SIIRE IIIIISEMINATION'
I'T$TR|BUTION OR COPYING OS TIIIS (:OMMUMCAT]ON OR THE
INT'ORIUA'I'ION CONTAINEI' Ttr.EREIN IS S'I'RI C'I'I,Y PROHIBITED.
TITANKYOU.
Smding tclccopier number: (303) 796'7377
(ircluding mvor 3h6ot) I
AUG. -06' O I (MONI l5 , 20
Aug-O5-ol ol : e9P
I
ECKEISERGER & JAcKsoN; LI.C.
ATTOflNSV$ Ar't
^W !6tE grc FAFKWAY. lit'rrc O
ENCLET'r'OOO. a)r.trfArx: r()t | |
JetlwQ. Jd$otr
August 6, 2001
VfA TELEFAX ONLY: (303)57:l-0921
Store Prlcdzik
WH Ughting AssosrttcE, Inc.
1fi4 SposElvd.
Dcvc, Co to204
BE: Aooth Falls Rock Fdl Mitigation; Town of Vail Erscrnoot
Dcar StGr!:
As wa dircrruul, cnclorcd plcrrc find I drcft F.l*ment Agrcctn€ttt for thc Vail ProPcrt]t.
Fleare notc tlo ftllowltU with rogard to thir agreemeot-
l. t.efd frsoription. Sincc therc wus no uwcy for thc Vail propcrty, I have done my
bc* to 'Hd riuwEyor, ln crscncq wtru I hrvc tricd to do ir to croate t rctanglo usittg tho nonherfy
bouodrrfi lino dllp Booth Fdlt propdy rnd c.rending nonhwrd | 50 fect rlong thc cntirc width
of ruch nonhorly hundlry, Bctrurc Ycnter's drawing did not cpoci& thc mrmbor of fast by which
lhc walts woutd cncroach onlo Vril's propcrty. I urod tbo scalo (on6 inob - 40 f€et) to etinate the
rrquitd depth, ud tt appnrcd tht l5O feet would be morc then nrffcicnt. llowwsr. you sbotld
cmftrn thb wirh Yontcr bafine ths fisrernent ir signcd. Aloo, t agin recommod that t suncy of
thc rcquired propcrty bc mrdc as roon rr porriblo and thet the Ercement be amended to UBE fro lcgal
dorcription set forth in the suney,
2. U-S. Foq$ Scrvioc. Both the Condo Map urd thc overall l4at that yon scrt mc
indioltc thi thc U.S. Forat Scwicc hm som inlerct in thc propcrty on which tho baniers will bc
butlt, You should confrm with the To*'n of Vril whnt antcrert, if any. thc U. S. Forpst ServicO heS
in this proporty urd whaber any conrcnl nceds to bc obtaincd ffon the Foresl Service,
3. lnrurance/l'axcs. tfthis wor8 !n Eaqemcnt belween two p]ivalc paniss, dte way I
harrc dnftcd thc Earemcot wortld caure ftc grantor (Town of Vail) lo remrin rtsponsible for
nrimdning botft liability ud carualty inrunncc on thc carcmcnt propcrty and for tho paymant of real
sstlto ltxd. llowcrrcr, rinco Vail is r municiFalily, you might wrnt to conllrm thlt th€ HOA will not
haw to p$y lhbility insrrrnce or rcrl ectatc taxes for the esscment propcrty. A! to cssualty
iururrnco. I don'r knov whahcr thc IIOA unuld mnt or ncod to havo any suoh insurancc for thc
brrrl*f but ifit di4 t am ccrtrin that Vail woultl €r.pcct thc tlOA rc meintain guch insurEnco at irs
G'QGrnt!,
P. O02
P.O2
TFLE| r toNE (s3) 79e'755.5 TELEFAT( (3Og) 7947333 E+alr Aotnlr.EEi JcurtcxtctNtl n{wr:Fr HET
AUG. -06'or (MON) l3:20
Aug-O6-Ol olt29P
P. OO3
P.03
Stcvs Prawdzik
Augurt 4 2001
Prgc 2
4, fndcmnificnion (J3), Plc$c notc tlr4t I have rotluircd the HOA to indcmnify Vril
ftomrllncgliga@andmirconductofthcltOA.itstgetrtrendcontttclori. Thbisgtan&rdlanguags
frr clrcmantl and I bclicvs thot Vail will require it.
t. Mrcdlarqrur, ln prngnph l, I ststc thst the HOA is ttsponsiblc fur all ca*s std
€rpfiscs ofoon$nnior\ mrintcneoco, otc., and tlru Vail ir only rasporuible for rcuroving rcct lbll
dcbrir Som bohind the banicn. Howwer, I have only put in E gcnarat requirement that Vail will
rcmovc ruoh dcbriu on r rparqnablc rs-nccdcd bagb. You ghould eck Yefiter ar to whcther they hrrro
moro rpociflcguidelinor which should trc followcd and. ifso. wp slrouH imert zuch speciftc guidclincs
hto thi! Egsnent.
tn addition to the foregCrirq; pleasc rcad thc Elssnmt Agtcfltlc[lt carcftlly and lct mc know
ifpu lurrc arry quertionr orcomrncms.
Thuks.
Sincorcly,
F.CKELBERGER & IACKSON, LLC
gr'/,?ad,+-
JeffJrckson
Enclorurc
AUC. -06'or IMON) r5:20
Au9-o5-O1 Ol r 29P
P. OO4
P.O4
EASEMENT AGREEMENT
Tllts ISASEMBNT AGREEMENf is trudc snd cntcred imo this
-
dry ofA€ust, 2flll'
by and bctrtccn THE TOWN OIf VNL, e Colorado nrunicipal corPorution ("Q1Aglq"), whore
sd&css ir , ud BOOTII FALLS HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION. r Colorado nonprofit corporrtion ('Gfr!jle!'), whoeo addrees is
Ttis Errcracnt Agttcorcnt ir nudc and ente,rod irtto in contcrnplntion of thc followinB fiae
aill ciromsancos:
A Grurtor is thc owncr of ccrtaiu rcal propcrty locrtod in Eagle Counly, Colondq
which ir more prniorlarly dcrcribed on tho Exlribit A attadred herdo anl inanrporated herein by this
rdemnca (tfu "Earmrnt-tnnrtE)-
B. Orantcc il I homeownm' association with rcgard to a condominium devolopmont in
Ftgl6 Coudy. Colorrdo connon$ knonm as *Booth Fallc Condominium$', whiclr is msc
particulrdy dacribed on tho Erbibil! attaclrod herelo and incorpor'ctctl herein by this rcferencc (thc
"D!trdStd-E[ptEE'), Thc Eotufitted Proporty is rdirccnt !o tho Eac€|nent Propony.
C. Grrntee dcsirer to construct multiple rock fill mitiggtion barriers on the Essement
Froperty brthc prrpors of protoctitrg theBenrefitled Prcpertn urd Crrantor dcsires togrant Crrrntec
rn CananCnt On thc Eacment Pmpcrty fur nrch Purposq, on thc tcrms and cnnditions herBh.
NOW, THEREF1ORE FORAND INCONSIDERATIONOF TcnDoIIarg(S IO.OO)and othu
pod and valuablc cnnsideratio4 tho receipt urd rufficiency of which aro he,relry ac&nowledgal, the
partier agrce ar follows:
l. Subjcct to the tcrmr. eonditions, resenrstions ard rortrictiots ret frrth herciq Grutor
hff*y gnnBb asrigns and sefs ovcr to Grantco an gxdusivc pcrpenrel eppurtcn8flt @senr€nt lo
oonstruci. instrll, plant mahtein, rcplrc6, enlarge, re{:r}n6truct, improvc. lrupcct, rcpair and rnmove
rocft f8ll mltigation borriqs, troge, rocks ad ground cwer, rt Grantcc'r rolc cogt rnd orponsq for
thc purporc of protoctiag the Bencfittod Propsrty frqm rock fall o,sd rclated hazards, as may from
tisrc to tlm be useful to. or requircd by. Graatcc. undcr, tluouglr and rsross thc Eascmont Propcrty
Cfurtcc Bhsll bc rolcly rcponslble for dl expenses assockt€d with thc cxcrcisc of ir rightc
hc.rcnrndor, qpopt tht Cirrntor ghdl rsnorle. at ilE role cost and o<pcnsq all roch l'all rnd othor dcbds
which mry llom timo to time bc collcctcd behind nrch rock fnll mitigation baniers; and Grantor rhall
undclako and mmplctc ruc-h rcrnowl at srsh tirocs as rre reasonably rre+eusary to cnsure thc popu
opcttion rnd function of thc rock < bariers.
2, Grantor covenrntr and 4grees (a) thfi il chsil not cnoct or placc, nor shalt it allow or
parmit auy othq pEr$rn or cDtity to cr€ct or pleco, any peffiflEnt building, struoture improvonem,
troo or Ikrco on any portion of thc Easemsnt Proporly, 6nd (b) ftat Chantor shdl bc liablo tbr theit
reororal if nny erch itqnr lrc eo placed or erscted, gnd Crrrntor fiall * Grantor's sole expcnsc,
prorqltly rcmove ury nrch itcor ro plecerl or crpctcd on sny porlion of tte Erscmcnt Propcrty.
AUG. -o6'Ol (MON) r5:2r
Aug-O6-Ot 01 :29P
P. OO5
P.05
Grsntor llrther covoanB and sgfoss thil 3t slnll not dtnini$h thc giround covcr ovcr o4t portioo of
tho Earemont Propmy.
3. With roprd to the cxcrcirs of rny of any of its riglrts hercundcr, Granlec horchy
oovcng r$ md qgrccg thrt it fidl indcmni& and hold Grantor hannlegg ftom and against ary and dl
clrimr, rtionr (* hw of in squity), dmrndf lirbilitios, co*s and cxpcnrcc arining Sorn any damege
or injury to pcr.on or proporty rerultiog ftom Grutoe'e otociro of cny of ite rightr trseundq or
from ary rcgligposo orwiltf,rl miscondud of Grffitee. iB tgentr or Gonlrrslom, ircluding without
timitdiotr sny and dl co*r ard rcraonable dtorndr ftcs (of attorncy'g selcctcd by Grantor) wbich
arc inqrrcd by Grrntor in connsction with ury of thc forogoing.
1. Grrilor shrll htw thc unrcstricted uac and cnjoyncnt of lhe Euuement Propcrty,
povidcd thrt trtch ust shsll not intorfso with any of thc Grantce'r usc! of tho Eassmcnt ProPsty
ar cst frrtb bcroin.
5, Thc cr,rmmt grmted heroin end crected hereby io and strsll bo oppurlenant to tho
Bencfiflcd Propcrty, witb ths Bsnefittod Prop€rty bcl$g tho donunant cstrtc ind with tbo Errement
Propcrty bE[rU th€ 3€fviail Grtdc. All ptovirions and tcrms ofthis Ersomsnl Agr€efiert, inchding
tho boncfitc and budcnr hcrcof. chall run with lho lurd and shall bo binding upon end inurc to lhe
bcncfit ofthc particr hseto and thoir rospcctive, heirs, suc,ce$rors rnd arsigts.
6. ltir Eanenpnt Agreerncnt mry be orecutcd in rnultiplc coufltcrparts. oclr of which
rtull conrtitutc an original. rnd dl ofrrtich when uken log€ther rhrll cottstitute one and the srmc
inrtrurncnt.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undcreigrrcd hrve scutod this EssEmEnt Agrccmeot on rho
dry and year 0rsl writtcn rbovc.
GBANTOR:
TOS'NOFVAU1
l Colondo nmi<ipal orporrtion
GIIANTEET
BOOTHF LLS HOMEOWNERS .LSSOCTATION,
e Colondo rrcnprof,t corporttlon
Itr:_.
8y:-.
Itr:
By:
AUG. -06'Or (MON) r3'2t
Ar|S-06-0! OltSOP
P. 006
P.(t6
COI.'NTYOF
) rs.
STATEOF@LORADO )
Thc fqgoitg itrtrummt war drnowledged boftre m this
-
day of
norw .ac tha
Vril, on bchdf ofthcToltt.
Wrtncro my lnnd rnd offoid eeil.
NolaryFublic
My conmisrion cepircc;
COI'NTYOF
) cs.
STATEOFCOIJORADO )
Itc fqgdn8 iartrurncnt wrr rcknowlcdgcd bcfore mc thie
-
day of
of thc Towu of
of Booth Fallu Homeowncrs 2001by rr thc
Arrodation, on bchalf oftho corporation.
Witrcor my hand rnd official rod.
My oommirgion c*pircl
NotaryPubllc
AUG. -06' or (HoN) l3:2r
Aug-o6-ol ol:soP
P. OO7
P.O7
EXIIIBITA
TO EASEMENT AGREEMENT
(Eucncnt lbopcrty)
A prcel of lard NorO of rnd rdjacent to u lrsrt of Lot I, Block 2, Vail Village, TWelftl
Biling; County ofEagle, Ststc of e,obrado, more parlierla{ dcsoribcd ss follows:
Boginning rt ths Northmrt C-onrer of said Lot l; tbeaco N89o24't 3"W. 42.85 fest !o a Poitrt
on th6 Nonhsly Boadry of said Lot l, wbich is the TRLIE FOINT OF BEGINNING;
dranccl{00'1Fl/tiq t50.00 @ rhenccN89o24'l3'q 534,12 fo.l; thencc S00" l8'14'W
ll0.0O fcet to thoNonhrcstoly Comer of caid Lot l: thence S89"24'13"8, 534.12 feet
aloag tha Northcly Bomdrry of said tot t and along the East-Wert Centorline of said
Sectlon 2 to thc TRITE POINT OF BECINNINC
AUG. -06' Or (XoN) l5:22
Aug-O6-Ot Ol:SOP
P. OOa
P.Oa
EXEIEIT B
T1' EASEMENT AGREEMEN'I'
(Boncfltlcd Dropcrty)
A parl of tot l, BtocL 2, Vril Vilhge, Tnrclfrh Filing County of Faglo, Srste of Cdondq
morc partiarlrrly dcccribed ur follows:
Begfnning at the Noriheast Corner of Said Lor | ; thencc N89 o24'l}nW , 42.85 fcct to a point
on ths Northorly Ertrudrry of said Lot l. which is thc TRUE POINf Of BEGINNING;
thcttcc SU)" t8'l{'1l/, l8t.12 fg to a point onthc SoutlrolyBoundary ofcaid l.ot l; thence
Ntl9o4l?6iw, 96.75 ftet; thencc $4t"2849"W, 147.80 foet to o point on I curue; thencc
75.t1 f6t sbttg thc rtc of r curw to tha tcft, said curve having a radius pf 261.14 fost and
* lo[g shord N49'{q56'W 75.55 fe6t; thencc N58r0D'l3nW, 60.97 ftst to q point of
ilrvolutt; thcncs UE.33 fcct along thc rrc of a curvcto tho lolt, said curvs hrving a radiuu
d3tl,16feotandrchordNT3'1450nW, lT6.lSfceiloapointoforvrture;thme3i,76
ftct dottg lho erc of a orrue lo theright, sdd curo having a radius of 25.00 feot and a chord
N49oll98"W.32.02fccr;rhcncsNO9"l956'W l4l,3TfnotothcNorthwgstcdlrCom€r
ofsdd Lot l: thsnoe !l8g'24'l3nE, 534.12 feet along the NoCherly Boundary of said Iert I
and dong the East-Wost Centerline ofsaid Seotiou 2 lo ths TITUE POINT OF BEGINNINC.
mid pen c,ontsidry 106,386.34 qurr fcct or2.142 Acrer more or less.
,.{z
a LI z
o_
,)
t
Ld F Z
u.
!g
E
o
vl
an
E
E o-lr- Cl 4iR f >- -< ET\Lbbr
F=\3 Olr-9 gPd?
ii o lL
..Qt
i:'i a z -.
=o-ttr E|zTZ.<IL(LOO
a ()a
C)
EI
3 o
6
€al E;
)
F
Lrl ah
Fio H. H
H==Hgtr
HH 6 P5E 'L-
2eE ?t+o xd -re
+>E oH dHq
n sfr 6;q
n 2= Pq=
Lr=?a? bE trFF g?\EA =e Ut:O J Lrl
6 z.
UJ o td J
J o E F z o o
z o 6 o E
t-|J
.o
De sign Review Action Form
TOWN OF VAIL
Project Name: Boothfalls Rockfall Mitigation walls
Project Description: Amended approval- modified wall design by Yentcr
Owner, Address and Phonc: Boothfalls Condo Association, Susan Fritz, PO Box 3592, Vail, CO 81658
Architect/Contact, Address and Phonc: Robert Barrett, Yenter Companies, 20300 W. Highway 72, Awada,
co 80007
Project Strcet Address: 3094 Boothfalls Road
Legal Description: Lot l, Blk. l, Vail Village l2th
Parcel Number: Buildins Namc:
Comments:
Board / Staff Action
Motion by:
Seconded by:
Action: Staff approved
Vote:
Conditions: l. Irrigation shall be provided to new vcgetation and disturbed areas.
2. The 3 spruces labeled as Aspens, shall be Evergreens.
3. All Eversreens shall have a minimum heisht of 6'- 8'.
Town Planner: Dominic Mauriello
Date: I l-19-9tt
O o
DRB Fee Pre-Paid:
ocr os ss lo!22a
ff"
FRIrz "rJr"-*oo"p. r
BOOTHFALLS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
sincerel-.y,
(- -f ,'ilV,r.-fJ.t
.:'7-Suirar, Fritz
fresidant, Boothfallc Eomeowaers Assn-
Susan FriL
PrEgdctt
Gerald Grewn
TrEairrv
Unda Ansfteld
Scrtd,ry
Llbby Bortr
Kathryrt Boons
8o-d ldld|tb.r
october 5, 1990
Mr - RrrsseIl F,'Jrr|A.tt
ToqEr of vail
Dear Rugs,
The Bo<;[hfalls ltor:ntai Hooeo$rAe rs Associal-iorr would like t.o Lhauk you for all
you! he].p wlth the ].ock f all mctl i <;aLi(Jrt ' S€rdly y!: rr: rrt,rk 1s not donc ' Bob
Barrett, who worked for the state of Colorado and provided uuch of thc
informaticr$ used to build the betm to the easL of us, h'as come Lcr bhe
s.eEociEtiotl witb a ehar.ge in Lhe plals for orrr wal I - We woUld appleciate your
help in geLtr.ing the approvals to use his plar-
3os. Boorhhlls Rrgd trO Bor s602 Veil. Colsrdo 81658 le70|4 B 6E43
o o
STA|E OF COLOMDO
cotoRADo cEotoctcAt suRVEY
Division of Minerals and CeoloSy
Departmcnl of Natu ral Resourccs
1313 Sherman Street, Room Zl 5
Denver, Colorado 80203
Phone (303) 866-2611
FAX (303) 866-2461
September 21,1998
Mr. Russell Forrest
Senior Environmental Planner
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
su-98-0004
Roy Romer
( i()\cr nor
Jnntl's S Lo( hhe,rd
Exe( uli!e l)irc( t()r
Nlr( h.rol B L()n8
L)ivrsion t)irtr lot
Vi( ki (o\l,n
Strle C({Jlolii5l
,rnd I)ii('cl(n
for Booth Falls
I)EI'ARTMITNT OF
NATURAL
RESOURCES
RE: Review of Ycnter Companies Rockfall Mitigation Alternative
Conrlorniniunrs.
Dear Mr. Forrest:
At the request of the Town of Vail, the Colorado Geological Survey has reviewed the
alternative design for rockfall protection for the Booth Falls Condominium complex provided by
Yenter Companies. We concur with Mr. Barrett's assessment that their wall will provide the same
level of protection to the Booth Crcek Condominiums as the original AKS design. ln certain aspects,
such as the negative batter of the impact sidc of the wall and the spray fence on the top of the wall,
it is, in fact a better, more conseryative design. lt appears that the wall geometries conform to the
minimum requirements this office felt was necessary for effbctive rockfall mitigation of this site.
Upon review of the design of the protection system faxed to this office by Yenter Comparfes,
we have the same minor concerns as stated in my original November 20,1997 review letter. Those
concerns and recommendations are listed below:
Unless Yenter Companies have extended the 8 foot wall to improve the two wall's
overlap, the i2 foot high wali shouid reLain its tull height as it extends to the service road.
The tiered reduction at the wall end creates the potential for bounding rocks to possibly
bounce over the reduced wall height portion, and miss the end of the 8 foot wall.
The Yenter notes indicate that the grading of the service road is still planned in front
ofthe 8 foot high wall. That is still required unless the wall height is increased, as explained
in the November 20, 1997 review lettcr.
A locked gate should be installed to prevent unauthorized vehicle access into the
clean-out zone in front of the impact wall.
o o
Booth Falls Rxfl design revicw, page 2
The Town of Vail must take measures to insure that the rockfall protection system,
when constructed, does not deviate from the plans, specifications, and our recommendations
without prior approval.
In conclusion, the CGS believes that the Yenter Companies design for rockfall protection at
the Booth Falls Condominiums is an excellent design and will also provide rockfall protection the
Booth Creek Condominiums so desperately need. If you, or any other concerned or interested party
have any questions please contact this ofFrce at (303)894-2167.
Sincerelv.
B. Barrett, Yenter Companies, fax only
W.P. Rogers, CGS
File
cc:
Project Engineering Geologist
(-n\,t
( [)))
nEg8nil
BLASNNG
c0NInAcl
BLASIINE
8nwcE$
.>1 fEr
EOIDEN
EOIIIPMEilT
smwcES
m/
WEEIEBN
VIBBATNN
EtrCIALISIS
-rltt
POETABIT
CNUSHING
snwtr$
t o
September 19, 1998
Mr. Russell W. Forrest, Director of Community Development
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
SLTBJECT: This is a supplement to the letter and submittals to you dated September
14.
Dear Mr. Forrest;
We submitted a letter and a series of drawings to you and to Mr. Greg Hall on
September 16. Mr. Hall and I briefly reviewed the submittals. He requested a
revised profile sheet, a landscaping plan, that the spray fence be moved to the
hillside and a grading plan for the west Fortress Rockfall Barrier. We revised the
package as per his direction. We also added a Section B-B through the middle
Fortress Rockfall Barrier and a Section C-C through the west Barrier.
Attached is a complete series of drawings that supersedes the September 14 set of
drawings.
Sincerelv.
/il,/t/(@/-
Robert K. Banett, P. G.
Cc: Greg Hall, Jerry Greven
20300 W. Highway 72, ANada, CO 80007 .3031279-4458. Fax 303/279-0908 . www.yenter.com
J
(J
h=.,9 :f6-(,dr -(/|**gg*
ao @utr\o.o
-FNFI@
96 JP H :g;fi
3., E e=E EA"; E 6 E A 2a4Eais $$**=EF
a E lrJ !frE co
=g"E E * B a;;2ZiH
SE*EflEE
Ee?;i6a
5 l q ut
q
H z
J dl
^o
@@
O r.)$++
o
o
o
Eur3s77
l)cil,cc x156F
o
TO:
MEMORANDUM
Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Department of Community Development
DATE:November 10. 1997
SUBJECT: To approve, deny, or modify an Environmental lmpact Report for the proposed
Booth Falls Townhomes rockfall mitigation wall, located at 3094 Booth Falls
CourULot 1, Block 2, VailVillage 12th Filing.
Applicant: Booth Falls Condo Association Staff: Russell Forrest
I. PURPOSE
The purpose of this hearing is to review and approve, modify or deny, the Environmental lmpact
Report (ElR) for the creation of two walls to mitigate the rockfall hazard on the property owned
by the Booth Falls Condo Association. The primary wall is 360 ft long, 12 ft high, and 12 ft thick.
The second wall, directly south of the road accessing the water tank, is 60 ft long, 8 ft high, and
10 ft thick. The EIR reviews the impacts associated with the proposed walls, the need for the
wall, and the alternatives considered in the design process.
II. BACKGROUND
The Booth Falls Condominiums are located in the Vail Village 12th Filing, which was platted in
the Town of Vail in 1972. The Town of Vail issued building permits for Units 1-3 on March 27,
1973. Today there are a total of 18 units in the complex. In 1984, Schmueser and Associates
Inc. prepared the official Rockfall Hazard maps that were adopted by the Town of Vail. These
maps indicate that the Booth Falls Townhomes are in a high rockfall hazard area along with
development to the southeast of the Townhomes. In 1989 and 1990 after several rockfall
incidents, a rockfall berm was created and financed through a local improvement district. This
berm was not extended to the west to protect the Booth Falls Townhomes because of the
proximity of the Forest Service Wilderness Area Boundary.
On March 26, 1997, a 20' x 8' piece of the rock face broke off the rock band above the Booth
Falls Townhomes. Units 14, 15, 16 were impacted by several large rocks. The largest rock went
through the wall of Unit 14 and pushed a bed through the 1st floor and into the basement area.
On March 27, 1997, staff met a USFS team and Jonathon White of the Colorado State
Geological Survey to determine the risk of additional rockfall incidents. Through further site
investigation and an analysis done by the State Geological Survey, it was determined that the
area was in a high rockfall hazard area which means rockfall incidents are likely. However, the
risk of a rockfall incident is no higher now than "usual" at this location. lt should also be noted
that rockfall incidents can occur at any time in the year. Rockfall incidents, unlike debris flow or
snow avalanches, are not limited to one season
On May 6th, 1997 a Council worksession was held to review a report prepared by the Colorado
Geological Survey and to determine what should be done to mitigate the hazard. Council
directed staff to assist the Homeowners Association in determining a cost for mitigation. On July
7th, 1997, another worksession was held with Council to determine how this mitigation should be
funded and the process for completing the design and construction of the wall. lt was decided
that the homeowners would finance the construction of the wall themselves. The Town
committed up to $20,000 to assist with the design of the wall. Staff has also prepared the
attached ElR. lt was originally hoped that construction could begin in 1997. However, due to
delays in securing private financing and in the design process it appears that construction will
not begin until the spring of 1998.
An engineering company, AKS Engineering, has been retained by the Homeowners Association
to design the wall. The Colorado Geological Survey has agreed to review the proposed wall and
the rockfall hazard on the site and provide a written report on the adequacy of the design to the
Town of Vail.
1il.PROCESS
The requirements for mitigating a geological hazard are outlined generally in Section 18.69 of
the Town code. The process for reviewing this proposed project is outlined below:
PEC meeting to review the Environmental lmpact Repoft (on November loth):
This is an opportunity to identify any associated impacts of the wall and allow
residents to review the proposed plans.
Council review of proposed mitigation (on December 9th): Since this project will
impact Town of Vail land and land the Town will be acquiring from the Forest
Service, the Town Council must approve of the use on Town of Vail land. Also
the Town Gouncil will need to approve, after the wall is constructed, any proposed
changes in the Town's hazard maps.
Final DRB review (on December 17th): The DRB has reviewed the conceptual
plans and still needs to give final approval of the wall. DRB will focus on the
appearance of the wall, site disturbance, and landscaping.
After DRB Approval: Apply for Public Way, Grading, and Building permits.
After the wall is constructed, the Homeowners can request a hearing with the
Town Gouncil to present documentation from a qualified engineer/geologist that
the wall was constructed in accordance with the approved plans and can request
a modification to the Town hazard maps. lf this request is made and approved by
the Town Council, the Homeowners Association property would still be identified
in a rockfall hazard area, but the maps would indicate that approved mitigation
exists for the site and would refer to the site speciflc report. The associated
report would document to what degree the hazard has been mitigated. lt should
be noted that 100% mitigation of a natural hazard, is in most cases, not possible.
So it is important to refer to the site specific report which would accurately
describe the hazard, associated mitigation, and the degree of risk after the
1)
2)
4)
5)
3)
mitigation is constructed.
This schedule will allow the Association to have all approvals from the Town completed before
the end of the year. This should allow adequate time for loan approval and construction of the
wall in the spring of 1998.
IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Mitigation is needed to protect the Booth Falls Homeowners from personal injury and to prevent
further propefi damage. After reviewing the possible alternatives, staff believes that the
creation of a wall would have the least impacts on the site. In addition, based on input from the
Colorado Geological Survey, a wall would provide the greatest level of protection to the
homeowners. Staff recommends approval of the EIR with the condition that the mitigation
actions identified in the EIR are implemented.
f :bveryonevussVnemos\rockmmem2
i1-suRv.
iruh Fllb Rrfl dsrip rcvior. I'u1r I
Thc'l owrr of Vnil rnust t6ks neasures lo insurc that ths rockfsll protestiofi systcn,
wr&kn conslrilctctl, dtt.s not dcviatc frour thc plilns, specilicalir)ns, iltd our rocomrtrcrxlill ions
without prior aFprovill.
In conclusion, the CGS br:liuvcs thct thr,- Ycrrtcr Conrpcnies design for rockfall Frnrcction at
the Bootlt ljolls Cottdrrntiniums is an cxccllcnt dcsign antl wilt ulso providc rockfall protection thc
Rroth Crr-'cl Condontitrirtm5 sq d1:spcralcly ncccl. ll'yuu, ot any r)thcr conccnrcd or interestcd party
havc any questi(rns ph.-nsc contae I this trl'ficc at (l{ll)f 94.2167.
Sinccrcly,
tuh-
Pnrject Enginccring Ccologi st
B, Barrclt, YL'nrL'r C:ott)pilnies, firx only
W.P. Rogels, CGS
File
Jonnthnn 1., Whilc
e
lr- o
st- N f>
F E- q bt-6 89d?
^t
5fiEE E€E<
ri
Z
U''g z
o_
a t!F
z.
Ld
(s
O
O.,x
$<
C)
t-{
t-'t d
m
ct)a
O t{.l-)
.;l-(o tu E se ss€.E FE t=s ; 3'E Hei * re* d5;F : E;=
.L= Y : aiE
nn
J t
-o
-E Eig
!:€bE tr .:# iiE 3 EE
E
=l!'E -ii E FE ..I E
cEel*.*HE
sE Elg sgsB
Hr EI HE ,E$igF
4'tr o
ql t)
rE
c)c)
rt)
d il**o**
lo^Ft.'
*e
SuEEiE*
;iIEEi;
E H:!{a
=HEHoB
ii'i;;E
rtlEi;a
5
=t
q
a
iii
iii
iir
iti
iilr
iiil
tl lr iI
it
FI
tu
o
o E
d
(J
{J
o
lJ
fl
{.|
ii ii
t!.ii
fllii
| ,nrov+e-zool il:53AM FR0tFCotorado cefcat survev 3038562,{6 |T-235 P.00 t/002 F-737
sTAfE OF COLORADC
col-oRAoo GEor-ocrcA! SuRvEr
Division of Mineralg and Geology
Oepanment of Natufal Resoufc6
l3l3 Shorman Streel Room 715
Denv€., Colorado 80201
Phone: (3o3) 856-261r
FAX; (303) 066-2a6I
November 9,2001
DEPARTI\,{ENTOF
NAIURAL
RESOURCES
Bill O{,Eor
Cov<rnor
CrcG L wllci.,
Exccvtivr Oi.e(or
Mich..l 0. Long
Dlvlrion Dircdo.
Mcki cowrn
sErc C(glog;.t
and D;.ecro.
RE
Mr. Russell Forrest
Senior Environmental Planner
Town of Vail
75 SouthFrontageRoad
Vait, CO 81657
Review of Yenter Companies Rockfall Mitigation Impact Barrier for Booth Falls
Condominiums.
Dear I{r. Forrest:
At your request in ou phone discussion last month, the Colorado Geological Survey has
rwiewed the incrtial barrier wall for the Booth Falls Condominium complex consrucred by
Yenter Companies. The CGS conducted a site investigation of the project on October 22,2001.
Two geotextile-reinforced soil walls were completed at that time of our inspection so we did not
have an oppornrnity to observe ttre actual waU construction. While internal aspects of the wall
conshrction are unlcnown to us, it appears rhat the wall geomeFy conforms to rhe design as
submitted by Yent€f, Companies. A desigl element that was missing at the time of our
inspectiou was thc fence that Yenter proposed for the top of the wall. Mr. Barrett assured me
that the fence was still planned and would be installed as soon as the fence contactor was
available.
This system will provide a level of protection that is, in some aspects, superior to the
ditch and berm confguration for the properties to the east. Once dre fence is installed at tfie top
of the wall, the wall consmrction will basically conform ro the Yenter plan details and will have
the wall geometry that conform to the recommendations this office felt was Decesserry for
effective rockfall mirigation of this site.
Tbe ouly concern ute have at this point is the rcvegetation of the cut slope behind the
barrier. If left in its current condition, runolf may cause erosion and minor slumpiag of soil into
the rock catchment arca. The cut slope should be seeded and some t1pe of erosion control
matting (ECM) or rurf reinforcement mattiag (IRM) should be staked to the slope.
zos &11- ffi
t \
vt -o - riil -ui:.;*
*s?,r t;i; i:f E"'"
*!=;;. €iei ;e:s
;Et;s;E!tt
i;gE;; Fte: ;;;i
Egill;.- e+:a ss*;
E;;EE'g:$i ff;i B' u*:i {[ti " i'i*l ;rui
I Er' ltaFi _vC=.o_rOtOtqO-O
c so:()g*
ndt
,5 Er E;t'E= ; F
t<6 r B;xic U 9;d\.-- 9 or .o_v, H€.9 t^F'\ t> ; i 5o* 9:3
d. " : r-9 29,r, .q?E
-ooo v t
Hdo 3 oe E
3'-)= s e=
o-+ 3 i gE -.r
#S.e s u a€ E Sll p 5eE c @th o= zl--()=
., 3*
FeE *
:.9 |59" X o* E'
L! .l^
E:st
t I.. LJ t1) Z t) E o,o .^()
JF
<F
=9
=o -z :<
FJ
6=
9J PJ
OO d6
=z
'.tr
il"
|^ll-
lll"to tto
il:
m'J)n
F
DO
\.nd )
r0 l^!
.\'
!
n V'(]
p:p
r+
Jd
I
t
Itl
EF
=
HF
tl
\J
,,t \
!(,\.r
T'
t
ll
("," .
.i5!
rItl
=
tl I rl tl
I
E-
--tY
">o
;>c
E=E
!i;o:
.l
ol €l
:l
ci
EI
-l }I -\d
fl
t\l\
t-o ri
tn t
I
I
o
d
P 'z
b
z
1;
I
R>
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
L
F &b
_qH ,, hN<.; XRE ; i:t R'
3
I
.!
L'
t,i
ti.
i,
4 I E t I I I I' t, t I, t r lr.tr-r.-r.
sEP-:1-9A d4:Oz coLoJ .SUR1/.3e5A94 P.Or
STA|E OFCCLO|(ADC
cotot^Do crol oGlc^t strBvtY
lJtvtu,lr ul M,.ua.tlr ror, (,r\,1'Jtlt
Oot),rflrx.n! r'l N.rlr",rl lifr.x x
I I I l Str! ,rr', \||, r.r. RtxIn! t | :.
nr^vr'f, ( rrhrfr\lu nl)?lr I
llrr)|c I ,0 l) lln, .lb
'
I
rar ( rr rt tl(,L -ri(,1 NATURAL
IT.[,s()URCE!;
Septcnr[rr1 21. l99t
Mr, ll ussell For rcst
Scnior Ilnvironmcr)lnl l'lor rnct
'l'own crI Vail
?5 Suuth lrrontagc Ro.rd
Vail. ('O I1657
Rl:: Rr:virw of Ycntcr Conrprnics Rockflll Nlitig'rlion Altcrnalivc for Booth Fullr
Condominiunrs.
Dcnr Mr, I;orrr:sl:
At thc rcqucsr ol'rhe 'l'orvu of Vril. rhe ('ohrrado O,,'ological Srrrvcy has rr-vicwed lhc
rltcrnativc dcsign for nrcllirll prote'clion lor rhe Rooth !t:rlls ('ontlurninrunt colttplcx providcd by
Ycltter {'ontpanir.:s. Wc concrrr with !lr. Uarrct('s ir5)tc\srttcnt tltlt thcil wull will provide the silnlc
lcvtlofprgtr:ctiorrtotlrlloothC'r'cekCtlrtdrrntirriuntslsthctrrigirrrl AKSdusign. InccnainiLspcsls,
suclr.rs rhe uiigltivc b:rttcr of thc irnpnct sidr.'ot tltt'wnll uutl lhe spriry ltttcc ort the top of thc wall.
it is. irr tirut it bctlur, rllr)l'c collscrvltirc dr.'sign lt nDFei115 (hlt tlrc wall gcoutetries cunform (o the
nrilrirrrunr t!\uircnlEnis tlris ufficc t'clt wls ncc.ssitry lirr cll'e r:tivc roctfall rnitigirtiun ol'lhis site-
Llpgn rcvicw rrf thc dcsigrr of thr lrotection systL'rtr fa:r,crl trt this officc by Ycntcr Ctrmpanics,
wr, f r.rvr. tlrc snnrc rninor utrnccrrrs (rs stirL'd in rny original Novfrubcr Z(r,1997 rcview lcncr. Thosc
collqunls lnd rr.'ctlttlutc tttllr titrns irte listed bt'low:
Unlcss Ycntcr (lurrrparrics havc cxtcndrd thc ll foot wall to inrfrrrrvc thc two wcll's
ovgrllp, thc l2 fc'ot high rtrll shou[1 r'ct:rin it5 full hr'rght als it cxtcn(li l(t lhc scn'icc rt)ird.
l hc tiured rctluction at thc wall cnd cl'c:ltrrs thc ptrtcntial tbr lrotrrxling r(]uks trr possibly
hounc,.- ovcr the r.crtrrcc{ wa!l hcight poltiull, 1tld Iniss thc cnd ol'thC E frxrt wnll.
Thc Yr:ltcr llolss i6dictrE thirt tlrc grading ol'thr scrvicc ron(l is still plarrncd itr flont
gf rhc 8 teot high rvtrll Thlt is srill rctp ire<l rurlcss lltc wnll hcight is irrct'cascd, cs expluinr;d
irr thc. Ngvr.rrrbcr 20. 1997 re vicu lclts-r'.
n lockctl g:ue slroukl bc insurllcd t$ prcvcnt l.lnffuthor izc(l v!'lriclc acccss into thc
Clclrt-Out Z()l)c- nr lirntl (rl'lhc irnplCt wall.
a^-r-lrr F.r Nolc 7671 6*lo; FW ffi"-.U-,ffiT'WDdc
c,, CA f ffii f.uL,- a'
PIY'l|j I
6'r"3 43:4.4--F,.|r I
Attachmetrt D: Letter from Colorado Geological Survey
a
Environmental lmpact Report
Rockfall Mitigation for the Booth Falls Condominiums
November 7,1997
Prepared by: Russell Fonest
Environmental lmpact Report
Rockfall Mitigation for the Booth Falls Gondominiums
1. Purpose:
The purpose of this Environmental lmpact Report is to identify and determine the magnitude of
any environmental impacts that may have a significant impact. This EIR will also identify
mitigation strategies for reducing the impact of any significant environmental impacts. The EIR
is intended to ensure complete information on the environmental effects for the proposed project
is available to the Town Council, the Planning and Environmental Gommission, and the general
oublic.
2. Background and Need for Action
As mentioned in the cover memo, the area in and around the Booth Falls Townhomes have
been subject to rockfall incidents. When rocks fall, it is rapid and without warning which can
lead to serious injury and damage to property. In 1989 and 1990 after several rockfall incidents,
a rockfall berm was created and financed through a local improvement district. This berm was
not extended farther to the west to protect the Booth Falls Townhomes because of the proximity
oftheForestServiceWildernessAreaBoundary. At1'1 :20p.m. onMarch26, 1997 a20ftx8ft
piece of the rock face broke off the rock band above the Booth Falls Townhomes. Units 14, 15,
16 were impacted by several large rocks causing serious property damage.
Residents have been advised not to sleep on the first floor, due to the possible danger of
rockfall. The Colorado Geological Survey (CGS) has confirmed the threat to residents and to
property is real (See attachment 1). ln addition, the Town has been advised that insurance for
rockfall incidents has been revoked for some of the units at the Gondominiums. Mitioation is
required to reduce the risk of someone being hurt or even killed.
3. Proposed Action
The Colorado State Geological Survey prepared a report after the March 1997 rockfall incident
that describes the nature of the risk and recommend parameters for choosing and designing
rockfall mitigation to protect the Boothfalls Condominiums. The key design criteria was that a
"stout protection system was needed" that could withstand a force of 5,000,000 ft-lbs.
Registered Engineer, Suzzane Wohlgemuth of AKS Engineering, was retained by the
Homeowners Association. AKS Engineering, in collaboration with the Colorado Geological
Survey, are proposing the following (See attachment 2):
" Creation of a 360 ft long, 12 ft high, and 12 ft thick wall approximately 30 ft north of the
condominiums.
' Creation of a 60 ft. long, 8ft. high, and 10 ft. thick wall directly south of the road
accessing the adjacent water tank.
Both the CGS and AKS Engineering believe that this mitigation will stop up to a 7 foot in
diameter rock and 5,000,000 ft lbs. Figure 1 shows the proposed walls and the associated
landscaping.
f :\everyonevussvnemovockeir
Figure 1: Proposed Walls
4. Alternatives Considers
Various alternatives were considered in the report prepared by the Golorado Geological Survey
and by AKS Engineering. The following are alternatives that were considered and reasons why
they were not chosen as the preferred alternative:
Source Stabilization: This would involve securing rocks onto the face with a system of
cables and bolts. The benefit of this approach is no additional structures would be
required. However, it is very difficult to secure all the rocks and this type of a
mitigation can be very difficult to maintain. ln addition, the successful installation of
such a system can be very difficult.
Rock Fence: An alterative that is used in Glenwood Canyon is large cabled fences. lt
was concluded that such a fence could not be installed that would hold the size of
rocks that are possible to be released off the face above these townhomes.
Berm: A berm could be constructed that would be similarto the existing berm on
Tract A. However, the slope above the Townhomes is significantly steeper than the
existing berm. The width of disturbance of the existing berm is approximately 50 feet.
Creating a berm above the Townhomes was considered. However, it would create a
much larger scar (approximately 150 ft wide) than the existing berm due to the steep
f:bveryoneVussVremovockeir
slopes. Since this hillside is a critical winter habitat for bighorn sheep, a loss of
critical habitat would be expected if a berm were to be constructed. The use of
USFS Wilderness Area land may also be required if a berm were considered. Forest
Service regulations would prohibit the construction of a berm in a Wildemess Area.
5. Affected Environment
5.1 Land Use & Zonino
The Booth Falls Townhomes are located on land zoned Low Density Multi-Family. Tract A,
owned by the Town of Vail is zoned Natural Area Preservation District. Parcel F directly north of
the project area is zoned General Use. Parcel F is currently owned by the Forest Service, but
will be conveyed to the Town as part of a pending land exchange. USFS lands to the north of
Tract A are in the Eagles Nest Wilderness Area. The residential area to the south and east of
the Townhomes is zoned Two-Family Residential. There is currently a rockfall berm on Tract A.
The Town Attorney has concluded that mitigation for geological hazards is not regulated by
permifted and conditional uses for a zone district but is regulated under 18.69, Hazard
Regulations, under the Zoning Code (See Figure 2- Adjacent lands).
Figure 2: Adjacent Lands
5.1 Landscape:
The area that will be impacted, specifically the area within 120-1 3ffi north of the Booth Falls
Condominiums is predominantly moderately sloped hillside. Mature Aspens dominate the site.
Approximately 200 feet north of the condominiums the landscape transforms into a steep
(40o/o+\
hillside with a grassy/shrub vegetative mix. There are two cliff bands above the condominiums.
The highest cliff band is a limestone deposit, while the lower cliff band is sandstone.
5.2 Natural Resources:
The closest water body is Booth Creek, which is a perineal stream flowing out of the Eagles Nest
Wilderness Area. Booth Creek is approximately 400 yards to the west of the project site. Air
f :bveryonevussvnemovock6ir
and water resources in the area are excellent. The shrub and grass habitat above the Aspen
stand adjacent to the condominiums is critical winter habitat for bighorn sheep. This area has
been proposed for a controlled burn to improve vegetation for the bighorn sheep.
Soils on the project site are colluvial consisting of a silt and gravel mixture. Due to the steep
slopes above the project site, soil creep has been observed above the project site. Debris flow
in the Booth Creek area has been an issue, although the project area is not in a mapped debris
flow hazard area.
6. Environmental lmpacts and Proposed Mitigation:
6.1 Land Use lmpacts:
The proposed wall would be located primarily on the Boothfalls Homeowners Association
property. However, the western most end of the wall and the west end of the east wall would
extend onto Parcel F. There is currently an underground water tank and above ground water
treatment facility on the site. Given that the wall is required to protect the adjacent residential
area and that an existing berm exists on Tract A, a wall would not be a significant impact to
adjacent land uses except for a visual impact that is described below. The wall is located low
enough so that it is partially screened by the Townhomes and the mature Aspens in the area. lt
should also be acknowledged that the Booth Creek trailhead is within 400 feet of the proposed
walls. The wall will be visible from the trail. However, the view of the wall should be partially
screened by vegetation and topography.
6.1 Water Resources
No wetlands or other water bodies are directly adjacent to the project site. Booth Creek is to the
west of the proposed wall but should receive no direct impact from the construction of the wall.
There is the potential for sedimentation of drainage below the condominium site due to the soil
disturbance that will occur as the result of the construction of the wall. Approximately 1,753
cubic yards of soil will be excavated from the site and temporality stored on the site adjacent to
the road. All but approximately 300 cubic yards of this material will be used for fill for the wall.
Erosion and sedimentation impacts will be minimized by installing silt fences directly south of the
edge of disturbance for the project. In addition, silt fences will be created around any temporary
stock piles of dirt. Silt fences will be inspected and maintained on a daily basis. In addition,
"bumper bars" will be constructed to remove dirt off of heavy equipment as they exit the site.
6.2 Air Resources
Dust from exposed dirt will be possible. A water tank will be available on-site to reduce dust
problems from construction. ln addition, diesel fumes from heavy equipment will be visible.
Diesel emission should not create any significant health hazard but could be a short-term
annoyance while heavy machinery is warming up.
6.3 lmoacts to Flora and Fauna
No known endangered plant or animal species exist on the site. Approximately 70-80 mature
aspens will be removed as the result of this wall. A landscape mitigation plan will result in
revegetattion of impacted area with native grasses, 85 Aspens, 15 Colorado Spruce, 30
Junipers and a variety of shrubs.
The only potential for wildlife impacts is if a Bighorn Sheep were to be cornered on the south
f:\everyone\russvnemo\rockeir 5
side of the wall by a dog. This could endanger an individual sheep if this occurred. Based on
discussions with the Division of Wildlife, there should be no significant impact to the Bighorn
Sheep population, since they tend to inhabit the grassy/shrub area higher above the project site.
No other wildlife species should be impacted by this project.
6.4 Noise
Noise impacts will be primarily limited to the adjacent dwelling units. lt is possible to have 80+
DBA generated from the heavy equipment during construction of the wall. Construction would
be limited to the daylight hours. However, heavy equipment will be operated within 30 feet of
dwelling units which could create an annoyance during operation.
6.5 Visual lmpacts
A wall of this nature will have a visual impact. However, because the wall is close to the
buildings, the visual impact will be primary felt by the residents that are being served by the wall.
The wall will be visible from the North Frontage Road and from other residences in the
neighborhood (See Aftachment 3). Visual impacts are significantly mitigated by the close
proximity of the condominiums that will shield most of the wall. In addition, the landscaping plan
will also help soften the appearance of the wall. The color of the wall is proposed to be pewter
(gray). A description of the proposed block material is included with Aftachment 3. lt is
recommended that the Design Review Board review the color to ensure that it blends into the
landscape as much as possible.
f :bveryoneVussvnemoVockeir
Attachment I
Colorado Geological Survey Lefter & Report
f :bveryone\russvnemo\rockeir
Attachment 2
Report from AKS Engineering
f :bveryone\russvnemo\rockeir
Attachment 3
Visual Analysis and Description of Building Materials
tbveryonevussvnemo\rockeir
Attachment 4
Survey
f :bveryoneVussvnemo\rockeir