HomeMy WebLinkAboutVAIL VILLAGE FILING 8 BLOCK 1 LOT 1 LEGALI
o(nItfTYIEI/EunEt{t
Design Review Boad
ACTION FOR]II
Depaitment of Community Development
75 South Frontage Road, Vail. Colorado E1657
tel: 970.479.2139 fa* 970.479.2452
web: www.vailgo%com
Project Name: JONES TREE REMOVAI-
Prciect Description:
Participants:
OWNER JONES, EVAN
11013 CRIPPLEGATE RD
POTOMAC
MD 208s4
APPUCANT JEREMY BOWMAN
PrcjectAddrcss:
Legal Description:
Parcel Number:
Comments:
DRB Number: DR8080138
REMOVAL OF 3 DEAD LODGEPOLE PINE TREES DUE TO BEETTfKILL
0s/os/2008
05/05/2008 Phone: 970-{79-9990
PO BOX 1810
VAIL
co 81558
1031 EAGLES NEST CR VAIL Locationr
Lotr 1 Block 1 Subdivision: VAIL VILLAGE FIUNG 8
2101-092-0300-9
Motion By:
Second By:
Vote:
Conditions:
BOARD/STAFF ACnON
ACtiON: STAFFAPP
Date of Approval: 05/05/2008
Cond:8
(P[AN): No changes to these plans may be made wlthout the written consent of Town of
Vail staff and/or the appropriate rwiew committee(s).
Cond:0
(P|-AN): DRB approval does not constitute a permit for building. Please consult with
Town of Vail Building personnel prior to construction activities.
Cond: 201
(PLAN): DRB approval shall not become valid for 20 days following the date of
approval, pursuant to the Vail Toan Code, Chapter 12-3-3: APPEALS.
Cond: 202
(PLAN): Approval of this project shall lapse and become void one (1) year following
the date of final approval, unless a building permit is issued and construction is
commenced and is diligently pursued toward completion.
PIanneT: MCHEL FRIEDE DRB Fee Paid: $O.OO
I
(Contact Eagle Co. Assessor at 970-328-8640 for parcel no.)
Phone:
u\
$50 Plus $1.00 per square foot of total sign area.
No Fee
$550 For construction of a new building or demo/rebuild.
$300 For an addiUon where square footage is added to any residential or
commercial building (includes 250 additions & interior conversions).
$250 For minor changes to buildings and site improvements, such as,
re-roofing, painUng, window additions, landscaping, fences and
retaining walls, etc.
$20 For minor changes to buildings and site improvements, such as,
re.roofing, painting, window additions, landscaping, fences and
retaining wallt etc.
$20 For revis'rons to plans already appmved by Planning Staff or the
Design Rwiew Boarc.
No Fee
Minor Exterior Alterations
Application for Design Review
Department of Community Development
75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colondo 81657
tel: 970.479.2128 fax: 970.479.2452
web: www,vailgov.com
General Information:
All projects requiring design review must receive approval prior to submitting a building permit application, Please
refer to the submittal requirements for the particular approval that is requested. An application for Design Rs/iew
cannot be accepted until all required information is received by the Community Development Department. The
project may also need to be reviewed by the Town Council and/or the Planning and Environmental Commission.
Design review approval lapses unless a building permit is issued and construction commences ryathin
one year of the approval.
Descripuon of the Request:
Location of the Proposat: rot: I elocr<: I Subdivision:
Physical Address:
Ttot o a
Zoning:
Name(s) of Owner(s):
Address:
Owner(s) Signature(s):
Address:
Type of Review and Fee:
tr Signs
E Conceofual Review
D New ConstructionD Addition
E Minor Alterauon
(multi-family/commercial)
n Minor Alteration
(single-fam ily/d uplex)
D Changes to Approved Plans
tr Separation Request
Name of Applicant:
IAo:toH' -$TLf).ho
NO
u)z
JFrC
e.lo\
CA
F\
>1
E
z
zH
u,F
o
IuF
thoo?zo
Fo-
LrJv
uJ
co
oF
F
=tuld
l!o
o-oo
I
IJJFoz
u)
z
(A
FlFl
(n
LI
z
(.'9zz
coo
=z=t=
o-- I
F
cul
lto
UJoz
loo
oF
CE
9Ec
JFlU:h=3Eo- uJ>o-O|!oohrrxo-x>fiFI
IL
nJ
@
F
Eo
Eq
oo
eE
.E
t
E
E
8
o
t\o
to!
l!
E
=&
lrJ
o-zIF(J
EFazo()
.-i5
=F=B;3
ffirn
an
IJJ
uJlt
L
=(t
luI
dlorr1
/-s-r8 -s-et?b I
.l
Rr
dlE*l
ts<lEl
I
I
glrc t-
ffrP
E;Hu'2
,-: l3J16i-j.<
" 19
l-t
lo
I
I
I
I
I
I
t_.,,
r(J
IEio
,zr6
o\
C-l
E
vE]z
ts
.J)
z
ltJ
UJ
=
oF
GFz
N.\
\c\
^\!Y
{
HE
A
E,
z
H
H
&
tr{
rrltrlE
F(
tsHE
It
F.{
XM
B
E
E
FfFl
ct)
BgltE
.;c)ai .c
8:
-$5.9'aa't o.
E(5.oc
aepF
FEo*.so
C, at!,od)NO
-o$cct
E!1FO
eb-=oo
oDcc(!
E€oo8o(ooD
o.S
?i'3rd)!-oc
f€
of
-E
^d)99o-ocLc(!t'
.aO.'tdE
ld: g.ro; l!j'i9|/l
Jg8E
;.E': g
iEE:.F'= E
:€ ug
.ef ii:€Pii 'S =lc 9 6
lEsE
E E-s.{*OO
rEis
iF! f).Y - (oio-(u 0.
sEE
oP OE*:
Et;:EEE
O(!:
EE E- o.i:
6 6.s-c=0)
s€;s:];6>
9 (sa
.Y=Esiis.if e
9rEct
eEg
-o(t
F\o\
.4
.t)Iu
UJt!
E
=
UJIL
F
FNO[Vn]VA
Flxl
EIH It&l= SlHld> E >lx lzrElFllH= - -ts| .lS
=: IElgls
" i:J 1.2:i; lE
Xe IX5 5 bat:q s gael?
;ootrol6 6 EH|E
8 I ExlE
h 5 ;Elsr t ;HIHi <li 6r'i lr'.
1
l!
uJc
z
Eo
X)<
z
E
r.lJ
zl
.. >1
uJ
uJ
uJzo
tr
uJ(L
z
E
2o
F
Jl
z
Fz,.
94
.J 'rdo3tr
oz
E
=e
UJo-
Hco
Fl
FlH
FlH
oz
lJ-
d
aa
H
&
ah
&(,
ui
=z
co
'lol
LulEl
JI
<l>l
ttlol
zl
il
I
I
I
Etr
EF
=ltrl
Orrn
Or
I
Or|.\\t.
E1Fl
EH
FfH
Eo
Hu,
14z
u,
rd
cno
q>
UJ
oos.J
=
C!
.s
Io\\f
o,\
i
dH
Eo
@
o.l
ctr
N
o
F{
ql
Eoo
=
zrt]
H
M
14ts
ah
=q
tr
I
I
I
olzl.ilr
5+
1e
;l'
PI
z
HH
ts(nzo
C)
FF
&
FI
Jl
<l>l
tu
:l}IolFI
d i,
!J
L'Z
E
<F
uJ<zEUJF
oo
JG<oOF
trsf?F-tz
2"?
=Ed3o
"E-
\
o
=
ts
=E
L|Jo-
rr
o
r'l
o
o
r-.1 tn
uJ
u.llJ-
==
TJJo-
"-''6/t/L ,rr(
96Lbb -o do 6l
CA
<
'-{
FFlDb
zz
E
Fl
Ir1h
V
Ei
$J
o
o
l!lt
z
J
llJ
F
al,z
=
zz
in
uJFoz
oz
J
o
4
zz
co,
t'9!c'
,tE
oooE
-(go,Y'6E';o.
.oc
"'v,o
9F
FE
CD-.5ocatooNO
-urEcc
BTFq.
cb'!5oo
PF
E€oo3or! oD
or .S
=1'+.=gd
att c,
f€
Ef
=Eo9q9-cLooc6t;
t/, .9
.[E
E tiE'=o(,'*iu;ocE()6
€E HF'5 Eo xTtc-oef:
:EPg >=c96'- o. -c
EEE
E EE,FoO
i:o!os!q! iE=!o-o o_sEio+. o-Ef;e
(E-,-
E E.EO6:
EEE
6 0'-G; O
t,*:
Eal
9 6E
J=E3ii sBfe9Eo
eEg
-o(t
o\
.ir
fi
.+
or
+
rn
F.
4
\t
co
&
E
E
uJ
o-oz6
@
I()
uJ
oz
o-
Fc)
UJ
uJ
z
=
J
oz
u,
=
UJ
UJl!z
tr
uJe()
UJE
@
=g
UJ
z9
UJo
F6
o-
llJ
z
uJ
x
qtof,
at[!ulIIt
EE
UJo-
-t
FoF
(,z
!
@
()
F
UJJ
uJ
('z
t
JG
oz
o
uJ
=
H
H
NOIIVN]vA
F
tt
FN
F
zts
E
tl
F
z
c)
-
3Z zrLo ootr ^ 62; B
=Foooa5b IQzXtr <(oq iH6 E-H 2'. : uriot(,
E>o.
-Ed)3uS
=cool
xH
z
U)z
CA
.J)
fr1
CJ
F1&
&F]tsa4t
zt-l
tn
&
r{
F{Ht'{
z9F
l!
co
UJ
F
o
=UJ
J
z9tr
>{{
z
E
UJFJ
;
uJz
Eztrz9ea<oo<
=P9dUo<z
tz,
9z
3EOI
>(x X X
F)
Fa
z
a
d]
zvE
IL
uto
Jl<l
FI
zl
zl
.. >l
uJ
u.tulz
tr
UJ
J
zo
Eoo
uJl
o!)
UJzY
iF
2o
F
J
oz
I&
-
olr)
LO|r)O
Nc'\o\
o\N
Irlv
-
z
zH
ItF
o
g
{
mz
FJ
AlrJFooo?zo
Fo-
UJY
IIJo
oF
F
=cc
UJ
o-
t!o
o-oo
I
ulFoz
H!!
z
rJ)
'-f
F{(r)
ifi
2?1_': a\ r-
=x(Jdd=
Fpp
E
=
UJ
bEE
E<cLl€EE9!a
EO
E itE FE: >o-I o r.r-E oo9 \urE Xo-E ;'au{o-!i
uJo
z
.r9ze
dro
=z
dts
E
=Elrlo-zIF(J
DEj-,
zo(J
Ftnxr t_r
I
I
I
I
>l
JI
<l>lttlol
El c
Pl r'
I
I
I
.lo|
f;=
il:
blx
zl
FI
t
J
I
,l
flln
3|$
Fq
I
F{
\o
Io\.if
o\
IFrlrlF\IFl-l
I
cil
=lOI
uJl
5l
:lol
zl
3lolFI
H€
E]
H
dH
Fft{
oEtc&
u)
E
ti,i
=z
dt
o\Inoo\
I
O'lN.it
i
Fl
E
ct)
r'1
F1
(tl
an
TIJ
o
J
=
(n
zHtl
UJ
z
E ir
=+E
Oz
z
co
=
J
F()
UJ
=I
E
-rO<FG(JuJ<zE
LU I--o
C)
oz
F
=t
uJo
ra
U>
uJ
UJl!
E
=E
IJJ
,ff'),^ ts66rn
c{qr
O't
N
t47
h
14
N
Fl
H
rJ)z
.r trl<z6Zi:- <
OA
2o6zJ
$r
uJF
o
Eo
az
o
zz
t!
z
z
6
=l
d)
.6
ozz
z3
llJ'r
F
z
q)
-9.o
=
',F
o)
U)oo
&
t
o
b
c(!
oE'
o
o)c!
fdl
E
=
l
-io
'.o)
q)
o)
<toEo
oo
v,
€
o)
N
-o,
(J()o
o
at)
6
o
'(u
ox('
'= O) 4l*is
T8E
Fe3E! 99Y:Flc
o(gS
EaS- 6.o
=EFd'f =c96
33t_'; >,
E Ea
=:E*OO
cc-.:ee
tq: c.Y- 6o-(' o-*tx
.r> r O-E9o-(6CE6:o!:
o)(!=ifE!:
=
-eC6 0'-
- B-c
'hO!-E,F s
_E=;iE>.o(E=
-r=E3i I,it s9E or6EEr-ocD
(
^"a
Y)A'r,)u,/)
/,
'11/,/
t),
7)
,A
O^
ur,,@
F
uJ
z
o)
x
z
trF
tu
uJ
/)
z
=f
n
/
J
z
LU
=
lr,lullrz
tr
E
E
o
3g
tllEz
6
L].l
f-6
ocl
2
ul
()
X
F
uJ:
<n
uJl!u-
L
=
IJJ(L
F
(9zo
=
to
C)e
o
uJ
lrl
z6
=f
o-
J
a
uJ
=
NO[VnlVA
tr
zF
FC
z
zF&
FB
F
2
Fl
Ft
F
@zH
Y
3
z
tr
E
uJo
g.
uJztll
--rt,
=c0N
zz
tr-6xfE9o'u, o1>9(JQZl!<oo-
E!?i5;tri
>c
zH
HB
zHHrnH}{
rt1
F]F{<(-)
Fl
T4M
oH
2
tr
c
UJ
F
G
z
Eoo
R!tz
tr
E
llJ
3
urz
r$
EI
oz
l
l
t:z
9z
-.1 TdoBtrOI
Lzlz
F-
o
o(-)
X X x X
Fl
FU'
(Jz
F
Jo
oz
rl
-l:l
zl
. >l
u,lo
llJ
UJz
<D
tr
t
UJ
J
z
Eoo
Irlu{loYlYd
z
F
J:)oz
I-sl
FI
Lr)I
u) Oleoldl
v;
IIJF
@o
-zo
FL
IIJY
IJJ
d)
O e.rForr9
i'ii -l
=F{lJ-
t! trloE>E
o4()e
tzrt{
t
uJ
IL
IJJ
z
oo
oF
I
IL
-1 Fh>5(r(LuJ>oOu-oo\ r-ux(L:>ut-l!I
qJ
@oF
o
Eclo
a,
c,!
.:
r
E
Eol,
o
tro
E
o
CLott
LC
---I||!
E
=Elrl
o-z9F
C)f
E.Fazo
C)
.t !JoEz6
ftL J
z.-o9i-zz
rDO
=zJOLu-
fl Tt
--i5\J\J=
=eeo!:-
6E=
=.1olull
:l
al>l
t!lol
fl
ol
IJJIql
<l>l
tl-lol
fl
I
I
I
I
.l
?l('t
ull
:l
al>l
tI-lol
il sol ulFI F
zl
cil
uJl
5l
al>l
6l
zl
3l
sl
IrlrlFlF\l
'-r I
I
dl
=.1$l-
--.rl tn
<tTlt3"l c.)
FI
IA
H
&
U)
at)
I:lc
=d
tr
Ht r|(,t oltll orztllo\cal Nql -f
=l E-l
'{l<Y) |ol-l
I
n '-1
Hg
J>-<F
=o
u)
&
u;
=z
o-l
_l
HI-l
14l(rl
sl
:l
z
IL
tataII
=E9s9?>E
]F!zrJ-O
O
c
F
zoo
z
.r
(J
UJ
=
E ir
uJ
\JZ
oF
zo
C)
<F
r!<zE
u.r Ftrzo
rr D{l rrLl lxl L-,.1
331 ,FE1 JUL.-eA-r 92
memo6al
ffin JUL 2 01992
peak elevatlon of the ne$qtre reEults of that survey
Juty 2O, 1992
Ifr. Bobp.o. Box 1001VaLI, CO 818
Via Telefax:
Re; Lrot 1, B
ProJect
Dear Ur. B
Asradditlon atare as foll
BaEie of
referenced location.
Post fl" brand fax
s
4?6-0373
oek 1r vatl village Filing No. Io. 92393c
ted we Eurveyed the
Peak eI tion
Ground e evatl.on
If you any
below pealt
further questlons,
elevation - UIt32 fnv. el.evation
Riu
I t 6t_6.97
I, 536.77
8 r 66tl .07 i.
8,634.23
ts- , ,n. E4 p: 8,
DF: j lc
please call.
Fehringer,P.E. r P.L.S.
No,978 ' Avon, Coloraclo81620 . 94{15072 Denver893-1531
Vance Street ' Lakewood, Colorado 80215 . Phone: 2324158
Inter
t
I'azc/ -
fu/e.5,(q//1.
#/. qa
Phone Y--
Project Application
Proiect Name:
Project Descriplion:
Contact Person and
fufra,
A$ ftz*m:AaOwner, Address and Phone:)I
/o_r/ Eaaluj //rs.
Architect, Address and Phone:
477- 7a5q
Legaf Descriptio n,tot /Block , zon" P/s
Com ments:
Design Review Board
o^" /*'
Motion by:
Seconded bv:
APPROVAT DISAPPROVAL
Summary:
Stafi Approval
IlF
)oa
:r- i.-'E
o
,l 1
{
jF
il
$
dl.
it
-+'
i$
J I,rl$iIlfF
l
I
I
I
$
t
N
'rF.L{F
)oV)
)
)
\
0
t
{
J
t
I
+
-{ts
t
-qf
. :t.1 ,
{
rL
=r
.g
fi
I
L
t
-s
)
{
{rs,i
$i
$
$
$Itf i1
$]}
dl.
$t
:+
v'v,vn<-
l>( hr, tJ,1//2,*t
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SU&JECT:
MEMORANDUM
Planning and Environmental Commlssion
Gommunity Development Dspanment
/rY q! 4,,Eft./,
t"c
Yw - 1J'20
June 22, 1992
A request for setback variancss for the Grubbs Residsnce, located within he
Primary/Secondary zone distric{ at 1031 Eagle's Nest Clrcle/Lot 1, Block 1, Vail
Village Eighth Filing.
Applicant: G & S PartnershipPlannsr: JillKammerer
BACKGROUND
On March 23, 1992, the PEC approved rear, east side and west side setback
variances for an existing single fami[ residence located at 1031 Eagle's Nest Circle.
These setback variances were requested in order to allow the proposed redevelopment
ol an existing residence to occur. Under this previous application, the interior ot the
existing single family residence was to be totally remodeled, an additional 288 square
feet of GRFA was to be added to the resktence, the exisfing flat roof was lo be
changed to a sloped roof and a number of cosmetic exterior facade cfianges were
proposed. The additional2SS sq. ft. of GRFA was proposed to be located in a new
3rd floor on the eastem end of the sxisting struc'ture. Chapter l8.7l-Additional Gross
Residential Floor Area (250 Ordinance') was proposed to be utilized in order to allow
this addition to be constructed. Also, under the previous redevelopment proPosal, site
covsrage was proposed to be reduced by 91 square feet.
DESCRIPTION OF THE SETBACK VARIANCES REOUESTED
The applicant now proposes to witMraw he previously submitted and approved
application and to submit a new application. Under the revised application, the
tootprint ol he existing building will remain unchanged and no addilional GRFA will be
added to the residence. However, in removing an existing trash/storage enclosure
which is located to the west of the existing residence, the GRFA will be reduced by 53
squars feet. Therefore, the additional gross residential floor area chapter of fie code
will not be employed. However, new exterior materials will be applied to the facade of
the building and the existing flat roof will be changed to a sloping roof. lt is this
proposed sloping roof which necessitates the request for rear, west side and east side
setback variances. Also under his proposal, site coverage will be reduced by 66
square feet.
' A. Rear Setback Varlance (Nonh)
The appllcant proposes to construct a sloped rool over the existing flat roof.
The required rear setback In his zone district ls 15 feet. The existing building
encroaches 6 fest lnto the requlred rear setback. Under thls orooosal. the roof
structure will encroach 7 feet inlo the reoulred l$foot setback. resultino in an 8
foot rear setback.
B. East Slde Setback Varlanca
The required side seback for this zone district is 15 feet. The existing slruc{urs
encroaches into the sicle setback 5 bet, therefore, fre resulling east side
setback ls 10 feet Under he proposed application, he roof structrre will
encroach 2 feet€ inches into the required east side setback Therefore. a 2
foot-6 inch setback variance is reouired to allow the roof to ba constructed.
resultino in a 12 foot 6 ingh east side setback
C. west Slde Setback
As previously stated, the side setback requirement for the zone district is 15
feet. The existing sbucture encroaches 4.5 feet into the west side setback.
Also encroaching into this setback is a trash/storage enclosure which the
applicant proposes lo remove. The traslr/storage enclosure cunently
encroaches 10 leet into the west side setback. The proposed sloped roof
addition will extend into the required skle sebaclq herefore, the applicant must
obtain a west side sstback variance. The proposed roof additlon will encroach
to a lessor extent then does the existing trash/storage enclosure. However. the
roof addition will encroach 7 feet into the reouired 15 west slde setback
resultino in an I loot west slde setback.
ilt. HrsToRY
The residence was constructed in June of 1976. At the time the residoncs was construcled,
the required side and rear selbacks were 12 teot€ inches. PEC approval was obtained to
allow the slrucrture to encroach 2 feet-6 inches lnto he required west side and rear (norh)
setbacks resulting in lO-foot setbacks from the north and west property lines.
ln general, the staff recommended approval of the 1976 variance as the proposalwould not
impact adjacent structures, and wouts also respect visw conidors. lt was also felt the location
of surrounding residences and he small lot size (9,322 sq. ft.) created a situation that
wananted the variances.
In May of 1983, the PEC approved site coverage and east side setback variance requesb in
order to allow he construction ot a 120 sq. ft. bedroom addition east ot the existing residence
which encroached 5 te€t into the required east side setback. At the time this east side
setback was granted, requked side and rear setbacks were 15 feet. Therefore, the resulting
eastern side setback was 10 feet. Under this approval, site coverage was exceeded by 178
sq. ft.
In 198if, even though staff recognized there were special drcumstiances associated with the
lot, lt was the staff's bgliet thsre wers olher locations whlch woukl allow for the construction of
the bedroom wihin, or al least closer to, $e required setbacks and recommerxded denial of
the requested oast side setback variance. The PEC approved the request with tryo members
vofrng 4alnst the variance.
ln July of 1986, the PEC approwd rear and west sid€ setback variances and a site ooverage
variance request In order to allow the construction of a living room ddition whidt encroacfied
5 feet lnto the required 15 foot rear setback and a 2nd floor cantilevered bedroom addition
whlch encroached 1.5 foot into the required 15 bot west slde setback. Under the 1986
approval, maximum allowable site coverage was exceoded by 366 sq. fL
Based on the 1992 lmprovement Location Certiflcate which has been subrnltted with the
previous application, the 1986 living room addition was constructed per the approved plans.
However, as construc'ted the living room addition encroaches 2 feet into the eastem side
setback.
The final setback encroachmenb which need to be discussed are an existing 6 foot-6 inch
rear setback bay window encroachment and west side trash/storage enclosures encroachment
of 10 feet. The Town does not have any records regarding the review or approval of either of
lhess additions.
ilr. zoNrNG coN$rpERATroNS
Zoning: Primary/Secondary
Site Area: 0.2140 acres8,322 sq. ft.
GRFA Allowed: 3,006 sq. ft. (lndudes 250 Ordinance)Existing: 2,700 sq. ft.
Proposed: 2,647 sq. ft.
Decrease Under This Proposal: 53 sq. ft.
Site coverage (20% ol site area)Allowed: 1,864 sq. ft.Existing: 2,283 sq. ft.
Proposed: 2,217 q. ft.
Decreass Under his Proposal: 66 sq. ft.
Height
Allowed: 33 ft.
Proposed: 30 tt.
o
Setbacks
Front
Required: 20 feet
Existing: 49 feet
Proposed: 49 feet
'West Skle
Required: 15 feet
Existing: 5 t6et
Proposed: 8leet
'East Side
Required: 15 feet
Existing: 10 feet
Proposed: 10 feet
'Flgar
Fequired: 15 feet
Exlsting: 9 feet
Proposed: I leet
Area ol requested setback variances
IV. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
Upon review ol Criteria and Findings, Section 18.62.060 of the Vail Municipal Code, he
Gommunity Developmenl rscommends approval ol the rsguested rear, east and west sHe
seback variancss, based on the following tactors:
A. Consideration of Factors:
1. The relatlonshlp of the |equesbd varlance to other exlstlng or
potentlal uses or slructul"s In lhe vlclnlty.
a. Rear setback variance:
lmmediately north of and adjacent to ths rsar setback lines, is a utility
easement whicfr is also used to provHe pedestrian and golf cart access
to he golf course. The requested rsar setback variance if approved
would not adversely atfect the use or enjoyment of the adjacent
properties. When originally construcled, the PEC granted the necessary
approvals to allow lhe structure to encroacfi 5 leet into the required 15
foot setback, resulting in a 10 foot setback. As a result ot the
@nstruction of a bay window the existing structure cunently encroaches
2.
6feetintotherequired15footsetback.Theextenttowhichthe
building facade encroaches into tre setback will remain unchanged
under f,ris proposal. However, through the construction of the sloped
roof, th€ root witt encroach into the required 15 loot setback. The extent
ol tre roof encroachment will be 7 feet, resulting in the I foot soback.
staff belleves the roof encroachment wlll have no negative impact on
adiacsnt Properties.
b. East side seback:
The existing structure cunendy encroaches 10 tset into ths requlred 15-
foot east side seback. As a iesult of constructing the new roof, the roof
wlll encroach 2 feet-6 Inches Into the requlred 15-loot east side setback.
The extent ol this roof encroachment is less tren the extent of the
existing structure's encroachment into ths setback. staff believes this 2
foot-6 inch encroachment into the eastem side setback, to allow lor the
construction of the roof, will not negatively impact adjacent properties'
c. lflest sidg.:
Under this redevelopment proposal the amount of encroachment into he
west side setback would be decreased trrough the removal of the
trash/storage enclosure. However, the proposed sloping roof would
extend into the required west side sehack. The existing structure
currently encroaches 10 feet into the required 15-loot side setback. As
a resuliof the redevelopm€nt proposed, the structure would encroach
no further into the required 1s-foot setback. However, the proposed roof
would encroach 7 feei into the required 15-foot setback resulting in an 8
foot west side setback. staff believes the proposed encroachment will
have no negative impact on adjacent properties.
The degree to whlch rellef from the strlct and llteral lnterpretatlon and
enforcehent of a speclfled regulatlon ls neceesary to achleve- - .
compatlblllty and uhfformlty of treatment among sltes In,the vlclnlty or to
obtain tne oblectlves of tltle wlthout grant of speclal prlvllege'
a. Rear setback Variance: under this development proposal the applicant
is dedeasing the amount of site coverage by 66 square feet', Any
addition to the north, east or west would necessitate approval ol a
sehack variance. For this proposal, statf believes that it is reasonable
to consider the existing resldence's location in the east, west and rear
setbacl(s to b€ a practical difficulty wananting a rear selback.variance
for the roof overhang. lt is staff's opinion that the original rationale for
the granting ol fre s-etback variances is reasonable and still pertains to
tne proposat being reviewed, and is nol a grant of special privilege to
coniinu-e tre seback encroachmenb. A degree of relief from the sttict
and literal interpretation ot the code is appropriate and has been granted
to other property owners with similar circumstiances'
. b. East Side Setcac*: Staff believes lt is reasonable to conskler the
existing residsnce's location of he seback to be a practical difficulty
wananting an sast side setback variance.
c. West Side Setback Variance: As previously stated under the proposad
development, tie apflicant will be decreaslng the amount of
encroachment into the west side setback. The amount of encroachment
Into the wsst skle setback under this proposalwould be decreased from
10leet to 7 feet.
Statf believes that construction of the sloplng roof wlll lmprove the general appoarance
of he property. The degree of relief from he stict and literal Interpretiation ol the code
ls appropriate.
3. The effect of the requested varlance on llght and alr, dlstrlbutlon of
populatlon, tEnsportatlon and trafllc facllltles, publlc l*llltles and
utllltles, and publlc safety.
With the exception of the addition requiring the transplanting of an existing large
aspen tree, the proposed variances wlll have no major lmpact on these
considerations. The applicant has agreed to relocate the existing trse to the
southeast comer of the site. ln addition to the transplanting of this aspen, he
applicant will add 4 additional aspen to this same area.
The previous variance approvals were based on the facl that the variances
maintained separation between adjacent houses and also respected their views.
Stafl believes that this proposal will have no impacts on the lactorc above.
B. The Plannino and EnvironmentalCommission shall make the lollowino findinos before
orantino a varian@:
1. That the granting ot th€ variance will not consttute a grant ol special
privilege inconsistent wih the limitations on other properties classified in
the same district.
2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety or welfaro, or materially injudous to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
3. That the variance is wananted lor one or more of the following rgasons:
a. The strict literal interpretiation or enforcement ol the specified
regulation would result in practical difliculty or unneosssary
physical hardship inconsistsnt wih the objectives of tris title.
b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstiances or
conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not
apply generally to other properties in the same zone.
The strlct lnterpretation or enforcement of he spedfied regulation
would deprive the apflicant ol prlvileges enjoyed by the owners
of oher propenies in the same distict'
V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Based on Findlngs 1, 2, 3 (a thru c) the Community Development Departmsnt stalf
recommends approval of the requeited east and west side seback variancss and
approval ol fis rear setback varlance. Statf believes the setback varlances are
wananted because of the unusual (small) lot size and the location of the exlsting
structure in the setbacks. The setback variances do not greatly increase the bulk of
the bu1ding or negatively impact the adlacent properties. The proposal will not be a
grant of special privilege as inis type of interprstation has been used with other
properties.
please note, under Section 18.62.080 of the Town of Vail Zoning Code, this approval shall
lapse il construction is not commenced within 2 years of the date of issuance and diligently
pursued to completion.
clFdrmmoabtutrb-2
,
I
I
I
I
I_J
It
#
a
li
fi
#
fij
!'-!---.__,,rrrts.._t
$
iti
I\-r
T
a
lI
.ll iI
--+------__ \
It
\
---..-\
, '-a
\
I
ti
It
t
FfI
ii rii
1
7li
It
ttIt
Jit
(
{
I
t
+
;I
tI
iii
i
i
I
i
I
I
It
ii
ti
$
It
$il:
iIil
t,/
lrt'
l.t
l,
$ll5ri{
t
tt
ritt
I
I
I
^.1i t
iJ: r Iiiri I Ir[]r + I
tit':
i\
i
!
l\
$
+a
\l.\qt *
t
R'\
\
\).t-
hi<i!Jl
(
_tIII
I
II
a'
irit
I
.l
$it
I iliiiliii i
il
i
0
I
I
$
HO\40AN o,c cop
5Flo()oIrl ()v&H6Jfr oFr}rPi(J=SrnrtlFINE
t
$s
$E
chap
E 6l
FloFl F-H\OEAApox
Fl&H
rlZ2
&
=oF-]H!EFfanH
FfF.FHNO
= F. (rt
'%?4:1
Es
$5
+ €/u'o ,bQ '-i,nart, tr* ?*', f*f-Z- "
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTTCE lS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of
Vait will hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 18.66.060 of the Municipal Code of
the Town of Vail on June 22.1992, at 2:00 p.m. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building.
Consideration of:
1. A request lo extend for 2 years the September 9, 1991 front setback variance approval
for the Krediet residence located at 224 Forest Road, Lot 11-A, Block 7, Vail Village
First Filing.
Applicant: John KredietPlanner: Jill Kammerer
2. A request to extend lor 2years the June 10, 1991 sile coverage variance approval for
the Stanley residence located at 1816 Sunburst Drive, Lot 1, Vail Valley 3rd Filing, a
Resubdivision ol part of Sunburst.
Applicant: Jack StanleyPlanner: Jill Kammerer
3. A request lor a minor subdivision for Lot 5, Block 2, Bighorn First, 3916 Lupine Drive.
Applicant: Marty Abel, President of Sable Lupine Partners, Ltd.
Planner: Mike Mollica
4. A request for a minor subdivision lor Lot +, ilOge at Vail, 1452 Ridge Lane.
Applicant: Frank McKibbenPlanner: Jill Kammerer
5. A request for a conditional use permit for a bed and breakfast located in the
primary/secondary zone district at 4768 Meadow Drive, Lot 1, Block 7, Bighorn
Subdivision Sth Addition.
Applicant: Wolfram KlawriterPlanner: Shelly Mello
6. A request for setback variances for the Grubbs Residence, 1031 Eagle's Nest
Circle/Lot 1, Block 1, Vail Village 8th Filing.
Applicant: G&S Partnership
Planner: JillKammerer
7. A request to amerd Chapter 18.71 - Additional Gross Residential Floor Area, of the
Municipal Code relating to Employee Housing Units.
Applicant: Town of VailPlanner: JillKammerer
The applications and information about the proposals are avallable for public review in the
Community Development Department office.
Town of Vail
Community Development Department
Published in the VailTrailon June 5, 1992
Project Application
'ry'trnhaza)
=c nr/;tkr/
-/, /-^s61s J/ (r// L
Project Name:
Project Description:
Contact Person and
owner, Address and Phone: N' /"'r//":6ralls 4 3 /ro.r
atocx /,r.n /at/ /i//ri{o 6U ,zon" P/(
------;- \r7'n"r I /ttts3). / ./
Legal DFscription: Lot
/a3/ /fuCzj /l/cs/ Lrn',/o lhtrru 47/ - "7oE7
\J
Architecr,Addressandphone: s/tul) .ranrl ,?rc/ert .4/,4 , lo f ' s238, t/aJ,
Com ments:
ztbtvsszt/ - Under haot , r7,A< r.t,
Motion by:
Seconded by:
ft/a7tnill
APPROVAL
I rtquzr,
a(.4r.
Design Review Boa
z+ ru3f';6r,n
4 a,t/ma'4ut
o"rc €/6/42
DISAPPFOVAL
httpz rl /- unota
/ ajl
Summary:
Town Planner E Staff Approval
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Staff will be reviewing a
Design Review Board application on April 15, 1992 in the Town of
Vail- Municipal Building.
Consideration of:
1. A request for an additional 250 square feet of Gross
Resident.ial Floor Area for the Grubbs Residence located
at 1031 Eagle's Nest Circle. Lot !t Block Lt Vail
Village lSth Filing.
Applicant: H. Lindley Grubbs
The applications and j-nformation about the proposals are avail"able
in the zoning administratort s office during regular office hours
for public inspection.
TOI{N OF VAIL
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Published in the VaiL Trail on March 27, L992.
:\,-\ \. \,\N\b\\ 3 \\\ .
\,
.)":
\\.\ bt-r-:N.ts=
\\ '\\\,{. .__\ \\
\\
olr{^il,lf,"r.""I
.!
I
SITE VISITS
1:00 p.n.
DESIGN RE\TTEII BO]ARD IGENDA
ePRrL 15, L992
3:00 P.M.
Mindlia Residence - 800 Potato Patcb Drive.
Lionsbead ldall - Sundial Plaza.Bailey Ragidence - 193 B€aver Dan Road.Ski uuser[ pocket park - Irocated at tbe nortbrestintersection of Vail Road and w€st Meadow Drive.Vail Gateray Plaza - 12 Soutb Frontage Road.Vail Villag€ IDD Plaza - 100 Soutb Frontage Road.
Snitb Reeidence - 950 Sainay Drive.
Bossow/Acuff Rssidence - 3235 thtsos Rancb Road.Xaiser/Ball Residenc€ - {916 ,Iuniper Lane.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
AGENDA
1.
z.
Ski Museum pocket park - Conceptual reviewi located MM
at the northwest intersection of Vail Road and wesl
Meadow Drive.MOTION: SECOND: VOTE:
Conceptual - no vote taken.
Lionshead MaII - Sundial Plaza.
Located west of the Lifthouse Lodge.
MOTION: George Lamb SECOND: Diana DonovanVOTE: 3-0
JKlKP
Approved. Applicant agreed to investigate grouting
flagstone.
The Club - New front entry door. MM
304 Bridge Street/Red Lion Building.
MOTION: George Lamb 1 SnCOnp: Sherry Dorward
VOTE: 4-0
Consent approved.
Mindfin Residence - Addition to primary unit of JK,/AKexisting prinary,/secondary residence. 800 Potato
Patch Drive,/Lot ?A, Block 1, Vail Potato Patch.
MOTION: George Lamlc SECOND: Ned Gwathmey
VOTE: 3-1
Approved with conditions. Diana Donovan Opposed.
I
T5. Grubbs Residence - 250 Addition and exterior JKIAK rmodifications to existing single fanily residence.1031 Eaglers Nest Circlellot 1, Block 1, vait Vi1lage1st.MOTION: SECOND: VOTE:
TABI.ED TO IIAY 6!8 UEEBING.
6. B11ley Residence - New Single Family. JK/AK193 Beaver Dam Road/Lot 38, Block S, vaif Village3rd Filing.
MOTION: George Lamb SECOND: Sherry DorwardVOTE: 4-0
Approved with conditions.
7. Smith Residence - New Duplex. AK950 Fairway Drive,/Lot 5, Vail Village 1Oth FiIingMOTION: SECoND: VoTE:
Conceptual Rsvier - no vote taken.
8. Hutchinson - New primary with restricted 2nd unit. SM2995 Basingdare Road/Lot 15, Block 6, vail rntermountain.MOTION: George Larnb SECOND: Sherry DorwardVOTE: 4-0
Approved with conditions.
9. Bossow,/Acuff Residence - Bedroon/Bathroom JKISMAddition. 3235 Katsos Ranch Road/Lot 5, Block 1,Vail Village 12th.
MOTION: George Lamb SECOND: Sherry DorwardVOTE: 4-0
Consent approved.
10. Kaiser/Harl Re-sidence.- carport addition to existing sMprimary/secondary residence. 49L6 Juniper Lane,/Loi 5,Block B, Bighorn 5th Filing.MOTION: SECOND: VOTE:
TABI.,ED TO T'IY 6TE MEETTNG.
11. Frein Residence - Revision to driveway configuration, sMlandscaping and elevation changes. - j9g pbtato patchDrive/Lot 8, Vail potato patch.
MOTfON: George Lamb SECOND: Sherry DorwardVOTE: 4-0
Approved as submitted.
I
12. Vail Gateway Plaza - Seasonal Christmas Tree(50' taII) at the southeast corner of the 4-way stop.Lots N & O, Block 5-D, Vail Village tsL/12 South
Frontage Road.MOTION: SECOND: VOTE:
TABI.ED TO IIAY 6TE T{EETING.
13. Byrne Residence - Change to approved plans to JKallow different architectural treatments for
separated primary & secondary units. i-6 Forest Road/Lot 1, Block ?, Vail Village 1-st Filing.MOTION: SECOND: VOTE:
TABLED TO l,iAY 6T8 MEETfNG.
14. Vail Village Inn Plaza - Changes to approved plans MMfor Phase 4-A. 100 South Frontage Road/Lot O,Block 5-D, Vail Village 1st Filing.
MOTION: George Lamb SECOND: Sherry Dorward
VOTE: 3-1
Approved as presented. Diana Donovan opposed.
MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSBNT:
Ned Gwathmey Pat Herrington
Sherry Dorhrard Gena Whitten (PEC)
George Lamb
Diana Donovan (PEC)
STAFF APPROVALS:
Slifer Building - Modifications, 3 skylights.
230 Bridge Street/Lot B & a part of Lot C, Block 5, Vail Village
t sE. t'l11nq.
Herdrich Residence - Landscaping.Lot 18, Vail Valley 3rd.
Lodge at VaiI - Temporary Tent for Taste of Va1l.
174 Vail Road.
Thona Residence - Modifications.Lot 2, Block 8, Vail Village ?th.
vail Golf Course Townhomes, Phase I - Add 4 decks to rear of each
townhouse in Building #A. 1550 Sunburst Drive.
Creekside Building - Modify interior and one window on southelevation. 223 Gore Creek Drive.
MM
iJohns Residence - rnterior remodel, finish off area in basement ;behind garage. vail Gorf course toirnhonreJr- a"irai"g a, unii-i:2.
. vorlaufer CondomLniums - Landacaplng inprovements.385 Gore Creek Drive.
Arthur Duplex - Add 114 sguare feet to Unlt *2.Lot 4, Block 2, Bighorn lst,.
Tropg Residence I Qlanges to gite development/erevations.Lot 5r Block 1, Vail Vlllage gth.
One Vail place - Exterior window changes to Unlt *3.Resub. I.,ot C, Block 5-C, Vail Vlllage-lst.
Eaglewood Restaurant - New siqn.Vail Arhletic Club/352 VatI vifley DrLve.
A4re a/a1 l/0" N6 &zLnrsstat ffi
Lo/ 4/va tsea V,.rt (p.a//o /o)
GpA l/hacd ! s7s/* 4ZS' zfsb ./
detA @:
/{/az/' t46d
dU /ar/: ///o{
^tz.qn de; Lrv wt
/Uk -@ 2Rp //dr A@:
27/A d
J/ofr/
ais/re'
tu7Ma
fr,%277f,/
FIL T COP Y
PLANNING AND ENTVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
Il{arch 23,1992
Present. Staff
Greg Amsden Kristan Pritz
Diana Donovan Mike Mollica
Kathy Langenwalter Jill Kammerer
Dalton Williams Andy Knudtsen
Amter Blecker
Absent
Chuck Crist
Ludwig Kurz
Gena Whinen
After an executive session, the meeting was called to order by Chairpenon Diana Donovan at
approximately 2:10PM.
L A renuest for the establishment of a Special Development District at the Christiania at
Vail. 356 Hanson Ranch Road./I.ot D. Block 2. Vail Villaee First Filine. and l,ot P-3.
Block 5-A. Vail Villaee Fifth Filine.
Applicant: Paul Johnston
Planner: Mike Mollica
Mike Mollica explained the changes in the request since it was previously reviewed on March
9,1992.
The Commissioners and members of the public examined the plans.
Paul Johnston, the owner and applicant, reiterated that the purpose of the request was to
upgrade his property, while maintaining the maximum number of hotel rooms. He said he
had done his best to cooperate with the rcquests made by the Town with regard to
landscaping and other issues.
Jim Lamont, representing the East Village Homeowners Association, stated that the
Association viewed the 191 PEC approval for the Christiania as being supportable.
However, the Association was very concerned with this prcject becoming a Special
Development District. They did not view this project in a similar light as the Garden of the
Gods, as it was not a complete demolition and rebuild, and did not believe it was appropriate
in this instance as it would change the zoning.
Jim continued that the Association may support a series of variances, rather than an entire
SDD, and that changing the request to variances should not alter the time frame for final
approval, both being targeted for mid-April. In addition, Mr. Lamont believed the trash
enclosure should be addressed with an interior solution, and that the sEeetscape around the
property was not complete. He believed certain aspects of the approved Town of Vail
Planning and Environmental Commission . March 23, 1992' Page I
Streetscape Plan were not bing addressed, specifically pavement Eeatment and street lighting
aspects. He also did not believe having the required landscaping for the project installed on
Town of Vail land was appropriate.
Mr. Lamont also addressed the Mill Geek Court Chute. He stated improved safety for this
area should be dealt with, spccifically.recommending a 5-8 foot sidewalk, at a minimum.
Jim asked that he be given more time to speak with his Board, and that the streetscaping and
trash enclosure be addressed more fully.
Mark Matthews, reprcsenting the Mill Creek Homeowners Association, agreed with Mr.
Lamont, in that he believed variances were more appropriate. The consensus of his Board
was that they could not support a Special Development District proposal.
Paul Johnston indicated that his proposal had taken into consideration, and complied with, a
non-adopted view corridor in the area, and had worked in good faith with the staff.
Kristan Pritz commented that a final solution to the issue of ownership and rights of Lots P-3
and J would be necessary before an appropriate solution to the Mill Creek Court Chute could
be addressed. Diana Donovan stated she did not feel it was appropriate to hold up approval
of the Christiania when the disputes and questions were not caused by him, nor would they be
increased by this project.
Greg Amsden commented that it appeared the Christiania had parking rights to I-ot P-3, and
that the addition of valet parking spaces, both on P-3 and on the applicant's property, met the
additional parking generated by the request. He was not sure the garage was necessary,
especially since it extended into the setback. He suggested eliminating the garage and using
that space as the location for a dumpster enclosure.
Regarding the issue of a sidewalk along the Mill Creek Court Chute, Greg thought it could be
placed on the west side of the chute.
On the question of whether an SDD was appropriate versus applying for multiple variances,
Greg believed there would be a problem with rcquesting a variance for increased density, as
he could see no hardship which would justify such a variance request.
Dalton Williams read from a prepared statement as follows:
"After reviewing this request, I am convinced that this project would be a positive addition to
the Town of Vail. Certainly Paul Johnston continues to provide Vail with a fine family run
lodge that grcatly contributes to the ambiance of Vail. I also telieve that the proposed
upgrade to the Christiania at Vail is positive for the community. In particular, I find the
'alpine architecture' to be attractive and in keeping with the image of Vail. The proposed
streamwalk, landscaping and the upgrade to the property are posirive steps that arc necessary
to keep Vail the premier resort we all want it to be.
Planning and Environmental Commission . March 23, 1992 . Page 2
Diana asked if Lot P-3 could support a wider planter along the rctaining wall. Mike informed.
her the pa*ing stalls were at the bare minimum now and could not be narrowed. Diana also
believed the dumpstcr should be covered. Paul informed her the plans called out for a
covered dumpstcr.
Kathy Langenwalter supported a Special Development District for the reasons already stated.
She said she was in turmoil over the dumpster, as she wanted to keep as much parking as
possible, but also enclose the dumpster. Paul said that he was not at all comfortable
wrapping the guest rooms around a dumpster, and did not believe that had been done in other
projects in Vail. Kathy said she could support the project as proposed, with the stipulation
Mr. Johnston pay lR of the costs of a sidewalk.
Dalton asked if the Town could require the Mill Creek Court Building to contribute l/3 of the
sidewalk costs. Larry agreed to work with the Council to resolve the issues.
Kathy asked for the Design Review Board to have input on the sheetscape issues, enclosure
of the dumpster, the concrete edgtng of thc pavement, lighting in the area and the planter.
Larry said all that could be addrpssed as part of the design review process.
Dalton Williams moved to recommend approval of the request for the establishment of a
Special Development District at the Chdstiania at Vail, 356 Hanson Ranch Roadllot D,
Block 2, Vail Village First Filing, and l-ot P-3, Block 5-A, Vail Village Fifth Filing, per
staffs memorandum, with the inclusion of applicant's offer to connibute U3 the cost towatd
construction of a sidewalk on the Mill Creek C-ourt Chute. The sidewalk rcquest was
warranted and mitigated under criteria C and G of staff's memo. Greg Amsden seconded the
motion.
Kathy Langenwalter asked that thc motion be amended to add that the Design Review Board
funher develop the landscape plan in the area of the dumpster, coordinate the elements from
the Streetscape Plan (specifrcally the sneet edging, lighting, and planter treatment and size).
Diana Donovan asked to further amend the motion to add that placing aspens in the planter
along the retaining wall on Parcel P-3 be investigated. Dalton so amended his motion, and
Greg seconded the amendments. The recommendation was unanimously passed, 4-0.
In the interests of time and audience participation, item 3 was next reviewed.
3. A request for setback and site coveraee variances for the Grubbs Residence. 1031
Eaele's Nest Ctuclelrt l. Block l. Vail Villaee 8th Filine.
Applicanc G & S Partncrship
Planner: Jill Kammerer
Jill Kammerei explained the request, which included the construction of a new third floor on
the east end of the existing structure, the removal of an existing bay window, and
construction of a new bay window on the north facade, construction of a garage, the removal
of existing trast/storage enclosures on the west, and the removal of a portion of a
cantilevered second floor bedroom on the south.
Planning and Environmental Commission . March 23,1992. Page 5
Kattry Langenwalter asked for more specifics on the wall changes in conjunction with the bay
window. Jill answered, and Stevc Riden, the applicant's representative, further explained
additional questions by the Commissioners and audience members.
Tom Steinberg, a neighbor, indicated he believed the proposed bay window on the north
elevation helped break up the back wall of the house. Flo Steinberg disagreed, stating that
blank north wall of the residence was supposed to be blank, and that a flat picture-type
window would serve the same lighting purpose in terms of letting light in as would a bay
window.
After a review of the plans, with an informal discussion between Commissioners, staff and
the audience, Jill clarified that a 425 sq. ft. GRFA credit was permined on this lot, even
though it was zoned Primary/Secondary, because the lot size was less than 15,000 sq. ft. If
the applicant desircd to construct a restricted secondary unit on the site, he would be eligible
to obtain another 425 sq. ft. of GRFA.
Diana Donovan commented that she believed this addition was an upgrade for the
neighborhood.
Kathy asked for clarification of how architectural projections were viewed under a setback
variance request, and if the extent of the encroachment approved under a setback variance
was measured to the foundation wall or to the projection closest to the property line (i.e., a
roof overhang). In other words, she wondered if an architectural projection could be added to
a wall which encroached into a sctback. Kristan Pritz stated that the variance was approved,
based on the submitted drawings with the variance application. Kathy could not support the
variance requested for the north elevation, as she believed the bay window made the elevation
worse. Steve Riden rebuned the rationale behind the staff recommendation to deny the rear
setback variance requests for the bay window. Kathy responded that a golfer walking by
would be l% stories below the grade of the building, and consequently would be looking at 2
stories of stucco. Shc believed the north elevation needed to be softened, and agreed with
the staff recommendation to deny the request for the bay window.
Steve indicated the stucco would not be a smooth and monolithic finish, but would be a rough
"Fred Flintstone" finish.
Greg questioned, with the golf course to the north of the structure, who was impacted by the
nonh facade.
Kristan clarified that when a variance was approved, a specific set of plans was approved as
pan of that variance, and those plans included the applicable roof overhangs. Jill said it was
the general policy of staff to measure the extent to which a building encroached into a
setback from the building facadefioundation. However, with this structure, because of the
extent to which the building encroached into the setbacks, there were instances where the roof
encroached farther into the setback than the allowed 4 feet, as set forth in the Supplemental
Regulations of the Code. The extent of the roof overhang was shown on the associated plans.
Planning and Environmental Commission . March 23, 1992. Page 6
Kathy wanted the applicant to use whatever was available under the architectural projection
section of thc code to make the north facade more interesting. She further asked that staff
use its discretion to determine what was appropriate. She also stated she was talking about
something like an additional 6 inches of projection. Kathy reiterated that she could not
support the variance for the north elevation as submitted. Kristan suggested, as an alternative,
the PEC approve a setback encroachment of a certain distance in addition to the requested
setback variance in order to accommodate architecnral pmjections.
Dalton Williams asked if an encroachment variance was granted to the end of a roofline
(overhangs). Kristan indicated it was based on the submiued plans. Dalton continued that, if
a variance was given to the overhang line, then the bay window did not require separate
approval, as it was a lesser distance from the propcrry line than the overhangs. Jill disagreed,
stating that approval was given for a specific set of plans, and any additions or changes
required an additional variance approval. Kristan agreed, stating that a greater roof overhang
did not equate to an automatic variance for the bay window.
Kathy said she could not find a hardship to justify supporting a variance for the bay window,
but would like to allow 6" for relief from the blank appearance of the north facade through
the use of architectural projections.
Diana also could not justify a variance for the bay window, and reiterated that a variance was
given for every projection, be it roof or wall. Greg Amsden agreed with that assessment,
finding no hardship to justify the bay window.
Kathy Langenwalter moved to approve the request for setback and site coverage variances for
the Grubbs Residence, l03l Eagle's Nest Circlel-ot 1, Block l, Vail Village 8th Filing for
the east and wcst elevations, and deny the request for a setback variance on the north
elevation per staff's memo with the finding that the requested variances met the criteria for
hardship based on the existing building's location. In addition, a strong recommendation
would be given to the Design Review Board to review the north elevation and allow the
applicant to submit plans which encroached an additional 6-8 inches to allow for "interest"
and relief from the blank facade of that elevation. Greg Amsden seconded the motion. It
was unanimously approved, by a vote of 4-0.
After the vote, Flo Steinberg voiced conoerns about notification procedures for adjacent
property owners, as well as encouraging the Commissioners to be more consistent with their
use of microphones during the discussions.
2. A request for a site coverage variance and a conditional use permit for the Vail
Mountain School. 3160 Katsos Ranch RoadPart of Lot 12. Block 2. Vail Villase 12th
Filing.
Applicant: Vail Mountain School
Planner: Andy Knudtsen
Since the issues identifred in the staff memo werE explained to the Commissioners during site
visits, they waived a prosentation by staff.
Planning and Environmental Commission . March 23,1992. Page 7
Dalton Williams moved to approve the request fon a site coverage variance and a conditional
use permit for the Vail Mountain School, 3160 Katsos Ranch Road/?art of Lot 12, Block 2,
Vail Village 12th Filing per the staff memo. Greg Amsden seconded the motion. It was
approved, 4-0.
4. Review of Planning and Envfuonmental Commissions in other communities.
Presenten Susan Scanlan
A discussion was held betwecn the Planning Commissioners and Susan Scanlan.
Diana Donovan could not support another level of govemment at the Town level, but could
maybe see an environmental commission of the type currcntly used by Telluride formed at the
county level.
Greg Amsden liked the fact that, in Telluride, 5 of the members of the commission were
residents of the town, but 2 could reside in the county outside the town limits. He also
favored the approach of the commission being a non-regulating body.
Dalton Williams found himself changing his opinion toward the commission toward favoring
the implementation of such an organization. He believed it could be a positive aspect of the
Town process.
Kathy Langenwalter liked the fact the Telluride commission was a pro-active board, along
with the fact they could review qpecific environmental proposals. Susan agreed, also favoring
the fact that subcomminees were formed within the main group for research purposes on an
individual issue.
Diana stated again she would still prefer to see such a board formed at the county level to
address the general environmental issues.
Kristan Pritz did not think there were a grcat number of projects in the Town which had large
environmental impacts, citing those which had been rrceived in the past few years. Kathy
agreed, but stated thosc large projects had not had the environmental concerns addressed in
the same degree of depth as those areas of the proposals which were more familiar to the
Commissioners.
5. ktter to U.S.F.S. concerning the Air Resource Management Plan.
Presenter: Susan Scanlan
The consensus of the Commissionen was in favor of sending the letter as presented.
After additional comments by the Commissioners regarding DRB procedures, and a request to
staff to research an appropriate memorial for Arne Hansen, *re meeting was adjoumed at
approximately 5:00PM.
Planning and Environmental Commission . lvlarch 23, 1992. Page 8
,t(b
L
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
MEMOBANDUM
Planning and Environmental Commission
Community Development Department
't
March 23, 1992
A request for rear, east side and west side setback variances for the Grubbs
Residence, 1031 Eagle's NestCircle/Lot 1, Block 1, Vail Village Eighth Filing.
Applicant: G andS PartnershiP
Planner: Jill Kammerer
l, DESCRIPTION OF THE SETBACK VABIANCES REOUESTED
The applicant proposes to totally remodel the interior of an existing single family residence.
Under the redevelopment proposed an additional 288 sq. ft. ol living area will be added to the
residence. Chapter 18.71 - AdditionalGross Residential Floor Area ("250 Ordinance")willbe
utilized in order to allow this addition to be constructed.
Under this redevelopment proposal, site coverage would be reduced by 91 square feet.
However, in order to construct the modifications to the residence as proposed, the applicant
must obtain rear, west side and east side setback variai'rce approvals.
A. Rear Setback Variance
1. Bav Window:
The applicant proposes to remove an existing 1 foot by 10 foot bay window
which encroaches 6 feet into the required rear setback and to construct a new
11/zfool by 10 foot bay window in the area immediately west of the bay window
to be removed. The new bay window would encroach 6 feet-6 inches into thev'required 15 foot rearsetback. Therefore a 6 foot-6 inch setback variance is
llow this bav win
inch rear setback.
2. Third Floor:
The applicant proposes to construct a new third floor on the eastern end of the
existing structure. This new third lloor area will not encroach further into the
required 15 foot rear setback than the 5 feet the existing structure encroaches.
However, because the proposed construction would incr
I
,.J
t'i\
'required.
a
East Slde Setback Varlance
1. Second Storv Deck:
-,ln addition to constructing the new third floor on the eastern end of the
r'structure, the applicant proposes to construct a deck above the existing 1st
floor den (this den is the 120 sq. ft. bedroom which was approved to be
constructed 5 feet into the required 15 loot east side setback in 1983) and add
slone veneer to the exterior of lhe building. In adding the stone veneer to the
exterior of the structure, the building will encroach an additional 6 inches into
the required setback. Therefore the buildino will encroach 5 feet 6 inches into
the reouired 15 foot setback. resultino in a 9 foot-6 inch setback.
Other changes to the east facade of the structure under this proposal include
the removal of a 2 loot by 10 foot solarium, which currently encroaches into the
east setback. The net result of the removal of this solarium will be the
elimination of an existing encroachment into the east side setback. No further
changes within the east side setback are proposed.
West Slde Setback
Garaoe:
The applicant proposes to remove existing trash/storage enclosures, a portion
of a cantilevered 2nd floor bedroom and a carport which currently encroach into
the west side setback. The applicant further proposes to construcl an addition
to an existing one car garage in order to allow the garage to accommodate two
automobiles. In order to expand the existing garage, the applicant must obtain
a west side setback variance.
\, }. The nel result of all of these modifications to the southwest corner of the
rr\r-\- structure will be lhe elimination of the carport, trash/storage enclosures, and
-*'*C cantilevered bedroom west side setback encroachments. The proposed garage
nui."J expansion will encroach to a lessor extent than do the existing trash/storage'"r" enclosures and the carports. However, the oaraqe exoansion will encroach 2' feet into the required 15 foot west side setback resultinq in a 13 foot west side
setback
Changes to lhe landscaping include the relocation of an existing aspen and the installation of
four new ten-foot tall (2 inch caliper) aspens to the southeast corner of the site.
II. BACKGROUND
The residence was constructed in June of 1976. At the time the residence was constructed,
the required side and rear setbacks were 12 feet-6 inches. PEC approval was obtained to
allow the structure lo encroach 2 feet-6 inches into the required west side and rear (north)
property lines resulting in a 10{oot sehack from the north and west property lines.
B,
.{'
.,,.V _,
':riL' ':
"{\.
t.
v \.- , , \i
)'\r, i
N'.',{" \\t
?'u
.. li'
4[r" ,,)l, t
tlrli
,,prt'
4too'
\)r
c.
In general, the staff recommended approval of the 1976 variance as the proposal would not
impact any adjacent structures, and would also respect view corridors. lt was also felt that the
location of surroundino residences and the small lot size created a situation that warranted the
variances.
ln May of 1983, lhe PEC approved site coverage and east side setback variance requests in
order to allow the construction of a 120 sq. ft. bedroom addition east of the existing residence
which encroached 5 feet into the required east side setback. At the time this east side
setback was granted, required side and rear setbacks were 15 feet. Therefore, the resulting
eastern side setback was 10 feet. Under this approval, site coverage was exceeded by 178
sq.tt.
In 1983, even lhough staff recognized there were special circumstances associated with the
lot, the staff felt that there were other locations that would allow for the construction of the
bedroom within, or at least closer to, the required setbacks and recommended denial of the
requested east side setback variance. The PEC approved the request with two members
voting against the variance.
ln July ol 1986, the PEC approved rear and west side setback variances and a site coverage
variance request in order to allow the conslruction of a living room addition which encroached
5 feet into the required 15 foot rear setback and a 2nd floor cantilevered bedroom addition
which encroached 'l .5 foot into the reouired 1 5 foot west side setback. Under the 1 986
approval, maximum allowable site coverage was exceeded by 366 sq. ft.
Based on the 1992 lmprovement Location Certificate which has been submitted with this
application, the 1986 living room addition was constructed per the approved plans. However,
as constructed the living room addition encroaches 2 feet into the eastern side setback.
Please note that under the redevelopment proposal to be reviewed today, this 2 loot eastern
setback living room encroachment will be removed.
,/
, ' ' r'\,/The final setback encroachments which need to be discussed are an existing 6 foot-6 inch
d..,''' .; / rear setback bay window encroachment and west side trash/storage enclosures encroachment
\{ ,t, l of 10 feet. The Town does not have any records regarding the review or approval o{ either of".' \ these additions.
III. ZONING CONSIDERATIONS
Zoning:Primary/Secondary
Site Area: 0.2140 acres/9,322 sq. ft.
GRFA Allowed: 3,006 sq. ft. (lncludes 250 Ordinance)
sq. ft.
sq.ft.
Proposal: 288 sq. ft.
Existing:2,718
Proposed: 3,006
Increase Under This
Site coverage (20% of site area)
Allowed: 1,864 sq. ft.
Existing: 2,283 sq. ft.
Proposed: 2,192 sq. tt.
Decrease Under this ProPosal:
Height Allowed: 33 tt.
Proposed: 33 ft.
Setbacks
Fronl
Required: 20 feet
Existing: 49 feet
Proposed: 50 feet
91 sq. ft.
.West Side
Required: 15 feet
Existing: 5 feet
Proposed: 13 feet
.East Side
Required: 15 feet
Existing: 10 feet
Proposed: 9 feet, 6 inches
'Rear
Reouired: 15 feet
Existing: 7 feet
Proposed: Sfeet,6inches
' Area ol requested setback variances
IV. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
Upon review of Criteria and Findings, Section 18.62.060 of the Vail MunicipalCode, the
Community Development recommends approval of the requested east and west side setback
variances and approval of the rear setback variance to allow lhe construction of the third floor
addition. Staff lurther recommends denial of the rear setback variance to allow the
construction of the new bay window in the rear sehack based on the following factors:
A.Consideration of Factors:
1. The relatlonshlp of the requested varlance to other existing orpotentlal uses and structures ln the viclnity.
a. Rear Setback Variance:
lmmedialely north of and adjacent to the rear setback line is a utility
easement which is also used to provide pedestrian and golf cart access
to the golf course. The requested rear setback variance, if approved,
would not adversely affect the user enjoyment of the adjacent
properties. When originally constructed, the pEC granted the necessary
approvals to allow the structure to encroach 5 feet into the required 15-
foot setback, resulting in a 10 foot setback. The existing structure
currently encroaches 9 feet into the required 1S-foot setback. Through
the removal of the existing bay window, and the construction ol the new
bay window, the building would encroach 8 feet, 6 inches into the
required 1s-foot setback or would encroach an additional 1/2 foot than
the existing situation. The Town has no records regarding review or
approval of the existing bay window which is to be removed. The
proposed new third lloor addition on lhe eastern end of the building
would encroach no further into the setback than does the existing
building footprint. Therelore, the encroachment will have no negative
impact on adjacent properties and would be merely an extensioi of the
originally approved 1976 variance.
b. East Side Setback:
To the east of the existing residence is a primary/Secondary zoned
residence. As a result ol adding slone veneer to the exterior of the
existing structure the building will encroach an additional 6 inches into
the required 1S{oot east side setback. The existing structure currenily
encroaches 10 feet into the required IS-foot east side setback. staff
believes the additional 6-inch encroachment into the eastern side
setback will not negatively impact adjacent properties.
c. West Side:
To the west of the existing residence is a primary/Secondary zoned
residence. Under this redevelopment proposal the amount of
encroachment into the west side setback would be decreased througn
the removal of the trash/storage enclosures, carport and the existing
cantilevered second story bedroom. However, the garage expansion vwould occur in part in the required west side setback. The existing / ^dstructure currenily encroaches 10 feet into the required 1s-foot sid; * ldJ'setback. As a result ol the redevelopment proposed, the structure .ue'.,f,would encroach 2 feet into the required l5-foot setback. The ,1i['1+u-encroachment will have no negative impact on adjacent properties.
-r
2. The degree to which rellef from the strict and literal lnterpretation _
and enforcement of a speclfied regulatlon ls necessary to achieve
compallbllity and unlformlty of treatment among sites In lhe viclnlty
or to attaln the oblectlves of this tltle wlthout grant of speclal
prlvllege.
a. Rear Setback Variance:
Under this development proposal, the applicant is decreasing the
amounl of site coverage by 91 sq. ft. Any addition to the north, east or
west would necessitate approval of a setback variance. For this
proposal, stafl believes that it is reasonable to consider the existing
residence's location in the east side, west side and rear setbacks to be
a practical ditficulty warranting a rear setback variance for the third floor
addition.
It is staff's opinion that the original rationale for granting the setback
variances is reasonable and still pertains to the proposal being
reviewed, it is not a grant of special privilege to continue the setback
encroachments. This degree of relief in the strict and literal
interpretation of the code is appropriate and has been granted to other
property owners with similar circumstances.
The staff does not believe, however, there is a practical difficulty
warranting the construction of the new bay window which would extend
6 feet-6 inches into the rear setback.
b. East Side Setback Variance:
Staff believes it is reasonable to consider the existing residence's
location in the setback to be a practical difficulty warranting an east side
setback variance.
c. West Side Setback Variance i
As previously stated under the proposed development, the applicant will
be decreasing the amount of encroachment into the west side setback.
The amount of encroachment into the west side setback under this
proposal would be decreased from 10 feet to 2 feet. The applicant has
indicated the encroachment is necessary in order to allow the expansion
of the existing garage to accommodate 2 automobiles.
Staff believes that construction of this garage will improve the general
appearance of the lot by allowing for interior storage of automobiles.
This degree of relief from the strict and literal interpretation of the code
is appropriate.
3. The effect ol the requested variance on light and air, distribution of .
populatlon, transportatlon and traffic facllllles, publlc faclllties and
utilitles, and public safety.
With the exception of the addition requiring the transplanting of an exisling large
aspen tree, the proposed variances will have no major impact on these
considerations. The applicant has agreed to relocate the existing tree to the
southeast corner of the site. In addition to the transplanting of this aspen, the
applicant will add four additional aspen to this same area.
The previous variance approvals were based on lhe fact that the variances
maintained separation between adjacent houses and also respected their views.
Staff believes that this proposal will have no impacts on the factors above.
B. The Plannino and Environmental Commission shall make the followino findinos
before orantinq a variance:
1. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special
privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in
the same district.
2. That the granting of lhe variance will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
3. That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons:
a. The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified
regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary
physical hardship inconsistent with lhe objectives of this title.
b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or
conditions applicable to the same site of the variance lhat do not
apply generally to other properties in the same zone.
c. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation
would deprive the applicant of privileges en.joyed by the owners
of other properlies in the same district.
VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Based on Findings 1,2,3(a-c), the Community Development Department staff recommends
approval of the requested east and west side setback variances and approval of the rear
setback variance to allow the construction of the third floor addition.
.lt is felt that the setback variances are extensions of previous variances that were granted
back in 1976. To require that the additions jog in and out in order to meet the current setbackrequirements is unreasonable. The seiback variances do not greaily increase the bulk of the
building or negatively impact adjacent properties. The proposal will not be a grant of specialprivilege, as this type of interpretation has been used with other properties. lt is also felt that
the existing setback configuration creates an unusual circumstance which warrants the
variances.
Staff further recommends denlal of the rear setback variance to allow the construction of the
new bay window in the rear setback. staff does not believe there are any special
circumstances or hardships which would warrant the granting ol this rear setback variance.
Please note that, under Section 18.62.080 of the Town of VailZoning Code, the approval shalllapse if construction is not commenced within two years ol the date of issuance and Oitigenttypursued to completion.
Drsoq.*az't /f6 ' '?ay' at*'tfur -
Mq a,Tzt// /tz. ft p*c- a/4. >4 eac :/'ul *3::
6'ra/ ii//dk atfu , pratzrhatt &#a>--# -a'/aa4o
/u f.r;L ;,;;' ;;/i&j g s,A/ /tsaau*'n-
72 /& t,: a /taz,j 6' ; 7'/; -'U ;'/b //g'
,J
tffir,o',o,Y,,uo':fiffr(^
'n: ;i:f, fii, il r r r,,frY r'firi,,r,
An
',, i
;-.:: -
ii ..,i 1;lJ r" 't
ti:ijl, J:-
,-'"t-l i!; !:rl lE: { 'i , {F! rrrirli!i_rr:'II t - irt* i i ,' . f .i I1,It.!,:.' 't ! !l . ,llL"'[- 'r iS"rC,!EJ iivil"$r- , ;ii
g
:
,t{i'
.,7
Ir-di
rl-*{;
lgJ
"- t/rItt:i t r'ri ls, i'
\ $iie.'
l, .l ){r\--+-
I{
?{u
I
t
)
L
{-!
I
":i{t
!x
I{
I
It!
il. t!
-).r
l
I{)-.
J
!
:F
d (
\
I
Tu
E
t-t'
$l
T.
$ifl
Ith
l:
t.'ls
lrl\
a
UIILI'Y E,ISEM€NT
1ea'29-!!
.".l1 /" " z
oEc( o.l /: i---'i--'-
FNO CESAR
Fr! D et'{ iQtcN.tRcs
qcOF JiEor:rc
PAT C
i
t-
-. a
Ct
'.0 -"*{-
I f-\T Il-v I
,O3, ErGL€ S rr€5' : iClE
s 89053 39 {
i 92.
I
:
l
tS.rrLl
WESIEB|-Y E
FO!L0wS E.
PARXING EJ
.
-o
o
Fz
z
=$
lo-/:,
ot
, F : 45 ^,^\.= eiJi ra
EX/577/vo /LC
a,
tO
.y e-
;r5-':!:'*;
-.*rZ-
i ti-t!!tt
ta:alF-:--Tr_ll--=:{ 1
n
tr
Di-j
i==i
LJ
lF-rt,
l=J
LJ
r.tr
!:---t=!
"lrtlJ lJsI\ ?\
ti
Ii
\\
\
a
'at=--
iDa
5-F:es\t)7\:!
':r-'.*-
II'IIII!tI
aa-------rI
III
III,ll.b--r--rrl
II'l
III.l'l
IIIIIt
#
Io
-_f
+['
Iif
i--)
.tl
I
-_ t
tl
ilil-_l iillil tilL-----Jl
i
r
la
iI i.! rli t'i,t
'X'--t
o0
V'I
XI
-srl
I
EI
c.)lJi
Of.
olr
-\l
( -;'\-,
11
tr
tl
'^l
i
--i'l
rl
I
l
I \-'{^ --
---., l+]-.,,-''\
-1-'
' /--'\-<i,4_\!r-^
\j-'-,t "
a
t{ll
i\i-1}
-_r_ \
,Alo(FILI._i.Jlv)l'xl
ol
-l I
i
>loll:
-t.- - - t-l
cgi<t.z.l
IlrF-.
'.o-
I t, '
----+-,\
8ESr00pI
AIHIIAELE
rrrirrrrrrr
ir
tl
i
,t
1
It
!
+
i
I
i
I
a
+
& --,'t lt I -t
t -r{r
A__ - Lil i
I
: l!' i
i r.. l:
rf
f:'t-
I
;I
I
I
L-t, ' i:: E S'-, I
|
"
\-\ F'.?. I rl \--: F'i i-J<I :\ -']iit--- - -;: ,n-- ---t-
-
! :i:---/,
rl I l!-
r-^__j'.\.*--1, ,
5l
I+
4-
t
t
':
t,
T
E
E
ov'l
|
-
_---+
I4-;-:+=-f
-,o
.l
c.\s
q
5 -------tr- ---__-_____
.'
- -- _______ J_ ____ --___.
t
a./t':
s=,.I_-'-_
Si.- \
.=-
<,4:'
1J
,,0:7
,i .J
i,.
i":l;4
ll,id
I
I
t
i
Il,
I
It!II
i
I.
t:'
.JI
J'J
.J../'\
I
\\I
I
I
I'.1
o,
s,i-i
I^t-c.,1 L
\\
' \ ,.-
r..\-
a:>
X "I/,;- ^n9*tu ^tf*1^
o_4
w"y^K
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 18.66.060 of the Municipal Code of
the Town of Vail on March 23, 1992 at 2:00 p.m. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building.
Consideration of:
1. A request for setback and site coverage variances for the Grubbs Residence, 1031
Eagle's Nest Circle/Lot 1, Block 1, VailVillage 8th Filing.
Applicant: G & S Partnership
Planner: Jill Kammerer
2. A request for a site coverage variance and a conditional use permit for the Vail
Mountain School,3160 Katsos Hanch Road/Part ol Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12th
Filing.
Applicant: Vail Mountain SchoolPlanner: Andy Knudtsen
3. Any items tabled from the March 9, 1992 PEC meeting agenda.
The applications and information about the proposals are
available for public review in the Community Development
Department office.
Town of Vail
Community Development Department
Published in the Vail Trail on March 6, 1992
COMMENTS NEEDED BY: SIT/TE
-
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL:
PRO.]ECT:
DATE SUBMITTED:
PUBLIC WORKS
Reviewed by:
Comments:
irjo
.Jr-l
No+6
fv
POLICE DEPARTMENT
Reviewed by:
Cornments:
RECREATION DEPARTMENT
Reviewed by:
Comrnents:
G, 'i" L ,.y!i
{ A-... 'r i'..\ ", .-.\l-
-'\ly/rr,.,^t la cxtcJ d' r\
f *re-'--v ''*\ t
\)/LL 2/8
INTER-DEPARTMENTAL P€VI EW
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Date:
Date:
Lu\,
Date:
Date:
FIRE DEPARTMENT /i ,AL;tuLi2Reviewed byz f t' - ').- tY- qL
Conmentsr dS:y ,^.r:-, \.-.be'c \'.
t \//LL J/e
-INTER-DEPARTMENTAL REVTEW
dt/ re
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Date: 3-t /-9)
Date:
Date:
Date:
7',:/,rzdr,4oro
^ / ./4 -COMMENTS NEEDED BY.. d///r=/
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL:
PUBLIC WORKS
Reviewed by:t La lSeA
FIRE DEPARTMENT
Reviewed by:
Comments:
DATE SUBMITTED:
POLICE DEPARTMENT
Revi-ewed by:
Comments:
RECREATION DEPARTMENT
Reviewed by:
Comments:
1 ?'.4"-tG e^/F^; ,^ft-!a'-d+
rt"1 ^*J tq ffi, LrJ p"^-,-.--;
rt
--< a
iltcHARDs ENClfr*, !NC.
\)\
\i
\-\
\\,'ri
\)
I.zo
tJ1
I
I
I
:\
',
I
v\J(,
.a
No. l/ 7-72
P. O. Bot C'lo1
e yor1, Colo.s.to 81620
P6onci49.5077
Dcnvot Lino.8?J-t5.jl
,/8. O 3'
N B?o28',39'u
s;;v_ Augus* /2,'/727_
'3ook /-/55 ,pg, i--=
Sheet l of z
\
),\
h
'\s
sJ
\at
U/,'/i lg fase,rreol /
89.oo
.2iaz'E
K,"
,v'"2
oo'
d
6
TJ
o
F
F
It
I
I
I
I
I
J
I
YI
9r
\JI
l. I\l;
I
I
I
o
Fz
(J
I
I
J
I
I
irs\t
\ifr\
\ti't;
;
i.i
z
t't
z
=
I,l
aC\\
I
I
l.
$
h.)
V)
B
o\
.,+
+
\
Fo
c /,Pc, ) ,*f./ \
,''/
hy
$E5T;h
ry
ih13
v.
\
'l^\
\
I
''l
{
a
..:
f /zd,Zales p,n frun,y'
^ /rtd't alcs p./.2 ./ ca? sel al
{ f aseoz ea/ Corac,r ScALt'- /'!.Zc'
lr /dPEo i/E/n:N7 ./ oc4rn;,tc[RIt;tcATi ot suRViY
Thir ir to <crlily that on 1116 .bovo dalo 6n improveFont turvo, wat mldd by .lo, c, unJar rny lriorvition. ot
tho .bovo dct.rfbcd proparty, and th.)l to ,\o br !l ol Iny lnowtodro ond boliol, tL., obovr, ?l;) e.cut.t.ly t4p.e-
,cnll lho rrnirovomcntj in rolotron to tho Dropcrty li6c! .r rhov..n, an,J !hlt lho lo:olio;r lnd dinonficnr ol all
5uillrng irnprgvemenlr, ca!otnenli or right.ol-wrr,in ovidon<c or lnown tl no, 2nc qntrc:rchmonlr b7 or on lhe
RIGISi!IiD zRCTE55IONAL
Ai.iD 1.,\,'.:D SUkV;yOR j..rO.
lNCrNit?
.:-Jj>
- zo.Lg'_ _
la* ,/. B./oek /
l/a ,' / //;//ag e ., *. tg,h rA F; /, ,t3
e "t5'5? t
*{t'r.a 0t\ \
rt'$\'r:\t
r$*s
l"\
r /^t/
/Y!^
ru
ty'ood 1a:?,".%
I
t,/
"o.Lo
I
1
r€vitggEl 91419L
.lPPIJICJ[I!IOII
This procedure is requiredvarlance. The applJ.cationlnformatlon is cubmitted.
NAME OF APPLICANT' S
ADDRESS P.O.Box 3238
applicari,.cFil.:I 1y
pEC MEETING DATE MARCCH 23,L992
FON, A \IARTANCE
for any project requesting awlll not be accepted until all
A. NAI.{E 0F APPLICANT G & S partnership
ADDRESS l03l Eaglesr Nest Circle
Vail,Co pHONE 4799059
B,REPRESENTATITTE
r t^ .; 1 t1r\vctlrru\/.
Steven James Riden A.i.A. inc.
c.
,'v
,,1
..,P
r\',I
,h ,t' (r
nI
,lv Utw
/A'
a,$Y
'r#
Yv
/\i5
PHONE e4e-41 21
OWNER(S) (type or p int )G & S Partne::ship
SIGNATURE (S)
1031 Eaqles' Nest Circle
PHONE 479-9059
L,OCATI0N 0F PROPOSAL: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: tOT_.!_
BLOCK-I- FILING Vail Virlaqe Bth _
ooo*tt
FEE $250.09 Pp-tn 25oL"W /tq,/rzev, fua*,*w&an"/Fan4;# ofi7y7
--
-
IHE FEE MUST'BE PAID BEFORE THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT WILL ACCEPT YOUR PROPOSAL.
A }ist of the names of ewners of all property adjacentto the subject property INCLUDING pROpERTy BEHIND AND
ACROSS STREETS, and their mailing addresses. THE
APPLICANT WILL EE RESPONSIELE FOR CORRECT MAILING
ADDRESSES.
II. A pre-application conference with a planning staff menber isstrongJ.y suggested to determine if any additlonalinformat.ion is needed. No application wiII be acceptedunle$s it is complete (must include all ltems required bythe zoning administrator) . It is the applicant, sresponsibillty to make an appointment with the staff t,o findout about addit,ional subrnittal requirements.
III. PLEA$E NOTE THAT A COD,EIJEEE APPLICATION WILLJ STREN{ITINE THE
APPROVAL PROCESS FOR YOUR PRO.JECT BY DECREASING THE NUMBER
OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THAT THE PLANNING AI,ID
ENVIRONMENTAI., COMMISSION (PEC) MAY STIPULATE. AL!
CONDITIONS OE APPROVAL MUST BE COMPLIED WITH BEFORE A
BUITDING PERMIT IS ISSUED.
FOUR (4) COPIES OE THE FOLLOWING MUST BE SUBMITTED:
A. A WRITTEN STATEMENT OF THE PRECTSE NATURE OF THE
VARIANCE REQUESTED AND THE REGULATION INVOIJVED. THE
STATE}TENT MUST ALSO ADDRESS:
l. The relationship of, the reguested variance toother existing or potential uses and structures inthe vicinity.
NA.tt{E OF
owNER(S)
ADDRESS
L -Yf.L'.l,Llt"F. I;-vArL, co.81658
(3 o 3) ,)OAQOCXXtr 9-4r2r
Feb.12,L992
Planning and Enviromental Coumision
Town of VailVaiI CO.
RE: 103I EaglesrNest Circle
Dear Sirs and ltadams,
The applicant is seeking a variance to the setback
and site coverage requirements for Lot l,Block I
Vail Village 8th Filing. The purpose for this
variance is to allow for the reuroclel of the existing
residencerbuilt in the '70srto present standards.
The original structure was constructedin what is
now a 15' setback and in excess of the allowable
site coverage. The original constuction net the
requirements at that time and as it exists, does
not.
We would only utilize the allow able square footage
for the site and would be utilizing the existing
structure . In fact the proposal is to remove aportion of the struture from the setback area.
And replace the existing flat roof with an alternate
version (hip) and re-side the structure with stone
and stucco-
[Ie believe this is in line with the desired estheticsin the inmediate area and the town as a whole.
This proposal has no effect upon the lightrair,distribution,of population,transportationrtraffic,utilities,
or pulic safty.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Regards,
ames Riden A.I.A.
. MEMBER OF AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS.
flli'/i ,' //, ^ ./- , \ .. I
*rryVi /P7b /$ ft.A sry//act t/aa - ?+, al(*/e) ..' fra,<-(7y1. I v
,e /rhl /atht trX x//ac,te l,tcu /z'-4 "lc)
I'l
t??z I s/hcr- & &1b. ewaaa,
I n:"*: prt 6 ,s**,Q.- ,y//ax-ttr if/al * hf
F,haU €*t,c( y sfra, .' thrc q
o g,n '(H:;ffifl,/;,a sta,tt/ee e,s /rr3'/716,{f.n, , ca-r25y'. i7 to'Kru} s<^/&rr ( /s'Ffr;) "
1r/,' A /o'&/e /( /' //
(,1) o, r'u -,,4 7u4.LrL ,.*attd /.r I norl( l/t ltO 5',2-ncn oq
I r /'5-' /r '' ade " / " 6R-'{ad/ti
I \ s>L a*@gt t/at /3e
A\
A '@otz w/e'(r; ) */kq ra"t- fic*nft1 h -'o'xpa-"d 64fl,
I
TOWN OF VAIL
DEPARTMENT OF COMMTJNITY DEVELOPMENT
SAI,ES ACTION FORM
DATE:
0l 0@041330 qq!,r. DEv. APPLTCATTONFEES \ /)
01000041540 ZONINGANDADDRESSMAPS N n)$5.00
01000042415 I,JNIFORMBTJILDINGCODE ' OTL ,XI '/:$50.00
01000042415 LNIFORMPLUMBTNGCODE ' Ifl.'( (r"$36.00
l,.i:.:h
-t "i'.l rr,:t ,
f. i, r, ;r ,. r! ,.
i j-tsi'r. -,:. i .
,1, ,. ,,:,:-.
s32.m
$36.00
$30.00
$7.00
$0.25
$20.00
'.:..:::.:::i:i::ii:i..:.ii:.:i|::i:'.ii.:i.':i:l.:.i:.i:j:::i:'ji:.ii'i:iijinl
rH
!<
iB
a$
$$$
} fi$u
i 'tIi$
\i
2
EX
hl
:
s
R
*
g
v
F
\
s
{b
J
fi
$
Xt
ilu
$€
rf
$i
$$
flc
G
s
*tt
?
F
5e
ild
u
u
+f.-
' ",i.
o
l'13 l.^Y
cj
$F
F
Hv
I
I
a!
I
I
1
\
-r
tt
H
t,
Fi{
t
o
sll
#f
$t
*g
Lo
0-p
llj:f.t
6
OZIL
q
o)
IrJ
-T
i$
=
=PS.
";.:E
,'o
sz
d
o
L'3
:iorl
.Q
t-.)
i$(i
s&
uiPq:
J dq;r q
e$s fi*nT-
za$
u-l
<-r I-T
-l
7
a
t_IA
ulll
r
b
0Z
I
I
I
I.
I-{-{
:
U
$
s(s
,u
o
Btl
d
5
llL
t7.
[3 .
oz
J=-rlo
49-1 ltp>
$i,
6{.
36
o{
f,3
7\t--oa-al cJd.-:
1V'>z
SDt)'a3
AF
3,'-'
et
flP
$B
-
\,-l
u
?qt4
??_
isp>
,/>
7I
L
I
or-)so
-t-
6i2
x)i
<
bJ UJ
h{th
sr
{
$
.)+s
iA-Ft:.$
{to_
$$fr
a+xIila
l
t'hF
$a.iqN
,a
n,
4_
[JIIt-
{
z
so
*s{rz
36
J
\J
b
bl
7a$
=sx-s
o
7
o
I
I'l
i
t'
I
I
I g
J
ILI
IIJ
r
t-f
0l
tf,'l
o
Lel;a
?
,N
L--:-_:
tQ-t
l-nIU
t$
rt
d
EIr
a
\F-
Ed
fd
62-J-U6
49-1trp>
il'
ts'
,Y+
nE
<3u-3jz
-l --
Ha-
i
,'z
It
1
[l,rr
$3
$P
a
$
t
|\r€ru<a#i
NEo+lE{rsr
il
3
l.;
rfui1
lLA
k&fE EXtsT
UJqNWtt)
k€ug ex,
tillqPot'L)
F{,\@6rA55
CT,TION - TO9IN OF \':trIL,
DATE APPLICATION RECETVED :
DATE OF DRB MEETING:
**********
TBIS APPLICAUO}T WILL NOT BEUNTIL ALL REQUIRED INFORUATION**********
PROJECT INFORMATION:
A. DESCRIPTTON:
o
APPLT
O revised g/4/gr
col.oRlDo RtC'g tEB 1 0€92
lr
ACCEPTEDIS SI'BMITTED
B. TYPE OF REVIEW:
-New
Construction (S200.00)
n Addition ($50.00)
r
Subdivi sion
ZONING:
LOT AREA: If reguired, applicantstamped survey showing lot area.
NAME oF APPLT.ANT ,{.ril*rhtBw=Mailing Address:
Minor Alteration ($20.00)
_Conceptual- Review (S0)
BIock
$l^ t-lr i
Phone
JAIEA A,IA.
Phone
Phone
500e
c. ADDRESS, to?l Ealrwb NF-T cn<g
D. LEGAL DESCRIPTIoN: LoI I
If property is described by a meets and bounds legaldescription, please provlde on a separate sheet anOattach to this application.
H.NAME OF
Mail j-ng APPLICANT' S
Address:
I.a
NAME OF OWNERS:u{8&:w=
*STGD{ATIIRE (S) :Mailing Acdress:
J.
K.
Condominium Approval if applicable.
DRB FEE: DRB fees, as shown above, are to be paid atthe time of submittal of DRB application. L'ater, whenapplying for a building permit, please identify tireaccurate valuation of the proposal . The town of Vailwill adjust. the fee according to the table below, toensure the correct fee is paid.
FEE SCHEDULE:
VALUATION
0 - s 1,0,000$ 10,001 - $ 50,000$ 50,001 - $ 150,000
$150,001 - $ 500,000
$500,001 - $1,000,000$ Over Sl.rOO0,OOO
* DESIGN REVIET{ BOARD APPROVAT EXPIRES
APPROVAI. UNI.ESS A BUILDING PERMIT IS
ONE YE.AR AFTER FIIIAI,
ISSSED AI.ID CONSTRUCTION IS
FEE
$ 20.00
$ s0.00
$100.00
$200.00 <-
$400.00
$500.00
STERIED.
**NO APPI..IqATION T{ILL BE PROCESSED I{ITHOUT OTINER' S STGNATT'RE
1
must providg a current
,ztlo,4(,. ( 1??o. lq..t)
rI PRE-APPLICATO MEETING :
A pre-application meeting with a member of the planning. staff is strongly encouraged to determine if any additionalapplication information is needed. ft is the applicant'sresponsibility to make an appointment with the staff to
determj-ne if there are additional submittal requirements.
Please note that a COMPLETE application will streamline the
.ar"rrrrrtrta l rt r,3CeSS rOr your prolecE.
rII. IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDTNG ALL SUBMISSIONS TO THE DRB:
A. In addition to meeting submittal requirements, theapplicant must stake and tape the project site toindicate property 1ines, building lines and buildingcorners. All trees to be removed must be taped. AIlsite tapings and staking must be completed prior to the
DRB site visit. The applicant must ensure that staking
done during the winter is not buried by snow.
B. The review process for NEw BUILDINGS normally requires
two separate meetings of the Design Review Board: aconceptual approval and a final approval. Applicants
shoufd plan on presenting their development proposal ata mini-mum of two meetinqs before obtaininq final
^-^-^-.^ 1<aPIJ!\Jvdr.
C. 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 bepostponed, will have their items removed from the DRB
docket until such tine as the item has been
rorrrr}. l i chod
D. The foflowing items may, at the discretion of thezoning administrator, be approved by the Cornmunity
Development Department staff (i-e. a formal hearing
before the DRB may not be reguired) :
a. Windows, skylights and similar exterior changeswhich do not alter the existing plane of thebuildi.ng; and
b. Building additlon proposals not visible from anyother.lot or public space. At the time such aproposal is submitted, applicants must includeletters from adjacent property or^rners and/or fromthe agent for or manager of any adjacent
condominium association stating the association
approves of the addition.
E. If a property is located in a mapped hazard area (i.e.
snow avalanche, rockfafl-, flood p1ain, debris flow,
wetfand, etc) r a hazard study must be submitted and the
owner must sign an affidavit recognizing the hazard
report prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Applicants are encouraged to check with a Town Plannerprior to DRB application to determine the relat.ionshipof the property to all mapped hazards.
F. For aL.I residential- construction:
Clearly indicate on the floor plans the j-ns j-de
face of the exterior structural wal-1s of the
l-'" i 'l Ai nn. rnAvsfrsrlrY,
Indicate with a dashed line on the site plan afour foot distance from the exterior face of thebuilding waLls or supporting columns.
If DRB approves the application with conditions or
modificatlons, all conditions of approval must be
resolved pri-or to Town issuance of a building permit.
1-,
LIST OF MATERIALS
NAME OF PROJECT:
LEGAL DESCRTPTTON: LOr-t- BLOCK -l- SUBDTVTSTON u. v. Fr*
STREET ADDRESS:
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
The following information j-s
Revi-ew Board before a final
A. BUILDING MATERIALS:
Roof
S iding
Other WaLl Materials
Fascia
Sof f i-ts
Windows
Window Trim
Doors
Door Trim
Hand or Deck Rails
Flues
,ir r asnlngs
Chimneys
Trash Enclosures
Greenhouses
Other
B. LANDSCAPING: Name of
required for submittal to the Design
approvaf can be given:
TYPE OF MATERIAL COLOR
CE?Atr..,l( tt
(l rl
PLANT MATERIALS: BoLanical Name
PROPOSED TREES
Size*
/o'/74.
EXISTING TREES TO
BE REMOVED
,i 't /
I
*Indicate caliper for deciduous trees. Minimum caliper for
deciduous trees is 2 inches. Indicate height for coniferous
trees. Minimum heiqht for coniferous trees is 5 feet.
Designer:
Phone:
Common Name
PLANT MATERII: Botanical- Name
PROPOSED SHRUBS rln
EXISTING SHRUBS
TO BE REMOVED
*Indicate size5 qallon.
GROUND COVERS
co.n,no,lu^"Ouantitv Size*
of proposed shrubs
Tvpe
t'
F.X6T h
Minirnum size of shrubs is
Sguare Footaqe
SOD
SEED
TYPE
OF TRRIGATlON
TYPE OR METHOD OF
EROSION CONTROLf
LANDSCAPE LIGHTING: If exterior lighting is proposed, please
show the number of fixtures and focations on a separatelighting plan. Identify each fixture from the lighting plan
on the list below and provide the wattage, height abovegrade .and type of light proposed.
N,
tl
n OTHER
poo I s,
wal-1s.3 feet
LANDSCAPE FEATURES (retaining walls, fences, swimmingetc.) Please specify. Indicate heights of retaining
Maximum height of walls hrithin the front setback is. Maximum height of walls el-sewhere on the property
/\rGrr, "o.orro* **r.r.orrO I F:pr,'oQiw 1
suBDrvrsro* t'f i auK t [t/ D-r t '
JOB NAME
LOT BLOCK FILING
ADDRESS
The location and availability of utilities, whether they be main
trunk lines or proposed lines, must be approved and verified by
the following utilities for the accompanying site plan.
Authorized Siqnature Date
U.S. West Communications
r-duv-Yzz-rYd I
458-6860 or 949-4530
Public Service Company
949-57 Bt-
Gary HalI
Holy Cross Electric Assoc.
949-s892
Ted Husky/Michael Laverty
Heritage Cablevision T.V.
94 9-5530
Steve Hiatt
Upper Eagle VaI1ey Water
& Sanitation Di-strict *
47 6-'7 480
Fred Haslee
NOTE:Thi-s form is to verify service availability and
location. This shouf d be used j-n con junction wj-th
preparing a utility plan and scheduling
instal-Iations.
For any new construction proposal, the applicant
must provide a completed utility verification
form. .
T€ - .,.-: 1 .: +-. ^^---! r- cL !,.Lrrruy wwrrrpdfl! has concgrns with thg
proposed construction, the utillty representative
shoutd note directly on the ut.ility verification
form that there is a problem which needs to beresol-ved. If the issue is relatively complicated'
it shoutd be spelled out in detail in an attached
letter to the Town of Vail. However, please keep
in mind that it is the responsibility of the
utility company and owner to resolve identlfied
problems.
ff the utility verification form has signatures
from each of the utility companies, and no
comments are made directly on Lhe form, the Town
will presume that there are no problems and that
the development can proceed.
These verifications do not relieve the contractor
of his responsibility to obt.ain a street cutpermit from the Town of Vail, Department of Public
works and to obtain utili-ty locations before
diqqinq in any public right-of-$ray or easement in
the Town of Vai1. A buildinq permit is not astreet cut permit. A street cut permit must be
obtained separately.
a site plan, floor pIan, and elevations when
Eagle VaIley water & Sanitation signat.ures. Fire
be addressed.
* Please bring
obtaining Upperflow needs must
ZONE CHECK
FOR
sFR, R, R P/S -ZONE DISTRICTS
Bl-ock I Fi l ing
/,f
y411, y/tut&E Or*
I
DATE:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot I
t
ADDRESS:
OWNER L. btzubps
ARCHITECT
ZONE DISTRICT
PROPOSED USE
**LOT SIZE
Height
Total GRFA
Primary GRFA
Secondary GRFA
Setbacks
Parking
Garage
Dri-ve:
.2140 ,tc.
2n?0 + 425
Front
Sides
Rear
Water Course Setback
Site Coverage
Landscaping Alafat
Retaining Wall Heights
PHONE
PHoNE 747- 1/z /
Proposed Total
a4
zboz.z1 uor.do ,zzEo)
-zo' (Fxnr'e Nof \
-
i:; to Fe *uw'b)
" / l/nlzt&rv(E &fu/R-
r soiisor ru./ zbft/qro J4 (
?t /6t
Z Reqrd
(300) (600) (900) (1200t ato
Permitted Slope 8E Actual Slope
Date approved by Town Engineer:
Yes NoX
+ 425'T
2^
Credit i
FN+r/DA
View Corridor Encroachment:
Envi-ronmental /Hazards :1) Flood Plain r-{4
2) Percent Slope /U/
3) Geologic Hazardsa) Snow Avalancheb) RockfalLc) Debris Flow4) Wetlands
Previous conditions of approval (check property file)
Does this request i-nvol-ve a 250 Addition?
How much of the allowed 250 Addition is used with this request?.4L.
**Note: Under Sections !8.12.090 (B) and 18.13.080 (B) of the Municipal
Code, lots zoned Two Faniily and Primary/Secondary which are less than
15r000 sq. ft. in area may not construct a second dwelling unit. The
Community Development D€,partment may grant an exception to thisrestriction provided the applicant meets the crj.teria set forth underSections 18.L2.090 (B) and 18.1,3.080 (B) of the Municipal Code includingpermanently restricting the unit as a long-term rental unit for fuII-time employees of the Upper Eag1e Va11ey.
F/t
PtAEru&
?zo.n a.r.)
(
10
l, BLNI< 2-fttt, df L&/L
3,LF/ / fiLK O 41 7tu
tlrrs r olf
5 f21t/77'r
'PA U/s/A ,N€,
t cA, q//aD
tul/lt Y M/ha uz
Lut,/ la/,<too
z5 founz- ct'tt7, D?-lDt
/rr> 1,,F;N*L
th,&w , "Ru, 77227
t
2lrt- 1z
tww ef uPrc
Pt{ f ehw;ry e',17',-,,/
Ilti tOl/ f,4alzs' ,ut6t clp4t
/ru Vtar;O /4 "4. t,,/ of "ry/4 Fry^*g az.uzpJ'l /l" M / bry I Upt t,/ttv64 5h-,
(nry c***)
,.,.-h /'
2, lsr L pLK / 4(A'
o/q/AZ as
^
hnl 24tt/oa"*to''/ '/'il rnnu*buf'-" s/cot Sdat
,y'//i/d/,l- & / 4y'2 )// a' tflans
/2/3 U94rz fr
6&*% l*1, rx L 7o?z B,
40h
FA4i,
\ep,xr- (n,
Sc!.-\ o'\ \S sNf.o--\
bo?1
N \toe. \u:sq*g co".. ts-)\-qJ.-( ri"S-f""iU B-*\\\A. .\!f
55t/ )
PERMTT NUMBFR Of PjOJECT
DATE
READY FOR
LOCATION:
INSPECTION:
JOB NAME
INSPECTION REQUEST
,.T_O_Fo VAIL
REINSPECTION REOUIRED
CALLER
UES WED/
tr DISAPPROVED
n
tr
tr
tr
tr
tr
tr
ELECTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER tr HEATING
tr EXHAUST HOODS
CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
tr APPROVED
CORRECTIONS:
INSPECTOR
=s\\ |)I
SPEIN CTION REQUEST
TOWN OF VAIL .PERMIT NUMBER OF PROJECT
oor= \-\-\ JoB NAME
READY FOR
LOCATION:
INSPECTION:
(nPenoveo
CORRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVED
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr BOUGH / WATER
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
tr FRAMING
,- ROOF & SHEEB
" PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION tr POOL / H. TUB
tr SHEETROCK NAIL
tr FTNAL ......_.tr FINAL
ELEGTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER tr HEATING
tr EXHAUST HOODS
CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIB
tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
DATE INSPECTOR
TOWN OF
, , . ,i. +.t!rti?ii,,* .J.
REQUESTVAIL I
t.t
..o/ r'..<./ 4/ I "-.
AM PM
t
INSPECTION
PERMIT NUMBER OF PROJECT
,/
D^rE 4'/2 JoB NAME'
CALLER -/',,,
INSPECTION:MON TUES WEDREADY FOR
LOCATION:
B
tr
tr
tr
tr
tr
tr
tr
ILDING:PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH / WATER
FOOTINGS / STEEL
FOUNDATION / STEEL
FRAMING
ROOF & SHEER
PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
INSULATION tr POOL / H. TUB
SHEETROCK NAIL
tr HEATING
r.,')
ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
tr SUPPLY AIR
APPROVED
RRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
oo* a'/o'72 rNSPEcroR
il_{/ru)
DArE /q/7J. JoB NAME
PERMIT NUMBEB OF PROJECT
READY FOR
LOCATION:
INSPECTION:
INSPECTIONTOWN OF
REOUESTVAIL 't,
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
tr FOUNDATION / STEE-
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH / WATER
tr GAS PIPING
tr POOL / H. TUB
-
t-1
tr FINAL
MECHANICAL:
tr HEATING
tr EXHAUST HOODS
tr SUPPLY AIR
-
n
tr FRAMING
,- ROOF & SHEER" PLYWOOD NAILING
tr INSULATION
SHEETROCK NAIL
tr
tr FINAL
ELE
trI
trF
trC
tr_
CTRICAL:
TEMP. POWER
ROUGH
CONDUIT
tr FINAL tr FINAL
APPROVED
CORRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
DATE -7 - r{- /z-INSPECTOR
l-:':":.'s:-r - -'l
r'la INSPECTION REQUESTlr^tt IPERMIT NUMBER OF PROJECT
ssE 7/sz/ f'JOB NAME 2.^ /-1,"2)
TOWN OF VAIL
/ )L9-1 ,
-
t
READY FOR
LOCATION:
INSPECTION:/l t,/
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
tr FRAMING tr ROUGH / WATER
-la ROOF & SHEER" PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION tr POOL / H. TUB
tr fHE:Tl??,h TIIL
ELECJRICAL:
O TEMP. POWER tr HEATING
tr EXHAUST HOODS
CONDUTT 'tr SUPPLY AIR
$nrpnoveo
CORRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVED D REINSPECTION REQUIFED
7-5.
$t
j tt'l ^onre -l -21'Y l-- rNSPEcroR
ffi&oP !
l
-."-. \ r(-.,\-
-iL\\\\
PERMIT NUMBER OF PROJECT\r-\\\ \rronre \-- \ \- "\^r JoB NAME
INSPECTION REQUEST
TOWN OF VAIL I
READY FOR
LOCATION:
INSPECTION:TUES WED THUR FRI
CALLER
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
PL
tr
tr
tr
o
EI
tr
UMBING:
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
UNDERGROUND
BOUGH / D.W.V.
ROUGH / WATER
GAS PIPING
tr
tr
tr
tr
INSULATION
SHEETROCK
POOL / H, TUB
NAIL
FINAL
tr
tr FINAL
\/..rl\
&FRAMING \s-t-
l- RooF & sHEER\, PLYWOOD NAILING
ELECTRIGAL:
tr TEMP. POWER
MECHANICAL:
tr HEATING
tr ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT
rt
tr SUPPLY AIR
t]
trFtd tr FINAL
ffi{{yps tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
GORRECTIONS:
D^rE ?'' z.a - 7z tNSPEcroR
5 vq01-' t-- A 'l
, \/ | *.--/ \J \J
--T;--
'\zfn'l''
NAME
INSP REOUE$T \CTION
TOWN OF
READY FOR
LOCATION:
INSPECTION:^"@
PERMIT NUMBER OF PROJECT
BUILDING:
O FOOTINGS i STEEL
PL
tr
tr
tr
tr
tr
tr
UMBING:
UNDERGROUND
ROUGH / D.W.V.
ROUGH / WATER
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
tr FRAMING
ROOF & SHEER
PLYWOOD NAILING GAS PIPING :
tr INSULATION
tr SHEETROCK
POOL / H. TU; ?
NAIL
tr
M FINAL
tr
tr FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER
MECHANICAL:
tr HEATING
tr
tr
tr
tr
ROUGH D EXHAUST HOODS
CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
FINAL
D
tr FINAL
lt PPROVED tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
CORRECTIONS:
OATE INSPECTOR ::,y'(.,._.A- '-
nrffisroe
OF PROJECT-l F- JOB NAME
t
INSPECTIONTOWN OF
Kn ^oJ./
REQUEST
VAIL 't
.t
(-/
PERMIT NUMBE
DATE
READY FOR
LOCATION:
INSPECTION:TUES
(
WED THUR FRI
CALLER
BUILDING:
O FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL PROUGH / D.W.V.
ROUGH / WATER
ROOF & SHEER
PLYWOOD NAILING tr
tr
tr
E
tr
GAS PIPING
INSULATION
SHEETROCK
POOL / H. TUB
FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER tr HEATING
tr ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
CORRECTIONS:
/tD^rE l/L /? 2- rNSPEcroR C ' -^ :
a,
QUEST. t-
l-'t
RE
VAI
a,a1tit
INSPECTIONTOWN OF
5b5D
PERMIT NUMBER OF PROJECT
INSPECTION:
oot. J [3 JoB NA
READY FOR
0/''l
LOCATION:
WED THU
CALLER
BUILDING:
E FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
O UNDERGROUND
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL /loucw D W V
/.q RoUGH / wArERtr FBAMING
tr
E
tr
tr
ROOF & SHEER
PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
INSULATION
SHEETROCK
tr POOL / H. TUB
NAIL tr
tr
tr FINAL tr FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER
MEGHANICAL:
tr HEATING
tr
tr
tr
ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
tr FINAL tr FINAL
tr APPROVED
CORRECTIONS:
ISAPPROVED REINSPECTION REQUIRED
oor, */q > rNSPEcroR
I
SPECTIONTOWN OF
; /(rn-",o,
INi55c t
UE
I'
REQ
VAIL PlJECT
'Lro, *o*,DATE
READY FOR
LOCATION:
INSPECTION:
CALLER
TUES
( --'
MON
BU
trl
trl
trl
oi
trl
Ell
tr
ILDING:PLUMBING:
ts..uruoencnouruo
ffioucH / D.w.v.
tr ROUGH / WATER
FOOTINGS / STEEL
FOUNDATION / STEEL
FRAMING
ROOF & SHEEFI GAS PIPINGPLYWOOD NAILING
INSULATION tr POOL / H. TUB
SHEETROCK NAIL
FINAL
tr
tr FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
B TEMP. POWER
IIECHANICAL:
tr
tr
tr
tr
HEATING
tr ROUGH EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT SUPPLY AIR
tr FINAL tr FINAL
6i4-rRovED O DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
CORRECTIONS:
INSPECTOR
REQUEST 'VAIL }
, ,|'.
CTIONTOWN OF
I
SPE
il,-,6f sv
PERMIT NUMBER OF PROJECT
DA1E .i,//r''4',/ t/ i- JoB NAME
INSPECTION:
)
READY FOR
LOCATION:
WED
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS i STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH / WATER
B FOUNDATION / STEE_
O FRAMING
,_ ROOF & SHEER' PLYWOOD NAILING O GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION tr POOL / H. TUB
tr
tr
SHEETROCK NAIL B
tr
tr FINAL tr FINAL
ELECTRIGAL:
tr TEMP. POWER
ME
. trl
. trl
tr!
X
CHANICAL:
HEATING
tr ROUGH EXHAUST HOODS
tr
tr
CONDUIT SUPPLY AIR
, -/'. : ,,+, ' ,-
FIN^.I TI FINAI
PROVED N DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
CORRECTIONS:
oo* Vzc-j7z rNspEcroR.
I \
l*rFc(4 a'/-/ )L)|NSPECTION REQUE$T I
PERMIT NU OF VAIL ,'-!q
DATE I JOB NAME
READY FOB
LOCATION:
INSPECTION:
CALLER
TUES THUR FRI
BUILDINGT"
O FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLl4!BrNG:
o uruoeR6nouruo
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH / WATEREI FRAMING
,- ROOF & SHEER" PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
tr POOL / H. TUB
tr FINAL
tr TEMP. POWER tr HEATING
'- -l-tr ROUGH / ...K-i .: O EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
trtr
tr FINAL
APPROVED
RRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVED tr BEINSPECTION REOUIRED
,).J
INSPECTOR
..i\
Nl
l|1''d,
tr'i..i
*'::'nn- |,"{l Aaroqra,.r ,c-'?
,:f ,\ '.1
I LJ'
t\
I,
\
J)
qI
o'fi
iL:l|.v.3
n>
u
tJ
R
frt {
il$
ll.a u
UJrLs
,@
@
s\
_ls
:\\rn-
\7 \
-- -Fnt'tZ i o,) r,9:b
s.it-
-lt /
dr | _,'
i -$ {--^t*- -'I
iiiihit.iii4 il$ 'J i 5-ii?
iii F r **,i11
d:
$g $$
s s.',ti9U Y it .',.,3-+r-l-
{7q 4 lr}
$:x \ J iis I
I
I
I
I
I
II r_t
ul
-r I
,frl
i- /.
alU ct\:St I,l
n \l) 6l r-f i,li 3 .'.
-t \-
n(ll
't'
I
l,Jl
<{
0_tlr\ln
stl
LI
fl
il6t
F
3na-T
;
'lr
=
a.\J
3
,-
t
d
s
)
d
I
.i
lrs
dr
ul
3
TL
q
-i'-l
lUv' I: rft()
hI
;+tsr|-
t, :{e(\t-i?,h
t
t
f .,
-i-!l
->.
!c}l
_lir
cl
$\
.!
-\
-7
{_
_J
,l
\_t -n
tl
)
frLL-
al
7_n
lrl
UJ
7t
;
hl !
$$ofr
--l
Q;
Mr
- - - I
f Cl,o I\./- | I
$-:
I
_s i\c)l
--++--
-- =+-
x
rN1-;
ds,,?/,V -,Ll
$*il
$$H$,
1-z
-4
t,.',1
sst +n.f,
=y \F->c
,JhF14
Zu
a
r5(9rl
i
^l-.
$
d
ua
'Jl
rL
h$o$
*$9s
Htffr
.s.>$
t-2
ol 6
fl.nT^t<d_rtitfi
rl
i
I)-
I
ut
_{
-sr
iaI
$
U
{
d
Hjt{
tl
BI
llt I r-nl uul 4
H $i
xt
fi*Fffi..-.-..-l
^@d--;ry*-si:
,i\
IJ
o
o
B@RaA^^
a.t6T/^E wklL T'b 4:
-$R.qou@ 1+-
_F.-_
kwrr 10 Ba)e/V[.13'x7t-6tt- 37.5*,n
' )^REU6r rurNDc{os + trocj(
r NEIIJ €.tDE atA*S I,. GGr# xEg.)e,.
doExt'orL4bt)eF
Fy rl6T
114,@
o ooo
: l$$u
TJL f;
s#l
:a,spld
u$is;
tC
^lE=/,,frRLT
J
$
o
$
tto
$
rx:I
b)
P
=o
t
o
$
$
b
s.-f0
t\Itr
'-{ $
{55
rir. h
.qil5
--
o
fi
rD
j
"T-{
h'xu,
.F
I
I
I
Io
\:
l\
o
It
l{
i
o
a
$
u
o
a
lua?
;f
l{
'tiE
lb
ril
Fivl
I--, i.t
v
-
$
ss
,- ,-- ain >r5'Ei?e ,o7-
\ ,'' :
YIt, -. _.-'
.a-\./l
'l{t3l
$t3ldl
oi
r:|'rrii,
\\'r
. ',i
iI
I
iI
\ ./',Y
I
I
ii
II
I
\
i
\
I
I
I
Ilt4
L
lo'
ry
ldJrs
!J
tn
nU
I
t
\'
i
I/
T
/
t
!
I
j
I
I.l
I
a$
'$
h
Mtr
\-q
h
H
o)
-cJI
e
s"ll'l
r.l-$ I{ xl;, tJ
*rt
5Ri
:l---. - T
{if
r.D
I
.T
-{
h'
il
o
I
-EXt6T?At6' Ar,tr€H"
--Begss14
altstrytE. wklL Tb EE<q,lovgP 1I
r=f x1LGil= 37.9*Fr
$
i
l.
{Cs
t
o
o
a
$[[r
$.|
hx
Itl
3
H
I
H
d
TFJ
$
{
0{\
\
q
I
2.
3
b
il
\t
$
ffih'q
sl
$$
u
s
$
t\
ttl
u
ilteu
\Jz oo
o0tqwfrf . (rrc'1re
?ryh b E?fHo
I
f .t1,
fpin
r1
rl
S;
lll)
L
L4i
iUr
HaS*\$*el5
fu$
$i:
ool lZdl{
$
F.
',4x
9l
\i)5
$
a
a
o
a
I
\
Ir- " -- -----*-J*-
I
I
i+- -- - ----i,
o
o
I v?
HI OH
$$$$$
p rrTN
HBsTT
? tffi fir.
; $: tn
fi r* i$$
pii$$$ri
z,o.r ;1, ;i
o
,o
t
IUJ
il ,
l-!l
uo
t\
I
I
=.l orr^- S. TuscgruaN
atorr 11. l.( r( )t, s.r1 T . sutT.E 1255
I t()L sT()N. TnX,tli 77027
February 8' 1991
Ms. iIil1 E. Kannerer
Senior Planner
Tovn of Va 11
75 S. Frontage Road
Vail' Co.81657
Dear Us. Kamnerer,
Ba6ed on our diEcusslons, I an reconflrning the 250 aqua re
foot flve year bonus ls aval1ab1e for 1031 Eagle Neat clrcle. The
property haa not received a temporary CO in the last five years.
r have 9'320 sq. ft. of land. 251( of this ls 2,330 sq.
plue 425 sg. ft.' pluE the 250 sq, ft bonus provides 3005 sq.
allosab1e. The present slze of ny house Is 2,469 sg. fl ., so
unilerstand that 536 eq. ft 1e nor left for expanslon. f have
reconflrmed these flgures also uith ,tohn Railton and same are
accord ulth past correapondence wlth you.
For two yeara I have been trylnq to ae11 my house, and most
buyers seen to need the fourth bedroom. It ls thus essentlal
that f not lose the 250 sq. ft. bonus. There are three ways to
add the extra bedroom, so f want to let the buyer nake this
cholce. I thus prefer to contlnue to hold off on flnalizing the
addltlon appllcatlon to you until I have the buyer.
HoLever, lf it appears there ri11 be any change agaln 1n the
25O sq. ft. bonu6, p].eaae lnnedlately notlfy me and I shall then
ruah to have ny archltect and surveyor get you final p1ana.
By the r{ay' your alanuary 22 let,Ler arrived 9g9gf .
Js\/is
cc: John Ra l1ton, AIA
ft.,
f t.
I
ln
Regar
Tuschnan
I'rI
75 3outh trontage road
vail, colorado 81657
(303) 47$,2138
(303) 479-2139
ollice of communlty developtnent
i7/3) ,.t r':t - 7s ci: t'4X
January 22, 199L
Mr. John S. Tuschman, President
Southwest National Mortgage Conpany
2100 West Loop South, # L255
Houston, Texas 77027
RE: 2,O/Bedroom Addition
L031 Eaglers Nest circLeLot 1, Block 1, Vail Village Eighth Filinqr
Dear Mr. Tuschnan,
The Conmunity Development Departnent staff has had theopportunity to review all of the naterial which has beensubmitted to this office regarding a 2si/bedroorn addition foryour residence at 1031 Eaglers Nest Circle in Vail, Colorado.The staff has found your application to be incomplete.Additional materials nust be subnitted prior to staff review ofttre 21O/bedroom addition. Because the application is inconplete,the addition request will be reviewed under the revised 1991
Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) and Site Coverage gruidelines.
Please subnit the following material-s:
1. Conplete developrnent plans which accurately reflect the
developnent proposed. These plans should include but arenot linited to existing and proposed floor plans and
proposed elevations for those elevations irnpacted by the
redevelopment.
2. Site pJ.an showing the relationship of the proposed additionto existing property and setback lines.
3. Current stamped survey.
4. Completed DRB Application. Please note that
Be Suburitted IIf. Additions - Residential orwould apply to your request.
trMaterials To
Commercialrl
5. List of names and mailing addresses of all adjacent property
owners.
6. A $100 filing fee. Check should be rnade payable to the Townof Vail.
The additional 250 sq. ft. of GRFA is availabLe on a one timeonly basis for the purpose of upgrading existing dwelling units.Before the additional GRFA can be granted the dwelling unit urusthave received a final certificate of occupancy and at least 5years must have passed since the unit was issued a temporarycertificate of occupancy. This additional 250 sq. ft. of GRFA isavailable only at such tine as there is no allowable GRFArenaining for a site.
Regarding the issue of properties Located within theprirnary/secondary zone district qualifying for tqro 250 sq. ft.additions. As we discussed, under this zone district, lots underL5,000 sq. ft. in size rnay not construct a second unit unlesscertain criteria are net and the Cornrnunity Development Departmentgrants an exception to the 1ot area restrictions of theprirnary/secondary zone district. Further, the applicant mustagree to restrict the unit in such a way that it may never besold and will only be leased to employees of the Upper EagleValley. Under the Additional GRFA ordinance, units restricted inthis manner are not eligrble to receive the additional 250 squarefeet of GRFA. Therefore, the additional 250 would not beapplicable to a second unit on this lot.
It would appear that an error was rnade in earlier correspondencerelating to the amount of GRFA which could be constructed on thissite under the existing zoning ordinance. Again, because the lotsize is less than 15,000 sq. ft. and the Cornmunity DevelopmentDepartnent has not granted an exception to the zoning to allowthe construction of a second unit, the existing single farnilyresidence uould not have been eligible to construct the ZOo -q.
ft. of storage applicable to the second unit. This is a mootpoint given the fact that any request which you may subrnit willbe reviewed under the L991 revised site coverage and GRFAguidelines, however, I thought f should nention it as a point ofclarification.
Enclosed are copies of the revised GRFA and site coverageordinances, a copy of the Additional GRFA ordinance, the revised
GRFA Design Review Board (DRB) application and a copy of the DRBMeeting Schedule. Please cornplete this application and subnitall reguired review material to this office. When all
inforrnation has been recel.ved, the application will be scheduledfor review by the DRB. Please note that all 250 applicationsrequire four weeks for review because of the required 15 day
advertisement period. If you have any questLons or coruments
regarding this natter, please do not hesitate to contact me at
(303) 479-2138.
Sincerely ,
KaDnerer
Senior Planner
,7EKl1rdcc: John Railton
Railton-McEvoy
954 Pearl Street
Boul-der, CO. 80302
Larry Eskwith, Town Attorirey
JOsnr S. TuScrrrvr.lw
IOSI EAGLE 'S NEST CTRCLE
vArL, coLoRADO a1667
AOB- 4'1(J - (J49'7
';/nt/f o
6f/ -5n/(€ 7aJCI(/r
ru;A(/.//// L//e/ lA&
//v/-t Drugt6pFD. rua
/AP.7U,SQ(/UA/U 744f /E
mdd,u D/o/Uar,.l4/FK
&7' O,F P4//S A^)//Att/D
rJAr4a4p- nte eaUsa) -/E c' a nPZLTz,ZP?Z/ 42//u
Ptzztg lauzo 4./ar Be-
,(gulezue a//w& /7?o
€/e/-V 6u/Dez/h.&t &tr,4/rya<- p,op/JCATZoU
tu0t/12 6E /(e7//fuAp
a!u-o_n< z€7//@ /2?/o,+ZOz/N-Z,uEE
Ms. Betsy Rosolack
Planning Technician
Office of GommunitY DeveloPment
Town of VaiI
75 S. Fnontage Rd.
Vail, Co., 81657
December 31 ' l99O
Dear Ms. Rosolack:
Asperpreviousdiscussions,Iherebymakeapplicationfor
the five year bonus of 25O square feet on my house'
centificates of occupancy were issued in rJuly 1986 and in
July 1983 by Gary lloran to my direct knowledge, and they also
m.rst have been issued when the house was built in 1976'
I also have 23 square feet left on the available GRFA and
252 square feet available for storage- See the pnevious
cornespondence on this enclosed.
This additional space will be used fon a fourth bedroomt
bathroom and additional storage space. I do not anticipate that
any variances wiII be needed or requested-
Please obtain approval on this request immediately as I am
in negotiation with a buyer fon my home who must have the extra
bedroom. This sale has been necesitated by the unexpected
passing of my wife last Year.
Enclosures
' -^'ooulr"K:% {l'3"' :'
fe;ff: TI_,rr,o-J,,0 )
Tuschman
r l\ll,n ,'t'rt; I nilAr+l't 7t,I
--
75 .outh hont 0G |ord
urll, coaorado 41657
(3Gi) 4792138
(3Gr) 4rS2139
May 29, 1990
Mr. John Railton
Railton-McEvoy
954 Pearl street
Boulder, Colorado 8o3o2
Re: Lot 1, Block 1, Vail ViIIage 8th Filing
Tuschman Residence
Dear John:
This letter is to confirrr that the available GRFA onproperty is 23 square feet. In addition, storage of
feet nay be utilized (52 left on thiE unit plus 200 fromunit not yet constructed).
lfr. Tuschman rnay apply for 250 square feet if he hascertificate of occupancy 5 years ago.
Sincerely, a-
A"61 6o/"-(-'
Betsy dosolack
Planning Technician
offfoe of conrmunlly devdopmcnt
the above
252 square
the Eecond
received a
YI€.y 22t L99O
Betsy Rosolad<
Itcnur of Vail
75 scuth F)3ffrtage Road
Vail @ 81657
Re: I-ot L, Block L, Vail Village 8th Fifirg
nrsctunan Residence orr Eaglers Nest Circle
Vail
Dear Betsy:
Thanlc ycnr for yorr lett€r of l.[ay L7, I99O. Regard.irq t}!e square
foortage arrailable I ricrrld fi}<e ycu to .coneu:n_-bf.-letter-ttrat the
follcruirg applies:
(D
Itl[T01rl.1lcEU0I
ARCHITECIS
= 23 square feet .
250 square feet i
= 200 square feet
. .. ,--_- _ - .t
(site zoned prirnary seudar,y, tlterefore 2OO x 2 = 4OO sq. ft. of
stomge qne arrailable. I-ess ttnrr 200 sq. ft. el<ists nohr - see
plans ard calculatiqrs provided with rry letter of April 20, 1990)
I enclose a site plan shcnrirg tlre pncposed location for a 4th
bedrccnr addition. Itris lnild be constnrcted on a third floor
}erreI. I belierre this addition can be planred withi:r ttre heigfitrestriction (31 feet for flat tpof hcuses), withir the o<istirg
setbacJ<s ard witlrin tlre allcnnble site ccnrerable. Wittrcnrt
acfinlIy designhg ttris addition I cannot, be cer*ain that we wouldrpt need to apply for a rrariance. Hcffelrer, I will adrrise nyclient of yar ccmnents r€gardfug ttre history of tlris projecf,
variance.s grcnted to &b, ad possiJcle Plannirg Ccnnrission
reIuctarce to gu:ant nrc:e rrariances.
Iharik yor for yorr inforrnation.
Available GRFA
Bonr.s for hcuses 5 )tears or older
Storage Space
"TT "T-'-'',t i 4> 1
&l,ut.f4,/:
Jdrn Railtsl
PROJECTCONCENS . EESIDTNCES
RTSMRATION . COFPOMTT DESIGN
954 P€arlSl., Boulder, C0 80302
(303) 443 . 4353 . FAX 443 . 553s
P0. Box 430,6N[n, Colorado 81620
{303) 949 . 5595 . FAX 949 .1315
\.
-'April 20, t99O
Betsy Rosolack
9**ltf Develolxrent - plannirq Departrnrentltrvn of Vait
75 Sc,uti F?ontage RoadVail @ 816s?
Dear Betql:
Re: the 1\schnan Residence
L03t Eagle Nest CircleVail, Oolor:adoIot 1, Block 1, Filiry I
Frclosed are tJ.e follouirg:
Docurpnt Date
A. Original House plans 11976B. Study Addition 1983
9. Blcony within Livirq Rn te84D. Living Rn & Bedrln Addn 1986
GRFA stor-agesq. ft. sq. ft.
7926 148
145,a034--t14.?b.L o 3Y -2L6 ---t- ;
232I 148
. -- |/ltltl\l\t\l
Rl ltI0it
ARCltt
.il
I
I
CTUOYfcls
?
Totals
Lot Size
GRFA (25?)
: 9320
= 2330
I arn also enclosiro.copies of building pennits ard corresporderrcerrelevant to thris prt;".c.
l'Iy crient wistres to add a bedroom witJ. bath to ttris ho'se.
As r urderstarxl the Tbr,in of vair reguirenrents this wqrld pernLitthe follcruing:
Additiornl @FA ArrailableAvailable GRPA to ho:ses5 yr"s or older
TIotaI GRFA
Additional storage available (2Oo _ t4g)
sq. Ft.
(233O-232L) s
3::_
(259)+-
=52
?
3{ --
PmJto cor\cf fls ntsrDtilcfsnfs(rtulo c0fi'oB tf ftsnN
954 ttarl St., Boutdet C0 80J02
(303) 4,r3. 4353. f AX 4t3. 5535
P0 8or 431lren. Coto'ado86m
(3031 9,19. 5s95 . rAx 94S.t315
1..:': -/
Betsy Rosolack
April 20, 199O
Paq,e2
I urderstard tiat this 25O sq. ft. rnust be applied for per ttre
Tcftrn of vail requirement, tut frqn. orr corwersation today, you
believe it r.rclfld be granted to nry client.
Revieffirq the city requirenent, ard ttris project, do ycu see any
further sq. ft. available.
Please contact ne if I can assist you furttrer wittr this revievr,
ard advise ne if I can advise ny client tlnt he can prcceed with
plans for additions to t.l.is hcr:se.
Betsy, thark you very muctr for ycr:r ass.istance to rne in this
natter.
Yo,rrs sincerely,
John Railton
I ,', t
r it t,r ,* , 11 i;-$'.,- -\-lt'Y\ j 1 ''
cc: John T\rschnan
75 soulh lrontage road
Yall, colorado 81657
(303) 47$2138
(303) 47$2139
offfce ot community devdopmenl
ltay 17, 1990
Mr. John RaiLton
Railton-McEvoy Architects
954 Pearl Street
Boulder, Colorado 80302
Re: Lot 1, Block J-, VaiI Village 8th Filing
Dear John:
The available GRFA on this property is 23 square feet.
Additions as you have proposed to the residence on the above lot
would reguire setback variances and site coverage variances.
Although your client could also ask for 25o square feet inaddition, tbe Town Council discourages the use of variances in
order to obtain the 250 square foot bonus.
Looking at the history of this site, it appears that variances were
given for the additions in L983 and 1986. It is possible that the
Planning Conrnission would be reluctant to grant more variances tothis property unless undue hardship were involved.
I hope this explanation helps explain the current situation.
Sincerely,
A'rr(",t-t
Planning Technician
oz
E
=t
IJJo-
(f)
oos (o rr)
ra
(n
u.Jt!IL
E
=Elu
D48*4,I
I
I
@(o\coFt'.\\. (oc(I$\tplo
I
I
tl
':I I
INz. ts-l-+ r-{
qo-o{,#j:+-#q*
rdrj
lu
o
F
F
?
=o
=z
ild.l
:l
"l
ol>ldlOIo-lo-lol
ara
in
IJJ
oz
=J
l
@
€
oz
z
N
ILJ
UJo
=I
or!
oFo
(r
z
E
UJz3o
F
o-
L!
J
o
o
o
(D
c
oE)o
o)
;
=f(n
E
=
l
Eq)
(5
;
.9
o
ln
3oF
o)-c
=
ooo
o
()
o
.th
=o
o
U;!(E
{,
(u
o
at
()
(g
E
E
o
o
c
;
(!
E
o
o
=
tr
o
oo
o)(!
o
o
o
o
ooE
oc
EYts:.Y-
o(UA-.d(u
'-o
(o
(5"
O(!
(!c-cg
-o-oo
.|,to)
(Jr (69:
E3o(!
J;()'-(!E
>.9lto:, ct
r-o
-o
o
q)
.E
E
o
o)
l
c
)ar'.tta
,
q
J
C\ror-{
3
{s'ro
.<
F\
C\J
I
c
LTc\c
F
=ut
zoJ
co
Y
uJI
(_)z F
uJJ
uJ
z6
=l
E
=
uJ
'j4
t!tu
z
tr
UJ
G,
uJE
o
3g
uJ
z(,
LUo
6oo-uto
o-
z
u,/
-.J
x
F
rJlatf
.l)Iu
uJII
F
=uJ
o-
J
FoF
z
!
o
EF
uJJ
IIJ
z
=
2
()lu
=
t-
r
NOrwn]v^
I
I
It>=lE>trld
=; J 1.,tz
= ltl ^j lt-
=!o.li
;-EFor-
= =iuooo=tr ^ 62"X f >_ YuF 9 6i=66 tr:6b fitozX;rI'<oq d;_uJ ;i E:q H=r(\t(,F
=o
d,6
L!
F
t!z.O
z,
l-Jtz,
Flz.
IE
t<
z
tr
J
{
LL
cc
rri
l
o
ur
.
O
ro
<r
e
o-
uJ
J
z
E
z
tr
e.
u,lFJ
=uJz
titltlaFz
z9i4<oo<
=Hx!-do<z
Fz,
9z
--1 'r
rl- 63trOI
I
f-+
lllt]
toltoltdl
LUl
J
(r
aa
UJzY
=f-
F
z
tr
5oz
q
=
=!
lrJ
B
Ff
Fu)
=lzl
z
.. >lo
llJ
IJJ
uJzo
=
Etu(L
J
zo
Eo
@
z
J
2
TL
c,')
I
11124
(/
LrO(\{(f
c)
a,
// '/
/t.
//,'./1
,'V t!Fooo-zotF
(L
LuY
uJdl
o
F
F
tt!
t!|oli38qt1
H !.!lOEzo
a
tr:
uJ
o.t!o:!!EZE<El.)ot2E2E9E;
EE
F-Lt-
=lll-5 h=(, dtrE :o-E U5
9 \tnE X6-f x>6HFct -:oitr^
ut
cooF
E
=E,
UJ
o-zIFof
E,Fazoo
z:l
olutl
:l
<l>l
Bl
5lolFI
-clal
lrl I(51
5lJl
=lJ
(,z
=trF
J
t!(Jz
ant!
z.s
-(J
vl
ui
z
tD
'-)
F\
<tro
I(o
I
o-
F
(J
ol
"l
a
=
q
=ltrl
o
(u
+J
=o
(f)
(f)
cil
=.1ol
r.rJl
5l
<l>l
tJJz,
=
=Etr
>l
lllol
zl
3lolFI
olzl
olull
5l
<l>l
bl
zl
3lotH
I
I
I
I
I
.l
el
"lql
<l>l
rl-l
21 .:3l lol ulFt l-
2?
=fJZrLo()
|}o
UJ
E.r
--.r O<F0aouJ<ZE
(tZoo
E.
z
J
tr.
o
UJJ
F
Fz
z
-
uJ
=
=
rJz
z
r^ =z2coo
=z
(L t!
Efi
=t!Xdd=
xtt
!!u
-,-it,,
. - tI+
rq .t vtv|7
Name of Company:
Address:
Phone #:
C0NTRACT0R REGISTRATI0N PREQUALIFICATI0N FoRM
Must be received and approved prior to issuance of reg.i stration
Submit to Town of Vail Building Department
PLEASE SUBMIT COPY OF ANY PERTINENT REGISTRATION WITH APPLICATION
Type of registration being appl r: )ww/" [.lc eu*z-
Application made by:---CTTIe)_-
DATE OF BIRTH 5/lr
Registration Fees
Renewal Cost
tPs i:;(JV
$l 25.00
:.
75.00
55.00
55 .00
55.00
55 .00
55 .00
General Contractor A or Construction Manaqement(valuation over g1,000,600) .g175.00
General Contractor B or Construction Management. (val uation under gt ,000;000) 100.00
PlumbingMechanical 75.00Electrical 75.00Special (includes drywall, glass, masonry, concrete,Excavation ......:l::illi:.lli::::: 13.33_0wner/Builder.. ........--50:0-0-\\-----.-
IT IS IMPEMTIVE THAT ALL CONTRAITORS HAVE THE FOLLOI,JING INSUMNCE CERTIFICATES:
Liability - 0ption #1: $1,000,000 in the aggregate for Bodily Injury
$.l,000,000 in the aggregate for Propeity Damige"i
0ption #2: Combined single limit of 9.|,000,000.
Workmen's Compensation - Show that you are covered in the Stateof Col orado
If you are.purchas'ing an e'l ectrical or plumbing registration, youmu:t provide a copy of a Mastqr Registration from the State of
Col orado.
NOTE:
Regular Cost
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJ ECT:
APPLICANT:
GRFA:
Planning and Environmenta'l Commission
Communi ty Devel opment Department
July 28, .|986
A request for rear and side setback variances and a site coverage
variance in order to add two additions to an existing residence at
Lot 1, Block l, Vai'l Village 8th Filing.
John S. Tuschman
&flP
I.DESCRIPTION OF VARIANCE REQUESTED
The applicant is requesting a five foot encroachment on the rear setback
in order.tgdadd a living room addition. He is also requesting a 1.5
foot sidetlBbtback encroachment in order to add a bedroom addition. A
site coverage variance is also necessary. Presently, the existing site
coverage is 2,042 square feet. The allowed site coverage for the site'is 1,864 square feet which means that the property is a'l ready 178 square
feet over the a'l 'l owable site coverage. With the proposed bedroom and
living room additions, the tota'l amount of sjte coverage over the
a'l 'l owable would be 366 square feet. Please see the zoning statistics
bel ow:
Prjmary/Secondary Zone District
TOTAL LOT AREA: 9.320 sq ft r
t.
l,anqhdr^ Wf 6D 6,'(
iffi^\ Jiuq (q+ s) ro"a
ItH d!4-
lo9a,,a .(tro*)
3E a wil),addilrrAllowable: 2,330 sq
Existing: lst floor
Znd f|oor
Total
Addition for bedroom
6/23/83
Addition for window seat
s/10/84
f.fo,u,ug.
fr Q5/")'
999'sq ft
+1..l28 sq ft
2,127 sq ft
+ 145 sq ft
32 sq ft
2,304 sq ft
1l( ua nN
storage - 164 sq ft
2,140 sq ft
Proposed 'l iv addition 51 sq ft
Proposed bed addition 91.5 sf
Total
storage -
New Total
Remaining sf after
proposed additions =
2,289.5 sq ft
8
z,ZB-i-Tq--ft
a
SITE COVERAGE
Al |owed: I ,864 sq tt Czo)6 )
Exi sti ng: ?.042
Amt over al I owabl e .|78 sq ft
Proposed Addition:Bedroom 104 sq ftliv room 84
Amt over al I owabl e
-
after additions 366 sq ft
CREDITS:
Garage
:
Mechan i cal
Ai rl ock
Storage
A'l 'lowed
600
50
t)
200
Exi sti ng
403
0
0
172
This residence received a setback
(side) and north (rear) property
the required setbacks were 12'-6u
var't ance
I ines on
The memo
"The variance
residence on
of surroundin
ordi
I ocated on the site to respect viewtightly clustered residential areas.
fo
i nqqce,
Rema'i n i ng
197
50
25
?8
the west
At that
build a single familyft) which re
e zonlng
time,
js requested in orden to
a very small lot (9,320 s
o ex] sEl nq nomes. tne
-r+
ilbeen met in that the
't ews
but would have
which we feel
This site is
or new
them
an adverse impact
would be contrary
been designed andin one of the most
be des'i
on the adjoining
to the intent of thenel9n0ors,
ordi nance.
Vail of
granEe
practi ca1 to I ocate
house has
corri dors
one of 'l ess than 10 in the e
residences where it was not desirable orin comp'liance with the ordjnance."
small lot site created a situation that warranted the variances.
t i^ setback encroE-chment in order to build a bedroom addition on the east
'tlt -i,]^ ^f +ha aviclina naci,{anaa Evan +ha'ah o+rff -^-^^-i,^,r +h^+ |r^thouqh sside of the existing residence.
were speci al ci rcumstances asso_ci
bedroom a I eas cks.
tna&lo+
ww"
'Y,Wffo +frdft In seneral, the staff recommende{-3pppy3t, "rtt#ol*0.31}?rto nr.'impact any acijacent su|lfiffiici would qiso respect viFr^r .ornid;iEa'l so respect vipw corniddFS,
oundi no residences and the'ffr**h*it and ihe
,',[u rlt+ Oa4" sma | | ror s'r re
,altLcnurt( lffi';
J'Ahd n4rii o,,.<- "/"A rrll - |
-
ituYd;e 4, (q!-$y-Ig"j€991 the PEC reviewed a second request for a 5 foot side/ftiilt1p4l,1t-,; setback encrolchment in order to build a bedroom addition on the eas
0ndt(lL (r rt rt' side of the existino residence - Even thouoh st-aff neconnized thet i,!\'i hat there
An irnportant factor@t was a non-building easement
agreement wFTch-was arranged between the owners of lof Z-EilLot 1 in
November of 1980. According to the previous memo dated May, 1983:
-2-
At
"The applicant does own an easement for the -full and free liqht ryg"F[to the uninterrupted access, transmission and enjoyment of lilht WftNand view over and across Lot 2, which is adjacent to the proposed ulal,
addjtjon. The easement does not completely deny the possibifity
that further construction wjll take place on the adjacentproperty. There is GRFA left on Lot 2, and the easement agreement
may be altered to allow an addition to the residence on Lot 2."
er
-bui I dab'le area describ rties. However, Larry Eskwi th,
ould be abandon
and.roved
Separat
own
e
wit
II
The relalionship of the requested variance to other existing orpotential uses and structures in the vicinity.
h Lrts I sglt Jsr,vclr,n, l,t
ilvlo r*-tz adjacent properties.
'fa4'8-
wiw
befiryJ
The variances should have no impact on adjacent structures. The
Olttho hOUSC WhiCh Wera ^fidinrllv apnnoved .in JUn--.ma4+€*isd. The encroachment for the bedroon is Tess than the existing
side encroachment due to the ang'l ed'l ine of the house- The living roomadditjon encroaches exactly the same amount as the rest of the house on
the rear setback, therefore, the encroachment will have no impact on
on review of Criteria and Findi ecti one. lne
8.62.060 of the Munici
oDmen re commen rova I o
actors:
r literal inter retation andtoa
tes e vicinitto
AE
. ,M^. t As was stated in the memo of June 1976, the staff supports the previous,#gf tot- statements that rr',e to the veny s ng''dLln site standards are djfficult to apply to ttrC_-BroEIU. }Je a'l so agree
"ffi-a-f the house has been designed to respect view corridors and that to
require the building to be designed so that it meets every technical
requirement of the ordinance would have an adverse impact on adjoining
neighbors." (Memo June 1976)
Staff finds that the applicant is requesting a "sf
an
exi sti n
c0rnsetbacks rather than c
after
the vari ence.
CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
re o ue sEe
Consideration of Factors:
The deqree to which relief from the s ri ct
enforcement o eclTte
un t Torm treatmentto attain s title 0ulprrv'l Iege.
As was stated in the memo of June 1976,
awkward
nTorm w setDa c
-3-
wi th
al I Eon
letter June 1986) Staff has also revjewed sjmjlar requests and foundthat the variances were reasonable. As lsn Beaver Dam Road
extended a prwT-ous . It is
ong as Ene original rationale for granting the
staff' s
setback
setback
ion of
variances is reasonabl e and
reviewed, it is not a grant
encroachments.
sti1l pertains to the proposal beingof special privilege to continue the
III.
IV.
The effect of the var'l an n li ht and d i stri bu
opu la ti es ano
uti I i ti es. and pub et.V.
The previous vari sed on the fact th the
df,ed their views. Staff bel ieves that th'i s proposal ave nowi 1'l hffisaoove.
RELATED POLICIES IN VAIL'S COMMUNITY ACTION PLAN.
SUCH OTHER FACTORS AND CRITERIA AS THE ISSION DEEMS AP ICABLE TO
FINDINGS
findings before grantjnq the vari ance:
That the grant'i ng of the variance will not constitute a grant of specialprivilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties
classified in the same district.
That the granting of the variance will not be detrimenta'l to the public
health, safety, or welfare, or materjal 1y injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
That the varjance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons:
The strict or 'l iteral interpretation and enforcement of the
specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or
unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives ofthis title.
There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions
applicable to the site of the vari ance that do not apply generally
to other properties in the same zone.
The stri ct or ljteral interpretation and enforcement of the
specified regulation would deprive the appl icant of privileges
enjoyed by the owners of other properties jn the same distrjct.
V.
ransoortation and tr
-4-
VI.STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends approval of the three varjances. It is felt that the
setback varjances are merely extensions of previous variances that were
granted back in 1976. To require that the additions jog in and out in
order to meet the existing setback requirements is unreasonable. Thesite coverage variance does not greatly increase the bulk of the
buildjng or negatively impact adjacent properties. The proposal will
not be a grant of special privilege, as this type of interpretation has
been used with other properties such as the Peterson property. In the
June 1976 memo it a'l so states that:
"Similar variances (Morgan, Carnie) have been granted for new
resjdences where jt was not desjrab'l e or practical to locate themin compliance with the ordinance."
!It is also fe1 t that the existing setback configuration creates an
unusual circumstance which warrants the vari ances. Staff recommends
approval of all three requests.
*ly 4"w o{ yc,iaw,wruny n& * n,A *Yfrtr"ftiin, h0loly qittqV b-T ftzvtatd vwrytLaa 1 ( 1r{. \,<Qt<e*\ v-*-'-*'p
, l" ,<4. ll4 +b n i^i*l+, ,,tl+'l{1,^1 &tll'*}J uh'ldL u^nwaQ
' o u ''r*l'LtL-r{t/q-'/*^t,tiQ. *f,o* A 0 t ,frIfrr$-Wffi ^tt'^o' rlrd'|e t*z
/ft.,,hfo.-
n vf^( (*r*a,
25 June 1985
TO: Town of Vail
Plannirq Department
elannirg and Envirornental Ccnrnission
RE: Tusctman Residence
On belhalf of my clients Mr. & Mrs.
requesting the Planning arrl Envirornent
setback variance.
John S. TusclTnan, I an
Ccrnnission to grant a
Milburn. Sparn
INCORPORATED
Architecture and Planning
Ski Muir Milburn AIA
Stephen Sparn AIA
Philip McEvoy RA
Kermit Wells RA
This variance is requested to enable my clients to expard
their house with an addition to the living roorn and master
bedrocrn.
This addition is available to them within the GRFA permitted.
Ihe additional 250 square feet now available for houses 5
years or older is not requested.
,- llhe deck addition does not project into the setback more than/)V3 of the setback distance and therefore conforms with the
setJcack requirarents.
1[he variancre requested for these additions is as follows:
(A) Rear Setback (living roon addition)
The house was constructed on a 10t rear setback line. ltre
current setback requirernent is 15r. Had the house beenset on the 15r setback line the hardship in exparding the
house rpuld not exist.
The expansion is restricted by the location of the
fireplace, the room layout planning, and other existingconstruction. The expansion would continue along the
original l0r setback line, and continue the architecturallines of the house. The intrusion is approximately 6r-6tt
x 5r = 32.5 square feet.
(B) Side Setback (master bedrocrn addition)
llhe house was constructed on a 10' side setback line.
current setback is also l-5r.
The
The expansion would ocqupy the existing roofed deck and a3' glass solarir.un type addition. The current master
bedroom is small (14' x 13'). This intrusion over the15rline is a wedge shape from 1r-6" to 6" and
approximately 7r long = 8.75 square feet. A very sralljog in the building would avoid this variance, but I
believe would look very awlmard.
33OO MITCHELL LANE, SUITE 390, BOULDER, COLO RA DO 8O3O ] OSA 3 03.447.2646
Mdressing your application itenrs I tbrough 3:
1. The relationship of the requested variance to adjacent
houses does not effect existirg circunstances.
The house is already located off the 15' setback lines
and on a 10r setback 1ine.
The planning concept of setting this house back frcrnthe street. (Approximatety 60tard more than twice the25' front setback required) and its east side
neighborhood house forward, and the resulting viewcorridors is maintained.
The house occupies, even with the proposed additions,
only 50t of the buildirg envelope.
2. I believe that my clients are not asking for a specialprivilege. They are entitled to additional sguare
footage for their house.
Given the existing plan layout and tocation on site ofthe house I believe these proposed additions are
planned for the best available locations.
We are really requesting a eontinuance of existing
setbacks rather than contorting the house with awkwardjogs and corners to conforn with setbacks enacted after
the house was buiLt.
3. I hope you can agree that ttre variance will not affectlight, air or any of these other natters.
A research of the history of this house indicates that
the planning cqrunission granted a variance to set the
house l0r off the rear and side lot lines. The
requirarent at that tirne was L2t -6n . The lot is very
small and the ccmnission at that time wished to respect
the relative locations of existing adjacent houses andtheir vienrs, and felt that this e,as the proEEr locationfor the ho.rse on this site.
I have hoped that ny design for the proposed additionsis in the spirit of the intentions of the planning
department and conunission, as conveyed by the historyof their past actions.
I feel f have an obligation to apply for a variance inorder to provide for my cllents the beEt answer totheir program reguirements, arrl for ttre ccmnunity ttre
best site planning and architectural ansrer.
The alternatives that do not require a variance, Iconsider to be less desirable than this proposal , asthey add awkmrd jogs arrt lines to the clean ard simplearchitecture of the house, or provide dominantadditions forward at the front of the house thatdisrupts the views frqrr within this house and alterexisting landscape, view corridors and street
character.
Please contact ne if I can assist further with your review or
ansrer any qr:estions or concerns that arise.
Sincerely,
MILBT'RN-SPARII IhTRPOMTED
John Railton
Partner
JR/sls
J.A request for r ran
vam ance n or ertoa
oc a
canx:Jo
side setback vart ances and a si c0ve ra qe
two addi t ons to an exi st in residence at lot
Kristan Pritz explained the background of the request whjch included a setbackvariance of 10 feet for the west and north property 1ines jn June of 1976. shepointed out that in 1976 the staff recommended appioval , as the proposal wouldnot impact any adjacent structures, and would also respect view corridors. Itwas also felt at that time that the location of surrounding residences and thesmall lot site created a situation that warranted the variinces.
In May, .l983 the PEC reviewed a second request for a 5 foot side setback
encroachment in order to build a bedroom addition on the east side of theexisting residence. The staff fe] t that there were other locations that wouldallow for the construction of the bedroom within, or at least closer to, therequired setbacks and recommended denial . A non-building easement agreement
between the owners of Lots I and z had been arranged in November or iggo. ThePlanning Commissjon members felt that this nonbuiiaante area described in the
easement provided adequate separation and low impact between properties andapproved the request 5-0 despite the staff,s recommendation.
The staff felt that the present request would have no impact on adjacentstructures, the lot is small and built to respect view corridors and
recommended approval of the request. Pritz added that the staff had revjewedsimilar requests and found that the variances were reasonable. She stated thatthe it was the staff's opinion that as long as the original rationale forgranting the setback variances is reasonable and sti11 pertains to the proposal
being reviewed, 'it was not a grant of special privjlege to contjnue the selbackencroachments, and was a fair interpretation. The variances are merelyextensions of previous vani ances. To require that the additions jog in andout in order to meet the existing setback requirements was unreasonable. Thesite coverage vari ance does not greatly increase the bulk or character of thebuilding nor negatively impact adjacent properties
John Rai'l ton, architect for the applicants, answered questjons. Donovan askedwhat rationale could be used to grant additional site coverage. Kristan
answered that it was the size of the lot and that the added bulk did not createproblems. Railton added that without the variances, the house would be forcedto be constructed with 3 stories.
Piper stated that as long as GRFA beyond that allowed was not being requested,
and as long as the height was not being added to, he was in favor of therequest.
Pritz stated that if the addition were buiIt, the staff would like to makecertain the tree by the Iiving room was replanted or replaced.
Sid schultz moved and Pam Hopkins seconded to approve the request. The voteffi
Peter Patten stated that Jay Peterson, attorney for the applicant, requested to
4.tabl e raddl e Creek Subdi vi si on.
-3-
"1
postpone the originally scheduled zoning of Spraddle creek. George Gillettwanted to propose a zone and so the Town agreed to the postponement. G.i llettwas supposed to submjt a zone request today. Jay Peterson stated that Gilletthad not iglyarly closed_on the property yet and there were many agreementsbetween Gillett and Vail Associates which needed to be processea.- He said thatthey would like to cone in August 25th for a work session which woula givJ ih;
PEC time to review their plans before,going into expensive engineering-p'l ansfor the subdivision. Donovan asked if theie were any guarantee that Oiitettwould be the owner by August 25. Peterson answered ltrit tnere was no guaranteebut that he would be working with the staff to show them what they wjll bepresenting. Piper was disappointed that the project was not on tiack. Heasked Patten how far past the deadline for zoning the property the Town wis,and Patten replied that the property had been annexed i-tl2 y""r. ago and wisorigina1 1y to be zoned March of .|984. The staff agreed to an exteniion untilJanuary 1986. In January .1986 the applicant appliid for an extension.
Peggy Osterfoss felt that the board had to agree to an extension as a practicalissue, but that eventually even the attorneyi in chicago dealing with [tii --
issue should know that the board could not be pushed forever. 5he suggestedzoning the property on August 25. Patten replied that the staff wouli'have topublish the zoning jn the August 9 newspaper in tjme to do the zoning on Ruguit25. He said that the Town could publish on g/9 the zoning the town [adpreviously proposed, Agri cultural and 0pen Space, which wou'l d allow them totake action on 8/?5.
Donovan stated that someone needed to emphasize to the Chicago attorneys thatthe-board was getting seri ous. patten asked if the board woita tike him topubl ish on August 9 for the 25th. Piper asked the members how many of themwould like to see a work session on the 25th. This was discussed ind patten
emphasized that a work session could be held on the 25th as'l ong as theapplicant submitted everything needed two weeks before that date. p.i per saidthat if there was a work sess'i on on the 25th, he would like to know ti'rat theywould move forward from that point. Patten explained that if there was " *oiksession on 8/25, a complete submittal must be in by 9/2, which meant thatrealistica] 1y there may be an October date for the zoning, because thesubmittal would have to go through many Town agencies.
Donovan moved and Hobbs seconded to have a work session on 8/25 and to have theprocess move fo
The board was told that there were no jtems scheduled for the August 1lmeeting, but that there was a possibility that there would be a joint meetingwith the CounciI on that date.
The board had looked at some projects in west vail before the meeting, and theCounty Planning office had asked the Vail Planning Commissjon to comment on theproj ects.
1. First Bank of Vail drive-through ATM.
This was to be next to the 7-lI bujlding in Chamonix Corners. Jay Peterson wasrepresenting the applicant, and said that he had concerns about the slope.i nthe winter time and would withdraw this from the County agenda if the board hadconcerns as well. Pam Hopkins fe1 t that there would be a problem if there weremore than two cars in the drjve lane waiting to use the machjne. Sid Schultz
-4-
\,l.^ ^ c.R. Ao ra$ 6,$p'{r r.o" ''l-
Application Date
PEC MEETING DATE
APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE
I' Th-is procedure is.required fgf gn{ project requesting a variance. The applicaticnwill not be accepted until al'l inloimalion is 'submitied.
A. NAME 0F AppLrcANT .JolfAl s. TD&,ilrA/*N
ooo^rrr ,o=,
PH1NE+ft-1497.
APPLICANT' S REPRESENTATIVE Jot+xlB. NAME OF
ADDRESS
c.
X
"NAME
0F oWNER(S)
si
ADDRESS o3(arczlE UAtt-. 5
pxsxEtF -6 e7.
D. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL
ADDRESS
.
LEGAL DEscRrprroN lor I BLocK / rtttrue I rtl
K E. FEE $IOo PAID cx *_4o_3€FRu4JoFRu s r)sqfuIW.
THE FEE MUST 8E PAID BEFORE THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPYOUR PROPOSAL.
ARTMENT I'IILL ACCEPT
J F. A'list of the names of owners gl_lll qrgpelty adjacent to the subject properryINCLUDING PROPERTY BEHIND AND.ACRoSS_SI1lrri, inl tn"i" mailins ulJ"urr"s.THE APPLICANT t,tILL BE REspoNsrsLE ron-coR-nici I,r[irrnG ADDRESsEs.
II. A PRE-APPLICAT-IqN CONFERENCE WITH A PLANNING STAFF MEMBER IS STRONGLY SUGGESTEDT0)DETERMINEIF-ANI ADDiTI0NAL tllronNniioti-ii nirblo.''no npplrcRTr0N r,trLL BEACCEPTED UNLESS IT-Is^coMpLEIE (MUST rr,rcluoE iirr-iiir,r! REQUTRED By rHE zoNrNcfl9ILNIlIR4I98l.- II-I! rHr RppticRrur's nEiporuSisriiiv'T0 MKE AN App0rNTMENrl'lITH THE STAFF TO FIND OUT NEOUi-NOOTTIONAT-SISMiiiNi NEqUTNEMENTS.
PLEASE NoTE THAT^A^I9+!!gE_APPLICATT0N tjrLL STREAMLTNE THE APPR0VAL pRocESS FoRY0uR PR0JEcr ev-DecR-msIffi-THE NUMBER or corvoiriorus-or nppnovAl THAT THE pLANNINGAND ENVIRoNMENTAL cOMMIssIoN mni srtput-Rli. -fti-Cordirrons
0F AppRgvAL MUSr BE. cOMpLrED r,rrrH BEF0RE A BUTLDING pEmrti-ii-issffi.--":,' : i , )
III. FOUR (4) COPIES OF THE FOLLOWING MUST BE SUBMITTED:
A. A WRITTEN SIITFI,IENT OF THE PRECISE I.IRTURE OF THE VARIANCE REQUESTED AND THEREGULATI0N INV0LVED. THE STATEMENT MUST ntso noonrst, -' "----''-- 'nr
l' The relationship of the requested variance to'other existing or potential. uses and structures in the'vicinity. -.- -:
2' The, degree to-which relief from the strict or literal interpretation andenforcement of a specified regulation'is-nei.rru.y.to achieve compatibilityand uniformitv of treatment atong sttei-i'i-irt" viiinitv-6i-i6 iiilin tneobjectives of this tiile without'grant or sfeciat privitege. ----
OVER
7
Vari ance l,-
3. The effect of the variance on light and air, distribution of population,
transportation, traffic facilities, utilities, and public safety.
B. A topographic and/or improvement survey at a scale of at least l" - 20' stamped
by a Colorado licensed surveyor including locations of all existing improve-
ments, including grades and elevations. 0ther elements which must-be ihown
are parking and loading areas, ingress and egress, landscpped areas andutility and drainage features.
J C. A site plan at a scale of at least'1" = 20' showing existing and proposed
buildings.
J D. All preliminary building elevations and floor plans sufficient to indicate
the dimensions, general appearance, scale and use of all buildings and spacesexisting and proposed on the site.
Jt.alll.rPi]f{il +rpJ$nort to verifv ownership and easements
/F. If the proposal is located in a mult'i-family development
association, then written approval from the association
projebt must be received by a duly authorized agent for
,1G. Any additional material necessary for the review of the
determined by the zoning administrator.,
which has a homeowiiers'in support of the
said association.
appl ication as
* For interior modifications, an improvement survey and site plan may be
waived by the zoning administrator.
IV.Time Requirments
The P'lanning and Environmenta'l Comnission meetsof each month. A complete application fonn and
(as described above) must be submitted a minimum
PEC public hearing. No 'incomplete applications
administrator) will be accepted by the planning
nated submittal date.
on the 2nd and 4th Mondaysall accompanying material
of 4 weeks prior to the date of the(as determined by the zoningstaff before or after the desig-
i
I
\) :to+ t,
.i
fl)i
-: -
,) \ .JttlJVr.-
-./ i]-rll
rl. (Jts^^^-"-"
sLrb' '
.:r
1
:o
8\t-1, rlu^0 uli\ K+L
\ L"+ r Pihor^
\ fra.l c thi! fitlas-TL
a
lr
ir b* t, UhrI u;llaa_ tr,-N' \ ', 0-
I
lrnaO /r a v.
D Lt \ Diho,r-\r" if,' fulo corrb 6r.Q{
rtfDuw,6- (ry
:
lr
@,}lor! ruh&r"tD'*'14
,h. Y
i,Auun,
(o' Il{}b
lnt x, B\lc I ) Uu. 6'n^
X"r\ C
b\r, $\Lt,
4
I
ui^i tJ.'ttq"]+
UfLL3 flipinor RoLg;^l-d,roa ?ne+
'/
I
I
L
+
'mrl%,@'iilurqr 6\ua^ {'.^^\b,,ta!,
% ftd Mart^r- dvprralron
11P frtL- {ue^rr!.'. ..ffi tli^, Va.l,-, lJ'Y. /DOt
e \\u*s ss*\\n!* - - \r. do"Js \_u:lrf
Prolect Applicatlon
Project Name:
Proiecl Description:
Owner, Addr€ss and Phone:
/O3/ al\, ,# Nc:,7- . /r'i;..{:.; v'A.iLr ..'" ,:'/ 5i'''
Architect,Addressandphone: A,{/;i..'tu\..-..-r'2i.,".ru 1A.,I,-- A,t,; 'ii7-e',:-71t (1-'iv f - ..l,4-.a\
--.?:'- (- .\1tT,: t'l
t
Legaf Docription: Uot LN€ , Block t r*r &i , Ftling f l-H ', Zone
-
Commenls:t\Li.)t-i1 INJL i , rwpt, t, ,(..:
Deslgn Review Board
o"," A*r [, l'lbt
d
APRFOVAL DISAPPROVALr{r)
Summary:
E statt Approval
LIST OF MATERIALS
NAME OF PROJECT:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
STREET ADDRESS:
DESCRIPTION OF P
The following information is requ'ired for submittal
Board before a final approval can be fiven:
A. BUILDING MATERIALS: TYPE OF MATERIAL
e
by the aPPlicant to the Des';n
:OLOR
Revi ew
Roof
Si di ng
Other Wall Materials
Fasci a
50TT r ts
Wi ndows
Window Trim
Doors
Door Trim
Hand or Deck Rails
Fl ues
Fl ash i ngs
Chimneys
Trash Enclosures
Greenhouses
0ther
B. LANDSCAPING: Name
PLANT MATERIALS:
PROPOSED TREESgEE oVzR,
of Designer:
phone:
Botanical Name
NoT UI
NO,
6 /vtKD4+ 4.tg7tlb
FLusH e*7. pLy p*tN_@ cp€kM To A,lftrc4
a,ASs.
6'/'tP/Vrt er-LsT/^a:
a,ETtiW -bu4.s 6 .w- -6 -E RE-USED
E{LsTtts
W-W
EXISTING TREES TO
BE REMOVED
Common Name Quani ty Si ze*
Indjcate height for conifers.
(over)
*Indicate caliper for deciducious trees.
PLANT MTERIALS:
(con't)
SHRUBS
EXISTiNG SHRUBS
TO BE REMOVED
GROUND COVERS
Botanical Name Cormon Name Quani ty Si ze
Type Squc: e Footage
SOD
SEED
TYPE OF
IRRIGATION
TYPE OR METHOD OF
EROSION CONTROL
C. 0THER LANDSCAPE FEATURES (retaining wal1s, fences, swimming pools, etc.) P'lease specify.
(A) Llut!)6 Rwtt €t€;Al5ze'\J'
ANE AM$LL.. c.6Nlft& N\LL E MweO A^rO
A *@O gu\l/|,. edNtffi' tt ffi:@ 8( qc^)eTL'6r\)
N)LL B€ Msv@ fr)tzTt+z-1<- oo'f ffiEvA P{LLptN6'
-fK€ D|ST/,(A@ a//'Ss MEp. W|LL 8€ P:g&de'
-ftr€ s^4 frr1-. aMEN ts4)t@9 fite grstia s^'pr I
wapow ^oDi{6al
NLLL-. EE- Ptt/@ (/rtTt+ S ^J€ A5
frccG5is To niattUU Ci€Wwf I s,avt € G'fuv^to 4/'a<'
b@Pasru r@ftL6'J 4 @?F'
-r-1+€
Tl*E Dp.^rq^t<Y Ntt'L 8e 1as1p5N@ aua'rTLY AT
^@'fit\€d' O&'i 7D A<5/'s7^.Nvb+ c& fr\pr4(\E' p14vt*@
L-ApP-vxpe -r7s ANt 6€ARS rt:uz 'f€' PEfr&GO'
@)
'otof
1
address
soiect 'tofo8 3o6
: ?3 ZO sa F"r
-2330 Wtr
Z'|t ,/ 54t = + l+58'ot3'X2-16:- Z'72.5
1+y* -- qD.3'lB 456 - _ 3l ,l
6t {Z z- t3.o
lo, t1 Z9 - - U.O_F1Bil
Z-/t*54-t=
71',^x tze:'3Ex I e
6 tZ E:-
12,./?-
z tz E
+ t+58- o
- s30.8+ : zz,o-1 'o
26.o
--r.o-7kt-. oe'ru (gva<n,le|-ToTfu Sfo&,e€ - es-trnrE
F(Pa6A) @ .te a14- 2XZ
OR4 aF-Tkt-
arctritecG group ltd pc. the clod< torrer vail colorado 4|65, FOOaFlfrE
:,l?s 9+,re'l2+s( fr
t4l
2- t o+ qFr
Lor 6lzE.6PFa (z*/")
e STnE tfrvSe .
n'4egf f-?eE;t<
6>Ne-&-e
14€-14
%p,4
A/o3€tS
:, ctp.,74
Sgzvo Tela5?-
sTAt,P- LkNDn-6,Ansgx z-K
,', G/P.4
PEIIIISYLVAN IA GENERAL
INSURANCE COMPANY
GN
Policy numberType of policy Policy period
RENE9IAL POLICY HOMEONNERS
Namc ar rd arjr irt:ss oi ir rsured
HP 2303286 01
Agent name and address
o8/L4/86 TO O8/L4/87
Agenl code
TUSCH}.TAN, JOHN S
1031 EAGLE'S NEST
VAI L
Dt'tails
& JULIA LOVE
C IRCLE
co 81557
NABITY-YOUNG INS
3333 S WADSVfORTH
DENVER
AGENCY INC
BLVD
co 80227
72479I
THE PREMISES COVERED BY THIS POLICY IS LOCATED AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS.
RATING INFORMATION- AUTOMATIC VALUE-UP AT RENEWAL, FRAME, CONSTRUCTED IN 1978,
PRI}.TARY RESIDENCE, APPROVED ROOF, PROTECTION CLASS 6, TERRITORY OI,
FEET FROM HYDRANT N/A, 51000 SECTION I LOSS DEDUCTIBLE, I FAMILY.
PRE}TIUX GROUP 7, INSIDE CITY.
COVERAGE AT IHE ABOVE DESCRIBED LOCATION IS PROVIDED ONLY }IHERE A
LIABILTTY IS SHOI.IN OR A PREUITU IS STATED
LIMIT OF
PREMIUI,{S
s364.00
SECTION I COVERAGE
A. DI{ELLING
B. OTHER STRUC URES
C. PERSONAL PROPERTY
D. LOSS OF USE
SECTION I I COVERAGEii. PERSONAL &IABrLil'Y
F. MEDICAL PAY. TO OTHERS -
LIMIT OF LIABITITY
sr57,300
sl.5,730
s83, 650
s33,460
$i00,000 EAca occuRRENcE
ST,OOO EACH PERSON
TOTAL BASIC PREl,lIUl{
ADDITIONAL PREMIUMS
THEFT COVERAGE EXTENSION, HO-45
NEt{ HOME DISCOI'NT O7I
REPLACEMENT COST COVERAGE - HO-537
OPTIONAL DEDUCTIBLE
TOTAL ADDITIONAL PREMII'MS - -
TOTAL ANNUAL PREMlltl.{
POLICY PERIOD- 12.01 AM STANDARD TII.|E AT THE RESIDENCE PREMISES.
***PAGE 0r
FIRST-MORTGAGEE tOAN #49247
FIRST BANK OF IIESTLAND *
&/OR ASSIGNS
10403 WEST COLFAX AVE
LAKET{OOD co 80 215
SEPARATE BILLING STATEMENT.
PAYOR - MORTGAGEE
DIRECT BILL * YOU T{I[,L RECEIVE A
PAYMENT PLAN - PREPAID, BILL
lorrrr P\lS lir 9.8? 00121/86
Orieinal 7L1:l
s7.00
s371.00
s2.00
s25.00cR
$34.00
sr13 .00cR
s102.00cR
s269.00
,*ilx*"l3"gfilf*' ,
Purpose 'fvpe of policy
(i/\
Policy number ['olicy period
RENEWAL POLICY HOI{EOWNERS I
Name arrd address o{ insured
HP 2303285 01 08/14/86 rO 08/14/87
Agent rrame and address Agenl code
TllScHl{AN, Jollil s & JULIA LovE NABrrv-youNG rNs AGENcv rNc
IOSI EAGLE'S NEST CIRCLE
3333 S }IADSWORTH BLVD
'|24't9|
VAIL
ielails
CO 81657 DElrvER co 80227
,ronMs AND ENDORSMryT|_-. Ho3 07/77,_HO300CO 08/At, Ho330 09/83, HO325 12/85,HO322 tv/es, HO46 07/77, HO537 Lt/77
ffi(FOR NET{ BUSINESS ONLY)
*********************************************************************************
DESCRIPTION OF ADDITIONAL COVERAGES
REPLACEMENT COST COVERAGE
***PAGE 02
IRECT BILL - YOU !{ILL RECEIVE A SEPARATE BILLING STATEMENT.AY}IENT PLAN - PREPAID, BILL PAYOR - MORTGAGEE
,rm PMS10 9.82 0621lA6
riginal 7813
l\ t-<.--< iC^.-.,-r_, 1 rNspciloi,,t'*:'Jr*
TOWN OF VAIL
NAME
READY FOR
LOCATION:
INSPECTION:.. MON AM PM
PERMIT NUMBER OF PROJECT
j
BIWED THUR
.x/ J- t-.'ir
BUILDING:PLUMBING:
f,
o
tr
o
tr
tr
tr
tr
FOOTINGS / STEEL tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH /WATER
FOUNDATION / STEEL
FRAMING
ROOF & SHEER
PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
INSULATION
SHEETROCK
tr POOL / H. TUB
NAIL tr
tr
trFINAL FINAL
ELEGTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER
MECHANICAL:
tr HEATING
tr ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
tr tr
tr f,rNAL tr FINAL
/.Jil^PPH(JVED/ bonnecrrorus,
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
-
ru
INSPECTOR..
PERMIT NUMBER OF PROJECT-.ltl
,.,\\.,Loe
TOWN OF VAIL
DATE
',/ \'\\,. ..\NAME
READY FOR
LOCATION:
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
Irou*ootoN / srEEL
tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH / WATERtr FRAMING
ROOF & SHEER
PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION
E SHEETROCK
tr POOL / H. TUB
NAIL tr
tr FINAL
D
D FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER
MECHANICAL:
tr HEATING
tr ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT T] SUPPLY AIR
tr tr
:
tr Fr1t4L tr FINAL
/6FNaoveo/- ti
OORRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
DATE INSPEC
, 't ;r7., ,1)' )
.-r\ r_- r.- l
. - _ri. ,:, ) i
.-
-
JOB NAME
PERMIT NUMBER OF PROJECT
DATE
READY FOR
LOCATION:
INSPECTION:
J ... - ,
MON
....-(
CALLER
TUES WED THUR FRI AM RM
rNS#cnoN REouisr :
TOWN OF VAIL -t
BUILDING:
O FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V,
tr ROUGH / WATER
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
r-r ROOF & SHEER" PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION O POOL / H. TUB
tr SHEETROCK NAIL
tr FINAL T] FINAL
ELECTRIGAL:
tr TEMP. POWEH tr HEATING
tr ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
tr FINAL
I APPROVED
CORRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVED O BEINSPECTION REQUIRED
DATE INSPECT
:1
PERMIT NUMBER OF PROJECT
DATE ]I JOBNAME
t
INSPECTION
t
REQUE$T{1TOWN OF VAIL
READY FOR
LOCATION:
INSPECTION:
,t[' ! /
TUES WEP
/j ,., \ f_(,,
THUR FRI
CALLER 't, " \/,-t
BUILDING:
O FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
tr UNDERGBOUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH / WATERtr FRAMING
n BOOF & SHEER" PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION D POOL / H. TUB
tr SHEETROCK NAIL
tr FINAL
tr TEMP. POWER tr HEATING
q'RouGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
O FINAL tr FINAL
tr DISAPPROVED O REINSPECTION REQUIRED
CORRECTIONS:
DATE INSPECTOR
r r.r s eQg*o N, $^qg ;ir,,o
T
JOB
PRtJEcF
I
PERMIT NUMBER o
NAME
CALLER
READY FOR INSPECTION:
LOCATION:
G;-3 ;"
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
O UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V,
tr ROUGH / WATER
tr FOUNDATION i STEEL
tr FRAMING
r_r ROOF & SHEER" PLYWOOD NAILING
b-nrsulnrroN ':'*:-
tr GAS PIPING
tr POOL / H. TUB
{sneernocK r.ret rd tr
tr
tr FINAL
tr
tr FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER
MECHANICAL:
tr HEATING
tr ROUGH EI EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
tr/FTNAL tr FINAL
PPROVED tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
CORRECTIONS:
oerc c:! -' /O -3(! rNspEcroR
u rNstcnoN
rt
rb
REQUEST,VAIL .17
t-
PERMIT NUMBER OF PROJECT
DATE
INSPECTION:MON ruES g!9, rHUR
TOWN OF
JOB NAME
CALLER
FRI PMREADY FOR
LOCATION:
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH / WATER
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
FRAMING
ROOF & SHEER
PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
INSULATION
SHEETROCK
C] POOL / H. TUB
ELECTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER tr HEATING
tr EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
DArE lO - 6 6b rNspEcro
oz
E
=.e,
UJo-i'l'I P,9
| ; t<:ii,cl;i ta;= ='2
15 s;;lo (,'E
tiEtz
h,1
i;;EilNiE
gEEgd/IF
EE:EilIIE
SEisJ
IEF€E
iiE€g(ll 0'-i -s=rD(,)c
g;i;:
gBiEg2
F-
J
oz
3
ut
llJ9bF
0 -l9lelE ilEl+l;< ctl qllo-lo
(E
g
zl
.. >lo
ulo
uJ
uJz
9)F
ul(L
J
z
ut
JJl-lr
lEI:
EElu)l(6
ilE
=sl:Pr[]
=.^ |
frElEolc_.,(oto< l+)f,gl.-
FI;
l-lr
i;+liE:::lF{E
E
tt
I
lltltl|lloll=ltolI ulltEl
l*lloltzl3;lE9t
JI
<l>l
t!lol
zl
3lolFI
I
I
I
I
I
ul.lollr|l
5l
al
BI
3l g
Ol uJFI F'
I
ol
2.1
ol
il
al>l
u-lol
zl;lolFI
(o
-cor^
F
=tr
(\tr\l\t>
IN(\
I
HI-l
.lol-I
3lol
zl
FI
(-)
L+,(J(l,
LJJ
(lJ
(o
(u
(6
trl
=
tr
o+t
dd.
c
o.-)
tr
+J
@
o(t
(l,
rd
=o!c
=
pp
.ttco
Ee-cott
:5F
ui
=z
d)o-)
(o
c
(,
F
.:
uJ
=z
G'
b.J
!-l
(f)
o*.b
=*t tsOz
IEF
TJ.JJ
t2?e?
=E
d. zo
o
E
-tO<F
ul<zEUJF(1 Zoo
F()
lll
ts-
E
UJFoooazo
F0.
IIJY
IH
ioFt
=E
LlJ
o-
ttlo <.1>cqo-!8Sr1gu,skz6
zo9zz(D0
=z=fdP
ifi(,(J=
=ri-r "'i ul6il=
!trtr
tr
o-
Lo
EUE<g8E9ttir
tr5t
-E dEE h=E ;ffE =*E 669 \u.rE XO-t x>Fi.iFo, 'i€=
HoF
NED
,"ril"toN REeuEsr
TOWN OF VAIL
DATE JOB NAME
MON
CALLER
TUES THURREADY FOB
LOCATION:
INSPECTION:AMWEDFRI
BUILDING:
T] FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH/WATER
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
tr FRAMING
r_r ROOF & SHEER" PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION tr POOL/ H. TUB
tr SHEETROCK NAIL cl
tr
tr FINAL tr FINAL
ELEGTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER
MECHANIGAL:
tr HEATING
tr ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT tr
tr
SUPPLY AIR
tr FINAL O FINAL
F APPROVED
CORRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
DATE INSPECTOR
'.oo.za{FC'c)
{ozTFlF3
{
{o
IDmEer-,h EI<X IIHE Af9g =-l!= g
lmP ol*r Il=t
=;=.o<To.d89,9SE
=Eii*ITm
{
3tr9m:-(-
ti=
=oc)YPl-
!!n
8PCCz=
22
66)z
DDE
t
4o -{7lTtfi\.1 v
a
x<
=3Ei-lFY>
z !-
3
@z
cc
;
!
c
v
mt-mo{a
t-
9.n-tmnz>mon-{>or-
u
I
mo
-i
€zmu
I
@z
3
IT
--tc
IAo
=o,
qt
oo
=
o
=
oo
,o=Bhio>'t-
t-o
-1
(!|-
l
=z
o
-l
0)
rct(D
c+
mTm
-{
€z
o.tl
-
mo
z
€z
l
-um
9)
n
3
1l l<
Lo
l€z
loI
LF
E
lzlo
n {!
n
o,
an
o,
o
o
t-{
l€
lzoI
F
tm
l6-,lz
'n
F
=
d
i)
5
o...:
o
c)o
T,or--F€
(tl(tl
3
=o!s
Y
@
x
F(^)o
I
I
=
ng,
cfo
=
q,
c)o
s\r9r6\F(o
\j
t-
m
o)
rrlt,(O
(D
=(Docl
a)
z
m
c-o
-t
UIo
=9'
z,o{m
Ioo.tt
0
-{m
o'n
T
ma
=-.|
Io
@mxmro
-.1
oz
qo
@I
-.t
m
I
ITIFl
=-{!
zo
OO
@(tl
(.^)
f, t-o -.t
63sij>'nzo?g226'
-qY
oz
m
-b |q, o382J.l +-'l=;( lJ.r
-' l=oBqFf
5.k: o
HE9 ''F! e
loo
E.r
Hn:
EEObhlo ll
F'Ftlll
o
_q
r
P
-'-tfllu>
62
=z
t-
m
I
=0r o -;E3d- ogd
36*g
;g qi
99or 6
=:EF*lFt'
(/, o =f+-.oo
H3.==g
H s 3e
O^'qr=
3aB
=@p+o*O fr oro-=E
-lt o) tt
e.3-
=
il
gs 3i
IgiE
=
!.9I@3oL
Potdra=:.a
E3 $i<o-f
s.d.g d3;E j
Bd *?
t3qE
iii e. E :.,;' ol X o
;Qtt 6'
={5Ar!o!t
d3
=occgf
g_9
..4
@
=s
=(o
oo
o
!)
o.
=\E'-\ 9\ci
l\.D
M
\l ,<
ITbt
E
t,D
BI
Fl+
rHlllU(D'o
o=
-lc
o
q,
=
I
(j)
mo(o
(D
z
(D
at,cf
c)
c,
c)o
@
O)
>+i
>cD
-l\uI+mc
vm
m 'tl
Po
=z
m
o
z-{,
o
-.1
'r'lo
T
@
7
2
!mu
=-.{
!m
='n
mmU'
fllt
Fil
iN
IN
:t
it
ol
ir -.l
t\
t\
}{
I
.i<l5
l$
l.o.-t
ral
tN
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
=z
--t
m
-.{o
-'l
t-
!mn3
='n
mmU'
oa/i | /84
b
..t(\
ro
t! t
'!::u-t | -AAruoq'rnat .,4-6- .--- +-tt? |
I.l
O'l,'9rb
o
t-.-]ro$ \-/I
sF. rvl
ir ' ,v-: I\) F:F .l!da) 't--
:he\-tu\* U
@
1['ofi
-j-.--.-
(\,:
tlL\:.+l
il
I
s
Xsl
I
fF
o
dr
od
$
w
4
tt-l
olrrl
\l
$l E
Ql 3 "l I
{
aU
AT
Itj
.r
3qoa
;
=-Ir
=
u?/,ar',F
r: ts..1{i_:'
$*'::':Jo
'tl$l
1l
^ldi
_sr i
t $r i i*iiid il 5 : t,r,
S {: li I I't -8--i-*- -r i rfotts)tl; I",: ,t<silP +$ $$ i ?*rit:.ridtSrb S s J it< ri/ :lJ +F { utol,*
i'6)r;3\_--J | | .hru |, "N @iri ipH 'i. li 'i
I-', o,i - 4- ilF_- > r.4td 4 ,rg--- -I
$i*\; iir iitl
oProlect Applicatlon
Project Name:
Project Description:
Contact Person and Phone
Owner, Address and Phone:
Architect. Address and Phone:
Legal Description: Lot Block I.-_-+-
ttt
ritingG,zone;irl" ir(
Comments:
Design Review Board
Motion by:
Seconded by:
APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL
Summary:
,1 i
\'rtr IIt
Town Planner lJ,tStatt Approval
Dale:
/ f,JU
PERMIT NUMBER OF PBOJECT
,,' ,'I /' ,'1''JOB NAME
INSPECTION:MON
)
NSPECTION REQUEST.
, , .:,?YE.OF
VAIL
DATE
READY FOR
LOCATION:
CALLER
TUES THUR \lll./PM
| -l ,/ ,/ /',
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
tr BOUGH / D.W.V.
O BOUGH / WATER
O FOUNDATION / STEEL
tr FRAMING
- BOOF & SHEER
" PLYWooD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION E POOL / H. TUB
tr SHEETROCK NAIL o
trtr
FINAL O FINAL
ELE
trT
trF
trc
tr-
CTRICAL:MECHANICAL:
TEMP. POWER O HEATING
ROUGH B EXHAUST HOODS
CONDUIT O SUPPLY AIR
tr FINAL O FINAL
w
CORRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVEO tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
,// / ,,t,zDATE // '' | -t, '-" |NSPECTOR
tm]
Prolect Appllcatlon
Proiect Name:
Proiect Description:
Contacl Person and Phone
Owner, Addrsss and Phone:
Ldgal Description:
Design Revlew Board
""," tlllsl
DISAPPROVAL
Motion by:
Secondod by:
APPBOVAT
Summary:
(t"\^ ?,,h
Town Planner
{t""
Approval \
o
DATE:
LEGAL
ADDRESS:
Ot'JNER
ARCHITECT
ZONE DIST
PROPOSED USE
LOT SIZE
Hei ght
Total GRFA
Secondary
Setbacks:
ZONE CHECK
FOR
SFR, R, R P/S ZONE DISTRICTS
ock I riringV'U'
ne
Phone
Al I owed
(30)(33)
20'
15'
15'
(30)(50)
(300) (600)
(eoo) (1200)
(50) (1oo)
(25) (50)
(2oo)(4oo)
Slope Actual
g+L
XDD
=
Aval anche
Flood Plain
Sl ope
l'Jet'lands
Geol ogi c Hazards
*N.rd""qh 6u\rry6 ,
Prooosed ) ?dto- c\acL
GRFA
Front
Sides
Rear
Water Course
Site Coverage
Landscapi ng
Fence/Reta i ni.ng tllnl l
Parki ng
Credits: Garage
Mechani cal
Ai rl ock
Storage
Solar Heat
, o.'
Drive: Slope Permitted
Envi ronmental,/Hazards :
Comments:
Hei.ghts
t'^t,"ps{
Zoning: Approved/Disapproved
Date:
)tatt 5rgnature
J.ir-l)
UJFo
@o-zo
Fo-
IJJY
l!
dt
oF
F
Ero
ffiEL,-
Edli:{O=lo .?lrl
Hu,:^FIJzo
z('9
z_e
d)o
=zd8
:E?
=oi-!-.it!6E>
ts
gJ
l!
IJJoz
oa,
oFtIEo-
JFllJ -h=
o- ulEO-
9o\ uJxc:>
:itr
ul
@oF
\E\E\ep?
oT'
.E
:t
E
Eoo
i\o
t=6l>Fl=€'rl-x\!!'5 r
F
=E.
UJ
o-z9F
C)fEFazo()
a
trDtr
oz
F
=t
IIJo-
))f
)
an
IJJ
uJu-
F
t
I.IJL
azu/-- Er/S/L
/ tur #,Y)N'\:\'l
brs
N5
I
I
s*l
J*r.\,
lc\, I
hJlu\l
t6
\{Ex,o-,.Yo,r\=
UJF
F
FIz
=o
(Jz
z.
o
rlJFoz
oz
=
t0
zz
ItJ
UJ
=
IL
Fo
Fzo
C)
lfo
IJJ
c;
o
o
(D
lt(!o
c.9
tt,
ui
lt)T'
o
E .!oti 6'= C) q)
gsE
ctto.9; I69c
"0 8pc-o'-ao(!E
=EE
d '>- =c96
tEt
3EA
=:E,roo
-i: ()
! os!q: i.=- (!
c!-(5 ct
sEE
U,f o,E€:E;:EE Eo(E=
EfEs:
=- o")J
-tC(! 0'-.c; o- -.c$t;oi;
=5>.o (6:
;cFi9 6
^B'f B9Eq:e5g
-o(!
oK)
(o
o
N
Y)+
oI
1r,(\l
cIc
rr)r\
(\l
cc
IJ6
oo
oo
oo
oo
T
==ulI
z
J
to
Yo
UJ
oz
o-
J
GF(J
ruJ
lll
z
J
J
oz
-
|l'|
=
!r,l
uJ
z
EluEo
arJE
=g
uJEzI
UJo
F
UJ
o-
z
IJJ
x
F
uJal
oIu
LrJl!
F
=G
uJLJ
FoF
z
@
u,l
|.lJ
z
ao
=J
9z
llJ.
NOT.tVOlVA
IP
t;
lo
:?* lE
=aOorl
Y-EEoo
=9Z Z t!->ooo(f5 q -"- ="3
d 5 6Fts6-oEoz>-()_g9
^8bl!<35 #:g Hrol(J
I
I
I
I
I
lol()tc
p
IU'
Fl>t-fr-
t|t'IF
z
tr
J
{
rri
UJ
F
ctoro
o uJ
r
z
Eoo
z
tr
u./FJ
=u.l2
lltltl
(r,Fzlz
F- IIJ<oo<
=FYrtUci<z
o
Ez,
\)z
-F
}Eor
ullJ
G,
a
ulz
:<
i
z
tr
a2
l
!
z
==F
d
3
ali-l
zl
zl
.. >l
llJ
uJ
UJzo
tr
uJ(L
J
z
E
o
z
6
rftsf
z
Y
il;
t;,;
(a
I
ol
=.1olull
5l
<t>l
rr-Iol
zl
=lolFI
=.1ol
uJl
crl
-Jl
<l>l
t!lol
zl
=lolFI
IJJI
1t
?l>l
rI.I
zl
BlolFI
I
I
I
I
Iol
=.1olurl
5l
3l
t!lol
5l r
Pl r'
I
lrl
z
=lJ-
dt
F
J
o
P
!E
(U
vl
o
c
rE
ov,5F
u.;
=z
d)
")
I
|l
L)
+'vlrt)z,
!
(u
('t(|t
lrJ
(f)ot1t)
IJJ
c,oo
(o
F\
o-
(l'
(,
+,.g!o
a6
o(-)
J
(U
(uL(J
t\Ol
(o
I(or\sr
Gl
JI
<l>l
rLl
:l
3t
PI
.t'
E()
an
=F
L
=
=tr
Eoozt-
'=-3
d6
(J
E
F
t-z
z
I
r,lJ
E
*.5
=b2
E
-rO<F(ts(JuJ<zEt!F(42o
J
9EFO
uJJQ!tr
C
0/(
lr.. 8.306.
WKLL, o SnWJ6'
.qu wwilH/*tufWf?rE tal E,J?
z_ W-ltLT)_
56pe fAu4l b-tu--.
.6tsS 4 T"r ar
tZ*tC<- futC anz \-
@.4 AL-frtP wla"c,#4w-a-@'Tr@
i|{'E. .fuah6
Tttls t^Xtl- lrWt l-1&€.gr8 S*l'L - Toug<.fi,r--€bsn6?a: GAA fur<-
oqnq f@fi6 fr
1o BE kU..ot'->s AT
^-,\n'!E?'4F..tT
5._
th. t?ori crcat collaboraliv., rrchitcct3 group !td.,'thc clock toryor" vait oolorado A1657 476-1110
ir
o
75 south f.onlage road
rail, color.do 81652
(303) 476-7000
June'16, 1983
John Tuschman
l03l Eagle's Nest Circle
Vail, C0 81657
Dear John:
0n June 15, 1983,
Addition with the
A specimen aspen
courtyard wa1 I be
Si ncerely,
Re: Tuschman Addition
the Design Review Board approved the Tuschman
fo1 I owi ng sti pu'lati onC :
tree be p'l anted in the new courtyard and the
fjve feet away from the property f ine.
-,/frVt+ 6F,-12^-/r'
Ji'm Sayre
Town Planner
JS/bb
oProject Applicatlon
Project Name:
Proiect Description:
Contact Person and Phone
\i'./'/
owner, Address and Phone: -),-'i, , -. / (.1 :7< 'tt lt: ''r 't
Architect. Address and Phone:
Legal Description: Lot Block I , Filing irt'/ ,? -t/
, =on" /(-
Commenls:
Design Review Board
Date
Motion by:
Seconded oy, T4tc->f4
DISAPPROVAL
summary: dftE<lHAlJ 4t* ') #+*^ T' E'' | 4
E Statt Approval
<-.2
,i'r
'
,
(,1 I'l:otli.i'
€, are_F.ulv.I
I
:l r
OIJ€
'J''
I r'
l;ll.l,iiirt':
G/fP-D€\)@FJT
'l'hc ftrl lr,1;ll1f irrj'orr:r:rt iotr ir: r'r.:r1rrit'ld {'ot' strlrr;,i t t.;rl I'y litc tr|r1rl i,
lk;urd br.lur',: a fi rr:rl irJlprov:.rl crrrr lrc 1;ivclr:
''.,1 to thc l)cs i1.;r | ' vrr ..
(.o l tlrA. IillIl.lr|l;i; i.tril'lill.lAl.S
Ilrrof
Sid ing
Othcr l','all Matcrials
Fascia
Soffi t s
Windous
IttinCor'r Trin
Doors
Door 'l'rim
Hand or Deck Rails
Flues
Fl ashi ngs
Chin:re1's
Trash Encl osules
Grecnhous es
Other
B. LANDSCAPING
Name of Designer:
Phone :
PLANT MATERIALS
=42 Dl2Av'r;t&:d ftR- Pi4fo5q9 f€tt:6 4.P@rr
EkJ-ct-# vitr-D #Jtr6t j^fuiL€' wJlil€(s:aoP/tr6 s7;"',e+)
P(.AN-7€<-E& E 1-v-E=,
ID l4Ktc4+ 4/ST1 E.
Pwl^)ffi Zffi aKr^G
SAnr€
fX'N-f@-(e /aqtz-4
BA6et u7.4-
ll,PLY 41
P/<i\J1TP
3-17.16 WtNOavE.
lJoru e
3L. G/-. Pk-fi.o fu#cAB*- BENLF- titt*t,
l\lcpE.
NoNE
NotvE
N€TftL ,N21,"8724Nre
/,to\-tF-
LDAT'/-)
Si ze
TREES
Botanical Name Conmon Name 0uanti ty_
I Proiect Application
I
IProiecl Name:
te83
Prolect Descriplron:
Contact Person ancl Phone
Owner, Address and Phone:
o3 €A€tElc rJ=r ctRaE. UktL:
Architect, Addtess and Phone:'; dE dco54 7ouJ&u+t't-. caLoPr,b - 8(657.
6 - tl
Block OI,JE Filing
:pRtNiey
zone%Legal Descriplion: Lot
Commenls:
o-t32o sQ.FT
Design Review Board
Date
Molron by
Seconded by:
APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL
Summary:
Dat e
Town Planner Cl sratt Approval
Ol ProJect Appricatiolt f
Oate z6 tMAY ts.tl3". r
Proiect Name:
Project Description:
Contact Person and
6
!
Owner, Address and Phdne:-s \ic l/N -4)S;C,H AlAt )
o3 trACI"E€ AItrE.T CLRC1E.. UAIL. CdLVKLAY)O
Architect. Address and Phone:tT I a/.Qpt< :. /\LLl4 ffel= GK.ovTl+e CLcrc'(<- -n)DA<'AIL (:aLoN.At-D " A(65/.Pttclte' 4'/(' tt74
Legal Description: Lot
Comments:
FJock oNE Filing 6tn
lRrualeYzon;Y(?32o sa FT)r
.,11&\J
o Design Review Board
Dateil
Motion by:lL li'' i l'" '
Seconded by:
APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL
Summary:
Dale:
Town Planner E statt Approval
I
lri
.apD@{_ @BJT
'l}c f<,'l lr't;irri', irrforrn:rt ion i:; r',:r1rr ir.r:tl f'ot. s;ulrriit l,rl lly lltc ;r11'l
l|<;:rrd bt.l')r'(: al fj.nJ l irpprovirl c;rrr lrc ,1;ivcl:
A. l',lltl.!,liii: Lti'I't;nIALS l:l:rrf l.t.'rlr_,r !.:rl
i, ;rrtl to thc l)r,':; i11;r li, vt r ..;
(,oIor
Roof
Siding
Other l'ial I Mat crial s
Fascia
Soffi t s
l{indous
It/i-nCor,r T'rin
Doors
Door 1'rin
Hand or Deck Rails
Flues
FlashS,ngs
Chirnrrel'5
Trash Encl osures
Grecnhorrs es
Other
glGrftzJ Prr&te)Frti-i .A?_1fut1_ p_!7^?+_Eg4gr7n8.
5-rm yzo6 Mfr141 AtShG
@___@t-1K174a6-nr€
3Tfr71)
W,?. PLY wrN-fa{J BA6et uue-
Te /Vtf(ca 64s-7hE
PktrJtW Ee;ot',q't awt<-.
\It)tNOeuJ=.
3L. G'{-. Pk1r,c m D4PK B(*F, ,ft-LA
A lr.. t tE
MeNE
NotttE
l,4trTAL DNte Ela"446R_
lJo/.--l./€-
lJett€
D4Alrh-u\s frF- _eFsP_o;& #lE 68P-p€r\r UJA4,L).*. nrrsr> PA'.)t t E. =-fu7J€. Ht'r/N€(
= t'*&P/,J6 S-ze'-/eS\37216a$'NfrD
PLA\rTA<_ EePc['h<-eec 4'W.NryD pA\ttrV, =
-,.eJ\L t n e 1=74aP /t' E S't.yJ 4:)
Wr
B. LANDSCAPING
Name of Designer:
Phone :
PLANT I'IATERIALS
TREES
Botani ca'l Name Cornmon Name Quanti ty_
5@,
5i ze
Pffiu)ffi _
AJOAJ E
SHRUBS
--aJ_
Rreur drd et-.---
Reception No.--ud:=s#11 r.;ar. Eegh
Fef
JULIA I,oVE TUSCHMAN
FTUNG
t. ".S{l.gf+d,
whoee legal rddrers ir oak Place, Suite 220
Texas 77027
4543 Post
Houston,
ofthc
Coloredo, oithe second part:
Wf TfiESSETH,thrtthtrarrlprrt'.,'lthr, li lst part, for and i n consideration ol thc run of ,:.':,. '-,': r,'. ... .. r tt.;t.1 ,
Five Ilundred Sixty-Nine Thousand Trvo Hundred rlfty. t .@?Wifi'':rnd other good end valusl.'le conciderntionr r'.the raid party of the firrt prrt in hrrd rid tl tfi di h$.||rt#'rcond pirt' i he rec€ipt *'hereuf ia hr,retrl' confesre.r and ecknowtedged. har grrntar, tr'|rrnci, ru a"a ;qaaLl
by these prcsents doer grent. bnrgain. nell, conve-r arrd cunfirm unto th" rrrd prrtlet d rcsa prtt,.;h*'t atr; diii(), rneae Prcaenla ooea Irrnl. bRrgaln. dell, .onve-r atrd cunfirm unto the r|rd prrtlet d raia.p]t, thdr hiltt lilJ:
asrig'na frrrever. not in tenanry in mmm()n l,ut in joint renancl., rll the following dcecribed t4 '
"rrre*il..Hir;,,-.4lend, riturt... l).ing and beinsinthe County of Eagle . .nd Sr.tt of Cdcrdo: l. fdi-
Iotl, . rBlock 1,. r
VAIL VILi,AGE, EIGHTTI FILTNG
rLro known rg street and numb€r
TOGETHER u'ith sll and singular the hereditements in<t rppurlenrnc€r 't here unto belongin3. or in rny;ir. r!{rFtrinin3 and the reversion and reversi.rrs, r'enrainder end remainders. renta. issu.a end profiir thereof; and a! tba
'ttrt€. right'trtle. inierest.clarm enrl rletrranrir hat $oerer of t he raid party of t he fi rst prrt, either in lrr or equity, of.Inrnd tp the s b<rve bergained premises. r.ith the hereditamerrts rnd sppurtenlncer.
m UAVE AIiiD m HOLD the said premires above hargained and descritrd. $,ith the appurt"nrnees. unto th" faLprrticr of the second part, thrrr herr. errrl rr-.t,!;- f ,, ,.. \rrrl i , ,r. l.r. .{ :r,? frril pt,rr, lol hrnrrclf, hrr heirr,crecutor!' 8nd administlators' d()ex c()t enlnt. greltt. lrargarn and agree to and sith the said partie! of thc recond perq
lhci r hein and assignr' that rt t he tinre of the enseali ng a nd rleli ver.r' "f t hese prese ntr, he is well seized of the premirer
rbovc conveyed, $ of g<xr'd, rure' perft'cl' ahs(rluie anrl indefeusible (.state of rnherit8nce. in latr,. in fee rimple, rnd hrrpod ri8ht. fuit power and lau.ful autborittr. to grant. hargatn. sell and convey the sanre in manner end form eforereid.
'nd thrt the tame are free and clenr fi'r,nt sl; L,, n,..r' and ()ther grant.r, Irirgaing. sales. liens, tare6. asressmants lnd
cricunbrancer ofuhateverlcind or nsturc,roev(r. EXCept fOf eaSements, feStfiCtione,covenants, and rights of way of record, U.S. patent regervatlona,a Deed of Trust for the use of Bank of Vail recbrded August 23, 197Ln Book 258 at Page 812, a Deed of Trust for the use of Jack L.Itarghall and Jean L. Marshall to aecure $lZ5,OOO.OO, andreal property taxes for 1981 and subseguent years.
'id th' above brrgairred premires in tlre quret and peaceable possessi<rn of the said part)es of tlre second part. theanrvivor ol them, their aesignr and.the heirs and assigns of such sur'rvor.. against all and elery p€rson or perlonr
hwfully cleimingor to clrim the whole ot an-v I'Ert t hereof. thc said part5.of t he frrst part shsll and u,ill I{'A RRANT AND
FORE}'ER DEFENlD. Thctingular number shall include the Dlplural. the plural the singular. and the use of any genderArll be rpplicrblc to atl gcnden
Ix $'.ITNEBS $'HERBOF thc seid part.r' of t he fit'rt pnrt hes hr.r..trntr, ret hir henri end reel the day end yerr firrt
The for cgoing urstru
bY Joseph J.
STATII ( ) F riil#r{t+l*. 'c > r}{
' | /lt-.-/? t >( ||unl)- (rl
Drent .A ns ackno\rle,lg,.rl i,t'f,rrr.rrrr
Colangelo, Trustee
Il .*
J
I hs
)My Com miss ro n er;rirer
I
L_
lio.3tlA, TARRA\!l I'l i:D-t.Jo,,rT,nr.,..-coprr,rhr, ro;r, .
\. 2-' /
TJOSBPH J.i LiOr-AirGL
.i TrLrG tee
--f-- 1F tl./-ffi\
lsEAt,, j,
II
tlt.sEALt ii
llti
Ill
!".aat,l-((t--4.-..f . ,o8f Ir' ' ll l:'' ll '-lr.,
,sr rrl lrat,,i ar',t, ,",nl.rel- il-t', l:r . )t rrrrrss rrrl lrar,,i ar,d, ..,r,al.r,el- ll t'
: t1 /t .,h','tt, / . I l'-'ji(t( C,i-{ (a:,.---- i',it_:"'..\ 16. , l\rl,tt.. ll. - _.._.Jl
t r(
PLANN ING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
May 23, 1983
PRESENT STAFF PRESENT
Dan Corcoran
Diana Donovan
Jim Morgan
Duane Piper
t,Ji'11 Trout
Jim Viel e
ABSENT
Gordon Pierce
The meeting was callpd to order at 3:00 pm by the chairman, Dan Corcoran, fo1 lowing
site inspections.
'l . Approval of minutes of meeting of May 9,
Donovan moved and Viele seconded to approve the
5 in favor, none against, with Piper abstaining.
minutes as written. The vote was
2. Appointnent of PEC member to DRB.
Duane Piper was appointed to represent the PEC at the DRB meetings for June, Ju'ly
and August.
3. Request for rezonjng from R P/S to HDMF on lot 'l , Block 6, Intermountain toi convert the existing structure to 4 employee units. App'l icants: Charles
0!'iTE[f'n-d-TffiTa r to n
Peter Patten showed a site pian and explained the information in the memo. Jay
Peterson, representing the appljcants, stated that the project could not use a
tax exempt bond process, and did not want to get locked in to a specific interestrate. He explained that interest rates fluctuate. He added that the GRFA was
approximate, that it could be 200 square feet more, and would like the f'l exibility
of approval of up to 3500 square feet. Also the applicant wanted the $8S/squarefoot to be the averagg price because studios cost more per square foot than largerunits. He added-Thi:-t units A & D were nicer units so cbuld conunand more money.
Peterson stressed that the total seliing price would not change. Peterson stated
that the membership to the Tennis court; would be mandatory, ind jn three years
the fee would increase to $]5.00 and after that would be determined by the CPI.
Chuck 0gilby discussed a possible financing arrangement whereby the mortgagc payments
gradual'ly'increase for five years, and then level off, Patten explained that the
staff had done research on prices in Vail and $85lsq ft was below the market rates
nol.l. He added that only Matterhorn was less. Morgan asked if the applicant wanted
to change the proposed GRFA to 3500 sq ft, and Jay answered that tha! would be
very cl6se, anb *hen the plans were fr'naiir.a, ttr".y couta ttuctuate t 200 sq ft,
but wou'ld be 3500 sq feet maximunr. 0gi1by agreed. Patten suggested that if the
total GRFA were to be 3500, the maximum sales price would be $297,500.
Peter Patten
Jim Sayre
Betsy Rosolack
PEC -2-
Peterson suggested restricting the number of units allowed when rezoning. Morgan
wanted to make the maximum GRFA 3500, and was concerned with the large parcel across
the road. He fe'lt that with thjs precedent, they would want more density wh'ich
would affect the neighborhood. Corcoran'pointed out that there rvas no one there
from the neighborhood to oppose the proposal , but that a'l arger project may have
Inore respondents. Patten said that he did meet with owners who represented the
Bellflower Condcrniniums who did have cOncerns about increased activity, and that
he encouraged them to put their concerns in letter form (which they dfd not do),
and also from one Westridge condo owner who also was not at the meeting.
Vieie wondered ff there were any way to prevent these condos from becoming rentalunits, and Jay answered that jt would be best for the developer to build and se'l 1,but if the units did not sell, the developer would like to be able to rent longterm. Patten reminded the board that the proposal being considered concerned
sales on1y. To Vie'le's guestions concerning financing, Peterson replied that they
wou'ld use normal financing, possibly with a graduating rate such as used at Pitkin
Creek Park. Piper questioned zoning change to HDMF rather than SDD, and Pattenreplied that with an SDD there stil'l had io be an underlying district, which would
be HDMF.
Piper was concerned about taking a zone and changing it. He was also concerned
about the design of the structure. Patten stated that the site coverage and the
height would remain the same if approved, but the des'ign would be handled in DRB.
Piper wondered if on-site parking had been studied, and Peterson replied that to
do so the structure would have to be torn down and construction started again fromthe beginning. P'iper did not like the idea of having to walk down a stredt toget to the off-site parking, and wondered if there was room for a sidewalk. Petersonreplied that it wou'ld have to be along the right-of-way next to the road.
Discussion continued about financing. Peterson explained that interest rates werenot tied to the amount of down payment, and also explained that the points would
probably be 21 to 3 points total. Donovan asked if Ogilby had to pass on theinterest rate that he received. Peterson explained that thb construction loan
floated with the prime, but that the long term financing did not.
Donovan was also concerned with the sidewalk or pedestrian way, and wondered if
there was a bike path in the area. Patten said that there wain't, 0gi1by. statedthat since the new bridge had been built to the east, there was less irafiic onthis end of Intermountain, and he felt that traffic was not going to be a problem.
Donovan fe1t that the numben of condos should definitely.be limited to 4 units
and the GRFA should be limited to 3500 sq ft. She also stressed that whoever from
PEC was to be on the DRB should make sure that the design was improved.
Discussion then concerned whjch restrictions to use concerning whothe units and it was finally decided that the buyers would follow
as stated in the Pitkin Creek Park deciarations,
could purchase
the same restrictions
Trout expressed qualms about granting the variances since others in the neighborhoodduring the past year had wanted variinces to have employee housing, and werE turned
down because of increase in density. He pointed out thlt the deniity would be
doubled on this site. Jay replied that in this case the unjts were-restrjcted
to employee housing.
5/23/83O
PEC 5/23/83 -3-
corcoran pointed out that since the memo stated in #ll that theand restrictions concerning leasing would be the iure ui pitt<in
owners wou'ld not be able to rent out tneir units for more than aplus their costs.
Corcoran.repeated the concern for a pedestrian way, and felt that somethinq shouldbe worked out with the Town. .:ay said the applicints would be witiing-ld ior[-with the Town.
Morgan stated that he would rather have seen this proposal as an SDD. peterson
answered that there could be restrictions in the dbclhrations, and that the declarations
lgt]9_11:-lo !9 lpproygd. by the Town. patten stated ilrat-ne nia-i, soo-tvp"ot statement which would be #12 in the list of conditions: ',The site plan, il oor
tl:l:'^ll!_gll,approved pians as submittea are nereuy aev.ropm"nt-piini,-Jno invmaJor cnanges to these must be approved by the pEC.',
basic stipulations
Creek Park, the
certain amount
Jim Viele'moved to rove the uest for rezoni r the staff memo dateder0ow] nq mo cat t ons :
That_the applicant be al'lowed to construct not more than 3250 square feetof GRFA and that the sale price average $8s/square foot.
That #5 be stricken.
That #12 be added as stated by patten above.
That the word "parking" be inserted before the word ,'maintenance,, in item#9.
The motion was seconded b The vote was in favor 2 aqain Morqananrou
a.
b.
c.
d.
Donovan moved and Viele seconded to approve the request for parkinq variances
uan tavor qgainst (Trout) an
4.uest for iistorical buildi for the "Baldauf Cabin', at 3160 Katsos Ranch, parE of tne va campus.ppIIcant:for Vail MountaJn-SEfool
Peter Patten explained that the Town hadfor historical building status and thatfrom following the Uniform Buildinq CodeHe gave the history on the Baldauf"cabin
necessary for the designation.
recently passed an ordinance providinq
those buildings so designated were exefrptfor work done to preserve the buildinqs.
and felt that it did meet the criterii
Piper was concerned ahout the safety. Ogjlby answered that the local bui.ldingdepartment would have jurisdictrjon-i,ver-ttre i:onstruction. slgyq patterson, buildingofficial, stated that !he Mountain i.r,ooi *ui-;i;;;ii;";eri.irains the buildins
EC 5/23/83 -4-
and bringing the footings, f1oor, electricity" alarm system, etc. up to code.
He added that the only th'ing not bejng changed was the front door which opened
in rather than out.
Corcoran asked if the Mountain School ha.d been given their first conditional
use approval based on a certain amount of square footage, and Patten explained
that it was based on the nurnber of students, but that the Mountain School had
come back and asked for an open ended number of students and received permission
for an unlimited number of students.
Oonovan moved and Trout seconded to app
5. Request for a side setback variance in a Residentjal zone district=jn order
to construct an addition to a residence on Lot l, Block I, Vai'l Vil'l age 8thffi
Jim Sayre showed site plans and explained that the staff was recomnending denial
because there were other alternatives available to the applicant. A1 Abplanalp,
.representing the applicant, repeated the reasons stated in the merno for requesting
the variance, He added that the two lots, lot I and lot 2, were developed in
conjunction with one another and the easement was to ensure each a view of the
Gore Range. He gave other examples of variances granted.
,lohn Rai'l ton, of Trout Creek Collaborativen architects for the project, stated
that his office had gone through the options Iisted in the memo. He discussed
. each alternative.
Vjele stated that the purpose of the side setback ordinance was to jnsure a mjni-
mum setback, and that he was in favor of this request because of the extraordinary
circumstances. Piper agreed with the staff's ph'ilosophy and felt that the a'lterna-
tives should be explored. He added, however, that with the nonbuildable area
there seemed to be adequate separation and low impact, and he was in favor of
the variance.
Donovan felt that as long as there were alternative places where the addition
cou'ld be constructed, and the fact that the easement was not necessarily permanent,
she was against the variance. Morgan wondered if the setback could be reducedif the addjtion were placed where requested, and Sayre answered that it would
-have to be a long narrow room. Morgan. said he cou'ld not see any benefit to
placing the addition anywhere else. Corcoran pointed out that the board had
turned down a side setback request in Biqhorn which would have allowed a I0 foot
airlock, and the board acceptdO it after the size was reduced to an 8 foot air'lock,
showing that the board was concerned with degree of variance.
Donovan pointed out that there was the possib'ility that the lot with the easement
wou1 d be sold and the use of the area where there was an easement changed as
had occurred elsewhere in the. same neighborhood. Abplanalp answered that in
the deed no building "whatsoever" could be built in the easement. Larry Eskwith,
Town attorney, stated that the easement could be abandoned because the easement
holder or hjs successor has control because it goes with the land.
P
-
5/23/83 -s-t
Morgan asked which other variances had been grante9 in 1lg jmmediate area, and
Sayie answered that there had been two others which he did not research. but '
ttrit ttre staff had tried to be consistent with the Bighorn airlock referred to
by Corcoran.
Morgan mentioned Sejbert'shoUSe remodel , and Patten repeated that part_of the
garige could be made into a bedroom, and.a new garage built in front of it.
Viele moved and Morqan seconded to apProve the selback varjance lequef!-:tatjng.sPecial Privilege
inconsist6nt with the'limitations on other properties classified in the same
district, that the granting ofthe variance'would not be detrimenta'l to the public
health, safety, or welfare, or material 1y injurious to properties or improvements
in the'v'icin'iiy, and that the variance was warranted because there were exceptions
or extraord'inaiy circumstances applicable to the site that did not apPly generally
to other properiies in the sarne ibne. The vote was 3 in favor, 2 against (Donovan
and Corcoran) and Trout abstained. The-vailahce was qranted.and Corcoran)
6.uest for renewal of an existin ar conditional use rmit for the
onotam or arca r|rT ronta
y Arca
PEC
Jim Sayre exp'l ained the memo and read the conditions under which the renewal
iouta-"f,e-githtea. Shockley, one of the owners stated that he felt the Town
supported"the arcade, thafhe probably had 75% local customers, and wished to
reihain-in Vail. tte was quesiibneA co-ncerning the percentage of customers who
were adults, to wtrich he rep'l ied, "75%."
Piper moved and Corcoran seconded to approve the renewal subiect to the fouri
7. Request for a side setback variance to construct a saraqe for a resiCqqqg
on 'lot 7 ock 9. Intermountain.i a reouest for variances rom Sections
allow parkinq to DE
0-(
GcaT&-paiTlally wjth in Town of Vail
riqht-of-wav an ction to construct one less off-s reet parkin
space tnan requ pp cantt arles Harnes a
Jim Sayre explained the memo and showed site plans and e'l evatjons. Corcoran
read ilettei^ from Mike McGee of the Vail Firb Department in which he stated
that the Fjre Department was not'in favor of this variance.
Dave Irwin, desi$ner for the applicants, showed a rendered perspective.which
revealed the ste6pness of the'lbl. He explained how he arrived at the de1ig1
which would have the least impact, in his mind, on the property' He added that
s'ince the Barnes' only owned one iar, four parking spaces wou'l d be more than
adequate. Sayre expiained that any approval would be contingent upon the, Town
of Vail abandoiring the easement, ani that Irwin did have the approval of the
ut i'l i ty compan i es .
PEc 5/n/: -6-
Trout was concerned with the method of construction, and Irwin explained the
reasons he wanted to bui'l d as presented,
Donovan felt the building did not be'l ong on a steep lot, and Irwin said that
he had kept the addition-as small as possible, that he was using'less GRFA than
was al'lowable. Donovan felt that it would be too imposing to the neighbors.
Irwin answered that that it was surrounded heavily with woods, and that the addition
was an improvement to the property.
Piper mentioned that they cou'ld not deny the number of units al'lowed in the zone
diitrict, but that the number would be partially determined by the parking limitations.
He added that there may have to be a setback variance, but there should not be
a parking variance.
Vie'te agreed with Piper. Patten reminded the members that non-conforming parking
cou'ld remain, but parking for the new addition must be satisfied' He said
that there were two questions, l. Are there three non-conforming parking spaces?
and 2. what are the merits of the'overall program3
Corcoran asked that assuming that there are three spaces, if the wall were rebuilt'
wou'ld the three spaces still be legal non-conforming? Sayre answered that the
non-conforming spaces could be repaired or improved, so'long as the discrepancy
not increased. Viele stated that the burden of proof lay with the applicant.
Dave Terrell, representing the Andersons who own'l of 8, stated that there wou'ld
be visual blockage, and from lot B it appeared to be a massive structure because
of the proximity-of the project to lot b. He was protesting especially the setback
variance whjch was close to the more |evel and most logical part of 1ot 8 upon
which to build. He added that any variance would set a precedent for further
variances on that street, and that it would prevent the minimum setbacks the
Town was try'ing to maintain. He added that it was the board's responsibility
t! protect absentee property owners, and that there would be a problem with snow
removal .
Irwin stated that he had considered all of these things, but that this was the
worst (most steep) lot he had ever seen. Discussion continued trying to find
alternative methods of parking.
Pioer moved and Donovan seconded to denv the request for a side setback variance
and the parking variances because to do so would constitute a qralt o!_spqclal
privileqeinconiistent with thel imitations on other properties classified inDr'lvi leqe lnconsistent wlth the Ilmltaf,lons on otner propertles class'lrleo ln
inst, with Corcoran qDstajni
8. A request to amgnd Chapter .|8.54, Design Review, of the Vail Municipa'l ^Code.
App'l icant: Town of Vail
Peter Patten stated that Peter Jamar had asked him to request to table this
item. It was decided to have a special meeting on June 20 at 2:00 pm for only
this item. Viele moved and Piper secon6-0'in'favorl---
The meeting was adjourned at 7:45 pm.
tJ
Pl ann i ng
v
uno enui"onmenta'l co*isrionl-
May 23, l9B3
l:30 pm Site Visjts
3:00 pm Public Hearing
1. Approval of minutes of meeting of May 9.
2, Appointment of PEC member to DRB,
3. Request for rezoning from R P/S to HDMF on Lot l, Block 6, Intermountain
to convert the existing structure to 4 emp'l oyee units.
Applicants: Charles 0g'ilby and Tim Garton
4, Request for historical building for the "Baldauf Cabin" at 3160 Katsos
Ranch Road, part of the Vail Mountain Schoo'l campus. App'licant:
Chuck 0gilby for Vail Mountain School
'5. Request for a side setback variance in a Residential zone district in order
to'construct an addition to a residence on Lot 1, Block I' Vail Village
8th Filing, '1031 Eagle's Nest Circle.
Applicant: John S. Tuschman
6. Request for renewal of an existing one-year conditjonal use pennit for
the continuation of a major arcade in l,lest Vail Mal 1, 2l 6l North Frontage' Road. App'licant: Vail Family Arcade
7. Request for a side setback variance to construct a garage.for a resjdence
on'Lot 7, Block 9, Intermountain. Also a request for varjances from Sections
'18.52.080(A) to allow park'ing to be located partia11y withjn Town of Vail
right-of-way and Section 18.52..|00(I) to construct one less off-street
paiting space than required. Applicants: Charles Barnes and David Mauer
8. A request to amend Chapter'18.54, Design Review, of the Vail Municipa'l
Code. Applicant: Town of Vail
-(rO
MEMORANDUM
T0: Planning and Environmental Comn'ission
FR0M: Department of Cormunity Development
DATE: May 'l 9, l9B3
SUBJECT: Request for a side setback variance in order to
build a bedroom addition on Lot l, Block 1, Vail' Village 8th Fi ling. Appl icant: John S. Tuschman
DESCRIPTION OF VARIANCE REQUESTED
The applicant is requesting a five foot variance from the required l5 foot
setback requirement in order to build a bedroom addition to the east of the
existing residence. The addit'ion is approximately '120 square feet, which would
be adjacent to the living room. The result'ing setback would be ten feet. The
addition would bring the Tuschman residence to its maximum GRFA.
The applicant is requesting the variance for the following reasons:
'l . "A downstairs bedroom is required for applicant's inva'l id mother, who
cannot climb stairs.
2. A ten foot minimum width is needed for a small (10' x12.6' ) bedroom, thus
reducing the setback from 20.18 to 10..|8 feet.
3. The front elevation of the house wil'l be enhanced by the addition, as sameis presently too "boxy" in appearance, and the expanded elevation will be
more in conformity with neighboring units.
4. This is the only location for the addition that will not b'lock present views
from the house, and same will obstruct no other neighbors' views.
5. App'licant owns a perpetual easement to the fight and air over the land directly
adjacent to the variance.
6. The adjacent home is set forward 33 feet from the applicant's home and rvill
be 41 feet away at their c'losest points. Also this neighboring home is set
back 18 feet from our contiguous lot line and'is 2'9" inside its own side
setback line--the two homes toqether thus wil'l have 33 feet actual setbacksvs. 35'3" required (and the lalter includes an additional 5'3" additional
setback required by the height of the building next door)."
(See attached statement.)
Tuschman -2- 5/19/83ror
CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
Upon review of Crrlgfra and Finings, Seclion 19.62.060 of the Mun '
thC Department of Communl- r'iance
-Consideration of Factors
The re'l ationship of the.rqqlrested varjance to other ex'istjng or Potential uses
and structures in t!g_yl_ql_!_1_!y.,-
The applicant does own an easement for the "full and free light to the.uninterlupted
access', transmission and enjoyment of light and view over and across" Lot 2' which
is adjicent to the proposed adOition. The easement does not completely deny.the
possi6itity that tu'rtfrbr construction wjl'l take p'lace on the adjacent.properlY.
ihere is e-RfR teft on Lot 2, and the easement agreement may be altered to allow
an addition to the residence on Lot 2.
In 1976 the Planning Commission did grant a setback variance on the north and
west sides of the Tuschman lot.
The deqree to which reljef from the strict or l1lglg-1-j-!-lglpretation and enforcement
this title
wiftiout grant of special privilege
The staff has consistently mainta'ined that if there is any way an applicant can
exercise their deve.l opmeni rights without resorting to a variance, then a variance
should not be granted. In this case there are several areas on the Iot where
the bedroom cai be built wjthout a variance, or can be built with a variance of
on'ly one or two feet. These possibil ities 'incl ude:
l. Bui'lding the bedroom in the present garage and extending the garage gut
towards-the front of the lot. This would requ'ire a variance of approximately
'18 inches.
2. Bujlding the bedroom to the front (south) rather than the sjde (east) of
the lot.
3. The addition could also be added to the second story of the house and other
provisions (j,e. elevator) be made for the invalid mother'
Since there are a'lternatives avai'lab1e, the granting of the variance for this
specific design would constitute a grant of special priv'i1ege.
}'lsct;'a|- 5l1e/83
The effect of t@ 19qq,es!g1u-qtiqnc-e- rn ligh!-et{ g-!r, distribution of
frans-oortation and-#a-ftr-c faclt iTies. pTttirc--ftciTiTies inO-ut'il iiies_on_ of popq-latioq,
lfqry-p_o_ftqti" utll i-!-5:J-'-qld.-p-rl!l-rs
safety.
The significant
Setbacks are a
Such other factors and criteria as the cortmission deems ljcable to the prorrosed
va rl a nce.
F IN D ]IIGS:
The ?lary1-1nq ild Environmeltal Co shal I rnake the fol lorilng f indings-lqf9l-e-
grantln9 a val'lance:
That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege
jnconsistent rvjth the l imitatjons on other properties classjfied in the same djstrict.
That the granting of the varjance wj'll not be detrimental to the publjc health,
safety, or welfare, or materia'l 1y injurious to propert'ies or itnprovements in the
vicinity.
That the variance is warranted for one or nlore of the fo'l lovring reasons:
The strict or'l iteral interpretation and cnforcement of ',"he spec'i fied regulation
would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent
with the objectives of thjs tjtle.
There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions app'ljcable to
the site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties jn the
same zone.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Department of Community Development recommends denial of the requested side setback
variance. Although the staff recognizes there are some spec.ial circumstances associated
with the lot in terms of the vjew easement and past variances, there are alternatives
which would allow the construction of the bedroom withjn, or closer to, the required
setbacks. Since these possibil jties do exist, no physical hardship or pract'ica1difficulties are present which would justify the granting of the varjance.
impact would be to encroach into the required side setback area.
method of preserving light and a'ir between buildings.
I
5TliTE".i,liT CI Tliit i'FillriI:lr'l NlrTl-ll-il, 0F
I.'i,,()
"
RiiGUL,.'1' 1 i)l{
THit VARI Aliii. il'rr lurl:iTED
18. 1] . 060
Llplicant requests a ll '82 foot variance from the 'l 5 f oot
;5i;;;k "norri."*ont at the rearr of his horne a.t 10-11 )''-,r.gle's
il"ri-c:t"le in Vail, I ega]iy riescribed as iot ]' tsl ock l-'
ri.ii vilrage, Eithir't ;'ifittel rraking the setba"i ]0 ' 18 feet
frorn the properti line. Such variince will not be a special
ii.i"iiiter'o"i-*iir-trot U" detrirnental or injurious to other
propersles.
The strict or l_iteraf interpretation and enforcenen! of the
*pu"iri"a regulation rvill re::ult in practical ,difficulty and
unnecessary pnysic;r_ h;a"hip inconsistent r^rith thc objeetive--
of the title for the following reasons:
- A clownsta.irs beclroon is required for zrpplic:lnt's
invalid mother, "ho "?nlot :l*L*3f.:'
- A 10 foot minirnum width is needed for a small (10'x
iz.e'j u"0"""*,--{n"i reducing the setback from 20'rB
to lu.io feet,
- The front elevation of the house will be enhanced by the
aijdi-tion, as sane is 1rf€€€htry r'oo ' bo:iy'' 1n ar-'pear-
e-nce, an,i 'i;ne ei-tr'an'le* e:eva..'r;ion will :'e "ir.€ '"rt corl-
forrnity with neighboring units'
- This is the only location for the addition that will
not bl-ock p"u""i-tt-*'iJvis from the house, and same wi-l1
obstruct no other nei,ghbot's vievts.
I'urther, there ate ei'.ttaordinary conditions
si-te th::'t clo not r'.'i i;r 'to o-bhui' I.r'crj erries;
r-ppricah.le to Lno
- Applicant ovrns a perpetuaf easernent to the
. aii over the land-directly adjacent to the
Juil""li "equirea by the height of the builcling ne>rt
(**
John \J . itt:'cl'rt'lan
Ilight andl
varlance rl
- The acl jacent home is set forwarrl 33' from the appli-
cant's horne anci will be 41 ' arvay at their."lo"9sl^.
points. r\lso this neighboring home is sct :jzrcj( ro'
i"o* our contig"o"" toI tine and is 2'!" insicle it's
ovrn si.1e set-bdcli line - the tvro hones together thus
iuif r it.'o" ll reet actual- setbacks vs ' ::5')" required(;;a th" lllter-inctuoes an . ariditi.o""l l:?l 'ldlition;il
door)
Appl i c;tlt
r:1 to Applicatio". ria
I.
APPLICATION
This procedure is reguired
The application will not be
rORM FOR A VARIAIiTCE
for any project reguest.ing a Variance.
accepted until all information is submitted.
A. NA!,TE OF
ADDRESS
APPLICAIVT John S. Tuschman
1011 Eagle's Nest Circle, Vail-, CO., B16Jlpgq11B 4?6-6497
B. NAl,tE OF APPIICANTTS REPRESENTATM
ADDRESS PHONE
c..NAl'lE 0F OWNER (type o prjnt )S. Tuschman
SIGNATURE
IADDRESS l-OJl- Eaglers Nest Circl-e, Vail_, Co., 8155hHONE 4?6-649?
D.LOCATION OF
ADDRESS
PROPOSAJJ
10J1 Eagle's Nest Circle, Vai1, Co., 81657
LEGAL DESCRIPTION lot bLock 1 Filing Bth
,)}-,r E." ..Y "
lD' . \j
l iL'i F., , ,.rl
, t"l' '
P
FEE- $100-00 prus an anount equal to the then current first-crass postagerate for each property owner to be notified heretmder.
A list of the names of owners of al1 property ad,jacent to thesubject property and their mailing addresies.-
Town of.Vail (part of golf course urirler lease to
201-4 from Vail Associates), Town Ha11, Vail
c Lucy Dikeou, 2J pol-o Club Dr., Denver, Co., BOZO/
tt"ercer/Johnson lownhouses, c/o States r,,larine Corp.,,../. 280 Park Ave., New York, N.y., l_001?
I t-r--c -f-sa-.y
E" *Jtor
(.,f-
t.'it
/Jb
I
Vt/ rrt
tY 11/
rfr\*'
I
dA
o
lU'1 ll'"/C1',1"' 8o -l
- -
--/-'t
FT
:
q
st
P
<L
,'
;'I
o
-!
I
:>
-'
:l
.,, r +r.;.R\\
\-* -r- :. .\
r + r !-iI : ;33Ji i .$4 3
il\ 2Ri/ sxl
,, t,v!;+ Yl
dq,
i:.iil
.i.\'
t)
iilill9'1'
I
I
I
i
_lt,t;ti
s'<-).
ra D'
-
c
a
?i
G:
,I tt
: -- <t Ii ; ,-J II :v -i '
i,9:^:---:1i:__r-r--+i-4<-\-- --- _O.-__ \
.i+,._j i\Zl:. "l Ji t , I+,^i ii'Zl\-. q
j:),\* { r
'- - f. ll 4J i- !l-" -
q
a
' l_ v'u I i {ld
FJIt.{
{tI
lt
ti
do
)-r
):6
lo{-:;\
\r- tlt i'f ,\ \ i igll )
; i\r$, {:i .r " \ f--i9"---fi
I
t
t
'..,,:,$$lrr
t
i
'|}:
I ;"i-"t,r
ATTACHED !O AIID OF
tr
read:
in joint tenancy
FORMING
I
In all other respects,
jlc
LO/2L/8L
1,/1 Vail VitS-age 8th
Dated:
ol
A PART POLrC"r f 4105079
thLe policy shall remal-n the Eane.
TRANSAI.{SRICA TITLE INSI'RANCE CO.
I
Amormt of Inrurance t 559,250.00
. Dete of Policy August 18, 19 8t
1:00 P.!1.
l. Name of Inrureil:
SCEEDULE A
'4
PolicyNo. 41050 79
Shcet I of A
i'ACK S.TUSCHMAN A}TD JULIA LO\TE TUSCHMAN
2. Thc erretc or inrererr in rhc lanil ilescribeil herein anil wbich ir covercd by thia policy ie:
IN FEE SIMPI.E
;
3. Tbc crtete or intcreat rcferred to herein is at Date oI Policy veeted il:
iIACK S. TUSCBI{AT{ Ar{D JULIA LOVE TUSCHUAN
in joint tenancy
SCHEDULE A-Continued
Thc lanil referred to in thir p"li"y i" riturled in rhc Starc of Colorado, County of
Eag1e\'andirdeccribeilarfollowa:
t'
ILOt 1,
Block I,
VAIL VTLLAGE, EIGHTTI FILING
' !3lllJ,3;-t;""?3?^t"? ^."'ff^N LAND rrr,-E As=o.,^i,o," o'"n.^'f,JlRM B-re7o (AMENDED ro-r7-7o,
SCHEDULE B
This Policy does not insure against loss or damage by. reason of the following:
l. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shorr'n by the public records,
2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by rhe public records.
3, Discrepancies, couflicts in boundary lineg shortage in area, encroachments, and any facts which a cor-
rect survey anil inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records.
4. Any lien, or right ro a lien, for services, labor, or material herelofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by
law anil not ehown by rhe public recorde.
5. Taxea due and payable; and any rax, special aasessments, charge or lien irnposed for water or sewer
6ervice, or for any other special raxing district. Taxes and assessments not yet due
and payable.
Right of the Proprietor of a Vein or Lode to extract and remove his
ore therefrom, should the same be found to penetrate or intersect
the premises hereby granted, as reserved in United States Patent
recorded May 20, 1905 in Book 48 at Page 511.
Right of way for ditches or canals constructed by the authority of
the United States, as reserved.in United States Patent recorded
May 20, 1905 in Book 48 at Page 511.
Easements as shown on t}1e recorded PIat of Vail Village Eighth Fi1in9.
Restrictions, which do not contain a forfeiture or reverter clause,
but omitting restrictions, if any, based on race,'color, religion
or national origin, as contained in instrument recorded December 17,
1965 in Book I87 at Page 523.
6.
8.
9.Deed of Trustto the Publicfor the use ofto secure
dated
recorded
from :
Trustee
Jack L. Marshall and Jean L. llarshall
of the County of Eagle
Bank of Vail
9135,000.00August 22, L977
Augrust 23, 1977 in Book 258 at Page 812
NOTE: Assignment of Rentb recorded August 23, 1977 in Book 258
at Page 8I3, given in connection with the above Deed of Trust.
NOTE: Assignment of above Deed of
Bank, recorded September 20, L977
Trust to First !{estland National
in Book 259 at Page 937.
,/-;;=;;t;";1;;,.=o? "=o,o*]a[ . "o rr?LE as6ocrarroN LoaN eorf rTrMENDED to-t.-7o,
FoR uEE wtrH coLoRADo nscror,r r'lien rcaN LAND TrrLE AssocrlTroN owNER's poTicY-ronx E-t97o (AMENDED to'l7'7ot
SCIIEDULE B-Continued
A perpetual and, non-exclusive Easement for the full and free right
to the uninterrupted access, transmission and enjoyment of_1i9ht
and view over and across all that pariel of land, described as
follows: '
Beginning at the Nh'L of Lot 2, Block 1, Vail vil-1a99 Eighth-I1li"S,
To*n of VaiI, County of Eagle, State of Colorado; thence S0"31'21"W
45.00 feet along the West line of said Lot; thence S89o28'39"E
75.57 feet to a point on the East line of said Lot; thence N0"31r21'E
53.09 feet along said East line to the Northeast corner of said LoL 2i
thence S84"25'O'"W 75.00 feel along the North line of said Lot to the
Point of Beginning.
11. Easernent and right of way across the premises for the construction,
operation and miintenancE of a parking area, described as follohls:
Commencing at the Northeast corner of Lot l, Block 1, Vail Village
Eighth filing, Town of Vail, County of Eagle, State of Colorado;
thence SOo31r2l"W 52.85 feet to the True Point of Beginning;
tlrence S89o55'59"W 9.24 feet; thence SOo04'01"W 43.84 feet to a point
on the Easterly line of said Lot I; thence N28"09'5I"8 18.94 feet;
-thence NO"3l'21"8 27.L5 feet along said Easterly line to the
True Point of Beginning. ---;
12 ' Deed of Trust from ;Joseph J. ColangeIo, Trustee
to the Public Trustee of the Count)- of E ag lefortheuseof : Jack L. Marshall and Jean L. Marshalltosecure : S 175,000.00
rlated
recorded
August 14, 1981
August 18, 198] in Book 327 at Page 851
DATE
READY FOR
LOCATION:
INSPECTION:
INSPECTION REQUEST
TOWN OF VAIL
,. )JOB NAME __] rr.,>Ln marn-.
cALLER l3,or..-,*rrft ?\o rt-,' c
TUES WED THUR FRI -----@ PM
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGBOUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.tr FOUNOATION / STEE-
tr FRAMING tr ROUGH / WATER
r_r ROOF & SHEEH- PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION
tr SHEETROCK
tr POOL / H. TUB
NAIL tr
tr
tr
tr
tr FINAL FINAL
ELECTRIGAL:
tr TEMP. POWEB
MECHAN!CAL:
tr HEATING
tr ROUGH O EXHAUST HOODS
tr
tr
CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
p11,141 r€ rzrd.," I tr FTNAL
Xlppnoveo/CORRECTIONS:
T] DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
ffiff
(,+' a' 'It.
INSPECTIONTOWN OF
REQUESTVAIL t
JOB NAME --.. / r )t 1'
,rlb
'r.
DATE
CALLER
READY FOR INSPECTION:
LOCATION:
THUR
/. -.\AM {.;r'r./
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
O ROUGH / D.W.V.tr FOUNDATION / STEE-
D FRAMING tr
tr
ROUGH / WATER
r_r ROOF & SHEER" PLYWOOD NAILING GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION
tr SHEETROCK
D POOL / H. TUB
U
n
tr
I
FINAL O FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER
MECHANICAL:
tr HEATING
tr
tr
tr
ROUGH tr
tr
tr
EXHAUST HOODS
CONDUIT SUPPLY AIR
E rryfi tr FINAL
<'z tr DISAPPROVED // tr REINSPECTION REQUIREDvED \\.(a
CORRECTIONS:
('r','.7
.. <-->Q_
. -:t'DATE l) " ,/ i7"'-i .;'2 TNSPECTOR
#
DATE JoB NAME '7 U':; //'M A #
REQUEST
VAIL .
..
rN#cnoNTOWN OF
INSPECTION:
CALLER
MON . TUES )THUR FRI AM PMREADY FOR
LOGATION:
BUILDING:
O FOOTINGS
tr FOUNDATI
tr FRAMING
/ STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDEBGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V,
tr ROUGH / WATER
ON / STEEL
n 199.f-&-s-H.qFn...- tr cAS prprNc- PLYWOOD NAILING
tr INSULATION
-
tr POOL/H.TUB
SHEETROCK NAIL
-
tr
trtr
tr FINAL tr FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER
MECHANIGAL:
tr HEATING
tr ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT E SUPPLY AIR
tr
tr FINAL tr FINAL
,-Et'Appnoveo
CORRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
DATE INSPECTOR,
#
/.. ,
INsPEc-fl*oN, $FguE9.l
(1,
DATE
READY FOR
LOCATION:
INSPECTION:
JOB NAME
MON
.":)
TUES WED THUR KM) PM
CALLER
BU
trl
D
n
_lLJ
f,
trr
tr
ILDING:PLUMBING:
FOOTINGS / STEEL tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W,V.
tr ROUGH / WATER
FOUNDATION / STEEL
FRAMING
ROOF & SHEER O GAS PIPINGPLYWOOD NAILING
INSULATION tr
tr
POOL / H. TUB
SHEETROCK NAIL
D FINAL tr FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
tr TEMP, POWER
MECHANICAL:
tr
tr
tr
o
tr
HEATING
O ROUGH EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT SUPPLY AIR
tr
tr .TFINAL -
FINAL
f-ppnovro D DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
CORRECTIONS:
DATE
CTION REO|..}EST
TOWN OF VAIL . {
CALLER
-/--\READY FOR INSPECT|ON:
-
MON r5a $leO ) ruun ,2t^ _
-
AM PM
LoCATIoN: /0:!/ ,2r,r" ro-'7 | r+r,/e
INSPE
BUILD!NG:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
PL
tr
tr
tr
tr
tr
tr
UMBING:
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
UNDERGROUND
ROUGH / D,W.V.
ROUGH / WATERpNlrnnvrrr.rc
u
tr
tr
tr
ROOF & SHEER
PLYWOOD NAILING GAS PIPING
INSULATION POOL i H. TUB
SHEETROCK NAIL
tr FINAL tr FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER
MECHANICAL:
tr HEATING
tr ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
fr Ftl{AL
-
tr FINALtre
CORRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
INSPECTOR.-'-
ir' 11,
DATE
READY FOR
LOCATION:
INSPECTION:PMTUESpTHURFRI
ltt
BUILDING: PLUMBING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL tr UNDERGROUND
tr FOUNDATTON /,STEEL tr ROUGH / D.W.V. t
tr FRAMING E ROUGH / WATER
n 199.1^&-s-H.EFn...^ tr cAS prprNc" PLYWOOD NAILING
tr INSULATION
-
tr POOL / H. TUB
tr SHEETROCK NAIL tr
nn
tr FINAL tr FINAL
ELECTRICAL: MECHANICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER tr HEATING
^hllt,s.^houcn {awcail Qdd.r6"n tr EXHAUST HooDS
tr CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
-
t-t n
tr FINAL tr FINAL
1{aeeaoveoy'.o**="r,o*.,
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
oor=,/' :s> -f,J, rNsPEcroR
|
JOB NAME
rNSAtoN REeuEsr
TOWN OF VAIL . ' N.
.1
DATE
READY FOR INSPECTION:
LOCATION:
PMAMMON
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH / WATER
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
tr FRAMING
r.1 ROOF & SHEER" PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION
tr SHEETROCK
tr POOL/ H. TUB
NAIL tr
trtr
tr FINAL tr FINAL
ELECTRIGAL:
tr TEMP. POWER
MECHANICAL:
tr HEATING
tr ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
tr
tr
tr
tr FINAL
APPROVED
CORRECTIONS:
B DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
DATE INSPECTOR
rNsfctoN
TOWN OF
REQUEST
VAIL . o ..
DATE JOB NAME
CALLER
TUES FRIREADY FOR INSPECTION:
LOCATION:
WED THUR PMAM
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
tr FRAMING tr ROUGH / WATER
rr ROOF & SHEER" PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
B INSULATION tr POOL/ H. TUB
tr SHEETROCK NAIL tr
tr
tr FINAL O FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER
MEGHANICAL:
tr HEATING
tr ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT O SUPPLY AIR
tr
tr FINAL tr FINAL
tr APPROVED
CORRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
DATE INSPECTOR
DATE
t
JOB NAME
INSPECTION: ,t6
TNSPECTION REOIIE$T
TOWN OF VAIL
t:/. -,-.,t: t'i :D -
+
i1 a / Agr tr "', o,
CALLER
TUES WED THUR FRI -!AMPMREADY FOB
LOCATION:
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH/WATER
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
D FRAMING
n ROOF & SHEER- PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION tr POOL / H. TUB
tr SHEETROCK NAIL
HNou (' i,2 t tr frNAL
ELECTRIGAL:
r] TEMP. POWER tr HEATING
T] ROUGH
tr CONDUIT EI SUPPLY AIR
tr FINAL tr FINAL
tr DISAPPROVED O REINSPECTION REQUIRED
CORRECTIONS:
O '", /' -'onte / .r.z,t, z
I |NSPECTOR
ao
CA
F{
F{
Ft
>relaft
o
F{(,
l{.A
C.)
+,o(u2
o
o
F{ulqt
EI
Nr!o
FI
co.r{
rJ
Ott{
+Joq
o(,
ID
oNg;)
o
N
a)
]L
h
I
qt2
I
I
r.o
Icn
GI(\l
oz
t{c€
2
ao
Cl.a
o
or
tUl{(t(,
ra
ooco€.Ft
ooE
Fl.rl
F
El
I
cl
F{
trla.,1
(,l
c
5c(Ja!ac
(.)
sI
l'l
IH
S,q | |HSS IbgH IHfiH I
EEEIR€P Isr$ I
FFg= |
XIFFI
tEs$ |
RFTH I
lHiFIl
IEIgl
i{ts(F
C.
-EttFrfratte.R
EN
-tiH.t,rAH
.iFH
-F
-aflJaF
tHfr\€v
f-
-F{G(F?
El|e
F
-dLIF
-d
*:q
HLI
C+.trE/
r+a
11
Atft
ELr
IFfHofJtH
|-e.
€
o
attr
o
zt/
2
>
.)
9l
F
nz
(a,^J
eH<o> -fiBid<'|
q
FI
gl
(,
2o
F
9
J
Iu
UJ
z
uJoz
s
FallJ
=lta
ul
tr
E
ul
at
E
Jtt
ult
F
9
F
F
e
FI
h
F
e
FI
q
s
t
Ttt
!
.E
=r=Hlrot
=?=oTJf.o
(ter
\ri uxr {
(fo r't
ulF
o=
-o-ot
zo
F9Cd.6FG2:
:26fufo.otE
;ci
Y!
lE
3
II
z
F
ct
ulo
7
9y
EtT$:ssrrrr*'\t:f{fr
/tw*6rnouaavsro 3 tt::F
r3J Itt4UAd __rl"/ y', 33r rrlfH3d
:s)uvN3u :sxuvt\l3u
$ NOllvn-lvn
ulswnN :lvctNvH33w W ulsrlnN :eNl'wn'ld
:xHoM JO Noudl
urvdsE E 13oow3u E No|rroov E MrN Iq :)uor/r ro
:9Nto'iln8 JO
-_\--zH.-> JNOHd
l IVN IO NMOI
lll,\|ESd'tvctNvHcSt t/ElNlE|lrun'td
t
Yail, colorado 81657
(3031 47e5613
Dear Sir:
It has come to my attention that a residence constructed
durlng the past year is eurrently being occupied by you. Our
records indicate that no final inspectlon has been *pproved nor
has a Certificate of Occupancy been issued for your property.
It is necessary that you contact me, at your earliest
convenience, to arrange for this inspectlon and subsequent
issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. If any of the information
contained in this notice is incorrect please contact me. I amavailable at the above address or at (303) 476-56L3 ext. 235.
rely,
(/t-z.n.)illiam Pier0eBuilding Offieial
Department of nity evelopment
nP/di
Qqpr<Z
office of the town manager
Itay 10, 1977
box 100
Sluc
a7I
I
@
)
MEMORANDUM
TO: PTANNING COI{IIISSION
FRO[!: DEPARTTIENT OF COMIIIUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DATE: JUNE 24, 1976
RE: Hugh Hyder Residence (Single-family)
Setback Variance for
Lot 1, Block 1, Vail Village 8th Filing
The applicant has requested a setback
from the west and north property lines. The
are 12 t 6".
The val'iance 1s requested in order to
family residence on a very small 1ot (9,320
spects views of surrounding existing homes.
on the followingThe applicant requests the variance based
information:
' I'Lot l is a sma1l lot, therefore the house 1s small'
Reducing the rvest side by 2'6" will make srualL bedrooms smal1er.
ltte would probably have to go higher to solve problem. A view of
the Gore Range is possible betrveen a break in ihe pine trees
if we can keep the house to ten feet on the north 1ine. Therefore,
a variance to build to the 10 foot setback would be rnost helpful."
The Department of community Development has revierved the
criteria and findings provided for in Section 19.600 of the Zoning
Ordinance and our conclusions are as follorvs:
The relationship of the requested variance to other exist-
j,ng or potential uses and str:uctures in the vicinity.
The Johnson res j.dcnce to the rvest, the Brittan resldenc.e
to the east and the Steinberg residence to the southeast have been
revierycd and thc requcstecl variance would [at'e no adverse impact
on the adjoining drveLlings. There are no adioining vacant sitcs
on which the proposed residencc rvotrld have an adverse impact.
varianee of 10 feet
required setbacks
build a single-
sq. ft. ) which re-
The degree to which relief from the strict or llteral
lnterpretation and enforcement of a specified regulati.on is neces-
sary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among
sites in the vicinity or to attain the objectives of this or-
dinance without grant of special privilege.
The objectives of the Zoning Ordinance have been met by
th6 appllcant in that the house has been designed and located
on the site to respect view corridors in one of'the most tightly
clustered residential areas. A building could be designed for
the site which meets every technical requirement of the ordinance,
but would have an adverse impact on the adioining neighbors,
whieh we feet would be contrary to the intent of the ordinance.
This site is one of less than 10 in the entire Town of Vail of
such a small size.
The effect of the requested variance on light and air,
distribution of populatj-on, transportation and traffie facilities,
public facilities and utiLities, and public safety.
. IYe do not foresee any adverse effects upon these factors.
The proposed residence is sma1l (2,158 sq. ft., average height 20'
and rviIl not btock viervs and light as designed.
Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems
applicable to the proposed varj.ance.
No additional factors appear to be pertinent -
The Department of Community Del'elopment finds that:
The granting of the variance rvilL not constitute a grant
of special privilege inconsistent rvith the limitations on other
properties classified in the same district.
Due to the small size of the site and the location of
surrounding drvellings, it would be nearly impossible for the owner
to construct the residence without approval of the variance and
still respect adjoining properties. Nany residences in the Golf
Course area were constructed when no setback requirements were in
I I fJ
f,
IIyder
Page 3
force, thus we do not feel approval would be grant of special
privilege.
. That the granting of the variance will not be detri-
mentaL to the public heatth, safety, or welfare, or materially
injurious to properties or improvments in the vicinity.
The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to
the above factors; disapproval of the variance could have a much
more detrimentaL affect. No other structure in the area rvi11
be impacted by the variance.
That the varianse j.s warranted for the following reasons:
A. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement
of the specified regulation rvould result in praetical
difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inccnsisient
with the objectives of this ordinance.
B. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement
of the speeifled regulation lvoufd deprive the app11-
cant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other
properti.es in the same district.
See orvners statement regarding locatj-on of proposed
structure. ITe do not feel the approval of the requested varj-ance
wouLd be a grant of speeial privilege. Similar variances (llorgan'
Carnj-e) have been granted for new residences rvhere it was not
desirable or practical to locate them in compliance with the
Ordinance.
The Department of conmunity Development recommends approval
of this variance as requested.
.., i(.Jri lr(rVi(rri lL,tJ
rto Paid
io.ttcT
:0AL DE5Ctl IPT l0l'l
lT s rzE
ETBACKS:
Actua I
ISEABLE OPEN SPACT:
l{:'*-z0l1 lll(; ulll.(;tiL | 5l
- 5 UMI4A RY
; ARCtI E.U IITil
.t/z/iE zoilE /1 ; PRoP0SED USE ( S )
FRONTAGE
I so 4+
$, Common
Actua I
Actua I r
c.r ++
Cove re d Re-
.---------------,
iu i re d
IttG: Required
AN D LOAD I f,lG: No
n
70 Cove red Act ua I
Req u i
No
:ON ING APPROVAL
)ES I GN RE V I EI./ BOARD APPROVA L
JTII-ITIES APPROVAL
:NVIRON14ENTAL I l''IPACT APPR0VAL
Zon ing Admin istrator lJ ct I v
Da J eChairman, Des i gn Rev ierv Boa rd
. Town Eng i nee r Da te
lilayor Date
Required - Front J0 , Sides '/a2{ /Q1. (, a.u, Jf>t J. (,
- Front 4S fal, s ldes t4!- "2--, Rear /D i
i red , Actua'
-
/Height Allowed /7ft- , Actual "2D ;
.R.F.0., .2( Ratio, Allowable sq,tt.233d'-/L'-, Actual sq' tt4/d-t
Ol,lpiERC f AL FLOOR AREA: Percenlage a I lowab I Q-l A I lowab le sq
Actua I sq. ft.
UII.DING BULK CONTROL Allowab le rnax imum length Diagona I
D i agona Iequi red Of fsets Actua I length
trE g0VERAGE: Alowab t. }d-$, Allowable sq. +t. WlLb Actual J2- X
Actua I sq. tt. J0 4? ;
Required
Ground Le ve I
.AN DSCA F
,ARK I I.IG
I STAI{CE BETI'IEEN BU I LD I t'lGS : Req u
E IGHT: Average Grade
-^A
sq 1+ Aa*rra| | . , ,,v ' ve
{+
-7-, No.
I
i
)ate. Submi
)ate Submi
Date Submi
Extens i on
by Sect ion
COI'll''IENTS:
for Zon i
for Des i
for Env i
ng Review
gn Review
ronmen ta I
tted
tte d
tte d
of
Dead I ine
Dead line
Date
Da te
I mp a c t Rev i
to
elv Dead I ine
as perrnitted
da'fe
B (Serios of 1973).
i tem
of 0rd inanco No
/. /l " 'Ji" l^r | %- t7tu /{'/t4r' J73 td ]lo/c -ffiw
4t^-- ,1(/
/r.f .x J7.s- ////
y'_r,"*._.r{
,7 l. 2 7,)- tc / 7.s-
R rs-F
_- -a
8E$rC0PY
AYflIrilE
f '.-*"i*
o
|: '-'.; a. 4&,4..au*d*r.irrtrd.*e - $r.."r/r&;r*i;
' ,,rt- .- -)
-- {P --Lr) t- - - - - - L4 -- - - -.-. - -
ii--/._[4y_7t__:
:'. .Jii::; .
. .2 r,rl
3l:rl
,t t!:
:( $'i:
? t:r)
tl tir
): 0.'i5x 1..00.-' 'l qrr
:/.*-*..--.-.--*- .
ToiLc';, ilr i,-.:r!. ,
Xc s i- C::: ".: i-e I
Con-:,orc i.nl' ,Shoqt:t. o:: TiiS
3. i'lrs' :Lcl:
fcc l i:ch-i-;i c s / lr 0.25
ll;l'i:c:. Cc rrl r:::s
- iir.n a1,i '..ra iicr f ouni:a:l::.: >.- 0 ,25 t:' ' ,t i:)r
il its
It s.;1
'/-ttd':ii1rf
lt.i.:h
ii i.i .' lls i;
2l'rtl'
Srcl
. tl-iir
_ llas
Sirul:l:;C,.7.i t,
t:
6.
0lr e - jit:.lf iii:'ilr
( S no:;e:. c:. 'lulr,
0.''- s.in , Toilct )
" | .-,.^)'t: /.r r\'
3 .'i 3.oo "' t7.ao
2n<l 7-/7'*- I'rrt I Par-ir
B:-' lr
.t. r,., .;
2;r t!
kI,l
D a:;
'2ncl
lt th
lias.
ls!
Roor:rs ( Livi:rA :.corls ,!lr,zlr.sar.c nri.'^.^.
Sl:o3s . S tu(li os ).
'....
..t-
Xitchens XcsiCc:rti.a1
Di s: ) r:..:r s )r c- t"
51 t.oc =5.:e
/,,
/,,
?. 50 =]. CC 3
c
.4D(l
ll r'<l
tai r.^r,^-. a-.-,.-.-..: - I
l)i r;)rrrl:irc r
Scati:rg i- 4
>:1.00 ll' ... .t r- n - --_.-...-_
L-/ ). 0.1;(t -.
--._.:2Q.^
n . ll.'r:;
'ilrr,.l
7.5t)
o
t,;r
I,t
. :.' Cot;,::rcr.c i ;t I
aS lrc r.):2.00 3
1.00 ,' Z. A o(r: i (:(! !.l i-c:.
( :;.. : r i;:rut;r oi' cr c )
(, u'- ji j.dc Si'r:'::ni:).c:'s
L,,
j. trslsi:
2: t<\
3r'rl
lt'i)r f ir'c. liose Ca];ine'cs
Scr.vi c e S ta'c i on
Sr.'i.ir:ri.n il I'o<rlL
>: 1.00
yl(t. tt(t
_LU lia 3
ll- s.i:-
3r.J
Q Llr
Convc:r';:'.on Ce:t t cr:
I'c:.' j'c r" l-; ot:
T(rii.r:1, fOliilTS ?JJ-5
= !.-G-5-Ze
?r Ll .l-0 :,
10: 00
'Ic''i:2,.il.
l>(,j-;rt5 = !.0t) :.i:]:ll:
,,'rtrrr 2.l75x"3C0. 00
.-;-,,.'.
I | 1i'C
oi:. l'c,11 ).o'.r in g';irc coi;:i>)- et: :iorr <i:1 (:(-:;) ::t:liic:'! j.(,:1
Cr-r:;::.'e'r'c i tt L :; t,r.'u(l i'.1:'i.:5. !ile Dis'i:':i,ct slla.l-]o:'.;i: a ?i;:,' !;:r c:r i
-f:p<:,-:-i:1<:.;r o: a:ll. P'tc:::j.::c1:j 'co dc:ict't:r j-trc tl:c ;rtl,;,i:cr. Lrf pcilrts i:a
l.,c its:;r::;:;':<i ::cco:-'ri:ii:g to 'th'r llrrc:' ;r:rd si,:;c;: '-i'-1 i-cc. ai:(i j:.ii''j
Sci:'.rrl:r 1,.: , arrj i:;ia,jrj"(.:; al:<l 'cllt: Dj.:;l'ric:t :l;-.:J.l-.1- :r.11':c ?:ll)' ('l C:iu: -'J::r'-.:'rt l;
.r).i.t.!.,.:,.:r..!J irr -t l,r. r,-".,'-.:.--. r +..,r .^^ !...I.r 1',tj.:, i:i::'t:Ci:::!r;l S.:-,tlJ-
eJ-r:o (lc-!c;!:dnc t.':e bui1cli.nJ,, oirjr,.:t.'rs \..'.rtc!. and seil'el sc!'vii:al
char.ge.
+
<: :; i. r.i e t r'.: i i: l-a:: d
' llo...r:cl of l)irrrct c:':;
!ai] l'l:rtcr- end Sait i'i at ion
.!o
liEitF il;fi;i fi$FEi
E:::gl :;:;:l:,FF:;; i;tigil l;:ti:ii 3i s sg Fi ii; g:33 E.eE; E =fi,ii!-;,XE:,Ete; " sr:s6:! ;sijq?;3 :
ui:€:E ;g;iFEg: E;*:;t;:E;i:i!i i
o()
lt*JaF.'Gr
oa-lE{GrEsB'-t&
Itr
!ra
'l \t :
'Jl o'.-ilz
g\+tr (-lr'l o,
Fq
$lsN
I
I
I
I\
\'vs\\
'axoco
Etro
>5
b
ql
tr
ct
'(t
€
ll
,cn
.2E
6
c
-!l oc'.1 :'6t' i".g.oeE
<l)
to
cl
€)
B
o
o
dl
!
A
sri
ci
;
<l
JI
R
i4
I
I
I
.-IJ
,. Ifulz2la
I
I
I
!,(l)
.,
CL
A
!
€
ad
o
o
B
<)
9
q,
F
E
'
x
!,
a
I
o
E I EEE.grEg-g EJ H e3:itqE; :
E f #:i;E;:= s
lirEg€;:*Eii i E i,5P3?:E f= <,E .e };b€:iE! 4z i H Eti.:BfEE E6 ; s or!-:Ht=:E ai ", E€::;E.E3E gH Ii;EE3E;:: gi # Yl iE;?tEEggE.g
b ^^^ '9i i':=Ftt+:;€ €
fr8q *i::Ei{;€?i ;r ? s 6l F :E;E*;E:? P-'cr ;i {l E :e,.g;#=gi g: Idr$t ;;E;*;'EE ia !q l|3l ;l€i.;*;F o l*l =EEEe;;== E-o
H 2 ldi =.,iE:3;ri:i ta l€jjeEHisrE E
(!
'\Jl
CN
t
!td
o
o
GI
ct)
DESIGN REVTEw Bo48D
DATE OIT MBETING:
MEMBERS PRESENT:
SUBJECT: y'
ACTION TAKEN BY BOARD:
--T?
MorroN J/AC? ' SEcoNDED BY:
VOTE: FOR:AGAINST:
ABSTENTION:
APPROVED:
DISAPPROVED:
tf//ffA r/rtc4szu tt
SUlrlirlARY:
/ktttn- Eo>//e
-?\' lrJ. r,',\. : i,' : :,il,,,,,,l"
I
....t1r1r.,..t,.,r.._,.':,, I J jt r l r..r f '.i.:,i']1,1.(]l,\ './-r. .r..t, r ,'tr,'r r, ,'.1.
e(';.()::.1i i) [;].(, 5'i; \tiJ.t,,
tl,rmc of !itl:;itterl, crr" i':(,:;:'r 0i,'nc
A<lr!r'c:; r; --/fuZEAQtl,Ct J t trlocf.
-1J..'-a--.--
3.,
a BESTCOPY :.
AIIAI|'.|BIE, , "
:t';1-l.I/V..frtt-___
)ii::;
1s't
..2ncl
3r.'rl
'i'(.i:
Toj.l.ct, th.i,r;r3.
licsiC;.::;'J:-eL
Co;i:.erc i.ll
SJror+cl: t>;: Ti:l>
fcc l'i:c]:i.;',es
>r a.'15
v. L .00... 'l r. ft
2,lr-..
It s'i:
?t:d
3 r'rilltir ): ().2i; ..
3. l]ls' llsl: "
' tr r.l.'r a ll
i;i:.d
r!.i.:)r
iils.'ll.si:
Zt^tti
3r..cl
. tl'lii
. llas
J. s;t
Sirul:ll;
*:l_._*.
----' iil:.i-.l.il :l::<l i'ci-..1-.;:-L
_L_.*.__-....._ L_
i'uLl. llai:h
( Sno',:.::. c::. ?r,rl,,Dlsin, To:)-c';)
.\ootrs (Lir'.ing r.co::s,ilc,<l:.colls, OI: :c:c:,
Slio:>s , S';u<i i os ). .
'/
;J .>: 3.00 .,00
€x L.0c = A-A71
f::t t,c::
X.itc!reris iie:: :'.rlcni.i.*1
l)i.::li:ra s)rc i.
2. so : Z;€Ar.r'c = re;/x
/>:
. lll 7-tr:-:::
llth
B::s
.1. i, i..
2::ti
Ii l.-:llrtir
D;r:;
I st'
2nd
3 r'C
Ir t)r
)ii t clrrr.t:s Co;;u;rcl.citI
l)i :; lrr rir I ir c r.
" r: 2.
>: L.
o'r 4t
50
00
50ticil'l:'.:r1; i. t;
l!a s
I$t
2 r:r tl
ill. tlllr)r
Itir Ilrit
'il:ttl
i*)'il
,; t )r 0.Ii0 ;.:.6?>_ ..._ ,...-_.,. .l/,,
-l
II r''lrl $
I'r aghcr
,(t: : :. ll c r,l1 i. c: :.(:,,:r:;il.:t;r ()i cnc)
(tu'- :;id e $;i:'';i n): J.c :.s
,.. 2,00 =
x30.00 =
.- -;--Conve:rt:lon
)>et l)cl-so::
--...:q
?: 0.1r.0 ::
Z
,fd"t
{
I
I
.i4 0.33
:'.ll
.: t: '.
i:r:i
3 r'ri
li tlt ______ fix.r: liosc Cal>.inc,;s ): I.00 = _.-
Scr.vice S';a'ci.on
Srri;rtt;.t'tt tort )l 5.00 =
1.. ..
.'l.s'i:
2i.:i
3:'Jl;tlt Cc::tc::
.fOii.ril, l-0iil'il:i
J.0"tl(l ))c,:l;:ts = i1.00 Li;r:it
':..-. 'Ic.-i;i:.I. Uni'i:; '4.16 >: $3C0. Cr-\ = {;(.;fl$-
I riii) g
{r.l--.l .r .'l
ia r- ;:. d ) -'r 't-
;:n5' a<.!-i r.:s i'
?ect:.:11;1 si,a
CI. Sct'Vi(:t-:
lloa.rcl of Dirc:ctc.r.:;Vail I'lari' c:r. a:rci S.-r n i,; at i on lii st:.,--:- ct
AE
1i
.:..'\ i
'l l'r i
qar:
t!
.::a
I
i:
i,
:i'
'ini;'l'):e co::'r:Le',::i.o:i <if cl-::rst::ric:-Lj.cr;r of .-r'c.i;rl' st:..'..1.i:'i'.1:-.::s .'L-itc D-i:;-;:.:i.c.l siia.l..L p.:rr:;r of a.ll. pi'c:;ri.:: e:i .io detei.r.li.ire tl:c ;lr.:r:,r::::;cri ;:cco:-ij:ii:g';o'Ljrc !,';r-c:. ai:<! S.:.:;cj:J..:, ;is ;i;lcr:lic:<:, .tr)C -il'ir: D.i-:;-.-:.ict sii:-l-.1- I;i:';r !11 il:i: o:"-i;i;'r.-lJ. i;:i:r ;1.-.e t:e j cl . Tjr j.r:
':-ie:-:lj nc t):c ):u:ici-{.t:g, oi.,:tt:,...rIs l..'ittct a;tci
,:.r
'x'
i;i
'l:!
(i
jc'
*
.J'.
L.
5l
r'l :
(
$(
-rl
i.l
i:*'.
S:Oc:
Jls,L
Crlrlii
s:p(.:
)ic
.Sci:
,)ec
i:f- s,,
cJra:
dr
p
c
e
)-
h,
.t:
c
s:
)i
.s
,)r
i:.
:-r i.ri a n';
. rr'
ira,.
oo o o
MEMORANDUM
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: DEPARTMENT Of' COI,IMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DATE: JUNE 24, T976
RE: Hugh Hyder Residence (Single-famiJ.y)
Setback Variance for
Lot 1, Bloek 1, Vail Village 8th Filing
The applicant has requested a setback variance of 10 feet
from the west and north property lines. The required setbacks
ate f,2'6",
The vari.ance is requested in order to build a single-
family residence on a very small tot (9,320 sq. ft.) which re-
spects views of surrounding existing homes.
The applicant requests the variance based on the following
information:
' "Lot 1is a small lot, therefore the house is small'
Reducing the west side by 2'6" will make smafl bedrooms smaller.
Vle would probably have to go higher to solve problem. A view of
the Gore Range is possible between a break in the pine trees
if we can keep the house to ten feet on the north 1ine. Therefore,
a variance to build to the 1O foot setback would be most helpful ."
The Department of Community Development has revierved the
criteria and findings provided for in Section 19.600 of the Zoning
Ordinance and our conclusions are as follows:
The relationship of the requested vari-ance to other exist-
j-ng or potential uses and structures in the vicinity.
The Johnson residence to the west, the Brittan residence
to the east and the Steinberg residence to the southeast have been
reviewed and the requested variance would have no adverse impact
on the adjoining dwellings. There are no adioining vacant sltes
on which the proposed residence woul"d have an adverse impact.
Hyder
Page 2
oo oo
The degree to which relief from the strict or literallnterpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is neces-sary to achieve compatibllity and uniformity of treatment amongsites in the vicinity or to attain the objectives of tbis or-
dinance without grant of special privi.lege.
The objectives of the Zoning Ordinance have been met by
thb applicant in that the bouse has been designed and located
on the site to respect view corridors in one of.the most tightly
clustered residential areas. A building could be designed for
the site which meets every technical requirement of the ordinanse,
but would have an adverse impact on the adjoining neighbors,
which we feel would be contrary to the intent of the ordinance.
This site is one of less than 10 in the entire Town of VaiI of
such a small size.
The effect of the requested variance on light and air,distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities,public fac,ilities and utilities, and public safety.
We do not foresee any adverse effects upon these factors.
The proposed residence is sma11 (2,158 sq. ft., average height 2Ol
and will not block views and light as designed.
Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems
applicable to the proposed variance.
No additional factors appear to be pertinent.
The Department of Community Development finds that:
The granting of the varianee will not constitute a grant
of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on otherproperties classified in the same district.
Due to the sma1l size of the site and the location of
surrounding dwellings, it would be nearly impossible for the owner
to construct tbe residence without approval of the variance and
sti1l respect adjoining properties. Many residences ln the GoIf
Course area were constructed when no setback requirements were in
Hyder
Dage 3 o.o?
force, thus we do not feel approval would be grant of special
prlvilege.
That the granting of the varj.ance will not be detrl-
mental to the public health, safety, or welfare' or materlally
lnjurious to properties or improvments in the vicinity.
. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to
the above factors; disapproval of the variance could have a much
more detrimental affect.No other structure in the area will
be impacted by the variance.
That the varianee is warranted for the following reasons:
A. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement
of the specified regulation would result in practical
difficulty or unnecessary physieal hardship inconsistent
with the obiectives of this ordinance
B. The strict or literal lnterpretation and enforcement
of the specified regulation would deprive the appli-
cant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of otherproperties in the same district.
See owners statement regarding location of proposed
structure. We do not feel the approval of the requested variance
would be a grant of special privilege. Simi-lar va:riances (Morgan'
Carnie) have been granted for new residences where it was not
desirable or practical to locate then in compliance with the
Ordinance.
The Department of Community Development recommends approval
of this variance as requested.
-APPL ICAT ION'FCR VAR IANCE
T
And/Or
CONDITIOI!AL. USE PERMI T
Ordinance No. 8 (Series of 1975,)
App I icat ion Date
Hearing Date Hearing Fee
Final Decision date for Town Council
(we )
(App I icant)
E*201*c;.tQrz*ea , ?-,rE-Z pnon"1,2-a(State)(ci ty) .
before the Vail
t
Pub lication Date
of
do hereby req ues t permission to appear
Comm iss ion to req uest the fo I low i ng:
P lann ing
Variance from Article_, SectionZoning Change f rom to
(
(
Parking VarianceConditional Use Pe rm it
in
to allow
7one.
For the f ol lowing described property: Lot/t+.c€+ O^./€, Bl ockl),U€
Fi I ins Numbe- t-ta lt/r4 *tztUa, /At t_
Clearly state purpose and intent of this application ,% ,/Zaaar
What do you feel is the basis for hardship in Jhis case? /aS Ope
It'e
od)
/al
a)
//ZA6*h>/r,&,',
ffin
( A d d re s s )
.\
it
t,
:1
:i
-.1
INS]'EC.N FIEBUEsiT
JOB NAME
TOWN OF VAIL
,lr-
DATE
TIME RECEIVED- AM PM CALLER
I ornen
MON
COMMENTS:
TUE
n pnnrrnl LocATroN
READY FOR INSPECTION
WED THUR PMFR
E appRovED florseppRovED f] nerNSPEcr
f] upon rHE FoLLowrNG conREcroNs:
CORRECTIONS
DATE
INSPECTOR
nuseecOru HEBUEsT
TOWN OF VAIL
DATE
TlME
.ro, "or, ,
RECEIVED- AM PM CALLER
flornen E pnnnau LOCATION
READY FOR INSPECTION
WED THUR FRr.....--..---.--.-eM irvrMON
COMMENTS:
L:I APPROVED E or sappRovED D nerNsPEcr
El upon rHE FoLLowrNG coRRECTToNS:
CORRECTIONS
INSPECTOB
BUILDING DIVISION
P. O. BOX 789
PHONE: 328-6339
rNsFE.frru
' t 'lt&:.--''- L:
FIEOUESTa
JOB NAMEDATE
TIME RECEIVED- AM PM CALLER
E orsen D penrreu.LOCATION
Wepp RovED
L-l UPON THE
CORRECTIONS
R INSPECTION
THUR
E orsepp RovED
FOLLOWING COR RECTIONS:
AM.
L
D nerNsPEcr
oor, '? f" - ?,(
INSPECTOR
o rNsPEcOru HEBUEsT
VAIL
'!
J.a;l
TOWN O
E ornen ! pannel.LOCATION
READY FOR INSPECTION
MON
COMMENTS:
TUE WED 'THUR.,'FRI ' AM P{tl
EappRovED E orsnppRovED fl nerNsPEcr
E upott rHE FoLLowrNG coRREcnoNS:
CORRECTIONS
/..''./.
.,)
\
DATE
INsiPEC1ON HEEUEST
VAIL
JOB NAME
TIME RECEIVED- AM PM CALLER
fl orxen ! panrral. LocATroN
READY FOR INSPECTION
WED THUR FRIMON
COMMENTS:
TUE AM PM
E eppRovED ! orseeeRovED ! nerNsPEcr
El upon rHE FoLLowrNG coRRECTToNS:.
CORRECTIONS
INSPECTOR
DATE
" Jr A' tt?S,Til"tJ$,uil*to'LETTT@F TRANSNNIT'TAL
DENVER, COLORADO 80216
TO
Phonc 303 399.1405
n/ ///lL,',4,.' (,/(,.+! it L
GENTLEMEN:
WE
!
tl
ARE
Shop
copy
SENDING
drawings
of letter
YOU KAttached n
.&Prints
C Change order
Under seoarate cover via
! Plans
oArE 5*'',2 {- 7(rl'"" ""
,' r'f 'Y ,' , .r" .' { lrl. <.'
,''.,.4,'l-
the following items:
I Samples ! Specilications
coPrEs DATE NO.DESCRIPTION
;- tt- ft /'.,- c - /l/(t:'b /../..'72:' 17r1 ; ,;t1 t'-r't'4../-(1*
./t., lt), .; /
/J,.'..//,"t''r\\r
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
iJ For approval
S. ro, your use
! As requested
L For review and comment
! FOR BIDS DUE
D Aporoved
I Approved
n Returned
as submitted
as noted
for corrections
!
!
!
Resubmit-copies lor a pprova I
Submit
-
cooies for distribution
Return
-corrected
prints
n
19- tr PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US
REMARKS
z'7 t;'"-/-
SIGNEO:
l, ancloavrca ara nol aa notcd, Xindly notilylh 24r - rd t9d !{id s..ts, iE.Iaa, r3 ua rt onca,
rNs"=.rt*
TOWN
, rr l '
FIEOUEST
VAI L N
, )1.' .") '/
E orxen I penrral LocATloN
READY FOR INSPECTION
MON
COMMENTS:
AIW PMFRITUE,THUR I
E appRovED E orseppRovED E nrtNsPEcr
f] upon THE FoLLowrNG coRRECrtoNS:
CORRECTIONS
rNsPEcrOru FIEOUEST
i r o w N o F Y7,11.!..-\""
,,a,/ ,,,i'r,.../.or.t ,.'- 7)=.
E orxen
MON
COMMENTS:
E pnnrrnl. LocAnoN
TUE
READY FOR INSPECTION
-
WED . THUR r FRI AM PM
El'App Rov E D E nerNsPEcrE orsappRovED
E UPOT,T THE FOLLOWING CORRECTIONS:
CORRECTIONS
INSPECTOR
rNsPEcOru rtEouEsr
TOWN OF VAIL
DATE JOB NAME
TIME RECEIVED- AM PM CALLER
E orHen
MON
COMMENTS:
E pnnrtnl. LocATroN
TUE
READY FOR INSPECTION
WED THUR PMFR
E nppRovED ! orsnppRovED D n e rNsPEcr
fl uporu THE FoLLowrNG coRRECrtoNS:
CORRECTIONS
DATE
INSPECTOR
: J?," "
a'{
.t
rNsiPEcroN FIEOUEST
DATE
TIME
JOB NAME
RECEIVED- AM PM CALLER
TOWN O
I orxen
MON
COMMENTS:
TUE
n pnnrrnt-LOCATION
READY FOR INSPECTION
WED THUR PMFR
E npp RovE D
E uporu rne
CORRECTlONS
I orsappRovED
FOLLOWI NG CORR ECTIONS:
E nErNsPEcr
Uc-
a2
O/u-
DATE
INSPECTOR
a'/
€.
DATE
TIME
rNspecrGru
OWN O
FIEOUEST
F VAIL#-2_JOB NAME
CALLERetveo /e\
n orxen ! plnrrlu LOCATION
READY FOR INSPECTION
E orsnppRovED fl nerNSPEcr
!/i rt L''' t a
APPROVED
! uponr rHE FoLLowlNG coRRECTToNS:
CORRECTIONS
INSPECTOR
DATE
TIME RECEIVED- AM PM CALLER
DATE i .: "." ../
E orn,en flpnnrrnr-LOCATIO
FRI-AM PM
READY FOR INSPECTION
di^rrro D orsnppRovED I nerNsPEcr
E uporv rHE FoLLowrNG coRRECTIoNS:
CORRECTIONS
' .)'\ t t. ./'DArE '?-/-'//-
-
TIME RECEIVED ,. , AM PM CALLER
i,,) /..!, 'tt.', ,lTNSPECTIDN HEEUEST
TOWN OF VAIL.
! orxen E pnnrrlu LocATloN
READY FOR INSPECTION
WED THURMON
COMMENTS:
TUE /)FRI -'. AM' PM
p.eepRovED
fl upott rHE FoLLowlNG coRRECTIoNS:
CORRECTIONS
E otsnppRovED E nerNsPEcr
\
INSPECTOR
oz
E
=c
uJo-
n nf,
(t)
lJl
uJ
l,|-
E
=G,
IJJo
c-lo\
o\C!
E
*
2
Fat)
z
c.l(!
,,, o'
roN
>'1
E
tlt
*EYE!+<6v
ctr
=FlOHlF)f
tr
E
F,'p.
tsl
Fr
Fl
H-p
AA
<l
tslIxl
Ei
zlol
HI
8l
9l
,,..
IJJ
loIuJIFsl9tslo
EIE.hl J
=laol.6<1,^2lz2.1 ="
tsI
t2
o
'-l
ox
tsr
:
H-
Hle
a
H
fl(a
3
lsilr
anrv
fi
fr
LI
lFl
136
tr{x
E
(,2
th
x
A
H
E
urat
=I
ot!
Fz
o
Eulz
=od
|! lll6z;3
=oPg
<F2;YZo<
j-oc
i;;9c
Eg EgE
igEEE
c 9 6 E.E'- CL -c -+:Ei;;
iEEig
eceFE
t";tgg
cl= - o "(5)9OrE
ffrFgE
:$EiH.! O'- .: -5-oP ., E
gEi;:
x;s:a s
EEgii
E
.if.s
t.-
o.1
F
z c{
@F
Ol
*
E
uJo.
(JzoJ
t0
!o
UJI
C)z
Jo-
F
uJJ
trJ
oz
dt
=)
J
9z
()
u,
UJtuttz
tr
IJJ
UJe
3;g)r
&.
Zt
6r
UJ;ol
rfi
;R
UJlo{c
1Z
lq
x
F
ulol
(n
uJ
IIJu-
ts
=Eul
o-
J
FoF
z
J
o
J
ocF
!!
tr
z
:
2
Io
uJt
-l
:{
NO|lVnlVA
=l>El
-r..rliut e I=.oNl
-'
lZz!.
tr ^ 62q 5 >eF9 OE
.ooEz>ooo9.)zx
l!<oq i
^trJ;itE6 si9 6!-. N (,
z
tr
!L
UJc
F
(n
.if
t
uJ
J
z
E
+
'q+2
tr
UJ
=L!z
<t)FzlzO(,)
<oo<
=g9c6o<z
(t,
Lz.
9=
-t--.1 'rtro3E
X x X X
o
v)
z
tra =YE
UJ
Jl<li-l
zl
zl
.. >l
uJ
LrJ
uJz
anF
uJ
o-
J
z
9to
ull
f
U)
UJzY
iF
zI
J
at)z
E
uJo- rL>oa!
aJJ
3
F
uJ
I
II
-lE
I
#31
lFl
lFl I
IHl<t>-l
otzF-.i9E
Fl
o
H
&
v,
E(.t
ii
=z
)-
tn
&(,
zH
rq-
4
UJEoo
=
ts
z
CN
F]
o\t/'lo.if
Io\
.if !
dH
!'.i>
t:tr
U'
an4l
J
=
N
.if
Io\.it
o\
r
z
ts
HH
Q
E-iU)z
r'lE
=tr
I
Itr
t{
IrntltilolllltolIu{
t5lt<ll>lEIol
zl
3lolFI
r\
cn
F\
@
Io\-iro\
=tr
ci
q
utq
tl
z;
F
=tr
o1
UJ
ar
Ji
<1
iI
ol
zl
3lIFI tr
oz
o
uJ
CE
J
lt
23I =tr
z
ciutG
J
ltoz3I
ul
|llF
E
uJz
B
Fc)
uJF
E
<F(E()
IJJ <zglll F6Z-o
C)
)E<o()F
EE
ris
E
2P
c3fFd6o
J
=
uJ
=
Y,
I(
E
2
J
F. tr
=+Eo2acl9-n=l
t*-
@
-:t
Lc}OO
uJF
c!o\o\
F\
>l
E
z
zH
He
t:t
n
v,2
A
UJ
E
U)oo-zo
Fo-utY
u.ldl
oF
F
=ccluc
ILo
o-oo
IJJFoz
E ls $
=
| | ll: l^ o g | |
E l: H f | | ll t
E!dz^fi"O*hE E: 6=Y E 5 9F 'r-'^, € A Ao-F EB
=382 se lg-sF E i=' r='=
IJ E h=I J,(-r { d Hl .'i6/ :\.t l\ v ^ .- I =,,. - ?-ZI t --) | ,-\ =I -I t--^r- c r c-rr =F(| \, /lllr! I I r,'l - i\ J-\ < -,,1 Il>E J =I -r \.. a\\ \-.t/t- E .\ q-l -[!E
"<rtrE = -t B;=-€ = Fr!
H
r jr\A't tB-r
2 r,.b-:;1 ,O )-,"ra\