Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986 DRB Agendas & MinutesDESIGN REVIEW BOARD AGENDA January 15, 1986 2:00 p.m. Site Visits 12:30 #2 1. Benetton Storefront; Lodge Promenade, Vail Village Motion: Gwathmey Second: Warren 4-0 Approved #3 2. The Cos Bar Storefront, Lodge Promenade; Vail Village Motion: Warren Second: Gwathmey 4-0 Approved #7 3. Horton Residence Addition: Lot 9, Block 3, Bighorn 3rd Motion: Warren Second: Gwathmey Motion for denial approved 4-0 #6 4. Williams Residence Addition; Lot 7, Block 1, Vail Village 1st Motion: Warren Second: Gwathmey Vote 3-0-1 for approval with conditions #4 5. Slifer Sign Interpretation Appeal; Bridge Street, Vail Village Motions Warren Second: Gwathmey Denied per staff memo sign code examples Vote 4-0 #5 6. Summers Lodge Temporary Site Development Sign; Lot 5, Block 6, Vail Village 1st Filing Motion: Warren Second: Gwathmey Approved per submittal 4-0 #1 7. Treetops Plaza signs and awnings; Treetops Plaza, Lionshead Tabled by applicant to study other design alternatives STAFF APPROVALS Sundance Saloon Awning, color amendment Ramshorn Lodge, hot tub addition to deck area for Unit #2 MEMBERS PRESENT: Kathy Warren Rick Baldwin Ned Gwathmey Duane Piper STAFF PRESENT: Kristan Pritz Tom Braun Rick Pylman MEMBERS ABSENT Steve Caswell STAFF ABSENT: DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AGENDA January 15, 1985 2:00 p.m. 1. Benetton Storefront; Lodge Promenade, Vail Village 2. Slifer Sign Interpretation appeal, Bridge Street; Vail Village 3. The Cos Bar Storefront, Lodge Promenade; Vail Village 4. Williams Residence Addition; Lot 7, Block 1, Vail Village 1st w 5. Treetops Plaza signs and awnings; Treetops Plaza, Lionshead 6. Horton Residence Addition: Lot 9, Block 3, Bighorn 3rd 7. Summers Lodge Temporary Site Development Sign; Lot 5, Block 6, Vail Village 1st Filing 1.0 isProject Name: Project Descrip Project Application Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: Block , Filing Zone Design Review Board Date Motion by: Seconded by: APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL ,10 Summary: 0 )n'AAJ\ D\47)� Town Planner Date: ` .11 Staff Approval 0 Project Name: Project Descrip Contact Persor. Project Application Date Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: Block Filing , Zone Design Review Board q Date�Amt 4 Motion by: Seconded by: APPROVAL T tflV �. Summary: is,, lq% � -- Towwn Oianner Date: DISAPPROVAL ❑ Staff Approval Project Name: , Project Description: ��- Contact Person and Phone � 0 Owner, Address a d Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: i Motion by: OL VK h Secondedby: k' Ck-- APPROVAL Summary: Town Planner Date: J S f Project Application .S f:> G(. V fo t k)'L 7l5 Block Filing Design Review Board Date , / ----------------- 0 0 i5 �-_1 rd �� Date 1 DISAPPROVAL ❑ Staff Approval , Zone - roject Name: Project Description: contact Person and Project Application Date AA -------------- Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: Block Filing Design Review Board Date Motion by: --tL; -- Seconded by: DISAPPROVAL APPROVAL • , Zone � Date ❑ Staff Approval T • I0 0 town of Voil LY 75 south frontage road vall, colorado 81657 (303)476-7000 TO: Design Review Board FROM: Community Development Department SUBJECT: An Appeal of the Staff's Administrative Policy Concerning Signage for Slifer Designs: Applicant: Beth Slifer DATE: January 15, 1985 I. THE APPEAL The applicant is appealing the staff's decision to deny Slifer Designs a 3 square foot hanging sign to be located below the existing Slifer Real Estate sign on Bridge Street. The applicant feels.strong.ly that due to the fact that her business is completely separate from Slifer Real Estate, a 3 square foot sign is warranted. Staff's opinion is that to allow the 3 square foot sign would conflict with the section of the sign code that states that: 16.20.190H.4. Space shared with common exterior public entrance by more than one business or organization shall be treated as a single business organization for purposes of calculating frontage-. II. APPLICANT'S REQUEST The applicant is making the following request: I am asking for you to rule that I may hang my sign at 230 Bridge Street. In 1985, 1 started a new business, Slifer Designs. We have 2 full time employees plus myself. We sell furnishings to individuals who are redecorating their homes. Our charges are based on retail prices of goods which we have in inventory or order on a custom basis. page two DRB 1/15/86 Slifer Designs In addition to warehouse space in Eagle -Vail, we have an office in a space in the rear of the Slifer Building on Bridge Street. Our space is just under 200 square feet and it has two doors. One door opens into a Slifer and Company room. The other door is used as an outside entrance and opens into a common hall shared by the Clock Tower, Grafetti, Slifer and Company and Slifer Designs. Our operation is completely separate from Slifer and Company. We share only two things, ie. the door on Bridge Street and the receptionist. The Town of Vail ordinances governing signs for commercial businesses is unclear in this instance. The question is whether, as a retail commercial business, I am allowed to share a doorway with another business and be permitted to hang a sign which is separate from the three foot square sign allocated to the other business. I will be available to answer any questions you may have. I hope that you will be able to rule in favor of allowing my commercial business to have a sign in front of'`its location. Thank you for your attention to this matter. III. STAFF'S SIGN CODE INTERPRETATION Staff has maintained the policy that if one lease space has more than a single business within the lease space then the signage for that space must be divided among the various businesses. As an example if a single leased space had 20 feet of frontage, and contained two businesses, the lessees would be allowed one sign that had two square feet of signage per business. The lessees would not be allowed to have two separate signs each containing two square feet of signage. The sign code spells out very clearly that wall signs and hanging or projecting signs for individual businesses within a multi tenant building are to be used to identify a business or organization which has its own exterior public entrance within a multi tenant building. In respect to the location of Slifer Designs, shoppers wishing to go into Slifer Designs must enter through the Slifer Real Estate office on the Bridge Street entrance. This type of entrance does not satisfy the code's requirement that the business or organization have its own exterior public entrance within a multi tenant building. r page three DRB 1/15/86 Slifer Designs It is true that Slifer Designs does have an entrance through a common hallway on the east side of the building. If the owners wish to locate a three square foot sign on the east side of the building this would be possible under the sign code. However, the owners of Slifer Design wish to locate the three square foot sign on the Bridge Street side of the building. Under Section 16.20.190 H4, it states that "space shared with common exterior public entrance by more than one business or organization shall be treated as a single business or organization for purposes of calculating frontage." Staff believes that this portion of the code clearly states that if businesses share one lease space that they are allowed to have one sign and that the square footage allotment based on the shop's frontage shall be divided between the two tenants. This reference is found in the wall sign section of the code, however, staff feels that is also applicable to projecting and hanging signs. Staff feels that the applicant does have an opportunity to have adequate signage. Presently, the Slifer Real Estate sign is 5 square feet. Slifer Designs could share this 5 square feet with Slifer Real Estate by creating a new sign that would divide the square footage between the two businesses. Slifer Designs may also have a window sign. Window signs may cover 15% of the total window space as long as the si-gn-is not greater than 10 square feet. The sign code does not require that a business must have their own exterior public entrance to have a window sign. The reasoning behind the staff's decision is based on the concern that if each business within a single lease space was allowed to have a minimum 3 square foot sign, sign clutter would greatly increase in the Town. By maintaining the concept of allowing one sign per business having its own exterior public entrance, the number of signs is kept to a minimum. Those businesses within a single lease space are still allowed to have a hanging, projecting, or wall sign as long as the square footage of the sign remains within the amount based on the store's frontage. This approach has been used with many stores who have previously asked the staff for signs. There are many instances in which there are several businesses within one lease space. To approve this request would mean that any lease space that had more than one business within its walls would automatically be allowed a 3 square foot sign per business, Staff feels that this interpretation would go against the intent of the sign code and also create a great deal of sign clutter for the Town. For these reasons, we recommend to the Design Review Board that the request be denied. L : 10 140 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AGENDA January 29, 1986 2:00 p.m. Site Visits 1:30 p.m. #2 1. Dobson Arena Information Signs; Lionshead Motion: Warren Second: Caswell Vote 5-0 #1 2. Vail Valley Frozen Yogurt Company Awning; Lionshead Parking Structure Tabled #3 3. Overland & Express Sign Variance; Village Center Motion: Warren Second: Caswell Denied 5-0 16.20.020 and per staff memo 4. Design Criteria for Ford Park No Motion Necessary New Business Discussion of DRB meeting to start at 3:00 Approved to begin February 19, 1986 . Old Business Staff Approvals Hank Residence Remodel; new garage doors Staff Present Kristan Pritz Rick Pylman DRB Present Kathy Warren Rick Baldwin Steve Caswell Duane Piper Ned Gwathmey Staff Absent DRB Absent PARK DESIGN GUIDELINES DRAFT . January 20, 1986 18.54 Park Design Guidelines These guidelines shall be used by the Design Review Board in reviewing any proposals for the development of Town of Vail park land. The guidelines will be used in conjunction with the general design guidelines found in Section 18.54.050. The purpose of the guidelines is to provide continuity in the character of the park which will be developed over many years. The guidelines will provide consistent design criteria to maintain the beauty of our Town of Vail parks through all phases of development. A. BUILDING MATERIALS AND DESIGN 1. General a. Natural and native materials shall be used in park construction. Materials and detailing must fit into the park's environment as well as be functional and attractive. b. Materials and designs should be chosen that are realistic in cost and economical to maintain. 2. Stone a. Natural rock should be used for architectural features such as exposed building walls and small retaining walls. Sandy gray and brown colors should be encouraged, as they blend in with the natural environment. Construction should minimize exposed mortar. 3. Pedestrian Walks/Plazas a. Interlocking concrete pavers may be used to emphasize important features or pedestrian areas. Natural colors are encouraged, as they blend in well with wood, stone and plant materials. 4. Children's Play Areas a. Children's play areas are designed with challenge in mind. Multi-level play structures, tunnels, and other climbing apparatus are designed to excite and to encourage free expression. Native landscaping materials shall be incorporated into the play areas to soften and blend into the environment. Plant materials shall be provided for the enclosure of the play areas and for summer shading. Play areas and buildings shall be oriented to take advantage of warm winter exposures and buffering from the wind. 0 5. Visual Impact a. Structures, shelters, or other site buildings shall be designed in a low profile or be set into slope areas to reduce their vertical dominance upon the site. b. Major architectural structures such as a pool building complex and the amphitheatre shall be designed and accented to attract visitors without becoming a distracting visual element to other visitors of the park or to adjacent developments. B. LANDSCAPING/SITE PLANNING 1. General a. Plantings should be used to soften the edge between developed and natural park areas and to heavily screen conflicting adjacent uses. Such plantings unify developed and natural areas as well as provide a protective buffer where the adjacent land uses conflict with recreational activities. As an example, gently sloping lawns are desirable for picnic areas and open field play. Irrigated and manicured lawn areas can transition into natural areas through the use of native grasses and shrubs. Fences shall be discouraged between active and passive areas. b. Noise -generating and active play areas should be integrated together and placed away from passive or natural areas. Needed service facilities, such as restrooms, drinking fountains, etc. should be located in or adjacent to activities with a high user demand. 2. Views a. Plantings and site work should be used to direct views by framing interesting and attractive features such as distant mountain ranges, ponds, or Gore Creek. Visual screens of plant materials may be used to close off undesired views.such as the Interstate, frontage roads, or neighboring development. 3. Accent Plantings and Materials a. In areas of special interest or activity, and in pedestrian areas, plantings should be used to provide color, texture, form and scent to highlight and emphasize the special character of these places. Horizontal ground plane textures such as native shrubs, ground covers, colored pavers, and smooth boulders are also used to complement the environment. 11 • • 0- 4. Lighting a. If exterior park lighting is deemed appropriate, the lighting should provide for clear visibility while at the same time eliminating any glare within the park or on adjacent properties. Lighting fixtures shall be as subtle as possible so that they blend in with the natural park setting. 5. Signage a. Public information signs shall be made of natural material to blend in with the surrounding park areas. Private signs are prohibited from the park. Destination points within the park shall be identified and highlighted through the use of a unified park signage program. C. ACCESS AND PARKING 1. Pedestrian/Bike Paths a. Pedestrian walks and bike paths shall be provided in the areas of developed facilities and circulation routes. Walks and bike paths shall be accessible to the physically handicapped and should be constucted of concrete or asphalt. b. Pathways through natural areas shall be placed where little grade change is required and shall be constructed of compacted, inexpensive road base materials. Other surface materials which provide a hard surface but appear natural should be considered. 2. Parkin a. Parking areas shall be sensitively planned to provide needed parking without impacting the natural or recreational use areas. Parking shall be visually screened to as great a degree as feasible. b. Landscaping should be provided along public perimeter roads and between parking areas to provide screening of noise and visual pollution. D. SITE PRESERVATION AND MAINTENANCE 1. Site Preservation a. Open meadows of native grasses and flowers, and permanent stands of evergreen forests should be maintained in undeveloped areas of the parks. • 2. Site Revegetation a. Natural areas that are disturbed during construction, and are not subsequently developed, shall be vegetated to encourage plant associations that develop naturally on the site. Revegetation should match pre-existing conditions as closely as possible. 3. Erosion Control a. Temporary erosion control measures during construction, and permanent control measures after construction shall be established to prevent sediment pollution of the creek and to stabilize disturbed areas. Straw bales shall be used for temporary control measures and jute netting should be used to permanently stabilize slopes. Any park projects shall be required to include a site preservation program during construction phases. Extending these preservation programs into projected development phases will help to keep future maintenance costs low by preventing undesirable plant growth and park user practices. b. Limits of construction shall be clearly defined in order to minimize disturbance to other areas in the park. Ir CJ • . 0 1-1 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD February 5, 1986 2:00 p.m. Site Visits 1:00 P.M. #2 1. Vail Valley Frozen Yogurt, Lionshead Parking Structure Approved with changes Motion: Warren Second: Gwathmey Vote 4-0 #3 2. Vail Valley Medical Center, Conceptual Review Conceptual Review; no vote taken #1 3. Irwin Estate; Lot 49, Glen Lyon: Final Review Tabled 4. Review of Ford Park Design Guidelines Conceptual Review; no vote taken Staff Approvals Currents; Casino Bldg. Haagen Dazs window signs U.S. Postal Service signs Battle Mountain Trading Post; exterior sign, Treetops Plaza DRB PRESENT Rick Baldwin Duane Piper Kathy Warren Ned Gwathmey STAFF PRESENT Kristan Pritz Richard Pylman Thomas Braun 140 0 DES IGN -REVI ESI BOARD AGENDA r Februry9$' r .,.._. 3:00 p.m. Site Visits 2:30 #1 1. Ramshorn Roof Redesign and Window Change Lot A, Block 3, Vail Village 5th Filing Motion: Warren Second: Gwathmey 5-0 Fence must comply with approval #2 Cunningham Residence; Conceptual Review Lot 13, Block 7, Vail Village 1st Filing Motion not required 3. Appeal of Staff Interpretation of Section 16.20.170(A)(B). Multi purpose traffic control sign Applicant: Gail Strauch, Overland & Express Travel Service Motion: Warren Second: Gwathmey 5-0 NEW BUSINESS: none OLD BUSINESS: none DRB PRESENT DRB ABSENT Kathy Warren Duane Piper Grant Riva Ned Gwathmey Rick Baldwin STAFF PRESENT STAFF ABSENT Kristan Pritz Rick Pylman Tom Braun OTRLANB .. #{ T T . u 5 3 FPESS G6Pi,188ea� st gore creek drive "r-vall colorado 8 657 ,. (3031.2266 4 -iY N .b .0 ♦"' � � 5� �..YT � �% 'M -S y^y S 'S-. y�CT�� y . $ � S s. ro x..a=,sY `, s �- 4S'�,• ni -F �"" mss^' ".k.•tr j 1 ` rK& �""•ct g.a a �irs r n r -IS r DESIGN REVIEW BQRj n r t Town of:Uall Uai3, Colorado 81, ® Dear .sirs f]TfiPLA) r agency afflce�lacatea ats�c,as� L! (N7U2 n.e�i_ buildlr�g rYiich ewe now ares ' r with a fiverft ;display box {appro: Meadow Drive street ssde As: otic. FI are located .off_.the :street, onthe..'.: the window box would provide us:wi t opportunity for better identfy2ng With- approval, the window boX aster acid raur ;agency name travel ':P. 3 is _around the- corner We xaould not infarmatlon " 2 - We?beleive .this reguest ga.s ` vstI f .. - facility :-to post aQclear dent fy that ;i within ;clear �rzew of,,the,x one ft sign that lies already beer ` ;� r F ` w111 look .betterancl cleaneit aril i� not_cluttere&vith d�rectic '- Overall' the combiiiatiori of small.; p°rovi dethe lest aossible -a dentfa instructions without any addition Z hope we can r`ece:L `_y pert P ' SCal S erel ,ice" icy, 1 '7 .pF+_eixF` 17'- January ' 1.985, 5 if TS uxxu ..— Ee, biiildirig; I=() rusi:ve,_..., m 1,9, -to C • TO: Design Review Board FROM: Community Development Department SUBJECT: Overland and Express Travel Company Appeal of Staff Interpretation of the Definition of a Multi -Purpose Traffic Control Sign for Private Property. Town of Vail Sign Code Section 16.20.170 A and B Applicant: Gail Strauch DATE: February 19, 1986 I. THE APPEAL The applicant is appealing the staff's decision to deny Overland and Express Travel Company a multi-purpose traffic control sign. The section of the Town of Vail sign code that is actually in question is: 16.20.170 Traffic control signs for private property. Traffic -control signs for private property shall be regulated as follows: A. Purpose, to relieve vehicular and pedestrian traffic congestion and promote the safe and expedient flow and parking of traffic on private property; B. Size, all vehicular traffic -control signs shall not exceed one square foot, except multi-purpose signs, which shall not exceed four square feet. All pedestrian traffic -control signs shall not exceed one square foot, except multi-purpose signs, which shall not exceed four square feet, subject to approval of Design Review Board; II. APPLICANT'S_ REQUEST The applicant is making the following request: I believe this multi-purpose sign shared by Overland and Express and the Village Center offices will greatly relieve and promote the safe and expedient flow of pedestrian traffic to this part of the Village Center Mall and relieve the congestion of parking on the private property of the Sonnenalp. People will know exactly what is at this end of the mall without having to park and pull into a very icy and dangerous driveway. This consideration will fall under sign category 16.20.170 Traffic control signs for private property. I am in appreciation for any consideration you will allow us in this matter. 0- STAFF'S SIGN CODE INTERPRETATION The multi-purpose traffic control sign is not specifically defined under the definition section of the Town of Vail sign code. However, staff believes that the intent of a multi-purpose traffic control sign is clearly stated in the purpose section of Section 16.20.170. The purpose section states: Traffic control signs for private property shall be regulated as follows: Purpose, to relieve vehicular and pedestrian traffic congestion and promote the safe and expedient flow and parking of traffic on private property. The primary purpose of this type of sign is to relieve pedestrian and auto congestion and to expedite parking of traffic on private property. The purpose of the sign is not to advertise for a business that is somewhat difficult to see from a pedestrian or vehicle way. Staff does agree that sometimes there is traffic congestion going in and out of the Sonnenalp parking lot. Staff would also like to point out that there is a no parking sign directly in front of the northeast corner of the Village Center to prevent cars from parking in front of the east end of Village Center. Staff feels that it is clear after reading the size section of the code (16.20.170b) that multi-purpose signs would combine information for both vehicular as well pedestrian control. It is for this reason that 4 square feet is the maximum size allowed for a multi-purpose sign. The 4 square feet is to be used foreng eral parking and business information. The signs should not be used for adding more advertising for a business. Staff believes that to allow the 1 square foot sign for Overland and Express was stretching the intent of the code. A multi-purpose traffic control sign would be appropriate for a project such as the Cascade Village Development, or a large shopping center with many types of uses included in it such as offices,retail and residential. Multi-purpose signs were intended to be used for large projects that require vehicular and pedestrian traffic control information in order to promote easy access through the project. The Village Center project does not need this type of informational sign in order to guide pedestrians through the project. The Village Center's two directory signs will provide adequate information for pedestrians. Staff feels very strongly that to allow a sign greater than 1 square foot for Overland and Express Travel Company would be a misinterpretation of this section of the sign code. Even though there is not an actual definition for a multi-purpose sign, staff feels that there is enough information in the traffic control section of the code to understand how a multi-purpose traffic control sign should be used. Staff believes that it is very clear that a multi-purpose sign is to be used to relieve vehicular and pedestrian traffic. The only reason the code allows for 4 square feet is to allow adequate room for pedestrian as well as auto information. The additional square footage is not to be used for the benefit of a single business. The one square foot pedestrian sign is more than adequate to direct a lost pedestrian to the Overland and Express office. For these reasons staff feels that the interpretation given to the applicant is correct and in compliance with the sign code. 0 • • • . TO: Town Council FROM: Community Development Department SUBJECT: Overland and Express Travel Company Sign Variance Applicant: Gail Strauch HATE: February 18, 1986 On January 29, 1986, the Design Review Board heard the Overland and Express Sign Variance Request. The applicant, Gail Strauch, requested to have a display box for her travel agency located on the east end of the Village Center building. She was requesting to locate the display box on the north side of the building between Karats Jewelry Store and the Scotland Boulevard shop. The Town of Vail sign code stipulates in Section 16.20.020 that "display boxes shall be allowed to only display current menus, current real estate listings or current entertainment." The staff recommended denial of the proposal for the following reasons: 1. The business already has an awning with signage, two directory signs and one 1 square foot pedestrian sign. Staff felt that this signage was more than enough to assist pedestrians in finding the office. 2. The sign request departs from the provisions of the Town of Vail sign code more than is necessary to identify the applicant's business. 3. Staff does not feel that there is a physical hardship due to the location of the office on the east end of the building that would warrant a sign variance. The applicant was aware of the location of the office when the space was leased. 4. To grant this variance would be a grant of special privilege. The approval of the variance would set a precedent that would make it very difficult to prohibit display boxes for other businesses in the area. Staff cited the second level of the Vail Village Inn development and the Mill Creek Court Building shops as examples of businesses that also have visibility problems. Staff felt that it would be very difficult to draw the line in determining which offices and retail stores have a visibility problem and which ones do not. For these reasons staff recommended denial of the proposal. The Design Review Board voted 4-0 to recommend denial of the variance. The board cited Section 16.20.020 and staff memo as reasons to deny the request. `101 Project Name: Project Descrip Contact Perso3n Owner, Address and Phone: _ �J Project Application Date Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: Motion by:� Seconded by: Summary: Block Filing Zone Town Planner Date:. Design Review Board Date DISAPPROVAL ❑ Staff Approval • Project Application Project Name: u 191� Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Block ; Piling Zone Comments: 1� Date Motion by: Seconded by: APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL Summary: Date: Town Planner ❑ Staff Approval Project Application Date 0 Project Name: Ramshorn Lodge Project Description: Adding dormers to existing structure. 4 Contact Person and Phone James R. liorter, AIA February 10, 1986 476-5105 Owner, Address and Phone: The Polar Partnership; 416 Vail Valley Drive; Vail, Colorado 81657 476-507.5 Architect, Address and Phone: James R. Morter, AIA; Morter Fisher Architect; 143 F Meadow Dr; Vail, Colorado 81657; 476-5105 A 3 Filing Vail Village, Fifth , zone Legal Description: Lot Block Materials will include: stucco, Pella windows, wood fascia, and built-up Comments: roofing, all to match existing. Design Review Board Motion by: Seconded by:: APPROVAL Summary: �A Town Planner] Date: ;J Date �1 DISAPPROVAL ❑ Staff Approval • 0 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD YY1axck5, 1904 _ .. 3:00 p.m. Site Visits 1:30 p.m. 4 1. Riva Ridge North, Vail Vaillage remodel east entryway Tabled to March 19, 1956 2 2. Vail Golfcourse clubhouse, addition and remodel Conceptnal Approval only with Reconnendations 5 3. Vail Valley Medical Center Final Review Motion - Gwathmey, second - Riva Aproval for landscaping, and final review of expansion - conditional on PEC and council approvals. 3 4. Spitz Residence addition, Lot 8, Block 6, Vail Village 7th Filing, 1107 Vail Valley Drive Motion - Grant, Second - Riva Preliminary approval 2-0-1 (Warren adstention) 1 5. Crowley Deck Enclosure, Resub Lot 9, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing, 3090 Booth Falls Court Approved: Motion - Riva, Second - Gwathmey, Vote 2-0-1 (Warren Abstention) Old Business Le Petit Cafe Awning Setback Requirements Ramshorn Lodge Sign Enforcement Members Present Duane Piper Kathy Warren Ned Gwathmey Grant Riva New Business Members Absent Rick Baldwin DESIGN REVIEW BOARD k 1. Riva Ridge North, Vail Village remodel east entryway 2. Vail Golfcourse clubhouse, addition and remodel 3. Vail Valley Medical Center Final Review 4. Spitz Residence addition, Lot 8, Block 6, Vail Village 7th Filing, 1107 Vail Valley Drive 5. Crowley Deck Enclosure, Resub Lot 9, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing, 3090 Booth Falls Court • a Design Review Board March 19, 1986 3:00 pm Site visits 1:30 pm 2 1) Spitz Residence addition, Lot 8, blk 6, VV7th Moton - Warren Application denied 3-0,citing Second - Grant 18.54 050 1.A as reason. 1 2) Vail Golf Course Clubhouse remodel Motion - Warren Preliminary Approval 3-0 Second - Riva 5 3) Cunningham Residence final review \� _ lot 13, Block 7, VV 1st�\�``'`�`,� <` Motion - Riva Second - Warren Approval per submittal 3-0 8 4) Riva Ridge North, east entry, Vail Village Motion - Riva Approval 3-0 Second - Warren��'� 7 5) 147 Rockledge unit addition Motion - Warren Preliminary approval with conditions. Second - Riva 6 i 6) Edborg Residence final review , Lot 8, Block 7, VV 1st; J { Motion - Warren Approval as w/conditions Second -Riva 3-0 7) Alpine Garden, Ford Park, conceptual Review No Vote 3 8) Plaza lodge Conceptual Review No Vote 4 9) Hong Kong Cafe Conceptual Review No Vote Old Business New Business Members Present Members Absent Kathy Warren Ned Gwathney Rick Baldwin Duane Piper Grant Riva Staff Present Tom Braun Kristan Pritz Rick Pylman i 0 Design Review Board March 19, 1986 1). Cunningham Residence final review LI:. 227 Rockledge Road Lot 13, Block 7, VV 1st 2). Fdborg Residence final review Lot 8, Block 7, VV 1st 127 Rockledge Road. 3). 147 Rockledge, new unit 147 Rockledge Road, Lot 9A, Block 7, VV 1st C",: 4). Riva Ridge North, entry remodel, Vail Village. 5). Vail Golf Course Clubhouse remodel.-/ 10 6). Spitz Residence addition 1109 Vail Valley Dr.,Lot 8, Block 6, VV 7st. 7). Alpine Garden Conceptual review, Ford Park. 0 T0: Design Review Board FROM: Community Development Department DATE: March 19, 1986 SUBJECT: Conceptual review of the Alpine Garden proposal Enclosed you will find a great deal of information on the Alpine Garden. The most important documents to read are the Town Council Memo dated March 4, 1986 and the Friends of the Alpine Garden development proposal. At our March 19 meeting, the Friends of the Apline Garden will make a conceptual presentation of their proposal to the Design Review Board. This information has been included with your agenda to try and give you more of an understanding of the scope of the project. Project Application Date March 3, 1986 Project Name: Edborg Residence Primary 1 Secondary Duplex Residence Project Description: Contact Person and Phone William J. Ruoff 500 Lionshead Mall, Vail, Colorado 81657 Owner, Address and Phone: Mr. 8 Mrs. Ulf Edborg P.O. Box 665, Vail, Colorado_81658 91 Marland Road South, Colorado Springs, Colorado 80906 William J. Ruoff The Ruoff Partnership - Architects AIA Architect, Address and Phone: --- . 8A Legal Description: Lot Comments: Motion by:�• Seconded by: APPROVAL 500 Lionshead Mail, Vail, Colorado 81657 7 First PIS Res. Block ;Filing ,Zone Design Review Board Date DISAPPROVAL Town tanner ElStaff Approval Date: Project Application am R6(a Date 2P, 6 „ I _ Project Name: _K 1_uCA I� ,I d9 P. N (mit ft Project Description: !U U e- n Y"4 y\n e, �i —� 2 +s` n m Contact Person and Phone t^ s - I -Soo a6 05 fA /616 - Owner, Address and Phone: SC's C Ct 1 b ►'\. - -- Architect, Address and Phone: ' ` Legal Description: Lot �.� Block Piling Comments: o ry)VF a vi, �'S f `i,Zane Design Review Board Date Motion by: w Seconded by: � On I en — APPROVAL ' DISAPPROVAL Town Planner ❑ Staff Approval Date: _ �/ (L 1 � 1:30 p.m. Site Visits 7 1.1 1 2 4 Design Review.Board Agenda Apryl 1986 1) Plaza Lodge, Vail Village Lots G,H,I,J,K and part of F Bloc Filing. Rick Motion - Warren Approved 4 -0 - Second - Grant 2) Hong Kong Cafe, Vail Village Lot C, Block 5C, VV 1st Filing Rick Motion - Warren Approved 4 -0 - Second - Gawthmay 3) Hill Building, Vail Village Lot 1, Block 5C, VV 1st Filing Rick Tabled 4) Fall Line Apartments 1500 Matterhorn Circle, unplatted Rick Conceptual Approval - No Vote 5) Vail Village Inn Facade Remodel, Vail Village Tom Motion - Warren Apprc°v wl per submittal Second - Riva 5-0 6) Ski Club Vail Remodel, Tarac B, VV 7th Filing Tom Rescheduled to April 16, 1986 7) 147 Rockledge, Unit Addition �� `✓,��� Lot 9A, Block 7, VV 1st �� Rick Motion - Warren Approved with conditions Second - Gwathmey 3-2 3 Tom Old Business Macdonald Sign Members Present Rick Pylman Tom Braun Staff Present Ned Gawthmey Kathy Warren Rick Baldwin Grant Riva Pam Hopkins 8) Kidsports Sign Proposal Village Center Bldg, Vail Village Motion - Warren Motion to upheld staff Second - Gwathmey decision that business has only one frontage. New Business Members Absent Kristan Pritz Design Review Board Agenda Plaza Lodge, Vail Village Lots G,H,I,J,K and part of F Block 5C, VV 1st Filing Hong Kong Cafe, Vail Village Lot C, Block 5C VV 1st Filing Hill Building, Vail Village Lot 1 Block 5C VV 1st Filing Fall Line Apartments 1500 Matterhorn Circle, unplatted Golf Course Clubhouse Remodel, Vail Golf Course Vail Village Inn Facade Remodel, Vail Village Ski Club Vail Remodel Tract B VV 7th Filing 147 Rockledge, Unit Addition Lot 9A, Block 7, VV 1st Kidsports sign Proposal Village Center Bldg, Vail Village Design Review Board April 16, 1986 ap f 3:00 p.m. 1:30 p.m. Site Visits 4 1) Hill Building Remodel Denid for reason of lack of acompatibility Motion - Ned Gwathmey Second - Kathy Warren VOTE - 4-0 At end of agenda Hill Bldg. applicant returned to discuss revisions to application. The DRB then made the following motion: Motion to rescind previous Hill Bldg. vote and table item to next meeting. Motion - Ned Gwathmey Second - Grant Riva VOTE - 4-0 9 2) Ski Club Vail Remodel Motion - Warren Second - Gwathmey 3-0 7 41� 3) Shapiro Residence Addition ",�--�� Lot 1 Vail Valley 2nd 1548 Springhill Lane Approved as submitted with provision that disturbed area east of the resid. be revegetated. Moton - Gwathmey Second - Warren 3-0 5 4) Karats, Village Center Bldg. Vail Village Motion - Gwathmey Second - Warren 3-0 8 5) Bighorn Lodge 4145 Bighorn Road Lots 6 & 7 Block 7 Bighorn 3rd addition Motion - Warren Second - Gwathmey 3-0 Relim. Approval 6 6) Sonnenalp'Sign Tract C Vail Village 1st 242 East Meadow Dr.0 Motion - Second - Tabled by applicant. 1 7) 22 Glen Lyon Residence Lot 22 Glen Lyon 1380 Westheven Circle Motion -- Gwathmey Second - Warren Approved 4-0 Approved as submitted 2 8) Bossow Residence Lot 1 Block 1 Vail VaI-Tey 6th 486 Forest Rd. Concep 4al Review 9) Irwin Estate Lot 49 Glen Lyon, Westhaven Circle Tabled for revision. 3 Lodge Entry Color Scheme is Tabled until next meeting. Old Business Lodge Entry Color Scheme Members Present Kathy Warren Ned Gwathmey Grant Riva Rick Baldwin Staff Present Kristan Pritz Rick Pylman New Business Members Absent Pam Hopkins. Design Review Board April 16, 1986 1) Shapiro Residence Addition Lot 1 Vail �Vtt+&e 2nd 1548 Springhill Lane 2) Karats, Village Center Bldg. Vail Village 3) Bighorn Lodge 4145 Bighorn Road Lots 6 & 7 Block 7 Bighorn 3rd addition 4) Sonnenalp Sign Tract C Vail Village 1st 242 East Meadow Drive 5) 22 Glen Lyon Residence Lot 22 Glen Lyon 1380 Westheven Circle 6) 254 Beaver Dam Greenhouse Addition Lot 23 Block 2 Vail Valley 3rd Filing 7) Bossow Residence Lot 1 Block 1 Vail Valley 6th 486 Forest Road And Previously Tabled Items. Project Application Date Project Name: r Project Description: Contact Person and Phoned Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Leqal Description: Lot Block A. &6 _ aM Zone 0 e Design Review Board Motion by: El 1) Seconded by: tk)uon APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL Town Planner f Date: L `�' ❑ Staff Approval Project Application fflk i My Project Name: Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Date Owner, Address and Phone:—�k— — --- Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: trot , Block , Filing Comments: Design Review Board Date Motion by: - Seconded by: APPROVAL. DISAPPROVAL Zone Town Planner ❑ Staff Approval Date: �' Project Name: Project Descrip Contact Persor Project Application Date Owner, Address and Phone: /Up II7HAn .-f, 41P " rr1 Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot 1 G Block Filing Zane .. l Comments: Design Review Board Motion by: " y A�2s l - Seconded by: ZV#,V- APPROVAL Summary: Town Planner Date: Date DISAPPROVAL ❑ Staff Approval 0 Site Visits 2:15 p.m. Design Re eMIA, - bt r�oard�a 1) Spitz Addition 1107 Vail Valley Drive Lot 7, Block 6, Vail Valley 7th NO VOTE taken tabled to May 7, 1986 3 2) Kiandra Color Change Kiandra Lodge, Vail Village Motion - Gwathmey consent Second - Riva 3--0 3) Bossow 486 Forest Road4`,� Lot 1, Block 1, Vail Valley 6th �— Motion - Gwathmey Approval 4-0 Second - Riva 4) Bighorn Lodge\� 4145 Bighorn Rd, Lots 60, Blk 7 Bighorn 3rd Motion - Gwathmey Approval 3-0 Second - Hopkins 4 5) Byrne Residence Addition 254 Beaver Dam.Road Lot 23, Block 7 VV1st Motion - Gwathmey consent 3-0 Second - Riva 6) Sonnenalp Sign 242 E. Meadow Dr. Tract C Vail Village 1st Tabled Until Next Meeting 1 7) Westwind Color Change 20 Vail Road, Vail Village Motion - Gwathmey consent 3-0 Second - Riva r� 2 8) Banner Sports Awning Marriott Mark Motion - Gwathmey consent 3-0 Second - Riva 9) Hill Building���\ Bridge Street, Vail Village Motion - Gwathmey Second - Riva Approval 4-0 Final Colors to be submitted to Board. 10) Irwin Estate Westhaven Circle, Lot 49, Glen Lyon��n Motion - Gwathmey Second - Riva Approved as submitted 4 -0 - Old Business New Business Lodge Canopy / Moti$on Gwathmey, Second Riva 4-0 Pownall Residence 250 Addition / Approved Ski Club Vail / Request Changes DRB Meeting Signs / Res - interested Staff Approvals Town's Addition -Piper Members Present Ned Gwathmey Pam Hopkins Kathy Warren Grant Riva Staff Present Rick Pyiman Tom Braun Kristan Pritz Members Absent • • • Project Name: Project Descrip Project Application n �*. Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: Block Filing 0 Design Review Board Date Motion by: Seconded by: La APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL i� Summary: i � 1 Town Planner ❑ Staff Approval 6,,,Date: D , Zone Project Application Date 14 Project Name: Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: Block Filing 1,0 Design Review Board Motion by: Seconded by: UIW% b&E�J-- APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL Summary: 0 �St `QA '11 Uel lis �. R)� - N� Town Planner Date: , Zone J34:1 ) lis- will ❑ Staff Approval 1.140 Project Application Date Project Name: eA - — Project Description: / ' "G4C,(,P- - — Contact Person and Phone�(e- -- G- - 3 - --- Owner, Address and Phone:��0' �-- ArchitectAddress and Phone:�� Legal Description: Lot Block, Filing �� Zone Comments: Motion by: Design Review Board Seconded by: APPROVAL Date DISAPPROVAL Town Planner Date: ❑ Staff Approval 0 Project Name: Project Application nate Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Leaal Description. Lot , Block , Filing Zone 0 Design Review Board Date Motion by: 613 6 %qA Seconded by: APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL Summary: Town Planner ❑ Staff Approval Date: Project Name: '40 Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: Block Project Application Filing Date Design Review Board ate Motion by: 04o Seconded by: APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL , Zone �— Town Plann r Date: L ❑ Staff Approval Design=���crv�orad4na Yri 10.,96 Westwind Color Scheme, 548 South Frontage Road Kiandra Color Scheme, 20 Vail Road Banner Sports Awning, Vail Lionshead Spitz Residence Addition 1107 Vail Valley Drive Lot 7, Block 6, Vail Valley 7th Ron Byrne Green douse Addition 254 Beaver Dam Road. Lot 23, block 7, Vail Village 1st Filing. s and previously tabled items. AP Site Visits 1:50 p.m. Design Review Board Agenda May 7, 1986 1) Spitz Addition - Final Review (3rd review) 1107 Vail Valley Drive Lot 7, Block 6, Vail Valley 7th 2 2) One Willow Place (Bishop Park) conceptual review (1st Review) 43 & 46 Willow Place Lots 1 & 2, Block 6, Vail Village 1st Filing Conceptual 3) Sonnenalp Menu Box Final Review (2nd review) 242 East Meadow Dr. Tract C, Vail Village 1st Tabled to next meeting 4 4) Frampton Residence Final Review (revision to approval) Lot 3, Block 3, Vail Valley 11th Motion - Riva Approved 4-0 Second - Sante 3 5) Gilliland Residence Final Review (1st review) Unit 6C & 7C Village Center Condominiums 122 East Meadow Drive Consent Agenda Approved 4-0 1 6) Johnston Residence Conceptual Review (1st review) Lot 1, Lionsridge Filing #2 Conceptual Old Business New Business Ski Club Vail Revisions/Approved Plaza Lodge Revisions/Approved Summers Lodge Revisions/Approved Staff Approvals Vail Gifts & T's Signage Shades of Vail Signage Members Present Members Absent Roy Sante • Grant Riva Kathy Warren Ned Gwathmey Pam Hopkins Staff Present Tom Braun Rick Pylman' Kristan Pritz Is Design Review Board Agenda May 7, 1986 1 One Willow Place (Bishop Park) Lots 1 & 2, Block 6, Vail Village 1st Filing 43 & 63 Willow Place 2 Frampton Residence (New Residence) Lot 3, Block 3, Vail Village 11th 3 Gilliland Residence Unit 6C & 7C Village Center Condominiums 122 East Meadow Drive 4 Johnston Residence: Conceptual Review Lot 1, Lionsridge Filing #2 Project Application Date Project Dame: — Project Description: Contact Person and Phone 9S - Owner, Address and Phone:�� `Z Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Block Filing 6 Lh4a Zone Comments: 0 Design Review Board Motion by: Seconded by: _ r ah— APPROVAL Date -s7 /X/ DISAPPROVAL Town Planner Date: ❑ Staff Approval * Project Name: Project Application Date Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Block Filing Comments: 0 Design Review Board Motion by: \ Seconded by: APPROVAL Date v r� DISAPPROVAL Lam' , Zone Towne Planner Date: ❑ Staff Approval DIN PYA 8 �d 3:00 pm Site Visits 1:00 P.M. 3 1) Valli Hi Sign Final (1st Review) Lots C1 - C5, Lionsridge #1 Motion - Gwathmey Second - Riva Vote 4-0 6 2) Nature Center Campfire Ring Final (1st Review) Road Park Motion - Gwathmey Second - Riva Vote 4-0 4 3) Sweet Basil Awning Final (1st Review) Gore Creek Plaza Vail Village Motion - Gwathmey Second - Riva Vote 4-0 5 4) A & D Building Roof & Street Furniture Vail Village Change to previous approval Motion - Riva Second - Gwathmey Vote 4-0 1 5) Johnston Residence Final (2nd Review) Lot 1, Lionsridge #2 1773 Lionsridge Loop Tabled 7 6) Mueller Wyman Residence Conceptal (1st Lot 7, Vail Village 10th Review) 930 Fairway Court NO VOTE 4 8 7) Booth Creek Tot Lot Final (1st Review) Booth Creek Subdivision Motion - Sante Second - Riva Vote 4-0 9 8) Sheahan Residence/New Residence Final (1st Lot 1, Block 1, Bighorn 1st Review) 3977 Lupine Drive Tabled 2 9) Lauterbach Residence Final (1st Review) Lot 9, Block 1, Potato Patch 775 Potato Patch Drive Motion - Gwathmey with conditions Second - Riva Vote 4-0 Old Business New Business West Vail Mall Staff Approval. Staff Approvals Valli Hi Sign Sweet Basil Awning Booth Creek Tot Lot A & D Roof Vail Village Inn Facade Remodel Members Present Kathy Warren Ned Gwathmey Roy Sante Grant Riva Staff Present Kristan Pritz Rick Pylman Members Absent Pam Hopkins Staff Absent Tom Braun Peter Patten • • Design Revje. Bo.rd 00 pm Mueller Wyman Residence Lot 7, Vail Village 10th 930 Fairway Court A & D Building Roof & Street Furniture Vail Village Sheahan Residence/New Residence Lot 1, Block 1, Bighorn 1st 3977 Lupine Drive Sweet Basil Awning Gore Creek Plaza Vail Village Lauterbach Residence Lot 19, Block 1, Potato Patch 775 Potato Patch Drive Sonnenalp Sign Sonnenalp Hotel Vail Village Nature Center Campfire Ring Ford Park Johnston Residence Lot 1, Lionsridge #2 Booth Creek Tot Lot Booth Creek Subdivision 1773 Lionsridge Loop Valli Hi Sign Lots C1 - C5, Lionsridge #1 Project Application Date May 5, 1986 ,4W Project Name: J• Randolph Schumacher & M.-L.auterba.ch duplex Project Description: Primar /Secondar Residence Contact Person and Phone Michael Lauterback 476-6944 owner, Address and Phone: . same Architect, Address and Phone: John Perki ns 49-4637 - Legal Description: Lot Comments: Motion by: Gwathmey Seconded. by: R V 19 Block Filing Potato Patch Design .Review Board , Zone Date 5/21/86 APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL 4-0 Minimum trees are to be 2" for deciduous trees and 6' for evergreens. The board gave their permission to move the house 0'-15 tote east. Architectural changes are to be drawn and presented to staff by—Friday, by—Friday,May 23. Conditions: Additional landscapin must be added to north elevation, north elevation to be restudie with the possibility of adding more interest via a chane in material etc., the fireplace in the west unit will be relocated per building code, and the garage doors on the east unit will be combined SLiri4Uro Town Planner ElStaff Approval Date: `L • Project Application Date S Project Name: � Project Description: sGLS Contact Person and Phone Y s Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: Motion by: Seconded b) Block Filing Design Review Board Summary: Town Planner Date , Zone DISAPPROVAL � ' r Project Application Date `a Project Name: 1�=� Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: M 2e CA,, 4,P— Legal Description: Lot Comments: Block Filing Design Review Board Date Motion by: Seconded by: APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL V,,T �,z - 14--0 Summary: Towl Itnner Date: ❑ Staff Approval , Zone Project Application Date Project Name: C� Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Block ,Filing Zone Comments: Design Review Board a Dateau 6*, Motion by: ti ,4� Seconded by: 'V y, (--I\— APPROVAL - APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL Summary: �k Town hanner ❑ Staff Approval Date; 1 Project Name: Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: Block Project Application Filing Date . , Zone - 10 Design Review Board aI I Motion by: ki 0 (1 Seconded by: APPROVAL Date DISAPPROVAL VIJ Town Panner Date ❑ Staff Approval 0 Project Name: Project Application Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: Block Piling Design Review Board ,.p Date Motion by: t �" Seconded by: APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL Summary: Ula.. Town Planner ❑ Staff Approval Date: , Zone - W Agenda Design Review Boaro„ 'M- . k. - `' p.m. Site Visits 1:30 p.m. 8 1) Mueller Wyman Duplex Lot 7, Vail Village 10th Final (2nd Review) TABLED to June 18th 7 2) Vistabaun Landscape and Drainage Vail Village Final (amendment to approved plan) Motion - Gwathmey Approved as submitted, coningent upon TOV engineers approval Second - Schultz VOTE 5-0 9 3) Sheahan Residence Final (1st Review) Lot IA, Block 1, Bighorn 1st Motion - Gwathmey 5-0 Approval Second - Riva 4 4) Kiandra - Sonnenalp Remodel Vail Village Final (1st Review) Motion - Gwathmey Second - Riva Approved as submitted, with modification to loading, mininal encroachment onto town property. Landscape & sign plans to be forthcoming. 2 5) Benway Nursery Final (1st Review) Volitor Property, 1031 South Frontage Road Motion - Riva Second - Sante Approved as submitted, without greenhouse #2. Approval valid only until . 15, 1986. oQk. 40 6) Hill Building Vail Village TABLED to June 18th 1 7) Hester Satellite Dish Final (1st Review) Lot 12, Block 1, Potato Patch Motion - Gwathmey Second - Sante VOTE 5-0 ApproveAas installed with pevision that dish be painted a more nuetral color. Color to be reviewed by staff 6 8) Gillett House Remodel Final (1st Review) Lot 22, Block 7, Vail Village 1st TABLED to June 18th 9 9) Sevfert Deck Final (1sr Review) Lot 12, Bighorn 4th Add. Motion - Ned Second - Riva VOTE 5-0 Approved as submitted, with understanding no set backs are violated. 3 10) Fall Line Remodel Final (1st Review) Matterhorn Subdivision, Unplatted Motion - Riva Second - Sante VOTE 5-0 . Approved as submitted, with modifications to landscape plan. 5 11 Tezla Lingerie Signage & Awning Final (1st Review) Motion - Ned Second - Riva VOTE 5-0 Approved as submitted with graphics on umbrella awning only. 10 12 Downey Residence Conceptual (1st Lot 20-6, Resub. Lot 10, Bighorn Review) NO VOTE Necessary. 13 Lauterbach Residence Lot 19, Potato Patch Filing 1 Motion - Sante Second - Riva 5-0 as submitted. 11 Old Business: Holiday Inn Trash Dumpster Cohn sunroof preliminary review Motion - Gwathmey Second - Riva 5-0 Preliminary Approval New Business Staff Approvals Members Present Ned Gwathmey Kathy Warren Grant Riva Roy Sante Sidney Schultz Staff Present Kristan Pritz Rick Pylman Betsy Rosolack Members Absent Pam Hopkins Staff Absent Tom Braun Agenda Design Revd fiord Mueller Wyman Duplex Lot 7, Vail Village 10th Vistabaun Landscape and Drainage Vail Village Sheahan Residence Lot 1A, Block 1, Bighorn 1st Kiandra - Sonnenalp Remodel Vail Village Benway Nursery Volitor Property, 1031 South Frontage Road Hill Building Vail Village Willow Place / Bishop Park Lot 1 & 2, Block 6, Vail Village 1st Hester Satellite Dish Lot 12, Block 1, Potato Patch Gillett House Remodel Lot 22, Block 7, Vail Village 1st Sevfert Deck Lot 12, Bighorn 4th Add. Fall Line Remodel Matterhorn Subdivision, Unplatted lie Project Name: ■ Project Description: 1 Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Project Application Date Legal Description: Lot Block Filing IIA r Zone Comments: Motion by: Seconded by:��1 Q APPROVAL Summary: Design Review Board Date DISAPPROVAL 0 Town Planner Date: ❑ Staff Approval Project Application Project Name: �" 0 TI 0 t Project Description: N3 Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Block Comments • Motion by: Seconded by: APPROVAL Vo k jc� —0 Summary: Date: a Date Filing Design Review Board Date DISAPPROVAL ❑ Staff Approval , Zone -- 0 Project Name: Project Application Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: Block Piling . Design Review Board Date Motion by: Seconded by: APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL Zone 0 Town Planner Date: ❑ Staff Approval Design Review Board Agenda June 18, 1986 3:00 p.m. Site Visits 12:30 p.m. 14 1 Cohn Sun Room, Ramshorn Lodge Final (2nd Review) Vail Village. Motion - Riva Consent Apprvd. 3-0 Second - Hopkins 3 2 Benway Nursey, Voliter Property, S. Frontage Rd. Final (2nd Review) Motion - Hopkins 24x26x9'4" building with Second - Riva black shadecloth remove by Oct. 15. sing 8' existing logo & colors. VOTE 3-0 11 3 Bishop Park/Willow Plaza Final (2nd Review) Lots 1 & 2, Block 6, Vail Village 1st Motion - Riva Second - Hopkins VOTE 3-0 Approved as submitted 10 4 Chair 16 Awning (Formerly Red Lion Lounge) Vail Village. Final (1st Review) TABLED TO JULY 2nd 2 5 Vail Tire Sales Sign, Voliter Property, S. Frontage Road. Final (1st Review) Motion - Riva Second - Hopkins VOTE 3-0 Approved as submitted, approval valid thru midnight of Nov. 30th, 1986. 15 6 Chair 12 Lifthouse Expansion, Gold Peak Final (1st Review) 1st) Motion -Hopkins Second -Riva VOTE 1-2 2nd) Motion -Grant Second -Hopkins VOTE 3-0 3rd) Motion -Grant Second -Hopkins VOTE 3-0 Approval contingent upon redesign of roof lines subject to staff approval. A. 8 7 Hill Building Remodel, Vail Village Final (2nd Review) • TABLE TO JULY 2nd Submit materials to staff ahead of time. 4 8 Gillett House Remodel Final (Tabled from June 4th meeting) Lot 22, Blk 7, Vail Village 1st. (Final) Motion - Riva Second - Hopkins VOTE 3-0 Approved as submitted 5 9 Tyler Residence Final (1st Review) Lot 3, Block 3, Vail Village 3rd. Motion - Hopkins Second - Riva VOTE 3-0 Final approval as submitted, with revisions to site plan regarding driveway. 16 10 Horton Garage Final Lot 9, Block 3, Bighorn 3rd Motion - Riva Second - Hopkins VOTE 3-0 Approval Consent. 1 11 Lionsmane Condo. Repaint Final (1st Review) Motion - Riva Second - Hopkins Consent Approval 3-0 7 12 Gorsuch Dining Deck, Final (1st Review) Vail Village TABLED 9 13 Sportstalker Sign, Final (1st Review) Vail Village Gold Peak House Motion - Hopkins Second - Riva Approval with conditions 3-0. 13 14 Vail Entry Design, Final (1st Review) Vail Village Preliminary Approval did not pass 2 against Pam Hopkins, Kathy Warren 1 for Grant Riva. • 6 15 Childrens Fountain Sculpture, Final (1st Review) Vail Village NO VOTE 12 16 Sonnenalp Sign Program, Final (1st Review) (Formerly Kiandra Lodge) Vail Village TABLE© TO JULY 2nd Old Business New Business Members Present Members Absent Pam Hopkins Roy Sante Kathy Warren Ned Grwathmey Grant Riva Staff Present Staff Absent Kristan Pritz Tom Braun Rick Pylman Project Application Date �a 40 Project Name:Project Description: Description: Contact Person and Phone 0 �" ��� 16 Owner, Address and Phone:y1V4---- : 0, W , � , 6o • x'70 - ;�-z Architect, Address and Phone: 7- A -7rW �i-- /- Legal Description: Lot Block Filing -!5P4? 7d � 11V-7 , Zone Comments: � f iii i%y�Y . /az / zon-A ((//��-'-5 / /.--V �j N olnee7n Design Review Board Motion by: - C a"t& Seconded by: . _ i ft L-" - APPROVAL o...,....,. 1 0 Date DISAPPROVAL own Planner Date: ❑ Staff Approval I• Project Application Project Name: — Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Date Legal Description: Lot Block Filing Zone Comments: Design Review Board Motion by: Seconded by: APPROVAL Date DISAPPROVAL T Town Planner ❑ Staff Approval Date: Project Application Project Name:��- Project Description:�L "� - I �`', a— J�4'0rt-w— Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: 51-3 Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot �Block Comments: Date Filing , Zone • Design Review Board Motion by:(' Seconded by; �W Date -- Summary: APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL LC) 1 Town Pla(nr�er Date: ( 1\V►I ❑ Staff Approval c Project Name: Project Description: Contact Person and Project Application Date — ] �] � + �` - 6�2— -- Owner, Address and Phone: , k - � �1 ^Architect, Address and Phone: _ �£' r•�' �� 7 `��tr c� (3:D\. X04-7 7 -- Legal Description: Lot Block Filing Zone Comments: y /+ { I., . fS�. A.... — _ <M+ i n .,. r - Arin11r L ` 1 Q� " K -A [v� FF� �i i/�A•i_ �O ylA hi' V V1CL 1 Design Review Board Motion by:T►� �m - Seconded by: APPROVAL Summary: Date �\ DISAPPROVAL - / } °1\ f i1rII-I�1 f n,. e i11 c -L . .n _ L. <'.-I 1<-) f!1 +.,,I Town Planner Date: ❑ Staff Approval Project Application Project Name: Cohn/Ramshorn Stan Room Addition Project Description: Greenhouse addition contact Person and Phone Dave Peel 476-4506 Owner, Address and Phone: Harold and Marshall Cohn 4411 N. Orange Blossom Tr Orlando F1 32804 Architect, Address and Phone:. Dave Peel Legal Description: Lot Unit 2 , Block Comments: Date May 28, 1986 Piling Ramshorn Lode , Zone • Design Review Board Date Motion by: Seconded by: i Summary: 6/4/86 APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL All 4N On i /Town Planner Date: J 1� ❑ Staff Approval Design Review Board Agenda June 18, 1986 Cohn Sun Room, Ramshorn Lodge, Vail Village Vail Tire Sales Sign, Voliter Property, S. Frontage Rd. Chair 12 Lifthouse expansion, Gold Peak Lionsmane Condo. Repaint Vail Entry Design, Vail Village Chair 16 Awning (Formerly Red Lion Lounge) Vail Village 0 Childrens Fountain Sculpture, Vail Village Bishop Park/Willow Plaza Lots 1 & 2, Block 6, Vail Village 1st Hill Building Remodel, Vail Village Corsuch Dining Deck, Vail Village Horton Garage Lot 9, Block 3, Bighorn 3rd Sportstalker Sign, Vail Village Gold Peak House Sonnenalp Sign Program, (Formerly Kiandra Lodge) Vail Village Tyler Residence Lot 3, Block 3, Vail Village 3rd. Design Review Board Agenda 3:00 p.m. 12:00 p.m. DRB & Staff Meeting Site Visits 1:15 p.m. 9 1) Main Vail Entry Design 2nd Review (Final) TABLED 7 2) Mueller Wyman Duplex 2nd Review (Final) Lot 7, Vail Village 10th Motion - Riva 5-0 Approved Second - Gwathmey See conditions 8 3) Vail Golfcourse Townhomes Entry Signs SDD Sunburst Drive 1st Review (Final) Motion - Sante 5-0 Approved Second - Riva See conditions 3 4) Gallery One Canopy & Sign 1st Review (Final) Lodge Promenade Consent Agenda Approval Motion - Gwathmey Approve as submitted Second - Riva Vote 5-0 4 5) Great American Lobster Co. Sign Creekside Bldg. Vail Village 1st Review (Final) Consent Agenda Approval Motion - Gwathmey Approve as submitted Second - Riva Vote 5-0 6 6) Chair 16 Awning 2nd Review (Final) Red Lion Bldg. Vail Village Consent Agenda Approval Motion - Gwathmey Approve as submitted Second - Riva Vote 5-0 11 5 7) Gorsuch Deck 1st Review (Final) - McBride Bldg, Vail Village TABLED 1 `B) Kinney Garage 1st Review (Final) Lot 13, Vail Meadows 1st Motion - Riva Approved as submitted Second - Sante Vote 5-0 2 9) McDonalds Sign Variance 1st Review (Final) Lot 2B, Val Das Schone #3 Motion for approval of sign variance request. Motion - Gwathmey Second - Riva (NOTE: motion denied) • Old Business New Business 0 Members Present Members Absent Kathy Warren Grant Riva Roy Sante Ned Gwathmey Pam Hopkins Staff Present Staff Absent Rick Pylman Kristan Pritz Tom Braun 7 DRI Al . 1). Kinney Garage Lot 13, Vail Meadows 1st. 51.64 South Main Gore Drive 2). Vail Golfcourse Townhomes Entry Signs Vail Golfcourse Townhomes Sunburst Drive & Golf Terrace 3).. Gallery One Canopy & Sign Lodge Promenade - Gore Creek Drive, Vail Village 4). Great American Lobster Co. Sign Creekside Building, Vail Village 5). Gorsuch Dining Deck, Gorsuch Cafe Gore Creek Drive, Vail Village . 6). Mueller Wyman Duplex Lot 7, Vail Village 10th y Project Name:" Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot , Block Comments: Motion by: �s Seconded by: APPROVAL Project Application Date Filing , Zone Design Review Board Date DISAPPROVAL D 0 �"%� Town Planner Date: —+[ )] U — ❑ Staff Approval H Project Name: Project Description Project Application Date aAe G eA L � ��TSr 0e- LJ ti t` N7 FNTi it r r _ ei F Contact Person and Phone IJ Lf w G Owner, Address and Phone: T! �"'� ►f} S �' a' 3 o aa 6A- ef`I 1 -Cc h 144(Z - Architect, Address and Phone: fir- - Legal Description: Lot Block Filing Zone Comments: t,. +tea � —�� d The Ree Zl�ry �c�i _ u is) (' FGA Me&IV Tree R V) Z16N Zatu�., Design Review Board �p Date Motion by: Seconded by: APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL Summary: Town Planner Date: Qaaz " � / ❑ Staff Approval • Project Name: Project Description: Contact Person and Phone is Project Application nate Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: Motion by: I.X!► t L-1 Seconded by: Kl1/ APPROVAL Block Filing Design Review Board Date DISAPPROVAL O Zone Town lanner ❑ Staff Approval Date: Project Application Project [Name: Yrf- Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: Motion by: Seconded by: i1/ll APPROVAL Summary: Town Planner Date: N Block Piling Date Design Review Board Date V DISAPPROVAL © Staff Approval , Zone Project Name: Project Descrip Project Application ter= Contact Person and Phone O Sf C 01% O ner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: �� 4Q �' ��/ r O� `0 trCAC ca- -- Legal Description: Lot Block Filing Zone Comments: `3 1 '0 Design Review Board Date Motion by: Seconded by:y}ya—u — APPROVAL n DISAPPROVAL V a Summary: Town Planner Date: ❑ Staff Approval Design Review Board Agenda July 16, 1986 �•Q� ��� �p�� 3:00 p.m. Site Visits 1:30 p.m. 4 1 Vail Trails East Repaint of Bldg. Lot 8-15, Blk 4, Vail Village 1st Filing 1st Review (Final) Motion - Gwathmey Approved as submitted Second - Sante VOTE 5-0 2 2 Lionshead Bar & Grill Awning Concert Hall Plaza, Lionshead 1st Review (Final) Motion - Gwathmey Approved as submitted Second - Riva VOTE 5-0 3 3 Villa Cortina Entryway Addition Lot 22, B1k 6 & H, Vail Village 2nd Filing 1st Review (Final) Motion - Gwathmey Second - Riva VOTE 5-0 Conceptual approval as submitted final drAwings to be resubmitted. 4 Hili Building Bridge Street, Vail Village 3rd Review (Final) (Color and Details) TABLED for final color selection.,, 5 Golfcourse Clubhouse Remodel Lot 3, Sunburst Filing #3/1778 Vail Valley Dr. 3rd Review (Final) Old Business Discussion Review of Public Projects Members Present Kathy Warren Roy Sante Ned Gwathmey Grant Riva Staff Present Rick Pylman Tom Braun TABLED New Business Members Absent Staff Absent Kristan Pritz 0 0 Design Review Board Agenda . July 16, 1986 1) Golfcourse Clubhouse Remodel Lot 3, Sunburst Filing #3 / 1778 Vail Valley Drive 2) Villa Cortina Entryway Addition Lot 22, Blk 6 & H, Vail Village 2nd Filing 3) Vail Trails East Repaint of Bldg. Lots 8-15, Blk 4, Vail Village 1st Filing 4) Lionshead Bar & Grill Awning Concert Hall Plaza, Lionshead 5) Vantage Point Landscape & Parking Plan Lots 1 & 2, Blk 1, Vail Lionshead Filing #1 06) Hill Building Bridge Street, Vail Village 0 DES10, REV;.,EW _BOARD, CA p.m. Site Visits 2:00 p.m. 3 1) Ambrosia Menu Box, Vail Village Inn Plaza Vail Village. Final 1st Submittal TABLED 4.2) Byers Residence (1 Lot 5, Blk 3, VV 3rd Filing Preliminary 1st Submittal 1 5 Motion - Gwathmey Approved Conceptually Second - Hopkins as submitted with under - VOTE 4-0 standing applicant study possibility of one curbcut. 3) Villa Cortina Entry Addition Lot 22, Blk 6 & H, VV 2nd Filing Final 2nd Submittal Motion - Hopkins Second - Gwathmey VOTE 2-0-1 4) Hill Building Vail Village Motion - Gwathmey Second - Hopkins Approved as submitted (Warren Absent) Final Color Selection Approved as submitted VOTE 4-0 2 Old Business Members Present Sante Gwathmey Hopkins Warren Staff Present Pylman Pritz 5) Sonnenalp Temporary Awning & Sign & Elevation Change. Sonnenalp Hotel, Vail Village. Final Motion - Hopkins Second - Sante VOTE 3-0 New Business Approved as submitted for all 3 items. Members Absent Riva Staff Absent • • DESIGN- A-61 ES I GN A-61W$QRRD 1) Ambrosia Menu Box, Vail Village Inn Plaza, Vail Village. aY Byers Residence Lot 5, Block 3, Vail Village 3rd Filing. 3) Sonnenalp Temporary Awning & Sign & Elevation Change Sonnenalp hotel, Vail Village. 4) Villa Cortina Entry Addition. Lot 22, B1k 6 & H, Vail Village 2nd Filing. and previously tabled items. Project Application Date Project Name: rx�.-S Project Description:' Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: Motion by: _ Seconded by: APPROVAL Block Filing , Zone Design Review Board Date IR � DISAPPROVAL '71101 S((> , Town Paan Date: fM ❑ Staff Approval Project Application Date Project Name: Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: . 4 -RIS Arch itect,.Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Block Filing Zone r Comments: n Design Review Board Date Motion by: Seconded by: APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL Summary: Town Planner Date: ❑ Staff Approval Design Review Board Agenda August 6, 1986 ok 3:00 p.m. SITE VISITS 2:00 p.m. 1. Vail Golfcourse Clubhouse Remodel 3rd Review (Final) Lot 3, Sunburst Filing #3 Motion - Gwathmey Approved w/modifications Second - Sante VOTE 4-0 -z_ `, () 5 2. Tuschman Residence Additions 1st Review (Final) Lot 1, Blk 1, Vail Village 8th Motion - Gwathmey Second - Sante Approved as submitted 1 3. Westwind Signs Westwind Bldg. unplatted, Lionshead 1st Filing 1st Review (Final) Motion - Sante Approved w/conditions Second - Gwathmey VOTE 4-0 4 4. Christiania Chateau Exterior 1st Review (Final) Modifications Lot D, Blk D, VV 1st Motion - Gwathmey Apprvd. as submitted Second - Sante 2 5. Byers Residence 2nd Review (Final) Lot 5, Blk 3, Vail Village 3rd Filing TABLED TO AUGUST 20, 1986 3 6. Ambrosia Menu Box Vail Village Inn Plaza TABLED TO AUGUST 20, 1986 Old Business New Business Discussion Items: I. Prim./Secondary Connection 2. Art on Private Property Members Present Members Absent Kathy Warren Diana Donavon � Roy Sante��- Ned Gwathmey Staff Present Staff Absent Kristan Pritz Rick Pylman Tom Braun Ll Project Application Project Name: — Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Date Legal Description: Lot Block Filing Comments: , Zone Design Review Board Date Motion by: Seconded by: APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL Summary: �,Q4 Town Planner ❑ Staff Approval Date: Project Name: Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Project Application 1K7- Owner -Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: Block Filing , Zone Design Review Board Date Motion by: Seconded by: APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL Summary: —Ci C Q W1 i tIr c? 1`1 V Ik I iA 1A Town Plann Date: ❑ Staff Approval Project Application Date Project Name: 10. Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Y Architect, Address and Phone:— - -- Legal Description: Lot Comments: Block Filing Design Review Board Motion by: Seconded by:� - APPROVAL i Summarw Town Planner Date: Date -310- Vt t [' DISAPPROVAL ❑ Staff Approval , Zone Project Name: Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: Motion by: _ Seconded by: APPROVAL Summary: r ec _ Town Planner Date: Block Project Application ) tL ! I Filing Design Review Board �r .ka Date A DISAPPROVAL ❑ Staff Approval Zone Project Application Date Q 6; $� .- Project Name: k'��'. Project Description: kDDITI20 S T s'iIIL� ,Qat l � Contact Person and Phone JoHl\d Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: c303-0 l (52 i 71a�__ __z Legal Description: Lot SDN 4 Block ON � Filing 714 Zone Comments: R. T�! i5 G(�S"XTc77ar`1 a G_rca1N� rz . Design Review Board : Ll Dateim L� Motion by: Seconded by: APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL INII1 'L WIN 1� 4 �► Summary: J1W 1 Town Planner ❑ Staff Approval Date: - �I t M- Project Application Date Project Name: Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: -)hGy-- R h - 10� 0� e� �VQ�"� �- Architect, Address and Phone: '�1t�1T11 SSV , 4--t.sr R� Legal Description: Lot Block Filing VAAL J LI,!=&g3. P 61�-T Zone Comments: Design Review Board Motion by: Date Seconded by: APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL To n Planner ❑ Staff Approval Date: rN' DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AGENDA. AUGUST : 20 . 3:00 P.M. SITE VISITS 1.00 P.M. 5 1 Ambrosia Menu Box, Vail Village Inn Plaza Spec. Dev. District #5, Lot 1, B 5D, VV 1st Filing 2nd Review, Final Approval TABLED BY APPLICANT 2 2 The Vail Mountain School Revised Landscape Plan Lot 12, Blk 2, Vail Village 12th Filing. 2nd Review, Final Approval Motion - Gwathmey VOTE 5-0 Approval Second - Sante • 7 3 Lionshead Parking Structure Repaint Lionshead 1st Filing. 1st Review, Final Approval TABLED 4 4 Vail National Bank, Exterior Alterations Mill Creek Court Building, Vail Village. 1st Review, Final Approval Motion - Gwathmey Second - Riva Approved as submitted w/cond. that galvanized conduit painted to match, applicant return & submit awning fabric & color. VOTE 5-0 5 Byers Residence 3rd Review, Final Approval Lot 5, Blk 3, Vail Village 3rd Filing. Motion - Sante Second - Riva Approved as submitted VOTE 5-0 1.1 0 3 1 6 Cascade Village Club & Parking Structure Landscape Plan / Special Dev. District #4 Westhaven Drive 3rd Review, Final Approval Motion - Gwathmey Second - Riva Approved w/cond. 1 double landscaping 2 raise berm 3 resolve sidewalk with staff. VOTE 5-0 7 Fellinger Addition 1st Review, Final App. 'r Vail Village 1st, Lot 118, B1k 7. Motion - Gwathmey Second - Hopkins Approved 5-0 8 Cadmus Garage & Guest Bedroom Addition ' Lot 17, Resub, of Tract E, Vail Village 11th Filing 1st Review, Final Approval Motion - Riva Second - Sante Approved with roof change 5-0 9 Gerwig Addition 1st Review, Final Appr. Lot 34, Vail Meadows Motion - Sante Second - Gwathmey Approved as submitted VOTE 5-0 • 1-3 • r Staff Approvals: New Business Members Present Kathy Warren Pam Hopkins Grant Riva Roy Sante Ned Gwathmey Staff Present Kristan Pritz Rick Pylman Vail Mountain School/3 property signs Halvorsen Balcony/95 Forest Road Old Business Hong Kong Fenestration Modification Approved 1 yr extension granted to Palmer/Walker Duplex Members Absent Staff Absent Project Application Date August 3.986 Project Name: -� Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Frank Fre er • Vail Ventures Ltd • 30314 76-6602 Owner, Address and Phone: Vail Ventures Ltd. 303/476-6602 1000 South Frontue Road Wes , Vail. QQ 81657 Architect, Address and Phone: CA 94133 - Robert L. Arnold Associates; 303/476-1147; 1000 South Frontage Road West " A " SDD #4 Vail, CO 81657 A portion of Area Legal Description: Lot Block ' — Filing Comments: Final Approval - Exterior Trim Doors & Louvers Exterior o Landsca e Plan 0. Design Review Board Motion by: Lto w Seconded by: APPROYAL Date L) DISAPPROVAL Zone ti %fown`Planner Date: ❑ Staff Approval Project Name: Project Descrip Contact Person Project Application Owner, Address and Phone: -- Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: Block Filing 0 Design Review Board • CAMotion by: Seconded by: APPROVAL Summary: Toowlri Wanner Date: Date DISAPPROVAL ❑ Staff Approval , Zone C J �11L �v 1.11Q, Project Application Date `; 'J�� - ZE; Project Name: Project Description: Contact Person and Phone �' S Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: �i�li / Legal Description: Lot A Block Filing 7eewe-2!7—PAPS Comments: �- Design Review Board Motion by: Seconded by: , APPROVAL Date DISAPPROVAL Date: Plan ❑ Staff Approval C �1 Project Name: Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: Motion by: - (-AlY&W i Seconded by: APPROVAL Block Project Application Filing Design Review Board Date , Zone Date f `i" DISAPPROVAL O Town Planner Date: ❑ Staff Approval Design Review Board Agenda ;September�� 3; .19861.�Se.3, 3:00 p.m. Discussion of Art on Private Land SITE VISITS 1:00 P.M. 5 1 Hughes Precious Metal Window Addition Red Lion Building, Vail Village Motion - Riva Second - Sante Consent - Approval VOTE 4-0 4 2 Racquet Club Tennis Courts Vail Racquet Club Condominiums Motion - Second - 3 Ski Club Vail Final Color Scheme • Tract B, Vail Village 7th Filing Motion - Riva Second - Sante 4-0 1 4 Boyle Addition Lot 20D, Bighorn Terrace Motion - Riva Second - Sante Consent - Approval VOTE.4-0 5 McDonalds Signage Motion - Riva Second - Sante Consent - Approval VOTE 4-0 3 6, Benkelman Addition Lot 16, Bighorn 4th/4542 Streamside Circle Motion for approval as submitted by Riva Second by Sante VOTE 0-4(motion denied) 7 Terrace Wing Modifications to approved plans Cascade Village Motion - Sante Second - Riva VOTE 4-0 All changes approved except for north elevation balconies 8 Cascade Village Mural for Athletic Club & Parking Facility Motion - Sante Second - Riva Approved VOTE 4-0 6 9 Crossroads Site Improvements Lot P, Block 5D, Vail Village 1st Motion - Riva Second - Sante 3-0 2 10 Messner Addition V' Lot 11, Bighorn 4th Addition Motion - Sante Second - Riva VOTE 4-0 with conditions 7 11 Kravis Addition {'- Lot 4, Blk 1, Vail Village 3rd Motion - Riva Second - Sante 3-1 Denial Staff Approvals: 1) Potato Patch Club/Slifer Addition Unit 25 2) Vail 21/Roof Drainage 3) Scott Garden Wall/Units 33 & 34 V. Potato Patch 4) Caster Deck Addition/Lot 16, Blk 2, VV 13th 5) Hanks Resid./New Window in Garage • • r . New Business Old Business Hong Kong Windows & Tree(NO Tree) Fila Shop Remodel Lionshead Structure Glof Tourney Members Present Members Absent Roy Sante Ned Gwathmey Grant Riva Kathy Warren Duane Piper Staff Present Staff Absent Kristan Pritz Rick Pylman Tom Braun Or Name: Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address.and Phone: Legal Description: Logit Commenta � N A Block Project Application �W r �S 1 - �S� Pesign Review Board } Motion by: Seconded by: Date kI , Zone Date . � 131 G - --r— D[SAPPROVAL l Town Planner Date: ���� ��✓ ❑ Staff Approval 0 Project Name: Project Description: Contact Person and Project Application Date 15 AQ:�7 6,6 _ Owner, Address and Phone: A Architect, Address and Phone: ;lurl&' l �l 97, 47-769© ---- �/ Legal Description: Lot � Block ,Filing,Zone Comments: Design Review Board Date )-3 T Motion by: k i Y Seconded by: APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL Summary: -SI wa__c_ (- Town PI a er ❑ Staff Approval Date: Project Application Date Project Name: v Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: Block , Filing Design Review Board Date Motion by: )-uh Seconded by: ` APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL , Zone 1 Town Panner Date: 31% 11 f ❑ Staff Approval Project Application Date Project Name T rraCascade Village Project Description: 120 Room addition to existing Westin Hotel. 476-6602 Contact Person and Phone Frank Fre er And Norris - Owner, Address and Phone: alar l Ventures,.i,td- , e Road_ West, Vail 476-6602 Architect, Address and Phone: ROMA Design Group 1,420, San`Fl:an risco, CA 4109 415-775-4350; SLP, 1100 Stout Street, Ste300, Denver, CO 80204,303-623-7031 Legal Description: Lot Block Filing Zone SD -4 Comments: Requesting approval of design modifications to building plans and specifications as outlined in Vail Ventures, Ltd. letter dated 8/18/86. Design Review Board Date Motion by: Seconded by: VVivo, - — APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL r " e�(If-T Vx own Planner Date: —913 /L ❑ Staff Approval 0 Project Name: Project Description: Contact Person and Phone 1..—�L"`� " lo Project Application Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: As -- egal Description:• • �� 1� • 1� �. • • - Jar Comments: . Design Review Board Q - Motion by: Seconded by: Summary: Date APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL viown P nner Date: " 13/ ❑ Staff Approval 10 Project Name: Project Application Project Description: Contact Person and Phone (6f)k UaW Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Block Filing , Zone Comments: Design Review Board 1 Date Motion by: �V 61 Seconded by: �Wk APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL Summary: Town Planner ❑ Staff Approval Date: A-7 1 0 Project Name: Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: Block Project Application Filing 9 1Design Review Board Motion by: Seconded by: APPROVAL t C) Summary: Town Planner Date: -111*� Date Date DISAPPROVAL ❑ Staff Approval , Zone • Project Application Date August 18, 1986 Project Name: Primary/Secondary Project Description: Bill Reslock, Gordon Pierce Contact Person and Phone 476-4433 Rpnry & Carolvne Kravis, 740 Park Avenue Owner, Address and Phone: New York, NY 10021 212-288-0373 Gordon R. Pierce, Architect Architect, Address and Phone: 1000 South Frontage Road.West, Vail, CO A .1 Legal Description: Lot Comments: Motion by: Seconded by: APPROVAL Town Planner Date: Block Piling 81657 V.V. 3rd Design Review Board Date 476-4433 R-3 Zone DISAPPROVAL �Pr tisk Er s 0, D VD MIMIMEN I t ► 1Jr ❑ Staff Approval AGENDA DESIGN REVIEW BOARD September 17, 1986 17, 3:00 p.m. 1:00 P.M. Site Visits Agenda Items 4 1. Frampton Residence Landscaping Lot 3, Block 3, Vail Village 11th Filing Motion - Grant Riva Second - Ned Gwathmey approved 5-0 with changes to plan 3 2. Messner Landscape Plan Lot 11, Bighorn 4th Filing Withdrawn - staff will handle 7 3. Pease & Schutter Deck Addition Lot 5, Vail Village 3rd Filing Motion - Ned Gwathmey Second - Grant Riva Approved 4-0 5 4. Svanoe Addition . Lot 1, Vail Valley 2nd Filing Motion - Ned Gwathmey Second - Grant Riva Approved 4-0 1 5. Davies Residence Lot 12, Resubdivision of Lot 7, Block 2, Potato Patch Motion - Roy Sante Second - Grant Riva Approved 5-0 with conditions 9 6. Christy Sports Awning Vail Village Tabled until October 2, 1986 11. 7. Vail Police Dept. Microwave antenna Vail Municipal Building Motion - Ned Gwathmey Second - Roy Sante Approved 5-0 with conditions 10 8. Holiday Inn Sign Variance Lot C, Vail Village 2nd Filing Motion - New Gwathmey Second - Roy Sante Denial 5-0 per staff memo 8 9. Drisko Residence Addition t/ Lot 18, Block 7, Vail Village 1st Filing Motion Ned Gwathmey Second - Grant Riva Approved 4-0 6 10. Village Entry Way Design Vail Village Entry Way Motion - New Gwathmey Second - Grant Riva Approved 5-0 per submittal 2 11. Benkelman Garage & Addition Lot 16, Bighorn 4th Filing Motion - Roy Sante Second - Grant Riva Approved 5-0 as submitted Old Business: Members Present: New Gwathmey Kathy Warren Grant Riva Roy Sante Peggy Osterfoss New Business: Members Absent: 0 Project Name: Project Description: Contact Person and Project Application Date Owner, Address and Phone: \<-- - Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Block Filing Zone Comments: 0 Design Review Board Motion by: Seconded by: r Summary: Date DISAPPROVAL \T,,wn Plz r r V ❑ Staff Approval Date: \ 'A Project Application Project Name:' Date—0 [ Project Description: _ Contact Person and Phone o c � C� C� `�h - — - -- - Owner, Address and Phone:: ' 0 1 Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: Block Filing U� '1 Zone Motion by: _ Seconded by: (AL Design Review Board s - N Summary: ' �tR� �_ (J;L� l I---) -t-mt�7- Town Planner (�/' Dater Date DISAPPROVAL ❑ Staff Approval Project !Name: — Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Block Comments: Project Application Date Filing Zone Design Review Board Date Motion by: SIftt Seconded by: APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL 4— I i r t b� 0 . Town Planner Date: ❑ Staff Approval Project Name: Project Descrip Project Application Date – Contact Person and Phone aw6m Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone:' h., � � �i� 4 , zone Legal Description: Lot h Block ,Filing V 4 '�aGf•Q — - Comments: Design Review Board Date Motion by: Seconded by: APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL Summary: L{ Town Planner ElStaff Approval Date: I* Project Name: Project Descrip Contact Persor Project Application nates Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: Motion by: Seconded by: Summary: Date: APPROVAL Town Planner Block Filing Zone Design Review Board K Date-- J DISAPPROVAL ❑ Staff Approval Project Name: \J(--' Project Description: Contact Person and Phom Owner, Address and Phone: Project Application Date . VI Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot mil—, Block Comments: Motion by: _ Seconded by: APPROVAL Filing Design Review Board Date DISAPPROVAL , Zone la V 1 L y'-1 W— Town Planner Date: 9) R I I L ❑ Staff Approval u Site Visits 1:00 P.M. Design Revd ew _hoard Agenda October 1, 186 3:00 p.m. 1) Christy Sports Awning Motion - Riva Second - Sante VOTE 4-0 Approved as submitted contingent upon approval by T.O.V. operational departments. 4 2) Vail Select Signage �G Treetops Plaza, Lionshead. Motion - Sante Second - Riva VOTE 4-0 Check height of ground for minimum clearance 3 3) Purcells Signage Lifthouse Lodge, Lionshead. Motion - Riva Second - Sante VOTE 4-0 Approved a submitted with location 7 colors as discussed, color green to match trim. 7 4) Sports Stalker Sign Golden Peak house, Vail Village Motion - Riva Second - Sante VOTE 4-0 Approved as submitted w/condition that light not extend more than 2 feet from wall and the fixture be painted to match the building. 2 5) Enzian Lodge Color Change Lot 1, Block 2, Vail Lionshead 3rd. Motion - Sante Second - Riva VOTE 4-0 Building color to Bid 42, color end at inside corner, stair trim to be green. \ 1 6) West Vail Mall Color Change West Vail Mall, West Vail TABLED for further review by applicant. 5 7) Ambrosia Sign Variance Ambrosia Restaurant, Vail Village Inn. Motion - to approve sign variance by Riva, Second - by Sante VOTE 2-2 Recommendation to council to deny variance. 8 8) Aspen Alley Storefront Remodel Lazier Arcade, Wall Street Building. Conceptual approval, no motion required. 9 Williams Remodel Lot 13, Bighorn Sub. Conceptual approval, no motion required. 10 10) Crotzer Addition -11" Lot 5, Block 4, Bighorn 5th. Motion - Osterfoss Second - Riva VOTE 4-0 Approved as submitted w/condition that square footage calculations meet zoning regulations. STAFF APPROVALS: Sonnenalp-West Bldg./Bavaria Haus John Galt Mountaineering Sign Matterson Gallery. Sign Evans Hot Tub & Deck Addition Roe Messner/Landscape Plan 7 x„ NEW BUSINESS MEMBERS PRESENT Kathy Warren Roy Sante Grant Riva Peggy Osterfoss STAFF PRESENT Kristan Pritz Rick Pylman OLD BUSINESS MEMBERS ABSENT Ned Gwathmey STAFF ABSENT �� a Project Application ,11 gCP Date September 15, 1986 . Project Name: E lle Project Description: and Contact Person and Phone Steve Palmer, 'sox 722968, Steamboat Springs, Co 80427 .879-4536) Owner, Address and Phone: SteaMboat Springs, CO 804 77 829-4536 — Architect, Address and Phone: Steamboat Architectural al Associates, BOX 772210, Steamboat Sxrings GO 80477 879-0819 Units 105, 106, 107 Golden Peak House, 278 Hanson Ranch Road, Legal Description: Lot Block — Filing Zone Vail, Colorado Comments: Re uest for approval on sin and lighting for Design Review Meeting October 1, 1986. Store frontage 51 ft. 0 Design Review Board aG`'.Qrx,� QJ Motion by: Seconded by: , Date id ,� -• VAL 41f Summar y: 0 42�� �T,�-A Planner ❑Staff Approval /141 Design Rei Qar�d genlda �� _ _..3:00 p.m. SITE VISITS 12:30 p.m. 1 1 West Vail Mall Color Change West Vail Mall, West Vail (Tabled at 10/1/86 meeting) (Final Requested) Motion -Ned Second -Grant W/Provision holes be removed & use more intense color 3/1 & virgine pink for accent. VOTE 4--0 approval 9 2 Aspen Alley Storefront Remodel Lazier Arcade, Wall Street Building (Has Conceptual Approval) (Final Approval Req.) TABLED i 12 3 Williams Remodel (Has Conceptual Approval) Lot 13, Bighorn Sub. (Final Approval Required) TABLED 3 4 Wicked West Storefront Remodel Gondola Building, Lionshead (Final Approval) Motion- Ned Second -Riva VOTE 4-0 approval. Tree to remain 6 5 Lodge South Entry (Final Approval) Lodge South Condominiums, Vail Village. Motion -Riva VOTE 4-0 approved. 2 6 Uptown Bar & Grill Signage Vail 21 Building, Lionshead (Final Approval) Motion -Riva Second -Ned VOTE 4-0 3 signs in neon as submited. One vestibule at entry. 4 7 Lionshead Centre Building Staircase/walkway Lionshead Centre Building, Lionshead (Final Approval) 11 8 Crossroads Awning Signage & Directory 141 E. Meadow Drive Block 5D, Vail Village 1st (Final Approval) Motion -Riva Second -Ned VOTE 4-0 10 9 Slifer Building Window Addition Lot A, Block 5, Vail Village/230 Bridge Street (Final Approval) is Motion-Gwathmey Second -Riva consent aganda 4-0 approved. 7 10 Squash Blossom Awning (Final Approval) 198 Gore Creek Drive Lodge Promenade, Vail Village TABLED Applicant did not appear at the meeting. 8 11 Maui Traders Storefront (Final Approval) 225 Wall St. / Lazier Wall St. Arcade Building. Motion-Gwathmey Second -Riva Approved 4-0 • STAFF APPROVALS: Sandstone Park Unit C-3/New Window Vail Prof. Bldg./Century 21 Signage OLD BUSINESS: Sonnenalp Water Feature & Sculpture (site visit only) NEW BUSINESS: MEMBERS PRESENT Peggy Osterfoss Kathy Warren Ned Gwathmey Grant Riva STAFF PRESENT Kristan Pritz Rick Pylman Betsy Rosol ack (1) Artisan's Sign (2) Great American Lobster Company • MEMBERS ABSENT Roy Sante STAFF ABSENT 1J��'IL�''fRAIL DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AGENDA 1986 Uptown Bar & Grill Signage. Vail 21 Building, Lionshead Wicked West Storefront Remodel Gondola Building, Lionshead Crossroads Awning Signage & Directory 141 East Meadow Drive Vail Village 1st Lot P, Block 5D Slifer Building Window Addition Lot A, Block 5, Vail Village 230 Bridge Street Squash. Blossom Awning 198 Gore Creek Drive Lodge Promenode, Vail Village Maui Traders Storefront 225. Wall Street Lazier Wall Street Arcade Building Lodge South Entry Lodge South Condominiums, Vail Village Lionshead Centre Building Staircase/walkway Lionshead Centre Building, Lionshead and Tabled items Project Application Date 7-5c;p—) �L - Project Name: S&�90L-<- Project Description: A vJ3� t ri G �1 ,1 Contact Person and Phone t - �jT �� A - IL ZI ZI �'�5 58`T5 'R'jovn- Owner, Address and Phone: �& r t-' 411 E:643- -41 - Architect, d3 - Architect, Address and Phone: n �f + - j m'9'5�0.-w Q- SZ`DG 10 5f Legal Description: Lot Block Filing Comments: _ t 3i�-,)c�� V �I z � CiZ ea -A t70 iA.N I i 5 Tr 9 Design Review Board Motion by: IF Iy - Seconded by: �! APPROVAL �U , Zone Date O l �� DISAPPROVAL Ai 4P -.V 1 4 ' WV_ul/�:[ J `116? s s I 'I-� � !101 '1�0 O,P-71D iti k ' S L-J'-�a , 4!�2h-64-C-4 7a. Town anner Date: Scgn o� sJu ❑ Staff Approval 0 Project Name: Project Description. Project Application rlatP Contact Person and Phone UtA()LM3L__jLtllIL1_ `t Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Block Filing Comments: , Zone • Design Review Board Date Motion by: La Seconded by: APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL s L Town Pia er Date: `� h �0 ❑ Staff Approval * Project Name: • Project Descrip Project Application Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: _6 L q w ��- Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: Motion by: Seconded by: Summary: Date APPROVAL Town Planner ID) Block Filing Design Review Board Date DISAPPROVAL ❑ Staff Approval , Zone Project Application October 7, 1986 Date . Project Name: This Wicked West Remodel Project Description: Remodel to storefront - interior to remain the same. Contact Person and Phone Dean Liotta 926-3738 Owner, Address and Phone: Dean Liotta P.O. Box 1143 Vail, Colorado 81658 Architect, Address and Phone: Morter Architects 476-5105 143 E Meadow Drive Vail,.Colorado 81657 Part of Vail/Lionshead Legal Description: Lot 4 Block 1 Filing _ First Filing Zone Comments: 5 l lel 6 A-) Design Review Board Motion by: Seconded by: APPROVAL 0 Summary:�L c�y4 Town Planner Date: ` O l 1.3 Date 7 /'' DISAPPROVAL ❑ Staff Approval Project Application . Project Name: MAUI TRADERS STORE FRONT Project Description: Contact Person and Phone CHUCK STRUVE 453-9531 Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: Lazier Arcade 225 Wall Street Block_ — Filing Design Review Board Motion by: Seconded by: /?!7JLt-'e__ APPROVAL its S Summary: _T Town Planner Date: Date 10/3/86 , Zone r S Date 10/1,x/86 DISAPPROVAL ❑ Staff Approval Project Application Project Name: LODGE SOUTH. TOWER LOBBY Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Charles Duncan 524-7574 Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: Block Filing Date 10/3/86 , Zone Design Review Board 9 1O/15/86 Motion by: Seconded by: APPROVAL V CO Date DISAPPROVAL Summary: �S G Town Planner Date: t' 0 `S © Staff Approval Site Visits 1:45 p.m. 1 4 L 5 2 Design Review Board Agenda 3':00._p.m. 1 Aspen Alley Storef=ront (Tabled) (Final App.) Lazier Building, Wall street, Vail Village Motion -Sante Second -Riva VOTE 5-0 Approved as submitted 2 Eagle Pointe Sign (previously called Fall Line) 1500 Matterhorn Circle (Final App.) Motion -Ned Second -Sante VOTE 5-0 Consent Approval 3 Holiday Inn Sign Variance (Final App.) Lot C, Vail Village 2nd / 13 S. Frontage Rd. 2nd Review. Motion -Ned Second -Sante VOTE 5-0 With Conditions 4 Squash Blossom Sign (Tabled) (Final App.) Lot ABC, Block 5-C, Vail Village Lodge Promenade. Motion -Sante Second -Ned VOTE 5-0 Approved with conditions 5 Vail Sweater Company Awning One Vail Place, Vail Village. Motion -Riva Second -Ned VOTE 5-0 Approved w/no lighting considerations -awning to cover shingles on side: Existing sign to be removed. 6 Marriott Mark Resort Sign Variance Lots 4&7, Blk 1, Lionshead 3rd / 715 W. Lionshead Circle. (Tabled by Applicant) (Final App.) 8 7 Crossroads Sign Program (Final App.) Lot P, Block 5-D, Vail Village 1st. Motion -Ned Second -Riva VOTE 4-0-1 Labstention Peggy Osterfoss 7 8 Memories & Eyepieces Storefronts & Signs Lot B, Blk 2, Vail Village/Golden Peak House (Final App.) Motion -Ned Second -Riva VOTE 5-0 Approved with conditions. 9 Lodge South Condominiums Sign Lot A,B,C, Blk 5-C, Vail Village 1st Motion -Sante Second -Riva Approved if redesigned to be w/in 20. 3 10 Four Way Stop Improvements (Final App.) Main Vail Exit. Motion -Ned Second -Sante VOTE 5-0 Consent approval STAFF APPROVALS: 1) Linseed Oil on East Unit/Walt Olson Lot 1, Vail Village 10th 2) Vail Associates, Add 1 Max Machine at Vail Village ticket area. 3) Semmer Remodel Unit 4A, Texas Townhomes. 4) McKinley's Grill Sign / Potato Patch Club 5) Steep' N'Deep Sign / Lobby of Gondola Bldg. NEW BUSINESS: MEMBERS PRESENT Kathy Warren Peggy Osterfoss Roy Sante Grant Riva Ned Gwathmey STAFF PRESENT Kristan Pritz Rick Pylman Susan Scanlan Betsy Rosolack MEMBERS ABSENT STAFF ABSENT • • VAIL TRAIL Rekvlew Board Agenda 1) Eagle Pointe Sign (previously called Fall Line) (Final App.) 1500 Matterhorn Circle. 2) Holiday Inn Sign Variance (Final App.) Vail Village 2nd, Lot C, 13 South Frontage Rd. 2nd review. 3) Squash Blossom Sian TABLED (Final App.) Lodge Promenade Vail Village 1st, Lot A,B,C, Block 5-C. 4) Vail Sweater Company Awning c One Vail Place, Vail Village. 5) Marriott Mark Resort Sign Variance. (Final App.) 715 W. Lionshead Circle,-Lionshead. Block 1, Lot 4 & 7 Vail Lionshead 3rd. 6) Crossroads Sign Program (Final App.) Vail Village Ist, Block 5-D, Lot P. 7) Memories & Eyepieces Storefronts .& Signs (Final App.) Golden Peak House, Vail Village Ist, Block 2, Lot B. 8) Four Way Stop Improvements, Main Vail Exit. (Final App.) Separate from the above items. Sign Variance Total Beauty Center Sign Variance: Vail Village Inn Phase II, 500 Vail Road November 19, 1986 is Project Application Date October 13, 1986 nt��i' Project Name.' Project Description: 54 residential condominium units with common facilities i A A Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: ICa i ser F. Morcus Marr iot I s Mark P 476-4444 Architect, Address and Phone: Mi chael G. P949-5835 Legal Description: Lot (Unplatted) Bloc 00 Matterhorn Fiiingl e, West Vail) Comments: • Design Review Board Date Motion by: Seconded by: APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL Summary: own Planner ❑ Staff Approval Date: Zone HDMF fil Project Application Date October 13, 1986 nt��i' Project Name.' Project Description: 54 residential condominium units with common facilities i A A Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: ICa i ser F. Morcus Marr iot I s Mark P 476-4444 Architect, Address and Phone: Mi chael G. P949-5835 Legal Description: Lot (Unplatted) Bloc 00 Matterhorn Fiiingl e, West Vail) Comments: • Design Review Board Date Motion by: Seconded by: APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL Summary: own Planner ❑ Staff Approval Date: Zone HDMF Project Name:===i Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: VA Block 911 —, Filing o • Design Review Board Motion by: Seconded by: APPROVAL 1Y���— •► —� •' itAl �lf�7LI'AM , j, ti- � , / Town Planner Date: 171U Date 1 Z DISAPPROVAL Zone �A / z 0 -/-D t� � ❑ Staff Approval Project Application Date ioZi6/86 - Project Name:�� ^ `' Project Description: Quarter circle style XYMM$N[ storefront M awning with artwork. Contact Person and Phone Same as owner Owner, Address and Phone: Tom Boselli Box J928 Vail 81658 476-484.9 Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Block Filing Zone Comments: Design Review Board Date Motion by: Seconded by: APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL 1 (7M WPM 4 d, Town Planner Date: fA i� ❑ Staff Approval Project Name: v. Project Description:�s Contact Person and Phone Project Application Date �' —�� Owner, Address and Phone: . ��� . " " Architect, Address and Phone: Q"' Legal Description: Lot Block Filing Zone Comments: Design Review Board Motion by: - Seconded by: ClAPPROVAL Date DISAPPROVAL Town Planner Date ❑ Staff Approval 0 Project N Project Description: Project Application Date 39Yom: Contact Person and Phone i x'17 �ss 4-4— !) r G 1 / Owner, Address and Phoner: r�rl ■ • Architect, Address and Phone: �pv� -}fig i ,D r --f ' -_T--.-" I , �, F-� ," =J Legal Description: Lot Block Filing Zone Comments: r • Design Review Board Date Motion by: Seconded by: 1V APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL f) "at Summary: AM 1NOcLi W, -OYVV)rVL via Abw�AAL 4&' LiI 1 0 &' Wi Pf h,dl I l Town Planner Q S a pproval,)' Date: �`� V Desi gn�.Re- i ew ; BRgr# A en -da 3.00 p.m. Site Visits 1:45 p.m. 2 1 Vail Associates Lionshead Ticket Office Signage Vail Lionshead Motion-Gwathmey Second-Osterfoss Approval 3-0 5 2 Scandia Shop Awning Lodge Promenade (first review) Motion-Gwathmey Second-Osteross Approval 3-0 1 3 Vantage Point Landscape Plan (first review) TABLED until after December 27th. 8 4 Sonnenalp Signage & Ski Locker Addition Sonnenalp Hotel, Vail Village (first review) Motion-Gwathmey Second-Osterfoss Approved 3-0 9 5 Scotch on the Rockies Awning Sonnenalp Hotel, Vail Village (first review) Motion-Gwathmey Second-Osterfoss Approved 3-0 7 6 Total Beauty Centre Sign Variance Vail Village Inn, Vail Village TABLED by applicant to December 3rd. 3 7 Lionshead Arcade Sign Lionshead Motion-Gwathmey Second-Osterfoss Approval 3-0 Two Bldg identification signs. 4. 8 Solar Vail Sign 501 North Frontage Road Motion-Ostefoss Second-Gwathmey Approval 3-0 6. 9. Crazy Shirts Sign Casino Building, Vail Village Motion-Gwathmey Second-Osterfoss Approval 3-0 STAFF APPROVALS: 1) The Hamlet/increase size of window. 2) Unit B Pease/Shutter - Sm. addition to Garage. 3) Coldstream, Window addition Unit 13. 4) Laura's Fudge Shop Door Addition/Crossroads Bldg. NEW BUSINESS: MEMBERS PRESENT Kathy Warren Peggy Osterfoss Ned Gwathmey STAFF PRESENT Kristan Pritz Rick Pylman Betsy Rosolack MEMBERS ABSENT Roy Sante Grant Riva STAFF ABSENT Project Application Date 11/3/86 1ii0 t3L'li1hG 111 F ASH 1 i Project Name: F Project Description: sign "LIFT TICKETS" on main L8 ticket offices Contact Person and Phone u_ sloe Mary- - -- 476-5601 Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: -C Block Motion by: A. 4/1 2 Seconded by: APPROV L Summary: Town Planner Date: Filing — Design Review Board Date 11/19/86 DISAPPROVAL ❑ Staff Approval , Zone 0 Project Name: Project Descrip Project Application Date% b Contact• and Phone ZfLArZA* ��1+L►���7i/ESE �. 1:x.,1.. i Owner, Address and Phone: `J. Architect, Address and Phone: T 00 XV/4 )Awlvvig Legal Description; Lot /y(pT.E`L Block C/1�7" Filing .i'�a`4�PE' /VA�f Zone Comments: • Design Review Board Motion by: Seconded by: APPROVAL Date DISAPPROVAL Town Planner Date: 11.119 1 ❑ Staff Approval Project Application w� Mntfficati Protect Name: �. Project Description: Kit Williams 476-0906 Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Date 11/7/86 Architect, Address and Phone:. Legal Description: Lot Block Filing Zone Comments: nn G -r . Design Review Board Date 12/3/86 Motion by: ' `� ' ' h -e Seconded by: 05 �Lk--f'o APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL 3-0 Summary: Town Planner ❑ Staff Approval Date: Project Application Date 11/7Z86 1 0 Project Name: • III Project Description: Contact Person and Phone KIT WILLIAMS 476-0906 Owner, Address and Phone: Bob La7.ier - - Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: Block Motion : bY Seconded by: APPROVAL Summary: 1 z- C - & r6a CYC - Town Planner Date: Filing Design Review Board Date 12/3/86 DISAPPROVAL ❑ Staff Approval Zone Project Application Date Project Name:$- Project Description: Sign for shop on Bridge St in Casino Bldg Contact Person and Phone Bob Zeeb 949-5152 Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: 11/10/86 Legal Description: Lot Block Filing Zone Comments: -60 . Design Review Board Date 12/3/86 Motion by: Seconded by: APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL_ U Summary: 0 '14 fGe.4, . e Town Planner Date: ❑ Staff Approval VAIL TRAIL DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AGENDA December 3, 1986 aa'e' 31 Irg(o Scotch on the Rockies Sign Sonnenalp 'H Lionshead Arcade Sign Lionshead Solar Vail Sign 501 North Frontage Road Crazy Shirts Sign Casino Building, Vail Village Video Explosions Sign Treetops Plaza Total Beauty Centre Sign Vail Village Inn, Vail Village Design Review Board Agenda - L)ebertl7 1$5..`: 300 p.m. 12:00 - 1:15p.m. Primary Secondary Unit Connection: Staff Presentation SITE VISITS 1:15 p.m. 4 1 Scotch on the Rockies Sign Variance Sonnenalp, Swiss Chalet Building Motion-Gwathmey Second -Riva Denial 5-0 1 2 Cascade Club Signage Cascade Village Motion-Gwathmey Second -Sante Approved 5-0 3 Hill Building Awnings • Hill Building, Vail Village Motion -Riva Second-Gwathmey Approved as submitted 5-0 3 4 Total Beauty Centre Sign Variance Phase II, Vail Village Inn Applicant Tabled to January 7th meeting 2&7 5 Vail Associates Information Booths Lionshead and Vail Village Motion-Gwathmey Second -Sante Approved with conditions 4-1 5 6 Crossroads Unit Addition / Dragone Unit C-4 Crossroads Development Motion-Gwathmey Second -Sante Approved 5-0 6 7 Crossroads Directories Crossroads Development Motion -Sante Second -Riva 5-0 8 8 Devoe Residence Lot 18, Vail Meadows Filing #1 Conceptual 9 9 Gerwig Duplex Lot 34, Vail Meadows Filing #1 Conceptual 10 Kowloon Restaurant Entry & Signage Conceptual STAFF APPROVALS: Cut -It -Out Sign, Wall Street Bldg. Vail 21 Sculptures Lionshead Arcade Sculpture Charlies Shirts Sign Sandstone 70 Condos./small landscaping CMC Renovation VA Signs "Group Sales" NEW BUSINESS: MEMBERS PRESENT Kathy Warren Brian Hobbs Roy Sante Grant Riva Ned Gwathmey STAFF PRESENT Kristan Rick MEMBERS ABSENT STAFF ABSENT 0 • • VAI L TRAIL. Design Review Board Agenda December 17, 1986 -------------------------------------------------- Cascade Club Signage Cascade Village Hill Building Awnings Hill Building Vail Village Vail Associates Information Booths Lionshead & Vail Village Crossroads Unit Addition: Dragene Unit E-4 Crossroads Development Crossroads Directories . Crossroads Development Devoe Residence Lot 18, Vail Meadows Filing 1st Gerwig Duplex Lot 34, Vail Meadows Filing 1st Total Beauty Centre Sign Variance Phase II, Vail Village Inn Scotch on the Rockies Sign Variance Sonnenalp, Swiss Chalet Building Project Application Date — Project Name: _ Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: Block Filing • Design Review Board Date Motion by: Seconded by: APPROVAL _ & DISAPPROVAL Zone .0 K Toiwn Planner Date: ❑ Staff Approval Project Applicationlsfc=� Date 62/4 Project Name: Project Description: Contact Person and Phone + �� 47 to (¢Low --- - --- -- Owner, Address and Phone: vQ--'&A19 S 1l�J 02 -- Zone 2 Architect, Address and Phone: --- Legal Description: Lot Block Filing Zone Design Review Board Date Motion by: I Seconded APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL G a Summary: Town Planner Date:al 10 ❑ Staff Approval • Project !Name: Project Description: Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: Legal Description: Lot Comments: Block Project Application Filing Date , Zone Design Review Board Date Motion by: v Seconded by: V� — APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL l ! - — — Summary: •i< Town Planner Date: _ 1 - ❑ Staff Approval 10 Project Name: Project Desch Project Application Date Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Ab� LI 6m - Architect, Address and Phone: _ I P-- 141 e hr t -le 9 0 Legal Description: Lot �" Block Filing Zone Comments: —L��`� Motion by: 6ATt'w Seconded by: -SaAi Summary: Design Review Board Date APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL '1�- 0 10ri, TAA "- • Tow'nn Planner � ❑ Staff Approval Date: i !1 ALJ fowl 75 south frontage road vall, colorado 81657 (303)476-7000 March 24, 1986 Craig Snowdon Snowdon and Hopkin Architects 201 Gore Creek Drive Vail, Colorado 81657 office of community development RE: Plaza Lodge Remodel: Comments from the December Design Review Board meeting on March 19, 1986. Dear Craig, On March 19, 1986, the Design Review Board made the following comments: 1) The possibility of softening the hard corner of the trash room should be studied. 2) Details on the planter should be presented at the next meeting. 3) Signage should be studied on the south west corner of Christy Sports. It was suggested that perhaps the triangular projection should be removed and instead a double sided sign should be added for signage. 4) Details on landscaping for the building and the landscape island should be submitted. This would also include details on the bench and trash receptacle for the landscape island. 5) The collector drains should be studied to make sure that the drainage buildup dose not conflict with windows. 6) Ice and snow buildup from the roof should be studied as to how it effects the hot tub areas. 7) The band that extends around the south east corner of the remodel on the second floor should be consistent with the existing band on the west elevation. 8) The design considerations for the commercial core one district should be submitted 9) A complete set of drawings for Design Review Board should be submitted. As you know, I will be out of town on April 2. Either Tom Braun or Rick Pylman will be at the meeting in my place. Please submit this material by March 28, 1986. 1 would appreciate getting the material in the morning so that I can familiarize one of the other planners with the project. If you have any further questions please feel free to give me a call. Sincerely, Kristan Pritz Town Planner KP:jlt T • 1 • a SEQUENCE OF EVENTS FOR KIDSPORTS AWNING March 27, 1986 This sequence concerning the awning was determined by listening to tapes of the Design Review Board meetings, notes in my calendar, as well as letters written to r .�:ul Treacy. November 6, 1985 At the Design Review Board meeting, Paul Treacy, Brad Henry, and Daniel Barry were present. Fred Hibberd was also at the meeting. The board discussed for at least an hour the shape of the awnings and how they would be attached to the building. Toward the end of the meeting it became clear that the applicants wanted to have two signs on their awning. Kristan said that it would be possible to have the two signs, as we have allowed other people to have two-sided signs on bubble awnings and back to back signs on square awnings. At that time, she also stated that she was unaware that the submittal had included two signs. The board ended up agreeing on the colors for the awnings and lettering for each business. The meeting concluded by the Design Review Board asking for further information on the construction of the awnings, locations and numbers of signage and square footage for the signage. The applicant said that they would hand deliver the drawings in a few days to the staff and then the staff could call the DRB.and invite them to look at the drawings. Kristan al -so mentioned to the applicants the possibility of using window signs in place of one of the signs on the awnings. Technically the item was tabled with the understanding that the Design Review Board could make a decision on the awnings without a formal meeting if everyone agreed that the revised design was reasonable. The applicants also wanted to check with Tom Rau to see if he would be willing to change his awning for The Foreign Connection to match theirs. The drawings were then brought in within the next week and reviewed at the staff meeting. The Planning staff felt that one sign was appropriate for each business. The applicants were called and told they would be allowed only one sign. Brad Henry was very upset about the decision and felt that the staff decision was very capricious. He stated to me in my office that he would appeal the staff decision to the Design Review Board. 0 Daniel Berry, owner of Eye Pieces, also came by my office. He was very upset about the decision to only allow him one sign. He asked that I come by the shop and look at his frontage situation again to make sure that I felt strongly about our decision. I told him I would bring the board by during site visits for our November 20, 1985 URB meeting. November 20, 1985 The Design Review Board went by Eye Pieces and got into a discussion about the appropriate number of signs for the business. Staff and the board had to move on, as we had other site visits to make. Daniel Berry and Paul Treacy came to the meeting as we were finishing up. They waited in the audience for a while and then seemed to have to leave. At the end of the meeting the board discussed the situation for Eye Pieces, Bag 'n Pack and Kidsports. It was determined that Eye Pieces would be allowed two signs, as they actually had two frontages. The board did not feel that is was appropriate for Bag 'n Pack or Kidsports to have two signs each. It was also agreed that we would write up a policy statement at our next meeting concerning awnings. November 27, 1985 Daniel Berry came in to receive his approval sheet that clearly stated that he could have two signs for Eye Pieces. • December 27, 1985 I called Paul and asked what was going on with his signage. He told me that there was a mistake by the awning company and he would get the signage corrected. On the same day, I wrote Paul a letter stating that I appreciated the fact that'he was already in the process of remedying the situation with the additional signage. I told him that it was our understanding that he would contact me by January 6 and let me know how he wished to resolve the signage problem. January 6, 1986 I received no word from Paul Treacy concerning the signage. January 9, 1986 I called Kidsports and left a message that Paul should call me. On January 10, 1986 I wrote a letter informing him once again that the additional signage on his awning was a problem. I gave him a new deadline of January 21, 1986 to remove the signage or I would have to cite him for the sign code violation. January 21, 1986 I received no word from Paul Treacy. January 22, 1986 I called Paul and he said that he would find out the time frame for changing the awning. I told him that I would be giving him a call on January 27, 1986 to find . out his time frame for removing the awning. I told him that if I did not receive an answer from him on • • the 27th that I would have no choice but to cite Kidsports for the sign code violation. January 27, 1986 I called Paul and left a message with Karen in the morning at his office. January 28, 1986 I called Paul and left a message at 8:35 am. January 29, 1986 I called again. The person in the store said that they saw messages for Paul and as far as they knew, he had received them. February 3, 1986 I noticed that the Bag 'n Pack Shop sign was up. Peter Patten had called Brad Henry and he had said that he was going to get Jay Peterson to represent them in court. February 4, 1986 1 noticed that a patch was up on the Kidsports awning additional sign. February 13, 1986 I noticed that the patch was removed from the awning. February 13, 1986 A citation was issued to Paul Treacy for the sign code violation. March 6, 1986 The sign code violation was reviewed by Judge Buck Allen. It was determined that Paul Treacy had violated the sign code. He was asked to appear at the April 2nd Design Review Board to resolve his signage issue. It was determined that if the sign was not allowed by the Design Review Board, the sign must be covered up to avoid further citations. • NO of voil D/ 75 south frontage road vall, colorada 81657 .(303) 476-7000 December 27, 1985 Paul Treacy Kids Sports 122 East Meadow Drive Vail, Colorado 81657 Re: Extra Sign on Kidsports Awning Dear Paul, I appreciate the fact that you are already in the process of remedying the situation with the additional signage on your new awning. It is my understanding that you will contact me by January 6th and let me know how you wish to resolve the signage problem. I think the awning looks very sharp. I hope it will increase your business. Thanks for your cooperation. Sincerely, fri S,4� g, Kristan Pritz Town Planner KP:br In 75 south frontage road nail, Colorado 81657 (303) 476-7000 January 10, 1986 Paul Treacy Kidsports 122 East Meadow Drive Vail, Colorado 81657 Re: Extra Sign on Kidsports Awning Dear Paul: On December 27, 1985 I wrote you a letter and informed you that the additional signage on your new awning was a problem. We had an understanding that you would contact me by January 6 and let me know how you wanted to resolve the signage problem. At this time, I have not heard any response from you. I also called your store on January 9 and left a message with one of your employees that you should call me. I am writing to inform you that if the additional signage on the awning is not removed by January 21, 1986 I will have to cite you for the sign code violation. I feel that this is more than enough time to address the problem. If you have any further questions please feel free to give me a call. Sincerely, Kristan Pritz Town Planner KP/blf :7 iA it town of voi 75 south frontage road vail, colorado 81657 (303) 476-7000 January 22, 1986 Mr. Paul Treacy Kidsports 122 East Meadow Drive Vail, Co. 81657 Re: Extra Sign on Kidsports Awning Dear Paul: On January 22nd, I called to find out what pians you had for your Kidsports awning. The last time I talked to you, you had stated that you . were in the process of trying to resolve the situation. In our conversation today, I asked that you call the awning company and find out how long it would take them to change the awning. I will be giving you a call on January 27, 1986 to find out what the awning company told you. Please try to talk to them before that time. I am willing to work with you on resolving the awning issue, however, I cannot let the situation go on indefinitely. If I don't receive an answer from you on the 27th, I will have no choice but to cite Kidsports for the sign violation. I would like to avoid taking that action. Without a timeframe on the resolution of the signage, the problem may possibly be unresolved for weeks. I would appreciate it very much if you would contact the company as soon as possible. I was also concerned about your -statement that there are many sign code violations in the village -that the staff does not address. The staff does try to keep up on sign enforcement. If you are aware of other sign code violations, I would appreciate knowing about them. In no way is the staff trying to single out the Village Center project while not attending to business in other areas of the Town. Please let me know if there are sign code violations that I may follow up on. I will give you a call on January 27, 1986. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, 0 Ilr4.n V4-4 Kristan Pritz Town Planner KP/blf MEMO TO: Design Review Board FROM: Community Development DATE: April 2, 1986 SUBJECT: Kidsport Awning Kidsport was taken to court on March 6, 1986 for a sign code violation. Due to the fact that Kidsports had two signs on its awning, the owner, Paul Treacy, was taken to court. Judge duck Allan found Paul Treacy guilty and asked him to go back to the Design Review Board to verify the staff and the DRB decision that Kidsports had only one frontage and therefore was allowed only one sign. At the April 2 meeting, Mr. Treacy will not be presenting a new proposal but will instead be confirming the board's opinion that he has only one frontage. If this opinion is confirmed he will be required to remove the extra sign. Please see the enclosed "Sequence of Events Concerning Kidsports Awning" to refresh your memory on how this problem occurred. TO: Design Review Board MFROM: Community Development Department DATE: September 17, 1986 SUBJECT: Sign variance request for the Holiday Inn APPLICANT: Holiday Inn/Ricks Hayes, General Manager I. REQUEST The applicant is requesting variances from the following sections of the Town of Vail sign code: Wall Signs = Single Business Use -- 1. 16.20.210 B. Size. One square foot for each five front lineal feet of the building, with a maximum area of twenty square feet. Combined maximum area for more than one sign shall not exceed twenty square feet. 2. 16.20.210 C. Height. No part of the sign shall extend above 25 feet from existing grade. 3. 16.20.210 D. Number. One sign per vehicular street or major pedestrian way which the business abuts with a maximum i of two signs per business, as determined by the L� administrator, subject to review by the Design Review Board. 4. 16.20.210 G. Lighting. Indirect or pan channeled The Holiday Inn management is proposing to locate a new wall sign in the same location as the existing sign above the northeast entrance to the building. The proposed signage includes: 1. "Holiday Inn" written in script material: white plexiglass size: 3`3" x 18' = 58.5 square feet height: 40 feet lighting: interior lighting 2. A starburst symbol centered over "Holiday Inn" material: orange and yellow plexiglass size: 7 square feet height: 40 feet lighting: interior lighting Total proposed sign square footage: 65.5 square feet (Please note this sign will be the exact same square footage as the existing sign except for the addition of the starburst.) 4 Presently, the Holiday Inn has the following existing signs: 1. Wall Sign: "Holiday Inn" (3'3" x 18' = 58.5 square feet) 2. Frontage Road free standing sign: "Holiday Inn" (1'10" x 6'3" = 11.5 square feet) 3. Vail Road free standing sign: "Holiday Inn" (1' x 4' = 4 square feet) 4. Entry wall sign: "Holiday Inn" (1'1" x 4'7" = 5 square feet) Total existing signage = 79 square feet The applicant has stated that the Holiday Inn Corporation is requiring that all their hotels come into compliance with the new sign design. Their Rules of Operation manual states, "After January 1, 1985, upon license renewal or change of ownership, old script signs must be removed." II. BACKGROUND Size (16.20.210B) The Holiday Inn is allowed 20 square feet of signage. Their existing total signage is 79 square feet and is 59 square feet over the allowable. The proposed signage total is 86 square feet which is 66 square feet over the allowable. The additional 7 square feet requires the variance. Height (16.20.210C) The maximum height of a sign is 25 feet. The proposed sign will be 40 feet above grade. A 15 foot height variance is necessary. Number -of Signs (16.20.210 D) Under the sign code, the Holiday Inn is allowed two business identification signs. At this time, the business has two signs beyond what is allowed. Town records do not include any record of approvals for the four signs. Staff's opinion is that the Vail Road, Frontage Road, and large wall sign are grandfathered. The new small sign by the entry has not been approved. The proposed sign will maintain the existing number of signs on site and therefore requires a variance to the allowed number of signs for a single business (16.20.210 B). Lighting (17.20.210 G) The code states that indirect or pan -channeled lighting is appropriate. Indirect lighting means that "the light source is separated from the sign and illuminates the sign by means of spotlights or similar fixtures" (16.04.140). Pan -channeled lighting means that the light source illuminates the wall which the sign is attached to and therefore highlights the lettering. The light does not shine through the lettering. The existing sign has pan -channeled lighting. This proposal has interior lighting which means that the light will actually shine directly through the plexi --glass lettering. -2- III. FINDINGS AND STAFF RESPONSES Before the board acts on a variance application, the applicant must prove physical hardship and the board must find that: A. There are special circumstances or conditions applying to the land buildings, topography, vegetation, sign structures or other matters on adjacent lots or within the adjacent right-of-way whic Wo-uldsubstantially restrict the effectiveness of the sign in question; provided, however, that such spec circumstances or conditions are unique to the particular business or enterprise to which the applicant desires to draw attention and do not apply generally to all businesses or enterprises. Staff Response: It is true that the visibility of the Holiday Inn is somewhat blocked by the Alpine Standard gas station in front of the hotel. Two signs are located on Vail Road and the Frontage Road to indicate the entrances to the Holiday Inn. Staff believes that the Alpine Standard does create a special circumstance that warrants additional signage, however, the proposed signage of 65.5 square feet plus the existing signage of 20.5 square feet is greater than the square footage necessary to address the visibility problem. B. That special circumstances were not created by the applicant or anyone in privy to thea licant: Staff Response: Special circumstances involved in the evaluation of this variance request were not created by the applicant. C. That the grantin2 of the variance will be in general harmony with the purposes of this title and will not be materiallydetrimenta to the persons residing or -working in the vicinity, to adjacent property, to the neighborhood, or to thepublic welfare in general. _ Staff Response: The variance requested is in conflict with Section 16.16.020 which states that: "The sign should not visually dominate the structure to which it belongs or call undue attention to itself." it is felt that the interior lighting for this sign is unnecessary and that softer indirect or pan -channeled lighting could be used to decrease the brightness of the sign. The square footage for the sign could also be decreased so that the sign does not dominate the structure. The request also does not comply with Section 16.16.180 of the code that states: "Lighting should be of no greater wattage than is necessary to make the sign visible at night and should not unnecessarily reflect onto adjacent properties. Lighting sources -3- shall not be directly visible to passing pedestrians or vehicles and should be concealed in such a manner that direct light does not shine through any element of the sign." Given the present design, direct light will shine through the plexiglass letters. . The staff believes that this request is not in harmony with the purposes of the sign code. D. The variance applied for does not depart from the provisions of this title any more than is required to identify theapplicant's business or use. (0 Staff Response: It is felt that the proposed sign departs from the provisions of the sign code, particularly in the areas of lighting and total square footage. The proposed sign is approximately three times as large as the allowable square footage for a business identi- fication sign. IV. Such other factors and criteria as the Design Review Board deems applicable to the proposed variance. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Even though the proposed sign will be only 7 feet larger than the existing sign (including the addition of the new starburst logo), the staff believes that the signage for the Holiday Inn must be decreased in order to comply more closely with the sign code. The lighting for the sign is in conflict with the sign code, as it will draw undue attention to the sign. Staff's opinion is that the square footage and lighting for the sign could be decreased so that the sign conforms much more with the sign code. If the wall sign square footage is decreased to 20 square feet and the lighting is changed to indirect or pan -channeled lighting, the staff would have a more favorable opinion of the variance request. At this time, the request is not a reasonable solution toward a compromise wherein the need for business identification is met and the intent of the existing code is respected. -4- 5J111W� at Vail M E M O R A N D U M TO: The Design Review Board FROM: Rick Hayes, General Manager DATE: September 4, 1986 SUBJ: Variance on Holiday Inn Signage Our intent is to ask for a variance on a new Holiday Inn sign, to be installed on the northeast wall of our main building. The sign will be 5 feet 5 inches high and 18 feet long. The words, "Holiday Inn" will be back lit and it will be set about 2/3 of the way up the wall. The new sign will be placed in the same spot as the existing Holiday Inn sign, with the same dimensions. The new Holiday Inn sign is needed, because the existing signage on the building is outdated. Therefore, it must be replaced with a sign of equal dimensions and with the addition of the new "starburst (*)" logo. The sign will be no brighter; it will, in fact, have a much softer glow. Holiday Inn requires this variance of us due to their article no. 400.3 in the Rules of Operation Manual. It states therein, "After January 1, 1985, upon license renewal or change of ownership, old script signs must be removed. Script sign face drawings and electrical information (including electrical requirements) necessary to obtain permits and to install signs are available upon request to the Product Development/Brandmarks Department." At this time, any consideration you grant will be much appreciated. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact me. RH:ner 13 Vail Road • Vail, Colorado 81657 • Phone Vail 303/476-5631 • Denver 573-9006 SWANCOURT HOTELS INC. ' t y' '" '�'''• _, �� `' � ��l5;�� btu }. S , .; ss ; ��p�,��.�:�" :.: Iii•` , b U• r + � 4r \y� ' t y' '" '�'''• _, �� `' � ��l5;�� btu }. S , .; ss ; ��p�,��.�:�" :.: Iii•` , b U• �kJAGA� 2JIA� at Vail M E M O R A N D U M TO: The Design Review Board % .FROM: Rick Hayes, General Manager / DATE: September 4, 1986 SUB.: Variance on Holiday Inn Signage Our intent is to ask for a variance on a new Holiday Inn sign, to be installed on the northeast wall of our main building. The sign will be 5 feet 5 inches high and 18 feet long. The words, "Holiday Inn" will be back lit and it will be set about 2/3 of the way up the wall. The new sign will be placed in the same spot as the existing Holiday Inn sign, with the same dimensions. The new Holiday Inn sign is needed, because the existing signage on the building is outdated. Therefore, it must be replaced with a sign of equal dimensions and with the addition of the new "starburst (*)" logo. The sign will be no brighter; it will, in fact, have a much softer glow. Holiday Inn requires this variance of us due to their article no. 400.3 in the Rules of Operation Manual. It states therein, "After January 1, 1985, upon license renewal or change of ownership, old script signs must be removed. Script sign face drawings and electrical information (including electrical requirements) necessary to obtain permits and to install signs are available upon request to the Product Development/Brandmarks Department." At this time, any consideration you grant will be much appreciated. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact me. RH:ner 13 Vail Road • Vail, Colorado 81657 • Phone Vail 303/476-5631 • Denver 573-9006 SWANCOURT HOTELS INC. TO: Design Review Board FROM: Community Development Department DATE: October 29, 1986 SUBJECT: Sign variance request for the Holiday Inn APPLICANT: Holiday Inn/Frank Johnson, General Manager I. REQUEST The Holiday Inn is submitting a revised sign variance request. On October 7, 1986, the Town Council voted to deny the original sign variance. They recommended that the applicant try to decrease the number of signs and proposed square footage, as well as use lighting that complies with the sign code, and use a material that complies with the sign code for the new "starburst" above the existing wall sign. The applicant has stated that the Holiday Inn Corporation is requiring all their hotels to comply with the new Holiday Inn logo standards. Their Rules of Operation manual states, "After January 1, 1985, upon license renewal or change of ownership, old script signs must be removed." The Holiday Inn has revised their sign request to include: A. Addition of the "starburst" design to the existing Holiday Inn sign on the wall above the portico. Lighting to be "pan channeled" exactly as existing sign. The material will be metal to match the existing sign. B. Deletion of Holiday Inn sign between the front doors. C. Substitution of existing Frontage Road sign (11.5 sq ft) with carved wood sign (identical sign/new logo), per the submitted drawing, 1'8" x 5'10". (9.7 sq ft) D. Substitution of existing Vail Road free standing sign (4 sq ft) with carved wooden sign (identical design/new logo), 11 " x 3'11" (3.6 sq ft). TOTAL PROPOSED SQUARE FOOTAGE: 1. Wall Signs, 65.5 sq ft. 2. Frontage Road sign, 9.7 sq ft. 3. Vail Road sign, 3.6 sq ft Total 78.8 sq ft LE This proposal will require variances from the following sections of the Town of Vail sign code: Wall Signs - Si_n_gle Business Use 1. 16.20.210 B. Size. One square foot for each five front lineal feet of the building, with a maximum area of twenty square feet. Combined maximum area for.more than one sign shall not exceed twenty square feet. 2. 16.20.210 C. Height. No part of the sign shall extend above 25 feet from existing grade. 3. 16.20.210 D. Number. One sign per vehicular street or major pedestrian way which the business abuts with a maximum of two signs per business, as determined by the administrator, subject to review by the Design Review Board. Presently the Holiday Inn has the following existing signs: 1. Wall Sign: "Holiday Inn" (3'3" x 18' = 58.5 square feet) 2. Frontage Road free standing sign: "Holiday Inn" (1'10" x 613" = 11.5 square feet) 3. Vail Road free standing sign: "Holiday inn" (1' x 4' = 4 square feet) 4. Entry wall sign: "Holiday Inn" (1'1" x 4'7" = 5 square feet) Total existing signage = 79 square feet II. BACKGROUND Size (16.20.210B) The Holiday Inn is allowed 20 square feet of signage. Their existing total signage is 79 square feet and is 59 square feet over the allowable. The proposed signage total is 78.8 square feet which is 58.8 square feet over the allowable. Holiday Inn is decreasing their existing square footage by 7.2 square feet. However, they are adding the "starburst" which adds 7 square feet to the total signage. Heigh t (16.20.210C) The maximum height of a sign is 25 feet. The proposed sign will be 40 feet above grade. A 15 foot height variance is necessary. !Number of Signs (16.20.210 D) Under the sign code, the Holiday Inn is allowed two business identification signs, as the hotel has more than one frontage. At this time, the business has two signs beyond what is allowed. In the request, Holiday Inn is proposing to remove one sign so there will only be a total of 3 signs for the project. The sign that will be removed is presently located at the Holiday Inn's entry and is 5 sq ft. -2- r 0 III. FINDINGS AND STAFF RESPONSES Before the board acts on a variance application, the applicant must prove physical hardship and the board must find that: A. There are special circumstances or conditions applying to the land, buildings, t_o_pography, vegetation, sign structures or other matters on adjacent lots or within the adjacent right-of-way which would substantially restrict the effectiveness of the sign in question; providedhowever, ' q , r, such special circumstances or conditions are unique to the particular business or enterprise to which the applicant desires to draw attention, and do not apply generally to all businesses or enterprises •_._,___ Staff Response: It is true that the visibility of the Holiday Inn is somewhat blocked by the Alpine Standard gas station in front of the hotel. Staff believes that the Alpine Standard does create a special circumstance that warrants additional signage. Holiday Inn has decreased the total number of signs from 4 to 3 (a decrease of 6 sq ft) and has also decreased the square footage for the Frontage Road sign by 1.8 square feet and the Vail Road free standing sign by .4 square feet Staff believes that this is an improvement over the original proposal. In respect to height, it is felt that due to the fact that the existing sign is located at approximately 40 feet, it is reasonable to allow the "starburst" to be located in the same area of the wall. B. That special circumstances were not created by the applicant or anyone in privy to theappl_icant: Staff Response: Special circumstances involved in the evaluation of this variance %request were not created by the applicant. C. That the grantinq of the variance will be in general harmon.v with the purposes of this title, and will not be materially detrimental to the persons residing or working in the vicinity,to adjacent property, to the neighborhood, or to__the_public welfare in general. Staff Response: The variance requested supports Section 16.16.020 which states that: "The sign should not visually dominate the structure to which it belongs or call undue attention to itself." The square footage of the wall sign is in scale with the building. It does not dominate the structure. The applicant has also changed the -3- v proposal to arrange for pan channeled lighting. This lighting is compatible with Section 16.16.180 of the code that states: "Lighting should be of no greater wattage than is necessary to make the sign visible at night and should not unnecessarily reflect onto adjacent properties. Lighting sources shall not be directly visible to passing pedestrians or vehicles and should be concealed in such a manner that direct light does not shine through any element of the sign." Pan channeled lighting is proposed, which means that the light source illuminates the wall which the sign is attached to and therefore highlights the lettering. Staff believes that this request is in harmony with the purposes of the sign code. D. The variance applied for does not depart from the provisions of this title any more than is required to identify the applicant's business or use. Staff Response: It is felt that the proposed signage complies with the intent of the sign code and does not depart from the code any more than is reasonable and necessary to identify the business. The confusing entrances to the Holiday Inn through the Alpine Standard property create a situation that warrants relief from the strict and literal interpretation of the sign code. IV. Such other factors and criteria as the Design Review Board deems applicable to the proposed variance. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The applicant has made the effort to respond positively to requests made by the staff, DRB, and Town Council to decrease square footage and the number of signs as well as to use sign materials and lighting which comply with the sign code. The Holiday Inn management has cooperated by: 1. -Decreasing the number of signs from 4 to 3 2. ` Decreasing existing sign square footage by 7.2 sq ft 3. Using a painted metal starburst {7 sq ft} instead of a plastic starburst 4. Using pan -channeled lighting instead of the previously proposed interior lighting For these reasons, staff recommends approval of the request. -4- T0: Design Review Board FROM: Community Development Department DATE: November 19, 1986 SUBJECT: Sign variance request for the Total Beauty Centre APPLICANT: Total Beauty Centre: Brenda Le Grange I. REQUEST Total Beauty Centre is in Phase I & II of Vail Village Inn. The business is located on the second floor above Alpine Gold. To reach Total Beauty, a pedestrian enters off of East Meadow Drive passes through an outside covered stairway between Alpine Gold and Vail Village Inn Sports, and goes through a common door at the top of the stairway. The applicant is requesting variances from the following section of the Town of Vail sign code: Section 16.20.090 Projecting and Hanging Signs ---Individual business within a multi -tenant building. I. Special Provisions . 3. In a case where a business or organization located above or below street 'level fronts directly onto an exterior balcony, deck, walkway or stairway which is utilized as the business' own entrance and for unrestricted public access and use, the allowable sign area for any sign to be located at the building level shall be based upon the portion of the business frontage which abuts directly upon the balcony deck, walkway or stairway with a maximum size allowed not to exceed 5 square feet. A sign of a maximum area of 3 square feet shall be allowed for businesses having__ insufficient frontage The applicant is requesting approval for the following signs: 1. A black and white awning which has one sign on the front of the awning and one on the side. Side signage: 8" x 2' = 1.3 sq ft Front signage: 1' x 3' = 3.0 sq ft 2. A hanging black and white wooden sign located in the covered walkway leading up to the entrance. This sign is 1'x 3' = 3 sq ft. At this time, Total Beauty Centre has three signs (two on the awning) with a total square footage of 7.3 square feet. Under the sign code, a . second story business is allowed 3 square feet at the entry point into the building. Therefore, the applicant is requesting two additional signs beyond the one sign that is allowed as well as an additional 4.3 square feet of signage for the business. The applicant has submitted the following statement as to why she feels the sign variance is warranted: "Total Beauty Centre has over the past 5 years had 2 entrances --our main entrance being where Goods' main entrance is now and our back entrance was just west of Alpenrose' back patio. We now have only one entrance --that being the back entrance which is now our main entrance. The visibility to the entrance is difficult, having to walk under a covered walkway and then upstairs. The signage used now is without a doubt a lot more tasteful than what was originally being used --a bright yellow and green sun shaped sign also larger than what we have now. The old sign was in a more strategic position --on the front corner of the building. We have now moved our new sign further back off the street. With regard to the awning, we basically replaced the old Polo colours --green with orange stripes --with our colours --black and white. The sign next to our entrance was removed when the new awning was installed. Both the sign and awning have our logo and are a vast improvement to what was previously there. As we have decreased the signage and done a more subtle and tasteful job on our new signs, I am sure you will agree and thus approve the new sign and awning." II. FINDINGS AND STAFF RESPONSES Before the board acts on a variance application, the applicant must prove physical hardship and the board must find that: A. There are special circumstances or conditions applying to the land buildings, topography, ve etation sign structures or other matters on adjacent lots or within the adjacent right-of_-way_whic would substantially restrict the effectiveness of the sign in question; provided, however, that such special circumstances or conditions are unique to the particular business or enterprise to which the applicant desires to draw attention, and do not apply generally to all businesses or enterprises. Staff Response: Total Beauty Centre has a visibility problem due to several factors: 1) The salon is located on the second floor of the building, 2) the entrance is located off East Meadow Drive on the second (or rear) tier of shops, and 3) in order to get to Total Beauty Centre, you must walk through a covered walkway which blocks the visibility of the awning signage and entry. Staff believes that this is a special circumstance which warrants some . additional signage to identify the business. Our opinion is that the awning signage which includes one sign of 1.3 square feet and one sign of 3 square feet is warranted. We do not feel that it is necessary for Total Beauty Centre to have a separate sign at the -2- • • I1 entrance to the covered walkway off East Meadow Drive. If Total Beauty Centre is allowed this sign, then all the businesses on the second tier of shops in the Vail Village Inn commercial area should be allowed to have a sign at this entrance. To allow the approximate ten retail spaces to have signs at this entrance would create unnecessary sign clutter. For this reason, it is felt that a variance is warranted for the awning signage, but not for the hanging sign. B. That special circumstances were not created by the applicant_ or anvone in privy to the applicant: Special circumstances were not created by the applicant. C. That the granting of the variance will be in general harmony with the purposes of this title, and will not be materially detrimenta to the persons residing or working in the vicinity, to adjacent property, to the neighborhood, or to the public welfare in general. Staff Response: Generally, the proposed signage is in harmony with the purposes of this title which state in Section 16.16.010, that "sign location, configuration, design, materials and colors should be harmonious with the majestic mountain setting and the alpine village scale of the town." Staff agrees that the signage is very tastefully done, however there is concern with the 3 square foot sign being located in the covered entry way into the second level of shops. Our opinion is that signage should be located in the area of the business and should not be scattered throughout a project to direct a pedestrian to the business. R variance is warranted for the awning, which is a request that will still be in compliance with the sign code in the sense that the signage is located at the entrance to the shop. Staff cannot support the request for the sign in the covered entry way of the Vail Village Inn Phase II commercial area. D. The variance applied for does not depart from the provisions of this title any more than is required to identify the applicant' business or use. Staff Response: In respect to the awning, it is felt that the requested signage is necessary to identify the applicant's business. However, the sign in the covered entryway does go beyond the amount of signage that is really necessary to identify the business. III. Such other factors and criteria as the Design Review Board deems applicable to the proposed variance. -3- 0 IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION L-] The staff supports the variance for the awning, however, we are unable to support the request for the additional sign in the covered entryway. For this reason, the staff recommends denial of the variance request. We would recommend to the applicant that a joint use directory be placed adjacent to the covered entryway up to the second level of shops at Vail Village Inn to direct pedestrians into this area. The purpose of this type of sign is "to list all tenants within a multi -tenant building and to guide the pedestrian to an individual tenant within the building." (Section 16.20.040) This approach to the visibility problems for the businesses on the second level of the Vail Village Inn commercial area will provide additional signage for all the shops on the second level in a manner that will not create sign clutter. The staff prefers this approach to the alternative of allowing many of these businesses to locate individual signs out on the East Meadow Drive entryway. -4- TO: Design Review Board FROM: Community Development Department DATE: December 17, 1986 SUBJECT: Request for a sign variance for Scotch on the Rockies APPLICANT: Susan and Hamish Tear, Linda Park I. RE_ QUEST The owners of Scotch on the Rockies are requesting a sign variance for their awning. The business is located in the Sonnenalp Hotel on the east side of the Swiss Chalet building. Scotch on the Rockies is in the space just to the south of Blossoms and Bric a Brac. At this time, Scotch on the Rockies has approval for signage on the front of the awning (east end) which includes the logo for the business plus lettering that states "Scotch on the Rockies." The total square footage for this signage is 6-1/2 square feet. The business is allowed 7 square feet, as it has 35 lineal feet of frontage. The applicant is requesting approval for the following signs: 1. On the south side of the awning, a sign which states "Apparel and Gifts" in black letters on a white insert. The sign is approximately 4 ' long and 5-1/2 " in height. The total square footage is 1.8 square feet. . 2. On the north side of the awning a sign that states "Gifts" in black letters on a white insert. The sign is approximately 1`-5" in length and is 5 1/2" in height. The total square footage is .6 square feet. Given the location of the business, the applicant is allowed one sign which has already been used on the front of the awning for the 6-1/2 square foot sign. In order to have the two additional signs and extra square footage, the applicant is requesting variances from the following sections of the Town of Vail sign code: Section 16.20.090 Projecting and Hanging Signs - Individual business within a multi -tenant building. B. Size, one square foot for each 5 lineal feet of the individual business or organization having its own exterior public entrance in a multi -tenant building with a maximum of ten square feet and a minimum area of three square feet will be allowed if a business has insufficient frontage. D. Number, one sign per vehicular street or major pedestrian way which the business abuts, as determined by the administrator, with a maximum of two signs, subject to review by the Design Review Board. The applicants have submitted the following statement as to why the sign variance is warranted: "We are requesting the addition of lettering on the awning because of the visibility of the shop front caused by three large evergreens. When viewed from Crossroads and the bus stop, the trees block the view of the shop front. We understand the Town's desire to preserve these trees, but we ask that the Town consider allowing the lettering to help counteract the effect of the trees hiding the space. The word "Gifts" on the north facing side is of greatest importance to us. Thank you. II. FINDINGS AND STAFF RESPONSES Before the board acts on a variance application, the.applicant must prove physical hardship and the board must find that: A. There are special circumstances or conditions applying to the and, buildings, topography, vegetation, sign structures or other matters on adjacent lots or within the adjacent right-of-way which would_ substantially restrict the effectiveness of the sign in question; provided, however, that such special circumstances or conditions are unique to the particular business or enterprise to which the applicant desires to draw attention, and do not apply generally to all businesse or enterprises. There are no special circumstances which substantially restrict the effectiveness of the signage. it is true that several large pine trees exist to the north of the entrance. However, these trees do not block the view of the signage on the front of the awning. The trees will make it difficult to see any portion of the storefront from the Crossroads bus stop. There are many similar circumstances throughout the Town of Vail where trees and other types of vegetation block a direct view of a storefront. It should be emphasized that the trees do not block the visibility of the signage on the front of the awning from most vantage points. B. That special circumstances were not created by the applicant_or anyone__ in privy to the applicant: Special circumstances were not created by the applicant. C. That the granting of the variance will be in___general harmony with the purposes of this title, and will not be materially detrimental to the persons residing or working in the vicinity, to_adjacent property, to the neighborhood, or to the public welfare in eneral. The proposed signage is tasteful and does not conflict with the purposes of the sign code to promote signage that is not visually dominating to the awning or storefront. n n U n U D. The variance -applied for does not de art from the provisions of this title any more than is required to identify the applicant's business or use. The requested signage clearly departs from the provisions of the sign code more than is necessary to identify the applicant's business. The applicant did have the option to locate signage on the north and south sides of the awning as opposed to the front of the awning. A window sign could have also been used in the glass door to indicate the name of the shop when standing in front of Scotch on the Rockies. However, the decision was made to locate all of the signage on the front of the awning. Staff believes that the intent of the sign code is to provide reasonable signage options. The sign code's intent does not provide for additional signage so that the name of a business may be seen from any adjacent street and walkway. III. Such other factors and criteria as the Design Review Board deems applicable to the proposed variance. IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The staff recommends denial of this sign variance request. Our primary concern is that the request departs from the provisions of the sign code more than is necessary to identify the business. The Design Review Board and Town Council have reviewed similar requests in the cases of Kids' Sports and the Bag and Pack Shop. In these examples, business owners wished to have more than one sign on their awning to increase exposure when, according to the code, only one sign was allowed. To approve this request would be a grant of special privilege. Staff's opinion is that the bright red awning and signage on the front of the canopy provide an attractive entrance to Scotch on the Rockies which will be highly visible from the adjacent street and walkways. It should also be emphasized that there was an alternative within the sign code that would have allowed 7 square feet of signage on either side of the awning plus the possibility of using a window sign in the glass doorway to address the applicants' concern for visibility from the Crossroad bus stop. The applicants made the decision to focus the signage on the front of the awning. jel 264 �W{ • tea.. •,. ': J ± ! i '�5 3 u q � �lgllyMt� ♦•��� .A,'2�''FiG� 6sikY- ?/ w� _i' 1 � - - loft -. � � � j 1 � �-- �.. _ � � .��`- � f l?•I���i'jjl --ill' � / , � ` - Or x �t'� Design Review Board Discussion of Primary Secondary Connection �.. December 17, 1986 Agenda I. EXISTING WORDING CONCERNING THE PRIM/SEC. CONNECTION: 18.54.050 C13. Duplex and Primary/Secondary Residential dwelling units shall be designed in a manner that contains the two dwelling units and garages within one single structure. However, in the event that the presence of significant site characteristics necessitate a site design which includes a physical separation of the two dwelling units and/or garages into separate structures, the DRB may approve the design. Such a design may be approved only when the separate structures are visually attached by means of the use of similar and compatible architectural design, colors, and materials and/or physically connected with fences, walls, decks or other similar architectural features. II. DISCUSS OPTIONS FOR AMENDING SECTION 18.54.050 C13: A. Leave the wording as is . B. Exclude the connection requirement C. Define clearly. physical connection & design criteria and require compliance with all the criteria. 1. Unified landscape plan 2. Walls where appropriate 3. Materials: siding, roofing, trim, stone, etc. 4. Root forms 5. Architectural style 6. Grading 7. Balcony style 8. Railings on decks, patios, and balconies 9. Window treatments D. 10% perimeter of Existing Unit Connection. III. DISCUSS CRITERIA FOR CONNECTION BETWEEN AN EXISTING UNIT AND PROPOSED UNIT. f TO: • 10 FROM: Design Review Board Community Development Department DATE: December 17, 1986 SUBJECT: Sign variance request for the Total Beauty Centre APPLICANT: Total Beauty Centre: Brenda Le Grange I. REQUEST On November 19, 1986 the applicant tabled the variance until the December 17, 1986 meeting. The request has not been changed from the original proposal. In general, members favored the variance for the awning but did not support the additional sign in the covered walkway off of Meadow Drive. Total Beauty Centre is in Phase I & II of Vail Village Inn. The business is located on the second floor above Alpine Gold. To reach Total Beauty, a pedestrian enters off of East Meadow Drive, passes through an outside covered stairway between Alpine Gold and Vail Village Inn Sports, and goes through a common door at the top of the stairway. The applicant is requesting variances from the following section of the Town of Vail sign code: Section 16.20.090 Projecting and Hanging Signs--I,ndivi'dual business within a multi -tenant building. I. Special Provisions 3. In a case where a business or organization located above or below street level fronts directly onto an exterior balcony, deck, walkway or stairway which is utilized as the business' own entrance and for unrestricted public access and use, the allowable sign area for any sign to be located at the building level shall be based upon the portion of the business frontage which abuts directly upon the balcony deck, walkway or stairway with a maximum size allowed not to exceed 5 square feet. A sign of a maximum area of 3 square feet shall be allowed for businesses havin insufficient frontage The applicant is requesting approval for the following signs: 1. A black and white awning which has one sign on the front of the awning and one on the side. Side signage: 8" x 2' = 1.3 sq ft Front signage: V x 3' = 3.0 sq ft 2. A hanging black and white wooden sign located in the covered walkway leading up to the entrance. This sign is 1'x 3' = 3 sq ft. At this time, Total Beauty Centre has three signs (two on the awning) ! with a total square footage of 7.3 square feet. Under the sign code, a second story business is allowed 3 square feet at the entry point into the building. Therefore, the applicant is requesting two additional signs beyond the one sign that is allowed as well as an additional 4.3 square feet of signage for the business. The applicant has submitted the following statement as to why'she feels the sign variance is warranted: U "Total Beauty Centre has over the past 5 years had 2 entrances --our main entrance being where Goods' main entrance is now and our back entrance was just west of Alpenrose' back patio. We now have only one entrance --that being the back entrance which is now our main entrance. The visibility to the entrance is difficult, having to walk under a covered walkway and then upstairs. The signage used now is without a doubt a lot more tasteful than what was originally being used --a bright yellow and green sun shaped sign also larger than what we have now. The old sign was in a more strategic position --on the front corner of the building. We have now moved our new sign further back off the street. With regard to the awning, we basically replaced the old Polo colours --green with orange stripes --with our colours --black and white. The sign next to our entrance was removed when the new awning was installed. Both the sign and awning have our logo and are a vast improvement to what was previously there. As we have decreased the signage and done a more subtle and tasteful job on our new signs, I am sure you will agree and thus approve the new sign and awning." Ii. FINDINGS AND STAFF RESPONSES Before the board acts on a variance apmustafion,the nd that:applicant must prove physical hardship and the A. There are Special circumstances or conditions a 1 in to land buildin s to o ra h ve etation sicin structures matters on ad'acent lots or within the ad'acent ri ht -of - would substantial) restrict the effectiveness of the sig uestion- rovided however that such special circ conditions are uni ue to the Darticular business or which thea licant desires to draw attention and qenerally to all businesses or enter rises. Staff Response: the or other Aa wh i c n in Lances_ or ter rise to not aDDl.v Total Beauty Centre has a visibility problem due to several factors: 1) The salon is located on the second floor of the -2- building, 2) the entrance is located off East Meadow Drive on the second (or rear) tier of shops, and 3) in order to get to Total • Beauty Centre, you must walk through a covered walkway which blocks the visibility of the awning signage and entry. Staff believes that this is a special circumstance which warrants some additional signage to identify the business. Our opinion is that the awning signage which includes one sign of 1.3 square feet and one sign of 3 square feet is warranted. We do not feel that it is necessary for Total Beauty Centre to have a separate sign at the entrance to the covered walkway off East Meadow Drive. If Total Beauty Centre is allowed this sign, then all the businesses on the second tier of shops in the Vail Village Inn commercial area should be allowed to have a sign at this entrance. To allow the approximate ten retail spaces to have signs at this entrance would create unnecessary sign clutter. For this reason, it is felt that a variance is warranted for the awning signage, but not for the hanging sign. B. That special circumstances were not created by the applicant or anvone in privy to the applicant: Special circumstances were not created by the applicant. C. That the granting of the variance will be in general harmony with the urposes of this title, and will not be materially detrimenta to the persons residing or working in thevicinity, to adjacent • property, to the neighborhood, or to the public welfare in Ln eral. • Staff Response: Generally, the proposed signage is in harmony with the purposes of this title which state in Section 16.16.010, that "sign location, configuration, design, materials and colors shou.ld be harmonious with the majestic mountain setting and the alpine village scale of the town." Staff agrees that the signage is very tastefully done, however there is concern with the 3 square foot sign being located in the covered entry way into the second level of shops. Our opinion is that signage should be located in the area of the business and should not be scattered throughout a project to direct a pedestrian to the business. A variance is warranted for the awning, which is a request that will still be in compliance with the sign code in the sense that the signage is located at the entrance to the shop. Staff cannot support the request for the sign in the covered entry way of the Vail Village Inn Phase II commercial area. -3- VJ • D. The variance a lied for does not depart from the Drovisions of this title any more than is re uired to identify theapplicant's business or use. Staff Response: In respect to the awning, it is felt that the requested signage is necessary to identify the applicant's business. However, the sign in the covered entryway does go beyond the amount of signage that is really necessary to identify the business. III. Such other factors and criteria as the Design Review Board deems applicable to the proposed variance. IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The staff supports the variance for the awning, however, we are unable to support the request for the additional sign in the covered entryway. For this reason, the staff recommends denial of the variance request. We would recommend to the applicant that a joint use directory be placed adjacent to the covered entryway up to the second level of shops at Vail Village Inn to direct pedestrians into this area. _The purpose of this type of sign is "to list all tenants within a multi -tenant building and to guide the pedestrian to an individual tenant within the building." (Section 16.20.040) This approach to the visibility problems for the businesses on the second level of the Vail Village Inn commercial area will provide additional signage for all the shops on the second level in a manner that will not create sign clutter. The staff, prefers this approach to the alternative of allowing many of these businesses to locate individual signs out on the East Meadow Drive entryway. -4- 0