HomeMy WebLinkAboutVAIL VILLAGE FILING 1 BLOCK 5E LOT K VILLAGE CENTER KIDSPORT SIGNS LEGALMarch 7, 1991-
Sharon and Paul Treacyc/o Kids Sport
L22 East l{eadow DriveVail, Colorado 8L657
Re: Kids Sport Signage
Dear Sharon and Paul:
Enclosed is a copy of a letter mailed to you on February 20' l-99L.
With the letter, you ltere mailed a copy of the sign code relating
to window signage. I spoke to Sharon on March 6th and she
indicated that it was her understanding that the sign code allowed
each retailer to have two window signs j-n each window.
rn fact, you may have two window signs per business. The two signs
nay total Lo square feet for the conbined area of the two signs.
Hortever, no sign shall be greater than L5? of any window in which
it is placed.
In the tetter of February 20, I mention that you had four window
signs. on March 4th, there were six window signs. This rnay have
been due to the fact that you felt you could have two signs per
window. I am requesting that you reduce your window signage to two
signs by Wednesday, March l-3th. (The deadline in the letter of
February 20th was February 28th. )
If for any reason you feel that you cannot rneet this deadline,
please call. me with an explanation. If you do not contact me nor
neet this deadline, we will have no choice but to cite you for code
violation. we would prefer not to have to do this. There are
other retailers with excess signage, and we are attempting to reach
each of them. Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Betsy Rosolack
Planning Technician
l
Design Review Action Form
TOWN OF VAIL
Category Number {-/s-27
Project Name:
Building Name:
Project Description:
Owner, Address and Phone:
ArchitecVContact, Address and Phone: 1-, f -i1-.\. ^.1 ( ' ' 0 t '*n L, ,
a,-J I
LesalDescription:Lot- e',cx ff suoa,ui"ion H/ /.'//rn ,/ €7
Zone District 1z -V
Project Street Ad aress: / 2 I .€- "/ dtolo ,^,t -b.
comments: /:..#t. .4 2^ ' o "
,4//,,, ,.i1, '--,,.,-,
^-*e * e. f3- *
Board / Staff Action
Motion by:Vote:
Seconded by:
[] Approval
! Disapproval
;D(QatrApprovat
DRB Fee Pre-paid
{
tl
lvl
\,
J
t0
1
3,i
;"vt
:
\
n
t
\
sEa$
ffi
,.t
ta
s
illJ0-:r..Ar
P
)(
$,
'dtroo onol=-;;;
t'-' r''-:--'F rtFtFFqrt"rr'rr -r'clFrt-
slzlql
(P Iease
NAME OF
NAME OF
AIJUT(II J J
NAME OF
ADDRESS
APPLICATION DATE
SIGN/AWNING APPLTCATTON
Print or Tvpe)pnOjici- PA:Z!!'s ArN N r tv ur P-{1.-pvl98-
PERSON SUBMrrrrNc ea44--i-,,Nt-+-- E&blr-ct pHONE c1/1c1-' 121 1C'
vA1 L f1 c'al CE?1- .P -rr tsDX s-,tO AVgr.j ,LD Vtl"tD
OWNER
\1,L
-To acatt-w sonn 416 -qoLb
E , F4EAf>c,(',J DP vAtL
PROJECT
\(r\
SIGNATURE
LOCATION OF
DBSCRIPTION
OF OWNER 'za
OF PROJECT
THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION IS REOUIRED FOR SUBMITTAL BY THE
APPLICANT PRIOR TO THE REQUEST BBING SCHEDULED BEFORE THE DESIGN
REVIEW BOARD.
A. DESCRIPTION OE THE SIGN/AWNING (FREE STANDING' WALL,
PROJECTING, BTC) , INCLUDE SIGN MESSAGE.
SIGN OR AWNING
e^4A,{-,1/_
MATERIAL
rii gr4Zet!?EP
SIZE OF OVERALL SIGN, SIZE OT LETTERING AND LOGO
,, l+{ t " trt 4,,--.{,^ / .L?=t- t t,
Qln'tHETGHT oF srcN ABovE GRADE b' u
pC
./ t-i/ AACLv,'
DESCRTBE LTGHTTNG gIr$J_Ne- OR PROPOSED)
1
D.
F.
c
.)
D.
Site PIan
ELevations showing exacL locaLion of sign or
awning on t.he building
Photographs showing proposed Iocation
Colored scale drawing
Sample of proposed materials
Photograph of sign if available
LENGTH OF BUSINESS FRONTAGE (FT)
CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION APPROVAL (ATTACH)
FEE: $20.00 PLUS $L.00 PER SQUARE FOOT OF SIGN AREA.
PAID CHECK NO.DATE
Sign Administrator
OVER
TO: SIGI.I APPLICANTS
When applications for signs are submitted, the following
information is required:
1. A completed sign,/awning application (at.tached) .
2. A site plan showing tlre exact locat.ion where Lhe sign
i.s Lo be located .
3. A photograph if possible and building e.levation showing
t.he location of the proposed sign.
4. A scaled drawing which details l-he design of the sign,as follows:
(a) CoLored e:<actIy as sign wiff be.(b) A ]ist. of materials to be used i.n sign (metal,
wood, canvas, pai-nt, etc, )(c) Photograph of sicln if available.(d) Specific lettering style and size.
5. If an awning is proposed, submit draw.ings showing
exactly how and where the awning is ar-Lached to the
building and hor.r the awning is to be constructed.
6. Description of l.ighting that wil-I be used in
conjunction with the sign or awning. rf proposing an
awning, Iighting is not all.owed Lo slrine through the
entire awning which calls undue attent-ion Lo the
business. Lighi'-ing may spotlight. only Lhe acLua] sign
let.tering on thc awning,
RBCOMMENpATTONS OR POrlrl'E_llS
1. Check sign code - ver:ify site, height etc.2. Be specific. Vagueness on design, si-ze, construction may
delay the approval oF your sign.
3. Measure f ronLage of l,ltrsi.ness.
APPLICATION FEE WILI, BTi IIIIQUIRIID AT TI]D T]ME OF APPL]CATION
SUBMITTAL
If this application requires a separate review by any local,
State or I'ederal aqency other than the Town of VaiI, the
application fee shall be j.ncreased by $200.00. Examples of such
revj-ew, may include, bnl- are noL limj.tecl to: Colorado Department.of Highway Access PermiLs, Army Corps of Engineers 404, eLc.
Ttre applicant shall be r:esponsible for paying any publJ.shing fees
which are in excess of 50% of the application fee. If, at theapplicant's request, any matter is post.poned for hearing, causinqthe matter to be re-publi,shed, Lhen, the entire fee for such re-publication shall be paicl by the appl.icant.
Applicat.ions deemed hy t.he Community Development Department to
have significant des ign, Land use or other issues which may havea signif icant imp.lcL on [he communit.y may require review byconsultants other: that town staff. Shou]d a determination be
made by 1-he town staff tirat an outside consult-ant is needed toreview any application, Cr:rmmunity Development- may irire an outsideconsull-ant-, it shall- est- jrnaLe Lhe amount of money necessary to
Pay )rim or her and this armounl- shal1 be forwarded to the Town bythe applicant. at the tirne he files his application wit.h the
Cornrnunity Developmenl Dep.1rtment.. Upon completion of t.he reviewof t.he application by the consul-t.antr doy of the funds forwardedby the applicant. for payment of the consult,tnt which have not
been paid to t.he consull-ant shall be reLurnr:d t.o the applicant.
Expenses incurred by the Town in excess of r lre amount forwardedby the applicant shall be paid to the Town by t.he applicant.within 30 days of not.i f i.cation by the Town.
tlsvArt srcrrYt coR PoRArtoN ,.(L' . P4270' 5 C.o toz5
Wtzv / Wl "l tury'
n*t t tla('L- +'Wi'(/''L'
* Laal/,rl
h/,f 7s + '' *{uttd'/4L"
,,-u{r/ 'rs lt " oow4/L'
6fr/^p&E 7'rzszy'
P.O. BOX 5010 / 41010 U.S. HIGHWAY 6 / AVON. CO 81620 i 303-949-6710 / FAX: 949-6715
75 soulh lroniage road
vail, colorado 81657
(3os) 47$2138
(303) 4792139
olflce of community deYelopment
February 20, L99L
Sharon & PauI Treacyc/o Kids Sports
t22 E. Meadov DriveVail, Colorado 8L657
Re: Window Signage
Dear sharon and Paul:
on february 14, LggL, I noticed your shop had four window signs.
The Vail sign code permits two window signs per business. The two
signs rnay total ten square feet for the conbined area of the two
signs. In addition, no sign sha1l be greater than L58 of any
window in which it is placed. Enclosed is the section of the Vail
sign code relating to window signage.
I am requesting that you reduce your window signage to two signs by
Thursday, February 28t L99I.
Thank you for your cooperation. If you have any questions, please
do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
/&4,'dr/*/
Betsy Rosolack
Planning Technician
/abEncI
l-
MI NUTES
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING
MAY 20, 1986
7 :30 p.m.
A regular meeting of the Vaj'l Town
7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
MEMBERS ABSENT:
TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT:
The fi rst
Lahey, a
Vail belt
expressed
The next
I.
2.
Council was held on Tuesday, May 20, 1986, at-
Pau'l Johnston, Mayor
Kent Rose, Mayor Pro Tem
Dan Corcoran
Gordon Pierce
Eric Affeldt
Gai I t,lahrl ich-Lowenthal
Hermann Staufer
Ron Ph il l i ps, Town Manager
item on the agenda was a ten year employment anniversary award to Tim
Captain in the Vajl Fire Department. Ron Phjllips presented the ten year
buck'l e to T.im. Mayor Johnston and Mike McGee of the Fire Department
theif appreciation of Tim and commended him on his length of service.
item was a consent agenda for the following items:
Ordjnance No. 11, Series of 1986, second reading, concerning an amendment
for final plat requirements to include a tax certificate.
Ordinance No. 12, Serjes of 1986, second readjng, concerning supplemental
budget appropriations.
( S. dra:nance No. 13, Series of 1986, second reading, approv'i ng SDD 15 rezonjng
\--"'/ f o? One WiIIow Piace.
Mayor Johnston read the fulI titles. After a brief djscussion it was decided that
0rdinance No. 13 would have to be tabled until a later date. Dan Corcoran and
Gondon Pjerce would have to abstain from voting on it due to theiri nvolvement in
the plan, therefore, there would not be a sufficjent number of votes to act on the
ordinance. At this time, Gordon Pierce made a motjon to approve Ordinances Nos. 11
and 12, and Kent Rose seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously
4-0.
The third item on the agenda was the appe-a.l -of the Design Review Board denjal of
_Ki{sport_ arvning signage. Kri stan Pritz gave background information on the appeal ..-_Paul-Treaty, owner-of-Kidsport, gave his thoughts on the appeal and thought-the
reason he wis before the Cbuncilwas to defjne a "major pedestri an way", which the
DRB could not do. Mayor Johnston asked for clarifjcatjon on what the appeal was
for; Krjstan Pri tz explained. Paul Treacy gave his perception. Mayor Johnston
expiained there was a misunderstanding and explained the appe?] process.. After some
discussion by Council, Kent Rose made a motion to uphold the DRB's decisjon to not
grant double signage. Gordon Pierce seconded the motion. At this time, Paul Treacy
iave his thoughis on why the appeal should be approved or the ordinance should be
ihanged in the future. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 4-0.
The fourth item was approval of addenda to the Town of Vail/Eagle County
intergovernmental agreements for law enforcement, dog control , environmental health
and snow and ice removal services by the Town of Vail to the l^lest Vail area. Steve
Barwick exp'l ained the contracts had to be revised due to the reannexation of the
Buffehr Creek and Vail das Schone areas and gave details. Ron Phillips explained
the addenda should be approved subject to the Town Attorney's approvai. There was a
short discussion by Council. Dan Corcoran made a motion to approve the addenda
subject to Larry Eskw'i th's approvai, and Gordon Pierce seconded the motjon. A vote
was taken and the motion passed unanimously 4-0'
There was no Citizen Participation'
75 south tronlage road
vall. colorado 81657
(303) 476-7000 olflce of communlty development
May 29, 1986
Pau'l Treacy
Ki dsport
122 East Meadow DriveVail, Colorado 81657
RE: Removal of Kidsport extra s.i gn
Dear Pau'l ,
0n May 20' 1986 the Town council denied your appeal that would haveallowed you to have two signs on your Kidsport awning. After the meeting,
we agreed that you would call me within the next few days to let me know
how much time you wou'l d need to remove the extra sign. It has now beenover a week and I have not heard any response from you. Therefore, I amrequiring that you remove the signage by June l.z, 1996. If you have any.further questions please feel frie io give me a cal'l .
Si ncerel y,
Kti+.^ Q"f
Kristan Pritz
Town Pl anner
KP:jlt
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Please see the enclosed "Sequence of Events for
expla'in how the issue wjth Kidsports developed.
from tapes of the Design Review Board meetings
enclosed you will find three letters thar were
Kidsports'signage.
Town Council
Community Development Department
May 20, 1986
Appeal to the Town Council concerning the Design Review Board
decision that Kidsports has only one Frontage and therefore is
permitted only one sign for the busjness. Applicant: Paul Treacy
Due to the fact that K'i dsports had two signs on its awning which were not
approved by the staff or Design Review Board, the owner, Paul Treacy, was takento court for the sign code violation. Judge Buck Allen found Paul Treacyguilty of not obtaining the proper approvals for his signage. Judge Allen also
asked that the owner go back to the Des'i gn Revjew Board to verify the staff's
and the DRB's decisions that Kidsports had only one frontage and therefore was
allowed one sign. At the April 2nd DRB meeting, the Board determined that
Kidsports has only one frontage. The vote was 5-0. Mr. Treacy is now
appealing to the Town Counci'l the Design Review Board's decision that he only
has one frontage.
The staff recommends denial of the appea'l . The sign code clearly states in
Section .l6.04.110 Frontage, Business that:
"Business frontage" means the lineal distance from outside to outside of
a structure or portion of a structure housing a particular business or
businesses directly adjacent at ground level to a major pedestrian or
vehicular way.
Kidsports has one frontage, East Meadow Drive. This frontage will allow the
business one sign. The sign code is structured around the concept that the
number of signs js based on the number of frontages a business has. To approvethis appeal would go against the methods used to calculate signage throughout
the entire sign code.
Kidsports' Awning" that wil'l
This information was taken
as well as staff records. Also
sent to Mr. Treacy concerning
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS FOR KIDSPORTS AI.INING
March 27, .|986
This sequence concern'ing the awning was determined by listening to tapes of the
Des'i gn Rev'iew Board meetings, notes in my calendar, as well as letters wri tten
to Paul Treacy.
November 6. .|985 At the Design Review Board meeting, Pau'l Treacy, Brad
Henry, and Daniel Barry were present. Fred Hibberd
was also at the meeting. The board discussed for at
least an hour the shape of the awnings and how they
would be attached to the building. Toward the end of
the meeting it became clear that the applicants wanted
to have two signs on their awning. Krjstan said thatit would be possible to have the two signs, as we have
allowed other people to have two-s'i ded signs on bubble
awnings and back to back signs on square awnings. At
that time, she also stated that she was unaware that
the submittal had incl uded two signs. The board ended
up agreeing on the colors for the awnings and
lettering for each business. The meeting concluded by
the Design Review Eoard asking for further information
on the construct'ion of the awnings, locations and
numbers of signage and square footage for the
signage. The applicant said that they would hand
deliver the drawings in a few days to the staff and
then the staff could ca'l I the DRB and invite them to
look at the drawings. Kristan also mentioned to the
applicants the possibility of using window signs in
place of one of the signs on the awnings. Technical 1y
the item was tabled with the understanding that the
Design Review Board could make a decision on the
awnings without a formal meeting if everyone agreed
that the revjsed design was reasonable. The
applicants also wanted to check with Tom Rau to see if
he would be willing to change his awning for The
Foreign Connection to match theirs.
The drawings were then brought in within the next week
and revjewed at the staff meeting. The Planning stafffelt that one sign was appropriate for each business.
The applicants were called and told they would be
allowed only one sign. Brad Henry was very upset
about the decision and felt that the staff decision
was very capricjous. He stated to me in my office
that he would appeal the staff decision to the Design
Review Board.
November 20, .|985
Novenber ?7, 1985
December 27. 1985
January 6, .l986
January 9, .l986
January 2l , .l986
January 22, .l986
Daniel Berry, owner of Eye Pieces, also came by myoffice. He was very upset about the decjsion to onlyallow him one sign. He asked that I come by the shop
and look at his frontage situatjon again to make surethat I felt strongly about our decision. I told hjm I
would bring the board by during site vjsits for our
November 20, .|985
DRB meeting.
The Design Review Board went by Eye Pieces and got
into a discussion about the appropriate number of
signs for the business. Staff and the board had to
move on, as we had other site visits to make. Daniel
Berry and Paul Treacy came to the meeting as we werefinishing up. They waited in the audjence for a while
and then seemed to have to leave. At the end of the
meet'ing the board discussed the situation for Eye
Pieces, Bag 'n Pack and Kidsports. It was determ.i nedthat Eye Pieces would be allowed two signs, as theyactually had two frontages. The board iid not feejthat is was appropriate for Bag 'n Pack or Kidsportsto have two signs each. It was also agreed that we
would write up a policy statement at our next meeting
concerning awn'ings.
Daniel Berry came in to receive his approval sheetthat clearly stated that he could have two signs for
Eye Pieces.
I called Paul and asked what was going on with hissignage- He told me that there was a mistake by the
awning company and he would get the signage corrected.
0n the same day, I wrote Paul a |etter stating that I
appreciated the fact that he was already in the
process of remedy'i ng the situation wjth the additional
signage. I told him that it was our understanding
that he would contact me by January 6 and let me know
how he wjshed to resolve the signage problem.
I received no word from Paul Treacy concerning the
s i gnage.
I called Kidsports and left a message that Paul shouldcall me. 0n January .|0, 'l 986 I wrote a letter
informing him once again that the additional signage
on his awning was a problem. I gave hjm a new
deadline of January 21 , .|986 to remove the signage orI would have to cite him for the sign code violation.
I received no word from Paul Treacy.
I called Paul and he said that he would find out the
tjme frame for changing the awning. I told him that I
would be giving him a call on January 27,1986 to fjndout his time frame for removing the awning. I told
him that if I did not receive an answer from him on
the 27th that I would have no choice but to cite
Kidsports for the sign code violation.
January ?7,1986 I called Paul and left a message with Karen in the
morn'i ng at his office.
January 28, .|986 I called Paul and left a message at 8:35 am.
January 29, '1986 I cal led aga'i n. The person in the store said that
they saw messages for Paul and as far as they knew, he
had received them.
February 3, .1986 I noticed that the Bag'n Pack Shop sign was up.
Peter Patten had called Brad Henry and he had said
that he was going to get Jay Peterson to represent
them in court.
February 4, .1986 I noticed that a patch was up on the Kidsports awning
additional sign.
February 13, 1986 I noticed that the patch was removed from the awning.
February 13, .1986 A citation was issued to Paul Treacy for the s'i gn code
vi ol ati on.
March 6, 1986 The sign code violation was reviewed by Judge BuckAllen. It was determined that Paul Treacy had
violated the sign code. He was asked to appear at the
April 2nd Design Review Board to resolve his signageissue. It was determined that if the sign rvas not
allowed by the Design Review Board, the sign must be
covered up to avoid further citations.
lnwn
75 soulh fronlage road
vail, colorado 81657
. (303) 476-7000
December 27, 1985
Paul Treacy
Kids Sports
122 East Meadow DriveVail, Colorado 81557
Re: Extra Sign on Kidsports Awning
Dear Pau1,
I appreciate the fact that you are already in thesituation with the additional signage on your new
understanding that you will contact me by-Januaryyou wish to resolve the signage problem.- I thin-ksharp. I hope it will increase your business.
Thanks for your cooperation.
Si ncerely,t/.t nl
'finflun t(.lt
Kristan Pritz
Town Planner
KP: br
process of remedying theawning. It is my
6th and let me know howthe awning looks very
l|flI
75 south trontage road
vail, colorado 81657
(303) 475-7000
January 10, 1986
Paul Treacy
Ki dsports
122 East Meadow DriveVail, Colorado 81657
Re: Extra Sign on Kidsports Awning
Dear Paul:
0n December 27, 1985 I wrote you a letter and'informed you that theadditional signage on your new awning was a problern. We had an
understanding that you would contact me by January 6 and let me know howyou wanted to resolve the signage problem. At this tjme, I have not heard
any response from you. I also called your store on January 9 and left a
message with one of your employees that you should call me.
I am wrjting to inform you that if the addjtional signage on the awning .i snot removed by January 21, 1986 I will have to cite you for the sign codeviolatjon. I feel that this js more than enough time to address theproblem. If you have any further questions please feei free to give me acall.
Kristan Pritz
Town Planner
KPlb lf
luwn o
Sincereiy,
K+o^ft
75 soulh honlage road
vail, colorado 81657
(303) 476-7000
January 22, L986
Mr. Paul Treacy
Ki dsports
122 East Meadow Drive
Vail, Co. 81657
Re: Extra Sign on Kidsports Awning
Dean Paul:
0n January 22nd,, I called to find out what plans you had for your
Kidsports awning. The last time I talked to you, you had stated that you
were in the process of trying to resolve the situatjon. In our
conversation today, I asked that you call the awning company and find out
how long it would take them to change the awning. I will be giv.i ng you acall on January 27, L986 to find out what the awning company told you.
Please try to talk to them before that time. I am wjlling to work w.i thyou on resolving the awning issue, however, I cannot let the situation go
on indefinitely. If I don't receive an answer from you on the Z7th, Iwill have no choice but to cite Kidsports for the sign violation. I wouldlike to avoid taking that action. t,lithout a timeframe on the resolutionof the signage, the problem may possibly be unresolved for weeks. I would
appreciate it very much if you wou'l d contact the company as soon as
possible
I was also concerned about your-statement that there are many sign codeviolations in the village that the staff does not address. The staff doestry to keep up on sign enforcement. If you are aware of other sign codeviolations, I would appreciate knowing about them. In no way is the stafftrying to single out the Village Center project whi'l e not attending to
business in other areas of the Town. P'l ease let ne know if there aresign code viblations that I may fo1 1ow up on. I will give you a calI on
January 27, L986. Thank you for your cooperation.
S i ncere 1y,
Kn,\on ?^t
Kristan Pritz
Town Pl anner
KPlb lf
lnwn
75 south lrontage road
vail, colorado 81657
(303) 476-7000 offlce ol communlly developmenl
March 19, 1986
Paul Treacy
Ki dsport
122 East Meadow Drive
Va'i1 , Col orado 81657
REF: Extra sign on Kidsport awning
Dear Paul ,
0n March 6, 1986, Judge Buck A1 1an required that you make a signpresentation at the April 2, 1986 Design Review Board meeting. Enclosed
you will fjnd an application for Design Review Board and signage. PleasefilI this applicat'i on out with the information necessary for your signageproposal. Please retunn this information to me by March 25, 1986 so thatI can go over your.application with the other planners. I will be out of
town on April 2, 1986 so e'ither Tom Eraun or Rick Pylman will be handling
your applicat'ion.
If you have any other questions please feel free to call ne at 476-7000ext. 111.
Si ncerely,
KMn{,,h
Kristan Pritz
Town Planner
KP:jlt
Encl osure
aI
ProjectAppllcatlon -qF
Project Name:
Pro,ect Description:
Contaci Person and Phone
Owner, Address and Phone;r{:
Architect, Address and Phone:
Legal Description: Lot Block Filing Zone
Comments:
Design Review Board
Date
Motion by:
Seconded by:
APPROVAL DISAPPHOVAL
ao
D
a
Br\\J,$ ,Lt\iF:iFfqY t4 -'{
; r?
'l.n 3 E-qfush;r
310
amr.u3alo2:
d.[ N
--f-
I
I
I
I
I
I\' I
\I
I
I
I
,.1,
tI-;
!
SiGN /rPl)t.lCATI0N
Fee Paid tr- . Di
r'lame of P.oiect_- 14 tDsf:Of<fi,S-a{s
Nanrc of I)crson SubrnittirSB44LG Phone 474-ILLQ
Loca ti on or project .\4*n<g-G-==a-(U*r-
Description of Project Ciool. --SA+iD-:E-tl,{K 5
l,.tz<r5.
The f ol lovri ng i nforrnat jon i s
to the Design Reviel Board be
Sign submittal fee is $20.00.
submittal
a pprova 1
by the
can be
appl icant
given.
t.
^A. Sign I'iaterial Lf_\A.{R
inforrnatjon is required for
Review Board before a final
r.l
B. Desr;ription oF Sign r . T<€-qaAL\(at At'{ S€A
Re*srr-rffis
D. Comnents
l.
aL.
,l .
lu[r]uA-Lllu!i!_L!rQ_.]1r.ul4r'lll-q,tll0ii,
Si te Pl an
Dr.rr.;i n:;s s,lr()r,'i ncl c>lact I crca t.i on
[)lrotoqrllilrs slrorvirrg lrropo:,cd ioca li oir
Acl.ual si gn ._ -----_ _-
Col or"cd s ca I c'-dl;ltrili-tr
6. Plrol.ogralilr o{' sign
Apgrlot,ed f ol' ttllll Sllrrrri tt.al
lli sapprovr.'rl f or" ltRli Srrlr:rri tt,i l
S iiirr lirir, iiii . ii ,r li;t:
Prolect Appllcation
Architecl, Address and Phone:
Legal Description: Lot Block Filing
Comments:
Design Review Board
i' t.
Motion by:
,\l;,,
Seconded by:
,)r,j,t',.11 rr-/v!,,.'t11r.,
DISAPPROVAL
Ll
Summary:
Date:
O statt Approval
€;T'
D\--
Appl ication Number
SIGN APPLICATION
Name of Person Subrnittinq
Location of Project
Description of Project
The fol lowingto the Des'ign
Sign subm'ittal
A.Siqn Material
u)
informat'ion is required for submittal by
Review Board before a final approval can
fee is $20.00.
Date ? -L(" - 8( '
Phone 4-76-(6€,6
the appl icant
be given.
; l.-r t t.9 'l
F\
B. Descript'ion of Sign Lu
f
-tSize of Siqn 7- a+ 5 <a eaa inl
D. Length of Frontaqe (Ft. ) 3L'
E. Conunents
ix,tccxbp\ 0F aF,.: Aerwp.* 9rq,^-
C. Size of Siqn ?- a* 5'<o ea.z i^t '
AQ oJ
rJ
L*s*.
4-<tJ <cq,ugqf
rc
/1
MATERIALS SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION
1. Site Plan2. Drawi ngs showr'- ng exact I ocation3. Photographs showing--proposed location.+-+€drJa]:ti€L
5. Colored sialEtriEwing6. Photograph of sign V-
Approved for DRB
Disapproved for
Submi ttal
DRB SubmittaT-
Sign Administratoi-
Sign Administrator
'--
Project Applicatlon
td.0$, b/lo
G7 rl
\b!0cR<Pro,ect Name:
Owner. Address and
Project Description:
Contact Person and Phone )L-
Archilect, Address and Phone:
oc
t.
BI k Filing
Cts
DISAPPFOVAL
PF
LAf4e &,iLt Dok),.,J
-/ ft ( tJ€ l-or rx
f"w
OF
{J' oesign Review goara frl€ 55"s udst<''p 6{
Ayta< 0.. ,+t-s t|)u.1 cg# 4"
Motion by:
Seconded by:
APPROVAL
Date:
Town Planner E statt Approval
1G.be c.\8r;;!*t\
l
:
\4
+
'-a.p.s5--
l^ ":.l
Project Applicatlon
pora:<l, ., o.[.u
75 a'.Y'--r
Cfr(
Date
e-/'J."( ': fProiect Name:
Proiect Description:
Contacl Person and Phone
Owner, Address and
Architect. Address and Phone:
!,,. L t{rr-.
!A/,1(' h),t..: )t'2-) 'AN.
iry it,( ,.-;. ./7t lf
// "7'.5.; Design Review Board t:'ti"
" iia;' :'r''' * ? Ac'
{'\ yi rr,; ::, , ( 4c 5 l/.\rrJ i '#Jf; ' tr..l
/-t
Motion by:
Seconded by:
APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL
Summary:
El statt Approval
Date:
Town Planner
ta -'; ?e -- L':* .t.* "..f
1\;'1. i fi F*:-(h*(Proiect Name:
Proiect Description:
Project Appllcation
irtu e."
t\ . _r 'l l L.. i.
Contact Person and Phone '"1
\ ..
owner, Address ano pnone:')- i' 'i ' \ 'r- (\''.
Legal Descri
Comments:
, ..'1 la-.
/ '-., ,'"
\,,'-i.tV-{Date
Motion by:
Seconded by:
APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL
Summary:
Date:
Town Planner E Staft Approval
ft" srrltr
ElEbDhtil.'ronib*tt@l.l'.E
./1/ ./' '
\ 7lf /qiy.,ar S,1r', lu)tr*cD 6- r, fr. 6erry o,=-
J)"nrs 4rT ^,o> D-,r"(TLc4 6 |sa Ltx-tt' Pr<r,rl--l
ot:- Fnca oF 7fr s fror J/- o A f- F, u e LJ,,..-: 'NO.., 7o*t,
,r , U,vttxr Gt 8. '.' - Di *ji AM , {nru o n (1-t 2''(tDJlct1j" Le<zqt \ urcw,D g. ,tliuruw,tr\
4n*Or-1.'* {.u r\.\\ A 1lt'p..-c1 -6i,*( Actse r^ Sd Xxt
S:.S. . Ar.n,.r -G g - "G AN: pn.{az sJ a , ,{,r } 1,a5 o-.,*r cb
o*.,^ A fr r'r€r /s.nri - q{,,- qir-tg,- -6.r<s \*s.l
A A r-.4Lvl tb dt,-z- Si1,,*-. n (J
A\e/e-xn,mi\-<c S,a<-
O F t)Pe- frc,-f f cU i,*l S tr d
-/,
0u\ i<rA 5 (Ji \cPcr-P ( AS
u e- r.-, c.-\ D Lr *e to
9c*- r-(,
JO,S- /
0^rvtertts, )
rt
I
l
I
al
lb
K
{0" I 8"
lnwn o l|al
75 south tronlage road
vail, colorado 81657
(303) 476-7000
January 10, 1986
Paul Treacy
Ki dsports
722 East Meadow
Vai 1 , Colorado
Re: Extra Sign
Drive
81657
on Kidsports Awning
Dear Paul:
0n December 27, 1985 I wrote you a letter and informed you that the
additional signage on your new awning was a problem. l,{e had an
understanding that you would contact me by January 6 and let me know how
you wanted to resolve the signage problem. At thjs time, I have not heard
any response from you. I also called your store on January 9 and left a
message with one of your employees that you should calI me.
I am writing to inform you that if the addit'i onal signage on the awning is
not removed by January 21, 1986 I will have to c'i te you for the sign code
violation. I feel that this is more than enough time to address the
problem. If you have any further questions please feel free to give me a
call.
Si ncerelyn
ttl o,\ll - ,,ln lAha<\n<l /i - ,tl I l-*.\\ltJl[r{\ $r r L
Kristan Pritz
Town Planner
KPlbl f
\,, \ 'P -l'EA qtl? q53
' .-r'\b\.._ \ \ \. _.t_.r r r
neclipi ro^ &;ril,$,iN,.
*^l8f i3liii,,,"xTAtiiilx,,i*
/See Reverse,,
t
4iottts
Eol|ll
el
fflff3"l?"XB":!TJilg"*
3:U'"mia,r;i*-llcr,gF;
TOTAL posteg€ and Foo;
75 3outh frontage road
vall, colorado 81657
(303) 476-7000 offlce of communlty development
March 19, 1986
Paul Treacy
Ki dsport
122 East Meadow DriveVai1, Colorado 81657
REF: Extra s'ign on Kidsport awning
Dear Paul ,
0n March 6, 1986, Judge Buck A1 1an required that you make a sign
presentation at the April 2, 1986 Des'ign Review Board meeting. Enclosed
you will find an application for Design Review Board and signage. P'leasefil'l this application out with the information necessary for your signage
proposal . P1 ease return this information to me by March 25, 1986 so thatI can go over your. application with the other planners. I will be out of
town on April 2, 1986 so either Tom Braun or Rick Pylman will be handling
your appl i cati on.
If you have any other questions please
ext. 111.
Si ncerely,
feel free to cal I me at 476-7000
KM^{,'h
Kristan Pritz
Town Pl anner
KP:jlt
Encl osure
lmno llflI
75 loulh lronlage road
Yall, colorado 81657
(303) 478-7qn
April l, .|986
olf lce ol communlty d.Yclopmonl
Re: tlork Session for the Vail Vi'llage Study
Dear
Qver the past few months, the Town staff has been working to develop a final
"package" for the Vail Village Study. This package will include graphjcs as
well al a narrative outlining goals and po] icies, design considerations, and a
system that wou'l d establish impact fees for future development in the Village'
A work session to discuss this plan has been scheduled for Friday, April 18,'1986. The meeting wil'l start at'l 2:00 pm and conclude by 2:00 pm. (Lunch-
wil'l be provided.j We feet this is a very important work sessjon in that it
is our hbpe to Uelin the formal review of this p'lan this qnrinS- You wil'l-be
receiving a packel of information early during the week of_April'l4th. Tfis
material-snoLld provide you with a general understanding of the presentation
to be made at the work session.
tlJe look forward to updating you on the progress of the Village Study. You are
encouraged to review the mitlrial you will be receiving next week. Please do
not hesitate to call me or Peter with any questions you may have.
Si ncerel v.A/\\rw
Thomas A. Braun
Town Planner
TBlbr
cc: Ron Phillips
s . \ \'t .
- [F\ 6DYL\"^ -\', L+ /16+t'Y\
t
c at /i,*n u-
aI! - c',.n'''-"..,-
"A - \.\:^-)\ '"'*
99> ' 'yn,+fu- ' ft
lll,h,np5f* , "l,nu
"-Fj't s{ l4'+
Z l<"^J*r' t
h.l h\ s;74 '
,,,,;-,^l'
u^,fl, t+/l al-nJt'^
v:lfh An "1 "F'(!-
-\" t lt'? -9-o
)r
fprl.t "t[ Ll*^ L \s \q,:
ro}'lN couNcIL AGENIA 8_EQIESI
Request forms must be given
Thursdays.
to the Secretary to the Town Manager by 8:00 am
Work Session
Meeti ng
Even i ng
Date: May 20. .1986
X
I.Item/Topi c:
Appea'l of the Design
only one frontage and
Paul Treacy, owner of
Review Board's determination that Kidsports has
ih.t"fot" is alIowed only one sign. App'l icant is
iiasports, Iocated in thl ViIIage Center Bui'lding'
II.
III.
IV.
Action Requested of Council:
To determine if Kidsports actual 1y has one or two frontages'
Engi neer i ng,Fi nance,0uts i de
Background Rationale:
Due to the fact that Kidsports had two signs on its awning which were
not "pptou"d
by the staff or Design Rev'i ew Board, the owner,. Pau'l
it.".V, was ta-ken to-iourt for th6 sign code vio1 ation. Judge Buck
Allen found paul Treaiy guilty of not obtaining the proper.approvals for
his signage. Judge A'lien a'l so asked that the owner go back.to the
oiiigr'R;uiew soaia io verify the staff's and the DRB's decis'ions that
fia.p".ii had only one trontige and therefore was allowed one sign. At
[f,"-lprii ina O.sign Review B6ard meeting, the Board determined that
[iaspbrts fiii ontv-one-frontage. Mr. Treicy is now appeal'ing the Design
n.uiln Board,s deiision that he only has one frontage to the Town
Counci I .
Staff Recommendation:
staff recommends denial of the appea'l . It is the staff's opinion that
East Meadow Orive provides the main frontage for Kidsports. The single
frontage w'i ll allow for only one sign for the business'
V. Assurance ( xLegal ,
Professi onal
Ean
Empl oyee
MEMO
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Design Review Board
Cormunity Development
April 2, 1986
Kidsport Awning
Kidsport was taken to court on March 6, 1986 for a sign code violation.
Due to the fact that Kidsports had two signs on its awning, the owner,
Paul Treacy, was taken to court. Judge Buck Allan found paul Treacyguilty and asked him to go back to the Design Review Board to verify thestaff and the DRB decision that Kidsports had only one frontage andtherefore was allowed only one sign. At the April 2 meeting, Mr. Treacywill not be presenting a new proposal but wilI instead be confirming theboard's opinion that he has on'ly one frontage. If this opinjon is
confirmed he will be required to remove the extra sign. please see the
enclosed "Sequence of Events concerning Kidsports Awning" to refresh your
memory on how this problem occurred.
tlr
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS FOR KIDSPORTS A}lNING
March 27, 1986
This sequence concerning the awning was determined by listenjng to tapes of the
Design Review Board meetings, notes in my calendar, as well as letters writtento iaul Treacy.
November 6, .|985 At the Design Review Board meeting, Paul Treacy, Brad
Henry, and Daniel Barry were present. Fred Hjbberd
was also at the meeting. The board discussed for at'least an hour the shape of the a,,vnings and how th"_
would be attached to the building. Toward the end of
the meeting it became clear that the appljcants wantedto have two signs on their awning. Kristrn said thaiit wou'l d be possible to have the two signs, as we have
a'l 'l owed other people to have two-sided signs on bubble
awnings and back to back signs on square awnings. Atthat time, she also stated that she was unaware that
the submittal had included two signs. The board ended
up agree'i ng on the colors for the awnings andlettering for each business. The meeting concluded bythe Design Review Eoard asking for further informat.i on
on the construction of the awnings, locations and
numbers of signage and square footage for thesignage. The applicant said that they would handdeliver the drawings in a few days to the staff and
then the staff could call the DRB and invite them to
look at the drawings. Kristan also mentioned to theapplicants the possibility of using window signs in
p1 ace of one of the signs on the awnings. Technically
.. the item was tabled with the understanding that the
Design Review Board could make a decision on the
awnings wjthout a formal meeting if everyone agreedthat the revised design was reasonable. The
applicants also wanted to check with Tom Rau to see jf
he would be willing to change his awning for The
Foreign Connection to match theirs.
The drawings were then brought in within the next week
and reviewed at the staff meeting. The Plannjng stafffelt that one sign was appropniate for each busjness.
The applicants were ca'l led and told they would be
allowed only one sign. Brad Henry was very upset
about the decision and felt that the staff decision
was very capricious. He stated to me in my off.i cethat he would appeal the staff decisjon to the Des.i gn
Review Board.
'
Daniel Berry, owner of Eye Pieces, also came by myoffice. He was very upset about the decjsion to only
aliow him one sign. he askeq that I come by the shop
and look at his frontage situation again io make surethat I felt strongly about our decjsion. I told him I
wou'ld bring the board by during site visits for our
Novemoer 20, .l985
DRB meeting.
November 20, '1985 The Design Review Board went by Eye Pieces and got
into a discussion about the appropriate number of
signs for the business. Staff and the board had to
move on, as we had other site visits to make. Danie'l
Berry and Paul Treacy came to the meeting as we we-?
finishing up. They waited in the audience for a while
and then seemed to have to leave. At the end of the
meeting the board discussed the situatjon for Eye
Pieces, Bag 'n Pack and Kidsports. It was determined
that Eye Pieces would be allowed two signs, as they
actually had two frontages. The board did not feelthat is was approprjate for Bag 'n Pack or Kidsportsto have two signs each. It was also agreed that we
would write up a policy statement at our next meeting
concerning awnings.
November 27, 1985 Daniel Berry came jn to receive his approval sheetthat clearly stated that he could have two signs for
Eye Pieces.
December 27, 1985 I called Paul and asked what was going on with hissignage. He told me that there was a mistake by the
awn'ing company and he would get the signage corrected.. On the same day, I wrote Paul a letter stating that I
appreciated the fact that he was already in the
process of remedying the situation with the additional
;i:["fl !' *,1, l"ll,,Hl.'13'o]'rlii"li"u":l:'i:l'*l'fl ,,",
how he wished to resolve the signage problem.
January 6, .|986 I received no word from Paul Treacy concerning the
s ignage.
January 9, 1986 I called Kidsports and left a message that Paul shouldcall me. 0n January 'l 0, 1986 I wrote a 'l etter
informing hjm once again that the additional signage
on his awning was a problem. I gave him a new
deadline of January 2l , 1986 to remove the s'i gnage orI would have to cite him for the sign code vjolatjon.
January 2l , .|986 I received no word from Paul Treacy.
January 22, 1986 I called Pau'l and he said that he would find out the
time frame for changing the awning. I told him that I
would be giving him a call on January 27, 1996 to fjnd
out his time frame for removing the awning. I told
him that if I did not receive an answer from him on
January ?7, 1986
January 28, 1986
January 29, 1986
February 3, 1986
February 4, .|986
February 13, 1986
February 13, .|986
March 6, 1986
the 27th that
Kidsports for
I called Pau'l
morning at his
I wou'i d have no choice but to cite
the si gn code vi ol ati on.
and left a message with Karen in the
offi ce.
I called Paul and left a message at 8:35 am.
I ca'l led again. The person in the store said that
they saw messages for Paul and as far as they knew, he
had received them.
I noiiced that the Bag 'n Pack Shop sign was up.
Peter Patten had call ed Erad Henry and he had saidthat he was going to get Jay Peterson to represent
them in court.
I notjced that a patch was up on the Kidsports awning
additional sign.
I noticed that the patch was removed from the awning.
A citation was issued to Pau'l Treacy for the sign code
vi o lati on.
The s'i gn code vio'l atjon was reviewed by Judge EuckAllen. It was determined that Paul Treacy hadviolated the sign code. He was asked to appear at the
Apnil 2nd Design Review Board to resolve his signagelssue. It was determined that if the sign was not
al lowed by the Design Review Board, the sign must be
covered up to avoid further citat'i ons.
luwn
75 soulh trontage road. yail, colorado 8i652
. (303) 476_7000
December 27, lgls
Paul Treacy
Kids Sports
122 East Meadow DriveVail, Colorado 8]657
Re: Extra Sign on Kidsports Awning
Dear Paul ,
I-appreciate the fact that you are already in thesituation with the additionil signage on your newunderstanding that you will contict-me by-.:anuaryyou wish to resolve the signage prob'lem. I thinksharp. I hope it will increaie your business.
Thanks for your cooperation.
KP: br
process of remedying theawning. It is my6th and let me know howthe awning looks very
Si ncerely,t/.t nl
dnfiun K...rt
Kristan Pritz
Town Planner
lnwn
75 south tronlage road
vail, colorado 81657
(303) 476-7000
January 10, 1986
Paul Treacy
Ki dsports
122 East Meadow 0rive
Vai1, Colorado 81657
Re: Extra Sign on Kidsports Awning
Dear Paul:
0n December 27' 1985 I wrote you a letter and informed you that theadditional signage on your new awning was a problem. }Ji had an
understanding that you would contact me by January 6 and let me know howyou wanted to resolve the signage problem. At this time, I have not heardany response from you. I also cal'led your store on January 9 and left a
message with one of your employees that you should call me.
I am writing to inform you that jf the additional signage on the awning .i snot-removed !V January 21, 1986 I will have to cite you for the sign c6deviolation. I feel that this is more than enough time to address theproblem. If you have any further questions please feel free to give me acall.
Si ncerely,
Krh.
Kristan Pritz
Town Planner
KPlbr f
luwn
75 south tronlage road
vall. colorado 81657
(303) 476-7000
January 22, 1986
Mr. Paul Treacy
K'idsports
122 East Meadow DriveVaiI, Co. 8165?
Re: Extra Sign on Kidsports Awning
Dear Paul:
0n.January 22nd, I called to find out what plans you had for yourKidsponts.awning. The last time I talked to you,-you nia stateu that youwere in the process of trying to resolve the iitualion. In ourconversation today, I asked that you call the awning company and find outhow long it would take them to change the awning. i wili bi giving you acall on January 27, l9a6 to find oui what the aining company loto io-u.Please try to talk to them before that time. t am iilliirg -to work withyou-on resolving the awning issue, however, I cannot let ihe s.ituat.ion goon_indefinitely. If I don't receive an aniwer from you on the z7th, l'will have no_ chojce but to cite Kidsports for the siin violat.ion. i wouldlike. to avoid taking that action. l,tithout a timeframe on the resolutionof the-signage, the problem may possibly be unresolved for weeks. i-rouraappreciate it very much if you would contact the company as soon asposs i bl e.
I was also concerned about your-statement that there are many sign codeviolations in the vil'lage that the staff does not address. itre itatt aoestry to keep up on sign enforcement. If you are aware of other sign code--violations, I would appreciate knowing about them. In no way is lhe stafftrying to single out the Village Center project while not atlending tobusiness in other areas of the Town. please let me know if there iresign code vib'l atjons that I may follow up on. I will give you a call onJanuary 27, L986. Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
K'\on ?^t
Kri stan Pritz
Town Pl anner
KP/bt f
E2E}EtrD/Frfl,@bstpg4rffi
Rtc'0APR-81986
,/: - 8u
)\\ )€^q-{^{ "..- trS r
I'L{As r S-= A -f;^{- i;} {* d tor
fn{eZ, Y"1 g F (-gt- i 'o.- -G"; ^l (oo'-x'<-t<---
' l'-J A --- \ .'' /
I O t\ lqnz- rx^._n_r l{7 -*--- A tr , ( r\ r- D t1 \: .S
)\ r ' . I \ '- /,/. \l) ,-<19 r ",*) K{n"*-s , ^.1 , ( Ki }5eea-<*-\
_b,"ry. S. r alt o D Cr..,e) rc" *,'^'., o 1 A
Q^*-,. -..-x-rc=
*fi. b<rr^ Qru-,> -*i+ b*, *.
,Op -(r-f,, Dcrpr*i-i ot) atr ,4 "/4o1,^^ P.U^
f S-c(14+] L";,r*\ '), . l- Bt,=.. r)q- -Grt-"U,uc-A1 L
C*o, rn"rr-'i7E Bc- AJop, ?"o'sruiloJ
(l.r{,q A,uU fu4,\ /+S<i*t,t F- Jaaru^-^-z- ) o-s.a o
O 5i.ro"r-- 5_ -gnr,(aJa, \ dS +-w,- /,.-,*=)
1; 7Q ,,^ou , 0/r L o tr *^\ €-* Lg-s -
.-GE
X-*-,
75 south Irontrge road
vall, colorrdo 81657
(303) 470-7000 ottlce ot communlty dcvelopmont
April 14, 1986
Paul Treacy
Ki dsports
122 East Meadow Drive
Vai l , Col orado 81657
Re: Date for Town Council Appeal
Dear Paul ,
I have scheduled the Kidsports awning appeal for l'lay 6th. The Town
Council meetings begin at 7:30 and are held in the Town Counci'l Chambers.
At thjs time, I am unab'l e to tell you when you wi1 I be on the agenda.
Please call several days before the meeting and I will be able to let you
know where your item js on the agenda. If you have any other questions
please fee'l free to give me a call.
Si ncerel y,
KtU^?*tt
Kristan Pritz
Town Planner
KP:jlt
i
f:til iiC I Ai ii - ,l ,.':':
€2 Ef'l:;dty*i.:!':{,e;*gii35t
@3i+?6+S
, Ll.l.:$l-__. )jp_4:-.*) \ - ". :
;ii:ii-i' --?-i L''/"--- -
. j ':::
-,- L f*\ rj-\ . l)=.. , 'l.-L - -; "]
. \\ \"\
.".1)
-ta-- '-
\=-/- f_- ----,- (_ .)_ .-.:.!\A-t- d4a.q , {---' I v-4.s ,\--:'-,-4iP .. .:t_
---f'-=I_l-.'!C,\/tn'a,L04L-f,:Ffi,..4,-.:(.'-,9-t.:;193'
i,-t,-,.:1---.;tia\. i_ | 1*'q,
|i':'''.''-]:;';:...:...''i:;:-..'.{..J-.:'l....:.::)..,.l:':'l.:--.1,.]':l--i'..f1i.,l]:::::.,..:t.:".}
l..'..]tFnd--..,;:.j.."=.'j
EF"ffi &EFf,TI &Sf 9/6T IPJ ffi il_-.-
.^'..i,''.-'...
FoRM 4O4 nrv. r.ttto NOTICE OF TRIAL SETTING-III s. F. HoEcxrL qo., DENVEF !eo.l
STATE OF COLORADO \,l
County of .--.-.-..--.EAS.l.g...--.--.-----.-...-. r\rr.*Town of t*citX)0fX..-..........]lai.1-.......-..-.......-...J
TIIE PEOPLE OF TI|E STATE OF COLORADO
cAsE NO..-..-
IN THE MUMCIPAL COURT.
vQ.
Munic1pal JuCqe or Cferk
Fileil 1l
of Vail
Time of Filing---.----.-------....O'clock--._---JVI.
NOTICE OF TRIAL SETTING
Pre-trial Conference
You are hereby notified that the above captionec case has been set for,\IilIilIJX#lLXttUtrX
..-.-....3-n*-tr.i-aL--..-.-...-. ilil+I oe . -.?.?tt--d..-.-.aay ot May
19------86--, at -.---.-.-9-:--4.5-..o'ctock --.-A.'-rra. If the issuance of subpoenas is necessary in this case, you
are hereby directed to apply to the Court for same.
This constitutes the only notice you wilt receive regarding this setting.
Notice sent to:
Date of Notice:.---.--..--.......-!!gy-..!.9.:...1999...-.-.
tstrike according to the facL
\
ilrl
slr€i
u- t33tE-
a,nort
^lro
coFtatxt
ln ll|. lAricip.l Cou.l ir rd b. llE lown ol V!il. E.gtr Corrtt, Sl.t€ ot Cotordo: lha gaoCta ot fia Stato ot Cot.or$ by .od fi.ougn
'la
lrolrr ol t|. tor!_Ol Vril, Colo..t o Pt.htitt V.
pR,D
;.|o. I typa
J
)
.a
I
)
),
,].trl
N 4304
oo
Dockel t{o.
Cace ib.
F
=5l-|l=tIJ
et-
ta-GI--=t4tJ)
8'41
J
J
J
oo
o
I
I
rib t|-thl W.aem Hait
Friala
Ey.!8.rt|t O.t.Sctr!, Uarta, Trloo!
VEHICTT colo.Yttt Hrt
rftdal Yrrr. Lac. t{o. -slata Y'Jlha Todr ol Van, b tr.!ol. natrd ffiait. graataEa. Yot ra hartbt ctar!6d rith lha bah ttatad vidr.
licr(al t'd tq, -a trr6y o.(b.ad lo F.. bahra ofr corn at [r lhr d ltaca rrltrr bator to a,la,fr
ch.reaa ol th. V|oLt|ootsl or th. Vrit f .kbat Cod. ot tb tog|r olV.L Cotor.rb s"T"lil't*" ***"""' l<Aq p ftop
I I rr.x5 | Y..r. L.c. xo. -sl.l. I t .
I,ich occrttad
XX Corn S..rrrr Frrierrn t) .t
V.il, Colo?.do.
dit ol
Ylolrtbr
tina
-
Ho{'3, Oato
m !h. Municip.l Cou.i in th. V.il Mrrnicip.l Buildine, 13t t hrt Front ga Rd..
Darcrixro.l
\,J A! NdT
aeaha ha O.*a
oorPu l}fr
Ollic.t
Oiicar
CqrpLt tr{
gaccraa d arori lo. balo.a ||r t$
-
rtay ot-. t9-.frdoa ot llrtcip.l Cosn. by
taiacl lr !o Jraal.
Far co.*ltLa a t.Dr$a olbrr rd wit/f.llltt in I wryrrt bairg ildrd.
O€FEiDANT
bl,r abra 6aa It|. | |n('-dJd that ahnlr|o fta t oail.. ia rpl Jr addaaldr ot gdllr D'!|tdaa lo s.a,!d bll'r
T0: Town Council
FROM: Community Deve'l opment Department
DATE: May 20, 1986
SUBJECT: Appeal to the Town CounciI concerning the Design Review Board
decisjon that Kidsports has only one Frontage and therefore is
permitted only one sign for the business. Applicant: Paul Treacy
Due to the fact that Kidsports had two signs on its awning which were not
approved by the staff or Design Review Board, the owner, Paul Treacy, was takento court for the sign code violation. Judge Buck Allen found Paul Treacyguilty of not obta'i n'i ng the proper approvals for his signage. Judge A1 len also
asked that the owner go back to the Design Review Board to verify the staff's
and the DRB's decisions that Kidsports had only one frontage and therefore was
allowed one sign. At the April Znd DRB meeting, the Board determined that
Kidsports has only one frontage. The vote was 5-0. Mr. Treacy is now
appealing to the Town Council the Design Review Board's decision that he only
has one frontage.
The staff recommends denial of the appeal . The sign code ciearly states in
Section'16.04.110 Frontage, Business that:
"Business frontage" means the lineal distance from outs'ide to outside of
a structure or portion of a structure hous'i ng a part'icular business or
businesses directly adjacent at ground level to a major pedestrian or
veh'i cul ar way.
Kidsports has one frontage, East Meadow Drive. This frontage wilI allow the
business one sign. The s'ign code is structured around the concept that the
number of signs is based on the number of frontages a business has, To approvethis appeal would go against the methods used to calculate signage throughout
the entire sign code.
Please see the enclosed "Sequence of Events for Kidsports' Awning" that will
explain how the issue with Kidsports developed. This information was taken
from tapes of the Design Review Board meetjngs as welI as staff records. Also
enclosed you wjl1 find three letters that were sent to Mr. Treacy concerning
K'i dsports' si gnage.
SEqUENCE OF EVENTS FOR KIDSPORTS AhJNING
March 27, 1986
Thjs sequence concerning the awning was determined by listening to tapes of the
Design Review Boand meetings, notes in my calendan, as well as letters written
to Paul Treacy.
November 6, .1985 At the Design Review Board meeting, Paul Treacy, Brad
Henry, and Daniel Barry were present. Fred Hibberd
was also at the meeting. The board discussed for at
least an hour the shape of the awnings and how they
would be attached to the building. Toward the end of
the meeting it became clear that the appiicants wanted
to have two signs on their awning. Kristan said thatit would be possible to have the two signs, as we have
a'l lowed other people to have two-sided signs on bubble
awn'ings and back to back signs on square awn'i ngs. At
that time, she also stated that she was unaware that
the submjttal had included two signs. The board ended
up agreeing on the colors for the awnings and
lettering for each business. The meeting concluded by
the Design Review Board asking for further informatjon
on the construction of the awnings, locations and
numbers of signage and square footage for the
signage. The applicant said that they would hand
deliver the drawings in a few days to the staff and
then the staff could call the DRB and invite them to
look at the drawings. Kristan also mentioned to the
applicants the possibility of using window signs in
place of one of the signs on the awnings. Technically
the jtem was tabled with the understanding that the
Design Review Board could make a decision on the
awnings w'i thout a formal meeting if everyone agreed
that the revised design was reasonable. The
applicants also wanted to check with Tom Rau to see if
he would be willing to change his awning for The
Fore'i gn Connection to match theirs.
The drawings were then brought in within the next week
and neviewed at the staff meeting. The Planning stafffelt that one sign was appropriate for each business.
The appljcants were ca'l led and told they would be
allowed only one sign. Erad Henry was very upset
about the decision and felt that the staff decision
was very capricious. He stated to me in my office
that he would appeal the staff decisjon to the Design
Review Board.
November 20, .l985
November 27, 1985
December 27. .|985
January 6, .|986
January 9, .|986
January 2l, |986
January ?2, 1986
Danie'l Berry, owner of Eye Pieces, also came by myoffice. He was very upset about the decjs.ion to only
al1ow him one sign. He asked that I come by the shop
and 'l ook at his frontage situatjon again to make surethat I felt strongly about our decision. I told hjm I
would bring the board by during sjte visits for our
November 20, .|985
DRB meeting.
The Design Revjew Board went by Eye Pieces and got
into a discussion about the appropriate number of
signs for the business. Staff and the board had to
move on, as we had other site visits to make. Dan.i ej
Berry and Paul Treacy came to the meeting as we werefinishing up. They waited in the audience for a while
and then seemed to have to leave. At the end of the
meeting the board discussed the situation for Eye
Pieces, Bag 'n Pack and Kidsports. It was determjnedthat Eye Pieces would be al'l owed two signs, as they
actually had two frontages. The board djd not feelthat is was appropriate for Bag 'n Pack or Kidsportsto have two signs each. It was also agreed that we
would write up a policy statement at our next meeting
concerni ng awn i ngs .
Danjel Berry came in to receive his approval sheetthat clearly stated that he could have two s'i gns for
Eye Pieces.
I called Paul and asked what was going on with his
signage. He told me that there was a mistake by the
awning company and he would get the signage corrected.
0n the same day, I wrote Paul a letter stating that I
appreciated the fact that he was already in the
process of remedying the situation with the addjtional
signage. I told him that it was our understandingthat he would contact me by January 6 and let me know
how he wished to reso'l ve the signage problem.
I received no word from Paul Treacy concern'i ng the
si gnage.
I called Kidsports and |eft a message that Paul shou'l dcall me. 0n January 'l 0, |986 I wrote a |etter
informing him once again that the additiona'l signage
on his awning was a problem. I gave him a new
deadline of January 2.l , '1986 to remove the signage orI would have to cite him for the sign code vjolation.
I received no word from Paul Treacy.
I called Paul and he said that he would find out the
time frane for changing the awning. I told hjm that I
would be giving him a call on January 27,1986 to find
out his time frame for removing the awning. I told
him that if I did not receive an answer from him on
75 soulh lronlage road
vail, colorado 81657
. (303) 476-7000
December 27, 1985
Paul Treacy
Kids Sports
122 East Meadow DriveVail, Colorado 8'1657
Re: Extra Sign on Kidsports Awning
Dear Paul , ,
I appreciate the fact that you are already in thesituation with the additional signage on your newunderstanding that you will contict-me by-Januaryyou wish to resolve the signage problem.- I th.i nksharp. I hope it will increase your business.
Thanks for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
process of remedying theawning. It is my
6th and let me know howthe awning looks very
ffirk^R{tKristan Pritz
Town Planner
KP: br
January 27, 1986
January 28, .|986
January 29, .|986
February 3, .l986
the 27th that I wou'ld have no choice but to cite
Kidsports for the sign code violation.
I ca'lled Paul and left a message with Karen jn the
morning at his offjce.
I cal led Paul and left a nessage at 8:35 am.
I called again, The person in the store said that
they saw messages for Pau1 and as far as they knew, he
had received them.
I noticed that the Bag'n Pack Shop s'ign was up.
Peter Patten had called Brad Henry and he had saidthat he was going to get Jay Peterson to represent
them in court.
I noticed that a patch was up on the Kidsports awning
additional sign.
I noticed that the patch was removed from the awning.
A citatjon was issued to Paul Treacy for the sign code
vi ol ati on.
The sign code violation was reviewed by Judge BuckAllen. It was determjned that Paul Treacy had
v'i o'l ated the sign code. He was asked to appear at theApril 2nd Design Review Board to resolve his signageissue. It was determined that if the sign was not
allowed by the Design Review Board, the sign must be
covered up to avoid further citations.
February
February
February
March 6,
4, .|986
13, .|986
13, .|986
1986
luwn u ffil
75 south lrontage road
vail. colorado 81657
{303) 476-7000
January 10, 1986
Paul Tneacy
Ki dsports
122 East Meadow Drive
Vai1, Colorado 81657
Re: Extra Sign on Kidsports Awning
Dear Paul:
0n December ?7, 1985 I wrote you a letter and informed you that theadditiona'l signage on your new awning was a problem. t.le had an
understanding that you would contact me by January 6 and let me know howyou wanted to resolve the signage problem. At this time, I have not heard
any response from you. I also called your store on January 9 and left a
message with one of your employees that you should call me.
I am writing to inform you that if the additional signage on the awning isnot removed by January 2I , L986 I wil I have to cite you for the sign codeviolation. I feel that thjs is more than enough time to address theproblem. If you have any further questions please feel free to g'ive me acal|.
Si ncerely,
Kr|o^?..,h
Kristan Pritz
Town Planner
KPlbt f
' 75 soulh lronlage road
vail, colorado 81657
(303) 476-7000
January 22, 1986
Mr. Paul Treacy
K idsports
122 East Meadow DriveVail, Co. 81657
Re: Extra Sign on Kidsports Awning
Dear Paul:
0n January 22nd,, I called to fjnd out what plans you had for your
Kidsports awning. The last time I talked to you,-you had stated that youwere in the process of trying to resolve the situatjon. In ourconversation today, I asked that you call the awning company and find outhow long it would take them to change the awning. i wili be giving you acall on January 27, t986 to find out what the awning company lola loir.Please try to talk to them before that time. t am wi11in9 lo work withyou on resolving the awning issue, however, I cannot'l et ihe situation go
on_'i ndefinitely. If I don't receive an answer from you on the zith, Iwjll have no choice but to cite Kidsports for the sjgn vjolatjon. i wouldlike to avoid taking that action. without a timeframe on the resolutionof the signage, the probiem may poss'i b1y be unresolved for weeks. I wouldappreciate it very much if you would contact the company as soon aspossi bi e.
I was also concerned-about your'statement that there are many sign codeviolations in the viliage that the staff does not address. The itaff doestry to keep up on sign enforcement. If you are aware of other sign codeviolatjons, I would appreciate knowing about them. In no way js ihe stafftrying to single out the Village Center project while not attending to
business in other areas of the Town. Please let me know if there aresign code violations that I may fo11ow up on. I will give you a calI on
January ?7, t986. Thank you for your cooperation.
Si ncerely,
Kn,\on ?^t
Kristan Pritz
Town Planner
KPlbl f
75 south tronlage road
Yail, colorado 81657
(303) 476-7000 otflce of communlly development
June 12, 1986
Paul Treacy
Ki dsport
122 East Meadow Dr.
Vai1, Colorado 81657
RE: l,lindow Signs for Kidsport
Dear Paul ,
I am writing this letter to clarify our conversation over the phone today
concerning window signs for Kidsport. The code alIows for a maximumof 10 square feet for the window signage. This signage is used toidentify particular types of serv'i ces, products or events. The purpose ofthis sign is not to state the name of the business, i.e. Kidsport.
However, you are allowed a 3 square foot sign that will state the name ofthe business at 1.5 s.f. and the remaining 1.5 s.f. may be used for the
display of hours-of operation, credit card jnformation, and s'imi'l argeneral information items. Please note that this area will not be
included as part of the total allowable window coverage.
In respect to the design and location of the signage, the 10 s.f. window
sign may be designed as one 10 s.f. sign area or the 10 s.f. may be
djvided into two signs. It is important to understand that there may not
be more then two separate window signs and that the square footage for the
one or two window signs must together total no more then 10 s.f. The 10s.f. could also be designed as a continuous signage band across your four
window panels as long as the total square footage does not exceed 10 s.f.
The 3 s.f. sign may be located in one of your windows or on your door. Itis up to you where you wish to locate this sign. The important point isthat the name of the business may be no greater than 1.5 s.f. on the 3s.f. sign.
.l
I have enclosed the sign code for your information. If you fcel that reare not interpreting the code properly, please let me know and I wlll be
happy to discuss youn lnterpretation with you. P'lease let me know whatyou decide to do with the signage.
Paul Treacy
Kidsport llindow Signs
June 12, 1986
Page 2
KP: j'lt
Si ncerel y,
tt I n tv'-t ^ v^:Er-nfi67r {l -tt I t4
lllr, lq' I t'rr c
Kristan Pritz
Town P'l anner