HomeMy WebLinkAboutVAIL INTERMOUNTAIN BLOCK 8 LOT 6 LEGALoz
E
=tluo-
.if
o
rn
at)uJ
uJlJ-
tr
=G,
UJo-
,b/r//t
8€E-s*.t
4.ir(t) |rlca c.)
I
I
I
I
.nl
?rs
SrE
-lr
I
I
I
I
ilt
6t9*tI
Eizoto
UJ
E
F
I
==o
zz
uJF
z
z
6J
co
.oo
=z
lqfrr
F
Itt-l
lFthr-r
t:
E
o
C'
:Erurl]q
f'-11rq)
+.1
tqI
{.,
tr0,
cuJz
=o
ulEF
z
ts
HH
A
14
z
z
c.93eoEqiL9i6o96
Eg(/,o.'a.o
EGttc
aEpF
FEo-.cO56Ng
-28
egFoeb
oo
PF
E€ooEoGcD
o.E
f'=gdi5oO
--'
Egq9'cloo-c(!t3
o.9
.0E
E6E'=(D(,'
g8E
,.e n'Yo 6
F.g FF5C5PEc-o'.3s
=EE
d'5 =c9c
35t
EEE500;E <J
5;eRi f.:- (l
ct(5 ct$Et
.,f o.
=fieE6:EEE
O(g:
EaE_ o.ge+'C6 0'-5ae
St€gi'
'6>,P Ilo
EfiE
eE:
cEg
-oo
ln F-o.t rn
.if
FI
\t
ln
p4
(\
o
C.lF-lr)
=
o-
z
d)
YoUJI
z
Jo-
EFoulJlu
z
dl
9z
tu
=
qJq,l!zotr
IIJ
E
oo3g
UJGz
6
UJo
F
o-UJ
z
uJJ
C)
x
F
ulo
(n
uJuJIIt
=EIIJL
J
F
F
z
f
co
oUJ
ul
C'z
ao
=f
)
9z
ult
NOllvntvA
t-
tJ
No
.|J
.u.rl
IJa!
x
BZz!-
tr ^ -u> zq 5 >ea9 0E
tooe.ia fir!<o1 i--69;o:3FO?-lN.u
=>cl
--(oi u.r ,{
=coN
z
E
J
s
eo
UJo-
F
Ilut
z
E
N><
z
tr
tuFJ
=aljz
ttrltt
trzlzOaF- -ulo<
=H9trbo<z
=z,
9z
-iFd6;trox
uJl
(E
uJzY
iF
z
F
oz
n
f
!l
b
P
3
lrl<l
-l
4l
zl
.. >l
uJot!luzo
=
cc
UJIL
J
zIi ztro
J
t[
l"l*
l*uH*?lioH
rco2.t
l! -,o{)
tr)@o
LO
uJFodlo'azo
Fo-uJY
llJ
a0
oFF> iticc o\lll '"'lo-
bFl> --, 1n ilo 'iloal
'<lrlguJbkzo
z&
-;'\
-)J
D<ET
I,Eir\ rL
ujOz
l
;
FtrI
JFUJ-h=-i atsd r.lJ
=o-O|!9o\uJxox>UFJ
tl.
qJ
oF
c!'
ElLoo
o
.E
t
E
Eo(,
o
co
E
Fo.ott
\o
\-.oJ
F
=GlrJo-z9Fo3GFa
=L'o
Z
!!
z
rn=ze
coo
=z
CL LL
o
J:<.:o;;
=3r,^(J:i
UJX
=iiI
.l;l
fl
il
F?l
z
=tr
(I)+J$
.0
6>,
lr
CUE
ii
=z
-
rd
E
7tr(!E
tl
0,
luE
4
F
L'
TJJ
J
=
rn\oo\rt I
-r.fcao.
E
l-F
Fo =tr
a
UJ
oo)-
=
ts
q
3
t-
=
t!-
IOrrr
z
olrl
Ja
l|"oz3IF1
e.l
rn(\
I
f\\?
ui
IJJF
o
t{P
CJFI
14
IJ
=ttr
Ir^(\
ctz'
(,l
ut
ac
u-loz3I
\'
Io\\t
ui)
UJF
ol
"'l
rt
6l.'{
uE
=tr
IF-
oz
ti
utE
J
oz3oF
ot
To.i
ol
-jI
.lJ
qd
It,-
oz
outE
J
tloz3
01H
V
I
.n
uJ
lrJF =(r
oz
duJE
l!oz
=9
ITJJutF
UJz
=
oIu -J O<F
ur<zEUJFt,,t zo
JE<oOF
FS
;,1F
=za8
t2?=o
=#-J t-
dzo()
dx9tr
=3gE
ar
ttig:r'.E t-o2<Qon3i
I
l"',
t<ro
I
I
l.
IE
IEzl=to
lotz
@
F\
NFH
A
v
l*'
E
I
I
I
I
I
I
t._,
rc)
IEtototzro
@@
rn
F\
zl-{
&
E
I
c!(n F\
ah
UJuJlJ-
E
=cuJd
Na
\a\\IH
l9
Itrlo
1115ltF\tollI
il3HO
/ I /lt=
t' -lr-4trtlZ,l l3llod
lllEEI llutl:liE! 162ll/)<
a;t :c
EIHEt
Effl;
3EFiEg.;E€€
SE;Bi
rEigl
!EEtg(E0'-.:-E; 0) U, l:
enE.c€
iEgiE
U'ul
LlltL
ts
=t
UJo-
FoF
E
rlJ
z
!
llnt< t<IE IH
lg l"'
lSlE
F;II
:E IEtrA ltr'
EE Irr'E
LU) lA
gEF
(,
9oF^Vtia e
ata7>.6:r!<oq
i-o-8
ici
t!
ti
o-
(f)4
e
uJ
J
z
tr
z
F
uJ
J
zl
.. >lol,u
u,lluzoF
tr
uJo-
zoF6
I
lol ..-{
II
(D
trzlz
tr
o
u)Fz,
Oz
doBtrOI
o\
I/,I&
ca
I&l"
sl9
,ilt
=toul v)
uJo. tr.>o
\o \o N
E{Frr
G
-)l!
u))
3
Fxlu
IL
E
\o
|-\ro
Ir\c\t
IJJI
5l
<l>lt4lolzl
=loFI
zH
F
Fl
il
Fl
Hv)
a
r-)
=dtr
@o00
Io\'>lttlol2l3lolFI
H&H
Fl
14Fl(9z
H&H
=tr
zH
FqE
Ff
>rrqFl
Hu)
I4
F-l
=tr
I
Ij
ciluJlEI
il
el
3l cOl r.uFI F.
.lAI>lJI*l
F1l
dl
9lHIu)l
nl
!11C\c'lN
(,z
l!
z
HU)
E
/H
ui
=zo
-)
I*
(9H
HE
Fofr
=o
E
zH}4
t\ca
tn
a
=
rnr\@
I
@
i
&F]
B
(J
H
t
(|-
,l@lr-'{l
e.rl
I
ctl
EI
il>lttlol
FI
v7trlH
H
u)u)
d
E
=tr
EoF
EFzo()
J
9EF
UJJ
UJ
tgP
=#1ZrJ- oo
z
Ioul
*b
=iE Fo2
O
t
-tO<Flr(JIJJ <zEI,U F(r1 zoo
ic>
-.,8H
oz
ts
=c.
UJG
z
,ta 9
Z*.
2Z
JO()! r,!
:f=-xoA;E
EE
F
ulo-
:!!EZ.E<of€Ea9EirB9cf,E drE E=(, dtrE R}E p6E iuE F,ic.lo-i!E
l!d!
F
--trEE
rJ.
t-{$
af)
c>cf
,(f
A'Y^
v /l/.4
/)/)
-/a .7,i.
IIJFa@o?zo
F.L
uJY
IJJo
oF
tr
ccuto-
lto
coo
I
u.IFo2
."1@l-.\|
sl
u,lF
o
E
=g
lrJo-z9F(JfE
6zoo
\
,%rzl ?t*,1,rj
I
wt
t\
_-s
---I-;!Nr'.--
iI
I
{
I
I. -'. i .---.
-t-
T
EAp*1
fJ
$rTY\R
T$
I
-l
{{Jnl
TS
F
"t&t'
i
tra
"t9-ilt' t
ol.,...N
q1sslu^'F"ct(
ET
q'$
?E
$u
-G
$S
F.
ti
TU;
Lti
$g
t/\
*
_l
dt
1s.
ftup lft,ttf',1t---
-98
QDOc
?(tI
T
EAa+
€o
3tl:(d
I
f 'rlT\JddrN{+-z\
1 ret?l
- ^
rf;l'.':?il$t',"r'.ti:|&t17e O
cg4JfrltlousE, rAGrE co. _ pH. (303) 32a_7311
APPLICANI
PERMIT TO
BUITDING
PERMIT
AT I LocA T IoN )6ii+xi.,____P5__
CR055 5TREEf I srnEET)sugotvlstoN
BUTLO| G ts To aE Fr.
ro rvpe V-N use
uor6s1rcx8.Llrr.
wlDE BY FT. LoNG By- FT. rH HETGHT
cnoup R-3 E^SEMENT waLLs oR Foulroarroil
ANO SHALL CONFORM IN CONSTRUCTION
{ IYPE)
R E MAR XS:
Check #tZZ Receipt #2109
03[0# t^nn ,:ft,,,tJr,--, a,, EsrrMArED cosr
til::
l0 Change of ute from
SITE PLAN MUST BE INCLUDED WITH THIS APPLI
Plan Check Fee 976i.48
$ 252,000.00 FEE"'' g tt71.50
BUI
BY
PinK Copy - DEPT. FILE coPY YCIIow CoDy - APPLIcANT coPY Blu! Copy - AssEssoRs coPY
excepti
ctions
are listed in
r to Eagle Countyty Building Resolution. For site plan p
publication "Graphic & Submittal Requirements for Si
lilhit. Copy-l NSp€CTOR
14 Totalfloor area of structuro:I I Vrlurtion of mrk: 3
t5 H€ighl of sttucturg above finish grade:l2 furs8gs or !q. f ootrge of lot:
f 3 Sq. footagr of lot coverage: 4L" IO
l6 Special Conditions and Additional Information:
I
U/rh- f %,/4t
I8 I HEREEY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REAO ANO €XAMINEO THIS- - APPLICATION ANO KNOW THE SAME TO BE TRUE ANO CORRECT.ALI PROVISIONS OF LATI'S AND OROINANCES GOVERNING THISTYP€ OF WORK WILL BE COMPLTED WITH WHETHER SPECIFI€DHEREIN OB NOT. TXE GRANTING OF A P€RMIT OOES NOTPRESUME TO GIVE AUTHORITY TO VIOLATE OR CANCEL THEPROVISIONS OF ANY OTHER STAfE OB LOCAL LAW REGULATINGCONSTRTrcTIOI{ OR THE PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTION,oa otrNEFr 0F own€F tutLoERl
C.r'!ry Copy-APPLICANT Pink Copy-ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH cold Copy-ASSESSOR
EAGLE
F Ii\AL:
'Rev t er^r
COUI|TY BUILDII\tr3 plqiitT AppLICATI0rr
C/O INSPECITI(]II, LAi'IDSCAPE IIISPICTIcl.I.IRourlNsFonM ( ), pnnrnnv.Fournre
FnPll
()\-/fua?/)
zONEffi
ROUT I I'IG
n
--3
BUILDIi|G CFFICIAL: Cor.rprlEs r,,,r*YEs No Revt eureofoorllc & Fourunnrloru
ARCFII TECTURAL
I-'LU11B I NGFl traTD r.
^
tt vr-t t_
flecHnru r ncnl
LO|!MENTS: rr I WE
TEaa_
fez-'r -tL
€bAL Ettc.rA 7 fl<t- EcE. 'T:o
NllliJG
otvts
l r,re RePu FH
i
tolr Reeulartous
EGULAT r 0ilsN (LANDScnpnrc)
PLA
Suelol.rSrr
Co,utt Recor+lelro ApFnovnr_ :I,IENT
C()U|{TY EUG Ii,tEtR : ^ Ronos
DHXtiliiS
f--lntl
Coitrei'rts:Recoi'ureNo Appnbvnll-
ALJH: h'nre n)AI'ITATIOII
rERC. TEST
HTCCUIJTY
*h|]or'ueirrs:Re cor.lr.teiro Ap pporn
C/O ISSLIID
Fntau Ftr_lrrc Dnre DnreBv
ao
County of
ELECTRICAL
Eagle
PERMIT Job Name .... ........Hen.ry .Ma.ruJama....
2925 Bassingdale, West Vail
Date of Application ........0ctober.16,......... ....... .... ..... .... l9 ..87
Electrical Contractor .....Ava.lanche...E1ectr:ic........ ........ #L7.54
Box 1395, Dillon, C0 80435
Applicant
S18nature
APPROVALS
B. .-J"nlr^/4'_ /! _{7Datc
Ng 4t30
Building Valuation
Electrical Valuation
Permit Fee
Inspection Fee
Total Fee
)S(..-3600 sq-...f.t.
$.... ..123..00.....
s. -.....123.,.00.....
Date Paid ....... .0ct0ben..15.,...1987-.......
ReceivedBy C..8a1dwin............ ....
Check #3283
Recei pt #4045
BP#3065
/a/rz
Date
THIS FORM IS TO BE POSTED ON
.,OB SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION
24 HOURS A.DVANCE NOTICE
REQUIRED FOR TNSPECTIONS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REAO AND EXAMINED THIS
APPLICATION ANO KNOW THE SAME TO AE TRUE ANO CORRECT.ALL PROVISIONS OF LAWS ANO ORDINANCES GOVERNING THIS
TVPE OF WORK WILL EE COMPLIEO WITH WHETHER SPECIFIEO
HEREIN OR NOT. THE GRANTING OF A PERMIT OOES NOT
PRESUME TO GIVE AUTHORITY TO VIOLATE OR CANCEL THE
PROVISIONS OF ANY OTHER STATE OR LOCAL LAW REGULATING
CONSTRUCTION OR TH€ PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTION.
d -t5-6
COSTS THEREOF. ANO SUCH FEES SHALL BE A5 FOLLOWS:
VALUATION OF wORK: (ACTUAL COST TO CUSTOMER)
NOT MORE THAN $3OO.OO
MORE THAN $300.00 BUT NOT MORE THAN 92.000,00..........................45.00
MORE THAN $2,000.00................ ................................16.00
(PER EACH 9t,000,00 VALUAT|ON OR FRACTTON THEREOF
OF TOTAL)
MOBILE HOMES AND TRAVEL TRAILER PARKS PER SPACE...............36.00
RETNSPECTTONS ON ALL OF THE A8OVE............................................... 40.00
TEMPORARY POWER PERMITS:
TEMPORARY POWER
TEMPORARY HEAT RELEASE
WHEN PROPEBLY VALIOATED IIT{ THIS SPACE' THIS 18 YOUB PERMIT
PLAN CHECK VALIDATION
WHITE.INSPECTOR PINK - APPLICANT YELLOW. FILE
PERMIT VALIDATION
MECHANICAL PERMIT APPLICATION
EAGLE COUNTY
Applicant to complete numbered spaces only,
I D E5C l.tflstt errrc'rzo sxr ert
, F/AZI v*,.n /4
M IL ADOiESS - PHONE LlcEr{sE ro.
/ricHrTEct oi oa5rcrr€t MlrrL lool E5 s ' pao|lE LrcaNs€ r{o.
MAIL AODIESS FHONE lrclfr9E to.
rJ 5E OF 6! !Or{G
Classofwork: {rueW tr AoDtloN tr ALTERATION tr REPAIR
I oescribe work:
TypeolFuet: Ott E Nar.Gas E lpC. O
PERMIT FEES
SPECIAL CONOITIONS:
Air Co^d. Units-H.P. Ea.
ion Unirs - H.P. €a.
Boilers-H.P. Ea.
Gas F ired A.C. Units-T
Forced Air Systems-8.T.U. M E!.
APPIICATION ACCEPIEO 8Y
Floor Furnac6-B.T.U.
Wall He8ters-8.T,U.
NOTICE
THIS PEBMIT EECOMES NULL AND VOIO IF W]TRK OR CONSTRUC.TION AUTHORIZEO IS NOT COMMENCED WITHIN 120 OAYS. ORtF coNsTRUcrroN oR woRK ts suspENDEo oR aanNooileoFOA A PERIOO OF 120 DAYS AT ANY TIME AFTER WOFTK ISCOMMENCED.I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I J{AVE REAO ANO EXAMIN€D THISAppLlcATtoN Aryo KNow rHe sAME To BE TRUE AND coaREcr.ALL PROVISIONS OF LAWS ANO OROINANCES GOVERNING THISTvpE oF woRK wtLL BE coMpLtEo wtrH WHETHEA spectrreoHERETN oR Nor. THE GRANTTNG oF A pERMtr ooEs noipREsuME Io GrvE AUTHoRtry ro vtoLATE oR cANaEL THEpRovtstoNs oF aNv orHER srATE oR LocAL LAw CecuuArillocoNsTRUcrroN oR THE PERFoRMANCE oF coNstRucrtoN.
Unit Heate6-B.T.U. M
Ventilation Fan
WHEN PROPERLY VALIDATED (IN THIS SPACE} THIS tS YOUR PERMIT
PLAN CHECK VALIOATION
WHITE.INSPECTOR PIN K . APPLICANT
cK. M.O.PERMIT VALIOATION
.., .f'-,
"4Lro* - , taa
CK. ../ M,O. CASH
'.t'7,:i'"
. ./ .,tt - .\,
';'.1/J/': ;"::: ',tl/'" -^- !
EAGLECOUNT
o
Y
551 Broadway
Eagle,Colorado 81631
(303) 328:7311
DATE : l'larch 31 , 1987
RE: Building Permit Extenslon.
BUILDING PERIIIT: 3065
Dear Mr. Woodley,
I9e have recieved your.request for a buildingpermit extension and appreciate your interest inkeeping this file current.
. The Eagle County Building Department wi1lgive you a six month extension on this buildingpermit, which will expire September 30, 19g7.
ff we can be of further help please feelfree to call.
Gerald Best
Chief Building Official
GB/1r1
cc: File
Board of County Commissionen Assessor
P.O. Box 850 P.O. Box 449
Eagle, Colorado 8165l Eagle, Colorado 81631
Oerk and Recorder
P.O. Box 537
Eagle, Colorado 81631
Sheriff
P.O. Box 359
Eagle, Colorado 81631
Treasurer
P.O. Box 479
Eagle, Colorado 81631
Sincerely,
PLUMBING PERMIT APPLICATION
EAGLE COUNTY
Applicant to complete numbered spaces only.
WHEN PROPEBLY VALIOATEO (IN THIS SPACEI THIS IS YOUR PERMIT
y'1,k,,-o/rt/r'7/orr/
I oEsct.(LlsEE Arr^Craao !Haarl
LICEN3t NO.
-71
AICHITECI!A OESICNET LrcEXtE O.
IICEN9' NO.
U5E OF 6U II,OIN G
8 Ctass ol work: R NEW tr ADotTtoN tr ALTERATT0N O REpAtR
Typ! ot Fixtur. or lt m
SPECIAL CONDITIONS:WATER CLOSET (TOtLET)
LAVATORY (WASH 6A5INI
KITCHEN SINK & DISP.
OISHWASHER
APPLICATION ACCIPIEO 8Y:LAUNORY TRAY
CLOTHES WASHER
WATE R HEATE R
NOTICE
THIS PERMIT BECOMES NULL ANO VOIO IF WORK OR CONSTRUC.TION AUTHORIZED IS NOT COMMENCED WITHIN 60 OAYS, OR IFCONSTRUCTION OR WORK ISSUSPENDEO OR ABANDONED FOB APERIOO OF 120 DAYS AT ANY TIME AFTER WORK IS COM.MENCED.I IIEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REAO ANO EXAMINEO THIS4ppLrcATroN ANo KNow THE sAME To aE TRUE AND coRRECr-.ALL pRovrsroNs oF LAws ANo oRD|NANCES covERNtNG iHtSTy?E oF woRK wrLL BE coMpLtED wtrH WHETHeR spe.rrreo
Lr_EB-Er.ry _o! Nor, THE GRANTTNG oF A pERMtr ooEs Noi?BEsulrE To Grv€ AUTHoRtr../ ro vtoLATE oR caNcEL rHElBgylsloryg qF ANv orHER srATE oR LocAL LAW iEGtaArrNGcoNsrRUcrtoN oR THE pERFoRMANCE oF coNsiRutTtoN.
URINAL
ORINKING FOUNTAIN
FLOOR..SINK OR ORAIN
SLOP SINK
GAs SYSTEMS: NO. OUTLETS
WATER PIPING & TREATING EGIUIP.
VACUUM BREAKERS
LAWN SPRINKLER SYSTEM
SEPTIC TANK & PIT
PLAN CHECK VALIDATION
WHITE.INSPECTOR
PERMIT VALIDATION CASHcK.M.O.?!'75;t'"'"'
WctclE LEYlll
-
^-
III
MclElFE
co
3
T
R
uc
T
Io
l{
co
n
P
o
R
A
T
I
o
tl
.':
.1tt aD
-rt,. c2
"'o^' 't'? ''12
October L2, L987
Eagle County Building Dept.P.O. Box 179
Eagle, CO 81631
Dear Andy:
Enclosed is a letter from the structural engineer allowlng us to move thefooter in question 6" to the south. See notes ll2 and ll3.
Sincerely r
WOODLEY-MOORE CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION
?;*T*r
Rico Dldier
As soc late
RD/sv
Enc 1o sure
Fost Ofrce Box I I 12 . Avon Colorudo 81620. Teleptrone 303/949-7114
Chen&Associates 5080 Road l54
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
303/945-7458
Casper
Colorado Spnngs
i,13"11,* i4.
PnOenrtrA
Q-'::',qbelo,
Consulting Geotechnical Engineers
October 13, 1987
Subject: Observation of Upper
Level Excavation,
Lot 5, Block 8, Vail
Interrpunta i n Subd i -vision, Vail, C0
Job No. \ 299 87
Wood ley lloo re Construction, Inc.
P. 0. Box lll2
Avon, C0 81520
Attn: Larry Woodley
Gent I emen :
As requested, we observed the upper level footing excavation atthe subject site on October 1, 1987. The upper level is the last ofthe foundation excavations for the residence. The results of our
observation for the other two levels were presented in letters to you
dated September ll and 17, 1987.
l.lhen observed, the upper level had been cut to design grade ata depth up to l0 feet below the ground surface. About the upperJ feet of excavation depth consisted of old roadway fill. The under-lying natural soils consi sted of silty sandy gravel with sandstone/shale blocks of typically I to J feet in size. No free water was
obse rved .
The soils observed in the excavation are simi lar to those pre-viously excavated at the site and should be acceptible for the 1000 psf
recommended design pressure. other recommendations presented in ourprevious correspondance which are applicable should also be observed.
lf you have any questions, please donrt hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
CHEN 6 ASSoCIATES, tNC-
Enclosures
SLP./ew
CC: KKBNA, Attn: Dave Austin
#h:{&ba a
wc'ctltLEYutt
MctC'RE
coxsT
F
ucI
Ioil
c
o
Bp
o
R
A
T
I
o
t{
?^
a''qt,-
:yk;"
","".liro,*
0ctober 13, 1987
Andy Montoya
Eagle County Bulldlgn Dept.
P.O. Box 179
Eagle, C0 8163I
Re: rnspecrion d,aced, Lo/8/ez, i;;Ji'*foO:J Maruyama Lor 8, west vail. .
Dear Andy:
To further clarlfy the letter Rico sent you, I have enclosed a copy of thefooting modification as built. This nodification was made according to thedesign letter of March 24, L987 fron KKBNA. If you have any other questionsplease call rne.
S incere
I,l00D CONSTRUCTION CORPOMTION
'v,
w.oodley
s ident
LWlsv
Enclosure
cc: Inspection flleLot 5, Maruyama
Fost Ofiice Box I I 12.lvon Colorudo 81620. Telephone 919/949-7114
o
75 soulh fronlage road
vail, colorado 81657
(303) 476-7000 otllce ol communlty developmenl
April 30, 1986
Mr. Mike Mollica
Eagle County Community Development Department
Box .l79
Eagle, Colorado 8l63.|
Re: Maruyama variance, Lot 6, Block 8, vail Intermountain, zgzs Basingdale
Boul evard
Dear Mi ke:
I thought it would be helpful if I wrote you a letter outlining the Town ofvail's position on the vari ance for the Maruyama residence. Aicording to ourdiscussion over the phone, it appears that the Manuyama's are asking ior theexact same variance that was requested originally from the Town of Vail. hJhenthe_proposal was previously reviewed, the staff recommended approval of thevariance request. Our position is basical ly the same due to the fact that therequest is the same. The Town of Vail Engineer, Bill Andrews, listed thefollowing concerns:
1, A slope stability study should be completed to jnsure that thestructure is compatible with the site. He indicated that there havebeen some sloughing problems nearby.
2. Engineered foundations and,/or retaining walls would be required if theslope stability study states that they are feasible anq necessary.
3. Subsurface drainage should be looked at very c1ose1y.
4. A revocable ri ght-of-way permit for the improvements in the publ.i cright-of-way will be required.
If you have any further questions about this proposal , please feel free togive me a call.
Sincerely,
K+^ ?,'h
Kristan Pritz
Town Pl anner
KP: br
PROJ ECT:hi&nr
DATE SUBMITTED:
COMMENTS NEEDED BY:
ERIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PR0P0SAL:.
iNTER-DEPARTMTNTAL REVI II.'
DATE OF PUEL]C HEARING
ffiLoatejtt/E;_
Comments: ' I
f:,.,6- t n,a 4.1i.6.--' 8wxo4776.1 5 .er.Oy' < pe4g / d/^t 6 u)r+LeS //=e s4, s 74€y /rfe /?>tsrBtg
6 €oGslu.ra.n ptu,at11,€- Ree,;rzeotgtuzs ,_ C7
@ R*o.*B(6 4ia47or htAt fea,nrT EB /Otxavc>n€xty //-r
Ko+o Pr|Hr oc (,r-t,+y.- ?&,-ttpgZ>
Pt4*s 5,+? "tr' prak1^G D.er4 " =v4*,, on*, <ot Fo. _/,r€,vES? tPace5
@
POLICE DEPARTMENT
,r-.\ \ tn\U ',.>'oG'Sz+gtur7 - /4ue 7,y€7 r2o..re- rltS sruaz
.9.-'O tS- 7*e 5iV-4ctgro4a <arnP47/8l€, la.lg ,r'*{
4+o $oa€ 6F 74eT€ SLouq.21r.l," toeog&>,1s are.fu.T
Reviewed by:
Comments:'
Date
RECRTATION DEPARTI'|ENT
Reviewed by:
Corrnents:
Date
FILE o ffiff,,ApplrcATroll FoB
'ARTAN.E
-4_ ry t4 Ot6
FROM THE EAGLE COINTY LAND USE REGULATIONS
(minimurn 2 copies required; print or type, except slgnatures)Chapter II, Sectj-on 2.13.03
AppLICANT Henry H. Haruyama
l1ailing Add.ress 5137 Buckingham Place, Troy, Ml 48098 Phon" . (313) 6\1-9659
/\..,- ^- same as above
If applicant is not owner, furnish evidence of owner's permissi"onto proceed with application.
l. Submit two copies of application, site plan and all relatedinformation on the lst or 15th dav of the month.
2.a. Regulation of Zoning Resolution fr.om which Varlance is sought:b. Section Number (s) 7.06.14 (setbacks)
Present Zone PR - Primary/Secondary
General locatj-on of property (in relation to a Town, Road,Stream or other landmark)
2925 Basingdale Boulevard, West Vail, C0
o.
6.
Legal Description of
a. Subdivision Name
properry
Lot6B1k.8,or,b. [Ietes and bounds (may be attached) include survey or map:
Brief purpose and reason for variance (may be attached):
Attach explanationunder Section 2.L3.
See attached
or more conditions exist as listedthat one03(h)(2).
8. Names and addresses of all adjacent property owners:
See a ttached
?AGE 2
9. Names and addresses of owners and lessees of mineral riEhtson subjeet property:
doh re ertify that the foregoing
ach
Ln
ignat
d nts are true and correct
, and belief.
statements,to the best represent at ions ,of ny know-
3t26t86
Date
FOR OFSICIAL USE ONLY
Received By:
Date
Application accepted as complete for Publ1e Eearing on
Date
Application rejected as incomplete for Publlc Eearing because:
FEE PAID:.RECEIPT NO:
zoNE APPEAL STATEMENT - APPLtCATt0N FoR VARtANCE, EAGLE CoUNTY, C0L0RAD0
3/26/86
Appl icant: Henry H. Maruyama
Var iance requested :
That the proposed residence be allowed to project at the southwest corner
into the front setback a distance of twenty-five feet, and into the
maximum calculated side setback (17* feet) a distance of three feet.(Structure will not violate the basic side setback of l2! feet) .
This variance is being requested because of the unnecessary physical hardship
that would be imposed upon this site by compl iance with the setback requ irements.
The site has three features unique in this neighborhood which have caused this
hardship:
1) The road has been built ten feet or more above the front property I ine.
2) Average slope over the site is 492, with the slope in front of the site
exceeding 7O% near the road,
3) The front property I ine is a minimum of fifteen feet from the road over
most of its length.
These conditions, coupled with the setbacks, serve to place the proposed structure
so far below the road as to cause an extreme access problem. The enclosed draw-
ings show l| fl ights of stairs just to reach the top floor of the building, wi th
the lower floor tenant having to negotiate 3* flights. Without the requested
variance, another nearly full fl ight of stairs will be necessary, and provision
of an attached garage will be impossible.
Other structures in the neighborhood have garages and parking structures tocated
on the property I ine.
It is requested that the variance be approved for the fol Iowing reasons consistent
with section 2.13.03 (h) (2):
a) The strict enforcement of the front setback regulation will result in
pract ical diff iculty and unnecessary phys ical hardship inconsistent
with the objectives of the regulation.
U) fne property in question possesses except ional topography which does
not occur generally to other properties in the same zone district.
c) This variance will have no effect on views from adjacent sites and will
not be detrimental to the publ ic heal th, safety, or wel fare or be mater-
ial ly injurious to properties, uses, or improvements in the vicinity.
It should be noted that Vail zoning regulations allow the pl acement of the garage
on the property line for Ateeply-sloping sites. Prior to the de-annexation of
this property, the y3i1+6J3$I:f€v-ie.* B6ard, on 1/3Q/85, approved the location
of the structure as now being presented to the county. lf this subdivision
returns to the Town of Vail as expected, the positioning of this structure will
aga in meet town requ irements.
APPLICATION FOR ZONING VARIANCE - Eagle County, CO
Applicant: Henry H Maruyama
Property: Lot 6, Block 8, Vail Intermountain Subdivision
Listing of adjacent property owners as of 3/25/86
Block 6
tot f Douglas E and Kathleen S Talbot
Box 825
ArLington Heights, IL 60006
Lot 13 Carolee and Jonathan B Stewart
Box 3586Vail., C0 8165Q
Lot 15 Fred and Elenor Trawoger
Box 177vail, c0 81658
Block 8
Gi*t- Christopher E and Sheila w Sewell
Box 1076
Vail, CO 81658
LotS ElissaLSlauger
Box 8668
Truckee, CA 9573'l
Westridge CondoniniumeUnit I Robert Barrett and John Purcell
549 W Lione Head Mal1
vail, CO 81657
Unit 2 ttillim T tlezwick
Box 2485Vail, CO 81658
Unit 3 James D Deneon
Box 756
Vail , CO 81658
Unit 4 Randy D Burton and Phillip E Robbins
Box 3172
Vail, CO 81658
{Joloqoo
od
UJ
z
UJo
Fat,zoIo
E
ort
|.lt
@
GT'coc)(to
sz
olrJE
oE
el!Ozo(J
(,
e,
lrJzul
L
Lit)
3o!-L)
J
'('t-
|U
-()
E
trruOUctr cEt!E.-!uL(, .- rul!= > .
L . c.l ot) >-S lUt,| o +.r +,l)LT'F L.coo>C|| L+rE oLC{rUlotno. o -.-o > !cr- .- oCLFO|n.-o
t)c
C'a
tu
rua
.|J
:t
E
Oc^C,\OE o.>otco !+.t F (0ce =to\o xc) L(JO@^v)tD {,t-cDo cD o(o.o {Dtr.t o- r! o
(,
@O|
\o(!
EuL(!
=
0, .-.c g o- ol+, O CLC.- o.-$- (,'l +,,O- (,rr,
L--g Eo! -oCll +, :3tc|,1O{t 0,U|E'rrcooCF Io o cl-
+, c o+,cf+,ooo Eo E c+r_LO
- ()- |,o- +, +, co-c o oO- N--o0- L.c.-o(uP tE -C, E>r +,, +,-to - o!E@ +,o O tF---=r -<ii E \---a__,LoCru c,EE 9g*t-
>.<D!L\O Lc l,o
L|n
=o
rD +, o o-j=G l-U|
(JJ!\ :lc c\ cto.- -s
E
uJ
3o
CEoj
G
.L
=
_oChen &Associates
Consultirig Gootechnical Engrneers
96 South Zun'
Deover. Colo.ado
303.744.7 r05
t
ao?23
Casper
Cheyen^e
Colorado Sp.rngs
Clenwood Sprngs
Rock Spftngs
Sall Lake Crly
SIfE SMBILITT EVAUNIrIOI.I
rcR @IISIRT'ErION O[' A PROreED RESIDEI€E
wf 5, BICK 8, \rArL rNlER{OUlrAIN gJBDrVrsroN
EAGrl @OTYIY, @IOR,AM
PREFARD FOR,:
UR. HE.IRY I.IATUn|hIIA
5137 EtKrlrcHnfi PrACts
rnoY, MrcflrceN 48098
PUBLIC lrliiRKS
JOB riD. t 547 86 JUNB 12, 1986
TABLE OF CANTENIS
olrT,usrot6
Pm,rcsB A}tD smPE 0F slltrx
PROPGED @IISIRT'ErION
SrIE AIE g'BS(n'FACE @IDITIOITS
SIOPS STABILTTT AIqL}ISESl'letd of Arnlysis
Existi.ng Stope
Post{onstrucE,ion
Oonstruction hcavation
Tenporary b<cavation Slope Retain4e
REE{iG!DAfIOIiS rcR STTE EICA\IATION rcR roI{DAcIObT @ITSMSCIION
AN) OIEER, ST'PE SXABILTNT @IGIDERACIOIG
FOUNDATION DESIGN RM{MENDACIOI.6
FCIJIDATIoI{ thIJS A,llD REthtNIbG SIRUCruRES
FIOCR SLABTO'|{&ADE
S(NS{N,FAC8 AIID g,RFACE MAIIqGA
EDDTIIO}IAL GEOIECSNIC3L E}EITitsERTTG SER\NCBS
LIl.Tf,ATION
ETG. I - EXISEIIiG STOPE @IDTTIOI€-E}CIEIOED SIOPE
FIG. 2 - EI(ISII}G SIOPB @N)ITIObTS-IC.ALIZED
EIG. 3 - PC'M{STRTJCTION @}DTTIOIi6
FIG. iI - @I{SIRETION EICAT'eTION @iDITIOTS4A.SE T
ETG. 5 - OIr'TRTETION EIC.A\TAIIICN @iI)ITIOIIS<ASB 2
FIG. 5 - @NSFITTION ErcAVAf,ION @IDTTIOTIS<ASE 3
Stc. 7 - @tilSITXfTION EICAI'ACIoN @IDIrIONS{ASE {
APPEIDIX A - PRET.I}IIIqRY GEOTEIIINICAI, SIUW
ABPEIDD( B - GEOI&IC RruNN,trISSAT.c8
I
3
4
5
6
5
7
8
9
t0
il
l4
t5
17
18
r9
r9
Chen&Associates
corg{Elols
(1) The results of our analyses of elope sEabiliEy irdicate the loads ittposea
by the residene after ccnrplet,ion ehould nct cauae a &crea.e in the
existirq slope stability. Gris is nainly drr to the entralized pcition
of the prqosed residen€ in relation to tlle ste€per seglEnt of the over-
all hillsicb frcm the valley bottcm to at least 100 fe€t. in elerration
above the site.
(2) on the basis of ttre aborre results, the resi&nce rnay b fourded wittt
spred footirgs desigrned in rrordane ctith the criteria originally given
in tlre prelirninary geotedurical study ard restated in this report, with
minor npdifications.
(3) stope st$ility wiff be dhini.sbed by excavation for the residenoe four-
datidt @nstr6tion. Our analyses irdicatc factors of tlp safety against
elqe failure of tenporary cuts to the epf,hs required for fourdation
construction in tlE existirg slope wiIL b reduoed bry as mudt as 25t.
oeperding on tjre actrrrl etrerryth of tJre adcaoils, the safety factor could
be l€ss than ore for ertain excamtion georetries, ttereby resultirg in
pesible slqn failure.
Chen&Associates
-2-
({) Constnrction Sxoedures recqnrerded in this report shorild be foUor,Ed co
redrre potentiaf slotrn failures durirg site excavation, fourdatiqr and
m.Il cpnstnr.tion ard s;trrrtural backfiUirq. Slope failures on this ld
cpuld affect rni$boring properties irrcIudirg a pdclic rod ard buried
ucilieies.
Chen&Associates
-3-
P(RPOSE AIID SOPB OF SITJD:T
Ttris report presents the results of sbbility analltes corducted Co
evahnte t}re slop sCabifity c.onditions Prior to, durirg ard follotsiqt con-
struction of a prqosed sirgle-fanily residene at IoC 6, Blod< 8, Vail
Internpuntain Srlcdivision, t€st Vail, E4le Cornty, Colordo. 9b previo'rsly
corduc.ted a pretirninary gededmicaf study for the prqced residene tlder
our Job No. I 358 85, surmarizing our findings ard reccrmendations in a report
dated April 19, 1985. 'tr.tat report is trresented in AFperdix A. t€ also per-
ford a geologic reconnaissane of the eite ard adjrcnt area ard Presentd
our filrti(rgs in a letter datcd May 27, 1986, Job r.lo. I 547 86. that leCter is
presented in Appentlir B.
Ttre slcpe stabifitsy anallees nere @rdr.lcted to develop infonnation on
prefer$le foundation bearirg eleyations ard onstruction proedures to redue
tJre potential for onstn:ction irduced slqe instability of the very steep
natwat slogn. Ttris report tras been pregnred to sr.mrnria tte resulLs of the
anatyses ard to presenc our oorclus ions ard recrcnnerdations. Input data for
tle anallees ere inferred frcm tlre prelirninary subaurfae exploration previ-
otrsly corrtrrted for the prelimirury geotedrnicaf study ard ottair|ed frcrn the
ardritec.tural &awinge ard tlE structural engineer. Desigrr lnraneters ard a
dirussion of geotectrnical ergineering ccrsiderations related to ongtrrrc'tion
of the propcd resi&re qt ttn \tery Eteep natural sloln are included in the
rq)ort.
Chen & Associate;
-4-
PROFo.SED @TIISMUCIION
Ttre proposed residene &sign is basically tlre safiE as it l.as t*|en te
onducied the prelirninary study in 1985. ltre bagic propced const.ruction
featrres are discr.rssed in the preliminary reporc, APPerdix A-
Bqildirq loads have beei supplied to r,13 b1l tlE structural engineer for
u€E in otrr stability ana-tyses. tte st{Erstnrcture loads will be applied to
tle foqndation soils via ontinuous gra& bean foundatio walls ard spread
footirqs in ssre areilt aId throrgh olta1s witlr irdividual spred fod'irgs in
other areas. Belor-gra& fotndatioo nalls si}I be desiged to resist tlE lat-
eral earth pressure exerted on the qhill sides of tte Ha-Us. the sqErst'rur
ture loads on cortinuous foundation m.lls range frcnr aSproximately I to
2.5 kips per linear fod. Irdividuat o\wt toads rarge frcro 12 to 25 kips.
lte rei$rt of tlc @ncrete forrrdatiqr ElLs ard spred footirgs Fre also
ad&d to the srperstructure loads to &rre1q the tda.f lods on the slope for
the stabiliQz analyses.
Ihe stsSility arEtyses arrl resultant conclusions ard recqnrendations are
based on the buifdirg fu|gr ard gtrgc.lural lods provided to us ilay 23, 1985.
If the &sign or lods vary significantly frcm tte infonnation provided to tlse
t€ should b notified to reevaluate our analleeer reccrmErdatiolr3 ant
conclusions.
Chen&Associates
-5-
SIIB AIID g'8S(RFACB @bDITIOiIS
A description of tlre topographic corditions of the lc't ard djacent rod-
hq/ ard the subeurfc conditions encprntered in preliminary exploratory
borings are lxesented in tne prelfunirnry report, Apperdix A. l€ returned tso
the site on lrlay 17, 1986, to observe onditions qt tle site ard adjaent
areas. ldditional information relative to tle geologic orditions in the area
are presented in the geologic recpruraisaane for lrt 6, Bloclc 8 presented in
the letter in Aperdir B.
Ttre naturat soils ernuntered in tne preliruinany sr$surfrte erploration
onducted at tte site @nsist€d of nedir,m &ne to &ne, siltlr to clayey
gravel rrith erratic arcunts of cobbles ard boulders. A Edge of silty to
clayey gravel firr sns encorntered orrerlying tle natural soils at tle road
slpul&r.
Itrree piezoreters r€re irstalled in tlE prelfuninary exploratory borirgs
to nonitor potentiat grourd*ter levels at varyirg deptlts. lltn piezoneters
consisted of plastic pipe, perforated aC the various lenelg irrlicated on
Fig. 2 in Apperdix A. Gror.ud Fter ma nd encor.rntered in tJn borirgs at the
t,inE of drillirg, April I ard 2, 1985. tte piezoders Fre st$oegently
neasured cr llay 7, 1985 ard !,lay 28, 1986. Grourd €ter eras erpountered in
8ol€ I at a depth of 48 feet on llay 7, 1985 ard a &pth of 52 feet on llay 28,
1986. ltc cther piezders ere dry to tlE d€pth to *lidl tfEy $sre oolF
structed on all of ttse dates.
Chen&Associates
o
-6-
SIIPB SMBILIIY AI{ALYSES
Itre slcpe stability analyses rere orducted for t}ree general corditions.
Ihe* are: (1) exiseirg elope conditionsl (2) post<pnstruction corrclitions,
ircludirq loads inpoeed by the residerri ard' (3) cordicions during @nstruc-
tion r$en excavations are rna& for tle fourdatian elqrentg. For tte cordi-
tions durirg construction, four ca,*s Fre anafyzed with eadr case varyirg in
tte excavation gecrretry att/or tesporary slope retaining sderres.
uethod of Analwis: Itre slqe st$ilitt/ for the aborre orditions tas aralyzed
using tln finit equifibrirrn proedure. Gris prooedure calcuLate a factor of
safeQr rrllidr is the ratio of tlre resist,irg fores to the drivirg fores along
an analyzed surfc. Ite drivirg foroes result frcrn tle eight of tte soil
mass arrl in the case of post-cronstnrction orditions, the furyosea brifding
lods deperdirg qr tte relatirrc pciticr of the- Ioad3 with reslEct to tttg
orrerall nrass balane of the slo1n. !trre resistirg foroes are dtieved b'y tlE
shear strength of the soils along tne analyzed surfc. ResisEing forces are
reduced by gror.nr&nater presrsure d.ing qr the anafyzed surface below tle
grotnd*ter t$le. A factor of safety greater than ore fuplies ttre slope is
st&l€ for the anafyzed alqe gdry, eoil strerqrth' ard grourd*ter
oorditiorc.
Sine tlre ir?nt, data on the solL strengrths ard grourd-rrater oorditions
6re very limitd drre to only havlrq @ducted a prelininary subsurfc erplor-
at,ion, the &olute factor of aafety valrng o*afuied frcm t}re stability anafy-
ses are nct highly reliable. lerefore, tlE €rrpha.sis of tlE seability
Chen&Associates
-7-
analyses eas to ocrrpare potcnt.ial drarges in the factor of safety of tlp
existirg sl-ope oorpared witi that of the slope under loads irposed by Che pro-
posed strtrture for pct-ctonsertrction stability considerations. F\or constnre
t.ion corditions, botlt tte derived factors of safety ard dnnges in these
factors rere evaluatcd to judSe tlre @ree of increase in potsentiat slope
instability.
Ttre slqe stabiliQr anallees nere perforned usinq the rcdified BistpP
netlrod of slioes for anatyzirg circular surfcs. Etis prooedure is rcdel€d
in the onpft€r progran GEGITPE based on tlre progran SnB[,3 developed at
Purdrr &riversity un&r the sponsorship of the Fte&ral Highray Afujnistration.
Irpltt' Fraeters ensisted of the grornd surface slqe gecnetsry, grorrd-rnter
t$le surfc aecretry, nrcist ard saturated soil urits reights ard soil stear
strergth. ltre progran calcrrlates the factor of safeQr alcg circrrlar surf€res
at various &plEhs arrt latcral positions below the slope. the critical surfe
is &termined by aeardring several trial surfaoes ard calculatirtg the factsor
of safety for eadr ore until tlre lorest factor of safety is ottained. Disctrs-
sion of edr of the ana-fyzed orditions are presented belor.
E<istinq Sto[E: 'Itre existslrg slop ondit,ions are presented on Fig. 1. fte
slcpe gecrctry for ttrie *ction ms gernrated based on the topographic nnp
prepared for tot 6 ard tfE copographic base nap used for geologic mappirg of
Ragid trlass-flasting Proesses for the lbnn of VaiI regnrt. Gte srjcsurfaoe @rF
digiorB strowr on Fig. I cEre inferred frcm surficial geologic corditions ard
prelininary srlcsurfae data fron the exploratory borings drilled for t}te 1985
Chen&Associales
-8-
gectedmical study. Ttre searcfi area for anafyzed surfaces tras limitcd to tlrc
unshaded area, $ore the base boundary only. the lo$est factor of safety
ottained for this cordition is stprn on Fig. l.
Figure 2 presents $e slope in ttE irmEdiate proximiQr of tle building
site at a larger scale. Gre safety fac'tors derived for the six analyzed
surfc sho$r on ?i,g- 2 irdicate tlat, th safety factor increases as the
analyred eurfre becqes deeper. ltre results of the slcpe etability aralyses
for tte ordltions strosr on FLg. 2 irdicate tlE anafyzed surfrc with loter
fetors of safety are @n€nfrated in an area occurrirg betreen tlle rodtay
aborae Lot 6 to slightly dornslope of the slope drange fuwediatefy below the
prqced residene. Therefore, furtlrer ana-lysis of the renaining sditions
rns oonentratd in this area.
Irost{onstnrction: Figure 3 presents the existing elope gecretry wit}t the
loads irposed by tle resi&rc. Ttre irdividual cpfu,trn lods rere onverted to
line loads by di*f,ifilting the olurn loads aroes tie distances betseen
oltwts for tlre purpces of appJ.icatiqr to tle slotrn sCability anatlees. Ihe
lods rere applieil to the existing grord surf&€ to derirre t}te potentialfy
lorcgt factor of safety. Brterdirq thee loads bele the sloln surfc totrld
reault in higher factors of safety drre to elirninating shalldter Potertial
failure surfrc ard drivirg the critsical failure surfrc to a greater @th
c,tEre faccors of safetyr lncrease wittr increa.eing dePth. Siroe t}e results of
inpcing ttE lods * ttE groqrd surfa€ did not decrea.* tte factors of
safety belon ttpse ottained for the elisCing sloln orditions' further
Chen&Associates
-9-
analysis of the slcpe stability wittr the lods furposed at scnre depth belol t}re
grourd surfae is not considered necessary.
Ccrqnrison of the analysis for tlre po€ts-<rorxrtruct,ion corditions with ttrat
of the existing slotrn conditions irdicate a slight irrcreae in factors of
safeQr as a result of lodirq ttre slcpe with the residene. frese oorditions
are dtr to tte relatively entralized position of the resi&ne on the steelEr
or rore critical sect,ion of t.tre hiU.side with resSnct to elope stability. If
tJe residene hd been positioned m tte tqr of tle steep slope segrent,, the
imposed lods cpuld have trxobably resulted in a decrease in the factor of
safeQr against slope failure. In corclusion, tte results of our analyses
irdicate the loads irposed by the residence after ocnpletion should not, c'ause
a decrease in the existirg slope instability.
Constluct.ion Hccavation: As a result of excavatirg for foundation elenents
ant de to CtF presen€ of tte netastable redge of road fill at the tq of the
lct., tJrcre will be a reduct.ion of ttre faqEors of safety 4ainst localized
sJ.otrn failure during oonstruction. Potential slope failures could exterd inEo
the existirg rodny at the t p of toE 5. ftrerefore, various slope georetries
creatd try rcsibl,e foundation excavations tas analyzed. In ddition, terqn-
rary slogn retainqe by leans of tieback m.lls ms analyzed.
Figures 4 through 6 lresent caseg of rnretained excavatiqr corditions-
Figure 4 is a case rlrere the entire buifdirq area is excavated to tlre narious
foditg levels witlr internediate riser slopes beten foc'ling levels corr
strained Laterally in order to not urdermine the djacent, uFtrr lerrel
Chen&Associates
- l0 -
foocirgs. tris proedure rpuld result irr tqo riser slqrs approxima@Iy
I feet, hi$r at abouE 0.7:l (horizontsal to vertical) ard a 30-foot high l:l
slqe daylighting ac the existing rod stpulder. Figures 5 ad 6 represent
slop geoetries created by first excavatirg for tle forxdations qr tle locPr
part of the slqe, curstructing t}ese for.nrdation elenent-s ad baclcfilling the
for.rrdation nalls prior to excavatirg for the fotndations m tle tpper part of
the slqn. Ilre rier slc;ns created during ttris st4ed ercavation lxooess
Here assuned to be l:l (horizontal to vertical) for tle Furpooe of analysis.
Ihese l: t slopes spuld be rp to 25 ard 30 feet high for the loer ard q4nr
excavations, repecE,ively. A steeper riser slotrn for ttre loer excavation nas
also analyzed. its shosn on Fig. 5.
The results of anallees on rrrretained excavation slq=s irdicate a &-
crearn in ttE fac.tor of safety of tle existirg slope by as muctt a,s 251. In
addition, assrmirg relatively r^nconservative soil strergrtl pa.ranreters' the
fac.Eors of safety for tte unretained excavation slops are calculated to be
aprorimately orE. lEprefore, if the 4lrral soil strengttt ie Legs than tlat
used in tJe ana-l1ees, slog= failure of onstrustion excavations rpuld be rllcre
probable. As a result of otrr analyses of the lresible excavation orditions,
precaut,ions rnst be talen during onstruc€ion to redrp ttE poterGial for
slotrn failures during eite excavation ard footing ard rral1 onstruction prior
to backfilling.
TerrE|oranr Eccavation Sle ReEainae: In order to ercavate for the rrarious
footing lerngls ard redrre the extent of excavation arrt focalized sloln failure
Chen&Associates
- 1l -
potential of the er<cavated slopes, these slcpes ould be tenporarily retained
durirg @nstrucE.ion of tte concret€ fod'irgs ard earth retainirg fourdation
F}b. An androred or tieback rall could be used to bra.e the excavations
rtrile allowing an unrestric€ed rorking area in fronE of tte retaining waU.
Figure 7 presents tJre results of an analysis for brcing the slope abwe
an excavatd bendr for tte cpntinrrous fourdation salls. In tllis cae' it
rpuld be tE€ssrrry for tlre tieback Elt to proride 5,000 totJrds Fr Lirear
foct of restrairt irNctined downmrd into ttE slop at an angle of 30' frcro tlre
horizontal. fBris rculd inprorre the rnretairrd slo[le stabifiqt oniitions
presented on Fig. 4 ard eliminate the necessiQz of onstructing a l:1 slotrn
30 feet high. For the case stpr*n on Fig. 7, tlrc factor of safety rculd only
be redrd approrinately 5$ or less frqn eristirg corrditsions. ttis is Presrrr
irg tJe tiebacks extemt far enorgh bact( into tlte slo1E to exterd below
potencial failure surfa€s. In addition, tte tiebacks sttould also ex@rd far
encugh into the natural soils to create the required resistane to 5rrll ott.
AU grllort, resistane sttould be adrieved betrird tte hypottetical failure
surfrces.
RUTOGIUAAIOI|S rcR SITB E(CAIIAtrION rcR FOUIDATION @}SIRT'CTICT{
ATD qIAR, S[OP8 SIABII,IIY @IISIDERAtrIOI.IS
t€ strorgly reccnrrerd s6ncia-l lxecautions be taken at tJE tile of oe
stnrtiql to redrre tln potential for slope failures as a resrrlt of excavation
for the fourdations of the residence ard associated structures. |Erig is based
Chen&Associates
-12-
on ttE results of orJr analyees as discussed in the preceding sect.ion, tte site
rcs @nstraincs, ard our general erperiene in steep ncuntainous area-s
arourd the vail vaUey.
lhe extert of r.nretained exczrvatioru; durrrg onstnrct,ion shoufd be linF
ited. trb reccnnrerd tenporary r.nrretained crrts in tte natural slogn nct exeed
a maximun rertical height of 5 feet. IC nray be possible to @nstruct. srdl
slolns at argles as ste€p as 0.5:l (horizonta.l to vertical) in the grannl:;
soils if the slopes are carefully nonitored during @natruction ard onstrue
tion proeeds r4ridly sudr that thee types of slopes do nct remain expoed
for npre than a ferr days at a tire. Aplication of gunite or shotcrete to tlE
slop fc nray also be &sirable to preeent ravellirg of tfE granular soil
particles frcm the fae of the slqe. trretained fill slcpes up to 5 vertical
feet rnay be terqorarily onstructed for a@ess ard rcrkirg area purposes.
Tenpes6ly urretained crts q) to l0 feet in vertical height can be con-
structed for limited lateral extcnt irrGs tle slqe. 9ts strongly recqmerd
the lateral ertent of qrtg exeeding 5 feet high be restricted to less tJtan
20 feet. Similar rrcnitorirg ard treatsnent of thee tsqorary slope fcs
should b provided as diecussed above. bocirlgs ard rnlls stpuld be on-
struct€d within thee laterally linitcd excavations ard brl<filled prior to
excavatirrg the rext eec.tion. Iateral liraits of excavation will aid sloPe
stabifity drn to ardrirtg effects. It will also decrea,e tle etftenE of danaqe
in the esent of a slqe failure.
Chen&Associates
- 13 -
Excavation retainage ard backfillirg of ralls should proeed frcrn tle
lorest elevations to the r4per elevations of the slop. Special precautions
in design ard @nstruction should be taken to not, urdermine tle existirg road
fill ta area. the additional eurdrarge of ttris oversteelEned slope ard the
relat.ively poor strerqti of tlre fill nateriale oould result in nrcre criticaL
conditions tlran for excavations or;er the renainder of the site.
We strongly rec.cnnerd onsideration be given to t€mporary retainage of
tle excavation slopes by a tiebad< rall systsen, particularly funediately dotm-
slope of the existing road fill vedge to inprove stability of that parts of the
slqe. the constructabifity ard associated ccts for tsenqnrary retainage
s)rstsrc stpuld be discussed with a speciality contrdor experiened with this
type of onstruction.
Precautions $pufd b taken to prc'tect denslcpe property frcrn mterials
rerncved frcrn the excavation, especially rollirg cobbles ard boul&rs. Otler
cronstruction precautions ard &sign corrsiderations presented in eppsrdil g
should be implenerted.
Grqrd rater is nd articipat€d to be a problem in tlE excavation' pa.r-
t,icularly in tlE sumer ard fall. Itris i.s bas€d qr the grourxl*ater condi-
tions enoountered in tlre exploraEory borings. Hot€ver, if eat€r seelrage is
ercormtered in any of the erca\rErtions, it t€uld irdicate tle presene of
saturated soils nct rerrnted for ln our analyses. ttis rmuld increase slotrn
failure risk. If ceg4e is oberyealr €fcrvation shoufd be ternfuutd ard
oorditlons erraluated lnrediately b1r tlE geotedtnicaf ergineer.
Chen &Associates
- 14 -
Ff,I,JNDXTICI.I DESIGN REOO.II.IENDATTOtIS
Discrrssion of considerations given to selection of ttre foundation syst€rn
for tte propced regi&ne is presented in Apperdix e. As a result of tie
foregoirg stabilitsy anallees, tlre preli.minary fourdation design ard recqr
nendations harrc been reviet'ed ard rrpdified vtcre appropriate ard are presented
belor.
( t ) Ttre residene Btpuld be founiled with spred foctings placed on udis-
turbed natwal soils and,/or goperly cupacted struciural fill- tte
stsrtrctural fill should onsist of nonexpansive granular soils similar to
the on*ite natrrral soils, exc€Ft rocks orrer 8 indres in dianeter.
corpaccd fill plaoeil to sqfprc t}re fod.irgs should be capacted to 98t
standard Proctor naxinn dry &nsity wittrin 3t of optfunm rpisture
c.ontent.
(2) Footirgs plaoed on tlre undisturbed natural soils ardlor prolnrly ccrr
pacted fill may b desiged for an allowable soil bearirg lxessure of
3,O00 psf. An eroegtion to this allorabf€ baring lxessure is for piers
supporcing tle sorrtlr erd of the bridge dec* tttidl tnay be desiged for an
allomble soil bearirg lressure of 41000 psf. Ttris is provided t}te mini-
mrn bearirg depth ard foot,irg di.mnsions presented belon are net.
(3) t.or the residene, epred footirge pfaoed on the granular soils should
have a minimn wldttr of 18 indres for continuous footings ard 24 indtes
for ods. Bcterior footings sfpuld be a minimum of 4 feet ard interior
Chen &Associates
(4)
- t5 -
footirrys should be a minirnun of 2 feet belor the finished grourd surface
for fr6t protectim ard bearirg capacity cpnsiderations. tte bridge
pier footings should exterd a minimum of 4 feet belor the finished grourd
eurfrc. All of thee minim.m deptls apply to the side of fod.ings
nearest the sloln face.
the lateral resistance of tJre spred footirgs pfaced on the rrdisturbed
natural soils ard proprly ccnrpacled fill will be a condcinatiqt of
slidirg resistane of the footings on the fourdation soils ard lassive
earth pressure against tle sides of the footings. Sliding fri<t,ict at
the bdto.n of the footings can be taken as 0.4 tires the vertical &d
load. Passive pressure against tle sides of foot.ings can be calcuLated
using an equivalent, fluid reight of 150 pcf. [tis is based qt the
existirg 30' slope. Passirre resistane slpuld be ignord in tle tryper
2 feet.
Cqpacted fill placed against the sides of fodings to resist
lateral lods should be a nonexpansive, granular soil similar to ttE on-
gite soits. FilLs should be placed ard cqrpacted to at least, 95t of the
rnaxirnrn standard ProsEor density to resist lateral loads.
Bridge piers nay be designed to resiet lat€ral lods by using a constant
of horizontal subgra& reacE,ion of 40 ccf for the portion of the pier
peretrating natural soils.
Oortiruous fourdation rnUs stpuld be reinfored top ant bdtdn to span
an unsqplnrtd length of at least l0 feet.
(s)
(6)
Chen&Associates
(7)
(8)
-15-
Care slpuld be taken stren excavating near fod.irg bearirg elevation to
arroid distsurbance of supportsirg rmterials.
Areag of loce or disturH soils erpuntered within the fourdation erca-
vation should be rermved ad tlE footings exterded to adequate natural
bearirg nraterial. As an alternative, the loce nrateri"al can be repLaced
with proprly copacted fill as &scribed above.
Granular fourdation soils strould be ccrpacfed wittr a gooth vibratory
pfate copactor prior to plrerent of ooncrete.
FIXJT.DATION t'ALI.s AIID RSBINI}€ SIROCAT,RES
Foundation qalls ard retainirg structures constructed at the site may be
designed for a lateral eartJr pressure carpueed on tte basis of an eqtrivalent
fluid unit reight of 70 pcf for tie ontite or gimilar type granuJar soils.
Itris vaIE includes tle approxinately 30" sloge for backfilf upsfope of the
eaffs. Itre valre of 45 frt can be used for lateral lods on tlE souttt erd of
the bridge decl< adjcnt to tle road. Ccntpacted filt shor:ld be pl*ed in
front of the €ffs to regrde tlc arourd surface in the crawl slnce of the
resi&ne ard exterior slolns on tte sides of ard bela the reslderc to rnar
tln eristing natural elo1le @nfiguration.
fltn quivalent fluid [ressure girren above is for drained baclditl ard
does nd irrfu# hlitrctatic pressure. Surdrarge pressures dtn to artificial
Ioads eudr as traffic, hrilding loads of r4per level footirtgs ard onstnrtion
mteriaLs or equitrcnt strould be added, as aSpropriate, to tlE lateral
(e)
Ctren & Associates
-17-
pressure. Itre coefficient of at rest earth pressure used to @nvert tlrese
Ioads to lateral loads should be 0.50.
t{e resnrerd a retaining roll be prwided rear the WhiU side of the
resi&ne rtridr wiII allon regradrrg of the exist,ing road fill slope to an
argle nct exeedirg 30'. Care should be talten to not overccnpact, backf ill
placed behird retaining stru(tures as this will ircrea,e la@ral pressures on
tJre ralfs. BackfiU plaed behird mlls r*ridr will not b carrying fourdation
or floor slab loads strould b ccupacted to * least 95t standard Proctor den'-
sity rear opt.funrm noistsure @ftterrt,. Otherwise, the filf should be ocnpactea
to the degree recrcrnrerded in the Fomdation tEsign Reccrrendations arrl Floor
Slab-on{rade sections. DcEerior backfill rttidr does not, have to provide
passirre resistane or rtridr will nct b directly srportirg foctirgs or sulc-
ject. to seresses furpced by the stnrcEure or other surdrarge lods shottld be
ccnrpacted to at least 90t standard Pro<tor density.
FItrR SIAB.OiK,hDE
we un&rstarr:l tlre soutlrern parE of tlre lmst floor Lerrel will onsist of
a oorcrete slabongrade btreen foqndatim ra.lfs ad Gridliles G ald K. It
is desired to tie the slab futo the top of t}re wall qr Gridline X. :[nis will
.result in a potential for crackirg of the glab drr to settlement of the under-
slab fill. fbrmally slabe are separated frcnr rmlls by a oonstnrction joint to
allon freedcrn of rrertical rrp\tentrrt to redrn tte potential for cracking. Dtr
to the connection of the slab with tlre rnII, t}re 811 bacldill belon ttte slab
Chen&Associatq;
-t8-
areas should be ocrqpacf.ed to 98t stardard Proctor na(iJnrm dry &nsity within
3f of optimrm noisture oontent.
A {-irdr layer of freedraining sartl or gravel should be pfaced beneat}r
the floor slab ard connected with an rur&rdrain lire as degcribed in the next,
s€ction. *ris mat€rial should crntain legs than 5$ passing tne No. 200 sieve.
STJBSURFACE AID STJRFACE DRATIWE
Eadr fourdat.ion level strould be prorrided with an urderdrain placed at tie
bae of tle excavat.ion. ltE uribrdrain should onsist of 4-indt perforated
pipe surrotrrded by a minim[t of 6 indres of I l/2-indt gravel rhidr is
separated frcnr the bactcfill soifs by a perneable filter fabric. Tbese drains
stpuld slqn to sr.qrs rtrere Eter can be renrorred by 1rrrping or graviQr flcrr to
a daylightd outlet dwrslope of t}E resi&ne. Disdnrge of un&rdrains on
tle slqe stpuld be cqrtrolled to lrevent ercion or affect, neighborirg prq
erti.es. ltp* un&rdrains are a protective fie€rsure to redtc potential for
irtermittent{ perdred grorld r€ter to &velq behirrt t}E EIls. Drainage
provisions should also be ma& for any exterior retaining mlls.
Exessirre rettirtg or dryirg of the fordation excavationa should be
arrcided during oonstnrction. TtE grolrl lrurf.re surroundirg tste extserior of
tle residene should be sloped to drain aray fran the foundacion in all direc-
tions. Itris is especially ftqlortfic qr tle uphiff side of tle residene.
Roof dwrspouta ard drains stpuld diedurge eII beyord the lhits of aII
bacl<fitl.
Chen&Associate;
-19-
ADDITtOtqL @IECHNICAI, EIGI}AERTIG SERS/TCES
Durirg construction, r€ reconrErd that obsewation ard testirg of geo.-
tedrrical relatd onstructiqr activities be provided by a representatirc of
Chen & Associates, Inc., to see that the recqnrerdations presented in this
report ard criteria in tle specifications related to foundation cronstruction
are adrieved. Grese eervies include nonitorirg of excavations, evaluation of
bearirrg rnaterials, bacldill rnaterial approval ard fill ccnpactioo testirg.
Ttre ged.edurical ergirner should also revien proposea tsieback retainirq design
for ue at the site prior to canstruccion.
If acess can be established for a drillirg rig at or near the lot€se
foundation level on the site, dditional subsurfae exploration should be cor
dud€d in order to irrrease the conf idenoe level of assr,nptionst on ttte subsur-
fae orditiorrs used in the stabifiEy analyses. If oorditions are encountered
by addieional exploration *ridr irdicate substantially different oorditions
than rere erployed in the analyEical nodel, the sIoF stabiliLy analltses
stpuld be reevaltnted.
LIIIITMIOIiS
fhis report tras been prelnred il acprdane wit} gereralfy ryted gee
tednrical engineerirg practic€ in tiis area for use by the client for design
pu4r6es. Tlre onclusions ard recqnrerdations suhnitted in ttris report are
based rpon limited data obtained frco preliminary exploratory borirgs drilled
Chcn&Associates
-20-
imediately ,'trslope of lot 6 as irdicated on Fig. I of Apperdix A. the nature
ard extcnt of subsurfae variations crGs Cte site may not becqre evi&nt
until excavation ard/or further srtsurface exploration is orducted. If dur-
irg construction, fill, soil, rock or Fter cpnditions ap[Ear to be different
frcm tlree &scribed in this report thia office should be dvised at onc€ so
reevaluation of reccnuerdations nray be nade.
this hrildirg sitc irtrerently [Esesses a higher @ree of risk of slqn
failure related proble(B ttran construction on grentl.er slolrs. R.e€d qr our
tnowledge of tle srtsurface oorditions ard the results of the slqe stabiliqt
analyses, r* belierre it is tedrrrically feasible to ere(t a residere qr the
site witJtout an increased risk of slope instability above that r*ridl previ-
ously existed at tle site. Eorever, tle owner must be anare of ard cept tne
relat,ively higher risks of slo6n insttbility for oonsCruction on t}te very
steep slope.
cflEN & ASS€rATES, ItC.
Marc{s J. Pardi, P.E.
Reviered By
Barold Eollingsrcrth, Jr., P.B.
ILIP/e*oc: Crorrthers Ardritects Grotrp
KKEIqAttn: Mr. David Ar,stin or llr. tbrran Kirk
Chen&Associa(es
o
!-
-.ul
(ltrJ) ilvti riitrljir lyrttrSi ^rvultr!v
o
oo
x9;3
?q>:.'
=:
<t
o
:
;
t
t
=
a
a
t
-
IIta
€
o
o
o
F
o
(r,ttJ) - x0|rv^tlt
5OlArn
(rltJl llvls ltitrlltf 'rvlrlrl^ lwrrraw
a
2
;_
:
'i
-o
o-6
E,
;&
,z
ta
rt
\b\o
\q\t
aI
;
-
?
=:
2I
t
I
\
\,,
\i". i;
5.:3 .l38.' !e-:--Y
o
!
--c,-!it
A .,t
(r3tj) ttvl3 ttr tJtt 'tv, I trtl ^tvtttaw
:
-
( rllJ ) - No r lv^l t!
I
::
3\
| (.'LL-----34-
)
(i
\?\3
\-o\i\i
o
1>6;
I
(lllJl I1YJS tlituiltr lvftlrl^ rwtlraltv
,
?
9
,
:
)
-
?
e
-
a
a
3
C
t
€eII
u
a
=
{rllJ) - ||0rlv^!1t
E
i;I
,'o"
\'"
ili
;\"x\9r \e.i\1
c
o
t
.E
g
E
0
)
a
t
t
.:
'=
co
a.
o
t
o
o
o
(rttJt !]Y:s llrltlJlt lvlrtll Afytt t tty
,o
-o
t
t
2o
E2
!
a
I--
o
2
3
I
5I
I
53
-
3!
-
=os;
tr
(rt3J) - N0rlt^tll
T
I
I
I
IL
i
rr\.\i\b\i
.:
;
o
g
.E
g
I
\\\
-_-_-\\
\\\
It-r-----f| "lI tlI ctui :iI a-L----r-1iF
3
a9
=
!
9
t
a
a
t
-
-tt
F:
t:
It
f
:"1d:
eqF;
:
i'r
:
oo
( 1l tJ) - N0r wit lt
T
I
I
I
It_
o
3
.t
o
t
D
o
C
:
'lt
\z
\o-
I
o
(l!!Jl llvls llfrlrijtr 'rvlrlrli lwrrrltv
:
t
a
F
a
a
t
a
Flr,6!frnJ
u,
(J
L,L'tllr-,XLJ9l!
OE
2oN
d.
3I:t &,
4:toc,
oN
t'\
o'
:oco
c
q)
(J
u
Lq,
Lo
ru
(133J ) 3'lvls 3li.t3u3J3u lvil IUlA AUVU! 8UV
c)
o
o(+-
1Ue.
c
q)!-C'O'oufl^
OP
oo[,(,!- l-oo
oottLoo4q)
-\
'.t______
o
'J\o\
ul-o11ulizoL)lotl.l2 i_|,/|ltrt IFOOi<L- |(Jor, -OGIrJJCG
l!olJ2<JEOE€-<t th
o
(Jz
F./l
)<
9
C)
u
o{,
oru
o
@
ll
u
q)
o
t-o
oo
o
0)
.3
0)Uo
L
oN
a!c
J< tJ1
-F
=v,JC)JO-ol!
t
O!rc\t '-ooLCL
o.-tD -cE+,
c)
4o
L(,
0)\
\t'"\"
>\,
\""
'- \ge\'
\."!; \"'*
r3lj - N0|Ml]l
zIF
ze
l!
z,d,
F
=:
oo_7/
1t i\"o
\'--\""\."
\e\'t
\".
\ "e,\L
o
c)
o|J
-q)<.|/|'tr,rrUL-ClU +J+roq,E'9oo
TE
.-ooan ttoF6'ou.-x>o:-
q(J
(a-Io
ll
3Oltt
:trt
oul
oz
o
ll
act
1't
C2
oo
!llU
oL
o
oa
t
Co
.:t-
oc
{,
.:
o
o
orc
g
CL
o
I
g
.9
.11Eo(J
.
I
I
.ft-9
F
Cl lrlZGoct
gt
LJGCtotlJOttt
ta,gFzx
-lJFtt
)<rrl
=o
2
a)@:f
-
F-=0aIlri
-
e
€
v,(Jo
6
\o
FoJ
l!(J
2,t!
3
attlr,oc
T
:fc
E
{
e
T
L)
rCo
+
oo
FtrJurlr
IJJrJt\<GI (Jtn
t!(J-lrJG
l!O lr,r'\g
2o!4orn-6t6t>E
cF
.D4
ooG.
(\T
orl\oF
(r]3J) - N0l1VA3'13
o
(!(I
tl
U-
OtF\
tl
lt
c\I\o-+
tltt1t!
$
ll
lJ-
N
tv,
-T
I
ort\CrN
|rJ
2.|r,
3rnlJ- lrJ Iod iI2.6 |o rr, i-uA IFO I<o- I'Jo Ioc. IJG !
-_J
L_
t!(J
l,l-&,:)
oz
o
<5
a3z
F2
><
(tr
\o
tli
)
Arnlr,, tr,N(J
Jl!<dz,)<0
l,
E
'+
tuuo
L3U|
o
E
0rc.Oo-.t'o.^
Fo
FoO
oUExtrL0, r.Fo>!!iu{rtJL'!(,QtLr- L
il,
a-.l(
lz
(uir->
t,cooq)
e-
o.-
40o
L-COrJ
O.J
=o
o
9"
[n
\',
\q
H
(rr3J) 3'lvts txN3u3J3u'lvlr.ruSA AUVUJ.rsuv
6lr,:J
.Jo
I
-o
F
oao(J
ll,!oJ
(5
=tl
xt!
-Itt
;@Dtt,
-
F-l
?tt!
-
-e
o
Y(JoJ6
{t
FoJ
t!L'-]Ue
ar|lr,c.
-
=t
=
Flrit!lt
lrJ !J
(Jtt
ut(J-t4,c,t!1!t!c,
-oN
alor,\!na(\G
G,F
Ee
F-GI
or
ooor\
N
rtlr - N0llvAS'I3
\o lt'lor\
ou-<
'|loe&)O ttr
(Jz
F
x
trJ
o
oe
6l
crl
orfro1l\,
Lo
:co
CLLq)
r-C(ootu .-
Ctt.-u
-9t-ooO- .J
3
<foo
J
T'a!
o
3o
o
oL
oU
(J
@.+
tltt',t!
>
l'r
It/,lt
q'\
Ivtl!
o
F"
\i
\'u
\e
(13lJ) r'rvts 3lNlu3J3u 'lv3tru3A AUVU!gtV
l
t^-o
E
CI-ct(J
-I
=Fr/,2(fc,
I
F.aoL
-9tt
;6
z,
F--o-&,ulF
=J
@xr-!€t
6
\o
FoJ
t!IJ-IrlI
IrJe
-
&,
:
€
EIT()
rO@
-t
rt\
(\,1
FUJ
l4Jl!
trJ(Jztr,loau,ll!l,c.
-o!4o-
&
t
=6e
(rr3J) - Nouv^3'tj
ro
IJ\@t\
(131J) tlvls t1N3u3J3U 'lV3u.U3A. AUVUilSUV
x
0)
!-oo
0)l-
o{.)
Ea,'.J(:
L+,
-|.,1)-oL
|/lc
-!o
!,/ .- LuqJo<4e-
(.}
=
th
xlrJ
\
\
IJ\oo
tl
t!
c\r\
c\.9\
;
OLuoXt!qJ >'(,tl L.-orr|,,lEo>J E-t,OO.|,(rc\< sto
\
t\
\\
o
tltJ',lr.
OrGI
".:
lt
lr-
-f
tl
!s
rl-
\ott\o
9rq,u
T'
c,E
+Na:
tl
t!
.t
tl
!t
\o\o6
o
o
q)o
o
9a
\i"\'
\;\""
\:
\E\L
$7
\'>\-o
-f
i
tt'l2I
F
ct-o.J
-o
>llt<6(J<xrJl!
-9
tcFtn-oIJ
232
66
=ttl
2
F-De-.OEtalF2
J
@
vt)o
6
\o
oJ
l!c,-talo
t!G
t
:fc,
=
{
E
TU
rOo
J
Ft!
UJlr.
|JJ
(Jrn
LJ(,-t!&lU|!l!e
J
-oN
&o-
G
cF
o&
N
rt\ht\'
lt\N(.'l
ooa\
(1!3J) llvls 3tNtU3J3U lvltJ.3A AUVSLt€UV
j
(13lJ) - N0|1VA3r3
o
xo
tu
o
c)
!.ocrro
r-(.j|(^f(D r-l-P
eo
9)oo4||
o
q
ru
2
o\z\>\orad L)'t(5<
l!-eFz=
F
)<lr,
|.\ooc{
r----
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
IL_
(\l
rn
<F\
(\
o
(r
\"
i\r
.: \*,
E* Y't
oco
L
(u
I
oq)
q,
a)
o
oIxc)
!o
q
ul
oo
o
5
\
\
u
L
CJ
o
o.
ruo
o
0)
()uo
L
!ruN
o
o
o6-
c
!Jc'lcoEU
E
.9
E
]
Nq1
01
o
o
oL
Ctl
rts
oU
to
CL
:tu
Lo
t/,u
oEP
Lruoc){,
lo
(u
o,o
!n
L
C\(
o
tl
l!
o
I
-IF
cr2oIJ
-o
F",
> L.J< .f,o<XIJtL
-I
t4F
ao(J
-o
CI-
-
F-o-?clrJF
=J
4
@
IooJ6
\t)
FoJ
t!L)zl!a
lrJoc,
-
&,
-
€
rC6
{
oo.t
o]n
oo
Ft!tri|!
rn u'l rhe(Jv,
IJZurc,lr'
14.t!xc,(\t J
=o
4or,.tr!l &,
4
=6c,
|\
o
(\I
oo
oocoN
(l-3rr) - N0r1vA313
ro lt\@F\
F.
ooqlF.
T_
I
I
IL_
o|J\o\
t)
-0(t
\9\e
\,
\",\s
\:
\s"\$
)
oco
L
L
q)
Eo(,
c
.Po
ux{,
T'(J
E
o
tltt)rr-
(u3l) 31VlS 3lN3UlllU ]vlllu3A AUVUtlsUv
\o
!
-I
=o-oI
-I
> lrJ< atlrJ<xctrl'|
-9F)cF
-o.J
tIvl
cl@3
-e
-=oiLGtrJF
=J
6
I(JoJo
\o
FoJ
t!
LTz.
3
t^t4
-
=&,
-
€
E
T(J
!O@|\d
oo-?
t\
orn
tN
oo
lJ\NGI
ot'r(\l
IJ\NN
ooN
r.r\t\
ortt
lt\|\.l
oo
Noo(\J
(r3rr; - N0rrv^313
tn@F\
of\
oz.Do
t---t:
I
IL____
oo(\
l!JvItr
(\(\
o
c]
o
(\I
o)\;
\dl
\€\q)\q\$
o
(0t7
0)
9"
t-
1U
6t,g)
c
.9
o
o
oco
L
(,
E
rlJq)
c
o(.)xo
oF
|',l
\
F-C{
tl
lt
a,cou
'ooo
Ju
IE
o.
rFt
'rt{,
E
=u
ou
Lo
t)cx
tU
CD
!'
Lo|+.
c.
6-c.|n
t/|'lruo
L)
o
=u.:
U
arloN
o
o
Ec
3oll
o
'c,{,
a
a)
do
tE
J()ooc)
a)tJCo
Q
q
ruL
tcl
\o
u.n
-#'(J(J<
=u-&F=tt1 u,xlfl
o
(13lJ) 3'tvts t3Nlu313u 'lvlrrulA AUVUII€uv
N
i
tn
=3:o-o(J
-3F{
> L/<1A(J<xolr,
-o
(-,:te
ta-oIJ
-3
;6
vl
=
-=o-&lrJF
=J
€o
rz()oJo
\oFoJ
EJ(J-t!3tt)
trJG
-
=c,
=
€
ETU
io.D
+
,o o
APPENDIX A
PRELltrtr{ARY GEOTECHNICAL STUDY
.-r "?Chen &Associates 3X,i*'.'Lj,illo" ro.., chevenneConsulting G€otochnical Engin€ets 300/744.7105 CotoaOo Springs
Glenwood Springs
Rock Springs
Salt Lake city
PRELII,IIMRY GEOIEUN ICAL SII'DT
PROrcSD SITGLE-FAI.,IILY RESIMNCE
Lr't 6, Bt@K I
VAI L INTERf.{OJItTAIN SUBDIVISIOIII'AIL, @T.oRAM
PREPARED FR:
MR. HE.IRY MAFUYAMA
P.O. mX l1l8
DgImfT, itIClIGAtl 48288
JOB r.to. I 368 85 APRrL 19, 1985
TABLE OF @ITTENTS
@ircl,UsroNs
P{IRPOSE ATiID S@PE OF SIUDf
PROFOSED @IISTRLJCTICII
srrE oiDlTtor{s
SI.tsSURFACE @IIDITIONS
SrcPE STABILITY
PRELIUIMRY FETjNDITIICN RECTX$IENDATIOTIS
RSTAINITG STFI'CTURES N.ID DR.ATI.IIGE @I.ISIERATICNS
ADDITIONAL GM1ECTNICAL EVAI.IJMIOI
FIG. I - T.CATICN OF D(PTDRAIORY flOLES
FIG. 2 - IOGS OF DGT.ORAIDRY H)I.aS LEGEND AIiD IATES
FIG. 3 - GET.IERALIZED CG9-SMTIOi.I
fIG. 4 - GRABTION IEST RESJLTS
TABI.E I . g'MMARY OT' IAFRATDRY TEST RESJLTS
I
2
2
3
3
4
7
I
9
Chen&Associates
OtELUSI0''6
(f) Based on Lhe resul.ts of this preliminary geotechnical study, it should be
Cedrnically feasible to construct the proposed residencre at the site.
Due Eo the \€ry steep slope of the bLrilding siCe. the potential Eor
constructiorFinduced slcpe inseability wilL impce najor constraints upon
desig'n ard corrstruction.
(2) This report presents preliminary &sign ard constnrction recqm€ndations
ard precautions for site develognent. ltp infonnatiqr nay be used for
preliminary design and constnrct.ion ct estimatirg. An additional
geotechnical engineerirg evaluaE.ion should be corducted prior to final
design ard constnrction.
Chen&Associales
-2-
PLRPOSE AI'ID S@PE OF STUDI
This report presents the results of a preliminary geotechnical study for
a propced sirgle-fanily residence to be corstructd at tot 6, Block 8, Vail
Intentpuntain Subdivision, VaiI , Oolorado. Ttre project site is shroqn on
fig. l. The study was conducted in acc-ordance with our propGal to lrtr. Henry
Maruy&na, ourner, daLed Mardr 27, L985.
Ttis report has been prepared to sunmarize the data obtained ard to
present our preliminary corrcIus ions and reccnnendations based on Ehe proposed
corstruction ard ttre subsurface corditions enccunEered. kelfuninary design
paranetel's and a disqrssion of geotechnical engineerirg consi&rations related
to corstnrction of the prcposed residence are included.
PROFOSED O-ISfRUCTION
The propeed res idence r+ill cons ist of a t imber frare sEnrcture. Ihe
propced livirg areas will be on thr"ee levels. Ttre lorer ard middle levels
will be partiall.y cut into the existirp hillside. kesent plans call for
maxinrun cut. depths to be approximately 5 feet beloer the existirg grourd sur-
f ace.
A garqte floor level will be prorrided above the level of the Ehree livirg
area floors. A bridge deck will exterd frqn the garage to the existirg road
on the south side of the lot,.
A generalized cncs-section thrcugh the prcposed residence is shor+n on
Fig. 3. Tttis generalized crcs-section r*as drarm to strcr the approxfunate
relatiorship of the existirg ground sr-rface slcpe, the propGed constnrction,
ard the pcition of one of the exploratory tpl.es. Ttre naxirmm ort depths,
Chen&Associates
-3-
the proposed retainirp wall, and the fill indicated on the cres-section have
been or may be nodif ied durirg desigrn.
SITE ONDITICIIS
The average slee thrcugh the central porcion of the proposed buildirg
site is approximately 30o or 60t. The elevation difference acrGs Ehe
prcposed buildirg siLe frqn Ehe existirg road to the dovrnslcpe blildirg is
appnoximately 45 feet. ExistirB Basirgdale Boulevard occurs irnediately
upslcpe of the lot as shoon on Fig. l. Ttris rod corsists of a cut ard fill
cres-section with qtt on the scr.rth si& ard fill on the north side. The fil.l
slope at the top of the lot is approxinately 40o or 85t.
Ttpre was a fen feet of snory coverirg the site at the tfure of the field
reconnaissance ard exploration drillirg. Serreral trees r"ere grovrirg on the
site. Based on the appearance of the trees, there was no sign of lxesent
slqe instabifity. An oxistirg residence occLrrs at the toe of the \tery steep
slope belovr the propced buildirg site.
SI,ESI'JRFACE OIDITIOIIS
D.E to the very steq) slcpe, it is not possible to place drillirg equip-
nenE on the sloln withcut subtantial gradirg. Therefore' the subsurface
exploration was lfunited to a preliminary progran crorsisLirg of drillirg
exploratory lples at the stroulder of the exist.irg road above the lot. the
a14ro:<irnate locations of the exploratory tples are slpr,n on Fig. l. Gr4hic
Iogs of the borirgs are presented on Fig. 2 along with descriptiorrs of t}te
nraterials enccuntered in the borirgs.
Chen&Associates
-4-
tlole I was drilled to a rnaximun depth of 55 feet belour the level of the
road. Approxirnately I0 feet of silty to clayey gravel fill was errcotrntered
overlying naEural soils. ltre variaEion in vertical ard lateral extent of Che
road fill sas not deEermined by this investigation. Ttre natural soils
encolnterd consist of nedium dense to dense, silty to clayey gravel with
erratic anrcunts of cobbl,es and boul&r's. Similar soils rere encountered in
Hole 2 v*rictr ras drilled to a naximum depth of 19 feeE. f€sults of laboratory
testirg consist.irg of irdex properties are shor"'n on Figs. 2 ard 4, arul
swrlarizd in Table I.
Free grcundwaEer $as not errcqlncered in the exploratory tDles at the t ime
of drillirg. Ihree piezcrneters r"ere insEalled in the exploratory toles to
monitor potential groundwaeer levels at three depths. Ttre piezcnreters corEist
of plastic pipe perforaeed ard sealed with bentoniLe pellets at. the intervals
strcnrn on ttre gn4hic logs, Fig. 2. the elevations of Che piezoreteL's riere
selected to rpnitor vario,rs pcsible groundurater leveLs that tttq/ develop'
especially durirp seasonal nrnoff of snownelt.
SI,OPE SIABIIJTY
fte very ste€p slqe of the
relatively high risk of potential
stnrct,ion considerations mJst be
corEtnrctiorrindrced sLoge fa i lure
the site after constnrction.
br"rilding site ard surrutndirg area has a
slope instabitity. koper design ard cort-
given to this site to reduce the risk of
ard to help maintain lorg'-term stability of
A detailed sl.qe stability investigation is beyord the scQe of this
report. If the project is continued afEer preliminary plannirg ard design, an
Chen&Associates
-5-
additional geotechnical ergineerirg evaluation stpuld be cordwted. bcqn-
nendations for an additional study are disc'r.rssed in a later section of this
report.
ftre follorvirg general guidelines are presented in order that preliminary
plannirg ard design of che site feaEures can be acconplished by the project
designers ard cantractor.
(1) Ac€ss rod ard b.ril.dirg fourdation orcavatiors slptrld be relatively
shallow to redrre the risk of slope instability durirg constnrction. !rt:
recqurerd t€rporary unretained cuts not exceed a rnaximun uertical height
of 5 feet. Tqnporary unretained cuts up to I0 feet, in vertical height
may be possible if the lateral extent of the cut face does not exceed
20 feet. unretained filt slopes up to 5 rrertical feet may be tanporarily
creaLed for access ard v'ork i rg area purposes.
(21 ltle existirg road stpulder fill at the tscp of the site is probably less
st&le than the natural slqe of the site. Ttrerefore, qe recqnrend the
road fill slope ramin undisturbed unless ic is properly retained. It
nny b neessary to cpnstruct an acc€ss road acrcs neighborirg lots. If
sor all of the precautions related to orFsite excavations stpttld be
otsenred for the djacenE sLqes.
(3) If the abo/e tqnporary sl.cpe criteria cannot be achieved' it will be
necessary to tsnprarily retain excavaLed slopes by neans of a tieback or
braced retainirg system.
(4) Excavation, retain4e, ard backfillirg slpuld proceed frqn the lorest
elevations to the uplnr elevations of the slope. Ttris procedure will
Chen&Associates
-5-
rduce the risks of upper level corrs truct ion beconirg undermined by lo^er
level excavation.
( 5 ) Onoe excavations lrave been made, the founda Lion walls should be
constructd, braced ard backfilled, and the slopes graded to final con-
f iguration as ex@itiously as possible. This entire process sftot-tld be
carefully nrcn i tored to warn of potenlial slope fioverent.
(6) Fotential slcpe instability durirg construction of the foundation ard
access road can be reduced by starti.rg ard conpletirg the tork durirg the
relatively dry periods of the year. If groundwater is present at. shallow
depths, excavaLion shouLd not be conducted. ltris condition may be
presenb durirg the sprirg ard early sumer.
(7) Precautions should be taken to protect downslope property frcrn rolling
rocks rsrrcved fron the excavation.
(8) Addi tional design ard construct ion recorurerda t ions presenbed in this
report regardirg foundat ions and surface drainage must be follorrcd to
reduce charges in the slcpe Ioadirp corditions.
Ttre above precautions will reduce the potential for Iarge scale slope
failures. lbrever, they will not eliminate the potential . Ttre orrner should
be ar"rare of the relatively high risk of potential slope failure on the very
steep natural slcpe. Ttre potenEial for slqe instability will probably be the
greatest durirg corstnrction. tong-Lerm sEabilicy of the conpleLed structure
should be conparable to the stability of the existirg slope' if, thror.ryh
design, the slope loadirq ard groundr.rater conditions are not changed
s ign ificantly.
Chen&Associates
-1-
PRELII.I I IIARY FOUNDATIoN RE@|'{}€NDATIOiS
Cons ideration was given to bot h shal" Ior.r ard deep founda t ion systems.
Fep foundation systens such as driven piles ard drilled piers have the
advantage of trarsferrirg the buildirq lods to deep levels in the slope. In
this nranner, stability of the slope wilL generally be increased. Itre degree
of increase of slope stability r.ould need to be evaluated by a slope stability
analysis.
Die to the presenc€ of borlders in the subsoils, drilled piers rould be
nore difficult to construct than driven pi1es. PiIe drivirg eguignent and
access *culd be difficult to provide on the sEeep naLural slcpe ard the narloot
existirq public road. The vibrat.ions of pile drivirg may also pce a
significant risk to the stability of the existirg roadfill.
It should be pcssible to use a spread footirg foundation on this site.
It rrill probably be necessary to rqnove an anount of soil frcrn the foundation
ard belorgrade floor areas of the residence eguivalent to the weight of the
buildirg to prevent o\rerloadirg the slope.
This section presents preliminary for-rndation design constnrction
recqwrendatiors based on the subsoil conditions encounterd at the exploratory
holes drilled frcm the roadway ard olr general judgrrent with respect to the
slope stability concerns. Mditional subsurface exploration ard detai.led
slcpe sEability analysis strculd be corducted as discussed in a later sect,ion
of Ehis report, prior to final design and construction.
(f) Foot.irgs placed on undisturbed natural soils may be designed for an
allowable soil bearirg lxessure of 3,000 psf.
Chen & Associates
(21
(3)
-B-
Spred fooEirgs placed on the graruIar soiL should have a minimurn width
of 18 indres for continuo.rs footirgs and 24 inches for pads. Footings
should be a minimum of 4 feet belct', the finished grannd surface.
ltre lateral resistance of spread footirg foundations placed on Ehe
undisturbed natural soils wilL be a ccrnbinaEion of a slidirg resistance
of the footirp on the foundation soils and passive earth pressure agairst
the side of the footirg. Slidirq friction at the bottcrn of the footirgs
can be taken at 0.4 tines the vertical ded Load. Passive pressure
against the sides of the Eootirgs can be calculated usirg an equivalent
fluid unit neight of 150 pcf. This is based on the existirg 30" slope.
Passive resistance should be ignored in the upper 2 feet.
Conpacted fill placed against the sides of the footirqs to resise
laceral loads should be a nonexparsive granular soil approved by the
geotechn ical engineer. FilI should be placed ard ccnpacted to at leasL
95t of the rnaximr.rn stardard ProcCor density.
(4) C.onti nucus foundat ion walls should be reinforced Cop and bottcrn to span
an unsupported lergth of at least l0 feet.
RETAINI$ STRIJCruRES AtlD IRAIIIAGE @{SIDeRArICt,lS
Fcundation rnlls ard retainirg structures wtrich are laterally supported
ard can be expected to un&rgo only a roderate alpNmt of deflection, may be
designed for a laEeral earth pressure conputed on Ehe basis of an eguivalent
fluid unit reight of 70 pcf for the orrsite gnanular soils. AII foundation
ard retainirg walIs stptrld be designed for appropriate hydrctaEic ard
surcharge pressures. the eguivalent fluid pressures given above are for a
Chen&Associates
-9-
drained backfill wtr ich slcpes up fron Lhe wall at no greater than 2:l
( hor izontal to vertical).
Underdrain systsns should be pro,v ided behird all retainirg ralls.
Fermanent, unreta ined cut and fill slopes should noc be planned, except as
necessary to reconfigure diseurbed areas to the original undisturbed
conditiors ard to provide minor soil cover €or frcb protection to exterior
footirgs. Surface drainage should be adequately designed to prevent pordirg
of water or concentrated runoff on unprotected slopes. AII disturbed slopes
nust be positively rcll vegetated or prorided with acc€ptable slope
protection.
ADDITIONAL GEOTEC1IN ICAL EVALUATIOI.I
gile recqnnerd the piezoneters in Holes I ard 2 be nDnitored durirg the
sprirg ard early sLrnnEr. Any groundwater levels above the perforation zones
may be inaccurate for initial redirgs. Ttris is due to the bentonite pellets
used as an annuLus seal bet'.€en the pipe and Ehe borirg walL. Upon initiat
suhnersion, the pellets will expard ard create a seal . fhter should be bailed
frqn the piezqeter€ after neasurirg the water levels for at least the firsL
tro obsenrat.iors to rqncve e,ater hhich may have passed t,hrough the pellet
zone.
A stability analysis stpuld be perfonned Eo estimate the effect of
ctnngirg loadirg conditions on the slope and to judge the optimun foundation
depth ard locations to reduce the poeential for decreases in the existirg
slope stability.
Chen&Associates
- l0-
The preliminary recorunerda t iorrs in this report are based on the subsoil
ard groundr,rater condit.ions encountered in bhe exploratory hrcles drilled on the
roadway upsl.cpe of Ehe buildirg site. Corditiorrs may vary acrGs the site
$tlich cor.rld impact these recqurendations ard future slope stability
analyses. Consideration should be given to drillirg at Ieast one exploratory
hcle on the downslope side of Ehe propced buildirg site. This rcrk will
require Ehat a drill pad be corsEructed by an excavation contractor for an
all-terrain drillirg rig. Ttre rig would har,e to be lol€red down ard to*ed up
the slope with a winch ard cable on a large tqv, cnrck or dozer-
CHEN & ASS@IATES, I}IC.
Marcus J. Pardi, P.E.
Rev iered By
wP/))
cc: Mr. David Austin
KKBIIA
t'tr. Richard Crosrther
Crcnrther Solar Gtorp
By
Chen&Associates
-- qJ
'E()'-o -c)
:a)
.:oxE(o(}E',
^o\Ji .,4za-oo):.,o1
!.9-c
|{ r.- t)
qJ
c .t\
gO
$-o G)(oN
L'-(r|'/'l
()
70
80
30
12t I
r5?
m
to
(,
a
' rul til nl)rur;:,
i;|l |lritt 19 MrN 4 MrN I rJtN
cLAY rO Srt I
GRAVEL \ '1" SAND
LIOUIO LIMII %
SAMPLEoF silty gravelly
chert iurd ilss(,ciales. inc.
297 | 590 r19 238M2 ?O
:r 5-6 A-
r0
m
30
ao
50
DIAMETEB OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS
63 't srLr AND cLAY
PLASTICITY IND.X
33%
I at depth l9'
24!5
sand FROM Hole
o12 20
DIAMETEB OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS
lag 297 l r9 2 3a 176 952
3" 5'6'
z
z
60 MIN I9 MIN iI MIN I MIN
CLAY TO SILT
o
z_
50c(
z
60(J
m
762 r21
152
GRAVEL %
LIOUIO LIMIT
SAMPL E OF
% SILT ANO CLAY
PLASTICITY INDEX
SAND
I 158 85
FROM
GRADATION TEST RESULTS
SIEVT' ANAT YSISriYDROr.,tl T t tt ANAI YSrS
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS
SI
r9r 38r
Fig
coaaLEs
o
t"'R9
:.!
(n
c
!
o
-n
t-
@o{
f,
1-J 'mo
!
{
m
@
{
f,
m
g)
cr
{a
o
-
m
z
z
o
C"
g,
o
o
-{
ma
c|\
r\l
O
o-
^\oz.'tr, (9F-t! vrJ lr,t4, ooJr!<6Z
- u-z=
o
\o\o\-'.o
I
JJ
=a5z
2
=Ft!&
\
ol,tJrnocoGG
lol*l>t:
\e1',,
\a\z\i
\?\e
o-\
\r
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
I
I
l
I
a
\\
\\
\\l\
\
T€o
\
\
\
\\\
\toGe
\\
\I
I
\
(\
ll
/\ z_ j
u
\
\
6Lll
z.
-i F!=2.o>ooo-Jtrn6d-t!>.F -\OZO
-@F-o)rn
1!
=F6,r.l.|o-o
I3
.E
HU'
€
-lI{,EU
sLSL -
088/
JUUL
UOUL
) OUL
0051 -
:UOL
U I OL
> tbL
UCOL
C7C. I -
0t6L -
9f6t -
,0[5/='t3I aloH
tlJlI.,l!
zo
F
t4JJ
(z) xapu I Atlrltsetd=ld
: ('Z) llrut't p!nbrl='ll
: a^a rS OOZ .oN 6u rssed a6e1ua:.ra6=gg7-
: (lrd) It !sua0 A:6=69
, r(Z) tuaruol rareA=Jl.l
' .srl@.1
'aurrl qlt/4 Jnf,tro AeLU IaAal Ja]e,tl arll
ur suortenlfnll '5u!lllrp Jo aL!tl aql lesJl()q aql ur paJalunolua lou seM -talerl ae-ll .g
. lenpe:6 aq Aeur suo rl tsupll
aq I pue sadit le I r ateo uaeMlaq se I Jepunoq
aleurxo.rdde aqt tuasaJda: s6ol aloq lsalaql uo uMoqs s lerJeleur uaaMlaq sautl aql .s
'pesn poqtau aqr Aq par Idur r aa.r6ap
rqt ot,{luo ate..rncf,e parap!suof, aq plnoqs
suorleAala PUP suot telol aloq lsal aql .ll
.paplno:d ueld
aLll uo s J nol uof uaaMlaq uollelod.ralul
lq paurelqo araM saloq tsat Jo suo!le^etl .t
.paprAo,r o uulo alts JL] I uo uMoqs\aJnlua] u.r() r 1 burdL'l Aq Alale,rrxrrtdde
palnseJrU JJcM sJloq lsal J() suotlelol 'z
':cbne .ramod 1q6r1.;snonurtu()l ralau.rp rp r..llu !-q p qllM 5B5t'Z 'l I I r,rdy u() pJl I r"rp ")-ri)^1 s.)l()q lsaf 'l
,sSroN
'leas lattao at ruutuaq Fmsa letr rpu r bu I peqg ' euoz uo | 1e.ro1.r ad Y:il
" "'' o,'o',
t'"",', :\ . J i
t
:: : il::" ; :': :;:l;il i ffit
.saqlu I 0l raldtues 165.ro
eru.roJ rlel Jql a^ rrp ol par InDaJ arar4 saLlf u I
0t 6u I I leJ rauLueq punod-Oi/ t L' lo sMolq Ogleql salL)f tptrl 'lunol &\olq aldues ar'!JC 0t/05
'aldLues uciods lllds '0'l qtul-g/t Llsel uor teJtauad p-epucts 'aldules anr-r6
'a louresqru!-e 'alduies aAtl0
'uMoJq 'lslotu ol lslou ,(1rq611s 'asuapAran ot asuap uJn !pau 'sraplnoq 'salqqol
'Apues ',(aAe 1f, ot Allls '(|.lg) le^eJg
-
JLUL
- noo /
>UUL
UOUL
JOUL
UUb L
)UOL
U I OL
f I oL
- 07,61
\ LbL
ULOL
', t oa
ct tv
| /05
5l=002-
5 '9=ctl
zr/st
llJ
LTJt!
I
z.
;
JtrJ
t€=0oZ-
o'8=lA
t/05
I
qraurleruro]riel'0'l
H
n
9t=o0z-
t '8=lt't
zt/tt
0z=002 -
T L4A
9/Z\
Zl=ld
6t=11
5t=002-
6'l0l=00
6'5t=tn
0t /0s
'LrM()-rq I s | ( )trl
'A,rAu | :) () l
' s.r aP I noq PUU
A r 1 ls ',{pucs
sJ lqq()f ouios
lc^ur3 : lllJ
rt*ua.y ffi
:0N39lt
,l f.6L-' t3
Z JIOH
trJJ
T
t. !)o=FV2x z.Xo-a z.;<iloz.f! lrJoS
a9
)
o(urT
.EIil
€
a--Otsa-lQ
o
|t\oF\
o
@|-\
|rI(-,
t!E
z
d
z
F
)<
UJ
I
II
I
oOl@F\
ou
t-
-o-coo-
tl
oI,NO
oo
ooo\F\
oo(
LllJ - N0|].vA313
z,<-&F=0t_
z.xz.
t-zz.<l!<z. t!
-}JJJFJ-lr, lrJ - OOGtlll,
H
=><lo\tr\t\r
\
\
N
|.\
oc.lq'\
o\
J
=
o
o\
cuv^llnoS llvocN tsvS
I aloH
J6AZ.<. ,rt Z, -z. tJt < z,
-o(ro-J<
-OJFEE-U)oo-u-d
-to\r\
o\
o\
o\
o@@F.
I33r - N0rlv^ll3
zI
FtJtrj
I
oGIJ
ou.lt!
J
d
trJztrJ
I-.Ec,
E
a
€
AIq)a--(J
(r>
@@
o o
APPENDIX B
GEOLOGIC RECONNAISANCE
ChencnQo.irte,
Consuftirq Goot€cfi n€al Engino€rs
o
ao2?3
96 South Zunt
O€nve( Colorado
303fla4-7r05
Casper
Ct|e)€nn€
Colcrado Springs
Cleniood Springs
Rock Springs
salr Lake cny
w 27. 1986
Sr$ject: Geologlc Reconnaissane' I-aE 6.
Blodc 8, Vall IntenPuntain
SubdlvLsldt t ?ryLe @rrrty, @1or&
Job No. t 517 86
Ur. Erry l,|aruyaa
5137 Brd<irgtral PlaceTrry, l,tidtigan 48098
Dear llr. l{anryama:
As rqtEsted uy your ardritect, crcnthers Ardritec.cg Grqrpr re have
ordrrted i geologic r-eonnaissan€ of tte sqbject proPerty ard -surrourdingarea in reraane- wit}r the requirerents of the Eagre cotJnq/ tuildirg- Depart-
rent. VE previansly cordqcted a prelininary geotedurlcaf etudy fo-r your
pr.pou"a sirife-fanify residene on [tris lct, ieporLllry qe results rnder our
ioU- No. I 368 g5 in i report dated April 19, 1985. In ddition' re are Pre-
""ttfy anafyzirg the slcpe st$iliqr of your lot for_ bottr the erist'irg unde--
vefdd onEiti6rrs ard E# dranges drr to-the propoeea congtnrction. r
cernral Ccolcqic Settinc: ftre lct is situatd on the ouitlr eide of tjp Gore
@ one mile u[Ftrea of its onflrnne *gt gp e-4le
River at Do&-iunction.- Itre tct is-sitratd at elesations d abcut 7840 to
?9OO 6eet. ltn grourd surfc crc{r t}E lct averages q4ro:Intely J0' 9t6(tt. rhe slqe argb aiministes dornslqn, to tJre north of the ErcfErty' to
;o,rt, t0' "i-fSt.- ltp natural elope ontints to ftatten to mre gentle
elops as it €rtfuues dor'n to tlte @re Credc vall€y floor.
Eristing Basirgdafe BorLe.nard o€1rrs ircafately pslqe $- tl= 1*'
fhis rod odrsf*s 6g a c.rt ad fill srcs sectlon wit!1 the g|rt' befutg on -theeqrtlr gf& ard a fltL rrcdge cr the rprttr st& of, tlre road stroulder. I'tE fill
elotrn 6 the q6" of the ict fe agprcLnately 10-' _9t 85t.. tgre natural slogn
onifns ,ryt and frcm naQirEdale iiulenard, fnttUffy at abottt l0' or 18S for
amrqimateiv l5O feet outh of the rod. ltre elqe qain st€qtens fro $isFittt b *dtt ZZ' or ,l0t ard @ntirls eeveral htldred Geet, rp to ttn ridge
lirte.
Gr the basis of geologic rnappirg by l\€to ald Loverlqg (1977) the sit'e is
situated in a large aircienC efoi; faifure oqf,ex or lardsll&. Larrl use ard
ergfrErlrg geofog-ic mpping of -@le Countl' by rcbinson_ard Assciates' Itrc. r
if5ZSt al5p;rys [fris ";;a is a srip failure oryl-ex. -Ttn eurficial dePosits
are rlrderlain-by tlre Pennsylvaniarlage t{irrturn Fornation. 1[reee sardstone,
-rgfcderat€ and ehate sediirentary Ueas aip to tln norttr in ttris area on t}te
scrrrth side of Gore Creek valleY.
Mr. Benry Maru)rama
t{ay 27, 1985?4e 2
Potential Geolqic Inoactg: the arrcient lardslicb or slq>e fallure ocrylexcupnted by existirq Bteep to very steep elogns on ard djaoertt to tle lot,irdicate the poCentiat for fr.rture elqe instabiltty. Ttre rid< d slcpeinsE$lU.ty can be furttcr qgravatd by mrruade drartges to ttE sloln audr asrod ard hri.ldirg onstruction.
Signrs of reert, slqe irstabiliQr rere obeerved in the prqtntty of ttrialct durirg a eit€ visit on tfay 17, 1986. Itrese @nditlons, decrlbed belcnr,
a[,[Ear to tnve beqre active srlcsegent to the field rprk @rduct€d for thepreliminary etudyr in 1985.
A alope failure tras ocurred in the existirg rod cut, slqn 4proxi.oatsely200 feet, tpslope to ttE southeast of loE 6. Eris elope mvcnt, 6\rera an
area on the order of 2,500 sgrnre feet.
The rcdge of rod fill adjac€nt to Basingd.le Boul.evard qr tlp upslopeside of Lt 6 has slurped dorn aSproxirately I foct frcm t}e dJrent pavedrod surface. Sinoe ttrere cns sonE snohr @ver at $re tirE of the 1985 fieldrcrk' re are nct sure if t}ris fill netlge sh4age tras occlrrred subeeqrnnt tothat str.dy or if it existed aE tlte tirrc of tlrat. study. In any elvent, itaPIEars to be in a marginally sbable onilition. Other signrs o'f relativelyreent slotE rcvercnts on tlre lot or in the Foxi'nity of the lot rere not
ob€ened.
ceolqic mppirg erduct€d by ilears (1977) relatd to rpid mss*asting
troc€ssrea in the trosr of Vail rms also reviened. Gris map doea nd, irdicatethat tne€e ttpe of potential geologic hazards dridt include &hris flors,debris floods, rock avalandrcs ard rockfalls rpuld preeent an iryact to I.oC 6.
Gooclusions ard Reocrulqdations: Cr the basis of the above geologic factors,ial greologic jryact of slo1n inatability ghoufd berealized ard onsiderd for develqnent of Iot 6. lltere are several eristirgresi&neg on tte snrroundirg steep to v€ry st€ep slops in the VaiL lnter-rcuntain $$division. Ihe potertial for natural or mrirduced alqe tnstabiliq, Gqrrs to aG degree for tle existing ard future regldenee.
As disusseal in otrr pre.liruinarlz geoLedurical ddy, it stpuld be t€dtni-cally feasible to @nstruct the proposd residen€ at ttE site. Eorcver, dlcto the rcry steep alcpe of tne brifdirg site, the poCentia.l for onstnrctiorFirduod elop instability witf fupo* major onstraints upon desigrr andoonstruction. lltre E$'sr.rfrce orditions enor:ntered by ttre prelininaryeploration orducted in 1985 irdicate relatively favorabl.e soit ard grord-r€ter @rditions with resSnct to slcpe stability. t.tanely, tlee are the
tresen€ of deep granular soil.s ard a relatively deep grourd-*nter level belqrthe slope.
Chen&Associates
Hr. Renry fhruyana
t{ay 27, 1985
Page 3
Reonerdatlons given in the prelimirnrlz gectedurical acudy ard addi-
tlorral deslgn ard onstnrctlon crltseria r&idr will be trxovided ag a regult oftle orgoirg slqe et^$lltty analyses should be clcely follqred to reduoe tlp
potenttaf for slqn lnatabitlLy relatd problc durirg constrtrctlon ard fol-
Iosfrg cofiletton of tle regldence. As the dnxlr' pu stnuld be atmre that
eudt precautlons nay redr.e tle risk of elope lnstability. Eciaer, ttn rlsk
cannd. be ellninatd.
If there are anlr qrnstions, please do nct hegitate to catl.
Sinerely,
flrht & AssGlNrEs, rt€.
Marqrs J. Pardi, P.E.
llIP/ee
Rerr. Qr: mc€: Cronthers Ardtitd,s Gro4t
KKNUAttn: Ur. hvid Arstin
Chen&Associates
REFEREIWS
l\€to, O. ad lorcrlng. T.S., 1977. Geologr of, ttre t{inturn eradrarqle, @leard Suutt Contlea, @lordo: O.S. Geolcaicrt Survey prof. papr 95G.
I'l3ara, A.8., 1977. Geologlc Rapid t{asa{lastlrq eroess, Current Oondit.ions,
trorn of Vall, Eqle Counqz, @lordo.
&btnsn, C.S. ard Aaociatea, 1975. Sra Avalandte Sazard, Envirorrental andBngfnering Geolqic ard Geologic Resoure Haps, Eagt€ @rnty, Colordo.
Clrm&Associates
Chen
Coosulting G€olodrn|cal Eng'noors
c.Qocirtes o
80223
96 South Zunr
O€nr€( Colo(ado
30317 44.7105
Caspet
Che!€nne
Col ado Springs
Clenwood Springs
Rock Springs
salt Lake city
June 9' 1986
Suloject: bad FiIl Instabifity' Basirgdale
Boulevard, tPslope of Id 6' BLod( 8,
Vail Inten@untairt Subdivision' t|est
Vail' @le CountY' Colordo
Job t{o. t 5{7 85
tlr. Ken Beller
Eagl€ Corrtty Rod ard Bridge Departrent
P.O. Box 250
Eagle Cannty, Oolordo 81531
bar l,lr. Heller:
As di*rrssed with you in our teleptone conversation of June 5, 1985, otrr
client, ttre owner of f-ot 5, interds to build a trouse this swrEr. I;oL 6 tus a
eery steep slqn arrt wilL requi.re slncial lrecautions be taken durirg ooFgtrirtiqr-to rm-intain tlE stability oi t}E existing slope. trb harre corducted
soil tests ard analyses r&idr irdicate the naterral sloln is in a reasonably
sEable onlition. frorrever, the redge of fill placed alorg the north side of
e""i.€d"f" Borrleyard on t$e Whifl s:ide of Iot, 6 appears to have sluqed ard/
or "eftta approxi.mtely I foot, belcxp tte aeerage road grade. t'b suspeci that
this fttl tray b in a potentialty unstable corrlition-
Orr recqnrerdation to the owrer ard his design consultants will be to see
that the st$ility of tte fill rrdge is fuproved to redgce possible ftrture
advrarse effec€s on tte residene. As a result, the arctriCect has requested
that the @le counQr bd ard Bridge Departnenc take the nec€ssary [IEasures
to jryroee the sLabifity of cte exist'ing road fill-
Blclced is a m5l stpwirq the letion of I-oE 6 ard the affec€d area.
t€ rculd apgeciate ldur earliest possible resEpnse to tiis rnatter. If ttere
are anlr qr-stions, please give rrs a caII.
sin€rely'
C8EN t ASSCLAtrES, IliC.
,rllP/eac'Ecs.
cc: ltlr. tlenry Marul,afiE
Croq,Chers Ardtitects Group
tu
- tlarqrs J. Pardi' P.E.
TIrI
Elt
o
Chen&AssociatesCqrJli! O.oa.dr.ic.l €qiroo
96 Soufi Ztti
Ormc( Corord 0022|:1
tc(Yt.l+716
C.so€r
OTF.YE
Cfira<b Sgngr
Glfirood Spdngs
Rot r Sging
Sd lX. Cny
ltaY 27, 1986
SubJeccr Gologlc Hlnafssane. I&, 6'ffi'ilf;Iffffi*-**
it6 tb. | 5{7 86
llr. Eenry ihruyc
5t3l Btdclttgha Plrc?
troy, l,tldrlgnn {8098
Dear l,lr. l{aruluu:
As rqrratd Uy yarr ardrltect, Crqrthers Ardtltd'6 Cgp' f lfl.@rdtcd i geologld rionnataeane o,f tlE aub;tect- property "4 -?urrgdTgarea ln reritane der the regulrcnts of the Eagb Aorncy Edf+rg_ Depart-
Ert. I€ prevlansly @drEta a preltnlnary geotednbar atudy 6o-r yo.r
prq."ea "ftiU-faUly resldene qr Erfg- fog, -rggrtt4g qg reaults urder qrr
bU- rO. I 3Gi 85 tn i report dited Aprll 19, 1985. rl ddltlcr' 13 are [rF
aettfy anafyzfrg u|" r1+ st$lllty-of yq|r I€t for_ b*Jr tne edst'lrg tlldF
*[A;r o.riftfSns ad Ui" citanges dn to-tre prqaeil onstructlm'
Cereral Geolqlc Seil:tlrs: Itte ld, te eltrratd o tJre oqtlr aldc d the @re
eiEF@ qre mil.e qrsrrea d Lts onf,Lrrc rdth ttc Bqle
Rlvrgr at Odds-.tm€ton. - Itle lct lg-attratd at eLevatloog d $qt 78{0 to
79OO E€t. [c arrord aurfe rcrc3a ttp ld atragea {4rcldely ?0' 9.5(F. Sre slcpe "tgle a|nf"f.efes dmsfqle, to the rprth d ttE [rqErtsl'' to
;bqrt, tO' oi-lSt. .gE n*,urat slee ;mttflE to Eleen b Dr€ ggttLe
elqee as tt @atfurreg dmr to tln @re Credc vall€f f,Loor.
Ertstfutg gastrgdale Barlesad GurE lnrfrately- tPel,4le $. ft I*:
fhts rod odrskts 6f a q1g ad ftlt crcg eectl3tr rtgh the 611E' betr€ oo-tlE
ea1;lr sl& anl a ffff rdge qr tle rprtlr el& d tfa rod sttottLder. lttE ftII
AA" - tr," tO o€ tlre lit ts 44rctndely fo-'-o5 af. :[te n+ura1 el.qle
&rifrurea rryad- fro Bastrg&le i&rlerard, InfUaffy d, rboue l0' or l8t for
"sqtnateiv l5O fe€t s6h of the rod. 11lre alqe qaln steepns frcn $tsp"itt O &drt 22' or lOt ad @nql11g *rrcral hurdrd 6eet qt to ttE rldge
ttuE.
or tlE basls of geolqtc nappirg by .Iltto ald f,overtq (19771 th9 alte te
attqd,ed ln a large aircferrt af{,i faffrlre oqlcr or Lardsllde. Itrd us anil
erglneertrg geofoifc mpplrg of -E4l€ County Uy rcUlnson ard Aascldea, Inc. ral6t-i-;6 i+u ir,r. ;;,a fu a srfoe fa[uie caplex. -rtre surfl.clal depcits
ire rnaerUin-by the Fennsylvanian-age titinturn Forroatlon. itrteae eardstorrc,
.rgfcserate and ghat"e seaiirerrtary txis alp to tlE rprth in ttrlg area qr the
eouttr side of Core Cred< va1leY.
t{r. Eerlrlt t{anrl,ma
l{ay 27, 1985
Page 2
Potenttrl C*olqlc l4rcter ftc arEtcnE l.ardsfld€ or alq,e f,allure od'TrLexto rt!ry ste€g sl,opes qt aol itlent to tlE-lot,ldlcate tfE got€nt,taf for futurc efqe br;t$filty. lltre rlCc d efopemtaUfUW qn bc furtlnr qgrasdd by un+* draqcr to tln alop andr asrod ard bulldl.rg orutnrct,lon.
Sfgns d reeflt sfcpe lnrt&fUty rerc ob.rrcil tD tlc prclnft1l o,f th18lct durtrg a altc vlrlt an t{ry 17, 1986. ,ltrEa ordltloal deslbd belcr,aptcar to tttrn bec dl$c aScqrrt to thc flel.d rcrt @rdGd 6or tlregellntrnry Btdy tn 1985.
A alqe fallure has ocrrrd In the extatslrg rod qrE alqn 4gclnrtery200 6e€t tpelope to ttE aqilna* oE taE 6. llils sLpe rcvenred, @erera an
area on the order of 2r5O0 agrare feet.
fte Gdge of rod filf djsrt to Baslrgdale hrf.evard o ttp upalcpeslde of Lot,. 6 tus rlr4led dxr 44rorlnately | 6od, frcn tlr dJert paredrod aurfc. Sine tfiere ss sG arxr @ver d' the ttne of the 1985 fteldrork, e are nct eure Lf Urls flrr nedge sLt4rge tus crrrd aubeeqrErt tothat sbdy or if lt erl.etd at the ttpe of Urd' sbdy. In any eoent, it
appears to be in a mrglnally at^$le onalltton. Gher elgrrs of reLatlvelyreert, alqn rcvcrEa qr.tlte lct or ln the prclnlty of tne lot rere notoberved.
Geolqlc ryirg @rduct€at bdr ltears (1977, rdateil to r4rld rgs<.astiq,Foesss in ttE lqn of tJlail ms also revl€rrcd. [rts -t does nd kiltd€thd. eEse tf,pe of pd€rtfaf geolqic trazards rfrldr lnclrde &brLg flos,d€brk €looda, rodc avaLandres ard rodcfalfs sqdd Feeert, an I4lact, to lrt 6.
Oornl lotts ard negcmerrlatlaqs: (lr the h.lrts of the &ove geologlc f&oce,Ic ,rya.t of alo6n fngtilfUty strortd b;reallzd ard qrEldereil for &velo'nerrt of lot 6. lt'here are seaeral exlsttrgrealdeneo o tlre surroudlrg steq, to rery ste€p slees in the Vall Inter-untaln $tdl.vlcim. ItE pot€rt,|d Gor natural or nrplrduod elcpe lnsErbl[tl' G.qrrc to ere degree for tle ertsting ard future resldenea.
As dlcuegecl ln qrr prefidnary geocednbaf etrdy, tt etpuld be tedrni-crrry feasible b onetruct tfn prqood real&e d' tlp alte. Eorcrler, dtnto tlte rcry ateep alqn of tlre hrildirg gitc, the pot€rth.f for onstnrctslorlrdrcd alope irutabtliQr will lnpo€ najor @nstralnta rpoo destgr andcorutruction. fte sdrsurfrce orditlons eranntered by the prelininaryorploratian ordrrfd in 1985 irdlcatc relatively farrorabLe eoll ad grourd-nter ordltlons wlth respect to slqe shbUtty. t@ly, tJrese are thetreelr of &ep granular soib ard a relatively deep gro:rd*ter level belq
Che slope.
Chen&Associates
Hr. Eenry lianry na
l&y 27, 1986
Page 3
o
ncrcrdactorr gfren In the prelhfnary geotedntcal Btsudy ard aallf-tLfid dcrlg ard ocatrucElm crlterla *rldr rlLL be Srwlded as a result ofttr cFgofrg sl.qle lt$lll.ty snafyse! atpuld be cleely follcned to r€due the
goterrt|af for elq: fnetabl.Uty rclatd probf€c durlrry @rutructlcr ard fol-forlrg oqlcttm of th. ttalderc. lr the crl€(e yor ahould be mre thd,
eudr grattme uy rdrr th rlals of dopc lnstablll.ty. 8ffier, tle rl"gk
aamd, be clhfndCl.
If ttere are anlr qrn6Cl.crc, plase do not tEsltde to call.
Slrerely,
cSllf t AssclAtrEs, rlc.
YI]IP/erc
Rev. Qz: Ec€: Crqrthers Ardrltects Gra4r
KRERAttn: tlr. hvid Astln
Bl(__
ltarcus .r. Partif, EEI-
Chen&Associates
I
RETBREITCES
lieto, O. ad lonrlrg. 1.S., 1977.
ard Anft QnGlce, @lordor Geology of the tllnturn Qradrangl€, @leO.8. Geologtcaf Survey Prof. Paper 956.
tbatlr A.&, 1977. Gcologlc R4!il Hasa-{6eE&g proeea, qrrrene Ordttlona,th of vall, Elc oqnq7, coLcdo.
Fblnm, C.8. rd laadrtce, 1975. $or. Avalandre Err-rd, Errlrqrertal anitllgfnerlq Geologtc ad Geologlc Resure l,t4rs, Eagle @urty, @lorailo.
Chen&Associates
Planning and Environmental Commission
.January 28, 1985
STAFF PRESENTPRESENT
Diana Donovan
Duane Piper
Howard Rapson
Jim Viele
Jere l,lalters
meeting was called to order at 3:00 pm
ues! for a front setback variance in orderoc,Intermoun n suDd]v'lsion.Staff recommendati on:Approval
Peter Patten
Tom BraunKristan Pritz
Rick Pylman
by Duane Piper, chairman.
Approved 3-0.
ruyama
ck request
The
l.
2.Lot
Kristan Pritz gave
which should have
Henry Maruyama was the memo. The app:l icant,
moved and Rapson
the staff presentation and correctedbeen 7 feet, not 6 feet as written inpresent to answer questions. l,Jalters
3.
seconded to approve the setback viriu;;;-;i-t-i."fr Vote 5-0 in favor.
st for a conditional use rmit in qrder to construct a hand gun ranqeevaqwn shops in se strict. Appl ican : rotrce uepartment
visibl il ity from
moved and }Jalters
n tavor.
Tom Braun explained the request anci stated that extensiye grading would betlone to-construct berms on 3 sides. The range was to be used on.ry by the vailPorice Department anci at irris-iir.'or"i'rg auvitsfii i;r;; ;;iy. The Vail Metr:oRecreation District had writien i-r"ii"r.rtating that they had no objection.The Police Department heid i p,iuTii'r"Iiing to discuss concerns. No verbaror, written concerns had been i.,ei"iu"a-ii out".
Donovan mentioned concern ofsrgnage to the north. Vieleper the staff memo. The vote
neighborhoods and al so suggestedseconded to approve the request
4. Request to amend the zonin code Chapter 18.04, definition of GRFA, inqllg to a ow an extra GR of2 ua re eet to structures ve yearsOld or o r un rce con plicant: Town of Va
j'ld a residence
Tom Braun explained the requested amendment and added that after gaining approvalIiSl'l?i.llii:H.TilTi;'ii:-il.Hfil#;ii"iiSliiil:,ltfi.t:fi!:l;:uit"iiti,,.,
Braun pointed out that the ordinance waswith single family, primary/secondary orfrom the previous submittai. The s"itionhad been changed to eliminate enclosurei
f erc rl?stss
in two parts. The sectio'n dealinoduplex structures was unchanqed"''deal ing with mul ti-family slructuresof decks or balconies.
After discussion, Howard son Tgve9 and Jim Viele secolded to approve theamendment for reconrmen e Uounci | . The vote was 5-0 Tn TaTo-r.-
5.uest for a
to
conditional usetime share Co
ermit and for minor subdivision tn ordertoconvertinium unit of thep I r cant:gene E. Herz rger n ums.
Tom Braun askedto February 25.
6. Set date for
to table this
Vote was 5-0
item. Viele moved andin favor.
I ic hearin for zonino of Spraddle Creek subdi vi s ion.
Peter Patten stated that
It was moved and seconded
February 25th was a
to set February 25,
reconrnended date
1985 as the date
for the hearing.
for public hearing.
Planning and Environmental Commission
January 28, 1985
2:15 pm Site Visits
3:00 pm Public Hearing
l. Approval of minutes of January 7, 'l 985
2. Request for a front setback variance in order to build a residence
on Lot 6, Block 8, Intermountain Subdivision.Applicant: Henry H. Maruyama (Staff Rec: Approval)
3. Request for a conditional use permit in order to construct a hand
gun range at the Vail Town Shops in the Publjc Use District.Applicant: Vai'l Police Department (Staff Rec: Approval)
4. Request to amend the zoning code, Chapter .|8.04, definition of
GRFA, in order to al'l ow an extra GRFA of 250 square feet to structuresfive years old or more, under certain conditions.Applicant: Town of Vail (Staff Rec: Approval)
T0 BE TABLED 5. Request for a conditional use permit and for a minor subdivisionin order to convert to t'ime share condominium unit 408A of the
Wren Condominiums. Applicant: Eugene E. Herzberger
6. Set date for pub'l ic hepring for zoning of Spraddle Creek
subdivision . fu, F,
7. Review of changes being made to the proposed redevelopment planof Phase IV of SDD6, Vail Village Inn.
TCI:
FROII:
DATE:
SIIBJECT: Request fororder to buildSubdivision.
DESCRIPTTON OF VARIAITCE
Planning and Environuental
Cmunity llevelopnent De1tartuent
ilauuary 28, 1985
a front setbacka residence on lotApplicant: Eenry
REQT'ESlED
variance of 6 feet6, BloclE 8, InterurntainE. l'laruyama
i($:
wY,
's;l--
\M
Mr. Henry Maruyama is requesting a front setback variance of6 feet in order to construct his residence. The slopes beneaththe house are greater than 40t. For this reason, the garagemay be located in the front setback. Hor,vever, the 40$ slop-sdo not allow for the house to be built in the front setback.
The applicant makes the following statement as to h'hy the varianceis being requested:
"... because of the unique nature of this site (49t slope)and more specifical ly because of two resultant conditionswhich havE worsened the hardships I ) The road has beenbuilt l0 or more feet above the property Iine over mostof its length, and 2) The front property line is 15 feetor lnore frcrn the road over most of the length of the propertyIine. These conditions do not exist on severat propeitielfurther lvest on Basingdale Boulevard. This has allowed' those owners to build much closer to ttre road, el iminatinglong structured driveways and parking and minirnizing theproblems of having to push the buildings out over the slope.The requested variance will not result in the buildingappearing too close to the road, nor will the buildingappear taller than one story above the road. Its relationshipto the road will be closer to that of the nearby propertiesmentioned. It is believed that the property Eirectfy tothe west of the subject property could also benefit lrornthe relief being requested, and that the configurationof all buildings' entrances could then have a more equaland uni form appearance as wel I ease of construction. "
rt should be noted that the planning commission reviewed anapplication by Mr. Maruyana on December 10, 1984. At that timethe appl icant was requ-sting an 11 foot height variance, a frontsetback variance of 7 feet, and a side setback variance of 6feet. Atl three variances were denied. planning commi ssionsuggested that the house be designed with more considerationfor the site. Pl ease 6ee the enclosed drawings.
Maruyama rl28/8s
STAFF RECOUMEgDATIOX
T-hgr-3o_mnun_ity Devel opment Department recomrnends approval ofth4l| foot front setback variance. The variance is-iarrantedbecause of the practical difficulty on the site of locatinqthe house on the property without cieating a height varianc5problem ae well as other setback problens.- tn adEition, thereare extraordinary circumetancea on thls site due to the elopethat make it difficult to construct a houEe wlthout creati-ngeither a height or getback variance probrem. The applicanihas resubtnitted a proposal ntrich elirnlnated two out of the threevariances that were previouely requested. staff feels thatevery effort has been made to comply with rown of vait ioningrequirements. The 6 foot getback ig warranted and shourd b;approved.
PUBLIC WORKS
Reviewed by:
Comments:
-// Z..A@"
DL@ lr ?..*-x,-c
FIRE DEPARTMENT
zo (ort Set
(4/La /t/e?5'b z(cL^Js€ tftaeel-z ezvil '*u aur, fr-r. L<t€>>ecn ^5f n,ee G4s ( /,,-,q.-
Fsz :'€e.!tc,€ 1/^'.as il'(A4(4'
\@ A<uo.-.tt<.c- EtG*z' ar O-tnz ftz.,ot7 ?<4',jcqo fre tk<- /tt/2auqz-z s->(S
r o .our.____o
^-,lTDe-oeir7E- : <.L' /t /4€4{ //tr*<t,eG /*-tF<;4€ {5 o-a7 Zcst z.u c_.a.t<4.t&., .r,
Reviewed by:
Comments:
Date
&a.7 cF 6aaaqg- /F so
-?o P4t< 4*o .uo ft,>-.'- *a>an€,s !k-,rr-_,,,*_-,
-fo 1o,+o ^ 5.k"u.o 2<,*r.., -rl arro rr*t
\ .--A\ @ Sr+r.^t kr|e u,a,v GcaeE-
2Alueu.47 S,/g,o<.c tuoT ?24..v
fl,ry,oq? ra4JLL Wde_d
a:*, h tp ktu ca^p'
POLICE DEPARTMENT
Reviewed by:
Comments:
OeT
Date
Reviewed by:
Comments:
Date
75 south tronlage road
Yall. colorado 81657
(303) 476-7000 ottlce of communlly developmenl
,.:'
0ctober 2, 1985
Henry H. Maruyama
5137 Buckingham Place
Troy, Michigan 48098
Re: Maruyama Resjdence Lot 6, Block E; Vail Intermountain
Dear Henr,v:
0n 0ctober 1, 1985, the Vail Town Council gave final approval to theinter-governmental agreement that addresses construction in thE-WestVa'il area. As you are aware, the West Vail area has now been de-annexed
from the Town of Vail. At this time, the countyhasimplemented a six
month moratorium on alI construction except minor remodeling and repairof existing structures.
The inter-governrnental agreement between Eagle County and the Town of Vaileffects your proje'ct by prohibiting you to build until after the nnratoriumis lifted. The nnratorium will end on February 25, 1986. At that time,you would submit your project to the county for their approval and buildingpermit review. If in February, your lot is once again back in the Townof Vail then you r^rould finish your Design Review Board review and thenproceed with the Town of Vail for a building permit.
If you have any further questions about this project p1 ease call me.I am sorry that it took us a few weeks to respond to your letter,
however, final decisions on new development had not been made until lastnight.
S i ncerely,
K'fu^
Kristan Pri tz
Town Planner
KPlbl f
r1€+,.i,
E1?7 !r:nlri-rrham PlaCp . .Troy, l'lichigan 48098;i,- i i, ljll5September 17, 1985 l,-.i;.ill.a,;l
Eagle CountyDepi. of Plannlng & levelopmentP.0. Box 789Eag1e, Colorado 91611
S ir:
Will your office please forward rne anl/required for me to builci a duplex houseproperiy ini l^iest tlaj-1 .
and all inf orrnati onconstruction on mr*
My lot is lot 6 Block8 in the Yaiilntermouniain subdivision.
My architect stated thar I should acquire as much informationas I can from your county since',{est Vail- is or will beseparated from the Vail town.
I have prelimi.nary approval of rny building plans fron t ner/ai1 counciL.
Your help is appreciared.
Q i n n a'r.a'l rr
_a:,/;s;77
U p4 r'7 '-i - l,,la.r^trr/arna
G:-
er|
q\
o?
aov.Y
Fg
', tb
a?9pv,t P
7<Or:t
Ad.
d-rxloF9
bC9g
9' -o*!bdr- dz cSta P--
\., o-^a
g
d. t{:.o
9.r b
oh,
7,...g:
)i, r
*!?dr t79,
q.r Y.r
\., c
g{r
Y
t.
;
.d'-v ao
.\2o
12t)2
hE
o
E
*
H'1.S5137 Buckingham PlaceTroy, Mlchigan 48098Sept. 17,1985
14r s. Krlstan Pritz75 South l'rontage Road'/ail-, Colorado 81657
Dear P! rs. Pritz:
f am writing to you for possible information that you might giveme in my quest to bu1]d on my lot in Vlest Vail_.
since v/est vail is or w111 become separated from the town ofvail itself just what kind of restrictions or other restraintswillthere for me to overeome to bu1ld on my 1ot.t/ail- Council- has.given me preliminary apprbval of my earlyplans as submitted from my architect, Richard L,. Crowther FAIAsome three months ago.
Will you please send me any and al_l_ information needed for meto pursue my building p1ans.
Thank you very mfrch.
SinceTely,
Ja,>7+arqz*'^4-
Henry H . Mar-iryanna
?ll'l rl
75 south lronlage road
vail, colorado 8'1657
(303) 476-7000 oltlce of communllY develoPmenl
Itarch 8, 1985
Richard Heinemeyer
3Z0I East 3rd Avenue
Denver, Colorado, 80206
RE : llaruyama Res i dence
Lot 6, Block 8, Vail Intermountain
Dear Richard,
0n l4arch 6, i985, the Design Review Board gave preliminary approvai to
the l'laruyana Residence. The fol lowing conrnents were IrEde by the Board
and should be addressed at the next Design Review Board meeting:
'l . The piers on the east, west and north elevations should be
screened in some way. It was suggested that by recessing
the skirt the impact of the piers maybe m'i nimized.
Landscaping near the dri veway entry and garage should be
analyzed.
'a\'\gD Details on the roof in respect to gage of the roof material
; :::*'::::,::.'::":':::'":::::: l,.",l,""1ddressed
,/F\ ,( 5.') liindow details should be provided.
6. The Design Review Board mentjoned that ST0 at grade tends to
peel or fall off.
r -+.
\\\(t)A.cess for constructjon should be studjed'
1O 4cthe area underneath the garage shou'l d be returned to existinc arade.
A.XtV At -->#-)freatnent of the post under the garage needs further stud.y. Ferhaps
di#ilclJltt Hskirt or a larger pier would improve the appearance of this elevation-
n\\,/1 1'\ \v,',a-' .,
'.6{\'
.
-^'' ".'-' l..,J
inr
\)'Ah ftUtr,.r^
+F!t;'{u i"t\,\- q'"tl
"k 1$t*' ty.jJLlo,I
ir pJtVr
\nii,,"
l)
Limits of the construction activ'i ty should be c)ear1y def.inedas wel 1 as impacts from run off and rock fall from c6ntruction of thesite.
ll. The exis'uing decks on the east elevation may have limited use.perhaps it. rvourd be appropriate to analyze ihe design or tneiedecks so that they could be nore useful to the owners.
The following items should be included on your new site pl an vrhen yousubmit for final Design Revierv Board Reviei:r- 1t.:q;ff l. l:iglt of retainjns wal)s and roof ridses (most of th.is .is on yourr-v , previous plan)
DY-?,. Indicate the new eighteen foot garage door.F--l\]_,/ S how d r.i v ervay g ra de -
4. Show drjvervay drainage and the necessary swa'l e.
Also at the time of the building_permit a revocable right-of-way agreementwill need to be sign for the stiiis and other portions of the pioj6ct thatextend into_the publ ic _ right-of-way. al so. a' I icense aoreem.It-i,iii u.necessary if any of this project,s uti es need to cross thE-tiEstEin Sto
o* Jo.i )-.' -t..';\'
o
must be underground. please let-mE-6;il;;F'A;you r.Jo u
Rev'i ew . Al s oor additional
ti ese to make yourif you have anyinformation, p1 ease
fina1 Design Review Board
oncern i ng these conmenrs
ta I for-
s ti ons c
al l.
next submt tfurther que
g'lve me a c
5 i ncerel y,
ltt
Pri
nne
K'jh-
Kri stan
Town Pl a
KPl rme
\ .,.'"i$tqrci..v.t
6ff^q\u6^\\rpr 6 iofth tr,i..r'
ftttfi vtri$u,J',,)
h UnJoH^"1*/
hq Do',.-/ /tt a"u'4{ I__l
A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
APPL I CATI ON
OATE OF DRB MEETING:
DRB APPLICATION
*****THJS APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED UNTIL ALL INFORMATION IS SUBMITTED*****
I. PRE-APPLICATION MEETING:
A pre-apprication_meelilg yi!h.. planning staff member is strongly suggested todetermine'if any additional information is n""a"a. -ilo apptication will be acceptedunless it is complete (must include all items ""lri"ea Ly the-zoning administrator).It.is. the applicant's responsibility to make-an-a-pioiitrent with the staff to findout about additional submittal requirements. Pleiie note.that . CoNpiiii applica-tion will streamline the-approval process ro"-your-i"oject uv decreasinq the numberof conditions or approval that the'DRB *av iitiuiitE.-"nri;;il;;i;;;'ii iill""uut mustbe resolved before a building permit is iisueai-'---'
:J
B. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL:
Addres s
Legal Description
Zon i ng
Lot___ t(nl Brock 6 Firins U;l l"t*,nuL
C. NAME OF APPLICANT:
Address
D. NAME OF
Add res s
E. NAME OF
Signature
Address
DRB FEE:
VALUATION
60^
REPRESENTATIVE:
r)
The fee will be paid at
telephone n68-1tr),
@wzpo telephone@Z?Z
te'l ephone
the time a building permit is requested.
FEE
$ o-$ 1o,ooo$10,001 -$ 50.000$50,00i-$ 150:000
$150,00i - $ 500.000
$500,001 - $1,000,000$ Over $1,000,000
IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING ALL SUBMISSIONS TO THE DRB:
1' In addition to meeting-submittal requirements, the applicant must stake the siteto indicate proDerty.lines .nJ-uuiiiing co"n""s. -r"!Er that will be removed
:??:1, also be inarria. ir,it'ro.['*rrt-u".orpi.tea'iiio". the DRB visiti'irre
2' The review process for NEl,l BUILDINGS will normally involve two separate meetingsof the Design Review Aoard,-io-piin-on at least tilo meetings for their approval.
3' People who fail to appear before the Design Review Board at their scheduledmeeting and who have'not asied ior'i postponemeni ,iii oe required to berepubl i shed.
fo
F.
$ 10.00
$ 2s.00
$ so.oo
$100.00
$200.00
$300.00
I
APPL I CANT 'S
P
AME OF PROJECT:
EGAL DESCRIPTION
,TREET ADDRESS:
)ESCRIPTION OF PR
Ihe following
3oard before
A. EUILDING
Roof
Si di ng
Other Wall
LIST OF MATERIALS
tL
information is required for submitta'l
"'iinut aPProval can be fiven:
MATERIALS: TYPE OF MATERIAL
COLOR
{L;;"u.
by the aPPlicant to the Design Review
Materi al s
Fasci a
Soffi ts
Lli ndows
l.tindow Trim
Doors
Door Trim
Hand or Deck Rails
F'lues
Fl ashi ngs
ChimneYs
Tras h Enc'l osures
Greenhou ses
0ther
6a,ra7e Aoot-
B. LANOSCAPING: Name of Des i gner :
Phone:
PLANT I'IATERIALS:
PROPOSED TREES
EXISTING TREES TO
BE REMOVED
rlF
w
I
ft
'-,
N
l.i$'
Ftlla
\0'
J?.'
a
Yir
*Indicate caliPer for deciducious trees'I irdi cate he'ight for coni fers '
INTER-OEPARTI4ENTAL REVI EX
PROJECT:
oV () V.-
@ Cr*rc.-rJtrJ/LC /Ue€b UctArS€ ,/4,aav=rz ew7)' =b
fuz- SeR.et<-€- 1/.g€5
ril"i
. I I
I
<.t7r<7 77.g 2 .??u5/ Z? Ozv o€E G-av,\/Q
,taAtG,s. oF a-t/tz
4Daa.tt*zE- ! "z' lr-/68{ //tie,./,4c /^,-T fc7€ t s o-c7 Z<>t t^, lz.'t r <4.rr2c,.r-. e-^<<-:P -z .a,t F>ffyr_G,f4<Z- "
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARINGDATE SUBMITTED: :
COMMENTS NEEDED By: -t
i'
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL:
PUBLIC I,IORKS
Reviewed by:
Comments:
?
a
'- Sc-evtce C*w4,-5 .ro t(ov 5e-
G4S 1/.-<.-
&o.-7 cF 6,+<,tse-_ /F So
-?o Pful. E* o .oo f:: *...2 *4>4ue ,4 Jv<-praF,..--/
\ @ s,#..t kt ve u',ty G Z.ta<-
@ ?e lo,ta - 5,tk"u- o 2< *r^,70 ;'44'J/rc
POLICE DEPARTMENT
Reviewed by:
Comrnents:
Date
+4fied*i.Af,ata.i,.r,.rr\-
RECREATION DEPARTMENT
Reviewed by:
Comments:
\ @ /<uo,-tzts<<-?l Z-e@
D\L@ /_s ?,rx-r,*o
EIRE DEPARTMENT
Reviewed by:
Comments:
&tu€a'e7 S4oe..2 .?eo7 ?24/a.
Srlr:y,r.,tqf );u;u2. ftQ_Ct 4
|/N4a,.!W ") /) ]t,1,2,, (;1,.C
(_
OoT
Date
Date
<&.i s/.<. *rt*T r6,X1o
ft-<.a r 7 kvieeo frz 4<t /4/pau2>aa,z./S
Date
$lo@
o
C)
tl.,
UJ
F
Ur
a
{E
sr
rr)F-@
co(D(')
c.,oc')
olrJtr
4oE
Fo-
UJoz
o
aE
lrJ
u,l
o
o+,'oo
L+'o
U)|noo.-
E.- O
+raEog)ED>'OJgr- L
.-!=
o>.o(,L
'-Oo)Ct.- -crJo.- .u)u)!
-oL o).- O-E +).oE o>.-attrurF >o o)Oc Lao.o_cLoB u= (oooF-.c-|./)U)xF l-J =cotr Ea3()o
>(too'o-cE >.ro o <oLc a |l
(no-$--
r' $ E==----: fEOO ur 3+JQL(rOE E ?L-t- 0) .- --- (-)OO +rq-c{.? oc 0j -c E >- _-< J'-LCtrOF\,O.- t ?- \-o,O.- t ?- \-oO '{- E d-s- ) t !
| .rJ ., ,.1 , cjcul oc-cx]-'o o .c o o o.-O
=-
+r '- L t/|rr- ,Ao br,ltPtoc()- q_Elcl u|]J-C._ L._ c< P{J O O {nE O Oc+ro|.r|Loo+rcoc oE . cESCOpa',O(n-ag o . o o o cDo g)O E -o > oq--c o cF LF oE L c c c.-O O ('.C f rJ.-^.- L-g>P> r:' C .(tO;o c O O o o L-o L o.-1'- L > o o >! c =o-O Ot +J- O-O!- o--c C - OcO 0 r)o'- o o o p L|/|(o trL L!_o('o=O> ortr O O+r- j- Oo- c (t o > c (a g-oO -.- c OO-oO(oC)!-@ c o.- o (J c')E L NO- O+J Erl c O O.-J N.- c O O._ cEt,O U (n O {J C o.-.- a-cO> OO u)(D+r- L (/) C (.r) cO (a C O-co O._O tr -._OOOo c-c.- .o u) a d! -.- +,.P F {J :xF .ri-r\O E (o O- ut.PF (UO .- LE O L O E CO+J- O C >'O Gt ? tEc o o(F J L O- tn U_ crJ L o o! o r^ o): L o'o q- coi6lqq o o O .- +, o- -.: oq2 +-oEcL> E O ->.gi.:cc|ooL.=ooi.r-.r-,l- TC LF r0 -.-.-.- t/l.-En o f 0r- c 0 o-c-.-EC C !, Ut >'.- r- i r-r.- .- itrJ '- O rU rU E O_ O_ .oE Oc |/)E.- c ro O.
P O O.- O,) O rU o c - t/||rE::-O+J(,|>>L-OrnCod() E lJ iD O O O_ r- - .r-.r .- d +.r.- -o -c.c o c c .-- o- O .. L O l/lOOl,OtI qt t\ qr 3 0J O- .- L- i oE OIO 3 +r= t, O +, rr-.- O_o 4J \o 0) O.- {J O O O trL C- L .-t,| o o.t j.r_r 6 o.-!- o@ ! .E- C- (u ._ .Cc.---L c LFC{JF .-ojO_c+r<-(or!
-C (J ' {J{J(nO E(oL(D-t! L {rtr.-F(n E+r o_o o-c.:o? = -C')o-ro 5u6oGr.Jco O r. Et.- = O i iE(,.I- L u).-!)- O u) .-.r CL +J rJ.1 O .- t,n o-o o o u c!-O1r\-O !i -c rU r.- O c L-C|+ d C,
=FF-> 6 FL(r+,E -a-Ort
r.r\@o\
Nc{
(,
=
Elrl
'oE(J
oE
tIE
)j
DONALD E. CORDOVA, P.C.
Ar ron^rr;,s-Ar-law
150 ll [.'lli F Srnrer Buildirq
l].i I i3rh Srnrrr
De rne a. ColonAdo 80202
D( r\Al D i. a.()ltf)(r\,.\
t,iit'?\' \ HA'?Rts
ll)\FPtl I \4fl t(rN
iol-lN \l C(r\\FI IrllcH^F A I)ERAI fS
\1]C HAFL, (, C()OI,5LY
1101\296't,6, I
June 13,' l9B5
Ivlr.'Bill Anders. P.E.
Town of Vail Engineer75 South Frontage RoadVail, Colorado 81657
RE: Wolfgang Lampe Residence - 2328 Garmisch Driver vail, CO
Dear Mr. Anders:
You are probably by now lrell avrare of the problems associatedwith the Lampe residence located at 2328 Garmisch Drive in Vail.
The undersigned represents Mr. Lampe in his dispute with EdwardsBuilders regarding repair of the structure. As part of myinvestigation of this case, I have consulLed Mr. Ron Holcombe of
Fox & Associates of Denver for expert geotechnical engineeringadvice. Mr. Holcombe has advised me to contacL you for youropinion as to the requirements which the Town of Vail may havewith respect to detailed geotechnical surveys done on houses. Asyou are aware, defendant Edwards Builders' counsel has hired Mr.Joe Jehn to come up with plans for remedial repair q,ork on thehouse. There does not now exist, nor has there ever existed, aset of detailed documents relating to a soils survey done on thelot. The only soils work that has been done on the house isderived from tvro test pits which vrere recently dug at thesoutheast corner of the house.
Mr. Holcombe has advised ne that these test pits will not provide
adequate soils information so that the house can be underpinnedas proposed in Mr. Jehnrs plans. Mr. Holcombe feels, as do I,that a detailed geotechnical survey should be performed on the
house before any underpinning repair work is conducLed to repairthe foundation. What is your feeling on this? Also' I aminterested to know what you feel the requirements are under Vail
Ordinance number 29 relating to a slope stability analysis on theslope to the south of the house. I would appreciate your
conrments on this matter as quickly as possible.
On June l8th, this matter will be taken Co Eagle County DistrictCourt for a settlement conference, and it would certainly behelpful to know the requirements of the Town of Vail in thisregard prior to such conference. W@, as plaintiffrs attorneys inthis matter, do noL want to place ourselves in a position where
we have to accept a settlement, offer that is based on a proposedset of repair plans thaL do noL caII for a detailed geotechnical
I.{r. Bill AndersJune 13, 1985
Page Two
survey. Obviously, the cost of such a survey is quitesubstantial and should be included in a settlement offer.Therefore, would you please advise me as soon as possible in thisregard.
Barbara Pisanko, in her leLter to you dated l4ay 24, 1985, on thismatter, has stated that it is her understanding that you wouldfollow the recommendations of the supervising engineer, namelyJoe Jehn, on the project and would not require anything specialbeyond Mr. Jehn's recommendations. When I reported this to RonHolcombe. he felt that this statement was made in error. Couldyou please advise me as to whether this statement accuratelyreflects your stance on such matters.
Thank you for your assistance.you in the very near future.
MGC,/vt
P.S.
If you would like
Denver number ) .
I look forward to talking with
Very truly yours,
DONALD E. CORDOVA, P.C.
7!w&
to reach me by phone, my number is 296-8631 (a
ooksey
PRESENT
Diana Donovan
Duane Piper
Howard Rapson
Jim Viele
Jere Walters
Planning and Environmental Commission
January 28, 1985
STAFF PRESENT
Peter Patten
Tom Braun
Kristan Pritz
Rick Pylman
The
t.
2.
Piper, chairman.
?-n
Tom Braun explained the request anci stated that extensive grading wourd bedone to'construct berms on'3 sides. Tlr" "ung.,uul-io-oe-useo only by the vail"Police Department anci at this time auring aaviigrri r,ou"i Jniv. The vail Metr:o,Recreat'ion District had written i-tetter-staiini tnat ttrey nao no object.ion.fhe Police Department held a public-mJeting to discuss concerns. No verbal''.or, written concerns hacl been ieceived to dite.
Donovan
si gnage
mentioned concern ofto the north. Viele
visibl il ity from
moved and Walters
neighborhoods and also suggested
seconded to a rove the ues tper the staff memo. The vote -0 in favor.
4.uest to amend the zonin code, Cha ter .|8.04, definition of GRFA, inorder to allow an extra of 250 s uare feet to structures ve yearsord or older under cEitain co p I i cant: Town o
Tom Braun explained the requested amendment and addedrrom the Planning Commission in November of 19g4, thesignificant issu6s which the siuii'it,..' incorporated
that after gaining approval
Town Council raised someinto changes in this proposal
meeting was called to order at 3:00 pm by Duane
Approval of minutes of Januar.y 7, l9g5 Approved
uest for a front setback variance in order Lot 6,ock 8, lntermffi nry MaruyamaSta f f recomme nda Eioil-TFFloGl
Kristan Pritz gave the staff presentat.ion and correcteiinE ck requesti"rJl"^ri""uipi i.unt,Hcnr v Mr nl.,l::9,*'ll.T:^y:^pf:.:!-lg_l"*.i q,.stioli, -yiir.i:, ili,ii"'seconaea to approve tne setuact< vaiiar.iie-oi-)-ie"ffi
3.uest for a conditional use rmit in order to construct a hand. Applicant:epartment
uild a residence
a
Planning and Environmental Commission
January 29, l9g5
2:15 pm Site Visits
3:00 pm Public Hearing
l. Approval of minutes of January 7, l9g5
2. Request for a front setback variance in order to build a residenceon Lot 6, Block 8, Intermountain Subdivjsion.Applicant: Henry H. Maruyama (Staft Rec: Approval)
3. Request for a conditional use permit in order to construct a handgun_range at the Vail Town Shops in the public Use District.Applicant: Vail Police Department (Staff Rec: Approval)
4. Request to amend the zoning code, Chapter .|g.04, definjtion of
GRFA' in order to allow an extra GRFA of 250 square feet to structuresfive years old or more, under certain conditions.Applicant: Town of Vail (Staff Rec: Approval)
T0 BE TABLED 5. Request for a conditional use permjt and for a minor subdivis.ion
;lJ"3:;.:;,;:H::' ffioll::";1""E,;:l:"?l'l:T.il:l.l"lo8A of the
6. Set date for public hqpring for zoning of Spraddle Creeksubdivision. ($ Js"t.
7- R9v!9w of_changes be'i ng made to the proposed redevelopment planof Phase IV of SDD6, Vajl Vjllage Inn.
e
CRITERIA AISD FINDINGS
Upon review of Criteria andlfunicipal Code, the Departmentapproval of the requestedfactors:
Consideration of Factors
co
Maruyama L/28/e5
Findings, Section 7A.62.06O of theof Corununity Devel opment recommendsvariance based upon the following
r*\'
Srr
The six foot front setback will not create a major negativeimpact as the house is rocated approximately 32 feet from theedge of the road. Lot 6 is also located below the road approximateryl0 feet. r,ooking from Basingdale Boulevard towardJlhe housS(looking north)] ttt" view w5utd only show the first ftoor ofthe house. Because the road is located 32 feet alray from thehouse and is also above the property looking down on Lot 5.it is felt that the 6 foot encroachment into the front setbackwill not have any significant negative impacts on adjacent proper-tles.
The degree to wlrich rel ief from strict or I iteral interpretationand enforcement-of a speccompaancl unl torm of treatment amonq sites n thevicinitor to attain ect ves o s ti.tl e woi spec pr elte.
Staff believes that the applicant has made an effort to redesignthe house in a way which eliminates the height variance as wellas the side setback variance. It is felt that every efforthas been made to design the house is accordance wittr the zoninorequirements for this lot. For these reasons it is felt thai.the front setback variance r+ould not be a grant of special privilege.
The effect of the requesteq variance on I ight and air, distribution
-
As mentioned in the previous memo, no significant impacts wouldoccur due to the granting of this variance. However, the Townengineer has requested that a revocable right-of-way permitbe obtained for_the retaining walls needed for the dfivewayonto the site which are actually on public right-of-way.
to othe. existingor pgtential uses and s
.t
t.
Oc
Planning and Bnviromental
Cornpunity DevelotrDent
ilanuary 28, 1985
l1o:
FROII:
DATE:
Depart.Eent
,\'f,i$:
- s^
SII&IBCI: Requeat for a front aetback variance of 6 feetorder to build a reeidre q lot 5, Bloek 8, Intetmrtal.nSubdivieion. A5rplicantr Eeury E. l,[aruyana
DESCRIPTTOU OF VARIAIICE RBOTIBATED
Mr. Henry Maruyama is requeeting a front eetback variance of6 feet in order to construct his residence. The elopes beneaththe house are greater than 40t. For thie reaaon, the garagemay be located in the front setback. Eourever, the 4Ot tfopesdo not altow for the house to be buirt in the front setback.
the applicant makea the following ataternent aa to ntry the varl.anceis being requested:
"... becauee of the unique nature of this site (49t slope)and more specifically becauee of two reeultant conditlonsrdhich have worEened the hardebip: I ) The road has beenbuilt lO or more feet above the property line over mostof its lengttr, and 2) fte front property line is 15 feetor npre frcm the road over moet of the length of the propertyline. These conditions do not exist on Eeverar propeitie-sfurther west on Baeingdale Boulevard. This has allowed' those otdnera to build-much closer to the road, eliminatinglong structured drivewaye and parking and minimizing th6probleme of havlng -to push_the buildings out over the s1ope.The requested variance will not result in the buildingappearing too cloee to the road, nor will the buildingappear taller than one etory above the road. Its relationshlpto the road wirr be croser to that of the nearby propertielmentioned. It is believed that the property -aiiedtf y tothe rdest of the eubject property coula-a!so benefit tromthe relief being requeeted, and that the conflguratlonof all buildinge' entrancee could then trave a more equaland unifonn appearance as well ease of construction.,,
rt should be noted that the pl anning comrniEsion reviewed anapplication by Mr. Maruyana on December 10, 1984. At that timethe applicant was requesting an ll foot height variance, a frontsetback variance of 7 feet, and a eide setback variance of 6feet. AII three varianceg were denied. planning commiseionsuggested that the houee be designed with more considerationfor the site. Please see the enclosed drawings.
fC
- -(
t-tc: c,-r'l_=e_:t
l' . r.l
?p'.e ultt€
a3i=,
i 7.!;-''-':1
II
-.,=+-+ *li-,. ,.i.
(?'P-, 1 ,r-.:,' r'; , =
-r: ..\-
'' ". lJjTo"-rll''* trlzAw'lr"J6".7 AFi:rv-;is- '-.",. '. .:: IUTWO'I2 aQ ZJV\D Tt\C
.' ir' aVLFAL-L 5l\A1't At,.lt2t^l1-l_tNa
.:.1 -:J-;: :F arv ?lltLplhlq - |airJAL
, -. .: . l l^)r / l/ ll \^ir I b-.,a /tr|.trt<'tl':,,'.,,-.;i 9Vll4N Wll- be 9IU9M$TLE- _;:.-ftK FE\lcw. A'2 l))[:f,\l,u-Y
.)-::'.- KE(?Jli<f l./
. ,-:-:t
- ;i.i
- - rL_-..:
''a-
l'i1Al4t'fAl$A FgJP*tcE . I
fLft)l4 .. ,' '.r:'+-:'a:I,,i
t-Df (,P'1P:YE vltu tt'ftle
MCr.rNfAtN €LIPQ:J'; :' .i,
OC
Maruyama r/28/8s
STAFF RECO}IMEITDATIOIT
T-h."r.5o.*uni ty Devel opment Department recommends approval oftnf$ foot front setback variance. fhe variance is-iarrantedbecause of the practical difficulty on the site of locatingthe house on the property without cieating a height varianc5problem as well as other setback probrems.- rn addition, thereare extraordinary circumstances on this site due to the slopethat make it di?ficult to "orr.t.r"t a trouse trithout creating
_either a height or setback variance problem. The applicanftras resubmitted a proposat which eliminated trr,o out of the threevariances that were previously requested. staff feel s thatevery effort has been made to comply with Town of Vail ioningrequirements. The 6 foot setback is !,/arranted and should beapproved.
IP
<-E
\'. $, ..\|
-a{a J7. rlil
-*'sFrESS.,;-:'i'
'..:'..:" ''.
r:- '. al :
F
s..
.tft
\sB
7l
,
t
a
t
&o.
\\2F\s2-
s.sc '|.
\.r2\
\.' \
,[
")t.\:t
,il
1t
-;.i
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
STT&]ECT:
Planning and Environmental Co"""i ssion
Comunity Deveiolment DeveloPment
Decerrber IO, 1984
Request for a height variaDce, a front setback variance
.td . side setback variance in order to build a residence
on Iot 6, Block g, Intermountain subdivisioD'Applicant: Eenrl' E. Maruyama
DESCRIPTION OF VARLANCE REQI'ESTED
Mr. Henry Maruyama is requesting a.heigh.t variance, a front
setback vaiiance ind a side s-etback variance in order to construct
a primary/secondary residence and a garage. The first request
is to exceed the a.l I owabl e height of 3 3 f eet by 1l f eet. The
height of the structure is measured verticalJy from the existing
gt.d. or fini shed grade (whichever is more restrictive) to the
highest ridge line of a sloping roof. In this case, this would
maie the height of the propbse-d structure 44 f eet above the
existing grade.
Secondly, a front setback variance of 7 feet is being reque_sted.
The southvtest corner of the house encroaches into the front
setback. The slopes.beneath the house are above 408.
The applicant is also requesting a 6 foot side setback variance
in orblr to construct a garage for the Primary/Secondary resi_dence.
Trhe garage is located in tte front setback on the southwest
cornlr of the lot. This location is allowed given the fact
that the lot has slopes in excess of 30t.
The applicant makes the following statement as to why these
variances are being requested:
"...because of the unique nature of this site (498 sJope)
and more specifically because of two resultant conditions
which have worsened the hardship: 1) The road has been
built 10 feet or more above the property Jine over most
of its length, and 2) the front proPerty li-n9- is 15 feet
or more frorn-the road over most of the length of the Propertyline. These conditions do not exist on several Properties
further west on Basingdale Boulevard' This has allowed
those owners to build"much closer to the road, eliminating
long structured driveways and parking and minimizing the
problems of having to push the buildings.out over the slope
lwhich create building height problems). The req.uested
variances wilI not result in the building appearing too
close to the road, nor wil I the buil ding appear tal I er
than one story above the road. It's relationship to the
road will be closer to that of the nearby properties mentioned.
Upon review of Criteria and Findings, Section :"-8.62.060 of the
t'tunicipai Code, the Department of Calrunln]lJ ment recommends
Consideration of Factors
It is believed that the property directly to the west of
the subject property could also benefit from the relief
being requested, anq that the configuration of alJ buildings'
entrances coul d then have a more equal and uniform appearance
as wel I as ease of construction."
CRITERIA AITD FINDI}IGS
The rel ationshi ^s !'^ ^ y^uested variance to other e::istin
or potential use s aiid struc'!ures i-n the vicinit
Height Variance
A height variance of such a magnitude will have a negative impact
upon adjacent structures in the vicinity. Houses are I ocated
on either side of Iot 6. ILre proposed structure wi]l be built
on piers ranging in height from 26 feet to approximately 13
feet high. The lots located below Lot 6 are also developed'
Views from these units would look up at the proposed Piers- Also,
view impacts from any vantage point woufd be decreased if the
house were terraced down the slope. (Please see attached Section
A, Section B and the elevations.) Views from adjacent ProPertieswill be negatively impacted by thi s tlpe of structure.
In addition, it should be emphasized that the intent of the
height ordinance is to consLruct buildings in relation to the
topography of the site. T'he excessive height of this structure
iJ in part due to the fact that the structure is not designedwith reipect to the topography. Certainly, the site is diffjcult
to work with due to the slope probJ em. However, the structure
could be designed in such a hray so that the structure wouldbe terraced down the hillside. ltr e height variance has a negative
impact on adjacent structures.
Front Setback Variance
Itre 7 foot front setbackimpact as the house woul
the road. However, it
in a way to el iminate the
Side Setback Variance
would probably not create a major negative
d be located 3l feet from the edge of
is felt that the house could be designed
need for thi s variance.
A side setbackproperty woul d
var i ance of 6 feet
have s ome impact on
along the west side of thethe adjacent propertY to
the west. Presently afel t that the garage andel iminate the need for a 6
t
house does exist on this lot. Ithouse could be moved to the eastfoot side setback.
lsto
v].cJ.nrty or o attatn oD'l ect ]-ves o s tit out' qran
or sPec]-al pr e9e
Heiqht Variance
The granting of the variance would constitute the granting ofa specia_l pfiyl,f eS,q- ?!q .would not be necessary to achieve compa-tibiliCy or u'nifoimi{y of treatment among sites. Accordingto Town records, other properties along Basingdale Drive didnot request height variances. Most of the sites aJong Basingda) eD:ive do have slopes in e-xcess of 3O3. The additional heightal so does not provide any benefit to the neigticorhood or cornmunity.Even though th6 building-will be somewhat sc-reened by evergre6ntrees on the site, the design of the structure should refl ectmore of an effort to build a house that fits the topographyof the site. For these reasons staff feels that it would bea grant of specia) privilege to approve the ll foot height variance.
Front Setback Variance
The granting of the front setback variance is considered tobe a grant of special privilege. Staff believes that the houseshoul d be moved back out of the front setbck to provide forparking on Lot 6 and to elirninate the variance. The applicantitatei tT-at by placing the house in the front setback nf'he con-figuration of al 1 buildings' entrances could then have a moreequal and uniform appearance" and facilitate construction.Staff believes that each lot requires a unique design solution.It v/as never the intent of the front setback requirement tocreate the appearance of uni form entrances along a street.Besides, the house to the east is built below the road witha walkway constructed on the slope to make EfrFTnit accessiblefrom Basigndale Road. The ease of construction is not a reasonto grant any t$)e of variance. To grant the front setback variancewould be a grant of special privilege.
Side Setback Variance
Staff also feels that it would be a grant of special priviJegeto approve the side setback variance. It appears that the housecould be constructed further to the east along with the garagewhich would remove the necessity of havinq to have a si.de setbackvariance.
The deqree to which relief frcrn the strict or literal interpretation
compatibilitv and uni formitv of treatment amonq sites in the
o
fhe effect of the requested variance on liqht and air, distribution@ifacilities and utilities, and public safety.
lib significant irnpacts. However, the Tovrn Engineer has requested
that a revocable right-of-way permit be obtained for the retaining
walls needed -for the driveway bnto the dite wtrich are actually
on publ ic right-of-way property
FINDINGS
llre Pl anninq and Envirorunental Commission shall make the folJowingtlnotnqs Detore grantlnq a varJ,ance.
tt' not constitute a gr-ant
of special-priviJege inconsistent with the limitations on other
properties classified in the same district.
That the graniing of the variance will not be detrimental to
the public health, safety, or vrel fare, or materially injurious
to properties or improvements in the vicinity.
That the variance is warranted for one or more of the folJowing
reasons:
The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of
the specified regulation would result in practical difficultyor unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the
objectives of thi s title.
Ttrere are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or
conditions applicable to the site of the variance that
do not apply generally to other properties in the same
zone.
The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement ofthe specified regulation would deprive the appJicant ofprivileges enjoyed by the olrners of other properties in
the same district.
S TAFF RECOI"IMENDATTONS
Height Variance
The Community Devel opment Department recommends denial of therequested height variance. It is felt that the residence couldhave been designed in a way that accommodates the topography
of this site. This type of design would have resulted in aheight that would be within the height limit or very close toit. T'he granting of the variance would constitute a granting
o f a special pri.vi ) egr e as other property owners that have buil t
along Basingdale Drive have adapted their proposals to the steep
topography of thi s area.
Front Setback Variance
The €orrunnity Development Department recommends denial of therront setbacr< variance, as to grant the variance would constitutea grant of special privilege.
Side Setback Variance
The comrnunity Development Department staff recommends denialof the requested side setback variance. The structures couldbe moved further east which would eliminate !!re need for a sidesetback-variance. The gfanting of the variancG would constitutea grant of special privilege inconsistent with the rimitationson other properties aJong Basingdale Drive.
lie offer our assistance to the applfor the resicence r.rhich wcrks witiipositive manner .
icant in arriving at a designthe existing site in a more
= -tJ-
i\llil;llt
\I
\..1 |1isiKi'-\ |
:ql\\-
I
\
\
I1-'I
I't
I
i
Il
ri
II
1
z
..\n
ffil-lF]', ,l'_l[ .,,
11 ,,, I'.:'.iJ ,,,,il '.'I
, ,l'; fl -- , ll .i, ,,'I
[r*.',i1,,:,1
-a,.--,/:-
'/'
-.
,rLt<
.. --r':
..;'r:\1-. ;7, .''': l. :.,:;i\.tzl :,.; ll,._.*: f.,i','fi ,':*d., : ff
,,i: \,..' t,l )r''/",- ,. \ll
,-.r' --.-.,- ..t,,li ,/' ., _ .,,-. .'jb...j, ,.:. .. , J+ . .._ :.:
r. :--,', 1.. ., tr ". -.t -,- ':.. 1, -^,.-:-... ".'-..li.
- 1., ,l--..1
:'.WLY
?"*i'-.":Ili.'r
Oc or 'l
rc?
TO:
FROM:
DtrTE:
Planning and Environmental Connission
Cmuunity Developnent Development
Ilecenber lO, 1984
SURfECT: Request for a eide setback variance, a front setbackvariance and for a height variance in order to builda residence on Iot 6, Block 8, Intenountain.Applicant: Eenrry H. Maruyama
DESCRIPTIOII OF VARIAIrCE REQUESIBD
Mr. Henry Maruyama is requesting a height variance, a frontsetback variance and a side setback variance in order to constructa garage. The first request is to exceed the allowable heightof 33 feet by lJ feet. tll:e height of the structure is measuredvertically frorn the existing grade or finished grade (whicheveris more restrictive) to the highest ridge tine of a slopingroof. In this case, this would make the height of the proposedstructure 44 feet above the existing grade.
The applicant is also requesting a 6 foot side setback in orderto construct a garage for the Pr imary/ Secondary residence.The garage is located in the front setback. Hotdever, this locationis al]owed, given the fact that the lot has slopes in excessof 30t. The applicant makes the following statement as to whythese statements as to why these statements are being requested:
". . .because of the unique nature of this site (49E slope)and more specifical 1y because of t\./o resultant conditionswhich have worsened the hardship: I ) The road has beenbuilt 10 feet or more above the property Jine over mostof its length, and 2) the front property line is 15 feetor more from the road over most of the length of the propertyline. These conditions do not exist on several propertiesfurther west on Basingdale Boulevard. This has allowedthose osrners to build much closer to the road. eliminatinglong structured driveways and parking and minimizing theproblems of having to push the buildings out over the slope(which create building height problems). The requestedvariances will not result in the building appearing tooclose to the road, nor will the building appear tallerthan one story above the road. It,s relationship to theroad will be closer to that of the nearby properties mentioned.It is believed that the property directly to the west ofthe subject property could also benefit from the reliefbeing requested, and that the configuration of all buildings,entrances could then trave a more equal and uniform appearanceas we] I as ease of construction."
Upon review of Criteria and Findings, Section 18.62.050 of the
-
o(or
CRITERIA ATD FINDINGS
The relalignship of the requested variance to @.!iggbrP
t"t""a t*t"*"
A height variance of such a magnitude will have a negative impactupon adjacent structures in the vicinity. Houses are locatedon either side of Lot 6. ltre proposed structure will be builton piers ranging in height from 26 feet to approximate 15 feethigh. Please see attached Section A, Section B and the elevations.Views from adjacent properties will be negatively impacted bythis type of structure. In addition, it should be emphasizedthat the intent of the height ordinance is to construct buirdingsin relation to the topography of the site. the excessive heightof this structure is in pait due to the fact that the structureis not designed with respect to the topography. Certainly,the site is difficult to work with due to the slope problem.Hohrever, the structure could be designed in such a way thatit would have more of a workable relationship with the topography.
Side Setback Variance
A side setback variance of 6 feet alongproperty would impact somewhat the adjacenta trouse does exist on this lot. It isand house could be moved to the east to ela 6 foot side setback.
Front Setback Variance
the west side of theproperty. Presentl yfel t that the garageiminate the need for
The degree to which relief from the srict or literal interpretation
compa ty and uniformity of treatment amoncr sitesor to at nt e obiectives of this title w out
spec al pr J ege.
Height Variance
The granting of the variance would constitute the granting ofa special privilege and $rould not be necessary to achieve compa-tibility or uniformity of treatment among sites nor to attainthe objectives of the zoning code. According to Town records,other properties along Basingdale Drive did not request heightvariances. Most of the heights along Basingdale Drive do haveslopes in excess of 308. staff feels that to qrant a variance
Oc or
of ll feet for the height of the building would be a grant ofspecial priviJege. Ttre additional height also does not provideany benefit to the neighborhood or community. Even though thebuilding will be somer,vhat screened by evergreen trees on thesite, the design of the structure should reflect more of aneffort to buitd a house that fits the topography of the site.For these reasons staff feels that it would be a grant of specialprivilege to approve the Il foot height variance.
Side Setback Variance
Staff also feels that it would be a grant of special privilegeto approve the side setback variance. It appears that the housecould be constructed further to the east along with the garagewhich would r emove the necessity of traving to have a side setbackvariance.
The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution
tacrl ttj-es and utilities, and publ i
t" *""**""a *"acts. Hohrever, the Tohrn Engineer has requestedthat a revokable right-of-way permit be obtained for the retainingwalls needed for the driveway onto the site which are actuallyon public right-of-way property.
FINDINGS
Ihe Planning and Environmenta.l Conunission shal I make the fol I owing
That the granting of the variance wilI not constitute a grantof special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on otherproperties classified in the same district.
That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental tothe public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injuriousto properties or improvements in the vicinity.
That the variance is warranted for one or more of the followingreasons:
The strict or literal interpretatlon and enforcement ofthe specified regulation would result in practaical difficultyor unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with theobjectives of thj-s title.
There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances orconditions applicable to the site of ttre vriance that donot apply generally to other properties in the same zone.
The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement ofthe specified regulation hrould deprive the applicant ofprivileges enjoyed by the o\.i/ners of other properties in
Or or
the same district.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
The Community Development Department recommends denial of therequested height variance. It is fel t that the residence couldhave been designed in a way that accommodates the topographyof this site. That type of design would have resulted in aheight that \dould be within the height Iimit or very close toit. Ifhe granting of the variance would constj.tute a grantingof a special privilege.
Side Setback Variance
The Community Development Department staff recomnends denialof the requested side setback variance. The structures couldbe moved further east which would el iminate the need for a sidesetback variance. The granting of the variance would constitutea grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitationson other properties along Basingdale Drive.
Or O6
Planning and Environmental Commission
December .l0, .l984
PRESENT STAFF PRESENT
Diana Donovan
Gordon Pierce
Duane Piper
Howard Rapson
Jim Viele
,Jere ll|al ters
ABSENT
Scott Edwards
The meeting was called to order at 2:50 by Duane piper, chairman.
l.
2.uest tor a heiqht and front and side setback vari ances in order to
Peter Patten
Tom Braun
Betsy Rosolack
Duane Piper corrected vote on item three,. Sorenson and Cooper reaiignmentof'lots lines between parcers c and D oi Lot,20-r ;;a io-Z, aisno"n. Thevote was 5.in favor, 0 against.with piper not participai;ng.Viglg. mgygd..and Pierce s6conded to appiove the minutes as corrected. Vote waso-u tn ravor-
u1 lo a prlmary,/SeCOndar res l dence an a qaraqe on Lot QCK 6,ntermountai n Subal v i s iin-pp | 'l cant:nry H.ruyama
Tom Eraun reviewed the request. (The commissioners had visited the site beforethe meeting. ) Braun pointed out itrit 6"cuuse of the steep site, the garagecould be in the front'setbact wlthoui neea ror a variance. He explained thatthe applicant felt his request qruiiii"a as a hardship ueiause the road wasconstructed l0 feet or more above the Rlgnerty tine oiei-moit ot its lengthand because the front property tine is'is'feei or more-from-the road over mostof the length of the pi.opbrty'lint. '- '
Braun reported that the staff felt a height variance of such a magnitude (11feet) would have a negative impact on adjacent struiturei-ina wouta be a grantof special privileoe 6ecause olner propeiti"i-uiorg-ri.tirgilre had not requestedheight variances. He stated that tire staff also t;tt tnai-ttre buildings could!lu" 9"gr designed in.such a way to'iciommooate il'e iteepreis or the site.The staff also fert that.grantiirg_a_front setback uu.iin[.-"ouId be a grantof special privilege. The staff"felt that the houie;;;i;;" buirt furtherto the east, etimiiating the:need ioi i siCe settiil ;;;i;n;".
Planning and Environmental Conrnission
December .l0, .l984
2:00 Site InsPections
3:00 pm Publ 'ic Heari ng
l. Approval of minutes of rneeting of November 26.
2. Request for a height and front and s'ide setback variances
order to build a residence on Lot 6, Block 8, Intermountain.
Appl i can',: Henr-r' H. iiaru-t'ana
3. ieques" for a ccnci-"icl:al use peir-ii in cr,jer ;c construci a
heii-pad on Tracts E and F, Yail \tillage Znd Filing (tne Vail
Va11ey i'ieoical Cenier. ) Appi icant: Vail Valiey i'iedica1 Center
4, Pref iminary revjew of exterjor alterations of:
a. Lionsquare Lodge - KB Ranch restaurant deck enclosure
b. L'ionshead Gondola bldg remodel and addition
c. Lifthouse Lodge bldg commercial expansion
5. Report from the Park steerjng conm'i ttee
6. Djscussion of Plann'ing "Open House" January 10.
7. Brief presentation of proposed modifications to the
approved development p1 ans for Golden Peak.
(;)
6f:tt
!noC-rnIflm
mzo
6azo
IrgFgi**'H
fid
t(flo)N
IS
l0'
I
I
I
5o
3
I(toz
t-lFrnrn
omz
mt
oo
ot0
rfo
@oNoo
m
m!-ozra
ato
0,)Io)(rl(,|
Il\)
CDo
t
p
6
!0
ono€
T
m
0,"l
\n
\ooo
{-{ otn.rta-< or€Tor> -i-.o<croT,@o 9 , <.{<iroo)o x-.rro ETorJ:n o-'-''-roiO6ic5 6' d oi r-n o.r r-_ f -.rt -.O c -o O o. o-.r it r i - 5 Ct A- it ;: _.q'o 0.| (,olnc-r Itr o ;{ j,.i.+ii
= -rt i -< -oO O'O -t! OrO O- r,/r i .; d O -,rO O =. O' r . r-r:O oo-- <Jq||'- Aii.oOiirttr ^ = oo,I'<- f urt O O,nOrO f -. O, Ur -rr-t. r O c,r-n+fO I tr)Oor=rrr {:."t- 6<<1-o.r.<o -r cr -1 -nr-t O(.c 3JO-i "rO+er rtOiO-io,.'-- ut C -O_:-Oq-. tc) OcLrro T Qo. -.i:.4 6,1 6 \0 rt -< jOr:1ic N -r. o -r OTq O L-. - --. €-- ii d oort io -.q9o ol-ro I r+ cr c -C-n5O-d = = -0, .aoQ o-JO o-X O ;r o- '-r JrL. ooOr--.jOdr- ; 6 o'\(o O i.l-o-nolt_onoTore.+O=-ito-inO-n._S .loQQ -.f tl, rr o -,rr-@ ni: co v !.+q--1 l-t:O7| (o_ O ir '-r irf f- -{<6G iD- pc)f< rAO tfr,J:. =rro rrc)i.O '-r- r, 6- b-fl, .t rq< q ta € O O O O-- =O ai :. O, =ri.t Y O, rr. - aroC: Jf-O=J-'O.< o- e=TO -r qr =t 0, c. -rt fr|-r -. = OCj O C.to .r O -.r.o tn -l- =. (oO=.{{-- 5 =y O trr -t \,1 -J0, ut< (o rr J- >i o O'd __t - ; _.o c O .r.rr 3 -<lo_d Cj =O 6 -.o 5'- o'-. id -_ :f : I T.< O ' (t, C O vr o -. J- -.r I r -<
=c-n -nO OrCOn t,-.+.tOeOl j -+r0rqc rr \O o=O-tro r-r -, -.- i o-=,Ci' r E'lFu rrlj r co cqL3-! 3-1 J O Ji b roEor:. Jl-. 1u - o=l,6 r =.-.ro.+Eoo j ;
= -O olo o e - r{ F j. ct o-- 5.f -r o OP - f lTO(/' o- ur -.:.b o--' ro-ro o O,-r ir ol\= c| E'to r+ !r e '-r to IOJ O .1 rr O < O - Oflq-d :.13ili 3Ei-a ol=:g.=L;._; @ g:r(9 o o o.€ -r - orl _. o- -r E:, (D(' q o, CL.t rro rt :. ni p tn tO ='- t-o O -. O fTo-r Trrr"6 -. 16J90Ool-'-: 6 "rQ iro :' o_ :ir O l:r0 O €l-'- i .t -< = Fc o:. (o (c) - o = = o=lct O yo o or:-t ? O o f- rt 5 olo ir-io -r cr-. @o-^(O Or. >-r :. -.:f O - ' -.-. O(r) O\J 1 ut (Ct f O f O |, O Or 5@ -.O 50Jq-+|rr O : Tir +-. r+ -+r -'=:5rr-O f P! > O O -0r: O, o ur.t O,- t-t O -.O-r- u'3Oiro rr.r -:r -< ir -i :.9?= fOo- rt rt i+ -.= otO6OCiOni crL-.! or< . 'rOo o_o.E| o_+--_oOI(' O :hC:..!| -r O:l .< . :. 1O_CQ :. 0, sr O O :. ,1 O o-f (o .? -. )o fo-9 (o oOc-. o-<-n- -oi].o-.-rt. ;oJ r-i of rCeOlqr-l.+ O-et OC-ngOr --r o_ ii-=; io.r =n.<t,lt . ^ =tg oeoo j'or6- j-. -t O lD .r 0, -.O rt 5 - 6COO 1.+OtO J:'.t -. :t +^1rz,.i O -? c o O 5(ct - !? O i-f, l.ct : c OO -. j+:..r o-ro o o' :io--<-tr= ;O 0, -r .i O f -r O t+ :..r .- O'O O,]| -r:. TO O(o (/. o Cr O o c r i = -.q o orx o- rrto Q <=l--r\o@ 6 =O t,.r f d. rr Ol C i -l OJ O O O CO- rt.<.:.:. LT r+-f O C< r f-o ../7nTg ur@: o O or -q J o -. -o - cTOJ \r3O O_rr (..l.- OOior\o gO. Ut O -i -.X O CCr r+ O_'it 0,r I .tO -N) (oE-.36FOr -:A - o',-to :r-oFJ y-o66 ; o-tXT€ O-On or- tii- .+ or or i.rO'-r i.!q5 dO "re O, -.3('JOr vto € -. -o o, '1 i =- O:6 c 6:O Or q Q o o! -' < o \o +o i -r 5 o 5 E oqr <:r q -o o_ o = O 6 o_o o o_€ o 1 -O o , O O -to c O u uz-- - il or i iti- -t € < -n -< o - ur,6\r r+ 6 irg- lD o -.o € 5 l(o -.:'n(,r+5O!J4 -lOOy(ocoNJ
Or\-e-3--\-a
mzm
oo
om
-t
D7c)
=mo
(,)
G)
(.t
coqo
@1(rl
5a
c
I
TJ'oz
@J
mz
m
-:oo
;oN
FoI
ttr'
t-
C)!o€:
m7
;(.l
vlfr
ID
-0-|
t-lN
!oG'o
N
z, o-to -ho..r cL.ro€ rto-..r (o
|/| Or.-l vrC, -'EJ(oA,
f -n -.lIt oo-.c
= ootcL -r
Fi -<€Lo
ox't E-o o-'! |/|rotD ot4.1Oif
- o-'|
1J { qito o -.f,|, (,o
-. ir o.'t O -l -lr-.o o o,
Oorit f<:tOr+0r<:t.an 0,O -. -i.aft-i t aito t:tO O-r(r -.ooq (ooO- :tvtt - .t!l.t cL -t:F -. -r Oof o<rr (.cl lt -.coO t, -.cIJ|rt-lt,
od 5r-nd O O3<at -+t rt -.Jr -. vl oOir . €oo
FV
cro.. :r-r 0Jo.t
t-
C)-1o{t-t
o-l
-n
=
mzmt
oozom!
Ito
;mo
(|)e(..,
(,)
€oqo
@\.|gr
A(5
3
6o
(J'J(f
mz
mPoIooN
luwn
75 south fronlage road
vril, colorado 81657
(303) 476-7000
Richard Heinemeyer
3201 East 3rd Avenue
Denver, Colorado, 80206
RE: Maruyama Residence
Lot 6, Block 8, Vail
oftlce ol communlty deyelopment
February 27, 1985
Intermountain
Dear Richard,
I'm.wri ting to confirm the additional information that is needed toreview-the^Maruyama Residence for the Design Review Board mJetingMarch 6, I985.
2.
3.
0n the.site plan the roof ridge elevation and existing gradeelevations rvhich lie below thi roof ridge need to Oe ifeariyindicated on the site plan. The maximufr height arrowed undLrthe roof ridge eievation is thirty three feei. Att poinii aiongthe roof ridges should not_exceed thirty three feet.' The thirt!three foot height is.calculated by takiirg your roof ridgeelevation and comparing that to your exiiting grade eleiation oryour finished grade elevation whjch ever is moie restrictive-
Heights of retaining r,rall should be provided.
Your elevations of the house (north, south, east and west) shouldclearly show existing and finjshed grades. 0n a couple oi tneelevations,the existing grade runs off the blue prini and it isimpossible to tell where that existing grade is.
4. Because this lot_is located on forty percent or greater slopesspeciai restrictions apply which ar6 builined in"rel69.oso otthe hazaad regulations. tt is my understanOing thai-Vo, ur.aware of these requirements. Ifyou have quesiioni-u"uort tn"requirements please let ne know.
I will be scheduling..the_l4aruyama Residence for the lnrarch 6, r9g5,Design Review Board f'reetins. 'ii-uny-oi["" questions arise I wiilbe sure and call.
S i ncerely,
d4'il,n?,,1'Kristan Pritz
Town Planner
KP/ rme
I
I
1
IIAZAI{D REGULATIONS
date for a public hcaring to consider the zoning districts to be
imposed on the annexed area. (Ord. 23(1974) g 3 (part): Ord.
8(r973) $ 22.30r.)
18.68.050 Zoning district determination-Hearing notice and
conduct.
Notice shall be given, the hearing shall be conducted, and a
report of the planning commission stating its findings and
recommendations shall be transmitted to the town council in
accordance with the applicable provisions of Chapter 18.66.
(Ord. 23(197 4) $ 3 (part): Ord. 8( I 973) $ 22.30?.)
18.68.060 Zoning district determination-Council action.
Upon receipt of the report of the planning commission, the
town council shall determine the zoning districts to be imposedon the annexed area in accordance with the applicable
provisions of Sections 18.66.150 and 18.66.160. (Ord.
23(1974) $ 3 (part): Ord. 8(1973) $ 22.303.)
18.68.070 Zoning district determination-Ordinance.
The determination of zoning district by the town council
shall be made through its enactrnent of an ordinance imposing
zoning districts on the annexed area. (Ord. 23(1974) $ 3 (part):
ord. 8(1973) $ 22.304.)
Chapter 18.69
HAZARD RECULATIONS
Purpose.
Dc finitions.
Illaster ltazard. plans.
Allproval of urastcr plans.
Su ppleureutal studies.
497
Sectiorrs:
18.69.0r0
18.69.020
18.69.030
18.69.03 r
t8.69.032
r:
i
i
(Y.ril 9'15-78)
HAZAoREGULATIONS
E. The "zone of influence" means any area in a potentia'l avalanche hazardzone tlhere detailed information is not curreirtly available but which mavbe impacted by said hazard. These zones of infiuence strait-oe ii.iiq".iiaontheappropriatemapsofthezoningadninjstratorofthetown.
(Ord 12, igzb)
"Flood Insurance Study,'means the officia't reportEmergency Management Agency that jncludes fioodelevation of the base flood.
G. lltlrlllll:l improvement" means any repa'ir, reconstruction, or improvementor a structure, the cost of which equals or exceeds 50 percent of'themarket value of the structure. Market va]ue shall be d;terminea uv iqualified assessor designated by the zoning administrator. the mai.ketvalue of a structure is-determined either:
(l) before the improvement or repair is started, or
(2) if the structure has been damaged and is being restored, before thedamage occurred. For the purp6ses of this deiinition, ;suusiantiii
improvement" is considered to occur when the first atteraiion orany wall, ceiling, f'l oor, or other structural part of the bu.i ldinocommences' whether or not that alteration affeits the exteinal difien-sions of the.structure. The term does not, however, inc'r ude anvproject for improvement of a structure to 6omp1y *iit' .iiiiing ituteor local health, sanitary, or safety coae spei:i?ications which aresolely necessary to assuie safe riving condiiioni.iora io, tse:) -
18.69.030 Master hazard p'l ans
Thetownmanager shall-formuiate and develop master hazard plans for the town.said hazard plans shal'1. be based on Jnginebring studies ini snall indicate thelocation of known f1 oodplaini,-iuii'un.i" and geological hazard zones of influence,known red and blue avalanchu ina geoiosicat nizira"ur"ur,-ind forty percent slopeareas' in addition,,.the plans ma! shoil any other informition or data deemed tobe desirable by the. town.manage.." lriiirrr citizen participation during the formula-tion of the master hazard p'lais as well as oilre"-pnliei-oi-tn" intormaiion impie-mentation of the hazard studies and regulations, itrili-be encouraged. rhe puiposeof the master hazard p'l ans is to ideniity and alleviate present and future problemsliuSlld by-the construction of improvements in the hazard areas within the toynDy means of presenting in an ordei^]y fashion ttre generii -oita and informationwhich are esiential to the understa"nding or the re'lationship between the hazardsand improvements located within iiil-a"eas. The master haihro plans may be alteredfrom time to time to conform with new information or existing conditions. (Ord 12 :,gTg)
18.69.03.l Approval of master plans
The master hazard olans shall not be considered to.be official hazard plans ofthe town until and'unless the town-cornlil iaopt;-ih; ;;;; by motion. No substantialmodification of the master.ha-zara ptan itratt nb made-r;i;;; it is first approvedby the town council in. a simiiar tinnJ.. As soon as ine-mister hazard plans areadopted, or portions thereof are adopted, a copy of it shall be placed bn file'in the office of
F.provided by the Federalprofi'l es and water surface
498-1
D.
E.
r5*o REGUL^TroNs
c.
18.69'045 Designation of frood hazard zones and flood hazard studies
There are two sets "l^ltg:1 hazard maps and studies designated and adopted forthe Town of Vail. They are:
The zoning adnrinistrator may require any.applicant or person desiring tobuild in an avalanche hazard zone of tnrtubirce to srorii i-auriniiiui iiuoyof the hazard area in which he proposes to build if the town,s master hazardplan does not contain sufficieni iiioimation to determin"-ir il," proposed locatjonis in a red hazard or blue hazard area._ rne iequire*unl-ror additional informationand study shall be done in accord "iit-ct,upte, ie.S6'.- -'-
The zon'ing administrator may require qny applicant or person desfring to buildin an identified blue avalairche'hazard zone to subrnit additional informationor reports as to whether or not improvernents are required to mitigate "s.i"itthe poss'ible hazardi_-lf !]tlgitiJi is-required, saia.jniormation and reportshould specify the improvemen[s proposed therefor. The required informationand reports shail be done in accbrdince "iin Ctipi""'i8.i;:
The zoning administrator may require any applicant or person desiring to modifyll:-ilrdl] ain. bv. f i I t, conit"riiion, -li,.nn"r iralio", i"iJins, or other s imi rarcnanges' to submit for revievt an environmental-impili iiiterent in icioraanie-'with l8'56 to estab'lish that the work witt not auvurs"iv-iirect adjacent propertiesor increase the quantity or veloc.iiv oi riofi;;;;;;:"'iora ii, isigi-"" p'vp'|-'
A. All areas designated as flood hazard zonesas weil as the Flood Insurance Study datednated and adopted for the ur"us en.6rpassedber 1,1980.
in the Flood Insurance Rate Maps,November 2, 1982, are hereby dbsig-by the Town of Vail as of becem--
B.The Gore Creek Floodplain Information, .|975 study andtrere rea described intion piat, dated Decemb6r 18, .t9g0. (O"O fO,-fSg5i
18.69.047 Procedures for the substantia'r improvement of regar-nonconferminqstructures rocated, in part or in'wtroiel in-i iiooo hazard zone.-A' structures *hirl^:fg :!!:1:nliqrlv improved must be anchored to prevent frotation,co'l lapse, or'l ateral movernent during a base rlood eveni; substantially inprovedstructures must also elevate the lowest floor el evation, including basement,to one foot or above the base tiood elevation.
B' Applications for the substantial improvement for structures shall include thefol lowinq:(1) Engineered drawings and spec'ifications sufficient to illustrate that theproposed structure wiil be anchored.to prevent-iiotation, cotiapie-or"lateral movement during a uaie frood ev6ni.- iuin-,rrowings shail bearthe stamo of a.registeied, professionaf "rdir"""l
'(2) Floor plhns ano eieviii;;; ;iiustrating th;t the'toyrest f'toor elevation,including basement, of the structure sia, be uiuuit"a to one foot orabove the base flood elevation.
accompanying maps arethe West Vail annexa-
498- 3
HA^RD *rtor.o*
K. A minimum ofunit. one covered parking space shall be provided for each dwelling
L' setbacks, as they gpply to this chapter, as required, by sections rg.r0.060,- l8'12'060' and l-8'tslo'60,i";'imenobd-ai irri"ilJi''in."" shalr be no requiredTront setback for garages, except as may-0"-"equirei"uv th" design review board.(Ord ls-1e82; o"i-25_iOeiib"i 5i:r geo,-d"j' iz_i,szii,
'18. 69.060 Right of appeal
Nothing irl this chapter shall be deemed to.deny an interested person his rightsto appeat the decjsion.or irre ;;r;;; aominisirit;; .i;";;""oance with section.|8.66.030.
Ar so, noth jrs i;-th'ii'cilapter sha.n -be d;;; to deny an interestedperson his rights to seel u ui"iuni.-tiir !lg.*ir,".i"ii, of this chapter, exceptln the case where a proposed itiuliur" or filt ;iii il;; the base flood eievationor increase the ouantitv ;;-r;i;;;;;es of.frood ,;i.;;'ii"ins a 100_year frood.Variances shar de soveinea ov iii'ir;"iii.ri"Jr"*ilpiui"i a.62. .id"i-i;,'iuE:l
18.69.070 Requirement of bond
Any applicant under lh::-:!loFr.mly bg required to post bond, a.tetter of credit,or other guarantee to insure that tie improvements, reportsr,or 916sr requ.irementsof this chapter u"" corpi"i"o-irj iiipi.ll"o with. (0rd 12, t9ra1.
498- 5
Lega I
ovlner
Descriptionr tot t
for
sFR, R, R P/5 T|JIE DISTR]CTS
Archi tect
Proposed UseZone District V
Lot Size t
\ a i f .Heieht0n\hr hb\ U\dR
Total GRFA O
Prinary GRFA
Secondary GRFA
Setbacks:
Front
) l ces
Rea r
!.iater Course
Site Coverage
Landscapi ng
Parh i ng
Credi ts :
Ga ra ge
llechan i cal
Ai rl ock
S'uo ra ge
Solar Heat
Stora ge
Dri ve: Sl ope perni t-ued
Envi ronmen t a'1,/Ha za rds :
Co;;ents:
/-\
IsssHtuW
(so)(1oo)
@ruol
(200) (4oo)
Propos ed
JKs-
tuj_
lift,tionto-
/.rIt
fl, R.
le'r ,'['.
a3}3
rnq
,q,3{
-;
Al I or.;ed
{:ot@ *thr
20'
15'
15'
(30) (s0)
dfd rytw^v
"*.--"ur^;
&qn,
Slope Actual
Ava'l anche
Flood Plain
Sl ope
itl ,'.'' !l ' n -.
Zoni ng: AFpro.;ed,tDi se pproved Da te:
f{\qio
-
'uF\
S(
$'
.Al
N
1
gl
(-
F{r{3\
cD
4.
GO
.L
I.slr,
+ri
E
b
fi
Ico
ct
oI
s(l. <f,;T[ --url-t
i
ti
I
+oT
-P
{,t
c.)v
!
f\t
N
\oo.:
3
ftas
dd3oJ
I5
lu0,.z3urzOE6.'
llltrr
S EiiZ E?(:E
f j jf jr( t gE g#
$t
$
6L
otl,j
s
3
st
..ig
i.
- 5.-
rE'Bi+-12
'1 ltt:lt 4)it s<
5d
5.p
N
.ls-
\F
\.J.--
B
R
$antf3
+iL$
3Jr,\_. .J>d-c ('oj
45
$E
o
1--
I
sc+
N
li
3oz
$D
7H
\$
gR
Ssz,
$t
I
It-
Irf+--llr'-FT
I
I
I
,
sR
$rN
$e
$m
s
E.5EEg$ $F
s6 $$s $-: s
$
..UTILITY LOCATION VERIFICATION
SUBDIVISION
Date
5s
Vail Cable T.V.
Ca^ry 66'1tn*n6i'F l#-llresUpper Eagle'Valley Waterand Sanitation Discrict
David Krenek
llLrtc-rrnov"traam
JoB NAME fho,,rnqa-*t+,- Vc,aiAe,"'vg
Lor ___b_Bl ocr____i[_r r r. r u c
ADDRESS
The location
I ines , rnust
acconpany ing
Mountain Bell
I -634-3778t *,bf, ./ .EFo
l.lestern Slope Gas
++a+qFl{et€s
Public Service Company
Gary Hall
Holy Cross Electric Assoc.
Ted Husky/Michael Laverty
of utilities, whether theybe approved and verified bysite plan.
be rnain trunkthe following
lines or proposedutilities for the
F^/a #
|1!fu(rt53 i.'iY' i'l i i
/ , attached sheet.4!&-
z/rP;
NOTEr These verifications do not relieve the contractor of his
responsibility to obtain a street cut permit from the
Town of Vail, Department of Public Works and to obt.ain
utility locations before digging in any public right-
of-way or easernent in the Town of Vail. .d, building permit
1s not a street cut pernit. A street cut pernit urust be
obtained separately.
This fo rm is to verify service availablity and location.
This should be used in conjunction with prepari.ng your
utility plan and scheduling installations.
CRITBRTA AlgD FINDTISGS
Upon review of Criteria andMunicipal Code, ttre Departmentapproval of the requestedfactors:
Maruyama t/28/85
Findings, Section IA.62.060 of theof Community Devel opment recommendsvariance based upon the following
The six foot front setback wirl not create a major negativeimpact as the house is located approximatery 3z teet from theedge of the road. Lot 6 is also rocated below the road approximateryr0 feet. r.ooking from Basingdale Boulevard to\rards the house(looking north)l tfte view w5uld onty show the first floor ofthe house - Because the road is located 32 feet away from thehouse and is arso above the property looking down on Lot 6,it is felt that the 6 foot encr6actrmenl into tfre front setbackwill not have any significant negative impacts on adjacent proper-ties.
The deqree to wh_ich relief from strict or literal interpretationano entorcement of a specifieii requlation is necessarv t o-Ec-hfETE
Consideration of Factors
-
The relationshi of the requested vari ance to other existinor potential uses structures in the vicin t
comoa and unrtormity of treatment among sites jn thevicinity or to attain the out qranor special privi l eoe.
staff believes that the applicant has made an effort to redesignthe house in a way which eliminates the height variance "" ,"itas the side setback variance. rt is felt that every efforthas been made to design the house is accordance with the zoninorequirements for this rot. For these reasons it is rerr itriithe front setback variance r,rould not be a grant of special privilege.
The effect of the requested variance on I iqht and air, distributionffii;
As mentionedoccur due toengineer hasbe obtainedonto the site
in the previous memo, no significant impacts wouldthe granting of this variance. However, the Townrequested that a revocable right-of-way permitfor the retaining walls needed for the-diivewaywhich are actually on public right-of-way.
TO:
FRO}I:
DATE:
Planniug and EnviroDDental Comission
Corrmuni ty Devcl opnent Del)artDetlt
atanuary 28, 1985
SIIBJECI : Requeat for a front aetback variance or #teet inorder to build 6 3ssidanrce on fot 6, Bloct( 8, fntdrrcrntainSubdivision. Applicant: Eenry E. Maruyama
DESCRIPTION OP VARIAISCE REQUESTBD
I{t. Henry Maruyama is requesting a front setbaek variance of'/t''rytee-t in order to construct his residence. The slopes beneaththe house are greater than 40t. For this reason, the garagemay be located in the front eetback. However, the 4Ot tfop5sdo not allohr for the house to be built in the front setback.
The applicant makes the following statement as to trhy the varianceis being requested:
"... because of the unique nature of this site (49t slope)and more specifical ly because of two resultant conditionswhich have worsened the hardship: l ) The road has beenbuilt 1O or more feet above the property line over mostof its length, and 2) the front property line is 15 feetor more frcrn the road over most of the length of the propertyline. These eonditions do not exist on severat propertiesfurther we6t on Basingdate Boulevard. This haC allowedthose owners to buird much closer to the road, eliminatinglong structured driveways and parking and rninimizing theproblems of having -to push.the buitdings out over the "lop".The requested variance will not result in the buildingappearing too close to the road, nor will the buiJdingappear taller than one story above the road. Its relationshipto the road will be closer to that of the nearby propertiesmentioned. rt is believed that the property -aiiedtry tothe nest of the subject property coutd also benefit tromthe relief being requested, and that the configurationof alr buildings' entrances could then have a m6re equaland uni form appearance as wel I ease of construction.,,
rt should be noted that the planning commi ssion reviewed anapplication by Mr. Maruyama on December I0, 1984. At that timethe appl icant was requesting an lr foot height variance, a frontsetback variance of 7 feet, and a side setback variance of 6feet. All three variances were denied. planning commi ssionsuggested that the house be designed with more considerationfor the site. Please see the enclosed drawings.
p
\)2s\s
1.,sP
&,,o.-t
1
\
\"'it
i
l:\ :$.
(
o
t\
riV
.sr
,""
p
t<+g
\
Maruyana rl28l8s
STAAF RBCOUI|EI|DATIOII
T_he €ommunity Deve,lopment Departm€nt recommends approval ofthe 6 foot front setback varl.ance. lrhe variance rg-iarranteobecauee of the practlcar dlfficulty on the eite of locatl.ncthe house on the propgrty wlthout cieating a height varrancEproblen as well aa other setback problene.- rn adaition, ttrereare ertraordinary _circunetances on thl.s Eite due to the slopethat make it diificul t to construct a house wlthout creatl-ngeither a_height or Eetback varlance problem. The appliei;ihas reeubnitted a propoaal rrhtch elininated tup out of ttre threevariances that nere previoualy requeeted. staff feels tii;ievery effort haa been made to conpty uith rown of Vail ioningrequirementa. lhe 6 foot setback ia warranted and ehould b;approved.
' -ii
. ., '.-J:
...... i ji; I'. ,: r: _:.1
.., ""r:'. .'
:t..\. :ij::.. ,-:-r.-
,-r.l.'.',"' ' _' tr'r'ln_ :a!
: ;.. : l:r ::
l.-.?\'- LZ
(v'-a- 1 zt--'::' \'- t'z -i
tl].'lr. allL":{ tr}4'A'rN6/: AF-6
IUILUWfS aO ZJV\D Tr\C
ovL F- LW 5lu{'tr Ahlp MM4INL,
L-F aAE V-iltLt2lNiq - FINAL
9v?l4v wtJ- be -iueM$\LAftK Ftrvlcw A'., lr:f:r,il.u-Y
-. Ks4Jti<tl./
l,lAl(FiArrA FslVr*yE .: ,
rLfSiFl .'':r;-'::1;:::
t9T 6 t P;,9LL5 Vlrtu I Pt'F
MClNfAllJ €A--AJ'; : ."
I
trlI
t$itE'p;
!
\
W::? EEJ_:i:E-:-l
tr _.\i
' ::-- -,"- vffi=,.,..ri-_':il..=_.:{._ frWt_a'iij_.=l**t, l'
t3
=,
.._-.-...'*-.--..-.--..-'...-...._:-..:--.--:....jj...';:'.:'-..--|ji-"', ,i.. ,. -;:-;.::'::::'ff.:--=-":.;': "'+-
.....-'j,...'..:':.,''''.,','.'..'...
ALTA I: fI M
5I:HENULE
I',IITI'I EN
A
AppI icatian N,r. V{}C}Cr7lilI
Fc,r I rrf or'nrat i cn ftn l'r
- tl:har.ees
Lender. F,rI irl
FRELII'1 REFI]RT*-Tr:'TAl---
l,l i th r"r rl r' r.r-'nr i
$ 1t10. (:xl
$ I r]'J. ct0
ttarrr* p la:,ase r.e Fer.
'J
Effectj.ve ftate: N|:TVEHETER {rl"
Pol ic''" tr;r lrlz issr:ed, an'l prcrp,tse,J
"ALTA" Loa.rr Foi ic.y 1i-r70 Revision,
Pr * pr' sc- d Insrrr'ed:
t,r V{-}(_){,71{:t3.
1?il4 at S:Clr) A,l"l,
Irrsur'ed:
TBD
4"
The estate ('r'ir,ter'est irr the'l an,J,lescr.ihed ar.r.efer.r.ed to in thistl*nrmi trrr:nt and r*vc.r.ed herr: i rr i s:
A FEE
Title tr, the estate c,r. intr:r.est caver.e,J herein is a.t the effectivedate her.enf vested irr:
HENRY H. I"IAFILIYANA and HARLII.:.I:I T4ARLIYANA
Tfre I arrd r'sferred t* irr this tr,rnrnli t nrr.'n t is ,Jr:scr i t,e,l as f rrl I r-ruls:
LI:IT {-., FLC'I::F: ::t" VAIL INTERI'II:IUNTAIN TIEVEL0F,I.IENT sUEtTIIvISITIN,AI:I::I:IRNINTi TI' THE REc$RfIEfI FLAT THEREEF, T:I:IUNTY trF EAGLE, ,;]TATE OFr:CrLCrRAIrtr.
A f:I:IMMIT
5IHETIULE F-1
(Re.ruir.enrsrrts)
I"I ENT
Appl icaticrn No. VOC,f-i71C):{
Thc, f rrl I 'ruirrs ar.Lr the requir'emerrts t* bg c*nrpl ied uJith:
1, Pavnierrt ta c,r' f c, r' thr', accgurrt {, F the gr.ntrtrtrs c'r. IrrRr.tgas':'r.s {rf the
f r.tl I c*nsiderati'rrr f r,r. th€ €state *r. inter.est t,:, he insrlr.c"d.
frr-r-, Fe r' irrstr'unrerrt (s) cr'eati rrs the €state r-i r irrtr:,r.est tc, Ee irrsrlr.ednrust br. L>liecuted and dulr filed fBr r.c-cnr.d, t,r-Uit:
T'IOTE: THIS FR':IFEFTY I,IAY EE sU8,.IHI::T TO THE REAL EETATE TRAN';;FER TAXBY VIRTUE I]F ITE INI:LU5II:II'J II'J THE TI:II,IN I]F VAIL. PURCHAEER SHNLILNI::fiNTACT THE TOHN r:rF VAIL REr:iARIrINrj gA1tr Ag:iE*,;t-1ENT.
o
LT
7.
t='
ALTA f,L'IMMIT
FI::HEETIJLE Il-:
( Ercept i orrs )Appi icatiarr N*, V(:t0(-t71(:r3
The p,r I icv r-, r p*l icies tr, be issue,l uJi I I cnrrtain e:r;c€r't i*rrs t,r thr-:f r., I l,ruins unlsss the same ar'€ disp*sed c,.F t* the satisfacti*n c,f tfre
l::*rrrpany:
I . I:tarrdar'd E:"icept i c'rrs I thr.'rrLsl-r 5 pr.i nted r-, rr the c,tver. shr,"et.
/;'. l-a.*es arrd asgeFsrTtr?rrts rr,:,t Tr't rJ g(,". ,1t-. paTat, I L3 art'J SFL!': ial aFsL3SSart€ntsn,rt yr-'t cr:'r.ti f ir'd trr the Tr.easur.gr.'s ,rf tire..
Arrv rlnpaid ta:ls"s ,:r r. ass€sstrrents asairrst said land,
LierrS f ':' r. r-trrpai,-J urater. and seurr:r Char.ses, if an.r'.
P. RII:iHT tlF FRI:IF'RIETBR LlF A VEIN IIR LI:ITIE TI:t EXTRAI:T ANI] REI4I:IVE HI:s fiRE
]-HEREFRIH :iHI:IULN THE rAI'IE FE FI:ILINTI T'N PENETFATE RR INTERE;EI::T THE
PREMIE;E5 A:J RESERVEN II.I LINITEII sTATE5 F'ATET'JT REI::I]RnETI AFRIL 1t:I,Lc!34, IN Br-.|0l{ 1?3 AT FAGE :r.
10. RIfiHT L--|F HAV Ft'R rrrr'HE::: r-rR |::ANALF r::r:rNgTRLlcTEIr F{y THE ALITHT:|RITY rrFTHE UNITEII::iTATELI AE REi::ERVEN IN LII..JITEN STATE:-1 F.ATENT FEI:I:IFNEN AFRIL
l,t.
1l::, J.?34, IN FtilJll 1!;:i AT FAr:iE B,
RE:!:TP1;;1 11N5 I^IHII:H Nr- NI-]T I:I:INTAII'] A FI:IRf:EI'TLIFE I:IR REVEIITER I::LAUSE,
Fl-lT fil'IITTINc RE:3TRIr::TIr:rN5" IF ANY, FAEiE[r r:rh] F{AI::F, l::r:rllrR., RELIFIRI.I.,I:.IR NATII:INAL I:IRIIJIN' A:: TI:INTAINETT IN If!::;TRLII.IFI.JT REI.:EIFnEn::;EPTEF1BER{_,6, 1.p77., IN BLil:rr.: l:5 AT pA$E :r1:1.
AN EASEI',IENT 15 FEET IN I,JINTH, I:ftN::.ILiTINI:i I.--IF A:::TRIF'fiF LANTI 7,5 FEETIN bJINTH ALI]NI:i ALL SINE LI:IT LINE.; ANn A STRIF'lcI FEET IN I^JInTH ALTINTiALL BAI:H LI]T LINE:i, Iii IIEIIII:ATET.I A:3 A LIf11-11Y EA:iEMENT FI:IR U5E I:IFPLIBL][: ANN FRIVATE LITILITIES ANII TIRAINAGE hJAYE:.
Project Application
Proiect Name:
Project Description:
Contact Person and Phone
Owner, Address and Phone:
Architect. Address and Phone:
Comments:
Design Review Board
Motion by:
""."stn*
DISAPPROVAL
Seconded bv:
APPROVAL
Sum mary:
Date:
Town Planner E start Approval
o
I'nq\il o( rdar,ri,rq t$\h
lofthticaflrfq U\(' t[d8. ilo'rr-
lnuuqblt B*i ,,( t\hr\ Pfuw^sn
ilru drii€uhr,ru 6*da- U U
k}*irnr?"p. \fth
^ _ d'\'nila4 tL'hh ua.lttl
,R\\ ulr$\er w$uqqd
Liuw, \g,pr,',*t t,l rl\uH qDn _l uierl ll,X oo
"MA-tua,r^. h urhnng 0olOnOr*' O
Rffi$'il'ffi4
X tinOi-UU-roArrAntQr {a0tdT{
u.tffi'/
0 Vl to'-\?\*o r.f q"
rh,I Jn{'
Project Application
Project Name:
Project Description:
Contacl Person and Phone
Owner, Address and Phone:
Architect, Address and Phone:
Design Review Board
Date
DISAPPFOVAL
Stafl Approval
l
'it
7-
Chen&Associates
Consulting Geotechnrcal Engrnee.s
96 Soulh Zuni
Denver. Colotado 80223
303t744-7105
/35*,?1-r,,
Casper
Cheyenne
Colorado Springs
Glenwood Springs
Rock Springs
salt Lake city
APR 2 8 $86
Hn:trhh
PRELIHIT.TARY GEOTECHNICAL SruDY
PROPOSED SITGLE-FAI.ILY RESIENCE
t-gr 6, BttrK 8
VAIL INTERMq.'NTAIN SIJBDTYISIOiiI
VATL, @I"ORAM
PREPARED FOR:
MR. HD{RY MAFI.JYAMA
P.O. Dx l1l8
DETrcIT, MIG]IGAN 48288
-i
1
I
l
rl
,lj
II
tII
APRTL
t,
JOB NO. I 368 85 19, 1985
!
'tIA
I?,)
I ono.usros
{
PTIRFSE AND S(DPE OF' SN'D'Y
PROPOSED OiISTFI'CIION
STTE @NDITIOIS
III ST'BSIJRFACts OIDITTOCS
J SrapE srABrLrrY
,5 PRE[.Il'tMRy ttt NDArICtil RE@t''lMENDilfICt'1S
il; I RsDtrrNrtG srFIJcrnREs a{D DRAIIIAGE @lcsrDERAIrIcNs.t
ADDITIOt{AL GBIECHNICSL E1'AI,I'ATTONIIj Frc. I - I{EATrcN oF ExPu)RRIIDRY IDLEs
" I EIG. 2 - IOGS tr H{PITRAIORS IDtESi LEGEND AND IUIES
ni Frc. 3 - GENERALTZED cGgsmrroN
)t Hrc. 4 - cRADnrloN TEsr RBstr,TsI
:
l.t
t.,
I
Il)
I
I
I
j
:
.rl' ;'-t
TA8[,8 OF' @IiITENTS
TAB[.8 I - g'}TMARY OF TAFRAIORY TEST RES'Ij!S
I
I.J
;J Clren&Associates.I)'t
I:l
r:l)
1
,J
I
J
;I
F,l
b
lz
F
ili
@ttrLttsrcNs
(I) Based on the results of this preliminary geotechnical study, lt shotrld be
tedrnically feasible to crcrstmct the prcposed residence at the site.
Dtrc to the very steep slope of the building site, the potential for
construction-induced slqpe irstability will impose major corstraints upon
design ard construction.
(21 This report, present,s preliminary design ard corstruction recqrurerdations
ard precautions for site develqnent. T?re informatior rnay be used for
prelininary design ard constnrction ct estimatirg. An additional
geotectrnical engineerirg evaluation should be corducted prior to final
design ard crcrstmction.
'l
i
I
I
I
I
I
Chen&Associates
I
I
l
I
1
,l
;#
-2-
PI.IRPOSE AT{D SOPE OF' SIUDY
This report presents the results of a prelfuninary geotechnical sttidy for
a propced sirgl*fanily residence to be constructed at tot 6, Block 8, VaiI
InteErpuntain Subdivision, Vail , Oolorado. The project site is sho,sn on
Fig. 1. The study was conducted in accordance with our propcal to l,lr. Henry
Manrlana, ohrrer, dated l{ardr 27, L985.
This report has been prepared to sr.lrunarize the data obtained ard to
present our preliminary conclusions ard reccnrcndations based on Lhe proposed
construction ard the subsurface corditions enccuntered. Pre).iminary design
paranEters and a discussion of geotechnical engineerir,g considerations related
to corstruction of the prcposed residence are included.
PROPOSM @bISfRUCTIOII
Ttre prcposed residence will consist of a timber frane stnrcture. The
propced livirg areas will be on three levels. The louer ard middle levels
will be partiaUy cut into the existirg hillside. Present plars call for
maximun cut depths to be approxinately 5 feeE below the existirg grourd sur-
face.
A garage floor leve1 will be prorided above the 1evel of the three livirg
area floors. A bridge deck will exterd frcm the garage to the existirg road
on the south side of the lot.
A generalized cres-section through the prcposed residencne is slpq/n on
Fig. 3. This generalized cres-section !{as drai*n to shcn the approxirnate
relaLiorship of the existirg grround surface slcpe, the prcposed construction,
ard the posicion of one of the expJ.oratory holes. ltre rnaximtm cut depLhs'
Chen&Associates
-3-
the proposed retainirg wa1l, and the fill indicated on the cres-section have
been or nay be ncdified durirp design.
SITE @NDITTCIIS
The aver4e slcpe throrgh the c€ntral portion of the pnqosed buildirg
sile is approxLnately 30" or 60t. Ttre elevation difference acr6s the
prcposed buifdirg site frqn the existirg rod to the dormslcpe hrildirg is
approxinntely 45 feet. Existirg Basirgdale Borlevard occurs innediately
upslqe of the lot as shown on Fig. I. Thris road consists of a cut ard fill
crcs-section with cut on the scuth side and fill on the north side. The fill
slcpe at the top of the lot is approximately 40" or 85t.
There was a fecr feet. of snoer coverirg the site at the tine of the field
reconnaissance ard exploration drilfirg. Several trees vere growirg on the
site. Based on the appearance of the trees, there was no sign of present
slcpe irstability. An existirg residence occurs at the toe of the \tery steep
slope below the propced buildirg site.
SI,JBSURFACE @I{DTTION
Dle to the vrery ste€p slcpe, it is not possible to place driflirg eguip-
rent on the slope withcut substantial gradirg. Therefore, the subsurface
exploration was limited to a prelirninary progran consistirg of drillirg
exploratory tples at the shoulder of the existing road above the lot. Ttte
approximate locations of the exploratory holes are sLpwn on Fig. I. Graphic
logs of the borirps are presented on Fig. 2 along wiEh descriptions of the
materials enccuntered in the borirgs.
I
Chen&Asociates
-4-
Hole I tras drilled to a rnaximrn depth of 55 feet belqr the level of the
road. Approxirnately l0 feet of silty to clayqt/ gravel' fill was encountered
overlyirg natural soils. ltre variat,ion in rrerLical ard lateral extenE of the
road fill rdas not determined by this investigation. Ttre natural soils
encounEered corsist of nedirm &nse to dense, silty to clayey gravel with
erraEic arcunts of cobbles and boulders. Similar soils rcre encountered in
Hole 2 wbrich was drilled to a maximum depth of 19 feet. Results of laboratory
testirg corsistirg of index properties are sho\fii on Figs. 2 ard 4' and
sunnarized in fable I.
Free grcundwater was not encolntered in the exploratory holes at the t'ime
of drilIirg. Three piezorcters rrere instalted in the exploratory holes to
rpnitor potenEial grro.rndwater levels at three depths. lhe piezcneters corsist
of plastic pipe prforated ard sealed with bentonite pellets at the intervals
shcwn on ttre g64hic logs, Fig. 2. Ttre elevations of the piezcmeter€ $ere
selected to rcnitor vario.rs pcsible groundwater levels that may develop,
especially durirg seasonal runoff of sncrsnelt.
SI,OPE SIABIIJTT
The rrery steeP s]'cPe of the
relatively high risk of Potential
stnrction corrsiderations must be
constmctiorrinduced slope failure
the site after constmcEion.
buildirg siEe ard surm,rndirg area has a
slope instability. koper design ard corr
given to this site to reduce the risk of
ard to help maintain lorgrterm stabiLity of
A detailed slcpe stability investigation is beyord the sccpe of this
report. If Ehe project is continued after preliminary plannirg ard design' an
Chen&Associates
i
.i'
I
I
:l
-5-
additionaL geoLecttnical ergineerirg evaluation stpuld be corducted' Recqn-
r€ndatiorE for an additional studlt are discussed in a later section of this
relnrt.
.Itre fol1oryirg general guidelines are presented in order that prelirninary
plannirp and design of the site features can be acconplished by the project
designers ard contractor.
(I) Access road ard brildirq fourdation eo<cavations strould be relatively
shallour to reduc€ the risk of slope irrstability durirg corlstruction. !€
recqntrerd tqnporary unretained qlts not exceed a maxjmunn vertical heiqht
of 5 feet. Tanporary Lnretained cuts up to l0 feet in vertical height
nay be possible if the lateral extent of the cue face does not exceed
20 feet. ttrrretained fill slopes up to 5 verEical feet may be tanporarily
created for access ard rtorkirg area purposes '
(2't the existirp rod shoulder fiII at Ehe top of the site is probably less
stable than the natural slcpe of the site. Ttlerefore, !,te recqmpnd the
road fill slope rernain undisturH unless it is properly retained. It
nay be neces$ry to constnrct an acc€ss road acres neighborirg lots' If
sor all of the precautions relaEed to orFsite excavations should be
obsenred for the adjacent sLq)es.
(3) If the abc^/e tsnporary slcpe criteria cannot be achieeed, it wlIl be
necessary to tqnprarily retain excavated slopes by neans of a tieback or
braced retainirg systsn.
(4) Excavation, retain4e, ard backfillirg should proceed frcrn the I'cnest
elevations to the upper elevations of the stope. Ttris procedure will
.1.,!
''ai
#Chen&Associates
(s)
(5)
,,I
,j.{
ll
-6-
reduce the risks of upper level c-orstnrction becunirg undemined by lo'er
level excavation.
Once excavations have been made, ttre foundation walls shoutld be
constructed, braced ard backfilled, and the slopes graded to final cotr
figuration as expediticusly as possible. Ttris entire proc€ss should be
carefully nrcnitored to warn of potential slope ltpveflEnt.
Potential slqe instability durirg construction of the foundation ard
access rod can be reduced by startirg ard ccrnpletirg the ',ork durirg tie
relaEively dry periods of the year. If groundwater is present at shallcrr
depths, excavation should not be conducted. ltris condition may be
present durirg the sprirg ard early sumer.
(7) Precautions should be taken to protect downslope property fron rolling
rocks rq{Dved frqn the excavation.
(8) Additional design ard corEtmction recqurerdations presented in this
report regardirg foundations and surface drainage must be folloped to
reduce ctrarges in the slcpe loadirg corditiors.
Ttre above precauEions will reduce the potential for large scale slope
failures. [lc&,ever, they will not elirninate the poEential . The orvner should
be aqare of the relatively high risk of poEential slqe failure on the very
steq> natural s1cpe. Ilre potential for slcpe instability wilf probably be tie
greatest durirg constrruction. torg-term stability of the conpleted structure
strculd be cunparable to the stabiliEy of the existirg slq>e, if, through
design, the slope loadirg ard groundr*ater conditions are not dtanged
significantly.
-i
,J
Chen&Associates
I
,t
I
II
i
-7-
PRELIMIMRY FOIJNDATICII RE@IIMENDATIOT{S
Consideration nas given to both shallow ard deep foundat,ion systens'
Eep foundation syststts such as driven piles and drilled piers have the
advantage of transferrirg the br.rildirg }oads to deep levels in the slope. In
this rnanner, stability of the slope will generally be increased' The degree
of increase of slqe stability rcufd need to be evaluated by a slcpe stability
analysis.
DJe to the presence of bculders in the subsoils, drilled piers rould be
nore difficult to construct than driven piles. Pile drivirp equipnent and
acc€ss r.ould be difficult to prorride on the steep natural slcpe ard the narlovt
existing public road. Ttre vibrations of pile drivirg may also pose a
significant risk to the stability of the existirg roadfill'
It should be pcssible to use a spread footirg foundation on this site.
It will probably be necessary to rqipve an arpunL of soil fron the foundation
and belor*-grrade floor areas of the residence eguivalent to the rcight of the
buildirq to pre\tent orrerloadirg the slcpe.
This section presenCs preliminary fqrndation design construction
recqruendatiors based on the subsoil conditiors ercountered at the exploratory
holes drilled frqn the roadway ard cur general judgrrent with respect to the
slope stability concerns. ldditional subsurface exploratlon and &talled
slqe stabilier analysis stpuld be corducted as discussed in a later section
of this report' pior to final desigrn ard construction.
(1) Footirgs placed on r:ndisturbed natural soils r|ay be designed for an
allowable soil bearirg pressure of 3'000 psf.
l2l
(3)
.;
J
II
-8-
Spred footirgs placed on the grarular soil stp1rLd have a rninimun width
of 18 inctres for continucgs footirgs and 24 inches for pads' Footirgs
sls,rld be a minirnr-un of 4 feet belcrr the finished grcund surface.
Ttre lateral resistanc€ of spread footirg foqndaEions placed on the
wrdisturbed natural soils will. be a cqnbination of a slidirg resistance
of the footirg on the foundation soils ard passive eadh pre$sure agailEt
the side of the footirg. slidirg friction at the boEtsn of the footirgs
can be taken at 0.4 tiIIEs the vertical dead load' Passi'le pressure
against the sides of the footirgs can be calqlated usirg an equivalent
fluid unit treight of 150 pcf. Ttris is based on the existirg 30o slope.
Passive resistanc€ should be ignored in the uptnr 2 feet'
ccmpacted fill placed against the sides of the footirgs to resist
lateral loads slpuld be a nonexpansiive grarular soil appnored b'y the
geotechnical engineer. Fill should be placed ard ccmpacted to at least
95t of the maximr.m stardard koctor density'
Continuqrs foundation rialls should be reinforced top and bottcn to span
an unsuplprted lergth of at least 10 feet'
RETAINIIG STRUCN'RES At{D IRAII{AGE @{SITERATIChIS
Fqrndation mlls ard retainirg structures rf,rictr are laterally supported
ard can be expected to undergo only a rpderate anount of deflection' may !g
designed for a lateral earth pressure ccmputed on the basis of an eguivalent
ftuid unit reight of ?0 pcf for the orFsite granular soils. All foundation
ard retainirg walls stpr:ld be designed for apprcpriate hyrirctatic ard
surcharge pressures. Ttre eguivalent fluid pressures given above are for a
I
J
l
l
,l
,t
i
-l
l
I
(4)
;l
id an*UAssociates
-9-
drained backfill r*rich slcpes up frqn the wall at no greater than 2:1
(lprizontal to \tertical) .
IJnderrcrain systsns should be prwided behird all retainirg ral1s.
Fennanent, r.nuetained cut ard fill slopes should not be plannedr excepc as
necessary to reconfigure disturbed areas to the original undisturted
conditiors and to provide ninor soil cover for frct protection to exterior
footirgs. surface drainage stpuld be adequately designed to prevent pondirs
of v,,aEer or concenErated rqnoff on unprotected slcpes. All disturbed slopes
nust be positivety 'rell vegetated or prwided with acceptable slope
protection.
ADDITIOiIAL @CITffiINICAL E\TALTIATICN
we recogrerd the piezcnreters in ttoles I ard 2 be ronitored durirg the
sprirg and early s1nuer. Any grroundraLer levels above the perforatlon zones
may !e inacclrate for initial redirgs. Ttris is due to the bentonite pellets
used as an annulus seal betr,,een the pipe and the borirg wal1' Upon initial
suhnersion, the pell.ets will expard ard create a seal . I€ter stpuld be bailed
frcm the piezcnetel-s after neasurirp the water levels for at least the first
tr,eo obsewations to rqtpve '*ater r*rictr may have passed through the pellet
I
l
l zone.
A stabilitY analYsi.s shottld
ctnngirq loadirg conditions on the
depth ard locatiors to reduce the
slcpe stabilitY.
be performed to estinate the effect of
slope ard to judge the optfumm foundation
potential for decreases in the existirg
It
1
!
I
-10-
The pretininary reccmrerdations in this report are based on the srrbsoil
ard grourdnater conditions encountered in the exploratory tnles drilled on the
roadway upslcpe of the buildirg site. corditions nay vary acrcs the site
wtrich courld impact these reccrurendations ard future slope stability
analyses. Consideration should be given to drillirg at least one exploratory
tple on the downs}oln side of the propced buildirg site. Ttris rcrk will
require that a drill pad be constntcted ry an excavation contractor for an
all-terrain drillirg rig. Ttre rig r+ould hare to be lorered do*n ard toled up
the slcpe with a winch ard cable on a large tow truck or dozer.
AgsocrArEsf
Reviewed
wP/jjcc: ltr. David Ar.rstin
KKBNA
l4r. Richard Cro*rther
Crorther Solar GotP
Kv.l*?irD$li.,'etsre4%.?j\:'"u"' "oi.?,
r55se i*3- .qi'.2- -{Y.'
;ftn,^.'):{1i
Kdi'lb'''E}
Chen&Associates
(\,,l
q)
I
o?\trr (Jt--trJ(^Jt!l!o6
rJ<@2,
tz
o
0.)
o
-tJ
=
z
z.
aFlrJ&.
lrl
o(Lo&o-
lerE
\:
\'e\i
\?\i
rl
\\
a
\
\
\
\
\
\
Irlroo\I\III
I
\
x,\\l
)lit
\
/I
I
\\
\5o6
\
\
\\
\\
o(\{
:
z- |Uu,
\
I
\
\
I
I
I
I
\
\
I
I
I
I
\t
\tII\
otut/,o
oG
=dr<Fvz.z.qr=ooo-J=r,(lld-t!>-F-\OZ6
-cOF=oJvlJ_
14,z.
J
FE
UJ
o&,4
lrlJo
c.
F
4oJcxur
l!o
z9F
(JoJ
ta€)36t()ov,U'
€
e,
U
@
@\o
'(t) xaPul Ar!?llseldBld
: (U ) r!{u!1 P!nbll=11
:a^a!S OOZ'oN 6ulssed a6eluarla6-997-
: (r"d) At lsuag Arq=gg' : (t) ruaruol raren-llJ:if tnsau rsat Aloleroqel '4
'au!l rll !A Jnlto leul 1aaa1 J el e'rr eql
u! suollenltn lJ '6ullllrP Jo an'll 'ql re
saloq aql ut Palalunorue lou seA Jelen earj '9
'1enPe.r6 eq
^eur
suolllsuerl
aqr pue sedll letJeleul uaarilaq salrePunoq
aletulxo.rdde aql luasaJdal s6ol aloq lsel
aql uo ur.roqs s I e tJaleu, ueanlaq .sau ! I aql 's
'Pasn poqleu aqr Aq pa1 1dtu1 aa'r6ap
aql ol Aluo alelnrte PeraPlsuo, aq Plnoqs
suo!le^ela Pue suo!letol aloq lsal aql 'f
'paP! Aold uPld
aql uo sJnoluo, uaaMlaq uollelodralul
r(q pau!elqo aJeM saloq lsal Jo suo!1e^alf '€
'pap 1ao.rd ueld alls aql uo urvloqs
sernleal uoll 6ulder AQ Alalerulxordde
Parnseaur eJ a{Y\ saloq lsal Jo suotlef,ol 'z
':a6ne r aMod 1q6! lJ
snonu I luo2 Jalau,elP qlul-t e ql t'la 585t
'z I | 11.rdy uo Pall!rP arem saloq lsal ' l
: s3loN
SLSL
088{
588r
s58L
OJSL
st6L
0z6L
5z6L
0€.61
z/58
J /0s
5 t=002-
5'9=lA
zt/st,
f.€=ojz-
o'8=rn
€./05
tt=002 -
I'8=ln
ZI/ TE
'leas 1a I lad al !uoluaq
sate? r pu 1 6u1peq5 'auoz uo!1elo1rad
aler Ipu ! saull qrleqssoJf, 'uo!leulJorul
uo!leI letsu I Jalauloza !d salet ! Pu I
'sat{f u! 0l raldues lds ro
eluroJ ! lel aql a^ !Jp ol Pa.l I nbal alam saqf,u !
Ot 6u!l le1 rauueq punod-gt1 I e Jo st{olq 05
teql salet!PUl 'lunot rvrolq aldues a^!r0 0l/05
'aldrues uoods lllds'0'l qf,ul-9/e I
'lsal uolleJlauad PrePuelS 'aldues anl.|6
rau ll e !uro} ! lel '0'I
'a l dues
qru !-Z 'a ldues anlrq
'uMorq 'ls !ou 01 1s!otlr {1tq611s 'asuap
Aran ot asuaP un lPeur 'sraplnoq 'salqqof
'Apues 'Aai(e 1: o1 At 1 1s ' (H9) [a^er9
t
q
0Z=002 -
!'/=34
9/ztt
ZI=ld
€ 6=1'l
5tr=002 -
5't0t=00
6 '9 t =lt't
0t /os
ffi
'umorq 'ls!o{,lr 'sraPlnoq Pue satqqotr "'ot S
'{aAe1e o1 Allls 'Apues 'la^eJO :tt!J IZJ
rreuasy ffi
: 0N3 911
' 1t5l='ll
z atoH
tu)o
F
Jo-)<EI
E
3
v1lr,Foz
6z
6z1!
trJ
z,o
F
trJJtll
5e6L 5t6L
S LqL
088/
JUUL
058/
s68L
006/
soSL
0 16l
S.6L
0z6L
<7Al
0t51
,0[51.=' t 3t aloH
z.
F
UJ
UJ
o
0,1
6t
9ov)ta
€
o,)
(J
@
\o
, ,,ar?
chen and associates. inc.
jb
.e6r.r ELO3.;
FL-{,E-
,!oE|^
rJO
a) 'L)
xgrl 'O
.9 -cLU+,, C
9o
c c.t
.9 ,r+roiYo19N
(9. tA
0)
z
HR. ' HR.
MIN T5 MIN.
o
z
z|ll()
u,
oz
c,
o.
zu()E
G
oz
F2(,G
2a
eo MrN. 19 MrN.a MrN. r MlN.
CI.AY TO SILT
GRAVEL 4 !r
' LIOUIO LIMIT
SAMPLE oF s il ty
'r0o '5O ',O'3O
.u2
OTAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETEBS
SAND 63 * slLr ANo CLAY
* ,roartclrY tNoix
g rave I ly sand FFOM Hol e
g'. 5:6' l'
33 tg
i
I at depth 191
TIME
2a tlR. t Hn.r.5MlN.l5 MlN.ao MtN. t9 t|tN. a MrN. t MrN.
CIAY TO SILT
'l@ '5o'4'3o "a
'to'a
o7a .r4g .a7 .o12 2.O
OIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS
GRAVEL TA
LIOUID LIMIT
SAMPLE OF
* SILT ANO CLAY
PLASTICITY INOE.X
FROM
'i
. L,
g1
r 358 85 GRADATION TEST RESULTS Fig
a
6i
d5"5a
||
!c(tt1
()
o
()
Lo
o
o
oL
crl
o
{,
.!Lg)
ttco
c)
ot-c'l
IJ
T'coo
q)
oLgl
gHEu
ItE!J('GIt3C
Ft
!x
EE8i
(\l
ClL
q=s
Ei!;o.it o(!\o ttr
-o
F
o
Go
38 \o
P-a.{Grt s
i*Ee
c,
o
:HI
FbHS<C,C)tro
o
tf
-f
F @
o
@
rn
\o
I9F
9
JGt
!g €(n ot Or(\I
ll
oa
I.t
I
|.ri@
6\o
CD
F
fo
lrJ
G,
C"
ul
:o
o
3r,o
o
=
u,
ul
F
E
o1F
;
FO
dt
tr
o
E
=
ct)
z
lt
Eo
't0HR, 7 HRMIN 15 MIN.2a
chen and associates. inc.
'r@ '50 'ao'30 '16
ib:;uELO3;
El-5c)tr.-.: cL
nioE!n
OO
TrO.rJt!.9=r-uatc
il,L .ir
C ..no
rro
€q,|!N
(9. .a
i;
oz
o4
G
2ul(,E
oz
G
zgl
A.
II
I
60 MtN. 19 M|l{.a tt|N.
ct aY To stlt
GRAVEL 4 *
. LIOUIO LIMIT
SAMPLE oF silty
.u2
OIAM€TER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS
SANO 63 T SILT AND CLAY
* ,*"rrcrrY lNoix
out
=F
a,Fzu,oE
G
33rt
I at depth 19'
HR.7 HR.t5 MtN.
g rave I ly sand FRoM Hol e
CO Mlt{. tg MlN.,l UlN. t MlN.'lq, '5r) .ao'30 .ra 'to'a i- 1}l' l' s'6r
o71 .tag 87 .u2 2.0
OIAMETEF OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS
CtAY TO SILI
GRAVEL *
LIOUIO LIMIT
SAMPLE OF
tI SILT AND CLAY
PLASTICITY INO€X
FROM
GRADATION TEST RESULTS Fig
||,I
5a;I"Ea
rF
T'cot^
q,
o
(,
Lo
!
o
q)
ot-ctl
P
(t
o
oLctl
o
(o
ru
oL
ctl
!co
c,
o
ctl
+t
a.ft
o-
2oa)2t
Ll>!
9Ec
H93;5u
t
ts!
|'C
aC,tFh
!x9u=
Eeu--JG
N
C|E
q=e
Ei!;o oN \lt t^
-9F
o
Go
;s \4t
J
as
l'
i*;e
q
c
rEl
EEHS<ooitt (,
o
rf
.f
r\@
o
@
r
\o
-9F
I
a-t
!t
E!.f O.|s Or c\(\a
oa
.{
IJ\@
@\o
I
J
:ii
I
I
:.i
I
a,
f
@
ut
E
I
:'
,lj.
H
,l
l
tt,
UJ
F
:
()
o
(t,
o
U'
ul
F
G
ou'l F
;
FO
cl
l!
o
(E
U'
o
=
z
UJ
-(J
.i
.,1i!{l-l:s
I.
B.
THE FEE MUST 8E PAID BEFORE THE
YOUR PROPOSAL.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT I.IILL ACCEPT
A 'l ist of the names of owners of all property
INCLUDING PROPERTY BEHIND AND ACROSS STREETS,
THE APPLICANT |,IILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CORRECT
II. A PRE-APPLICATION COilTENINCE WITH A PLANNING STAFF MEMBER Is STRONGLY SUGGESTED
TO }DETIRMINE IF ANY'ADDITIONAL INFORMTION IS NEEDED. NO APPLICATION l,lILL BE
ACCEPTED UNLESS IT IS COMPLETE (MUST INCLUDE ALL ITEMS RIQUIRED BY THE ZONINGADMINISTRATOR). IT IS THE APPLiCANT'S RESPONSIBILITY TO UNXE NN APPOINTMENTI.IITH THE STAFF TO FIND OUT ABOUT ADOITIONAL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS.
PLEASE NOTE THAT A COMPLETE APPLICATION t.lILL STREAMLINE THE hppnovR|. PROcEss FOR
YOUR PROJECT gV OECREASiNG-THE NUI4BER OF CONDITIONS OF APPRoVAL THAT THE PLANNINGAND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION MAY STIPULATE. ALL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAI-MUST BEC0MPLIED l.|lTH BEFORE A BUILDING pERl'tIT Is IssnED. ,r ii. r ,, ..i r r.
IlI. FOUR (4) C0PIES 0F THE FOLLOI^IrNG MUST BE SUBMITTED:
A. A WRITTEN STATEMENT OF THE PRECISE NATURE OF THE VARIANCE REQUESTEO AND THE
REGULATION INVOLVED. THE STATEMENT MUST ALSO ADDRESS:
l. The relationship of the requested variance to'other existlng or potentlaluses and structures in the vicinity.
2- The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation andenforcement-of a_specified regulation ls necessary to achieie compatibilitvand uniformity 9f treatment among sites in the viiinity or to iiiii;'Ih;'-objectives of this title without grant of special privirege.
PLEASE SEE PREVIOUS SUBMITTAL FgR FURTHER INFI].
F.adjacent to the subject property
and their mailing addresses.
MAILING ADORESSES.
&n{att--
€il!,#air,,*a14t
ryr4 aq;-2%?-
ADDRESS p o'sox irl8
Detrott, MI ITBZBB PH0NE(_:LDgE6=ffFf.. i..
NAME 0F APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE Rlcnard L Drorutner
.ADDRESS !r01A Madlson Street
PH0Nq l0l) l8s-18?5
C. NAME OF Ot,lN t) Henry H Maruvama
Si qna
ADDRESS =""" "= ouo*
PHONE
D. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL
ADDRESS Near urestern extremety of Basinodale'Blvd
LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOT 6 BLOCK B FILING ValI Tntermountaln Subdlvlslon
E. FEE $1OO PAID cK#FROM
Application oate@_._
PEC METTING DATE V3A/B\
APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE
i red
nti I
'it
for any project requesting a variance. The app'licationall information is submitted.
,. ZONE APPEAL STATEMENT - APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE
12/28/8\
Applicant: Henry H llaruyama
Property: Lot 6, Block 8, Vail Intermountain Subdivlsion
Variance tequested:
That the proposed resldence be allorrred to project at the southrdestcorner into the front setback a distance of. seven feet..(ref:18.13.060)
This variance is being requested because of the unneiessary physical
hardship that uouLd be inposed upon thl.s site by compliance urith the front
setback requirement. The site has three features, unique. in this neighborhood
trrhich have caused this hardshipt
1) The road has been built ten feet or more above the front property
line
Average slope over the site is 496, urith the slope in Front ofthe site exceeding 70% near the road.
The front property line is a minimum of fifteen feet from the road
over most of its lenqth.
These condltions, coupled uith the setback serve to place the proposedstructure so far belol the road as to cause an extreme access problem.
The enclosed drauings shqu 1lt flights of stairs just to reach the top floorof the building, uith the lor,rer floor tenant having to negotlate 414 flights.hlithout the requested ?r variance, another nearly full fllght of stalrsttiLl be necessary.
Alrnost all nearby structures rrrere built to county requirements and are notconforming to vail requirements, esp. in regard to parking. One relativelyneu structure uhlch does approach compliance (see attached photos) has ltsfront property line mush closer and higher in rerationship to the road andconsequently has much less hardship. The requested variance is necessary toachieve a uniform treatment rrrith the other properties in the neighborhoodand as such uould not constitute a granting of special. privilege.
This variance r.rill have no effect on vieus from adjacent sites, and u1l.I notbe detrimental to the public health, sefety, uelfare, or materially injurlousto properties, uses, or improvements in the vicinity.
Lt is requested that the variance be approved for one o! both of the follorring
reasons conslstant uith section 18.62.060:a) The strict enfotcement of the front setback reguJ.ation r,lill resultin practical difflculty and unnecessary physical hardship lnconsistantuith the objectives of the regulation.b) There are extraordinary circumstances applicable to the site that donot apply generall.y to other properties in the same zone.
2)
3)
i;t{&'2
Applicat'ion D.t"? 11/12/E4
PEC MEETING DATE 12/10/84
I.
APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE
This procedure'is requilgg fgl qn{ project requesting a variance. The applicationwill not be accepted until alt tnioi:maiion is'submitied.
A. NAME 0F APPLICANT_Ftg15J_U_Uqruyqma
. petroit. MI 48288 pH0NE(:t2g.E=:6.:r
B. NAME 0F APPLICANT,S REPRESENTATM nicrraro r_ Cror,rtner
ADDRESS aorn yacis:n str"rt
PHON{ ro.A:ee=tqzs
c.NAME OF OWN t) Henrv H Maruvama
-
Si qnat
ADDRESS sire as onoue
PHONE
D. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL
r pri
ADDRESS F0Box1118
ADDRESS uestern extremet
LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOT 6 BLOCK B FILING Vaif Intermountain Subdivision
'1
/I
l
E. FEE gr00 eno_lgQic.#':J3k_*ov%f
THE FEE MUST 8E PAID BEFOdE iHr col,tt'tuNtry DEVELopMENT DEpARTMENT l,lILL AccEpTYOUR PROPOSAL.
I F' A I ist of the names of owners tl^lll glgpertv adjacent to the subject propertyI INCLUDING PRoPERTY BEHIND AND-AcR0ss-5rnEEii', iil u'"i" mailins addresses.J THE APPLICANT }JILL BE RESPONaIare ron-coflnici NniLrnG ADDRESSES. ---'-'
II. A PRE-APPLICAT.IgI...9gTIEIETCE },lITH^A PLANNING STAFF MEMBER IS STRONGLY SUGGESTEDT0 TDETERMINE I F ANY' ADDITIoNAL rnForuniiorl- ii r'rirbLo.''ilo nppllcnrroN wrLL BEAccEPTED UNLESS IT-Is^C0MPLFIF (MVII. rrlCfurii iiii-iier"rs REQUTRED By rHE zgNrNGADMINISTRAToR).- IT IS THE erFr-icnnr'9 nEipoNsisriiiv'ro MAKE AN AppgTNTMENTltrTH THE srAFF T0 FrND oiii nbbui-noorrror,rnr-sueMiiini nEqurnEMENTs.
PLEASE NOTE THAT A COMPLETE APPLICATION I^IILL STREAMLINE THE APPROVAL PROCESS FORY0uR PROJEcr ev.oecREAsING-THE rluNgrn or coruoiriorus-oi nppnovAl THAT THE pLANNTNGAND ENVIRoNMENTAL^cOMMtssioru NnV-srrputnrE. -A[-Cor'roirr0Ns
0F AppRgvAL MUST BEc0MpLIED wrrH BEFoRE n euILDTNG'pinutr IS Issm-. , , ,
III. FOUR (4) COPIES OF THE FOLLOWING MUST BE SUBMITTED:
L. A. A I,IRITTEN STATEMENT OF THE PRECISE NATURE OF THE VARIANCE REQUESTED AND THEREGULATION INVOLVED. THE STATEMENT MUST NISO NOONTSS:
l' The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potentialuses and structures in the'vicinity.'
2' The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation andenforcement of a specified regulation ls-neiessary-to achieve compatibilitvand unifonni!v 9f lreatment afrong sites in-ih; vicinity or to attiin theobjectives of this tiile witho;i"s;;;i-oi'rp";ur privirese.
-2-
3. The effect of the variance on light and air, distribution of population,transportation, traffic facilities, uti'lities, and public satLty.
B. A topographic and/or i.mprovement survey at a scale of at least l,' - 20' stampedby a Colorado licensed surveyor including-locations of all eiisting irp"ou.-ments, including grades and elevations. -Other elements which must-Ue lnownare-parking and loading areas, ingress and egress, landscpped areas andutility and drainage features.
C. l:!!g plan at a scale of at least l" = Z0' showing existing and proposed
bu i 1di ngs.
D. All preliminary building elevations and floor plans sufficient to indicatethe dimensions, general appearance, scale and Lse of a.l.l buildings ina-ipi..,existing and proposed on the site.
E. A preliminary t'itle report to verify ownership and easements
F. If the proposal is located in a mul ti-family development which has a homeowners,association, then wrjtten.approval from the-association in suppori of in"-""projebt must be received by a duly authorized agent for said association.
G. Any additi.onal material necessary for the review of the applicat.ion asdetermined by the zoning adminisirator.,
* For interior modifications, an improvement survey and site plan may bewaived by the zoning administratoi.
IV.Time Requirments
The Planning and Environmental Cormission 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
on the Znd and 4th Mondaysall accompanying materia'l
.of 4 weeks prior to the date of the(as determined by the zoningstaff before or after the desig-
l
'r
I
I
t.l
I
r
rt
5137 Buekingham PlaceTroy, Miehigan 48098
November 8, 1984
Department 0f CommunityAttention: Ms. Kristan75 South Frontage RoadVai1, Colorado 81657
DevelopmentPritz
Dear Ms. Pritz:
I hereby authorlze Mr. Richard L. Crowther FAIA or hisassociate Mr. Richard R. Heinemeyer to submit my applicationfor zoning variance to the town of Vail, Colorado.
Pl-ease find enclosed check for $10O.00 for fee application.
Sinperely, -.--lt, rn $f, n*e-1J@.,'-a- -\)'*riL l-{"u"'--''"-'"2^J"' -
Henry H. Maruyama
Haru Maruyana
oo
t-;
bluLa
lW9,lotn
M{- Z I n' t lopl'n €, 4 "-'r rl,(
boy bta
U6d./ q 6tOs7
C
falbaf
fi,;{4" ,tL QO)O Co
Hn&-l ,lnizl
AJ.-q .
Cntto
L{U
'T'"U q
\
U-rL/ t N+r*a'^fid^ /ap",}.-f-ro% fu't*t 5t^""*
4// La/"X,'.rc+</ C,nt{"
OAv--A^+p;f, A?ofro
l.4'*"r,*'a4L,f ptf,,-* Ad-'- G,Jr,*
V- t. rtxr
f2/j: I . ,'!'- i_ /LtL 7 (
,\ Dtt u ,'/ '
/t=/" )
Iqr- 1 J Luo/1,/u,,,
,5,rn'tr'1J /rar-, ///, Y'[cu.J
"\'t-9\r'l .t rlrlt,,
fu*qlo> e,
ts"Y zLz
, - h'l';3'1"*
Abd*6tntt
F.".'l- B P*l ,
be7 e O l,).e- 4+"*r.ftd
%-rV,*,CA Sofu-z_
laldrg .t*6
E/,ut^ L, ,lT
%r ttbL
-ah<. Ci{q , (A qarret ar,
7-
_r_r
DATE: og/a4./go EAc\' E cout'l rY Assd'.,soR
PAGE:CONDOMINIUM LISTING
CODE: R:CP COI{DOHINIUH: DOME MAIN COND.====== = --::= ===================================================================:
OOOl b:CHEE.ULE: Go4134 DISTR ICT: o45BRISCCE, THDT,IAS R.16391 EA.ST 9TANFORD PLACE
AURORA
STAIE: CB ZIp CODE: EOOISUNIT 4
B!( Ot76 PC 0314TAX ITEHS: 111 1
OOO2 gCHEBULE: OO413S DISTRICT: O4gBR IsCOE. TH8I,lAg R.1639' EAS.T ETANFORD PLACEAURtrRA
STATE: CO ZIp CODE: BOO1SUNIT 5
Ey,. $e76 PG 0314TAX ITEt'19: 1111
OOOG 9CI{EDULE: OO4136 DISTRICT: O4gBR Ig']cE, THDT'IAS R,16391 EA9T 9TANFORD PLACEAUROEA
STATE: Cg ZIp CODE: EO01gUNIT 6
EU. 0274 PG 0314TAX ITE|{E: 1111
OOo4 SCHEDULE: 0O413e DISTRICT: 04SCLAIR, KEVIIJ F. X. & I',IARGUERITE H.BOX ?o?7
VAIL
STATE: CO ZIp CODE: 81698UNIT "BK OEEB PG O9O4TAX ITEtig: tLtZ tZtT
OOOS SCHEBULE: OO4131 DISTRICT: O4gGORDOI,i, FRERRIC DR.615 EI,IMDNOS
sR if'lIN*HAI4
STAIE: HI ZIp CODE: 4AOOBUNIT 1
EK o2ea PG 0579TAX ITEf,{g: tLL? t?t7
0006 SCHEBULE: OO4t33 DISTRICT: O4gTORRIgI, SUSAN L,BOX 2792VAIL
STATE: C0 Zip CODE: Bt65BUNIT 3
B'4 A277 PC O?88
Or Or
INTER.DEPARTMENTAL REVI Et,J
PROJECT:
DATE SUBMITTED:
COMMENTS NEEDED BY:
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL:
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING
PUBLIC l.lORKS
a"r:"r.a ay, ,e 4 pur"l/hfkJCorments: T-T
6*-r<a G^,r.**c/,z1re:7,2 6tt ?o K O. q,2
fta.--a7?7n-, F _fo.*, .€.f%,e=6 <t-"'a t.r,<'to.,-_
FiRE DEPARTMENT
Reviewed by:
Comments:
Date
POLICE DEPARTMENT
Reviewed by:
Comments:
Date
REC REATION DEPARTI',IENT
Reviewed by:
Coflments:
Date
oo
7-
t
i\tl$A"rv\k^ r
q,-i^ d..1^,^qrl [imJMG
1', A.-- =J-{r,k k
\t* L4^- L--
-4v nry"*f
L gna$.-ora
&'tJ
t,JN A^1.
r/l I+a 4!*l',>,.^/<-
Lk tJN-,/,?. / y'^+
a^.*^$-n, ,*^llt"* ;- ^rl ,"*f/^ J,
)
5 - V>e,J l. aoal , ar< -*rr1..r1 L
oo
--
C(
t
$." s. xl
ti*(A - J4-'-
nzu f*r/
1\l\ \ll\oe (- 4 o.^-
l\\la 7ta^'il nrx-
6--
h "to
/"^' ur"-"(&
ri$r^^$krk .^^,!-L e /r,-L
\ f, ll .a+r. <JLdr-<- r4.L.lA_I tl ,t;QL.-Q/tt fucona -kfq't
5r"-
/nL.- gs*il +-
,/sufuarf hoose-tl
/rF L-d$.c\rrt I'- 7(ir^il, .gll u rflt<'''-
J"rJe==
.{ [.- ts-r/
J),-^./ , y'^n
-shdy / ' /*,
*t/*l , nJ
\y--*,*tT"'*\ A*o.*
o o
7-
((
{ilI,.[^ b,,r (l,.1." il,- \^,^-f
,) .! ^($. ^".1' .l tq /44t1"r
9*^//y //*^8
b O o7l^u'''\-
7-
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
STJBJECT:
Planning and Environnerrtal Corymi ssion
Cmunity oeveiolnent DeveloPment
December 10, 1984
Request for a height variance, a front aetback varia-nce
and a side setbaek variaace in order to buil d a residenc-e
on Iot 6, Block 8, Intermountain subdivision.Applicant: Eenry E. Maruyama
DESCRIPTION OF VARIANCE REQT'ESTBD
Mr. Henry Maruyama is requesting a height variance, a front
setback variance and a side setback variance in order to construct
a primary/secondary residence and a garage. fhe first request
is to exceed the allowable height of 33 feet by 11 feet. The
height of the structure is measured vertically from the existing
grade or fini shed grade (whichever is more restrictive) to the
highest ridge line of a sJoping roof. In this case, this would
nake the height of the propbsed structure 44 feet above the
existing grade.
Secondly, a front setback variance of 7 feet is being requested.
The south\,vest corner of the house encroactres into the f ront
setback. The sl opes beneath the house are above 408.
TLre appJ icant is al so requesting a 6 foot side setback var i anc e
in order to construct a garage for the Primary/Secondary residence.
The garage is located in the front setback on the southwest
corner of the lot. This location is allowed given tbe fact
that the lot has slopes in excess of 3O*.
The applicant makes the following statement as to why these
variances are beinq recluested:
"...because of the unique nature of this site (49$ slope)
and more specifically because of two resultant conditionswhich have worsened the hardship: l) The road has been
built 1O feet or more above the Property Jine over most
of its I ength, and 2 ) the f ront property .l ine is I5 f eetor more from the road over most of the length of the Propertyline. These conditions do not exist on several properties
f urther \^/est on Basingdal e Boul evard. Thi s has al l owedthose owners to build-much closer to the road, eliminating
long structured driveways and parking and minirnizing the
problems of having to push the buildings out over the slope
(which create buitding height probJ ems). The requestedvariances will not result in the building apPearing too
close to the road, nor will tbe building appear tallerthan one story above the road. It's relationship to the
roaci v.'il I be clcser to that of the nearby properties mentioned.
7'
Upon review of Criteria and Findings, Sectio! 18.62.060 of tlte
ffie Debartment of Community Development recommends
denial of the reguested variances based upon the lol lo\.flng ractors:
It is believed that the property directly to the west of
the subject proPerty could also benefit from the relief
being requested, ang that the configuration of all buildings'
entrances could then have a more equal and uniform appearance
as well as ease of construction."
CRITERIA ATD FINDINGS
The reletionship of the requested variance. to other existing
or potentia: uses and structures in the vicinity.
Height \zari ance
A height variance of such a magnitude will have a negative impact
upon adjacent structures in the vicinity. Houses are located
on either side of I-at 6. The proposed structure will be builton piers ranging in height from 26 feet to approximately l3
fee€ high. The lots located below Lot 6 are also developed'
Views from these units would look up at the proposed piers. Also,
view impacts from any vantage point would be decreased if the
house were terraced down the slope. (Please see attached Section
A, Section B and the el evations.) views from adjacent proPerties
witl be negatively impacted by this tlpe of structure.
In addition, it should be emphasized that the intent of the
height ordinance is to construct buildings in relation to the
topography of the site. The excessive treight of this structure
is in part due to the fact that the structure.is not-9gqigngawith reipect to the topography. Certainly, the site is difficult
to work with due to the slope probl em. However, the structure
could be designed in such a $tay so that the structure wouldbe terraced down the hillside. the height variance has a negative
impact on adjacent structures.
Front Setback Variance
The 7 foot front setback would probably not create a major negative
impact as the house would be located 3l feet from the edge of
the road. However, it is felt that the house could be designed
in a way to el iminate ttre need for thi s variance.
Side Setback Variance
A side setbackproperty would
var i ance of 6 feet
have some impact on
along the rrest side of thethe adjacent property to
--
rt
the hrest. Pr esently afel t that the garage and
el iminate the need for a 6
r\
house does exist on this lot. It is
trouse could be moved to the east to
foot side setback.
Tfre degree to rn*rich relief frcrn the strict or literal interpretationEno enforcement of a specified regul atlon is necessary to achieve
comoatibilitv and uniformitv of treatment amonq sites in the
vtcl'n or o attaJ.n the ob]ectlves ot t t 1 e v/r thout qrant
sPec fr -)-
Height Variance
The granting of the variance would constitute the granting ofa special privilege and would not be necessary to achieve compa-tibitity or uniformity of treatment among sites. According
to Tovrn records, other properties along Basingdale Drive didnot request hej.ght variances. Most of the sites along Basingdal e
Drive do have slopes in excess of 3Og. The additional height
al so does not provide any benefit to the neighborhood or conmunity.
Even though the building will be somewhat screened by evergreentrees on the site, the design of the structure should reflect
more of an effort to build a house that fits the topographyof the site. For these reasons staff feels that it would bea grant of specia) privilege to approve the ll foot height variance.
Front Setback Variance
The granting of the front setback variance is considered tobe a grant of special privilege. Staff believes that the housesttoul d be moved back out of the front setbck to provide for
parking on l-ot 6 and to el iminate the variance. The applicantstates ttr-at by placing the house in the front setback "fhe con-figuration of alI buildings' entrances could then have a moreequal and uniform appearance" and facilitate construction.Staff believes that each Jot requires a unique design solution.It eras never the intent of the front setback requirement tocreate the appearance of uniform entrances along a street.Besides, the house to the east is built below the road witha walkHay constructed on the slope to make IEE-Tnit accessiblefrom Basignda)e Road. The ease of construction is not a reasonto _qrant any tlpe of variance. To -qrant the front setback variancewould be a-grJnt of speciaJ priviiege.
Side Setback Variance
Staff also feels that it would be a grant of specia) priviJegeto approve the side setback variance. It appears that the housecoul d be constructed further to the east along with the garage
which would remove the necessity of having to have a side setbackvariance.
7,-
The effect of the requested variance on liqht and air, distribution
of population transportatron anal trattlc tacrl rtles, PuDr 1c
facilities and utilities, and public safety.
No significant impacts. However, the To\i|n Engineer has requested
that a revocabl e right-of-way permit be obtained for the retaining
walls needed for the driveway onto tl. e site which are actually
on public right-of-way property.
FTNDINGS
Tfre Planninq and Environmental Commission shalI make the following
!lndl.nos betore qrantLng a varLance.
tt r t not cons titute a gr-ant
of special-privildge inconsistent wj-th the limitations on otherproperties classified in the same district.
That the gran.,-ing of the variance wil I not be detrimental to
the pubJic health. safety, or welfare, or materiaJly injurious
to properties or improvements in the vicinity.
That the variance is warranted for one or more of the fol I owing
reasons:
The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of
the specified regulation would result in practical difficultyor unnecessary physicaJ hardship inconsistent with the
objectives of this title.
There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances orconditions applicable'to the site of the variance that
do not apply generally to other properties in the same
zone.
The strict or Iiteral interpretation and enforcement ofthe specified regulation would deprive the applicant ofprivileges enjoyed blz the owners of other properties in
the same district.
S TAFF RECOMUYENDATIONS
Height Variance
The Community Devel opment Department recommends denial of therequested height variance. It is felt that ttre residence could
have been designed in a way that accommodates the toPography
of this site. This type of design would have resulted in a
height that would be within the height Iimjt or very close.to
it. Ttre granting of the variance would constitute a granting
of a special privilege as other property olrners that have built
along Basingdal e Lliive have adapted their proposal s to the steep
topographl' of thi s area.
7-
Front Setback Variance
The commnity Development Department recommends denial of thefront setback variance, as to grant the variance would consti tutea grant of special privilege.
Side Setback Variance
The community Devel opment Department staff recommends denialof the requested side setback variance. The structures couldbe moved further east \.rhich would elininate the need for a sidesetback variance. Ttre granting of the variance would constitutea grant of special privilege inconsistent h'ith the timitationson other properties along Basingdale Drive.
lie offer our assistance to the appl icant in arriving at a designfor the residence which works with the existing site in a moiepositive manner .
(
7-;
= --J
i\Itlrrl
.1.
I
^l
I
I'l
IIsFs:a
i
\
I
I
.D
t>--,)
L''}i
(-\
- --f
--, - ?'--
\\', ,
\ f-, '
)1il
<t\7-k\
--
l-;}Jil*,(
7-
._,. ;.r , -,..y',... . L 'l ,,
.. ':- . ".-'. -:=H,=.. .,1 -..i.__.=::9,:
,I,H-'-;TF[',:? ,,
r,J
.r-:1
r,l!i=_:
lf,;". tt.oI
7-
i'^i.', : .:. -;.',.:,.)..,. .-,., ..'_''
.:.. .-':r-.. -.-. i i .--.- '.:, '- i.i-.
r':.r.. -:: .1i-' i : --.'i. :'':;,?
j::''--':: :.1j j- ii:::'r' t r' , .. 1- '.' -.-.-._i.i. ; , , i.,. 1: .,,-;;.;;--..,. .- .!.<, _\r,=,_..._; !......- .-* .
Planning and Environmenta'l Commission
December 10, .|984
PRESENT STAFF PRESENT
Diana Donovan
Gordon Pierce
Duane Piper
Howard Rapson
Jim Viele
Jere l,lalters
ABSENT
Scott Edwards
The meeting was called to order at 2:50 by Duane piper, chairman.
'l . Approval of minutes of meeting of November 26.
viele moved and Pierce seconded to approve the'minutei as iorrected. voten tavor.
2.uest for a he'i ht and front and side setback variances in order to
ntennounta ca nt:Henry ruyama
Peter Patten
Tom Braun
Betsy Rosolack
Duane Piper corrected vote on item three, sorenson and cooper realignmentof lots lines between Parcels c and D of Lots 20-l and 2o-2, gighori. Thevote t..tas 5 in favor, 0 against with piper not participating.
Tom Braun reviewed the request. (The commissioners had visited the site beforethe.meeting. ). Braun pointed out that because of the steep siie, the garagecou'ld be in the front setback without need for a variance. He explaiieA ittatthe applicant felt his request qualified as a hardship because th! road wasconstructed l0 feet or more above the property line over most of its'lengthand because the front property line is'l5'feei or more from the road ovei mostof the length of the piopbrty-line.
Braun reported that the staff felt a height variance of such a magnitude ('l 'l
fe-et) would have a negative impact on adjacent structures and wouid be a grantof.special priv'ilege because oiher propeities along Basingdale had not re{uesieOnergnt variances. He stated that the staff also felt that the buildings couldhave been des'igned in such a way to accommodate the steepness of the siie.The staff also felt that grantiirg a front setback variance would be a grantof special privilege. The staff-felt that the house couiJ ue built fuitherto the east, elim'inating the need for a side setback varjance.
ary restdence ancl a garage on Lo
o PEc ry84 -2-
Rich Heinemeyer, representing the architect, Richard Crowther, explained thatthe applicant had not intended to request a side setback on the wbst and thearchitect was prepared to redesign the project so as not to need the s'ide setbackvariance. He stated that the height was 45 feet, not 44 as indicated in the
memo. The reasons for wishing to design the buildings as requested was sothat there could be a single level entry, to cut down on the retaining walls,for solar access to the upper level , for the view to the east, and to tryfit the building into an open area where trees would not have to be removed.
He felt that it was better to have a tall slender structure and that bui'ldinqthe house into the h'ill was not necessari'ly the best aesthetically on thissite. Heinemeyer added that he had not received any complaints from the neigh-bors that he had talked with and had a letter of approval from one neighbor.-
He was asked if the trees had presented a hardship, and Heinemeyer answeredthat the trees helped to hide the house, though they did use the location ofthe trees to decide upon siting. Pierce stated that he could see some advantagesto having a pole house, i.e. not having to dig as much slope, but he felt that-it still could be stepped down. Pierce informed Heinemeyer that resident elevatorswere available. He also suggested using trellis to camouflage the piers, drivingonto the roof which would require only a small part of the building to be over33 feet, and added that solar benefits on that lot were minimal. -
Viele said that he generally concurred with Pierce and fe'lt that more studyof possible alternative design was required. Rapson asked about the uses ofthe different floors and was told that the top floor was for the owners'mainliving area, the midd'l e floor for guest bedrooms and the lower floor for theother unit. Donovan agreed with Pierce and Viele. P'iper felt that the heiqhtcou'ld be mitigated, and suggested that the requirment of entering on thelevel should be discussed further with the owners to see whether or not a variablecould be worked out. Piper felt that it would be difficutt to pick up muchpassive solar excgPt in the sufimer. Heinemeyer replied that there was actual'lyquite a bit of solar available on the site.
Viele
lvere
Viel e
explained that the guide 'lines that the cormissionquite narrow, and unfortunately did not include some
was required to followof Heinemeyer's criteria.
moved and RaDson seconded to den the variances uested oer the staff
memo ateo uecember lu. 19u4. lhe vo was 6-0 to
3.uest for a conditional ermit in order to construct a heli-
on racts enter ) .nter site visit before meeting)
Tom Braun explained the request which was to construct a helipad in the parkinglot at the Medical Center. He stated that to have the helipai at the reluestedlocation would benefittheMedical Center with respect to how they utilize helicopter'landings in their operation.
Braun stated that the staff felt there were two main reasons to deny the request.
One was safety for pedestrians and for surrounding residents and for landing
the helicopter and the other was noise and wind which would affect the surroundinoresidents. He added that the staff recomnended improvements to the exist'inqfacility.
Planning and Environmenta'l Conrniss'ion
Qecember .l0, .|984
2:00 S'ite InsPections
3:00 pm Public Hearing
l. Approval of mjnutes of meet'ing of November 26.
2. Request for a height and front and side setback variances
order to build a residence on Lot 6, Block 8, Intermountain.
F.pp1 i cant-: Henry H. i''iaru1'ana
3. Requesr for a ccnciIjonel use petiiii-jn crder_io.construc't a
;.{i:paa on Tracts E and F, Vail Village 2nd-Fi1r'ng (tne-vait
Va11ey i,ieciical Center. ) Applicant: VaiI Val1eJ, fi.6t.u'' Center
4, Preliminary review of exterior alterations of:
a. Lionsquare Lodge - KB Ranch restaurant deck enclosure
b. Lionshead Gondola b)dg remodel and addition
c. Lifthouse Lodge bldg conmercial expansion
5. Report from the Park steering cornrnittee
6. Discussion of Pl anning "Open House" January l0'
7. Brief presentation of proposed modifications to the
approved development plans for Golden Peak.
ZCNE APPEAL STATEMSIT - APPL]EATION FOR VARIANCE
11/12/84
Applicant: Henry H Maruvama
Prooerty: Lot 6, Block B, Va1l :.ntermountain Subdiv:.si-on
Variances requested :
1)That the Froposed residence be allaned to oro-iect at tne southrrlest
cornet into the front setback a distance of seven feet. (ref: 19.13.068)
Z)That the proaosed residence be al.lqled to be built to a heignt of 45 feet
as measured from the hignest ridge vertically to the lqlest point oiexisting grade (or neu grade if Lorrer) lying directly beneath tne ridge.(ref: 18.1f.075)
These vari.ances are being requested because of the unique nature of the terrain
on this site (49% slope) and more specifically because of tr,ro resultant condltions
trrhlch have uorgened.the hardship: (1)the road has been built ten feet or mole
above the front property line over most of its length, and (Z)the front propertyline is fifteen feet or more from the road over rnost of the lenoth of theproperty Line.
These condi.tions do not exist on several of the prooertiee further uest on
Easingdal.e Blvd. This has allcrrred those olners to build much closer to tJre
road, eliminating long structured driveuays and patking and mlnimizing the
ploblems of having to push the buildings out over the sJ-ope(r,rhlch cleates
buiJ.ding height ptoblems).
The too cI
the road, nor uill the ioad.I 5e closer to that of the neatbv
mentioned. It is beLleved that the property dlrectly to the r,rest of the subject
property could also benefit from the relief being requested and that theconflguratlon of all buildingst entrances could then have a more equal end
uniforrn apFearance as uelL as ease sf construction.
The proposed vari.ances rrrill have no effect on light, air, distribution ofpopulation, transportation, traffic iacilities, utilities, or pubLic safety.
Please see the attached letter for additional discussi.ons regarding designrationale and environrnental impacts.
c.
c
c
El!
lr
g
€
€
|r.t\lc
eccat
F,c.c)
(J
UJ
()
4ul
C)zo
C)
(5E
UJzur
G
e
L
t-
c0)
u
:,1
El6I
^l:f
olu)lcl3l
tnt,lc
co n : =-= cq |!- c'L)r' C C== i- -'-- a =o- =E F 3
=c o = G.;g'E .:f _: :; . .Ea - =- r^ t =o: f 3- "?g U'9,-c L.r LaC =>9,Ltetgol-GC
=- >-C ti eU C G) L OO c --: c'u c-N O t3 t? - L (o O == '-,L : |:Gll
-t^=!,CtnL'-=Lc= . = = = r- e-=:> (: rr = c- o |^E () o- '-'-T ! |CJ -O C .- !g L -C c:- o.r € 0i 3 .!- O E|O C! l!C t/) E C = UOO(,!l-EcOFE-r-L =3o OO C{Jq)- u.- ! r, Cj s= r- C L r,
.E- .t= g (n (t o c=C.i! O (' 0Jorc-3LcJ.tLO r.!. - O = O O .r O- ll-!(!O-tL!U!-Ott' tD-- C OltO, C t, O 15 t! C ! 19-O r^ O (n = O- O E-uro;C-9LF.L,O4+J - rE ! C -Ut |! c.- )x - > (! o cr
- rn N - 3- O .J Ct/ UrLc |D O O C .- O C)C, O- --l O q, rJ.c t-+r{Jtuo-LL(nL}rE.-oO X -. 3Oo 0l !t,| r! L o . o ur5 L a|,1 (D
rL O)!, O O) CL Fq, tr ! ! tn C ul- O lCtt 'E O- tr- O (! (! L C-5Pvt Oul=- O+rO - !!c{o t/! - L r', +' l! - cJ:: 4 t- Er tD -, t L
Orro tr-C.> oE5 J q; E .-+, (,'r E!O O.1t!g B E g= .- r )x C =EOO -+tC (u !r(',| cOc)u -a. - > O O.o O .U !.-.r (, O .-O (, L+, (,CL
= = t- C- lD E O la g O-r, CLOCTC Oq-e - .8./rT' o llrt -dJ>C t- !, >Ol ur ED CL >\o.:- O OUE.c O.JTt c ogr r-e O- lF f Lt J C L .- )TlJt)= L - oO!! ILEO;- =..t th= gE3 OoQA L O- O (,| O r, t L - C E lrl I>=-- -UO Flr U'.E O t! 3 - O '+- O = c -lo Ir J u > .iE rr-.- O Ol
- L.(J C JT, 3 - iL O L L O E- O {) = llll(/l| O O -C O A O r,, c= t ! O =l< !n-C FrtsEU -(q= Fd>' Fl
t'r=
-Gc! |
G= tt
-O c's= s -ItF
-O!|!! c)=
r-.r - -- iCJ- Vr l-
-(0q6,-> L i-
ur_; C-
tEE
E'l
o u =!'CGO- >-O
t-Ur '(D <\O=a0
Lt, f eooLC- 6 >
=0,
=L_ C! !
- r.- Co oEt-o)co-u >o
OOCq)-E o cr! (n-=-
3(l)(|)Lr,t-L=lgr >. o .rJc.) E'o ru
=ruulL\ ED|n I.o cootarJ .- dc-c 303O Or-Oq,E -e =>o(^ o |!g.. lD L F.NCat-c.,P L O O-(o OrF ' c.1'-L E rF C- lucL r! c o4>
. J o- r^- c(^ r- >o-E.-
= (o (l)>z JE.- -0,r- E E >OO .. .!.o.6 O;o c, tc=LOo 4 F (! (,)F.g
coN'oC'\ .P CE f\L 0) 1^- o- ctl\o@ - O-c{ C-r,CDorutrL !> oO rt t-O
-O -q-l!(JE LO0, :a:, c, tt -o- .3q, tn olf\ o(t =Fr\>
caf.il
=o
0c(J
o
c)
I
Y't
o.>
I
()
t-
L
c)
x
U
L
ru
t.-cl tn
.-lu
-1,!(!ll-
rlo
(olo).t:
o l.-
^1.-sfl>
q)
A'
(,) >
L>
(!
uo
vl
r-. cOtB
o>-u-
OtLENo-c, ur
tc.otrl
Lll(!ol co{o
<l!loojl c>l t
-ls!l(ul|,
dl r/l[JloJ
=l-
t)Etu ru
Sgto (!Eur Itr c rr?O - 3-
!nC
x>
=oo _ 9.G
==>L o cel!r-()>
o tt. !Etr^.g r .-.J =-Cc o o= a.EL! 5^gr, C-C
-o (D 0.) E c.L>.L L O c
t, ., C L)c o cr.- ooo -c -ool- rJ +, Ptn,t) O C
- vt .c qJ (oFo t, r,E u oco
@ > F l!.r t'|-
O-O O- (r^ F l!.O E OLc (! oLt > oO O- !J cL
- t) O E- -r, (D (o - \ EtOiD F-LCoi! O O.-+r0rOO-.lJ -OO- +r Cl l.- Fu(\| ELJ U),-_c,
t7r +, ru - I!- t Jc . lrEo) O +) C-c-o - o r! ruIDO FO Cn(o r! -.t'L .rJ L cJ l.-(! = lDr^ >lr-F o'r >Ul -13O.- Ot +,1.tt 1) (ol> .s .ul cl.c Er-l 3l!J r-, 1- 0ol-c srl J lDlorE
- lra -lO rrlc 0)ol.- ol! -lo q)vrl= =lo {l- c
c|,cq)
F() {,C.r- CJ.L
LO Ctr rF
OID L
-= > G)r- (7lt\ - l-CL t-Gt1()oOEE: Or\l L.L, { ir. O
=l-O- tD \\
'13 ()
6G) c co-LnL>>-O ri Lr-3 0 (!!!0. Ee- uo!LL >-o o-OLt!tOb-t!l|Et-oOo -rb (oLv)Lgd: ocd>o0.) Os !E-C O r.-(u !, \ttr tn Ec -- !J .-.DrJ crt oL q)- l! ELc)q,o r.- > .P Eruc,PdrO- O -gL E 3.- or, luJfu|LFu gcl q,oo3 .r-,9OOC.)rD-l-F
6
q)
sa-d.t:-t.<(
clo
=rno\ne-!
>'cL|!oF
ior
c>-cl 4ol-uo c.)
>o
x
rr- =
rr>o-
o>
r,E>,E.-t o!,lu(0lootl |,
lr
r>
o3
a)
o-oF\'s(ta.r!c
o-,oxrtco,
0J-C.O.-=LlJ!c1 o 3
=UF
EElU -r iPCt, . 0)llrr c q)LOOr*.oo>t) L c)o(/|cnt-ctLocE o to>qr/t €J |n
oL oEa L .JsUO--utiol) r, --oho 3 .s E:- : -=rJLl-|or10)rro Ul>OL lD COS -(.,gro ,L) o
--c r,!.ut!CCo o o:+rE rJOEO.|JLt,t-(,!Ott\.r! O . .L,N ol E-5, =1o. \.- |' (!olo clG Er- .PlL O.t llr [J Fa -lo arl EcOI LIIJ FFc -1tn urc \. Eo ()l J Ll+, ol ><u |UIO Ol ,NlL t!(n Llr, >lc '-lo J
O- !.- lrJ i- r/,l'+ O-
L=:26
l.u.lNUt-r=F
o lJl .., ,L, o)ScrE ' F
\.E\- tt L a!ci{t, L o (9clo rE \,
-ftr A- U|l OloJI.- G LI CDI (^ol> qrl olq,
slP E 5t ;t3.rla o ol (Jlo
t:****,
E
tu
3ol-()
.ot-o
uaJ
|n
q)
ru
ovlLoCL
T'ql
tg.;.€''<.H---Zc, t-5#
olnrt!Ooo.
oa
o--c t!
3tt ycur! ru
!.-
ou
Lt!o.oTt
Er i!
o0)C||
0, ul
+, ttq)
Lglo0,.PL
a!Lq,.!€EPI
o. Lt' o ll)c>IDL
CD II,)tio
G,r4
Ir!j>cnQ./ g
O(,ro'1J q)tr-tDA
ltr >.c,-|!-F(oo- (,
oo
:'+r.|-J ltluoq)
-coOE
|!-()!-
ruo
-ocooa,
o- r,
oor,E
r,l -(,
t lE-lD C rrt!oc.r.r - O
-.r O.Eoy'-occ,
|, TF
1., |!
olo o|,I E I'OIO.l C Polo urr- F- O4lr E
ctDoL
6)t)-ou ctl
Li ll
A
o
(n
Lv,
t.
r=
l1a ruyama Project Evaluation F.A*l!'C"-'fLt' F*.o,rhe site: "(rqltf
l. Extrerne grades, poor ac.ess for construct ion and density of
trees make site costly to build on.2. Access to sewer and ueter does not aPpear to be a problen.
Locat ion of House on Site:
l.
')
Ir
Best I oca t ion towards
Cal iper of trees wi I I
westend of site.
have to be on plan 3" and larger
Garage :an violate setback !,ine.House cannot cross set bacl ine.
Soljlr Factors:
l. Height alove road to accommodate clerestory passive solarto be 2lf*to optimize solar.
2. Height w5uld have to be reduced to l5r in reference to road
, to keep respective height of house within 33' - some
Decernber solar gains wou ld be lost.
3. Nevertheless, some solar and dayl ighting benef its would accrue(particularly as the sun moved towards the equinox).
Arch i tecture:
l. The floor plans are ideal as to the conservation of land' coverage, conservat ion in initial cost, and 1x51;!,of energy.2. The ratio of interior volume to exterior surface is ideal
3. The location of window openings is effective for view and
dayl i ght i ng .q. The exter ior porch decks are ideally located.
5. The floor plan provides I ivabil ity on the upper level at
such time that someone could not negotiate the stairway.5. The garage attacl'snent, access and exter ior parking places
as a supported deck, i$, practical and minimizes
snow removal.
7. Natural cool ing shoul d be adequate for summer.
t.
2.
3.
House cannot exceed J ll*i
radJ cannot be alteredri6
l,.in
accommodate height
he ioht from oriqinal crade.
Grade cannot be alteredTii
Factors:
To keep house to minimal height: Upper level
with high ceiling area as low as possible to
rrcdate solar. Lower level and apartment level
not exceed 7' 5rr in height.
A variance to be requested to c6mpensate for
qrades.
4.
restr ict ion.to be 71 0"
still accom-
cei I ings to
ext r eme
-2-
Maruyama Proj ect Eva lgat ion
S tructura I Enq i neer i n-q :
l. A major element of design and cost is the support ive deck for
garage and parking requ ired.2. lf a variance is not granted and the house is dropped to grade
with regular foundat ions, the roof of the house will be not higher
than the road bed.
3. lf a variance is granted, a support ive structural frame will be
requ i red for the house,A. Structural engineering for the suoportive vehicle deck and
elevated framing for the house will cost about 54,000 to 95,000.
0ther Costs: (Attributable to the difficutt site)
l. Survey of tree sizes will be more costly to obtain.2. PreparaGion of extra drawings and documents required by zoningfor variance appl ication.
3. Presentat ion in Vail at the Zoning Rev iew Board of such materials
at one or two meetinos of the Board.
lt . Arch i tectura I acconrn6dat ions for the eng ineer i ng that wou I d sup-
port the garage and house.
5. Additional costs for the unusual amount and type of structural
construction.5. Rernova I of trees at the site that rnould interfere with construc-tion.
7. Additional construct ion costs in the stag ing work and storing
mater ia I s at the site.8. Thermal ly protecting water and sewer lines.
9. Life-time maintenance of the structural support ive systern'10. Superinsultation required under the house, as wel I as for ex-
terior walls and roof.
Note: lt is diff icult to ascertain all of these foregoing extra costs, P€r-ticularly in regard to an effort that might be expended to secure
var i a nce.