HomeMy WebLinkAboutVAIL VILLAGE FILING 2 LOT I 1971-1979 REZONING OLD VAIL FIREHOUSE LEGALU*t /oA"
f7-/1 , 1I-lbU/nA 6-il
Lof" D
Q*n;r1Q of Yl/2,LtT
0A foiJ r-;ri,""-' -uFP b
/47( -/ E7?
f.-o
irl
l
111
l;
l,llrl :
Ul P!4-;* *,* x yy)rrct-
{ Wa-@A-e+]/
=\ lEe MA+ 3'-/3)qq1 Pt+/,r*ed Mpt
i o l":u {}f/"".ft.tu
Irltli'.1-\ ,t /ts,)'{ka#-^ b",, fe 3-k }?,i tYle fu^Jflr4 4t25ve4-lil Lu
l't
i'
iI
i
iii
:ll
II
i
il
I'IINUTES
PLAI{NING & ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
MEETING 0F: March 13, .|979
COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT :
Absent:
STAFF ME}AERS PRESENT:
Ed Drager
Sandy Mil ls
Jack Goehl
Roger Tilkemeier
Jim Morgan
Gerry Wh'ite
Ron Todd
Dick Ryan
Jim Rubin
The neeting was brought to order by Chairman Ed Drager and
was fo'l'l owed by an introduction by Dick Ryan, Director of Cormunity Development.
He spoke in regard to the first three items on the agenda. He recommends that
a Workshop be established regard'ing the growth in Commercia'l Core I'involving
the staff, CCI merchants, the Planning & Environmental Cormission and Council .
He would like to see a direction in po1icy result from this Workshop. Dick
also commented that he fee'ls more detail is needed from the applicants on their
proposa'l s, especially in view of those that are being heard today on bu'i 'ldings
in COumercial Core I.
The first item on the agenda is a request for a Conditional Use
Permit for the Schober Bui]djng in Comm .
Craig Snowdon, Architect is representing the owner in this request.
He introduced the owner of the building, Mr. Clark }'lillingham. He explained
his proposa'l to the Commission with f1oorplans, site plan and model of the building.
He further explained that they propose to add 2,900 sq. ft. onto five'levels
wtrich will include expanding the restaurant, ski shop, office space and liv'ing area.
0n the second level they also plan to open up the display area by pul'ling the
building back about five feet, creating a covered walkway/arcade and putting
in an elevator from this level to the offices and liv'ing quarters.
He then explained the site changes they are proposing which inc'lude
enlarging the planters on Gore Creek Dr., and along the creek side, they would
like to apply for the Public/Private Joint Venture so that the Toivn and the owner
can work together on the'l andscaping and the stairway replacement on that corner
of the building. He fee'l s that the building does not affect the view corridor,
since it will be stepped back on the creek side corner. A deck will be added to
the 4th floor, and the elevator tower is located on the street side.
Jim Rubin then gave the surnnry of the staff recomnrendations.
He stated there were changes in the square footage that is listed in the staff
memo, those changes are: on the first floor the additiona'l square footage is
700 sq. ft.,2nd floor,266 sq. ft.,3rd floor, 992 sq. ft., and the 5th floor,
937 sq. ft., which totals 2,895 sq. ft. He then went through the factors that
are listed in the memo and stated that the staff recorrnendation is for conceptual
approval
ET
o?9.. z
MINUTES . PEC
3-13-79
Eq Drager th.en asked for questions from the Commission. Jim I'torgan
asked about. the parking requirerent. Jim Rubin stated that before the buildingpermit can be issued, money has to be paid into the Parking Fund. The parking-
rrequirement has been figured at '10 spaces.
-lilr. Ryan told the Cormission that Counci'l has not stipulated thefees, and that recommendations will be nnde to Council for any inire'ase in the
amount per space that needs to be made.
Mr. Snowdon added that a loading zone now exists outSide the bu'ilding
which will not be changed and the alley way-wi]1 be cleaned up along with the
construction on the building.
ltlr. Morgan continued that he opposes the increased density. l.lr.
snowdon stated that-the only change of use'iritt ue in the tiving uniti, ttrit
there will be no new shops. They-wil'l only add space to the existing offices
and restaurant. Mr. Ti'lkemeier feels that-the prbposal improves the-north
side si the building, especially the patio area.
Questions were then taken from the public in attendance. Pepi
Gramshammer questioned whether the building wili infringe upon public property?lilr. snowdon stated that they will not be building on any public prcperty. Peii
continued that he is against enlarg'ing the building and- eirclosing everything.'
There vlere Town Council members at the meeting. Counci'lman Donovan asked whetherthe elevator shaft/tower is within their property lines? Mr. Snowdon answeredthat it is within the property lines. Fuithir d'iscussion of the bui'lding being
non-conforming and the addition making it more non-conforming ensued.
The Council members and the Cormission then discussed the considerationof the Floor Area Ratio (FAR), and that a 1.5/l FAR had been talked about but not
adopted. Mr. Drager added that the P'lanning & Environrenta'l Cormjssion havethe condjtional Use Permit for contro'l purposes, but that perhaps the factors
they are concerned with here bre not a proper hand'l e on the prob'l em where every
nook and cranny can be closed up. He cbntinued that if this'application is ap-proved,it can be assured that there wi1l be many others coming in with'similar requeits.
ltr. Snovrdon stated that there are many buildings in the Core that
could-be improved, and he feels their design is a-vast impiovement to the presentbuilding. Councilman Steinberg is concerned that the addbd square footage'willconstitute the need for more employees. Councilnnn Hopman is'concerned iboutthe view corridor, and that with expansion throughout the core, they could
Jose a'll the views throughout the Village.
Jim-Morgan stated that he is concerned about the entire Core beingtorn up with a'l I the construction this sunmer
Gouncilman }Ji'lto stated that the.Floor Area Ratio was turned douan
because [[rey wanted to give people the opportunity to come through the Corrnissionwith plans for their bui'ldings and that there shou'ldn't be a problem with settingprecedent because the Cormission has to'l ook at these plans on a case by case baiis..
Councilman Ruder feels the building design is good, but is concerned abbut more
kitchens and bedrooms, that this will have an undesirable impact. Mr. Snowdon
stated that the building profi'le was designed so that the adilition doesn't look
"tacked on." Mr. }lil'ljngham, the new owner.of the building, then addressed the
". -T.-
Pg. 3
MINUTES- PEC
3-13- 79
Cormission. It is his feeling that he has purchased a good building and that his
proposal makes the bu'ilding much more attractive.
Mr. Tilkemeier asked whether the owner has the right to make
condominiums out of the accommodation units and does the Conmission have control
over this proposed change? Jim Rubin answered that this is their right'
they are permitted three units by the size of the Lot.
Mr. Tilkemeier made the lhtion to approve the Conditional Use Permit
for the Schober Building in accordance with the recorrnendations from the Department
of Cormunity Development and wjth the corrnent that the north side of the bu'ildingwill not impact the view corridor. For lack of a second, the Chairman, Mr.
Drager seconded the Motion. The Cormissjon voted one in favor of the Motion,
Mr. Tilkemeier, and four votes in opposition, Mr. Drager, Sandy Mills, Jim ltlorgan
and JackGoehl. The Conditiona'l Use Permit request is denied.
Mr. Drager informed the appl'icant that he can appeal the decision
to the Town Council.
Mr. Snowdon asked the Corrnission the reasons for denial? He fe] t
that there had been no negative feeling on his preliminary presentation.
Sandy Mi11s answered that perhaps initially there was a positive
reaction from the Cormission, but that at 'least for her, she has been thinking
about the additional square footage that would require additional employees. Thatthis is the fjrst building to come through with a proposa'l of this type in the
Village, and they need time to'look at the Vi'l'lage as a whole; and that looking
at the droject as a community benefit, she doesn't fee'l that this proposal would
be a benefit to the conmunity.
Mr. Paul Johnston of the Christiania Lodge then spoke to the Cormission.
He stated that in the case of his'l odge, there are rooms only and no services.
He feels that the Vi'l lage does need an increase in services, espec'ia1 ly restaurants.
He would be unhappy to see the Town zone for day skiers on1y, and that some expansionis a good idea.
The second item on the agenda, Creekside Building requgst for a
Conditional Use Permit in Commercial-Core'I.
Jay Peterson, Attorney at Law is representing the owner in this request.
They propose to enclose the patio deck of the Watch Hi1'l Oyster C'lub restaurant.
They propose a greenhouse effect, and contend this would in no way shut off the view
and that it would make the patio more viab'l e. It could be used in inclement weather
and at night. There is a1so the problem of the retai'l space below the deck that
are having leakage prob'lems, and they have been told that only enc'losing the deck
wi'll eliminate these problems.
Mr. Tilkemeier asked about the pitch of the roof. l4r. Peterson stated
that there is not a great angle to the roof, but that engineers have been consulted
on this. Mr. Ti'lkemeier feels the biggest problem is with snow coming off the roof
of the main building onto the plexiglass and that this could be a dangerous situation.
o
lg.' 1MINUTES-PEC I I
3-13-79
Mr. l'lorgan is also concerned about this problein. Mr. Tilkemeier added that they mayhave^to.go with large skylights rather than entire plexiglass rooi. -ine conmiisionwould 1'lke to see the engineer's report re'lative to the design of the "greenhouse',addition. The cormission suggested'that this matter be tabl6d. Mr. Driger : --
feels there wi'll be an impaci-on the Children's Fountain pedestrian area-andMr. Goehl is concerned about the added seating capacity aha its potentiityear round use. Mr. l'{organ again stated that-he ioes not approvb of the design.He doesn't fee'l that it ties in with the roof'line of the ouiialng.
tabled until the Planning & Environmental Cormission meeting on March 27,1g7g.
Th^ third.item on the agenda, Hi'll Building request for a Conditiona'lUle Pennit in Conimercial Core I.
Mr. Jack Curtin was present to represent the owner. Mr. Curtinadr.'ised the Connnission that Mrs.'Hil1 has withdrawn her plans for the tower asfirst proposed. she_is asking to trade the garage space'for the cormercialspace and to gain 36'l sq. ft. She a'lso prop.oses-to bnclose her deck to add spaceto the kitchen. He exp'lained to the comirisfion that this is a one-fami'ly aweiiing.He had a model of the building and drawings to present to the commission-.
The Corrniss'ion asked whether surrounding building owners had anyprob'lems with the proposed addition. Mr. Curtin pr6duced letters from the ownerof the Red Lion Inn and the Mill Creek Court Buililing, and stated that no one was
i.l-gpPo!]tlon to the proposed changes. Jim Rubin adiised the Commission that theHill Bui'lding is still under its ailowable Gross Residential Floor Arei (CRFA)with the addition. Sandy Mills expressed the concern that the garage is'locaiedin.a hi.gh traffic area. Mr. Curtiir feels that changing the lociiioi-of-tht-giiagetakes it out of a higher traffic area.
Roger Ti'lkerpier made the Motion to approve the Conditional Use Permitfor. expansion of commercial and residential space'in the Hil'l Building in accordwith the recommendations in the memo from the'Department of conmunity-oeveiopmentdated l'farch 2, 1979, including the changes made by the applicant ind-noling-thewithdrawal of the variance request for ihe tower. ,lim labigan seconded the l'lotion.The conmission voted 3 members in favor, Jack Goehl oppoied and Jim Norginabstaining because of a confl ict of interest.
The fourth item on the agenda, request for the rezoning of Lot I,vail village zna ritinq (ota tirehouie siie)l-
Mr. Drager.Sayg !h9 background on the sale of the property arid itspresent density-which is High Density Multi-Family (HDMF). Th;| Tbwn louncilhas asked the Planning & Environmentil Cormission-fdr this rezoning or ihe property.
Two Councilmen were present., -Mr. Hopman and Mr. Ruder. Mr. Ruder 6xptaineA'ttritthe Council voted to.send this rezoiring request to the Planning & eniiionmentJicormission. It is his.fee'ring that th; vait Fire protection oisiriCi ivFpo)-iinnotsay that this parcel wil'l not-be needed by the Distrjct for ever more, and ttrat itis not correct for a.public body to give irp ttreir iana. iney are partiiurairv-
concerned about the density zoned foi this'parcel.. They wani it tb go througir a'lt theproper channels.
o
Pg. 5 t
"
MINTJTES.PEC
3-t 3-79
The Planning & Environmental Commission fe'lt that they aye not a
proper forum to tell the VFPD what to do.
Jay Peterson spoke for the person who is contracting to buy theland. He stated that Mr. Prado submitted his bid for $620,000. 0n.January '16,
1979, the Toum Counci'l met with the Fire District and discussed the sale and
the Town of Vail decided not to do anything about the land. He feels that down-
zoning this parcel now wou:l d be ridicu1 ous. He has been present through several
down zonings through the years, and nothing was done on this parcel .
, Roger Ti'lkemeier stated that the Plann'ing & Envinrnmental Cormission
had heard the plans for the sale, and he was not in favor of it. Bob Warner
a board member for the VFPD was present and explained that the District was very
up front with their plans for the sa'le and have gone through all required
procedures.
Sandy Mills stated that shedid not feel
Connission should take action to change the zoning.to rezone just thjs one site without 'looking at all
owned land.
that the Planning & Environmental
She doesn't think it makes sense
Town of Vai'l and District
Mr. Drager stated that it was not brought to the Planning & Environmenta'l
Cormission's attention that this parce'l (which is publica'lly owned) was zoned HDMF
during the last downzoning done, and it should have been downzoned at that time.
A woman (who did not identify herself), but lives in the Villa
Cortina is very concerned about the increased density in this area. She
brought up the problem the Villa Cortina had when the lst Bank came through
with their proposed addition, and she is against additional buj'ldings in th'isarea. Mr. Gordon Brittan spoke to the Cormission. He wou'ld like to see this
meeting held up until the lega'l counse'l for the Town of Vail can be heard with
his explanation of the situation.
Sandy Mil'ls nnde the Motjon that the reconrnendatjon from the Planning
& Environmenta'l Conmission to the Tovun Councjl is to'leave the zoning of Lot I,
Vai1 Vi11age Znd Filing as High Density Multi-Family (HDMF) based on the factthat it would be unfair to single out this parcel for rezoning as the Vail Fire
Protection District had come in good faith, and the sale of the 'land should stand.
Roger Tilkemeier seconded the Motion. Four members voted 'in favor of the l4otion,
,lim Morgan opposed.
The staff will be working on an inventory of publically owned land
and wi1 I present this to Council and the Planning & Environmental Commission
on Apri'l 10, 1979.
The fifth item on the agenda, Variance request for the Mue]]er Residence
located on Lot 3, Vai'l/Potato Patch 2nd FiTinq.
Tom Briner, Architect 'is representing th'i s request. He explainedthat they wou'ld'l ike to add an additional 40 sq.. ft., to the secondary unit of the
duplex in a Prinnry/Secondary zone district. The Commjssion asked whether he can
prove a hardship? He stated that the hardship would be economics. The developer
fee'ls that it would be a much more marketab"le product with the additional square feet.
---
tta 'r7
'i)
Pg.6
I,IINI'TES.PEC3-13-79 ---.--*.-.--,. -i-
Sandy Mills explained that the Cormission is required to fo'llow
the parameters of the Primary/Secondary zoning, and that approval of this request
urould be a grant of special privilege wh'ich they cannot do.
After further discussion Jim Morgan nnde the llotion to deny the
variarrce request for;the Mue1'ler Residence'located on Lot 3, Vail/Potato Patch
Znd Filing. Sandy Mi1'ls seconded the Motion and the Commission voted unanimously
to deny the varianceirequest. Mr. Briner was given notice that he can appeal
to the Town Council.l
Item 6 on the agenda, Resubdivision of Gondo]a I Parce'l Lot C.,
Block 5-C, Vai'l Villaqe lst Filing
Jim Rubin;,explained this to the Conmission by showing the site
plan with the Plaza ar€a, easements and'location of fire'lanes. After further
discussion, Sandy Mil'ls made the lvlotion to approve the resubdivision of Gondola I
Parce'|, Lot C, Block 5-C, Vail Village ]st Filing. The Motion seconded by
Jim Morgan, the Conmission voted approval with one abstention, Roger Tilkemeier
because of a conflict of interest,.
The 7th item on the agenda, Amendment to Sjte 8, Caso'lar Del 'Norte
Su!4ljylsion. Jim Rubin explained to theffiis merely a changein anglE of the bu'ilding evelope, it wi'll not affect distance betvleen buildings
or setbacks in any way. After some
to approve the amendment to Site 8,
Sandy Mills and unanimously approved
discussion a Motion was made by Jim I'brgan
Caso'lar De1 Norte Subdivision' seconded by
by the Commission.
Meeting adjourned'at 6:25 P.M.
TRANSCRIPT
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION MEETING
March 13, 1979
#4 on the Agenda: Rezoning - Lot I, Vail Village 2nd Filing
(Old Firehouse site)
Ed Drager:The next item on our agenda 1s the Rezoning
of Lot 1, VaiI Village Second Filing known as the o1d flrehouse
site. Is there anyone here to speak on behalf of fbaonldg the
o1d firehouse site? We were delivered a memorandum from the
Department of Community Development indicating the Town Council
has requested that we rezone Lot 1, Vail Village Second, which
is the o1d firehouse site. VIe got a lengthy memorandum, I
bel-ieve we asked to have Mr. Rider here to advise us accordinglyt
is he available? . . Sure Pepi.
Pepi Gramshammer: What is going to happen with this firehouse?
Ed Drager: The Firehouse site is presently zoned
as High Density Multi-Fami1y, 14 units of condominiums could
be built there with a Gross Residential Floor Area of 141701 sq. ft.
Question from Audience:
Ed Drager:
What is the request to change it to?
They didn't te1l us what they wanted
it changed to. I[hat precipitated, this is the, correct me if Irm
wrong, but the Vail Village Fire Protecti-on District Board of
Dj-rectors, sometime late in 1978 voted to sel1 that 1ot as it
is no longer necessary or essential to the Fire Protecti-on plans
of the Town of Vail , it is zoned Hlgh Density Multi-Fami1yl hs'-;
14 units, 14,OOO sq. ft. and could bring them a reldtively
handsome price in dollars and cents which they could utilize
for further fire department constructj-on, remodification of
the #&: firehouse, the one next door to it, reduction of bonds,
reduction of interest, possible reduction of taxes and bulldingt
part of a cost of a firehouse in East Vai1, or additions to the
East Vail Firer Station. They took it to Councilr they brought
it to Planning Commission, they put it out for public bid' bids
were accepted, they accepted a bid from one Mr.Pardo .
mispelled, Mr. Prado I thought it was, a Mr. Prado, who bought
the site on I believe the representation that it had 14 units and
141000 sq. ft. of GBtr'A, that was one of the inclusions in their
bid documents, that it had been certified by the Town of Vail
Page 2Transcript - PEC Meeting March 13, 1979
#4 on the Agenda: Rezoning - Lot I, Vail Village 2nd Filing
as the existing zoning and after the building had been soldr the
bid had been accepted, the Town Council decided they didn't like that
and they have asked us to rezone it.
Pepi Gramshammer:
are we that short of money?
Ed Drager:
Pepi Gramshammer :
(can't hear, too garbled. )
Ed Drager:
I think it is a shame that we have to se1l it
No, they don't need the building.
But, uh, j-s the Town that short of money
Well Pepi, it boils down .
ok, I think the easiest way to expl-ain that is that the land belongs
to the Fire Protection District, they are an entity separate and apart
from the Town of Vai1, I am sure if the Town of Vail wanted to buy
it from the tr'ire Protection District or j.f Mr. Prado wants to buy it,
they would be just as happy to seI1 it to them, however, the Town didnrt
bid, they didn't consider it as far as I know, or if they did, they
didn't elect to buy it and maybe . . . . we have two members of the
Town Council with us, maybe they can enlighten us as to their request
to have this rezoned.
Bob Ruder: (They were sitting way in the back of
the room, will try to pick as uuch as I can.) I{e were si-tting here
chatting about something we iust finished, the question again?
Ed Drager:You as the Town Council have asked
the Planning Comrnissdon have asked the Planning Commission to rezone
the fire district site. Lot 1, Vail Village 2nd, or whatever it is.
lThy and what do you want us to do with it?
Bob Ruder:f can only speak as one council person
and certainly not representing the board. 9E999ee9OA99A899999gegCADCA
000060000000 The reason that I voted to send it back to you to takes
a look at it in tefms of rezoning' as I think it is rather difficult
at this time for the fire board to say that forever and ever and ever
that this Town will not need this piece of property in some relation
to the fire needs, whether it is in terms or parking, or housing,
or whatever, and I do understand that the building at this time gj-ves
then no benefit j.n terms of fire rating, I understand that, but I find
it very hard to believe that the way this Town is and its present
state of growth that they can te1l us that forever, FOREVERT that they
rflonrt need this property.
I
Page 3Transcript - PEC Meeting March 13, 1979
#4 on the Agenda: Rezoning - Lot f, Vail Village 2nd Filing
Ruder Continued: Secondly, I think that with our present
zoning problems, our pollution and a1 I the other things, its not
correct for public bodies in this Town to be giving up land and add
to the density, when we ask everyone else to cut the density. With
those things in nind and because of our Charter and our rules we
have to send 1t back through you for your consideration to rezone it
before it comes back to us, as outlined by Larry Rider to us.
We couldnrt just rezone it without sending i.t back.
Ed Drager: We11, I am aware of that.
Bob Buder: And, we wouldn't care to do that if we could have,
we would like to see it go through all of the channels and all of the
public meetings.
Ed Drager: As far as what the Fire District should or shouldn't
do with their land and everythingr we are not the proper forum to
te11 them, nor should you te1l us to te1 1 them what to do. They
are a public body and they hold a regular meeting, and the appropriate
place to address them as to what their responsibilities to the Town
are is there. Right, wrong or indifferent they came both before the
Planning Commission and the Town Council, f am to1d, and disclosed
the:ir plans and the property was sold thereafter and at least the
contract signed. I had asked Mr. Rider to be here to advise us where
we stand, what we don't need is another $450,000 settlement from a
goofy lawsuit in this Town.
Question from Audience: Is the property actually sold? Or
is it sold with the intention of putting a highrise apartment condominium
or something on it?
Jay Peterson: Possibly I can answer a few of these questions.
Ed Drager: You represent Mr. .?
Jay Peterson: My name is Jay P. Peterson from the 1aw firm
of Otto, Peterson and Post, and I represent the person who is contracting
for that 1and, Mr. Baldir Prado. Mr. Prado after seeing the ad in
the paper, investigated further and submitted the bid on the property
the public bid, for $620,000. There also a couple of other bids
for. . . very close to this, over $6001000. Prior to this timet
this was a publicized thing, it went through the paper, on January 16
the Town Council met with the fire di-strict, Bob Warner, who is here today
Page 4Transcript - PEC Meeting March 13, 1979
#4 on the Agenda: Rezoning - Lot I, Vail Village 2nd Filing
and also Gordon Swanson our Fj.re Chief. They were in work session,
they discussed the enti.re mat:ter, some of the recall of what Irve
been hearing and what happened at the meeting didn't jibe with
conversations that I have had with staff on that day, so I went back
and tistened to the tape a week ago. We have the tape here if the
Planning Commission would like to hear it as to exactly what transpired
at that meeting. The way it came down is that the Town decided notito
do anything, they were not interested at that price.
Question: IVhat was the price, Jay?
Jay Peterson:
Bob Ruder:
Jay Peterson:
Ed Drager:
thats what
Bob Ruder:
Ed Drager:
what the bids
Bob Ruder:
$620 , OOo
The prlce was $620r000?
We11, they said . . (jumble)
You were merely looking at an appraisal at that time'
they brought to Planning Commission.
That was the number that they gave us at that meeting.
That was the appraised value, they did not know
would be before thev were out.
But at that meeting they said that if we interested
in it, the price of the building . .
Jay Peterson:I think at this point though . .
IYe11-, maybe the Town would have been interested at $62O,000, I donrt know,
but at this point for the Town, and for the Town to say now, v/e are
going to rezone that property to duplex, thats been High Density
Multi-Family for . . . f don't know for how many years, but its certainly
since Irve been here which has been 7 years. I don't know how many
downzonings wetve gone through in this Town since then, but it is
certain three or four, beeause I've been here for all of them. tr'or
the Planning Corrnission now, and the Town Councll to say, hey good
planning dictates that we downzone this property to duplexr or anything
that is in between, I think is ridiculous. Its a subterfuge to get
at the fac,t that they are trying to stop the sale. They do not want
the sale to happen, they are trying to bring pressure to bear on it.
Why didnrt this thing come up a year ago when we went through a massive
downzoning. We are looking at zoning now because we have too many
people in this Town, why aren't we looking every single parcel in Town
to get it downzoned, why aren't we looking at Mr. Stauferrs property
to down zone it?
Page 5Transcript - PEC Meeting March 1-3, 1"979
#4 on the Agenda: Rezoning - Lot I, Vail Village 2nd Filing
Peterson Continued:I{hy aren't we looking down va11ey,
or Bighorn to downzone everything else in sight? Werre talking
about a maximum of 14 units from a realistic standpoint maybe 10 units
that can go on that site. Its not the zonj-ng that bothering everybody,
its the sale from the fire district to a private person. Thats fine,
I don't have any quarrel with it, if the Town wants to take that
position that they donrt want it to happen, buy it in the future, i.f
they want to zone that property if they can, a1 I Public Use for all
Districts, fine, but to do it at this late stage, and to do it by
trying to downzone that property makes a mockery of our Zoning Ordinance.
And, for them to ask the Planning Commission to rezone that property
to try to solve this problem, is to me, once again to make a mockery
of our Zoning Ordinance. This isn't good planning, its no planning.
Jim Morgan:lfell, I think the point is that there .is a need
to catch this situation up and the zoning, I think is a proper
consideration in terms of all the public parcels, now, whether it
can be retroactive to this parcel , I think its a legaI matter, which
rea11y isn rt part of what we should be .
Roger Tilkemeier: Wasntt it our recommendation to the tr'ire Dlstrict
not to do this? That was it as f recal1, and I was very surprised. .
Ed Drager:No, I donrt believe it was. They told us what
they were going to do and we asked what the zoning on it was and at
that point if they wanted to do that and they wanted to spend their
money that way, that was their perogative, they are an independent
body. They werenrt asking for a rezoning or anything e1se.
Roger Tilkemeier:They came in to announce to us what their intentions
were and wanted to get a reading from us, is that not right Bobby?
Bob Warner:Yes.
Roger Tilkemeier: And, I know as one member of the Commission, I was
not in favor of that, I don't know what the rest were, what the favor
of the rest of the Corrnission was, or if we actually asked for a. .
Ed Drager: I don't think we asked for a vote, I think they
just came in and showed us as a matter of courtesy what they were
doing.
Bob Warner: lVe tried to do it very up forward, we went into
the Planning Comnission, published it, go to the Town Councit, by 1aw
Page 6Transcript - PEC
#4 on the Agenda:
Warner Continued:
and just sold it.
various . .
Roger Tilkemeier:
Meeting March 13, 1979
Rezoning - Lot I, Vail Village 2nd Filing
we could have listed it with Rod Slifer
We didn't want to take that route' we went to the
I'm not crj-ticj-zjlg what you did' I just
Bob lYarner. We got the feeling, I got the feeling,
talking to you, that thats the way it was zoned and rea11y wasn't
contrary to anything that you could do . (iumbled)
Sandy Mil1s: Wetl Roger, I think that, I think its true
that we did not give them an indication that we were going to pursue
it so that they could not se1l it or so that we were going to try to
rezone it or anything of that nature at aLL. I think we were surprised
that it was zoned, I also think at that point that we were laboring
under, as it turns out, the misconception that it probably had a deed
restriction on it from Vail Associates, and then when we found out that
indeed it did not, the water was under the bridge, and I think the
meetings with the Council proved to be the same thing. It doesn't
make any sense to me at this point, to take this one site and say lets
rezone it today, when $te are not looking at all the other sites
that have public buildings on them that the water district owns' or
the fire district might own. And for the Town to get into a 1ega1
hassle with the fire district I don't think makes any sense either
from a citizen's standpoint. It seems to me that this site was zoned
HDMF and that is what it has to remain and thats what we live with.
And, now we go forward if we want to, and rezone everything e1se.
Ed Drager:My recollection of that meeting is that the worst
possible way to do zoning is when somebody wants to sel1 their property
to someone else for development and slap them with some kind of a zoning
restriction because, its the quickest way I know to get down to Eagle
County District Court, that I know of . to try to rezone someone
as soon as they put their property up for sa1e. Thats rea11y lousy
planning. And, we rezoned a couple of pieces of property in the
Town of Vail last November that belonged to various and sundry districts
and had I known at that time that the ones that werenrt disclosed to
the Planning Commission had High Density Multi-Family ' I would have
have insisted they go to a Public Use or comparable zone districts;
however, they were not brought to our attention when we downzoned the
whole Town.
Page 7Transcript - PEC Meeting March 13, 1979
#4 on the Agenda: Rezoning - Lot I, Vail Village 2nd Filing
Drager Continued: And, I think that this is just a lousy
way to get at . if you don't like what the fire district did
bring them in and slap their fannies, but donrt come back and sneak
it through us and say take us off the hook. Pepi wanted to say something?
Pepi Gramshammer: Not rea11y, I wanted to ask you something.
Ed Drager: Sure.
Pepi Gramshammer: The fire department, don't the people
have to pay a bond issue?
Ed Drager: The fire district has the ri.ght to tax.
And they can tax you just as the Town of Vaj-1 can, just as the
Water & San district can, just as the Rec district can, they are all
separate entities.
Pepi Gramshammer: Question: (Couldn't hear)
Ed Drager: 1Ve11, within certain perogatives and
the Statutes of the State of Colorado, yes they can, they are not
governed by the Town of Vail , the Town Council, the Town Manager.
Pepi Gramshammer: Ifhat would happen if alot people were
against that and say we shouldn't sell that, we should se1l it to the Town?
They can sell to anybody they want is that right? I don't understand.
Ed Drager: That is basically why they put it up for
bid. They saw an opportunity to sell an asset they didnrt need, raise
some funds to be able to one, cut taxes, or otherwise pay off some
indebtedness or do some other things economically that appeared to
them to be a very prudent thing. So like if you have four cars anc
only need threer Vou'll sell the fourth one and use the money for
something e1se. Excuse me Morgan, the young lady next to Pepi, and
then Bob lYarner. Or f mean Bob Ruder.
. no the young lady next.
From the Audience: I arn representing the Villa Cortina, which
happens to be right behind this piece of property that we are talking about.
It seems to me that the thing we have been fighting the frho1e day is
closing in all the areas and having no remaining open space. Now
the area in front of us is owned by the bank, they have alieady been
approved to make an addition, so they are closing us off to the east.
IVe got a high rise behind us and are closed off to the west. lYhere do
you stop? Maybe I don't understand exactly what is happening .
o
Page 8
Transcript - PEC Meeting March 13, 1979
#4 on the Agenda:Rezoning - Lot f, Vail Village Second Filing
Ed Drager:The procedural problem is that it is presently
zoned to build 14 units, or whatever . 14 units, and 14'000 sq. ftt
that is their right and all the Council has said to us is through
the rezoning process and it has to start here, please look at the
possibility of rezonj.ng the property. I wish Larry Rider were here,
and I had asked that he be here, but is after 5 so I guess he doesn't
stay around. . Thatrs what he's paid for. So he could advise
us as to the legalities of it and the percentage chance of being sued
and the percentage chance of winning if we are to rezone it. Sure
a1 l- the things that each person has said here against it are very true.
But, the horse is out of the barn and down the road now, lets stop
worrying about locking the barn up.
Woman from Audience for Vi11a Cortina: So he se11s thisr or the fire
station se1ls this to a private individual , he comes to the Town Council
with a proposal much like what has been presented today. .
Ed Drager: He goes to the Building Department with his plans
and specs and they have to give him a Building Permit because he is
permitted by law to do it. He doesn't have to come back here and
ask us for anything
Bob lYarner: I believe Mr. Ruder . . that it would not
be advantageous for the prospective purchasor to attempt to try any
vari.ances, as one of the council members. .
Jay Peterson: If f can answer some of these questions' the
property will probably have 1O units on it' and I think you (Villa
Cortina) have 25, 26? Ours will probably be half that size.
We have 14'OOO sq. f t. A11 of your parking is on the surface, 75'/.
of ours will be underground in the building. I think from a practical
standpoint 1002 . The person that wants to buy the land and
is going to buy the land is from Brazil, he wants to do the nicest
project that has ever been done in Vail. In looking at what he has done
and looking at the planned resources (jumbled) .... has a unit
he is not very satisfied with and this is one of the reasons that he
got lnto this that he wants something much better. He doesnrt have
any problemwith, hey, if you don't want your publlc distrists to sel1
their land then zone it that way, he has no problem with that. But
he has gone, since he bought the 1and, he has a contra.ct on the land since
January 17, it is almost two months later now . . . he has gone through
Page 9Transcript - PEC Meeting March 13, 1979
#4 on the Agenda: Rezoning - Lot I, Vail Village Second Filing
great expense and he is geared up to do this project. He said,
why didn't somebody te11 me this on January 16, that they didntt want
the property so1d, I wouldn't have put in my bid.
Bob Buder: One of the things that I thought, when we asked
you to take a look at this at the zoningr 4s a part of that we also
would like you take a look at all of the public owned land by all
of the Districts . .
Ed Drager: Yfer1l do that on one Motion as soon as we get
rid of this one.
Bob Ruder: And give us a recommendation on all of that.
It all has to be looked at together, we could look at it on a
piece by piece basis, but that all of the publically owned land
no matter whether it is the Town of Vai1, the water district, the
fLre distri.ct, or whatever, should have some kind of a public use.
But, we should start that process and you are the people to start it
and thats what wetre after . .
Ed Drager: Give us two Motions, I think wer1I make you happy,
maybe. May we have a Motion on the rezoning of the fire district
Iot? Ife got a tape problem there (CHANGE OF TAPE)
Ed Drager: Jim let me make sure I understand our exact
procedure. This is a application for a rezoning that has been filed
with your Department and published? And this is the Public Hearing
on it?
Jim Rubin:
Ed Drager:
Jim Rubin:
this.
That is correct.
ITho is the applicant?
The Town Council requested the staff to process
Ed Drager: I{hat is the application to be rezoned as?
Jim Rubin: They requested the Planning Commission to
discuss a rezoning of it
Ed Drager: Is that a proper matter for our consideration?
Just a general request to rezone?
Jim Rubin: That was what was done, and I asked Larry at
the neeting when the Council made that request, and he said yes,
that they are just sending it down for a general recornmendation to
the Planning Corunission.
';
Page 10
Transcript - PEC Meeting March 13, 1979
#4 on the Agenda: Rezoning - Lot I, Vail Village Second tr'iling
so we're powerless to act, is that what yourre telling me?
Roger Tilkemeier:
Ed Drager:
Jim Rubin:
Ed Drager
Jim Rubin
Ed Drager
Jim Rubln
Jumble of
Jim Rubin
Voices:
Sandy Mi1ls:
Jim Rubin:
Ed Drager:
Jay Peterson:
Roger Tilkemeier:
Ed Drager:
Ed Drager:
Jim Rubin:
Ed Drager:
Sandy Mills:
Jim Rubin:
Ed Drager:
Jim Morgan:
Jim Rubin:
It really isn't a rezoning hearing?
It isntt an official rezoning hearing
ft was published as a rezoning.
Of what? Do you have the Notice?
of the parcel
Do you have the Notice?
Yes.
(asking about staff recommendation)
Medium Density Multi-Family
Perhaps IIDMF (10 units). .
It wasnrt a strong recornnendation.
It wasn't strong . .
Well kind of maybe . .
Why don't you read it Ed?
Ok, Notice is hereby given that the
It can be the owner, or the Council?
Or the Town Manager.
Do they need the owrer's consent?
I would think not.
When we are doing a downzoning, the
I just want to make sure wetre right.
Ifhat are we rezoning to?
At the request of the Council, there was
Town Council of the Town of Vail is requesting the rezoning of
Lot I, Vail Village Second Filing on which the o1d Vail Firehouse
is located. Application is made in accordance with Section 18.66.160
of the Munlcipal Code. A Public Hearing to be held before the
Town of Vail Planning & Environmental Commission on March 13r 1979
at 3:OO P.M. in the Vail Municipal Building. Said hearing will
be held in accord with the Section 18.66.060 of the Municipal Code
something like. Who is allowed under our ordinances to apply for
rezoning of property.
Jim Rubin:The Council is one of the parties that is
allowed to appIy, it can be the Council
Council can initiate it without having the ownerrs consent.
not a specific zone that they wanted to be considered, they wanted to
Page 11
Transcript - PEC Meeting March 13, 1979
#4 on the Agenda: Rezoning - Lot I, Vail Village
Jim Rubin Continued:look at the parcel
to adjacent parcels and to just the overall area
I tried to address in the recommendations.
Second Filing
in relatj-onship
and that is what
Mr. Tilkemeier.
I didnrt say that.
No, but I said basically what happened in the
f am certainly not a lawyer, but if you
publish an article for Public Hearing and don't identify in that
publication that yourre going from this to thatr a person reading
that publication may not show up for the hearing because he doesnrt
know what the rezoning is all about. And I would think that if that
publication were to be effective, f don't think that they would let
an average citizen come before the committee with an open rezoning
request that was published that way, I just donrt think that would
happen. I think you would have to say what you wanted j-t rezoned to
and I don't think that our Town government probably has any other,
any special rlghts, above and beyond the right of an ordinary citizen.
Perhaps Scott or Bob would like to comment on that and gJ-ve us some
back ground as to why it was done that way rather than making a
specific recommendation, or maybe you got counsel advice that said
that this was legitimate.?
Scott Hopman: Basically what happened was when
we heard was not a question of trying to find a scapegoat for us
to make a decision, I think you are $/rong there. I think that basically
Ed Drager:
Roger Tilkemeier:
Roger Tilkemeier:
Scott Hopman:
Council was that the recounendation was that if we wanted it rezoned
it would have to come back down through the process, there was absolutely
no specific recommendation, there were some feelings by certain
council members but they varied in the council, so the philosophy
was that it would come back down to you which was permissable according
to Larry, come back down to you and you people would review it and make
any recommendat ion you want, you could make a recommendation not to rezone
it, you could recorunend to zone it . a certain way . .
Ed Drager: The scapegoat part 'aas on January the 16th or
whenever it was, when the fire board came in and said this is what
we are going to do, it would appear to me that if you had said 888
we have some very , very serious @ncerns about this Mr. Fire Board t
:'.
Page 1?
Transcript - PEC Meeting March 13, L979
#4 on the Agenda: Rezoning - Lot I, Vail Village Second Flling
Ed Drager Continued; they might have held up their biddlng
process untj-1 the concerns could have been hashed out for the benefit
of the whole Town. That was what I was alluding to .
Scott Hopman: T{e11, Ed, there was more than thatt
. it did not come across to us like that, they did come to us and
we were basically told that we could do absolutely nothing .
Ed Drager: By whom?
Scott Hopman: By them, by our counsel, we were told basiioally
at that point in time and it was happening the next morning' the bidding
was the next morning when they came before us .
Ed Drager: And now, your counsel has had a change of heart.
He 1s not here. I requested specifically he be here to ans{rer some
of these questions.
Jay Peterson: The other thing a1so, if I could iust say one
thing. The meetj-ng that they had requested was one week earliert
it was on January 9, that meeting was cancelled at the request of the
Town Council and then they decided to talk to them on January 16th,
thats why it got to be one day before the bidding.
Ed Drager: The bidding was much later than that Bobby.
Sandy Mi11s: No, that date is correct..
Bob Warner: . . all bids and the Council said donlt
se1l it because we are going to sue you, or we're going to do this
when they basically had said "go ahead." And, I think from a lega1 stand-
point we went ahead and now to come in and try to screw it up is going
to be a very expensive fight for the city. If they wanted to do something
they should have done it on the 16th and I think that if they had sdid
they were going to condemn it, or werre .
Ed Drager: IYe'd like to buy it, we'II work it out or something
Bob l[arner: And, they said, 1f you're talking those kind of figures
I don't think we're interested.
Sandy MlLls: Irm ready to make a Motion, but Jim do you.
Jim Rubin: I just have one cornment, that Larry Rider did
see the Publis Notice before it sent to the paper, so he was aware that
it wasn't being rezoned to a specific zone district.
Ed Drager: You discussed it with him otherwise? IYhat was
his advice to you as the net effect of our attempt to zone it after it
has been bid on and while it is under contract?
li
Page 13
Transcript - PEC Meeting March 13, 19?9
#4 on the Agenda: Rezoning - Lot I, Vail Village Second Fiting
Jim Rubin: Hi.s basic indication on that is that the Town
would not stand a very good chance of winning it in court.
Ed Drager: Were those his exact words? Or words to that
effect?
LAUGHTER
Unidentlfied volce: Words to that effect.
Ed Drager: Yes, Mr. Brittan?
Gordon Brittan: As I understand it, the counsel advised them
that they could not do anything and now has reversed his position,
is that correct?
Ed Drager: That is the way I heard j.t.
Gordon Brittan: Then I would like this meeting held up unt1l
Mr. Rider is here either to defend himself, or explain how the
law has changed, or his interpreta"tion of it may have, and I
think this is very interesting, this is the second time that there
seems to be a reversal by the attorney as to what the couneiil can
do or what the council cannot do.
Ed Drager: (there are many speaking at this time the
first part is not 1egib1e. ) from what Jim said, if
I understand Jim Rubin correctly, Larry Rider has not changed his
position, he is stil1 saying we dontt have much of a chanse if we change
the zoning, but frm not sure whether he feels, or whether the council
feels that by changlng the zoning and threatening Mr. Prado with
a 1aw suit, that they can negotiate him into a better position either
as far as the density is concerned or the fire district gets less money
or whatever, but I think if f were the fire district, f woutrd be
damned concerned that someone has gotten their foot into the middle of
my good contract at this point and cost me some money, and uh, we
in no way shape or form are prepared to represent the fire district
on the Planning Commission, but I have the same concern, and I did
ask Mr. Rubin to make sure that Mr. Rider would be here to answer
these questions and he was here earlier this afternoon, but he did leave.
Jay Peterson: I think . . . . and correct me Bob if Itm
misquoting or anything, I think what Larry told the Town Council-
was that they could not stop the sa1e. Ifhile they diseussed zoning
on this property, nothing was done on that, Larry made no determination
whether, did not te1 1 them whether a downzoning would be valid or not.
Page 14Transcript - PEC Meeting March 13, 1979
#4 on the Agenda: Rezoning -( rl-,ot I, Vail Village 2nd Filing
He only told them they couldnrt stop the sale. What we are
discussing here, is not the sale of the property but the rezoning
of the property, as something less than high density. The Town
Council has requested the Cornmission to look at this property
to rezone it. What Jim has just said is that Larry has indicated
and I think, . he has indicated thj-s to the Town Council
to, is that they do not stand a very good chance of rezoning
the property at this poiint. Two separate questions and his opinlons
totally, I think, are consj.stent with each other.
Ed Drager:
Sandy Mil1s:
Sandy Mi11s wants to make a Motion.
I would like to move that we recommend
to the Town Council that we leave the zoning on the Lot I t
I believe it is, Vail Village Second Filing, the o1d firehouse
site, as HDMtr'.
Ed Drager: There is a Motion from Ms. Mi1ls to leave
the exlsting zoning, the present zoning on the o1d firehouse
site. Do we have a second for that Motion?
Roger Tilkemeier: Do you want to add any reasons?
Sandy Mi1ls:Based upon the fact that I feel that it would
be unfair at this time to single out this parcel basically'
puII the rug out from under the owner, be it the man who has
contracted for the property, or the firehouse' Fire Districtt
I think that the Fire District came to us, came to the Town Council
in good faith, and said that this is what we want to do, and I think
that the Town missed a trick, and I think we now have to live with
it and get on with our program of acquiring land for open space.
Roger Tilkemeier:I'11 second it.
Ed Drager: Ok we have a Motion by Sandy Mills,
seconded by Roger Tilkemeier to not rezone the firehouse site.
A11 those j"n favor of not rezoning it, that is in favor of
the motion, give it by raising your hands. . Do either of
you gentlemen want to vote on this Motion, in favor of the Motion?
A11 those opposeal to the Motion. The vote is 4 to 1 in favor
of not rezoning it.
Jim Morgan: Is it possible to make to make a Motion
to create the Public Use District at this time?
Ed Drager: Can we file an application?
Page 15
Transcrlpt - PEC Meeting March 13, 1979
#4 on the Age'nda: Rezoning - Lot I, Vail Village 2nd Flllng.
Dick Ryan: The staff is now going througb the process
of looking at all the lands that could be zoned Public.
Ed Drager: Lets see if we can get some tlre parameters
on that, how quickly can we get that done, filed and on publlc
bearl.ng.
Dick Ryan: I{e're looking at maybe . . . probabJ-y
ca.n get that before the Plannlng Comrlssion probably the
second meeting in ApriL.
Jl4,Rubin: There is a Public Use Distrlct rlght now.
The Councll has directed us to look at the public land add
ve are doing that right nov.
TO THE NEET ITEM ON THE AGENDA
lnun
box I lX)
vail. colorado 81657
B03l 476-s613
Gordon Swanson
Chief
VaiI Fire Protection District
Vail, Colorado 8'1657
Dear Gordy,
Please find enclosed
Envi ronmenta'l Gonnnission meeting
As you knol,
reconmended no rezoning
and the Council wil] be
Tuesday, March 20,'1979.
department of community development
lhrch 16, 1979
the Minutes of the Planning &
of l''larch 13, 1979.
the Planning & Environmenta'l Conmission
of Lot I, Vail Vi'llage 2nd Fi'ling (0ld Firehouse Site),
review'ing this at their evening meeting on
ENC
cc: Bob
VFPD
l,|arner
Board
-ff-'
^v
:
PIIBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE IS AEREBY GIVEN that The Town Council
of the Town of vair, colorado has requested. the rezontng
of Lot r, vail village 2nd Filing on which the ord vail
Firehouse is located.. Application has been made in accordwith Section 1g.66.160 of the Municipal Code.
. A public Hearing will be held before the Townof vail Plannlng & Environmental counission on Mareb 13, 1g?gat 3:00 p.U. ln the Vail Ifunicipal Building. Said hearing
w111 be held in accord with Section 18.66.060 of the
Municipal Code.
IOWN OF VAIL
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEI4ELOPMENT\AO_/''wFl-/U',LLJdines A. RubinZoning Administrator
Publlshed in the Vail Trail February 23, LgTg
'r
PI]BLIC NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY cMt{ that The Town Councit
of the Town of Vail , Colorado has requested the rezoning
of Lot r ' vail village 2nd F11ing on which the old valr
Firehouse i.s located. Application has been made in accord
wlth Section L8.66.160 of the Municipal Code.
A Public Hearing will be ,held before the Towa
of vail Plannlng & Environmental corurission on March rB, rg?g
at 3:00 P.M. ln the Vail Municlpal Building. Said hearing
will be held ln accord with Section 18.66.060 of the
Municipal Code.
TOWN OF VAIL
DEPARTDIENT OF COMMI'NITY DEVELOPMENT
-/)r'ryfu(^^!.-i-
Jdines A. RubinZonlng Adninistrator
Published in the ValI Trail February 23, L979
r'00 53351Y3 P00 5335174
RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL
*'i[i?Bl'ifi
irl'-lT,tii Ps ovr oEo -
8
(t)
?OTAL PTOSTAGE AND FEES
J4L
CERTIFIED FEE
ipecniotLrvEav -
REsrFtciEbD-UVER't
ElslSi9I'lt,vi,'JB*'
El3[ff#JB,[i,'r,*', '.'lE I 6ii1'lrii'i*"u'
F l! [ ;q;rv;nr,l'*lrezu
Ei''%5#ffi
c
RECETPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL
II(t INSUBAI{CE COVERAGE PROVIOED-
NOT F(lR IITTERNATIONAL MAIL
,.. I sHowT0wHoM Atl0
E I retr orL vento
!{ I SHOW TOWNOM OAIE
: I ANDAD0BESS oF+ I DETIVERY
H I snow rowxou I^o orrrC I IIELIVEREOWITN FESTFICT
=
I DELTVERY
P I srow ro wnolr oniinlto
H I AoDRtss oF 0ELIVERY w TH
1OTAL POSTAGE AND FEES
/,1,,
I
PI'BLIC NOTICE
NOTICE IS I{EREBY GIVEN that The Town Council
of the Town of vail , cororado has requested the rezoning
of Lot r, vail village 2nd Filing on which the old vail
Firehouse is located. Application has been made in accordwith Section 1g.66.160 of the Municipal Code.
A public Hearing will be held before the Townof vail Planning & Environmental commission on March 13, rs*gat 3:00 P.M. in the Vail l,tunicipal Building. Saicl hearingwill be held in aecord with Section 1g.66.060 of the
Municipal Code.
TOWN OF VAIL
DEPARTMENT OF COMMT'NITY DEVELOPMENT
\t1 0-;:t*w#'a^&LJfmes A. RubinZoning Administrator
Published in the Vail Trail February 23, LgZg
Mailed on 2122/79
The Peak of VailAtt: Dr. Tai
3150 Carpenter Boad
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48104For: Lot 1, Vail Village Znd Filing
To notify the Vi1la Cortina Condo Assoc.
Terence J. QuinnAttorney at Law
Box 77L
Eag1e, Colorado 81657
.t
'-..irlF;-
Town of Vail
E:I,F:CTRICAL PE|tryIIT
Dare or Apprication.... mAX .. b- ..........rn7.7-.....
Erectricar
"on
o"ro,... &/.fu/.. Et *lt< rcN9
Building Valuation
Electrical Valuation
Permit Fee
Inspection Fee
Total Fee
389
$....................-.....".
*..M-.Y...
$.....k*.?-..
Date Paid--..--.
,S/afez
THIS FORM 15 TO'BE POSTED Ot{
JOB SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION
24 HOI,JRII ADVANCE NOTICE
REQUINED FOR INSPECTIONS
THa !. F, naaarrL ro.i !aNvar 3roa52
rNsFEclDru
TOWN OF
F|EEUEST
VAIL
DATE
TIME
JOB NAME
RECEIVED- AM PM CALLER
I ornen
MON
COMMENTS:
FRITUE
n pnnrrnl. LocATroN
READY FOR INSPECTION
WED THUR AM PM
! appRovED E otsnppRovED fl nerNSPEcr
E uporrr rHE FoLLowrNG conRECTToNS:
CORRECTIONS
DATE
INSPECTOR
5|r 75
box i of Yail, colorado 8r 687 3O3.a76-6613lnrn
t-
o
DIISIGN REVI]i1V BOARD
DATE OF IIEiITING
hIIjIUBERS PRESEI'IT:
blb__
SUBJECT:
ACTION TAKEN
..MOTION:
VOTE: .
DISAPPROVED:
SUI'IIvIABY:
U4a4.1,.^-J
FOR:
SECONDDD BY
AGAINST
SUBJECT:
ACTION TAKEN BY BOARD:
MOTION
VOTE:
DESIGN
DATE OF I'IEETIIiG:
I.IEI'IBERS PRESENT:
REVIEI,I BOARD
Septernber 26, 1974
Parker ' Lou
AGAI NST:
-"'-/
Ruoff , Bill -/' -,/.'ffi
Hanton, Bi ll
0p
-.{r-to approve by =?f,L4<--- ; SECONDED BY
-/---
//
FOR:
APPROVED:
DISAPPROVED:
SU]4MARY:
Sage, Dave , -Z/
vAIL - Fire lJePartment -
s-TE n-appTleatl on
P.O. BOX 7
vAlL, COLO. 81857
ARCHITECTURAL
CONTROL COMMITTEE
April 23, I97I
VAIL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRTCTVail
Colorado 8l-657
Gentlemen:
The Architectural Control Committee has reviewed the drawingssubnitted to them for the new fire station building.
.The Committee would like to draw your attention to thefollowi.ng:
llead-in parking on the street side of the building isnot permiLted in the Town of Vail parking requir6ments.
The windows between the existing building and the proposedbuilding wiLl have to be fire-rated.
The Cornmittee suggests thaL the parking area in thefront of the building be landscaped. A1so, the Committeerequests landscaping to the west of the parking lot
and drive.
The pitch of the roof is too flat for a shake roof.
The Committee requests col-ors of the building and howthe builders plan to tie the two buildings togethercolorwise.
Sincerely,., ;
ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL COMMITTEE
''1
'": )
,.'" t' ., 1"'
Pe'tef W. Seibert
Chairman
cc3 Mr. Terry Minger
.l'{r. Robert Engelke
Mr. Ed Struble
CHAI.TGES REQLTESTED By THE BOARD OF DTRECTORS OFTHE VAIL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
FOR THE NEW FIRE HOUSE
Substitute tar and gr-avel noof for shingtes
Hot water heat instead of electnic
Doon to close off lounge
utiJ.ity closet upstains.
add eink in appanatus room
use 4rr insulation instead of 6r whene 6rr is called fon
subetitute mahogany door s and trim where binch is calledfon in specifications
,at|'+-
Vall Fire Protectlon Dlstrlct
VaIl, Colorado
ProJect: Fire Stetlon
Location: ValL Co Lorado
AY ESTII.IATE BREAKDOWN
Blckel Conetructlon Conp any
2291 So. Kalaroath Street
Derwer, Golorado 80223
EstiEate No. 1
Date:June 30 L97L
Descrlptlon of l{ork Contrsc t
Amunt
Percent AEount
Dueete
General Condlt ions and Supervislon
Layout, Englneering and Excavatlon
Pavtng
Exterior Concrete
Pooting and Fouadatlon
Interlor Concrete
Rebar and l{eah
l{aaonry
Structural snd Mlscellaneoua Steel
Rough Carpentry and Truss Jol8tMtll Work and Wood Door
Kitcheo Cablneta, Topa and Appllancea
Dry !1a11
Inguletlon
Rooflag, I{/A1r. #1
Caulklng and Sealant
Sheet l.ietal
Eol1oe Uetal
Glaaa and Glazing
Overhegd Doore
Finlah Bardsare
Paiottng
Real1lent Floora, Baae and Carpet
Stucco
Shorer, Tlolet Par.tltlon and Acceesoriee
Wood lllodma
lletal Letters
ltechenlcal
Electrical
Mlgcellaneoua Labor and Clean-Up
A1t. #2
A1t. #3
I Total Contract Anounr
$ 7890.00
6825.00
6800.00
518.00
3635.00
2782.OO
986.00
9284.00
2650.00
L2579.0O
5560.00
3902.00
3650.00
870.00
I130.00
550.00
938.00
352. 00
462.O0
2592.00
924.00
4400.00
1962.00
4187.00
672.00
990.00
4L2.OO
10408.00
7860.00
935.00
275.00
600.00
$107,580.00
30
40
$2,357.002,730,00
3,635.00
591.00
100
60
Amount Comp 1e te
Less 102 Retalnage
Total
Less Previous Es timate
Anount Due Thie EstiEate
$9,323. oo
932.90
8 . 390. 70--0-
$8,390.70
Contractor:Architect:
No. -l-
FOR PAYMENT
trYnAIA DOCUMENT C7O3
CERTIFICATE OWNER
ARCHITECT
CONTRACTOR
FIELD
OTHER
PROIECT:
(name, address, Vall Flre Statlon
TO (Owner)
I-I Vell Flre Protectlon Dlst.
Mr. Terry Mlnger sec./tres.
val I, Colorado
I
CERTIFICATE NUMBER: 1
PERTOD FROM Jun"l,
-l ARCHTTECT',S PROJECT
CONTRACTOR,BIckeI
I CONTRACT DATE: g"y
the attached Application For Payment the Contractor is
status of the account for this Contract is as follows:
ORIGINAL CONTRACT SUM
CHANCE ORDERS
TOTAL ADDITIONS .
t97lTo July t, t97l
"o' 7045
Oonstructlon Co.
28)1971
entitled to payment in the
.$ 1071580.00
In accordance with this Contract and
amount stipulated below. The present
Net change by Change Orders
SUBTOTAL. .$4
CONTRACT SUM TO DATE . . $
BATANCE TO FINISH . $
TOTAr COMPTETED TO DATE $ 9,523.00
TOTAL DEDUCTIONS .$4
| 07,580,0
TOTAL COMPLETED & STORED $ 9,525.00
RETAINAGE -Jp-6 952.50
TOTAT EARNED IESS
RETAINAGE
LESS PREVIOUS
CERTIFICATES
THIS CERTIFICATE .
o
MATERIALSSTORED. .$O
g n,5q0.20
. $ 8r!O0-70
Change Orders approvedin previous months byOwner- TOTAL
at thls
Architect: RObert R. EngelkC , A.l.A.
Bv:
This Certificate is not negotiable. lt is payable only to the payee named herein and its issuance, payment and acceptance are without
preludice to any rights of the Owner or Contractor under their Contract. lf AIA DOCUMENT CTQ2,APPL|CAT|ON FOR PAYMENT, or other
application form containing sarisfactory evidence of payment for Work previously completed DOES NOT ACCOMPANY THIS CERTIFICATE,
the Contractor shall first provide the equivalent certification by completing and executing the following:
State of:
Countv of:
The undersigned certifies that the Work covered by this Certificate for
Payment has been completed in accordance with the Contract Documentsf
that all amounts have been paid for Work for which previous Certificates
for Payment were issued and payments received, and that the current payment
shown herein is now due.
Contractor:
By:Date:
Subscribed and sworn to before me this
day of
Not",y |lsli., Rcqul red
My Commission expires:
AIA DOCUMENT G7O3 . CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT . APRIL 1970 EDITION . AIA@ . @ 1970
THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OT ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVE., NW. WASHINCTON, D.C.20006
ONE PAGE
CONTMCTOIT:
I]IC}GL CO}iSTRUCTION COI{PANY
SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAI:PROJT]CT:
Fire Station
LOCA1ION:
vail, colorado
Est. Cost PercentPrincipal Contract [eature
General Conditions, Bond, Permit
anal Supervis ion
Layout, Engineering
Excavation
Footing and Fundation
Interior Concrete
Rebar and Mesh
Structuraf & Misc. Steel
L2,579.Rough carpentry and Truss Joist
Millwork and wood, Doors
Ki tchen Cabinets & Appliances
w/AIt #I
Sheetmetal
Wood Windows
Glass and Glazin
Overhead Doors
Finish Hardr{are
Resilient Floor, Base and
4.L87 .
Shower Base, Toilet Partitions 'and Accessories
Metal Letters
Mechanica I
E lec trical
Miscellaneous Labor & clea
AIt. No. 2
8.O3 26.L2 68.27 100.00107 ,580.
t-
tsu]. l-or-n
PLAN CHECK LIST
f . eer,mit No: f/-r4
Date
Use Zone ?A1.
2.
Jr
4.
6.
n
8.
L0.
Ll_.
L2.
l-5.
0cc
Ave
He t-
No.
Floo:r Anea
Lot Anea
nage Gnade 8t41'- 6'
upancy Gnoup F: Z
ght of Buii-ding ' 28!4^ ('to.*"' 4ot-a-)
of Stonies ?--
ItJ =:4-5e35 46 Mf rne(, To,n*-
Type of Constnuction g
Floon Anea Ratio
Setbacks Requined:pnont 15(-o" sioe I o1-€' p..o 1o!o"
0ccupant Load
Panking Required.
Loading Berths Requine4
i+. Comptiance With:
a) 0ccupancy Sec. 5
b) Occupancy Gr-oup F ?-
c) Type Const. Sec. 17
d) Type Const. g
e) Exite Sec. 33 i
f) Gene:ral En . Sec. 23
g) Mason:ry Sec.2\
h) Wood Sec. 25
j) Concnete Sec. 26
lt'".".;
k) Stee1 Sec. 27
o
Ex., Fdtns.r Ret.r\
m)
n)
o)
P)
n)
s)
t)
v)
w)
x)
y)
z)
Veneen Sec. 30
Roof Const. Sec. 32
Penthouees Sec. 36
Fj.neplaces Sec. 37
' Fine Protection Sec. 42
Fine Standa:rds Sec. 43
Occ. of Pub. Pnop. Sec.45
Drywall 6 Plasten Sec.47
aa) .
ab)
ac)
Pne-Fabr^icated Const. Sec. 50
Plastics Sec. 52
GlaEs t Glazin Sec. 54
Skylights Sec. 34
Fine Svstemg Sec.
Stases Sec. 39
Public Pnotections Sec.
o
PLUMBIN
/A5+7 2
GPE IT
of 44L^=/Jurisdiction
Applicant to complete numbered spaces only.
PLAN CHECK VALIDATION
toN
WHEN PROPERLY VALIDATED {IN THIS SPACE) THIS IS YOUR
PERMIT VALIDA \ cK.tlV,
CA1-
1'r"i"
INSPECTOR
REOROER FFOMI INTERNATIONAL CONFEFIENCE OF BUlLOING OFFICIALS ' 50 SO. LOS ROBLES
'PASAOENAT
CALIFOiNIA 9lIOI
1!ser rrrrcx eo sre:rt
2 \/t,,'- l-- i i r;' ,
MA II AOOR ESS FHONE LICENSE NO.
ITEC T ON DEII MA IL AODF ES 3 PHONE LICENSE NO.
4,t\I , , ; i . /,.
MA IL ADDi ESS PNONE LICENSE NO.
USE OF BU IL DIN G
8 Ctas ol work: INEW tr A00lTl0N n ALTERATIoN D REPAIR
I Describe work, I I
Typ€ ot Fixturt o. ltam
WATER CLOSET (TOI LET}SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
LAVATORY (WASH BASIN)
KITCHEN SINK & DISP.
OISHWASHER-'^'{f,)*LAUNDRY TRAY
CLOTHES WASHER
WATER HEATER
NOT ICE
THIS PERMIT BECOMES NULL AND VOID IF WORK OR CONSTRUC-
TION AUTHORIZED IS NOT COMMENCEO WITHIN 60 DAYS. OR IF
CONSTRUCTION OR WORK IS SUSPENDED OR ABANDONED FOR A
PERIOD OF 12O DAYS AT ANY TIME AFTER WORK IS COM.
MENCEO.
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REAO AND EXAMINEO THISAPPLICATION ANO KNOW THE SAME TO BE TRUE ANO CORRECT.ALL PROVISIONS OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES GOVERNING THISTYPE OF WORK WILL BE COMPLIED WITH WHETHER SPECIFIEOHEREIN OR NOT, THE GRANTING OF A PERMIT DOES NOTPRESUME TO GIVE AUTHORITY TO VIOLATE OR CANCEL THEPROVISIONS OF ANY OTHER STATE OR LOCAL LAW REGULATINGCONSTRUCTION OR THE PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTION.
U R INAL
ORINKING FOUNTAIN
FLOO R.'S IN K OR DRAIN
SLOP SINK
GAs SYSTEMS: NO. OUTLETS
WATER PIPING & TREATING EQUIP.
WASTE INTERCEPTOR
VACUUM BREAKERS
LAWN SPRINKLER SYSTEM
SEPTIC TANK & PIT
Form 1O0.2 9-69
USE SPACE BELOW FOR NOTES, FOLLOW-UP, ETC.
a
------l
E{rSTrNG F}RE
StariOr'i.
pr+ fuon El Er4&C 1
.it..
-
ToP or
8r46. ag
'51L. Fri., TDp' --
EL,8rr'6.\\
"?,-
Co'tclf
' )rr..l' \
o
t iew F r a-r, H.r;- :'E
F,*j FIRE !:t.or:-(ELEV.-6145..) ,,
E,1,, r. r.. S, \ 0 o -) O
ss,
St,o 'o
{,i 1.'f1"
I
i*
\
New 61sex,
Sr; '"t6I.\
..P
{F-
.-s
S-1HL;.1 tr'"y.:,lS_
* *-n'
Q, -'
{.}
\'
+
cl. t rp, t, ,= '':--\\-/ f l- -l-': _'tJ
r.r.^, - t. '
ci.,,., :- i';'.M,HTIAN
Top EL. 8145. I'
I*v. el. 52.t6'
.,Y-
r. \_, 8o- )ss
o a
o,
5/6n t-t-rr oa$
ru. Yt>, AFr t€n
FET'ail l{at'fu.nve.€ur^'$rlNcr - €EE
ELIVAYIAF{t
r-rTl. R-r€+ltr{(r
-glx, at $EAD
$ xe, Rr'As,D
. r -Eu, tLLlt,
t=l..rea:i,t
@a--
6AULK.
5/6$ T- i-ll oRtlbvtL< \tl@? orl
lb*lEt,T oA \2|. -futtttp SHEATt+rNa(eE a-€.t|T6Fte)
---+
\*]-
cHANd-E zx(os |ct 2xt'),eT AETA'r l/dlo Toa-r-4{ FaR aiDtTro|..JAL,j)^lJ FrR ADPeD bJt Nir+].
rN'l.tDNA TrpE A.-
?*b oQ. 2*'o I.EAD€g5flq- loc'Er[HER
?a'Xtlil Eleg.rr .rRthrl
2 < G fttAffR !>. *fa-l CAOI4-
FdE r^rDHa.L +/AzJo 'rArigf5'F6< lq)^r 2$.
r?6zrseD
.$
..--_-f-
Vl' y tW eela I'Lrtwt
6/t asP, b.F.t2
-.--. 4t EATr ll.r5r.rL,
9LTAIL
glf t lt-Oll
3l Lt- -
NE"t^t
Btyrt(,P
lj::|IRr R. tNGeLf\E
rrcniii?I-s r.u
I# rzs4o
LICAT
VA\ L
BUILDI PERMIT APP toN
Jurisdictio -T-ot rU oF
o
NG
;tion of-
Applicant to complete numbered spaces only,
t
tl
i\
At
\
h
.I
/T
n
\
;
$
N
\
ul
il
{ol.
Fipa sf4"ftol
I DESC R.
qflst: nrracxeo sxeerl
F/28 D ls 7P,/C 7''
ZIP PHONE
Bt ci<ez Oous-.Ai;;;] 71y,t^r* ";;!ff{i ti4-A
AR CH ITEC T OR
4 ettae LtcE 5E NO.
B*6zztASu S, tlout Dett
ENGINEER MAI L ADOiESS ' PHONE I.I C EN9E NO.
zL75ZECH€.g
IENOEF
o
MAIL ADDiESS BFANCH
USE OF BUILDINC
F/2e 374'7/o/-rrtt / ZtrrA a, Q u 44-7ees
It8 Ctas o{ work: XNEW n A00lTl0N tr ALTERATIoN n REPAIH D MoVE fl REMoVE
9 Describeworkt c4tl < F,e.rez B(ocrc. <-ruc urA<L5. s-re€L J or s -7
l0 Change of use from
Change of use 1o
tl Valuationofwork:$ /D7, €06o:PERMIT FEE //6,?5PLAN cHEcK ,.. Z33rJO
SPECIAL CONDITIONS:Iiixi 'JEr '-7O PLAL, <'/i*j.
No. of .)storlor L-il'."tfi:id'g;' 35 46
Fir€ sprinktsrs
Requlred E\|,€sPLANS CHECKEO BY:
OFFSTREET PARKING SPACES:No. ot IOwelling Unlts
NOTICE
SEPARATE PERMITS ABE REQUIRED FOR ELECTRICAL, PLUMB.
ING, HEATING, VENTILATING OR AIR CONDITIONING.
THIS PERMIT BECOMES NULL ANO VOID IF WORK OF CONSTRUC.
TION AUTHORIZED IS NOT COMMENCED WITHIN 60 DAYS, OR IF
CONSTBUCTION OR WORK IS SUSPENDED OR ABANDONED FOR A
PERIOD OF 120 DAYS AT ANY TIME AFTER WORK IS COM.
MENCED.
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE
APPLICATION AND KNOW THE SAME D EXAMINED THISUE ANO CORRECT.; GOVERNING THIS{ETHER SPECI FI ED
RM IT OOES NOTTE OR CANCEL THE
OTHER (Sp6clfy)
WHEN PROPERLY VALIOATED IN THIS SP THIS IS YOUR PERMIT
PERMIT VALIDATION cK.
TOToL Au€
\
J
I:1
PLAN CHECK VALIDATION cK. M.O. CASH
,9
101
,/S-SZ,zf
INSPECTOR
FEoFoER FNOM: TNTERNATTONAL CONFERENCE OF BUILOING OFFICIALS. !O 30. I.OS ROALEs . PASAOEI,IA'Form 10O.1 9-69
tNSPECT|ON RFCORD
DATE BEMARKS INSPECTOR
FOUNDATIONS:
SET BACK
TRENCH
REINFORCING
FOUNDATION WALL &
WEATHER PROOFING
CONCBETE SLAB
FRAMING -'(r
INT. LATHING OR DRYWALL
EXT. LATHING
MASONRY
FINAL
USE SPACE BELOW FOR NOTES, FOLLOW-UP, ETC.
ri \
r1
*orElrr n. *ceLKE
atglr?l3lt A. l Arar I ttitr tl ltrfl ll lll '|t-ltlltlrvtr s0tetr00 t0tt2
Elckcl Consfruciloa Co.
ATTN: Bob lll lson
2291 S. Kllarath
0cnvcr, . Co lorcdo 8(l225
Deer 8ob:
In rcfcrcncc to nesonry
chould be radc:
ZZ Jut,1 J97 I
rclnforclng on {'lrr Flrc Sictlon, tho follqllng changcs
(1, SECTIOI 2-A/t - at rlcvctlon t!0,-EJ -In thr hor rlrylrq fcor, Inrtcll a ICS
derp troqh blocl coorr rltfr l-f!l rcbrr to? .
and bofnc on th. tro rl&t ot ta.r. lnrtitl
.@rn.r brrr et back tldr t€ attcch.to rtrndcrd8i tror6h block corrr.
l2', Icko cura io'lnrtal I rrlnforclng In roltanr acordlng fo notc cr Shrt 9-l on
@l c-nd Znd F.lor'Frrlng plm.
ls oftfr lor
(r) DETIIL 2-l-lt -- aa trdpr to br enchorcd toreronry-rlli li encfpr boltt | 2fn 0.C.
('l) DETAIL 2-B-lf -- hI Stsd rail io be anchondio mrorua rtl{r ln rrrchor bolfr | 24" 0.C.abi4
Sccrr I ght
rl^,1 / ka I
l.\l5.t
Slnccrely,
Podn6y
BNCKEN- CONSTRUCTION CO.
General Contractors >.1 Ll - go5 |
229I SOUTH KATAMATH . PHONE 936.4886
DENVER. COLORADO 80223
16 J\rly t97I
Mr.. Joseph Iangrmaid
Chairman, VaiI Fire Protection District.
P. O. Box 631
Vail, Colorado 81657
Reference: Fire Station
Vail, Colorado
Dear Mr. Langmaid:
Inasmuch as I was unable to attend your meeting on Thursday, Jtrly 15th, I
am writing to explain the causes of delay in construction of the above
referenced project.
I have tried numerous times to return your call on the number that Iarry
Bickel gave me, but had no ansr^rer.
Orr contract is dated May 8, 1971. Orr letter of Notice to proceed was
Postnarked l\tay 29th and received by us on June 2nd, which accounts forpart of the delay you speak of. We inunediately began placing orilers formaterial. We received the shop drawings from United Steel in our office
on ;nrrc 19th. In recent months we have had many, rnany de lays of up to
14 clays in deliverry of transrnittals through the mail. Jlrst recently, it
took 10 days to get a letter from Denver to Vail.
It was 6 days before we were able to field check the sLnrctural steel
drawings we had received inrne 19. On June 25. I personally hand. carried.
these drawings to the Architects for their examination and approval. on
ilr1y 2, the architect called and notified us that the shop drawings were
ready to pick up. Ihey were picked up the sarne day and taken to United
Steel for processing of the stt uctural steel order. United steel gave us
a shipping ilate of July 15th. We expect amival of this shipment in Vail
on July 19. To the best of our knowledge, shitrxnent will be on schedule.
The city of vail has several obtigations to us which they haventt met to date.shortly after the bid opening date, we quoted costs on several changes in the
work covered under t]le contract. These changes were verbally accepted byCity Officials. To date, we have not received written change orders. We
need these change orders in order to write our Subcontract Agreements andproperly proceed with the work.
ur. itoseph Iangmaicl
Vail Fire kotectLon District
L6 inrly 197L
Page 2
llhe orners are to carrtrr BriLclers RLsk, Vandalism, Fire anil Extended Csverage . Cr,'tInsurance, naming Bickel Constnrction Conpany along with the cft1r?fTttr?d ir;.as insured. we requestecl a copy of the policy but ale not in reeqlpt of Lt D^;L -to date. otrr Borrting Colpany frolrns very nrch on our perfomanoe of aDy
work without insurance. We are not willing to continue work withqrt pmofof co\rerage.
We have not been wilJ.fulJ.y neglbent in perfonning the work on this proJect.
Sren we r:eceive ttre stnrctural steel, we wiLl be in a position to teall-y
Dorre out and cdnpLete this project in a short time, but we do need t}te
items rentioned above fror tfie city of Vail.
Since3ely I'ours,
Brcrch coNsTRgcrf, oN coMPAlrY
V""ft" S/3*?"?I€*er F. BlckeL
Pregident
f,faztYl
\
CERTIFICATE
FOR PAYMENT
AIA DOCUMENT C7O3
OWNER
ARCHITECT
CONTRACTOR
FIELD
OTHER
ntrtrtr
PROJECT: YAIL flRE CtAllOl
(name, address)
TO (Owner)
CERTIFICATE NUMBER:
PERIOD FROM
July l' l9?l
Application For Payment the Contractor is
account for this Contract is as follows:
ORIGINAL CONTRACT SUM .
CHANGE ORDERS
TOTAL ADDITIONS .
SUB TOTAL .
TOTAL DEDUCTIONS
CONTRACT SUM TO DATE .
BALANCE TO FINISH
TOTAL COMPTETED TO DATE
RETAINACE IO X
TOTAT EARNED IESS
RETAINAGE
LESS PREVIOUS
CERTIFICATES
THIS CERTIFICATE
TO Aq'ct l, l9?l
Yall Flrr Protrctlon Olrt.llr. Trrry llfqer rcltrrar
Vrl l, Oolonado
-l ARCHITECT'S PROJECT *O' ,*,
CONTRACTOR: Blcbl
I coNTRAcT DATE' l|ly
Oonr?nsfloo 0qry
28, tyll
entitled to payment in the
. s 107.!8.00
L
In accordance with this Contract and the attached
amount stipulated below. The present status of the
.$
.$
,$
$
|,e10.00
108,00.00
Tfi;MS-
5fro7f.70
q ,0r669.9t
q t.lto.?o;--F.ffi,rT-
o"t"' \6r. $tl? |
the payee named herein and its issuance, payment and acceptance are without
their Contract. lf AIA DOCUMENT C702, APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT, or other
for Work previously completed DOES NOT ACCOMPANY THIS CERTIFICATE,
by completing and executing the following:
Subscribed and sworn to before me this
\
o
day of 19
Notary Public: l5T iGQtrlED
My Commission expires:
?-!t-717-2t-ll
,-?t-71,-21-ll
tyr.00
6t.00
2!0.00
799.00
MATERIATS STORED, .S
rorAl coMprErED & sroRED i-=yrprrm--
Net change Change Orders $!220.00
This Certificate is not negotiable. lt is payable only
prejudice to any rights of the Owner or Contractor
application form containing satisfactory evidence of
the Contractor shall fint orovide the eouivalent ce
State of:
Counw of:
The undersigned certifies that the Work covered by this Certificate for
Payment has been completed in accordance with the Contract Documents,
that all amounts have been paid for Work for which previous Certificates
for Payment were issued and payments received, and that the current payment
shown herein is now due.
Contractor:
AIA DOCUMENT G7O3 ' CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT . APRIT 1970 EDITION . AIA@ . O 1970
THI AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVE., NW- WASHINGTON, D.C. 2OOO5
ONE PACE
l
Oro EsrrHATE BREAKD.*N
Val1 Fire Protectlon Dlstrlct
Vail, Colorado
ProJect: Fire Statlon
Location: Vall, Colorado
Btckel Constnrctlon Coqany
229L So. Kalarnath Street
Demrer, Colorado 80223
Estinate No. 2
Date:July 30, 1971
Deacriptlon of lfork Contract
AmunE
Percent Amount
1e te
General Conditlone and Supervision
Layout, Englneering and Excavallon
Pavlog
Drterlor Concrete
Footiqg aad Poundation
Iaterlor Concre ce
Rebar rod l,lesh
l.Iasonry
Structurel and Mlecellaneoua Steel
Rough Carpentry .nd Trusg Joletlti1l tfork end tlood Door '
Kltcheu Cablnets, Topa and Apptiancea
Dry l{all
Ingulatl.on
Rooflog, g/A1r. #1
Caulklog aud Sealant
Sheet lletal
Eolloy lGtal
Glaae end Glazlng
Overhead D,oore
Ftntah Eat{ware
Paiutlug
Reel.lient Ploora, Base and Carpet
Stncco
Shmer, Tlolet Parlltlon end Acceasorleg
l{ood 9lodora
Uetal LetterE
Mechenical
Electrlcel
MlscellaDeous Labor and Clean-UpAlt. #2
A1r. #3
$ 7890.oo
6825 .00
6800.00
518.00
3635.00
2782.00
986.00
9284.O0
2650. 00
12579.OO
5560.00
3902. 00
3650.00
870.00
1130.00
550.00
938.00
352.00
462.00
2592.00
924.0O
4400.00
1962.00
4187.00
672.00
990.00
412.00
10/+08.00
7860.00
935.00
275.O0
600.00
$107,580.00
50
90
r0Q-
85
100
95
40
3,945.00
5 ,L42 .50
3,635.00
838. 10
9,284.OO
2,517.50
5,031.50
352. 00r00
15_
8
20
1,516. 20
628.80
187.00
t Total Contract Amount
ADount Comp Ie te
Leea 107. Retalnage
Tota 1
Less Previous Estimate
Amount Due Thls Estlmote No.
34,077 .70
3,407 .77
T333-fi
22,279 .23
Contractor:Archltect:
o o /1<-//-/u
MECHANICAL PERMIT APPLlcATlol.i
^'' ' (u
Jurisdiction of
Applicant to complete numbered spaces only.
- /'2;/' (r,ft
q[se: eruc x:o srr:r1
2 /4r^
M^rL AoOR€2-]ZIP PHONE
cor{riacto,B
/.,) ,/ /|il|NF /2.3': .7,/i LrcENsE No'
"'r th-izLi(,' -1..'.i.J+5+ i 5/:,i:3
AiCN I'ECI OR OESI6NER
'1 K*-
L lC Ell5 E r.l+') ::/.','*
MAIL AODiESS PHONE L IC ENSE NO.
MAIL AODIESS BiANCH
USE OF BUILDING
8 CIasoIworK: [a{IEW NAODITION DALTERATION N BEPAIR
9 0escribe work : - 1/ -
L>< -4l.lzt
-1 //
//- t .\
: /( 1 ,t'--,' 2.--'rr-/
,/
.( t'../'./ ./' ./ .? - r'(' ' -
TypeofFuel: Oit D Nat.Gas D UeC. E
PERMIT FEES
SPECIAL CONDITIONS:
Air Cond. Units-H.P. Ea.
Units-H.P. Ea.
Eoilers-H.P. Ea.
Gas Fired A.C. Units-Tonnaqe Ea.
Forced Air Svstems*B.T.U. M Ea.
Synems-B.T.U. M Ea.
Floor F urnaces- B.T.U. M
Wall Heaters-B.T.U. M
NOT ICE
THIS PERMIT BECOMES NULL AND VOIO IF WORK OR CONSTFUC-
TION AUTHORIZED IS NOT COMMENCED WITHIN 60 DAYS. OR IF
CONSTBUCTION Ofl WORK ISSUSPENDED OR ABANDONED FOR A
PERIOO OF 12O DAYS AT ANY TIME AFTER WORK tS COM.
MENCED.I !-IEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REAO ANO EXAMINED THISAPPLICATION ANO KNOW THE SAME TO BE TRUE AND CORRECl'.
^LL
PROVTSTONS OF LAWS ANO ORDTNANCES GOVERNTNG THtSTYEE OF WORK WILL BE COMPLIED WITH WHETHER SPECIFIEOFERETN oR Nor, THE GRANTTNG oF A pERMtr ooEs No-?RESUME IO GIVE AUTHORITY TO VIOLATE OR CANCEL THE
PEOVISIONS OF ANY OTHER STATE OR LOCAL LAW REGULATINGCONSTRUCTION OR THE PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTION.
Unit Heaters-B.T.U. M
WHEN PROPERLY VALIOATED IIN THIS SPACEI THIS IS YOUR PERMIT
PLAN CHECK VALIDATION
()x M,O..,1'(,
l/L'
. INSPECTOB
iEOiDEi FiOM: INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF BUILOING OFFICIALS ' 50 SO. LOS ROBLES |l PA5AOENA. CALIFORNIA 9110I
PERMIT VALIDATION cK.
Form lOO.4 9-69
INSPECTION REPORTS
DATE ITEM REMARKS II{SPECTOR
USE SPACE BELOW FOB NOTES. FOLLOW-UP, ETC.
CERTIFICATE
FOR PAYMENT
AIA DOCUMENT G7O3
OWNER
ARCHITECT
CONTRACTOR
FIELD
OTHER
ntrtrtr
PROJECT: VAIL FIRE STATI0N
(name, address)
TO (Owner)
State of:
County of:
The undersigned certifies that the Work covered by this Certificate for
Payment has been completed in accordance with the C()ntract Documents,
that all amounls have been paid for Work for which previous Certificates
for Payment were issued and payments received, and that the current payment
shown herein is now due.
Contractor:
Date:
. q7 a1< oo
^ ?'n AAO O1
- 11 | A-l dAs a/ r
Subscribed ancl srvorn to heiorc nte this
day of
Notary Public: \cr RFlr!r FEc
l'ly Commission expires:
19
RETAINACE 10 %
rOTAt EARNED LESS
RTTAINAGE
LESS PREVIOUS
CERTIFICATES
TH]S CERTIFICATE .
6.424,10
By
I' Vall Fire Protection Dlsf.
Mr. Terry Mlnger s€c/treas CONTRACTOR:Vall, Colorado Bickel Construction Co.
L I coNTRAcr DATE: yu, zB, 1971
In accordance with this Contract and the attached Application For Payment the Contractor is entitled to payment in the
amount stipulated below, The present status of the account for this Contract is as follows:
Change Orders approvedin previous months byOwner- TOTAT
ADDITIONS $DEDUCTIONS $
$1,220.00
Subs€quent Change Orden
Numb€r Approved
(date)
TOTALS
Net change ?20
Datc: c ^r7 | 971
CERTIFICATE NUMBER: 3
PERIOD FROM TO
August 1, 191 | September 1, l(
-l ARCHTTECT',S PROIECT NO:
1045
oRTGTNAL CONTRACT SUM . .$_l€ff€ffio--
CHANCE ORDERS
TOTAL ADD1T;ONS . . g__l220.00 _
suB ToTAL. .$ 108,800-00 __
TOTAL DEDUCTIONS . $-,_ -O-
69NTRACT SUM TO DATE . $ 'l 08,800-0L_
BALANCE TO FINTSH . $------O-
TOTAL COMPTETED TO DATE $ 64,241.0q
MATERTALSSTORED. .$,__,__,-O-
rqrAr coMpLETED & ST6RED g_ 64.241_.09
.,OCUMENT G7O3 . CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT ' APRIL 1970 EOITION ' AIA@' ,(]^N INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS,'1735 NEW YORK AVE., NW, WASHINGTON,
. @ 1970
o.c.20006
, ?..r r'.,' r; r
ESTIHATE BRTX\KDOI{NPAY
ValI Flre Protectlon Dl8trictVail, Colorado
ProJect: Pirc Strtlon
Locetion: Yall. Colorado
!
Blckel Cotrltnrctloo Coqany
2291 So. NlltErth Street
Denver, Colorrdo 8A223
Ectlnate ao. 3
Dete: 3I eucust 1971
Deacrlptlon of tlork Cootract Perceot AmuntAEunt Co@lcte Due
General Condltlons aod Srpcrvlelon
Layout, Englaecrlog aad E(cavatlon
Pavtog
Exterlor Coocrete
FoothS aod Pourrdrtlon
Iaterlor Concretc
Rebar rod lGrh
llasoErrr
Strucharl rnd l{fucellaaeoor Stecl
Ro.8h Crr?entry md Tnrra JolttUill l{ork end llood l}oor
Kltchco Crbltret3, Topr end Appllcncee
Dry flell
Iosulrtl,on'
Rooflog, r/Alt. tl
Carrltllg tDd Srrl.nt
Shect lietrl
Hollor UctrlGlrrr rad G1ezlog
Ovettcrd Doorc
Flnlrh Sardurre
Pal.utlng
Real.llent Floore, Erge end Carpet. Stucco. Shoner, Tlolet Prttl.tlon and Acceaoorles
I{ood 9lodcr
Uetal Letterr
Mechsalcel
Elcctrlcal
Mlrcellaoeous Labor and Clean-UpAlr. f2
A1r. #3
Total Contract Anount
t chanse o.u"'il:: ]
No. 3
lio. 4
rlno'ln t Conplete
Iess I0'': Retain.rge
Tota I
i-ess Previous Es timate
Ano'-lnt Dr-re Thi_s .Estin.fte No.
$ 7890.oo
6825.00
6800.00
518.00
3635.00
27E2.00
986.00
9284.00
2550.00
12579.00
5560.00
3902.00
3650.00
870.00
1130.00
550.00
938.00
352.00
452.00
E92,OO
926.00
4400.00
1962.00
4187.00
672.00
990.00
412.00
10408.00
7860.00
935.00
275.00
600.00
$ I07 ,580. 00
330.00
61.00
2 30.00(oo na
$5,523.00
6,483.75
-o-(la nn
3,635.00
2,782.OO
986. 00
9,284.OO
2 , 650. 00
L2,579.OO
-0-
-0-
522.OO
1, 130. 00
440. 00
844.20
352.00
. -9-'
-0-
-o-:0-.
-0-
268. 80
990.00
8,846.80' 5,502.00
. 467.50
-0-
-0-
330. 00
61.00
46.OO
-0-
70
95
n
100
lo0
100
100
100
100
IO0
0
0
0
60
100
80
90
100
n
0
o
o
0
40
100
o
85
70'
0
100
100
20
0
$64,24L.09
6.424.LOffiFq
"n ^ao o?
$frWb
a.-rF l- 'i?-.!^r.Architects:
o
August 3, I9?I
:
Robert Engelke, Arclritect
21.86 S. HoJ.Jy Street
Denver, Colorado 80222
ircar ilr . .dr^6]er.e :
Flre Stetion onJert Meadow Drlve, Vell, C
We are retru"ning pl&ng of thc above proJect shovlng our reconmenda-
tions f,or telephone conduit facil-lties, si.zed for lr,lount ai n BeIl vire
and cable, as follorrs:
Provide and instal-l:
l/[ plynood, backboard l+t0" wid.e, brot' higb, lrtO" center above the
floor in MCchanical- Roon for telephone temlnal and equiprnent. ALlow
3t0" deep clear work area in front of ttre backboard.
110 volt doub 1e cluplex receptacle TrOt' above the floor adJacent to the
beckboarcl.
Conctuit runs bushed flush vith the vall above and./or below the back-
board es iol,lows:
1/2" conduit to exposed cold irater pipe.
2" rigid, ga.r,var^.i zed, PVC or e,iuivair::.i cor.,.liiit 30" i,.-:. . . :''r';e Lc the
Tel.ephone PedestaJ. Teminal west of the building.
lrt contlrrits to telephone outlets anal I/2" condults betveen telephone
outJ.ets, as shovn.
Add.itlonal teleptrone outlets sbovn on the plans vere detennined at a
neetlng on the site .l'rly 30, 1971.
Exact .telephone outl€t locations are to be deterrnined by the oriner
ancl/or architect.
'@
Mountain Bell
Room 275
660 Bannocx
Denver, Colo. 80204
')i
Rober"t Engelke,
Pagc 2
Atrgu^st 3, 1971
4L1 telepbone condult faclllties 'contaired in these reco"rnendatlons
are to be fu::nlehed, installed, {nd Baintained at the expense of the
bui Id,lng ouner .
If we can be of fifther engineertng assistance regarding tbeee rec-
omendatlons, ca.Il I'b. C. E. Randall on 266-7325,
Iours tru\r,
)
/r
Archltect
l
:
*4
L
;
i
+--I
CER:lL
ITOBF]RT R. ETNEIJ(E
A r.A7tr-r7t0
4Q222
Bob Wl lson
Blckel Construction Co.
2291 %. lGlamath
rncttttc?st*a I tltrr tt tuttt t!. |latlrrtl ctrf rl0r
Septernber 2, l97l
Denver, Colorado 80221
/#--\Re:/ Val I Fl re JProtecilon Dtstrtct Fi re Sfailon
Dear Bob,
l. ln dlscusslng wfth Jack ihe possrbility of cutttng throuqhthe TJI jolsts for runnlng plunblng llnes, please refer toTrus Jolst Llterafure on illowable hole slzes. Generally,
ll rt! span the maxlmtm hole sdze would be approxlmately7u. Thls varles accordlng to dlstance fro,rr beartnq poiit.lf y9y have any questlons on slzes and locatlons, calI us atany tlme.
l2. The.cslllng exhaust fan at the toilef rocnr has not been chang-ed to fhe Nutone model as discussed prevlously. The-Creen_heck fan that ls presentry rnstailed wilr not frt frush wrththe celllng and therefore needs to be changed.
5. The concrete f loor slab as you w€ll know ls not acceptab leas is. There are several uneven areas thaf need to be ground
down and reflntshed.
4. The dryrall installatlon ls fo be the followlnq:' a) 0n concrete block, Install a l" furrlnq strlp ai oac,r
Jolnt plus top and botton.b) 0n wood f ramlng, install oyosum board panels with lonqd lmens lon parallel fo framinq mernbers. See specifications.
5. The exlstlng fire srren rs fo be rnsfailed on the west srdeof ihe roof ridge of existinq fire stailon. Discuss withJohn Eden the best method o{ constructing a olatform at thislocaflon. The control for the slren ls now located in theattlc of Manor Varr. Thrs contror rs to be re rocaled in theexlstlng flre statlon as direcfed by Fran Bush. At fhis time,I am unclear as to what the service requirenents for the srrenvlll be. We wlll have to send your electriclan over fo seejust what ls requlred.
Bob lf l lson
psge 2 Septanber 2, 1971
In general, rorhnanshlp ls good and progress ls saflSfactory.
Engelke, Archltects ls ln the process of settlng up an offlceln Vall. There are several r€asons for thls but the reason con-
cernlng you ls that hopefully re can ellmlnate a tlme lag that
o<lsts betreen problms dereloplng and gettlng solved. The man
In charge In Vall ls John Eden. fle can be reached at our new
nunber In Voll rhlch ls 476-3441. Although John ls not too fan-lllar rlth the flre stcflon, re feel he wlll be able to handle
nost of the problans that develop. lle certalnly do not rant to
ceas€ @mnunlcatlon betreen you and our offlce In Denver. Use
your oun dlscretlon as fo rhlch problens need to be solved by Johnor by us. In shor-t, call us at any tfme that you feel lt ls
ngcessalry.
Slncerely,
-/r=/v,/Rodney D.
0;L=
Searrlght
RDS/fdb
cc: Ed Struble
*t F:l-'ROIlt.ttt'f
A I C .tl I I J';l'!'l{Tlrllt ra lot 757-t'l!0t0rA00 goztz2llll. ri,[l tl.ottvrl c
ll icke I Cons t ruct ion Cn.
2291 So. Kalamath
0enver, Co lorario 802 2:-
i: Re: Vail Fire Hous,-., t'lov. 4 insc,,:rcf ion
Gent I emen ,
The inspection of the \"ail Fire l'louse on r'lovemtrer 4l-h was compleied
with l.!r. John Eden of my of f lce, iir. Fran i?ush, Bo b' !Jilson and
+he .iob foreman, .lack, Thr: {ollowino itens were rrored as nof yet
corn:rlefeC or in neer,' of repalr. In qeneral, I v,as quite satisf ied
with the work'nan..,hip apDarent on the Fire Fbt:se with the exceotion
of the naintinq subcontrrct, All other trades seer to have oroduced
c(-rflc€:rfl€d workrnanshinlike dpoearance in tlieir resfrecf ive ereas.
The follcwinc itcnrs were 'rote.J the date of insDection:
,lptaratus roorn { lo':r' shculd 5t, seal cleaneC and cr.lted.
Adjusi ove-neaC door panels t;-' f i+ snuqly fc the .i:tms now
rhat +he wood has trken its rinal sef' 4lso oDerator
handles should all be af rht-: same standarc heiqht as re-
,-uired by Fr.n ilush, the Fire Chief .
At the entry to the tcwer { r.;n the aDi\<lrr + r) r(vJm, the
trirr has !ulle.,d awav f rorn the sheet rock. This should l"r
f i lled .rnd re.nainted as ne:essarv fo rrrovide a neaf and
c lean ap oea ran (:e ,
Thr: block work .,n the interior of lhe l,rwe|' d.res r,':t :how
-;,rf i icien* paint coveraqe. -ihe specif icatic,ns allowed
on lv -f he f in isn coat to be sprave.l whe.e.t.. 'the f i rct coaf
wai, to heve treer' either brushc'i .r rollerJ. This .'rou ld
have eliminafed fhe 0roblenr i,f coveral€.
T l';a, lieht f ix+r,.es irr p6pv ini'iances houe ,to* been inslll led
;:nd.it is imrossible fo checP. oleraf ion withcut havinq
'l'hese f ixtur-es in o lace.
(. ihe sloo sink has not as o{ '.,..-'' t'een installed.
The door weather strippinn has not been insfalled.
Sink, range, and dlshwasher have not yet been fully lnstalled
and thelr oceration cannot be checked.
2.
A
).
7.
Page 2 lrir,worn lor O t 07lrt . r | -
9. Some palnf smears on the cabinet work in the kitchen areashou I d be cleaned.
10. Cleap all deirris f -om netal p<.rn ln heating roqm.
I l. Hoi water, dornest ic, has not been corlD leted and cannotbe checked at this tlme.
The staln on tne wardrobe units ls very uneven and is not
acceDtab le .t t', : s t ine.
13. One or two small chips in the exterior sfucco have beenno+ed. Please oatch these prior to f inal acceotance.
14. The lap marks an the exterior wood sidinl are very rnuchin evidence anrj musl be r-eworked to minimize the effectas no+ed in :ur conversation.
o
I willmake a f lnal trio to Vail to inspect -ihese items whenare f ully completetj. Plea;e sfay ln touch with r.r. Fc.ern inof f ice in Vall as to the proqress of the work. Thank vou.
I
la
:?
they
my
Sincerely,
P.obert P. En.te I ke, A. I
PRE/f db
cc. John Eden
Ed Strub le
Boh Wl lsc..n
4_3f ?.D,5.
A
o
CERTIFICATE
FOR PAYMENT
AIA DOCUMENT C7O3
OWNER
ARCHITECT
CONTRACTOR
FIELD
OTHER
!
Dtr
D
PROJECT: VAIL FIRE STATI0N
(name, address)
TO (Owner)
T' \./:r i
,.,1 T .
Vai
I F ire Protection Dist,
Terry l.t i nqer sec/treas
l, Co I ora do
CERTIFICATE NUMBER:
PERIOD FROMlctober'l
ARCHITECT'S PROJECT
CONTRACTOR:
5
TO
Ncvember I
NO:
7A45
Bickel Construction Co.
-l
In accordance with lhis Contract and the attached
amount stipulated below. The present status of the
in previous months by
IOwner- TOTAT I
-J CONTRACT DATE: i4av
Application For Payment the Contraclor is
account for this Contract is as follows:
ORIGINAT CONTRACT SUM
CHANCE ORDERS
SUB TOTAL .
TOTAL DTDUCTIONS
CONTRACT SUM TO DATE .
BALANCE TO FINISH
TOTAL COMPTETED TO DATE
MATERIATS STORED .
TOTAT COMPLETED & STOREDlt\RETAINACE ' U O/O
TOTAL EARNED LESS
RETAINAGE
LESS PREVIOUS
CERTIFICATFS
THIS CERTIFICATE
28, 1971
entitled to payment in the
.$ 107,580.00__
TOTAL ADD;T;ONS . .g 1,585.00
109 r 65.00
s
(
q
*
-0-tnq 165 nn
-0-
I n6 661 qO
-----:0-
tn6 AAl qO
l0 666.36
.$95,497 .23
84,01 9. 85
{11,911 .51
This Certificate is not negotiable. lt is payable only to the
prejudice to any rights of the Owner or Contractor under their
application form containinB satisfactory evidence of payment
the Contractor shall first provide the equivalent certification bj,
State of:
County of:
The undersigned certifies that the Work corered by this Certificate for
Payn]ent has been completed in accordance with the Contract Documents,
l hat all amounts have been paid for Work for which previous Certificates
1,)r Payment were issued and payments received, and that the current payment
.lrorvn hercin is now duc.
(-ontractor;
Nc-rvember 9. 1971
named herein and its issuance, payment and acceptance are withoul
Iract. If AIA DOCUMENT G702, APPTICATION FOR PAYMENT, or olher
Work previously completed DOES NOT ACCOMPANY TH15 CERTIFICATE,
completing and executing the followinS:
Subscrihed and sworn to before me this
day of
Notary Public: NoT REOUIRED
My CommiS:ion expires: ,
51,585.00
Subsequent Change Orders
TOTAI.S
"r.1
tlr)(-UMLNT C703 . CIRTIFtcATE FOR\,,1ttii: \N lN-\TlIUTI of ARCHITECTS,
PAYMENT . APRIL 1970 EDITION . AIA@ . O.1735 NEW YORK AVT,, NW. WASHINGTON, D,C.
1970
20006
Oro gsrrxarE rnsAKDowN
ValI Fire Protectlon Dlltrlct
Vai1, Coloredo
'Projeet: Flre Stetlon
Loiation: Vell. Colorado
81cke1 Cooltnrctlon Coqany
2291 So. Xal-.th Street
DenYer, Colorado 80223
ErtlEste no.
Dete: October 31, 1971
Deecrlptlon of tlork CoDtract Percalt Amount
AEunt C@lcte llue
General Condtttoor eod Srpewl.elon
Ilyout, Eogloeerlng rnd Bcavatlon
Pavlng
f terl,or Coacrete
Footiag .t!il Pgttadatlon
Interlor Colcretc
Rcbar and llcrh
ltasonry
Stnrctural end t{l.reelhneou! Steel
Rough Crtaentr7 asd Tnrsr Jolrt
!t111 l{ort rnd Ymd Door
KttcbeB Crblnetr, togr rod Appll.rnccr
Dry lfell
Iorulrtlon
Rooflng, I/alr. #1
Ceultlng rad Serlent
Sheet ltetrl
Eollor llctrl
Glaar rd Gleatag
Overberd Doorr
Flnlrb Eardnare
Palathg
Realllcat Floorr, Bere and Carpet
Stucco
Shwerj flolet Prttltlon and Acceeaorleg
lilood lflndorr
Metal Lcttcr!
Mecheolcrl
Electrlcrl
Mlscellaneoug Labor rnd Cleen-tlp
A1r. *2
A1t. #3
Total Contract Amount
Chanqe Order No. I
No. 2
lV^ ?
I\T^ A
Amount Complete
Tasc I nq Pflf: i nA.rrl
'l_.\ l-^ I
L€ss Prevfous Estimate
Amount Due This Estimate llo.
Archi tect :
$ 7890.00
6825.00
6800.00
518.00
3635.00
27E2.OO' 9E6.00
928{.00
2650.00
12579.00
5560.00
3902.00
3650.00
E70.00
1130.00
550.00
938.00
352.00
462.00
2592.O0
924.00
44@.(X)
1952.00
4187.00
672.O0
990.00
412.00
10408.00
7860.00
935.00
275.00
600.00
$107,580.00
330. 00
61.00
2 30.00
qoo nn
$ 7,495.50
6 ,825.00
6 ,800 .00
518.O0
3 ,635 . OO
2.782.QO.
986.00
9 ,284 . 00
2 .650 . 00
12,579 ;OO
5 ,560 .00
3,902.00 .
3,650.00 ' ,
870.00,'1,r30.o0
550.00.
e38.00' 352'.00
462.00
2,592.OO
745.40.
,4'180.0O..
95
100
100
100
100
100..
100 .
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
roo
100. 100
100
100
100
85
qq
100
100
90
100
0
98
98
t3
0
95
r,962.OO
4,187.O0
604.80.
990.O0
10 ,199 . 84
7 ,702.gO
7AL.25
- (r-
570. OO
330.OO
lfl-U\J
230.00
599 .00
100
r00
100
100
$ 106 ,663.59
10,666.36
Y5rYYt.Z5
84 ,019.86
f,t\ ,977.37
Contraetor :
rrorll-rRT n. ntnrfiFi
A. I A
'lt-tnat0rtr
Blckel Construction Conpany
2291 S. Kalarath
Den.ver, Colorodo 80223
Re: Flre Statlon af Vai|, Colorado
Genllemen,
The followlng ltens were noted on my
25rd of November.
November 24, 1971
recenf trlp to Vai I on the
)ot F,l'o
^QCrltgcTtzrtr t. tr.rt tf llrtt rt t0l0trvtt c0t0tr0a
l. The fan ln the ran_qe hood appears to be siriking the shroud.
2. The floor tlle has ralsed ln the Flre Chief's offlce.
3. !{ater Dressure xas observed at I35 ps|. Thls must be
corrected lrned iate ly.
4. As a result of wafer Dressure surge and suhsequent leaks,nall pops and geam bubf'les as well as dlshlng of qypsun
board panels has been noled. Hhen the building dr.ys ouf,the tofal extenf of the damaqe must b€ revlewed and cor-
rected .
5. Hot wafer heatinq system needs callbratlon bleedinq :Jnd
ha I anc inq.
6. Holes above sioD slnk need el*her patchinq or additlonof slainless sieel skirt as sucigested by Bob !,.rilson.
7, Liqht fixlures ns well as swltch In outlet olates arestlll mlssinq in some lr-rcations.
g. Traction sfr;ps in stair treads need to be reinstalted.
9. Broken flle at northwest corner door should be reolaced.
tC. Urlnal ls out of or,Jer ln second f loor foilet rom,
Your prompt aftention to the above matters would be greatly.apprec-
iated.
'((
Engef ke RRE/fdb
)*r"t*tr;{:u
.iidljgss...ROBEITT R. ENGELKEf tcxrttcrr A I At|'t I ttttr lt tttrl .t trr lrr rriiDrrutt ctt0lro0 !1822
Mr. Terry Mlnger
Clty Manager
Clty of Val IVall, Colorado 81657
Re: Vall Flro Stctlon
lbar Terry,
lncluded ln
trucf lon:
February 1, 1972
fhls packet plcasc flnd the tollorlng fror Blctel Conc-
t.
2.
5.
4.
,.
Confraclor Tax Cerilf lcates
Rooflng larraaty
Sfrrcco Craftsnanshlp Ccrtlf tcatoFlnaf Pay Rcquclt on bulldllqFlnal clecnup Chengc Ordcr li on all Iters unattcnded to asof thls datc.6. Chaggc Ordor f8 - defctlon of Altcrnetc 12 ln orlglnal contract.
And f rc-fhf s off lcc:
l. Certlflcatc of payront lru Engclkc Archltecfs.
You rl ll notlce fhat rc havc a changc order doductrng Arternatc J2frqr the contract for relocatlon of-thc slren. tr tils ls dcslred,rhen nather pernrfs, Brcker conrtructton has agrecd fo a srrprc rettcr@ntrrct frqr fhr To'or vail to rcrocate sard srren for thc crrsilngoontract aounf of l?!o.0o. Therr rril bc an addrtronar charge of3268'00 cs-careed last irovrbcr for Jnstrucfron of a pratforr oa thcexlstlrB-Flrc stailon.ro ccccpt fhrs srrco. Thrr pcrfrcurer proccodurels done In an effort fo total out fhc-f lncl rcqrrri anO-ccrtlf lcctc forpayrenf on fhe proJcct.
I revlercd all of tho operetlon and nalntcnencc schedules tlth gob tllsonof Blckcl consiructlon and found fha to bc In order. gob rilr, durrngthe_reek_of . Februcry 7,. cxplaln opcrctlon of cll systa--ini pr.csentto Frrn Bush not onty thr narntlacncc itni.rs but ihc coatrict revrscd
'ras bullf" as nll. Brckcr construcfroi c-,p"ny r,as oiiatned arr rub-llcn ralvcrs and rilr prc'nt those along rtirr i braakct lrcn rcrverfru Blckel Oonrtructron ccpany rs gcnlrar cootracfor at th of rce-clpt of flnal pcyncnt.
lf I con bo of asslstcncc rn crcrHyrng cny of thosc rtrs, prcasc donrt
I; :'.f*L
-?----l-j.--_-
o
call'rc hcrc at ry off lcc for dlscusslon.
February 1, 1972pagc 2
hcsltatc fo
RRE/fdb
c€: -Ed Strrblc v/
Blckol Constructlon Co.
orcl.
'-a ' '
tl
I
I
?r o
TOI.IN OF VAIL
BOARD OF ZONING, APPEALS , AND EXAMTNERS
MINUTES FoR I',IEETING 0F MAy 13, 1971
A.The meeting was ca11ed
Lodge.
A notion was made by Mn. Youngto Carl Nelson Constnuction onsatisfactony adjustrnent of theBoand. The motion was seconded
mously by the Board.
..{
to o:rder at 9:20 a.m. at the Tivoli
The.following membens were present: Messrs. Clark, Hoy!,We1in, Young and Stnuble (ei-officio)
C. The following guests were present: Messns. Dick Judd,Attonney fon Carl Nelson Const::uction; Chuck Ogilby, ApolloPank; Robent Lazier^; steve Boyd, close:r Than Most constnuction;.Bud Panks' Gondola Ski Shop; Buck Rink, Hyder t Bush Constnuction;John suchan, Foster Lumben cornpany; and James Kough, Ede]weiss.,,
II. Past Business
cari Nelson constnuction application fon contnactonrs license:Mn. vielin abstained from voting as he has a personal interestin the matter. The following backgnound. infonmation was givenby Mn. Judd, attonney for Canl Nelson Construetion: Thearticles of inconporation for: closer Than Most constnuction vrel?efiled Apnil 1970. Relationship between Mr. Nelson and Mr. Boydwas severed in Decemben 1970 because of disagneements about the
management of the companyl howeven, the conponaiion continuedwith each Mn. Boyd and Mn. Nelson or^rhing half of the corponationbut with Mn. Boyd handling all management for the co:rponition.
Mn. Judd presented the argument that the contracts for" the welinand Brown :residences welle signed by the conponation (C1oser^ThanMostConstruction)andnotaSapantnenship(Boydand
Nelson) and therefone the conponation and not the individualsal:e responsible and Nelsonts license should therefone be gnantedon this basis. Mr. Hoyt stated that the Boa::d. cannot accEpt thisargument since the Board is looking at each individuals' qualifi-:cations and financial responsibility and it does not make -any
.diffenence that the penson in question has fonmed another companyunden anothen name. Boyd stated that the conpo:ration haspaid all of the outstanding bi11s and the work is being finished.M::. Boyd stated that he is assuming responsibility for liens andBoyd will wr.ite a l-etten to the Boind slating that Closet ThanMost constnuction (the conponation) is nesponsibLe for Bnownrs
A.
Av
and Welints::esidences and not Canl Nelson as an individual onCanl Nelson Constnuction Company
that we grant'a 30 day extensiona pnovisional basis pending
two complaints neeeived by theby Mr. Hoyt and passed unani-
Meetin
nt'1*i13i.3'roo Meeting ., tu r3, r-e71' Boand of Zoning, Appeals and Examiners
II. New Business
A.Application for contnactorts license by Closen Than MostConst:ruction Company: A motion was made by Mf. young thatcloser" Than Most construction license application be handledin the same mannel? as carl Nelson constnuction. The motion wasseconded by Mn. Welin
Case 2-6-71- - Gondola Ski Shop application for a set backva:riance: The setback va::iance in accondance with dnawingssubmitted by Mn. Parks, was granted subject to written apfnovalfr:om Vail Associates fon the-stairs whi6h project into tiritract land. The Boand member"s looked at the pnoposed siteand it r^ras agreed that the t::act land. nust be pneser"ved as itwas befone the addition. A motion was made bv Chan Welin togrant the var^iance with the above provisions ind seconded byBob CLark
C. Case 8-2-71 - James W. Kough (Edelweiss) - Application fqn twobuilding vaniances, one for cornbustion ain vent and one for tnashchute vestibule: A motion was made by Mr. Hoyt that a solution
.-be worked out between Building Official and Mn. Kough on the.venting. The motion was seconded by Mn. young. M::; Strubleagneed to meet with Mn. Koughrs nepnesentative at.the site andwonk out the r.equined details fon the combustion air vent,. ;
. A- motion was made by M:r. Hoyt that vaniances negarding trashchutevestibu1enotbegnantedandthatMn.Koughberequined'to construct a vestibul-e anound the trash chute in the basement.The notion was seconded by Mn. Welin.
Case 8-3-71 - Hibbend Construction Company application forbuilding var"iance with negand to chases (tau16 17-A of unifonnBuilding Code): Motion was made by Mn. Hoyt that we acceprBuilding 0fficial's judgement in this case. The motion wisseconded by Mr. Young. The following recomrnendation was madeby Mn. Stnuble: The contractor should use Al-bi-C1ad on steel
membens and non-onganic matenial be stuffed into the chases.A motion was made by Mn. welin that the vaniance be granted withthe suggestions rnade by I4:r'. Stnuble inconponated. The motion -
D.
P
was seconded by Mrn. Clank.
case B-5-7L - Robert T. Lazien application fo:r building vaniancewith regand to placement of stair.s, A suggestion was made byMn. Struble that stains be moved to centen of building .instead.
of on the end of building to pnomote bette:: fine safeiy.
\?7i"\ must agnee and write a lette:: to the Boand stating that].5lofsetbackwi1].bepnovidedonpance1Cwhenitisbui.1t
on, and that pancel 1 will not be used for. a building. Motiolr
made by M::. Hoyt that the vaniance be gnanted pending receipt.of lettens fr^om Mr. Lazien and Vail Asiociates-with nespect-to
9,
.. ,/ i
parcel 1.
.! '.,,i'age 3 .
/-" I{inutes
..r,'' Boand of
c
l
of Meeting ofQV t3, 1971Zoning, Appeals, and Examinens
o
F. case 8-4-71 - Robent T. LazLer - Request for building variancewith negar.d to section 3302 (a) of ihe Unifonm tsuildfng Code: ,A motion was made by Mn. Hoyt that the vanianee not to providetwo exits as requined in section 3302 (a) be appnoved providedthat an altearnate rnethoci of exit be pr"ovided by way of laddersfrom the balconies. The motion was seconded by Mn. young.
G. Case Z-3-7L - Rodney E. Slifer - Request for,setback vaniance;.This case was preseuted by M::. Slifer at the April 22, I}TLrneeting as he was not planning to be in town for the meeting of
May 13, 1971. Mr. StrubLe stated that he could see no dansen
frnom the standpoint of fire since ther^e is a gneat distancE fromthe existing house (Hastings). Mr. Hastings has given his: r\t\ai,'i t' = 1 +n +fig Boand fon the vaniance. A motion was made bvr-\Jj. Lllc VCIJ. -Lo.lIUg . aa Ill\J L _M:r. Young that the variance be gnanted to allow a 5t setback ..fnom the pnoperty line. The rnotion was seeonded by Mn. Welin. ,,
ft was suggested that a letten be wnitten to Mr. Stifer statingthat he must be sure whene his property line is and should notbase his opinion on the position of the existing fence
Case 2-4-71 - Vail Fine Protection Distnict - Request fonsetback variance: A variance request was made for a 6r set-back variance on the west side. A motion was.mad.e by Mr. .Hoyt
that the vaniance be denied and that the Fine Protection Distnictmust meet the 10r setback nequi::ement, but th€ Boand would gt?anta va:riance on the South propenty line and the building must be
moved on the pnoperty in accondance with the above. The vaniance
was denied on the basis of assessibllity to the sewer line that.nuns between the two buildings. The variance .as granted wouldallow the buiLding to be no dloser than 6t on the-South pnopenty,,
.L IIIS .
I. Case 2-5-71 - Vail Fine P:rotection District - Request forsetback vaniance: A variance request was made for a 3r setback
vaniance on the pnopenty line which fnonts on the :road. A .
motion was made Py lln. Welin that the vaniance be gnanted if .the Fi:re P::otection Distnict Board agnees to accept recommendation
made fo:r Case 2-4-71. The motion.was seconded by Mn. V,lel"in,
IV. Other Business
The.following applications for Contractonrs Licenses were approvedsubject to r:eceipt of insurance centificates and other nissing.information:
1. Airway, Inc.2. Amco Electnic3. Stan Anderson4. .Benedictrs
5. Closen Than Most Constnuction - see III A.6. Down East Landscaping7. Gary Hamilton
H.
A.
DATE:
'rgcTLo t)D rsrB,,nespectfully nequest
-..-lv
APPLICATIONTO APPEAR BEFORE THEBOARD OF ZONING AD'UST'MENf
BOARD OF BUILDING APPEALS
VI,
var0f
I
ance inom thethe. Vail Zoning
requLrements
Ondinance in of sectionorder to
and sect IIBuildingc;
rn rnaking a detenmination on zoning the Boand considens only, r. un-9lF hanaship' 2.-need fon the pnop5sed-"""ii"..,- s. cornpaiiiririiv orthe pnoposed vaniance with trre'sui.no""ai"i-ii;JJl u. effect on futunedevelopmelt of the a:rea-and, s. hearth, sIr.ty, and the welfane ofthe inhabitants of the Towni veJ ' e
rn.building code vaniances the Boand may considen only, 1. suit-ability of. altennate mateniars and methods of constnuction and,2.. neasonabte intenpnetations oi the provi"i"""-or-it;-;;e":"-'
The Administnative officiaL nay challenge any vaniance gnanted whichgoes beyond the scope of the p6wens oi [ir"-L-6""a.
rt is undenstood that a fee of $2s.00 is payable in advance and that1tgl, (J-0) day posting peniod'is nequilr"a-piio"-to a pubric hear.ingon the.above nequests.
\
Signed:
L-4
t..
I
I
I
,o'APPLICATIONTO APPEAR BEFORE THEBOARD OF ZONING ADIUSTMEM
BOARD OF BUILDING APPEALS
DATE:
r,
vann€
I
Vat-
ance nonthe V Lt
ftore-crrod nespectfully quest
becton
onden to
LUT
-
and SectBuilding .o
:l-t*I::g,i^d.l.olili.i?" on zoning the Boand considens only, L. Un_iff :::-o:lil'..3:.:::l .{?:- tire pnop6";a-";;i;;.;;"5:-;iipltiiliriiu";;
:l:^y::ry::d-vaniance with the'iri"."rail;-;i;;:,;: ;;;#;;;T;i;:l::"1:ll:ll_9l the a:rea_ and, s. ireariir,-"Er"ivl'""; ;;;-;;ii"""-Jithe inhabitants of the town.
}o
rn.buil-dirg code vaniances the Board. may considen only, 1. suit-ability of altennate matenials and meth6ds of construction and,2., neasonabLe intenpnetatior,s oi the pnovisio""-"r the code.
The Administnative officiar nay challenge any vaniance gnanted whichgoes beyond the scope of the p6,tens of Ine S6and.
rt is undenstood that a fee of-$2s.00 is payab],e in advance and that
" tgl, (10) day posting peniod is-requin"a-pi,ion-to a public heaningon the above nequests. -.
' .1
I
'|.;
Signed:
o
a to
l{r, rloeaph Lrngrna;id
Chainoan of the BoardVal.l fire .Protcqtion Diatrist
VaiI , CoLonado
Subjeot: NEw Fine Station
Dccr .Ioc r
In rnakl,ng ny f.inal inepectlon of thethe foll.or{ng itcne hav€ eo&o to ny'be coneotcd priob to th6 ieeurancetif ieatc of . ooeuparlcy I
Fcbruary 2[, L972
,;.
eubjcet building,attention whl.ch nuetof the perDAnant osr-
Seotion 330E (h) - Rogar"dlcee of the occupant Load, thErcghall bc a floor on lqndirrg on oaah eLde of a door. Thefloon on landlng ehall bs level $rith, on not mone than twolncnoc (2t').lowcr. than the thncshold of the doonway. Thneerxicting doong do lot confonm to thl.e saation.
Sootion 3305 (b) - Stai:rwaye ecnving an occupant load ofnors than 50 EhalL be not lces.Ln wldth than 44 lnchre.
Stafuwayc senvlng an ocoupant Load of S0 or leag nry be 86lnohae widc. Pnivats stai.nways eerving .rn oocBpant: l.ord d,f,lces thrn L0 nay be 30 inchea wide. Tlrin Eh,tLl not n.ducitlre ncguLred wLdth by none than 3 L'lZn, Sfurce thc widthoannot bo neduEed by ioor than B LlZt,, the lights Eurt'benaiEcd to 6t6il.
Youno tnuLy,
TOWN OT VAIL
Ed Stnublc
Building Official
eer Robrrt R. Engelko .
BlokEI ConEtruction
Fnan Bugh
Stan Bcrnrtein
\ Fa?g SrArraz
a ac?zttt, - F/.c
Apnil 2?, 1.971
l,lr. Robont Engcl,ke
2181. South Holly
Dsnvcr, Coloredo
Subjrct: F!.re tlouEc
Dean Bob:
\1b 4
opcnable.
6. I would likc to diecueE detail B/llwith you.
7. I havE been told that the roof wl.Il be changed to a buil.t-up nock noof whioh ehall be fire nctardant.
'l{y plan chcck of thc above aubJcct bulldlng s}rows tho follorlng:
The uee zona ie Publlc Aecolpdatione; Oaoupancy group ile F-2i oonatnuctlon le typc V; neguincd alt ulctce ai"e front,ISfcldr and rrar 10 f. My p).an check revealg the following non-
eonfornltLeg:
1, No panking allowcd on nonth eids of building blnoc baoking
oDto a stra€t ie prohJ.bited by zoning ordinanca.
2. Slde yand on wcat cnd ig lr I loes than requined. A
vaniancc will bc needed and Lf gnantcd, all ogrninge
ehaLl, be pnotcctcd by 3/4 houn fine aeaenbly and thocxtatrlor wall shatl be one hour fire reoietl.vc ln accondancewith trbls 5-A.
3. Entny roof at northcast oorner of building is J-nchec awayfnon pnopenty ll-ne and will, neguire a var:isncc.
\ro5 '+' 3it*: 113 :H*1":'oH"Hll:"trr exhausted wrth a nininum
,.a( 5. l{indow F in lounge 202 muat senve ae natural Ltght andflvz vcntllation for both the lounge and the kltchcn and sha1lbe l/8 of tho floor alrca, one half of whlch thall b6
. 8. Conorcte block neinforcing ahall be a ninirEurn of;
24\D 2 - #sre at rf on center honizontarry andvcrtloally - l2rr cononeta blockI - fS at 2r8'r on oenton vcntically1 - .ff at $ r' on o3nter honJ.zontally
9. tlatar heatu room muat havc vent for oonburtlsn afur.
RetPeotfully,
TOWN OT VAIL
8d'Stnutilc
Building.. Offtotal
663 ;.,,"Vall Fl,rc Pnotcctton Dl.gtrlct .Board of Dl.ncctorr
|:
Er.en Euah
i.
-f,
_-J