HomeMy WebLinkAboutINDIAN CREEK PART 2 LEGALt-----Single ramily Fsidence, DuPIex,
ZONE DISTRICTS
oPrimary/ Secondary
DATE:
LEGAL DESC
ADDRESS:
PTION: LoL 3 Block Subdivision
OWNER PHONE
PHONEARCTTITECT
I,OT SIZE
ZONE DISTRICT
PROPOSED USE
Allowed
(3oxl33) rIleighl:
TOEAl GRFA
Primary GRFA
tf3z
+425=
J..t/o f €
BUILDABI,E I,OT AREA
ExisLinq ProPosed Total
- -l-fi
SeLbacks
I At,a 13 65SiLe Coverage --l'':-ts- - ) -
Lanclscapins ljC=rL \VT4'vVVxh-
ReLaining wall lleighLs 3' /6' b
Parkins 3neqra 3 Tsncl
Garase crecliu rraofGo94)(e00) (1200 | 6G'C
" 7-- ProPosed slope '4 *-* 'prirrc, CWC.I'V-(ti ':.{''':,r,,' Permit-t-ed slope '1,, +.. t6/4\i
{1, -r'-l r'^*^r l ^- ,.ri rlx .n n rl r.i rrh I i ncr Orrlinance Ygs NO XX ll Complies wi[.rr t.o-v. !,ighLing ordinance Yes
Fronb
Sides
Rear
20,
15',
15',
/ Lt>
)t ti l>tc;
'-> 1G
aY-waLer course Set-back (30) (50)
Do Finish Grades Exceed 2:1 (50e")
EnvironmcnLal/rlazards: l') FLood PLain
YES NO_X-
Nln
*fAzl Percenu Slope l< > 3o%l "=(>'291o tttta'
3) Geologic ltazards
a) Snow Avalanche
b) Rockfall
c) Debris Flow
4 ) weulanas I'J r r
Does Lhis regriesL irrvuive a 250 AliciiLiorr? = Ng
l{ow much of Lhe ofio*.d 250 Addit.ion is used wiUh Lhis requesL?
View Corridor Encroachment,: Yes i..) o
previous condiEions of approval (check properLy file):
ii
10
,4,ft
Retum , {f'rv\ AMuffr, Town Planner
PROJECT:/J Ct U ,'+ #q
DATE STJBMITTED:
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING
COMMENTS NEEDED BY:
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL:
Fe,P SF f<9 //3q
(*,Ccp /o f cr'{: P f* u t@ d-.\ {cr: , -1. .-.d.9
Reviewed by:
Comments:
Date: ro-4-cl4
@
t{; *ctts,\br,og to(- \sir\s <rr<rbe t er crxad rt- gopcrq es?r(ccotu.\ .
N:a.i t<, s\rcr^r Pcx\ - atroc^rr\ c5,.ar., ffl')sY u{t g Y -.]5 tt tia' F\'
6til(\f 6\ ci' rr',z, dc^.<rt{a -.\qb 9\pr';rr} be 1, - ,11..,63d ot '11 '
ItoorJ ctrr$rr c..e f$t 9er $e c\PQrc^itrl P\c$\ -
no*l lridt-,,s cs! P{t\e Gppt-rr.'rd p\o6\ '
;J";;: ..,eil(c.,x\ k) nlv-t'.Y\$! ot $t'&i1t.$\a.@'
S.rirarnq err*xrofE' \5 <-lor { fre c\Qg{Evsd P\on '
rtr,i.d ilriYP
DEPARTMENT
.tre nZai- to s-'€\t€'<\ai.J (.\o.$'/*
O
Retum,o il^ Cufnrlk-
Town Planngr
INTER-DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW
PROJECT:
DATE SUBMITTED:
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING
COMMENTS NEEDED BY:
BBIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL:
PUBLIC WORKS
iloa gigt-e &d(y Res;)a/.<ttsl %,pb&)e l/,
Date: qlclq4
LnceA asssvol {o c{er\ bead,fl ro erjAr.ble, \hia . nrotsrscl frecb+.o $rrsg
gpd e\€)to.! t.'r. oc\ \n*, e.)(.n..-'<t scoA. ooA seot e\o$oh."* o.,(erogo.ed
(lrc\{\€(}r(J\ \6 gdJqIe dct\E)l
Criaurs40gfoUg tyuS{ftvdErlri\re n\ty- 941Y1 &ft,,(^e- c.c4A q Soctr\
ot Yt€' entvs rooa '
l- :i
c,(Jfren\ s\Ecvtdn d cosn6; int6 tbc. bs.Ko} t\e b.o\J:A .
c,ut (4\h (cr\touf 5 ArA t4nfr,$(c\<, $o nOt "DloOuJ tJJ6s. hff accofare\\.
Beviewed by:
Comments:
1ro.. -
Tct"
drffiqg
tdr.d tlrJCtl
"(Y& 6q.{ 7
rb
TO: MIKE McGEE GREG HALL
----.-a
TODD OPPENHETMER
INTER.D EPARTM ENTAL R EVIEW
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL:
wan
Engineoring:
Reviewed by:
Gomments:
4@
Landscaping:
Reviewed by:
Commenls:
6ceg o$d.\€rn psts; 6lza11,
6arq1e Aooft nee.l \" be zt' o+( "( ec4.'
H-sJ ,s elrYhr{ si& <J bac.vs ( ncd t" ue r5t oF)
- sy.s*r at\, €r@ ptd ,o.rtwu, a .
^Lonv^Jr5 ( retw<^lrr a1x2) ne-<rd 6 li€ - tvlto sxthv
pf. wa\rl on Wu s'de *ri i-; itn'.-'iI.'p-"h"t" b'rid (te *?,#.i/ I "n
Lo6v76 Y\adV bedesrqne& toacute v'6terattrr"Arr1).r<-. \?'r^zatl t"lLr Vot'1'
\q"ef v,vlc<.tocY arrA 3(dt a\e\atton" 6\d9 e!6t|) '^6'c.c\ t'x"ot ' elc '1
34^bA {^- -t 1 *,,0; I ^,=
Dale:
tl""A ?^q ovbo?o( )rue*r;1 .
N<od .e\ooir\\ *\t: C {n-4.r6\& "forcs tl.rdrnlJcozl rr:, v'r"\F.)
1r^."* {rli erv.iv o( +,y4 }itrtrzb an<c, ' . ,,
Fire Dopt.:
Reviewed by:
Commenls:
d,u^ L'-r,*.-rt
Return to Afidrt(ntdben_
Town Planner
Distributed to the Fire Departmenr, pubtic works, and Landsc apins on Kl | & | n/4-
TO: MIKE
t
McGEE GREG HALL TODD OPPENHEIMER
./l' J't,.^' (-'"-t't'--fL
Retumlo Arnlv-Knudtsen_
Town Planner
.PROJECT:
Landscaping:
Enginoering:
Reviewed by:
Comments:
Reviewed by:
Comments:
Fire Dept.:
Comments:
Date:
Dale:
Reviewed Ay: 4:4xc.E Z}
2L--a oq/,qZo,J
^t | /
Distributed to the Fire Department, pubtic works, and Landsc aping on Kl I & | 4*
24/
INTER-D EPARTMENTAL R EVIEW
DATE SUBMTTTED: =", $ DATE 0KlllL .
COMMENTS NEEDEDeY: &13 r
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL:
we{n
v,2=.. t :
-
,,y
\s'-J-'
\!
-D
\--:\
Retum to
Town Planner
!]r|TER'DEPARTIIENTAL REVIEW
i
pRoJEcT: I*tJ t
DATE SUBMITTED:
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING
COMMENTS NEEDED BY:
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL:
AIKes,el<pee/U<r, siugLz Qnu', Ly
t lsg € rru)s{'tt t,t,
C
Freviewed w' 4J?//CIO o,an", X -3 / -?/
Comments:
?qle Nzut or ?.\'.*\o <Yi>[i^-q
Gn xkV*l.; 6r' €h-t' JhTdt.^t
'ptov$€ GCI\ qc,\\ o-.or^) 5t..,.-\.'sr,
Iii.d l lrtQ
i-
DRB APPI.ICEIION - EOTW OT \TAIL,
DATE APPLICATION RECEIVED T
DATE OE'DRB MEETING:
ft.rr"" d sl4ts:
corp8,aDo
******r*t*
TAIS APPLICATION WII.L NOT BE
SNTIIJ AIIJ REQUIRED INTORIIAIIONtt*t******
?
A. DESCRIpTION: Single Fanll Resldence
,f:E:ffii&
B. TYPE OF REVIEW:
x New Construction ($200.00)Minor Alteration (920.00)
Addition ($50.00)Conceptual Review ($0)
ADDRESS:1139 Sandstone Drlve
If property is described by a meets and bounds legal
desqription, please provide on a separate sheet and
attach to this application.
ZONING: RC
LOT ARE,A: If reguired, applicant
stanped survey showing lot area.
must provide a current
NA!!E OF Appl.,rcAlrr: 419!!91_!3tt!9!
c.
D.
E.
F.
G.
LEGAI. DESCRIPTION: LOT L
Subdivision InClqqCreekTownhones
NAH.
I.
NAI'{E OE'Mailing APPLICA}IT' S REPRESENTATIVE :
Address:
J.
K.
Phone
NAI{E OF O!'INERS:
ISIGNATURE(S): -
Mlchael Lauterbach.
lr"rii"g Adal.."
Condominlun Approval if applicable.
DRB FEEi DRB fees, as shown above' are to be paid at
the tlne of gubmittal of oRn application. Later, when
applying for a building permit, please identify the
abbuiate vafuation of the proposal. The Town of vail ..,rhAwiII adlust the fee according to the table belown to lwYu 7\ensure Ehe coriect fee is paid. 2Anq 1/t v \.,1ensure Ehe coriect fee is paia. 2nDq J( 0- \^UFEE PAfD: S|7 v'' ,r ._0 Y[ I
FEE SCHEDULE: X if_Ilt I ------r\
vAluArroN EEE "'aq)
$ 0-$ 10,000 920.00 \y
$10,001 -$ 50,000 $5o.oo
$ 50; 00I - $ 150, 000 $100.00
$150, 001 - $ 5001 000 $200.00
9500,001 - $1r 000,000 $400.00
$ over $1r 000, 000 $500.00
DESIGN REVIEIf BOARD APPROV]II EI{PIRES ONE YE;AR AATER TINAI'
APPROITA& SNI.ESS A BT'U.DING PEB!{IT IS ISSUED AITD CONSTRUCItrON TS
'IARTED.
'O APP'.ICATION WrI,& BE PROCESSED WIICOUT OI{NER' S SIGTIAEURE
I
I _-
-- LTST OF MATERIALS to
NAI,IE 0F pROJECT. Indtan Creek Townhomes
LEGAL DESCRIPTIoN: LOT;{-! BLOCK SUBDIVISION
STREET ADDRESS. 1139 Sandsrone Drive
DESCRIpTI9N OF pR9JECT. Eighr Single Family Residences
The following informat.ion isReview Board before a final
A. BUILDING MATERIALS:
Roof
Siding
Other WalI Materia]s
Fascia
Soffits
Windows
Window Trim
Doors
Door Trim
Hand or Deck Rails
Flues
Flashings
Chinneys
Trash EncLosures
Greenhouses
Other
B.LANDSCAPING:
PLANT MATERIAIS:
PROPOSED TREES
required for submittaLapproval can be given:
TYPE OF MATERIAL
Cedar Shakes
to t,he Design
COLOR
Nacural
Cedar Beige
S tucco Cream
Dimensional Lumber B rown
P lywood Beige
white Clad White
Cedar Beige
White Clad Whl Ee
Cedar Beige
White Aluminum WhiEe
S tuc co Cream
Sheet Metal Brown
Ga lvani ze d NaEural
N/e
N/a
Name of Designer S. J. Riden
p[one i
Botanical Name
See Landscape Plan
Common Name Ouantit,v Size*-
NoneEXISTING TREES TO
BE REMOVED
*Indicate caliper for deciduous trees. Minimum caliper forIndicate height for coniferous
Minimum heiqht for coniferous trees is 6 feet.trees.
'\
1H50F Shagbrk
tH10P Pearl Stone
\(:
PLANT MATERIAI
PROPOSED SHRUBS
Botanical Name
See Landscape Plan
Ouantitv Size*
EXISTING SHRUBS
TO BE REMOVED
*Indicat,e size5 qallon.
GROUND COVERS
soD
SEED
TYPE
OF IRRIGATION
TYPE OR METHOD OF
EROSION CONTROL
None
of proposed shrubs.
TVpe
Minimum size of shrubs is
Square Footaqe
Manual
NaEural- Grass RevegelaEion
c.LANDSCAPE LIGHTING: ff exterior light,ing is proposed, pleaseshow the number of fixtures and ]oiations on a ieparaceIighting.plan. Identify each fixture from the lighting planon the List beLo$r and provide the wattage, height-above -
grade and type of light proposed.
None
D.orHER LANDSCAPE FEATURES (retaining wa1rs, fences, swimmingpools, etc.) Please specify. lndicate heighEs of reCainin!walIs. Maximum height of warLs within the front setback it
? fg"!. Maximum height of walls elsewhere on the propert,yr.s b reet .
Boulder ReLalning Wa11s
Q, *, *ffiorrr*.rl
DATE: August Zg, Igg4
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 3 Block
ADDRESS. 1139 Sandstone Drive
Filing Ind{an Creek Townhomes
OWNER Michael LauEerbach
ARCHITECT Steven J. Rlden
ZONE DISTRICT RC
PROPOSED (,96 (l) Slngle Farnily Residence
**LOT SIZE NA
AIlowed
(30) (33)
pHONE 476-6944
pHONE 949-4r2r
Exislinq Proposed Totat
l.l
e 3,700
Height
TOTaI GRFA
Primary GRFA
Secondary GRFA
Setbacks
425
425
Front
Sides
Rear
Water Course Setback
Sit,e Coverage
Landscaping
Retaining WaIl Height.s
Parking
Garage Credit
Drive:
View Corridor Encroachment:
Environmental,/Haz ards :
3'' / 6'6r per course
33 Regrd
(300) (600) (900) (1200) 600
Pernitt.ed Slope JIL Actual SJ_ope
Date approved by Town Engineer:
Yes No-L- ???
No
20t
15t
15'
(30) (s0)
NA
-NEr----NI_-
NA
NA
87"
FLood Plain
Percent Slope APPlicable
Geologic Hazardsa) Snow Avalanche NA
b) RockfalI APPIicabIe
c) Debris FLow APPllcabre
4 ) Wet.lands
Prevlous conditions of approval (check property file)
Does thls reguest involve a 250 Addition? No
How much of the arrowed 250 Addit,ion is useffiIlfrEis requesE?
**Note: Under Sections 18. j.2.090 (B) and 18.13.090 (B) of the Municipalcode, rots zoned Two Fanily and primary/secondary which are less t|an15r000.sq' ft. in area may not construct a second dwelling unit. Thecorununity Development Department may grant an exception t6 thisrestriction provided the applicant meets the criteria set forth undersections L8.L2.090(B) and 18.13.080(B) of the Municipal code incrudingpermanentry restricting the unit as a rong-term rentar unit, for furr--time employees of the Upper Eagle Valley.-
1)
2l
3)
10
.Revir:ed 5/L/92
(PLEASE PRINT ORA. APPLICANT
33::,ffi :il"*,iffi ":?'-'"'*
APPLICATTON FOR
SINGI.E TAI|II.Y SUBDIVISION
CEAPTER 17.25 VAIL IIT'NICIPAI. CODE
TYPE)----'I^.,--L.-.-[ L-^-{.., b o-L
MAILING ADDRESS 6oo a 4fi U"" (/-'a t\--. \ ?8rL{8
416-G14 4
B. PROPERTY OWNE M.,'. k o-s*L
onttER' s sr
3+rr
ONE
a\-a
4 76-674+
8t Ur8MAILING ADDRESS V..-(
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL:
srREEr ADDRESS t(31 €,Jsfo.-.-- \ - .
D.
E.
ILOT I BLOCK suBDrvrsroN .fL {,'o- Cn-..J< FTLTNG
APPLICATION FEE S1OO. OO
MATERIALS TO BE SUBMITTED:
PAID CHECK *
1. Two mylar copies and one paper copy, of the subdivision plat
shall be submitted to the Department of Comrnunity Development.
The pl,at shall include the following:
a. The final plat shall be drawn by a registered surveyor inIndia ink, or other substantial solution, on a reproducible
medium (preferably mylar) with dimensj.on of twenty-four bythirty-six inches and sha11 be at a scale of one hundredfeet to one inch or larger with nargins of one and one-haIfto two inches on the left and one-ha1f inch on all othersides.
b. Accurate dimensions to the nearest one-hundredth of a footfor al] lines, angles and curves used to describe
boundaries, streets, setbacks, alleys, easements,strucLures, areas to be reserved or dedicated for public or
conmon uses and other important features. All curves sha.l-Ibe circular arcs and shall be defined by the radius, centralangle, are scored distances and bearing. All dimensions,both linear and angular, are to be determined by an accuratecontrol survey in t.he field which must balance and closewithin a limit of one in ten thousand.
c. North arror.r and graphic scale.
d. A systematic identification of all existing and proposed
buildings, units, lots, blocks, and names for all streets.
e. An identification of the streets, alleys, parks, and otherpublic areas or facilities as shown on the plat, and a
dedication thereof to the public use. An identification ofthe easements as shown on the plat and a grant thereof tothe public use. Areas reserved for future public
acquisition shall also be shown on the pIat.
f. A written survey description of the area including the total
acreage to the nearest appropriate significant figure. The
acreage of each Lot or parcel shall be shown in this manner
as well.
A description of all survey monuments, both found and set,
whlch mark the boundaries of the subdivision, and adescription of all monuments used in conducting the survey.
Monument perimeter per Colorado statutes. two perimeter
monuments shal1 be established as major controf monuments,the material-s which shall be determined by the town
engineer.
Y.
*":.3:t:":I..n" r.and survevor aainins how bearins b3se .
i. A certificate by the registered land surveyor as outld.ned inChapter 17.32 of this title as to the accuracy of the survey
and plat, and that the survey vras performed by him in
accordance with Colorado Revised Statutes L9'?3, Title 38,Arti.cle 51.
j. A certificate by an attorney adnitted to practice in theState of Colorado, or corporate title insurer, that the
owner (s) of record dedicating to the public the publicright-of-way, areas or facilities as shown thereon are the
owners thereof in fee simple, free and clear of all Liensand encumbrances except as noted.
k. The proper form for filing of the plat with the Eagle Countyclerk and recorder.
1. AII current taxes must be paid prior to the Town, s approvalof p1at. This includes taxes which have been billed but arenot yet due. The certificate of taxes paid nust be signedon the pLat or a statement from the Eagle County AssessorsOffice must be provided with the subnittal informationstating that g!! taxes have been paid.
m. Certificate of dedication and ownership. Should thecertificate of dedication and ownership provide for adedication of land or improvements to the public, allbeneficiaries of deeds of trust and mortgage holders on saidreal property will be required to sign the certificate ofdedication and ownership in addition to the fee simple ownerthereof.
n. Signature of owner.
The plat must contain the following statement: I'For zoningpurposes, the l-ots created by this subdivision are to be treatedas -gllg lot with no more than @ dwelling units allowed on the
combined area of the @ lots." The statement, shall be nodifiedto indicate the number of units and lot.s proposed.
2. A copy of the declaraLions and,/or covenants relating to thesubdivision, which shall assure the maintenance of any conrmon
areas which may be created. The covenants shall run erith theland and shall be in a form suitable for recording eritf! the Eagle
County Cferk and Recorder.
3. Schedules A and B of a title report.
APPROVAL PROCESS, REVIEW CRITERIA
The burden of proof shall rest with the applicant to show that thesubdivision complies with the zoning ordinance with respect tobuilding location and other aspects of the structure and ground, withthe origj-nal plat as approved by the Design Review Board of the Town
and the accurateness and integrity of the survey data found on theplat.
Upon receiving two copies of a complete submittal along with payment
of the appropriate fee, the zoning administrator shall route one copyof the site map to the town engineer for his review. The zoningadministrator shall then conduct this review concurrently. The townengineer shall review the submittal and return conments andnotifications to the zoning administrator who shall transmit tbeapproval, disapproval or approval with modifications of the platwithin fourLeen days to the applicant. The zoning administ.rator shallsign t,he plat if approved or require modificatlons on the plat forapproval or deny approval due to inconsistencies with the originally
approved plan or failure to make other required modifications of t.heplat.
FILTNG AND RECORDING
The Department of Community DeveJ.opment wil.l. record the plat and anyrelated covenants with the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder. Fees for
recording shall be paid by the applicant. The Corrununity Development
Department will retain one tnylar copy of the plat for their records
and will record the remaining mylar copy.
Revised 5/L/92
h
F.
:lR t
If thls appllcatJ.on regulree a separate revlew by any local, State or
Federal agency othel than the Town of ValI' the applJ.catlon fee shall be
lncreaged by 9200.00. Exarq>les of euch revlew, may include, but are note
lfunited to: Cololado Department of Blghway Access PermJ.ts, Atmy Corps of
EngJ.neers 40{, etc.
The appllcant ghall be responsible for paytng any publishing fees whLch
are in excess of 50t of the applJ.cation fee. I,f, at the appllcant's
reguest, any matter is postponed for hearing, causlng the natter to be
re-publlshed, then, the entlre fee for such re-publlcatlon shall be paid
by the applJ-cant.
AppllcatLons deemed by the Couununity Development DePartment to have
signifJ.cant deslgn, Iand use or other isgues whlch may bave a glgnificant
Lmpact on the conmunlty may require revlew by consultants other than town
staff. Should a determination be made by the tohtn staff that an outside
consultant is needed to review any applicatlon' the Comnunlty Development
may hlre an outside consultant' lt shall estimate the amount of money
necessary to pay him or her and this amount shall be forwarded to the
Town by the applicant at the tine he fifes his application with the
Cornmunity Development Department. Upon completion of the review of the
application by the consultantr any of the funds forwarded by the
appl.lcant for payment of the consultant which have not been paid to the
consultant shall be returned to the applicant. ExPenses incurred by the
Town in excess of the amount forwarded by the applicant shal1 be paid to
the Town by the applicant within 30 days of notification by the Town.
R"Ill\!4NOl$islx\l
N*
Rf
(o
E
IrsaE.E.e!Ffitl.Ecl-ct:F;,!#1SAqs
FI$I
3iE*
i*iH
;sn3rdt
lii
Bi$
Ei;
ffi
^sl
E
it3..."'ot.tb
o3c-n loJ
O.'ir-r.
*;;'.
TUttt
,-a \
ffiltl2fl2
N0V ?.1,,:i
Co
OWNER'S SIGNATUR
MAILING ADDRESS
F.
FEE $250.00
The first
applicant
review.
1.
3.
4.
5.
T0V - eOi'rivi. r,c,r, DIPL
APPLICATION FOR
MINOR SUBDIVISION REVIEW
CHAPTER 17.20 VAIL MUNICIPAL
(4 OR FEWER LOTS)
(please print or type)
I Ln-*t lo -.-L
MAILING PHONE 41b-L1++
PROPERTY OWN {.-. 16 -.- t
C.PHONE 17 c -1o t4l
C. LOCATION OF (street address')----11,,31 5.-.( S,L r+- .L,^,,-.-
LOTS BLOCK___- SUBDIVEION lG{.,u- C r-.--{r
ht,'c-l
D.
E.
/r^oSJ.5f;-cHEcK #-6!fl- o^rE t/- L-U W
to request a meeling with the zoning administrator to assist the fltb-,rting the submittal requirements and to give the proposala preliminary &
SU AL HEQUIREMENTS
The applicant shall submit three copies, two of which must be mylars, of the
proposal following lhe requirements for a final plat below. certain of these
requirements may be waived by the zoning administrator ancuor the planning
and Environmental Commission if determined not applicable to the proiiryt.
A list of all adjacent property owners (including those behind and across the
str€et) wlrH COMPLETE ADDRESSES shail also be submitted. In addtilon,..
submlt addressed, stamped envelopes for each of the above.
Title Report verifying ownership and easements. (Schedules A & B)
An environmental impaci report may be required as stipulated under chapter
18.56 of the zoning code.
FINAL PI.AT - REOUIREMENTS AND PROCEDURE:
(Some of these requirements may be waived.)
a. The subdivider shall submit four copies of the tinat ptat, two of which
shall be mylars, twelve copies of the final EIR (if required) and any
additional material as required below. Within thirty days of receiving the
complete and conect submittal for a final plat, the zoning administrator
shall cause a copy of a notice of the time, place and general nature of
the hearing and proposal to be published in a newspaper of general
circulation in the Town of Vail at least lifteen days prior to said hearing.
Also, acljacent property owners to the proposed subdivision shall be
notified in writing at least seven days prior to the public hearing.
Mvt/) ot,, . t
il<Q'u[fr ,HD
/ '*,
B.Final Plat - Staff Review.
The final plat shall be circulatod to and reviewed by the town's departments,
including, but not limited to Public Works, Transportation, Community
Development, Recreation, Administration, Police and the Fire Department.
Comments and concems of these departments will be fomarded to the pEC
prior to the public hearing.
Final Plat and Suoolementarv Material- contenb.
The linal plat and supplementary materialshallcontrain the following
information:
1. The final plat shall be drawn in lndia ink, or other substantial solution, on
a reproducible medium (preferably mylar) with dimension of twenty-four
by thirty-six inches and shall be at a scale ol one hundred feet to ons
inch or larger with margins of one and one-half to two inches on the tsft
and one-half inch on all other sides.
:
2. Accurate dimensions to the nearest one-hundrgdth of a foot for dl lines,
angles and curves used to describe boundaries, streeb, selbacks,
alleys, easements, structures, are€ls to be reserved or dedicated for
public or cornmon uses and other important features. All curves shall be
circular arcs and shall be defined by he radius, csntral angle, arc chord
distances and bearings. All dimensions, both linear and angular, are to
be determined by an a@urate controlsurvsy In the field which must
balance and close within a limit of one in ten thousand.
3. North arow and graphic scale.
4. A systematic identification of allexisting and proposed buitdings, units,
lots, blocks, and names for all streets.
5. Names of all adjoining suMivisions with dotted lines of abutting lots. ll
adjoining land is unplatted, it shall be shorrrn as such.
6. An identitication ol the streetrs, alleys, parks, and other public areas or
facilities as shown on the plat, and a dedication thereof to the public
use. An identification of the easemenls as shown on the plat and a
grant thereof to the public use. Areas reserved for future public
acquisition shall also be shown on the plat.
7. A written survey description of the area including the total acreage to the
nearest appropriate signiftcant figure. The acreage of each lot or parcel
shall be shown in this manner, as well.
8. A description of all survey monuments, both found and set, whlch mark
the boundaries of the subdivision, and a desoiption of all monuments
used in conducting the suruey. Monument perlmeter per Colorado
statutes. Two perimeter monuments shall be established as major
control monumenls, the materials which shall be determined by the town
engineer.
9. A statement by the land surveyor explaining how bearing base was
determined.
10. A certificate by the registered land surveyor as oudined in Chapter 17.92
of this title as to the accuracy of the survey and plat, and that the survey
was performed by him in accordance with Colorado Hevised Statutes
1973, Title 38, Article 51.
11. A certificate by an attomey admitted to practice in the state of cotorado,
or corporate litle insurer, that the owner(s) of record dedicating to the
public the public right-of-way, areas or facilities as shorn thereon are
c.
!,r.lL .\
o r,'-
o
MEIIORANDUII
TO: File
FROM: Jim Curnutte
DATE: June 22, 1993 (First building permit issued - Bldg tr3)
Revised September 28, 1993 (Minor changes - Bldg #3)
Revised tlarch 14, 1994 (Second building permit issued - Bldg #2)
Revised May 20, 1994 (Minor changes - Bldg #2)
Revised october 19, 1994 (Third building permit issued - Bldg #4)
Revised June 5, 1995 (Fourth building permit issued Fermanis - Bldg #1)
Revised September 6, 1995 (Minor Changes - Bldg #1)
SUBJECT: Development statistics for lndian Creek Townhomes, Lots A-1 and A-2
AllOwed UnitS: 9 6owever tre approved do\relopm€nt p|an calls tor att of lh€ prop€rlys GRFA to b€
utilized by lhe six unils shoivn on lhe plan)
Allowed GRFA: 17,363.0 sq. ft. + 225 sq. ft. credit for each
constructed dwelling unit
Alfowed Site Coverage: 28,356.0 sq. ft.
Building 3 - Building permit issued June 22, 1993
GRFA:
Site Coverage:
Garage:
2,481.0 sq. ft.+ 28.5 sq. ft. (added on 9/28/93)
= 2,509.5 sq. ft.
1,470.0 sq. ft.
600.0 sq. ft.
Building 2 - Building permit issued March 14, 1994
GRFA 2,668.0 sq. ft.
+ 132.0 sq. ft. (added on 5/20i94)
= 2,800.0 sq. ft.
Site Coverage: 1,451.0 sq. ft.
= t'ffi*added on 5t2ots4
Garage: 500.0 sq.ft,
a !r 6r
Bulldlng 4 - Building permit issued October 19, 1994
GRFA:
'
Site Coverage:
Garage:
3,937,0 sq. ft.
1,965.0 sq. ft.
600.0 sq. ft.
2,815 sq.ft.+ 50 sq. ft. (added on 9/6195)
= 2,865 sq. ft.
1,460.0 sq. ft.+ 10 so. ft. (added on 9/6195)
= 1,470 sq. ft.
600 sq. ft.
Bulldlng 1 - Building permit issued June 5, 1995.
GRFA:
Site Coverage:
Garage:
Remaining GRFA:
Femaining Site Goverage:
5,251.5 sq.
:
SUBDIVISION
JOB NAME
Llonrs Rldge
Lots A-l & A-2
A-l and A-2LOT BLOCK FILING
ADDRESS
The location and availabirity of utilities, whether they be mainlp"\ ]l"ug or proposed lines, must be approved and verifiea ui'the following utilities for the accompanying sitJ p1an.
Authorized Siqnature Date
U.S. West Communicationst-800-922-19I7
468-6850 or 949-4530
Public Service Company
94 9-57 81
Gary HalL
Holy Cross Electric
949-s892
Ted Husky/Michael
Heritage CabLevision
94 9-5s30
Steve Hiatt
Assoc.
Laverty
T.V.
Upper Eagle Valley Water& Sanitation District *
47 6-7 480
Fred Haslee
NOTE: 1.
* Please bringobtaining Upperflow needs must,
h Uo\e seq 'c$o$\ed ""^p2.rba3
This forrn is t,o verify service availability andLocation. This should be used in conjunction witnpreparing.your utility plan and schedilinginstallations.
For any.new construction proposal, t.he applicantmust, provj.de a compJ.et.ed utility verificilionform.
If a utility company has concerns rvith theproposed construction, the utitity representat,iveshoul.d not, direct,Iy on the utiliti velificationform that there is a problem which needs to beresolved. The issue should t,hen be spelled out indetail in an attached letter to t.he T-own of VaiJ..However, please keep in rnind that it is theresponsibitity of the utility company to resolveident,ified problems.
If the utility verification form has signat,uresfrom each of the utility companies, and nocorunent,s are made directly on the form, the TownwilJ- presume that there aie no problems and thatthe deveLopment, can proceed.
These verifications do not relieve the contractorof his responsibilit.y Lo obt,ain a street cutpermit, from the Town of Vai], Department of public
lgtk9 and t,o obtain utilitv tocations beforediqqinq in any public right,-of-way or easelnent, inthe Town of Vail. A buildinq permit is not astregt cut permit. A street, cuL permiU must, beobtained separately.
a sit,e plan, floor plan, and elevations whenEagle VaIIey Water & Sanitat,ion signatures. Firebe addressed.
2.
3.
4,
5.
-lttb
2-/ ?'73
L-/ I-f J
|. '.t
nt
ol,nn Review Action Flh
TOWN OF VAIL
Category Number on" =ft t /q'{
proteaName: A*r*l t ct t t C f<< (1 '-:)-S[*' Ca*i, (,i E
Building Name:
Project Description:€ ',, I ,'( ,'l
owner, Addres "^naenon", /,t,'k<- ( .r,u*rh. L VT6- (".cit/(
L co g r6sg
ArchitecVContact. Address and Phone:' ;'{ q- ( l--l t
yl(,t.[-<'K .)-.s v'ri( (6., €;/6rP
Legal Description:Lou-ii.14]Btocx 4 sunaiuision t ,ousi)gu is.{ zone District RC
Project Street Address:
Comments:
Sq ddc k-p
{,<,t ,*, o'ru -''
[] Disapproval
fl Staff Approval
Conditions:
u r"f*Pr#'"Mtss
C-/-
;L{
urt u''r(( Ln Ct
+t11 ' rz /9 wr(( tc(
a..g G' i /cran t- ,",
7'!s''cq( ,'ft.C -Sj
t{./\
'q'qs )f,{"t
Pro5y"f.
o"", l/,2/q / DRB Fee Pre-paid
{,7(t *'l'
aBE
rve.ea. /-
s{161
*q.d&/\4'gr>
@.rtd.
e*=,
fr hoLP *r,
CoqcG, L*-{rr,,l
:aold, exe LatrQn*.0
{;e6,2 fc*r2g>--vt@^\ r .: P*Lrrr-r\e
r€vised 9lU9L
DRB IPPLICtrIION - TO9W Otr Vf,IT.,
DATE APPLICATION RECEII/ED :
DATE OF DRB MEETING:
*fitffisaN lrW
t*l*irttri
EATS TPP&ICf,TION I|I&L NOtr BE ICCEPIEDEtf,!II. tI,L REQUTRED tNtORUtttON IS sUBUIITED*rrlttl*itr.PROJECT INFORMATION:
A. DESCRIPTION-:
B. TYPE OE' REVIE9I:
New Construction
Addirion (950.00)
(s200.00)Minor Alteration ($20 .00 )
Conceptual Revlew ($0)
c.
D.
ADDRESS 3 llS? 6a-*-/tt-.t-- .!n,r" -
LEGAI., DESCRIPTION: LoT 4.1 I4-T- BlocK
Subdivision
If property is descrlbed bydescription, please provide
attach to this application.
ZONING QC
a meets and bounds legal
on a separate sheet and
E.
E.I,OT AREA: If reguired, applicant
stanped survey showlng log area.
must provlde a current
G.NAI.{E OF APPLICA},IT: hrL(.-/ f.oul..l--LMailing Address z
Phone
H.
T NA},18 OF OWNERS:
APPLICAIIT' S REPRESENTATIVE :
Address:
NAI,IE OF
Mailing N4
Phone
*SIGNATI'RE (S} :Mdiling Address,l
Condominlum Approval if applicable.
DRB FEE; DRB f,ees, as shown above, are to be paid atthe tlme of submlttal of DRB application. later, whenapplylng for a buildlng permJ.t, please ldentlfy theaccurate valuation of the proposal. The Town of Vallwill adJust the fee according to the table belod, !91ensure tbe correct fee ls paid. .M WFEE PAID: S '(/
FEE SCHEDULE:
VAI,UATION$ o-$ 1o,ooo
$101001 -$ 50,000
$50,001 -$ 150,000
$150,001 - $ 500r000
$500r 001 - $1,000,000$ Over $1r 0001 000
* DESIGN RE\'1tEtf BOA8D. TPPRO\TAIJ EXPTRES ONE YEER .}rrER rINAI'
APPRO\TAIT UNI,ESS A BUIIDING PER}TT IS ISSI'ED AIID CONSTRUCTION
SIARTED.
**NO TPPLICETION TTILT. BE PBOCESSED WIIEOUE OI|NER'S SIGNATURE
'g,
1
.T.
K.
FEE
$ 20.00
s 50.00
9100 .00
s200 .00
$400 .00
ss00 .00
$'1''
R-'
l->{-1(
y't/l e- n o
C".-k *5
.r*/slo.r- )."-'-
4 [,t>
An ( ".*il51 t
prr*,'I
Tu o'l'r l- obl''"' 'L- ln*('r g-{
(n2L,,,-L ,u../"/ cllon' P"rLL;-.* P'-'l (o [-
€r1oft"'/ * {t- c-/'ue- "/'^"''1 hz9"/"t-'
T 1 I t z u 4,'-*+ t'L {t* Lu.u{ {t 't 1t"-
'Tlat X.c,'1 L Q.ur'-u 6"-^( /"1 6'/
L10fro-u
S2 -/<-r
ng,
Ux,'/
"/t*
5 /.- -{
a- 1-r+-
f r''a r
lnav<-
/oua-/,'o'- "/ {'L 5"t
r,L ;/ 'g e.)^s,-r-t /' t ''/"oL t
-/t"t *{-u(. ,'c.lu/-
I
I .[u-rtt ,-{c. ,'o/ {" - /t* ? c\ t'/... -
Tco
{-L2
tLde -P fo Lc-e--
$ t *-c-. Oro tI<l
fi.
o/'--*.
N .l A M E S
POST OFFTCE BOX 3238vAtL, co.81gs8
FA.\ 9{9-0rr} t
:-'{,noO0 tldps
llunv wvtsv
?:owo6Plrr
lh"
. MEMBER OF AMERIcAN tNSTtTUTE oF ARCHITECTS.
rtt:le,),tf\l /I'' | :'"il;'!t '- 9.y| ,)r t-Jrlrrl '-df rl
R)
It
l
/,[ grP
\H H!f -,l1
It1
\
Il-:q
A\
f
n
:l
I
tI
I
u-
a
[vi
$'
ri:(rt
Hitr I
t,J'
:"/
II
\!
$
p
l;,
I
nrc'ol zs tss:'
Re
INTER - DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW
ppg-Jgg1. INDIAN CREEK TOWNHOMES
DATE SUBMtTlsg. JUNE 7, 1993
COMMENTS NEEDED BY:
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF
JUNE 9. 1993
THE PROPOSAL:
/l*raZ=26 tlzJ, c>)
PUBLIC WORKS
(p'J8-?5
Reviewed by
Comments:
MIKE BRAKE 9oi". itllrtE-4-1993
4r //
BbL 4't '// | tl /znhuz'f ,
1. IN THE OF DEDICATION AND OWNERSHIP _ ]HE NAME AND STYLE OF
FINAL PLAT IS INCORRECT ACCORDING TO YOUR PLAT TITLE.
,4 HAVING J TRAcT A,S WITHIN oNE SUBDIVISIoN IS VERY coNFUSING. IT
WOULD MAKE MORE SENSE TO SEPARATE THE TRACT DESIGNATIONS.
6. EASIS OF BEARING SHOULD STATE SOMETHING LIKE "BETWEEN FOUND
1,/2', REBAR WITH WASHER L.S. 151,1 AT NoRTHEASTERLY CORNER OF LOTA-2 AND FOUND REBAR AND CAP PEAK ONE #99]g AT SOUTHEASTERLY
CORNER OF LOT A_2," THE NEW LOT A-1 DOES NOT YET EXIST!
+. PLEASE REFER TO ''BOARD NEWS'' VOLUME V, JANUARY 1993,
COLORADO STATE BOARD OF REGISTRATION FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS
AND PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYORS, OFFICIAL NEWSLETTER, PAGE 7''.
THE MONUMENT DESCRIPTIONS PROVIDED BY YOU ARE NOT RECOGNIZED AS
BEING ADEQUATE AS REQUTRED By CRS 38-51-1O2(f).
.S. SHOW MONUMENT DESCRIPTION FoR LINE DEFLEcnoN oN NoRTHERLY
SIDE OF PROPOSED LOT A-1.
,,T-SHOW BEARINGS FOR ENTIRE EAS]ERLY ''TRACT A".
/) n"fa-lrlAh^J/ /l*t T Kq.t A ,ren.rS
{- z \\ {". A;L- /z*/f_*+
/^ t*-4 t]^l-f L "-,,*, gu
*9lLo 5a-s.e t
+tT
")I
own 'rlonner
t
:'
,4J -
l{t}!,,
.).
I
Return to own rlonner
INTER - DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW
pp6.1E61 INDIAN CREEK TOWNHOMIS
DATE SUBM1TTED. JUNE 7, 1993
COMMENTS NEEDED gy. JUNE 9, 1993
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL:
fil*"aZ*1CD tt 3, e)
PUBLIC WORKS MIKE BRAKEReviewed by po1u. JUNE 8, 1993
Comments:
1. IN THE OF DEDICATION AND OWNERSHIP - THE NAME AND STYLE OF
FINAL PLAT IS INCORRECT ACCORDING TO YOUR PLAT TITLE.
2. HAVING 3 TRACT A'S WITHIN ONE SUBDIVISION IS VERY CONFUSING. IT
WOULD MAKE MORE SENSE TO SEPARATE THE TRACT DESIGNATIONS.
3. BASIS OF BEARING SHOULD STATE SOMETHING LIKE "BETVVEEN FOUND
1/2" REBAR W|TH WASHER L.S. 1511 AT NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF LOT
A_2 AND FOUND REBAR AND CAP PEAK ONE #S939 AT SOUTHEASTERLY
CORNER OF LOT A_2,'. THE NEW LOT A_1 DOES NOT YET EXIST!
+. PLEASE REFER TO ''BOARD NEWS,' VOLUMT V, JANUARY 199J,
COLORADO STATE BOARD OF REGISTRATION FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS
AND PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYORS, OFFICIAL NEWSLETTER, PAGE 7".
THE MONUMENT DESCRIPTIONS PROVIDED BY YOU ARE NOT RECOGNIZED AS
BE|NG ADEQUATE AS REQUTRED BY CRS 38-51-102(0.
5. SHOW MONUMENT DESCRIPTION FOR LINE DEFLECTION ON NORIHERLY
SIDE OF PROPOSED LOT A_1.
6. SHOW BEARINGS FOR ENTIRE EAS]ERLY ,'TRACT A,'.
f
)I
CLnRetum to tr
Town Planner
IT{TER.DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW
DATE SUBMITTED:
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING
COMMENTS NEEDED BY:
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL:
Muncr SuLb- tc Vci-co.J-!-- ALct tt-nC-
FIRE DEPARTMENT
Revie$red ov: 44aa^{Date:6: 7 73
Comments:-a,.22 O gttz--->1'"'- S
fhr coPY
6. A request for a minor subdivision to vacate the lot line between Lots A-1 and A-2 and' a request for variances from the subdivision road standards and wall height standards
for Lots A-1 and A-2, Block A, Lions Bidge Subdivision Filing No. 1/1139 and 1109
Sandstone Drive.
Applicant:
Planner:
Shelly Mello made a brief presentation per the staff memo and stated that staff was
recommending approval of all three of the applicant's requesls with four conditions: 1)
that additional landscaping be added along the lowest retaining wall, 2) that th€
applicant agrees to vary the wall, 3) that the applicant file a minor subdivision plat with
the Community Development Department prior to application for a building permit, and
4) that hazard mitigation be specified for each unit on the site.
Diana Donovan asked the applicant if he had any problems with the conditions set
forth by Town staff.
Mike Lauterbach, the applicant, wants Condition #3 to be changed so that the minor
suMivision plat can be filed prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of
Occupancy on the first building constructed.
Shelly Mello stated that it would simplify matters to do the minor subdivislon plat and
vacate the easement concurrently. She said that vacating the easement would be
handled by Upper Eagle Valley Water and Sanitation District. She also stated that the
minor subdivision plat and the application for any building permits could be handled at
the same time.
Mike Lauterlrach stated that he was concerned that this project would get dragged out.
Kristan Pritz suggested that Condition #3 could be changed to: 'The applicant shall
submit a minor subdivision plat prior to the release of a building permit for this proJect.'
Mike felt that this would be acceptable.
Bill Anderson stated that he still had a concem with the parking between the buildings.
Greg Amsden commented that he was still concerned with the design of the three
western units and that Dalton Williams could hopefully address the PEC regarding the
DRB concems.
Mike Lauterbach stated that the DRB was concerned with the southern elevation. He
said frat Sally Brainerd of the DRB proposed that the roof line be changed on the
middle and western-most units.
Plannlng and Envlronmenlal Commlsslon
May 24, 1993 4
I
7.
Kathy Langenwalter stated that she was concerned with the design of Unit 4 and the
vertical distance between the building and the driveway. She said that the DRB
needed to look closely at the design of this part of the project'
Greg Amsden stated that he does not want to see excessive exposure.
Kathy Langenwalter made a motion to approve the request for a minor subdivision to
vacate the lot line between Lois A-1 and A-2 and a request for variances from the
subdivision road standards and wall height standards per the staff memo, the
conditions contained within and that Condition #3 be changed to read: "The applicant
shall submit a minor suMivision plat prior to the release of a building permit for this
project." In addition, Kathy stated that the DHB should look at Buildings 1, 2, and 3
closely to insure that the units are not identical and that the DRB look at the vertical
height on Building #4 and its relationship to the site. Jeff Bowen seconded this motion.
Diana Donovan stated that this site is highly visible from the road and that additional
landscaping is needed to screen the site. A 6-0 unanimous vote approved this
request. lt was also stated that the parking among units 1,2, and 3 be removed if
possible. Kathy emphasized that the DRB should consider how visible this site is from
the valley floor.
A request for a conditional use permit to allow the construction of a 12-inch diameter
high-pressure natural gas pipeline generally located between Dowd Junction and the
VailAssociates Shops.
Applicant:
Planner:
Public Service Company of Colorado
Buss Forrest
Russ Forrest made a brief presentation per the staff memo and stated that
approximately the last one-third of the proposed high-pressure natural gas pipeline
would be located within Town of Vail boundaries. The proposed line would be located
in the Interstate corridor and is not zoned until it enters the Cascade Crossing area
which is zoned Arterial Business District. The Town of Vail staff recommends that the
Public Service Company of Colorado be granted a conditional use permit for the
pipeline. However, statf makes this recommendation contingent upon the issuance of
a Finding of No Significant lmpact from the US Forest Service based on the EA for this
project. Public Service should also be required to submit a construction vrorkplan to
Public Works prior to initiation of construction to ensure coordination on other utility
and path construction projects. ln addition, the DRB will need to review the
revegetation plan and screening of the valve set.
Diana Donovan stated that the PEC generally did not like the idea of the pipe passing
across Gore Creek.
Kathy Langenwalter stated that she liked Bill Anderson's suggestion that the pipe be
placed under a loot bridge. She also stated that lhere were already two pipes at this
location.
Plannlng and Envlronmental Commlsslon
May 24, 1993
;,-'! t'
lhsncs dspadinO said ROW llns N66'5325'E 39.15 fsot; thsnca dopaninC aald ROW lne S8l'23'19'E l6lt 42 Lel lo r lolnt ot
curve; th€nca 122,8:t l€€t along the arc ot 6 143.20 loot radius curve to th€ lei, havlne s ca. ral angls ot4trO85l'arrd a ('|oad lhal
bsarE 515"57 45'E t t 9.10 ts€t; $€ncs S40.32'10'E 3.00 test; rhencs 66,30 t€el alono lh€ arc ol a 77.21 loot tadl6 curv€ b lh.
rlghl, having E cenrat angle ol49't 2'10' and a chod thEt b€ar6 51556!5"E 64.28 l€€l; thenco S6'40tiO"V, 9(1,27 feel; thgnce
N38"42'24-w 22.1.55 l€€r; rhon€ S78o1012"w 101.44 teet lo rh€ Point of B€0innlng.
Tr/Py
Jim Curnutte made a brief presentation of the request and asked the PEC to make a
formal motion and vote on this request.
Jeff Bowen made a motion to approved the applicant's request for a minor subdivision
per the staff memo. Greg Amsden seconded the motion and a 6-0 unanimous vote
approved this item.
8. An appeal of a staff interpretation to not allow a cantilevered portion of a building into
an area exceeding 40% slope.
Applicant: Michael Lauterbach/The Reinforced Earth Co.
Planner: Shelly Mello
Staff explained that a formal motion was not recorded at the April 26, 1993 PEC
Meeting concerning this item and requested that a motion and vote be made.
Kathy Langenwalter made a motion to uphold the staff interpretation that a building
cannot cantilever into an area exceeding 40% slope with Dalton Williams seconding
the motion. A 6-0 unanimous vote upheld the staff interpretation.
Applicant:
Planner:
A request
exceeding
located at
Applicant:
Planner:
Michael Lauterbach
Jim Curnutte
for a wall height variance to allow for the construction of a retaining wall
three (3) feet in height in the front setback for the driveway to the residence
2346 Cortina Lane/Lot 4, Block A, Vail Ridge.
Arno Brinkman
Tim Devlin
9.
10.
Tim Devlin made a presentation per the staff memo and stated that the staff was
recommending approval of this item with the condition that the steps be heavily
landscaped with a mix of junipers, aspen and evergreen trees.
Kathy Langenwalter made a motion to approve this request for the wall height variance
per the staff memo with Dalton Williams seconding the molion. A 6-0 vote approved
this item.
A request lor a discussion regarding The Valley, Phase ll, upper development area,
concerning the soils testing requested by the PEC.
Applicant: Steve GenslerPlanner: Andy Knudtsen
Plannlng and Envlronmental Commlsslon
May 10, 1993
COPTFIL T
75 South Frontage Road
YaiL Colarado 81657
303-479-2 I 38 / 479-2 I 39
FAX 303-479-2452
April 29, 1993
D e parttne nt of C omntutt ity Deve lo ptnent
Mr. Michael Lauterbach
P.O. Box 3451
Vail, CO 81658
,,.
RE: Lots A-1 and A-2, Lionsridge Subdivision Filing No. 1
Dear Mike:
As we have discussed, there was an advertising mistake made for your item concerning Lots
A-1 and A-2. Because ol this, we will not be able to conduct a formal review and final hearing
for the request on May 1Oth. The reason for this is that the item was advertised in the Vail
Trail as a work session rather than a final review. We have readvertised the item and the
item will be a review for final approval on May 24th. I apologize for the inconvenience and
appreciate your understanding on this matter.
Further. I would like to reiterate that the review on your item looks quite positive. The PEC
had a lew items which you need to consider. These include the landscape plan, parking in
the front setback, and configuration of retaining walls. The proposed minor subdivision does
not appear to be an issue and, as we have discussed, a revised hazard report will be
necessary to compleie this.
Again, thank you for your understanding on this matter and I apologize for the delay of the
re-view ol this item untit Irlay 241d;r. lt you have any questions, please contact me at 479-2138.
.l
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
May 24, 1993
Development ol
No. 1/1139 and
Townhomes.
Applicant:
Planner:
MEMORANDUM
Design Review Board
Community Development Department
Lot A-1 ard A-2, Block A, Lionsridge Subdivision, Filing
1109 Sandstone Drive also known as Indian Creek
Michael Laulerbachffhe Reinforced Earth Co.
Shelly Mello
Attached please find a copy of a memorandum to the Planning and Environmental
Commission from Town staff regarding the Indian Creek Townhomes. The PEC approved the
request, however, there were a number ol conditions which I feel should be passed on to the
DRB. The conditions are as follows:
1. That the applicant submit a minor subdivision plat prior to the release of any building
permit lor units on this site;
2. That the DRB review Units 1 ,2, and 3 so that they not be identical and that they be
distinctively different bu ildings ;
3. That the DRB work with the applicant to remove as much asphalt as possible adjacent
to and in front of Units 1, 2, and 3;
4. That Unit 4 be looked at closely when proposed so as to limit the impact of the
building. As proposed, the lowest point of the building envelope is approximately 10
feet above the road grade. The PEC feels that the applicant should try to limit the
height of this building so as not to create a huge wall in this location.
I
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Kofrf,oTW-
ft1$ gaMEMORANDUM
Planning and Environmental Commission
Community Devdopment Department
Applicant:
Planner:
May 24, 1993
A request lor a minor subdivision to vacate he lot line between Lots A-1 and A-
2 and a request lor variances lrom he subdivision road standards and wall
height standards lor lots A-1 and A-2, Block A, Lions Ridge Subdivision Flling
No. 1/1139 and 1109 Sandstone Drive.
Michael Lauterbach/The Reinforced Earth Co.
Shelly Mello
I. INTRODUCTION
The applicant is requesting a review ol three requests. The first ol these requests ls a minor
subdivision in order to vacate the lot line between Lot A-1 and A-2 to crsate a single lot. The
second request is a wall height varianco to construcl a 6 loot wall in the right-of-way and in
the 2O-fool front selback of the property. A second 3 foot wall will be constructed in
conjunction with this 6 foot wall. A varlance ls needed for the addltlonal 3 feet ot wall
helght. The maximum wall height allowed in the fronl setback and right-of-way is 3 feet.
These walls are required for the construction of the access road lo the parcel. The third item
is a variance request from the subdivision standards for the minimum radius on a curvs for a
minor road (private). The minimum radius allowed by the Subdivision Regulations is 50 feet.
The applicant is requesting a radius of 44 feet. A varlance ls necessary for the slx foot
dlfference In radlus.
II. BACKGROUND
In April of this year, the PEC reviewed this application at a work session. Upon review, the
PEC specified that the applicant should further extend the proposed landscape plan and
increase he amount of landscaping adjacent to the walls in the front setback.
In addition, the applicant was directed to remove a parking spaco located in the lront setback.
The applicant has completed this. The applicant was also asked to try to eliminate parking
spaces located between Units 1 and 2 and Units 2 and 3. The applicant and staff have
reviewed lhis possibility, and unfortunately, due to parking requirements, these spaoes cannot
be eliminated. The applicant has also redesigned the fire access tumaround so that it ls
pulled back from Sandstone Drive. The applicant has provided landscaping In order to screen
lhese walls and they are in conformance with the ma,rimum wall height allowances.
In the work session, the PEC also requested the guardrail detail tor the roadway. Please see
the attached drawing of this element.
a
ilt. zoNlNG srATlsTlcs
Existino Allowed (Combined Lotsl
Zoning: ResklentalOluster ResHenUalOluster
Lot Size:
Lot A-1: 62,990 sq. ft. 113,428 sq. ft.
Lot A-2: 50.1138 so. ft.Total: 113,428 sq. ft.
Buildable Area:
Buildable Lot A-1: 29,819 sq. ft. 69,457 sq. ft.
Buildable Lot A-2: 39.638 so. ft.Totial: 69,457 sq. ft.
.GRFA:
Lot A-1 7,434 sq. ft. 17,363 sq. ft.
+ 225 sq. ft. crediUunit + 225 sq. ft. crediUunit
Lot A-2: 9,909 sq. ft.
+ 225 so. ft. crediUunitTotal: 17,363 sq.ft. + 225 sq. ft. credlUunit
Density:
Lot A-1: 4 units 9 units
Lot A-2: 5 unitsTotial: 9 units
Site Coverage Allowed:
Lot A-1: 15,747 sq. ft. 28,356 sq. ft.
Lot A-2: 12.609 sq. ft.Total: 28,356 sq. ft
"Parking:
Lot A-1: 10 spaces/4 enclosed 23 spaces€ enclosed
Lot A-2: 13 spaceslS enclosedTotal: 23 spaces/g enclosed
'Because GRFA is not on a graduated scale for Residential Cluster (RC), the GBFA does not
change with the vacation of the lot line between Lot A-1 and A-2.
"Based on units which exceed 2,000 sq. ft. and require 2.5 spaces per unit. At least one
parking space must be enclosed per Residential Cluster zone district parklng requlremenb.
Parking is not allowed in the 2O-foot front setback in his zone district.
IV. MINOR SUBDIVISION CRITERIA
The staff finds that the combined lots meet the minimum stiandards lor the crsation of a lot In
tho Residential cluster zone district. (Please see the ciart below.) The slaff has no issues
related to this minor subdivision. Mitigation will be required on this lot lor the debris flow and
rockfall hazards. The location and type of hazards will need to be specified on he minor
subdivision plat.
Please see the attached memorandum lrom Nicholas Lampiris, Certified Geologist' which
discusses the necessary hazard mitigation. The stiatf has worked with both the aPplicant and
the geotogist to achieve a safe mitigition plan which will have the least amount of site impact
posiiUn. -The applicant has commined to using internal structural mitigation for the rocldall
hazarO. As discussed in Lampirls' letter, a small berm (3 to 6 feet In height) adjacent to units
4 and 5 wilt need to be constructed to mitigate the debris flow hazard present on the lot. This
mitigation willbe constructed when units 4 and 5 are developed.
Minimum Lot Size:
Buildable Area:
Minimum Frontage:
Reouired
15,000 sq. ft.
8,000 sq. ft.
30 tt.
Prooosed
113,428 sq. ft.
69,457 sq. ft.
610 ft.
The staff finds that by combining these two lots that a more comprehensive development plan
can be achieved.
V. CRITEBIA AND FINDINGS
Upon review of Griteria and Findings, Section 18.62.060 of tlre Vail Municipal Code, the
Cbmmunity Development Department recommends approval of the requested variance based
on the following factors:
A.@:
1. The relatlonshlp of the rcquested varlance to other exlstlng or
potentlal uses and structures ln the vlclnlty.
WallHeioht
The staff has reviewed other possibillties for oonstructing access to this
properly. We found trat the available options, due to the slope of the
iot,'are very limited. A 6 foot boulder retaining wall has been proposed
in conjunctlon with a 3 foot boulder wall. Both will be located in both the
front seback and the right'of-way. The Town of Vail Municipal Code
2.
regulation requires hat walls in the lront sehack and right-of-way be a
maximum of 3 feet in heighl. The staff feels the applicant's request is
reasonable. The applicant h.ts proposed landscaping in front ol he
retaining walls as well as betw'een them. The staff would ask that a
minimum of seven 6 to I toot evergreens and five 2 to 3 inch caliper
aspen be added to the plan in lront of the first wall to turther mitigate the
impact of the walls.
The staff also finds that, as proposed, the walls on the site ate still very
linear. The applicant has indicaled that these walls will be undulate at
the time of installation. The staff feels that this is a very lmportant detail
of the walls and would ask the applicant to work with the staff and the
Design Bsview Board (DRB) to attain a moro natural curved wall.
Subdivision Standards
This application will have no impact on other potential uses or sfuctures
in the vicinity. The staff feels that the proposed radius of 44 leet for a
private road is a reasonable solution due to lhe topography ol the site.
Relief from the 50 loot radius requirement is appropriate because this
road access is only for three units. The staft feels that the minimum
radius can be decreased, however, it should not be decreased
significantly.
The degree to whlch relle{ from the strlct and llteral Interpretatlon
and enforcement of a speclfled regulatlon ls necessary to achleve
compatlbllity and unlformlty of treatment among sltes In the vlclnlty
or to attaln the obJectlves of thls tltle wlthout granl of speclal
prlvllege.
WallHeioht
The staff leels that this is not a grant of special privilege. Due to the
topography of the site, staff finds that relief from the strict and literal
interpretation and enforcement of the wall height regulations is
necessary in order to obtain a reasonable and acceptable solution for
access to the property. The slatf finds that the proposed plan is
sensitive to the sunounding area and that the proposed landscaping as
well as that being requested by the statf will adequalely mitigate the
impact of the walls.
Subdivision Standards
The stafl feels that due lo the topography of the site that relief trom the
minimum tum radius requirements would not be a grant of special
privilege. Other properties in the Town have also benelitted ftom some
flexibility in grade, radius, wall height stiandards to achieve ac@ss to
difficult sites.
B.
3. The ettect ol the requested varlanc€ on llght and alr, dlstrlbutlon of
populatlon, tEnsportatlon and trafflc tacllltles, publlc facllltles and
utllltle3, and publlc safety.
Wall Heioht
The stafi finds that the proposed wall of 6 feet will not lmpact any of the
above criteria. The stafi leels that by allowing only a single road cut tor
six properties, that the impact on the neighborhood will be far less than
allowing for perhaps two or more road cuts along that road. Tho statf
feels that this road configuration is positive and that the necessary wall
height variances to construct the access, as proposed, will not lmpact
any of the above criteria.
Subdivlsion Slandards
The request for a variance from the road stiandards will have no impact
on any of the above criteria. The Town of Vail Engineer has rsviewed
this application and feels that the proposal is a safe and reasonable
solution due to the site and its constraints. The staff has looked at
using two access points on this site, but feel that a single road qrt with
the variance from the minimum radius will limit the impac{ on the
adjacent properties.
The Plannino and Environmental Commission shall make the followino findinos
before orantino a variance:
1. That the granting ol the variance will not constitute a grant of special
privilege inconsistent with the limitations on olher properties classified In
the same district.
2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
3. That the variance is wananted for one or more of the following reasons:
a. The strict literal interpretiation or enlorcement of the specified
regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary
physical hardship inconsistenl with the objectives of thls title.
b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumsliances or
conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not
apply generally to other properties in the same zone.
c. The stric{ interpretation or enforcement of fie spedtied regulation
would deprive he applicant of privileges enjoyed by the ownerc
of other properties in the same district.
VI: BUILDING ENVELOPES
The staff has discussed the possibility of requiring building envelopes with the replat of this
parcel. The staff does not feel that it is necessary to plat the building envelopes. we feel that
the hazards, in conjunction with the regulation which disallows construction in areas with
sfopes in excess ol 4V/", already significantly restrict the area of possible development.
VII. DRB COMMENTS AT CONCEPTUAL REVIEW
The DRB has conceptually reviewed this application. In heir review, they have directed the
applicant to submit an extensive landscaping plan especially for hose units on the west side
of he site. In addition, they are very concemed with lhe proposed archilecture. lt is their
finding that while the units should be similar in form they should not be the same design. The
applicant was directed to adjust the building form, materials, buildirq fooprint and orientation
in order to achieve this compatibility.
In addition, the DRB has reviewed a proposed duplex development for the lot to the east of
the project, Lot A-3. In reviewing fie proposal for Lot A-3, the DRB directed the applicant to
change the proposed building from a duplex to two single family unils because they felt that it
was more desirable to have two separate units on this site versus a very linear duplex. Like
Lots A-1 and A-2, Lot A-S's developable area is very limited due to the slope of the lot.
VIII. STAFFRECOMMENDATIONS
The statf recommends approval ol the three requests. These requests include a mlnor
subdivision lo combine Lots A-2 and A-3, a variance from the wall height standards to allow a
6 foot boulder wall located in the right-of-way and in the front setback and a variance from the
subdivision standards for the minimum radius requirement for a private road. We lind that lhe
applicant has worked with the site in order to attain the best possible ac@ss solution on the
site. The staff linds that the applicant has met sections B 1, 2, 3, b and c as indicated in he
Criteria and Findings section of this memorandum we also tind that he minor subdivision
standards have been met. The staft would require the following items as conditions of
approval of all three requesb:
1. That the applicant add additional landscaping in front of the lowest retaining wall
including seven evergreens as well as five 2 inch caliper aspens along the edge of the
road at a minimum of 10 feet off the edge ol pavement to further mitigate the impact ot
the retaining walls.
2. That the applicant, during construction, vary the wall in order to obtain a curved natural
looking wall which is not linear. The staff would request that the applicant work with
the DRB and stafl to further refine the configuration of the walls.
3.That the applicant file a minor subdivision plat prior to the release of any buil
permits for units on lhis site.....$ll hazards must be located and labeled
ffi indicated on this subdivision plat.
+O YYiL^n
4. That the applicant submit specifications on all hazard mitigation at the tims ot
construction of the units. As indicated, the rockfall hazard mitigation will be handled
rvih intemal structural miugation however, the debris tlow mitigation, whlch Includes
landscape berms, will be required. The applicant will be required to submit a slt$
specific plan for this mitigation for each unit. The developer shall be include the
construction of the debris flow mitigation, as required by he geologist, with the
construction of the units lmpacted by the debris florrt hazard or the construc-tion of the
eastern segment of the road whlch begins at the radlus.
The staff flnds that this is a very difficult site to develop. In reviewing the adjacent peperties,
th6 statf has lound that there have been deviations from the stiandards In order to allow for
development. We feel that due to the topography of the site, that the approval of these
variance requests would not ba a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the llmltations on
oher properties classified in this same distrlct and that there will be no grant of speclal
pdvilege.
lgvrutrn tN I Wld^^\
I+ ;* dr/uprsly
a,fl6pr"<"'-<x ot@+w)-
4oo rcad U../^'"r Bv\frt"!'il-
n,^t Af,* \0O 6'a' '(.'6T- ft
N-ho*- +
Whc^-I
W^llrt
h%
Vah^ /N
AMr1,v NYrvTe Wd'X
5(\ -n/s41^/t
Ko*rt- ffi $*or#{t*,
bKbi 'M t?rz T.nr r>(
wry:lffiv'$ld* an'yk^9 r as
tffi u{u{;4t+ a !-tu}-a e-gnAe!tr
{€7$21'{u
{
H
ft
s+
E
\og
L][i!. , r', 1I I I .'.1
I
l1lltl / ^'it. ( ,',irlttrllo \I22s$?,$ti t
\L
R
TE
p?
OEgE
g$
3
?
$
3
*
Z
E
e
$
$
7
.(g
s
R
H
$
6
,I
I
I
I
ll
ll
ttl
rl
rliu#'
I
t
iriirn
t
- i;Ftl-, r Eu
'.'.
,!!
elrrr
$I\
l,,J!rrl-'n:t;,"
p+#E IJ:1/;:7t^ - '-'' I :l | ./ \/a\,'i&l7i l-J Lr,
W!-ifii/;,' ' ,':,
a \,/t\ ! )i'i i; .:"'iy''s{'.n,.4,1:; iiiVi!',ii1:/,i!":fil
iIf,
,
t, lr',
tlt.t*
:llii
i,i:.,t r'," ,,
I
I,,\'\i,I llfI \ \\\
\N
i'i't't
\,
ri
_',''1.,:&t!lE{f+it-.{"..,.:r . r' "'..'..;.-.,},!...-i3ao
ROCK RETAINING
(rYP)
cEX:S':];'{G SURF
(\
ut
e{
@
0+
Hi-,,ir';t-'r.r'tAL 1 "=,IC'
vdx riu/il 'l''-,.'i*'
PROFILT
ROCK RTTAINIhIG IryA!-L
SICTION A_A
l.It
,-)r
I'I
I
I
I
t
?i
-u
:1n
i\r$
=T
A-
$
-t\\
II
i
T
I
!
I
I
I
I
Ii
I
I
)t\
\
-t-
ob
i
i
I
i
I
-
fr
\
\
\
I.!l
_' I
{-.N
$-xJ
:I*rl' -*
fa- t
s{c
\)
i\
\r
qJ/zL/ql 10r17
i
SGIINC
Nlcholas J fmpirlc, Ph.D.
ool{4tLnNc ctoto€tgr
MEi ]NU!}GI.|!j.LA'{E
cLtcor.oRAootrE
Gros 50{EetEt Boor
B$slih't
2 1S9$
sln!.f,F[HqJBsl
tthy 3O1 l?!?it
lllkr l-arrtrrbrch
PO Borc S4FtVrll, C0 81658
REt Lotr.A-1, A-zt Llsn.l Rirlgr &,rbdlvtrlon
Dllr !F. lrutrrbrchr
t hrvr rrvltnd th; txo latr (rix unttrt .' rhqnr sn Hrr:rtrTp.'.rtng 0rg f6r Furpof.r of Fock Fell rnd Drbrtr Flcu rrvlufor thr Tor*r of vrll, The rlx rlt$ hrvr brd inir.n to b. outef thr €rbrrr frn cttmnct. Thr Glrlvrney ourt rnalr rna crorJlnrfrn, hmvrr.
?lrtc tr'ln r tocatlon rdrtra thr ridgrr, contalnlng thr tosrct ofFot'rntl.l frlttng, rcekre rrr et a low irvrr wrth Fref-ct to-trritltcr, Roeks ntlt ruch thc tttrrl butl if thry ao. rlll hevlrttt_lf lfirrgy. Frw unrtabk' rockr' occui rrciitrrir-eiogoladtvrlopmrtr but on tha Hlftrt.n rldgr, frrgi ro.1i drould brrteblltrrc sr rrnovcdl nlttgatlon f6r recr irri-irrqgro ll rt ttrrrur of rrch unlt r*rcrr r s l/z fogt concrrtl rtrn trell drq,rtc i.con3tructrd to .t hrrt sd) poundr plr rqu.r. loot rtrrngt--;d -
lr pro'trEtrd wtth rnrrBy rbrorptlvr ortrriel rgch rr fog'rtdfng.Fcr rny dsrr or widcm ln thir rrrr tnlrrvllf r iatlrr srtl (tnthr forn of r brfftrl rhould br csnrtructrd to piitrct tnrr.-opfitng fro rolllng- rockr. Ttrlr sill gnrtly r'"aucr rock frtlhrzrrc to thr Frajrct.
Txo brror rlrould b conrtruetrd, 13 m notxl ln thr.ftclds toprotr<t thr unltr cllrrctly on althrr rtcr of thr gully rnici-trth! altt of drbrtr flor rct:lwlty frorr tlar tc trd. Thr.. bfroriluft br rlx frrt htgh nrrr th. bulldlngj rnd trprr tarrrc thrhlllridr 1nd thry rurt ltnk thr nur rflr cElrnrF o+ nctr-*rJt$rth'thr hlllsidcr thrruby not rllontng nrd to rueh urr r.rr cfthr holrr, Thtr rlll IcmF rny floro Inttrrtr htrtcrlc pethr domthr ortstlng gully. ltrd or drbrlr rreehlng tnJrrcr rrtlr (thr3.Fr€f tn both eur;l ern cnly rrtlal alntnrt dror41r tc r nsrn-vttrl porttorr of thc hoor. Thr rrltern bern ourf crcer rn oldJrrp rcrd to br cffcctivr rnd thet rcrc rhoutd br mcttflld toprrvurt florr fren follslng lt tq'|rd oth.r porttonr ef thrdlrlopaolrt.
3
t
Thr conrlruetlon qf iltrrr unltrt or thr prcporrd ottlgrtlon, rtlt
not lncnarlr tlrr hezrrd to othrr proprrty or rtructurc, or topubltc rlghtr-o'f-wrvr buildtngtt roldls rtrratit lllrlrntrt.utllltlrf or frcllttlal or othsr proprrtltr ef rny klnd. totlrrnglnnrlng rtudtu erl rlruedy rvrllrbll .nd rttll rpprogrlrtrfor thrre rlte. tf thert aru gg.3ttcrr ptrut contrct [.
SGIIN(.B ooe
a
c
TOWII OFVAIT
75 South Frontage Road
Vail" Colorado 81657
303-479-2 1 38 / 479-2 I 39
FAX 303-479-2452
March 23, 1995
Department of Communiry Deve lopment
RE: Hazards affecting Indian Creek Townhomes, Building #2' Lot A'1'
Block A, Lionsridge Subdivision, Filing 1, 1139 Sandstone Drive
Dear Mark:
Michael Lauterbach has asked me to send you this letter for the purpose of documenting the
environmental hazards which atfect the above referenced property. The property is located within
tre medium and high severity rockfall zone and the high and moderate debris flcw zones. The
property owner haJhired a prolessional Geologist to review the site and recommend mitigation
measuies aimed at reducingthe risk ol rocks and/or debris reaching the residences (see attached
copy of letter from Nicholai Lampiris, Consulting Geologist, to Mike Lauterbach dated May 20'
1993).
I hope the information contained in this letter is what you needed from Mike, however if you have
any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me at 476-2138.
Mr. Mark R. Ristow
Executive Vice President
FirstBank of Vail
17 Vail Road
Vail, CO 81657
Jim Curnutte
Senior Planner
cc: file
enc: Lampiris letter
zL/Qx. lo.:12 arof selo
@ rtE5.e c1 HouBq
Fely ?O1 19ps
Iltke Lauterbrch
PO Dox S45tVril, D0 B16EB
REr Lctr.A-1 , A-Zf Llorr.s Riclge gubtttvirlon
Dr:r !h. Lrutrrbachr
r heve rcvilwcd the txo totg (alx units) rg r*ronn on thc.ctrErsrprnytng oap f6f purFores 0f Rock FalI and Debri: Flcn revra+rfor thr Toxn of Vrtr, The six rtte; hevr been inis"n to b. outef'the ccbrl3 frn cnlnnel . The ctrtveway rosi eni+ and crosr thrflnr hq{ever.
?hts ir'ln r locetlon-where thc ridgas, contalning thr gogree ofFot.nttrl frlltn-g^ rocksl ere rt a l6w iqvpt *ltn-fuse"ct to tni'Eites, Rocks wilt ruec'h tha. rites, butl i+ they dor will have.llttte rrrergy, Few unstable'rocks-cceui ruevJtrril'propo-ra -
devrloprnntr but on the wlBtern ridgef lrrqa rockr inouia urrtebiltrad or rrocvedl nttigatlon +Er'-ocr-hit-iiouro be et thererr of rach qnlt nhere e s llz fost concratr gtera xatl rhould brconstructed tg rt leest soo pounda pEr fq.,€* foot rtrrngth rndbr grotrcted with Encrgy ebsorptiva oaterirl rueh rl tog Fldlng-i.o" fny do€rr or widcnr'in thii rcar lntcrvar, i rintrar r*rt (tnthr forn of r baffle) should bo construct-J d.' piiteet thrr'opantng fron rolll,ng rockr. Thir will grcatly rlaucr rock frlthrrrrd to the proJxt.
Two baror chould bG conBtpuctrd, lr r.rc notcd la the.fteldl toprotect the unitc dtructly on rithcr side of tne-gurry wnici-rrtht aita of debrl.c-#lo, aetlvlty fron ticre tc ttcri. Tlrrrc brrolourt be clx {eet high near the buildtngr end taper towerd thrhllt:idr ?i{_t!.y ourt rink thr n..r re"r.o-rei of mch,"Jtrtth'thr hlllridel thareby not rllowing m,rct to ruch thr ruer ofthr hooer. Thir xtll &eeF rny flowa ln their trrst-girc pethr downthr cxtsting gully, ttud'or clrbrlc rmching tne ctdr Hrtlr (thrgerr€. tn both crrls I cgn o.ily Eaurl otntrnrt d*acC ts r ngn-vttrl portien of the hooe, Thr r:rtern bern ouri-=.o* rn oldJrrp rord to br effoctlrre rnd that rocd rhoulrl ba moctrflltl topr$rcnt flor' fren folloning it ton:rd othcr portlonr ef thrdrrrllopocnt.
sGxtlic
Nioholas .l ampiris, Ph.D.
coNsul.nNc ctoLOGtST
or8c nsu{Jotl lAt{E
stLT, @LORADO 81S2
G oor
S[$S\[[\
2 1'$9ll
SGXINc'
Thr conrtruction of thrct unttrr or thr propertd otttgrtlonr dtlt
not Lncnulr thn.hezerd to other proprrty or rtrustsrcct or topubltc rtghtr-p6-rnyr bulldlngrr rordrl rtrcatir ltllnentct.uttlitlu or {ectlttlsr or othcr prop:rtlrr od rny klnd. Sotlrrnglncrlng rtudlcr aru rlrrady evrlleblr rnd rttll rpprtrprlrtrfor thca sttrr. If therr lra qqrsttsrg plrrrr eontret sn.
c
o
F
'' t' '.
COPYILE
TOWN OF VAIL
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 8j'657
303-479-2 I 3 I / 479-2 I 39
FAX 303-479-2452
December 14. 1994
D e parn n e nt of Connunity Deve lo pment
Mr. Michael Lauterbach
MJL Development, Inc.
P.O. Box 3451
Vail, CO 81658
RE: Indian Creek Townhomes. 1139 Sandstone Drive
Dear Michael:
This letter is intended to respond to your letter to me dated November 27, 1994 regarding the
completion of certain work at the Indian Creek Townhomes prior lo the issuance of a
Temporary Certificate of Occupancy (TCO) for Building 2. As you know, on November 1,
1994, the Town of Vail adopted a policy which requires owners or builders to enter into a
developers improvement agreement and provide an escrow lor 125/o of the value of all
remaining improvements at the time a TGO is requested. The staff recognizes that the Indian
Creek Townhomes property is zoned Residential Cluster (RC) and lherefore, allows for the
construction of single family homes, in a cluster-type arrangement, on the property. Since you
are the owner, or majoTity owner, of the common area and all unbuilt dwelling units approved
on the property, staff believes that it is reasonable to allow you to defer providing escrow for
certain uncompleted common improvements until a significant portion of your project has been
built-out (i.e. three of the six dwelling units built). Since it is now mid-December, staff does
not believe there would be any benelit to requiring you to collateralize the cost of common
driveway paving and landscaping, as lhese improvements cannot be installed until the spring
of 1995. At that tirne, Building 4 should be substantially complete and you can complete your
paving and landscaping for the project in conjunction with finishing the work on Building 4.
Staff is also aEreeable to allowing you to defer completion of the work required in relation to
the utility meter enclosure until a TCO is requested for Building 4.
However, staff does not leel that it would be in the community's benelit, nor the existing
property owners, for you to continually deler completion of common improvements. Therefore,
staff would like to make it clear at this time, that even it design review or building permit
applications have been reviewed and approved by the Town ol Vail for Buildings 3, 5, or 6, no
additional deferments of landscaping or driveway paving will be authorized by the staff.
Mr. Lauterlcach
December 14, 1994
Page Two
Addltionally, straff would point out to you that even lf we were to require escrow for
uncompleted items prlor to the issuance of a TCO, all uncompleted work tor Buildlng 2
must be completed by July 1, 1995. In other words, statf is walvlng the reguirement
regardlng the collaterallzatlon ot the lmprovements but not the condition that all
improvements be completed by July 1, 1995. Your agreement that a TCO will not be
requested or granted for Building 4 until all improvemenls associated with Buildings 1, 2, and
4 are complete will be accepted in lieu of the escrow requirement.
ll you should have any questions or comments regarding the staff interpretation of the TCO
requiremenls, please contact me at your convenience'
Sincerely,
lr|^', C "' n"'
^''
/to-t
Jim Curnutle
Senior Planner
xc: File
MJL DEVELOPMENT INC,
PO Box 3451
Vail, Colorado 81658
303 476-6944
\,fF.MORA]\DLM
TO\l.C0t$til. DEV, DEP[.
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Jim Cumutte
Town ofVail Community
Michael Lauterbach
November 27,1994
Indian Creek Townhomes
I139 Sandstone Drive
Pursuant to our conversation last week, upon the approval ofthe utility meter
enclosure which was obtained on March 17,1994, several conditions were imposed.
Briefly, the approval required that the enclosure be finished with a light beige wash, a
property address would be applied to the doors, the maximum height ofthe enclosure was
limited to six feet, and additional details were imposed upon the landscaping plan. Even
though I vaguely remember discussing the completion schedule for the enclosure, I can't
find a requirement in print that it be complete prior to issuance of a temporary certfficate
of occupancy for unit #2. Even so, I intend to complete the enclosure with the completion
of unit il4 which is currently under construction. As I related to you, prior to completion
ofthe landscaping surrounding the enclosure, three electrical conduits must be installed to
the meter enclosure. The three conduits will all be placed in the same trench with one
being connected to unit lt4 and the other two direct€d toward units #5 and #6 prior to
being truncated. Thereforg if you wish to have a specific completion date for the
enclosure, I would be receptive to requiring completion prior to issuance of a temporary
certificate ofoccupancy for unit #4.
Pursuant to the Community Development memorandum dated September 13,1994
relating to temporary certificate of occupancy (TCO) requirements, I am requesting that
Indian Creek Townhome #2 be allowed a TCO without establishing a letter of credit or
escrow account to insure completion ofthe site paving. As the purpose ofthe bond "is to
ensure that all ofthe conditions" for approval ofthe project "are incorporated into the
final project" and 'that all improvernents are completed", I believe that it is premature to
require a bond on each ongoing residence as some improvements are logically best not
completed until portions offuture construction are complete. Additionally, it has been my
Page 2, Memorandum to Jim Curnutte
November 27,1994
experience that each purchaser which purchases a residence also requires that an escrow
for incomplete items be obtained at closing. Therefore, since I wish to avoid multiple and
perhaps overlapping escrows with the Town of Vail and residential purchasers and since
the Town of Vail rejects partial releases of escrows to reimburse for work completed, it
makes sense to identi$ specific improvements which must be complete with the issuance
of upcoming TCOs and update those requirements well in advance of a request for
inspections.
In summary, I believe that the landscaping required to be installed with the
construction of unit #2 is complete or nearly complete. Paving at the entry and to unit #2
would be accomplished prior to July I, 1995 pursuant to the terms of the TCO
memorandum. Unit #4 is currently under construction with completion scheduled for June
l,1995. Since unit #4 is an obvious component to the project, I am requesting that the
bonding for any overall project or unit #2 or #4 landscaping found to be deficient as well
as the paving required for access to either units #2 or ll4 be deferred until a TCO is
requested for unit #4.
In conclusion, I will be requesting a TCO inspection for Indian Creek Townhome
#2 this week. Additionally, please contact me if you have any questions or desire further
information.
til*;Actionrol
TOWN OF VAIL
-- _- ' ,-,!I
GatesoryNumber la- oxe kla/#r, 1711
eroieana e, T ncl ,'o n C,*<< K '
Building Name:
Project Description:
Lc c^d', o,
+ ol " L" {,'e,e S
q ( Se Se U€rt L ",.t)
e 3,-/5 Vo', L .C 8 res*
Architecvcontact, Address and Phone:S-{< v
?o. bx Z
LegalDescription:LouJ!!,tllBlock,- Subdivision Lror Zone District RC
Project Stroet Address:ll3q 5o ^) slenl Driv<
'ro p@tnJ c[,o,uqe> ua]€i<
o Prv6
",;{L *1.,e c[,or, u.svs **e o q/ea f sy'q€,
Boardl.-@
uotionoy: D f* u"" P ft
seconded bv: ll/rt.
oa". s/ea /q /
_t
DRB Fee Pre-paid
aae-<,@L
t
<ar/rr q^- f -t rt1.
Lr'-r !
Irc.-{rrrr-
r-4 '.st
. T. *t*-r..'Je gao
-tr.^- a( .a l,\Cr-r-.-k +2.&tr o. )RS
..'o{
ook b -t.t
4 r-.,a- rc-L .
t t rr-t e--l '*Lc
..9 e.tsc-|\at (L3 o
It- c, t - :*.4 a.pe sovu
oJ'1eL.{*,1- eb(-{<- . (.u,g*4
.'{c- l.q..'i Ltl clc 1're-l *.
.'lG- Ol tu c-L'c-l . g.- .{ .
L ?-I .
,
I c-rt c-
WL JF t.o r-
DNB IPPIJTCAITON - TOISN.Otr VAII|,
DATE APPTICATTON RECET\TED :
DATE OF DRB MEETING:
reviced 9ltlgt
coroRlDo
f'L3-?+
t*ttltrrrt
EETS TPPLICATION NII.'. NO! BE
uNarr. tI& REQUTRED TN'Onl|lElON rS SUEp|IEEED. ****i***** 1.1.,.I. PROJECT TNFOR}.IATION ."
T'4AV 2 3 1gg1
A. DESCRrprroN,: :rL_/..-. c.-..k T,,-.{0V,^eGhldil.SEV, DEP[,
B. TYPE OF REVIEW:
New Construction
Addition (950.00)
($200.00) ,,- Minor Alteration
Conceptual Review
-,. l. C"
($20.00)
(90)
c.
D.
ADDRESS:rx
I,EGAI DESCRIPTION:Lot BIock
Subdivision Tu &.'Cr..-k T).',--L--.-^-^-
I
L
If property is descrLbed by a meets and bounds legaldesqription, please provide on a separate sheet andattach to this applicatlon.
ZONING:E.
F.
G.
LO! AREA: If required,
stamped survey showing
Mailing Address:
nust provlde a current,
L.. +-. Lcs(-rr 4,. 1 CoPhone lrL -Lr.
appllcantLot area.
,' e- k <-c- |
H.
r.
NAI'{E OFMailing APPLICAIIT' S REPRESENTATIVE :
Address:
J.
K.
Phone
NA!,TE OF OIINERS:--1-.1---L
*SIGNAT9RE (S) :Mdiling Address:
Phone
Condominlum Approval. if applicable.
DRB FEE3 DRB fees, as shown above, are to be pald atthe tlne of submlttal of DRB apptication. Later, whenapplylng for a building pernit, please identify the
PEEI 20.00s 50.00
$100.00
s200.00
s400.00
s500 .00
FEE SCHEDULE:
VALUATIONI o - $ 10,000
$101001 -$ 5o,oo0s 50,001 - s 150,000
$150,001 - $ 500,000
$500,001 - s1r 000r 000$ Over S1r 000r 000
* DESIGN RETXTEI{ BO:ARD APPROVAI. EXPIRES ONE YEIR EFTER
'TIIAJI.IPPRO\f,AIJ T'NI'ESS A .ASII.DING PERMIT IS ISSUED ArtD CONSTRUCTION IS
STARTED.
**NO APPLICATION TULI. AE PROCESSED WITSOUT OI{NER' S SIGIIATUNE
_!.
1
I
.',1
-.t.
MTMORANDIIM
TO: ImCrrnttc
Tonm of Vail Comnrunity Dcvelopment
FROM: Mchael Lrrfr"rb*h rd
DATE: April16,1995
RE: Creologic llazard Review Form
Indiu Creek Tovmhomes lot 3
I acr in receipt ofthe above re,ferenced forrr which you had $ked me to pr€pare for the
rbovc referenc€d rcsidenc,e. Unfortunstely, I don't beliwe it applies to the residence under
construction on Lot 3. Tbe form ctates 'that the proposod building is loceted in a
-
hazard mne, . .." which just isn't true. Nicholas Ilryiris'letter of May 20,1993 states in
the first paragraph tbar the rix buildiag sites are ort of the debds fin channd. I{s qrrent
l€tlcr dated April 13, 1995 sstcs thEt rock fall does not impact this sit€. Tbdore, I
dont believe that this form is rppropriate for the above refer€ocod site.
Tbanks in advance for your oonsideration ard please contact me ifyou have any questions.
Nicholas Lampiris, Ph.D.
CONSULTING GEOLOGIST
0185 INGERSOLL LANE
stLT, coLoRADO 81652
(ru) 87S5400 (24 HOUFS)
l'lay ZOq 1993
l.li ke Lauterbach
PO Box 34$tVail, CO BI6SB
REr Lotr A-1, A-29 Lton'r Ridge Bubdtvlrlon
Dear l,lr. Lautarbechl
I have reviewed the two lots (rlx unlts) ar rhoxn on the
rcco.npanying map for purposer of Rock Fall rnd Dcbrlt Flow rrvlrw
own of Vail.
riveway mugt s,ntcr en cron thrtn, however.
Thls lr ln e locetlon where the rldgce, contelntng the rourse ofpotentlel felltng rockrr rri et e low llvrl wlth rrspect to thcriteE, Roske wlll rmch the ritesr but, l{ they do, wlll havellttla encrgy. Few unrtablr rockr ocqur rbov: thtr proporcd
developnent, but on thc wegtern ridge, lerge rockr rhould brrteblllzed or rcmovld; nltlgetlon for rock fell thould bc et thrreer of cech unlt wherc t 3 l/2 foot concrete rtem wall rhould brcongtructed to rt laert SOO poundr per rqurrt {oot ctrrngth rndbc protected wlth rnergy rbrorptlvr natrrlal ruch ee log rtdlng.For rny doorr or nldowr ln thlr rrer lntrrvel' e rlmllrr wrll (tn
the form of a befflr) rhould be conrtructed to protect thlr
oprnlng from rolllng rockr. Thlr wtll grretly reduct rock frll
hezerd to the proJrct.
Two berme rhould be conrtructrdr ra wG noted ln ths field, toprotect the unltr dlrrctly on rither rlde of tho gully whtch irthe rtte of debrlr flow ectivlty from time to tlne. There bcrmrnuet be rlx foet high nmr thr bulldtngr rnd trper toward thchtllride and they murt llnk thr nrlr r:er corner of rech unltwtth the htllrtdr, thrreby not rllowing mud to ruch thr rcer ofthe homee. Thlr wl 11 krap rny flowr tn their hlctoric pethr downthe cxlstlng gully. l'lud or debrle r:achlng the rtdr wellt (thr
garrge ln both caree) can only cru3e minlorel demrgr to r ngn-vltrl portton o{ thr honc. Thr wcrtern btrn murt srorr rn old
Jcep road to be effective rnd thrt road rhould be nodlfird toprcvent flowr {rom {ollowlng lt towerd othcr portionr of tht
devel opment.
The
Thr conrtructlon of thorr unttr, or thr propond oltlgrtton, rlllnot lncrlrr th: hrzrrd to othrr property or rtructur-r, or topublle rlghtt-of-rlyr bulldtngr, roldl, ltrrrtr, mrrnrntr,utllltlrr or fecllltlu or other proprrtto of eny lclnd. itollrrnglnrrrlng rtudllr lre elrredy evrllebtr rnd rtlil epproprletrfor thcr rttu. lf thrrr rrr qumtlonr plurr contrci mr.
Irllcholm LenplrlrConrulttng Brologlrt
4
Nicholas Lampiris, Ph.D.
CONSULTING GEOLOGIST
P.O. BOX 2
srLT, coLoRADO 816s2
(3O3) 876-5400 (24 lloURS)
April 13, L?VS
l'li ke Laurterbach
FO Eo;r 54Sl
Vail. CO €11658
RE: Indi an Ereelr Tonnhomee
Formerly L-ots A-l , A-3i Lion's Ridge St-rbdivision
Dear Flr . Le.lrt er b ac h :
At your reqr-rest I
wi th you on Harch
haaard to the uni t
recently re-visited the ahove refBrenced site
31 , 19?5 ionr
AE I stated to you in rny letter o{ May 2Ot
1993, a separate berm ehnltl d be cnnEtrurrtecl (one i s al ready
partially cornF, lete at. the appropriate lscation) on the nest side
of the existing natural gully tn prote,'ct tfre rrnit from debri:;
{ 1'rrr activlty which rn€y occur {rorn tirne to time. The unit wi l l
be protected {rom thi:; hazard if the berm ie conrpl eted ae
directed previously and the detrris {lor,rs in this area will be
kept in the existing gutl 1y.
It is my understanding that the recently framed unit on this Lc,t
S iE several {eet to the eagt o{ the T,:wn o{ Vail approvad
location. Even so, if the protectivE berrr iB constructed
properly, the rigk o{ debris {Iows toward the unit should not be
increased by this repoeitioninq of the unit tc: its present
locatiorr . The conEtruction o{ this rlnit n or- tl-re proposed
mitigation, rvill not increase the harard to other property or
structurea, or to public rights*o{-way, buildingsr roads tstreetsr easementE, utilities or {acilities Dr other properties
o{ any kind,
Upon initial completirrn n'F the berm,, I will re'.,iFr.r with you dn
site the siring and positioning {or adequacy. I{ there are
queeti on= please contact me.
Sincerely,
Ni chol
Con slrl
ffi.,"ti ng 6eo1 ogi st
?rrtr copy
Ned Gwathmey responded that the trees would be 12 feet, 12teel,6leet and t+ feit
in height.
Kathy Langenwalter suggested that half of the potentillas be replaced with climbing
rose bushes.
Shelly Mello asked the PEC whether they would like to see landscaping trees on the
upper deck.
Diana Donovan responded that they would like to see trees on the upper deck. The
applicant agreed to placing two evergreens, one 10 foot and one 8 foot evergreen in
lhis location.
Kathy Langenwalter made a motion that items 1 through 7 on page 2 of the staff
memo be approved per the stalf memo and that item 8 be approved by the PEC as
proposed in the drawing from Gwathmey, Pratt and Schultz dated May 10, 1993. Jefl
Bowen seconded the motion and a 6-0 vote approved this request.
12. A request for a work sesslon for a minor subdivision to vacate the lot line between
Lots A-1 and A-2, a request for variances from the subdivision road standards, wall
height standards and lo allow parking in the front setback located at Lots A-1 and A-2,
BlockA, Lions Ridge Subdivision Filing No. 1/1139 and 1109 Sandstone Drive.
Applicant: Michael Lauterbach/The Reinforced Earth Co.Planner: Shelly Mello TABLED UNTIL MAY 24, 199:l
Dalton Williams made a motion to table this request until May 24, 1993 with Jeff
Bowen seconding this motion. A 6-0 vote tabled this item until May 24, 1993.
13. A request for a front setback variance, a wall height variance and a site coverage
variance to allow the construction of a garage located at Lot 26, Block 7, Vail Village
1st Filing/165 Forest Road.
Applicant: Paul RaetherPlanner: Jim Curnutte TABLED UNTIL MAY 24, 1993
Dalton Williams made a motion to table this request until May 24, 1993 with Jeff
Bowen seconding this motion. A 5-0 vote tabled this item until May 24, 1993.
14. A request for a conditional use to allow tee-pees to be used in conjunction with Vail
Associates summer programs to be located adjacent to the Base of Chair 8, Tracts B
and D, Lionshead 1st Filing.
Applicant: Vail AssociatesPlanner: Jim Curnutte TABLED UNTIL MAY 24, 19Sl
Dalton Williams made a motion to table this request until May 24, 1993 with Jeff
Plannlng and Envlronmental Commlsslon
ilay 10, 1993
I
I
11
G---i
Lions'Ridge #4
Hoemowners Assoc.
P.O. Box 4191
Vail, CO 81658
Homestake Condos
1081 Vail View Drive
Vail, CO 81657
A.L. Shapiro
P.O. Box 1448
Vail, CO 81658
516[rc oo/p.orrs slrrcur
Qo,rrlG0q> e-nf,Tf) / MlHl A-rrenenC"t-f
Fred W. Pool ll
7 Martin Lane
Englewood, CO 80110
Walter Regal
13275 W. Burleigh
Brookfield, Wl 53005
Casolar at Vail
c/o Greg Hampton
1185 Casolar Drive
Vail, CO 81657
Lion's Mane I
c/o Ed Drager
P.O. Box 100000 M
Vail, CO 81658
*
rHls lrEM MAY EFFEcT YouR PRoPERTY
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTTCE lS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of lhe Town of
Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 18.66.060 of lhe Municipal Code of
the Town of Vail on May 24,1993, at 2:00 P.M. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building.
Consideration of:
1. A request for a work sesslon:for the establishment of a Special Development District,
a CCI exterior alteration, a minor subdivision, a zone change, and an amendment lo r"
View Corridor No. 1 for the Golden Peak House, 278 Hanson Ranch Road/Lols A, B,
: C, Block 2, Vail Village 1st Filing.
t
Applicant: Golden Peak House Condominium As;oc.A/ail Associates,
Inc./Partners, Ltd.iMargaritaville, Inc. "
Planner: Mike Mollica/Tim Devlin
2. A request to amend Section 18.04.170 of the Zoning Code to clarify the definition of
the height ol structures.
Applicant: Town of VailPlanner: Shelly Mello
3. A request to amend Section 18.58.020 of the Zoning Code to clarify the height allowed
for retaining walls in setbacks.
Applicant: Town of Vail- Planner: Jim Curnutte
4. A request for a conditional use permit to allow for an outdoor dining deck localed at
122 E. Meadow Drive, Village Center Commercial Building/A part of Lot K, Block 5E,
Vail Village First Filing.
Applicant: Fred Hibbard
Planner: Shelly Mello
5. A request for a setback variance to allow an addition to Unit 3-A, Vail Trails ChaleVa
portion of Block 4, Vail Village First Filing.
Applicant: W. Patrick GrahmPlanner: Jim Curnutte
6. A request for a conditional use permit to allow the construction ol a 12 inch high
pressure natural gas pipeline generally localed between Dowd Junction and lhe Vail
Associates Shops.
7.A request for a conditional us6 permit to allow the elimination of a dwelting unit in order
to allow the Vail Associates Rea! Estate Office to expand in the A & D Building, located
at 286 Bridge StreeULots A - D, Block 5A, Vail Village Fkst Filing.
Applicanl:
Planner:
Applicant:
Planner:
Public Service Company of Colorado
Russ Forrest
VailAssociates
Mike Mollica
+'A request for a minor subdivision to vacate the lot line between Lots A-1 and A-2, a
request lor variances from the subdivision road standards, wall height standards, to
allow parking in lhe front setback and lo allow a cantilevered portion of a building to
encroach inlo an area of land in excess of 40% slope at Lots A-l and A-2, Block A,
9.
10.
12.
A request for a wall height variance for a property located at 3130 Boolh Falls
CourvLot 6, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing
Michael Laulerbach/The Reinforced Earth Co.
Shelly Mello
Johann Mueller
Shelly Mello
VailAssociates
Jim Curnutte
Paul Raether
Jim Curnutte
Town of Vail
Jim Curnutte and Buss Forrest
A request for a conditional use lo allow lee-pees to be used in conjunction with Vail
Associales summer programs lo be located adjacent to the Base of Chair 8, Tracts B
and D, Lionshead lst Filing.
A request for proposed text amendments to Chapter 18.38, Greenbelt and Natural
Open Space District, and Chapter 18.32 Agriculturaland Open Space District, of the
Vail Municipal Code.
vA
A request for an amendment to Chapter 18.54. Design Review, to modify the review
procedures for the Design Review Board.
Lions Ridge Subdivision Filing No. 1/1139 and 1109 Sandstg.ne Drive.
Applicanl:
Planner:
Applicant:
Planner:
Applicant:
Planner:
Applicant:
Planner:
Applicant:
Planners:
11. A request for a front setback variance, a wall helght variance and a site coverage
variance to allow the construction of a garage located at Lot 26, Block 7. Vail Village
1st Filing/l65 Forest Road.
13.
14. An appeal of a statf decision regarding GRFA for a covered entryway to be constructed
as part of a residence located at Lot 1, Distelhorst Subdivision/4582 Streamside Circle
East.
Applicant:
Planner:
Appellanl:
Planner:
Applicant:
Planner:
Applicant:
Planner:
Town of Vail
Jim Curnutte
Kyle Webb
Jim Curnutte
Simba Land CorporationMalid Said
Mike Mollica
Town of Vail
Andy Knudtsen
15.
16.
A one hour discussion of appointmenl of a PEC chairperson before project orienlation.
A request lor a major amendment to SDD #5 to allow tor the development of lhe
remaining portion of the Simba Run SDD, Savoy Villas, located at 1100 North Frontage
Road, more specifically described as follows: *.
That parr ot the First Supplemental Map for Simba Bun Condominium, according 1o lho map lhereof
r€corded in rhe ottice of the Eagle County, Colorado, Clerk and Rocorder, d€scribed as lollows:
Beginning at lhe most southweslerly corner of said map, thence the following lhreE courses along the
west€rly lines of said map; t) NO3"33'01'E 160.79 teet; 2) Nl2'5033"E '!.44.72 feeu 3) N17"56'03'70.60
leet; thence, depaning said weslerly line, S13ol6'03"W 157.25 teel, thencE S76o43'57"E 91.50 teel; lhenc€
N13"16'03"E 35.00 teer; lhence S76'43'57-E 72.31 leet to th€ easlerly line ol said map; lhence the lollo\ring
lwo courses along lhs eastorly and southeaslerly lines ol said map; 1) S24"44'57'E 52.38 teel; 2)
S52'50'29nV 272.50 feet to rh€ Poinl ot Beginning, containing 0.6134 acres, more or lEss; and
That part of Simba Run, according to lh€ map th€r€ol, recorded in Book 312 al Pag€ 763 in the Ofiice of
lhe Eagle County, Colorado, Clgrk and Flecord€r, described as follows:
Beginning at the most sorrtherly corner of said Simba Run, rhenc€ the folloMng lour cours€s along lhg
soulhw€stErly and nonhweslerly lines ol said Simba Runi 1) N37'09'31'W 233.28 teelt 2) 334.57 feet along
tho afc ol a curv€ 10 the lett, having a radius ol 121.95 leel, a csnlral angle of 10049'06', and a chord lhat
bears N42'1320'E 334.07 leet;3) N36o48'48' E 201.36 teer;4) 15.96 le€t along lhe arc ol a c-uwe ro ths
tighl, having a radius ol 428.O2leel, a cenlfal anglg ot 02o08'12', and a chord thal bears N37'52'54' E
15.96 feet lo a corner on the weslerly boundary of the Fifsl Suppl€m€ntal Map fof Slmba Run
Condominlum, according lo the map lhereof recorded In the oflice ol the Eagle Counly, Colorado. Cl€rk and
Recorder; lhence lhE following four courses along said weslefly boundary; 1) S21"5128"W 69.90 t€el; 2)
S17'56'03'W 181.17 feel;3) S12o50'33nV A4.72 teeti 4) 503033'01'W 160.79 feer ro rhe sourheasrerly line
of said Smba Run; thence, along said southeast€rly line, S52'50'29'W 113.08 teer lo rh6 Poinr of
Beginning, containing 1.560 acres, more or less.
17.A request for a conditional use permit, a paving variance to allow for a gravel access
road and the cemetery master plan and managemenl plan for the proposed design of
the Vail Cemetery to be located in the upper bench ol Donovan Park generally located
west of the Glen Lyon subdivision and southeast of the Matterhorn neighborhood.
I
18. A.request tor a modificaUon to PEC condltlons of approval for the revised derretopment
plan lor Vail PoinUt88l Uonsridga LoodLot I, Block 3, Uonsridge Filing No. 3.
Appllcant: Steve GenshrPhnner: Andy Knudlsen
s:
4
\
IT.ITER.DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW
-4 r( Ar ^1/- |tn d rt A rtrr ( 't 00 nt-.-
pROJECT; JV|{X \ LV v\- \u/ \t"x't"
DATE SUBfuIITTED:
DATE OF PUBLIO HEARING
COMMENTS NESDED BY:
BRIEF DESCRIP]'ION CF THE PROPOSAL:
Comments:
) D*il 'nuJ s
./r\{ .rcc
"/..
)I'
3) fl^a". l, 1, 2 , j l,-l-
4) A rlru *Dro^o7
a J:*/r'as &J/ 4 3
h^)L 7.// i6 ';' 24'fr,J',{" i- e,, ny, d*
J*k z' b'7a-a EJf .+
nuJ -- -1,, J,', ,-,. J'" 6"-r)t L^,
c^ 51..y*, ,V , /L- fix,*, J
u,f ,^7 ,--. ll L r7*uJ
E,s.e ^uul ,'' ' (( r^u'J {'
14" AL/U - ,'Drot^tj-( (ofouL.l,,*, ,,-,.(I L
_ L.J,t J* Lo:,../, o7)r,,orl-
i, z-c )5) SooJ u,-7 t^r, J/A'on',/1, ,'ir,'L' o/ru tu. J r
l" L l/' u,J. -."/L Z,con. Fa.-, u,_,.11
n4*tl,u a, 4/* 5A*/Jn, , nol. a( /A"dr,'ru lo^.-
u-,, /l ao J J'
/>.,,/r.'.., oul
L Jrs;1*. J J-/
A/.-",cu'r s. L* L*t,J
/
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Zoning:
Lot Size:
Lot A-1:
Lot A-2:
Total:
rll.t g,'rpy
d Earth Co.
MEMORANDUM
Planning and Environmental Commission
Community Development Department
April 26, 1993
A request for a work session for a minor suMivision to vacate the lot line
between Lots A-1 and A-2, a request for variances from the subdivision road
standards, wall height standards and to allow parking in the front setback at
Lols A-1 and A-2, Block A, Lions Ridge Subdivision Filing No. 411139 and 1109
Sandslone Drive.
Applicant:
Planner:
Michael Lauterbach/The Fleinfgrce
Shelly Mello
I. INTRODUCTION
The applicant is requesting a work session to review four requests. The first of these
requests is a minor subdivision in order to vacate the lot line between Lot A-1 and A-2 to
create a single lot. The second request is a wall height variance to construct six foot walls in
the right-of-way and in the 20-foot front setback of the property. These walls are required for
the construction of the access road to the parcel. The third item is a variance request from
the subdivision standards for the minimum radius on a curve for a minor road (private). The
final request is lo allow surface parking in the front setback. Under Residential Cluster
zoning, parking is not allowed in the 2O-foot front setback.
The applicant has also requested that the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC)
review a staff interpretation for the allowance of the construction of a cantilevered area over a
portion of a lot which exceeds 401". This issue is addressed separately in an attached memo.
il. zoNtNG STAT|ST|CS
Existino
Residential Cluster
62,990 sq. ft.
50.438 sq. ft.
113,428 sq. ft.
Allowed (Combined Lots)
Residential Cluster
113,428 sq. ft.
\
Buildable Area:
Buildable Lot A-1: 29,819 sq. ft. 69,457 sq. ft.
Buildable Lot A-2: 39. 638 so. ft.
Total: 69,457 sq. ft.
.GRFA:
Lot A-1 : 7,454 sq. ft. 17,363 sq. ft.
+ 225 sq. ft. crediUunit + 225 sq. ft. crediVunit
Lot A-2: 9,909 sq. ft.
+ 225 sq. ft. crediVunit
Total: 17,363 sq. ft. + 225 sq. ft. crediUunit
Density:
Lot A-1: 4 units 9 unils
Lot A-2: 5 units
Total: 9 units
Site Coverage Allowed:
Lot A-1: 15,747 sq. ft. 28,356 sq. lt.
Lot A-2: 12.609 sq. ft.
Total: 28,356 sq. ft
"Parking:
Lot A-1: 10 spaceV4 enclosed 23 spaces/9 enclosed
Lot A-2: 13 soaces/S enclosed
Total; 23 spaces/9 enclosed
*Because GRFA is not on a graduated scale for Residential Cluster (FC), the GRFA does not
change with the vacalion of the lot line between Lot A-1 and A-2.
"Based on units which exceed 2,000 sq. ft. and require 2.5 spaces per unit. At least one
parking space must be enclosed per Residential Cluster zone district parking requiremenls.
Parking is not allowed in the 20{oot front selback in this zone district.
III. MINOR SUBDIVISION CRITERIA
The staff finds that the combined lots meet the minimum standards for the creation of a lot in
the Residential Cluster zone district. The staff has no issues related to this minor subdivision,
however we would reguest that before a final review is considered on this parcel, a more
definitive hazard report be submitted and that lhe hazards be indicated on the subdivision plat.
Mitigation may be required on this lot for the debris flow and rockfall hazards. lf this is
necessary, it will need to be specilied at the time of the minor subdivision and completed with
the construction of the buildings.
/
IV. VARIANCE. WALL HEIGHT
In reviewing this application, the staff looked at other possibilities for constructing access to
the property. We found that the available options due to the slope of the lot are very limited.
The applicant has proposed two possible scenarios each with a combination of 3{oot and 6-
foot walls in the front setback and right-of-way. Scenario One provides three 3-foot concrele
walls on Lot A-1 and one 6joot and one 3-foot boulder wall on Lot A-2. A variance is
necessary for the 6-foot wall on Lol A-2. Scenario Two would provide for one 6-foot and one
3{oot boulder retaining walls on Lot A-1 and one 6-foot and one 3-foot boulder retaining wall
on Lot A-2. A variance is necessary for both 6-foot walls.
The staff would request that the applicant submit a landscape plan for the areas of retention in
order to mitigate the impact of the walls. We recognize the need for some degree of relief
from the wall height standards in order to construct adequate access to this property. The
staff is working with the Town Engineer to determine which alternati-ve will allow for the most
screening. The staff feels that an extensive landscape plan is critical to the mitigation of the
retaining walls.
V. VARIANCE. SUBDIVISION BEOUIREMENTS FOR THE RADIUS OF A CURVE ON
A MINOR PRIVATE ROAD
The applicant is requesting to decrease the minimum radius requirement for a minor private
road from 50 feet to 44 leet. The Town Engineer has reviewed this with the applicant and
feels that the proposal is a safe and reasonable solution due to the topography ol the site.
The Town Engineer will need to review the final design proposal prior to the final review of this
project. The staff would ask the applicant to further study the site plan and access to the
units. We believe that by utilizing two access points to the site, the disturbance to the
property may be reduced. This option should be investigated.
VI. VARIANCE. PARKING IN THE FBONT SETBACK
The applicant is requesting to be allowed to locate a guest parking/vehicle turnaround area
within the front setback. The parking space is located at the west end of the project. In the
Residential Cluster zone district, parking is not allowed within the 2O-foot front setback. Due
to the topographic constraints on this project, the staff recognizes that it is difficult lo provide
parking due to the limited amount of buildable area in this section of the parcel. However, we
believe that the units could be designed to allow for parking out of the front setback. We
would like to see all of the surface parking screened with landscaping.
In addition, there is a Fire Department turnaround located at the east end of the property.
This is not to be used for parking and is a dedicated fire lane. Therefore, a variance is not
required for this section of roadway located within the front setback. Again, the staff would
like to see an extensive landscape plan to screen this area.
VII. BUILDINGENVELOPES
The staff has discussed the possibility of requiring building envelopes with the replat of this
parcel. The staff does not feel that it is necessary to plat the building envelopes. We leel that
\
the hazards, in conjunction with the regulation which disallows construction in areas with
sfopes in excess ot 40Y., already significantly restrict the area of possible development.
VIII. DRB COMMENTS AT CONCEPTUAL REVIEW
The DRB has conceptually reviewed this application. In their review, they have directed the
applicant to submit an exlensive landscaping plan especially for those units on the west side
of the site. ln addition, they are very concerned with the proposed architecture. lt is their
finding that while the units should be similar in lorm they should not be the same design. The
applicant was directed to adjust the building form, materials, building footsrint and orientation
in order to achieve this compalibility.
In addition, the DRB has reviewed a proposed duplex development for the lot to the east ol
the project, Lot A-3. In reviewing the proposal for Lot A-3, the DRB directed the applicant to
change the proposed building from a duplex to two single family units because they felt that it
was more desirable to have two separate units on this site versus d very linear duplex. Like
Lots A-1 and A-2, Lot A-3's developable area is very limited due to the slope of the lot.
IX. STAFF CONCERNS
The stafl is concerned with the following aspecls of the proposal:
1. Mitigation which may be required for rockfall and debris flow. The applicant
must submit a more definitive hazard report which indicates any required
mitigation prior to completing the minor subdivision which will vacate the lot line
between Lot A-1 and A-2;
2. Appearance of the proposed walls in the front setback and Town right-of-way.
The applicant will need to submit a landscape plan which screens the walls;
3. The use of single family units on this site is driving the need for an extensive
access plan. The stafl would like to see the applicant study the possibility of
connecting some of the units as well as using an additional access point to
minimize the lineal footage ol the access road and walls;
4. The landscape screening of lhe surface parking and fire lurnaround in the front
setback;
The staff would ask the PEC to comment on the four issues outlined above.
4
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
uEry
Planning and Environmental Commission
Community Developmenl Department
April 26, 1993
ApplicanVAppellant:
Planner:
t tt r ^flnr,
Appeal of the staff interpretation of Section 18.69.040(A) - Hazards -
Development Restrictions.
Michael Lauterbach/The Reinforced Earth Co.
Shelly Mello
The appellant is appealing the stafl's interpretation to disallow any cantilevered development
(i.e. building overhangs) into areas with 40% or greater slope on a Flesidential Cluster zoned
lot. Section 18.69.040(A) of the Town of VailZoning Code specifies the following:
"No structure shall be built in any flood hazard zone or red avalanche hazard
area. No struclure shall be built on a slope of 4Q"/" or greater except in Single
Family Residential, Two Family Residential or Two Family Primary/Secondary
Residential zone districts. The lerm .slructure" as used in this section does not
include recreational structures that are intended for seasonal use, not including
residential use."
Structure is defined as follows:
"Structure" shall mean anything constructed or erected with a fixed location on
the ground, but not to include poles, lines, cables, or other transmission or
distribution facilities of public utilities or mailboxe! or light fixtures. At the
discretion of the Design Review Board, swimming pools and tennis courts may
be exempted from this definition."
The appellant is requesting to be allowed to cantilever a portion of a building into the area ol
40% slope in a Residential Cluster zone district. The staff feels that it is important to restrict
devefopment in all areas of slope over 401" for structures to maintain the stability of the
topography. We feel that lhe lerm "structure', as used in this regulation, includes those
portions of structures that are cantilevered. Should the PEC choose to approve the
applicant's request, then cantilevered buildings would also be allowed to encroach into areas
covered by red hazard avalanche.
The appellant believes that cantilevered buildings do not constitute structure and, therefore
should be allowed to cantilever into areas with 40% or greater slope. This appeal is being
filed in accordance with Section 18.66.020 ol the Town of Vail Municipal Code which allows
an applicant to appeal all staff decisions to the Planning and Environmental Commission
(PEC). The PEC may confirm, reverse or modify the action of the Zoning Administrator per
this section of the Code.
Nicholas Lampiris, ph.D. O
CONSULTING GEOLOGIST
0185 INGERSOLL LANE
srLT, COLORADO 81652
(3@) 87654@ (24 HOURS)
April lBu 199,3
l"li ko Lar"rterbarctr
F0 Sox 34ii1Vail, C0 €t t6SB
RE: Lots A*;L o A-i?i Lion,s Ridqe $urbctivision
Dear Mr. Lauterbach:
I havrn reviewed tho tr,ro lo.l,s (si:{ r-rnits)itccompanyi nS map .f or purr-porsrs o{ Rocl,: F,aI{or tfre Tmwn o{ Vni l " Tlie si }t 6i tes haveo{: the dehr-i-q {an clrannei.. The dr^i veway{;ln o hnwever.
This i'u in er rocat-i.on whs+rn the ri r16:1eo c*ntaininq the s'urr-ce o{po{:en{::ial f al. I i.nq; roclrs, is at grrch a low level with re:ipect to'hhe gi. tps '[hat r.'c Ir; wi ]r. 1 rarer y reacr"r the si teos , and , i { theydo, rrr j. ll. ha.rcl ver-y. l:ii:t:l.e Hner-gy, F.elq r..rr-r:i.L.able rocl.,:s rjcctJr ahrovclth i s Fr-mpnsed dsrvel[ opmr,:rn h, , and -to
.h l-r ra Ne!,t , I ar-c]e roc h$ shoul d he*i:'lbi. i i.retjl nu..vc-r.trrell es*u r Lwrl .{:cLur- {oot hL.gh beirns Lihn rrr bclconsi:t"t.tt.:ti.ld abuvs.' ft.1. L r-r*si. rJencerrii ,nt i:he. rlou]rr hi I I edqJFr of rr)drdsabc,v€,r thr": ::i tels .('ne.r. r''acj i.* i.n pIace, thr= cther- i:: pr.oposecr ),Tlti r:i' wi. .l ll al. I l::r r..rt r* il i rni. n.:.rtn any roi:|.,: .l; al ], hi.lr;rr"rJ .Ln .1,6e pro jelct.
[,-0t, me rL:r13rfit{:! thai:. tht"r g:ites ar-e+ not in the cl*pbrr:i r-la:,ar-d areEsi,br"rt *n insrlre the :ia'f r+t-y o{: 1:rro projr*ct it- i.r; necessary t r.r*onst'lrct "e Later*rl berm u'i:r 4reet hJ,gh, asi shor.rn on the.tccnmpd nyinq1 ri[,:e*tnh marn, ar.nrrcl r:;idie trrn qur]. r. y in tirel virirrity o{9ii te 5. 'rfr:is wirr kc;:erp any +Iows in the:ir hi::.toric pathg down ther*r.r i st i. rrq qlrl I y.
5io:i 1s elnc.ri rreler':i. ng gt.t-rc:i r.,e $ (,ir r'(-: fi] rea.Jy ar.;l i I atrl e anri rsti l. I,:lprpro;lr-i;rt: for ther:s.t sii:Ers, l: j,rrirl p.lacinq o{ t:lrel utnits andni:lrer-r.r{nre, Ihr: pr-r:pmrecl rni.tr.q.r,hr.on shour]ci Lre dclne in the,upringtime When ''n c)r,rt cctncli. ti on:i ar.p leS* inlribi.bing and ,nflrccleLi.iti..l.s tr.f Lhe ;:r,-n.jc+c.L: are r.r.l,:lrJ;, " .lj .f .Lher-el &l!-a quegt:i nnr:i pl e;rsecnntac:t me.
$ii ncclr el y,nIa,44
N j. rhol a:i l-ampi'ri s
l)r::rns;l,rl. ti rin {ii+rolo(lt FT:
cls FrhOr^Jn on t h esI and Debris Flow reviewbeen chrrsen to be or-rt
mLigt enter and cross the
(
FIL T 00Py
TOWNOFVAIL
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
303 -479-2 I 38 / 479-2 I 39
FAX 303-479-2452
Departtnent of Communiry Development
April 16, 1993
Mr. Ed Drager
Lionsmane Association Board of Directors
P.O. Box 1000M
Vail, CO 81658 6-
RE: Proposed Development at Lots 41 and A2, Lionsridge Subdivision Filing No.4; 1149
Sandstone Drive
Dear Mr. Drager:
Thank you for your letter concerning the proposed project on Lots A1 and A2 in Lionsridge
Filing No. 4 and the incomplete project at 1 149 Sandstone Drive. At this time, the 41 and A2
project is scheduled for a work session with the Planning and Environmental Commission
(PEC) on April26, 1993. A final review is scheduled for May 10, 1993 with the PEC. A final
review by the Design Review Board (DRB) has not been scheduled at this time.
Currently, lhe stafl is reviewing information which has been submitted by lhe applicant,
Michael Lauterbach. The staff has not yet made a recommendation on the project. The
applicant has been asked lo revise the roadway plan as well as to further define the hazard
report which are both required tor the application. The roadway plan should be available as of
April 15, 1993 for your review. The hazard report is in the process of being prepared and may
not be available until a later date. The staff will send a notice ol the PEC hearings to you as
you are an adjacent property owner. Notification is not normally sent for DRB meetings. At
any time, please feel free lo call the planning otfice and ask the status of the project. The
stalf does try to work with applicants in facilitating the projects as they go through the review
process and, therefore, sometimes they are tabled in order to respond to staff concerns and
heard at a later meeting date.
ln your letter, you indicate that you are concerned with rockfall, soil reports, landscaping,
lrash, construction parking, deliveries, road cut and cleanup of construction debris on the
street. The PEC review will cover the issue of the hazards due to the request lor a minor
suMivision. There is an identitied debris flow between the two lots which is being addressed
with mitigation and building design. The applicant is working with a certilied geologist to
address lhis issue. Landscaping may also be addressed to a degree due to the request for
variances for wall height. The DRB process will review the location of trash lacilities,
architectural design and proposed landscape in depth. The issues ot soil reports, construction
parking, deliveries and clean up of construction debris are not the purview of either of these
boards, but are issues lhat are addressed at the time of building permit. Neither of the boards
t
Page Two
April 16, 1993
Drager
have the ability to mandate or dictate specifics on issues relating to the construction process.
A soil report may be required at the time a building permit is requested. lt has not yet been
determined as to whelher the soil report submitted which was dated in 1981 will be sufficient.
This will be determined by the Chiel Building Official, Gary Murrain.
Another issue raised in your letter concerns the possibility of the conversion of the units into a
multi-family project. While lhe developer may be representing this in his information to the
real estate community, the combination of the two parcels allows oitly nine units. Currently,
the proposal is for six to seven single family homes on the site. Because ol this, the applicant
may request the remaining units at a later date. For example, if he builds six single family
units, there will be a remaining right to three additional units. Should the applicant choose not
to maximize the number of units upon initial construction, the Town has no ability to withhold
the additional unit rights. Should he choose to install secondary units at a later date, all
development standards will need to be met.
In your letter you slated that Lionsmane is also concerned with the proiect at 1149 Sandstone
Drive. The Town staff has been working with the owner of this parcel to resolve the issues on
this lot. The owner is continuing to work on this project. By the Town ol Vail's regulations, we
are unable to withhold a temporary certificate of occupancy, which allows a person to occupy
a building, unless certain building code issues are not met. Because of Vail's seasonal
weather, il is not our practice to withhold occupancy permits for things such as landscaping
and paving. lt is common to allow occupancy without the landscaping being completed.
I understand your concern with the project and assure you that the siaft is working to the best
of our ability to facilitate the compleiion of the project. I think we should avoid comment on
his financial capability - he could feel that we are not in a position to make this call. I would
urge you to also contact the owner of 1149 Sandstone Drive, Mr. Pool, and discuss your
concerns with him. Often, when a developer knows that the neighbors are concerned with lhe
state of a site, they are willing to address these issues. We will also do our best to continue
to work with Mr. Pool in the completion of this project.
Again, thank you for your letter. I assure you that all required and necessary information lor
the review ot lots 41 and 42 willbe submitted. We willcontinue lo send notification to the
address above regarding the hearings. As I said before, the application is scheduled for April
\
a
Page Three
April 16, 1993
Drager
26, 1993 as well as May 10, 1993 for PEC hearings. However, there may be continuances
again should the applicant not be able to submit the necessary information in a reasonable
amount of time for the staff to review these items. Please contact me at 479-2138 should ypu
have any questions.
{
VailTown Council
Larry Grafel
Pam Brandmeyer
Kristan Pritz
o en, ApR , 4 pe'Lroxs Menrc Assocrerrox
P. o. Box 10000M
\rAII. OOIPRADO 8106?
April L2 r l-993
Town of Vail
Community DEveloPment Department
75 South Frontage Raad, West
VaiI Co 81657
Attention: Shelly Mello
Re: Indian Creek Tpimhomes
Lots A-1 & A-2 Lions Ridge
Dear Miss Mellor
our condominium associationr',is responsible"for the bullding
immediateJ-y to the South and East of the site of the above re-
ferenced project. Many of us have been owners here fos 20
years or more. We are very concerned about the project that
is proposed to be built by Mike Lauterbach. We h'ave received
several notices of continuance of the lot line vacation and
al-so the design review hearing. we are now advised that not
all the required reports and information harrc been submittedyet.
Not knowing when the hearing will be held puts us at a disad-
vantage in never knowing when these matters will be heard.
we are trusting in the process that you will obtain and review
current rockfalL and soils reports and stay on top of such
things as landscaping, trash, constructl.on parking, deliveries,
road cuts and cleanup of construction debris on our street.
We have a continuing concern with the temporary Certificates
of Occupancy. The house located at 1149 Sandstone Drive was
conpleted in June of 1991. It has been occupied regularllt
since that date, but as yet there is not one blade of grass
that could be callecl landscaping. The whole lot is a great
stand of thistles and other weeds. This despite personal
appeals having been made to Ron Phillips ' Kristin Pritz and
Mayor Peggy Osterfoss. We do not want a repeat of this type
of thing. Could we please get a resPonse on this onel
We shal-l look forward to your written assurances that all the
necessary and appropriate matters will be examined carefully
by the Town of vail Staff and there will be complete followups
as necessary.
We have a continuing concern for conversion of the units into
multi-family units as suggested by the developer to the real
estate community. Perhaps a Etatement on the plat to the
effect that these are single family units and may not be used
as lockoffs or rentaL units ntithout Town of Vail consent.
rn that event additional sewer and. water tap fees would also
\
Lions Mane Association
Board cA Drrectors4Y4il/l//U-
be due.
{ vn*a-,
O *, oo* r 4wSLrorvs M-o.nn Assocrarton
P. o. Box 10000M
vaII- croLoRADO a1667
April 12, 1993
Town of Vail
Community DEvelopment Department
75 South Frontage Read, WestVail Co 8L657
Attention: Shelly Mello
Re: Indian Creek Tpwnhomes
Lots A-1 & A-2 Lions Ridge
Dear Miss Me11o,
Our condominium association: is responeible for the building
immed.iately to the South and East of the site of the above re-
ferenced project. Many of us have been o\^rners here foc 20
years or more. we are very concerned about the project that
is proposed to be built by Mike Lauterbach. We bhve received
several notices of continuance of the 1ot line vacation and
also the design review hearing. We are now advised that not
all the required reports and information have been submittedyet.
Not knowing when the hearing will be held puts us at a disad-
vantage in never knowing when these matters will be heard.
we are trusting in the process that you will obtain ancl review
current rockfall and soils reports and stay on top of suchthings as l-andscaping, trash, constructl.on parking, deliveries,
road cuts and cleanup of construction debris on our street.
We have a continuing concern with the temporary Certificatesof Occupancy. The house located at 1149 Sandstone Drive was
conpleted in June of 1991. It has been occupied regularly
since that date, but as yet there is not one blade of grass
that could be catled landscaping. The whole 1ot is a great
stand of thistles and other weeds. Tliris despite personal
appeals having been made to Ron Phillips. Kristin Pritz and
Mayor Peggy Osterfoss. We do not want a repeat of this typeof thing. Could we please get a response on this onel
We shall look forward to your written assurances that all the
necessary and appropriate matters will be examined carefully
by the Town of Vail Staff and there will be complete followups
as necessary.
We have a continuing concern for conversion of the units into
multi-family units as suggested by the developer to the real
estate cornmunity. Perhaps a statement on the plat to the
effect that these are single family units and may not be used
as lockoffs or rental units without Town of Vail consent.In that event additional sewer and water tap fees would also
be due ' rt . / tions Mane Associationpt^4$ v{,9trr,r/"/n^t/i;r; "ffi;x'"'"
o
-Y
o
IiITER-DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW
PROJECT:
DATE SU
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING
COMMENTS NEEDED BY: hMh
PUBLIC WORKS
BRIEF DEScRIPTIoN oF THE PR6ffi
ttMvtonr Cf\jJ'o
Reviewed by:
Commenb:
g) t,t*lt
nezJ
r# ,|€
f) a.-
,)U7 cLa ?-fu Lo, *J -u'L- of dr,r7*rL
,l/"- ,rnu'1 uzJt L L ,"11L a.eu,s fi-,+
7) b)e npJ zot dn v;V x*e,,"-
L pov; Jt du.- Jrpl A,n q.o,.-.) sft'
e.oLJ l"
lL,tu;+
4q?*J,"t d corv4- r,urJs L L 5o' oy * t/aqq-
IP.'LL h r,oJ^ct
ltoan aln 161
lfuA , t -"(l
deare*< -
4)
It a6q[ lr- d].r-[l] 1,o6.^t
4t" lJt, L @nuiJ<- ' o*rh.*"t- 0
?tW acrx -/v- roa/ a.5
Tlh f.,ea-
/z'! m":o@)
a^ inli/. e W-:l
I I
INTER.DEPARTTIENTAL REVIEW
PROJECT:
DATE SUBMITTED:
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING
COMMENTS NEEDED BY:
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL:
Ivnrnaf q\,0W
FIRE DEPARTMENT
Revlared by:Z4<;*-'Date: 'r'P'?S
comments: 6ba4 -uuf /z.a* .zrl 4262.r,,-*ou* ,/o*./o'z
.zr...b)- ?/r--P /
t -r2-/<9/z'tac1
l) n"o 'Lzlo-*latto*d
z) F+4'-/ tl 6 rtrala0&'
7
I
.frn and associates, il..
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
sott E toulloATK)tl
lilGlxttt!llG
96 SOUIH ZUNI STr,EEr
JoB N0. 21,285
D${Vtl, COLOiADO tO223
SOIL AND FOUNDATION INVESTIGATION
FOR PROPOSED
EARTH INTEGMTED SHELTERS
LoTS A-t s A-2
LIONS RIDGE, FILING #I
vAlL, c0LoRADo
PREPARED FOR:
DAVAL WESTERN REALTY
P... O. DRAWER W
vAtL, coLoRADo 81657
to3/71+71O5
FEBRUARY 5, I98I
OTFICES: COIOIADO 5? NCs. cOrorADO ,/ OltXtfOOD tPrlXGl, COIOIADO / cAttll, WYOATIXO
'l
)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
c0NcLUs l0Ns
SCOPE
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
SITE CONDITIONS
suEsotL coNDrTtoNs
FOUNDATION RECOHI4ENDATIONS
FLOOR SLABS
LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES
SITE GRADING
SURFACE DRAINAGE
MI SCELLANEOUS
FIG. I - LOCATION OF EXPLOMTORY HOLES
FIG. 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY HOLES
FIGS.
TABLE
- 5 . GRADATION TEST RESULTS
. SUHHARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
3
I
:.)
coNcLUs loNs
Subsolls conslst of dense, coarse granular upper
soils overlying colluvium and siltstone bedrock.
Numerous cobbles and boulders were Incl uded ln
the soll proflle. Bulldlng foundations may be
placed on spread footlngs deslgned for a maximumsoil pressure of !1000 pounds per square foot.
Upper granular solls are expected^to have an angleof Internal frlctlon of 35" to 1r0". other soil-
related deslgn and constructlon details are dlscussedIn the body of the report.
SCOPE
The report presents thc results of a soll and foundation investigation
for the proposed earth lntegrated shelters to be located on Lots A-l and
A-2 of the Lions Rldge, Flllng //l In Vall, Colorado. Discussed ln the
report are the site and subsoil condltlons, recommended type foundatlon,
rtaxlmum soil pressure, lateral earth pressures and other sol l-related
design €nd construction dctalls.
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
We understand it is proposed to construct the residences wlth the
uphlll slde dug Into the hlllslope. Relnforced earth retainlng structures
will be used for the uphill wall of'thc unlts. A parking garage will be
constructed at the lower end of the slte adJacent to Sandstone Drlve. A
loop road wlll be graded to service the structures, but no autonobl le
traffic ls proposed. Some type of llft system from the garage to the
r
units is proposed. lt
20 feet, but general ly
un its. l./e assume the
spec if i c site plan was
-z-
is estimated that the maximum cut could be up to
the cut wl ll be on the order of l0 feet for the
foundatlon loads will be relatively llght. No-
avallable at the time of thls study.
S ITE CONDITIONS
At the time of our Investigatlon, the site was vacant. The ground
was covered wlth grasses and weeds and some aspen and oak. The ground
surfase slopes down steeply to the southeast with a maximum dl fference
In elevatlon of almost 100 feet across thc site. The slopc varlcs from
25% to \5"4. Bedrock crops out above the site. Some loose blocks occur
wlthin the study lots; however, these do not appear to be of recent
origin and no recenc rockfal l is evldent. Southeast of the slte are
numerous condomin lums four to f ive storles high and of falrly recent
construction. They appear to be In good conditlon from a foundatlon
point of view. We understand excavatlon for somc foundatlons encountered
large boulders.
SUBSOIL CONDITIONS
Six test holes were drllled In
buildlngs to determlne the subsol I
are generally fairly consistcnt, but
dept,hs of layers. lt appears that
the gcneral area of the proposed
cond i t lons. The subsol I conditions
vary considerably ln gradatlon and
Test Hole 4 encountered bedrock at a
1
-3-
depth of 7 feet. Drllllng was extremely difflcult because of numerous
cobbles and boulders. Practical rig refusal was met In all the holes.
Several of the test holes were offset and redrilled to obtaln a greater
depth. A trail was dozed for our €ccess. The test holes were drllled
on this trall and start 2 to 3 feet below the orlginal ground surface.
In general, the subsolls consisted of a shallow, 4 to 5 feet deep,
loose layer of soll overlylng a dense to very dense sand, gravel and
cobble stratum. Two of thc test holes cncountered a dlfferent type
stratum below the coarse granular solls. In Test Hole 2 a sl ltstone
mlxed colluvium was apparcnt and in Test Hole 4 apparently a slltstone
bedrock format ion was encountered. The colluvium material conslsts of
slltstone pieces In a sllt and sand matrix. Presence of large cobbles
and boulders was Indlcated by the dlfficult drilllng condltion and the
presence of large rock on thc surface. Gradatlon analysls of samples
obtained from the standard spllt spoon are shown on Flgs. J through 5.
These represent only the ll inch fraction of materlal rccovered In the
sampl ing process.
No free water was encountered ln the test holes at the time of
drilllng.
FOUNDAT I ON RECOHMENDAT I ONS
Spread footlng type foundations appear to be most feaslble for thls
site. The followlng deslgn and constructlon detalls should be observed:
.l".)
-4-
(l) Footlngs placed on flrm, undisturbcd solls or rock may be deslgned
for a maximum soil pressure of !1000 pounds per square foot.
General ly, these soils are capable of supportlng higher pressures;
however, I lmltatlons are in order because of the steepness of the
site and the variable nature whlch may be encountered throughout
the project area. Footlngs wldths should be a minimum of 24 inches
for square footlngs and l8 inches for continuous footings.
(2) Contlnuous foundatlon walls should be well rejnforced top and
bottom to span an unsupported length of at least l0 feet.
(3) Footings should be placed on undlsturbed soil. We suggest that the
excavat ions for foundations be inspected by a representatlve of the
soil engineer. Where solls arc dlsturbed by excavation such as
removal of boulders, the footing should be extended to lower, flrm
soll or compacted backflll placcd to the deslred grade.
(4) All exterlor footings should be placed below the frost depth.
(5) Footings should be placed back from the edge of the slope at least
5 feet. fJe assume that. no footings will be placed on downslope
' f il I materlal.
FLOOR SLABS
The upper natural solls are capable of supporting moderately loaded
floors. Slab-on-grade constructlon ls fcasible. I'le suggest that floor
slabs be separated from bearing walls and columns with an expans ion
4
joint. Slabs should
reduce damage due to
may be regul red below
cast I ng.
-5-
be provlded with adequate constructlon Jolnts to
shrinkage cracklng. A leveling course of gravel
the floor slab to provtde a working surface for.
LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES
The uphill sldc of the bulldlngs wlll serve as a retalnlng wall.
We understand that thls wlll be constructcd by the relnforced earth
technique. The upper granular soils appear to be sati sfactory for use
as backfill. Colluvlum and siltstone may contain cxcesilve flnes for
this type of construction. The uppcr coarse granular solls can be
expected to develop an angle of internal frlction of 35o to 4Oo when
compacted to at least 95? standard Proctor density.
For standard canti lcvered walls whlch can toleratc somc rotatlon to
develop actlve pressures, we suggest lateral earth pressures be calculated
on the basis of an cqulvalcnt fluld wclght of 35 pounds per cubic foot
where the backfil I surface ls level . Where the backftl I surface slopes
up steeply then an Increase In this pressure ls recorunended. For the
approximate 2:l natural slope, thls should be lncreased to 55 pounds per
cublc foot. Reslstance to slldlng can be taken as .5 tlmes thc normal
dead load. Passive earth pressure can be calculated on the basls of an
equivalent fluid welght of 400 pounds per cublc foot.
-6-
SITE GRADING
We assume that some slte gradlng such as cuts wlll be requlred both
for the access road and the bullding sltc ltsclf. We believe that the
maJorl ty of the materials encountered In our exploratory holes can be
excavated wlth conventlonal equlpment. The siltstone in Test Hole 4
appeared to be hard and may requlre a rlpper or llght blastlng in conflned
excavations. Cut slopes wl ll stand temporarlly on the order of l:1.
Permanent slopes should be not stceper than 2:1.
lf flll is proposed for the development, lt should be placed on a
prepared surface. Thls conslsts of removlng vegetat lon and benching the
present slope to rccelve the flll. General overlot grading should be
compacted to at least 90? of standard proctor density. Flll to support
floor slabs should bc compacted to at least 95% of standard proctor
density. we do not recommend a combinatlon of flll and natural soils
for foundation support. Thls could bc accomplishcd satisfactorlly lf
special attention is given to thc placcment and compaction of the fill.
On-site soils are sultable for usc as fill throughout the erea. Some
selection of material may be needcd for thc relnforced earth technlque.
SURFACE DMlNAGE
It ls lmportant that surface dralnage be dlrected away from the
buildlng sites. Thls may requlre swales or dlversion ditches above the
.a
-7-
units. In addition, the followlng detalls should be observed during and
af ter construct ion :
(l) Excessive wettlng or drying of the foundation excavatlon should.be
avolded durl ng construction.
(2') Backfill around the foundatlon should be molstened and compacted to
at least 908 standard Proctor denslty.
(3) The ground surface surroundlng the exterlor of the bulldlng should
be sloped to drain away from the bullding ln alI directions. tJe
recormend a minimum slope of 6 inches in the first l0 feet.
(4) Roof downspouts and dralns should dlscharge well beyond the limits
of al I backfl I l.
H ISCELLANEOUS
Thls report has been prcpared In accordance with gencral ly accepted
soil and founaatlon englneerlng practlces In this area for the use by
the cl ient for design purposes. Thc conclusions and recormendations
submi cted in this report are based upon the data obta ined from the
exploratory holes drllled at thc locations lndlcated on the exploratory
hole plan. The nature and extent of variations between the exploratory
holes or areas outside the drllllng may not become evident until excavation
is performed. lf, durlng construction, soil, rock and ground water
conditions appear to be different from those described herein, thls
JooFoo2oFow/ffi
llll*(dff
N'flLL
,\[\ [mf \\!
\
\
| ;'.'
I
i
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
:
I
I
I
I
I
:
I
i
I
l
III. DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING CONDITIONS
SITE DESCRIPTION
Topographv
Ttre site is located on the south facing sLope on the north
side of Ehe Gore Valley. The site is presently undeveloped and
is comprised of 4.26 actes. The site rises from Sandstone Drive
approximately 104 vertical feet, from an elevation of 8,245 feet
Eo 8,349 feet. Slopes range from Less than 102 to greater than
602. The site is bisected by a drainage swale which drains the
high country north of the site Eowards Sandstone Drive. This
northern site boundary is adjacent to a revegetated utility corri-
dor (Lionsridge Loop). This corridor has been fiLLed to cross the
drainage swale and the swale above the northern site boundary.
The utility line corridor is located north of the ProPerEy in a
para1le1 line with the northern site boundary and revegetated
utiLity cut. Existing utiliuies are included on the toPographic
survey map.
Geology
Geologic information pertinent to the proposed site was for:nd
in the map series, "Bedrock Geologic, Surficial Deposits and
PoEential Geologic Hazards l'Iaps, Eagle County, Col-orado" and "Snow
Avalanche Hazatd, Environmental and Engineering Geologic and
Geologic Resource Maps, Eagle Cor:nty, Colorado," compiLed by Charles
S. Robinson and Associates, Inc. (L976), .and in "Preliminary
Engineering Geology Report, Lots A-L and A-2, Lions Ridge, Vail ,
-14-
CoLorado" by Robert K. Barrett, ProfessionaL Geologist,.
Gore Valley was scoured into a classic "U,' shape by the
most recen! mountain glacier which left the floor covered with
deep morainal deposits. The val-Ley walls exhibit a variety of
lateral glacier features.
At the proposed site the glacier scoured on bedrock as it
advanced and then deposited morainal bouLdersr gravel, sand and
fine-grained soils as it retreated (or rneLted). Following that
sequence, the surface was modified to present day appearance by
a11uvia1 fan deposition from the smal-l drainage thar divides the
two 1ots, and by colluvial deposirion from the hillside above
the properry.
Bedrock at the site is from the Minturn Formation from the
Pennsylvanian and Permian age which includes medium to very
coarse-grained, gray to reddish-brown sandstone, congJ.omeratic
sandstone, thin beds of reddish-brown sil-tstone and sandy and
silty shale and prominent pinkish-gray to gray limestone beds.
The underlying bedrock surface at the site is probably much steeper
than the ground surface and should be quite deep.
surficiaL deposits at the site are glaciaL moraine which
consists of boulders, gravel , sand and silt deposited by glaciers.
These deposits are generally Less than 100 feet in thickness but
may reach up to 200-300 feet thick, consisting of precarnbrian
granites and gneisses.
The site is not in an area of rockslides, landslides, slope
-15-
o
failure or other geologic li.azatd' The site
susceptible to avalanche. In addition, the
Robinson and Associates indicate that' there
or other geologic resources Presen! on the
Soils
The U. S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation
Service (scs) has rnapped and classified the soils in the Gore
Valley to deEermine the nacure of the soil manteL and to develop
an understanding of inCeractions with Proposed uses. In addi-
tion, a soils reporE for the proposed site was developed by Chen
and Associates of Denver and is included in the Appendix'
The soil in che site area has been classified by SCS as
Argic Gryoboroll and Typic Cryoboroll . These soils are found
on alluvial fans and mountain side slopes and are deep and well
drained. The surface layer is fine sandy loam and typicaLly
averages 3 inches thick. The subsoil is made up of sEony sandy
clay loam and is about 22 inches thick. The substratum is very
stony fine sandy loam extending below 60 inches. Peroeability
is moderately rapid to raPid.
The soil conservation Service uses hydrologic soil grouPs
to estimate potential runoff from rainfall in watershed planning.
Lt has classified rhe soil present on the site in the B Hydrologic
Group. These soils have a moderately Low runoff potential and a
moderate infiltration rate when Lhoroughly $tetted. They consist
chiefly of moderately deep to deep, moderately well to well drained
is in an area Least
investigations bY
are no minerals
sice.
soils. Soil textures range from moderateLy fine to moderately
coarse. These soils have a moderate rate of waEer Eransmission
wiLh moderately rapid permeability'
In the soil investigations performed on LoEs A1 and A2 by
Chen and Associates' six test holes were drilled in the general
areaofEheProPosedbuiLdingstodete::urinethesubsoilcondi-
tions.
In general , the subsoils consisted of a shalLow' 4 to 5
feet deep, loose layer of soil overlying a dense to very dense
sand, gravel and cobble stracum' T\lo of che test holes encor:nEered
a different EyPe stratum below Ehe coarse granular soils ' In Test
Hole 2 a silcstone mixed colluvium was aPParent and in Test Hole
4 apparenEly a siltstone bedrock formation ltas encountered' the
colluvium macerial consists of siltstone pieces in a silt and sand
maErix. Presence of large cobbles and boulders was indicared by
the difficult drilling condiEion and Ehe presence of large rock
on the surface' Gradation analysis of samples obtained from the
standard splic sPoon are shown on Figures 20 through 22' These
represent only the lL inch fraction of material recovered in the
sarnpling Process' No free water was encountered in the test holes
aE the time of drilling'
' Chen and Associates has also prepared a soil investigation
for Lionsridge Subdivision' Filing #4 which included Lot 6'
Robert !I. Ttrompson' Inc' has performed a soil investigation for
LoE A3. Chen and Associates has reviewed these studies and has
presenEed their conclusions in the Appendix'
-L7 -
i
lr.!
r
rf.
Fi
t
!
IIt
I
i.
l|
l
-
i
a
s
HvdroLogv
There is very little published hydroLogic information
avail-able for the vail area and the proposed site. However,
some hydrological facts \^rere uncovered during this investiga-
tion to make some general observations.
Site investigations conducted by chen and Associates in
January, l-981, included drilling of six geologic test ho1es,
in which no free rvater was found up to a depth of 35 feet in one
ho1e. However, these hores were dug in winter, low gror:nd water
conditions, and do not necessarily reflect, conditions which occur
in spring when the ground water table is higher.
A general observation by the U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation
service indicates that soils of the type found at the site have
a water table at or near Ehe land surface.
The colorado state Engineer has a record of all ground water
welLs in the state, which are required by law to be registered
with chat office. The local well records include inforoation on
well depth, yield and depth !o lraler 1eve1 which can be inter-
preted to give a profile of locaL ground r,rater conditions.
unfortunateLy, no we1ls exist in the iurediate area of the site.
The closest existing well is to the east of the site across Red
sandstone creek, in an area which is known to have a high water
tab1e. The depth to the water table in this well is nine feer
(a high water tabLe is expected), with a yield of 50 gprn. since
this well is across Red Sandstone creek, ground arater leve1s and
I
I
I
l
E
tj
I
il
li
1,-18-
movement cannot be eorrel-ated with that of the site.
OEher registered wel1s Located approxi-ately a nile
southwest of the site, but north of Gore Creek, might have
better correlacion with site hydrologic conditions, except
that they are locaced in the valley botton elose to the creek
instead of the valJ-ey side slope where the site is Located.
Five we1ls located in this area have depths to water table
ranging from 7 feet to 62 feet, and weli yields ranging
from 15 gpm Lo 300 gpm.
Mr. Ed Drager, the Manager of Lionsmane Condominiuns
directly down slope from the proposed site, has been closely
observing the site for evidence of ground lrater seepage or
surface wacer since 1971 and has reported seeing no water on
the site during this period.
Both che U.S.D.A., S.C.S. and Chen and Associates have
observed that the soil at the site is highly pe::ureable and very
weLl drained. The ol-d road fill from abandoned Lionsridge Loop
bLocks the main drainage swale, iunrediately north and uphill of
the site. Ponding of any local- surface drainage behind the road
fill will occur, preventing free drainage of storn runoff over the
site. Due to the soil per:ureability at the site and the 6 foot
height of the road fill blocking the drainage, any water draining
here wilL percolate into the soil . This agrees with Mr. Drager's
observatj-on that the drainage swale on the site has been dry since
- 19-
r
il
E
I
t
E
I
I
I
I
he has observed it.
The watershed which the on-site swale
estiroated to be 74.6 acres.
A biologicaL indicator of low surface
is the size of rhe tall sagebrush (Lg to 24
indicates that grolrth of the sage has been
rtater.
drains, has been
water on the site
inches), which
strrnted by lack of
3
I
I
I
I
t
I
The general conclusions which can be drawn from the above
information are as follows: No surface r^rat,er florrs on the site
due to the high pe::ureability of the soil-s and relarively small_
drainage area. The ground wat,er table is reratively deep at the
site during dry periods (greater than 35 feet), but may rise to
higher levels during rretter seasons or years.
Biology
The major vegetative types present on the site are risted
in Table 3.
The vegetation on Ehe site is .classified within the
Aspen/Sage comslunity or ecosystem.
There are 93 Quaking Aspen between one inch and ten inches
in diameter.
The highest percentage of the plant cornmunity is sagebrush,
followed by rabbitbrush and wild rose, mohonia repens (acting as
ground cover) and serviceberry. canada thistle is an introduced
species and very unfavorable weed, which is dispracing native
species. There are a few smal1 snowberry plants and assorted
weeds.
-zu-
.,, .t t
".-': ND ,O*"" cuARANrrf coM"oro'"'. LA]
Representing old Repubric Nationar ritle rnsurance company
. THANK YOU FOR YOI'R ORDER
February 03, 1993
Our Order No.: V2o494
BTTYER/O!{NER:
I.{ICHAEL J. LAUTERBACH
SELLER:
THE REINFORCED EARTH COMPANY
ADDRESS:
CLOSER
1 Attn: LES KEYS
VATL ASSOCIATES REAL ESTATE
POST OFFICE BOX 959
AVON, CO 81620
1 Attn: RAYIIA ROSE 949-6400
VAIL ASSOCIATES REAL ESTATE
PO BOX 7
VAIL, COLORADO 81658
1 Attn: HELENA KREBS 479-2OOO
ALltr coMMrrMENr
SCHEDULE A
Our Order No. V2O494
For Infornation Only
- charges
ALTA Ohrner Policy 9680.00
s933: 33
****WITH YOUR REMITTANCE PLEASE REFER TO OUR ORDER NO. V20494.****
1. Effective Date: January 20, 1993 at 8:OO A.M.
2. Policy to be issued, and proposed Insured:
rrALTAtl owner,s Policy $550, 000. 00
1987 Revision (Anended 1990)
Proposed Insured:
MICHAEL J. LAUTERBACH
3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to inthis Cornrnitnent and covered herein is:
A Fee Sinple
4. Title to the estate or interest covered herein is at the
. effective date hereof vested in:
THE REINFORCED EARTH COMPANY
5. The land referred to in this Conrnitnent is described asfollows:
LOTS A-1 AND A-2, LIONTS RIDGE SUBDMSION, ACCORDING TO THE
PLAT RECORDED JULY 25, 1969 IN BOOK 215 AT PAGE 648, COUNTY OF
EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO.
PAGE 1
COMMIT
SCHEDULE B-1
(Requirements)
MENT
Our Order No. V2O494
The fol]owing are the requirements to be complied with:
1. Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors ofthe ful1 consideration for the estate or interest to be
insured.
2. Proper instrurnent(s) creating the estate or interest to be
insured must be executed and duly filed for record, to-wit:
3. RELEASE OF DEED OF TRUST DATED February 28, L992t FROM THE REINFORCED EARTH
COMPANY, A DELAWARE CORPORATION TO THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE OF EAGLE COUNTY FOR
THE USE OF MELLON BANK, N.A. TO SECURE THE SUM OF $],,5OT12L4'15 RECORDED
March 05, J-992, IN BOOK 574 AT PAGE 4l-7.
4. RELEASE OF DEED OF TRUST DATED February 28, 1992, FROM THE REfNFORCED EARTH
COMPANY, A DELAWARE CORPORATION TO THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE OF EAGLE COUNTY FOR
THE USE OF MELLON BANK, N.A. TO SECURE THE SUM OF 97,500,000.00 RECORDED
March 05, 1992, IN BoOK 574 AI PAGE 4l-8.
NOTE: THIS DEED OF TRUST SECURES A REVOLVING LINE OF CREDIT AGREEMENT.
5. EVIDENCE SATISFACTORY TO THE COMPANY THAT THE REINFORCED EARTH COMPANY IS
AN ENTTTY CAPABLE OF ACQUIRING TITLE TO SUBJECT PROPERTY.
6. THIS PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO THE JOINT RESOLUTION AND NOTICE OF ENCI,JMBRANCE
OF UPPER EAGLE VALLEY CONSOLTDATED SANITATION DISTRICT AND VAIL VALLEY
CoNSoLIDATED WATER DISTRICT RECORDED JANUARY r.8, r_990 rN BOOK 52r- AT PAGE
44L.
7. EVIDENCE SATISFACTORY TO THE COMPANY THAT THE TERMS, CONDITIONS AND
PROVISIONS OF THE TOWN OF VAIL TRANSFER TAX HAVE BEEN SATISFIED.
8. WARRANTY DEED FROM THE REINFORCED EARTH COMPANY TO MICHAEL J. LAUTERBACH
CONVEYING SUBJECT PROPERTY.
THE COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDERS OFFTCE REQUIRES RETURN
ADDRESSES ON DOCIJMENTS SENT FOR RECORDING! !
PAGE
A LE COMI,IITMENT
SCHEDULE B-2
(Exceptions) Our Order No. V2O494
The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to thefollowing unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction ofthe Conpany:
1. Standard Exceptions 1 through 5 printed on the cover sheet.
6. Taxes and assessments not yet due or payable and special
assessments not yet certified to the Treasurerts office.
7. Any unpaid taxes or assessnents against said land.
8. Liens for unpaid water and sewer charges, if any.
g. RIGHT OF PROPRTETOR OF A VEIN OR LODE TO EXTRACT AND REMOVE HIS ORE
THEREFROM SHOULD THE SA]I,IE BE FOUND TO PENETRATE OR INTERSECT THE PREMISES
AS RESERVED IN UNfTED STATES PATENT RECoRDED Decernber 29, I92O, IN BOOK 93
AT PAGE 42.
10. RIGHT OF WAY FOR DITCHES OR CANALS CONSTRUCTED BY THE AUTHORITY OF THE
UNITED STATES AS RESERVED IN UNITED STATES PATENT RECORDED December 29,
L92O, IN BOOK 93 AT PAGE 42.
].].. RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS, WHICH DO NOT CONTAIN A FORFEITURE OR REVERTER
CLAUSE, BUT OMTTTING RESTRICTIONS, IF ANY, BASED ON RACE/ COLOR, RELIGION,
OR NATIONAL ORfGIN, AS CONTAfNED fN INSTRUMENT RECORDED July 25, L959, IN
BOOK 215 AT PAGE 649 AND AS AMENDED IN fNSTRUMENT RECORDED Decenber 02,
L9'7O, IN BOOK 2l_9 AT PAGE 235.
L2. EASEMENTS AS RESERVED AND EXCEPTED ]-O FEET IN VIIDTH ALONG EACH SIDE OF ALL
TNTERTOR LOT LINES AND 20 FEET TN WIDTH INWARD FROM THE WESTERLY BANK OF
RED SANDSTONE CREEK FOR UTTLITY AND DRAINAGE PURPOSES AS SHOWN ON THE
. RECOhDED PLAT OF LION'S RIDGE SUBDTVISION.
13. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF THE JOINT RESOLUTTON AND NOTICE OF
ENCUMBRANCE OF UPPER EAGLE VALLEY CONSOLIDATED SANITATTON DISTRICT AND VAIL
VALLEY CONSOLIDATED WATER DISTRICT RECORDED JANUARY ].8, 1990 IN BOOK 521 AT
PAGE 44]..
NOTE: UPON EVTDENCE SATISFACTORY TO THE COMPANY THAT SAID ENCUMBRANCE HAS
BEEN PAID TN FULL. SAID EXCEPTION WILL BE DELETED.
PAGE 4
'^vtIJAND TTTLE GUARANTEE COMPANY
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Required by Senate Bill 91-14
A) The subject real property may be located in a special taxingdistrict.
B) A Certificate of Taxes Due listing each taxing jurisdiction
may be obtained from the County Treasurer or the CountyTreasurer's authorized agent.
C) The inforrnation regarding special districts and the boundariesof such districts may be obtained from the Board of County
Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County
Assessor.
Required by Senate Bill 92-143
A) A Certificate of Taxes Due listing each taxing jurisdiction
shall be obtained fron the County Treasurer or the County
Treasurer's authorized agent.
',
I Ii||dtttzE
DATE RECEIVED BY
COMMUN ITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
A.
APPUCATION FOR
illNoR suBDrvtstoN REvtEw
$IAP/TER 17.20 VAIL MUNICIPAL CODE(f oR FEWER LOTS)
(please print or type)
APPLICANT Michael Lauterbach
D.
E.
F.
MA;L;NG ADDRESS P.0. Box 3451 Vail, Co 81658 PHONE 476-6944
B.PROPERW OWN The Reinforced Earth Co. c/o Peter L. Bower
OWNER'S SIGNAruR
86fa-5."er Drt-ve
MAIL;NG ADDRESS suite 1100 Vienna, VA 22L82 pHONETo3 821-rI7s
c.LOCATION OF PROPOSAL (streetaddress) tt39 arid 1to9 sands
LOTS A-1 and A-2 BLOCK__JSUBDIVISION Lionrs Ridge
FEE $250.00, PA\D_ j]59 -CHECK #-'7 " f {-DATE 7->r-13
The first step is to request a meeting wih the zoning administrator to assist the
applicant In meeting the submittal requirements and to give the proposal a preliminary
review.
SUBMITTAL REOUIREMENTS
1. The applicant shall submit three copies, two of which must be mylars, of the
proposal following the requirements tor a final plat below. certain of these
requirements may be waived by he zoning administrator and/or the Planning
and Environmental Commission if determined not applicable to the project.
2. A list of all adjacent property owners (including those behind and across the
street) WITH COMPLETE ADDRESSES shall also be submifted. In addlilon,
submlt addressed, stanpeq enyelopeg for each of the above.
Title Report veritying ownership and easementsl lSctreOutes A & B)
An environmental impact report may be required as stipulated under Chapter
18.56 of the zoning code.
5. FINAL PI.AT - REOUIREMENTS AND PROCEDURE:
(Some of lhese requirements may be waived.)
a. The subdivider shall submit lour copies of the final plat, two of which
shall be mylars, twelve copies of the final EIR (if requked) and any
err{rli+innal rra}a.ial -^ raar rira.r{ halnr! ttfir}rla .hi*rr '{6r,- ^a a^^i..i^- .t a
3.
4.
'' ,"l !'
,
. ra.a t$ll
P,?
coMMUNnyoeveroprfifJrE85SfAlir?il
APFLICANT
APFUCATION FOF
ittitoR SuFotvtstoil nEY|EW
GHAFTEF 17.20 VA|L rn iltclPAL bOOe(. oH FEWEB roTgt
(ptesee prlnt or type)
tltchael Lrucrrbach
;TAILINGADDHESS p.0. Box 3451 Vell, Co 8f658 PHONE 476-6e44
E.PROPERW
OWHER'g 9IONA
MAILINGADDRES8 slr." ll00 ,v,l"n sgpEz?3.s21-n75
c.LOCATION OF FROPOSAL (atrest addrs*
o.
E.
F.
FEE Se50.00 PA|D:_CHEOK DATE_ _ .
I!,,trl-t.spq te to reql6ii?i@tr-iirJzonrng qdmhr$rrahr ro agarar rheappttcant ln meeilng rhe aubmrner ralulremanrs and-ro sil titi-ropofria biiiirrn"ry /revlew.
SUBMTTTAL REqUIHEMENTS
1, The appllcant shaltsubmlt thr€€ coples, Mo of whtch mu8t be mytars. of $epropoaal lollowlng the regulrernsntB tor a flnal ptat below. Cerraili oiif,ise-requ|reme nts mll,bj l{yd. { .Fe zonl ng aoinrnlsrrator and/oa td iini, nrn gend Envlronmental commtsston lf debrmlied not appilcabtalo rrie prot"ci. ''
2, A lhl of_all adJaca[ppr.rty qugr (tnctudtng thoeo bahtnd end acrosa thaatrest) wtrH ceMpLETE A0CIBE6sEs ehel atso bs eubmttrao. m ioortiin,lubfilt addrsssed, ttampod fnyoloper for each ot tho lbove.
3,
4.
Tltlo Roport vErl$ng ownershlp and easemsntsi (SctreOutee A & B)
$_erylppenlal lmpact ropoil may be requhed al silputetod under chapter
18.50 of the zonlng oode.
FINAL PI.AT. REOUIREMENTS AND PFOCEOURE:
($ome of lhese requlrementr may be walved.)
a. The eubdlvld"er ehall eubmlt four coples of he flnal ptat, two ol whlchehall ba mvlare. lwalva rnnloq af tha llnnl Fltr flt rarrr rl"ar{l qnrf on'
o
MEMO
TO:
FROU:
DATE:
RE:
Comlunlty DeveJ.opuent Department
lllcbaelLauterbach /"(
February 22, L993
Llons Ridge Subdivlsion
Lots A-1 & A-2
The purpose of thls applicatlon is to obtaln approvals nec€ssary tovacate the common lot llne betrreen tha 6bava caotLoned Lots. The easementadjacent to tbe lot l"lne might also be vacated uDon approval by theutilitles holding that easenedt.
Thank you 1n advance for your consideratlon.
AdJacent Property Omers
Ll.ons Ridge Subdlvlslon Lots A-1 & A-9
February 22, 1993
Lot 6, Block 1, Lton,lA Ridge Subdlvlsion, Ftling #4
Fred W. Pool- II
7 Martln Lane
Englevood, Colo 801101
Llonrs Ridge Subdivlslon, Tracts A, B, and C.|. Fourth Ftltng
Lionrs Ridge /14 Homeowner I s Associatlon
P.0. Box 4191
Va11, Colo 81658
unslatted - f:.i'rll"iil; u t''
Vail, Colo 81658
Lot A-3, Block A, LLonre Ridge Subdlvislon
Walter Regal
13275 W. Burleigh
Brookfleld, WI 53005
casolar "t ut:).
Greg Hampton
1185 Casolar Drlve
Vail, Colo 81657
Homestake Condomlniums
I08l ttetl3Vi€w Drive
Vall, C61o 81657
Llonrs Mane I
c/o Ed Drager
P.O. Box 10000 u
Vall, Colo 81557
?@ -.Sr'!1 \E/b: 'r!Y l:o'oB !:,aIoAilcFG s\bbl //'l;;-----IIIIre'nr!rt\It>-3"\ \{-t}k)iir)\+rT'6nb-o<N
It
;
I
fr
fr
I
to
loai tv
:
{ill
r cc.!'ct'r roa t'
z.oL.A;
-c,r 3:' )).J (,|tr
5 .. H--: Ei81 Ei'- :. S: V aE
Jt'=i > sl 3o-zln9*! )
rt::ii
.)t
-+
J
)
II
$r
1.:aaor r:cqjA - -,,
''-. v i
lt!d
a.ri
\J
tiq
,t
A
I,d t +
'ij: :d. i
l,+--o .I I U-
E=" ]f ,^j
lisji *;g
lsqL| .rr \^ 1
| :J-i :"l' \'\
ti
3it- +.\G,oz2oo2,oFJ-3 '/r,.o\8r w.'/Qi,6\\lotP/K#)#Bi'ul8\lqglw\. \. $\\. \ .:\7
V,/l',
.!
\,l
.. I
:a': e/
) viei
j't.1 - t1
I'I r"rri" ad. 9/419L
COIPRADO
Rtc'0 FEB 221993
DRB APPLICATION - TOWN OF \TAII,,
DATE APPLICATION RECEIVED :
DATE OF DRB MEETING:
**********
IIIIS APPI.ICSTION I{ILI. NOT BE ACCEPTED
UNIIL AIJ. REQUIRED INT'ORMATION IS SUBI{IETED**********
I.PROJECT INFORMATTON:
A. DESCRIPTION:Single Family Res idence - Site /13
S ub divi s ion LotiArl
R TYPE OF REVIEW:
x New Construction (S200.00)
Addition ($50.00)
Minor Al.teration ($20.00)
Conceptual Review ($0)
D.
ADDRESS:I 139 Sandstone Drive
LEGAI DESCRIPTION: Lot A-1 BIock
Subdivision Llon's Ridge
If property is described by
description, please provide
attach to this application.
a meet,s and bounds legal
on a separate sheet and
E.
F.
ZONING:1LU
LOT AREA: If required, applicant
stamped survey showing lot area.
must provide a current
62,990 sf
NAME OF AppLICANT; Michael Lauterbach
Mailing Address; l.o. Box 3451 Vall, Colo 81658
Phone
Same as ApplicantH.NAME OF
Mailing
APPLICA}IT' S REPRESENTATIVB :
Address:
Phone
I.NAME OF OI{NERS. The Reinforced Earth Co.
*SIGT{ATURE (S) :Malling Address: .
Suite 1100 Vienna- VA 22182 phdnc 7O3 82I-1I7522I82Phone 7O3 82I-1I75
Condominium Approval if applicable.
DP.B FEE: DRB fees, as shown above, are to be paid atthe tlne of submittal of DRB application. Later, when
applying for a building permit, please identify the
accurate valuation of the proposal. The Town of Vail
will adjust the fee according to the table below, to
ensure the correct fee is paid.,to J6e
@
J.
K.
FEE SCHEDULE:
VALUATION
$ 0 - $ 10,000s 10r 001 - $ 50,000950rooL-$ 1501000
$150,00L - $ 500,000
$500,00L - $1r 000r 000$ Over $1,000,000
>/az/a=
FEE
s 20.00
$ s0.00
$100.00
$200.00
$400.00
$s00.00
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPROVAI, EXPIRES ONE YEAR AI'IER FINAL
EPPROVAI UNIJESS A BUTLDING PERMTT IS ISSUED AIID CONSTRUCTTON IS
TARTED.
O APPLICATION WII,L BE PROCESSED WITAOUT OIYNER'S STGNATURE
1
O
IONIIPRE-APPLTCAT MEETING:
A pre-appLication meeting wit.h a menber of the planningstaff is strongly encouraged to determine j_f any additionaapplication information is needed. It is the applicantrsresponsibility to make an appointment with the staff Lodetermine if there are additional submittal requirements.Please note that a COMPLETE application will streamline theapproval process for your project.
III, IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING ALL SUBMISSIONS TO THE DRB:
A. In addition to meeting submittal requirements, theapplicant must stake and tape the project site toindicate property lines, building tines and buildingcorners. All trees to be removed must be taped. AIIsite tapings and staking must be completed prior to the
DRB site visit. The applicant must ensure that staking
done during the winter is not buried by snow.
B. The reviehr process for NEW BUILDINGS normally requirestwo separate meetings of the Design Review Board: aconceptual approval and a final approval . Applicantsshould plan on presenting their development proposat ata ninimum of two meetings before obtaining finalapproval.
C. Applicants who fail to appear before the Design ReviewBoard on their scheduled meeting date and who have notasked in advance that discussion on their itern bepostponed, will have their items removed fron the DRBdocket until such time as the item has beenrepublished.
D. The following items may, at the discretion of thezoning administrator, be approved by the ComrnunityDevelopnent Department staff (i.e. a formal hearingbefore the DRB may not be required):
a. Windows, skylights and similar exterior changeswhich do not alter the existing plane of thebuilding,. and
b. Building addition proposals not visible from anyother lot or public space. At the time such aproposal is submitted, applicants must includeletters from adjacent property owners and/or fromthe agent for or manaller of any adjacent
condominium association stating the associationapproves of the addition.
E. If a property is located in a mapped hazard area (i.e.
snow avaLanche, rockfalI, flood plain, debris flow,wetland, etc) r a hazard study must be submitted and the
ohrner must sign an affidavit recognizing the hazardreport prior. to the issuance of a building permit.Applicants are encouraged to check with a Town plannerprior to DRB application to determine the relat,ionshipof the property to all mapped hazards.
F. For all resldentlal construction:
a. Clearly indicate on the floor plans the insideface of the exterior structural walls of thebuilding,. andb. Indicate with a dashed line on the site plan afour foot distance from the exterior face of thebuilding walls or supporting columns.
If DRB approves the application with conditions ormodifications, all conditions of approval must beresolved prior to Town issuance of a building permit.
IA',d
P_ROJE,QI,, TNFOnEAEIoN :
A. DESCRIFTIONT
.BrcIt
f
r.
S{nele Fanll Ree{dence -
Or"rrtr" n slilgt
DRB SFP$TCAEION - TOnU Or VAr&, COIORaDO
DATE TEPLICATION RECEIVED :DAfE OE DRB I'{EETING:
*t* t**t*tt
EIIIS }EEI,IGABIOII I|II.I BOE EA ICCEDTDDutrErr. Atr, REqurruD rNFonMtrrIOn ts guBtrIT[EDtt****tttt
Subdlvtalon
B. TXPE OF REVIEI{:
x-wew Constructlon ($200.00)Mlnor Alteratlon ( $20 .00)
" - .,, ,Addltton ($50 .00) _Concept,uat Revl-ew ($0)
C.
D.
ADDRS$O:
ITEGAL, DESCRIPTION:
subdlvtrlon l.{on1s
Block'
a meeeg and boundS legal
on a Eeparate theet and
LrOU A-l
If propert,y le described bydesqrlpElon, please provldaattach to thla appllcation,
E.
F.
G.
LOT AREA: rf requlred, appllcant
€Camped survey ehowing Lot area.
ZONINGI !C
*u""ufi6tftoiF " current
NAME Otr eppr.rlcANt;_ Mlchaet Leurorbach
Maillng Addreas:
t(
ll .
I.
NAI"IE OF APPLICAI,IT'S REPRESENTATMT $ene as AppltcanrMaillng Addresss_
NAI"E OF OI{NERS ? __!h lnforced Esr
TSIONATURE (8) :
Condomlnlum Approval tf apptJ.cable.
DRB FEEI DRF feesl as Bhown ibovel ars Eo be pald at,the tlne of aubmltEal of DRB appltcatlon. r.Lterr whsnapplylng for a bulldlng permlt, pt€ase ldenttfy theaccurat€ valuation of the proposal. Th€ Tor{n of VallwllL adJust tha f6e accordl.ng to t,he table below, tosnsure the qorrect fee ie pald.
pEE pAtD: t_..
J.
K.
DETIIGII NEVIET| BOARD IPFROI/AJr EIiPIRig ONE TSER trrBER rINEJJtPPROvl! ulll.Eglt I BUTLDTNG PERMIT Is ISSUED A}lD GONSERUCTION Is
EIRTtrD.
'o tPDtIcrEroH t{rl.r. 8E DRocEssED WIrnOUS ogfifERrg ETCNAIUBE
I
EEIE SCHEDUI".Ei
VALUATI0Ng 0 * $ 10,000
9101001 -$ 5oro00
$ s0,001 * s 15o, ooo
s150r 001 - $ 5001 000, $500r 001 - 91,000r ooo$ Over $1,000,000
8EB'
$ 20.00
$ 50 .00
$100 .00
9?00, 00
9r100.00
9500.00
LIST OF MATERTALS
NAME OF pROJECT. Indian Creek Townhomes
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT A-1 BLOCK SUBDIVISION
STREET ADDRESS. 1139 Sandstone Drj-ve
DESCRIpTION OF pROJECT. Eight Slngle Family Resldences
The foLlowing informat,ion is
Review Board before a final
A. BUILDING I'IATERTALS:
Roof
Siding
Other Wall Materials
Fascia
Soffits
Windows
Window Trim
Doors
Door Trim
Hand or Deck Rails
FIues
Flashings
Chimneys
Trash Enclosures
Greenhouses
Other
B. LANDSCAPING:
required for subnittal to the Designapproval can be given:
COLOR
Natural
cedar l*(2 e( lx8 Beige lC<k'tr
TYPE OF MATERIAL
Cedar Shakes
Stucco Cream [6 p1 i'r<*
Dimensional l,umb er 2*l L Brown e ,ls4luElot
Plyruood Beit ge lt-^e- {
6rzc,.tibClad m .-J"11-lrt<
vra r\-t
$heet Metal
Galvani ze d
Brown 9rf t{ llar;sl
Natural
N/A
N/l
6.(y 6".-(e - {.,r1!u c-lr- ,, Q,.1,-or0
Name of Designer:phone:
S. J. Riden
949-4 L2 L
PLANT MATERTALS: Botanical Name conmon Name ouantity size*
PROPOSED TREES See Landscape Plan
EXISTING TREES TO
BE REMOVED
None
*fndicate caliper for deciduous trees. Minimun caliper fordeciduous trees is 2 inches. rndicate hei6hfficoniferoustrees. Minimum height for coniferous trees is 6 feet.
PLAI.IT MATERT I Botanical Name Co* oil"." Ouantitv Size*
PROPOSED SHRUBS See Landscape Plan
EXISTING SHRUBS
TO BE REMOVED
*Indicate size5 qallon.
GROUND COVERS
SOD
SEED
TYPE
OF IRRIGATION
rYPE OR METHOD OF
EROSION CONTROL
None
of proposed shrubs.
Tvpe
See Landscape Plan
Minimum size of shrubs is
Sguare Footage
Manual
Natural- Grass RevegetatLon
C. LANDSCAPE LIGHTING: ff exterior lighting is proposed, please
show the number of fixtures and locations on a separatelighting plan. rdentify each fixture from the lighting planon the list below and provide the watt,age, height abovegrade and type of light proposed.
OTHER LANDSCAPE FEATURES (retaining walls, fences, swimmingpools, etc.) Please specify. Indicate heights of retainingwalls. Maximum height of walls within the front setback ii3 feet. Maximum height of walls elsewhere on the propertyis 6 feet.
D.
Boul-der Retalning Wa11s
t
SUBDIVISION Li-on I s Ridge
Lots A-l & A-2JOB NAIVIE
LOT A-1 and A-2 BLOCK FILING
ADDRESS
The location and availabiLity of utitit.ies, whether they be maintryn! llr"g or proposed J.ines, must be approved. and ver-ified bythe following utilities for the accompanying site plan.
Authorized Signature Date
U.S. West Communications
L-800-922-t98'7
468-6860 or 949-4530
Public Service Company
9 4 9-57 81
Gary HalI
HoIy Cross Electric
949-s892
Ted Husky/Michael
Heritage CabLevision
949-5530
Steve Hiatt
^frzf
qs
'-/ ?-13
z-ll-ft
2ru-zs
Assoc.
Laverty
T.V.
Upper Eagle Valley water& Sanitation District *
47 6-7 480
Fred Haslee
NOTE:
,t\ Uc+e see <$qsUlnL
\*NS"$Ao'2.rt-q=
This form is to verify service availability andlocation. This should be used in conjunct-ion withpreparing.your utility plan and schedulinginstallat,ions.
For any new construction proposal, the applicantmust provide a complet.ed utility verificllionform.
3. If a utility company has concerns with theproposed construction, the ut.ility represenLativeshould not directly on the utility veiiticationform that Lhere is a problem which needs to beresolved. The issue should then be spelled out indetail in an attached letter to the Town of Vail.However, please keep in mind that it. is theresponsibility of the utility conpany to resolveidentified problerns.
4. If the utility verification form has signaturesfrom each of the utilit.y companies, and nocomments are made directly on the form, the Townwill presume that there aie no problems and thatthe development can proceed.
5. These verifications do not relieve the contract,orof his responsibility to obtain a street cutpermit from the Town of Vail, Department of public
Works and to obtain.utilitv locations beforediqqinq in an@or easement inthe Town of VaiI. a buildinq permit is not astregt cut permit. A street cut permiU lnr:st beobtained separately.
*_ Please bring a site plan, floor plan, and e.Levations whenobtaining upper Eagle varrey water & sanitation signatures. Fireflow needs must be addressed.
z.
ZONE CHECK
FOR
, R, R P/S ZONE DISTRIC
.DATE:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot A-I BlocK
-
Filing
ADDRESS: 1139 Sandstone Drlve
o
TS
I
SFR
OWNER Relnforced Earth Co.
ARCHITECT S. J. Riden
ZONE DISTRICT RC
PROPOSED USE Eight singl-e fanilf,'Residences
**LOT SIZE 29,819 sf
Allowed
(30) (33)
PHONE 703 82r-1175
PHONE 949-4T21
Existinq Proposed Total
Height
ToTaI GPJ.A
Prinary GRFA
Secondary GRFA
Setbacks
+ 425
+ 425 =.
Front
Sides
Rear
water Course Setback
Site Coverage
Landscaping
Retaining Wa1l Heights
Parking
Garage Credit
Drive:
View Corridor Encroachment:
Environmental /Hazards :
3' /6t
Reqrd
(300) (600) (900) (1200)_
Permitted Slope _..1Q! Actual Slope
Date approved by Town Engineer:
Yes No 222
20,
15,
15'
(30) (s0)
12/12
1)
2',t
3)
Flood Plain
Percent Slope
Geologic Hazards
a) Snow Avalancheb) Rockfal"L yes
c) Debris FLow4) Wetlands
Prevlous conditions of approval (check property file)
Does this reguest involve a 250 Addition? No
How much or cne arLowed 250 Addition is useffiTis resuest?
**Note: under sections L8.L2.090(B) and 18.13.080(B) of the Municipalcode, l-ots zoned Two Family and Prinary/secondary which are less t-han151000 sq. ft. in area may not construct a second dwerling unit. TheCommunity Development Department may grant an exception to thisrestriction provided the appricant, meets the criteria set forth undersections LB.1.2.090(B) and 18.L3.080(B) of the Municipal code incLudingpermanentry rest,ricting the unit as a long-tern rentar unit for fulr-time employees of the Upper Eagle Valley.
r.0
F r-ff-t1,-1-*F-13 1i+i1i1H -'9 l+t+t+1 q;F.+.+'+.+ + { r.ri'#+S-r#t, v'L. J. J_. -L..,|.. J_. J3EEffifi 5fiEgF!gEEEFEEHgFgE,'$"11{girr xogn6ggp
TL__ft/
lo
@/a
*-@
I ieirovou'"llxo1sonvs i1 otu _ _a8I5{EE*" grl
$tp,rrJ
t4iid
,3.'.1
'9.I oFoE
:o
':a
E@
I0x
03 =
\\
l--\
f----.
fi3
@
t-.A
T
f
{
/aH\7
l3
*.<.i,
t
i@
i
/Av
(,i
..o
I
It-
I
I
!
I
I
:
!
I
I
I
I
s
o''.. z
.r '€""
,Jrt
%
Jtwrcs fb
hE clfrEtnsD-
th'2
(303) 87&5400 (24 HOURS)
Februrary i[{3, 199:J
l'li l':e-. l-aute"rbclch
F0 Fox $4S1
Viej. I, C0 81ir58
REr Lots A.-1, A.-ll l-ion's Ridge lSr-rbdivigi.on
Denr lvlr Lnurterbach r
I [rave rev:i ewed ' re Lwn l ots ($evcn urni, ts) as shnwn on {:ho
acfiomp.Rnyinql rn*rp fur purposes o{ Rocl: F"el I and Debris FIow review
{rpr- the Tor,rrrr o{: V;li 1 , The sevmn gi {:es lrave been chosen In be oltt
of the ciebr"i s {afl c:hsrrnml . Tlre dri varwav rnursh enter and crosg the,l
'f an , however .
Th:i El ri.tr :i,n a .Locahion whnre the r:id6e, conLainincl hhe t;nltrce $f
pcrturrt:i al f allr.ncg r-ockr;, is .ah sir.rr:h a L ar,'r l. evcll w:i Lh reciFtlct C,o
thr? r=i. ies; that r'o[:|.,:$ wi 1 I rarel y reach 'l.he eii ter '' arrcJ, : { they
t3ct, r.ri 11 h'rvn veir./ 1iLt1e Enerc"ly, Few utnstabi.e r-ocks occllr abovL"
i:hi *, prmpI:sed deve1. npmerrt ', ;:rnd h r:r ttrrn west o i[ arge rocl.:g wi, ll bn
stahri i. i i:rllrj; ne.r+lrtlrr'll t.ls-"ii, i[ 1:r'oposr'r hwo {orrr- 'f ont hi.gh berns lre
r:orrst:ructrncl above bohh lotE aI the down h:L1i edge o'f rmads abovsE
{:fre 's j. tr:l:l (one roerci :i.s i.n pIactl, 'L,he other ie proposed). "l'his
t^l:i. ll. I all. ht-rt nl:i. ni11i.\he riny roc[,: {a]. 1 tran,irrd bo thta Frm,itirct,,
'fhe consrtr'uci:ion m{ thosr+ urnits wi L l not increass* the hacard to
r:tfier prr:pmrty or str-Lrcturesi, or- to putblic ri6hts*of-urayt
bt-ri. ,l. cj i nt;rl , r'nadr:, r;treets, es$emsntsr uti. litie:i or" {acil:itieg or
other. p:-opr+r-'Li er, r.: t nny k:i rrd,, l-e't me r-et::''hato th;r't the $i'hr.!si arn
rrat i n tfre cjebr-i s lr*r ar-ci icre$sr, but to f urther l nsltre the sa'f ety
o{: thr* pro.jrect ,1. recnmmenrJ tlre constructi on o'f a I ater-al ber-m si x
'f nert', fr:i.mh, as showrr en {:. !t rit accc}mpanyi rrg s[,:e'f.ch map, alonr.; si clc:
the qnl1.y irr the vi.r::ini [y o{: ri;i he ij. fhis w:l 11 l,:or(:}p .trr1y F.i.nws :irr
{:heir trirsf.or-rr: p*ths cjown the c+:r j.gtinq QL.tlL l. y.
$rim:i. ll. lii r.lncli ne.er':i, nq *tr-rrli. H{i {:rr- {r l;r.,r.clrJe*te;rJ llu$ to thet Let-t-i,:t:i. t1 near
{:t'rr'r :si.t{i*r,, F::in.ir.[ illl.*t:ing m'f thar r-ttrits ,antlr {::herr 'f mr"e, t- h r.':r
pr"onossd nr:i h:i.rt,.1t:lnn glronl d ire dr.rne j.n Lhe sni-i.nqtime wlten l;nc,$
concJ:i{::i.onrs ar'r .[ er$ :i rrh:ihi f :i. nc1 .encJ nrnre cJetai..l s of the prrr.ject
..lr-n rri:ard.v,, Ii' t:fimrm ,.lrm qnrtnt:ion* p:t l[ easic.,.+ con Llre:.l: mn"
Nicholas Lampiris, Ph.D.
CONSULTING GEOLOGIST
0185 INGERSOLL LANE
stLT, coLoRADO 81652
')ru.
{ii i. ncrar"r+1. y n4- t / ----Z/ fr^4Ml H)q-n
hl :i. c:: h c' .1. a ri 1.... tr rn p i r- :i. ri
[] t::n ri;lr .L t i n rl ti i l n .1. (l (:l i. :r t
'a
Nicholas Lampiris, Ph.D.
CONSULTING GEOLOGIST
0185 INGERSOLL LANE
stLT. coLoRADO 81652
(36) 87S5400 (24 HOUBS)
f'lay 6, 1??3 ,m!i,,iY llu1.1
Mike Lauterbech
PO Box 5451Vall, CO 8165€
REr Lota A-1q A-29 Lion'e Ridge Eubdivlsion
Drer Mr. Lauterbachr
iJ
I have reviewed the two lote (eix unitg) ag ehown on the
acco,npanylng map for purpores of Rock Fall and Debrls Flow revlew
for the Town of VaiI. The six sltes have been chogen to be out
of the debrts fan channel. The driveway muat enter and crose the
fan, however.
Thtg ts ln a locatlon where the rtdget containing the gource ofpotential falllng rocksl ls at euch a low leV-el wlth respect to
the rEitee that rocke will rarely reach the eitest andt if they
do, wlll heve very ltttle enerEy. Few unstable rocke occur abova
thle proposed developnrent, and to the westr larga rockg Ehould be
Etabllizedp neverthelertr two four foot high berme should bs
constructed above alI reeidencae at tha down hill edEe of roads
above the eitee (one road is ln placa, the other ls proponed).
Thie wtll al 1 but eliminate any rock fall hazard to the proJect.
The conEtructlon of theEe units will not lncrelse the hazard to
other property or etructures, or to publlc righte-of-waytbuildlngel roads, gtreets, easenents, utllitieg or fecilttler or
other propertles of any kind. Let me reetate that the glter are
not ln the debrls hazard areaB, but to lngure the eafety of theprojest lt ie necessary to congtruct a lateral berm el x feet
hlgh, ag shown on the eccempanylng skatch nap, along side the
gul ly in the vicinity of $tte 5. Thie will keep any {lowe ln
their hietoric pathe down the exlgtlng gulIy.
Eioils englneerlng studiee are already avallable and Etill
approprlat for theEe eltee. Final plactng of the unite andt
therefore, the proposed mitiEation should be done in the
epringtlme when enow condltione are leea inhiblting and moredetatls of the project are ready. If there are queetiong.pleaqe
Ei ncerplry t
4^,M( -
Ni chol as
contact me.
Consul ti ng
..4
it
. ./;,(-.- .l, IJ
Fred W. Pool 11
7 Martin Lane
ErBlarood, CO 80110
Lions' Ridge #4
HomEowngrc Assoc.
P.O. Box 4191
Vall, CO 81658
A.L. Shapko
P.O. Box 1448
Vall, CO 81658
Walter Regal
13275 W. Budeigh
Brookfield, Wl 53005
Casolar at Vall
do Greg Hampton
1185 Gasolar Ddve
Vail, GO 81657
Homestake Gondos
1081 VailVia,Y Drive
Vall, CO 81657
Llon's Mane I
c/o Ed Drager
P.O. Box 10000 M
Vail, Co 81658
Bl slqq
qd Qcorts SUrf ai:r Qt\
3la+tq3
@1tiooffs eJf ort Q,tf*/"'#F"^ srrt cif QN
&'pht* rpnu: O".d o F+n.r UW
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE lS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of he Totfln of
Vailwitl hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 18.66.060 of the Municipal Code of
the Town of Vail on March 22, 1993, at 2:00 P.M. in the Town of Vail Municipal Buildlng.
Consldaration of:
Indian Greek Townhomes - A request for a minor subdivision to vacate the lot llne
between Lob A-1 and A-2, Lions Ridge Subdivision/l129 and 1109 Sandstone Drive.
Applicant: MichaelLauterbachffheReinforcedEarthCo.+'
Planner: Shelly Mello
2. A request for setback and wall heQht variances to add a garage to an existing
resldence, located at Lot 10, Block 1, Vail Village 6th Filing/716 Forest Road.
Applicant: Neal EricksonPlanner: Tim Devlin
3. A request for a conditional use permit lo allow for an 'employee housing unit" on Lot
41, Glen Lyon SuMivisionll2l2 Westhaven l-ane.
Applicant: Larry GracePlanner: Andy Knudtsen
4. A request for a proposed SDD and minor suMivision to allow for the development of
single family homes located on Tracts A and B, The Valley, Phase ll/1480 Buffer Creek
Rd.
Applicant SteveGensler/ParlaroodRealtyPlanner: Andy Knudtsen
5. A request for a wall height variance to allow the construction of hazard mitigation
located at Lot 16, Vail Valley Third Filingl2039 Sunburst Drive.
Applicant: Mike GrlsantiPlanner: Jim Curnutte
:i.::
2.A request for a setback variance, at the Manor Vail Lodge to allow lhe construction of
a trash enclosure, located on a Part of Lot 1, Block B, VailVillage Seventh Filing/S95
East Vail Valley Drive.
Golden Peak House Condominium Assoc.A/ail Associales,
Inc./Partners, Ltd./Margaritaville, Inc.
Mike Mollica/Tim Devlin TABLED TO MAY 24, 1993
Manor Vail Lodge
Andy Knudtsen
Steve Gensler/Parlnrvood Realty
Andy Knudtsen
Anneliese Taylor
Shelly Mello
Vail Recreation District
Tim Devlin
4.
5.
:r.
t-
i
ii
1.
ti
t!
ir*|l
il
$..r
Applicant:
Planner:
:,; .
. A request for setback and site coverage variances to allow lor the construction of an
addition and a garage located at2409 Chamonix Road/Lot 19, Block A, Vail das
Schone Filing No. 1.
A request for a conditional use permit to allow the expansion of the Dobson tce Arena,
located at 321 E. Uonshead Ckcle/Lot 5, Block 1, Vail/Lionshead 2nd Filing.
o
THIS ITEM MAY EFFECT YOUR PROPERW
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE lS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commisslon of the Town of
Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 18.66.060 of the Municipal Code of
the Town of Vail on April12.1993, at 2:00 P.M. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building.
Conslderation of:
1.A request for a work session for the establishment of a Special Development District, a
CCI exterior alteration, a minor suMivision, a zone change, and an amendment to
View Corridor No. 1 for the Golden Peak House, 278 Hanson Ranch Fload/Lots A, B,
C, Block 2, Vail Village lst Filing.
Applicant:
Planner:
Applicant:
Planner:
Applicant:
Planner:
Applicant:
Planner:
3. A:request for a proposed SDD and minor subdivision to allow for the development of
-','sihgle family homes located on Tracts A and B, The Valley, Phase ll/1480 Buffer Creek
Hd.
#
6. A request for a setback variance, a sfeam setback variance, and a Uensity variance to
allow for an addition to the residence located aI2129-8 Kel-gar LaneAot 13, Block 2,
Gore Creek SuMivision.
Applicant: Bryan and SallY Hobbs
Planner: Jim Curnutte
7. A request for an exlerior alleration to allow for the expansion of the American Ski
Exchange located at 255 Wall StreeUBlock 5-C, Vail Village, 1st Filing.
Applicant: Robert LazierPlanner: Mike Mollica
A request for a minor suMivision to vacate the lot line between Lots A-1 and A-2, a
request for a variance from the subdivision road standards, and variance from the wall
height standards at Lions Ridge Subdivision/1139 and 1109 Sandstone Drive.
Applicant: Michael Lauterbach/The Reinforced Earth Co.Planner: Shelly Mello
9. A request for a wall height variance to allow lhe construction of a hazard mitigation
wall located at Lot 16, Vail Valley Third Filing/2039 Sunburst Drive.
Applicant: Mike Grisanti
Planner: Jim Curnutte
10. A request for wall height variances in order to construct a driveway to a new
primary/secondary residence located at 2683 Cortina Lane/Lot 7, Block A, Vail Ridgs.
Applicant: Cortina Joint Venture - Bob Borne
Planner: Tim Devlin
1 1. A request for a minor amendment to SDD No. 27 to relocate the private pedestrian
easement ("pool path') between Lots 5 and 6, Forest Glen SuHivision.
Applicant: RAD Five Limited Liability Company
Planner: Tim Devlin
.l a
THIS ITEM MAY EFFECT YOUR PROPEBTY
A PUBLIC NOTICE
-il NOTICE lS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of
:r Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 18.66.060 of the Municipal Code of, the Town of Vail on April 26, 1993, at 2:00 P.M. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building.
i Consideration of:
i 1. A request for a joint work session with the Design Review Board and the Planning and
Environmental Commission to review a request for a conditional use, a paving variance
and the cemetery master plan and management plan for the proposed design of the
Vail Cemetery to be located in the upper bench of Donovan Park generally located
west of the Glen Lyon subdivision and southeast of the Matterhorn neighborhood.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Andy Knudtsen
2. A request for setback and wall height variances to relocate a garage in an existing
residence,located at Lot 10, Block 1, VailVillage 6th Filing/716 Forest Road.
Applicant: Neal Erickson
. Planner: Tim Devlin
* 3. A request for a minor suMivision to vacate the lot line between Lots A-1 and A-2, a' z \ request for a variance from the subdivision road standards, and variance from the wall' height standards at Lions Ridge Subdivision/l 139 and 1't09 Sandstone Drive.
, Applicant: Michael Lauterbach/The Reinforced Earth Co.
' Planner: Shelly Mello
a
li 4. A request for a conditional use permit and a parking variance to allow for an outdoor
[' Oining deck at the Garton's Saloon located at 143 East Meadow Drive/Lot 1, Block 5D,
a
;
',n
at
!.-
Vail Village First Filing.
Applicant: Dave GartonPlanner: Tim Devlin
5. A request for a conditional use permit to expand the hours of operation and add lights
to the Lionshead Miniature Golf Course located at Tract D, Uonshead First Filing,
between the Uonshead Center Building and the base of the Bornfree Express Chairlift.
Applicant: Charlie AlexanderPlanner: Jim Curnutter
t
I
I
j.
THIS ITEM MAY EFFECT YOUB PROPERW
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE lS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of .. I
Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 18.66.060 ot the Municipal Code of ..,
the Town of Vail on May 10, 1993, at 2:00 P.M. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building. !
Consideration of:
1. A request for a joint work session with the Design Review Board and the Planning and
Environmental Commission to review a request lor a conditional use, a paving variance
and ths cemetery master plan and management plan for the proposed design of the
Vail Cemetery to be located in the upper bench of Donovan Park generally tocated
west of the Glen Lyon subdivision and southeast of the Matterhorn neighborhood.
Applicant: Town of Vail $Planner: Andy Knudtsen
2. A request for a landscape variance to allow for the reconstruction ol the parking area
at ths tirst BanU17 Vail Road/Lot 6, VailVillage 2nd Filing. ;
Applicant: First Bank of VailPlanner: Andy Knudtsen
3. A request for a conditional use to allow tee-pees to be used in con;unction with Vail
Associates summer programs to be tocated adjacent to the Base of Chair 8, Tract A,
Lionshead 1st Fiting.
Applicant: VailAssociate-sPlanner: Jim Curnutte
4. A request for wall height variances to allow for the construction ot a driveway to the
residence located at 2346 Cortina Lane/Lot 4, Block A, Vail Ridge.
Applicant: Arno BrinkmanPlanner: Tim Devlin
5. A request for setback and site coverage variances to allow for the construction of an
addition and a garage located a|2409 Chamonix RoacULot 19, Block A, Vail das
Schone Filing No. 1.
Applicant: Anneliese TaylorPlanner: Shelly Meilo
6. A request for a front setback variance and a site coverage variance to allow the
construction of a garage located at Lot 26, Block 7, Vail Viltage l st Filing/165 Forest
Road.
o e
+'
Appticant: j PaulRaelher-Planner; Jim Curnutte
A request for a work session for a minor suMivision lo vacate the lot line between Lots
A-l and A-2; a request for variances from the subdivision road standards, wall height
. standards and to allow parking in the front setback at Lots Al and A2, Block A, Lions
Ridge Subdivision Filing No. 1/1139 and 1109 Sandstone Drive.
Applicant: Michael Lauterbach/The Reinforced Earlh Co.' Planner: ShellY Mello
B. A request for a work session for a major amendment to SDD #5 to allow for the
: development of the remaining porlion of the Simba Run SDD, Savoy Villas, located at. 1100 Norlh Frontage Road.
.', Applicant: Simba Land CorporationMalid Said $I Planner:Mike Mollica
9. A request for a work session to discuss proposed revisions to Chapter 18.38,
Greenbelt and NaturalOpen Space District, and Chapter 18.32 Agriculluraland Open
Space District, of the Vail Municipal Code.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planners: Jim Curnutte and Russ Forrest
10. A request for a minor subdivision and a major amendment to SDD #4, Cascade
Village, to amend the development plan for the Waterford and Cornerstone parcels in
area A, described as follows:
Thar Fn ot |he SW lA NE rA. S.cnon la Torn3hlp 5 South, R|ngo 8l W€3t ot thcsirth Princh., Me.ldlrn, Tolvn ol vait, E|ol.
Cosnlt Colotldo' dsctlb.d ar tollowr:
B{lnnl.|o C r polnl on lha rodharlt det|totray l ol hErlrtc He hwrt No. 70 i,hanc. .n |ror! tln wllh ! plsrlic clp
'|l8r}|ng
lha
cg|br of |rld S.dlon tA b.|n S 33'1019 W l4il7.Gt ba[ hcnc. .loo0 rdt roulhrly ]ioht{l- t lina |Y'o cormd
tl N 52'5O?t E 229.68 L.|
2l N 7a3t17 E r60.ro b.!;
tnence deFnlng rdd roufislt rlgtl|€t wly 0n N 8€r455f E t38.93 L.q th€ncc S 4f45'14' W 9a.32 bst $erc. S 18' lE..af W
5a.08 l€.t fFnc. S ot?ll6i W 20402 bal: b.nca S t2'07'3€i lV 110.25 te3t f|eoo S 28?836i W 164.48 te.l; trnc. t{ aO
n 7Oa' W 2tl.1C te.l; t'lencc N 4ta25d E 9730 t .l: theoc. N 37te3t' W 95.59 t .t thsEa S 5i'5029 W 55.10 !.ct tr.no
69.48 tcel alorig the r,c ot r rur-t ttenl q/|ve lo fta bt hrying I radi$ ot 55.@ taei, ! cootrrl lnelc ol 6tola14a .rid ! ciord lh{
bearr t{ 58' 555f W 66.4 ber; heno. N 3t'(I931' W t 1E.50 leel To The Tn,e Polnt ol BeCinnhCi Counly ol Erele, $d. ol
Cobrado:
Applicant: MECM Enlerprises represented by Eustaquio Cortina and
Commercial Federal Savings.Planner: Shelly Mello
,,/ ,.\
11. A request for a conditional use to allow furniture sales at the Cascade Crossing
Building located at 1031 South Frontage Road WesUan unplatted parcel located west
of the Vail Associates maintenance shop.
Applicant: PaulAnderson Collection, Ltd.Planner: Andy Knudtsen
12. A request for a minor subdivision and an amendment to a previous PEC
recommendation for approval of a major amendment to Cascade Village, SDD #4,
Area A, Millrace lll, 1335 Westhaven Drive, Cascade Village, more specifically
described as follows:
AFnoa$e sw y., lGy+ secbn teTo rFhlp5 sorrt. Rel|9 It w6rolhe 6th P.l{. d6.nb.d r! bltoi,ys:
Eaehnlne .t . Foht ot rho ltlorltrsouth cantedine of aald Sedioo tA wlrncc an |ron Cn win . ph3tlc c|!| marl&e tic c.nbr ot 3.ld
Sec on '12 boas SO0f385fW 455.6 lte[ fi€nc. alon! rald c.nt.rllnc N(f38'lt6E r22,gl leet lo fi. 3orjthcrt RcnIY lln. ot l-7ol
thcnca depaning 3eid ROW llnc N66'53'25T 39.15 teeq 1enc. depNnlne sald ROW [n. S8t'23'19T t65.42 lber ro I point ot
curv.; lho.cc '122,E4t bol Etong rhc lrc ol r 143.20 loot ,!diu! qrrv. b rhc lctt, h.vlndEL cotrrr.l anel. ol.r9o85t' and r cho.d thar
bcatt 515"57?5'€ r tg.r 0 to€t thonce S4O32'10T 3.00 l.3q $encc 66.30 leel alone tha arc ol a 77.4 toot 6diut o,[va b f|e
tleht. havltE a contal lngb ot 4tr12'10' lnd a ciod that bers S15.56!tE Oa.2t lcct; thcrrc. S8.aOtX!1V 9O.2t bar: lha'|ca
N3t.4e24'W 22a.5t leer; ftence STt r 03a1n, I Or .{4 te.r |o O. Potnl ot B€ghnho.
Applicant: Michael LauterbachPlanner: Jim Curnutte
t o
-\.
Project Application
G^- ( l'/s,
A".lr"--.- V*,1Proiect Nam€:
ProiectDescripllon' eo;rL -e-Jot'*-Fed l^'o'^<ir'f
owner Address and Phone: J* *q c n---,.-f; / 96 h^' : h a-'o-
Architect Address and Phone:€ - >-o9 C,.o ssr.,*ds q>6- sffi3
Legat Description' ro, R /, F2 , etock r,tins fu (i*s P,Jje
Zoning Approved:
Design Review Board
Date
Motion by:
Seconded by:
APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL
€-Z-4-?a'(z-z-4
-r*T /-z7"{z-A;t'
.fu Cz>'z-
lr .. \,
DESIGN REVIEI{ BOARD AGENDA
lfednesday, January 7, l98l 2:00 p.n.
1. Essence of Tine
Bxterior changes Vail Village fnn plaza
2. Lionshead Directories
Lionshead Terninal Building
3, Architerra Vail
Earth Integrated Housing, Discussion only
4. lfarner Duplex
Lot 12, Blk 9, Bighorn 3rd, Discussion only
5. Streanside Townhouses , parcel A € B,
Resub'.of 20-l q 20-2, Bighon SubExterior changes
box 100
vail, colorado 81657
F03l 476-5613
Lester Podolsky
36 St. Charles Place
Hlghland Park, Illinois 60035
department of community development
16 December 1978
Re: Lots A-1 and A-2
Llonsridge Subdivision Filing 1
Dea-'Mr. Podolsky:
I have reviewed the slope calculations done by Richards
Engineering and have based the following nurnbers on their
sLope analysis.
The total site area is 2.596 acres, or 113,082 sq. ft. The
totaL slte area with slope in excess of 4O% is 16,6O0 sq. tt.,
which results in a buildable site area of 96,482 sq. ft..
A change in the Zoning Ordinance, which comes beforethe Town Council tomorrow and is likely to pass, would base the
number of units per acre strictly on the buildable site area.
Being in a Residential Cluster zone, with a permitted density ofsix (6) units per buildable acre, you would be permitted thirteen(13) units on the two parcels listed above. The GRFA (gross
residential floor area) allowed on these parcels would be
24,1'20 sq. ft.
If you have any further questions, please let me know.
Sincerely,
n A n nu!*-*nu ff . k-'-l/t'----.-./tUJanes A. Rubin
Zoning Administrator
JAB/gew
cc: John lVheeler
Gaynor Miller
t-r*
department of community development
8 January 1979
John Nilsson
Box 1908Yail , CoLorado 81657
Re: Lots Al aDd A2, Lionsridge Fiting Number 1
Dear John:
The above-mentioned Lots have a.combined acreage of 2.596
acres. On tbese lots, there is 16,600 sq. ft. of slope in
excess of 4O%. This leaves a buildable acreage of 2'2149 acres'
Being in a Residential Cluster zone with a density of
6 u:rits per buildabl"e acre, there would be 13 units allowed
on these-two Lots. The allowable Gross Residential- Floor
Area (GRFA) would be 24,120 sq. ft.
If you have any furtber questions, please contact me.
Sincerely,
fu,q4,t&Y"r"r A. Rubin
Zoning Administrator
JAR/gew
box 100
vail, colorado 81657
(303! 476-5613
-E !!* -
q
\
/'ilb
',Hi R
lili
il,1
\ \\
t\
\\
N, $I l, d\
lr
',\'\
'\ll
\ t \4{
}
I FFRI !TI it\6FJi:-\J-t-f,$=.iIt .l .rri'l , :\o" /-s\,"tf,-s-\ CFlliN-,.aQ.saaIP
t^,
:
6
\II,...\ .,.\ . i.' 1. . ( ir-{. \.\'\ Nl., ir'r fr\ l\ I\\ \i '',) i* \\ \ '..1\ .. \\ )'.'\ ). ) f\\\'\N*.t.S\\'\Nt. l.\- '.', 'r '\ t] )_>4Ni. .r-4\i', iq.^' i Y)') i
.1.
r\
\'t' l'
[..x
{.r
\Q\l\l
c)
==FL,c
:(9,-.,otrE-
N
N
\\
\
tlr
I
*
Ib
;
R
E
J
tlr
I
\\
ItG
ltt
CT
o
F
F
J
=(t
2_z
\
I
1
{
t\
I
I
I
i
I
l,
I,
I
It\
I'l
I
I
I
ll1
Irlllr
I
llril
I
)o ',1lri' 'l\'
,
,i\
'lI
\
Il'
I
l1
I
I
\1
I
\
s$,^
rE$$S\P.|
tstrsqJ