HomeMy WebLinkAboutEAGLE RIVER WATER & SANITATION DISTRICT 1982-1994 COMMON 2c.". rO 8zcvt32gVail Valley Consolidated
l{ater District
water Division No. 5
(
7.
of the high water line of the reservoir is
located at a point whence the Northwest corner
of Section I0, Township 5 South, Range 80 west
of the 5th P.tl . bears North 28"00r West,
7,800 feet.
Golf Course Reservoir No. 1, decreed 5.5 AF
out of Gore Creek, with adjudication date of
December 12, 1977 and with appropriation date
of Septenber 2, L977, Case No. 1{-3606. Entire
decrel made absolute in case No. 81cw282. The
dam is located in the NEL/4 of the ltWl/4 of
Section 9, Township 5 South, Range 80 West of
the 5th P.M. The reservoir outlet is located
at a point whence the Northwest corner of said
Secti-on 9 bears North 69000' West, 1,900 feet.
Golf Course Reservoir No. 2, decreed 25.0 AF
out of Gore Creek, with adjudication date of
December 27, 1977 and with appropriation date
of Septenber 2, ]-977, Case No- l{-3507. Entire
decrei nade absolute in Case No. 81cw282. The
darn is located in SwL/4 of swl/4 of Section 3,
s1t/4 of SEL/4 of Section 4, NEl/4 of NE1/4 of
seciion 9, ind Nw1/a of Nwl/4 of Section 10,
all in Township 5 South, Range 80 tlest of the
6th P.Itt. The ieservoir outlet is located at a
point whence the Northeast corner of said-section 9 bears North 38030r East, 100 feet.
Red Sandstone Reservoir, conditionally decreed
160.0 AF out of Red Sandstone Creek, a tribu-
iary of Gore Cre'ek, with adjudic.ation date of
Dec6mber 30, L977 and appropriation date of
October 15, 1977, Case No- w'3667' 1981' Ba-sin
Rank 5589. The westerly end of the darn is
located in Section 1, Township 5 South'
Ranoe 81 West of the 6th P.lll. at a point
wheice the Southeast cotner of said Section 1
bears South 13625'30il East, 1,810.2 feet.
Black Gore creek Reservoir No. l, condition-
iffv a""reed 112.0 AF out of Black Gore Creek,
i-t'riUutary of Gore Creek, with adjudication
date of Ddcernber 29, 1978 and appropriatlon
date of December 20, 1978, Case No' Vl-40o3,
igCi sisin Bank 6702. The east end of the dan
is-iocated at a point South l7o45r East, 5,761
i.ei from the Northeast corner of Section 13,
8.
(
9.
10.
(
A-22
;:ii *.33'8333.'idated
Water Districtwater Division No. 5
(
(
11.
Township 5 South, Range 80 West of the 6th
P.!1.
Black Gore Creek Resenroir No. 2, condition-
a1ly decreed 116.0 AF out of Black Gore Creek,with adjudication date of December 29, L978
and appropriation date of December 20, 19?8,
Case No. W-4003. 1981 Basin Rank 6702. The
east end of the dam is located at a point
South 22oL0t East, 11,340 feet fron the
Northeast corner of Section 13, Township 5
South, Range 80 West of the 6th P.Ii'!.
Black Gore Creek Reservoir No. 3, condi-tionally decreed 241.0 AF out of Black Gore
Creek, a tributary of Gore Creek, with adju-
dication date of December 29, l97g and appro-priation date of Decenber 20, L978, Case
No. W-4003, 1981 Basin Rank 6702. The North
end of the dam is located at point South
84"30r East, 10,400 feet from the Northeastcorner of Section 1, ?ownship 6 South,
Range 80 West of the 6th P.liJ.
Indian Creek Resenroir, conditionally decreed
598.0 AF out of Indian Creek, tributary to Red
Sandstone Creek, a tributary of Gore Creek,with adjudication date of December 29, 1978
and appropriation date of Decernber 2Q, 1978,
Case No. w-4003, 1981 Basin Rank 6702. Thet{est end of the dam is located at a point
North 34o40r West, 14,500 feet fron the
Northeast corner. of Section 1, Township 5
South, Range 81 West of the 6th P.l,l.
Red Sandstone Resenroir No. 2, conditionally
decreed 50.0 AF out of Indian Creek and Red
Sandstone Creek. a tributary of Gore Creek,with adjudication date of December 29, 1978
and with appropriation date of Decenber 20,
t978, Case No. Vt-4003, 1981 Basin Rank 6702.
The west end of the dam is located at a point
North l5o15r West, 7,29O feet from the North-
east corner of Section 1, Township 5 South,
Range 81 ldest of the 6th P.I{.
Black Lake, conditionally decreed 100 AF out
of Black Gore Creek, with adjudication date of
November 12, L982 and appropriation date of
December 20, l97g' Case No. W-4003. The west
L2.
13.
L4.
t
15.
A-23
(
$:ii f, 33'8333., idated
Water District
Water Division No. 5
end of the dam forming Black Lake is located
at a point approximately 17 '42A feet South
59035t East of the NortheaEt corner of
Section 1, Township 6 South, Range 80 West of
the 6th P.M.
16. Black Lake No.2 conditionally decreed
113.6 AF out of Black Gore Creeli with adjudi-
cation date of Novembet L2, L982 and appro-
priation date of December 20' 1978; -Caseilo. W-4003. The west end of the dam forming
BLack Lake No. 2 is located at a point aPprox-
imately 15,160 feet South 66035' East of tbe
Northelst corner of Section 1, Township 5
South, Range 80 l{est of the 5th P.I'l'
l?. Black take No. 2. First Enlargernent, condi-
tionally decreed 278 AF out of Black Gore
Creek witn aajudication date of Novenber 12,
1982 and appropriation date of Decenber 20,
1978; case'iio. eoOs. It is proposed to extend
tbe dam described in paragraph 16 above
80 feet South and 100 feet North to create
Black Lake No. 2, First Enlargenent.
18. Vail Val]ey Reservoir' a proPosed 5,500 AF
reservoir wtricfr will be constructed in the
drainage basin of Red Sandstone Creek with
point -of impoundnent of water located in-section 35, township 4 South, Range 81 west of
the 5th P.lr!. at a point whence the South 1/16
corner, a Bureau oi Land Management aluminum
caP, comnon to Spction 5 of Town-ship 5. South,
nairie 8o West of -the 5th P.!1. and Section 1 of
rowiship 5 South, Range 81 west of the 6th
P.M. beirs South 19006-135r' East, a distance of
7,4OO.29 feet. A decree was entered in Case
No. 81CW353 on llarch 4, 19S5 awarding an
appropriate date of October 29, 1981'
IV. Undecreed Water Storaqe Rights gtd Structures:
1. Vail Valley Reservoir No. 2 proposeq 1,000 AF
reservoir -wtricfr will be constructed in the
Arainage-of Black Gore Creek within 0'75 uriles
of the confluence of Black Gore Creek'and
Miller Creek, which confluence is located,
approxirnately, at 1 pgint - sgulh 31" East'
f-S,roo feet-irom the- Northeast corner of
(
t
A-24
(
c""" n? 82cw32sVail Valley Consolidated
Water District
Water Division No. 5
Section 13, Township 5 South. Range 80 West of
the 5th P.M.
StructuEes To Ee Aqgnnented:
1. B1ack Gore Infiltration Ga]lery (E.c.Dj!.-
eorurfittee witer Svstem Point B).
rn whence the
vIL/4 corner of Section 18, Tovrnship 5
South, Range 79 west, 6th P.!'1. bears
South 6l-a?l t west, l'264 feet-b. Maxinum Diversion: 3.0 c.f.s.c. Source: Bfack Gore Creekd. Use: All municiPal PurPosese. Associated lrlater Rights*:(i) o.25 c.f.s. E.c.D.c. Gallery,
Subsection II.7 above.(ii) 3.0 c.f.s. Hoyt Pipeline SubsectionII.8 above, per Case No. 82CVi328.(iii) L2.O c.f.s. Gore Creek Water Author-ity Committee Water Systen Point B,
Subsection II.23 above.
2. Biqhorn,/Gore vallev Pumphouse:of Section lS,
Township 5 south, Range 79 west, 6th P-l'l .
at a point 1.250 feet from tbe North
Section line and 1,100 feet from the ttrest
Section line.b. Irlaximun Diversion: 4-0 c.f.s.
c. source: Gorc Creekd. Use: All municiPal PurPosese. Associated Water Rights*:
10. o c. f . s. conditional lllain Gore
Irtunicipal Ditch and PiPeline,
SubEection II.10 above, decreed in
Case No. 82evl42 on llarch 6, 1985.
3. Gore Creek Intake for Booth Creek Treatnent
Plant:ETlocation: See Subsection II.18 above.
b. Maxinum Diversion: 15 c.f.s.
c. Source: Gore Creek
d. Use: A1l municiPal PurPosese. Associated Water Rights*:(i) 4.63 c.f.s. absolute and 0.81 c.f.s.
conditional , Subsection II.18 above'
(ii) 1.51 c.f.s. conditional First
Enlargenent, Subsection I I . L9 a'bove '
v.
(
t
A-25
(
c"". Nl szcw3zsVail ValleY Consolidated
water District
water Division No. 5
(iii) Nunetous municipal rights Per793wt24. See Table 1 below.
Booth Creek Water Treatment Plelt Inlele:
e.
b. Maximum Diversion: 15 c.f.s.c. Source: Booth Creekd. Use: A11 municiPal PurPosese. Associated Water Rights*:(i) 3.23 c.f.s. abiolute and 2.57 c'f's'
conditional , Subsection II.17 above.(ii) Numerous nunicipal rights Per79cwl24. See Tab1e 1 below.
5. Vail-ValleY ClnEolidated Well- No. Rl:
a. r,ocatro@tion 3,
Township 5 South, Range 80 West, 6th P't{'at a point approximalely I,-09,5 f-e-et fromthe sbuth sCCtion line and 1.256 feet
fron the East section line.b. Maximun Diversion: 2.0 c.f.s.c. Source: Gore Creek alluviumd. Use: A11 rnuniciPal PurPosese. Associated water Rights*: Numerous
nuniciPal rights Per 79Cw724. See
Table 1 below.
Vaflev Consolidated Well Iq. nZ:tion 3,
4.
(
6.Vail
a.
(
Township 5 South, Range 80 West, 5th P.!l'
at a p6int approximately 900 feet from
the S6uth $ection line and 2'365 feet
fron the wbst Section line of said
Section 3.b. Maximun Diversion: 2-5 c.f-s.
c. source: Gore Creeh Alluvium
d. Use: A11 municiPal PurPosese. Associated Water Rights*:(i) 2.5 c.f.s. of Hoyt Pipeline, Strb-
section II.8 above, alternate point
of diversion decreed under case
No. 82CW281.(ii) Case No. 83Cw258 decreed this well
as an alternate Point of diversion
for the following rights: '1'6
c.f.s. of, Bighorn PiPeline, Sub- -section II.9 -above, O.25 c.f .s. of
E.C.D.c. Gallery, Subsection II '7
above . 2-59 c.f .s. of Bootlt Creek
areatnent Pl'ant Intake,
A-26
(
7.Vait Vallev Consolidated Vlell No. R3:
case NP82cw32sVail Valley Consolidated
Vlater Districtt{ater Division No. 5
Subsection II.17 above. 4.53 c.f.s.
of Gore Creek lDtake for Booth Creek
water Treatnent Plant, Subsec-
tion II.18, above.
2,080 feet.
Uaxinun diversion: 2-0 c.f.s.
Source: Gore Creek Alluvium
Use AII nuniciPal PurPoses
Associated water rights*: Sane as Well
No. R3, Subsection V.7 above.
Vallev Consofidated WelL Nc. R5:
eq "i+iqioo-foot radiui from a point on the right
bank of Gore Creek nhence the NVI corner
of Section lo. Township 5 South, Range 80
West, 6tlt P.M. bears North 77o30r llest'
800 feet.
(
ed within
100-foot radiui from a point on the right
bank of Gore Creek whence the NE corner
of Section 8, Township 5 South' Range 80
West, 6th P.M. bears North 50030' East.
2,680 feet.b. Maximun Diversiont 2.0 c.f-s-c. Source: Gore Creek Alluviumd. Use: All municiPal PurPosese. Associated Water Rights*:(i) 0.478 c.f,.s. collectively decreed to
VaiI Vil]age West Wells No. 3, 4, 5,
subsectioni rt. 3-5 above, Per this
application.(ii) a-.154 c.f.s. collectively decreed tovail t{ater and Sanitation Distrlct
t'lells No. L and 2, Subsections II.
24-2? above, Per tbis aPPlication.(iii) 1.62 c.f.s. collectively decreed. toVail t'rater and Sanitation District
Spring and PiPelines A, B, and c,
Subsections II. 28-30 above, Perthis aPP1ication.
8. vail valleY CoLsglidate{ w,ell No. R4:a. f,ocatr ed within
100-foot radiui from a point on the right
bank of Gore creek whence the NW cornerof Section 9, TownshiP 5 South, Range
80 t{est, 5th P.}t. bears North 73o l{est'
b.
c.
d.
e.
9.
(
VaiI
A-27
case O szcw32sVail Valley Consolidated
Water District
water Division No. 5r\
b. lrlaximum Diversionz 2.0 c.f.s.c. source: Gore Creek Alluviumd. Use: AII nuniciPal PurPosese. Associated Water Rights*: Same as Well
No. R3, Subsection V.7 above
10. Vail Vallev Consol.idated well No. R6:
ed within
l0o-foot radiui fron a point on the right
bank of Gore Creek whence the SW corner
of Section 3, Township 5 South, Range 80
l{est, 6th P.}t. bears South 59010r West,
2,530 feet.b. ltaximun Diversion: 2.0 c. f . s.c. source: Gore Creek Alluviumd. Use: AII nuniciPal PurPosese. Associated Water Rights*: Sarne as l{ell
No. R3, Subsection V.7 above.
11. Vail GoIf Course Ditch.
@of diversion located on
Gore Creek -in the SWL/4 of Section 3,
Township 5 South, Range 80 West' 6th P.Itl- |
f t 9 noint within 200 feet of a point It 3lu':,;t H:Y"::?'?,?'ff"'n :ff'3::.lll"]ine of said Section 3 -b. tlaximum Diversion: 3.0 c.f.s.c. Source: Gore Creekd. Use: Irrigatione. Associated Water Rights: Nunerous
municipal $tater rights Der 79CwL24- See
Table 1 below.
12. Gore Creek water Treaqnent.?lant-I9gak9:
a. ---EoEEti-on: See Subsectlon I I .15 aDove.
b. llaximun Diversion: 15 c.f.s.
c. Source: Gore Creek
d. Use: Al1 nuniciPal PurPosese. Associated Water Rights*:(i) 1.90 c-f.s. absol'ute
Subsection II.15 above.(ii) Numerous municipal rights per
79CllI24. See Tab]e 1 below.
13. Gotden Pgk Snownaki+o.:@section rr.16 above.
b. Uaximum Diversion: 1.34'c.f.s.
c. Source: Mill Creek
(\
A-28
(
c""u Hle zcw3zlVail Va]ley Consolidated
Water District
Water Division No. 5
ffion II.6 above.
Uaximum Diversion: 0.55 c.f.s.source: Gore Creek alluviunUse: AII nrunicipal PurPosesAssociated Water Rights*:
0.55 c.f.s., Subsection II.5 above.
d. Use: Snowmakinge. Associated Water Rights*:(i) L.34 c.f.s., Subsection II-15 above.
( ii ) Nurnerous rnunicipal rights per
79CWL24. See Table 1 below.
]1. Vail Villaqe vlest Wef I No. l:a. Location: See Subsectron II.]' aDove.
b. Maximurn Diversion: 0.256 c.f.s.
c. source: Gore Creek alluviumd. Use: A11 municiPal PurPosese. Associated water Rights*:
0.256 c.f.s., Subsection II.1 above.
(
15.Vail
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
16.Vail
t7.Vail
a.ffitre NE1,z4 sw1,/4 of
section 12, Township 5 South, Range 81
west, 5th P.14. at a point 3,035 feet fromthe North Section fine and 1,436 feet
frorn the west section line.b. Maxinum Diversion: 0.556 c.f.s.c. Source: Gore Creek alluviund. Use: All nuniciPal PurPosese. Associated Water Rights*:
0.556 c.f.s. as alternate Point of
diversion for Vail Village West
Wells Nos. 1-5, Subsections II.l.-6
above, Per case No. W-2564-78.
Section 12, Township 5 South, Range 81
lrfest, 5th P.M. at a point 3,A44 feet from
the North Section line and 1,750 feet
from the West Section line.b. Irlaxinun Diversionz 0.267 c-f.s.c. sourcei Gore Creek alluviund. Use: All nuniciPal PurPosese. Associated Water Rights*:,
0.267 c.f.s as-an alternate point of
diversion for Vail Village tfest
a.ffiem1,z4 sttll/4of
t
A-29
(
t
case xl82cw328VaiI Valley consolidatedllater Districtllater Division No. 5
Wells Nos. 1-5, Sections II.1-6
above, per Case No. W-2664-78.
Vail Internountain Well No. 2:SvtI/4 of Sec-
tion 14, ?ownship 5 South' Range 81 west,
6th P.lu. at a point 1,42a feet fron the
South Section iine and 190 feet fron the
ttest Section line of said Section 14.
18.
b.
c.
d.
e.
Itlaxirnum Diversion: 0.2 e. f . ssource: Gore Creek alluviumUse: All municipal PurPosesAssociated l{ater Rights*:0.2 c.f.s. as an alternate Point of
diversion per case No. ll-1970 of
0.5 c.f .s. -of the Ruder No. 2 Ditch,
decreed a total of L.26 c.f.s. outof Gore Creek, PrioritY No. 389,with an adjudication date of octo-
ber 3, L936 and aPProPriation dateof June 1, 1900, Civil Action
No. 963, 1981 Basin Rank 2757.
(19.Vail Intermountain 9Je11 No. 4 also known as
n the SEL/4 Wtt/4 of Sec-
20.
tion 14, TownshiP 5 South, Range 81 West,
6th P.M. at a point 2'7OO feet from the
North section line and 1,750 feet frorn
the West Section line.b. tltaximum Diversion: 0.5 c.f.s.
c. Source: Goge Creek alluvium
d. User All nuniciPal PurPosese. Associated water Rights*:
0.5 c.f's. as an alternate Point of,
diversion Per Case No. 79Cw220 for
0.5 c.f.s.-of the Ruder No. 2 Ditch'
decreed a total of l-26 c.f.s. out
of Gore Creek, Priority No. 389'
with adjudication date of October 3,
1936 and aPProPriation date of
June 1, 1900. civil Action No. 963,
1981 Basin Rank 2757.
Tourist Tr?P SDrinq:a. Locatton: SG subsection II.13 above.
b. Maxirnum Diversion: 0. 133 c- f,. B -
c. source: Gore Creek alluviun.
d. Use: AIl municiPal PurPosest
A-30
(
;:ii $;$T:i:",idated
water District
Water Division No. 5
e. Associated water Rights*:(i) 0.133 c.f.s., Subsection II.13
above.(ii) Numerous municipal rights per
79CWL24. See Table 1 below.
Town of Vail Sprins Taps:ffiection rr.14 above.
b. llaxinum Diversion: 0.78 c.f.s.c. Source: Gore Creek alfuviultt.d. Use: A11 municipal purPoses
e. Associated Water Rights*:(i) 0.78 c.f.s, Subsection II.14 above.(ii) Numerous rnunicipal rights per
79CWI24. See Ta.ble 1 below.
Loq Chute Purnp Station:ffisection rl.2o above.b. Maxinum Diversion: 0.09 c.f.s-
c. Sourcer MiIl Creekd. Use: A11 municipal PurPosese. Associ.ated Water Rights*r(i) 0.09 c.f.s, Subsection.II.20 above.(ii I Nunerous nrunicipal rights per
79CW124. See Table I below.
Nunber 245 Punphouse and Pond:II.21 above.
b. I'laxinum Diversion: 1.78 c.f.s.
c. Source: MiI} Creek
d. Use: A11 municiPal PurPosese. Associated lrater Rights*:(i) 1.78 c.'f .s., conditional, Subsec-tion II.21 above'(ii1 Nunerous rnunicipal rights per
79CVll24. See Table 1 below.
(
2L.
22.
23.
24.Plow Sprins:El---GEon: see subsection 11.22b. tlaxinrr:rn Diversion: 0.178 c.f.s-c. Source: ltlill. Creekd. Use: A1l. municiPal PurPosese. Associated Water Rights*:
above.
0. 165(i) 0.013 c.f.s., absolute andc.f.s., conditional ,
Subsection lI.22 above.
( ii ) Nunerous nunicipal rig-hts Per79gttl24. See ?able '1 below.
t
A-31
"""" olr 2cw328Vail Val,ley Consolidated
water District
Water Pivision No. 5
(
25' X?" i:::ii:*:= ?f"sr?t?"ah ?i'E':'*+"3,1't?'"
lt., 6th P.M. at a Point located as
foilows: Commencing-at the NW corner of
said Section 7' thence South 1018' East,
a distance of 843 feet-b. Maximum Diversionz 4.5 c'f's'
c. Source: Gore Creekd. Use: Snowmakinge. Associated Water Rights*:
4.5 c.f.s. of HoYt PiPeline, -Subsection II.8. above, Per thls
application.
*The itassociated water rights" schedufed in this subsection
aie-runicipal water righti associated with these structures.
itrese strultures -iie aiso capable of being augimented Pfi th"
Eo"""rpti.,r. use Jvailable td tfre irrigation water rights
described in section I- above.
(
(
\
A-32
(
Case No. 82Cw328Vail Valley Consolidated
Water District
Water Division No. 5
TASLE 1
rights divertible at alternate points of
cases No. 79CW124 and w-2256 by priority.
Amount(c.f .s. )
. 0.32
2.50
2.25
4.O4
0.59. 0.59
1.33
0.25
1 .50
1.00J.40
f 1.00\ 4.40
0.50
I .00
2.O0
2.OO
0.0892
0.01042 AF
o.25
Water
diversion under
Case No. 79cwl24
1.0.00
1 .60
4. 00
10.00
112.00
240.25
2.22
**Webb Ditch**Mcl'lonag1e Ditch**Bryant Lower Ditch**Buffehr & Rose Ditch**Rose Ditch**Rose Ditch**Rose Ditch**Bryant Lower Ditch
't*Kiahtipes No. 1 Ditch
't*Kiahtipes No. 2 Ditch*'tXiahtipes No. 3 Ditch,t*Kiahtipes No. 6 Ditch**Black Gore Ditch**Webb Ditch**Main Gore Ditch*rtEdward Ditch**Mike Ditch*Fleming Spring and
Pipeline
Fleninq Storage Tank*E.C.D.C. Gallery(Black Gore Infiltra-tion Gallery,
GWACWS Pt.B)*Eoyt Pipeline*Bighorn Pipeline
(GWACVTS Pr. C)*Bighorn Fish Pond Ditch*Main Gore !!un. Ditch
and Pipeline
E.C.D.C. Resenroir
Hoyt Resenroir*Red Sandstone Gallery
(G\ndAcr{s Pt. A)
1981
Basin
RankName
847
1666
1967
2774
2779
2784
2784
2S2t
3299
3299
3299
3299
3306
3307
4183
4442
4443
5047
5047
AF
AF
5057
5057
5057
5057
5057
5084
5084
5273
(
A-33
-
C
c"". rl Bzcw3zlVaiI Valley Consolidated
Water Districtwater Division No. 5
1981
Basin
Rank
Case No. W-2256
Anount(c.f .s. )
2 .00
1 .28
2 .30
1.20
2.40l.2a
L.20
0.50
0.80
0.50
2.80
3 .30
2.00
2.02
3.00
1.00
2.70
6.20
4.2A
Name
**Mann Ditch**Webb Ditch**Larzalere Ditch**F. Larzalere Ditch**Scovill.e Ditch**Sawmill. Ditch**Shively Ditch**Sandstone Ditch*rPark Ditch**spraddle Ditch**Xatsos Ditch**Katsos No. 2 Ditch**Spraddle No. 2 Ditch**Vfebb Ditch**Sawmill Ditch**F. Larzalere Ditch**Sandstone Ditch**Larzal.ere Ditch**!Iann Ditch
735
8.47
850
851
853
854
854
2358
2359
2360
3299
3299
3300
3307
3444
3634
3836
3903
4185
(*These water rights were decreed in case No. 79Cwl24 toalternate points of diversion at t}re following struc-tures: Booth Creek l{ater lreatrnent Plant fntake, Gore
Creek Intake for Booth Creek water Treatment Plant, Vail
Valley Consolidated Well No. Rl, Vail Golf Course Ditch,
core Creek t{ater Treatment Plant Intake, Golden Peak
Snowrnaking, Tourist Trap Spring, Town of Vail SPring
Taps, tog Chute Pump Station, Nuriber 245 Pumphouse and
Pond, and PIow Spring. the E.C.D.C. Ga1lery, EoytPipeline, and Bighorn Fish Pond Ditch water rights nay
continue to be diverted at their original points of
diversion and the above listed points of diversionpursuant to the decree entered herein. The Flenring.
spring and Pipeline, Bighorn Pipeline, Uain Gore Uunici-pal Ditch and Pipeline, and Red Sandstone Gallery waterrights may eontinue to be diverted at the alternatepoints of-diversion but not at their original points of
diversion pursuant to Paragraph 5 of this decree.
**So.Iong as this decree is effective, the applicant will
use th6se ltater rights only as consumptivC use creditsto be diverted and- stored as describe-d in Paragraph 8
herein. If this decree is not in effect for sorne
reason, the Applicant reserves its right to divert rater
as decreed iri-Case No6. 79ca[24 and F-ZZSA or as subse-
quently decreed by a court of competent jurisdiction'
\
A-34
\Cr:r fe-.,-
Clc_..1
7 5 Sortb Frontagc Road
Vtil, Colorado 81657
t 0t -47 9 -2 1 0 t / FAX 1 0 t -47 9 -2 1 t7
Office of tbe Toun Manager
March 25, 1991
Mr. Warren M. Garbe, General Manager
Upper Eagle Valley Consoljdated Sanitat'i on District
and Vai1 Va1ley Consoljdated Water District
846 Forest Road
Vail, C0 81657
Re: Upper Eagle Valley Consolidated Sanitation District
Vai l Val i ey Consol j dated lJater Di stri ct
Town of VaiI - Road Cut Permits and Tap Fee Waivers
Dear Warren:
Since we were both interested in some pending projects which needed to be
resolved a couple of months ago, I beijeve we informed Fred Haslee that the
agreements between the Town and the Sanitation and Water 0istricts were
acceptable and would be executed. S'i nce that time, the agreements have
been fully executed, and two copies are enclosed for your files.
In response to Jim Collins' request jn his letter dated January 30, 1991,
the Town of Vail is happy to waive the street cut permit fees of $1,100 due
from the Vajl Valley District and $250 due from the Upper Eagle Va1 1ey
Consolidated Sanitation District. Pete Burnett will be in touch with Fred
Haslee if any further paperwork or correspondence is necessary to
accomolish this.
I hope that you are getting settled in the val 1ey and in your job, and
would like to get together with you for lunch after the end of ski season.I will give you a call in the next few weeks to get something scheduled.
I would also like to apologize for the length of time it has taken to get
these returned to you, but I am certainly encouraged that the Districts and
the Town of Vail are entering into this type of agreement again and working
closely together. Please Iet me know if have any questions concerning
these agreements. I will be glad to d'i scuss the history with you when we
get together.
Rondall V. Phillips
Town Manager
RVP/sas
Encl os ure
cc: Kristan Pritz
Pete Burnett
Gary Murrai n
Martha Jensen
rl o oI I Cor-r,rxs AlrD Cocrnnl, P.c.
"ou' "..oJ".f arroRNEys ar Law
rfMorHyJ. BEAToN DENVER. coLoRADo eo22a .h*Y
RoBERrG.coLE nl _.r lw- lil)a.
'AULC.RUFIEN January 30, 199i- YlYr,rrrrnmcAMERoNw'wLER l'uYl' W tr-'^*'=;;ffI
v. nn*rip' ffifwr''Town Manager
rown or vail W4 "CO
75 South Frontage Road t--vail, co 8t657
JeneS p. COt Ltt6 39O UNION BOULEVARD. SUITE 4OO
riri
-'!)
TELEPHONE
t3031 986-t551
WATS
{800) 354-5941
TELEFAX
1303) 9e6-t 755
Re: Upper Eagle Valley Consolidated Sanitation Districtvail valley Consolidated Water District
Town of Vail- - Road cut Permits and Tap Fee Waivers
Dear Ron:
we look forward to knowing of the acceptability of the
agreement among the three entities transrnitted to you December 2L,
1-990, a).ong with $37,700 in reinbursed water and sewer tap perrnits.
Enclosed is a copy of a request from Todd oppenheimer of the
town for additional tap fee waivers. We anticipate a granting of
that request when the contract is ful1y executed.
Finbl{, \tXere\j.4 Ronfflg-q3e<t ion
fees billed by the Town of Vail incut
from
from
theofa
JPC;dec
Enclosure
cc: Warren M. Garbe
Nancy D. Glenn
Becky Bultemeier,
Frederick Haslee
of sorne outstanding roadthe amount of $l-,100 dueDistrict and $250.00 dueSanitati-on District. In
we receive consideration
the Vail Va11ey Consolidated Waterthe Upper Eagle Va11ey Consolidatedspirit of overall cooperation, could
waiver of those outstandinq fees?
We look forward to hearing frorn you.
Sincerely,
c. P.A.
NEC'D FEB t 1991
PAUL R. COCKREL
JAT'ES P. COLLINS
TIMOTHY J. BEATON
aEcoDEc 2 71990
ROBERT G. COLE
PAUL C- RUFIEN
CAMERON w' TYLER
Rondall V. Phillips
Town Manager
Torrn of Vail
?5 South Frontage RoadVail, Colorado AL657
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
3'O UNION EOULEVAFD. SUITE
'OODENVER. COLORADO AO22A
December 21 , L99O
TELEPHOI{E
(Eo3t 086-t55t
WATS
taoot 35a-5eal
TELEFAX
1303,0aG-t755
Re: Agreements Among Town of VaiI , Upper Eagle ValleyConsolidated Sanitation District and Vail Va11ey
Consolidated Water District
Dear Ron:
Enclosed is the Vail valley Consolidated Water District Tap
Fee Reirnbursement of $23,200; the Upper Eagle valley ConsolidatedSanitation Distrl-ct Tap Fee Reirnbursement of $l-4,500t and threeoriginal Agreements anong the three Entities executed by theSanitation District and the Water District -- all pursuant to ourdiscussions of last nonth.
Please let ne knortr if there are anythe Torrrn conslder the Agreenents and, if
executed copies to us.
questions. Please haveacceptable, return two
Best wishes for the holidav season.
Sincerely,
CoLLINS AND COCKREL, P.C.
Janes P. CollinsAttorney for Vail Valley
Consolidated Water District and
Upper Eagle Valley ConsolidatedSanitation District
(DTCTATED BUT NOT READ)
JPC: le
Enclosures
ce: Nancy D. Glenn ({enc.)
Beclqr Bulteneier' C.P.A. (w/enc.)Walter Kirch ({enc.)
Ednund H. Drager, Jr., 8sg. (wrlenc.)
a.t"ro*s .o.ND c ocrnn",Q.c.
mfrooEc 2 rpql
AGREEMENT
Anong
TOWN OF VAIL,
UPPER EAGLE VALLEY CONSOLIDATED SANITATION DISTRICTVATL VALLEY CONSOLIDATED WAAER DTSTRICT
THrs TNTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREET{ENT is nade and entered into thisday ot , L990, by and betneen the TOWNoF vArL' a colorado nuni-bipat corporation (-trre Town'), the uppEREAGLE VALLEY coNsoLrDATED sANrrATroN DtsrRrcr, a cororado quasi-rnunicipal corporation (/sanitation District') and the vArL vALUEycoNsoLrDATED WATER DrsrRrcr. a colorado quasi-municipal corporation('Water District').
RSCITALS
L. Tlre Tolrn, the water oistrict and the sanitation Districtwish to contract together to provide for the waiver of certain feesbetween the Town and the Districts.
2. This rntergovernraentar Agreement is authorized pursuantto secti.on L8, Articre Xrv of the colorado constitution and'section29-L-2OL, efi seq., C.R.S.
Now THEREFOFE, in consideration of the mutual covenants,conditions and promi-ses contai-ned herein, the parti_es hereby agreias follows:
1. The Town sharr waive during the term of this Agreenent,for the water District and sanitatioi District, the folfoiing reeiand costs:
A.
B.
c.
D,
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
Street cuts.
Recreation arnenities.
Clean up,
Building perrnit.
Electrical pernit.
Mechanical per:mit.
Plunbing pernit.
Design Review Board.
Sign application.
Planning and Environmental
1
Coronission application.
:
2, The Water District and Sanitation District agree to paythe Town's direct expenses t,o third parties for al-l ptan revi6w3as per section 304(c) of the u.B.c. and will cornply with chapter3 of the U.B.C. for application for a permit.
3. The water District and sanitation District shalt waive alltap fees for pubric restroorns, park landscaping and drinkingfountains on Town of Vail property. These tap teei shall includ6irrigation tap fees, sewer tap fees and water tap fees.
4. The Town of Vail aglrees to apply to the Water andsanitation Distr.icts for necessary taps and comply with servicerine inspections and meter installation. rhe r6wi of vaiL alsoag'rees to pay monthly water and sewer servj_ce fees.
5. lermination
Unless sooner terninated as provided for herein, thisAgreement sharr be effective January 1, L991 and shall terminateDecember 31, L993. Notwithstanding the foregoing provision, eitherparty with or without cause rnay t6rrninate t'tris i,ireernent upon thegivingr of one hundred eighty irso) days prior riritten notice ofsuch termination to the other respective p-rties. Notice shall bedeemed to have been given upon the maj-ling of said notice by unitedstates certified first class rnai1, postage prepaid, and addressedto the parties at the respective addresses as shatl appear hereinor upon.a change of address pursuant to this notice provision. rtis the intent of the respective parties that this Agreernent shallbe renewed for additional periods following the end. of tne initialperiod, and unless one of the parties gives notice to the otherparties at least one hundred eighty (rB0) days prior to the end ofthe initial period that such party desiris -to terminate thisAgreernent or !o renegotiate the terns, thi.s Agreement sharr beautornatically extended for an additional period of 2 years each notto exceed a total of two (2) such extensions.
6. This Agreernent does not and shalr not be d.eerned to conferupon a grant to any third party any right to claim damages or tobring any lawsuit, action or other procLedings against either theTown or the Districts because of any breech hereof or because ofany terrns, covenants, agrreements or conditions contained herein.
7. No rnodification or waiver of this Agreement or of anyconvening condition or provision herein contaiied shalL be vali-clunress in writing and duly executed by the party to be charged.
8. This written Agreenent embodies the vrhole Agreernentbetween the parties and there are no j.nducernents, promise=l t"t ",conditions, or other obrigations rnad.e or entered'irito eith"i ly tt"Town or the Districts other than those contained herein.
L0. The Town has represented to the Districts and likewise,the Districts have represented to the Town that they possess thelegal abirity to enter into tlris Agreement. rn the event that acourt of coupetent jurisdiction deternines that any of the partieshereto did not possess the regal ability to enter intb thisAgreement, this Agreement shall be considefed null- and void as ofthe date of such court detemination.
IN WfTNESS I|HEREOF, the parties hereto have executed thisAgreement the day and year first written above.
9. This Agreementparties, their successorsanyone vithout ttre priorhereto.
TOWN OF VATL
VALLEY
strall be binding upon the respectiveor assigns, and nay not be assigned bywrj-tten consent of the other parties
UPPER EAGLE VALLEY CONSOLIDATED
SANT"A?ION DTSTRIC"
By
VAI WATER DISTRICT
L:
v.
CONSOLIDATED
3
[ _r.
li
75 soulh frontage road
vail, colorado 8't657
(3031 4792138
(303) 479-A3e
October 31, 1990
ollice ol community developnant
I
Mr. Jerry Bender
water operations Director
Upper Eagle Valley Water and Sanitation
846 Forest RoadVail, Colorado 81657
Re: Landscaping at Vail well, intersection of South Frontage Road
and Aspen Road
Dear Jerry:
Thank you very nuch for reseeding tlre area -at the chlorination
faciltf at the above location. We also appreciate the rrno parking'l
signs.
Ken Hughey, Chlef of Police in Vail , has agreed to ticketviolatois, but infotns me that he cannot tow any vehicles, as tlrey
would be on private property. The Police Department can tor
vehicles nhich are on public property. Mr. Hughey will call you
and explain this further to you.
once again, we appreciate your responsiveness on this issue!
Please call ne if you have any further guestions at 479-
2L38.
sincerely,
e6K"/-JBetsY:fRosol-ack:
'Planning Technician
b
UppeR Elcle Vlllev
WATE R AND SANITATION D ISTR ICTS
846 FOREST ROAD ' VAIL, COLORADO 8I557
{30 3) 476 7480
nrC?SEp11p90
September 10, 1990
.r V-^ '/
xn rul- h
Y)Wtl\,hd-y . ^ttA1t#',',7t <II IIN'u r /)ilu/
lb. I$istan Pritz Y{
Director of Cmrnity Dewloprt
Tcrn of Vail
75 South Frqrtqe RoadVail, Colorado 8155?
Re: Lardscape Seedirg at Vail IGU
Dear lcistan:
Tbe Vail Valley Crcolldated glater District tta6 reseeded the area of
ir{pact at the chJ.orfuntiqr facility for Vail t€Il R1 located at t}te entrance to
Vail Village, 11th Filing, qr Asrpen l-ane, qr three separette occasiors in sqe
areas. After the rct recent reseeding, the District tras instatl.ed "No
Parking" slgns ard narklrg EDsts to assist in ntntnizirg dmage durirg smor
rrencnral .
In orrler to reduce fr:rther datnage caused by urnuthorized parking, the
District wishes to enllst the Tcrnrrs aseistance ln tlcletirg ard rerErring suctr
rrctriclee since the District tras no jurisdictidr in tlris natter.
Your cwtte ard enforcsrt of parkirg restrictisrs r€uld be grreatly
atrpreciated.
Sincerely,
krLJ^^Jerry Berder
Water Operatlqs Di:rector
JB:sk
cc: Ror Phillips
Betsy Rogefach
Ed Drager
o.7
\ ll paRTrcrparruG orsrRrcrs - ARRowHEAD METRo wArER . avoN MErRo wATER . BEAVEFT CREEK METRo rvATEFI . BERR.u cREEK METRo warE. /i;;'\\
a\
EAGLE VA'L MErRo w"""' '"'"'f,;Lll:::::::,;iiffJ:TH:?:l'-H: ;:':ffff;:: "aLLE.. coNsoL'oArED saN'ra'oN
@
UppeR Elelg Vl
WATER AND SANITATION DISTRICTS
845 FOREST FOID . VArL. COL0FA00 81557
i303r 476 7480
066ltrtrdlsl:u
September 10, 1990
lib. lGistan hitz
Director of Cm:rrity Devefognent
Toyn of ValJ.
75 Souttr FrdltagE Road
Vail., Colorado 81657
Re: f,arrilscape Seedirg at Vail Well
Dear lGistarr:
the Vail Valley Crcolidated lbter Diatrict has neseeded the area ofiteact at the cilorination facility for Vail I€11 Rl located at the entrance toVail Village, llth Fllirg, on Aspen Lane, qr tnree separate occasiqts in screareas. After the nost recent reseedirg, the District has instal.led "NoParkiqg" signs arrt mrking trnsts to assist in rnininizirg danage dqring snorrellorral.
rn orrder to reduce firrtber darEge canrsed by unauthorized parking, theDistrict wishes to enJ,ist ttre Tqln's assistance in ticketirg arrt renovirg srrctr
vetricJ.es since the District has no jr.rrisdiction in this natter.
Your cornents arrc enforcenpnt of parkirg restrictiqts rmuld be gneatly
al4reciated.
Sincerely,
kr /L'c^
Jerry Bemder
I{ater OlErations Director
JB:sk
cc: Ron PhiU.iF6
Betsy Ro6elactt
Ed Dragier
o
LLEY
o
./
l\\ PAttlctpATlN. Drslt rcrs - aRRowHEA' METFo WATER . avoN METRo wA rER . BEAVER cREEK MErRo warER . BERR' :REEK METRo wATER ,4;;\
O\
EAGLE va'L MErRo warER ' ED*""::,:;:,*1)::::;::..'fi:lffl?""x';:fii'^,::;Tff:::""*'" coNsoL'|DA'Eo saN'|ra.oN
@
a
F[[.E COPV
luwn
75 south hontage road
Yail, colorado 81657
(303) 47!r-2138
(303) 47!r-2139
Aug'ust 7, 1990
olfice ol communlty development
Mr. Ed Drager
Eagle vatley Consolidated Water District
846 Forest Road
Vail, CO 8L657
RE: Reseeding entrance to Vait Village llth Filing.
Dear Ed:
In May of t-988, the water oistrict asked to build an R well pump
buildlng at the entrance to Vail Village lLth Filing on Aspen
Lane and the South Frontage Road. one condition of approval was
that disturbed areas be revegetated with natural grasses.
ft has become apparent that the site needs to be revegetated.
construction trucks have also parked on the property and have
darnaged the site. The Town of vail vrould like to reguest that
the area be reseeded and rocks be placed along the roadway so
that construction trucks cannot park in the area.
Please let rne know how and when this concern could be addressed.
Thank you for your assistance. Please give rue a caLl at 479-2L38
if you have guestions.
Sincerely,
BR/pp
o
7 Project APPlicatlon
- zr, , ro,,*. sf,t[*e
projectName: \rlr/{i:-"{. },S.Ip,<r ',}.., nA,,''s'+
-i\ . ttA --+-
Contact Person and enone UAJ€- l'1'b1T-
Owner. Address and Phone:
Architect. Address and Phone:
Legal Description: Lot Filing . Zone
-
l. tl ,t ,-
comments. \ tArt-_ V&:*<.r: llt r1 Y, t-t JC-
Design Review Board
Date
Motion by:5rr":if
Seconded by:
APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL
Sum mary:
PRAJECT,
DATE SUEMITTED:- DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING
COMMENTS NEEDED BY:
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL:
PUBLIC WORKS
Reviewed by:
Comments:
0ate
frot tS)* u"'.r, 7
lu, ,'., 't) t '"t.t fio ", /F-
P*^t, fo \^'LF , C8 5
FIRE DEPARTMENT
Reviewed by:
Comments:
Date
POLICE DEPARTMENT
| / ) /t,, -.U"/ f7 l b/,L.J"<P/
/z-\ Ll") U7/L//'l
;
6 |l*rn 0 /./ t/// t6Lv,c€S
Reviewed by:
Comments:
Date
RECREATIoN oEPARTI,,IENT
Reviewed by:
Comnents:
\
Date
)1
.|
*****THIS APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED UNTIL ALL INFORMATION IS SUBIIITTED*****
I. PRE.APPLICATION MEETING;
A pre-appljcation meeting with-a planning staff member is strongly suggested to
determihb it any additional information is needed. No application will be accepted
unless it js complete (must include all jtems required by the zoning adm'injstrator).It is the applicint's responsibility to make an appointment with the staff to find
out about additjonal submjtta.l requirements. Please note that a CoMPLETE applica-
tion wi'l I streamline the approval process for your proiect by decreas'ing the number
of conditions of approval that the DRB may stipulate. ALL cond'it'ions of approval must
be resolved before a building permit is issued.
' A. PROJECT DESCRIPTI0N: C1. Iniection Vault fot ve11 R-7
APPLICATION DATE:
DATE OF DRB IIEETII'IG:
DRB APPLICATION
B. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL:
Addt"ESS Interstaqs 70-and Aspe! I,ane
Legal Description
te'l ephone
Zon i ng
C. NAME 0F APPLICANT: Vail Va11ey Consolidated Warer District _
AddreSs 846 Forest Road Vai1. Colorado 8f657 telephone 476-7 L8o
D. NAME 0F APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: David Morr. General Manager
\
Addres s same as Aonf icant
E. NAME 0F 0WNERS: Edrnund Draeer. Chairman of the Board (VVCWD)
846 Forest Road. Vai1. CO 816s 7
' Interstate 70 Right-of*Way, west of Mile markerLot Block - Fjfing #rtg.
tel ephone L7 6-7 Lp,O
S'i gnature
Address
F. DRB FEE: The fee wjl1 be paid at the time a building permit is requested.
VALUATION FEE
$ 0-$ 10,000 $10.00
$10,001 -$ 50,000 $25.00
$5o,oo1 -$ 15o,ooo $so.oo
$150,001 -$ 500,000 $100.00
$500,001 - $1,000,000 $200.00$ Over $1,000,000 $300.00
IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING ALL SUBMISSIONS TO THE DRB:
1. In addition to meeting submittal requirements, the applicant must stake the s'ite
to indicate property lines and building corners. Trees that wjll be removed
should also be marked. This work must be completed before the DRB visits the
si te.
2. The review process for NEI,J EUILDINGS rvill normaliy involve b.ro separate meetings
of the Design Review Board, so,plan on at least two meetings for their approval .
3. People who fai l to appear before the Design Review Board at their scheduled
meeting and who have not asked for a postponement wilI be required to be
republ i shed.
\
4. The fo] low'ing items no longer have.to be presented to the Desiqn Review Eoard'
ii;;y,-h;;;r"i, niu" io U" p"utunted io the Zoning Administratoi for approval:
a. Windows, sky.l .ights and similar exterior changes that do not a]ter the
existing plane of the building; and
b. Buitding additions that are not viewed floqr lny other lot or pub119:11:.'
which hive had letters submitted from adjo'ining property owners approvlng
the additionl and/or approval from the aient f6r', or manager of a condominium
associ ation.
5. you may be required to conduct Natural Hazard Studies on your property. You shou'ld
check with a Town Planner before proceeding.
o
MATERIAL TO BE SUBMITTED
NEl.I CONSTRUCTION
A. Topographic map and site plan of site containing
1. Licensed surveyor's stamP.
II.
5.
7.
cabl e TV
Tel ephone
sewer gas
water e l ectri c
c. Property ljnes showing distances and bearings and a basis of bearing
d. Proposed driveways with percent slope and spot elevations
e. All easements
8. Existing and finished grades.
9. All existing and proposed improvements including structures, landscaped areas,
service areas, storage areas, walks, driveways, off-street parking, loading
areas, retaining wa))s (with spot elevations), and other site improvements.
10. Elevations of top of roof ridges (with existing grade shown underneath) to
determine height of building.
B. A statement from each utility verifying location of service and availabi'lity. To
be submitted with site plan.
C. Prefiminary title report to accompany all submjttals, to insure property ownership
and all easements on property.
D. Landscape Plan (L" = 2O' or larger) - 2 copies
1. Shovl the location of 4" diameter or.iarger trees, other shiubs,-and-iia'iive plants thare on the site and the location and design of proposed landscape area.s wittr- -- -
the varieties and approximate sizes of plant materi als to be planted. I'
2. Complete landscape materjals list.
3. Designate trees to be saved and those to be lost.
N0TE: As much of the above information as possible should occur on the site p1 an, so that
the inter-relation of the various components is clear. The landscape plan should be
separate. The existing topographic and vegetational characteristics may be a separate
map. The applicant must stake the site to show iot lines and building corners. Trees
that will be lost during construction must be tagged. The work should be completed
before the DRB s'ite visit.
o
the foliowing (2 copies):
2. Contour intervals of not more than 2' unless the parcei consists of 6 acres or
more, in which case, 5' contour intervals wi'l I be accepted.
3. Existing trees or groups of trees having trunks with diameters of 4' or more
one foot above grade.
4. Rock outcroppings and other s'ignificant natural features (large boulders,
intermittent streams, etc. ).
Avalanche areas, 100 year flood plain and slopes 40% or more, if applicable.-
Ties to ex'isting benchmark, either USGS landmark or sewer invert.
Locations of the following:
a. Proposed surface drainage on and off site showing s'ize and type of
culverts, swales, etc.
b. Exact locations of all utilities to include exist'ing sources and proposed
service lines from sources to the structure. Utilities to include:
' . E. Architecturai Plans (1/8" = l' or larger) 2 copies
. 1. Must include floor plans and all elevations as they will appear on colpletion.
Elevat'ions must show both existing and fjnished grades.
Z. Exterior surfacing materials and colors shall be specified and submitted for
review on the materials list avajlable from the Department of Comnrunity 0evelop-
rnenf,. Color chips, siding samples etc., should be presented at the Design Review
Board meeting'
F. The Zoning Adm'inistrator and/or DRB may require the submjssjon of additional plans'
drawings, specifications, samples and other,material (including a model) if deemed
necessary tb determine whether a project wi1l comply with design guidelines.
II. MINOR ALTERATIONS TO THE EXTERIOR OF BUILDINGS
Photos or sketches that clearly indicate what is proposed and the location (site plan)
of proposal may be submitted in lieu of the more formal requirements given above, as
long as they provide al'l important spec'i fications for the proposed including colors and
materials to be used.
III. ADDITIONS - RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL
A. Original floor plans with al1 specifications shown
B. Floor plan for addition - 2 copies
C. Site plan show'ing existing and proposed construction - 2 copies topos
D. Elevations of addition
E. Photos of existing structure
F. Specifications for all materials and col-or samples on materials ljst available at
Deparfinent of Cornrnun'i ty Development
At the request of the Design Review Administrator you may also be requ'i red to submit:
G. Statement from each utifity verify'i ng Iocation of service and availability. See
attached utility location verification form.
H. Site improvement survey, stamped by reg'i stered professional surveyor.
I. Preliminary tit'le report, verifying ownership of property and lists of easements.
IV. FINAL SITE PLAN
After a building pernrit has been issued, and when the project is undervay, the following
will be required before any buiiding receives a framing inspect'ion from the Building
Department: A certified jmprovement survey showing:
A. Building locations with tjes to property corners, i.e. distances and angles.
B. Build'i ng dimensions to nearest tenth of foot.
C. AlI utility service lines as-builts showing sjze of lines, type of material used,
and exact locations. 2 copies
0. 0rainage as-builts. 2 copies
E. Basis of bearing to tie to section corner.
F. A1 I property pins are to be e'ither found or set and stated on map.
G. AlI easements
H. Bujlding floor el evations and roof ridge elevations.
\
DATE : 1_3_l-p.dt_t9_B!__
LEGAL DESCRIPTI0N: Lot
ZONE CHECK
FOR
SFR, R, R P/S ZONE DISTRiCTS
Bl ock Filing
ADDRESS:
OI.lNER Vai l Vel l cy Cnnsol i dal-ed wa ter hi <r ll0ne--Z:O::.agO-Dnn r^^ I'nOne /,-7a aat.^ARCHITECT Bnn, r"c - Phone 4t6-bTt'O
ZONE DISTRICT
PROPOSED
LOT SIZE
USE Lrarer
Hei ght
TotaI GRFA
Primary GRFA
Secondary GRFA
Setbacks: Front
Sides
Rear
Water Course
Si te Coverage
Landscapi ng
Fence/Reta'i ning !r'la11 Heights
Parki ng
Credi ts: Garage
Mechan'i cai
Ai rl ock
Storage
So'l ai" Heat
Drive: Slope Permitted
Envi ronmental,/Hazards :
Sl ope
Al I ovred
(30)(33)
20'
15'
15'
(30)(50)
( 3oo ) (600 )
(eoo)(1200)
(50)(ioo)
(25) (50)
(2oo)(4oo)
+tt / foot SloPe Actual
Ava'l anche None
Propos ed
Q=gi__
I q5
195
z-0-'
-
1)Ol
lqq cq ft.
pi el d rO, 000
2
I" / foot
Flood Plain None
307
Wetl ands None
Geologic Hazards None
Comments :
Zon ing: Approved/Di sapproved
Date:
Staff Signature
LIST OF MATERIALS
tn*, oi PR0JECT: R-1 well House
DESCRIPTION OF PR : C1^ f q.jection Vault f;?-Tef 1 Rl
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
STREET AODRESS: I-zo-r-11.w1-- west E-TifE-Ti'i.' +fr-
The follorv'i ng'information is_required for submittal by the applicant to the gesign Review
Board before a final approval can be fiven:
A. BUILDING MATERIALS: TYPE OF MATERIAL COLOR.^tl .l- G{h^"rI {|<ttteST-Roof
Si di ng
Other Wall Materials
Fascia
Soffi ts
Wi ndows
Window Trim
Doors
Door Trim
Hand or Deck Rails
Fl ues
h lasnl ngs
Chimneys
Trash Enclosures
Greenhouses
Other
None
Rubber Membrane - Flat Black
Concrete Lieht Brown
Galvanized
None
None
Me ta1 Brown
None
N0ne
None
None
None
None
B. LANDSCAPING: Name
PLANT MATERIALS:
PROPOSED TREES
of Designer:
Phone:
Botanical Name
Nonb
RBD Inc .
416-6340
Common Name Quani ty Si ze*
EXiSTING TREES TO
BE REIqOVED
None
for conifers.
' (over)
Me tal
*Indicate calioer for deciducious trees.Indicate height
. PLANT I'IATERIALS:.. (con't)
cuDr ra<
Botanical Name
Nonp
Common Name Size
EXISTING SHRUBS
TO BE REMOVID
GROUND COVERS
Nen^
Type
NOne
Square Footaqe
s0D
SEED ?O-OOn srl ft.
TYPE OF
IRRIGATION
TYPE OR METHOD OF
EROSION CONTROL
C. OTHER LANDSCAPE FEATURES (retaining lval'ls, fences, swimming pools, etc.) please specify.
UTILITY LOCAT1ON VERIFICATION
SUB D IVI SION
JOB
LOT
1Ho
BLOCK FILING
ADDRESS I-70 R.0.W. - West of Mile Marker
The location
Lines, must
acconpany ing
of utiLities, whether they
be approved and verified by
be nain trunk
the following
#L7 9
lines or proposeCutilities for the
citp nl rn
Mountain Bel I
1-634-3778
l,lestern Slope Gas
Harry Moyes
Public Service Company
. Gary Hal l
Holy Cross Electric Assoc.
Ted Husky/Michael Laverty
Va i'l Cabl e T .V .
Gary Johnson
Upper Eagle Valley Water
and Sanitat'ion 0iscrict
David Krenek
Date
14Lsr
u tv-ft
t/-z y- {B
*For new con:
+/tt/rmlease fill or
atiached shee
+- /J-st
Authori Sionature
dhrvl ,A,74_ \LW
NOTE: These verifications do not relieve the contractor of his
responsi"bility to obtain a street cut permit fron the
Tor"n of VaiL , Departrnent of Publ ic ltlorks and to obtain
utility locations before digging r.n any public right-
of-way or easenent in the To sn of Vail. .A. building pernrit
is not a street cut pernit. A street cut pernit nust be
obtained sep arately.
This forn is to verify service availablity and location.
This. should be used in conjunction with prepering your
utility plan and scheduling instaLlations.
t
L_l pll L_l --I
trn!
{o
IDm
Iql-o
t-,, h El<x fl! :l tlm: 6l9q ;1l;: sl$H I13: el=e ii5
o.<4o-dEa!lttOctt>t3gmt
'n
Tm
=
3rqm :-_ (-
--o
;i7't-oozo{FF
c)
ozTmF
=-{
-n!
z=oqt\2
^_r.,z
q)z
=qmt
lrlol13ol;- o
l'- <
lNn
| 'Tl
ilxm
f
-{o
TDmx
m!i
oz
<-o(!g
-{m
c
c_l
(.-,
c.ic:l
no
-rm
(_
z
IT
I
{
trlr-'
l-
t-m
r
2.\
\.1 V
m
'.l'
z
z
--t
oIo
t-
=
m
I
=r
Za
vz.>moxl--{ >or-7 'Tl
t-z
Fa
trt
lz
lr
t=
le"
ai
r.
F
Ul
I-J5.
l-r
l=lz
lo
l-rll<t>
lF
lm
lc_,
l6
of*lg
lo
t;
lFl!lm
Plzlo
I
I
I
l-{
Elz
le
l<t>
lFlrt
lfllz
l-rto
l€
lzlo
l'r1I<t>
lFl!tm
F'lz
T
z
{
F
r-l
Hc)
Hz
l-{
l{
lz
t:t>
t;lmloflzlo
I
Il-lH
lll-
I
\o
F,\o
I+'o\
I
g_
;;f: n
:lqge
Igcn!col.s F
3;]FF
=(/,OYJ-=-.o9,
a*ie;dci3loti 5 0!iOO",@X
ISaB=369-r;'lag4€
=61._a*EiFr+[\Fgsli
s*t:Egl
iilr f qr ^. ^
r
pA''...i 1i i a
61 3 Fg$=il saae ail *;; ai
*l *iliFemt ,x D =otrt E*'o
loz
r.It
ma
=-t
U)z
m
m
mol<'
lz
l=l=
t>
Ir-
m
'tt
xz =za
-l
c
X X X X
zact-
-l
z
t-m
i
€
l-r
-lI
o
z
m
rcm
-oT€og+F
-zZA
'z -(h
z>vxnti!<u<
>oolm=@o zc
=
z
rn{
t---{m
l
o2
X)4
foz
t-
m
--t
m
_o
]!
c
^z
3
C)
zH
or
l.
Hz
ONF;- o -'r
=a1 <!^!4-r:>:^
->'nY.z(l.iitqoo'1 ztOq
Io 6I6< E;2.4
'nzz{
:
N@=
Sm=
OJI5-<tr<
=
FI
z
z
F
@g
r-
=zoima
zz
z
m
t-
z
nnott-
o
;
z
H
-
NFiH
H
\o
-{o
-.1
r'tt
m
=-!.'l
mm
(t)
m
+
x
t-m
zcT
m
L-{
m
9.
z
m
tn
=@
n
m
m
--l
z
1ttnm
=m
I
z
t-c3
=o
mt-m
-t
o
t-
'o
z
-m
x
-
=
m
=
=
m
='Tl
mm
U)
VALUATION
Tm
=-{z
9
I
H
H
F
m
z
t-
2
mt-mo-{,
a)
t-
z
Ltl
@('l
ii \N NX\RF os\- --N \ i\*tA,-' ) \,
f]t]D
uD!
={
- a-T'>
-t I /-\
=v.-"\_>
(
CI
(p
m
fe,
:- aDl*h El<x ft.0 x q
l'" -r ofOnal'n ;l-. i o
t:; olls I
| --r - t
;?.o<!^
o:i
-@@o
>1
o
-o
m
:-{
=mCD
-1. \,
-;=Yz=z
YPr
t
-t
'n 'DOr-
z<
a2
=6)
\N
\'n
F\
irq;'[6 i
8*
=o
ST.-{ ^9F
9=I{c3=c)=
i6
I C)tom
:m
;:
-r c)o>
zA
,z>m
-r .>
Ia)T
-{m
-{
a
=m
b
z
TF
P.A
Etl--l
:9,^l
5Sl
$ulFslFI
$,1x)d
r
al
I
I
I
I
or-
aAo>'r
-nJ
r",
Zl'l
I
I
I
I
I
;
tt,3nF
lst<
l>l:
ls
li
I
I
I
Hl)t{
F
larK
t>
lFt,
lFlz
li
t{
12
lnt<t>
l-l!lm
13p
I
{ l-rEloml<
lz
>l<{\ t>
I l.-
sl3)lz'lo
I-\F-D
itnl"'
I
I
I
l-rlol{
lz
iel<I>I-
lft
lm
t:
-r l><F
trpp
l'n,J'
|"
Irl
I
I
11. ' E VN: t> t>[< tr l<
FH Etf'H t<I-F IF
N lq.'r
h, lLl
'FlFl" N, lglY I EI'ttxlN I le,lBltfl
c
.o
_t
z
|-
m
5
-i(n
zm
m
m
l< '
iiEig:;giI
.[gcni
:; iF6
:(no=:t-=-.oo)sE3;:
5:a;so33dd
l;i E;3ag{g
ArEIF
9 ;'a !.3ila3.1qc3.'=
Fa3i8iir99
3P-6=--..d=IF
:e3ri
Ei3siOYJC-ior!r=J
sEisS+do a:
3.:iqE6ilods.,; D :.1 atf o --*
#il!
ot
ooz-{
o{
,
-
at
mr
VALUAIION
,*rl"toN REouEsr
TOWN OF VAILOF PFOJECT
JOB NAME
INSPECTION:MON WED THUR FRI
DATE
CALLER
TUES AM PM]READY FOR
LOCATION:
BUILDING:
O FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
O UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH / WATER
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
tr FRAMING
n ROOF & SHEER" PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
O INSULATION tr POOL / H. TUB
tr SHEETROCK NAIL tr
0o
O FINAL O FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER
MECHANIGAL:
D HEATING
E
tr
tr
ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
CONDUIT O SUPPLY AIR
O FINAL tr FINAL
O APPROVED
CORRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVED O REINSPECTION REOUIRED
DATE INSPECTOR
INSPECTION REQUEST."
TOWN OF VAILPERMIT NUMBER OF PROJECT
DATE JOB NAME
CALLER
READY FOR
LOCATION:
INSPECTION:MON TUES -WED THUR FRI Attt PMi.,
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
FOUNDATION / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGBOUND
I] ROUGH i D.W.V.
tr ROUGH / WATERtr
tr
o
tr
o
o
FRAMING
ROOF & SHEER
PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
INSULATION
SHEETROCK
tr POOL / H. TUB
NAIL tr
tr
FINAL tr FINAL
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REOUIRED
ELECTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER tr HEATING
ROUGH D EXHAUST HOODS
CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
APPROVED
CORRECTIONS:
DATE INSPECTOR
Uppen Enele Vellev
WATER AND SANITATION DISTR ICTS
846 FOREST ROAD . VAIL, COLORADO 81657
(303) 476.7480
Aprll 21, 1987
Peter Patten
Planning & Envlronmental CommiaaLon
Town of Vall
75 So. Frontage Road West
Vall, Colorado 81657
Re: Roof Top Parklng
Upper Eagle Valley Consolldated sanitatlon District
Dear Mr. Patten 3
In conjunctlon wlth the above referenced proJect approved by the Vall
Plannlng and Envlronrnental Comisslon, I share the Comlsslon-s concern
for screenlng our roof top parklng fron the future I-70 exlt whlch will
lntersect the eouth frontage road near our west property llne.
As a pub1lc agency, we conmit to do our part to provide appropriate
landscaplng ln the highway rlght-of-*ay at the northwest end of our
property line to facllltate_ the above screenlng.
A speclflc landscape plan wlll be developed soon after the State Hlghnay
DepartDent has completed Lte intersectloa deslgn. I{e understand that
Design RevLew Board approval ls needed prior to landscape lnstallation.
Sl-nce re Iy ,
SANITATION DISTRICT
EIID,/ng
Drager ,
\ ll pARTrcrparrNo DrsTRrcrs - aRRowHEAo METR. *ATER . AVoN METRo warER . BEAVER CREEK METR' warER . BERR' .REEK METR. wora* /6aft1
a\
EAGLE''a'L MErRo w".'" ' '"*""ii,I,,,'I::y::::;;::ffTH:?::'J?::1'":Tff*::'" ""*'.. coNsoLrDA''rEo saN'aa'oN
@
75 soulh tronlage road
yail. colorado 8't657
(303) 476-7000
April 2, 1987
olf lce ol communlty developmonl
Mr. David Krenek
Operations Director
Upper Eagle VaIIey Consolidated Sanitation District846 Forest RoadVail, colorado 8L657
Dear David:
r wourd like to apologize for any inconvenience resulting frornthe.rescheduling of April 13th's planning commission meeting toApril 20. The meeting had to be rescheduled because of ouroversight in providing the Vail frail with proper public noticeof your agenda item. As you may know, we are reguired topublish agenda items 15 days prior to the meeting date. Bymissing this deadline, we trad no alternative but to reschedulethe meeting one week l-ater.
Once again I apologize for our oversight. I hope therescheduling has not inconvenienced you.
Sincerely,
^\/i\^"4 &.JS,*(.---
Thomas A. BraunSenior Planner
TAB: bpr
75 soulh trontage .oad
vail, colorado 81657
(303) 476-7000
April 2, L9A7
olllce of communlly development
Mr. David E Mott
Upper EagJ-e Valley Consolidated Sanitation District846 Forest RoadVai1, Colorado 8A657
Dear David:
r lrould like to apologize for any inconvenience resulting frornthe.rescheduling of april 13th's Planning Commission meeiing toApril 20. The ureeting had to be rescheduled because of ouroversight in providi-ng the Vail Trail with proper public noticeof your agenda item. As you may know, hre are required topublish agenda items 1-5 days prior to the meeting date. Bymissing this deadline, we had no alternative but to reschedulethe meeting one week later.
Once again I apologize for our oversight. I hope therescheduling has not inconvenienced you.
Sincerely,
A
^\^^t
&\(.-"_-=-_--
Thomas A. BraunSenior Planner
TAB:bpr
Uppen Enel-E VltleY
WATE R AND SANITATION D ISTR ICTS
84€ FOR€ST FOAD . vAlL, CoLORADO 81657
(30 3) 476-7480
March 3, 1987
Mr. Ron Phllltps
Manage r
TOI,JN OF VAIL
75 South Frontage Road
Val1 , Colorado 81657
RE: On-slte Parking, Vail PlanE
Upper Eagle Valley Consolldated Sanitatlon District
Dear Ron:
As you are aware, the DisErict plans to vacate the tenporary parklng across the
aEreet from our Vail saniEatlon plant in favor of provldlng on-sLte parklng. Ihis
wl1l alleviate the visual lmpacts of the temporary parking and allow the site to
accornmodate your consEructlon staging for your Forest Road bridge wldening proJect
thls year.
I have provided your planning deparEnent wlth an informatlonal set of
construcElon documents and wl11 appreciate comments and suggestlons. We intend to
stay strlctly wlthin our property 1lnes and will have a nlnl-rnal effect on the
exlstlng landscaping.
Past pracclce has noE required the Distrlct to go through the Town-s plan
approval or bulldlng pernit process; however, I would llke to maintain a spirlt of
cooperacLon by sollcitlng your lnpuE. Please let ne know when we could get together
wlth you and/or your staff to discuss the projecE and review on-slce staking. I{e
plan to begin the bldding process in mid-March.
Slncerely,
uwR/ EAGLE VALLEY CoNSOLTDATED SANTTAION DTSTRTCT
t/;, tlbfDavid E. Mott
General Manager
DEM: das.40
xc: Vall Plannlng Departnent
\ ll pARTrcrpATrNG DtsrRtcrs aRRowHEAo MET^. w,.rER. AVoN METRo warER a BEAVER CREEK METRo warER . BERRV cREEK METRo *ota^ /4I^n'-\
0\
EAGLE VA'|L METRo w".'^ ""*o^ll,Iin::::::iff:JfiTH:?::'#::T,:Ttrff::vaLLEV coNsoL'DATED sAN'ra'oN
@
Uppen Enele VllleY
WATER AND SANITATION D ISTR ICTS
846 FOREST ROAD . v lL, COLORADO 81657
(303) 476 7480
March 12, 1987
Betsy Rosolack
Town of Vall
75 South Frontage Road
Vai1, Colorado 81657
RE: Conditional Use Pe rmlc for Rooftop Parktng
Dear Betsy:
Enclosed are the fol1-owlng items:
l. An l4rovenent survey starryed by a reglstered surveyor r^rtrlch lncludes contour lLnea
and tree locatlons.
2. Phocographs of the bulldings frorn al1 dlrecclons.
3. Elevattons of the building, shordng raq, exlsting grades, flnish grades and handrall.
4. A finish grade site plan showlng the access road, portraylng che dlmnsions of road aE
the narronest polnt.
The Flre Department has approved the access road along wlth removl-ng a portlon of the fence
along the fronEage road to allow access off the frontage road.
A P.E. sta4 on the drawlngs wlll be provided next week.
A revised landscape plan was not aubml.tted because the State ltighway Departnent has asked us to
not nake any rpre lnprovenents nithin the StaEe Road lllght-of{'Jay untll after the nain
lnterchange has been corpleted. We wtll be happy to provide screenLng (subJect to your and
StaEe Htghway approval ) along the norEh side vrtren the interchange is coqlete. We will budget
$31000 to $4,000 co couplete thls landscaping norEh of the parklng lot. A ecreenl-rg of. 507" to
702 ls posslble uslng Evergreens along the north slde.
The State Ittgtnray Departnent l-s ln favor of our proJect, provldlng we can keep the accegg road
on our property, wttlch we are dolng.
If you have any further questl-ons, please feel free to contact ne.
Sincerely,
I,PPER EAGLE VAI,LEY CONSOLIDAf,ED SANITATION DISTRICT
Wr^.a P^"J
Davld Krenek, P.E.
operatlons Director
Enc:
DK/ng:57
,,<:::\I II PARTICIPATING DISTRICTS _ ARROWHEAD METRO WATER O AVON METRO WAIER
'
BEAVER CREEK METRO WATER ' BERRV CREEK METRO WATEF / CLE T \
a\
EAGLEVA'|LMETRow""^""*""f,ili]::y::::ff::ff1tr1?"":'#::1":T;;*::'."""'YcoNsoL'oarEo saN'rAa'oN
GF
75 soulh ,ronlage ?oad
vail, colorado 81657
(303) 476-7000 offlce o, communlty developmenl
March 3, L987
Mr. Fred HasLee
Upper Eagle Valley Consolidated Sanitati.on District
846 Forest RoadVail, Col-orado 81657
Re: Conditional Use Permit for Rooftop Parking
Dear Fred:
Today I discussed with you the fact that we have not receivedadditional support materials concerning your reguest for asonditional use perrnit. Before we can schedule this request for ahearing before the Planning and Environrnental Comrnission, we wiIIneed the following:
I. An improvement survey stamped by a registered surveyor whichLncludes contour lines.
2. Photos of the buildings fron tbe highway side.
3. Elevations of the building showing the ranp, and showing theexisting grades and finished grades.
s/"" f.Y")(x,:+,^'l 4. A.site pLan indicating landscaping and dimensions ofwidth of the road at its narrowest point.l1\tq,$^t$d rt A'h
5. The Fire Departrnent is asking for a roof manifold (stand.pipel 0/C
on tlre building, .or provide Fire Department access.' /;r;',;',_
6. Public Works woul-d like a P.E. stamp on drawings A-l and A-2or a letter from the engineer who reviewed those sheetsstating that the existing structure is adequate to supportloading conditions anticipated with the creation of theparking lot.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me.
l,o( tf"1"'
o
P"b VJ-*,h/.
/"t"*ttz-z-
Tu-- e/."x-
U.:: 8/"J
o
lnttn
75 3oulh trontrg€ road
vail, colorudo 81657
(303) 476-7000 offlcc of communlty deuolopornl
March 3, L987
Mr. Fred Haslee
Upper Eagle Valley Consolidated Sanitation District
846 Forest RoadVail, Colorado 81657
Re: Conditional Use Pernrit for Rooftop Parking
Dear Fred:
Today I discussed with you the fact that we have not receivedadditional- support materials concerning your request for aconditional use permit. Before vre can schedule this reguest for ahearing before the Planning and Environmental Commission, we will
need the following:
Photos of the buildings from the highway side.
l.
2.
-t/**'tf) n.
€Y.rs*rx'S
/- 6.,rj6 Public Works wouLd like a P.E, stanp on drawings A-l and A-2.or a letter from the engineer who reviewed those sheetgstating tbat the exi.sting structure is adequate to eupportlorddng conditions urticipated with the creation of theparking lot.
you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me.
5.
If
o
_ slTuj.Ted
DUTU-IaCUOC S I er.Talpul ?_Tdddnslxel {el{f no^ qlr1r{ pess.rnssTp
ur.roJ 1{e1"! slT uo eTpood IzeI
e_T esn reuoTfTpuoc e JoJ lsenbal Jnon
Teuor+Tppe pa^-rrcajr +ou e^e/\q e^l fer.{1J ^epof,,
a1q1 nq lsaluocs 6ut66oC at{1
{eq1 ,relo spedun[ soJ uAorq >tpTno eqf
AE;
V.!-&P"rlc,) ,
PROJECT:
DATE SUBMITTED:.' u a /tz_ /r
COMMENTS NEEDED BY:
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL:
i NTER-DEPARTMENTAL REVI El.I
DATE OF PUEL
'oo-f
C HEARING
PUBLIC WORKS
Reviewed by:
Comments:
Date
FIRE DEPARTMENT
Reviewed by:oate J-/2' x'7
comments:
e/1 -/v-z'-o-,2,o',"t ,ao'Qzz'z x- y'':<z't''"2--' ,/*
./--,a-'*z'"f,"* '2'J'
POLICE DEPARTMENT
Reviewed by:
Comnrents:
Date
RECREATION DEPARTMENT
Rev'iewed by:
Comments:
Date
Appl ication
PECMeetinq ] Z/zs/
APPLiCATION FOR COi,IDITIOIIAL USE PERI,IIT
I' This procedure is required for any project required to obtain a conditionaluse permit.
The application will not be accepted until all information is submitted.
A. NAI4E OF APPLICANT rEa J-e Val.le Consolidat anita
ADDRESS 846 Foresr Road Vail, CO
Date of
Date of
87657
PHoNE 476-7480
NAME OF APPLICANT'S REPRTSENTATIVE pavid L. Krenek, p.e.
c.
^uuKL)5 846 Forest Road
Vail, CO pHONE 47 6-7 480
NAI4E 0F OHNER(S) (print or
ol,JNER(S) r STGNATURE(S)
ADDRESS
Vail, Co pHgNE 476-7490
D.LOCATION OF
ADDRESS
& Tract 'rDrl
PROPOSAL: LEGAL- LOT 31 BLOCK FILING Vail Village 2nd
E. FEE groo ,tro! ]+i22 cK #!Jt p
THE FEE I"IUST BE PAID BEFORE THE DEPARTI4ENT
ACCEPT YOUR PROPOSAL.
. F. { ljst of the names of owners of al.l property. INCLUDING PROPERTY BEHND AND ACROSS STNTiTiI
THE APPLICANT WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CONNECi
II. PRE-APPLICATION CLAUSE
0F C0M,'4UNITY DEVEL0PMENT l,llLL
adjacent to the subject property
and their mai ling adoresses.
OI{NERS AND CORRECT ADDRESSES.
A PRE.APPLICATION CONFERENCE I,JITH A PLANNING STAFF I,IEI,IBER IS STRONGLY SUGGESTEDT0 DETERT'IINE IF ANY ADDITIoNAL INFORiIATioN is-r'tibgii. ""uii nppricATr0N t,,rLLBE ACCEPTED UNLESS-IT^Is cor'lPlETE f uusr irqciuo'r-nii-irri',ii nrQurnro By rHE z'NrNGADI'IINISTRAToR)' IT-Is THEAPPLICATIi'i-nEspor,rirsrrii io-i,inxE AN App0TNTMENTI,IITH THE sTAFF TO FIND OUT ABOUT ADOiTior.rqi 'sUBI,Iiiini"n!OurnEI.IENTS.
PLEASE NOTE THAT l.,lgtltlt APPLICATI0N-|,lrLL STRrAr.lLrNE THE AppR0VAL pR0cEssFOR Y0uR PROJEcr ev DEcEmri{G THE lrur'reen oe coruoriioiii or nppnovAL THAT THEfiffrffilrtlli,yifr|s ,s!!s:norTroNs oF nFpnovei'iiuii'sEtdHpLrED r,'iTH BEFSRE A
I €'&
al, /v,.,6,t
^
_ | - Q -?tt:
,----
OV ER
:7 UppER Elcle Vl
WATER AND SANITATION DISTRICTS
846 FOREST ROAD . VAIL, COLORAoo ai657
(303) 476 7480
February 18, 1987
Krlstan Prltz
Town Planner
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
RE: Vail Wastewater Plant Conditional Use Permit
Dear KrisEan:
Enclosed ls a coropleted Condlcional Use Permlt Appllcatlon for che Vail
Wastewater Plant parking 1oc.
I^Ie are proposlng constructlng a parklng lot on Eop of the west half of the
Vail plant. It would be accessed from our present parking lot and Pass
along the north slde of the building. The entire access road would be
located on district property.
We have xoet r^rith officials of the State Highway DepartmenE for their
comments and they have no problem wlth our plan. They would 1lke to delay
any additional trees belng planted along the northwest corner of the 1ot
untll- the lnterchange Deslgn is conplete. We w111 agree at thls tlme to
plant addltional trees ln the area to provlde screening after the State
Highway Departnent personnel have made thelr finprovements.
Having planters or green space on top of the parklng 1ot w111 not be
possible because of load bearlng capaclty linlts.
I hope chis applicatl-on meets r'JlEh your approval slnce our presenl parklng
1ot east of the planE ls an undesl-rable locatlon.
Thank you for your conslderatlon.
Slnce re1y,
UPPER EAGLE VALLEY CONSOLIDATED SANITATION DISTRICT
o
LLEY
#r-a /4"*/
David Krenek, P.E.
Operatlons Dlrector
DK/ng
'rl ,,:'-. --"r
rII PARTICIPATIN6 DISTRICTS ARROWHEAD METFO WATER'AVON METROWAAER' BEAVER CREEK METRO WATER I' BERRY CREEK METRO WATER / CLEAiI \
/lll EA6LE.vATL METRo wATER. EowaRDs METRo WATEF{ . LAKE cREEK MEADows warER . ur'pER EAGLE vALLEy coNsoltoarED sANtrartoN GED
!7 rtr vatL vaLLEy coNSoLtDATED WATER a VAjL WATER AND SANITATION
l
o
LLEY
LIST OF PROPERTY OWNERS NEXT TO THE VAIL
WASTEWATER SEWER PLANT, VAIL, COLORADO.
1. Town of Vail
75 South Forntage Road
Vai1, Colorado 81657
2. Vail Associates
P.O. Box 7
Vail, Colorado 81658
:/
Uppen Enele Vl
WATER ANO SANITATION DISTRICTS
846 FOR€ST ROAD . VAIL, COTORADO 81657
(303) r175-7440
l ll panrrcrparr{G DrsrRrcrs - aRRowHEAD METRo warER a avoN METRo warER . BEA'ER cREEr< ME rRo warER . BERRV cREEK METRo wa-a* /'6ili\
a\
EAGLE''a'L MErFo w""^"o*"^;:,I;;:;::::::i;r::ffTH:?:r'-H:1',:Tff;:',::"aLLE., coNsoL'oarED saN'ra'oN
@
INTER-OEPARTMENTAL REV I El.l-
PROJECI.
DATE SUBMITTED:- DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING
COMMENTS NEEDED BY:
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL:
PUBLIC I,{ORKS
FIRE DEPARTMENT
Date
POLICE DEPARTMENT
Reviewed by, G 4 oate z/zy'AZ
Corments:
a'1 e L€ 7 7<z
-TtJose s7/<E -7s
/S 4a€Q ''/tt "/e'
Arz4 2.4€
Reviewed by:
Comments:
lfto-.o lf*v{ 4 P.€. trr4',4P c,^J 2ea-tt,r6s 4-/ i 4 -Z
Fao.n -Z /e- €1" G /^, €7-r<- a//o K<wt€-"' ec>
-97'? //.\..,,6 7//l t' -2,/€- €t , , 7 "tC s- 7<ua7o(€
=6 .9u /7a <--Z 1.t4oz.,tG C6.-O -z,a^-t J Aai'/./a9 7C.b
</1(,9/',op oF -//{ F4,e <tuC L<t/.
Reviewed by:
Comments:
Date
RECREATION DEPARTMENT
Reviewed by:
Comments:
ItIt
\
t
o
o
n
I
v
It
\\
\
../tV\
\\
t't t'
voll7
s.
o$
t\
",
to,
i't
\
\
\_-.-?-
$
o
Jtt
.1,
)
t
I
0.
oII
\
F
z
H
{I
o
0tI(
J
H(
(
l
tt
\
\
t
o
o
n
I
v
0.
1
I
\\
\\
o
o
orl
I
I
I
I
I
It
I
I
--/
$)c{I
I
\I\
rV
o
k
-/\
\! ----
\\\rt\
\
\
\
\
\
i
t
I\I
\
I
o^
os
\
$"^
\'. \o
\!
t
tor
i'ti\
.V
\
\
9
o.
$
s\s7rf
$.
\\\l\l\t
\\
--\ \\s\
\\I
\
I
\\
I
t
\
PI,ANNING AND EWIRONMENTALApril 20 | 1,997
PRESENTJ.J. CoIIins
Diana Donovan
Pam Hopkins
Peggy osterfossSid Schultz
Jim Viele
ABSENT
Bryan Hobbs
The rneetl-ng was called to order by the chairrnan, Jim Viete.
1. Approval of minutes of March 9 and March 23.
Diana Donovan moved and J.J. Collins seconded to approve theminutes of ttre meeting of Marctr 9. The vote was 6-0 in favor.Diana Donovan rnoved and Peggy Osterfoss seconded to approve theneeting of l4arch 23. The vote was 6-0 in favor.
2. a. A request to adopt rules of procedure for home
occupancy revocation hearings.
Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney, explained that for tbe firsttirne, a home occupancy permit revocation was being appealed. Heexplained that this would be a quasi-judicial hearing and the
PEC would act like a judge and would decide whether or not touphold or overturn the revocation of tbe license. larry gavethe Planning Corunission a list of rules of procedure.
Diana Donovan moved. to ad.opt the trComrnission RegulationsSetting Forth Procedures Applicable to Appeals of theRevocation of Home Occupancy Permits by the ZoningAdrninistrator. I The motion was seconded by pam Hopkins and thevote to adopt lras 6-0 in favor.
2.b. Consideration of a r est for a sta of execution ofthe o rof ator revo Vail East
Ren Inc.at ermit and e shment of
a ate to hear Iof the revoca!on of the East
Va I Rentals, Inc.on
Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney, explained that he felt there wasno harm done by granting a stay of execution, since there wouldprobably not be very much business until June.Diana Donovan moved and Pam Hopkins seconded to hold thehearing of this license on May 27 at 3:OO pM. The vote was 6-0 in favor of this date.
COMMISSTON
STAFF PRESENT
FAEer PaEEAn
Tom Braun
Rick PylrnanKristan Pritz
Betsy Rosolack
(
3.A request for a conditional use perrnit in order to
tne
llpeef Eaqrlocated at 846 Forest Road.
solidated SanitationulsErrcE
(
Peter Patten explained that this building was located in thePUD zone district and the planning Commiision sets thestandards for this zone district as appricable. uEVcsD wishedto relocate their parking facirity from Town of Vair land andVail Associates property to their own property. He showed. siteplans and explained that the staff was concerned that there besome type of screening to the west as well as to the north.
Dave Mott, applicant, stated that he had no problen withIandscaping to buffer the view to the north, but it wasdifficult to do now until the width of the road is known. Hefelt that UEVCSD should not be asked to submit a bond to theTown of vail since he felt this was inappropriate between twogovernment entities, but was willing to submit a 1etter ofcredit. He added that he would be willing to raise to 42,r therail on the parapet wall to the west, but felt that no amountof.screening would be adeguate to hide the parking from thebuilding to the west.
Peter stated that a bond was standard procedure with everybody,but that a letter of credit would be fine. He added. that-somebuffer to the west was important for future developrnent on theadjacent property. Peter presented the parking proposar to theTown Council, and they had no problerns with the proposaf.
Pan Hopkins was concerned about having enough landscapinq tothe north and having it done well. she feti that witir tie newroad so crose to the existing road, enough landscaping was veryinportant. Sid Schultz and Diana Donovin agreed. peSSyosterfoss stated that she did not feel comfortable appiovingthe request until she had more inforrnation on the fi;;r d.esi.gnof the new ramp and whether or not there wourd be enough rooito landscape the area for adequate screening.
J-J. collinsr nain concern was with rnaking certain that therewould be enough landscaping provided when the HighwayDepartmentrs design vras completed. He felt that theie reallywas no way to plan the landscaping without State HighwayDepartment input. J.J. rs second concern was with screeiring thelot to the west. He fert that with the present conditions] theproposed parapet wall was adequate, but was concerned thatfuture use of the property to the west would change the
required screening.
Peterrs concern was that in the future the Town could not goback and ask for nore or different screening.
J.J. moved to approved the request for the conditional usepermit conditional upon Design Review Board review and in 1i9htof reguirements for landscapingr on the north property line,especially as it would be related to the new exit. alsorequired would be a letter of credit frorn the applicant. Themotion $/as seconded by Parn Hopkins and the vote-ior approvatwas 5-0.
est for a side setback variance in order tocoructa res ence on Parcel B, a res vts10n of Lots14 and 1-7 ock 7, Va Village First Flicants:Dlr.Mrs.chael Tennenbaum
A4.
Rick Pylman showed site plans and explained that the applicantwas requesting a 10 foot variance from the 1-5 foot sid6 setbackreguirement for a lot which had recently been created by theapplicant. Rick stated that the applicants also onned theproperty to the east (Parcel A) and were willing to restrictdevelopment on parcel A to a distance af 2s feei fron theproperty line by use of a deed restriction or covenants. Rickexplained that the staff requested that this area be left as( undisturbed open space, but the applicants declined to leave\ this buffer undisturbed. Rick arso stated that the sidesetback area requested for encroachrnent contained. severalfairly significant natural features, including tr,ro large sprucetrees. Tbe staff recornmendation was for denial of the-sidesetback variance because they fert there was no physicalhardship driving the side setback encroachment and- felt itwould be a grant of special privilege.
Jay Peterson, representing the appricants, stated that theapplicants could have achieved the reguested setbacks if theyhad requested a special development district, but had preferred.to go through a subdivision process instead. They felt that anyproblems could be achieved through the variance procedure. Hefelt the integrity of the setbacks was being maintained.
J.J. collins stated that he did not see why a building could.not be designed in such a sray that it rernained within thesetbacks and did not destroy large trees. Jay replied thatthis was the area in which to place the house-to take advantageof the views.
{.{. pointed out that the appricant had a c}ear rot on which tobuild and plenty of roorn. ilv replied. that when the trade-offsbecarne too great, they decided to ask for a variance. He addedthat hundreds of hours were spent on various schemes on al1three sites.
(
Peggy asked if there was any interest in protecting the twoevergreen trees that would be lost. Jay replied that they werealready spend.ing a lot of money on landscaping. peggy said .1.,f .did a good job of expressing her views. She felt that shewould work with the proposal if the lost landscaping would bereplaced.
Jay stated that a landscaped buffer could be a condition ofapproval . Kurt Cegerberg stated tbat they were trying to bringlandscaping into the building area and attention woul_d be paidto bring landscaping into the buffer area.
Diana felt it was too bad that the applicant first created theIot and then could not design a house to fit the lot.
Jay replied ttrat he could have asked for a special developrnentdistict and gotten rid of the property line and kept within theinterity of the zone code and received approval . He addedthat he would rather use the variance procedure as long as hecould keep the integrity of the zone code,
Sid shared a lot of the feelings the other members stated. llewished it hadnrt gotten to this state, but felt if there was a3Or buffer between the houses, it woutd preserve the distancefactor. He added ttrat he did not feel driven to preserve therocl< outcropping.
Pam felt that there rdas no hardship on which to base thegranting of a variance.
Jay replied that any ti.rne the pEC is given a variance, theylook at it on a site by site basis, that each project standsaIone.
Jim Viele agreed with Jay with respect to the proces. He addedthat if there is no objective judgement involved, there wouLdbe no variance procedure. He stated that in the overall view,the purpose of the setbacks is to rnaintain the distance ofseparation between dwellings. He wondered if the project wouldbe a better one if it conforrned to the setback regulations andadded that he would rather see the house where is was proposed.to be rather than take out additional trees.
J.J. asked why the house was sited where it was on parcel A tothe west, and Kurt replied that they were trying to pick upviews of Gore Range and down va1ley and that-tfre awelfing wasbroken up to help to reduce the rnassiveness of the proje-t.
J.J. stated that on Parcel B he saw plenty of room within thereguired setbacks.
curt said he could not argue with the fact that one can fitt
(something on the lot, but the trees were a major concern. Jayadded that on any given site one can build without goinq intosetback areas, but it may make an uninteresting town.J.J. pointed out that each time he had seen the pEC challengean architect, the architect had been able to come up witb apJ-an within the setbacks. He repeated the fact thai tnearchitect in this case had a clean piece of property. Jayanswered that they had voLuntarily torn down the existingstructure and shoul-d be given latitude to build, that they werebeing penalized for rnaking a clean site.
Viele spoke in favor of the proposal as long as the bufferwould remain. Jay answered that there would. be a deedrestriction that only the Town of VaiI could remove the buffer.Pan Hopkins pointed out that. another owner could hire Jay toask to remove the buffer. She added that the pEC was goingthrough this process because Parcel A had to be a rninirnun site.Jay said the purpose of the subdivision was to stop from havingtwo old homes being add.ed onto. He added that they knew theynigtrt have to ask for variances when they planned Lhesubdivision.
Peter Patten felt that the naturar features should be preserved.within the 1-5 foot setback area and added that this was a selfcreated hardship.
Jin Viele moved to approve the variance with the findings thatthe strict or literal interpretation or enforcernent of ihespecified regulation would result in practical difficulty orunnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objeetivesof the zone code. He specified that particular attention bepaid by the DRB of landscaping planned to be in the 30 footbuffer. Sid seconded the motion and the vote was 4 in favorand 2 (JJ and Parn) against.
est for front side rear and stream setback
ances te eovera e vart ange ss res entialoor area var ance and a variance fromer to construc addit on Parcels A
and B, Lot B ock Va 1 Villa eF rst F Linq.cant;Jerome A. Lew s, Down Street Foundation
(
5.
Betsy Rosolack presented the proposal, stating that theapplicants wanted to build two Z-car garages ind additionalsquare footage allowed under Ordinance 4 of 1995. The staffrecomnendation was for denial as it was felt the additionscould be constructed within the setback areas.
Tom Briner, one of the architects on the project, spoke infavor.of the project and Dan Rickli, another architect,explained that there seemed to be a discrepancy in the amountof sguare footage that they were adding. Jerry Lewis and John
(
Kennerly, applicants, also spoke in favor of the project.Rickli felt that garages should not be counted as- sile coverageif they were not counted as GRFA. He also proposed elirninating4 parking spaces and decreasing the curb cuts irom 4 to 3.
Jirn Viele asked Betsy if the staff had had tine to review the
new proposal , and she replied that they had not.
Craig Snowdon, architect representing the adjacent neighborsto the west, Steve Berkowitz, read a letter from Berkowitzobjecting to the encroachments, stating that views would benegatively irnpacted.
J.J. felt it was difficult to consider the proposal with adiscrepancy in statistics. Peggy osterfoss-agreed and alsofelt concern for Berkowitz's views. Rickli disagreed that theadditions would impact the views from the Berkowitz property.
Peggy added tbat tbe burying of the garage was a step in ttreright direction, but she stated that she would like to seefewer than 3 road cuts vith more landscaping instead ofasphalt. Diana agreed and added that her main concern was thestream setbaclc.
Sidts blggest concern was site covera€te. He aLso felt therewas too rnuch asphalt. Briner mentioned that this was a DRBissue' Pam l{opkins abstained from comment because trer firm wasworking on the Berkowitz proposal .
Jirn viere stated ttrat when-a proposal contains so many variancereguests, it is a good indication that too much is be-ing placedon the site.
Jerry Lewis asked if he could table and peter answered that theitem could be tabled until 4/27 if the applicant could getrevised figures and drawings into the couununity DevelopientDepartmant by Wednesday rnorning, the 22nd.
Leraris requested to table xo 4/2'7. Diana noved. and sid. second.edto table the request until Aprit 2?. The vote was 5-O-L (pamabstained from voting. )
6. I Tgaggg! to 3rnend spe t ro. e,Vail Villaqe fnn.
Ton Braun presented the arnendrnent request and stated the staffrecommended denial , citing the need for additional parking,assurances the ski Museurn would be relocated, and the need'foraccommodation units.
Jay Peterson, representing the applicant, reminded the boardthat twice the vail vitlage rnn complex had sulrnitted phasedprojects, but the potentiaL developers could not fund theprojects- Now Joe staufer will develop the new phases himself.,fay explained the valet parking and stlted that it was aternporary measure until the next phase could be constructed. flestated that it was not economicalry feasible for Mr. staufer toconstruct additional parking with this phase.
t
(Jay stated that the applicant was willing to restrict thedwelling units per the staff recommendation. Regarding tbe skiMuseum, Jay stated that 4,000 square feet of building iould begivg! to the Town to use free of charge for any use the Townwould want.
Pam asked if valet parking was planned for the commercial area,and Jay replied that it vas not. Joe Staufer stated that hehad 30 - 50 parking spaces that are always empty. He addedthat the Sonnenalp, Plaza, and Bell Tower had all expanded andnone had added any parking.
Jay then pointed out that there \,rere no large projects beingconstructed at this tirne which were not phased.
Pam agreed with the parking, and felt that perhaps rnore rocalswould be using this parking 1ot. Sid also dia not have anyproblem with the parking and felt that to receive the 41000square feet of space in the building was better for the Townthan for the Town to receive gj_s,ooo to relocate the skiMuseum. He did feet that the new residential units slrourd becontrorred for public use. Diana felt the units needed to beavail-abl-e for rental . she felt that the Museum relocation mustbe worked out and rnust be a part of this amendrnent.
Joe staufer felt that the Town did not gain anything bytrkicking the owner outt'especiarly if the ownei wanted-to be i-nvail for two months in the sunrner. Mr. staufer suggested thatthe unit be available for rental and not be the prii..yresidence of the owner.
Diana stated that she did not patronize many of the stores inthe vair village rnn eornplex because she did not have any placeto park. Diana asked for a commitment to finish the uuiialngas proposed, However, she sti1l felt that there would be a -
parking problem. Jay said that for the parking to work, allthe phases must be done.
Peggy osterfoss felt that the proposar shourd include assurancethat the developer will relocate the ski Museurn and reland.scapebecause a landscaped area was being rernoved in the proposar.Jay replied that with the new proposar, the Town of va-il wouldend up wi-th a large chunk of real estate. He added that theapplicant.was willing to participate in redoing theintersection. Peggy stated that she did not wait to see thelandscaping issue lost in the shuffle, and felt theresponsibility rested wittr the developer.
More discussion followed concerning parking. peter pointed outthat parking spaces under the condos were iontrolted by a gateand were under utilized. Ton felt that it was the reslonsiri:.-ity of the developer to provide parking on the site. J.J.referred to the rnemo which indicated a shortfall of loo spaces.He was told LB? of the spaces nere required to be valet and he
(
t
L
(
wondered how the decision was made to have 188 of the spaces bevaLet. Ton replied that it varied. with use. He added thatphases I and II contained 22,OOO square feet and phase IIIcontained L0,O0O sqluare feet with no parking provided. Headded that he felt it was the repsponsibility of the developerto provide parking on the site.
Joe Stauffer said he would like to be able to pay into thepark5-ng fund as did businesses in Commercial Core I and II.J.J. suggested that perhaps Staufer could pay the Town forparking at building permit tine and the Town could repayStaufer when his parking was complete.
The Ski Museum was discussed. Torn stated that at present the
amended SDD did not address the needs of the Ski Museum. Jaypointed out that the space offered to the Town was worth 91-Million. J.J. said it seemed like an opportunity for tlre Town,the space could be sold for a substantial amount of cash. Tompointed out that one condition was that it be used for thepublic, Jay stated that they were willing to remove thatstipulation.
if .J. felt the key issue of the omer/rental question was occu-pancy and thj.s issue was discussed. Also discussed was thedeletion of randscaping for parking. saundra srnith stated thatthey were wi).ling to renove two parking spaces and placeIandscaping in place of the spaces.
Peter felt to approve the proposed shortfall of parkingr wouldbe inconsistent. He pointed out that the Westin $/as not ablet9 do any more construction until the parking structure wasfinished. He stated that the Plaza and Sell-Tower weredifferent, in that they were in a pedestrian area and paid intothe parking fund. He pointed out that the proposal underconstruction was adjacent to the 4-way stop with vehicle accessand nust have on-site parking.
,f.J. discussed the parking figures. Joe Staufer proposed tomake the dwelling'units be available for rentar when they wereunoccupied.
Sid Schultz moved and J.,f. Collins seconded to approve the
annendrnents to SDD 6 as submitted with the followingconditioins:
The use of the units be restricted. to non-primaryresidence and be part of a rental pool.
The applicant shal1 participate in and not remonstrateagainst a special irnprovement district for theintersection of Vail noad and Meadow Drive.
3.
The vote was 5-1 in favor.
(
1.
2.
A
a
7.
J.J. left at this point.
est for setback variances in order to constructons to rtv at Lot 2 Bloc vail vil-}a
Howard Ju and Steven Berkowitz
9.A request to amend the zo code in order to add a ne\,\rzone district to be ent tled trHills de Res dentiaApplicant: Town of VaiI
This itern was tabled.
(
Rick Pylnan showed a site plan and explained the proposal ,adding that the staff recomnendation was for appr6va-1 . ciaig
Snowd.on, architect for the project, explained the plans. p"SSyosterfoss suggested the deck be only over the garage, and Criigsaid he would reduce the deck.
Diana rnoved and Peggy seconded to approve the request per thestaff memo. The vote l''as 4 - O - I abstention (Farn). -
8. A fectuest for a side satback wari anr.ro in rrrrior {.a
Tom Braun showed an improvement survey and explained therequest. Gary Walker, representing the applicant, statedthat the rnain reason for the location of the garage was tohave access to an existing driveway and parking in frontof the garage.
Diana Donovan moved and pam Hopkins seconded to approve therequest per the staff memo. The vote lras 5-O in favor.
A request for a side setback variance in grder toconstruct a garage
Yl"")rC
est for a conditional use rmit in order to
a lot on of the west half of ther Eaqle V ev Water tat on water plant
located at 846 Forest Road.
3.Are
(
ated SanitationDistrict
Peter Patten explai-ned that this building was located in the
PUD zone district and the planning Cornmission sets thestandards for this zone district as applicable. uEVcsD sishedto relocate their parking facility from Town of Vail land andvail Associates.property to their own property. He showed siteplans and explained that the staff uas concerned that there besome type of screening to the west as well as to the north.
Dave Mott, applicant, stated that he had no problem withJ-andscaping to buffer the view to the north, but it wasdifficult to do now until the width of the road is known. Hefelt that uEvcsD should not be asked to submit, a bond to theTown of vail since he felt this was inappropriate between twogtovernment entities, but was willing to submit a letter ofcredi.t. He added that he would be willing to raise to 42r therail on the parapet waII to the west, but felt that no amountof.:creening would be adeguate to hide the parking fron thebuilding to the west.
Peter stated that a bond was standard procedure with everybody,but that a letter of credit would be fine. He add.ed. that-sornebuffer to the west was important for future development on theadjacent property. Peter presented the parking proposal to theTown Council , and they had no problems with the proposal .
Parn Hopkins lras concerned about having enough landscaping tothe north and having it done wert. she feri that witl tfre newroad so close to the existing road, enough landscaping was veryimportant. sid Schultz and Diana Donovin agreed. peSSyosterfoss stated that she did not feel cornfoitabre appiovingthe request until she had more information on the ri.nh designof the new ramp and whether or not there would be enough rooito landscape the area for adequate screening.
J.,f. colrinst nain concern was with making certain that therewould be enough landscaping provided when the HighwayDepartrnentrs design was compreted. He felt that-there rea11ywas no way to plan the landscaping without State HighwayDepartrnent input. ,t.J. rs second concern was with s6reeiing thelot to the west. He felt that with tbe present conditions] theproposed parapet wall was adequate, but was concerned thatfuture use of the property to the west would change the
.t
required screening.
Peterrs concern was that in the future the Town could not goback and ask for more or different screening.
J.J. moved to approved the reguest for the conditional usepermit conditional upon Design Review Board review and in liqhtof reguirements for landscaping on tlre north property 1ine,especially as it would be related to the new exit. Alsorequired would be a letter of credit from the applicant. Themotion \das seconded by Parn Hopkins and the vote ior approvalhras 5-0.
4. A est
uaEn
for a side setback variance in order toa residence on Pa B, a resubdivision of LotsBlock 7, VaiI ViI First F: Mr. and Mrs. Mic Tennenbaum
cons14a
ApET
(
Rick Pylnan-showed site plans and explained that the applicantwas reqfuesting a 10 foot variance fron the ]-5 foot sidL- setbackreguirement for a lot which had recently been created by theapplicant. Rick stated that the applicants also owned tleproperty to the east (Parce1 A) and were willing to restrictdeveloprnent on Parcel A to a distance of 29 feet from theproperty J.ine by use of a deed restriction or covenants, Rickexplained that the staff requested that this area be feft asundisturbed open space, but the applicants declined to leavethis buffer undisturbed. nick also stated that the sidesetback area requested for encroachment contained severalfairly significant natural features, including two large sprucetrees. The staff recommendation was for deniil of the-sidesetback variance because they felt there was no physicalhardship driving the side setback encroachrnent and-fe1t itwould be a grant of special privilege.
Jay Peterson. representing the applicants, stated that theapplicants could have achieved the reguested setbacks if theyhad reguested a special development district, but had preferiedto go through a subdivision process instead. They felt that anyproblems could be achieved through the variance procedure. Hefelt, tbe integrity of the setbacks was being maintained,
J.J. Collins stated that he did not see why a building couldnot be designed in such a way that it remained within-thesetbacks and did not destroy large trees. Jay replied thatthis was the area in which to place the house-to Lake advantageof the views.
J.J. pointed out that the applicant had a clear lot on which tobuild and plenty of room. Jay replied that when the trade-offsbecame too great, they decided to ask for a variance. He addedthat hundreds of hours were spent on various schemes on ar1three sites.t
L
Peggy asked if there was any interest in protecting the twoevergreen trees that would be lost. Jay replied that they werealready spelding a lot of money on landscaping. peggy saia 9.,f.did a good job of expressing her views. she ielt tfrit strewould work witlr the proposal if the lost landscaping woul_d. bereplaced.
Jay stated that a landscaped buffer could be a condition ofapproval . Kurt Cegerberg stated that they were trying to bringlandscapi!9 into the building area and attention would be paid-to bring landscaping into the buffer area.
Diana felt it was too bad that the applicant first created thelot and then sould. not design a house to fit the lot.
Jay replied that he could have asked for a special developnentdistict and gotten rid of the property line lnd kept within theinterity of the zone code and received approval. He addedthat he would rather use the variance procedure as long as hecould keep the integrity of the zone code.
Sid shared a lot of the feelings the other members stated. Hewished it hadntt gotten to this state, but felt if there \,iras a3or buffer betrrreen the trouses, it would preserve the distancefactor. He added that he did not feer driven to preserve therock outcropping.
Pam felt that there lras no hardship on which to base thegranting of a variance.
Jay replied that any tine the pEC is given a variance, theylook at it on a site by site basis, that each project standsalone.
Jirn viele agreed with Jay with respect to the proces. He ad.d.edthat if there is no objective judgement involved, there would
!-e no variance procedure. IIe stated that in the overarl- view,the purpose of the setbacks is to maintain the distance ofseparation between dwellings. He wondered if the project wouldbe a better one if it confonned to the setback regutations andadded that he would rather see the house where is-was proposedto be rather than take out additional trees.
J-J- asked why the house was sited where it was on parcel A tothe west, and Kurt replied that they were trying to pick upviews of Gore Range and down valley-and. that-trr6 aweiring iasbroken up to help to reduce the massiveness of the proje6t.
J.J. stated that on Parcel B he saw plenty of room within therequired setbacks.
curt said he courd not argue with the fact that one can fit
f something on the lot, but the trees were a najor concern. Jay\ added that on any given site one can build r,rii.lrout going into-setback areas, but it nay make an uninteresting town.J.J. pointed out that each tirne he had seen the PEC challengean architect, the architect had been able to come up with aplan within the setbaclrs. He repeated the fact that thearchitect in this case had a clean piece of property. Jayanswered that they had voluntarily torn down the existingstructure and should be.given latitude to build, that they werebeing penalized for making a clean site.
Viele spoke in favor of the proposal as long as the bufferwould rernain. Jay answered that there would be a deedrestriction that only the Town of Vail could remove the buffer.
Parn Hopkins pointed out that another owner could hire Jay toask to remove the buffer. She added that the FEC was goingthrough this process because Parcel A trad to be a rninimurn iite.Jay said tbe purpose of the subdivision was to stop from havingtwo old homes being added onto. He added that they knew theynight have to ask for variances when they planned lhesubdivision.
(
Peter Patten felt that the naturar features should be preserwedwithin the 1.5 foot setback area and added that this was a selfcreated hardship.
Jim Viere moved to approve the variance with the findings thatthe strict or literal interpretation or enforcement of thespecified regulation would result in.practicar difficulty orunnecessary physical trardship inconsistent with the obje-tivesof the zone code. Ire specified that particul-ar attention bepaid by the DRB of landscaping planned to be in the 3o footbuffer. Sid seconded the motion and the vote hras 4 in favorand 2 (JJ and Pan) against.
5.
Betsy Rosolack presented the proposal_, stating that theapplicants wanted to build two 2-car garages ind additionalsquare footage allowed under Ordinance 4 of 1985. The staffrecommendation was for denial as it was felt the ad.ditionscould be constructed within the setback areas.
Tom Briner, one of the architects on the project, spoke infavor_of the project and Dan Rickli, another-architect,explained that there seemed to be a discrepancy in the arnountof square footage that they were adding. ,lerry Lewis and. .fohn
A request for front, side, rear and stream setback
Yartances, a s+te co ss residentialgloor arga ve_rianqe and a vafiange frgrn.iecrulrecl-landscaping in order to construct qdditions on parcels A
gnq_ g, rroE J, E rocr< r, vaf I vl,J.Iage !'].rst Fj-ling.Applicanq: Jerome A. LewLsf Downing Street Foundation
(
(
Kennerly, applicants, also spoke in favor of the project.Rickli fert that garages shourd not be counted. as- sile coverageif they were not counted as GRFA. He also proposed elirninatiig4 parking spaces and decreasing the curb cuts fron 4 to 3.
Jirn viele asked Betsy if the staff had had tine to review thenew proposal , and she replied that they had not.
craig snowdon, architect representing the adjacent neighborsto the west, Steve Berkowitz, read a letter lrom Berkoriitzobjecting to the encroachments, stating that views would benegatively impacted.
J.J. felt it vas difficult to consider the proposal with adiscrepancy in statistics. peggy Osterfoss-agieed and alsofelt concern for Berkowitz's views. Rickri disagreed that theadditions would impact the views from the Berkowitz property.Peggy added tbat the burying of the garage was a ste| in trrlright direction, but she stated. that she would like to seefewer than 3 road cuts with more landscaping instead ofasphalt. Diana agreed and added that hei miin concern was thestream setback.
sidts biggest concern was si-te coverage. He also felt therewas too much asphart. Briner menti,oned that this was a DRBissue. Paur Hopkins abstained from comment because her firm wasworking on the Berkowitz proposal.
Jim viele stated that-when.a proposal contains so many variancerequests, it is a good indication that too much is Ueing ;i;-;;on the site.
Jerry Lewis asked if he could tabre and peter answered that theitem could be tabled-until 4/27 Lf the appricant could getrevised figures and drawings,into the conrnunity DevelopientDepartrnant by Wednesday morning, the 22nd.
Lewis requested to table to 4/27. Diana moved and sid secondedto tabre the request until April 27. The vote was 5-o-l_ (pamabstained fron voting. )
6. I TgElg:! to 3rnend spe topnenr pistrict No. 6,Vail Village Inn.
Tom Braun presented the amendment reguest and stated the staffreconmended denial, citing the need for additional parking,assurances the ski Museum would be relocated, and the nee6.'foraccommodation units.
Jay Peterson' representing the applicant, remind.ed the boardthat twice tbe vail village rnn complex had submitted phasedprojects, but the potential developers couLd not fund theprojects. Now ,Joe staufer wilr deirelop the new phases hinself.Jay explained the valet parking and stated that it was aternporary measure until the next phase could be constructed. Hestated that it was not econornical).y feasible for ffr. staufer toconstruct additional parking with this phase.
t
f Jay stated that the applicant vas willing to restrict the
\ dwelling units per the staff recommendation. Regarding the SkiMuseum, Jay stated that 4,000 square feet of building could begiven to the Town to use free of charge for any use the Townwould want.
Pan asked if valet parking was planned for the conmercial arealand Jay replied that it was not. Joe Staufer stated that hehad 3O - 50 parking spaces that are always empty. He addedthat the Sonnenalp, Plaza, and Bell Tower had alt expanded and
none had added any parking.
(
,fay then pointed out that there were no largie projects beingconstructed at this tine which were not phased.
Pam agreed with the parking, and felt that perhaps nore locaiswould be using this pqrking lot. Sid also did not have anyproblern with the parking and felt that to receive the 4,00b
sQluare feet of space in the building was better for the Townthan for the Town to receive $L5,0OO to relocate the Skil{useun. He did feel that the new residential units should becontrol]ed for public use. Diana felt the units need.ed to beavailable for rental . she felt that the ltuseum relocation rnustbe worked out and rnust be a part of this amendment.
Joe Staufer felt that the town did not gain anything byrrlcicking the owner outtt especiarly if the ownei wanted-to be inVail for two months in the surnmer. Mr. Staufer suggested. thatthe unit be available for rental and not be the priroaryresidence of the ordner.
Diana stated that she did not patronize many of the stores inthe vail vi1-rage rnn cornprex because she did not have any placeto park. Diana asked for a commitment to finish the fuilOingas proposed. Howeverf she sti1l felt that there would be aparking problem. Jay said that for the parking to work, allthe phases must be done.
Peggy osterfoss fert that the proposar shourd include assurancethat the developer will relocate the ski Museum and relandscapebecause a land.scaped area was being rernoved in the proposal .Jay replied that with the new proposal , the Town of vail wouldend up with a large chunk of real- estate. He added ttrat theapplicant was willing to participate in redoing theintersection. Peggy stated that she did not wait to see thelandscaping issue tost in the shuffle, and felt theresponsibility rested with the developer.
More discussion followed concerning parking. peter pointed outthat parking spaces under the condos were iontrolled by a gateand were under utilized. Tom fel-t thaL it was the reslonsilit-ity of the developer to provlde parking on the site. 1..r.referred to the memo which indicated a shortfall of 100 spaces.He was tord 188 of the spaces were required to be valet and het
(
wondered how the decision was made to have LBE of the spaces bevalet. Ton replied that it varied with use. He added thatphases I and II contained 22,000 square feet and phase IIIcontained 10,000 square feet with no parking provided. Headded that he felt it was the repsponsibility of the developerto provide parking on the site.
Joe Stauffer said he would like to be able to pay into theparking fund as did businesses in Comrnercial Core I and. II.J.J. suggested that perhaps Staufer could pay the Town forparking at building perrnit tirne and the Town could repayStaufer when his parking was cornpl-ete.
The Ski Museum was discussed. Tom stated that at present theanended SDD did not address the needs of the Ski Museun. Jaypointed out that the space offered to the Town was worth g1Million. J.J. said it seemed like an opportunity for the Town,the space couLd be sold for a substantial amount of cash. Tompointed out that one condition was that it be used for thepublic. .Jay stated that they were willing to renove thatstipulation.
J.J. felt the key issue of the owner/rental question was occu,pancy and this issue was di-scussed. Also discussed was thedeletion of landscaping for parking. saundra smith stated thatthey were willing to remove two parking spaces and placelandscaping in place of the spaces.
Peter felt to approve the proposed shortfall of parking wouldbe inconsistent. He pointed out that the Westin was not abletg 9o any more construction until the parking structure wasfinished. He stated that the plaza and Ael1-fohrer weredifferent, in that they were i.n a pedestrian area and paid intothe parkJ-ng fund. lle pointed out that the proposal un-derconstruction was adjacent to the 4-way stop wilh vehicle accessand must lrave on-site parking.
J.J. discussed the parking figures. Joe Staufer proposed tomake the dwelling units be available for rentar wnen they wereunoccupied.
Sid Schultz moved and J.J. Collins seconded to approve thearnendments to SDD 6 as subrnitted with the followingconditioins:
1. fhe use of the unj-ts be restricted to non-primaryresidence and be part of a rental pool .
2. fhe applicant shall participate in and not remonstrateagainst a special improvement district for theintersection of Vail Road and Meadow Drive.
3.
The vote was 5-L in favor.L
(
(
A
a
?.
J.J. left at this point.
est for setback variances order to construct1n
ons to the at Lot 2 Block Vai.l villa
cants:Howard, Jud and Steven Berkowitz
Tom Braun showed an inprovement survey and explained therequest. Gary Walker, representing the applicant, statedthat the rnain reason for the location of the garage was tohave access to an existing driveway and parking ii frontof the garage.
Diana Donovan moved and pam Hopkins seconded to approve therequest per the staff nemo. The vote was 5-0 in favor.
A est to anend the zon code in order to add a ner^tzonedistrentedrrHillsde Residentia
This itern was tabled.
Ric\ Pylraan showed a site plan and explained the proposal ,adding that the staff reconmendation was for approval . CraigSnowdon, architect for the project, explained the plans. pegSy
Osterfoss suggested the deck be only over the garage, and Craigsaid he would reduce the deck.
Diana moved and Peggy seconded to approve ttre reguest per thestaff memo. Ttre vote was 4 - 0 - 1 abstention (pan).
8. A feouest for a side setkrack rrari enr''re in rlr.r:l ar l.n
9.
A reguesE for a side setback variance in order toconstruct a qaracle at 325 Forest Road.
4pplicant: Tin Drisko
L
o
Project Application
Project Name:
Proiect Description:
contact person and rn""" DauB lrfblf t$A- }'t(D.
Owner, Address and Phone:
Architect, Address and Phone:
I
Legal Description: Lot
Comments:
fn'^
Design Review Board
Motion by:
o*" }/)Q6-lf
DISAPPROVAL
Seconded by:
APPROVAL
j
tr
lr',!! \';
Town Planner
,l]+
J..\
Date:
lr
E star Approval
lnwn
75 south lrontsge road
vall, colorado 81657
(3O3) 476-7OOO
July 2L, 1988
ilr. Dave Mott
General Manager
Upper Eagle Valley Consol"idated
Water and Sanitation Districts
846 Forest Roadvail, co 8l-657
Re: Gaging Station
Dear Dave:
On JuIy 20, L988, the Design Review Board gave final approvalto your reguest to locate a gaging station to the south of theexisting Upper Eagle Valley facLlity. The approval was givenh'ith the following conditionsl
L. A landowner's letter of approval rnust be submitted.before construction begins.
2. The Town of Vail bike path must be repaired
inrnediately after construqtion.
3. The gage station will be painted forest green.
4. the gage statLon must be a minimurn of four feet frorn. the edge of the asphalt for the bi-ke path. The Town
wouLd like to see as much separation as possible
between the bike path and the station.
5. Please have your construction manager check withPublic Works before the construction of the stationactually begins. Please talk to pete Burnett at476-7000 ext. 25O.
If any have any further guestions, please feel free to give rne
a call. Thanks for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
i/^ I n. I
ltifino rrffr
Kristan PritzSenior Planner
KP: kc
J o.7 UPPER EAGLE VALLEY
o
Cottsotrol
I
WATER AND SAN ITATION DISTRICTS
846 FOREST ROAD . VAIL. COLORADO 41657
(303) 476.7480
, 1', I
a'
July 1, 1988
Peter Patton, Director
Vail Communi ty Development
75 South Frontage Road West
Vail, Colorado 81657
RE: GORE CREEK GAGING STATION
Dear Mr. Patton:
In cooperation with the Vail Valley Consolidated Water District, the U. S.
Geological Survey, Department of Interior plans to install a gaging station just
west of the Forest Road bridge sometime in August. I am writing you to advise you of
the project and inquire as to what approvals are required, if any, by the town.
The instrumentation will be located inside the Upper Eagle Valley Consolidated
Sanitation District's Vail wastewater treatment plant. A small buried air line in
1 1/2" conduit will sense creek level as shown on the attached sketch. The only
visible mechanism will be a ttcantilever gaget' which is necessary for calibration.
This is also shown on the attached sketch and in a photograph of another
instal l ation.
Please advise.
Sincerely,
VA,{L V&LEY CONSOLIDATED WATER DISTRICT
M'%.7
David E. Mott
General Manager
DEM: ikl .84
At tac hment
ll .-'\
A ll PaRTrcrparrNc DrsrRrgrs - ARRgwHEAo METRo warER . avoN METRo wATER . BEAVER cREEK METRo warER . BERRy cREEK ug.,ao /' CLEAN \
O\ wArER ' EAGLE-va'iLMErRowarERv';'J::nJiJ:r;#::'iil,r';:il1r::'i":,:fi:"EAGLEVALLE'saNrrArtoN ' u^''- @f
f-
laa
;74rg
t-rr3-D(Mrrrb l9te)
8L6L! forE- I)o.rbh O':':'"'^':^:-+:igl#Sff*f,':"'o" Fitz
lGo,--C"sek -tJ -TteatmoaL Plaat --l- -l/-aiL - e e/-..-
t,J"+i""i bllg:
l..o.rD-'e^c'a:tar
I
I-t-
I -, lo" o/ rrJ"rorounJ llJr.f- sr d-.- - 4
I
Jtz- U S 63
.canlileter
Creet
Plan
czle l"
.ust'5 a.i 12. l'ne
::\
masph"lt
f,;l<c'patA.,^J.'g'ounJ Ud3-
8"x'
fl"", llatec
I'hrJ lolarS.-ro,L
scale l'.4'
ro(0
cPo a30-s5t
o
ConsouolreoUPPER EAGLE VATLEY
WATER AND SANITATION DISTRICTS
846 FOREST ROAD . vAlL. COLORADO 81657
(303) 476,7480
August 9,1988
Kristan Pritz
VAIL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
75 South Frontage Road West
Vail, Colorado 81657
RE: GORE CREEK GAGING STATI0N, FOREST ROAD
Dear Kr istan:
Attached please find a copy of a letter from Vail Associates, dated Awust 5,
1988, granting permission to cross their property with an underground sensing line in
conjunction with the above gaging station. This is intended to satisfy condition
Number I of your letter dated July 21, 1988.
Should you have any questions, please call
Sincerely,
VAIL VALLEY CONSOLIDATED WATER DISTRICT
| '/ /--''' ''dra I- David E. Mott
General Manager
DEM: ikl 5,49
Attachment
.ll --\
A II PARTICIPATING DISiTRICTS - ARROWHEAO METRO WATER . AVON ETRO WATER . BEAVER CREEK i'ETRO WATER . BERRY CREEK y,ETAO /' CLEAN \
a\ wArER ' EAGLE-'A'|L uErRo wArERv';"J::nJiJ::; ffi:'."":,TTH"^l:'"i;:J,fi"'"'LE vaLLEy saNtra'oN ' vArL @
\hilAssociafeqLrc.
Creators and Operaton of Vail and Beaver Creeko
SITE OF THE 1989 WORLD ALPINE SKI CHAMPIONSHIPS
August 5, 1988
Mr. David MottVail Valley Consolidated V{ater District
846 Forest RoadVail, Colorado 81657
Dear Dave,
The purpose of this letter is to give VaiI Associatesconsent to the water district to dig a trench and place
equipment assoeiated with a stream guage on Vail Associates
owned property located to the west of the Forest Road bridgeand to the south of the sewer plant.
Please call if you have any questions, or need additionalinformation. Obtaining permits and approvals from 1ocal,state or federal regulatory agencies is.the water dj.strict,sresponsibility.
Sincerely,
/'7,/./ , -tfz-2./47
/ toe uaey /
Manager
Mountain Planning
JvL/kL
cc: Larry Lichliter
Pct Office Box 7 . Vail, C-olorado 81658'USA - (loi) 476-5601 .-IElex: 910.920-3183
''.r
Project Name:
Proiect Description:
Conlact Person and
Prolect Application
Owner, Address and Phone:
Architect, Address and Phone:
Legal Description: Lot Block Filing
Comments:
Design Review Board
Motion by:
Seconded by:
APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL
1,*r,, r" X=j
[own Planner', ls , l<fh.ro.X.""
Approval
Project Appllcation
Project Name:
Proiect Description:
Contact Person and Phone
Owner, Address and Phone:
Architect. Address and Phone:
Legal Description: Lot Block Filing Zone
Commenls:
Design Review Board
Date
Motion by:
Seconded by:
APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL
lTown Planner,l ,l 7 Staff Approval
j
.?
-.4
:tg7r
,l\l
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.Jr
k-,rl
F-,e4
r,-
11
rt.-J
';.J-
J
t(vt
_-!
.J
\c
{I.3
R\
\
-eI3
{.-Y
.e s3
d.?t-..d rttJ_ .;.:
\
'I
+t,_l
: :-'i
\€ Jtr-{?3 sQ, \,?
:-oo-C,r t<.iI ..d
Jj+ {3d s
:5€o
J
75 south frontage road
vall, colorado 81657
(3031 476-7OOO
July 21, 1988
Mr. Dave Mott
General ltanager
Upper Eagle Va11ey ConsolidatedI{ater and Sanitation Districts
846 Forest Road
Vail , CO 8L657
Re: Gaging Station
Dear Dave:
On Julyto yourexistingwith the
20, l-988, the Design Review Board gave final approvalrequest to locate a gaging station to the south of the
Upper Eagle Va1ley facility. The approval was givenfollowing conditions:
1. A landowner's letter of approval must be subnittedbefore construction begins.
2. The Toern of VaiI bike path rnust be repaired
irnrnediately after construction.
3. The gage station will be painted forest green.
4. The gage station must be a minimum of four feet fromthe edge of the asphalt for the bike path. The Toernwould like to see as much separation as possible
between the bike path and the station.
5. Please have your construction manager check withPublic Works before the construction of the stationactually begins. Please talk to pete Burnett at
476-7OOO ext. 25O.
Gli
It
If any have anya caII. Thanks
Sincerely,
i r- I O, l-(htho YrfB-I rr.v.v. ' ,..tL
Kristan Pritz
Senior Planner
KP:Kc
further questions, please feelfor your cooperation.
free to give me
uppen EAGLE VALLEY cOXSOLrOereO
WATER AND SANITATION DISTRICTS
846 FOREST ROAD . VAIL COLORADO 81657
(303) 476 7480
l.lovqrb€r 23, 1987
Kristan Pritz
Tohn Plann€r
TCf{f,l OF VAIL
75 Soufi Frontage Road
Vai1, Oolorado 81657
RE: Int€rgovermpnta'l Agreenent with tpper Eagle Valley Oonsolidated
Sanitation District ( "IEVCSD" ) and
Vail Va]]ey Oonsolidated hlater District ("WC[ID")
Dear Kristan:
Erc'lced you will find three (3) copies of the agreenent betr€1 the Tosr of Vail
ard tJre TEVCSD ad WqD regarding the rutual uaiving of certain fea. Both districts
fave sigred, with Ed Drager being the Bmrd Chainrtan in ach case.
P'lease have Ron Phi1 1ips execut€ the agreannnt and return one origina'l to theDistrict.
I an truly pleased that our Boards are rrcrking together mrtually to the extslt
they better serve the tax payer.
o
./
Sincerely,
T..PPEJL{AGI_E VALLEY @f,TSOLIDATED SA |TTATTON DISTRTCT
VAIL V4LLEY MNSOLIDATED WATER DISTRICT
/".''i,/rzahDavid E. tbtt-
Ggpral l,lanager
DEI{:&s.93
Enclosures
r\\ paRTrcrparr'G orsrRrcrg - aRRowHEAo METR. warER . avoN METRo wayER . BEAVER .REEK METR. warER . BERR' .REEK "at"o ZG\
O\ warER o EAGLE va'|L uErRo warER '.':y::'#fi::: il'.:"iil,rTH"":::':;s;:" *"LE vaLLEy saN'|ra'oN ' u^'' QGI
- $v
'rt-i6,t-
],',' -.+ r'. t-^ '. .
( !ilJ,
'',,
(l
tL lil
the UPPER EAGLE
and the VAIL
between
the TOWN 0F VAIL,
VALLEY CONSOLIDATED SANITATION OISTRICT
VALLEY CONSOLIDATED WATER DISTRICT
THIS INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of
, 1987, by and between the TOWN 0F VAIL, a Colorado municipal
corporation ("the Town"), the UPPER EAGLE VALLEY CONSOLIDATED SANITATI0N DISTRICT,
a quasi-governmental entity ("Sanjtation Djstrict") and the VAIL VALLEY
CONSOLIDATED WATER DISTRICT, a Colorado quasi-governmental entity ("Water
Di stri ct" ) .
REC I TALS
1. The Town, the Water District and the Sanitatjon Djstrjct wish to contract
together to provide for the waiver of ce'rtain fees between the Town and the
Di stri cts.
2. This Intergovernmental Agreement is authorized pursuant to Section 18,
Article XIV of the Colorado Constitution and Section 29-L-201, et seq., C.R.S., as
amended.
NOt,l, THEREFORE, in consideration
promises contained herein, the parties
1. The Town shall wajve during
Distri ct and Sanitation Djstrict, the
A. Street cuts.
B. Recreation amenities.
C. Clean up.
D. Bui lding permit.
of the mutual covenants, conditjons and
hereby agree as follows:
the term of this Agreement, for the l,laten
following fees and costs:
f.-Trez=G:zE4=-
H-
permi t.
L. A. Electrical permit.
q ?F . Mechan'ical permi t.
,\ 4 0' [tPt'tr- Pl'*t B'"d-
'',"i b. ;,?rl' Ppt'io7;"-t | ^ ^t', i',Mnd (nu trnrw&oJl h'uuat'n"
2. The Water District and Sanitation DistrjcUagree to pay the Town's direct
expenses fcr= ar At&{ reviews. 4S PEf- 9k.3o9G)dE 0'6.C' At-tp ?/zc 4cto-Pz7 ut7t1 c44/7EZ 3 ac <l.Bz. aC Affllc.tr^N3. The Water District and Sanitation District shalI waive all tap fees for
t. Plumbing permit.
projects on Town of Vail property. These tap fees shall include irrigation tap A"i,
fees, sewer tap fees and water tap fees. I
4. Terminati on
Unless sooner terminated as provided for herein, this Agreement shall be
effecti ve and shall terminate
%4
A,
z
.^J:v
Notwithstanding the foregoing provision, ejther party with or without cause may
terninate this Agreement upon the giving of one hundred eighty (180) days prior
written notjce of such termination to the other respective parties. Notice shall
be deemed to have been given upon the mailing of said notice by United States
certified first class mail, postage prepaid, and addressed to the parties at the
respective addresses as shall appear herein or upon a change of address pursuant
this notice provision. It is the intent of the respective parties that this
Agreement shall be renewed for additional peri ods following the end of the jnjtjal
period, and unless one of the parties gives notice to the other parties at least
one hundred eighty (180) days prior to the end of the initial period that such
party desires to termjnate thjs Agreement or to renegotiate the terms, this
Agreement shall be automatjcal1y extended for an additjonal period of
each not to exceed a total of two (2) such extensions.
ffi
ffi,i-
to
-2-
5. This Agreement does not and shall not be deemed to confer upon a grant to
any third party any right to clajm damages or to bring any lawsuit, action or other
proceedings against either the Town of the Districts because of any breech hereof
or because of any terms, covenants, agreements or conditions contained herejn,
6. No modifjcation or waiver of this Agreement or of any covening condjtion
or provision herein contained shall be valjd unless in writing and duly executed by
the party to be charged.
7. This written Agreement embodies the whole Agreement between the parties
and there are no jnducements, promises, terms, conditions, or other obligations
made or entered into either by the Town or the Djstrjcts other than those contained
herein.
8. This Agreement shall be binding upon the respective parties, their
successors or assigns, and may not be assigned by anyone without the prior written
consent of the other partjes hereto.
9. The Town has represented to the Districts and likewise, the Districts
have represented to the Town that they possess the legal ability to enter into this
Agreement. In the event that a court of competent jurisdiction determines that any
of the parties hereto did not possess the 1ega1 ability to enteri nto this
Agreement, this Agreement shall be considered null and void as of the date of such
court determination.
-3-
By:By:
By:
IN WITNESS I,IHEREOF, the parties
and year first written above.
TOI{N OF VAIL
Rondal 1 V. Phillips, Town Manager
VAIL VALLEY CONSOLIDATED WATER
DISTRICT
hereto have executed this Agreement the day
UPPER EAGLE VALLEY CONSOLIDATED
SANITATION DISTRICT
-4-
I
75 loulh lronhgo road
vall, colorado E1657
(303) 476-7000 olflco of conmunlty dcvclopmonl
Novmeber 5, L9A7
Mr. Dave Mott
Upper Eagle Valley Consolidated Sanitation and water Districts846 Foregt RoadVaiI, Colorado 81557
Dear Dave,
llere is the intergovernnental agreement. This will be reviewedat a Council work session at 2:OO p!! on Tuesday, Novenber LO.
l,/ r "n I
llll\l/lll^ .lvl I f-1" r ?--
Tonn Planner
TO: Ron Phillips
FRoM: Peter Paftegff
DATE: October 2, L987
SU&TECT: VaiI Valley Consolidated Water Districtrs Surplus
Properties
The attached letter from Dave Mott identifies two properties
which the District is intending to dispose. we felt it wouldbe prudent to allow the Council to review these properties for
any potential public use. Kristan and I have visited the sites
and cannot think of any reason that we would want to obtaineither parcel for public purposes. The VMRD may be interestedin a portion of the Village parcel to locate restrooms for thegolf course.
Please schedule this for an appropriate Council work session,
and I will inform Dave.
iz UppER EaclE Vlr-r-Ev
WATER AND SANITATION DISTRICTS
846 fOR€Sr ROAo . VArL COLORAOO 8t557
{303) 476 7480
Septenber 18, 1987
Peter Patton
Director L'.fl Connrxli 1y Developxnent
Town of VaiI
?5 South Frontage Road West
VaiI , Colorado 81657
RE: Site Inspection
VaiI Valley Consolidated Water District
Surplus Properties
Dear Peter:
Prease be advised the VaiL Valrey consor idated water District hasdeterrnined that the below ]isted properties are surprus to their needs andintends to dispose of them at fair nrarket value (plat maps are attached l:
\
Gore Creek Water Treatment PLant.7th Filing
Lionsridge Water lbeatment Plant.
Subdivision
Ttsact C, VaiI Village,
Block D, Lionsridge
Bet ore underta.king a formar zone change proceeding r would rike your
feedback as to what pubric uses might. be planned for tf,ese properties ardwhether the public sector wourd be interested i.n thei,r acquisition. r wirrappreciate your input.
Sincerely ,
David E. Mott
General- Manager
/,,v /-/zd /-
VALLEY CONSOLIDATD SANITATIOT.I DISTRICII
DEM:das
TOV
Eoclosures
xc: Bob Ruder
\\
I\\ Paattcrtatr'rc Drs?erctlr - AARowBgAo METRo wATER . avoN MErRo wATER . B€AyER CREEK MerRo wArER . BERRV 6REEK METR. waraa ,ff\
O\
EAGLE va'L ME'A. wArER ' EowAFos ^'t':::::'"Iff::,fiitrff;'J1::.;:?;;,T;X"^.".y coNsoLtoAreu sAN''A.oN
@
o
lRlC tar1
*'.t\
' i /.'i,
/,
f
:i-; .a':.'+ /
"..l.d z
')'"c;. "v
/!
,r Io5 I
;-r'o'
A d joining
,' 2tol- 06
IGE
r5h
@
@
BROOKTREE '..:
TQWNHOUS ES
i/
:-/
/ tt
.'t
/i
A-J
r/i,/".lt
:"'/+
I
>t'l
a
c
q,q
qt5l:.
tl
.l
I
lf'
i
;.
i
a
I
'{-
\
-:l
;,\-q SANOSTONE 7O
taAcl A
@@
;!r
a
t:
/ ,' /.'
3 /' yPd'., Y"
/'n
/.:
"1
.r/
.",: /,*:' ,/ i
.d .r"
t.. .o' I
J@ J
i.ai-ocr "u'
t, 'uu o,o.
:lo4l ;
61l- 5
( sANDsroNE cREEK cLUB )
)'.
!/.
045- 065
7 /:."
a/,y
ffi
*4ii6 ';t
r'---@'\rA'>\,} I \-'/
-.- --1-1 ,,o.../.. (o2 6:64
ir;l
90q
@
\q t I,,X, l
' s\!\i
y \.r
----.=\I
I
{t]o!q
:14
\-i
.\
R\
v
^:-
^1t
:,.;.:.
Iv
!s
.r)
'..q
l\<t
N
=rt
'rY
i€Is\:r{
n*
{;
iasr
tq
t,aa
,
75 south lrontage road
vail, colorado 81657
(303) 476-7000
olf ice of lhe town manager
September 4, L987
Board of DirectorsVail Valley Consolj_dated Water District846 Forest RoadVaiJ-, colorado 81657
Dear Board of Directors:
on behalf of the Town of vail , r wourd like to thank you forwaiving-water tap fees for Buffehr creek park, nighori park,and sandstone park. The irrigation tap fee for euffenr creekpark would have cost the Tolsn 914,500. Both sandstone andBighorn Parks required a 3/4r water service rine at s5,76o per
]ine. rn total, the Board saved the Town of Vail a totar of126'o2o for water tap fees. This considerable amount ofsavings will enable the Town to spend additional money onIandscaping and facility improvernents which will be gieatlyappreciated by the geneial public.
The Town of VaiI would like to continue to work in acooperative manner with the vail varley consoridated waterBoard. The Board has expressed an intlrest in forrnalizing acooperative policy between the Town of vair and the vair iaireyconsoridated water District. r believe tnat che-t".t approachis to schedule a di-scussion with the Town councit at anupcorning work session. r would like to inviie nave Mott anathe mernbers of the Board to attend a Town council work sessionon. september 15th. r will be calling Dave to confirm thisqaEe.
rn addition, the Board expressed interest in d.iscussing thecore creek treatment plant and Lionsri-dge treatrnent plintsites. Kristan pritz will contact Dave Mott to arrange arneeting between the water oistrict and planning o-partment. weare interested in working with you on alternative lub1ic usesfor the two sites.
Itli
,
Vail Vallley Consolidated water DistrictAugust 31, L9A7
Page Two
once again,
cooperation
appreciated.
we would like to thank
on the tap fees. Your
the Board for theirefforts are greatly
Rondall V. Philli
Town Manager
RVP:bpr
/
f
a
75 south lronlage road
Yail, colorado 81657
(303) 4792'138
(303) 479-2139
office ot communlty developmenl
October 29, 1990
ltr. Jerry Bender
Upper Eagle Valley Water and Sanitation District
845 Forest Rd.
Vail , CO 81658
RE: water Tank in East Vail
Dear Jerry,
I am writing in regard to the current status of the proposed
rnitigation for the East Vail water tank which is located in the
vail ueadows Avalanche Path. Due to the location of the tank,
ttre Town is very concerned with both the scheduling and type of
nitigation which lrill be installed. we would like to have the
opportunity to review the proposal when it becornes available. we
would like to insure that the mitigation is cornpleted as soon as
possible.
According to our records the water tank is partially located in
the Town of Vail , it will therefore be necessary that any
proposed nitigation located within Town boundaries be reviewed by
The Townrs Design Review Board for aesthetic iropacts and by Greg
Hall, Town Engineer. It will also be neccessary for the district
to neet the Townrs requirenents for developnent in a hazard area.
P1ease contact nre should you have any new inforrnation available.
Thank you,
Shel1y Mello,
Town Planner
,'i1t
[:f!-f tilFi'
Present
Greg Amsden
Chuck Gist
Diana Donovan
Ludwig Kurz
Kathy Langenwalter
Dalton Williams
Gena Whinen
PLANNING AND E}.IVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
March 9,1992
Staff
Kristan Pritz
Mike Mollica
Jill Kammerer
Andy Knudtsen
Shelly Mello
Amber Blecker
The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Diana Donovan at l:05PM.
l. A request for a worksession for a minor subdivision and a zone district change from
Primarv/Secondarv Residential to Low Densiw Multiple Familv. for the Schmetzko
oropertv. generallv located at 2239 Chamonix Lane. more particularlv described as:
Parcel A: A tract of land conraining one acre, more or less, located in the South l/2
of the South East ll4 of Section ll, Township 5 South, Range 81 West of the Sixth
Principal Meridian, rnore particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the NE corner of the SW ll4 of the SE l/4 of said Section 11; thence
westerly along the northerly line of said SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 bearing south 86 20' W
a distance of 167.80 ft. to a point:
Thence southerly along a line 167.80 ft. distant from and parallel to the east line of
said SW l/4 of the SE 1/4, a distance of 200.00 ft. to a point:
Thence easterly a distance of 167.80 ft. along a line 200.00 ft. distant from and
parallel to the north line of said SW l/4 of the SE l/4 to a point on its east line;
Thence easterly on a line parallel to the north line of the SW l/4 of the SE 1/4 of
Section 11, a distance of 50.95 ft. to a point:
Thence northerly and parallel with the west line of the east ll2 of the SE 1/4 of said
Section 11, a distance of 200.00 ft. to the point of intersection with the extension of
the north line of thc SW l/4 of the SE l/4 of said Section ll;
Thence westerly on a deflective angle left of 95 21'00" along the extension of the
north line of the SW 1/4 of the SE 1i4 of said Section 11, a distance of 50.95 ft. to
the NE comerof the SW 1/4 of the SE l/4 of Section 11, being the point of
beginning.
Planning and Environmental Commission . March 9, 1992'Page I
f
Parcel B: Tract A, Vail Heights Filing No. 1 according to the recorded plat thereof.
Applicant Erich Schmetzko
Planner: Andy Knudtsen
Andy Knudtsen explained the request and issues surounding the proposal.
Chuck Crist asked why the Land Use Plan called out this area as Medium Density
Residential. Kristan Pria said MDR was a general range of 3-14 units, and was used as a
guide. Greg Amsden asked if the Commission should then give the applicant a development
range.
Rick Rosen, representing tlrc applicant, said they wanted to obtain approval for as many units
as possible. He said the hazard mitigation plans were still being worked upon, and that he
would like to see direction from the Commission on the maximum number of units which
would be approved.
Greg asked for a history of the parcel. Rick responded that when Mr. Schmetzko purchased
the property, it was not yet annexed into the Town of Vail. At that time, he believed it was
zoned for 5 units by the County. When the Town annexed the area, he believed the owner
was given no notice that the Town was going to down-zone the propeny. At this point, Mr.
Schmetzko wished to rezone the property and replat it into one parcel for continuous access.
Diana Donovan indicated that how the County had zoned the property was not the issue. She
indicated she could only support increasing the density of the property if sufficient mitigation
was performed. She believed it was unbuildable without mitigation. In addition, she felt it
was critical that the mitigation be performed on the property, not off-site, as there would be
too much scaring if the mitigation went back into the BLM lands. She challenged the owner
to address the aesthetic cory)erns of the mitigation.
Kathy Langenwalter was not comfortable rezoning the property. She thought a Special
Development District would be more appropriate. She was leery of giving the parcel a new
zoning, then having it sold. Since the mitigation was critical to the proposal, she wanted
more development controls placed on the property than just zoning. Diana agreed, but
suggested placing plat restrictions on the parcels. Kathy did not believe that would be enough
control, as the mitigation was part of the design process. Andy indicated that standards for
the mitigation construction could be placed on the plat.
Kathy believed the rezoning request would be easier to support if it was known who would
develop the properry. Rick replied that if the property was restricted through use of the plat,
the developer would still be required to go through the planning process. If a site-specific
request were approved, it would be difficult for Mr. Schmetzko to sell the property, as it
would limit the use and value of the land. Kathy reiterated that the site is very sensitive, and
she did not believe a plat restriction would sufficiently protect the character of the area.
Planning and Environmental Commission . March 9, 1992 . Page 2
Greg Amsden asked if any of the adjacent property owners had given feedback on the
proposal. Shelly indicated none had been received and all adjacent propefty owners had been
notified.
Steve Isom, representing the Upper Eagle Valley Consolidated Sanitation District gave a brief
history of the property. Hc indicated a minor subdivision, as discussed in the staff memo,
would be very expensive. There was no question of the boundaries, and the District did not
want to pay to "clean up" the problem. Shelly agreed that the current condition of the
property lines was confusing, which is why staff felt it was important to address at this time.
Kristan Pritz indicated the Town may be able to split tbe cost of the subdivision prccess.
Diana asked if having the suMivision in place at the time a Temporary Certificate of
Occupancy was issued was realistic. Shelly thought it would be.
Dalton Williams did not think it made sense to use tax dollan for a formality between two
government agencies, especially when there was not a conflict between the entities. Steve
agreed, stating that when the propeny was deeded, both sections were given to the Town. He
agreed to work with the Town to reach an agreeable solution. Kristan also agreed to work
out the issues. Diana Donovan believed it should be a requirement of the project.
Steve addressed the height and landscaping issues, stating that the exact height of the addition
would be 25'-9" due to an increase in structure needed to carry the snow load. He did not
believe 5 more trees in the front of the property would be beneficial. Kristan suggested
placing the trees in a landscapittg "gap" toward the gas station. Diana felt there were
locations which could also benefit from additional landscaping.
Diana asked if employee housing could also be built in conjunction with this application.
Steve indicated that the oflices were above the aeration and settling basin, and were definitely
not desirable for housing placement. Diana did not see the justification for 6,000 additional
square feet, as she believed the building worked at this time. Steve responded that % of the
space was for public meeting area.
Kathy Langenwalter was concemed that the architectural detailing be carried over to the
addition and that it be consistent with the existing facility.
Kathy moved the request for a conditional use permit to allow for the expansion of the Upper
Eagle Valley Consolidated Sanitation Disrict administrative offices, at 846 Forest Road/l-ot
31, Vail Village 2nd Filing be approved per the staff memo, with the condition the Design
Review Board review the addition's detail to ensure it was similar to the existing building and
verify location of l0 additional evergreen trees to be planted, noting the building height was
18 inches higher than reflected in staff's memorandum, and recommending that the Town of
Vail and the District pursue a minor suMivision. Ludwig Kurz seconded the motion. Before
the vote, Dalton Williams encouraged the District to consider additional landscaping, where
appropriate. The motion was approved by a unanimous 7-0 vote.
Due to the a:rival of an adjaccnt propeffy owner to the Schmetzko property, the Commission
brieflv retumed to discussion of the first worksession item.
Planning and Environmental Commission . March 9, 1992 . Page 8
As this was a worksession item. no vote was taken.
The public meeting was called to order at 2:50PM. All the Commissioners were in
aftendance.
1. A request for an exterior alteration in the Commercial Core II zone district for the
Cano Residence. Lot 5. Block l. Vail Lionshead First Filinp/52O East Lionshead
Circle .
Aoplicant Victor Cano
Planner: Andv Knudtsen
Andy Knudtsen presented staff's recommendation for approval.
Kathy Langenwalter asked if the window cladding would match the others in Lionshead
Center. She was assured by Mike Krohn, the Cano's reprcsentative, that it would match the
enclosure immediately above this proposal.
Dalton Williams moved that the rcquest for an exterior alteration in the Commercial Core Il
zone disnict for the Cano Residence, Lot 5, Block I, Vail Lionshead First Filing/52O East
Lionshead Circle be approved per the staff s recommendations. Ludwig Kurz seconded the
motion. It was approved unanimously, 7-0.
2. A request to extend a conditional use permit to expand the Vail Mountain School,
located at 3160 Katsos Ranch Road/ I-ot 12. Block 2. Vail Villase l2th Filine.
Applicant: Vail Mountain School
Planner: Andv Knudtsen
Andy Knudtsen explained this was for a renewal of a previously-granted conditional use
approval, and the renewal would be in effect for two years. Staff recommended the approval
be renewed.
Chuck Crist moved the request to extend a conditional use permit to expand the Vail
Mountain School,located at 3160Katsos Ranch Road/l,ot12, Block 2, Vail Village 12th
Filing be approved per staff's memo. Kathy Langenwalter seconded the motion. It was
unanimously approved by a vote of 6-0, with Gena Whitten temporarily absent during the
vote.
3. A request for a conditional use oermit to allow for the expansion of the Upper Eagle
Valley Consolidated Sanitation District administrative offrces. at 846 Forest Road/Lot
31. Vail Villaee 2nd Filine.
Applicant Upper Eaele Valley Consolidated Sanitation District
Planner: Shellv Mello
Shelly Mello presented the request to add additional administrative arca to the existing Upper
Eagle Valley Consolidated Sanitation District facility.
Planning and Environmennl Commission . N{arch 9, 1992. Page 7
a
Project Application
t
Pro.iect Name:
Projecl Description:
Contact Person and
Owner. Address and Phone:
Phone
Architect, Address and Phone:
Legal Descri
Comments:
Design Review Board
Date
Motion by:
Seconded by:
DISA PPR OVAL
Sum mary:t
Town Plan ner D Stait Approval
:-
I
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
MEMORANDUM
Planning and Environmental Commission
Community Development Department
March 9, 1992
A request for a conditional use permit to allow for the expansion of the Upper
Eagle Valley C,onsolidated Sanitation Disrict administrative offices, at 846
Forest Road/Lot 31, Vail Village 2nd Filing.
Applicanu Upper Eagle Valley Consolidated Sanitation Disnict
Planner: Shellv Mello
I. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED USE
The applicant is requesting an amendment to the existing Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for
the Upper Eagle Valley Water & Sanitation District (UEWV&SD), located at 846 Forest
Road, in order to expand its administrative offices. The proposal would add a total of 6,438
sq. ft. The following details the allocation of square footage by use:
Office: 2,423 sq. ft.
Common: 3,837 sq. ft. (Mechanical, etc.)
Meeting Room: 1,384 sq. ft.
Storage: 30 sq. ft.
Total: 6,438 sq. ft.
The expansion will be used to accommodate increasing staff levels and to improve the
facilities service areas. This addition will be dedicated to office-type uses and does not
include any sanitation operation facilities. The addition will be two stories located to the
south of the existing offices and on top of the existing treatment facilities. The building
materials will be similar to those of the existing building. With this request, the applicant
also proposes to install ten 6-8 foot evergreens as discussed below, and will also pursue a
minor subdivision of Lot 3l prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy
for the expansion.
JU. ZONING CONSIDERATIONS
The proposal is located within the Public Use Zone District ("UD). In this zone district, the
development standards are established by the PEC in order to allow for the flexibility
necessary to accommodate public and quasi-public facilities.
Zone District: Public Use Disrict (PUD)
Square Footage:
Existing: 3,320 sq. ft.
Proposed: 6.438 so. ft.
Total: 9,758 sq. ft.
Parking:
Required:
Existing Building: 14
Pmposed Addition: 13.83
Total: 27.83 or 28 spaces
Existing:
Employee Parking: 37 spaces
Customer Parking: 7
Total Avail: 44 total soaces available
III. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
Upon review of Section 18.60, the Community Development Department recommends
approval of the conditional use permit based upon the following factors:
A. Consideration of Factors:
l. Relationship and impact of the use on development objectives of the
Town.
The purpose section of the Public Use District states:
"The public use district is intended to provide sites for pubiic
and quasi-public uses which, because of their special
characteristics, cannot appropriately be regulated by the
development standards prescribed for other zoning districts, and
for which development standards especially prescribed for each
particular development proposal or project arc necessary to
achieve the purposes prescribed in Section 18.02.020 and to
provide for the public welfare. The public use district is
\intended to ensure that public buildings and grounds and certain
types of quasi-public uses permitted in he district are
appropriately located and designed to meet the needs of residents
and visitors to Vail, to harmonize with surounding uses, and, in
the case of buildings and other structures, to enstue adequate
light, air, open spaces, and other amenities appropriate to the
permitted fypcs of uses."
Upper Eagle Valley Water & Sanitation Disrict has requested this addition in
order to accommodate an increase in staff and to upgrade the existing facilities.
The request meets the purpose section of the PUD zone district and is in
compliance with the development objectives of the Town for this zone district.
In addition, the applicant will pursue a minor suMivision of this lot to formally
subdivide the Town of Vail parcel and the UEVW&SD parcel. The staff asks
that this action be completed prior to the receipt of a Temporary Certificate of
Occupancy for the expansion.
2. The effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population,
transportation facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation
facilities, and other public facilities needs.
The expansion will not effect any of the items listed above. The addition will
be visible from all surrounding properties and the recreation path. It will not
cast any additional shadow on the recrcation path.
3. Effect upon traffic with particular reference to congestion,
automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, tralfic flow and
control, access, maneuverability, and removal of snow from the
street and parking areas.
The addition will not impact any of the above items. The proposal will
ultimately accommodate up to six additional employees. This project currently
has excess parking spaces according to our parking standards. No parking or
snow storage areas will be removed as a result of this project.
4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is
to be located, including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in
relation to surrounding uses.
This addition is compatible with the uses and development objectives for the
surounding area. Due to the location of the addition, the impacts on public
ways and adjacent properties will be limited. The top of the parapet wall for
Ithe addition is approximately 5'-6" higher than the existing administrative
office's roof. It rises approximately 23'-6" above the parking arca to the east.
The applicant proposes to install five 6-8 foot evergreens to the south of the
temporary building approved in January, 1992. These will be installed when
the temporary building is removed. The applicant proposes to install five 6-8
foot evergreens along the South Frontage Road on'the right-of-way in order to
further screen the existing parking structure. These will be installed prior to
the issuance of a irnal Certificate of Occupancy for the building, provided the
Colorado Department of Transportation approval can be obtained.
Upon submittal, the staff had concerns with the south elevation. The applicant
has agreed to revise this elevation to eliminate the window forms off the
meeting room and reconfigure the stairway to decrease its visibility from Forest
Road. These changes are not represented on the attached drawings. They will
be submitted for DRB review.
B. Findines
The Plannine and Environmental Commission shall make the followins findings before
erantinq a conditional use permit:
1. That the proposed location of the use in accord with the purposes of the
conditional use permit section of the zoning code and the purposes of
the district in which the site is located.
That the proposed location of the use and the conditions under which it
would be operated or maintained would not be detrimental to the public
health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
That the proposed use would comply with each of the applicable
provisions of the conditional use permit section of the zoning code.
IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
The staff recommends approval of the request to amend the conditional use permit for
LIEVW&SD. The staff finds that the request meets the criteria as set forth in Section
II(BXl-3). As discussedin the memo, the applicant agrees to i4!ta!!ten 6-8 footevergreens
as indicated, assuming CDOH approval can be obtained for the plan-iings-5loE$
Road, and to pursue a minor subdivision of the parcel before a Temporary Certificate of
Occupancy is issued.
2.
3.
oo
j Please note that, under Section 18.60.080 of the Town of Vail ZnningCode, the approval
shall lapse if consruction is not commenced within two years of the date of issuance and
diligently pursued to completion, or if the use for which the permit is granted is not
commenced within two vears.
q\pec\ncmoc\revw&:.309
DC lan- no +D gwbd'\vt'51'u1/'--
btu'*a - gl/Lultl-d, I'x dsr\-!-
Yf low n- 6lA'6v'-taL Lor.Jnh"rl<- Arr"Cs
f'wvut- rrvunt udrL nl '
w
h.rto_r^r_ i;Pu r\r_ +arvJ
0
V*rWn\n4u W,uW
fAdA- X+oaAv,q 4 gwuwLrt- at.(_h
L*llw'*L kyr/,- d,truhuK ghn^-,,L k ca,((rc_d,_u v\rur, L)
Mphsn : Ythu.F L
U,tauuio k 79
Wtt,' p\X^ +o wU*ot- l,x(cfr\\A tantlavrwy
lA^,\deLwpttw tD h4 A+lnlld- (/
fW DRb unsdc'tn/
U,'to d0 Tu,bdivwtrv',
o,^tr o.Cd" , La^l dALc.tV, w\ uw re4
Lli!
ki
tl
\.]
!-- - ,-
o
\
ll'
'il.
II
"
th'
: llG} JI.
Hr lla) lr"
/
E
*-"
ai
tl
!
i-. {
()
o
o a I\!L+x-4
" ) f--------lti I
ll ll | -"---r-q.. Ill l!i ',\-___--.. I
It |$i 'c r'r- itiJt I_) '--:-----
n-'-E - -l|qr--lrE-rr ln
i#sll-ilql r:
" .l-tull : Fil!+-]l ! ll
,it ' ll E ll '
A
([-
\\g/
-t =il:L
ll
tl
a
F--:--
ll
t
n
It
t!
IlE-===
tl
ll
ll
F==
ll
Il
'' n
-----||l
tl
|ll
I r-rlL!=l
=--=-L'J
oo
t
_ .,/ .^/. ii
:I)- I ..*'. lltlililll'' - ----: --r--'I -'*;::i"'i'" li::--_- a-:- - . :.-=:_:=;:- l:: -:-:-:\1{*)i* --.:]r
\* j ----.--=--:-::=a-n,\ \i==t
NI)F{K
fLAr{ertp
*'oQ, i l reea
**** ****
ouR INVOTCE #
r
15461
UPPER EAGLE VALLEY
vorc
v
E ****
o6-26-90
****
o. oo
l_00. 00
$100. oo
846 FORREST RD.vArL, co 81_657Attn IESLIE
SANTTATTON DTSTRICT
ALLEN
I
REFERENCE:
Cust# G0gOwner TBDSelIeT THE VATL WATER AND SANT"ATIoNseller - DrsrRrcr, ^l ggr-,oRAoo qdir-MuNrcrpAlAddr vArL vrLr,AcE 2ND eriiwE-"-
IALTA owner policy IPRELTMTNARy nepoir I
TOTAL rNVOrcE# 1s461
PLEASE REFER TO OUR INVOICE NUMBER..^]-546]. OR RETURN THIS INVOTCEwrrH pAyMENT- pLEASE uaxi-voun cHEcK pAyABLE ToLAND TITLE GUARANTTT COUPAHY
o
Land Title cuarantee companvp.O. Box 357Vail, Colorado 8L658
303_47 6_225]-
ALT oA COMMITMENT
SCHEDULE A
- Charges -AIJTA O!'rner policy
PRELIMTNARY REPORT
--TOTAL--
With your remj_ttance please
Application No. V15461
For Inforanation OnIyVAIL VTLIJAGE 2ND FILING
sloo. o0
sl_oo. 00
refer to vL546L.
L.
2.
Effective Date:
Policy to be issued,)nsured:
is at the
ACCORDTNG TO THE RECORDED
TRACT D DESCRTBED AS
TRACT D' THENCE, NoRTH 73
rrALTArr Ovrnerrs policy
ForItr B-l_970 (Anended Lo-L7-70)
Proposed fnsured:
TBD
3- The estate or interest in the rand described. or referred to i_nthis Comraitment and covered herein is:
A Fee Sirnple
Title to the estate or interest covered hereineffective date hereof -vested in:
t(
4.
I,ORADO
THAT PORTION OF
QUIT DEED RECORDEDIN BOOK 346 AT PAGE 615 AND PARCEL 3 ANDUPPER EAGTE VALLEY CONSOLIDATED SANITAITON DI'TRQUASI-MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, AS TO A PORTION
5. The land referred to in this cornmitnent is described a3follows:
PARCEL 1:
ElE VAIL WATER AND SANITATION DIottrq3(tlrrcr*pAL coRpoRjar-otir, As (
TTRACT C,/ PARCEL 2, DESCRTBEi INT-SBPIEMSER 30, Lg82 IN BOOK ?46 A
I$gT_q VArL/LToNSHEAD rrrrRD FrLrNG,PIAT THEREOF, EXCEPTING THAT PART OFFOLtows:
BEGINNING AT THE I{EST CORNER OF SAID
PAGE ]-l
June L1, 1_990 at
!*q-
ar,r^O"oMurrMENT
SCHEDULE A
Application No. V15461
SOUTH 73 DEGREES 42 MTNUTES 37 SECONDS WEST 93.OO FEET
THENCE NORTH 78 DEGREES 37 MTNUTES 15 sEcoNDS wEsr, 87.62 FEET
THENCE' sourH SL DEGREES oL ltrNurEs 38 sEcoNDs wEsT, 62.80 FEETTO A POINT ON THE APPROXIMATE CENTERLINE oF SATD CREEK, THENCE,NORTH l_4 DEGREES 46 MINUTES 10 SECONDS WEST, 7g.2O FEET TO APOINT OF TNTERSECTION I{ITH THE SOUTH r,rUr Oi' TRACT C, VArLvrLraGE sEcoND FTLTNG' AccoRDrNG To rHE RECORDED pr,AT
TYEIEoIi THENCE' NoRTH 79 DEGREES 03 MrNurEs 56 sEcoNDs EAsr,90.99 FEET AI,ONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID TRACT C TO THEsourHl'{Esr coRNER oF sArD ror 31,' THENCE, NORTH 73 DEGREES 42MTNUTES 37 sEcoNDs EAsr, 145.oo FEET AroNG THE sourH LINE oFSAID I_,OT 3l_, To THE porNT oF BEGINNING.
PAGE
A L T AO" o M I'I I T M E N T
SCHEDULE B-2
(Exceptions)
be issued will contain.exceptions to theare disposed of to the satisfaction of
5 printed on the cover sheet.
due or payable and specialto the Treasurerrs office.
9. RIGHT OF PROPRIETOR OF A VEIN OR LODE TO EXTRACT AND REMOVE HIS ORETHEREFROM SHOULD THE SAI.,IE BE FOUND TO PENETRATE OR INTERSECT THE PREIT{ISESAs RESERVED rN I'NTTED srATEs PATENT RECORDED r.t"v za, L9o4, rN BooK 48 ATPAGE 5o3 AND fN LNTTED sTATEs PATEN? RECORDEDteptember 04, tgzs, rN BooK93 AT PAGE 98.
].0. RIGHT OF WAY FOR DITCHES OR CANALS CONSTRUCTED BY THE AUTHORITY OF THEuNrrED srATEs As RESERVED rN uNrrED srATEs pairrvt REcoRDED yray 24, Lgo4,BooK 48' AT pAcE 5o3 AND REcoRDED_s"pt"tnu".-oi, Lg23, rN BooK 93 AT pAGEAND JULY l_3, L939 IN BOOK 123 AT pAGi 6l_7.
(TTEMS 9 AND L0 AFFECT ALL PARCELS)
11' RESTRICTIVE coVENANTs, wHrcH Do NoT coNTArN A FoRFETTURE oR REVERTERCLAUSE' BUT oMrrrrNc REsrRrcrr-oNs, rF ANt; sAsno oN RAcE, coion, RELrGroN,oR NATToNAI' oRrGrN' As CoNTATNED iN rNsrRWENr nnconono octouei re, rs71,,ijflofr,33"l.r;*.x*t3i"fl?uAs AMENDED rN nrsrnuMENr REcoRDED eususr 12,'
(AFFECTS PARCEL L)
12' REsrRrcrrvE covENANTs, w'rc* Do Nor coNTArN A F.RFETT'RE oR RE'ERTERcr,AUsE, BUT oMrrtrNc REsrRrcrr.glsl _rr al,li,- e;isno ou RAcE, coLoR, RELrcroN,oR NATT.NAL oRrcr', As ..NTATNED iN rnsrnurqnlir_rpgqlolo January oe, Ls63|rN BooK L74 AT PAGE 431 AND AS AMENDED rH iltsrnurunNT REcoRDEo irrg,..t zz,ry IN BooK 183 AT PAGE 23e.
IN WIDTII AIONG THE WESTERLY AND SOUTHERLY LOTAS SHOWN ON TITE RECORDED PI,AT OF VAIL VILLAGE,
Application No. V15461
The policy or policies tofoLlolring unless the samethe Company:
l-. Standard Exceptions 1 through
6. Taxes and assessrnents not yetassessments not yet certified
Any unpaid taxes or assessments
Liens for unpaid water and sewer
13. UTIIITY EASEMENT ]-o FEETLINES OF SUB..TECT PROPERTY
SECOND FILING.
7.
8.
against said lanc..
charges, if any.
rN
98
PAGE
\ebose sddre$ i8
colorado
VAfL ASSOCIATES, LTD., a CoLorado
Llnited Partnershrp
VAII
Couotl'ol Eag le
, for the colsideratjoD o!Ten and no,/100 ($ I0.00 ) ----
ilollars, in hand paid, hereby sell(e) alrd conyey(6) ro
Vail water and Sanitation District
whose oaldress i8 VaiI
, sDd Stete oi'
County of
Eag Ie , srd State of Colorado,rhe iollorviug rcal property iu the
, ald Strrte of Colorodo, to-rvit:Coulty of Eagle
fractsA and C and Lot 31, Vail ViIlage, Second FiIing.
/ //"3 ti
Together with the right to use the roads, streets, dri.ves.
lanes, places, circles and walkways as shown on the maps andplats of VaiI Village, Fif,st Filing, Vail Vitlage. Second Filing,Vail Village - Third Filing, and resubdivisions thereof, filed
in the PIat Book of Easle Countv at paqes 49. 50. 54, 56 and 59.for acceGf-€o-1:r=E -Ei om -trr6-pr dn-i s e s, - r^,i:-ch f iirhf' sh=il-5;- -
aPpurtenant to and run with the land and shall not be construed
to be personal to the party or parties of the second part"
Nith oll its ap|nrt\loarcesr oDd varraDt(s) tbe titlc to tho sante, sulject to 1963 generalproperty taxes due in 1964 and al} subsequent years.
Sigued tbis 2? th day ol Augus t
STATE OT COLORADO
City and CouDty of Denver
Tbc loregoing itrstrulrctr! rvas Rcknowledged before ue this 27th
doy ol August ,19 63 ,by Peter W. Seibert, a .general p;iri:ter
I
[sr'
)
Linited nersh ip
ceneral
9, t965
of VaiI Associates, Ltd.
A
i
':c(
Ims Dnro. tta,te rtris Fifteenth (i5th) d;r1. of I tluco::o'r:: s s:'',rirt'
i
lP:il - .-j1r!rc -vcar o! our Lorl onc thons:1url I , , i
Tms Dnro. lta,le rlis Fifteenth (i5th) d;r1. of i llucollDiill s s-i'\i ll'
oiio lu',aroa ooa,. s irrtv-ji..=* *" " '" "'" - ^ ; l r
bctwesn IL *5"€R+ND SANITATI6I{ nt s.nnre.r'. u IDctrYesn IL hthtRR:-*ND SANITATIOI{ DI.STRICT, a | .ir.:, :..r.r,.,rJ,irir r rigcvernmental subdivlsion of the Sturte of I Cli..""' ' ": ",'.., . ll
a colorado corporation, I ilof theq:unty of Eagle aqd State oi Colorc.do, of tlc i j,
sccond part;
T,']TNDSSDTII, Thct the said part of lbc ii.st, pu+ i:i':nil ir consi(lcrlt.ion oi tl,c.rur, "f jl
TXN DOLLARS and other good and va iua,ble €l',rs.dcrat ion - - - - i:T:s, lj
to tlle said part l, of thc fjrst part, i! ha.d prid irl. ilc si ril part / uf thc secorrLl plti, rlrc ljrcceipt n'hcrcof is hereby eonfessed and acknorrl.cdged. ha g g:.:rotcd, bnl.saine(I, sohl arrd cnnt"-rc,l. llald b.v thcse prescDtsrrl€scqrant. barr:cin. scu. coutcy nuil ,.^niir.rr u.lo tLe :iriri lilry -
"i Iithe seco!.d part,ItS - -'- - -f,i*_t ii n'l ossigns forcr.er, :rll t\c f.lllosiog (lcscribc,l lot or :.irr(el llof laurl. situate, lyiDg aDd bciug in thc County of E3g le oo,l liStatc of Cr,lorado, to.rvit: ' I
e part of Tract c, vail village. second Filing, more particularl-v idescribed as follows: -
I.
Seginning at the llorthwest corner of said T;act C; thence N,l:"AZ,gZll,e.and along the Northerly line of said Tract C a distance of I45.Oo llfeet; thence S.t4"46'lO"E. a.distance of 146,36 feet to a'!-oftt ot l,intelsection with the Southerly line of said Tract C; thence llS,79o03'56"1v- and aLong the SoutherLy line of said Tract C a distanc=of 180.00 feet to the Scuthlvest corner of said Tract C; thence ]lN,ooO6'06"E. and along the viesterly line of said Tract c a distance liaf 1?< nn f ^a+ .r.^ +1^^ llI U,O'00,06"E. and along the viesterly line of said Tract c a distance li
I of ,135.00 feet to the true point of beginning. II I ll'\-ia 1i,,1^: \',,r.. '^
-iLa,,.-- !,- :'
TogetLe! rtith all and singular tbe hereditarocnts and appurtclraaees thereunto belonging, or iu auyl-isc lllppcrtainitg' and the relcrsiou aud relersious, rcuainder and remaiuders, rents, issues oual plolifs fhcre- lluf; oud all the estate, riglrt, title, interest, elaim aad demond whatsoeyer, of tle soid part, y of tf,o jl
fi$t part, either in law or eqnity, of, in ald to the aboye bargaiucd preutises, Nitit the he-rcditaruents lland sppurtcEaoces; To llele and To Ilokl the said. premiscs abole bargained and dcscribed, with tbc ll
appurteuances, unto Vail Associates, fnc., a Colorado corporation, ll
rcus ano lssrgns forcrcr, ll
alal the ssidvair water and sanitation District, a qovernmental subdivli_sionof Colorado, port y of tLe first port, for it scl.f , j-tE succ.ssor*{, executors ontl ll
ad.ministrators, do es covelcnt. ;3rant, bargliu anrl og:cc to ltnd \rilh thc sirid palr y of fhe lit^'^n'l n6* i+c successoiijQ ontl assigns, tb1 abo*c tcigaiucri prc:uises in the quict onrr pcn,.al,l" li
.'. ?oiaession of ssid pa.t y of ths secouil part,its suce cl s s o.lc-:lrx and :rssigirs, rguinsi all ana ll( rertfl parson or persoDs lawfully claimiug or to clairu thc rrhole or any parti thcrcof, by, through or rrl,lcr ll
:_ ilc st.id port y ot tbe first parr tq WARRj,NT AND FOREVDIi DnI'END. ll
i i LIN:T{ITNDSS TIIIEREOF, Tbe said part y of the fi.st pxrt ha s hereunto set, its li'-tiri*: -i..qqd seal the day aud year first above rrrittcn. - n."r,or..- li
,. f ig:ir.tl.-Scale{ dhd Deriscrcd io ttre prcscnce orl vn rL._r.rA.TE.i..AlID...gA}lITLTf.OU...Ilislilil_-l- ll:;:'arigir,,:12-'. I L/ul ,/rri // / ll
,.:,,j:r;.:...:>,.:-\ ...::...:,....:r.........../ .....--.1 ay, tl.,t:/tt.r/lil4:1.1:,t"i/1.r.,-!!r Wn.,r,l i,t-1f;,.$fj{;4^"x I chairr,,an and presideni'
/l
.'. i: i I .:: g::Cfetarv,/ -" " ""'->--r---" "'J - --"'-"' " "- '. ""{SUnLl i:.. ,. .. ::.:..jsJe^^r_g!
doioooon,
scvernmental surdiv!siln';i"i1r;"s;;,i;^:;'' " I t\t !li':'rl';rrr t'i., .- licclorado, I ji'*-'- "' I
of the Couur-r'of Eagle ourl I h , ^, t-:
ift:ltc of Colorado, of tlre first parr, aud \4It .dssoc1",Tls, I:rc I, l.//" '44:7 . -=
I
ii
I
ii
\o
t-
t'lz
F)
a
Q
o'
F
Fz
EI'!2.
H
t'l
FI
t'l&
-1
z
d:ty o! A.'r'il lland F. Blatie Lvnc'l.r ii
District, a g ove:-nne.nta I
o:.1 and oftici.l sc!,I. il
)o
County of [.aq1e
of the
&rd Stete of Colorado, of the s€€6nd
ii
WmqESS&"TF, Thst the srid psrtyof TEN D0LLARS and other good and
.. .T.r,,..'-,:r,l rr,- ...c:. r..: r(fr.r...:.t,(, l,!orrr: ,l' rt ... ti,ii..,,, u ;,r,..j.-,,'.
:.,,. , :- ,. /.1i.:, r:..
A pa!t of Tract C, Vail Village, Secon<t Fi'l inq, ncre particularly describedas fol I ows:
Beginning at the f,lorthwest ccrner of said T:.act C; thence N 73042,37,, Eand along. tng_Norrherly line of said tract C a Olitince-of .l45.00 ieet;thence 514"46'.]0. E a distance of 146.36 feet to a point of intersectionl{ith-the. Southerly line 0f sajd Traci Ci fhence S 79b03,56, ! ana aiong-'the Southerly line of sairi Tract C a distance of lgC.OO feet to theSouth!.resi corner of sajd lract C; thence N 0006,06; E ind along theHesterly 'line of said Tract C a^di-s^tance of 135.00 f;ea to the truei9il!,9f beginnjng, contdining 22532 sguare feet or .51 7,1 acres, moreol- iess
t!j!o ffn'lr.h at-t re€.fan d:nnn be r
Together *ith ali and sin!ruls.r tle heredil_.a'ents and appurtenaDces t,Ereunto belonging, or ir. r--gr-wise alp1.:r-tsinirrg, anC tire :e'rr:rsiotr alti reverlions, rer,rainder *oa
"un,ainOere, rents, iasues andFrof it' ther-eor ; and an rhe estate, riFht, ti[re .iDte.est, "i"lin "nJ?-^t o whatao€ver, of the B&idpa.t.y of the first part. eitber in law or-eriuit:., of. in ".a io ii*iiru"" bargahed premiree, witbthe he!€iitamenis and apps ienarce.i; TO iIAvE AND I-;;i; th.e. said pre*ises a.b,rve bar._ga'inerl 6rd. deB_cribei- rril.h .ir€ appu!-r4rrance:.. ur,.* . iie- i-O-lifl-Tfr- ,d1Lr a (otoraool,lulic i Da l Lorlcr€ i i t,!l
bErrs arld aislgris iorerrr the said iJar'l' -\' of the secdnd i'art,
Anc..h€-6&id vAlt lr5s0 A1ES- INC., a tolorado coroorationp4rry of .,Ie first part,.fo. ..its€lf . rs lrejrs, sectrtorl aucl&drnjn;strators, ato es cal,ets_lr |IaDi, bargair ,r I i ::;r:_ee L :r,j *lth tfla s:id psrty 6f tiref--...'C ilztl ,:1 ;,,:::.,::i,o;,., i::-- lt.. il.\! ,.-_:,..,,-l ;r,., ,0.,., ,,,...ra i:i.i::; i.nd D::L.J:rb&,,t/t!::'..,-.j.1 :.r:C ;i:rt j' r,i !''. .,s:i :rrd :,art, i-.S iiCir.: aia as.igr.r', Ag'ingt ,Il ;il:^;i€raot or. person$ lat-fully clairning ur to claim
-the
whol€ o. *fjp"* tl""of, by, .uhroult rr unrlerthe 8e,id party or tb,l first Fart.i! WARRANT At6 ;iii,#uo DEFEND.iN lfI.fNElS i!,.tj.ERij.rF .I-i.e s: jo. parl .r, . ,,f tl.lir.i pi," r,".. he rsurto se!n"Ll ?'r1o E/Jzi ii'ie or,t 1i:(: t.a,-r fir:.i rl,,-.,,e o-r.,,,uu.- ' ''^ '
. !iry..-4 ts{i,:di.".i lrci:r:r:c:r. riie preeepr:e ci} ii.,i-'l.s:,iiCtr':tS, .jl!!!. ......_..-rsell,r-:jf* s.,*"i,,c *.i:'.,"..".,1';1,:;;:#:;:?i'" "ili,.!";s:,i,crr.rs. r,rri . ....rseAll
.itr",' I*-f,$,-r:; vctu!:*i!, i.i,,-,,{;!,, l!\i,t,ntil41ytr7.*r^.,i -.:-:-, '."f
""
l
/1
qr- I
:l
::ra llir;"i:.i
, ic jl.ri:i.
Ii*
.r i.' :r. t, iii.-iaa,.
t'
.,\
rrt'l^
J'J ii d.y of Apri I
a\'
and Slatr of
of th.Counry of Eag Ie and Slar. of Colorndo. granteefi),
WTTNESSETH, That the Sranror(g, for and in considerarion of lh! sum of Te n Dollars ($I0.00)
xgqDo4illtx
thc Eccipt and suficiency ofwhich ishercby a€knowlcdged, ha s rcmised, rcleased, sold, conveled andQUIT CLAIMED, andby
thcsa prEscnts do esrrmisc, rclcrs€. sctl, conwy andQUIT CLAIM unlo thc granrcds), its hcirs, succcsso6 and assigns,
for.w., alt drc right, tialc, intlrcst, clafn and dcmand which thc grantoroo has in End to thc lral plgpcny, togrbct witb
imprcwmcnts, it any, siruat!, lying and bcing in thc
Colorsdo, dGcribcd ai follorsl
Faad-
counry of Eagfe
Tract A and Tract C, I,ot 31, VaiI Village, Filing No. 2,
Ea91e County, Colorado, conveyed to the Vail Water District,
by the Vail Water,-a]rd Sanitatiot ..Qi strict by warranty deed
recorded in Book /335 aL Page,/ 380.. Reception No. 231734
on January 25, L9&2', in Eagle-C6unty.
4@t74A ' E-945 F-554 Irg 1t]F 1
?et
tAs/Q4/ gg 14. @r
EAGLE COUNTY CLERI(JOHNNET'TE- PH I LL I FS
i
Ialso known by stEet 8td numbcr as:
10 HAVE AND TO HOLD thc same, togcrher wilh all atld sinSular the appu.tlnarc.s and privilcges thcr.unto bclongi!8 or i!
anywisc ttecudto appcdaining, 8nd all aic 6tatc, righa, ritlc, iDE.esl .nd claim pbatsod€., of the Sranlo4*), ciLlrer iD lrw or cquity, lo
thc only propcr us€ , bcnefi( and bchoof of th. grantce(li, i t s heils and assigns forevcr.
IN WITNESS WHEREOR Thr grantor{D ha s exccutcd this dc€d on thc daE se! fonh abovc.
VAIL VALLEY CONSOIIDATED WATER ti
DISTRfCf, a Co.l-orado guasi *
.tn-iffi
STATE OF COIORADO,
rrrt
74'r
of
mun.L
i-n-i
B\v'/ffi
I -.'
J- dzy I
ation, srporpal
b-{
T
E_
ih
ll
RI
q
f
8
x
f3
l9
ucc
R:-€
Wa
i-
Ap
byEdmu;d-Drager, Jr.as Presidlent of vail valley ConsolidatedDistrict, a-Coiorado quasi-rnunicipal corporation. successorDistrict, a Colorado guas i -rnuni cipa I corporation, successorinterest to vail water District.
M) cornmission crpircs aE bn c-..r o1 3 , 19fl2 . Witness my hand and gfficial seal.
, . ' ':'!'..5q.
-* :
"3-Ler-{e J. Ftlsr.-
Ll J' ., tr""o,a.a"r-"'.r*r-p
Rcccplion No,
-
-
Rccordcr' :-,
QUIT CLAIM DEED
THIS DEED, Made rtris
bctu€envAIl VAL],EY CONSOLIDATED WATERa quasi-municipal corporation, asiNIETESI tO VAI! WATER DISTRICT
SANITATION DISTRICT, a quasi-munic ipa lcorporation
whosc l.gal address is 846 Forest Road, Vail
, 1999 ,
DISTRICT,
successor
J. EO
D0c
o. oB
No. 933. R.Y. 3{S. QUIT CrIUM DEEn lrib.d Pu!ti.hi.!, 5t25 w. &r Aw.. Urc{.od" C$ ao:ta - (lltt) 2l!{9O ot,, @
1 5OUTH FRONTAGE ROAD i
6OR€
CREEK
oLD U.5. NO. 6
E
ZE
-= r!:
^e:5 :-
5e ,tj
tt
Ul
il/l
-lil
I.ltl
lt
IN f TEI
CURB TRAN 3 TTION
ao-.otloto
l"'lo'
-f?-A<-+ A,
€XJI.6A1 IANK
un
it
PTAPEKT}' LACATIAN
EER I.AND TITLE A tA-aF UUNE ll) lliA )Vl54CD I
I
* (to*n oF .uA,
x
{'
UNPLATf ED --)
/
I
.-ti,a,c ;fr*},uyl 4/&T *,'Q*-\(i ,J ,t U " g-^T"t
2.
3.
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE lS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of
Vailwill hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 18.66.060 of the Municipal Gode of
the Town of Vail on March 9, 1992 at 2:00 p.m. in the Town ol Vail Municipal Building.
Consideration of:
1. A request for an exterior alteration in the Commercial Core ll zone district for the Cano
Residence, Lot 5, Block 1, Vail Uonshead First Filing/S2O East Lionshead Circle.
Applicant: Victor CanoPlanner: Andy Knudtsen
A request to extend a conditional use permit to expand lhe Vail Mountain School,
located at 3160 Katsos Banch Boad/ Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing.
Applicant: Vail Mountain SchoolPlanner: Andy Knudtsen
A requesl for a worksession tor a minor subdivision and request for a change in zone
district boundaries from Primary Secondary to Low Density Multiple Family for the
Schmetzko property, generally located at 2239 Chamonix Lane, more particularly
described as:
Parcel A: A tract of land conlaining one acre, more or less, located in the South 1/2 ol
the South East 1/4 of Section 11, Township 5 South, Range 81 West of the Sixth
Principal Meridian, more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the NE comer of the SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of said Section 11; thence
westerly along the norlherly line ot said SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 bearing south 86 20' W
a distance of 167.80 ft. to a point:
Thence southerly along a line 167.80 ft. distant from and parallel to the east line of
said SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4, a distance of 200.00 ft. to a point:
Thence easterly a distance of 167.80 ft. along a line 200.00 fl. distant from and parallel
to the north line of said SW 1/4 of the SE 1l4lo a point on its east line;
Thence easterly on a line parallel to the north line of the SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of
Section 1 1, a distance of 50.95 ft. to a point:
Thence northerly and parallel with the west line ot the east 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of said
Section 1 1, a distance ol 200.00 ft. to the point of intersection with the extension of the
north line of the sw 1/4 0f the sE 1/4 0f said section 11;
Thence westerly on a detlective angle lett of 95 21'00" along the extension of the north
tine of the sw 1/4 0f the sE 1/4 0f said section 11, a distance of 50.95 ft. to the NE
comer of the SW 1/4 of the'SE 1/4 of Section 11, being the point ol beginning.
$t"r &-Jo 4t-
4.
Parcel B: Tract A, Vail Heights Filing No. 'l according to the recorded plat thereof.
Applicant: Erich SchmeEkoPlanner: Andy Knudtsen
A request for a major amendment to Cascade Village, SDD #4, Area A, Millrace lll,
1335 Westhaven Drive, Cascade Village, more specifically described as follows:
A part of the SW %, NE 1A, Section 12, Township 5 South, Range 81 West of the 6th
P.M., described as follows:
Beginning at a point of the North-South centerline of said Section 12 whence an iron
pin with a plastic cap marking the @nter of said Section 12 bears S00'38'56"W 455.06
leet; thence along said centerline N00"38'56"E 122.81 teet to the southerly ROW line
of l-70; thence departing said ROW line N66"53'25"E 39.15 feet;thence departing said
ROW line S81"23''19"E 165.42 teet to a point of curve; thence '122.83 feet along the
arc of a 143.20'oot radius curve to the left, having a centralangle of 49'08'51" and a
chord that bears S15'57'45'E 119.10 feet;thence 540'32'10"E 3.00leet;thence 66.30
feet along the arc ol a77.21 foot radius curve to the right, having a central angle of
49'12'10' and a chord that bears S15'56'05'E 64.28 feet; thence S8'40'00"W 90,27
feet; thence N38"42'24"W 224.55 feet; thence S78'1 0'32"W 101 .44 leet to the Point of
Beginning.
Applicant: Michael LauterbachPlanner: Jill Kammerer
A request for a conditional use permit to allow for the expansion of the Upper Eagle
Valley Consolidated Sanitation District administrative offices, at 846 Forest Road/Lot
31, Vail Village 2nd Filing.
Applicant: Upper Eagle Valley Consolidated Sanitation DistrictPlanner: Shelly Mello
A request to amend Section 18.34, Parking Zone District of the Vail Municipal Code to
allow construction staging as a conditional use.
Applicant: Town of VailPlanner: Andy Knudtsen
An appeal of a staff decision regarding grandfathered oflice space in the Mill Creek
Court Building, 302 Gore Creek Drive/a part of Block 5A, Vail Village First Filing.
Appellant: Ned GwathmeyPlanner: Shelly Mello
A request for the establishment of a Special Development District at the Christiania at
Vail, 356 Hanson Ranch Boad/Lot D, Block 2, Vail Village First Filing, and Lot P-3,
Block 5-A, Vail Village Fifth Filing.
Applicant: Paul JohnstonPlanner: Mike Mollica
Any items tabled from the February 24, 1992 PEC meeting agenda.
o.
7.
8.
q
a-
The applications and information about the proposals are
available for public review in the Community Development
Department otfice.
Town of Vail
Community Development Department
Pubfished in fte Vail Trail on February 21,1992
.:
Justine H. Smith
5280 Rich Road
Memphis, TN 38177
Roberl D. Working
503 Mount Evans Road
Golden, CO 80401
frTfl:l,i?fl$unications'
Inc' o xfl.Tj:ciares'
Inc'
Denver, CO 80206 Vail, CO 81658
Cyrnhia Jacobson
764 Forest Road
Vail, CO 81657
l-l /7x rsoM & AssoctArEs
Lj ltr\ Architecture LandPlannins ProjectManasement
February 10, L992
Andrew Knudtsen
Town PLanner
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVEI",,OPMENT
75 South Frontage Roadvai1, Colorado 81657
RE: ADMTNISTRATIVE OFFICE EXPANSION
UPPER EAGLE VALLEY CONSOLTDATED SANITATION DISTRICT
Dear Andrew:
Enclosed is an application for Conditional Use Permit for the
proposed administrative office expansion for Upper Eagle Va1 1ey
Consolidated Sanitation District. The proposed expansion is to
the south of the existing administrative offices at 846 Forest
Road in Vai1. The application is signed by warren Garbe,
General Manager. ft is understood that the 5200 fee for the
CondiEional Use Permit is waived for the Metropolitan
District. The submittal is being made to meet the February 10'
t992, deadline for the Planning and Environmental Commission
which is scheduled to be heard on March 9, 1992.
In regrard to the questions outlined in Section 3 of anApplication of Conditional Use, those points are addressed as
fo1 l ows :
1. The project is the expansion of the administrativeoffices for Upper Eagle VaI 1ey Consolidated Sanitation
District. The expansion will cover the remainder of the
roof structure over the aeration Lanks of Upper Eagle
Va11ey Sanitation District, specifically to the south of
the existing administrative offices. The floor plans
show the relationship of the proposed building to the
existing administrative offices which will a1 1ow for the
following features.
1. Conference Room, 34 feet x 34 feet
2. Visitor's Office, 10 feet x 12 feet
3. Four Administrative Offices, approximately 10 feet x
12 feet.4. Mens and womens lavaEories.5. Future mapping,/computer area.6. Second sLory addition with future administrative
area.
P.0 Box 9 Eagle, Colorado 81631 (303) 328-2388 FAX 328-6266
The proposed expansion is compatible with the existing office
buildlng and sanitatl-on facilities located west of Forest Road'
north of Gore Creek, south of the Frontage Road and east of the
Town of Vail Maintenance Building. The proposed expansion is
compatible with other properties in the viclnity' including the
Town of Vall Maintenance facility to the west, the parking lot
to the east, Vail Associates' ski maintenance area to the
north, and the residential properties to the southeast' which
are oriented away from thls structure.
1.A The proposed administratj-ve office expansion will have no
impact on development objectives of the town other than
providing administrative offices for the adminlstration
of the ConsoLidated water and Sanitation Districts in the
Vail Va11ey and Eagle Va11ey.
1.8 The proposed administrative office expansion will have no
effect on the schools, parks, recreatj-on facilities or
other facilities in the Vail- Va1ley. The expanded office
is designed to accommodate the existlng personnel who are
currently working for t.he DistricU in very cramped
spaces, and provide a board meeting room and community
meeting room for outside use. There ls also a temporary
traiLer which has been approved on site for an offlce
which will be removed once this facility is ln
operation. There witl be no effect on the use of light
and air, or distribution of population or transportation
facilitles by the proposed expansion.
1.C The effect on traffic, with particular reference to
congestion of automotive, pedestrlan safety and
convenlence, traffic flow and control , and access will
not be effected by thls project slnce the personnel to be
housed ln the new expansion are already working at Uppe r
Eagle Va11ey under very congeated conditions and also
have expanded into a temporary modular building which
will be removed once the project is completed. The
existing parking area to the west of the building is
adequate based on 300 square feet per parking space of
net office area to handle the proposed expansion.
1n The effect on the surrounding area of the Upper Eagle
Va11ey Sanitation complex will be very minimal due to the
character of the surrounding uses which include the
maintenance building for the Town of Vail' maintenance
buildings for vail Associates ski corp., and Ehe exlsting
and proposed parking structure to the eas! of this
complex. The scale of the proposed building will be
compatible with the existing buildings and slmilar in
character so that it does not intrude on the view
corridors of the resldences to the south and southeast of
this project. The height of the proposed expansion will
be in character with the exisling facility and of less
height than the existing building to the west.
2 The site plan at one inch equals twenty feet shows theproposed development including topography, bulldinglocations, parking, t.raffic ci-rculation and useable openspace has been lncluded ln the submittal . There is no
new coverage of land or removal of open space ln theproposed project other than covering the existingstructure over the aeration basins in the sanitary sewerfacility. A11 drainage from the roof is interior in thestructure to existing roof drains over the aeraLionbasins. Landscaping and utilities will remain the same
and do not have to be upgraded for this project.
3. Preliminary building elevations, a typical section andfloor plans at 1,/8r equal one foot, have been included inthe submittal .
4. The ownership of the property is the Upper Eagle Va11eyConsolidated Sanitation District, as shown on the recordsof the Town of Vai1.
5. Not relevant.
5. Any additional information required by the zoningadministrator will be forwarded upon his request.
If you have any questions concerning this submittal , pleasecontact Stephen fsom at 328-2388 or cayle Grider aL 4'76-7480.
Sincerely yours,
*'r t/>u_&"
ltt
^q*i.-r. ,
Isom !/
cc: Gayle Grider, UEVCSD
D?FEB 04 tpz
ADiTACENT PROPERIY O$INERS TO:
UPPER, BTGI,B VII,LEY CONSOI,IDATBD SAI(ITATION DTSTRIET
845 Forest RoadVal1, Colorado 81557
tAt
rBll
rcn
rDr
rEi
rFr
ilustine Ir. Snlth5280 Rich Road
I{emphis, TN 38117
Robert D. Working
503 Mount Evans Road
Golden, Co 80401
General Corununlcations, rnc.
100 Garfleld Street
Denver, CO 80206
Cymthia ilacobson
754 Forest RoadVal1, CO 81557
Vall Assoclatee, Inc.
P.O. Box 7
Vail, Co 81557
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road West
Vail, CO 81557
-6Tq
'9 -':- A ql
- 'o t\ tol.or ..._ .- g l
t;>-=.-.---0 .:
i
7^- 9
H\
:r9\: '@
ztx
5r aEt
-"=-':
_ 9F
6t t-\-,/ |
I
?t tot )
. -l@lI r.lt >.9\7
"r\9-
.; \ "i lBr0 \" I
(L6
l!
'l
6\,oo' e
'r n' or
' El-" 4
ll.)
5
o
o\('.""tvi
.i-it
6\
€/
ffiL;
a
?1",,.1r 'r'r'
v
4l
i/,,3("'s'e/
n
_
n
:
o
7;
- .l-
; <1,
: Yll
a .^l
'zl
?l1l.)
Z
l\
0
o- 2v
..
1.\:
F
H&tsa
z
F{F
F
z
F<lr
H q,)
F-l lr
.h klzO\o(J .$
v
>l
FI
4
p
IJ
a
B
!
CJ
t.
+J
c,
(d
.r-')
'U
:
,'-4
F'1. .
I
I\li\
\\
,) )iir,
.-. -r . -l\./,-t 1 1:.4 ;:l i i,
5. + I 1no, tr:iLl?t-
i lt ar | --. { I ' t
. -t ts| .:
zl
A
'Y
(J|lc-.- (\lc_
Or)
E:
<N
cE-
a
c
a
0.
o
I
a9
o
I'
t'
I
ii
NP
'h
r
:
ta
t:
r
It
E
I
t
rlI
'I|i
.il' S*'-
--
!i';:rii.::'*
:1. - \\-
"c' "".
.2
-l|'l
!t-D2
Jp
$
O E9FEB o4€s
U /7{, rsoM & AssocrArEs
I__l l/^\ Architecture LandPlannins ProjectManasement
February 17, t992
Andrew Knudtsen
Town Planner
Department of Community Development
75 South Frontage Road
vail , Colorado 81657
RE: DRB APPLICATION - ADMINISTRATM OFFICE EXPANSION
UPPER EAGLE VALI,EY CONSOI,IDATED SANITATION DTSTRICT
Dear Andrew:
Attached is a completed DRB Application for the Town of Vail
for the new administrative office expansj-on for Upper Eagle
Valley Consolidated Sanitation Dist.rict. The application is
being submitted to meet the February 17th suburittal deadline
which will be heard on March 18, 1992.
The application has been signed by warren Garbe, General
Manager for Upper Eagle Val 1ey Sanitation District. It is
undersEood Ehat the fees for Design Review are waived for Ehe
Metropol itan District.
Three copj-es of a detailed site plan of 1 inch equals 20 feetis being submitted as part of the DRB Application. The siteplan shows the existing site with location of the proposed
expansion on top of the existing aeration basins. There will
be no changes to the overall site plan either in landscaping,access to existing utilities or changing of existing grades.
All dralnage from the roof structure will be interior to
existing storm drains located on the roof of the aerationbasin. Three copies of architectural floor plans, tlpicalstructural section, and elevations are included with the
submittal . Exterior rnaterials for the expanded administrativeoffice will match tshe existing facia on the administrativeoffice and the facia and waIl material on the aeration basinsand mechanical rooms. This is a whiLe stucco finish, rough
textured and spackled to match.
The area of the existing administrative offices is
approximately 6,984 sguare feeE gross or 2,990 sguare feet net,exclusive of hal1ways, mechanical rooms, Eoilet facilitsies,storaqe rooms and access stairs. Total parking requirement forthe existing office space is twelve parking spaces.
P.0. Box 9 Eagle, Colorado 81631 (303)328-2388 FAX 328-6266
Andrew Knudtsen
Departments of Community DevelopmenL
February 17, L992
Page 2
For the nerrr addition the gross sguare footage is 5,043 squarefeet on tshe two levels with a net functional use of 3,237equare feet or 13 parking spaces. Provided on site are sevenvisitor parking spaces j-n front of the building and 30 lnrkingspaces on the west end of the bui]-dinq. There is al so truck
access down below to the equipment area and five parking spaces.
If you have any questions concernlng the appllcation to theDesign Review Board, please contact this office at 328-2388 or
Gayle Grider at the Metropolitan District, 476-7480.
Sincerely yours,
fSOM & ASSOCIATES
Stephen R. Isom
cc: Upper Eagle Valley Consolidated Sanitation District
'7-.r Jo{'l
\,
.i
trrgttB C419E/
revised 9/4/9L Date of APP1ication
Date of PEC Meetj-ng
IPPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAI, USE PERMTT
I.This procedure is required for any project required to obtain a
conditional use permit.
The application will- not be accepted until all information is
submitted.
A. NAME OF APPLICANT TrlFer Frgl6 \/!t t6y Co'.so] idnred sanitarion niqfri.t
ADDRESS 845 Forest Road
Vail- CO 8I557 PHoNEjT6ll!$11-
NAME OF APPLICANT' S REPRESENTATIVESEephen R. Isom. Is es
ADDRESS P.0. Box 9. Eaele. C0 81631. Phone: (303)328-21RR
Gavle Grlder for U.E.V.C.s.D.- Vai1. co PHONE-4]-6J380--
^_
.-'.6^\nE or Lypet t.F: .v.c.s.n.NAME OF OWNER(S) (pri
owNER(S) STGNATURE(S)
ADDRESS r.Same as Apolicanc
PHONE
D. LOCATION 0F PROPOSAL: LEGAL:LOT 3t BLOCK-FILING2-VaiL-VjILaee
ADDRESS 846 Forest Road. Vai1. CO 81657
E. FEE $200.00 PAID_ NIA_ cK #BY
THE FEE MUST BE PAID BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT WILL ACCEPT YOUR PROPOSAL.
F. A list of the names of owners of afl- property adjacent to
the subject property INCLUDTNG PRoPERTY BEHTND AND AcRoss
STREETS, and their mailing addresses. THE APPLICANT wILL BE
RESPONSIBLE FOR CORRECT OWNERS AND CORRECT ADDRESSES.
II. PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE:
A pre-application conference with a planning staff member is
strongly suggested to determine if any additional information is
needed. No application will be accepted unless it complete (must
include alL items reguired by the zoning administrator) - It is
the applicant's responsi-bi-1ity to make an appointment with the
staff to find out about additional- submittal requirements.
III. PLEASE NOTE T}IAT A COMPLETE APPLICATION WILL STREAMLINE THE
APPROVAL PROCESS FOR YOUR PROJECT BY DECREASING THE NUMBER OF
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THAT THE PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
COMMISS]ON (PEC) MAY STIPULATE. & CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL MUST
BE COMPLIED WITH BEFORE A BUILDING PERMTT IS ISSUED.
Four (4) copies of the following information must be
submitted:
1. A description of the precise nature of the proposed use
and its operating characteristics and measures proposed
to make the use compatible with other properties in the
vicinity.
The description must also address:
a. Relationship and irnpacL of the use on development'
obiectives of the Town.
lJ '-
Effecd of the use on light and
of populaLion, transPortation
air, distribution
faci l ities,
recreation
,1.t
t. rl
i.
A
utilities' school-s, Parks and
facilities, and other Publicfacilities needs.
facilities and Public
EffecL upon.tiaffic, with particuLar reference to
congestibn, automotive and pedestrian safety and
convenience, traffic fLow and control, accesst
maneuverability, and removal of snow from the
streets and parking area.
Effect upon the character of the area in which tbe
proposed use is to be located, including the scale
lnd bulk of the proposed use in relation to
surrounding uses.
A site plan at a scale of at least L't = 20' showing
proposeb development of the site, including topography,
builAing locations, parking, traffic circulation,
useabfe open space, landscaped areas and utilities and
drainage features.
Prelimlnary building elevations and floor plans.
A title report to verify ownership and easements.
If the building is condominiunized, a letter from the
condomin j-um asiociation in support of the proposal must
be submitted to staff.
Any additional naterial .necessary for the review of the
apptication as determined by the zoning administrator'
** For interior modifications' an improvement survey
and site plan may be waived by the zoning
administrator.
3.
4.
IV. TIME REQUIREMENTS
The Planning and Envj-ronmental Commission meets on the 2nd
and 4th Mondays of each month. A complete application form
and afL accompanying naterial (as described above) must be
submitted a minimurn of four (4) weeks prior to the date of
the PEC public hearing. No inconplete applications (as
determined by the zoning adrninistrator) will be accepted by
the planning staff before or after the designated submittal
date.
AII PEC approved conditional use permits shall lapse if
constructlon is not conmenced within one year of the date of
approval and ditigently pursued to cornpletion, ot if the use
f-o-r which the appioval is granted is not commenced wit'hin
one year.
If this application requires a separate revie! by.any local,
State or Federal agency other than the Town of Vail, the
application fee shal-L be increased by $200'00. Examples of
sutn review, may include, but are not limited to: CoLorado
Department of Highway Access Permits, Army Corps of
Engineers 404r etc.
Thre applicant shall be responsible for paying aly publishing
tees which are in excess of 50t of the application fee. lf,
at the applicant's requestr anY nat'ter is postponed for
hearing, tausing the natter to be re-published' then, the
entire fee for such re-publication shall be paid by the
applicant.
A.\T
App.Licat,iot.."d by the community oVeroprnent Departnentto have significant design, land use or other issues which
may have a significant impact on the community may reguirereview by consultants other that town staff. Shoufd adeternination be made by the town staff that an outsj-deconsultant is needed to review any application, Community
Development may hire an outside consultant/ it sha1J-estimate the amount of rnoney necessary to pay him or her andthis amount shalf be forwarded to the Town by the applicantat the time he files his applicat.ion wit.h the Corununity
DeveLopnent Department. Upon completion of the review ofthe application by the consultant, any of the funds
forwarded by the applicant for payment of the consultantwhich have not been paid to the consultant sha1l be returnedto the applicant. Expenses incurred by t.he Town in excessof the amount forwarded by the applicant shall be paid tothe Town by the applicant within 30 days of notification bythe Town.
.4,
a
1
trr0 FEB 2 61992
tl /7{, rsou & AssoctArEs
lJ l/^\ Architecture Land Plannins Project Manasement
February 26, 1992
She11y Mello
Town Planner
Department of Community Development
75 South Frontage Road
Vai1, cO 81657
RE: Office Addition to Upper Eagle Va1 ley Consolidated
Sanitation District
Dear She11y:
Upper Eagle Valley Consolidated Sanitation District would like
to ammend their applicaLion for a CondiLional Use Permit and
Design Review Board approval for their proposed expansion to
the administrative offices located on Forest Road in vai1. The
amendment will be to our letter of February 10, L992 for the
Conditional use Permit and the letter of February 1,7, L992 for
the DRB Application. The Board of Directors of UEVCSD at their
meeting on February 19, L992 decided to increase the size of
the addition to two complete stories. The one and a half story
as proposed would only meeL their present staffing requirements
where two stories would accommodate staffing for the
foreseeable future.
Employees for the new addition would consist of six people
already on staff and Lhree additional at a future date.
The gross square footage is 3.444 sq. ft. per floor for a total
of 5,888 sq. ft. The net square footage, exclusive of
hallways, mechanical rooms, toilet facilities' storage rooms
and stairs would be approximately 4,100 sq. ft. Total parking
requirement would be seventeen parking spaces. The existing 42parking spaces on site are more than adequate for the total
development.
Gayle Grider has already given you four copies of the ammendedplans for the project. If you require any other changes to our
applications, please contact this office.
Sincerely yours,
cc: UEVCSD, Gayle Grider
Stephen
Pres ident
P.0. Box 9 Eagle, Colorado 81631 (303)328-2388 FAX 328-6266
n /7X rsoM & AssocrArEs
l_l l/^\ Architecture LandPlannins ProlectManasement
PIC?FIB l g4gz
February 10, 1992
Andrew Knudtsen
Town Planner
DEPARTMENT OF COMMTTNITY DEVETOPMENT
75 South Frontage Road
Vail , Colorado 81557
RE: ADMINISTRATM OFFICE EXPANSfON
UPPER EAGLE VAII.,EY CONSOIJIDATED SANITATTON DTSTRICT
Dear Andrew:
Enclosed is an appllcation for Conditional Use Permit for the
proposed administrative office expansion for Upper Eagle Va1 1eyConsol"idated Sanitation District. The proposed expansion is tothe south of the existing administrative offices at 845 ForestRoad in Vai1. The application is signed by Warren Garbe,
General Manager. It is understood that the 5200 fee for theConditional Use Permit is waived for the MetropolitanDist.rict. The submittal is being made to meet. the February 10,t992, deadline for the Planning and Environmental Commissionwhich is scheduled to be heard on Marctr 9, 1992.
In regard to the questions outlined in Section 3 of anApplication of Conditional Use, those points are addressed asfollows:
l-. The project is the expansion of the administrativeoffices for Upper Eagle Va11ey Consolidated SanitationDistrict. The expansion will cover the remainder of theroof structure over the aeration tanks of Upper EagleValley Sanitation District, specifically to the south ofthe existing ad.ministraEive offices. The floor plans
show the relationship of the proposed building to theexisting administ,rative offices which will al low for thefollowing features.
1. Conference Room, 34 feeL x 34 feet2. Visitorts Office, 10 feet x 12 feet3. Four Administrative Offices, approximately 10 feet x
12 feet.4. Mens and womens lavatories.5. Future mapping,/computer area.6. Second story addiLion with future administrative
area.
P.0. Box 9 Eagle, Colorado 81631 (303)328-2388 FAX 328-6266
?he proposed expansion is compaLible with the existing office
building and sanitation facilities located wesL of Forest Road,
north of Gore Creek, souttr of the Frontage Road and east of the
Town of Vail MalnEenanee Building. The proposed expansion is
compatible with other properties in the vicinity, including the
Town of Vail Maintenance facility Uo the west, the parking 1ot
to the east, Vail Associatesr ski maintenance area Eo the
north, and the residential properties to the southeast, whlch
are oriented away from thls structure.
The proposed administrative office expansion wil-1 have no
impact on development objectives of the town other thanproviding administrative offices for the administration
of the Consolidated Water and Sanitation Dist.ricts in theVail Valley and Eagle Va11ey.
The proposed administrative office expansion wilL have no
effect on the schools, parks, recreation facilities or
other facilities in the Vail Va11ey. The expanded office
is designed Eo acconmodate the exlsting personnel who are
currently working for the Distrlct in very crarnped
spaces, and provide a board meeting room and community
meeting room for outside use. There ls also a tenporarytrailer which has been approved on site for an office
which will be removed once this facllity is in
operation. There will be no effect on the use of light
and air, or distrlbution of population or transportationfacilities by the proposed expansion.
The effect on traffic, with particular reference to
congestion of automotive, pedestrlan safety and
convenience, traffic flow and control, and access willnot be effected by this project slnce the personnel to be
housed ln t.he new expansion are already working at UpperEagle Valley under very congesLed conditions and also
have expanded into a temporary modular building which
wl11 be removed once the project is completed. The
existing parking area to the west of the building is
adequate based on 300 square feet per parking space of
net office area to handle the proposed expansion.
The effect on Lhe surrounding area of the Upper Eagle
Va11ey Santtation complex will be very minimal due to the
character of the surrounding uses which include the
maintenance buildinq for the Town of Vail, maintenancebuildings for Vail AesociaEes Ski Corp., and the existingand proposed parking structure to the east of thiscomplex. The scale of the proposed building will be
compatible with the existing buildings and similar incharacter so that it does not intrude on the viewcorridors of the residences to the south and southeast ofthis project. The height of the proposed expansion will
be in ctraract.er with the existing facility and of less
height than the existing building to the west.
1.8
1.C
2 The site plan at one inch equals twenty feet shows theproposed development including topography, bulldinglocations, parking, traffic circul-ation and useable openspace has been lncluded ln the suburittal . There is no
nelv coverage of land or removal of open space ln theproposed project other than covering the existingstructure over the aeraLion basins in the sanj.tary sewerfacility. Al-l- drainage from the roof is interior in thestructure to existing roof drains over the aerationbasins. Landscaping and utitities will remain the same
and do not have to be upgraded for this project.
3. Preliminary building elevations, a typical section andfloor plans aL L/8" egual one foot, have been included lnthe submittal .
4. The ownership of the property is the Upper Eagle Va1 leyConsolidated Sanitat.ion District, as shown on the recordsof the Town of Vail.
5. Not relevant.
6. Any additional information required by the zoningadminlsLrator will be forwarded upon his reguest.
If you have any questions concerning this submittal , pleasecontact Stephen Isom at 328-2388 or Gayle Grider aL 475-7480.
cc: Gayle Grider, UEVCSD
Stephen
AD,JACENT PROPERTY OIIINERS TO:
UPPER EAGLB VALI,BT CONSOI,IDATM SANTTATION DISTR.ICT
845 Forest Road
Val1, colorado 81657
rAn Justine t{. Srnith5280 Rich Road
Memphis, TN 38117
'B' Robert D. Working
503 Mount Evans Road
Golden, Co 80401
iCn General- Corrmunications, Inc.
100 Garfield street
Denver, CO 80206
I'Do Cynthia ilacobson
754 Forest Road
Vail , CO 8L657
nEt Vail AssociaLes, Inc.
P.O. Box 7
Vai1, cO 81557
"F" Town of VaiI
75 South Frontage Road tVest
Vail, CO 81657
+t
o|{(,
3
JJtro
lr
rJ
o
(g
le\
;G
..r\,O '":)
t 13* eI
Z" n'"'i'9 ir_-7-.1,
LION>/:^>;;- t3t
: ra:' o
iv, e - Iol
9 \""
;al
9 '.\
i F@o l'
.z ttot J5 ;.I .6\t5l3 \,/:"Ae-
-i-^ \ "i8 ?
ft? r I'
ri 6\g \o'. :
oo=
e
j .^\GJi i
'9
' Ft-"
fJ- )
o,.,*hK' i
rOi lY
vW i 3
\.oo.., ...,..r.!o
Lf' \y;too - t
{"^ -6'
.,,.,_l'
;t.'
ii;-lli.s'.::'.i>
,/[
o
dI
a
li
li,
''r.;<
ts()
HfiHrt)H
H
F{
F{
Hz
C/I T'
rd
A&Fl<p
HCJ|Jlr
u) 14z
(J \+
F
F-l,t
Fl
tr.]
ol
.- (\lc-
o r.);9<(\,
.,:li.:'a..' .u:i i ; ll,l ;rJ { }-: I l, x\; + ,.t { fiHI I | , tt:I,ti_1 ,lt
! | lt >1 ra{ .r i !,'
t-zf
z
a
J
It
\
:
Tt
!
f
g
a\
:
-l
a.i!9i:i
.t!l
-li
9:
I
l
\ ,-i revised 9/4/9L
I.
^^!^ ^.F r*^r.i ^ationL/ ct L- E v r .rP}J r- -! \/,
Date of PEC Meeting
APPLICATION !'OR CONDITIONAI.. USE PERMIT
This procedure is required for any project required to obtain a
conditional use Permit.
The application will noL be accepted until alL information is
submitted.
A. NAME OF APPLICANT llplar E4g16 rr,r'r6y Ccnsol id.fFd sFni r.af i.'n Diqiti.t
ADDRESS 846 Forest Road
Var'l. Co 81657 PHONE azn-7480
B. NAME oF APPLICANT' S REPRE SENTAT IVE stephen R. Isom. IsOm & ASSOC1ATCS
ADDRESS P'O. Box 9. Eaele. C0 81631- Phoner (303)328-??88
Ga.rle Grider for U.E'V.C.S.D.- vai1. cO PHONE 476-74Ro
NAME OF OWNER(S) (print or LYPP)
or{NER (S) STGNATURE (S)
ADDRESS *Same as Aoplicant u
PHONE-
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL : LEGAL:LOT 31 BLOCK-FILINGJ--vr.i.l-lLLUae.
ADDRESS 846 Forest Road. Vail. CO 81657
E. FEE $200.00 PAID34,- cK #BY
D.
THE FEE I.|UST BE PAID BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT WILL ACCEPT YOUR PROPOSAL.
F. A list of the names of owners of afl property adjacent to
the subject property INCLUDING PROPERTY BEHIND AND ACROSS
STREETS; and their mailing addresses. THE APPLfCANT WrLL BE
RESPONSIBLE FOR CORRECT OWNERS AND CORRECT ADDRESSES.
II. PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE:
A pre-application conference with a planning staff member is
stronqly- suggested to determine if any additional information is
needed. No ipplication wil-1 be accepted unLess it complete (must
include all j-tLms requj.red by the zoning administrator). It is
the applicantrs responsibility to make an appointment with the
staff to find out about addiLional submittal reguirements.
rII. PLEASE NOTE THAT A COMPLETE APPLICATION WILL STREAMLINE THE
APPROVAL PROCESS FOR YOUR PROJECT BY DECREASING THE NUMBER OF
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THAT THE PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
COMMISSTON (PEC) MAY STIPULATE. AI,]. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL MUST
BE COMPLIED WITH BEFORE A BUILDING PERMIT IS ISSUED.
Four (4) copies of the followj-ng inforrnation must be
submitted:
1. A description of the precise nature of the proposed use
and its operatj-ng characteristics and measures proposed
to make the use compatible with other properties in the
vicinity.
The description must also address:
a. Relationship and impact of the use on development
objectives of the Town.
1'
Effect of the use on light and air, distribution
of population, transportation facilities, I
utilities, schools, parks and recreation
facilities, and other public facilities and public
facilities needs.
c. Effect upon tiaffic, with particuLar reference to
congestion, automotive and pedestrian safety and
convenience, traffic flow and control-, access,
maneuverability, and removal of snow from the
streets and parking area.
d. Effect upon the character of the area in which the
proposed use is to be focated, including the scale
and bulk of the proposed use in relation to
surrounding uses.
A site plan at a scale of at least l.'r = 20' showing
proposed developmenL of the site, including topography,
building locations, parking, traffic circulation,
useable open space, landscaped areas and uLilities and
drainage features.
Preliminary building elevations and floor plans.
A titl-e report to verify ownership and easements.
If the building is condominiumized, a letter from the
condominium association in support of the proposal must
be submitted Lo staff.
b.rl
tl
i.
q
Any additional material necessary
application as determined by the
** For interior modifications,
and site plan rnay be waived
adninistrator.
for the review of the
zoning administrator.
improvement surveythe zoning
an
by
IV. TIME REQUIREMENTS
The Planning and Environmental Commission meets on the 2nd
and 4th Mondays of each month. A complete application form
and aL] accompanying material (as described above) must be
submitted a minimum of four (4) weeks prior to the date of
the PEC public heari-ng. No incomplete applications (as
determined by the zoning adninistraLor) will be accepted by
the planning staff before or after the designated submittal
date.
A1t PEC approved conditional use permits sha1l lapse if
construction is not corunenced within one year of the date of
approval and diligently Pursued to completion, or if the use
for which the approvaf is granted is not commenced within
one year.
If this application requires a separate review by any Iocal,
State or Federal agency other than the Town of VaiI, the
application fee shaLl be increased by $200.00. Examples of
such review, may include, but are not fimited to: Colorado
Department of Highway Access Permits, Army Corps of
Engineers 404, etc.
The applicant shall be responsible for paying any publishing
fees which are in excess of 50E of the application fee. If,
at the applicant's requestr Eny matter is postPoned for
hearing, causing the natter t.o be re-publishedr then, the
entire fee for such re-publication sha]l be paid by the
applicant.
A.v.
{-
---T,.iil.l
Appricati?" *"^"d by the community ?rr.roo^"nt Department
to have signifigant design, land use or other issues which
may have a significant impact on the comrnunity may reguire
review by consult.ants other Lhat town staff. Should a
determination be rnade by the town staff that an outsideconsultant is needed to review any application, Cornmunity
Development may hire an outside consuLtant, it shallestimate the arnount of money necessary to pay hin or her andthis amount shall be forwarded to the Town by the applicantat the t.ime he files his application with the Community
DeveLopment Department. Upon completion of the review ofthe application by the consultant, any of the funds
forwarded by the applicant for payment of the consuLtantwhich have not been paid to the consultant shall be returnedto the applicant. Expenses incurred by the Town j.n excessof the amount forwarded by the applicant shal] be paid tothe Town by the applicant wit.hin 30 days of noti-ficaLion bythe Town.
.a
n /7(, rsoM & AssocrArEs
l_l l/^\ Architecture Land Plannins ProjectManasement
FF"'n r r ,,, t t1 1g1gg2,
February 17, :..992
Andrew Knudtsen
Town Planner
Department of Community Development
75 South Frontag'e Road
Vai1, Colorado 81657
RE! DRB APPLTCATTON - ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE EXPANSION
UPPER EAGLE VALLEY CONSOLIDATED SANITATION DISTRICT
Dear Andrew:
At.tached is a completed DRB Application for t.he Town of Vail
for Ehe new administrative office expansion for Upper Eagle
Va1ley Consolidated Sanitation District. The application is
being submitted to meet the February 17t.h submittal deadline
which will be heard on March 18, 1992.
The application has been signed by warren Garbe, General
Manager for Upper Eagle Valley Sanitation District. It is
understood that the fees for Desicrn Review are waived for the
Metropol itan District.
Three copies of a detailed site pl-an of 1 inch equals 20 feetis being submitted as part of the DRB Application. The siteplan shows the existing siLe with location of the proposed
expansion on top of the existing aeration basins. There will
be no chanqes to the overall site plan either in landscaping,access to existing utilities or changing of existing grades.
A11 drainage from the roof structure will be interj-or to
existing storm drains located on the roof of the aerationbasin. Three copies of architectural floor plans, tlpicalstructural section, and elevations are included vriLh the
submiLtal . Exterior materials for the expanded adminisErativeoffice will match the existing facia on the administrativeoffice and the facia and wall maLerial on the aeration basinsand mechanical rooms. This is a white stucco finish, rough
textured and spackled to match.
The area of the existing administrative offices is
approximately 6,984 sguare feet gross or 2,990 square feet net,exclusive of ha11ways, mechanical rooms, toilet facilities,
storage rooms and access stairs. Total parking requirement forthe existing office space is twelve parking spaces.
P0. Box9 Eagle, Colorado 81631 (303)328-2388 FM 328-6266
t
t.
And rew Knudtsen
Department of Community DevelopmenC
February 17, L992
Page 2
For the new addition the gross square footage is 5,043 squarefeet on the two levels with a net functional uae of 3,23'lsquare feeE or 13 parking spaces. Provided on site are sevenvisitor parking spaces in front of the building and 30 parking
spaces on the !'rest end of the building. There is also truck
access down below to the equipment area and five parking spaces.
If you have any quest.lons concernlng the application to theDesign Review Board, please conEact this office al 328-2388 or
Gayle Grider at the Metropolit.an DistricL, 47 6-7480.
Sincerely yours,
ISOM & ASSOCIATES
cc: Upper Eagle Val1ey Consolidated Sanitation District
o
APPLICATIONDRB
DATE APPLICATION RECEIVED :
DATE OF DRB MEETING:
I.
**********
TEIS APPLTCATTON WTLL NOT BE ACCEPBEDITNTIL AI.,L REQUTRED TNFORMATTON IS STTBMTTTED**********
PROJECT INFORMATION:
A' DESCRTPTToN: Expansion of upoer Eaqfe Varlev consofidared
B.TYPE OF RBVIEW:
New Construction ($200.00)Minor Alteration (520.00)
Conceptual Review (S0)x Addition ($50.00)
C. ADDRESS:
D. LEGAL DESCRIPTIoN: LoT 31 Block
J.
H.
I.
G.
NAME OF APPLICANT,S REPRESENTATM: srephen R. Tsom
NAME OF APPLICANT:Mailing Address:
Mailing Address: Isom & Associares. Inc.. p
_ _ Eaele. Co 8163I phone i.8_.?s8Gayle Grider for U.E.V.C.S.D. Vail, CO 416_74g0
LOT AREA: ff reguired,
stamped survey showing
applicant must provide a currentIot area.
Phone Lj 6-7 /!ao
FEE
$ 20.00I 50.00
s100.00
$200.00
$400.00
$s00.00
sEri-cE
z-n*STGNATURE (S) : XMailing Address:
K
O revised s/4/sL
- TOVW OF VAITJ, COToRADO
Subdivisi_orr 2 va.i 1 viltege
If property is described by a meets and bounds ]eqaldescription, please provide on a separate sheet .naattach to thj_s application.
F
E.ZONING i publi c lrep Di cf ri ^F
Condominium Approval if applicable.
DRB FEE: DRB fees, as shown above, are to be paid atthe time of submirrql of DRB applicarion. L;i;;, whenapplying for a building. permit, please iOentiiy-lneaccurate valuation of the proposal . The town 6f VaiIwiIl adjust the fee_according-to the table l"fo", toensure the correct fee is paid.
C.OIf JLNI:UULE:
VALUATIONs 0 - $ 10,000$ 10,001 - s 50r0oo$ 50,001 - $ 150,000$150/001 - $ 5OO,0OO
$500/ 001 - $1,000,000$ Over $1, OOOT 0OO
* DESTGN REvrEw BOARD APPRoltAr, ExprREs oNE yF.aR AI'ER FrNArAPPRovAr. UNTJESS A BUTLDTNG pERMrr rs rssuED AlrD coNsrRucrroN rsSTARTED.
**NO EPPIICJA,TION WILL BE PROCESSED WTTEOUT OWNER'S SIGNATURE
\-o
PRE_APPLICATION MEETING :II
III
A pre-application meeting wjth a member of the planningst.aff j-s st.rongly encourag.:-1. to det.ermine if any additionalapplication infornation is needed. It is the applicantrsresponsibj-lity to make an appointment with the st.aff todetermine 1f there are additional submlttal requirements.Please note Lhat a COMPLETE application will streamline theapproval process for your project
In addition to meeting submictal requirements/ theappl-icant must stake and tape the projecL site toindicate property Iines, building lines and buildingcorners. AII trees to be removed must be taped. AIlsite t.apings and staking must be completed prior to the
DRB site visit. The applicant must ensure that stakingdone during the winter is not buried by snow.
The review process for NEW BUILDINGS normal-Iy requirestwo separate meetings of the Design Review Board: aconceplual approval and a final- approval. Appl-icantsshould plan on presenting their development proposal_ ata rninimum of two meetings before obtaining finalapprovaf.
Applicants who fail to appear before rhe Design ReviewBoard on thei.r scheduled meeting date and who have notasked in advance that discussion on their item bepostponed, wj-11 have their items removed. from the DRBdocket until such time as the item has beenrepubl i shed .
The fol-Iowing items may/ at the djscretion of thezoning administrator, be approved by the CommunityDevelopment Department staff (i.e. a formal hearinqbefore the DRB may not be required) :
a. Windows, skylights and similar ext.erior changeswhich do not aLter the existins plane of thebuilding,'and
b. Building addition proposals noc visible from anyother l-ot or public space. At t.he time such aproposal is submitted, applicancs must incfudeletters from adjacent property owners and,/or fromthe agent for or manager of any adjacent
condominium association statinq the associationapproves of the addition.
ff a property is located in a mapped hazard area (i.e.
snow aval-anche, rockfall, flood plain/ debris flow,wetland, etc)r a hazard study must be submitted and theowner rnust sj.gn an affidavit recognizing the hazardreport prior ro che issuance of a building permit.Applicants are encouraged to check with a Town pLannerprior to DRB application to determine the rel-ationshipof the property to all- mapped hazards.
For aL1 residential construction:
Clearly indicate on the fl-oor plans the insideface of the exterior structural- wa1ls of thebuilding,' andIndicate with a dashed line on the site plan afour foot distance from the exterior face of thebuilding walfs or supporting columns.
If DRB approves the application wirh conditions ormodifications, aII conditions of approval must beresolved prior to Town issuance of a buildinq permit
B
c
b
b
T\T
A.Three copies of a recent topoqraphic survev, stanped bva licensed survevor, at a scale of 1rr = 20t 'or farger,
on which the following information is provided:
l- . Lot area.
Two foot contour interval-s unless the parcelconsists of 5 acres or more, in which case, 5,tcontour intervals rnay be accepted.
3. Existing trees or groups of trees having trunkswith diameters of 4" or more, as measured from apoint one foot above grade.
Rock outcroppings and other significant naturalfeatures (large boulders, Lntermj-tt.ent streams,etc, ) .
Hazard areas (avalanche, rockfal1, etc.),centerline of stream or creek, required creek orstream setback, 100-year ffood plain and slopes of40t or more, if applicable.
Ties to existing benchmark, eit.her USGS landmarkor sewer invert. This information should beclearly stated on the survey so that all
measurements are based on the same starting point.This is particularly important for height
measurements. See Poficy On Survey Information,for more information regarding surveys.
Locations of the following:a. Size and type of drainage culverts, swales,etc. must be sho$rn.
b. Exact locat,ion of existing utility sources
and proposed service lines from their sourceto the st,ructure. Utilities to include:
6.
CabLe TV
Telephone
Sewer
water
Gas
E.l-ectric
R
c. Show all utility meter Locations, including
any pedestals to be located on site or in theright-of-way adjacent to the site. Revocablepermits from the Town of VaiI are requiredfor improvements in the right-of-way.
d. Property lines - distances and bearings and abasis of bearing must be shown.
e. AlL easements (Ti.tle report must. also includeexisting easement locations)
8. Existing and finished grades.
9. Provide spot elevations of the street, and a
minimum of one spot elevation on either side ofthe lot, 25 feet out from the side property lines.
Site Pla4
1. Locat.ions of the following:
a. Proposed surface drainage on and off site.
b. Proposed driveways. percent slope and spotelevations must be shown.
2. AlL existing improvements including sLructures,landscaped areas, service areas) storage areas,wa1ks, driveways, off-street parking, Ioadingareas, retaining wal1s (with top and bottom ofwal1 spot eLevations)., and other existing siteimprovements.
3. Elevations of top of roof ridqes (with existinq
and proposed qrades shown underneath) . Theseelevations and grades mus! be provided in orderfor the staff to determine building height. AIIridge lines should be indicated on the sj_te plan.Elevations for roof ridges sha1l aLso be indicatedon the sit.e plan with corresponding finished andexist.ing grade elevations.
A. Driveway grades may not exceed 88 unless approvedby the Town Engineer.
Landscape Pl-an (l-r' = 20t or larger) - 3 copies reguired
1. The following informat.ion must be provided on thelandscape plan. The l"ocation of existing 4',diameter or larger trees, the 1ocat.ion, size,spacing and type (common and Latin name) of allexisting and proposed plant mat.erial . A1I treesto be saved and to be removed must also beindicated. The plan must also differentiate
between existing and proposed vegetation.
2. Complete the attached landscape materj-als list.
3. The location and type of existing and proposedwatering systems to be employed in caring forplant material following its installation.
4. Existing and proposed contour lines.
Jn order to clarify the inter-rel_at.ion of the various
development proposal cornponents, please j-ncorporate asmuch of the above infornation as possibfe ont.o the sitepl" an ,
location of utility serviceattached) .
and availability (see
A prelirninarv litle report must accompany aIlsubmittals, to insure property ownership and locationof .aLL easements on propert.y.
Architectural Plans (l / 8', = Ir or larger , ! / 4,, ispreferred scal-e for review) 3 copies required.
1. Scaled floor plans and alL elevations of theproposed development. Elevations must show bothexisting and finished grades.
2. One set of f Loor plans must be ,,red-l_ined,' Lo showhow the gross residential floor area (GRFA) wascalculated.
Reductions of all elevations and the site plan (8-1/2" x 1-L") for inclusion in pEC and/or TownCouncil memos may be requested.
\IATF.
D.
E.
G.
4. Exterior surfacing materials and material colorsshall be specified on t.he attached materiats list.This materials list nust be completed andsubmitted as a part of DRB application. Col_orchips, siding sampLes etc., should be presented tothe Design Review Board meeting
Z_ong check list (attached) must be completed if project.is l-ocated within t.he Single-FamiIy, erirnary,/Secondiryor Duplex zone districts.
Photos of the existing site and where applicable, ofadjacent structures.
:.' I. The Zoning Administrator and/or DRB may require the
:;:11 ;i::1, 3l"lo3*;i:3'"*'lii,.l'i:il:i :, " { inc ludins
a model) if deemed necessary to determine -*-hether aproject will comply with Design Guidelines.
V. MINOR ALTERATIONS TO THE EXTERIOR OF BUILD]NGS.
Photos or sketches which clearly convey the redevelopmentproposal and the location (site plan) of the redevelopmentproposal may be submitted in lieu of the more formaLrequirements set forth above, provided all importantspecifications for the proposal including colors andmaLerials to be used are submitted.
VI. ADDITIONS - RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL
A. Original floor plans with aII specifications shown
3. Three sets of proposed floor plans t/8" = 7t or larger(l/4" = Lt is preferred)
C. Three copies of a site plan showing existing andproposed construction. Indlcate roof ridge elevationswith existing and proposed grades shown underneath.
D. Elevations of proposed addition.
E. Photos of the exisling structure.
F. Specifications for all materials and color samples onmaterials list (attached).
At the request of the Zoning Administrator you nay also berequired to submit:
G. A statement from each utility verifying location ofsdrvice and availability. See attained utilitylocation verification form.
H. A sit,e i-mprovement survey, stamped by registeredprofessional surveyor.
I. A preliminary title report, to verify ownership ofproperty, which lists all easements.
VII. FTNAL ST?E PLAN
Once a buj-J-ding pernit has been issued, and construction isunderway, and before the Building Department will schedule aframing inspection, two copies of an Improvement LocationCertificate survey (ILC) stamped by a registeredprofessional engineer must be submitted. The followinginformation must be provided on the ILC:
A. Building location (s) with ties to property corners,i.e. distances and angles.
B. Building dimensions to the nearest tenth of a foot.
C. A11 utility service line as-builts, showing type ofmateriaL used, and size and exact location of lines.
D. Drainage as-builts.
E. Basis of bearing to tie to section corner.
F. All property pins are to be either found or set andstated on improvement survey
G. AIl easement.s.
H. Building floor elevations and all roof ridge elevationswith existing and proposed grades shown under t.he ridge
l-ines.
vrrr.coNcEPruA" ota* REVTE*o
Submittal requirements: The owner or authorized agentof any project requiring design approval as prescribed
by this chapter may submiL plans for conceptual review
by the Design Review Board to the Department of
Community Development. The conceptual review is
intended to give the appJ-icant a basic understanding ofthe compatibility of their proposal with the Town's
Design Guidelines. This procedure is recommendedprimarily for applications more complex than single-family and two-family residences. However, developersof single-family and two-family projects shaLl not be
excl-uded from the opportunity to request a conceptualdesign review. Complete applications must be submitted
10 days prior to a scheduled DRB meeting.
The foLlowing information sha1l be submitted for aconceptual review:
1. A conceptual site and landscape plan at a ninimum
sca1e of one inch eguals twenty feet;
2. Conceptual- elevations showing exterj-or materj-a1s
and a description of the character of the proposedstructure or structures;
3. Sufficient information t.o show the proposal
complies with the development st.andards of the
zone district in which the project is to belocated (i.e. GRFA, site coveragle calculations,
. number of parking spaces, etc.);
4. Completed DRB application form.
Prnnerlrrrp . Ilnnn rar.ai nl- nf an enn l i n:f i nn f ^r:-g:-conceptual design review, the Department of Community
Development shafl review the submitted material-s forgeneral compliance with the appropriate reguj-rements ofthe zoning code. If the proposal is in basic
compliance with the zoning code reguirements, theproject sha1l be forwarded to the DRB for conceptualreview. If the application is not generally in
compliance with zoning code requirements, theapplicatlon and submittal mat.erj-aLs shal1 be returnedto the applicant wit.h a written explanation as to why
the Community Developnent DepartrnenL staff has foundthe project not to be in compliance with zoning codereguirements, Once a complete application has beenreceived, the DRB shall review the submitted concepLualreview application and supporting material- in order to
determine whether or not the project generally complieswith the design guidelines. The DRB does not vote on
conceptual reviews. The property owner or his
representative shall be present at the DRB hearing.
B.
:.. . LIST OF MATERIALS
NAI{E OF PRO,IECT: Upper Eagle Valley Consolidated Saniratlon District
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOt_-lr BLOCK SUBDIvISTON 2 vail Village
STREET ADDMSS:
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Additlon to ExisEinR Adninistracive Office ln a
Southerl Direction.
The following information is
Review Board before a final
BUILDING MATERIALS:
Roof
Siding
Other WaIl MateriaLs
Fascia
Soffits
Windows
Window Trirn
Doors
Door ?rim
Hand or Deck Rails
FLues
Flashings
Chimneys
Trash Enclosures
Greenhouses
Other
LANDSCAPING: Name of
reguired for subrnittalapprovaL can be given:
TYPE OF MATERIAL
Buj-ld Up
to the Design
COLOR
Brovrn AggregaEe
Concret.e & Stucco Off White
Existing 0ff l{hite
Exi s t ing
Tinted Bronze Brown
Anodized Aluminun Brown
Anodized Aluminum Brown
Anodized Alunlnum Brown
Anodized Aluminum Brolrx
CaLvanLzed Painced Brown
Cop per Na cur a1
N/A
Existing
N/A
Designer:
Phone:
PLANT MATERIALS: Botanical Name
PROPOSED TREES Arr Fvicrino
Common Name Ouantitv Size*
EXISTING TREES TO
BE REMOVED
Nonc
*Indicat.e caliper for deciduous trees.Minimum caliper forheight for coniferous
N/A - No chanqe to exlstln
trees.fndicate
""*r--"or"*rt,
PROPOSED SHRUBS
Botanieal Name
A11 Are Exis cins
Ouantitv Siz.e't-''
EXISTING SHRUBS
TO BE REMOVED
*Indicate size5 qaIlon.
None
of proposed shrubs.Minimum size of shrubs is
GROUND COVERS
Type Square Footaqe
No change to existing Landseape
('
qon
SEED
TYPE
OF IRRIGATTON
TYPE OR METHOD OF
EROSION CONTROT
LANDSCAPE LIGHTING: If exterior lighting is proposed, please
show the number of fixtures and locations on a separatetighting plan. Identify each fixture from the lighting planon the list bel-ow and piovide the wattage, height'above -
grade and type of light proposed.
No excerlor lighting ocher chan existi.ng plus down lighr aE rear
exiE Eo replace exist.ine lieht.
OTHER LANDSCAPE FEATURES (retainj.ng wal1s, fences, swinmingpoo1s, etc.) Please specify. Indicate heights of retainingwaLls. Maxirnum height of watl_s within the front setback it3 feet. Maximum height of walls el.sewhere on the property
i c 6 f ooJ-
oo
UTILITY LOCATION VERIFICATION
SUBDIVI S ION
U\JD
LOT
NAME Upper Eaqle Vallev Consolldaced SanitaEion District
BLOCK FILING 2 VaiI ViIlaee
Authorized Siqnature Date
ADDRESS 846 FoTest Road- Vail. CO 81657
The ]ocation and avail-ability of utilities, whether they be main
trunk lines or proposed ]ines, mus! be approved and verified by
the folfowing utilities for the accompanying site plan.
U.S. West Communications
L-800-922-1-987
468-5850 or 949-4530
Public Service Company
9 4 9-57 81
Gary HaII
Holy Cross Electric Assoc.
949-5892
Ted Husky,/Michael Laverty
Heritage Cablevision T.v.
94 9-5530
Steve {{;i'a€t .ft6tr k Grctu,ts
Upper Eag]e VaLfey Water
& Sanitation District *
4'7 6-7 480
Fred Hasl-ee
W
bGP',
a. u..7)
2s-72
NOTE:This form is to verify service availability and
location. This should be used in conjunction with
preparing a utility plan and schedulinginstallations.
For any new construction proposal, the applicant
must provide a completed utility verification
form,
If a utility company has concerns with the
proposed construction, the utility representative
should noLe directly on the utility verification
form that there is a problem which needs to be
resolved. If the issue is relat.ively complicated,
lt should be spelled out in detail in an attached
Ietter to the Town of Vaj.L. However, please keep
in mind that it, is the responsibility of the
utility company and owner Lo resolve identified
problems.
If the ut.ility verification form has signatures
from each of the utility companies, and no
comnents are made direcLly on the form, the Town
wiII presume that there are no problems and that
the devel-opment can proceed.
These verifications do not relieve the contractorof his responsj"bilj.ty to obtain a street cutpermit from the Town of Vail, Department of Public
Works and to obtain utilitv focations before
diqqinq in any public right-of-way or easement in
the Town of VaiI. A buildinq permit is not astreet cut permit. A street cut permit nust be
obtained separately
* Pl-ease bring a site plan, floor p1an, and elevations when
obtaining Upper Eag1e Valley Water E Sanitation signatures. Fire
flow needs must be addressed.
a
ZONE CHECK
FOR
SFR, R, R, P/S ZONE DISTRICTS
DATE:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: I,ot 3l Block
-
Filir$ 2 Vai1 Village
ADDRESS: 846 Foresu Road. Vail. CO 81657
OWNER Uooer Eaele Val1ev Consolidaued PHONE (303)476-7480
Sanltatlon Dls Lrict
ARCHITECT Tsom & Associates. Tric.PHONE (?01)32R-?j88
ZONE DISTRICT prrhl i e IIse Di srri cr
PROPOSED USE AdmJnisrrarive offiep Exnansion
**LOT SlZE
All-owed ExisLinq Proposed TotaI
Height
TOtAl GRFA
Primarv GRFA +425=
Secondary GRFA +425=
Setbacks Front
Sides
Rear
water Course Setback
Sj-t.e Covetage
Landscaping
Retaining vla1l tteights 3' /6'
Drrlrinrr
Garage Credit
Drive:
20t
15'
15'
(30) (50)
-Ir/A
P o /'r F.l
(300) (600) (900) (1200) N/A
Pernitted Slope lll ActuaL Slope JJ-
_--
N/A
Date approved by Town Engj-neer:
View Corridor Encroachment: Yes No .),>.)
Environmental/Hazards: 1) Flood PLain
2J Percent Slope
3) Geologic Hazards
a) Snow Avalanche- tiob) Rockfal]c) Debris FIow n.,4) Wetlands None
Previous conditions of approval (check property file):
Does this request invoLve a 250 Addition?
How much of the aflowed 250 Addition is used with this request?
**Note: Under Sections 18.12.090 (B) and 18.13.080 (B) of the Municj-pal
Code, lots zoned Two Family and Primary,/Secondary which are less than
15/000 sq. ft. in area may not construct a sec'ond dwe11in9 unit. The
Communit,y Development Department may grant an exception to thisrestriction provided the applicant meets the criteria set forth under
Sections 18.12.090(B) and 18.13.080(B) of the Municipal Code including
permanently restricting the unit as a long-term rental unit for full-
tirne employees of the Upper Eagle Valley.
10
I
-^A/JfoTOW OF VAIL
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
303-479-2107 / FAX 303-479-2157
Ofice of the Town AttorneY
February 4, 1992
Mr. James P. Collins, Esq.
390 Union Blvd., Suite 400
Denver. Colorado 80228
RE: Expensjsa of Existing Upper Eagle Valley Consolidated Sanitation District OIEce
Dear Jim,
I am writing to comment on your letter of January 28, 1992, dealing with the $an'ifsfi6a
District's expansion of its existing offices within the Town of Vail. I must respectfully differ
r-ith your opinion that a location and extension application under Section 31-23-209 C.R.S.
is the appropriate procedure for compliance with the Town's zoning and subdivision
regulations.
Section 37-23-209 relates to statutory municipalities and tov/ns only. The Colorado Supreme
Court has rules on innumerable occasions that planning and zoning matters are considered
matters of local concerrr. Thus, a home rule municipality is not bound to follow the provisions
of Title 3l Article 23 when the home rule municipality has Charter provisions or ordinances
which set forth a different plannilg and zoning process.
It is my opinion that the Upper Eagle Valley Consolidated Sanitation District must go
through the same process that aly other property owner must go through when it wishes to
pursue a similar expansion. The Town is happy to work w'ith the District in helping it
through the Town's Land Use Regulations, and I will be happy to answer any questions you
might have regarding this matter.
Very truly yours,
,',2': t- i;/ - ../
Lawrence A. Eskwith
Town Attorney
LAEidd
Ron Phillips, Kristan Pritz
FILE COPf
75 soulh lron age toad
vall. colorado 81657
(3{r3) 4792138
(303) 4792139
offce of community development
February 13, 1992
Mr. Jerry Bender
Vail Valley Consolidated Water District
846 Forest Road
Vail, CO 81657
Re: November 11, 1991 Condltlonal Use Permlt
Dear Jerry:
Enclosed is a copy ot the minutes of the November 1 1, 1991 Planning and Environmental
Commission (PEC) meeting at which your conditional use permit request was approved. The
attached copy of the minutes will serve as your record of the conditions of approval.
Please note that the approval of this conditional use permit shall lapse and become void if a
building permit is not obtained and construction not commenced and diligently pursued toward
completion, or if the use lor which the permit is granted has not commenced within one year
from approval (November 11, 1991). lf approval of this conditional use permit lapses, an
application must be resubmitted for reconsideration by the Community Development
Deoartment staff and the PEC.
lf you have any questions or comments regarding this information, please do not hesitate to
contact Mike Mollica at 303/479-2138.
Sincerely,
,,i
,Ll,,vrt*, /\:*
Amber Blecker
Planning Assistant
Enclosure
t
Project Application
Project Name:
Project Description:
Conlact Person and Phone
Owner, Address and Phone:
Architect, Address and Phone:
Legal Description: Lot
Com ments:
Design Review Board
L Date
Motion by:
Seconded by:
6-O
DISAPPROVAL
Town Plan ner E statt Approval
firr
_The deck to be constructed at Russell's Restaurant was discussed. Beth Slifer felt the deck
would further decrease the visibility of Slifer Designs.
Rod Slifer expressed an interest in getting rid of the newspaper racks. Connie Knight
wondered if people getting newspapers lrom the racks would then notice the Slifer Design
store, but was told the racks did not help in this regard. Proposed was a bench incorporated
with the planter.
Rod felt the roof additions would be lower lhan the roof line of Gorsuch, but this would be
checked. Diana pointed out that the covering of Gorsuch windows would have to be worked
out with Dave Gorsuch.
A question concerning the caliper of the exlsting tree followed. lt is approximately 5"-6' in
caliper. Ned felt the tree was in a poor place with relation to the windows. The Slifers
proposed the installation of two aspen of 3'-4" caliper in the planter. Diana wondered why the
maple tree was not just transplanted. Beth Slifer responded this tree was very messy. Bod
felt it was too large for ib location, and shed for several weeks each fall. Diana felt a
substantial tree was needed, and preferred one larger tree to two smaller trees.
Gena liked the architecture. However, with the anticipated construction of Russell's deck, she
was concerned about everyone on Bridge Street moving outward toward the street. Kristan
replied the staff was concerned about being consistent with respect to past decisions made on
site coverage variances. She pointed out the staff had just told Paul Golden he could not
increase his site coverage for two bay windows.
Connie felt the ridge line was also crucial. She asked for dimensions of the increase in
shadow. Ned replied it was 5-1/2' - 6' deep. Connie asked that it be drawn with other
.shadows along Bridge Street. She liked the architecture.
Kathy Langenwalter was concerned about the news dispensers. Kristan mentioned there had
been talk of combining the racks into one wooden dispenser and perhaps moving them to
another place. Kathy also felt a model would be helpful.
Dalton had no problems with the proposal.
Diana again expressed the desire for a 'significant'tree. Kathy wondered if a different type of
tree other than aspen could be used.
Kathy moved and Chuck seconded to recommend to the Town Council lhat the Councll
deslgnate locatlons for newsracks and llmit the newsracks to those locatlons. The vote
on thls motion was 7-0 in favor.
PUBLIC HEARING
1. A request for a conditlonal use permit for a modular office trailer at 846 Forest
Road/Lot 31, Vall Vlllage 2nd Flllng.
Applicant: Upper Eagle Valley Consolldated Sanitation District
Planner: Shelly Mello
o Lrui il
o
.Shelly Mello distributed elevations and plans. She explained that the size of the trailer had
been changed from 12' x 56' to 14' x 50' and was to be in place for one year. In the Public
Use District (PUD), the development standards are set by the PEC. Shelly pointed out the
staff recommended approval ol the requesi with conditions. She then reviewed the
consideration of factors. The factor which concerned the staff was the visibility of the modular
unit from the recreation path. To mitigate this, the stafl recommended the applicant install five
6-8 foot evergreens along the south fence line adjacent to Gore Creek and the modular unit.
They also wished to have the dumpster enclosed, as it was also visible from the recreation
path. In addition, the staff recommended that the unit be a minimum of 5 feet from the south
fence line, reducing the visibility from the Frontage Road.
Fred Haslee, representing the Sanitation District, stated he had no problem with the enclosure
of the dumpster. However, the planting of trees and moving the unit would impact a plan the
District had to use space in the future for environmental recycling and mulching. This new
activity would require a mulcher, and chipper and several bins. Further, the District stores
their snow where the trees were proposed to be planted. Mr. Haslee added the District would
to propose a landscape plan in late summer which would include the whole property. When
asked if he could move the unit 5 feet from the south fence line, he replied that it would
interfere with the use of a door in the existing building;
Diana asked if the project would be completed within one year, and Fred replied that it would.
Kathy wondered if the building could be painted another color which would be more
compatible with the existing building. Fred stated that, since the District did not own the
building, but was leasing it, he was not sure if it could be painted. Kathy asked that the
concern of the color of the building be passed along to the DRB.
Dalton agreed with Fred that it would not make sense to plant the trees only to take them out
at a later date to make room for snow storage. He did feel painting the unit to match the
existing building would help to make it less obtrusive.
Connie felt the requirement of trees would be a hardship. She added when she biked along
the recreation path, she did not look up toward this area.
Chuck Crist liked to see a continuous line of the buildings rather than move the unit back.
Gena had nothing to add. Ludi asked about height, and Haslee replied the height would be
approximately 12'-13.5'. Ludi did not feel the trees were needed.
Fred offered to look into another trailer, and would bring that issue plus color samples to the
Design Review Board.
Kathy Langenwalter moved to approve the condltlonal use permit per the staff memo,
deletlng the request for trees as a requirement, and the requlrement to move the
building to the north 5 teet, but with the addition of the enclosure of the dumpster and
the recommendation to palnt the building a color to blend wlth the existlng buildlng.
Connle Knlght seconded the motlon, and the vote was 7-0 In favor.
lF ffi Lte"1 /isL'C beLo* -^l "#"* Y&r*
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE lS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Gommission of the Town of
Vailwill hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 18.66.060 of the Municipal Code ol
the Town of Vail on January 13, 1991 at 2100 p.m. in the Town of Vail Municipal BuiEing.
Consideration of:
1. A request for a work session for an exterior alteration and a site coverage variance in
Commercial Cc ior the Slifer Building, 230 Bridge StreetrPart of Lots B and C, Lot
5, Vail Village First Filing.
Applicant: Rod Slifer
Planner: Jill Kammerer
2. A request to amend the Town of Vail zoning code regarding minor exterior alteration
procedures in Commercial Core I and Commercial Core ll, Section 18.24.065 Exterior
Alterations or Modifications - Procedure, and Section 18.26.045 Exterior Alterations or
Modifications - Procedure.Planner: Jill Kammerer
3. A request for a variance from the maximum allowable driveway grade at 16 Forest
Boad/Lot 1, Block 7, Vail Village 6th Filing'
Applicant: Ron Byrne/Jay Peterson
Staff: Jill Kammerer/Greg Hall
4. A request for a density variance in order to allow an addition to an exisling non-
conforming struclure at 864 Spruce CourVa part of Lot 12, Yail Village 9th Filing.
Applicant: Dr. and Mrs. Joseph Broughton/Steve ShanleyPlanner: Jill Kammerer
5. A request lor a major amendment to Phase lV-A of Special Development District No. 6,
Vail Village lnn, 100 East Meadow Drive/Lot O, Block 5-D, Vail Village 1st Filing.
Applicant: Jose{ StauferPlanner: Mike Mollica
6. A request for a conditional use permit for a modular office lrailer at 846 Forest
Road/Lot 31, Vail Village 2nd Filing.
Applicant: Upper Eagle Valley Consolidated Sanitation DistrictPlanner: Shelly Mello
7. A request to allow a change to an approved development plan, Tracts A and B, a part
of Parcel A, Lions Ridge Filing No. 2, commonly refened to as The Valley, Phase ll.
Applicant: Crossview at Vail Properties, Inc./Steve Gensler
Planners: AndyKnudtsen/KristanPritz
8. A request for a side setback variance at 254 Beaver Dam Road/Lot 4, Block 1, Vail
Village 6th Filing.
Applicant: William Sheppard
Planner: Andy Knudtsen
9. A request for a setback variance and conditional use permit to allow a tow which will
transport people and supplies from the garage to the house aI2701 Davos Trail/Lot
15, Block B, Vail Ridge.
Applicant: Brian and Sonja CraythornePlanner: Andy Knudtsen
TABLED TO JANUARY 27,1992 MEETING.
Information on the listed items is available at lhe Communily Development otfice in the Vail
Municipal Building during regular office hours.
TOWN OF VAIL
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Published in the Vail Trail on December 27, 1991 .
il UppEn Enelr Val-tEv
WAIE R AND SAN ITATION D IST R ICTS
846 FOR€SI ROAO . v lL. CotORA0O 81657
t303) 476 7480
Adjacent ?:rope:'ty Owners to:
UPPER SAGLE VALLEV CONSOLIDATED SANITATION DISTRICT
6 -.:6 iorest RoadVail, Col.o:'ad.o 8'.657
!!B rl
l!.-l !l
rr?rr
'|F'r
./-usti":1e li, Smith /
528C i.:ch Roaci
)lemphis , TN 38117
3obert D. Working '/
5OS iiount :vans i.oao
Go:.c.e:l , CC 804O1
Ce:1e3a: Comnunicat.:. o::s lrc
LCO Garfi.ei.d Street -/
lenver, CO 50206
,l :tf t::: a v-&Coogoir /?64 Fores t .Road
Vai.L, CO A1657
\7-=i I Ac<6/..i =:-e< ,/, -:!V .,a
?ost Cff:ce 3o:{ 7
Vaii. CO 51656
iown of Va: l-
75 South frontage Road West
Vail. CO 81657
r
{w, ^Xu
^.h.tr? l',4f?" \ ( ' ,-u,
,-lf tr/" W
i,,ur"
1,,tI
MY)
\ ll PaRrrclparrNs orsr'rqrs - ARRowhEAo M€TRo *ATER . AvoN METRo *ATER . BEAvER cFeEK METRo *ATEFT . BERR' GR€EK METRo wArta /tlli\
O\
EAGLE va'L MErRo \'""" '"*"".7i,1"'r:::::::;'r::ffiiff:::x'-:i::1'":T;:,::'""aLLEV coNsoL'|DArED saN'rA'oN
@
*t a DeLo,u -'.1a n€{".+ you-1... J J ?".P*tj
PUBLIC NOTICE
lS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of
-ait witt noE a public hearing in accordance with Section 18.66.060 ol the Municipal Code of
the Town of Vail on January 13, 1991 at 2:00 p.m. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building.
Consideration of:
A request for a work session for an exterior alteration and a site coverage variance in
Commercial Gore I for the Slifer Building, 230 Bridge StreeVPart of Lob B and G, Lot
5, VailVillage First Filing.
Applicant: Rod SlilerPlanner: Jill Kammerer
A request to amend the Town of Vail zoning code regarding minor exterior alteration
procedures in Gommercial Core I and Gommercial Core ll, Section 18.24.065 Exterior
Alterations or Modifications - Procedure, and Section 18.26.045 Exterior Alterations or
Modifications - Procedure.Planner: Jill Kammerer
A request for a variance from the maximum allowable driveway grade at 16 Forest
Road/Lot 1, Block 7, Vail Village 6th Filing.
Applicant: Ron Byrne/Jay PetersonStaff: Jill Kammerer/Greg Hall
A request for a density variance in order to allow an addition to an existing non-
conforming structure at 864 Spruce CourVa part of Lot 12, Vail Village 9th Filing.
Applicant: Dr. and Mrs. Joseph Broughton/Steve Shanley
Planner: Jill Kammerer
A request for a major amendmenl to Phase lV-A of Special Development District No. 6,
Vail Village Inn, 100 East Meadow Drive/Lot O, Block 5-D, Vail Village 1st Filing.
Applicant: Josef StauferPlanner: Mike Mollica
A request for a conditional use permit for a modular oflice trailer at 846 Forest
Road/Lot 31, Vail Village 2nd Filing.
Applicant: Upper Eagle Valley Consolidated Sanitation District
Planner: Shelly Mello
A request to allow a change to an approved development plan, Tracts A and B, a part
of Parcel A, Lions Ridge Filing No.2, commonly referred to as The Valley, Phase ll.
Applicant: Crossview at Vail Properties, Inc.lSteve Gensler
Planners: AndyKnudtsen/KristanPritz
A request lor a side setback variance at 254 Beaver Dam Road/Lot 4, Block I, Vail
Village 6th Filing.
Applicant: William Sheppard
Planner: Andy Knudtsen
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9. A request for a setback variance and conditional use permit to allow a tow which will
transport people and supplies from the garage to the house at2701 Davos Trail/Lot
15, Block B, Vail Bidge.
Applicant: Brian and Sonja CraythomePlanner: Andy Knudtsen
TABLED TO JANUABY 27,1992 MEETING.
Information on the listed items is available at the Community Development office in the Vail
Municipal Building during regular office hours.
TOWN OF VAIL
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Pubfished in the VailTrail on December 27.1991.
a
revised 9/4/91
an^,4 ^-,r.1-y)!..u nrr\a'r {ry I(Iication'
AppLICANT Upper Eagl-e Va11ev Consolidated Sanitation District
846 Forest Road
Vail, Colorado 81657 PHONR 476-7480
APPLICANT' S REPRESENTATIVE Warren M, Garbe - GeneraManager
Date of App
n^f a nf PEf-Meeting
APPLICATION FOR COT{DIIIONAI, I'SE PERMIT
This procedure is required for any project required to obtain a
conditional use permit.
The application wi-.1-1, not be accepted until all information is
submitted.
A. NAME OF
ADDRESS
R
- sane as Applicant -
NAME OF
ADDRESS
a NAME OF OWNER(S) (Print or ype ) u. E.v. c.
a-'
oeNNER (S) STGT.TATURE (S)
ADDRESS - smae as I ic ant
HONE
PHONE
D.
E. FEE $2OO. OO PAID cK#
THE FEE MUSE BE PAID BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT WILL ACCEPT YOUR PROPOSAL.
A list of the names of owners of all property adjacent to
the subject property INCLUDTNG PROPERTY BEHIND AND ACROSS
STREETS, and their mailing addresses. THE APPLICANT WILL BE
RESPONSIBLE FOR CORRECT OWNERS AND CORRECT ADDRESSES.
II. PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE:
A rlre-anol i cation conference with a planning staff member is
sLrongly suggested to determine if any additional information is
needed. No application will be accepted unLess it complete (must
include all items required by the zoning administrator) . It rs
the applicant/ s responsibility to make an appointment with the
staff to find out about additional submittal requirements.
III. PLEASE NOTE THAT A COMPLETE APPLICATION WILL STREAMLINE THE
APPROVAL PROCESS FOR YOUR PROJECT BY DECREASING THE NUMBER OF
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THAT THE PLANNING AND ENVTRONMENTAL
coMMrssroN (pEc) MAy sTrpuLATE. E CONDTTTONS OF APPROVAL MUST
BE COMPLIED WITH BEFORE A BUILDING PERMIT IS ISSUED.
Four (4) copies of the following information must be
submitted:
1. A description of the precise nature of the proposed use
and its operating characteristics and measures proposed
to make the use compatible with other properties in the
vicinity.
The description must aLso address:
a. Relationship and impact of the use on development
obiectives of the Town'
BY
EFfect of the use on light .t urt, distribution'
of population, transportation faci.lities,
utilities, schools, parks and recreation
facilities, and other public facitities and public
f aci-lities needs.
Effect upon traffic, with particular reference to
congestion, automotive and pedestrian safety and
convenience, traffic fLow and control, access,
maneuverability, and removal of snow from the
streets and parking area.
d. Effect upon the character of the area in whj'ch the
proposed use is to be located, including the scale
and bulk of the proposed use in relation to
surrounding uses.
A site plan at a scale of at
proposed development of the
building locations, parking,
least lf : 20' showing
site, including toPograPhY,
traffic circulation,
drainage features.
Preliminary building elevations and floor plans.
A title report to verify ownership and easements.
If the building is condominiumized' a letter from the
condominium association in support of the proposal must
be submitted to staff.
Any additional material necessary for the review of the
application as determined by the zoning administrator.
** For interior modifications, an lmprovement survey
and site plan may be waived by the zoning
administrator.
REQUIREMENTS
The Planning and Environmental Commission meets on the 2nd
and 4th Mondays of each month. A complete application form
and alI accompanying material (as described above) must be
submitted a minimum of four (4) weeks prior to the date of
the PEC public hearing. No incomplete applications (as
determined by the zoning administraLor) wiII be accepted by
the planning staff before or after the designated submittal
daLe.
All PEC approved conditional use permits shall lapse if
construction is not commenced within one year of the date of
approval and diligently pursued to compleLion, or if the use
foi which the approval is granted is not commenced within
one year.
If this application requires a separate review by any Iocalt
State or Federal agency other than the Town of vailr the
application fee shafl be increased by $200.00. Examples of
such review, may include, but are not limited to: Colorado
Department of Highway Access Permits, Army Corps of
Engineers 404, etc.
The applicant shal1 be responsible for payi.ng' aly publishing
fees which are in excess of 50? of the application fee. If,
at the applicant's requestr dnY matter is poslponed for
hearing, causing the matter to be re-published, then, the
entire fee for such re-pubLication shall be paid by the
applicant.
IV. TIME
A.
B.
B.
. r, t c.Applicatit O..*"d by the Community l.r"rop^"nt Department
t-o- have significant d-sign, land use or other issues which
may have a significant impact on the community may require
review by consultants other that town staff. Should a
determinltion be made by the town staff that an ouLside
consultant is needed to review any apptication, Community
Development may hire an outside consultant, it shall
estimale the amount of money necessary to pay him or her and
this amount shalf be forwarded to the Town by the applicant
at the time he files his application with the Community
Development Department. Upon completion of the review of
the application by the consultant, any of the funds
forwarded by the applicant for payment of the consultant
which have not been- paid to the consultant shall be returned
to the applicant. Expenses incurred by Lhe Town in excess
of the amount forwarded by the applicant sha11 be paid to
the Town by the applicant withj-n 30 days of notification by
the Town.
a o
CoilsoL|DAUPPER EAGLE VALLEY TED
WATER AND SANITATION DISTRICTS
a46 FOREST ROAD . VAIL COLORADO 81657
1303) 476-718o
December 12. 1991
The Office of Comrnunitv Development
Town of Vai I
75 South Frontage Road West
VaiL CoLorado 81657
RE: Conditional. Use Permit
To Whom It May Concern:
The Upper Eagle Valley Consolidated Sanitation District would like
to request a "Conditional Use Permit" to ali-ow the District to
locate temporarily, a modu.lar office trailer (MOT) next to the
existing of f ices at the Vail. Waste Water Treatment Pl.ant (V}'IWTP )
846 Forest Road, Vail, Colorado, The Location of the proposed MOT
is on the lower parking area adjacent to the treatrnent plant and
Gore Creek, as shown on the enclosed site pIan.
The District has outgrown itrs current office space. Three
additional employees have been hired and there is no office space
available. We will be constructing additional office area in the
Spring/Summer of 7992, We anticipate the expansion to be complete
by Novenber, L992. The proposed MOT will be used to accommodate
three employees until. the new construction is completed.
The parking spaces temporary displaced by the MOT will be absorbed
by the existing parking lot on the upper level of the VWWTP and the
area immediately west of the existing lower parking area.
The MOT dj.mensions are L2t x 56' including the hitch. Because this
is a tenporary condition, the hitch, wheel.s and axles wil] be left
attached. Skirting will be instafled to enhance the appearance of
the MOT. A description of the MOT is attached for your review.
Please note that faci.lities within the traiLer consist only of
office fixtures. There will be no water or sewer connections to
the MO?. A11 sanitarv facilities are provided within the
v.w.w.T.P..
This site was chosen specificalLy because of its 1ow visual, impact
aspect. The District bel j.eves the impact on the Town will be
nininal . This is simply a temporary condition until the new
construction is comp.leted in 1992.
\\ _-\.
I lt F,aRTrcrpart G DsrRrcr! - aRRowHEAo METRo warER . avoN METRo warER . BEAvER cREEK METRo warER . BERRy cREEK ,eteo / CLEAN \
a\ warER ' EAGLEVA'|LMErRowarERv'i'J::iliJ::;#::Ti:,lrH';:a:,'J,ff*"LEvaLLEysaN'|ra'o. ' va'|L @
Thank you for your time and effort in this matter. If you have any
guestions please contact me.
Sincerely,
{-aA \. Ho.sJ2!{
Fred S. Haslee
Regulations Administrator
cc: hlarren M. Garbe
Terry Nolan
Leslie Allen
tlBrt
l|cr!
-Uppen Elelr VnllEv
WATER AND SANITATION DISTRICTS
846 FOREST ROA0 . vAlL. COLORAoO 81657
GO3) 475 7480
Adjacent ?roperty owners to:
UPPER EAGLE VALLEY CONSOLIDATED SANITATION DISTRICT
446 Forest Roaci
Vai-1 , Coi.orado 8i657
;us t ine ii, Sm.ith
5ZUU J{]cn i{Oacl
Yenphis, TN 36ii?
tsobert D. Working
5O3 Mount avans Road
Go]den, CO 804O1
Generai. Communications inc.
LCO Garfieid Street
]enver, CO 80206
Cvnthia ;-acobson
?64 Forest Road
Vail, CC 81657
!t^.:: n^-^^.i-!^^vcrr J A5>(r\/l4 !E> | L-lW .?ost cf f :ce 3ox 7
Vai.L, CC 8i658
lown of Va: L
75 South Frontagie Road West
Vai1, CO 81657
||Ert
l|Frl
tl
It\ paRtrcrparr*G orslRrcrg - aRRowHEAD METR. *ATER . avoN METR. *ATER . BEAVER cREEr< METR. WATER . BERR' .REEK METR. wat.* Zfii\
O\
sa6LE va'LMErRow"""""*""::,1"':::::;::fff,'J;';ff:?:l'#::l''":Tff,?t'.."""'vcoNso'oarEo sAN'rA.oN
@
c)
Cz-t
fv
(ro
-tt\) -'
-J io
FI
rft
-F
O\Ozt4 <n
FJ-OH
fiF FI
0)
P.z
F]
FJF
z
H
oH
I
i
f'l"r
r )'
\\
o
=
!o
(tl
(rl
rill9
o
a
3-: \fr:ei
t, o lX/
\J. . \-,/
a t.t.
3o
m
\o/
l6t
;o9
r1\t -81
: t9l: v'tD :
at,.at
=l @
aJ, -'--l -o - 9\*;
o\, ;7'\ 9
Iclv
l'.ll
tIet
a- aoa a2'
i- 6\ ,-r; 'vt/
(ft -,
-'r' 9i t6\ 6 -'.8@ai a) iA\-
o"t€l :
,:\i
.ra2- ' n--' t8t\o/ 6
/o\{ to lN/
Q3B /qN0\1
'r'1'---7ii
./;\
;i -
" " iot ,;o tntq v .l
(t "g .]'
io't""?
0)
o
ft
6
onft
€
ono
-l
Eidor i,quiprnenr Lqia$ing, inc.
illl*ilti",:'.k21601ss
(303) 292.4800
(800) 362-s5?1
Decenber 4, I99l
tzpe*
HOLA.!t
CITY ..-.-. V}.IL.___.__.--__ srArE
PI{ONE NU!{BER it7-6-7480--.. _-- FAX
QUOTATION
rag!*E__V-4IIigY
cq._ 3LP____-_....
_._4_2_€-108e
TERI{ t0-I2 XOTTHS
APFROXIUATE DELIVERY DITE ASAP
I'
s
rF
u
K
NAHE .
CONTACT
STREEI
I'PPER
TEF.RY
** f{e bill on a rnonthly basis, flOT a ?g day cycle.
SECURITY DEPOSIT I . :' i;-,
SET-UP CI{ARGES AND TEAR DOI.IN CHBRGES
. RETURN CHARGE S .'
BLOCK tEVEt TIE DOI^]N CTIARGES S ' , - .1tirn"r. a-H""j-ei";i; i"t'-i"irl in Anchors)
MONTHLY LEASE RATE **
TEAR DOHN CHAXGES S ,
CO},IME}IfS; PTEASE REVIE Ir (800) 362-3621 rF You
BEST REGARDS,
ETDER EQUtPt{ENT
I}TFORI'{ATION AXD
ANY QUESTIONS.
Tgrc
HitrF
ANCIE COStsITT
Oenver . Sesx.e
e00'35,Ud
LEASINC, INC.
. Pcrlian,J . Aiir-q,Jefgue Caspe:Grano J;nctron
:0:il 16, ?f,tlI dlnfl dl,l-.lj I'IQU J 1:rt
a't
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
MEMORANDIJM
Planning and Environmental Commission
Community Development Department
January 13, L992
A request for a conditional use permit for a modular office trailer at 846 Forest
Road,/I-ot 31, Vail Village 2nd Filing.
Applicanc Upper Eagle Valley Consolidated Sanitation District (IJEVCSD)
Planner: Shelly Mello
I.DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED USE
tQ '/- f,1)
The applicant is requesting to place a t21+t*-5f-ft modular unit on the above site to
accommodate an increased demand for office space. The proposed location of the unit
is on the southwest side of the property behind the parking structurc. The unit is
proposed to be located for a period of one year during which a pennanent ofFrce space
can be built. The proposed modular unit would be wood-sided with a pitched, shake
roof.
The proposal is located in the Public IJse zone disnict (PUD). In this zone district,
the development standards are established by the PEC in order to allow for the
flexibility necessary to accommodate public and quasi-public facilities.
CRITERIA AN'D FINDINGS
Upon review of Section 18.60, the Community Development Department recommends
approval of the conditional use permit based upon the following factors:
A. Consideration of Factors:
l. Relationship and impact of the use on development objective of the
Town.
The purpose section of the Public Use District (PUD) states, "The
Public Use District is intended to provide sites for public and quasi-
public uses which, because of their special characteristics, cannot
appropriately be regulated by the development standards prescribed for
II.
b
I
)
other zoning districts, and for which development standards especially
for each particular development proposal or project are necessary to
achieve the purposes prescribed in Section 18.02.020 and to provide for
the public welfare."
UEVCSD has requested this temporary facility in order to accommodate
an unexpected increase in staff. A remodel to the existing facilities is
proposed for the summer of 1992, with completion by January 1, 1993.
Because a permanent solution is being proposed, the staff finds that it is
rcasonable to allow the modular unit on a temporary basis. In general,
this request meets the purpose section of the PIID zone district and is in
compliance with the development objectives of the Town for this zone
district.
The effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population,
transportation facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation
facilities, and other public facilities needs.
The proposed modular unit will be visible from the Town's recreation
path located along Gore Creek. In an effort to mitigate this, the staff
would recommend that the applicant install five, 6 - 8 foot evergrcens
along the south fence line adjacent to Gore Creek. We also would like
to see the dumpster enclosed as it is also visible from the recreation
path. In addition, the staff would also recommend that the unit be a
minimum of five feet from the south fence line. This will decrease thc
visibility of the unit from the recreation path and will not increase the
visibility of the unit from the frontage road. There will be no impacts
on any of the remaining criteria-
Effect upon traffic with particular reference to congestion,
automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and
control, access, maneuverability, and removal of snow from the
street and parking areas.
The following details the existing on-site parking:
33 paved spaces
4 unpaved spaces
7 paved customer parking spaces
44 available spaces on-site
3.
,
t With this proposal, 6 spaces would be removed. There is 3,320 square
feet of existing office space in the UEVCSD facility which requires 14
parking spaces, based on one space per 250 square feet of office space.
The temporary unit will have 672 square feet of office space and will
require 3 parking spaces. The total parking requirement including
existing offices and the temporary modular offrce will be 17 spaces.
Office space does not include areas such as bathrooms, oommon
hallways, mechanical arcas or storage space. In this case, thc square
footage does include offices, reception areas, conference space and
laboratories. Since the parking requirement will still be met, we find
that the loss of 6 spaces will not be a problcm.
4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is
to be located, including the scale and bulk ofthe proposed use in
relation to surrounding uses.
The proposed unit will not incrcas€ the'mass and bulk of the existing
building.
B. Findines
The Plannins and Environmental Commission shall make the followins findinss beforc
granting a conditional use permit:
l. That the proposed location of the use in accord with the purposes of the
conditional use permit section of the zoning code and the purposes of
the district in which the site is located.
That the proposed location of the use and the conditions under which it
would be operated or maintained would not be denimental to the public
health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
That the proposed use would comply with each of the applicable
provisions of the conditional use permit section of the zoning code.
STAIT RECOMMENDATIONS
The staff recommends approval of the request for a period of one year from the date
of approval with the following conditions:
1. Five 6-8 foot evergrcen treps be installed by June l, 1992 along the south
property line in order to mitigate the appearance of the modular unit; and
3.
m.
2. The existing trash dumpster be enclosed in order to further improve the
appearance of this area from the recreation path.
The staff finds that since this is a temporary structurc to be located for a period of no
more than one year, the use of a modular unit is appropriate. In addition, since the
project will stili meet its pa*ing requirement, we find that the temporary loss of
parking spaces will not be detrimental.
Please note that, under Section 18.60.080 of the Town of Vail Zaning C-ode, the
approval shall lapse if construction is not commenced withih one year of the datc of
iszuance and diligently pursued to completion, or if the use for which the permit is
granted is not commenced within one year.
t
I
74.et, l)'t+Lu - oV. fo
(*"*^t 7
?*n
UwcruaV t
!,v4Jn'v
WaNJ( .y0
*vr^+t", Ctt*-nrrySfar-
\,pcrJt \'Yee-s
t^0\AJJ ladno'l
{" n"--.'-6
lrorv,'Y nnc\'(
YVcD\(w\('
,\IIII\ra,twr wfJev,
NJD Qt,tzg
I\40'hp4 VtW L
Yra+A
:'/ \n D
\yt 0
Ve<s
rl.vn ?4r(
tD DKT,
\ntctt<,
[pl tr
<h
n .r,d 4
[JDrvf-,r t L -
vl D{l(a
\
e
I
li
;
ll,
9iti
"l3l
.1
I
tg
\lt
r$
t )'-
\o
z;t
o
o
z k tr.E$q i"
5$N ti\,
-\ 9i' i3
i!<4
=BteI$
E[$
*-t
" :<
'a S.' -5
J
I
JHll 10 '33 rl:45 ,rof,-r,r* Eourp rr,rc pne E,'OOe
urt
Flf'
w
FT
o\
a
I
firffi
l
[ ilum
ifiE
o g
H
laD.
t5ta
d.ro
H$
zin!c !tF
E' ,'J
F. v)N' r.ctt\) (f
u)3o'r >c)xoin
'€d
FFiGE. E6E .JFfl lO'54 S:-+5 tt,,faoaR Errrurp Ir.rc
tr
Frh
EDlr
lrl
l1
E
{-
(/{
o
a4
tg{,
F-
,l
4y
p
n
,.,.-\
)
l'/'/
. r t:!
v
,n
L -;-
s-a-i
(,t) <z rrl+>7
ouF' \Of\) (o
]\JO
6=sJ :rcr 2Sa)mo
!w
It1-
/7 / 7i 4/.
(D --; -t//. a. - -
Lt((.'i" b
Connie felt the deck would add liveliness to the core, but that maybe liveliness could be
obtained with a smaller deck. She wondered if the location of the interior bar could be
changed. Connie felt public land was sacred, and could not support the proposal.
Diana wanted to convey to the Town Council the feeling that only the winter deck size should
be considered (per the staff recommendation), because the summer deck would not be
successful. Chuck stated that if the restaurant did obtain approval for only the winter deck,
the applicant could instead just build Rekord door.
Kathy wanted the Town Council to be aware of the concem of the loss of Town of Vail
landscaping. Connie added that her vote against the deck would also be based on
congestion in the area.
Kathy moved that the request be denied because it did not meet the necessary criteria.
Connie followed with a second. The vote was 3 in favor of denial, and 1 (Chuck) against.
Kristan reminded the applicants that they had 10 days in which to appealthe decision to the
Town Council.
Item #2 was taken oul of order.
.\
3. A rcquest by Upper Eagle Valley Water and Sanltatlon Dlstrlct to dlscu&s the
deflnitlon of temporary structures.'.=-..----
Fred Haslee and Terry Nowlan trom the Upper Eagle Valley Water and Sanitation District
explained that more room was needed lor employees and the District proposed using a
lemporary building for 11 months until permanent ofiices could be consfucted in lhe spring
and summer. They showed photos and site plans. Kristan said the question was, was this a
temporary building, and if not, would a variance to the DRB development standards which
disallow aluminum, steel or plywood siding be necessary.
Terry Nowlan pointed out that the building had been changed since they had last talked with
Kristan, and the siding would be wood with asphalt shingles and would also be skirted. In
light of this new information, Kristan felt a variance was not necessary. Fred Haslee reminded
the board and staff of the wooden temporary buildings which the Town had allowed Vail
Associates to use at Golden Peak.
Fred added that since the UEVW&S was a district, perhaps the Town could waive the
process. lt was suggested that the attorneys for the Town and for the UEVW&S get together
to decide this.
5.
?ntto't"
Art Abplanalp stated that with regard to the list of conditional uses, it did not sound like
there were issues concerning ltem F (ski lifts, tows and runs) and G (cemeteries)' He
said that he did not want to see the logical conditional uses for the Recreation and Open
Space Zone District removed.
Kathy stated that it sounded like the three categories needed to address 1) preservation,
2) passive recreation and 3) active recreation.
Kristan Pritz inquired whether the PEC wanted the Recreation and Open Space zone
district to be mainly oriented toward passive recreational activities.
Kathy stated that this was correct.
Russ Forrest suggested that staff would focus on moving active recreational uses to the
Public Use District. Further discussions were necessary with stalf and Tom Moorhead to
investigate this alternative.
An update on a previously approved conditional use permit for a well water treatment
facility, generally located south ol the Vail Golf Course bridge on Vail Valley Drive, (Well
R-4).
6.
Planner:Mike Mollica
The PEC commenled that the gravel needed to be cutback in the area of the pulloff, that
the willows needed to be planted and that the rock drop slructure be placed where the
Division of Wildlife wants it. lf DOW did not want the drop structure at all, then the
condition could be removed.
A request for a minor subdivision, a request for a variance from Section 18.13.050
buildable area, and a request for a rezoning from the High Density Multi-Family to the
PrimaryiSecondary Residential zone district for a property located at Lot 4, Block 3,
Bighorn Subdivision Filing No. 314333 Bighorn Road.
7.
Applicant:
Planner:
Applicant:
Planner:
Diana Donovan made a motion to table this request indefinitely with Bill Anderson
seconding this motion. A 4-0 vote tabled this item indefinitely.
A request lor setback and site coverage variances to allow for a new residence on Lot 18,
Block 7, Vail Village 1st Filing/325 Forest Road.
BAB Partnership
Andy Knudtsen TABLED INDEFINITELY
Timothy Drisko
Andy Knudtsen TABLED TO SEPTEMBER 13,1993
Diana Donovan made a motion to table this request until September 13, 1993 with Bill
Anderson seconding this motion. A4-0votetabled this item untilSeptember 13, 1993.
Plannlng and Envlronmental Commlssion
August 23, 1993 12
.\
=l=D,,.."
Engine€ring Consultants
953 S. Frontaoe Rd. West. Suite 201
Vail, Colorado-81657
303/476-6340
January 6, 1993
Ms. Gayle Grider
Project Manager
uEvcwesD
845 Forest Road
Vai1, CO 81557
RE: WCWD WELL R-4
NPI CHANGE ORDER REQUEST NO
Dear cayle:
Enclosed is the above -re ferenced
add i ti ona I compensat i on for ecompensation fox three items,increase of $79 36 .72 .
Change Orderight items andresulting in
Request asking fora reduction ina net contract
I have reviewed the request item byoffer the following:
INCREASES:
item with Ron Hauqlund and
Requested by Owner Representative, cost is appropriate.
Additional pipe was required due to Owner/EngineerRepresentatives field-locating the building at a sitethat varied somewhat form what was sho$n on the plan tominimi.ze disturbance of wi1l"ows. The cost appears highon a cost-per-foot basis for ductile iron pipe butthere ar:e no unit prices in this contract on which torely and the Lime to construct was longer than normaldue to the amount of ground water encountered.
Approved by Owner Representative, cost is appropriate.
Necessary addition initiated by Contractor, cost isappropriate.
Extra time and care was exercised around theseutilities that were not shown on the p1ans. part 19 ofthe General Conditions (GC-54) is, however, veryexplicit about the fact that utilities which are notshown are the responsibility of the Contractor and donot constitute a claim for additional comDensation.
I tem
I tem
I tem
I tem
Item 5
Olher Offices: Denver 303/458-5526 . Fort Collins 3031482-5922
I tem 5:
Item 7:
A new requirement of the Colorado Department ofTransportation of which no one was aware, cost isappr opr iate .
Spools r^re r e not shown on thepatterns were not compatible asspools, cost is appropr iate.
drawings. Flange bolt
suppl ied without these
I tem 8:
DECREASES:
Item l-:
Item 2:
I tem 3:
P Iease contact me i fadditional information.
Very truly yours,
RBD. INC
J<'/,fK|,,^-
Kent R. Rose, p.E.
Project Hanager
enc:
copy: Hauglund
Bender
034081.2L5
you have any questions or need anv
A required correction to an omission in the electricaldrawings, cost is appr opr iate .
Pump and motor hrere downsized from the originalspec i f icat ion in ans\i/er to the pro jected wellproduction being less that what was anticipated (800gpm vs 2000 gpm) . Cost is appropriate.
In response to the pump/motor downsizing, cost isappropr iate ' o--r/ Ja-^ ,.r,'.,-l..on
--' ,1o"K "lot1 s(rvcd'ztt
The fish habitat was a suggestion of the Design ReviewBoard of the Tovn of Vail and vas, therefor, shown onthe drawings. It later came to our attention that aspecial permit would have to be applied for for itsconstruction and the value of such a structure at thatlocation- was Sugs!ioned by Ur. AIan Czenkusch, anaquatic habitat biologist, for the Colorado Division ofI{i1dlife. Mr. czenkusch also noted that there have beensome problems with erosion of the golf course at asimilar instaLlation. The decision was made by Engineerto delete the item. Cost is appropriate.
I recommend an adjustment to the contract price of $6715.I2,accepting all items as proposed with the eiception of rtem 5under f ncreases .
Uppen Encle Vnllev
WATER AND SANITATION DISTRICTS
846 FOR€Sr FOAD . VA L COIOFAOO 8163/
ij03) 476 7480
December 11, 1991
Mike Mollica
TOWN OF VAIL
Community Development
75 South Frontage Road WestVail, Colorado at657
RE: VAIL VALLEY CONSOLIDATED WATER DISTRICT
PROPOSED WELL R-4 CONSTRUCTION
Dear Mr. Mollica:
Enclosed is a copy of the letter I received from the Corpsof Engineers regarding the construction of the proposed well R-4.
The design of the proposed construction has addressed the
concerns stated by the Corps of Engineers, including golf cartpaths which are no longer being considered as a part of this
proj ect.
If you have any further questions regarding this matter,please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
UPPER EAGLE VALLEY
CONSOLIDATED SANITATTON DISTRICT
klrz2^J<-
Jerry Bender
Water Operations llanager
Enclosure
Copies (with enclosure) to:Kent Rose/RBD
Warren Garbe/UEVCSD
Gayle Grider,/UEVCSD
JB: das
Jz
AII PARTICIPATING DISTRICIS - ARROWHEAD METRO WATER ' AVON ME IRO WATER ' BEAVER CREEK METRO WATER
' BERRY CFEEK METRO WATER / CLEA}I \
a\
EAGLE va'|L MErRo w""" ' '"*"^l;Ii;:::::'.::,[I-..'fiTsl?""n:i::1'^,:Ttr,.;":: vaLLLY coNsoL'DArEo saN'rA'oN
@
NSPLY
'OAlrE}{tlotl oF
RegulatorY Section
SACRAT'EIITO OISTR]CT CORPS OF ET{GINE
DEPARTMENT OF THE AFMY o
ERS
650 CAPITOL ilALL
sAcRAriENTO, CALIFORI{IA 95814'4794
Decenber 5, 1991
( 19S10119? I
!1r. JerrY Bender
ij;;";-;;;te-varrev water and sanitation District
846 Forest Road
Vail, Colorado 8165?
Dear Mr. Bender:
I am responding to your letter dated october 10' 1991 and
attached plans' 'Y;;"-"o"""tpo"a"""" concerns installation of a
domestic water *"i1, construtti'ot--oi a treatment-facility' and a
water Iine crossi;;'";-;;;e creek "i ln"-Vail Golf course in the
Town of Vailr Colorado'
On October ?r 1991t Gary-Davis of this office conducted an
inspection of the'p;;;;;"-; "i:]1.""d tt"ttnent facilitv site'
During this inspttlio", ff"' na"is--iaentified jurisdictional
wetland boundaril; ;;t'offered """"tt""aations to avoid and
ninirni ze wetland imPacts '
To avoid wetland impacts ' Mr' Davis recommended that
installation of if't t"ff'and construction of the treatment
facility not u^""ot"i' upon the ";;; dominated by-sedges and
willows. You t";l;;J'i" titt u"iit tn" well and the treatment
facility outsid""'"i"""ir"r,a" "itii;--"; area which historicallv
had received fill maleriaf' Mr"';;"f; ad"l"ea you that pruninC
HiIlows was acceptable where .orrril"l" exigt with the treatment
facilitY overhang'
we expresserl concern regardinE bhe construction of golf cart
paths within th;-";;i;llv of tt't'ii""[tent facilitv' The elolf
cartpathgwilr-";;-;;;;;r'eauthoii;;ti;"undersection404provided "I1 ditlitu"""-t-i-,"""ri"tJ to the previouslv fiIIed
site refe"",'""4'Jtot"' Golf cari"plti= n1"o!'t"9'outside of this
area in wetlands *lfi require Federal authorization'
Mr. Davrs also briefly discussed the limitations of the
nationwid. g""tlii'pu"'nlt ior utilitv line crossings' To
reiterate, bhe corpl. of -EnEine""t-f'"* issued a nationwide generar
pernit authoriziis"tt't discharge"";";";;;"d o"' firl material into
i,wabers of rhe u^it"l-slares,' i" i".o"i"Iion with utiritv line
crossingls p"otii"i-Il"t"t uta.a"aTor wetland substrate contours
are restored to pre-cons t "'o t i ot*li"tt"r " and further provided
that materials used for trench de-watering are obtained
ffi
exclusively from trench excavation. Based upon your commitments
and our review of the information submitted, we have determined
that the proposed crossing can proceed subject to the terms and
conditions of the netionwide general permit. Please insure that
your contractor(sl complies with the ter:ms and conditions of the
enclosed nationwide general permit information paper.
We have assigned Number 19910119? to this proiect. Pleage
reference this nurnber in any correspondence submitted to the
Corps of Engineers concerning this project '
This verification wiLl' be valid until the nationwide Eeneral
pernit is modified, reissued, or revoked. AII of the nationwide
Eieneral permits are scheduled to be raodif ied' reiesuedr or
revoked prior to January 13, 1992, It is incumbent upon you to
remain informed of changes to the nationwide general permits. We
issued a public notice on April 10, 1991 announcing the proposed
chanEies. F'urthermore, if you commenoe, Or are under contraot to
commence, Lhis activity before the dete this nationwide gieneral
pernit is rnodified or revoked, you wil.l have twel-ve nonthe fron
lh" date of the modification or revocation to complete the
acti.vity under the present terms and conditions of this
nationwide general pernit.
t/e appreciate the opportunity to meet with you in the field
to discuss your proposal . Should you have guestions, please
Office i
402 Rdod/Avenue' Room 142
Grand Junction, Colorado 81501-2563
Enclosure
Copy Furnished:
ttr. Dan L. Collins, Subdistriet Chief, U.S. Geological Surveyt
Post Office Box 202'1 , Grand Junction, Colorado 81501
contact Flr. Davis at 243-1199 .
ft$i2cerelY, {/
tt l) J ,.,.Kru^ \i/V\>
{ /crYitv L, $cNure \
t "
"n1:{ 'r/weptern colorado Reguratorv
z.
a
Project Application
//, 2o ,7 /
Projecl Name:
Project Description:
Contact Person and Phone
Owner. Address and Phone:
l/nil ( /) sztr^.- ")
Architect Address and Phone:
Legal Descriplion: Lot
Comments:
B lock Filing Zone
-
Design Review Board
Dale //'20,7t
Motion by:
Seconded by:
D ISAPPROVAL
Su m mary:
/Uh hrH^_
Oate:
Town Plan ner E Statt Approval
reviaed 6/le/91
DRB APPLICATION - TOWN OF VAIL' COLORAqO I
DArE APPLrcArroN RE.ET'ED : 1, [;ulal
DATE OF DRB MEETING: I
******t***
THIS APPLICATION TIILL NOT BE ACCEPTED
I'NTII., ALI, REQUIRED INFORMATION IS SUBMITTED
*****i****
PROJECT INFORMATION:
A.
B. TYPE OF REVIEW:
y' We" Construction ($200.00)
Addition ($50.00)
n LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Subdivi s ion
Minor Alteration (920.00)
Conceptual Review ($0)
Block
ADDRESS:
Lot
If property is described by
description, please provide
attach to this application.
ZONING:
a meets and bounds legal
on a separate sheet and
LOT AREA: If required,
stamped survey showing
NAME OF APPLICANT:Mailinq Address:
applicant must
lot area.
provide a current
NAME OF
Mailing
APPLICANT' S REPRESENTATIVE :
Address:
Phone
FEE * PLANS BY.
R6P tsc'
J.
K
NAME OF OWNERS:
'iSIGNATURE (S) :Mailinq Address i
Vzr. I- CO 8l(o54
Condominium Approval if applicable.
DRB FEE: DRB fees, as shown above, are to be paid at
the time of submittal of DRB application. Later, when
applying for a building permit, please identify the
accurate val-uation of the proposal. The Town of VaiI
will adjust the fee according to the table below' t-o
Iensure the correct fee is paid. 4r-.c..0t V
FEE PAID: S Ol-l-I) r
FEE SCHEDULE:
VALUATION
$ 0 - $ 1o,ooo
$ 10,001 - $ 50,000
s50,001 -s 150,000
$150,001 - $ 500,000
$500,001 - s1,000,000$ Over $1,000' 000
NGtcT
vlr'$ctt
$ 2o.oo 753 S FR0NTA6E R9.W.
i. :9'91 vAtL co I tb s7
Ii33:33 176- cst{o-ffii.it- co\srAc r; K e Nr Ko s e
s500.00
*NO APPLICAIION I{ILL, BE PROCESSED 9IITHOUT OIiINER'S SIGNATURE
tF)k'NO AODR€,oS Aeis16tlso - LocArEO A?PKoX ' 4oa-rt 'au\-rH
oF
\* QOLF COLIKC g b?ipae 't oN vA(tr vAuuEY DRTVE ' I+l€ D€'V€LoPED
p(opiqf/ w\LL EYLNTu(auLj/ OE or5icK\sED A-5 A L'tTlL\fY
E ,A5 €M E,NT F KOT.N TOLTJN OF VAI(_ TO V V C (' D .
Phone
ba;(
o
Prssent
Chuck Crist
Diana Donovan
Ludwlg Kuz
Kathy Langenwalter
Jim Shearer
Gena Whitten
Absent
Connie Knight
PI.ANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
November 11,1991
Staff
Kdstan Pdtz
Mike Mollica
JillKammerer
Andy Knudtsen
Shelly Mello
Betsy Bosolack
Larry Eskwift
The worksession was called to order by Chairperson Diana Donovan at 1:35PM.
1. A requdst for a worksession to discuss a condilion{usg permit to allow a seasonal
olant oroducts business in the HeavLService Zone Dislrict,
Applicant: BichardDillino/RichardMattheuis
Planner: Jill Kammerer
Jill Kammerer explained the request, and asked applicant Richard Matthews io respond to the
"items for discussion" from the.statf's memo. Mr. Matthews distributed a portion of the survey
tor the area, and indicated the trailer would be a regular 8' x 20' sales trailer which he
currently owned, with the purpose being to keep the sales attendant warm. The sales area
will be secured by a 4' high snow fence. The lighting for the area would be 100' long strings
ot white 'Christmas lights" with light bulbs every 10 feet and larger light bulbs at each tree.
Mr. Matthews explained these lights are sold by Christmas tree business wholesalers. No
more than 40 trees would be on the lot at any one time. The business would be open from
November 25 to December 24, and the hours of operation would be 10:30AM-7:30PM.
Kathy Langenwalter asked if the lights would be tumed off when the business was closed.
Mr. Mailhews said they might possibly leave on one string ot lights for security reasons.
Regarding signing lor the business, the applicant proposed using a banner, which he
illustrated by showing pictures to the Commissioners. Mr. Matthews estimated the size of the
banner/sign was approximately 2 feet by '12leet or 24 square feet. The wording for the
banner was 'Christmas Trees". Statt informed the applicant that the ma,rimum size the sign
could be in this zone district was 20 sq. ft. and hat allovvable sign size was based upon he
lineal frontage of the business.
Chuck Crist asked if music would be played during the hours of operation. Mr. Matthews was
not sure.
Jim Shearer asked when the trailer would be removed from the site. Mr. Matlhews replied it
would be taken out the day after Christmas. Jim was concerned about storing 'junk,'(like
saw-horses or trees, which did not get sold). On site, particularly in the area behind the
trailer, Mr. Matthews repeated he would only have 40 trees on the lot.
Richard indicated the trees to be sold would be attached to rebars which had been pounded
into the ground. In response to a question from Ghuck Crist, Richard indicated the banner
would be attached to the trailer.
The state requires the trailer be set back 50 feet from the North Frontage Road right of way.
Based on the site plan, it appeared the sales trailer would be approximately 50 feet from the
road. Gena Whitten believed it looked a little "tight." She requested the rest of the survey be
presented. Kathy was concerned about knowing where the property line was, so that the
Commission would know where the trailer was actually proposed to be located and to insure
the business was located entirely on West Vail Texaco properly and not in the state nght of
way or on adjacent property. Kathy also asked how the fence would be stabilized. Mr.
Matthews said it would be attached to T-posts by black ties.
Diana Donovan believed it was important that everything be located on Mr. Matthew's
property, and that the trailer be removed as soon after Christmas as possible. Diana
suggested all material be removed from the site by Oecember 26th. Mr. Matthews stated he
had no intention of leaving anything up after Chrislmas but he was reluctant to committing to
removing everything from the site by December 26th as inclement weather could make it
impossible for him to comply with this deadline.
Jill reminded the PEC that based on Ordinance 43, Series of 1991 which will allow plant
product businesses in the Heavy Service Zone District, the site must be cleaned with 72 hours
of the date the conditional use permit expires.
Kathy asked that the fence be kept in a straight, vertical position. She thought it would be
nice if the trailer had a red door.
2. A reouest for a worksession tor a conditional use oermit for an outdoor dinino patio for
the Gallerv Buildino {Russell's Reslautant), located in the Commercial Core lzone
district. 228 Bridqe Street/a part ot Lot A. Block 5. Vail Villaqe First Filino.
Applicant: Ron Rilev/D.R.R.. Inc.Planner: Mike Mollica
Mike Mollica presented the request. As this was a worksession, no staff recommendation was
given, but staff raised several issues for discussion. Applicants Ron Riley and Mike
Staughton were present for the discussion.
Ron Fliley pointed out that the deck would only be used for 90 days in the summer, and did
not believe it would obstruct views on Bridge Street. He believed a summertime
encroachment ot 2'-11/2" was minor, stressing the fact that lower Bridge Street was 'sterile,'
and that the dining deck would add interest to the area. He believed that, due to the
popularity of outdoor dining, a restaurant was almost required to have a dining area outdoors.
Mr. Riley advocated the deck since otheruise there was no visual penetration into the Gallery
Building, and because of that, people could not tell there was a restiaurant contained therein.
Ludwig Kurz was concerned about nanowing Bridge Street, stating it was easily one of the
mosl congested areas a great deal of the time. He was not convinced this was the best use
of public land. Mr. Riley reminded the Commission that this request was only for a 90day
period each summer. He explained that, in the summer, people walk more slowly than in the
winter.
Jim Shearer was concemed with the use ol public land. He wanted lo get Pete Bumett's
opinion on cleaning the streets. Mike said he had spoken wih Pete, and Pele indicated that,
if the deck was in place, the south end of Bridge Street would require hand sweeping. Ron
Riley said the distance across Bridge Street would be 13 feet. Mike Staughton said the Town
did not clean the streets every week, but only 2-3 times per summer. Mr. Riley said he could
build the deck so it could be removed lor street sweeping.
Jim discussed the sterility of that end of Bridge Street. He asked what the Town of Vail would
gain from the proposal, and suggested Mr. Riley could do something to make the area more
inviting.
Chuck Crist agreed with Ron Riley regarding the sterile look, and liked the concept of a
removable deck. He was concerned with the loss ol two Town of Vail planters, as well as the
bench between the planters. He indicated the bench had frequent use. Chuck also was in
favor of narrowejr streets and the proposed rekord doors.
Ron Riley was frustrated because no service trucks were allowed on this end of Bridge Street,
and indicated the upper end of Bridge Street became much more restricied when service
trucks were making deliveries than his proposal would make the area.
Gena Whitten believed that this was an important entrance to he town, and Mr. Riley could
achieve the transparency with a 3-foot wide deck and rekord doors, which would have the
feeling ot an outdoor deck without going onto public land. She felt this was very valuable
space.
Kathy agreed with Ludwig and Gena, stating that rekord doors would give better exposure to
the outside and better planters could be designed. Kathy could not support the construction
of a deck on public land, not wanting to further constrict the area. Ron Riley indicated the
location of the restaurant's restrooms created an interior constriction, and rekord doors alone
would not achieve his objectives.
Diana could not support a deck on public property, but suggested pulling back the deck. Jim
could also support such a revised proposal. Jim reminded the Commission that the Town was
running out of Village restaurants, and believed undulation on that side of the street was
important. He strongly supported retaining restaurants in the Village core areas, especially
restaurants at street level. However, in this particular situation, he was concerned about
potential botllenecking.
Ron Riley indicated he would investigate other possibilities to ensure he did not restrict the
area and would look lor a proposal which would enhance the area. He suggested a 90-day
trial basis.
Chuck supported this use lor public land, as it would increase the vitality ol an area which was
currently'ugly and dead.'
Mike Mollica summarized the Commission's position and stated some of the members had
difficulty in supporting this use of public land.
1. A request to amend Section 18.52. Off-Street Parkino and Loadino. of the Town's
zonino ordinance to allow car rental businesses to lease oarkino soaces in the
Commercial Core lll zone district.
Apolicant: Peter Jacobs of Days Inn
Planner: Andv Knudtsen
Andy Knudtsen presented the request. Staff supported the proposed amendment.
Chuck Crist asked if this amendment would allow more than one agency per property. He
asked lor a simplification of the wording.
Diana Donovan was concerned with the wording regarding the term of the lease. She
requested that section be simplified. She believed landscaping should be required. Kathy
Langenwalter did not think an amendment addressing landscaping would be necessary, as it
was addressed in the parking section of the code. Andy pointed out that the parking section
dealt only with new parking lots. Diana believed the Town should have the ability to require
additional landscaping for this type of use.
Chuck Crist moved to recommend that Town Council approve lhe request to amend Section
18.52, Off-Street Parking and Loading, of the Town's zoning ordinance to allow car rental
businesses to lease parking spaces in the Commercial Core lll zone district, incorporating the
Commission's concerns into the ordinance regarding lhe ability of the Town to require
landscaping, allowing the length of lease io range lrom 1-12 months, and limiting each
property within CClll to a maximum of one agency with a maximum of 15 cars. Jim Shearer
seconded the motion. lt was unanimously approved, 6-0.
2. A request for a conditional use permit to allow a well water treatment facilitv in the
Aqricultural/Open Soace zone district. oenerallv located south of the Vail Golf Course
bridoe on Vail Vallev Drive. and more specificallv described as follows:
To be located within 100{oot radius from a point on the rioht bank of Gore Creek
whence the northwest corner of Section 9. Townshio 5 South. Ranoe 80 West, 6th
P.M. bears North 73 deorees West. 2,080 feet.
Aoplicant: Vail Vallev Consolidated Water District
Planner: Mike Mollica
Mike Mollica explained the request. Staff recommended approval of the request with the
conditions listed in the memorandum.
Discussion ensued regarding whether the proposed structure should become a shelter lor
golfers or a utility building which disappeared into the willows. Kent Rose, engineer lor the
project, indicated the proposed building was 14' x 24', and the size was necessary in order to
properly treat the water. He indicated the willows would nol be disturbed. He thought that the
proposed building could eventually take the place of the existing shelter.
Diana Donovan asked if the proposed building could tr" ' ,nh.r [idds1. Kent said the size
could not be reduced, but it could be pushed further ' ,ad into the willows without
disturbing more of the site. Diana visualized a larqi ..ing with a cart path cut into the
willows. She preferred to have a square, @ncretr ;,,,,.. - .,, tte willows without a cart path.
Kent said the parking space could be minimized and placed to ensure no U-tum would be
needed. Diana asked about trenching across the creek. Kenl said a pipeline would cross ths
creek approximately 5-6 feet under the stream bed. A rock drop structure could be
incorporated into the design.
Chuck Crist asked if the roof could be llat if no oyerhang were built. Kent said it could.
Chuck agreed with Diana in that the current golf shelter was adequate, and he would prefer to
have this structure more hidden. Gena Whitten concurred with this preference.
Ludwig Kuz preferred to see rock rather than wood for siding.
Jim Shearer lelt it was important to minimize the pull-off area, and perhaps rather than paving,
gravel or chip and seal could be used. Kent replied gravel could bre used. Jim did not
support the large overhangs. He suggested putting the buiEing into the willows with a path.
Diana believed, it they were careful, the willows in the front ot the building could be
maintained. She did not like the idea of carts coming out onto the road, and did not want to
see the building become a golf shelter. Kent said they could talk with the Vail Recreation
District. He thought they might be willing to leave the current golf shelter intact.
Chuck believed adding a rock drop structure in the creek would add interest.
Kathy Langenwalter moved to approve the request lor a condilional use permit to allow a well
water treatment facility in the Agricultural/Open Space zone district, generally located south of
the Vail Golf Course bridge on Vail Valley Drive, and more specifically described as lollows:
To be located within 100-loot radius from a point on the right bank of Gore
Creek whence the northwest corner ol Section 9, Township 5 South, Range 80
West, 6th P.M. bears North 73 degrees West,2,080 teet.
The motion was made per staff's memo, with the following conditions of approval:
1. Change the roof to a flat roof with no overhangs;2. The pull-otf parking space be minimized insize and have a gravel surface;3. A rock drop structure be placed in the creek;4. The exisiing willows shall be maintained wherever possible; and5. Move the building further east from the road.
Jim Shearer seconded the motion. ll was approved, 6-0.