HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-0510 PECPLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
—
May 10, 1903
Project Orientation/Lunch 11:15 AM
Site Visits 12:00 PM
Savoy Villas/Simba Land Corporation
O�346 Cortina Lane/Brinkman
PQul Anderson
[19M4905M�
Work Session 1:1
A request for a work session for 8 major a0eOd08nt to SOD#5tO allow for the
development Qfthe n3[Uainim] pnMjOU of the SiDlba Run SDD, Savoy Villas, located at
1100 North Frontage Road, more specifically described as follows:
That part rfthe First SoNdomema| Map for Simba Run Condominium, according tothe mupthemo
recorded in the office o{the Eagle Cnun'y, C*|nmdo, Clerk and Rncnn1er, d*yohhed as follows:
Beginning at/he most southwesterly corner of said map, thence the following three courses along the
westerly lines of said map; 1> NO3°33'01^E 160.79 feet; 2> N12°50'33''E 14472 feet; 3) N17156'03''70.60
feet; monce, departing said westerly nne. S13^16'03^vv 157.26 feet, thence sr6r4o'o7^ee1.so feet; thence
W13°16'03^E 35.0O feet; ohenoo S76"43'57 "E 7231 feet to the easterly line ofsaid map; thence the following
two courses along the easterly and southeasterly lines u1said map; 1) S24^44'57^E 52.38 feet; 2)
G52"50'29^VV 272.5O feet tothe Point of Beginning, containing 0.6134 eoreo, more nrless; and
That part of 5imba Run, according mthe map thereo recorded in Book 312ao Page 753 in the Office of
the Eagle County, Colorado, Clerk and Recorder, described as follows'.
Beginning at the most southerly corner of said Simba Run, thence the following four courses along the
sou and northwesterly lines of said Simbo Run; 1) N37°0931"W233.28foet�2) 334.57 feet along
the arc ofa curve m the left, having a radius mf1771.95 feet, a central angle cd 10°43'06r. and a chord that
bears N4211 3'20"E 334.07 feet: 3) N3604848^ E 201.36 1eeu� 4) 15.96 feet along the am of u ounm to the
right, having a radius of428.O2 feet, a central angle o}O2"08'12^. and a chord that bears N37"52'54^E
15.96 feet to a corner on the westerly boundary of the First Supplemental Map for Simba Run
Condominium, according to the map thereof recorded in the office of the Eagle Covn|y, Colorado, C|odh and
Recorder; thence the following four courses along said westerly boundary; 1)S21°51'28^VVS8.8U feet; 2)
S1 7056'03"W 181]7 feet; 3)812"5O'33"W14472f*et;4) S03°33'01^VV 1GO73 feet uu the southeasterly line
of said S|mba Run; thence, along said sou line, S52 feet uo the Point cd
Beginning, containing 1.560 acres, more or less.
Applicant: Sirnba Land COrpOradinn/VValid Said
Planner: Mike MnUio@ -~
E
WK512N
2:00 - 2:30 PM
A request to review a referral from the US Forest Service to review a scoping proposal
regarding the installation of a cellular telephone site in East Vail.
Applicant: US West/Cellular One/US Forest Service
Planner: Andy Knucltsen
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Andy Knucltsen
3:00 - 3:20 PM
3. A request for setback and site coverage variances to allow for the construction of an
addition and a garage located at 2409 Chamonix Road/Lot 19, Block A, Vail clas
Schone Filing No. 1.
Applicant: Anneliese Taylor
Planner: Shelly Mello
3:20 - 3:30 PM
4. A request for a conditional use to allow furniture sales at the Cascade Crossing
Building located at 1031 South Frontage Road West/an unplatted parcel located west
of the Vail Associates maintenance shop.
Applicant: Paul Anderson Collection, Ltd.
Planner: Andy Knucltsen
3:30 - 4:00 PM
5. l A request for a landscape variance to allow for the reconstruction of the parking area
at the First Bank/17 Vail Road/Lot 6, Vail Village 2nd Filing.
Applicant: First Bank of Vail
Planner: Andy Knudtsen
4:00 - 4:15 PM
6. A request for a minor subdivision for Cascade Village, SDD #4, Area A, Millrace 111,
1335 Westhaven Drive, Cascade Village, more specifically described as follows:
Apart of the SW NE Y, Section 12, Township 5 South, Range 81 West of the 6th RM., described as follows:
K
A part of the SW Y ,,, NE V,, Section 12, Township 5 South, Range 81 West of the 61h P.M., described as follows:
Beginning at a point of the North -South centerline of said Section 12 whence an iron pin with a plastic cap marking the center of said
Section 12 bears S00'38'56 "W 455.06 feet; thence along said centerline N00 °38'56 "E 122.81 feet to the southerly ROW Tine of I -70;
thence departing said ROW line N66 "53'25 "E 39.15 feet; thence departing said ROW line S81'23'1 9"E 165.42 feet to a point of
curve; thence 122.83 feet along the arc of a 143.20 foot radius curve to the left, having a central angle of 49 "08'51" and a chord that
bears S1 5'57'45"E 119.10 feet; thence S40 "32'1 WE 3.00 feet, thence 66.30 feet along the arc of a 77.21 foot radius curve to the
right, having a central angle of 49"12'10" and a chord that bears S1 5'56'05 "E 64.28 feet; thence S8 "40'00 "W 90.27 feet; thence
N38 °42'24 "W 224.55 feet; thence S78 °10'32 "W 101.44 feet to the Point of Beginning.
Applicant: Michael Lauterbach
Planner: Jim Curnutte
4:15 - 4:20 PM
An appeal of a staff interpretation to not allow a cantilevered portion of a building into
an area exceeding 40% slope.
Applicant: Michael Lauterbach/The Reinforced Earth Co.
Planner Shelly Mello
4:20 - 5:00 PM
8. A request for wall height variances to allow for the construction of a driveway to the
residence located at 2346 Cortina Lane /Lot 4, Block A, Vail Ridge.
Applicant: Arno Brinkman
Planner: Tim Devlin
5:00 - 5:30 PM
. A request for a minor amendment to SDD 4, Cascade Village for the Waterford
parcels in area A, described as follows:
That part of the SW 1/4 NE 1/4, Section 12, Township 5 South, Range 81 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Town of Vail, Eagle
County, Colorado, described as follows:
Beginning at a point on the southerly right -of -way line of Interstate Highway No. 70 whence an iron pin with a plastic cap marking the
center of said Section 12 bears S 33 °10'19" W 1447.03 feet, thence along said southerly right -of -way line two courses
1) N 52 "50'29° E 229.66 feet
2) N 74 "38'1 7" E 160.70 feet:
thence departing said southerly right -of -way line N 88 °45'57" E 138.93 feet; thence S 40 °45'14" W 94.32 feel, thence S 18' 18'36" W
54.08 feet; thence S 01 °21'36" W 205.02 feet, thence S 12 °07'36" W 110.25 feet, thence S 28 "28'36" W 164.48 feet; thence N 40
"1 T04" W 21116 feet; thence N 49 E 97.80 feet; thence N 37'09.31" W 95.59 feet; thence S 52 "50'29" W 55.10 feet; thence
69.48 feet along the arc of a non - tangent curve to the left having a radius of 65.00 feet, a central angle of 61'14'42" and a chord that
bears N 58" 55'53" W 66.22 feet; thence N 37 11 09'31" W 118.50 feet To The True Point of Beginning, County of Eagle, State of
Colorado;
Applicant: Steve Gensler
Planner: Andy Knudtsen
I
ri
53 oil •
E
Kristan Pritz
Mike Mollica
Andy Knudtsen
Jim Curnutte
Tim Devlin
Starting at approximately 1:15 p.m., the Planning and Environmental Commission was
called to order for a work session for a major amendment to SDD #5 to allow for the
development • the remaining portion of the Simba Run SDD, Savoy Villas, located at
1100 North Frontage Road, more specifically described as follows:
194*019or-10011MIMM HOOKOISHIM Wo 6=1
That part of Simba Run, according to the map thereof, recorded in Book 312 at Page 763 in the Office of
the Eagle County, Colorado, Clerk and Recorder, described as follows:
Applicant: Simba #': Corporation/Walid Said
Planner: Mike Mollica
Mike Mollica reviewed the staff memorandum to the PEC and discussed a number of
Is specific issues that r had identified as possible concerns regarding the project's
design.
May 10, 1♦93
Bill Anderson questioned how snow storage would be accommodated between the
buildings.
Kathy Langenwalter stated that she was also concerned with the overall site planning
• the project and felt that the neighborhood is currently constructed as multi-family.
She suggested combining some of the four-plexes so that there would be more open
space and that the overall project would be more compatible with the neighborhood.
Dalton Williams recommended removing the eastern-most unit on the lower bench. Re
felt that this eastern-most unit would block some • the existing views from the Simba
Run project.
Kathy Langenwalter again stated that she was concerned with putting smaller buildinig,
envelopes on a site that is surrounded by larger developments.
Dalton Williams suggested that moving the building envelopes could help solve the
parking concerns at this site. He also commented that he would like to see all parking
in the 20-f•ot setback eliminated.
Greg Amsden commented that the northern buildings need to be rearranged
rondensed. I
Jim Morter, the applicant's architect, stated that rockfall concerns will be addressed by
Nick Lampiris. He also said that he feels the proposed design of this project is
consistent with the Town's Land Use Plan and surrounding properties in the area. He
further stated that private view corridors will be provided as a result of this project's
is orientation.
Planning and Environmental Commission
May 10, 1993 2
E
Jeff Bowen asked Jim what phase the employee housing units were proposed to be
built.
Mike Mollica stated that the Fire Department has requested the location of all fire
hydrants proposed on the site. He said that he was still waiting for comments from the
Public Works Department.
Nit"VyWIF M I stogm 0 LIMN"I'LIMBLVIM IPA M V pip
Mike Mollica stated that Sally Brainerd, an architect in Morter's office, has completed a
conceptual grading plan and it appears to be compatible with this site.
Dalton Williams stated that he feels the existing Simba Run buildings have good
Planning and Environmental Commission
May 10, 1993 3
rl
L-
11 1! 111111 1 A
2. A request to review a referral from the US Forest Service to review a scoping proposal
regarding the installation of a cellular telephone site in East Vail.
Applicant: US West/Cellular One/US Forest Servic
Planner: Andy Knudtsen\Shelly Mello
Diana Donovan inquired whether any changes had been made to this proposal since
the last time this item was before the PEC.
Rich Phelps with the US Forest Service stated that the water tank site is still being
focused on and that the height of the cellular telephone tower has yet to be
determined.
Larry Storms with Cellular One stated that the tower would consist • a wood pole with
an open lattice cross arm and that they were attempting to make the pole as aesthetic
as possible. He stated that the whips would be the only elements visible above the
tops of the trees.
Jeff Bowen commented that this site is located within an area that receives substantial
snowslide remains.
Shelly Mello inquired whether the equipment building would be back behind the water
tower.
Larry Storms responded that the equipment building would be 50 to 100 feet between
the pole and the building.
Ron Adepoe with US West stated that the western portion of this site slopes downward
2nd that access to this area would be primitive.
Kristan Pritz stated that the neighbors wanted to be kept informed of the progression of
this proposal and inquired what the next step would be.
Rich Phelps stated that there would be a formal opportunity for public comments after
an internal review and that the Town would be notified of any decision relating to this
proposal.
I I 1 00 1*
Larry Storms added that the road may be subject to Design Review Board revie
Dalton Williams inquired when the cellular telephone site would be in place. I
Planning and Environmental Commission
May 10, 1993 4
11
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Andy Knudtsen\Kristan Pritz
Sherry responded that she did not have numbers addressing Bill's question.
Diana Donovan commented that she would like to see the area be more of a park.
Planning and Environmental Commission
May 10, 1993 5
2
Kristan Pritz stated that the Town was attempting to strike a balance between the
neighbors and park. She said that they were not anticipating that this area would be
used as an active recreation it She added that they could always decide to go
back and pave the road at some future date but that a "natural approach" was being
attempted first.
The PEC members stated that they did not have any issues with the proposed gravel
road.
14 111 04 IONNS -1 I WON VA N J 0111 01111-111111 0
Diana Donovan commented that it was a huge cemetery by anyone's standards and
she did not think that the committee had originally envisioned the entire Donovan Park
site being used for the cemetery.
Sherry Dorward stated that there had been discussion concerning defining the
cemetery's boundaries.
Greg Amsden stated that he would like to see a detailed road and cross-section.
4. A request for a conditional use to allow furniture sales at the Cascade Crossing
Building located at 1031 South Frontage Road West/an unplatted parcel located west
of the Vail Associates maintenance shop.
Applicant: Paul Anderson Collection, Ltd.
Planner: Andy Knudtsen
Kathy Langenwalter made a motion to approve this request for a conditional use permit
per the staff memo with Greg Amsden seconding the motion. A unanimous 6-0 vote
approved this item.
5. A request for a landscape variance to allow for the reconstruction of the parking area
at the First Bank/1 7 Vail Road /Lot • Vail Village 2nd Filing.
Applicant: First Bank of Vail
Planner: Andy Knudtsen\Mike Mollica
Mike Mollica gave a brief presentation per the staff memo and stated that staff was
ommending approval of this request for a landscape variance.
Greg sden inquired what the anticipated construction period for this proposal would
be and when it was to be completed.
Mark istow replied that they hoped to be finished with the reconstruction of the
parking area by July 1, 1993.
Planning and Environmental Commission
May 10, 1993 6
11
Bill Duddy stated that the Town of Vail has requested that First Bank maintain the
stucco wall along the inside • the parking lot and that First Bank agreed to maintain
the wall.
Dalton Williams stated that he was concerned that the project would not be completed
by July 1st and that he did not want this site to be torn up over July 4th. He further
stated that he would like to see a condition attached to this approval concerning when
construction would be completed.
Greg Amsden stated that it could either be by July 1st or that construction would be
delayed until September 30th of this year.
Diana Donovan stated that she was concerned with the Town of Vail doing the
maintenance of the landscaping and that she felt that this was the applicant's
responsibility.
Jeff Bowen commented that he felt this proposal was a positive improvement to the
site.
E
Diana Donovan added that she felt that First Bank should be required to contribute to a
Town of Vail maintenance fund.
After further discussion, Kathy Langenwalter made a motion to approve this request for
a landscaping variance per the staff memo with Jeff Bowen seconding her motion.
Dalton Williams added that the construction should either be completed by July 1,
1993 or delayed until September 15, 1993. Kathy and Jeff their motion accordingly
and a 6-0 vote approved this request.
6. A request for setback and site coverage variances to allow for the construction of an
addition and a garage located at 2409 Chamonix Road/Lot 19, Block A, Vail das
Schone Filing No. 1.
Irwin Bachrach, the architect for this project, stated that they were currently only 1.8%
over the allowed site coverage and that the closet was an important part of this
renovation. He stated that he feels they have complied with the PEC's requests of
stepping the walls of the garage. He commented that he felt the garage was now as
small as it could be.
May 10, 1993
6
E
M
gpace in order to reduce the site coverage and that this situation is not a hardship.
She also stated that she was concerned with how the stair tower and the garage are
attached and the proposed roofs.
Dalton Williams stated that he had no problems with the request and added that the
closet has a dual function - airlock and storage area.
IFT ITT;
IF 1 11 , 111: 1 11
�j
moll • to
A part of the SW 1 /4, NE 1 /4, Section 12, Township 5 South, Range 81 West of the 6th P.M., described as follows:
Beginning at a point of the North-South centerline of said Section 12 whence an iron pin with a plastic cap marking the center of said
Section 12 bears S00 455.06 feet; thence along said centerline N00 '38'56"E 122.81 feet to the southerly ROW line of 1-70;
Planning and Environmental Commission
May 10, 1893 8
LI
thence departing said ROW line N66 39.15 feet; thence departing said ROW line S81 165.42 feet to a point of
curve; thence 122.83 feet along the arc of a 143.20 foot radius curve to the left, having a central angle of 49 and a chord that
bears 515 °57'45 "E 119.10 feet; thence S40 1 32'1 OT 3.00 feet; thence 66.30 feet along the arc of a 77.21 foot radius curve to the
right, having a central angle of 49 and a chord that bears S1 5 °56'05 "E 64.28 feet; thence S8 90.27 feet; thence
N38o42'24"W 224.55 feet; thence S78 101.44 feet to the Point of Beginning.
Applicant: Michael Lauterbach
Planner: Jim Curnutte
Jim Curnutte made a brief presentation of the request and asked the PEC to make a
formal motion and vote on this request.
Jeff Bowen made a motion to approved the applicant's request for a minor subdivision
per the staff memo. Greg Amsden seconded the motion and a 6-0 unanimous vote
approved this item.
8. An appeal of a staff interpretation to not allow a cantilevered portion of a building into
an area exceeding 40% slope.
Applicant: Michael Lauterbach/The Reinforced Earth Co.
Planner: Shelly Mello
11
ny Langen'
cannot cantilever into an area exceeding 40% slope with Dalton Williams seconding
the motion. A 6-0 unanimous vote upheld the staff interpretation.
9. A request for a wall height variance to allow for the construction of a retaining wall
exceeding three (3) feet in height in the front setback for the driveway to the residence
located at 2346 Cortina Lane/Lot 4, Block A, Vail Ridge.
Applicant: Arno Brinkman
Planner: Tim Devlin
Tim Devlin made a presentation per the staff memo and stated that the staff was
recommending approval of this item with the condition that the steps be heavily
landscaped with a mix of junipers, aspen and evergreen trees.
Kathy Langenwalter made a motion to approve this request for the wall height variance
per the staff memo with Dalton Williams seconding the motion. A 6-0 vote approved
fts item.
10. A request for a discussion regarding The Valley, Phase 11, upper development area,
concerning the soils testing requested by the PEC.
Applicant: Steve Gensler
Planner: Andy Knudtsen
May 10, 1993
PI
Jay Peterson, the applicant's representative, updated the PEC concerning the soils
test. Jay stated that with regard to the soil test being requested by the PEC, that thd.
track machine could not get on the road and that a cut needed to be made to build
access to allow the machine into that area. He said that the cut will be made in an
area where a driveway will eventually be located.
Diana Donovan stated that any disturbed areas would need to be regraded an#
revegetated. Kristan told Jay that the staff would need a letter of credit and a
developer's agreement.
A request for a minor amendment to SDD #4, Cascade Village for the Waterford
parcels in area A, described as follows:
That part of the SW 114 NE 114, Section 12, Township 5 South, Range 81 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Town of Vail, Eagle
County, Colorado, described as follows:
Beginning at a point on the southerly right-of-way line of Interstate Highway No. 70 whence an iron pin with a plastic cap marking the
center of said Section 12 bears S 33 W 1447.03 feet; thence along said southerly right-of-way line two courses
1) N 52 E 229.66 feel
2) N 74 °36'1 E 160.70 feet;
thence departing said southerly right-of-way line N 88 E 138.93 feet; thence S 40 W 94.32 feet; thence S 18 18'36" W
54.08 feet; thence S 01 W 205.02 feet; thence S 12'07'36" W 110.25 feet; thence S 28 W 164.48 feet; thence IN 40
°17'04" IN 211.16 feet; thence N 49 E 97.80 foot; thence N 37 W 95.59 feet; thence S 52 W 55.10 feet; thence
69.48 feet along the arc of a non-tangent curve to the left having a radius of 65.00 feet, a central angle of 61*14'42" and a chord that
bears N 58 55'53" W 66.22 feet; thence N 37 W 118.50 feet To The True Point of Beginning, County of Eagle, State of
10 1 Colorado;
Applicant: MECM Enterprises represented by Eustaquio Cortina and
Commercial Federal Savings.
Planner: Shelly Mello
Shelly Mello stated that items 1 through 7 on page 2 • the staff memo have been staff
2pproved and staff did not approve of item 8 and would like the PEC to discuss this
item.
Ned Gwathmey, the architect for this project, stated that he had studied two
21ternatives and had determined that they would essentially be going back to what A
*reviously approved, but the length of the shed roof would be s orter.
TO FJIM=18�011111 1111111111 111111111111ir 111111111 111
Ned Gwathmey stated that the eastern retaining wall would consist of keystone walls
2nd would be landscaped with cinquefoil.
Diana Donovan suggested that climbing rose bushes be used on the eastern retaining
wall.
Ned Gwathmey commented that the existing grade is steep and that the only way in
which they could comply with Town regulations was to terrace the retaining wall.
Greg Amsden inquired about the size of the trees.
Planning and Environmental Commission
May 10, 1993 10
7
Kathy Langenwalter made a motion that items 1 through 7 on page 2 of the staff
memo be approved per the staff memo and that item 8 be approved by the PEC as
proposed in the drawing from Gwathmey, Pratt and Schultz dated May 10, 1993. Jeff
Bowen seconded the motion and a 6-0 vote approved this request.
12. A request for a work session for a minor subdivision to vacate the lot line between
Lots A-1 and A-2, a request for variances from the subdivision road standards, wall
Aft height standards and to allow parking in the front setback located at Lots A-1 and A-2,
W Block A, Lions Ridge Subdivision Filing No. 1/1139 and 1109 Sandstone Drive.
Applicant: Michael Lauterbach/The Reinforced Earth Co.
Planner: Shelly Mello TABLED UNTIL MAY 24,1993
Valton Williams made a motion to table this request until May 24, 1993 with Jeff
Bowen seconding this motion. A 6-0 vote tabled this item until May 24, 1993.
13. A request for a front setback variance, a wall height variance and a site coverage
variance to allow the construction of a garage located at Lot 26, Block 7, Vail Villa•ea
1st Filing /165 Forest Road.
Applicant: Paul aether
Planner: Jim Curnutte TABLED UNTIL MAY 24,1993
Dalton Williams made a motion to table this request until May 24, 1993 with Jeff
Bowen seconding this motion. A 5-0 vote tabled this item until May 24, 1993.
14. A request for a conditional use to allow tee-pees to be used in conjunction with Vail
Associates summer programs • be located adjacent to the Base of Chair 8, Tracts B
and D, Lionshead 1st Filing.
Applicant: Vail Associates
Planner: Jim Curnutte TABLED UNTIL MAY 24,1993
Dalton Williams made a motion to table this request until May 24, 1993 with Jeff
Planning and Environmental Commission
May 1 0, 1993
7
WzMzff #M&t, aw"JaNgELNEM
Kathy Langenwalter made a motion to approve the minutes from the April 26, 1993
PEC Meeting with Jeff Bowen seconding this motion. A 4-0 vote approved the
minutes.
11
Planning and Environmental Commission
May 10, 1993 12
11. A request for a work session for a minor subdivision to vacate the lot line between
Lots A-1 and A-2, a request for variances from the subdivision road standards, wall
height standards and to allow parking in the front setback located at Lots A-1 and A-2,
Block A, Lions Ridge Subdivision Filing No. 1/1139 and 1109 Sandstone Drive.
Applicant: Michael Lauterbach/The Reinforced Earth Co.
Planner: Shelly Mello TABLED UNTIL MAY 24,1993
1 . Approve Minutes from April 26, 1993 PEC Meeting.
r]
0
That part cfthe First Supplemental Map for Simba Run Condominium, according nothe map
thereof recorded in the office oYthe Eagle Coumy, Colorado, Clerk and Reconder, described as
Beginning at the most southwesterly corner of said map, thence the following three courses along
the westerly lines mfsaid map; 1> NO3'33'01^E 1S07g feet; 2} N12°50'33^E 144J2 feet; 3)
N17"5S'03^70.80feet; thence, departing said westerly line, 813116I8"W 157.26 feet, thence
S76°43'57^E91.50feet; thence N13°1S'03^E35.0O feet; thence S78°43'57rE72.31 feet tothe
easterly line of said map; thence the following two courses along the easterly and southeasterly
lines of said map; 1) S24044'57"E 52.38 feet; 2> S52050'29^VV 272.50 feet to the Point of
Beginning, containing 0.6134 acres, more or less and
That part ufSimba Ron, according mthe map thereof, recorded in Book 312 at Page 763 in the
Office of the Eagle Coumy, Colorado, Clerk and R000njer, described as follows:
Beginning at the most southerly corner of said Simha Run. thence the following four courses along
the southwesterly ard northwesterly lines nysaid 8imha Run; 1) N37°0S'31^VV23328feet; 2)
334.57 feet along the arc ovu curve /o the left, having a radius cx1771.es feet, u central angle c4
10149'06''. and u chord that beam N42"13'20''E334.O7feet; 3> N38°48'48" E 201.36 feet; 4> 15.98
feet along the am of a curve »othe hgh/, having a radius cd428.O2feet, a central angle of
02108'12^. and a chord that bears N37~52'54^E 15.96 feet *oa corner on the westerly boundary of
the First Supplemental Map for Simbe Run Condominium, according to the map thereof recorded in
the office of the Eagle Cnunry, Colorado, Clerk and Recorder; thence the following four courses
along said westerly boundary; 1> S21151'28^VV 89.90 {o+y; 2) S17°56'03^VV 181.17 feet; 3>
S12150'33^VV 144.72 feet; 4> 503133'01"W 1O0J8 feet /othe southeasterly line cdsaid Simba Run;
thenre, along said southeasterly line, S52"50'29^VV 113.08 feet to the Point of Beginning,
containing 1,560 aorex, more or |nsc
Applicant: Si0ha Land [|u[pOrati0O/VValidSaid
Planner: Mike Mollica
The property owner and applicant, Simba Land Corporation, is requesting a work session with
the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) to review a proposed development plan
for the remaining phase of Special Development District #5 (Simba Run/Vail Run). The
property is located at 1100 North Frontage Road and is bounded by the Timber Ridge
Apartments to the west, the North Frontage Road and Interstate 70 to the south, Phase I of
On the northern bench of this SUe, each condominium is proposed to have e onf+carQ8r8ge.
and On the |Ovver or southern part OYthis Si18. each condominium would have ahwo-C8[
garage.
This final phase of the SIDD will be part of the existing Simba Run Condominium Association,
and as such, will have access to all of the existing recreational amenities located in the
existing Simba Run project. These recreational amenities include three outdoor tennis courts,
two racquetball courts and one indoor swimming pool. Vail Run has its own outdoor
swimming pool and two indoor tennis courts.
This project site is located within a high severity rockfall-geologic hazard zone. The
applicant's consulting geologist, Nicholas Lampiris, has completed a geologic investigation for
the property. The study is dated April 18, 1993 and is attached to this memorandum.
N
10 Ill. ZONING ANALYSIS
Listed below is the zoning analysis for Development Area B, located in SIDID #5 (Phase
.ncludes the two existing Simb• Run buildings):
r]
I
11011
6,3 acres
N/A
N/A
124,229 sq. ft.
7,179 sq ft.
131,408 sq. ft.
119
ire
84,194 sq. ft. (30,7%)
168,898 sq. ft. (61.5 %)
152 enclosed (82%)
33 surface
185
APPROVED DEV.
PHASE I
PHASE 11
STANDARDS
DEV. AREA B
DEV. AREA B
Site Area:
6.3 acres
4.7 acres
1.6 acres
Setbacks:
20' - all perimeter
20' - all perimeter
20' - all perimeter
property lines
property lines
property lines
Height:
45'
20 - 60'
28 - 43'
GRFA:
129,000 sq. ft. - DU's
90,807 sq. ft.
33,422 sq. ft.
10,000 sq. ft, - E H U's
_4,601 sq ft
sr. -ft
139,000 sq. ft.
95,408 sq. ft,
36,000 sq. ft.
Units:
139
95
24
Employee
Dwelling
Units:
10 (min.)
6
4
e erage:
65,089 ft.
19,105 ft.
20% (max.)
sq.
sq.
Landscaping:
60% (min.)
116,302 sq. ft.
52,596 sq. ft.
Parking:
85% enclosed (min.)
128 enclosed
24 enclosed
6 surface
27 surface
Commercial
Area:
-0-
-0-
-0-
r]
I
11011
6,3 acres
N/A
N/A
124,229 sq. ft.
7,179 sq ft.
131,408 sq. ft.
119
ire
84,194 sq. ft. (30,7%)
168,898 sq. ft. (61.5 %)
152 enclosed (82%)
33 surface
185
IV. CRITERIA TO BE USED IN EVALUATING THIS PROPOSAL
As stated in the zoning code, the purpose of special development districts is to:
Although the staff will not specifically address each of the nine SDD review criteria at this
worksession, the criteria are listed below:
Conformity with applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan,
Town policies and Urban Design Plans.
Identification and mitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect
the property on which the special development district is proposed.
Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions
designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive
to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the
community.
G. A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians
addressing • and off-site traffic circulation.
H. Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimi
I
and preserve natural features, recreation, views and functions.
0
Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional
and efficient relationship throughout the development of the special
development district.
A. The Town of Vail Land Use Plan identifies this area as High Density Residentia'
(HDR). High Density Residential is defined in the Land Use Plan as follows:
The proposed plan for the final phase of Simba Run would set the overall
density for Development Area B at 18.9 dwelling units/acre,
B. The following are the applicable Land Use Plan goals and policies which relate
to this proposal:
Goal 1.1 Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment,
maintaining a balance between residential, commercial and
recreational uses to serve both the visitor and permanent
resident.
Goal 1.12 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in
existing developed areas (infill areas).
Goal 5.1 Additional residential growth should continue to occur primarily in
existing, platted areas and as appropriate in new areas where
high hazards do not exist.
Goal 5.3 Affordable employee housing should be made available through
private efforts, assisted by limited incentives, provided by the
Town of Vail, with appropriate restrictions.
Goal 5.4 Residential growth should keep pace with the market place
demands for a full range of housing types.
Goal 5.5 The existing employee housing base should be preserved and
upgraded. Additional employee housing needs should be
accommodated at varied sites throughout the community.
• 5
VI. DISCUSSION ISSUES
Since this is a worksession, there is no formal staff recommendation at this time. However,
the staff has identified the following issues, which we would like to discuss further with the
PEC:
111 KO MI
Access to the lower bench of this site, to the four "townhouse- type" units, is proposed
via a curb cut off of the North Frontage Road. Access to the units on the northern or
upper bench of this site is designed as a series of three curb cuts off of Lionsridge
Loop.
Does the PEC feel that the proposed access points to the site are reasonable?
Consideration should be given to reducing the number of proposed curb cuts. It
appears to staff as though excessive backing and maneuvering may be necessary to
turn vehicles around on the lower portion of this site. It also appears that vehicles
exiting the northern bench of this site may need to back out onto Lionsridge Loop.
B. Future Simba Underpass.
Although lower in height, and not as massive as the existing two buildings in Phase I
of Simba Run, the proposed architecture for this Phase II development carries a similar
style and character of that of Phase I.
- 0 a M . 01111 0
The existing bike path would need to be relocated as a result of this proposal. The
bike path would be relocated so that it would be entirely within the CDOT right-of-way.
Is this new alignment acceptable to the PEC? A detailed landscaping plan will be
required before final PEC review. This planting plan should provide heavy screen
plantings between the bike path and the townhomes.
• 6
Please see page 3 of this memorandum to review the development statistics for the
project. As currently proposed, it appears that the project would not meet the minimum
standards for the following zoning categories:
-site coverage
-parking (enclosed)
-parking (in 20' setback)
111011 There is no trash facility designated on the site plan at this time. However, the
applicant has agreed to modify the plan and to add trash facilities for both the upper
and lower development areas.
Should a pedestrian walkway be provided from the proposed project to the shuttle pick-
up/drop-off area?
0
Per the Nick Lampiris letter dated April 18, 1993, it appears that the mitigation will
have impacts on the site. Staff would like to see the design for the mitigation
addressed as soon as possible as it will effect site planning, architecture, landscaping,
and possibly traffic circulation.
• 7
y Eqr ner°'d
:l ,:!• m East. M ( -9 a c°I {:2 to I: r- i v C
t::;r' ( ){:: >ss;i ')er {::I s•, s:a't,, Vail
Vail. CO 01637
RE. E3,nv(n Vi l 1. as ::a
l? k�i a[a r" Sa lly.-
I h1 i 1 v e r e a e :i c.:' 4�J (::a d the C: f t: h { 3 r t:(?'!' r r k:.. n {:" ii.: (:l Ols " h tl vv n 011'1
map +{: r 1:14..t r 1h o s F : "n t_ - f F" cl m k F .7 dl i en'a' ]° e yj - far the
.. I (:7tdr) ca•!" t.eaa. :l. ,.
•l. c t) s c ! _4 e to •t h t: O L.4'l: (v 1 "' (:i to p i r"+: i (. -F on 't:. l .° t +y ., r
rs :i, c::l c :' L.A. c) r'1 ' r R i (:! ( c. -, t ": o c:) {:a „ °!" 1l {: (: (: r,1 °2 t:J t:.:i, { 1 o->` :i. es 1 ")
°! � (2 :1. Fc; :i {:il 1. C °) i a a. i:1 C' :iit'f: 1. {:i i'2 1 � +ll C:•} 1 {°;7 °i :.1 "D kc't 1 :1. i::! t::� F:' y r.:: {'i S' "t '!':..:�. 3 S ") :4. r'? [::I 't° i "! ::` ".: ! .l ;. I "' {;' [;.• {.,} {''
: ".:Lei .i. °F a .l ,l.:i. 1"t c r' ( ) +:_: 1•-: s , :1. 'a a $.':. , a °s° (:7''d �. (:: 4` (. I. t,`v :E '1" s t r' .......s,... l:. , t.: t ,. $::. j +
s a_ F < 1 ::
h r.1 v (.� r {. 2. c .: "l r°t t.. ( °.s 5 ... + ¢; } r q:i y t::; a 't: h1 era ° t:. m j. t" 3 t) e::t � . ". C:) B 1 will 1 .I..t `) ::a 2 "} a S (' c�° ? ; ::i • :? (' ., y
't :. h1 . ? : b t..t't:
L.,::): "7S:'; i' °+)erv( "1. wiI'l. (::<;9't':.{::l+ s.cifile + ":)•!+ them„ The he:xt".,c:3rd incr "4::)csc. t(::)
r j. c:l L° o 1-1 F::) r. 1-117 E'. SS h1 i g 1"1 E' I
t �'r°) 4:? 1 "• (;! y im () p L".7 t. e n •t:° :1. a l f a °1..1 i n g S'" o c k 'ri
.1. !;) S'" r:) l:) t •}':: > k ? s (s:•'v e r a.°.a .t.
•f c.) 4..t r° •f o a to . h i tgfl l., t om,, ! ". rr2
;°t:1. con(: 'l 1''1: Snt..t°trh7 i•rdr,.. }e t:a•f k:l "tk r•(:3ac::l ' thc.
1:)k''? as t::DWeC. '�ec sc? i')m ma i wi th1 't':(+ °? road
{ 1l C)'E: ° 6' ") k r" °:a °t:. (a} h7 4`+d 1' °t i C:1 "1 C: < i 1 ha k "? `t' i::t ? (: C'1 :1: it; 't ". t "D d k: " :;i t. (1;1 't ".1 ") ki?
f'rtDr,'tA ( i:3 a•f c. a L" !'1 a 't".h(-:� •f o4"tt'"° L.lnits 't.'.(::D ea 7't. " {.7•f
1. }(:}t„ l F5cl A re •1•t:){)'" 71 c:a'!. 1. k: e::..i'
I. I ") {: :1 E5 .7 dra° P ., .ti . , e• w -. r 1 + C) LA E'"
$' 1 ! "1 i In e d (')S "a ?� - dal ,0 1 !'14` ? e ah+�7L4I {j 17th. 1101 tN S r :ClL16J i :f. t "1 :., + '.ia ( a.J 7.1'71 :.@ 1' "'Jea
c.. a n ; - i o °t:. t M° 1 r" .:a s h1 't: h'11 O U g h1 •l: h C rtt :i. 1'1 't: t 3 't 1'1 k.:' LA) "! :i. 'l".. y (::D t.!. S
- v a. ( inaY. •:a 4_4C1ges_ .211 .& nrx!rgy ! b not - t:)im fc3Ceinc) ....t..ich as
tar" :i. 't:: •t; l r7 concrete- l f b c:) J l..) c)-f. °t°. h e c � c :°
s h "1 (:.14..1 l d I r ": ? u to i .1.:t.' c; { 1 , e {:3 p tip c i era l l y - For •t: h•1 e 6k) E ?'. ii't L•:.` 1'" 1l 't: ty C1 U )l i $ s ,.
r1 s =s v: t o •! ". h1 eta a.4 i 1 c. 1.. <.,., which i s, ..:
1 "'s:i gh with the same strength givewn above. '1 "hi•-5 W, l [:,{:7L.tld
t"j i b"! h < ? r7... •h e 7
c:1 C" k:, Cl {.:t ;l <.1'" t::! r:' { :�e � {� (:a �.. } la r.:, L.c i. c:1 k::: r :; . S u.. c.. �:..:. � .::; (•:.. (-i •f t
nature.? {:')'f' 't`.1°' e h a z <:a 1'" { :l e"8 r) d the o j :Y t i o i'1 t 4 o 1'° {t2 :1. is i t� •[ "t °1^ i (:D S "1 y ,h 5:s t_t to {� C {? ra �
I::d c I::) y . your v: n g - i. n c:;° r r in ri d rn{ !� t r� 1"
f� t ":? r:i'): °. k' C_ 1'1 I "I 1. {°°. ra i f` +.{ t5 t' i'" 't:) l':71' ; t:• (i:1 : l tv (:� r° C•? : �? 1•" r_ {� {:! t11 t'•::''� h10:1 t =l ?::; 1' "1;°t'',•' ('? l:J t?? (a'rl (» I °1(°) ii5 t "� Il »'
�
v Th� sfru�tl t -n
-7�- ^~''
` Will . � '. _
wz�� nor increase the hazard t other t str ct re `
`
� '
"`^^^`^== = ,�` �r
ons please contact me, e your ^
preliminary conceptualizations.
_
Since ly, ~
/V '
Nicholas Lampiris
.
~
Consulting Geologist
.
' -
'
`
. .
n
u
VICINITY P
t
•
0
I
11
I�WE
al
77 -W 7 , 7 - --
11
11.1
UNIT
& 0 0
"UNIT
E M
EM
Etim.
ml
EMN
t4m.
mm
EM
W,
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
DATE: May 10, 1993
SUBJECT: A request to review a referral from the United States Forest Service to review a
scoping proposal regarding the installation of a cellular telephone site in East
Vail.
Applicant: US West/Cellular One/United States Forest Service
Planner: Andy Knucltsen
Please see the attached scoping document from the Forest Service as well as the PEC memo
from August 24, 1992 which provides additional background and an analysis of the
alternatives.
• 1
0 MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: August 24, 1992
SUBJECT: A request for a work session to discuss a proposal to construct a modular
telephone cell-site in the East Vail area.
Applicant: U.S. West/Cellular One/United States Forest Service
Planner: Andy Knudtsen
rom F, 1 ••• I
E
applicant regarding this matter. The Town of Vail will need survey information showing
Section, Township, and Range information, as well as a legal description correlating
the site to the Town of Vail boundary.
All five of the proposed alternatives for providing cellular telephone coverage to the East Tfail
area are listed below. Staff has provided excerpts from the Environmental Assessment for the
information about each alternative below:
a. Truck Ramp Berm. "This site would not require an actual tower, as the
antenna would be mounted on pipe attached to the equipment
shelter. . .. The tower would not be needed a site sits out on the
bluff overlooking 1-70 and East Vail." However, "this site is within the
Highway Department's "A" easement for
The applicants proposing these cell-sites are U.S. West New Vector Group,
represented by Larry Storms, and Independence Day 1988 Cellular Partnership,
-2-
represented by Dave Rutter. Each company would like to construct a cell-site
at the selected location in the next one to five years.
MAMMKMMCN#�
070107, M
6. Issue Decision Notice and Finding of No Sii��
1 0 ON • kill c agg in 1;4 " kj
These categories compare to the other standards of the Forest Service by generally
being the most restrictive possible. For example, of the four visual quality objectives,
including retention, partial retention, modification, and maximum modification, the
retention category is the most conservative. This is also the case with Sensitivity Level
1 and Variety Class A.
The Environmental Assessment continues on page 28 in the evaluation of the visual
impacts of the East Vail site. It states that:
The staff is particularly interested in Alternative Site A. This alternative appears to
provide a solution that does not require the 60-foot monopoles. This is due to the fact
that the site is relatively high in elevation and provides adequate telephone coverage
to the interstate without the need for the monopoles.
0 -4-
i r� •'
Reply to: 2710
Date: April 20, 1993
E
E
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
U.S. West New Vector and Cellular one have proposed locating the cell site south
of the existing water tank in East Vail. This site was one of the alternatives
analyzed in 1992. In our opinion this site warrants further examination
through the Forest Service's environmental analysis process. We hope to
complete this process within the next several months.
one • the initial steps in the environmental analysis process is 11 scoping".
During the scoping process interested parties are contacted and invited to
assist the Forest Service in identifying issues which should be considered in
the Environmental Assessment.
In advance, thank you for your cooperation.
WILLIAM A. WOOD
District Ranger
S Caring for the Land and Serving People
FS-6200-28 (7-82)
SLOPING DOCUMENT
FOR
PROPOSED EAST VAIL CELLULAR TELEPHOI 4E
COMMUNICATION SITE DESIGNATION
'RhCEIVED APR 2 1 1993
INTRODUCTION
On August, 12, 1992, the Regional Forester approved the designation of three
cellular telephone communications sites in the Arapaho and White River National
Forests. The sites, West Portal of the Eisenhower Tunnel, Copper Mountain and
Shrine Pass, will be utilized by US ','EST NewVectcr Group, Inc. ("Ne
and the Independence Day 1988 Cellular Partnership ("Cellular One") to offer
cellular phone service in Colorado Rural Service Area F ("RSA-3"). The Copper
Mountain site has already been constructed and is operating� These companies
are licensed by the Federal communication commission ("FCC") to Provide such
service.
A total of five sites were identified in East Vail which could possibly work
technically and reduce the visual impact associated with development of a
cellular communication site. These alternatives were developed in response to
issues which surfaced during the analysis of the Truck Ramp cell site. Because
of concerns the Town of Vail and East Vail residents had relating to visual
impacts, alternatives to the original proposed action were considered.
The Forest Service has determined an Environmental Assessment of the proposal
must be prepared. Under provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (NEPA), the Forest Service is the agency responsible for preparing the EA.
other agencies, including and county, will also be 'involved with certain
permitting aspects of the project.
Interested persons, organization4, and agencies are encouraged to assist in the
environmental analysis process by providing their own information, comments on
11
Pq
issues, and alternatives to be addressed in the EA. This scoping document
provides an overview of the - proposed project and results of preliminary scoping
by the Forest service. It also provides a preliminary determination of the
resources ' likely to be affected by the project and the issues to be addressed
in the EA.
Written comments may be submitted to the Forest Service at the following
address by May 15, 1993:
Mr. William A. Wood
White River National Forest
Holy Cross Ranger District
P.O. Box 190
Minturn, CO 81645
(303) 827-5715
BACKGROUND ON THE CELLULAR TELEPHONE INDUSTRY
How a Cellular System Onerates
is In the past, mobile telephones were only available to those individuals willing
to tolerate the considerable limitations of a system that utilized only 12-20
channels and often had poor voice quality and spotty coverage. Those systems
operated with one centrally located high-powered transmitter to communicate
with all of the mobile units in the service area. This technology did not make
large-scale service practical, because each of the system channels could only
handle one call at a time. channels could not be reused because the
transmitted signals were strong enough to interfere with one another.
The current cellular telephone technology was developed in response to these
problems. The system consists of many low-powered antennas in a honeycomb
pattern of "cells" that invisibly blanket the service area.
The cellular system consists of a cellular phbne that both transmits and
receives radio signals. From the mobile phone, calls are sent to a central
computer called. the Mobile Telephone switching Office (.MTSO) . The MTSO
connects the cellular phone transmission with the local telephone company
system which completes the call.
From Cell To AIT50 To loco/ Call Anywhere
Telephone Co in the World
7
M
As a caller drives from one cell to another, the call is automatically handed
off to another cell by computer. The cells are also overlapped to insure
calling success even during the busiest hours and days of the month. The
system is engineered to provide excellent signal strength and clarity.
N SO
0' 1 4
SCOPING ALTERNATIVES
IVES
The site proposed for designation is south of the East Vail water tank. The
site is 16cated on White River National Forest lands. other alternative sites
in the general area will be considered in the Environmental Assessment ("EA")
as will the alternative of taking no action.
PRELIMINARY IDENTIFICATION OF ISSUES
Brief descriptions of the issues associated with potentially affected resources
are provided below. These issues will be expanded and clarified based upon
public input provided during the scoping process.
The EA will examine the present and anticipated needs, demands, and benefits to
6e derived from cellular and similar telephone systems.
Siting
The EA will evaluate the alternatives for siting the nrc-6osed facility on
non - federal lands.
Potential impacts to wetlands and special-concern plants have been identified
as an issue that should be addressed in the EA. Wetlands and floodplains, if
any, will need to be identified and areas of potential impacts addressed.
Potential impacts of the project on wildlife has been identified as an issue
rdcrAring - analysis.
Potential impacts on cultural resources in the area will be assessed. If any
cultural resources are identified within the proposed project area, they will
be evaluated to determine eligibility for the National Register of Historic
Places and will be documented and protected.
Recreation
Potential impacts of the site on public recreational use in the immediate area
has been identified as an issue that should be addressed in the EA.
9
LTAI�j
Potential visual impacts resulting from development of the proposed site has
been identified as an issue that should be addressed in the EA. Computer
simulations, renderings and site inspections will be incorporated to evaluate
the visual impacts of the proposal.
DECISION TO BE MADE
The decision to be made by the Responsible official (Regional Forester) is
whether or not to designate a location in East Vail as a single-use electronic
site for the purpose of constructing a fag lity which would allow for cellular
com,municat ions . 1;�r
----------------
t.7:
0
Pas
RED CLIFF QUADRAIINGL
yr
CGLORIA DO
7.5 !4IN 77 TE S ER! ME S (T 0 P 0 G A P-1 C)
i C5 21 5
37'
; - T
Z ' I-
K
0 MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development
DATE: May 10, 1993
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: /\ndyKnucltSen
The determination of a management group has been reviewed previously by DRB, PEC and
Town Council and the decision has been made to have the local cemetery district operate
These five options considered were:
1. Town operation.
2. District operation.
3. For-profit operation.
4. Private non-profit operation.
5. A combination of these options.
At the beginning of the cemetery design process, staff organized a kick-off meeting at
Seasons at the Green on October 27, 1992. The meetings that followed are listed below:
Initial design concept generated by consultant team during the charette on
October 28th and 29th, 1992.
2. Design alternatives presented to the public on the afternoon of October 29,
40 1992.
2
3. Staff met with interested members of the community individually over the past
0 several weeks.
4. Design presented to the Cemetery Task Force on November 5, 1992
5. Design presented to the Vail Religious Foundation on November 10, 1992.
Responses indicated that in-ground burial was a high priority, but that within the
congregations, (Lutheran and Presbyterian, specifically) cremation is becoming
a more attractive option.
6. Other mountain communities contacted about various issues, specifically out-of-
town requests for burials, general operations, winter burial and management
structure.
7. Management options presented to the Cemetery Task Force on November 30,
1992. Larry Sloane was present to discuss the alternatives with the Task Force
members.
8.
Meeting with neighbors on site on December 3, 1992 to review the design, walk
the upper bench, and understand where the cemetery facilities would be
located.
9.
December 14, 1992 review of the design and management plan with the
Planning and Environmental Commission.
10.
December 15, 1992 review of the design and management plan with Town
Council.
11.
February 1993, refining aspects of the management report.
12.
March 10, 1993 Task Force to discuss management issues.
13.
March 31, 1993 Task Force meeting with staff to discuss price structure.
REVIEW
PROCESS
The staff has analyzed the project using both sets of criteria. Under each criterion,
st2,ff h.?s tried to discuss relevant issues.
1 Relationship and impact • the use • development objectives of
the Town.
ro
sites. It was at that time that a cemetery was recognized as a community need
and the zoning code was amended appropriately in order to accommodate
fl. The effect • the use on light and air, distribution • population,
transportation facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation
facilities, and other public needs.
3. The effect upon traffic with particular reference to congestion,
automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and
control, access, maneuverability, and removal of snow from street
and parking areas.
4. Effect upon character of the area in which the proposed use i
be located, including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in
relation to the surrounding uses. I
Is
B. Variance Criteria
1 The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or
potential uses and structures in the vicinity.
Staff believes that the gravel road will not have a detrimental effect on
surrounding properties in the area. We believe that the cemetery and the
access road leading to it will be more compatible with the upper bench of
Donovan Park if it is left unpaved.
2. The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation
and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve
compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity
or to attain the objectives • this title without grant • special
privilege.
3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution •
population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and
utilities, and public safety.
Staff believes that there will be no negative impacts to most of these Criteria
and that the traffic impacts are reasonable.
E
M
`a (Phase t)
®® _ GrdVelPdthwayS - s % slope (Phase 1)
FIRST 56 : YEARS - � F Stet'p bank natural cemetery edge
- - Exacting
® SEC 5Q ;YE1 R5 -
.< ' utM— D _ f Cereriiony $pace' __ +
a-- - .'.'-" k! ~_ r�_ x _ s 1 �' �` �# , -y-�_ c > •' '�' ,� 7 = °' 7 `4 6 CO.�- �,.�.���t� � " -
�-- t(niitofyeX�st)nf '� r� - te e _'and
_ 4 6 - T.
.p
u ' forest c`i�yes �'"�'
J
t
,�
! W
1° Extend
Cemetery~
} conifers t
s ,>
y Gravel Entr'y. -z O t0 driver P P aS y �
,mss -= p' ... - i II -
-
�,
2 ;�, tracks - Years) 1
through'
'meadow > r_ r :�° x
Cemeter urial PTots` f ' \
\ k
(Phase 1)X Entrance
c \ S
° ' Boulders �` t f r
.• -. 4 �`y �7v1(e forest scree I
xd aspens from
%open creek /
r r ;� ! Mower Mead
Roa Entr _ y Feature --
Co er scr jr \` 1 \ VF '� I
'•r- Y - '- -. y 'y 6 ^i t ✓ J M `---- - /- /yq a j
pf
13
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
DATE: May 10, 1993
SUBJECT: A request for a setback and site coverage variance to allow for the construction
of an addition and a garage located at 2409 Chamonix Road/Lot 19, Block A,
Vail clas Schone Filing No. 1.
Applicant: Anneliese Taylor
Planner: Shelly Mello
The applicant is requesting site coverage and setback variances in order to construct a two-
car garage and building addition to an existing residence located on a Primary/Secondary lot
which is less than 15,000 square feet in size. There is an existing employee restricted
dwelling unit on this site located in the lower level of the project.
Under the current site coverage definition, the carport is counted as site coverage. The
property currently allows for 1,784 sq. ft. of site coverage or 20% of the lot size and with the
existing carport has a total of 1,635 sq. ft. of site coverage. As proposed the project would
have a 1,946 sq. ft. of site coverage or 21.8%. A variance is required for the 1.8% site
coverage or 162 square feet.
The proposed garage is approximately 17 feet • inches into the 20 foot front setback which
will leave a 2 foot 6 inches setback from the south property. There will be a 2 foot
encroachment into the 15 foot side yard setback. A 13 foot setback will remain along the
west property line. Variances are needed for the 17 foot 6 inch and 2 foot encroachments.
i
- I n 198• , the applicant received a variance to locate a carport in the front setback. This was ir
In 11111
qI11111 111 11 �11� I'll III
Total Size Area: 0.2048 acres or 8,921 square feet
Zoning: Primary/Secondary Residential
Allowed Density: One Primary with one restricted employee unit
Existing Density: One Primary with one restricted employee unit
E
Allowed:
3,080 square feet
Existing:
2,814 square feet
Proposed:
3,019 square feet
Site Coverage:
Allowed:
1,784 square feet (20%)
Existing:
1,225 (Building) + 410 (Carport)
= 1,635 total square feet
Proposed:
1,225 (Building) + 471 (Garage)
250 (Addition) = 1,946 total (21.8%)
Parking Proposed:
Enclosed: 2 spaces
Surface: 2 spaces (completely on-site)
E
I
0
IV. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
Upon review of Criteria and Findings, Section 18.62.060 of the Vail Municipal Code, the
Community Development Department recommends approval of the requested variance based
on the following factors:
A. Consideration • Fagj2r,
3
The relationship of the requested variance to other existing
potential uses and structures in the vicinity. I
2. The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation
and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve
compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity
or to attain the objectives of this title without grant of special
privilege.
The staff recognizes that the siting • the existing building does constitute a
physical hardship. Because of the existing location of the house, as well as thit
topography of the site, it is difficult to improve the property without obtaining
E
I
3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of
population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and
utilities, and public safety.
This proposal does not impact any of the other criteria listed above.
B. The Planning and Environmental Commission shall make the following
findincls before granting a variance:
That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special
privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in
the same district.
2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
a The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specifie4
regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary
physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title.
b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or
conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not
apply generally to other properties in the same zone.
C. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation
would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners
of other properties in the same district.
11
2
V. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
The staff supports the garage portion of the request as well as the building connection,
including the necessary setback variances with the following conditions:
2. Additional landscaping be added to the south and west elevations to screen the
garage and building addition; and
3. Additional landscaping steps be added to the existing retaining walls.
We find that this request, should it be modified per our recommendations, will not be a grant
of special privilege and meets the criteria set out in Section IV B, 1, 2, 3, a, and c of this
memo.
The applicant has worked with the staff to obtain a proposed plan for this garage and additior
that the staff can support. In the past, the staff has supported site coverage and setback
variances when they are attributed to the provision of additional enclosed garage spaces.
C
•
r EDGE OF PAVEMENT
a
' ~
~
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
DATE: May 10, 1993
SUBJECT: A request for 8conditional use permit for G liquor store at the Cascade
Crossing F<8t8i| [|eOt8r. 1031 S. Frontage RO@d, more specifically
described as follows:
A parcel of land located in Section 12, Township 5, South, Range 81 West of the PA4"
County of Eagle, State of Colorado, more particularly described as follows:
Commencing ata point onthe northerly ROW line mUS Hwy S.whence the northeast
corner dsaid Section 12 beam north 38"07' E87G.g9ft.; thence south 731.45' VV along
said northerly ROW line a distance n175ft. uo the true point of beginning; thence north
18145' VVtothe south RDVV line of 1-70; thence in a southwesterly direction along the
south RDYV line of |'70urthe point of intersection of that ROW line with the north ROW
line W US Hwy G and thence in an easterly direction along the north ROW N US Hwy 6m
the point of beginning, County of Eagle, State of Colorado.
Ano|iC8[t: George Dier/The Paul Anderson Collection, Ltd
Planner: ADdyKDuclt38D
.... . ....
Upon review of Section 18.60, the Community Development Department recommends
2pproval of the conditional use permit based upon the following factors:
1 Relationship and impact of the use on development objectives of
the Town.
2. The effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population,
transportation facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation
facilities, and other public facilities needs.
Staff believes there will not be an impact on the above- ref e renced criteria.
It'. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is
INITMm
granting a conditional use permit:
1 That the proposed location of the use in accord with the purposes of the
conditional use permit section of the zoning code and the purposes of
the district in which the site is located.
2
Staff recommends approval of the proposed furniture store. We believe the criteria have been
met, as discussed above, and that the findings are also met. Specifically, staff believes that
the proposed location of the use is in accordance with the purposes of the zone district and
the conditions under which it will be operated will not be detrimental to public health, safety or
welfare, and that the use complies with all applicable provisions of the zoning title.
Please note that, under Section 18.60.080 of the Town of Vail Zoning Code, the approval shall
lapse if construction is not commenced within one year of the date of issuance and diligently
pursued to completion, or if the use for which the permit is granted is not commenced within
one year.
•
c :\p(-c\jncm os\furn i ture. 51093
I
. It
a .
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
SUBJECT: A request for a landscape variance to allow for the reconstruction of the parkin#
area at the First Bank/1 7 Vail Road/Lot 6, Vail Village 2nd Filing.
Applicant: First Bank of Vail
Planner: Andy Knucltsen
E
The Public Accommodation zone district requires 75% of all spaces on-site to be enclosed
and does not allow parking in the front setback. Though the First it does not meet these
standards, they are not increasing or decreasing the degree of non-conformity. The number
• parking spaces stays the same in the lot. As a result, the percentage of covered spaces
•oes not change and the number • spaces in the front setback does not change,
III I
Replace the existing sidewalk along the eastern side of the First Bank property with
pavers, (per the Streetscape Master Plan).
2. Plant three r in grates between the sidewalk and Vail Road.
Install two "Village lights" at either end of the sidewalk adjacent to Vail Road.
5. Provide for the construction • the landscape improvements on the southwest corner of
the intersection of Meadow Drive and Vail Road per the Streetscape Plan.
v
I G l 1
188 square feet
723 sq. ft.
911 sq. ft.
.i M
Public Accommodation
21,196 sq. ft,
5,172 sq. ft,
4,800 sq. ft.
902 sq. ft. or 20% of existing planted area
1,515 sq. ft.
1,515 sq. ft. (932 sq. ft. of
this will be converted from
concrete to pavers.)
6,359 sq. ft, or 30%
6,074 sq. ft. or 28.6%
5,702 sq. ft. or 26.9%
6,866 sq. ft. or 32.4%
7,217 sq. ft. or 34%
0
Landscaping gained on-site:
Landscaping gained off-site:
Total landscaping gained:
Landscaping lost on-site:
Net gain:
11. ZONING STATISTICS
Zone District:
Lot Area:
Landscaping:
A) Planted areas
Existing
Proposed:
B) Hardscape (patios, sidewalks):
Maximum Allowed:
Existing:
Proposed:
C) Total landscaping:
Required:
Existing:
Proposed:
D) Total landscaping including
those on and off-site areas:
Existing:
Proposed:
188 square feet
723 sq. ft.
911 sq. ft.
.i M
Public Accommodation
21,196 sq. ft,
5,172 sq. ft,
4,800 sq. ft.
902 sq. ft. or 20% of existing planted area
1,515 sq. ft.
1,515 sq. ft. (932 sq. ft. of
this will be converted from
concrete to pavers.)
6,359 sq. ft, or 30%
6,074 sq. ft. or 28.6%
5,702 sq. ft. or 26.9%
6,866 sq. ft. or 32.4%
7,217 sq. ft. or 34%
0
HL CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
Upon review of Criteria and Findings, Section 18.62.060 of the Vail Municipal Code,
the Community Development Department recommends approval of the requested
variance based on the following factors:
The relationship of the requested variance to other existing
potential uses and structures in the vicinity. I
2. The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation
and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve
compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity
or to attain the objectives of this title without grant of special
privilege.
I
3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution A
is population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities an
utilities, and public safety. I
B. The Planning and Environmental Commission shall make the following findings
before qranting a variance:
That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special
privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in
the same district.
2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or
Is improvements in the vicinity.
3. That the variance is warranted for one ♦ more ♦ the following reasons:
�R- The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified
regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary
physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title.
b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or
conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not
apply generally to other properties in the same zone.
The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulatil
would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed • the owners
♦ other properties in the same district.
P|Ba38 note that, under Section 18.60.080 of the TOvvO of Vail Zoning Code, the approval of
all variances shall lapse if construction is not commenced within two years of the date of
issuance and diligently pursued to C000p|eti0n. or if the use for which the permit is granted is
not commenced within two years.
C.Ai'm f 4l" -
- vitt Ar�A 4T] -
,,b,r vm .?6%6 5.
Et
IL
I
u
fl
re
no
�l iz, rT
IT
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
A part of the SW 1 /4, NE 1 /4, Section 1 2, Township 5 South, Range 81 West of the 6th P.M., described as follows
Applicant: Michael Lauterbach
Planner: Jim Curnutte
.............
..............
........................ ............. .................................
................ . .......
.................................... .......... ........................ ...................................
. .. . . ............ ....... ............... -- ..............................
.......... .........
........... ...... - ... .......... ........ ............ .......... ....... ---- ......... .......................
. ................ - .... ---- ... --- ............
.........
.................. ...... ... ....... ............ ........
.................... ................
............. .......... -- ... -- ................. ........... ................
1h I DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
Michael Lauterbach, owner of an unplatted parcel of land located at 1335 Westhaven Drive, is
requesting minor subdivision approval in order to plat the 0.819 acre (35,676 sq. ft.) Millrace
III site.
The Millrace III property is bounded by Westhaven Drive on the east, the South Frontage
Road right-of-way and the Westhaven Apartments property ("the ruins") on the north, Gore
Creek on the south and the Cascade Club tennis court property on the west. The property is
currently vacant with the exception of two paved parking areas, one unpaved parking area
and a paved recreation path.
XMT�v
2. A 10 ft. pedestrian/fishermen's access easement shall be provided along the
shore of Gore Creek. This easement should extend approximately 10 ft. from
the high water mark of the creek to allow fishermen access up and down Gore
Creek. This easement will be dedicated at the time the minor subdivision is
approved.
0 2
6. Certain minor modifications shall be made to the site plan, landscape plan and
floor plans so that features shown on any one of the three are accurately
reflected on all plans per the staff memo on page 6. These changes shall be
made before the project proceeds to first reading by the Town Council.
7. The southern half of the single family residence shall be shifted 3 -5 ft. away
from the road and that the entire building be shifted approximately 5 ft. further
to the north.
VINAM
The standard criteria for any minor subdivision includes lot size, road frontage and lot
configuration which are different for each zone district. Because this is an SIDID and there is
no underlying zoning, there are no lot size, road frontage or lot configuration requirements for
this minor subdivision. The minor subdivision is being completed in order to carry out several
of the conditions of approval identified at the February 8, 1993 PEC meeting.
Staff recommends approval of the applicant's proposed minor subdivision with the following
condition:
1 That technical corrections to the plat be made as identified by Town staff prior
to the issuance of any building permits on this property and prior to the
recording of the plat with the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder's Office.
0 3
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
DATE: May 1O.18S3
SUBJECT: A request for a vva|| height v8[8Dc8 to Ed|ovv for the cDnSkuCUoD Of Q retaining
vvGU exceeding three (3) feet in height in the front setback for the driveway to
the residence |OCG18d at 2346 Cortina Lane/Lot4, Block A, Vail Ridge.
Applicant: Arno Brinkman
Planner: Tim Devlin
Upon review Of Criteria and FindingS, Section 18.82.060 of the Vail Municipal {}0d8. the
CQnnnnunih/ Development Department recommends approval of the requested variance based
on the following factors:
A. Consideration of Factors:
1 The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or
potential uses and structures in the vicinity.
L The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation
and enforcement • a specified regulation is necessary to achieve
compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity
• to attain the objectives of this title without grant of special
privilege.
The staff recognizes that the steepness of the lot makes driveway access to the
house very difficult without retaining walls. We believe that some relief from the
Orict interpretation of the code is warranted, and feel that the variance request
is reasonable given the site constraints and also given the fact that the house
9,nd driveway have already been built.
3. The effect
• the requested variance ♦ light and air, distribution of
population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and
utilities, and public safety.
The staff does not feel that the proposal as presented would have an adverse
impact on any of the above items.
I
B. The Planning and Environmental Commission shall make the following findings
0 before granting • variance:
That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special
privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in
the same district.
2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
a. The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified
regulation would result in practical difficulty • unnecessary
physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title.
b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or
conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not
apply generally to other properties in the same zone.
c. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation
would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners
of other properties in the same district.
IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Please note that, under Section 18.60,080 of the Town of Vail Zoning Code, the approval of
all variances shall lapse if construction is not commenced within two years of the date of
issuance and diligently pursued to completion, or if the use for which the permit is granted is
not commenced within two years.
N
BEST
AVAILABLE
►fTiTiC0 l= T�li11►�i1
O Planning and Environmental Commissio
FROM: Community Devel
1` 1 199
Waterf SUBJECT: A request for a minor amendment to SDD #4, Cascade Village for the
parcels in area x de a f ollo ws:
That part of the SW 1/4 NE 114, Section 12, Township 5 South, Range 81 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Town of Vail, Eagle
County, Colorado, described as follows:
Beginning at a point on the southerly right -of -way line of Interstate Highway No. 70 whence an iron pin with a plastic cap marking the
center of said Section 12 bears S 33'10'19" W 1447.03 feet; thence along said southerly right -of -way line two courses
1 ) N 52 ° 50'29" E 229.66 feet
2) N 74 °38'17" E 160.70 feet,
thence departing said southerly right -of -way line N 88 °45'57" E 138.93 feet; thence S 40 °45'14" W 94.32 feet; thence S 18' 18'36" W
54.08 feet; thence S 01 °21'36" W 205.02 feet; thence S 12 °07'36" W 110.25 feet, thence S 28 °28'36" W 164.48 feet, thence N 40
°17'04" W 211.16 feet; thence N 49 °42'56" E 97.80 feet, thence N 37 °09'31" W 95.59 feet; thence S 52'50'29" W 55.10 feet; thence
69.48 feet along the arc of a non - tangent curve to the left having a radius of 65.00 feet, a central angle of 61 °14'42" and a chord that
bears N 58' 55'53" W 66.22 feet, thence N 37'09'31" W 118.50 feet To The True Point of Beginning, County of Eagle, State of
Colorado;
Applicant: MECM Enterprises represented by Eustaquio Cortina and
Commercial Federal Savings.
Planner: Shelly Mello
L]
C]
0
The applicant is requesting eight changes to the approved plans for the Waterford parcel.
These changes include the following:
2) Change the keystone retaining wall configuration at the east and west ends of
the buildings based on the staff's request to reduce the impact of the skier
access on the east. In addition, other engineering input has been obtained and
therefore these areas have been revised.
3) Redesign of north and west elevations per comments at Design Review Board
(DRB) conceptual review. (No graphic)
4) The change of some aspen trees to evergreen trees per the DRB comments.
(No graphic)
5) Temporarily relocate and replace existing trees on the Frontage Road berm due
to utilities and inability to provide adequate protection during construction. The
owner agrees to document existing trees by the means of photographs and
recording height and calliper of each tree and agrees to replace any trees
which may be lost. (No graphic)
6) Changing small dormers on the south elevation to balconies recessed under the
roof. The applicant feels that this is necessary in order to avoid as much
retention of snow in valleys as much as possible. The applicant feels that this
is a safety concern.
7) Increasing the length of the western elevation from 46 feet to 53 feet in the
area of the northwest corner of the building.
8) Increasing the height of the western stair tower to full building height from two
stories to four stories.
In respect to item 7, staff believes that this change actually reduces the perception of building
mass as the roof eave on the northwest corner of the building is lowered. With either design,
8 2
one would see building mass in this area. Staff thinks the design change is positive. The
additional square footage has been counted as common area.
The staff does not support item 8. In reviewing this application, the PEC as well as the staff
were concerned with the mass of this elevation due to its proximity to Westhaven Drive and
worked with the applicant to minimize this portion of the building. The staff feels that the
proposed increase in building mass at this location can be removed. All other portions of the
building remain as proposed initially to the PEC and the Town Council.
11
.t -
25 t .
m
4 ° -0. .
14'-6'
O �LH
(TYPE C 1 )
O
31 ' -4'
O
-
0
0
(TYPE C 1 )
O
31 ' -4'
77
l
---
-
-----------------------
T.O.
la
. 130
-0°
1
124' -O'
TOP OP
ROOF
�
I T
7
o
'
Iw
00
a.
0
I
r
f
;
101- Tt
L
e'
T 7 t
~�
7
�
B
B
p
i
K. W T.O.M.
_
L _.
2°
69-0
98 6
2 °50'29° W
/ a 68
d
..• o• .O o
6
q
42 9
q
� 4
w
A 4
O
4
r XISTINQ STAID
/
TO M REBUILT IN
TW EVENT TWAT TWa
IS MRSTONETPROJECT
s
/
w
f
i
j1
:�•',.: ,. ,�.�d., .�N� -? _ ..s .;.,� . � �®
.A,�.:9 ^- ®. �`T;�.e ,., •e ". .. �.. ,_.. .•,_�s r�-: _t.�' , ^ ?.v a
�a,l'� •�a.
° '; fire. ae' � �i ':���b%;t`};F:�*'�.�'�^':4�e`:i *,���..?�? �?`k3a3��it
7
' r
----------
®1
9 ti 1 19
WAM,L
mw��
7
69
63
5 9
5
iN
TM ZWNT T14AT T
AT
Rk,
WAM,L
mw��
i
i
-
{
'
i.O.W. /
IQ�'v'• .M.
ppI
0
•
EL. 1 34' -6
T.O. DECKING
I I I " 011
EL, 124'
T �o - DEC
•
f ��jj qq 4 yyrr q�//++ �°' try ®/^a
PAgK I N il JVK °".`V^,.
1 g 1
Y
!(!
via
plg 1
AA 77.2
120` °8�
1
i
77
e
1
J
4
1
a
f te ^ -- - ^-^
_ ^______ ®__ ^" 1.
f
®®_
1
I�N 1 gl
i 1 1
,
g
r l
758.3
1
Itl •5 0
r
7
a t
i
7 8.
f
7A.3
9
..
r •
69
d
LANDSCAPED
AREA
r.o.w.
.o.w.
I
2 G
6
+ensca eeve g(
T OO
etmrQ ie
GATt
0
owr
PARKING SURFAC
tit
erg
K. p• p•
a i
$®- --`—''
$®
(�} `
101 ' 6 t !
119' -6.1
1 t e t
•uwrera
A CA
10 P
,.
W
7 9
�0
1 1 9'• 6`
t�
1
i
r
•r �.
1
t
I
_ 1 ..
f
t I
ii 134' -
11
TOP or ROOF-
I 1
1
tl
11
11
11 t
I
rl
11
11
t_.- —.11
1
c
II 1
It
tl t
7
t!
t!
11 1
11 1
I ' l l.
1
it \
of
1
,. 430 - O•
110 ° -6, p
'
1
1
124'-O' TOP OF 80013
7
t
1
$
' o a
1
o
'.
Q s 6
- .• vl
p 42
e
Y
-
G _ n i 1 + • CY
C• , t
7
i t