HomeMy WebLinkAboutVAIL VILLAGE FILING 7 TRACT B GOLDEN PEAK BASE 1989 LEGALftt
PIAI|NING AND ENVIRONI.IENTAL COUt'fi SSION
JrrNE 25, 1990
Present
Chuck Crist
Diana Donovan
Ludwig Kurz
Jim Shearer
Kathy Warren
Dalton Willians
ltenbers Absent
Connie l(night
In the interest of time, rork sessions were held prior to thepublic hearing beginning at 12:40 p.n.
A recruest for a work sesEion on the Sonnenalp redevelopnent and
Kristan Pritz explained that the reguest was for the
redevelopment of the Sonnenalp property and a proposed Special
Developnent District. She gave a brief surnmary of the request
and reviewed the zoning analysi.s. She reviewed those itens
related to the proJect found within the Vail Village uaster PIan
including Sub-Area #1-3, emphasizing Goals & Policies, andfllustrative Plans. She also provided corresponding prelininary
staff conments. Kristan then relayed comments made by the Fire
Department and Public l{orks. This was a work sesslon, so no
recommendation was made.
Jay Peterson, representing the applicant, explained that they
were before the board on a prelirninary basis and sinply wanted
conments and suggestions so they could move ahead with the design
process.
rrene Westby, nanager of the Talisman, e:cplained that the ouners
had discussed the proposal , though not in depth, regardlng
coordination with the sonnenalp on landscape and parking. As the
manager, she would encourage the board to move faster. They do
have concerns with parking, landscape and fire access.
Jay explained that he had net with the president of the
association and the Sonnenalp had offered access through the
Sonnenalp structure.
tlarilyn Fletcher, a Talisman condoniniun owner, felt the proposal
was very nice looking. She was concerned about the setbacks and
ingress/egtress.
StaffKristan Pritzllike Mollica
Shelly Uello
Andy Knudtsen
Penny Perry
o
Kent Rose, speaking for hinself as a Council ltenber, felt that
the zoning analysis found within the nemo was well prepared. fnthe future, he would llke to see a conparison of ttre sDD wLth theVillage ttaster Plan as weII. He suEgested to KrLstan to add this
conparLson to the present chart. lle etated that the additional
cornparison could help hin lean nore favorable toward the proJect.
As lt was currently depicted, the proJect looked too large.
Larry Eslarith ercplained that he would prefer that the Councl-l
nernbers not participate in the PEC neetlng. The councll le aquasi-Judicial board and he felt thelr participation could causelegal problens.
Diana asked if they coufd speak in a general sense or at a
mininun ask questions, and Iarry t.t6 ttyes.t'
Menr Iapin felt that page 2 of the Deno sas the key. When an SDDis proposed, there should be trade-offs. lle wanted to know what
these trade-offa were. He felt that staff presented the trade-offs in respect to the Marriott proJect well. Regarding theMarriott project, he felt that too nuch tirne was spent comparing
the original application to the current proposal . Merv agreedwith Larry Eskwith, that the Councilts conments should be linitedat this point. The Councit nas in a quasi-judlcial role.
Kristan explained that the Planning Conmission sinply wanted
general cornments and issues that the CouncLl felt needed to be
addressed.
Lynn Fritzlen aEked if staff could reetate the purpose of
applylng underlying zoning and Kristan explained that there were
basically tno reasons. fhe first was to identify the usesposslble on the site and the second was used to conpare the
proposal with the underlylng zoning requirenents which PEC and
Council always request staff to do.
,Jay Peterson addressed the trade-off lssue. He stated that the
Sonnenalp building could neet the PA criteria, however, the
building design would becone a terrlble bulky mass in the uiddleof the lot. He also felt that the proposed use of 99t hotel
rooms was a trade-off. A160, the proposal sas not far over GRFA.
The current proposal was at 32 units per acre conpared to the 25units per acre calted for under PA zoning.
Peggy osterfoss stated that it would be helpful if all partles
concerned had a copy of the vail Village lt[aster Plan.
Jin Shearer felt it was extrenely inportant for the Sonnenalp to
work wlth the Talisman regarding parking and landscaping. He tras
concerned about the Ludwig deck and its inpact on the creek area.
He also wanted to see the enployee housing issue addressed. He
rras very concerned about the height creating a crowded feeling on
o
l{eadow Drive. He understood Jayrs conments regarding the bulk ln
the nlddle of the lot, but felt that the uass could be pulled off
of l,teadow Drive and a nore attractive walk created. He felt the
approach would create nore Lnterest for the retail area. Jln
atso felt a phasing plan was needed. JIn liked the I'ncrease in
Iodglng units, underground parking, and felt that the Faesslers
were good managera. He had some concern about the anount of
retail space and density. He prefered the tower as an
archltectural feature ai oppos-d to a nbuildl.ng'r providing llving
area in the tower.
Kathy Warren asked if the Etaff could total all the-sq. footage
calculations (GRFA, Accessory etc..) on the charts in the future.
Fron what she could quickly calculate, the proposal was over PA
zoning by 25t. Kathy felt she could not eupport setback
varlances for VaiI Road, Meadow Drive or the Stream and she feltthat the heights caLled for by the Master Plan should be adhered
to. Though sJ.ightly under on site coverage and over on
landscaping, the landscaped area is private and ehould be opened
up and nore inviting to the public. creek acceas is lnportant.
Kathy fett enployee housing was necessary and would like to see
it on site. The Tallsman parking should also be addressed- No
variances on parking should be given. Iodge use ls very good.
She is lookJ.ng for the publlc aood in respect to the proJect.
Kathy felt that, because it was a hotel , she was not as concerned
wittr units per acre as she was with GRFA. She did not see uuch
in the way of benefits for the Town.
Jay, in response to the employee housl.ng issue, stated that the
Faesslers own za units in solir Val.I as well as some units in
Bighorn.
Chuck Crist stated that he had always rtanted to see the Eite
developed. He had concerns about the tower. lle stated that he
was not as concerned with setbacks sith the exception of l'teadolt
drive. The mass on Meadow Drive needs to be broken up. The loss
of landscaping is a problern. He also would like to see employee
housing in-orporated into the proJect on site. He felt that the
Town would be losing green space and the strean would be blocked
fron the public and he liked the arnount of retail space proposed.
He liked the underground parking.
Dalton was very concerned with the setbacks as they related to
the transfer of open space fron publlc areas to private areas.
The 20 foot setbacf nust be naintal.ned. The berm' per the Vail
Village lrlaster Plan, should be kept. He felt that the building'
along Dteadow Drive, should be stepped back in order to avold a
trcanyontr affect. He did not feel he could aPprove the requested
setbick variances. The parking for the entire project including
Talisman and Swiss House must be addressed.
f
Dalton continued by quotlng the Vall Vlltage lilaster PIan Sub-Area
*1-5 Wtllow Bridge Road Walkway aB statlng:
nA decoratlve paver pedestrlan walkway, separated fronthe street and accented by a Etrong landscaped area to
encourage pedestrian clrculatl.on along l.leadow Drlve.
Loss of parking sLll need to be relocated on site.rl
Dalton felt that the ingress,/egrees ehould be on the east si.de ofthe Sonnenalp by Vlllage Center (Swlss House) and the planter
along l,leadow Drlve nust stay. Ilalton also felt that the bullding
should be pulled back to buffer nolse fron bus traffic. He feltthat the gate should be noved cast and felt that the Dass andbulk was not conpatlble wlth Eaet lleadow Drlve. Dalton felt ttratthe 48 foot helght requlrenent Bhould be strictly adhered to, a
101! tower was out of the queetlon and the King Ildwig deck
should be stepped down towardE the creek. The deck creates too
nuch of a vall. Dalton felt that the enployee housing should beon-sLte and that the proposal was taklng open space and
Iandscaping away fron the publlc. The applicant should put inpublic spaces, like a stream walk. He conmended the FaeEslersfor being excellent hotellers.
Ludwlg conplinented the Faesglere for runnlng a rclass
operation." IJudwig Kurz felt the propoeal needed a conprehensiveparking plan as well as an access study. He felt he could glve
sone leeway with the helght and nass, how€ver, the buildl.ng still
needed work. Ludwig felt that the walkway and loading area werein conflict and need a better lnterface. Jay Etated that the
loading area was located by default. Ludwig also felt that theinternal open space was naximized at the sacrifice of areas along
Meadow Dr. and Vail Road.
Diana stated that the proposal dieregarded the Vall Vlllage
Master PIan. She questioned whether parklng for conmercial would
be acceEsible and reserved for conmerclal . ilay eaid space sould
be nade available to cugtoners. She felt that the building ras
beautlful but would be nore approprlate on large acreage. Dianafelt that a streanwalk ehould be propoeed and the parking
situation concerned her.
Jay explained that he felt the parking regrulatlons pertaLned to
smaller hotel rooms. The proposed parklng would nork slml,lar to
crossroads and the gate would be relocated. Diana felt that the
loading needed to be either moved away fron the creek orinproved. Parking for Swiss House and Talisnan needs to be
figrured out. The role of the Talisnan also needs to be defined.
Enployee housing nust be addressed - perhaps perrnanently restrict
what Sonnenalp already has for enployee unlts. She felt lt was
inportant to know what the Taligrnanrs intentlons were soon and
what would be done. Diana also had concernsi regarding the
setbacks along Meadow Drive and Vail Road. She didnrt have a
o
o
a,problen wLth a varLance for an architectural statenent, however,
the height in general nust be reduced. Diana was concerned
rrhether an SDD was realy necessary. She questioned the benefitof the proJect to the pulfic and stated more general public
iinprovenents were needed.
..(athy Warren felt that the trash situation needed to be addressed
and that ttre appllcant needed to soften the approach at the
pedertrlan lev-t. she also felt that new enployee housing units
needed to be addreEsed ln addltlon to those already owned. She
felt the connercl.al equare footage aleo contributed to employee
housing demand.
Jay felt that an addltional enployee unlt reguirenent would be
penalizing the applicant for having the foresight to purchase the
units. The appll-ant purchased the Solar Crest units wlth the
intention of conpletlng the redevelopment currently proposed.
Ton Steinberg comnented that he felt the proposal
the correct direction. He also agreed with Diana
sure an sDD rtould be needed.
was going inthat he lf,as not
iloodnlain nodification for the Covered Bridqe Buildinq, loceted
Mike Mollica explained that the applicants were ProPosing a major
redeveloprnent of the Covered Bridge Building. The proposal
called for naJor modlfications to the front entrance of the
existing connercial spaces, the creation of lower level
conmercial spaces, intiff on the north and northwest sections of
the existing- structure, the addition of an elevator, and the
addition of two upper floors. The reguest involved 5 separate
applications, an exterior alteration request, a site coveraqte
vliiance request, a heiqht variance reguest, a l-andscape variance
request, and a floodplain rnodification request. Mike reviewed
the applicable zoning considerations and gave prelininary staff
comnents. Since this was a work session, no staff
reconmendations were made.
Kathy Ytarren asked what the allowed GRFA rtas and Mike explained
that the sunrey was not finistred and therefore calculatlons sere
not made with legard to GRFA. Ned Gwathney, project architect,
felt that they would be withln what was allowed-
Ned explained the changes that rrere nade since the staff Itemo was
written. The only issue he felt that the PEC rnight be concerned
about was the trelgnt of the new roof line. The new proposal did,
however, elininate the flat roof design. He explained that the
a
adJacent propertiea sere built prior to the enactnent of tb3 -
he-lght restrl,ctions and nost sere above the helght. of ttre'piesent
Covered Brldge Building. Ned stated tbat the propoe-al would be
in llne wlth the surroundlng properties, and that ttre design dld
not negatively affect adJacent propertles. In fact the propoaal
could enhance the adJacent propertles, for example, thq new roof
would Ecreen r'PepLrg wall.il
Ton Stelnberg, sl.ttlng in the audience, eaid he felt he sould
have no obJections to the height variance due to the fact that
the roof sould screen PepirE wall.
Dalton Willlans encouraged worklng with the pocket park and
extending the strean walk down to the end of the property line,
if at all possible, so that it could be contl.nued ln the future.
chuck Crist asked lf they would be increasing connon space and
Ned answered lrno.r However, there would be no decrease in connon
space either. chuck asked how the height related to the grade
found on Bridge Street and Ned answered that Bridge Street is 5l
higher than the grade used to calculate height. Ned also nanted
Chuck to bear in rnind that the building was etepped back,.hence
the highest point sould be 50r off of the etreet.
Chuck explained that he llked the proposal . He would like to see
nore flower boxes and perhaps a more Tyrolean look.
Ludwig Kurz felt the project looked good. lle questloned wtrether
there was any opposl.tl.on to the proJect and Mike explained that
the proposal had not fornally been published slnce this was
sfunply a sork session. Mike explained that he did have oneletter at that tirne fron Rod Slifer in favor of the proposal .
Kathy warren asked, if they removed the building area by the
park, highlighted ln yellow on the plans, including the rear
stair, if the project would be in conpliance wlth sl.te coverage.
She also stated that she was not confortable with the height
variance but if the Town could end up with a more usable public
park she could conElder the height variance. She was not
comfortable with the site coverage variance. Kathy felt she
could not obJect to the exterior alteration, it was a much needed
inprovenent.
Kathy guestioned whether the pocket parlc was identified in the
vail-village Master PIan and Mike explained that it was not
addressed. Kathy was concerned about the Bridge street access to
the park and ranted to see nore detail.
Jfun Shearer felt the proJect was good looking. He llked the roof
lines and would like to aee nore planter boxes. He stated that
the reason behind a variance is to improve the property. He
nould tike to see J.nprovenents to the streamwalk and to see all
evergreens saved or 4 put in for tbe 2 taken out. He felt there
1'
night be a problern with the floodplain nodification. IIe raa
concerned sith the elevator shaft and water seepage. lle had noprobleu sith the height. He would rather have an attractive roofIine. He nas satisfied with the Looks of the proposaL. He feltthe etaff and board needed to Iook at ttre vlew corridor. Heliked the way the proposal tiered back from the street with tbe
height.
Diana Donovan felt lt would be wonderful to get a wallaray to Gore
Creek Plaza. she felt it would be nice to have Jogs, and bay
windows on the north side of the bullding. She felt the accessto the park needed to be nore enticing. She was not sure about
the height. Trade-offs and other consl.derations such as
screening Pepits bullding would be a help. She rould have a hard
tirne supporting the proposal if the evergreen trees were removed.
Mike explained that the Town IandEcape Archltect felt the trees
were very healthy and would last many years.
Diana suggested the use of pavers rather than asphalt in front of
the building.
Chuck Crist asked about the alurninum siding that was originally
proposed and Ned explained that the slding had been changed to
wood.
The Pub1ic Hearing was
Donovan, Chairperson.of time, the board ski
to order at 3:10 p.D. by Dianathe interest
ften No. 4.The
caLled
Connie
ItemsNo.2&3w t present.
ftern No. 4:
SheIly
the Golden Peak snowmakins punphouse, Tract B'
Vail Village 7th Filino.ApplLcant: VaLl AssocLatee' Inc.
1o explained that Vail Associates was requesting a
conditiona per:rnit for a sumner seasonal staging area a
Golden Peak area for the construction of the Far
ReEtaurant. The was located ln the Skl tion zonedistrict. In this zone Storage for
t{ountal.n Equipnentr is an allowed condl-tional use. The proposed
use would be for an office trailer, 12 enployee parking sPacesfor the Eunner of 1990 and 25 parking BPaces for 1991. A linited
anount of construction naterials would also be located at the
staglng area. The construction trailer and the building
materials would be renoved by Novernber 15th of each year. Shelly
e:q)lained that staff was concerned about parking being located on
the eite and suggested the posslbllity of located the parklnguphlll on county land or an alternate area Euch as the west DayIot. The staff reconnendatlon vae for approval sith condltions
as found within the nemo.
Joe l,lacy explalned that the request was made ln order to
conetruct a 500 eeat restaurant at the Far Eaat. He stated thatVail Associates had received at leaet 2 other conditlonal usepernits and had no complalnte. They dld not want to take parkl-ng
away fron the publlc by parklng their enployees ln publlc parking
areas. The new VJ.llage Parking structure had created a parklng
shortage.
Jack tlunn explained that part of the goal was to have vlsibtlltyfor detlvery trucks. The other reason waE to have a collectingplace for employees Ln order to llnit the nunber of vehlcles on
the nountal.n. The applicant had originally looked at using the
West Day Iot. However, when the Town of Vail declded to go forthwlth the parking etructure expanslon, it nas felt that thls }ot
would be needed for publlc parkLng.
Joe ltacy clarlfied that the staglng arsa was actually downhill of
the punphouse. Krlstan Prltz noted that the proposal had stated
specifically that the staging would be uphill.
Ludwigt Kurz asked if any of the area would be fenced or screened
and Jack Hunn explained that the etorage area would not be
screened.
Ludwig saw no problems with havlng both the storage area.and
parking on the eite. He understood the hardship of staging from
two areas.
Diana Donovan asked uhy Vail Associates dld not wish to use the
Eagle county area uphill since it was already graveled and
graded.
Dalton Wiltians had no problem wltb delivery and staging but
wanted the parking hidden. He also wanted to know why the staff
condLtions of approval l-ncluded revegetatl-ng after the firstyear. He felt it would be a waste of tine and noney, for the
area would be used for skiing in the wlnter and reused for
staging the next year. He felt lt would be sufficient to
revegetate in the fall of 1991.
Jin Shearer asked why ttre request was for 12 cars in 1990 and 25
in 1991 and Joe litacy exl)lalned that the finish construction which
would be done in the second year regulred nore employees. ilin
conmented that the biggest problen would be how the site would
look fron I-70.
o
Diana Donovan felt that lf the area waE screened she could
Eupport the parklng of 12 vehicles. She was stlll unsure about
25 vehicleE. Dlana also felt that the trdust preventionn
statement should state from the iVista-Bahntr. She conmented that
she would rather aee approval for the etaglng site come through
the Vail board than to deny the request and be proposed to Eagle
County and have no control .
A notion to approval the recruested conditional use pemit
wlth the followlna conditlons was rnade bv Kathv Warren and
seconded by Chuck Crist.
Conditions:
1. That the stacrl.nq slte be used for construction fron
June 1. 199o-Novenber 15. 1990 and the end of the ski
aeason to Novenber 15, 1991t and
2. AII areas irnpacted bv the construction staoing have
straw laid at the by Novenber 30. 1990 and be
completely reveoetated bv Novenber 30, 1991; and
No more than 12 vehl.cles at any one time. screened in a
manner approved bv staff in 1990 and no more than 5
vehicles at anv 1 tine be oarked on site ln 1991; and
A 3or setback be maintalned from MiIl Creek; and
road.
VOTE: 6-0 IN FAVOR
Itern No. 5: A request for a sLde and front setback variance in
order to construct a craraqe on Lot 7' Block 3,vait village 9th Filing. 898 Red sandstone circle.
Applicant: Paul Testwuide
SheIIy Mello explained that the request was for a garage and
entry addition to the north and west sides of the existingresidence. The proposed garage had a total area of 526 s,q. ft.
and would encroach a naximun of 3 ft. into the 15 foot side
setback reguirenent and 2 ft. into the 20 foot front setback
requirenent. With the exception of the requested varlance, all
other development standards would be net. The staff
reconmendation was for approval of the request with the conditionthat the easternmost 1or of the existing paved parking area be
renoved and landscaped. The variance would not be a grant of
special privilege and did not inpact adjacent properties in a
3.
4.
5.That the applicant treat the road from the Vista Bahn
to the staqincr area to limit the amount of road dust
that would result from the increased use of the access
o
negative Danner. The staff felt that the addltlon of enclosedparking would inprove the general appearance of the nelEhborhood.
Ga1en stated that he had eignlflcantly reduced the garage per the
boardrs reguest at the laet neetlng. lfhey were sinply aeklng to
keep the asphalt. The proposal dld add a sl.gnlflcant anount oflandscaping. They uiehed to leave the aephalt as a place for theklds to play. Galen aleo asked to have a llttle l-eeuay uith ttresetback (inches) in order to avoid havlng extensLve survey rork.
Kathy t{arren asked why the addltlonal lor of asphalt waE needed
and Mrs. TestwuLde e:<plained that vithout the additLonal asphalt
they would have no guest parklng. Gueste vould not want to parkin front of the garage, therefore blocklng the garage.
ill,m Shearer questloned the landecaplng as lt rae portrayed on theplan. tle felt if the 10r area was left, lt would look strange.llrs. Testwulde explained the existing rock wall which framed theportion being spoken of and how the landscape features wereplanned around the asphalt.
Kathy Warren stated
However, she could
concerns.
Chuck Crlst, Dalton
Diana Donovan suggested the appllcant reduce the asphalt on the
west side of the driveway.
A motLon to approve the recnrested 3r slde eetback and 2t
front setback variances with condition as follows was made
bv Kathv Warren and Seconded by Jim Shearer per findings C-
1--topographv. C-2 and C-3.
Conditions:
VOIE: 6-0 rN FAVOR
rtem No. 6: A recruest for a front setback variance and a creek
setback variance for Lot 5, VaiI Villaqe tfest,Fillncr No. 2. 1755 t{est Gore Creek Drive.ApolLcant: Dan and Xaren Forev
t{ike uollica explained that the applicante were requesting
variances fron the front setback and the strearo eetback. llhey
were proposing a naJor rernodel of the exlstlng two-fanily hone
that she understood the staffrs concerns.also slmpathize with ltrs. Testnuiders
Willians, and Ludwig Kurz had no concerns.
The Desiqn Review Board be asked to look at elimLnatino
asphalt on the west slde of the drivewav and
landscapinq.
1.
10
o
which included an attached two-car garage with a secondary,rental unit located above the garage which is reguired to berestricted per the Townrs zoning code. lllke aleo explained thatthe lot was Beverely conetrained by the llnltations of the
setbacks and ttre renaining bulldable area vas liuited. The lot
was also constrained by the exlEting topography; the average
slope beneath the parking area and the proposed garage eite was
approximately 31t. The elope dld allos the owners to conEtruct a
garage in the front setback wlthout a varlance. The variance was
required due to the proposed secondary unit located above thegarage. The staff reconnrendatlon was for approval . Staff
betieved the lot to be encunbered with a physical hardship and
believed the siting of the garage had been deslgned ln the mostsensitive nanner possible.
John PerkLns, representing the appll.cant, explalned that the hone
was purchased with the lntent of renodellng. The plan was to
convert the duplex Lnto one unl-t and add the garage and caretakerunit. He felt the key points were that the applicant was
proposing to upgrade a property and add a much needed enployeeunit.
Kathy Warren felt that the parking asphalt should be decreased to
40r compared to the proposed 5Or width.
Chuck Crist comnented that he liked the plan as presented.
Ludwig Kurz also liked the proposal .
Jim Shearer agreed with Kathy that the driveway could be
decreased in width and John Perkins felt he could adjust the
width but felt 4or may be too srnall.
Jim connented that it was part of the job as a Planning
ComnissLoner to encourage upgrading, entployee housing and coveredparking. He could not see any negative impacts and therefore
could support the proposal .
Diana Donovan concurred with the board. In general, she feltthat the PEc was beginning to be too easy wittr lots that hadphysical constraLnts. The zoning regrulations were written to
address the uatters and should be adhered to.
A motion to approve the requests per the staff meno. wlth
the condition that the DRB review the width of the drivewavto rnalntain as close to a 40r as possible. was made bv Jin
Shearer and seconded bv Kathy Warren.
VOTE: 6-0 IN FAVOR
11
o
Item No. 7:
Road.ApplLcant! Town of vall Pollce Department
Andy l(nudtsen explalned that the Pollce Departnent proposed tobuild a tower for a new antenna and llcrouave dlsh as part of an
inprovenent to the Energency Setinl,cee Comunication Systen. The
tower would be 40 feet tall wlttr a 10 foot antenna on top for atotat of 50 feet ln height. The etaff felt that the propoeal
would have nininal negative funpacte and that the overall proJect
would J.nprove the character of the area. lthe staff
recomendation waE for approval wlth conditl.one as gtated ln the
nemo.
Kathy warren felt that the mechanical equlpnent referred to lnthe reconmended conditions of approval was already suppoeed to
have been renoved. Ken Hughy agreed and apologized that lt hadnot already been done. He aasured Kathy that it would be done.
Dalton Willians was concerned about the proposed height of the
tower and Ken explal.ned that he had looked lnto alternatLves;
however, cost and the lack of cooperation fron the U.S. Westbuilding attributed to the proposed location.
Ken conmented that the long range plans were to relocate thepolice station and hopefully the move would Lnclude novl.ng allthe equipment.
Kristan wanted the board to understand that the reason staff was
recommending approval of the requeet wae because the buil.dLng was
located in the Public Use district, not becauee the applicant was
the Town of Vail.
Ludwlg stated that he had concerns, however, in light of the
safety issues he felt he could support the proJect.
Jin Shearer asked if there would be any guide wiree and Ken
responded rno.rr ilin then asked what the chances were of the
Police Department adding other dishes in the future and Ken
explaLned that there sere no plans for addltione in the nearfuture. Jin pointed out that the paint color waa an inportant
iseue for the Design Revlew Board to consider.
Kathy l{arren had no connents.
Diana felt that the big trees salvaged fron the parklng structure
renovation would be too big and vould attract attentlon rather
than divert attention to the tover. She uould prefer to see
aspens but felt it was a natter better left for the Desigrn Revl.ew
Board to review.
A re<nrest for a condLtLonal uee pelmLt and a
hel.qht variance Ln order to constr:uct an antennaat the Vall Uunlclpal BuLldLng, 75 South Frontacre
L2
o
and seconded bv Jim Shearer.
ConditLons:
1. Renove unnecessarv nechanical ecuipment on the roof;
and
2. Reoalr the danacred fence on the northern propertv line;
and
Buffer the tower bv plantinq 3-5 trees; and3.
4.
VOTE: 6-0 IN FAVOR
Iten No. 8: A reauest for a eide yard setback variance at 4247
Colunbine DrLve, Unit #2o, Bicrhorn Terraee.
Anplicant: John Nilsson
Shelly Mello explained that the applicant was requesting a
variance from the 20 ft. side and rear setback reguirement to
allow for the construction of a 101.25 sq. ft. addition on the
north side of the buiJ.ding. The variance requeEt nas for an 11
ft. encroachnent into the 20 ft. rear setback and a 15 ft.
encroactrnent into the 2o ft. side yard setback. Bighorn Terrace
is a nonconfoming subdivision because it was annexed into the
Town and zoned }!DMF after it was establlshed. The inposed
setbacks greatly linlt the locations of possible additlons whlch
would not require setback variances. The staff recolnmendation
was for denial of the request. staff acknowledged that other
propertJ.es in the Bighorn Terrace subdivision had received
setback variances and therefore ttre variance reguest was not a
grant of special privllege and that although there were
exceptions or extraordinary conditions applicable to the lot
which did not generally apply to their properties in the sane
zone district, a mininun setback should be naintained Ln orderto guarantee a nlnlmum distance between buildings to insurepubllc health , safety, and rrelfare as well as the fair treatmentof all property ottnerB within Bighorn Terrace. If the PEc were
to approve the variance request, staff reconnended the applicant
be reguired to underground the electrical service fron the
service pole.
the Desiqn Review Board approval .
13
o
John Nllsson e:<plalned that he needed the space to nake the hone
uore habitable. He felt the idlstance betneen bulldingsi rrrle
was unfair since there were nany homes much sloser together. tlefelt the additlon rould improve the area by ridding the Junk onhis porch.
LudwLg Kurz dLdnrt feel the addltl.on lnpacted nelghborLngpropertles Ln a negative way. He could not see denylng the
request sith the anendnent of the code stlll outEtandlng.
Dalton Wlllians vas also concerned about denying the requestwlthout formal pollcles belng ln force. Ite asked where the pole
and lLneE were. He felt lt sas unreasonable to ask the appllcantto underground the wires when it had not been asked in the past.
Kristan and Shelly enphasized that shen a variance ls granted,
nany tines there ls a trade-off. In this case, the
undergroundlng of sires nust begln sonewhere.
Dalton was not in favor of requiring the appllcant to undergroundthe wires. He felt he could support a condition that requiredthe appllcant to underground the wireE at the tlne that 5ot ofthe residents whose lines were located on the sane pole
undergrounded their wLres.
Chuck crist had no problen supporting the varlance requests. He
was not in favor of requiring the applicant to underground thewlres. He would rather see increased landscaping.
Kathy Warren clarified that the addition would be where theexisting deck was located. Because the deck was already there,
she would be comfortable wlth the addition. She would also lLketo eee the undergrounding of utilities.
Jl.m Shearer asked how close the house was to the west and Shelly
explained that the distance was 17r staggered but the deck
enclosure sould not increase the distance. Jin shared Daltonrsfeeling regarding the undergrounding of utilities though he dld
agree ttrat the Town should get some tlpe of trade-off in returnfor a variance.
Diana agreed wlth Kathy warren ln that the utilitieE needed to be
undergrounded.
John Nilsson felt it was unfair to requLre hin to underground theutitities until done by all. He explained that, wLthin the last
6 rnonths, there was a connittee folaed to try and have the ll.nes
undergrounded. The conmittee sas unsuccessful . During hisactivity on the connittee, the Lnfornation he recelved wascontrary. He understood one line at a tine could not be
14
o
undergrounded. It would have to be a mass proJect. He stated he
would be happy to get bids on the cost, reopen converEatlon sith
the assoclation regarding the undergrounding of the utilitles,
and be willlng to spend up to 9IOO.OO to underground theindlvidual utttity llnes to hls unlt.
nade bv Chuck Crist and seconded bv Jim Sbearer.
2.
Condl.tions:
1. The applicant obtain 3 bLds and aqrees to underqround
utllities if the cost of underqroundincr sas S4oo.oo or
less.
3. The applLcant acrrees to head a comnittee for Buildings
A, B. and C in order to arproach Holv Cross Electric
and the Town to address the underoroundinq of theutillties for the proiect as a whole.
VOTE: 6-0 IN FAVOR
A re<ruest for an arnendnent to SDD No. 23.,ViaI
National Bank. Part of Ipt D. Block 2, Vailftem No. 9:
Mike Mollica explained that the application involved two
elements, an anendrnent to the approved development plan to allow
for the enclosure of two decks on the third floor of the
structure and an anendrnent to the parking standards of SDD No- 23
l-n order to provide parking for this proposed addition rithin the
parking structure at the Vail valley ltledical Center. The
proposal constltutes a major anendment to an existing sDp. The
ntannlng Connissions action is advisory, and final decisions are
nade by the Town Council. The staff was suPPortive of the vail
tlatlonil Bankrs request. staff was confortable with the tining
of the request and the Modificatlon Agreement and Irrevocable
Letter of Credit. staff felt that the Joint-use parking
arrangement was very reasonable. The staff reconmendation
carried conditions as found within the neno.
Jay Peterson, representl.ng the appllcant, explalned that the
applicant had walted for the ltedlcal Center to get approval for
the additlonal apaces and begin construction before they returnedto the PEC. He felt the tininqt was now right.
15
o
Kathy tfarren agreed the tlnLng saa rJ.ght and Jl.u shearer agreed.
Dalton l{lllians guestioned, slnce the applicant was purchasing
extra spaces, if the board could regulre theu to delete a apacethat he felt was unsafe located on the front lot. DiscuEeLon
centered around the issue and lt was decided that the board did
not have the authority to regulre the renoval of the epace.
occuoancy for the parkin<r structure.
If for some unforeseen reason the lledical Centerreparkincr structure l-s not conoleted. the newlv
Eacrle Countv Clerk and Recorderrs OffLce.
VOTE: 6-0 IN FAVOR
Item No. 1O:
A notion to aporove the recnrests oer staff peno and
conditionE as follows was nade bv Ludwia Kurz and seconded
bv Dalton Willians.
Conditions:
1.
2.
Aoolicant: VailuBeaver Creek TelevLsion Network.
Mike Mollica explained that the appllcant wae reguestl.ng to anoend
Section 18.26.040 of the Town of VaiI Zoning Code Ln order to add.rTelevision Stationsn as a first floor level , conditional uee in
the Commercial core II zone diEtrict. The current zoning code
did not speclfically address television Etations, however the
positi-on of the planning staff had been that television stations
fall under the category of professional offices. Profeesional
offLces are currently not allowed as permJ-tted or conditional
uses on first floor or street level . The staff reconmended
denial of the applicantrs reguest to nodify the Townrs Zonlng
Code. Staff did not support the proposed change in the zoning
constructed deck encloeure shall only be allowed to be
18.26. 040.
16
o
code as they felt that the appllcantrs reguest was not consistentwith the purpose sectl.on of the Coruercial core II zone district.
Although etaff belleved that television stations should be
allowable uses ln Conmercial Core fI at basenent or second floorlevels, staff strongly felt that the proposed use on the firstfloor was inappropriate.
BilI Perkins, Presldent of Vail/Beaver creek T.v., disagreed withthe staffrs assumptlon that a lelevlslon Station should fall lntothe eame category aa a professlonal offlce. First, a televisionstation needed high ceillngs. The nature of the business vas tocater to and attract the guestE of the valley. An open frontageis also very inportant. tle stated that the nerchants in the area
were very supportive. Bill elaborated that the area they were
considering was an area that had been unsuccessful for retail usein the past.
Chuck stated that due to the nature of VaiI and this proposed
T.V. Station, he would tend to support the proposal . However, he
was afraid of creating a precedent for other professionaloffices.
Kathy Warren asked staff how the proposal would be handled since
T.V. Stations were not directly dealt with in the code and
Kristan explained that the staff rnade the assunption T.v.
Statlons would fall lnto the same category as professional
offices due to sinilar uses and impacts. Kathy felt she couldnot support the proposal .
Jiro Shearer felt he could be supportLve of anything that wouldbuild clientele in the area but didnrt feel a f.V. Station wouldbrlng sales tax revenue to the Town.
BiIl Perkins stated that he understood the boardrs concerns.
However, he needed a tenporary solutlon untll the Sunbird wasrebuilt. He asked if the board would be supportive if he could
nake the station first floor without frontage on the nall. It
would be difficult for hin to operate but felt it could be
nanaged.
Kristan felt that it would still be considered first floor level
even without the frontage on the rnall.
Dl-ana connented that it was not appropriate to change zoning for
a single applicant.
Ludwig Kurz felt that the board was hung up on the definition of
etreet level and stated that the proposed site was, without a
doubt, first floor and a T.V. Station should be considered a
professJ-onal office. He felt the board could not afford to set a
precedent.
L7
I
Dalton Wlllians couented that he had the chance ln the past to
operate a T.v. station. lle felt the board was ml.sslng the polntof traffic. If done correctly, a T.v. Statlon could insrease
sales tax in excess of what could be generated by a retail store
Iocated ln the aame Bpace. He felt thiE waE the exact klnd ofcondltional use that should be petmltted
Chuck Crlst asked etaff lf a petnanent condltion could be put on
a conditional use and Dlana etated an example from pg 346 of the
code, Barber and Beauty Shops, rhlch stated the use would be
allowed as long as there was no exterior frontage.
Discussion tlren centered around the poselbtltty of adding I.V.
Statlons under the sane conditions as the Beauty Shops and
whether it would be feasible for the appllcant.
I(ristan conrnented that lf the use was allowed under the Beauty
Shop conditions, the space would be taken away from other viableretail shops.
A notl-on to deny the request to amend the zoninq code oerthe staff nemo was nade bv Kathy Warren and seconded bv
Ludwigr Kurz,
It was reguested by the board that the vote be passed on to the
Tonn Council with comnents from the board as fol.l.ows:
Chuck Crist - questions whetlrer the proposed use will really
draw pedestrians to the area. llowever, he feelsthat due to the general resort nature of the Townof Vail and the proposed l.v. statl.on he tends to
support the reguest.
- guestions whether a conditional use pemit
process would be rnore appropriate lf the proposal
had absolutely no frontage on a pedestrian mall or
street.
-.generally felt that the proposed use uas aviable use on first floor ln CCII.
Kathy lfarren - generally not confortable wl.th the request.
- she believes that the reguested use would bebetter eulted to a basement or second floor level
and suggested that the appllcant pursue an
rrnendment to the zoning code regarding Section
La.24.030(c-6) regardlng pernitted uses on firstfloor or street level wlthln a structure, subJectto the Lssuance of a condltlonal use permLt, ghelg
the use does not have anv exterior frontage on apubllc wav, street, walkwalt or rnall area.
l8
o
JLn Shearer - fe in favor of bulldlng up the conmercial areasln Lionshead, but belleves that Linited Eales tax
would be generated by this proposal .
- believes that an upper floor location would be
nore appropriate and feelE that an upper floor
would provide a better backdrop of the ski areafor the T.V. Etudio.
- believes that the proposed use does have
narketable value for the Town of Vail but feelethat we nust guard agalnst settlng a precedent
wlth thts proposed use.
- agrees nith Kathy warren regardJ.ng Section
L8.24.030(C-6) and stressed the need to protect
against setting a precedent and feels that he was
voting strictly as a Planning Cornrnission menber
and not sith his enotions.
Diana Donovan -believes that once this use is listed ae a
conditional use lt would be very difficult to deny
a request for such a conditional use.
- agrees with Kathy Warren and chuck Crist
regarding Section La.24.03o (c-6) .
Ludwig Kurz - agrees with the staff that we cannot afford toset a precedent wlth ttre proposed change and is
not in favor of the request.
Dalton WLlliams- believes that this proposed use would produce
very heavy pedestrlan traffic in Lionshead, which
would generate sales and sales tax.
- believes that this is exactly rrhat the Tosn ofVall vants.
-believes that people will show up for this
proposed use. Feels that this is a rrdynamitell
ldea.
-believes that this is a proper conditional use.
VOTEs 4-2 WTTH DALTON WTLLIN,IS AIID CIIUCK CRIST OPFOSED TO
THE DENIAL
19
o
ften No. 11: A recmest for a conditional use oer:nit for a deck
This lten wasIten No. 12:
wl.thdrawn,
and a floodolain nodlfication on Lot
Mike Molllca explained that the reguest was to schedule a reviewperiod. Staff reconmended a 9o day revlew period for the covered
Bridge Buitding and a 60 day review perlod for the Montaneros.
A.motion to set the review periode as reconnended bv staff
was nade bv Kathv l{arren and seconded bv JLn Shearer.
VOTE: 6-0 IN FAVOR
Item No. 13: A recnrest for a variance from the wall heicrht
recnrirenent on Iot 29, Block 1. val-l Potato Patcht
805 Potato Patch Drlve.
Item No. 14:
Applicant: Patev and Pedro CerLsola
A recruest for an exterior alteratLon and a
Creek DrLve. Part of Tract A, Block 58, vaLl
Villacre lst Filino.
Applicant: Hermann Staufer - Iancelot Restaurant
A notion to table ltem No.s 13 and 14 to Julv 9. 1990 was
made by Kathv Warren and Eeconded bv Dalton WillianE.
VOTE: 6-O fN FAVOR
A.
B.
no actlon was talcen.
Bruce Ann & Associates.
Appllcant: l{ontaneroE Condo. Assoc.
20
o
Iten No. 1: Approval of nlnutes fron June 4. 1990 and June 11,
1990 neetings.
VOBE: 6-0 IN FAVOR
Chuck crist stated that on page 13 of the 6/LL/9o ninutes the
vote should be adJusted to show that he had abstained.
Kathy warren also had changes to be nade on tbe 6/LL/90 minutes
and asked if she could nake then later and have the minutes
resubnLtted for approval at the next neeting.
Item No. 2:A recmest for a condl.tional use permit to allowfor a Bed and Breakfast at Lots 6 and 1,/2 of 5'
Btock 5, Vail Villaoe Seventh Filincr. 1119 E.
There sere no public connents and the applicant was not present
A notion to approve the request oer the staff nemo was made
by Dalton Willlarns and seconded bv Chuck Crist.
VOTE: 6-0 IN FAVOR
Item No. 3: A recruest for a conditional use petmit to allowfor i Bed and Breakfast at Lot 8' Block 3, Blghorn
Subdivision. 5th Additlon. 5198 Gore Circle.Applicant: John and Paula Canning
There rtere no public conments and the applicant was not present
A motlon to approve the request per the staff memo was nade
bv Chuck Crist and seconded bv Ludwiq Kurz.
VOTE: 6-0 IN FAVOR
The neetlng was adjourned at approxinately 7:oO p.m.
2L
I
TO:
FROMs
DATE:
RE:
Plannlng and Environrnental Conmission
Connunlty Development Departnent
June 25, 1990
A request for a conditional use pernit for a
constr:uction staging area, located Just uphill of the
Golden Peak snowmakJ-ng punphouse, Tract B, Vail Village
7th Filinq.Applicant: VaiI Aesoclater, Inc.
I. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED USE
Vail Associates is requeeting a condltional use permlt for a
summer seasonal staglng area at the GoLden Peak baEe area
for the construction of the Far East Restaurant. The area
ls located in the Skl Base Recreation zone district. Inthis zone district, lsummer outdoor Storage for Mountain
Equiprnentrr is an allowed conditlonal use. The constructionwill take place between June 1 and November 15, during the
sumners of 1990 and 91. The staglng area wiII be locatedjust uphill of the existing snowmaking pumphouse at Golden
Peak near the Town of Vail and Eagle County boundarles.
Access will be on the an existing service road which crosses
under the Vista Bahn. An office trailer will be located
tenporarily on the site; 12 enployee parking spaces have
been requested for the sunners of 1990 and 25 for 1991i and
a llnited amount of construction materials vill be locatedat the staging area. No helicopters will be used.
The construction traiter and the building materials will be
removed by Novenber 15th of each year that the permlt is
issued for. A11 disturbed area will be revegetated as
needed.
II. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
Upon review of Section 18.50' the Community Development
Departnent recommends approval of the conditional use pernit
based upon the following factors:
A. Consideration of Factors:
1. Relationship and Lmpact of the use on developrnent
obiectives of the Tortn.
The site wlII be used for a staging area for the
errpansion of the Far East restaurant. This
proJect was j-dentified in vail Associatesr l'laster
r
2.
Plan for Vail lilountain. The Town took part lnthis plannlng process sith both VA and the ForestService. The Tonn encourages and supporte the
improveuents of the on-mountain facilities which
contribute to the overall experience of the Vailvisitor. No construction or staging wlll takeplace at the Golden Peak base area.
The effect of the uee on lLaht and aLr.distribution of oopulation. transportatLonfacilities, utillties. schools, parkE and
recreatLon facllltLes. and other public facilities
needs.
The staff finds that the request to park vehiclesat the staging area wiII have negative visualimpacts. we feel enployee parking is an
inappropriate use for this recreation area. The
proposea parking area ie vLsible from the Gold
Peak and llill Creek Clrcle residential,/lodging
areas and the upper floors of the Mountain Haus.
The staff flnds two options available to theapplicant. First, they nay provide enployeeparking in an existing Vail Associates employee
parking area, (i.e. the North Day Lot, West DayLot, etc.). In staffrs opinion, this approach
could be used without taking away public parking
for this surnmer when the Village Structure is
under construction. Enployees could then be
carpooled in a van to Far East. It is our
understanding that whether enployees park at the
proposed Gold Peak site or another outlying lot,
v.A. 's intentLon ls to bus the ernpl.oyees uP to Far
East each day. This in turn would linit the
nurnber of vehicles needing access to the mountain
area and would also linit the visual and
environmental inpacts that would result fron the
high use of this area.
Second, the applicant nay use the area to south of
the proposed staging area for parking. A flatgravel area already exists. This area is locatedin unincorporated Eagle County and Vail Associates
would need to get the proper approvals from them
concerning this use. This area is less visible
from the Town and ls better suLted for parking.
If this area iE uses, we would strongly recomnendthat v.A. treat thls parking area for dust
control .
t
3.
There vill be no effect upon any of the other
factors named above. AII acceEE will be taken
fron an existing sentice road located below the
Vl.sta Bahn. RegardlesE of the parking solution,
the staff reconnends that the appllcant treat the
road surface to linit the anount of road dust thatwill result fron the use of this road.
The staff feels that the request for a staging
area is appropriate. However, we do not eupportthe request for L2-25 on-site parking spaces. Wefeel that there are other vlable options availableto the applicant that would satisfy the parking
needs for this proJect.
In addition, the staff is concerned with the
per:nanent environmental inpacts in regards to soil
contanination that may result from parked vehiclesthat are leaking fluids.
This site is also a recognized trail area for both
mountain bikers and hikers. We feel that it is
Lmportant to the Bafety of the users to linit the
number of vehicles that will be located on site.
I{ith the linited vehicular access, there will be
no inpact on any of the other above factors.
Effect upon the character of the area in whl.ch the
oroposed use is to be located, includinq the scale
and bulk of the proposed use in relation to
surrounding uses.
The proposed staging area is located uphill fron
the existing punphouse. The area Ls somewhat
screened from the Gold Peak and the ltill Creek
Circle neighborhoods by existing topoqraphy and
vegetation and will not be visible from the Vail
Vlllage area. However, the staff finds that the
use of area to park 12-25 vehicles would have
negative visual and environmental impacts upon the
character of the area.
4.
street and parkincr areas.
,
v.
IV. FINDINGS
A. That the proposed locatLon of the uEe in accord wlththe purposes of this ordlnance and the purposes of thedistrict in vhich tbe site is located.
B. That ttre proposed locatLon of the use and the
conditions under which lt would be operated or
maLntained would not be detrlnental to the public
health, eafety, or welfare or materially LnJurJ.ous toproperties or lnprovenents in the vlcinity.
C. That the proposed use would conply sith each of the
appticable provisions of this ordinance.
STAFF RECOUI.IENDATIONS
Staff reconmends approval of the request with the following
conditions:
1. That the staging sLte be used for construction from
June l-Novenber 15, 1990 and 91; and
2. AII areas inpacted by the construction staging be
revegetated by Novenber 30 of each pemitted yeari and
3. No more than 5 vehicles be parked in the area at any
one timei
4. A 3or setback be maintained fron !1i11 Creek; and
5. That the applicant treat the road to llnit the amountof road dust that will result from the increased use of
the access road.
The staff recognizes the inportance of an easily accesEible
staging area for nountain expansion. Staff strongly
supporis the appllcantrs Lntent to funprove the on-mountaingu-st serrrLces. In the past, reguests dealing rith the
expansion of the ski area have been supported by the staff
and approved by the Plannlng Connlesion. However, with the
increased numbers of vlsitors to vail and the increased use
of Vail llountain during the summer [onths, the staff feels
that it is inportant to linit the vehicular access and
parking for this area.
I
I
'Y-./4/z
iiti
,'
t{,
cr)
\q
F
I
TO:
FROM:
DATEs
RE:
Planning and Environnental Conmission
Conmunity Developnent Department
June 25, 1990
A request for a conditional use pernit
construction staging area, located just
Golden Peak snonmaking pumphouse, Tract
The construction, , ^,-., r( Equipnentrt iE an allowed conditlonal use. The constructi
,trrU"tt\-lY",hi will take place between June l and Novenber 15, during the' O *\v c.rlrnrnarq nf l aafl and q1 - '|rha starri ncr area r.li I 1 be located
will take place between June 1 and November 15' clurlng th
sunmers of 1990 and 91-. The staging area will- be located
, I,4rr^d{'tA vn ,.1'"""-{l ,,1-rl Peak near the Town of VaiI and Eagle County boundaries.
VYtrU--r I u/ - ^- ^--! ^Lt-- ----r -^ -^-r --L:-t^ --
yfl:iY just uphill of the existing snowmaking pumphouse at Golden
uf,qt Access will be on the an existing serrrlce road which crosses
h'uVv'under the Vista Bahn. An office trailer will be located.'iitemporarily on the site; 12 enployee parking spaces have
-\1 tn;Ytvu,t$r,t+ 6""n requested for the sumrnera of 1990 and 25 for 1991i and
.J ,) n , a llnited anount of constructLon materlals will be located
L5 'l' ' r' at the staglng area. No helicopters will be used.
The construction traiLer and the buildlng materials will be
removed by Novernber 15th of each year that the pernit is
issued for. A11 disturbed area will be revegetated as
needed.
II. CRITERIA AND FTNDINGS
Upon reviert of Section 18.60, the Conmunity Development
Departnent reconmends approval of the conditional use pernit
based upon the following factors:
A. Consideration of Factors:
1. Relationship and inPact of the use on developnent
objectives of the Town.
The slte wilt be used for a staging area for the
expansion of the Far East restaurant. This
project was identified in Vail Associatesr Master
/pwr'/
f theViIIage
7th Filing.Applicant: VaiI AsEociatea, Inc.
r. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED USE
vait Associates is requesting a conditional use permit for a
sutnner seaEonal etaging area at the Golden Peak bage area
for the constnrction of the Far East Restaurant. The area
\ is located in the Ski Base Recreatlon zone district. In\ this zone district, rrsunmer Outdoor Storage for Mountain
o a
IPlan for Vail Mountain. The Town took part inthis planning process with both VA and the ForestSenrlce. The Town encourages and supports the
inprovements of the on-nountain facilities which
contribute to the overall experience of the Vailvisitor. No constructLon or staging will takeplace at the Golden Peak base area.
2. The effect of the uee on licrht and aLr.distrl.bution of population. transportatlonfacilitles. utllities. schools. Darks and
recreation facillties. and other public facilities
needs.
The staff finds that the request to park vehiclesat the staging area will have negative visualinpacts. We feel enployee parking is an
inappropriate use for this recreation area. The
proposed parking area is visible fron the Gold
Peak and Mill Creek CLrcle residential/lodging
areas and the upper floors of the Mountain Haus.
the staff flndE two options available to the
,n,b ,.;v4 ;::ii;e"h .x':it;.t$"'lll $:::i:.::"*ili:r""
^7la- ,0,\\'' u , parking area, (i.e. the North Day Lot, West Day
a u' v. Y l^tuY Lo|-, etc.). rn staffrs opinion, this approach
: ,- b\\" ,.. (!Jr" could be used without taking away public parking
0 stp ,r s for this sunrner when the Village structure is
,^^A5(* under construction. Enployees could then be
, ,,^r, Il'' carpooled in a van to rar 8aEt. It is our
..,.\\ tt und-erstanding that whether ernployees park at the\l\\ proposed cold Peak Eite or another outlying lot,
V.A. ts intention iE to bus the enployees up to Far
East each day. llttis in turn would linit the
nunber of vehicles needing access to the nountain
area and would also linit the visual and
environmental inpacts that would result fron the
higlr use of this area.
Second, the applicant nay use the area to south of
the proposed staging area for parking. A flat
gravel area already exists. This area is locatedin unincorporated Eagle County and VaLl Associates
would need to get the Proper approvals from thent
concerning this use. This area is leEs vieible
fron the Town and ls better suited for parklng.
If this area is uses, we would strongly recorunend
that V.A. treat this parking area for dust
control .
r.NY'N//' ye/"
" qP<\
(/!"
It
There will be no effect upon any of the other
factors naned above. AII access will be takenfron an existing senrice road located below theVista Bahn. Regardless of the parking solution,the staff reconmends that the applicant treat the
road surface to llnit the anount of road dust thatwlll result fron the use of this road.
Effect upon traffic rrlth narticular reference to
congestion. autonotive and pedestrian safetv and
convenience, traffic flow and control access.
maneuverabilitv, and removal of snow fron theetreet and parkincr areas.
The staff feelE that the reguest for a staginE
area Ls appropriate. However, we do not support
Jhe request for L2-25 on-site parking spaces. We
^ h-. r, l*v{ r'e"(fr6feel that there are other vlable options available
,hr" lvv- v"''- to the applicant that woutd satisfy the parking
'/ needs for this project.
In addition, the staff is concerned with the
permanent environmental irnpacts in regards to soil
contanination that may result fron parked vehiclesthat are leaking fluids.
This Eite is also a recognized trail area for both
nountain bikers and hikers. We feel that it is
J.rnportant to the eafety of the users to limit the
nunber of vehicles that will be located on site.
With the lfunited vehLcular access, there will be
no inpact on any of the other above factors.
4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the
prooosed use is to be located- incLudins the scale
and bulk of the pronosed use in relation to
surroundincr uses.
The proposed staging area is located uphill frorn
the existing punphouse. The area is somewhat
screened fron the Gold Peak and the llill Creek
Circle neighborhoods by existing topography and
vegetation and will not be visible from the vail
Village area. However, the staff finds that the
use of area to park 12-25 vehicLes would have
negatlve vLsual and envl-ronmental I'npacts upon tbe
character of the area.
3.
IV. FINDINGS
A. That the proposed location of the use in accord wLth
tbe purposes of this ordinance and the purposes of thedistrict in which the eite ls located.
B. That the proposed locatl,on of the use and the
conditLons under wtrich lt vould be operated or
maintained would not be detrinental to the public
health, safety, or welfare or naterially injurious toproperties or inprovenents in the vlcinlty.
c. That the proposed use would comply with each of the
applicable provisions of this ordinance.
STAFF RECOUMENDATIONS
staff reconnends approval of the request with the following
conditions:
That the staging slte be used for construction fron
June l-Novenber 15, 1990 and,.91t andLh,AA V\ gVt <L&\4-w!-
2.
.*vv\ 4 utr z lI"L w'tv v
a @-ttIe-('onEEEUEt f6n- sUa g i ng lretff&Z#"u*fityt*%i-*,.*29 eactr pern*eted vear i and
-
3. No more than 5 vehicles be parked in the area at any
r_ one tine;
v.
1.
'Qo1[ wlZc,n^-,n-( \ 4t- 5
4. A 30' 'setback be fairitained !
Lo/ n,o s.4.\ru4-, ^-4ffron Mill Creek; and
5. That the applicant treat the road to lirnit the anountof road dust that ^will regult fron the increased use of
the access road. Yr-" +1M, V$fa, (kL,h/v\,
The staff recognizes the importance of an easily accessible
staging area for nountain expansion. Staff strongly
supports the applicantrs intent to improve the on-nountain
guest serrrices. In the past, requests deallng wlth the
expansion of the ski area have been supported by the staff
and approved by the Planning Connission. However, with the
increased nunbers of vlsitore to vail and the increaEed use
of Val.I tlountain durlng the sunner nonths, the staff feelsthat lt is inportant to linit the vehicular accesg and
parklng for this area.
Nu
/T
t)v^,tnvtr WtC
\
I
R'/e\
.t
s-
tA
::
R
,,i
i
I
I
I
if,i
l,l
li3/
,'
/l
I
J
orrril,ro, FoR coNDrTroNAL usE or*r,l
I. This procedure is required
use perm.it.
The appi icat jon wi'l'l not be
NAI4E 0F APPLICANT Vait Asssociates
ADDRESS
for any project
accepted unti 1
required.to obtain
al'l information is
vq Lc ul rLL l,leet i ng
a conditional
s ubmi tted.
Post Office Box
co. 815 5I PHONE 476-5601
NAME OF
ADDRESS
APPLiCANT' S REPRESENTATIVE
Post Office Box 7
Vai1, CO. 81658 PHONE 476-s501
c.NAr'lE 0F Ol.lNER(S) (pr.int
0!I|NER(S) : STGNATURE(S)
or type)
ADDRESS post Office Box 7
Vai1, Co. 81658
D. LOCATION 0F pR0p0SAL: LEGAL- LOT BLOCK FILING
ADDRESS
E. FEE $'t00 PAID cK#BY
THE FEE MUST BE PAID BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT OF
ACCEPT YOUR PROPOSAL.
F. A 'l ist of the names of owners of al.l property
INCLUDING PROPERTY BEHTND AND ACROSS STRLETS;
THE APPLICANT l^lILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CORRECi
COMMUNITY DEVELOPI4ENT WILL
adjacent to the subject property
and their mailing addresses.
OI^/NERS AND CORRECT ADDRESSIS.
II. PRE-APPLICATION CLAUSE
A PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE I,JITH A PLANNING STAFF MEI,IBER IS STRONGLY SUGGiSTED
TO DETERMINE IF ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IS NEEDED. NO APPL]CATlON tiILL
BE ACCEPTED UNLESS IT Is c0MpLtTE (MUST INCLUDE ALL ITEtls REQUIRED By THE z0Nrr{GADH]NISTRATOR). IT IS THEAPPL]CANi'S RESPONSIBLITY TO I4AKE AN APPOINTMEIITl,lITH THE STAFF T0 FrND oui Aeoui noorrronnl suBMTTTAL nrQurnrNrnrs:- - ;
PLEASE NOTE THAT A COMPLETE APPLICATION l^lILL STREAI'ILiNE THE APPROVAL PROCESS
FOR YOUR PROJECT SY_DEmMSING THE NUI"IBER OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THAT THE I
!.q9. !4Y STIPULATE. ALL CONDIT]ONs OF APPROVAL MUST BE COI,IPLIED I4ITH BEFORE ABUILD]NG PERMJT IS ISSIIED;
'- ,- '' . -r'
t.. ...:!
rr. Four (4) copie! of
A.
p
.^
\,.r
D.Any additionalas determined
o
+ha folLowing jnf ormation :
III. Tirne requirenents
The Plannitg .la Environmentar commission meets on the 2nd and 4th' Mondays of each month. An applicati"r-rit'ir-trre necessary accontranyingmarerial must be submitred f"ir;--il;k; ;;;;, to the dare of rhemeeting.
A description of lhe-nrecise natrrre of the proposed, use andits operlting charactlristicsl-Jit: u;;-;;*pi.iri" witn-oine,'nliin'.lii:yff lil:T:il$":*.
A site plan showit',g proposed deveropment of the site, 5'cltrc:ngcopography, buirding l0cations, p..ii,.,g, i;.#i"-;ircurat,ionz
I::i*:=:pen space, landscaped'a'rea, a;a ut*iliel and drainaee
Freliminary bu-i.lding prans and erevations sufficient to indicate:li iiTiffi;::' een"'ir app;;;";;",. scare, and jnrerior pr.n oi-
material necessary.for the review of the applicationby tJre zoning admiiistrui"i.--'--'
,\Pt ,. ,tPl'- t'-
A n1 at-./
U,4n, /.rC,t'
( . fi rt4't| ,''-A UJ)-'
0Gv
' /') -/;i r v
/ a ,r/" ""q
o
\AilAssociates,Inc.
Creators and Operators of Vail and Beaver Creeko Resorts
SITE OF THE 1989 WORLD ALPINE SKI CHAMPIONSHIPS
May 16' 1990
Ms. Kristan Pritz
Director
Town of Vail
Department of Community Development
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
Dear KrisLan,
Attached is a Conditional Use Permit application for a
surnmer seasonal staging area at Golden Peak for the construction
of the Far East Restaurant.
The staging area will be located just uphill of the snowmaking
numphouse at Golden Peak. An office tiaile?-wilT-6e-Io-cd€El
LfiForerfly on itie sit-e; parking will be needed for the employees;
a limited amount of construction materials may be staged from
tine-to-time on the site. No helicopter use is contemplated
at the time.
The term for which this application is requested is two
surnmers, 1990 and 1991. The permit would be needed from about
June 1 to November 15. The construction trailers would be removed
by November 15' 1990 and no construction materials would be
left on site through the winter. The project will take two
summer construction seasons to complete and would be open to
the public at the beginning of the L99I-I992 ski season.
I have attached a site plan of Golden Peak, a current address
list for public notice and a check for the application fee.
Please call if you have any questions.
Sincerely 7
,)t%.@7'Joe Macy
Manager
Mountain Planning
J[1,/km
Enclosures:CheckApplication
Site Plan
List of Nej-ghbor' s Addresses
. USA - (l0l) 476-5601
rcC: cfzr
Post Office Box 7 o Vail, Colorado 81658 910.920-1 183
lJqLtr UI TLL
orlrorro* FoR coNDrTroNAL usE or*?,
I. This procedure is required for anyuse permit.
The app'lication will not be accepted until all information is submitted.
project required to obtain a condi tiona'l
NAME OF APPLICANT Vail AsssociaLes
ADDRESS Post Office Box 7
co. 81658
B.NAME OF
ADDRESS
PHONE 476-s601
APPLICANT'SREPRESENTATIVE Jqe MacV
Post Office Box 7
Ysal, CO. 81658 PHoNE 476-s601
c.NAME 0F 0I^JNER(S) (pr.int or type)
owNER(S) l STGNATURE(S)
ADDRESS Post Office Box 7
v4i1, co.81658 PHoNE_ 3Js:55 !t_
D. L0CATION 0F PROPOSAL: LEGAL- LOT BLOCK FILING
ADDRESS
pAIoj(n-t0_ cr#f!€L nv \1 | A<<nr'ttrFt<,
THE FEE MUST BE PAID BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPI.IENT l,llLL
ACCEPT YOUR PROPOSAL.
adjacent to the subject property
and their mail'ing addresses.
OWNERS AND CORRECT ADORESSES.
II. PRE-APPLICATION CLAUSE
A PRE-APPLICAT]ON CONFERENCE WITH A PLANNING STAFF MEMBER IS STRONGLY SUGGISTED
TO DETERMINE IF ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IS NEEDED. NO APPLICATION IiILL
8E ACCEPTED UNLESS IT IS COMPLETE (MUST INCLUDE ALL ITEI4S REQUIRED BY THE ZONING
ADMINISTRATOR). IT IS THEAPPLICANT'S RESPONSIBLITY TO MAKE AN APPOINTI,,IENT
l^,ITH THE STAFF TO FIND OUT ABOUT ADDITIONAL SUBMITTAL REqUIREMENTS.
PLEASE NOTE THAT A COMPLETE APPLICATION WILL STREAMLINE THE APPROVAL PROCESS
FOR YOUR PROJECT SY-DECRENSTNG THE NUMBER OF CONDIT]ONS OF APPROVAL THAT THE
I.qg. lAY STIPULATE. ALL CONOITIONS OF APPROVAL MUST BE COMPLIED WITH EEFORE A
BUILDING PERMiT IS ISSUED.
E. FEE $100
A list of the names of owners of a'l I property
INCLUDING PROPERTY BEHIND AND ACROSS bTNtTTS,
THE APPL]CANT I^IILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CORRECi
{
I
I
i|..",,',
'f,o
(4) copies of the
.
O. 1*9"::Iiption of the precise nature of the proposed use and. rts operating characteristics r drrd *"u."rrr.r. iroposea to make
. al: use comparibr-e wirh other nrop"=ij!;i" il" vicinity.B' A site pran show!*g proposed. deveropment of the site, inclucrng... topography, buirding-rolationsr_parkin9, traffic circuration;' F::i*!"lnr" space, randscaped area, and urilj-ries and drainage
c. Freliminarv build.ing plans and erevations sufficient to incicacethe dimensions, generlt.appearance, scale, and i5terior plan ofaII buildings.
:
D- 'er,y additionar materiar necessary,for the revi-ew of the apprication,.": . ds determined by the zonj_ng aa^iiirtr"6;.--'-'
II. Four
III. Time requirements
following i.nformation :
.. The planning andMondays of eachmaterial must bemeeting.
Environmental Comrnission meetsmonth. An application with thesubmitted four weeks prior t-
on the 2nd and 4thnecessary accompanyingthe date of the
CI9/'9'
' /')//; r v
/ z,tl "-4
u,4.4, ,rl lr*'
( .. n( tl '"' .| , ' .-A l\tt- 'LU" "
0ev
LIST OF PROPERTY OWNERS
USFS
Post Office Box 190
Minturn. Colorado 81645
Pinos Del Norte
Post Office Box 59
Vail, Colorado 81658
Northwoods Condo Association
Post office Box 1231
VaiI' Colorado 81658
Manor Vai-l
595 East vail valley Drive
Vail, Colorado 81657
AII Seasons Condo Association
434 Gore Creek Drive
VaiI, Colorado 8f657
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road t{estVail, Colorado 81657
Ramshorn Lodge Condos
415 vail valley DriveVail, Colorado 81657
First Filing - see attached list
Upper Eagle Valley
846 Forest RaodVaiI, Colorado 8L657
ct
=
E
=e
ll,tc
I o
an
IJJ
uJlt
tr
=E
uJo
\SN\$s $R
or
Or
f.r
z
NF
(,
Hutv
rrl
uJF
ott\o0z
6
IIJF
o
G
e,F
==o
o22
CN
u,l
Fo2
0zoJfo
.!
ozz
^\\!r, rl,
g\
lt.I L,/t=o,oip
tr
ESE-
o
atu!z3o
ttJuto
I
oG
o
Ec6
oEoo
CDc
E
fo
E
o
=c:)
T'o
Ictct
a!
'.g
E
EEgg
Efi g€
E i€E
:€*;Io€o
iEiF
EE
gE
Else
EL 6 CL-
SEae
EEig
EEEE
- El.!a o
-.- tr p
a, o'- .:c;or,
gEiE
;ffE
iE$E
\T\t .if
.if
g
E-E
UJo'o
=o
=llo
-o
UJ
oz
o-
J
o
EF(,
UJJut
(,z
ao
=t
o-
J
9z
ql
=
tr,lu,l!z
9F
ulc,
C'
uJG
oE
o
ao
B
UJt
uJezo
uto
F
ut
Rulo
o.t2
ulJ()
x
F
u.lttt)
oul
lrJltt
=E
UJ
o-J
Fo
(Jz
oJ
ao
Ic,FC'qJ
Jllj
azoIfJ4
I
4a()
uJt
Fl
H
ts
NOIIYn'tV
=L> s li
=islE= (D . ltr
EIo<= -iFo o orrF - ai z,>
EA=EE2v" f;ifl: 6Eo* ciEg F;
'.N(J
2H
6
zI
F
DJ
l!c
o,
Eo
ur
F
cut
xX}.
J
z9
Eoo
zo
e,utFJ
l
UJz
q)
=zfz
F-
o
:
=o
8
I
<,)F
2
zl.J
u,t]
at)uto
5
IIJ
E
oz
E
=F
I
u,lI
ut
=
CC
ooulzY
i
zI
anz
I
I
I
I
-+
I
I,l
rql
=lolzl'l
il-1 |<l:l
xlu,I
rr-
o
3
o
Fo
2l
.. >lo
UJo
uJ
UJzo
E
E
uJ
2
E
oz
Fo
Jo
il;
lt;.;
r-_r-
C\J*s
OO
z
.rP
=eoo
=z=rf,
o-- P
:f;;
;Hg
ulFooo.)
zo
Fo-
UJY
UJo
oF
F
=3Eol
b{iflO r'{oilrilguraEzo
tr
G
uJctto
EgF;E2IPa9'EE
=>
E H;I etE oo! ituE XO-T HTsi
IJJ6
oF
@
F
=OElrlo-zIF
C)fE*,
zo()
D!D
oz
cj
uJe
l!oz3oF
oz
ci
u.lG
J
ILoz3
frl()
t-{
Fl.A
t{v.J)
o
&
Ff
c)
xE!
F{H
BI
I3l
ii
=z
@o-)
t\F\
I\o
o.
FlH
v)otlo
Flt'loFJ
ul:
z
(,z6
=Jo-
J
()
E,FolljJ
uJ
gi)
=+E Fo!Hn
il
INSPECTION REQUEST
TOWN OF VAILPERMTT\uM.
NATtr ,.-+lw":\\t (:--
._) \-r r. -_)DATE _JOB NAME
CALLER
INSPECTION:(frb rHUR FRIREADY FOR
LOCATION:
EI
tr
o
tr
tr
tr
tr
FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH / WATER
FOUNDATION / STEEL
FRAMING
ROOF & SHEER
PLYWOOD NAILING O GAS PIPING
INSULATION tr POOL / H. TUB
SHEETROCK NAIL
tr FINAL tr FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
O TEMP. POWER
MECHANICAL:
O HEATING
tr EXHAUST HOODS
tr SUPPLY AIR
FINAL
APPROVED 1("tr DISAPPROVED E REINSPECTION REQUIRED
CORRECTIONS:
INSPECTOR
oz
F
=&
uJd
(t
IJJ
uJu-
E
=Elt,o-
$$$$s{
Ol€o\
rn
z
F-)
zH
&
>1
a
9J
E
Js
trlt
z
6
=
u/F
l!
F
FI
==
=2
o
uJFoz
oz
6
!ldl
.6
o
z_za)
lu)IFt<
t,^,
F
lEIts
lFltz
t:
ls)
t;IEtrd
F
t!Julo
=T
(Eolr
troFo
EEF2
o
.E
IEulz3o
g.o
tp
fF
zIo
.Eluz3o
lUIFoz
U) .-l
Fl 14 -l<>oH<Ozco
&H\toF()H.Fl frl !
H1r)E(,!nO
14N p4
A\O FcD r-r <
ts
Fr
z
rrltl
o
rt)
l|
atto
o.
G
o
o
0)o
(!
Eo
b
o
Ec
G
q)
Eoo
o)
E
fo
E
o
=cl
Eq)
o
o.
CL(o
'.g
E
6*6.9
B HE:
F.s Sr €';EE8
E.= 6 -
E UE:Oc-o>
cf:E
Egi;c96F
-*-o)3 5;.=
EEE;
EE
gE
E!;eo- (E cL-sE; eoEEor
s *:€
:€E s
E6 FE:-oi36 O'- .=.c=o./)
ef;; r
E ei;
Ifis;9Eo -cEgg
- o (6=
CN lrl
F\
o
c'\
cn
r+
E
=Euto-(,z6J3o
:(o
UJIoz
I
J
E
UJJ
IJJ
o2
ao
l
c
9z
Io
uJ
=
UJ
uJ
z
tr
UJ
gJ
=uJ
UJ
z
tl,
UJ
F6oo-
u,loc?z
u,,
()
X
F
u,lo:)
trl
H
Ff
rr
frFz
U'
uJ
uJIt
F
=g,
I.IJo-
|-oF
z
J
9
F
UJ
gJ
0z
=
c
J
C)
=Io
UJ-
Fl
ts
ts
NOtrvn'lvA
F:
B
Effio!!
=aZZu-<9 9 0r!b c e-64a 0 68.
o a clifi0 fiE;e o-oq i'iEg gf,
d (\l OzH
=>e.
-llDI tr,t 3
=1061
rn
H
!E
U)z
H
E
E
z9F
{
4o
q
ot(,
UJo-
F
E
o-u,E
z
9troo
zIF
e
u.l
;
uJz
p
2l23rkoo<
=Hxrr6ci<z
<nFz.
2=-iIo3EOI
I
tJ
tlIi]tGltoltoitdl
ull
E
(t,
t!2YI
F
ul
F
2I
F
oz
I
frlz-oz
I
=
=F
llJ
o
oo3
I
IJl I<t IFI2tl
I--l
.l=*l--l
., >l I8-lolulIutlzl?l
>lEIurlo-l
JI<lzlolE 3l
O Fjl< tDl
o
=v,
6
..\.{
i^-mc)o
IJJF
U'ooazo
Fo.
uJY
ul
@
oF
F
Eoff3
o-Flb;l>-lo-.l9el
-^lt-lg.'rbkzo
z
oP
=Qdro
=z>f
dP
:f;;
;Hg
F
UJ
o.
:!{EZE<cl€aE9tt;
Ed
=>
=lrJ-E h=o + i'i;E
=o--c Eb9 iutEX(l.t x>t q-
o-j!i
uJ(0
oF
E
=E
lrJ
o-zo
F()fEta
zoo
tr!!
ol
=.1ol
r.tJl
5l
al>l
t!lol
7l
o{FI
el
dl
HI
ilttlol
zl
FI
ol
=.1oll!l
5l
al>l
t!lol
zl
3lolFI
>l
blz
3toFI
oo\rn
I.il\o
co
uiJulF
v)
I\'
-Yo.l
.iz
0
uJ
J
t!
z3
F
v
rd
4trl
Ff
4
H
t!
iri
=zoo-)
T
F
C)
\'
ln
c{\o
UJ
J
=
x
Fl(.)
rt]ztr
B
UJ
=2
E2?
E3.=:
sb
=+EFl-o2
E,
-rO<FEC)uJ<ZE
u.t F6ZE!!
^c.. lr, oF -J .F
HEI *JE€ ogL) Cfr, H at|cL _r _(5R9-=< c,
-l la .-rl>rH o,*-.:
6s . =lC, c.olr'. n: Io; -l
HoSluJ! oJlrlJ E -l=oalLI EI3e3lol(5 L r.-l
= ,+- c.l
3 L rnfoo+rlJd cjlJ+JCaIQq, IrrJNl
ul-..1l_Hc\r
uJ
X
z,"o\./ -
zz
+otI t!
nnr-r
J."i5YY--.=s
6;=
=><cluaac
=B:s t{:'- :
5=ait J O:= F-r- aE
:-.q
==>:- J t_E= 3 =O= ur =;5i t:+u xEJr- -
=i> !u:- o I
l!t:J V F
=L. "lo<f,-"1 tr,iur:aoIo
.t,:.1r ii..
rl
Ju,
:
o
IElo
lot<
lzo()
o
u,z
Boi
L'
oz
E
Ig;ra
IggE:s
Ifigi€
f striNF.=9I;e\
i :5:;; \
i;E5iEN
o'- o o Y- \l
=9-FQ\-Jl!3;:E'.13:3; E 'Ij€iE ><
;#e:$ x
gP S 30.t 6= cJ Ot
iEE:5
- c_: (J:
g::: c
E i.;;5
E !i=girSeFi.!leF
EFsii
-(,(iJE
z
oz
o!f
.a
0z,
z
I
I
I
l_
t<to
I
I
I
I
IrE
t<
| ./, )
t3 |.<ll(J I
,=ltYl
trl
rE
tt,
ulc
an
UJ
II,,lt-
o
3
lUFCrL<>ol:JFI
x
F
r.lJt,)
o
q.
()
al,
i
j
I
t'1
=
|:t
z
LT
u,
rl.,
u,
t2
J
I
ol,
z. .-
<5=z=
=a!.r o3E
()
z
I
z)2
tr
l(Jl=
lo:
tl
li=
lr<|l41
ll"l^l
lil:ltr< |
l9tlr-llrotollt< tl
i=
lqJ
lo^i
;l|rrl:l
o
tl,
Y(J
z
=
(J
.J)
LtJ
UJr!
l-
t.lJ
z
g=6
pE=
9oep.3fHA>(,FOj a\i
J
o
\s)
o
6
=
<lol
=l-;t<
NO|lvnlvA
,AY*"'L c:
=
7t 1+4.<Co ;v=
96
=c)=s;JZ
()
Fct
EFzoo
J
F
l!J
UJ
-.r O<FE(JuJ<
rlr bt.r 2-o()
li r-lr c)E l; H
=H lEo It
-t
lrJ
J
J
u.,
=o-
l>lr-l
(JI
I
J
uf
d
J
=
z
ogJ
5l
sl
IU
fl
=r|Jl
JI
<lilol
zlilolFI
><
.€En
c.n/l
u,
tro
o-zo
Fo-
UJ
tuo
o.F
hE
IU
oz
F
E
ttt
zo
l-
CJ
:)
F
CNzo
C)
ILo
qoo
!.
't
75 soulh tronlage road
Yail, colorado 81657
(303) 479-21.38 or 479-2L39
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUB.TECT:
ofllce of communlly development
ALL CONTRACTORS CURRENTLYL REGISTERED WITH THE
TOhIN OF VAIL
TOWN OF VAIL PUBLIC WORKS/COMMUNTTY DEVELOPMENT
MARCH 16, 1988
CONSTRUCTION PARKING & II,IATERIAL SToRAGE
rn summary'.ordinance No. 6 states that it is unlawfur for anyperson to litter, track or deposit any soil, rock, sand, debrisor material, incruding trash dumpsteri, portable toilets andworkrnen vehicles upon any street, sidewalk, alley or public
Pf?9e or any portion thereof. The right-of-way on alf Town ofVail streets and.roads is approxinateiy 5 ft" 3ff pavement.This ordinance will be striltly enforced by the Town of vail.PyPli: works Department. persons found vi6tating this ordillancewill be given a 24 hour written notice to remove-said material .rn the event ttre person so notified does not comply with thenotice within the 24 hour tine specified, the puirric worksDepartment will remove said material at the expense of personnotified. The provisions of this ordinance sniff not beapplicable to construction, rnaintenance or repair projects ofany street or alley or any utiLities in the right-a-way.
To review Ordinance No. 6 in futl, please stop by the Town ofvail Building Department to obtain i copy. tirani you for yourcooperation on this rnatter.
Read and acknowledged by:
Positj.onlRelationship to erojEEE-1i.e. contractor, owner)
Date
I
I2 / 6/AA REVISIONS- KROHN
NOT }IEASURED IN FIELD
IIOTES:
fLAG & 6AtINERS
V€RTICAL COLOREO BAtItIERS BEHIND
ELEACHERS 1 'WASC VERTICAL SAi.INERS ETHIt{O
cotlhEt{TARY 60oTHS
I'ASC IIORIZOMTAL FLAGS ATONG
PRESS FEI{CE
@ = ,n,ro.nro srcr*,r,
1Q9 2"
28OLF
PAD &
EANNERS
x44
22 ROWS
A
^^'^''_+_lL' l_l sKl _ w/ \Y
98X44
22 RoWS
I, t50
SCOREBOARD
UI1BO TV
$h34 COHT€NTARY BOO]HS
2 TIERED- BOTIOI1 NEEDS
8' CLEARANCE TO GO
OYER OPERATOR zuItOI
JAtB€RT
CAhERA
POSll rON
CAN NO]
B€
ELEVATED
sDO LF PAD
EANNERS
r15 5'
<----I- 77' O" =__->
rEotA
Q lr t
&
z
19zt
F
YB
PR0POSED RED LtNt/ \
t..'
RACER EXI
EVPASS ROUTE FOR
AUTHORIZ€D
PERSONNEL - 3'WID€
PHOTO
|0xt5'
rflllll I
ro x25
TV RUN ]' X 1O'l0Qtr
-pAo a aar,rruERs
ADDrTtOtrrAt_
t5x14'
200
/
ENTRA
\orcuron
CONTROT r
SKI - WAY
HA tU L
scoR OARD
PRESS CONTROL POINTSTICKETNCE
l.
!
(Yllft
cr (o
3P
Efi
rfrV, V,FOiUtrzo
oo-Iazo
o-
=
C)
8
uJz
o-
do
E,o7
cr,
@
<rt
uJ
d(Jg,
o
z
=tro
oz{HAI
=s,FZfi1(/, o-
ct
G}ol,ntI(f,
f4G'r,
q,
d
zutt
{6
lrJo-v,(
l.
(Y)
rfl
€:
aln
F':
Efi
fi?,
Cf, U,pOir(rZQ
ct(v)
$
q)
o-
=(/,zoE
=g
O
?t
TUzdI
oJ
E.
C)
,aP 'o,: r\-
tot
@(3o,
lJ.)II
0/)
fi,c"fr)
a
d
zlutr
{()
ul
h
llj
d(J(f,
oF
Er
ft6-F
9H
L
(o
LC,(3 $l
loF
-gJpfikaul cD
U) U)FOluczo
rf\r
(f,
o-
=(f,zod
=I
O
dt
utz
o--J<(o
c()
3
o)cto)
oc)o!to
Irc(o(a
o\o(Y)
QJ
Fztu(r
6tu
o-(f)
uJ
dOaot-z3o<zEO
5HZ, ar)
t
>\
\_tl
\-E \A
\
\
TTTNI
(,c,
u)z
fle
6g
4*FZod
</,
Ern
$
T G)Zsgq. aau)' rn(/)rn
9m*nlv/zda E
@o(rl(,
WHEREVER
SPECTATORS
GATHER...
SPEC'ALTYRENTALS Featuring the
Finest in all
Aluminum Bleachers.
E
SPECIALW RENTALS can Provide Your
organization with the finest in allaluminum
bleachers and box seating. Let us handle
all of your seating headaches for your next
event. We can include:
r All labor for set up and take down
o Transportation of seats to and from your
evento Liability insurancer Site planningr The best looking finished product in the
businesso Numbering ol seats (an extra charge)
Specialty Rentals has provided seating to
nieet the individual requirements for many
types of events, such as:
r Tennis Tournamentso Auto Racing. Air Shows. Volleyball Tournaments. Parades. Concertsr Athletic Events. Boxing Matches
We also can provide complete packages for golf
tournaments.
Niagara Falls Grand Prix - whal ever your
n6eds aro trom the smallest €vsnts lo the
Speclalty R€nlals can do th€ job.
Fiesta Bowl Parade - Total 22,000 seats, 11,(m ssats in
olacs on C€ntral Ave. in 14 hours and remov€d In 7 hours!seating
largesl,
N
Ontario Racquet Club - Specialty Rentals can provide
box seating and bleach€rs for your tournamenl. we take
special care lo protect the playing surlacs.
Superior Ouality Construction - Ridged, all aluminum'
OSHA approved bleach€rs provld€ the safest, taslsst
seating option available.
. . .':. - '; 1;-iil. i;. . . '.. .,, .
Bobcat Corporate Meeting - We can provid€ bleach€rs
lor small tonts to blg tops.
That Perman€nl look - our all aluminum bleachers give
that p€rmanent look lo your €vent.
Spscial Bequiremenls - Specialty Renlals can handle
all your spoclal needs trom: Handicap seating to towers
and slaging.
World Cycllng Championships - 12,000 soats placed
around lhe velodromo.
The International at Casile Pines - Specialty Bentals
has all the equipmEnt to handle all your golf tournament
nesds.
Phoenix International Raceway - addilional bl€achers
lo gupplsment lhelr permanent seats tor special events.
SPEC'ALTYRENTALS
:
OUR PROFESSIONAL CLIENTELE
Fiesta Bowl Parade
RKO Productions - Campus Man
World Cycling Championships
LPGA National Pro-Am, Denver, Colorado
Moffett Field Air Show - San Francisco, CA
7-Eleven World Cycling Championships
Grand Raoids Seniors Golf Tournament
Denver Post, Champions of Golf
Charley Pride Seniors Golf Tournament
San Diego LPGA Tournament
Circus Flora
The International Golf Tournament,
Castle Pines, CO
Second Creek Raceway
General Motors Desert Proving Grounds
Cateroillar Test Grounds
Cuervo Gold Crown Volleyball
Association of Volleyball Professionals
Niagara Falls Grand Prix
Grand Prix of Dallas
Chinese Acrobats
Texas State Fair
Maxwell House Air Show
SPEE'ALTY
For Further Inf ormalion Contact:
Main Off ice
SPECIALTY RENTALS
16255 E. 4th Ave., Aurora, CO 8001 1
(303) 364 - 5900. 1 -800-544 -6658. FAX 303 -344 - 1410RENTALS
Olfices In California, Nevada, Texas, Oklahoma, lllinois, Arzona, Canada. Please call the 800 number lor the office nearest you.
GOHSULTING ENGIT{EET?S
slruclural and systoms deslgn
PRTNCIPAI ENGINEER:
WII TAM O . SHELL, S.E. , P.E. , A.E.:. ...-.
EDUCATTON:
Br.S. Architectural h:gineering -
REGISTRATIONS : Architectural, Civil'
fowa State
Mechanical ,
and Professional Engineer
. STATES of RXGISTMTION:
' '-fIlinois
Co]-orado
fowa
Tndiand
WisconsinN. JerseY
Massachusetts
Pennsylvania
Nebraska
Minnesota
TexasN. Mexico
LouisianaMaryland , .
S. Dakota
Wyoming
Tdaho
Michigan
Georgia
0hio
N. Carolina
Kansasr.r rti-^.i-.i ^VY. Y tISIrlIct
Tennessee
S. Carolina
Kentucky
Alabama
Washington ..
l'Iorl-oa
N. Dakota
New YorkYirginia .-=,-.Missouri
Mi ssi ssippi
Arizona
. -.c'- ,+-- .
..:
AREAS of DESTGN PRACTICE:
Tndustrial and conmercial structurqs - conventional and metal
building systems
Investigations & Expert Testimony for constructi-on, da'nage' ,
structural failure, etc
BuIk Materials Handling Equipment & Systems
Graj.n Processj-ng Facilities
AIcohoI Facility Design & Systeus
Stadiums & Grandstands
DESIGN SPECIALfTIES:
l+
Patent
Copyrights
Pre-cast Concrete Waff Panel Systern
Pre-cast wall and floor systen design
Aluminum storefront extrusion, design- ::
Ethanol Facility Layout & design '''-'' . -r'':i'
Design of steef & a1uminum "bleacher" l&- ..:.:'l{$Computer prograns for Steel Design'l d-*:ry
S-ite work, Drainage & Foundation Designffi
structural and gYsloins desig'1
DSSIG}I ASSUMPTIONS & CRITER]A
1. Seat and Fooi-boards designed to re
1,,Siruciure designed for:
120 Psf. horizontal Projection
lO Psf. vertical Projectionl0 PIf ./.seat' to seats
24 plf./seat to seats
Guardrails around Perineter:
20 plf @ toP rail horizontal
Guardrails around exit waYs:
JO Plf. @ toP rail horizontal
NFPA alternate all rails I
J0 plf. horizontal & I00 plf' vertical
4 . Iilaterial-:
sieel: - A36i'il , ty = 50. Ksi., F5 = 30'
Arurn. : - 605r-T6", F.,. = 18, Fb = 22 'B '
boltt
ai tcp ra:-.-
t/ _ _Lv,,,L,
u = /1,w,'
D:S]GII CF FCOT-BOARDS
):s:-gn baseci on fixed ends:
,ltrll+t2
ralz" | |
:BYL" +tA tz'' T/.o'/2" i
6) a'a ri c
^/;"trJ a ., l-- \- </:a.')) L /\ .L2 ^ )l -v
i,l
',/|.''
.e',9
-=|<
L'
i - i ',\
= 4j6#
1
f\J
lc) ?< /rL,/. t 1t, v
Qiaol =
Jl.-L Ulil .
t. I++c
= LLI'.)t
aol'v /e <,LBz.084
/a7
[r4i
i/ = 870,
.L
!
c\olr,r c I4ry\f I
d=l1--
e"x
I hcrcby ccrtity thit this plJn, sprcriicition or reDon wJs
prepirrcd by me or undlr my direct personal supsrvrsron
ind lh;r,t I nm n d.rly rcqntc:crl Proliilisron.rl In,1nt'er under
lfrc f.rws ol tlfe St.ftcru( Qg4uSlt-Vsr:t*
:;;1x,y ../ 1 ./ ,,4 t7//;- . , D.,
--...t .:...1... ......tg -4 - !--
R:G. No. 2€Bz+ E
f"St'\{
@oNsuLliii.lcs !3i;G::; =:iidlslructura! and systsr,rs dos!gn
4
Design based on fixed
L=26,W=1039,b=
ttl = 2022 in.Ib., S*
L=28,w=1r6J,!=
11 = 1483 in.Ib., S*
c=15.5,d=
'097 <.182
. r07
c = 18.5, d =
'1r5 <.IBz.L27
2xLt x 3h6"
?xL*x 3/!(,"
2xLEx3/L6"
ends:
2L25,
Stee1 =
A1um. =
23 .25,
Steel =
AIum =
13
L
r I'
TJJ
jtfi =
30, W = L23O, b = 25.25, c = 2O,5, d = 15
38e5 in'lb' '" il:;' = :ii: <'182 L
Design for bolted ends:
lall-.1=f L( 2x * b) x ( ai Ri/?w)l at cenier
= Z!f, W = B?0r w = 50, Ri = 363, d = 4.?5, o
= 36LJ in.Ib. Sx Steel = .I2l <.ISz L
Aluni = ,L33
= 25, W = 1039, w = 50, nt = 1133, & = 4.75, b
= 4510 in.Lb. s* steeJ- = .r1! <.182 L
Aiun = .164
.11
?L)
.,]
= L4.5, c
2xiix
= J.O.),
2xlix
- 1Q <
xi*x
= Zv.),
xL*x
= L-. !:
i/ '6"
c = !,.?,-
3/i6"
c = 4.?5
3/,6"
c =!+.75.
3/L(,"
b
a1c=i
L = 29, lV = IL65, w = 50, R],=.486, a = 4.75,
;,1 = Jti6I in.Ib. Sx Steei = .L82 <,??g LAlun = .2OO
= )0, N = I23O, rar = J0, RI = 5131 4 = 4.?5' b
= 60?? in.rb. sx steer = ,zoj
AIu;n = .222 <.2?9 L 2*
2
S','ray ioading
C;,ecir Angle Size for Legs:
,:-:, \ r.'.1(-.1 .l': .','i: ^-j i'\ i:i l: (3 j lj f : ;iG'+r \., L ! s., \-.r
-
tl uq u\'
structural and sYstoms dosign
= (10 x 5)
=6x24=
+ (.?5 x 30# x 6') = L95 ' tri - !755 '^""'-.:
I44#, M=L295 in.ib..
Standard. TJength = 9" (1-4) (5-!?")
P.crv .{ngle
i lzxl*
2 fzl x ]i-
I ii' x 121
lr 1;xI!
5 2x?
Row
a )uI .
Ai.
^ .-,L'rZ J u-L .
Al.
^ ^.L.:J D ',
J- .
A1.
/' <'-L l
"
J U.L.
A1.< c+'l
) 'J v' '
41,.
Si ze
x 3/t6"
x j/L6"
x 3/r5"
- z /t A"
x 3/L6"
r
,293
.29)
20?
'391+
.527
. )z (
,).(
.527
.'/ L>
L.
)v'(.
1A at
30.72
)Q.14
-:,
:.0e2
- ^ ,': ^L,V; a
1':-,ai 2
aal t
.ov 1)
ACtA)
^ ^^ l.
,+tto
.-b
.5626
.74a)
.5626
.740j
. tolo
.7403
.)ozo
.7403
ennn
.Lyv)a
4.Fta I'a
.9222
,v toY
.v )oY
.0399
.a 569.o)99
.0 569
. oll4
.oLr.Z6
DiSIG}i
_sl
N
.a,\n.:.-: n F.! r:nl-ra ru-F,',i-i:' 'r-.1':a'-:1<'l
Vt\!/ lvs,r\r/
- - JLu\.!.,
struciural and systerns desiSn
Check Legs bei;ween Foot-board Angles
Legs2,)&4 L lBxr*x3/t6" c=,5-!+/iv|-\
Y'tI't.85 x
= ,2?6, llin. = .!
F=-v .5? + .4lr = 1.0I, KL/r =B/.293 = 23,2!
-\:{o
l':2e?
s"i
'-lzzqz
F^ = 2?.95 StI.' l-9.57 AL.it
f- = 1.0f + .52? = I.92, fO = 2932 + .f04 = 27.23a
f^f'^:a = .059 str. # = o.?op st. t = 9'277 <,.)i)'a .098 Ar 'b = I.194 L.292
Sway M = L296 + .f04 = !2.20
r.._ = .!.07 str . :i ,069 = .476o 'ww7 - '-'r(v <1ra .J)J Ar. :: .o9B = .633
Sway Forces transferred, to ".X" braces ai ioo;-
boa:'d line.
L = J,2" {F,, = r'45, Net l/lomenl = j40 in'r'c'
rfi./r = .85 x 12/.293 = 34.81, Fa Sil . 25,53, ;--
f. = i.45 + .52? = 2,?5, fo = 540 i 'rol = SiYi'
Cneci; i,egs belolv foot-boarC Angles (LegI&2Ncti.equ::ec)
4!'> ''
tv6 )
Ffr^ - 'ln/r c+l ri -cL - .IVY \) \,I . lJ -
- ^1 ati .r)\J Ar. .c,
ii. I
i].
K |,/ r
T
47. -
F
F,, = .57 , Itlet Momeni =
l{L/r = L7/.394 = 4).L5,
f^=.57:.7I5=.797,
fo = .oj2 s1l. fb= .1v96
in .Ib ,
= 25.33 Sii, Ai=.:-j .I -'
= 2.B): .190 - r-'l''
:=
na1
.F - 't I, 'l
I - .1,._7 l-it
I' J VJ- *U
,2?B 1 '', Q,)(v
(-.::
1t.st
L = 20" r-a = 2.75, KL/4 - .85 x 2o/.29J = 58,a2
F" Sii. = .4.06, Fa A1. = L).5a
'ir = .1i9 SLi' *b -
.204 Ar. Fb
7. = 12t'- .4 ,[I1\= .so6
\M2l
C m
.L73
.2BB
-t
, \ o.i"
I
,,I
'rl
| +- <lnt]''-
2832
F a
T n
. oif8 A1 F,. .6'5)D-
l..0l.,Iicii; l.qomcnt = 2..
- .tJ5 x 2U/ ,J9Ltr = 60
t'.0S3 StI.-i1 = .4Oz
.]og AI r^ ,529
Ir "
?o2
2()
a
::?, <>=
')&
,.F,:r\ nI j]::! -r! -.iira1/li ia;I\44+,F:\- -.:'-? -i, c:;1,1;.i-j L.l:! A/ L ii rirv\;.i liL\'r\iJ!u\r.-
stlucturel ond sYstcms dosisn
Diaeonal Brace
lotal ?erPendicular Sway Load & Wind L,oad =(v tv\ = I /\+-
h'a\Fno = | l'./ !\
-tJ
Brace Angle l. = 53.4?0
Brace Force = g?5 ; Cos A = I6i6
ck. L 1* x 1* x 3/t6" T, = 33.6"
lT/c =.85 x T.6/,244 = 1l-?.05
t--
N = StI. I0.91' AI.
= I.64 : .V4 = ).78
3 .80
3 .80 <ic .9i
F
f a
I. , iG-otSlSLtLi'iiU(E;iiJGl:.:5:3:tS. structural and systems design
DasIGi\ r'oR 5 - 10 ROW FBAME 8:24
Jor loot-Board Loads & Angles - See Sheets L & 2
S;eei i,es(s) 5,?,8 & 10 (Sa:;ie as 7,2,i & J above Foot-3oa:c)
Leg g is L 2 x 1* x 3/$", Sx = .I82, r ='322, A ='62''
I
I
I
I.l.\|
col
I
I
I
q
&9
x
Sx
Ir^
fb* =
F5
are L 2*
z x 3/t6"
= .!82,
= 79 .Lt7
- \J2\ -
.32! € =
x 1* x 3/16",
r=.JZZ,fa=
.)55 < 1
,9I8, f5* = 9.51,
-!J
FF:
_{o
5\.
s
tno
\9
/
//
p = ,5?t L/r = 2?.g5, Fa = 21 .4, fa = .918, f1.= p.6+
aa = .031+
Fa
.{l-um. ieg(s) 6,7,8Leg10isL2
i,eg(s) 6 - 9,
L/r = Z?.95,
3= .047
Fa F6
.+23 { =.4?o <'l
l.:-.'i :a,.F.\;)li l:t 11f i,'rr\'rfi' tr-r:GIlJtr:i-l$\!, \-/ r.v i-.,/ \t',
-struclural and sYslens dooign
.rJs 3 rr
-\ '*ta
{F.,, = I.0I, lM = 2
Stl. I1€xI*x)/L5"
ltr-,/r = 8/.293 = 2?,3, F.
, -;^f"=l.or;'527=r'9?'
fr. = .070 fb = .908
FI'' l-,a-
A]. i 2 x I* x 3/L6"
F, = lP.P6
f = l-.OI : .62L = L.63,af = .o8i6 f- = ,68?+
.n-F
^ha1 v
Belorv tsotted Fooi-Board
StI'{t/r = (.85 x )5) :
= ,0876 'b
o{t/r = (.85 x
T= .r0J o =
.832
= 27 ,48
f b* = 2.A32: .:C::=2?
t =0.978 <!.3)
:, 'lql
c-
<,.: .JJ
.t: 4''
,!,' l" ,, /s ztl
f a
F a
f a
e<\ - A2t =)_) /
.68) Z =
-h
KL,/r = A/ ,3zz = 21..8L,
r t^.. -
t=
T-))-
)r A -
lz
) F,':,,
. /o+v
O'.'/
lt. -l
/.
z7
z/z -.'-. !'.
, ._. t-.r 2L-.L @'.-
/i,,,\^rr(* ^ n I ^1t-.'tlT: r- ^ 4 /:ll r':.T i:'i;l(Rl{, $./ r,\j ri, \ri r.- d UL\J\;) rri !\r \\, r Lv rr
. struciural aird systorns dosign
Leg / e,o
t 2€ '/ leJ-ovl ..ooT -
<F
st]..
N-J/T
t
T_2
A1 T
I
E--
Board
= 'l nl
l. l:i 'L
= (.85
'l o2
nAAA
.L2 a\
F
M = 2.832
3/L6"
: ;293 = I4.8, F
,n t'\
.9oB f.-- 0,975
a = 2t,32
(i ':i
2xL2x3n6"
= (.BJ x B) : .322 = 2L.L2, F"
.094 fb = .6q €.= ,??Z
T:T'b
l, = 44,zFv = L.lY,s, M = 2,292
'dt-,/r = ( .85 x 44) : .46 = 81.3,
I'45: .527 = 2.75, f.o= 2.292
.L466 ft, = ,11.46 f-- O.ggi2
F]^b
= 1V,)-
<L,33
5T..1-.
a
I
IJ
. ': /.:. - ^^: .:v* - -::
<a- ??
AI- Id.,/r = (,85 x 44) + .532 = 59.]-t, ?^ = :3.22
f- = 1.45 .. 4.1 -.11 4 - 2,292: .Ij: = _2,':'a --'-/ . :"t- - L')) t 'bf- = ,L?6 tb = .552 2= ,?28 <i.::-=cL
"a "b
ieg B Selorv Foot-Boaz'd L = 5L, Fv = L,+5, iVi = 2.292
SiL. TJ,/r = (.85 x 5I) : ,46 = 94.2, F* = ij '::.
- / t1^,t, = ro.o1
n _ r.\ '1 / f. = ZZ,1L,la' 1'()'
D
i"a = 'r72 jg = 'B?8 2= 'LC5 {''i:l'a r''b
AL. [fi.,/r = (.85 x 51) : .5j2 = 58,6, F^ = l-C.J-:,F' = l-0.85 ^
f = 2 ?". f - l2-<ota'.JJ*b
ff'a = .ZLL|? ,b': ,?032 A= ,9I?9 <i.j3Fu. Fl
ir':ir:,: r:orr-i.cl l>r: t:I j.mi n:r'l:crl bc-brvecn B ,t 9
/r<l r,-\ f\n r- n ,r n .h.^a.lE r{\d a-.\r-'\irllji i.{.J\tii I .jLi\J |-l-J\-lJt -u !; -:: ii\ii;)
, structural anC systems design
L"g 9 L2xI+xj/I6"
T^- 1n T .! -- .l.LeE J.U ),,ZXZX
<T' =
ln /r
F=4
f
e--;--
4
StI . & AI . f, = 31" to Brace 29,' Abcve
L.45, fa = 2.33; M = ?.292, fO = L2.JJ
= (.85 x 31) : .632 = 4L.?
25 .6 St1,', ., I? .0 2 Al .
.0910 stl rb = .4Ig6 stl-. - _.5L06 sil- _-".1368 A1 Fr .552L AL. <-.6889 At \-'rj
3/t6" stl. & A1. L -- rZ", Fr, = .52; yt = .5t:
lff-,/r = L?/ Jg4 = 4).L5, F^ = 25.38 Sit., t6.?j A!.
f" = .57 + ,715 = .797, fb= 2.83 r .190 = 1-:.o9
:u-= .g:? slr rb. = .)69 stt. , = .J2B st!.- .i-F" .048 A1. Fb .653 AL. I - . Z0I Ai \r 'r-
Below Foot-Board L = 11" to Brace, L = 3?" Vco:-Board to Brace.
€F'=1.01, M=2.292
h[,/r = (.85 x 37) : .632 = 4g.?6
Fu = 24.35 Str. L5.36 A1.
f" = l.of i ,7L5 =..1.4i, fb = 2.92 : .i9 = i?. -..
f" = .0524 stI. fb = ,4ozo sii < - .4594 -. .:.,
F". = .0917 At. Fl .5289 Al < - .62C4 \ r''l-
Horizontal Brace in line with Rorv 10 Fooi-tsca:.:
may be eliminateci,
\.640
,ri
'tl
l1,,oz
DIAGONAI BRACES:
COCJSI.'!.TINC ENGTIJN:IR5
' struclutal and sYstoms Cesign
Force to Resist = 9?5#
LA= 59.26o, LB
Force in Top Brace =
Force in Bottom Brace
ck.r1*xL*x1/L6"
Top Brace lJ'/r = ( ,85
= 54.640
)lJ i Cos
= 9?5 +
A=1908#
Cos B = 1685
x 43) +,293=124.?4
F_ = 9.80 StI., 3.34 A1.a \ (g'aof^ = 1.9r: .527 = 3.622 3'3+
Bottom Brace 7g'../r = (.85 x 38) : .293 = Ii0.2
F" = 12.3 str., 4.28 A1.
tl = t.6g : ,JZl = ).2L 1+.ze (i2.3
Horizonial Brace at Row I0 Foot-Boarci wiii
pernit bracb. l, to be same in boih cases.
I\J
c()hJsStJI-?[;{iG En:(}iuJ EEles
structural and systsms design
DESIGN FOR BACK GUARDRAII
Sianciard Guardrail with 20
NFPA & UBC Exit Guardralls with JO plf horizontal & 100 pii
Veriical Loads ( Z or ll rail)
I
l--l-Sl | *u*l
rT-F'-/rLl
Force at
Force @
@
plf horizont
-+-^* -^; 'luvl./ r 4-L.r -
A = (l-20 x 6B=(120x4
=].'Z0x4)llfi /^\ ,tI|1 \-r ft
ck. r
Force at top raiL - V = 600
Force@A= (500x8.5)*
B - (6oo x 8.5) +
M@A=300x43,5=L3,050
A1 lt 3x2x5/16"StlL 3x2xL/4"
f" = .6 : t.69 - .355 AL,l
L/r = 4l.S/ ,95 = 45 .B , F,
f" = .oz2o at fl = .Bzj ,,Fu .OzOL St.Fb .803
Diagonal Knee Forc e = 789 i
Ck. L 2+xzx9/t6"
L/r = 5? .42, F" = L3.64
f^= 2.28:'.809 = 2.82
2*x2x3/]-6"5*=,293
5.22 :,293 = 1?.8I 1zz.a (30'o
aI load (2 rail)
6x20#=LZo#
6,5)i2)=J4fff3.5)i23=227#
,5 = J22O :in.Ib.
Diagonal liree Forc e = 22? * Sin 20.28 = 655#
ck. L 2t x 2 x 3/L6" f, = 24.52"
L/r = 24 ,52/ .427 = 5? .42, -n a = 13 .54 Ai . , ?3 .L5 s-:\
f" = -655 i .809 = o.Br <n.64<23.15
1i = J00
loo x 66.s)
300 x 43.5)
in .Ib .
.OO+ Ar I.^ = rc.,') -,-:
.542 sii . " 24.04 :'i.,- .
.6 t 1.L9 = .jOL S;i.
= 16 .19 Al- . , 25 .0 Sti .
,644'l -/.=-\t.8?27
: 23 = LO)?
;23= ?e9
(=
X
Sin 20.28
L = 24,52"
AI . r 1),r-)
<r3.54
= 1, 1/Cfr
SII .
-/^^ .t c\zJ . r)
11
G(DIJST,!X.TIN(3 EISGI CJ iTE RS
, structural and sYstoms deeign
DdSIGN FOR SIDE GUARDRATT,
Siandard Guardrail designed for 20 p1f
NFPA and Exist Guardrails designed for
1C0 plf vertical at top rail. Design
lf.I
120# Force @
Force @
l00f Force @
Force @
at top rai1.
horizontal anC6'o" spacing.
x 59) ' I? = 4I7#x 42) ". L? = 297#
..' <o\ t 1n = tol.:C=4 ),/ I . -t -- -.rt- Lr,z\ t 1? = lLa*
^ -.-I . -1 | J
M @ A = L20 x 4Z - J040 in.lb.
Stl-. T, 2 x L$ x 3/t6" s* = .182
A]. L 1* x L+ x 3/L6" s; = .?79
str. fb = 2?,6g 130; Al- fb = 18.L <22'E
t4 @ A = 3OO x 42 = 12,600 in.1b.
sti. L 3 x 2 x 14.",- S-. = .51?q,
Ai: i 3 x 2 x 5/:.6", ^Sx = .56+
stl. fb = 23,42 13O; A1 fb = 18.96 1ZZ.t
rail
nl f.E.--ed on
\ L.v
( rzu
( 300
( 300
Rq<
A
B
l]-
N
\t$
L'
t
I
a
a
GC'ITISULTII{G EI{GIITIEERS
tlructurtl tnd ty!l.mt dcslgn
120 psf . horizontal projection . -...' .
l0 psf. vertical projection
10 pIf ./.seat to seats
24 pIf./eeat' to seats
Guardrails arouncl peri:neter r
20 plf @ top rail horizontal
Guardraile around ex5.t waye r
J0 pIf. @ top rail horizontal
NIPA alternate aII railsr
50 pIf. horizontal & 100 Plf.vertical at top rail
?
4.lvlaterial r
Steel: - A36M, Fy
Alnm.: * 6o6t-r6,
J0 Ksi., Ib = JO1 C
= 38, FO = 22.8, CF,,
J
107.O
72.o7
. bc2oI-9^* i{ + 4c2 - 24i2)
DESIGN CF I'COT-BCARNS
Design based on fixed errds:
" =*" Gq -
L=?),W=870,
14 = 2292 in.l-b.
RI =Rz=436#
b = I9.?5, c = 14.5, d = 12
s*stee1 ='oll <.r82 LZxr*xiA6"
AIun. = .084
@ end.s
t tolz'
ra/z'
2oh"
GC)II|SULTIHG ENGIHEERS
riruelurrl rnd sYllcmt dc slgn
Design based on fixed
L=25,W=1039,b=
Itl = 2022 in.Ib., S*
L = 28, W = 1J.6J, 6 =
M = 3483 in.Ib., .S*
L=30,W=LZ)Q,b=
m.= 3895 in.Ib. S*
c =.l.5.5, .d =
:og? <.r_Bz.].07 '
c = 18.5, d.
.t_16 (.rez
.r27
c = 2O.5' d
'130 <.rlz.r42
ends r,
2L.25,
Steel =
A1um. -=
23.25,
Steel =
ALurn =
,
25.25,
Steel :
Aluro =
= l-4
L
=L5
I
J.3
I,x1*x
xl*x
2x7iax
3/L6"
3/L6"
3116-
2
2
Design for boltecl €nds r
M =+' [tz* + b) x ( a+ w/n)fat center
L=24,W=870,
y1 = 364J in.lb.
L=26,W=LO39,
M = 4610 in.lb.
L=28,W=]-I55'
y = J461 in.lb.
w = 50, Rl = 363,
S* Steel = .L21
AIum = .13)
w = 50, RI = 433,
S* Steel = .1-54
Alun = .154
T, = 50, R1 = 486,
S* Steel = .JBz
= l.6.5,
2xl.*x
b = 18.5,
22xLiax
a = 4.75,
<.fi? L
a = 4.75,
<.182 r,
a = 4.75'
<.2?9 ,L
!=
2
14.5, c
x1*x
= 4.75
3/r.6"
c = 4.75
3/L6"
c = 4.75
3/L6"
c = 4.75!
M
AIun = .200
= )O, W = 1230, w = 50' R1 = 5L3,
= 6077 in.Ib. Sx Steel = .203
A}un = .222
a = 4.?5, b ,, 2O.5,
<.2?g L2*xI?.x3h6*
2
S HEHU COXSULTTI{G EXGINEERS
ttruclurtl and tytt.mt dotlgn
a
:*
h
.. qlrt
+ (.?5 x 30# x 5') = L95. [t = 1755 in-]-b-
L44#, tI = l'296 in.lb..
Starrdard. Length = 9" (1-4) (5-I?")
A L/r P Fa f" fb,
.52? 30.?2, .s, ili. i;.05 r-.o82 16.88
.52? 30.?2 .5? StL- 27.05 1.082 16.88Ar. 19.01.52? 30.?2 .57 Stl.2?.05 1.082 15.88A1. 19.01.52? 30.?2 .5? str. 2?.06 1.082 15.88A1. l_g .01.?15 43.15 .5? 7::. 1:r..?t,
.?e? e-2\
_..,1$ol
N,a
.$l
N.1,f,
Svray Loading
Check Angle
=(10x6)
=6x24=
Size for Legs:
Row Angle
t l-*x1*
2 ttx],*
3 1*x1*
4 1*x1*
5 ?x2
Row
I Stt.
AI.2 St1.
A1.3 St1.
At.4 stl.
AI.5 Stl.
Af.
Size r
x 3/L6' .293
x 3h6" .293
x 3/t6i' .zgj
x j/r6" .?93
x 346" .394
€
.6025
.7972
.6025
.?9?2
.60"5
,797?
.6025
.7972
.)394
.4528
gIra '-a
.0399
.o559
.o399
.o569
.o399
.0569
.o399
.o 569
.o114
.04?6
fb;Fb
.5626
.7403
.5626
.?40). .5626
.740)
.5626
.7403
.lo8o
.40Sz
4.tt
)
GONSULTIHG ENGTIIEERS
rlruclurtl tnd sYtleml doslgn
Check JLegs between i'oot-board Sngles
:
Legs 2, 3 & 4 f, .1"* x 1* x 3/L6' c o
"-6I.,, = .5? + .'ltl* = I.Ol-, fr-',/r
Ta = 27.95 StI. ' 19.57
f"=1'01 ? '52?=l'92,
=..,2?6, lli.n. = .4
B/.293 = '23.2I
2932:i -1o4 = 27 .23
t = 9.277 <L;3:l3' 'l -ra\
4a. L.a>a
-!+
A1.
f*b
/M]-\.\fiZ
85x
l)'1;
s"l
'Jzztz
Kr
f- f'.
Eg = -069 stl. j = o.9o8 st..a .o9B A1 ''b = L.19t+
Sway !1 = )-296 3.-.104 =
f- = .40? StI. + .069 =o15 -fi5 N. + 'o9B =
Sway Forces transferred
board Iine.
below foot-board Angles
12.20 -
-476 -/-t -
. \J-.633
to "X' braces at
(Leg1&2NotRequired)
foot-
1t.tt
<nA
Stl, A1=16.73
.1p0 = i4.89
lt.tl
Check T,egs
Leg3 L
Leg 4
Leg 5
\ sto
I.'a
L=20" f"
F"
f-a
- r50
= 2'75'
Stl . =
= .rrg
E' Fr
,s,/4 =
.23.06,
stt. fu
= L2" {F., = I.45, Net Moroenl = J40 in'Ib
\fi.,/t = .85 x 12/.293 = 3l+.81, Fa StI ' 26'fi, A1 =18'
f" = 1-45 .: .52? = ?.?5, fb = 54o : '194 = JLJZ
-f^a = .104 Stl.-b = .L73 1:-.tt
.228 { = :'\277
.378
.B5x 20/.293= 58.oz
F" d. = I3.5O
t -- '292
.432
.4 rrl)\t'lzl
in.Ib.
= ?5.38
= z.B3 |
f = '528
I|a
L=]-7"
.204 A1. Fb
= .r73
.2BB
f, =.6-m
Fr, = .5?, Net Moment = 2B)2
tc,.,/i = r?/ J94 = 43.L5, F"
f" = .57 | .7L5 = .797, fu
f^ = .032 st1. fb= .496
F , .O4B A1 F A('7a b '" tt
F = I.0L,Net Momeht =v
hfr.,/r = .85 x zB/.394 =
rfta = .o8l stI.*b = .4oz
% .109 at \ .52s
.701
f. = 1.41, fb =
Fa StI 15.99, A1
=.485 1,n
.638
aa92
2.292,
6o.39,
t
]-2.06
l.2.93
t1
4
GOII|SULTING ENGINEERS
3lructurtl rnd ty!trmt dotlgn
Total Perpendicular
Diagonal Brace
Sway loa,tl &1lincl l,oad = J r
,.
Force = 975
Brace lng3.e l, = 53,4?0 :
Brace Force = gZ5 | Coe A = 1638
ck. r, Ll x Lt x 3/t5" L = 33.6'
N
fr,/r=.85x32.6/.Zr+tt
'F" = stl; -Lo.91' Al-.
f"=1.64 r.434=).lB
= ].'l..7.O5
= 3.80
+ 3:80 <10.91
5
COH|SULTIHG EHGI}|EERS
rlruclurtl and !ysloms dtslgn
Elevated Bleacher Franer Row 2 - 5 Steel & Alunintn
o.N
r)o
3e 24"
6
COBISULTTilG ENGIII|EERs
rtruclur!l rnd tyrlcmt dctlgn
Elevated Sleacher Fr"mer
(Front Walkway requlred
. Rov2-5
for Ror #1)
Steel &Aluminun
For Design Criteria - See Sheet fI
For Footboard loadg and Ang1es - See Sheete #L & #2
For Angles Above Footboard - See $reets #3 a #4
Yertical load per .endLe = 1.45k
Sway load = I95#/Lee, Ftbrd.. }{ = 2292 in ].b,, Seat Angle M = 5IrO in 1b.
Lea 2 & a- f., = 4W',' L= lr|x 1* x 3/16", tT'/r= .B5x 44.5/.293 = t29
Fa = 8.97 stl., 3.13 A1., fa = 1.45'.: .52? = 2.75 <3-]-3 <'8.97
- Conbined Stress, fb = -5t+ = .104 = 5.L92
1o,/r = ,85 x 44.5/.461 = 82. Fa = 18.51 stl., 7.73 AL.
f. = .t477 stl., fb = .L73o stI., , ,.3207 StI.
E J55? Ar. ' \ .3534 AL.' - .?091 A1.
Lee 4 - L = ??".Max., l{l-,/r - .85 x 27/.293 = 78.)3
Fa = 1g.36 StI., B.4B A1. > 2.75
Combined Stress satisfactory by inspection.
Les ( - L 2 x 2 x 3/l.S" above Sootboard See Sheet #4
Below Footboard satisfactory by inspection.
Sway Bracing 4 x ]r95 = ?Bo# LIi x I+ x 346"
*A = 3Z.B?5o, *B = 39.4?3o , 4c = Jl.oBZo
Brace Force = .78 -: Sin Angle
1A = Iz?L#, 48 = 1227#, {C = 1469# :
Brace at 4A
\fi,/r = .85 x 34.2I/.244 = J.Ig.2, F" = 10.52 StI., 3.66 AI.
f. = 1.2?.* .4J4 = z.)J < 3.56 < rc.52
Bra.ce at dBtfi,,/r = 115.1 , F* = 1I.25 StI., 3.9J pJ.
f a.= 2.91 < 3.93 < rr.25
Brace at *ClgJr = Lii.?4, Fa = ?.8? stt., 2.74 AL.
ra= 2,93 7 2.74 ( ?.8?
Horiz,ontal Srace I'X- not required for steel , is
required for alumimun. 7
GOIISULTII{G EHGI$IEERS
rlruclur!l rnd tY!l.mr dcflgn
Recheck Leg 4 bel-ow Brace + B
fFv = J..ltJ + G.?2? x cog 3) = '2.398,
f ^=
4,54 < 8.48 < :;9'36
Horizontal Brace LL* x lt x 3h6" v = f80#
' ft = 1.48 .4 30 < 22.8 Satisfactory bY i:rsPection.
= z.6gk,c)
Recheck Leg 4 beLow Brace
€ Fv = J-.4J + (1.1169
f" = 5.11 < 8.48 <
Recheck Leg 5 below Brace
{Fv = 1.O1 + (I.27L x
f^= 2'82 < 3'95
4c
x Cos
L9.35
4"4
Cos A) = 2.01k,
LI.)2
g
co]lsuLTlilG EllGlttrEERs
tlruclurtl rnd tYttcmt dotlgn
Elevated Bleacher I'rame r Row 2 - 6
Non-ELevated Bleacher Frane: Ror 5 -
Steel and Ah:minum
l0 Steel and Alunlnun
!s
'\9
i,
F
-s's
I
/
/
s$
mo
I
/
/
/I
4- e.24"
I
GC,iISULTI}IG ENGI!{EERS
tltucturtl !nd !Yslomt doslgn
Elevated Sleacher Framer Row 2 - 6 Steel & Alunlnuro
(Front Ualkway lequired for Row fI)
For Design Criteria - See Sheet fI .
For Footboard loadg nnd Anglea - See Sheets #I &' #2
For Angles Above Footboard - See Sheets ffi & #4
Yertical load Per An$1e - I.:.!5
Sway Load = Lgs1,/Leg, Ftbrd. l{,.= 2292 in 1b', Seat Angle y = J40
Lee 2 & a - Same at 2 - 5 -Row f'rame
lJeg +
t.art \
Fa = 16.g4 stI., 6.43 et.fa = 2.75
fr,/r = .85x 3l/.322 = BL.B3,Fa = 18.61 Stl., 7.77 AL.
fa = 1-..1+J : .6^ = 2.-33. < ?.?? < 18'61
Conbined Stress satisfactory by inspection'
Lee 6 - L2 x 2 x 3.t6', above Footboard See Sheet #4
Below footboard satisfactory by insepction'
lC = 28.6l-0
4C = 2036#
Fa = 12.60 stf .
L2.60
Fa = 12.95 StI.
]-2.9 5
Braceat4c LL? xL}.x)h6"
7o,,,/7 = 127..3 , Fa = 9.5? StI.' ).21 AL'
fa = Zoj6 . .52? = ).87 7'3.2t l g.SZ
Horizontal- Brace 'X" not required for steef is
required for alumlnum.
Combined Stress staisfactory by inspection'
= Lz x I* x 3h6"; I, = 60" to Ftbrd,' 3L" to brace
*a = 34,Lzo, 18 = 34.550 ,
Brace Force = 975 i Sin Angle
1A=I?38#, 48=t7I9# , '
Brace at 1.A LI* x 1* x- 3A6"
rfi.,/r = .85 x )?.44/.29J = 108.6,
fa = I?38 + .52? = 3.3 Z, 4.41
Brace at +B l1* x L+ x )/16"
rs,/r = .85 x 3?.03/.293 = 1O?.4,
fa = L?r9 : .52? = j.z6 < 4.51..<
in Lb.
, 4.41 AL.,
, 4.51 A1.
arta/f/
lo
GOHSULTING ESIGIFIEERS
tlrucluttl tnd tYrttms dotlgn
Recheck Leg 5 below.Brace {3
{F-v= L.45 + G.?t9 x cos n) = z'}?k,
fa=4.62<?.?Z<18.51
Horizontal Brace L]rt x LL x 3/L6" eatisfactory by inspectlon.
Recheck Leg 5 beLow
{Fv =
'fa =
Brace $C
L.4J + (2.035 x Cos C) = 3.24k,
5.?J <,?.?? < 18.61
Below Brace'l$ A
{Fr = 1.4J + Q.738 x Cos A)
fa = 4.04
Satisfactory bY insPection.
Recheck Leg 6
= 2.89k ,
tl
g EI HITU GOHSULTIHG EIIGIiIEERS
!tructurtl rnd rYttcmt dotlgn
Elevated 3I.eacher Frnne ? - 10 Row Steel & AluniYnm
$,no
$t'$no
t2
$titt_Hqu GOXSULTIHG EI{GIHEERS
rlructural rnd tytl.mt d.sl9n
Elevated Bleacher Framet ? - 10 Row Steel & Al:ninun
For Design Criteria - See Shet #1
Por Footboard Loade and Ang1es - See Sheete #I & #2
Ang1es above Footboard eatj-sfactory by inspection.
Refer to Drawing on Shee t #-J2-
With diagonal brace above horizontal at + 42" each 1eg ia required
to support in bending the sway forc e of I)JS U = I95# i 42" =
?995in Ib.. Lzx]:? x3A6", fb =?-995 i.182 =42.93>30>22'8
Seeond diagonal below horizontal at +42' i.s required. (Connection
of diagonals to intermediate vertical legs does not transfer loads
to legs - equilibrium equations do not produce unequal vertica'l
vectors. )
Upper Srace 4 = 39.090, Lower Brace I = 30.260
Sway T,oad = 4 x ]|95 = ?BO#, f'orce in Brace = 780 r Cos Angle
Force in Upper Brace = L0O5#, Lower Brace = 9O7#
Brace Angle = 1* x I+ x 3n6"
Brace length = Z4t0os A Upper = )O,)2",' lower = 27'79"
upper 7s,/r = .85 x 30.92/.244 - IO7.?, F" = 12.88 St]-., 4.48 AL'
f" = 1.005 : .434 = 2.)z < 4.48'< 12.88
f,ower Brace Angle satiefactory by inspection.
Lee 7 LZ x l* x 3/]..6", I'v = 1.45, m = 2,832 above Brace
Length = 42t" above Brace s\, +42", 7G,/t = .95x 42.5/;632 = 5?'2
Ta= 2).19 Stf .' I).? AL.' f^= 2.)), fb = 10.15
f" = .1004 st1., fb = .3383 Stl. f : .4387 Stl.
E .r?oo A1. ro -5"16 Ar. '- -6916 Ar-
L"g? belowBrace L=42"
F,, = 1.45 +(1.005 x sin 39.o9o) = 2.08K, f^= 3'36
t{,/r =.85 x 42/.322.= r1o.?, F, = 12.12 st1., 4.2) AI'> 3J6
t3
-s!:l HEU COI{SULTTNG EHGINEERS
tlruclurtl tnd rtftl.mt dotlgn
.beIow Brace length = 28'
Angle satisfactory by inspection.
Could be reduced to 2 x 1* x 3^6"
ee a Lzt x 2 x 3/L6" length between Braces = 39"
F.r, = 1.45, ttt = 54 f^= L.?9 fu = 1.84
' tfi/r = ,85 z 39/.?93 = 41.8, Va = 25.55 Stl. ' 17.0 A1'
f" = .o?00 stI. fb = .0513 9 = .1313 stl'
q .tosz Ar. q .o8o? 4 .1859 A1.
Lee B L Z* x 2 x 3h6" above Srace length = 23" .,'
fu = 2'97Check L2 x I* x 3/t5', f
^=
2.34
r{,/r = .85 x 3g/.612 = 52.5 , F" = 4.96 st1., t4.77 Ar.
f, = .0976 stl. fb = '0990 5 = 'l-956 stt '
{ .1i84 A1. E .l-486 t' .3070 ^q,1.
Reduce Angte lo 2 x I* x )/t6"
lee 10 /.ztr x 2 x 3/t6" Length between Braces = 5O'5"
Angle above footboard satisfac.tory by inspection
F.,, = 1.01, lI = 2.832, fr/r = .85 x 50.5/,?93 = 54.1
T^ = 23.69 Stl., 14.4 Af . fa = L-25 fb = 9,67
fu. = .o52? stl., fb = .???? t = .3750 stl.
q .0868 A1. Fo = .42r+1 .5109 A1.
Check L2 x l* x 3/t6" . fa = 1.63 fl = 15'56
7{,/r = .85 x 50.5/.632 = 6?.9, F. = 21,J2 Stl., 11.0:f A1
f* = .0?64 stt. fb = .5L86, 1 = .5950 StI.
E 'L4?? Ar ' q '6824
Can reduce Angle to 2 x tt x l/t5 "
Use Angle ? x 2 x 3/16" for Handrail Post loada
Check L z x z x 3/t6" below Brace 91 +42"
Fv = 1.01 + (.goj Sin 10.26) = 1.4? fa = Z.O5
frJr = ,85 x 42/.394 = 90.61, FF = 16'81 Str' 6'fi e]-' ) ?'o5 lL
S EI trJtlttr CONSULTII{G EHGIHEERS
ttructurrl tnd tYttcmt doslgn
)?" and.40" Bor Frames - Portable Bleachere - Steel
NoTE: 3ox frame verticals are aligned with vertical lege
in bleacher frame above; therefore, top horizontal angle is
not subject to unusual bending forces and. requires no special
design. Angle 2 x 2 x 3/L6" is r.sati-sfactoryVertical l,oad Each Angle = 1.'45:
Parallel Sway T,oad = .g?58
Vertical Legs )2" Box L = 28' CK 1* x 1* x 3h6" Angle
L/T = 28/.293 = 95.6, Fa = 15.?1, ta =1 -4.5y''5?7 = 2.?5 < L5'7L
4O', Box L = )6" cK 1* x lt x 3/t6" Angle
t/r -- )6/.2n - l,2), F3 = 9.8? '> 2,75
Angle A = 35o )2" Boxt ?8-g3o 40" Box
Force in Brace .= .975 : Sin Angle A
F = 1.7K )2' Boxi Z.O?K 40" Box
Double brace eystem allows one angle to always
act in tension mode. Check Angle 1* x I* x )/L6"
f* = 3.21 Ksi 32" Boxi 3.83 Ksi 40" Box
a
avf
0
t
Nn
CK Angle Ln compression for I/2 load = '4875K
32" Box L/r
4Q" nox L'/r
36/.293
43/.29J
L23, Fa
]47, Fa
9.87, fa
6,9r, fa
.93
.93 < 6.9L
t5
-slli{lE lgtt
32" and 40"
Angle A = 35o 32" Boxi 28.g3o
Force in Brace =
F = 1.7K 32"
GOIISULTING EHGINEERS
!lruclurtl .and rYrtomr derlgn
Box Frames - Portable Bleachers - Aluninurn
NOTEs Box fra:ne verticals are aligned with ve"tical legs
in'bleacher frame above; therefore' top horizontal angle is
not subject to unusual bending forces alld requireE no special
design. Angle 2 x 2 x 3/L6" is satisfactory'
Vertical. Load Each Ang1e = 1't4f
Paral1e1 Srray l,oad = .g?58
Vertical Legs )2" Box L = .28'nK 1+ x 1* x 346" Angle
L/r=2B/,"g7=95,6,Ta=5.64,.fa=1'.4s/.szz=.2.?5<
L/r = rt.zgt =ulrrl". :^ =1t,';;*r'n i)ir- 3/t6" Angle
4o'r Box
.975 + Sin Angle A
Boxi z.OZK 40" Box
Double brace system allows one angle to always
act in tension mode. Check Angle 1* x L* x 3/t6'
f* = 3,2) Ks:- )2" Boxi 3.83 Ksi. 40" 3ox
1,.
CK Angle in compression fot I/2 load = '4875K
)2" Boxl/r = 16/.297 = !23, Fa = ).44, fa = '% < 3'44
l+0" Box r'/r = 43/.29) = l4?, Fa = 2.4L, fa = '9J < 7'l+L
c
:t
a
Nn
t6
COHSULTTNG EIIGIHEERS
tiructural !nd sytt.mt dotlgn
rnOWt WAI-TKWAYS
4o"
48
s+
_s
to
]o
N
zo"zo"
?4'74"
27"21'
t-7
COfi SULTIhIG EI{GIHEERS
.
ttruclurt! tnd oyttcms dcrlgn
FRoNT WAT41{AY DESTGN
Footboard support angle load at 5o pft.
40"+vI = 49 wtz/sl:g = 2,266 in.Lb.
-!if = ,l'1J wLZ = 11000 in.Ib.
Reaction at E:ds = .3?5 wl" = E5O#
Reaction at Center = .625 wL x 2 = I5o0#
Check L2 x t* x 3/t6' , S* = .182
fo = 3000 * .82 = 15.18 < 30 Stl.,
+trt = 49 wtz/ s::g = 3,26j in.lb.
-[f[ = ,L25 wLZ = 4,320 in.lb.
Reaction at E:ds = ,)lJ wL = 54O#
Reaction at Center = .625 WL x 2 = 1800#
Check Lz x I* x 3/L6", S, = .182
fb = 4320 i .l!B2= 4.?4
Check L2* x Z x 346", S* = .293
fb=4320:.293=L4.?5
+M = 49 wt?/s]9 = 4,1j0 in.Ib.
l..rg "
54"
-fvf = .I25 wLZ = 5,468 in.lb.
Reaction at Ends = ,j?5 *L __ 60g#
Reaction at Center = ,625 wL x ? = 2025#
check L?* x z x 3/16", s* = .293
fo = J458 : .293 = 18.56 < 30 st]. < 22.8 AL,
Center Pr::t - (fgnore Diagonal Brace)
Max.-mum Load ( 54") : 2025#
Check L.I* x I^ x 3h6", Length - 27"
W/r = .85 x 27/,244 = 94, F" = 16.05 StI., 5.89 A1.
f.= 2.025+.434=4.6?
use /.tI x r+ x 3h5" Af,L THREE wAl,K:lvAYS.
te\
slH E tltl GOFISULTTTTG ENGIn|EERS
rlructurtl !nd ty!lomt dotlgn
Guardrail Post - (llo fxit way requireraent)
Horizontal Load. = 20 pIf, Yertical Load = J0'p1f.
Forces at top of rail post = I20# Il anal 300# V
Force at A = (LzO x ?2) t 28.5 = 3O3#
Force at ! = (120 x 43.5) :28.5 = IB3#
M at A = 120 x 43,5 = 5,220 in.Lb.
f,Fr, 40" = 3Oo + 450 = 750$' 48" - Joo + J4o = 840#
54"=J00+699=9O8#' Check Ang1e ?A x 2 x 3/t6"
Above footboard fr,/r = 2 x 43.5/.Zgl = lo9 .?
F" = 12.41 Stl., 4,)2 A]-., f^ = ,37I, fn = 17.82
f" = .0293 stt-., fb = .5940 6238 stl
q .oB5B A1. q .?Br5 2 s .B6n N,.
Below footbaord fi,/r = .85 x 28.5/.?93 = 30.55
T^ = 27.09 StI., L9.04 A1., f" = 1.12, f t = L7,82
f" = .04u stI., fb = .591+4
E .o5BB A1. q .?Br5 I' .8403 A1.
Guardrail Post (NFPA & uBc xxITwAY)
Horizontal Load = J0 p1f' Vertical Load = 100 pIf
Forces at top of rail post = 300# H and 600# V
Force at A = (3oO x 72) + 28.J = fJBfr
. Force at B = (100 x 4).5) i 28.5 = 45'-'#
M at A - 300 x 43.5 = 1J,050 in.lb.
{ F\r lro" = 500 +'45O = rcsj#
48" = 5oo + 540 = 1140#
54"=600+608=1208#
CheckArrgle )xZx5/L6"
Above footboard 7g-,,/r = Z x 43.5/ .948 = 91.8
F" = 16.5 stf ., 6.18 A1., f" = .411, fu = 19.65
f" = .0249 str., fb = .65so ? .52g9 str. ,/ .1F^ .0665 A1. i .urr-u | = .9zrj Fs..t9
CC'r|SULTIilG EFI(}II{EERS
. ftruclural and rYelcma deelgn
= 27"
= 2.81
= 2.98
= 3.11
stl., 8.48 A1.
.28?3 Str,
.5962 AL.
Diagonal Srace - Force = 30) + Lgs = 498# or lJ! + L95 = 993#
Below footboard E/r = .85 x 28.5/.948 = 25'55
?a= 2?.69 StI., Lg,85 AL.,. f^= .82?, fu = 19.55
f; = .0298 stl., fb = .655o t = '684? tlt'
q .0416 A1. q .8618 - .9034 A1.
Seat Post Angle 1* x 1* x 3/t6" Length
{F.,, = 4o' .5 + .53 + .45 = L.l}8k, f"
lpg' ,5 + .53 + .54 = t.57?, f"
54" .5 + ,53 + '61 = L'64K, f.
w/r - ,85 x z?/:?gi = ?8.3, F^ = f9-35
' Bendj-ng Monent = L95 x Il = i315 inJ.b'
f" = J6o? stI. , fb = '1266 I *q .3662 t;-. E .22e5
Brace Angle
Srace Force
Brace Length
Check Angle
F" = 1'13 i
N0TEr Equilibrium equations prod'uce
at center Post.
= z}.359o
-- 993 * Cos Angle = i-L3o#
= 25o i Cos Angle = 28.4"
1* x 11 x J.I6" 7I'/t = .85 x
.43t+ = 2.6
no unequal wertical vectors
28',:4 -- 98.9
20
DESIGN FOR SACK CUARDRATL
Standard Guardrail with 20 p]:f horizontal l-oad (2 rail)
Force at top rail = 6 x 20# = L20#
G!g tlllll Ellll
NFPA & UBC EXit
Vertical Loads
COIISULTITTIG ENGIHEERS
.rlruclurrl rnd ryrlcmc drclgn
Isoq
. Force @ A = (LZO x 66.5) 1 2) = .J41ff
@ B = (1ZO x v.5) | 23 =, 227#
DI@A = IZO x ,$.5 = 5220 in.lb.
ck.L 2Ix2x3ft6"s*=.293
fb = 5.22 ; .293 = 17.81 lzz,A (lo.o
Diagonal Knee Forc e = 2?? t Sin 20.28 = 655#
ck. L 2t x 2 x 3h5" f, = 24.52"
L/r = 24,52/.42? = 57.42, Fa = L3,64 A1., 23.15 st"l.
r" = .655 i .809 = 0.81 <D.64<4l5
Guardrails with 50 pIf horizontal & lOO plf( zor4rail)
Force at top rail - V = 500, H = 100
Force @ A = (5OO x 8.5) + (300 x 66.5) i 2) = lO89! = (6oo x 8.5) " (f00 x 43.5) i z3 = ?89
M @ A = 300 x 43.5 = U,O50 in.Ib.
AII )xZx5/l.6" S-=.664 A1 f)..=18.75AL
StI I 3 x 2 x I/4* /\ .542 StI." 24.08 Stl.
f" = .6 : 1.6g - .355 Al.r .6 : I.19 = .504 Stl.
L/r = 4l.S/.gS = 45,.8, Fa = 15.19 A1. ' 25.0 Stl.
f" = ,o?zo.et fu = .B?3 f = .8443 (r
F" .0201 St.Fb .Bo3 ,8227
Diagonal linee Forc e = 789 i Sin 20.28
ck. L 2tx2x3h6" L=24.52"
L/r -- 57.42, F, = 13.54 A1., ?3.I5
f
^
=' 2.28 : ,809 = 2,92 <13.64
= 2,275#
e+1
1zl.t5
7l
COITISULTING EHGIFIEERS
rlruclural rnd tYsttma dcclgn
standard Guardrail designed for 20 p1f of rail at top rait.
NFpA and Exist Guardrails designed for 50 plf horizontal and
1oo prf vertical at top rail. *Qesign Sased on 5'0" spacing'
loI*J.ZO#Force@A=(120xtrorceEtB=(L20x
300#Force@A=(300xForce@B=(300x
M @ A = ],2O x 4Z - 5O4O in.lb.
.st1. L 2 x I* x 3/L6" S, = .182
A1. 1 1* x L* x 3/L6" S; = -279
StI. fb = z?.69 13ot A1 fb = I8.1 1ZZ.A
M @ A =-.300 x 42 = l-2,600 in.Ib.
StI. L i x 2 x i'i',. S* = .54?..Ai; i 3 x 2 x 5/:.6", ^Sx =,664
stL. fb = 23.42 (30; A1 fb = 18.98 lZZ,g
59):]-7=4L7#42)it?=29?#
59)lt7=1043#4z).17= Z4j#
a2
(
s EI Ellll!CONSULTING ENGINEERS
struclut!l !nd .yttomt dc5l9n
Handrail Pipe Ca1cul-atione 6'0" Span
UBC Codet
Typical- Rail at 20 plf wt'Z/g = 1oB0 in.Lb.
Standard 1*.. D. Schedule lro
S* = .L33 in3 fb = BI2O
E*it Rail at JO pJ-f wt'z/g = 2?oo in-Lb
Standard U" D. Schedule 40 J ':
a-1..':
L = L33 in) fO = 20,300 < 21,000'
NFPA Codet
AI1 RaiLs 50 plf Horizonta.t 100 pIf Vertical
@ 50 , wt'?/g = 2?oo' in.:-b.o-eloo, wt'/8
=.'54AO-
'in:1b.
M = 8100 in.l-b
Heawy 1+' D. Schedule Bo
S* = .412 in3 fb = 19,660 <21,OOO
Wisconsin Coder
AJ.l Rails 200 1b. at anY Pqint
Maximuro Moment with Load at Centerline
Nt = pL/4 = 3500 in.lb.
Standard 1*" Schedule lto
S" = .I33 fO= ?l'Ol0
Internediate lt" D. Schedule lro
S* = .29I fO = 12,)70 < 21'000
23
IHsni
9lr.!.:': <Un
F: vi tro'nj:i *.l t'i *
il f ;irl,"
fi l+i Ei8
6 ur,rn,DlC c!l:l oLUos
I
SurcDrg ssorO locrC(_1
EEErl
f, \s"
.C
OoL-
CO
aa
L.
()
sL-ot_
LL
tr)
>\'c.l !!o)cr c(/)r:=: t') O)o o ':; Fdl {-,{ln 4)O
.: .g rr; <t .FL
1) ,^5 9;d .= o
.l-ltt - on'Pc:tO c -.'69 - 'o-Y
9tot g P-o ,^ .n 4)
," oi = ," li'"'i6 r- o ii i;o
6 i o 5.9i"
lil
z.
_l
o1
L r-lz.
t.(J()
;
1
.i
.;
\'il;
(!
o-
.l- , r' rlt-L
E5E-qEE9<re
*qJoo
BoF
!: .,9 u ..;
" FIiEr*
E= ts;e€E:
Ea EeE:$E3; rE t'E aE
== E;;E;EsT c:"EHE-eA EEe:sE
(:r ?; - )< -.o
o{,.)t:::a-
-. ". io = o-
fil'aaS;
=:: - :'.
- ]r
yi ,::i E E E
..c'!--;{J-)Y :'-: :: - o-:-:
Fc)(1 <)(o c
E<tt _dUU
Eo)>-:_9
4()
.o\
4r
l)
4to
x
4t
t,0
9.
CT
b\
c
LUF
c)
6
o
,9
;\
E9a-G>-ofFtFF!ao;;saETF>C)U'=
JE
rr;i
3tEi
fr;
ilHfi;I
[iliEs
,- ? {[r fi$llfifrltn*''R
I o l'f .'lit/
_.1 --t f <, -1. i_...___._ ..
i\ il ,'':s , [i; -'
ii ij $ia il f;ilthn*"*,s
burnnDrC clJlourosl
6urcDrB ssorl locrdz(1
C''t
C
Oot_
ar'\t-lJ
v)
L-
a)(-
L_oL-
LL
\-
:\:ct 'o-o(-e f a
c:: Ul\ {)oo ';; El, rn , /-.\ rD O-J 7O-o r:5,!: '- r
rii Jx*'- '9atr gr- -dO c:@J- c -.'z 'c, 9 -'o '(, .Yr1-r-,^'= O OJ i {r)- t r.- r-
111 ,ijlt ,lf'^!Y (/) tr O X a a()
:: v I'id o'Fo'g 6.9i"
7\
-t
\\..\
'\.
7o
41I
),,1
'ro
wtr#
ef;
ilgi?g ;:fiffi:ffiffilri H
burMDrc clrloLUosl
6 urcDrB ssorO locrd{1
C'')
C.O
o\_
m
aao
L-
O
0)
E
U
L-
LL
Xo
m
.o-)
iO 0)
'3dd 5'3cro 'rt E9; ct q, rr
. -:. i.E 6 1r e:"O-o .. r: or.= ,2 uH -otr o,52 .EEi 3:_, gii 99< a.^''\2 -l) otr sits sfit'{-. o h* o o I3 dEo* 6.9-
n.
25,
(.,{
4t
wffiil
*$llll
h[,u,-
HH ffil
nH EEe
:1
.94
" ? ,tEfi
l-- r/i .c(oid
-..r "1 {; I
^*
3 uo.Hi,iz BBa
[] ri pi8
q)
I
-
-;r'\
-()
LI.J
/--''-
'ii
{J^o
o
occoo
o-
l-
at
o
c
'
U
;
oo
-{-
Ii'roi tr\-./l r_-,"i pt,-I rJ-
Ilxio
.L-,OL
1..
-- ) '---" 4"*l
I
.l: ll- -l a)l:tiil i E'-ll I p
;;."1
t___lt--:llL __ilt\.-- -ti
| \.. tl
t.==.--_\ll
it=::il
1|1l ll
li_...-...-_Jl
\-,ll - -
|'tltl
fl]-_.j i_ -._i
lU-' - ( l
-l-;zr; e:,; ,i-
-Qf"..r,f
-olI t-l(!l
,-- |
oEorJ
-E
o
0
-'-\-/-I I o\ / !i I L-..---\/-il -l Lr-It---x- -- il -lli vtl lo|l -,,=.''.:: i -.-. i:-_-lt ,-- | s-ll i li-e9 |"li J it | (o
il--"-"'-- -- ' - *1'.-
\I
e
F .:-
r-\
L-
rn
o 1--
E
.
a
lz
/
-oo
c
z.
I
-(lf,
_o E
=t,:|Lt--l
I
, -.1t{\E+'l;
w
#'iE3 ia
Q*T
i i itx
*$![$I.*-*$
fir fti
HF Eg6 f,i{[r-,--d il[ lf,u
\". -- -
c, tl Xu6 ;
C.t - O
(|)c
ana'
.\.1
-l
I
a,
o
v1
C- - --r O::*'-J"E
/t | !? -o o
i il oCO Lr.l/ ll a/ tt!
oo
C
'a
o
c_:'J Lrj
l
l') |
J
'Ra
#l
il
.;l
€l
inl
oa
o;<
hc-oc, o.
ol)g:l
-\cn
.t,'r t-.t'o
-o
rg
ro
,.1
^t:,!Nc)
o
ao
$.e\orr-c
Fo
o
E;v, rl
.l
t'
-'1..-
I
I
*l
II
D
c',
l:o
E:l
({
c.l
o
-o
u
rO
'
(I.
_9()
-1?(I
il-o
otr,
tr(J
\\,- (o
L
9.oliCXox>.
o.o
| ,/\L/- 'tt( o,cF- b
C__o b
^'i o* 9t= t
d!: t)lt kl,iq.aQa -
o
o '.\
^Ly
.,ix
'o
(Y
-P
a)\.+-
-_L
O
r-'!
anL.LJ
'q)(\t -^\:' I.-.;:
'-r' rjx! 'lrooc{\\ ,.r-
1rolc{ Erx$
NC\5
--dlo
(,
f,
El'o
(-- --1 I \._"/ | -a 11),lV_l-:lLl
L_. Io!-t-, IOIo!c:lc-l^n\JI/\ u\_r I
tfel
o
'\ ., \
l,-r --i-l-\i r--:-*=-__'
U
EHEsi
$s
cl
o
J..
nl
; igg*! o-d+
E u:$
z 3X6
U EiE
J{()
trJ
a-\
o(,
C
;1 0o_-c) t:e- --loo
o(O9<6 o t')cx.r : c'l3;.d\
o96
-FC\6 o
@* -oXr
o.6'
E,'.- G)E">or)ocxc| hc{ovx4eo.lI
_l
tl
to
c-: I
FI;ilvl-
,i-l'o
| -l-,
olP--l -
Iol c
-l -lt-t -
ol11rl\-/ri-l O*l r-
nl c
=l ol-l()
v:
+o-ao-o. .o-i+
^t n=3:ra^o
a o l oxChL b - lJ..-:vg tir=o= 6 €=^gg: F EF
i3E55;-'.I): - -:di-4€T+
! -:i *
OEYXFYFEdiid
a
\:
ct
o
I
t
a)
[t
Co
a-t
(_.)
a)
C
C
L-,,
tl
{
-o
c)
=
q)
s\_o
L-
Ll-
X
CN
E
6.X
|r).c{CvE.o F
I : r')- (tro
5lp -o
-iE r@
PEe1.
| 1-:N6E 9-E?
@t " i*r=i5E
5bt:s-5\- o 6ot) O" -O gt
E efr ep €; "?i ii Bog -? 9 -'j #si# ro.oZ. r(\l r)\t O
c'l
\_7
x
c.t
Ec
E
=
(o
\n
x
ol
x
c.l
( r-,
o
C!
c{
@
UoE.sgg-6;'{=
. -o| .= {-
3 3-6 o:-c.c"..-\-96 ]'!1
o
'oo
'o
I
c)
oo
c'l
E
!o
o
a-Ctr N+\\
3 gi-. ", u'
Soxxx)xra:(o (o (o:of
-o t-t \- \. \totanr')
g@t/
oEc
-oEc
=a
F
;@o\
t{)(D
J-X
a.)cix\
I
cra
Hufisi
ri*i+n$
X 3 ',o.il .,
ur uia irtl
o
-l-J
a)
tl
(-
O('
C
-C(-)
o
-P
-l)
-\,Cr]
-no_-
r oA
\oo
-o o
x-PaP6
\p"-d-, : o
co t\3\Lo"
t:- ")"---t
9 l.',:i
, (fir), | 1'-'
(r!
I-v
.oC{ :-_
- crl
-.El-X(Jo.0-6-.-..
o
-o
rDo
.o'-E
4,,o''
=$ c)o-o-o tr
09ly|' og .
-O!-
tJ1o ! or= q)
() d=-: i o'o o o:-o
CtlE.c
oA
ro
=
\! c
X-Yc{a
t
r6oa
z*'
IJ
iso
C, IffiN
t.t?
Ilu
It-,l)lol
L,J I
I,-l
ol;lolol
(-l
-l(-- |
r\l
r"r I-l
.i,i I--l
I'ol
*_l
OI
=l'l
Iol
trlol
,L-lLr- |
I(^) |
"l
.-,- I
c.l
c.{
i6
_o
t:.v=c:lo();.
c)..,
o.
TRN;
o-
U'v: o.
otaP
"-:o" cE
F:e^
"\i1 n ::!l :iG^ a
9t.P bscnL ar =
\J !.iv o_ ii r-;
. ;.q a 5 3i'iv 1' ,= (t':; r-
€ !:s P,9 3o : rrw qa -'-c' !- - . -iJ: aiGEE"
.i:-".'iii*o Xiocco3 EF,fr*-I3
i
E
lr).c!C\t
E(o FG ;l:< :F).- 9(o
!-.i s -o
-i gr-
9 r o' rl
| -i,:N;; d 6?
@? o ?-
u EE 6 b
:<c
a-
c'l
5! _u: s
E>" *.3; eB r "€ 6p 5 \
:*r? 9s €=5i5
= -c{ r).+
g
c.l
rg3
-@o
ro .!:)+--
E
l?
ii\C ,,)oorx0ri
oorx
c\
(r))
x
ci
(c\)
T",-9;
oS
cs, L)
^ 0Exo c
c
Ellc
o
a)
j
\'\
f- rO rO
XXX
(o(o@\', \', "\f,) ra ta
6i) tO O\-,, \--l v
;\
ro
c)
];o
o-
(]
9Ccn q)o-x
IDN
=
-g'-
a(tcooPE
o
F
tsJ
0\
tt)(o{-x
(\X\
c!
ur lll/-:'-F -t.u, o-'t- ---s- 1----n
IHfi;i-'h dfls
EH sE$a< 5
t\N
ao
9 !i*>- = '(69
F- r.i <@<i
X 3 uo.il
E= sEa
hU EiE
i
tr
.Y
J.,
nl
cll
Y,!cro
c..t .::
r,c
{no
r.t l--.'-
\\
'-r'\,
t 8-.c
o
-o
rn.C\CvE(o F
_x _y r?).^ 9(oPi!'9
lu i oIr"
I f :N6E I-E?
-ooquE]6ti
,@ic)
o..-
&€
q
5e-E**6\E j oo ro o.-o
E eB e-o* ",n Z-lo t -? o?'! : g P€#=i;tt
oz .j o: ri+
E*
-:l atoa
c.t o'i
(r
uta9*
o''E-!o')^ *
-:"^^7 |r)=cl rrz5
3 i a'c':L o l o::or r- 3j=(Jrjv (l_ 7i -;L.:
g EE 6 3Ko' "t:A*:-€ ;3E i!:R 6* c*E: "i3€*;-F:-*ti-E Y> occoo IF O o O Do t-5@T.-11
I-4
_o
'o
o
o-
UIOr (\ {'-\\:i
Er-ro!ol9xxx
o
cllc
C
f
m
X
ct
x
N
(|r))
o6co
f
(o
x
c{
x
c!
(cr)\_7
C
:J
E
r)
x
ol
x
(Y
tr- I
ii
ooroJ
o
or
I
I
(-
.-;
(''
a)(-
t_.
r\
C)(-
oL.
LL
( (-l
c
(.)
-l'o6
=a)
t!-
l
-r-'1
-(l)
\
b
P,') So.> ih'<
Qd
o:i
9?t55rr I
-pt
F,
Esi:o'o --
o.E
o(/| o
^o Exo c
a-E O
c:o
cl
ollcE(,(t
-0
l9 .o
'o;
oii
c!J
O-o6
-9a
t:
o'l
.o
C.l
q,F
(Jr(]
(f
4JO8a3O
c
oEo9
6
rs\
r.)
o
5
a
@@o
1,,tl rI
Fri5 ildE
lfrHfli
o
I
ll
.+
r-)
tt,
"2
o
c
,o
L.,
C
Xq,
-o
oo
.!:o
o
1:
ll
-;
.4-J
r--I
tl
:: _()
'5ij(rr- O; xs\. c)
xx;59.r60
r{- o
elx ro _,N",o::
>E'.-R3
r-oa)(L
o
!)
c]
,E..
ta
NT
I r;.
h;1;H$
*il;3$;1 :_ ro p^
hp [59
-l
tl
N
-P
0)
II
C
.9
U)
C
O
-tJ
Il
On\
(/)--t
FL
-- r|;)
o c+o()
'D:: o
r?) ,- ,-x.toYi'ou,a-:
s " |!._v
'- r')1 cr- iiC. ::: -':r-qoc\
)
-L---- -
It,lo"
' cJ ()-
lc)| -\I o *.
| ,i 't:I c.r o)-to
\rt r/ rrI fi'
| (r 9|'
lr.:| '!
I N. o'
llllIr_
.lt lr-- -
l-xtc-:i.------.-()-l' o-
0qt
t/)
O
N
().^
-: tO
,- t",c:l"o'
e.o j.i
t. O I)
'l
|,):'
.,1
.- rO
(f *"-
rl .., o
N oa-.9c
c Li' iioo c, '()
'()
aJ.r{t
.)( r- o'\] L.c, t: (|)r tf (r
O o -() |r)'(l(t) ,. c: at r- clr.)tl).Jdt
:: c /' ;:\- q) x
x r':I'-Ul o
c\J-=o-
o-(l).:iXu,(\.l
I
I
.,v--- -.-'l''
t-
Pc)
od
ol
qt (o
).o
.1.
n
ra)
C
{J
c
-9o-
gt
olrl.:i I"-1--.
I
:__'t . rl
I
I
I
I
I_-.- l-__- _.
;o)
*e_-oo
(Da:
.9 t:(r o-oD-
9r _('
-l.: '::r:Eoao
-nn
ISr :Tot
_t
I
--l-r
i(
)
ttrr- tuJ
r- l- --- .-
{
-fi
I}EC:
ltl
90