HomeMy WebLinkAboutLIONS RIDGE FILING 4 BLOCK 1 LOT 6 LEGALi.Js r $*+
FtL t cCIP y
1 . A request for a minor subdivision to allow for two lots to be combined into one, located at
1502'Buffer Greek Road/Tracts 41 & A2, Lions Ridge subdivision 2nd Filing.
Applicant: Harold & Barbara Brooks, represented by lsom and Associates
Planner: Lauren Waterton
Lauren Waterton gave an overview ol the staff memo and said that staff was recommending
approval with two conditions.
Greg Motfet asked for any applicant input. There was none. Greg Moffet asked for any public
comments. There were none.
John Schofield had no comments.
Gene Uselton had no comments.
Galen Aasland had no comments.
Diane Golden asked who owned the parcel to the west of this site.
Lauren Waterton said the parcel was owned by the Town.
Henry Pratt asked Lauren if there was any gain in GRFA by combining these two lots.
Lauren Waterton said, no.
Gene Uselton rnade a motion lor approval in accordance with the staff memo'
Plannins and Envkonmental Commission
Henry Pratt seconded the motion.
The motion passed by a vote of 6-0, with Greg Amsden not present'
Planning and Eovironnental Commission
Minutes
March 10, 1997
Planners: please keep this in mind for all development in Lionsridse 4th Filing
MEMORANDT]M
TO: TomBrano
FROM: AndyKnudtsen
DATE: January 8. 1996
SUBJECT: Employee Housing in Lionsridge 4th Filing
On January 4, 1996, Tom Moorhead and I reviewed the attached memo and analyzed the
Employee Housing Chart, located in the zoning code at the end of the Employee Housing
Chapter. He concluded that the caretaker dwelling units in Lionsridge Fourth Filing should be
deed restricled as Type I EHU's.
;. Please call me or Tom ifyou would like to disclrss this further or would like additional
I documentation.
:
2
MEMORAND.LiM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Tom Moorhead
Andy Knudtsen
January 2.1996
Employee Housing in Lionsidge 4th Filing
The Question
Tom Braun, representing Carol Orrison, would like to know if the caretakers units
constructed in the Lionsridge 4th Filing should be deed restricted as Type I, II, III IV, or
V Employee Housing Units.
BackEound
Carol Orrison is the owner of Lot 10, Block 4, Lionsridge Filing No. 4. There is currently
a single family home and a two-car garage on the properfy. The properly has less than
100 sq. ft. of GRFA available for future development. He would like to build a two-car
gaxage and a caretaker on the properfy.
Lionsridge 4th Filing is zoned Sia-ele Family. However, Ordinance l5 of Series 1989
allows a caretaker to be consfucted on each lot. As aresult. each lot has the potential to
support a Primary/Secondary type of structure. Per Ordinance 15 of Series 1989, the
caretaker catruot exceed one third of the total GRFA allowed on the lot. The Ordinance
specifies that the employee unit "shall be permitted on each lot." The definition of the
ewrployee unit is provided in Section 18.13, which is the Primary/Secondary section of the
code. That citation has since been removed and transferred to the Type I portion of the
Fmployee Hbusing Ordinance.
The Ernployee Housing Ordinance
The Ernployee Houbing Ordinance provides for five different types of employee housing.
There are different atributes of each type that match the Lionsridge 4th Filing standards,
' brs there is not a clean match between auy of the types and the situation in the 4th Filing.
Staffbelieves that it is a closer match to the Type I, as there are six atfibutes of the
Eryloyee Housing Ordinance which match the situation under a Type I sceaario. The
Type II has only one attibute that matches this situation; however staffunderstands that
the one is significant. Staffbelieves that all of the attributes are important and would like
ymr interpretation as to which restiction, a Type I or Type II is appropriate.
I.
II.
III,
\f\ottw
)nJ
';u
SUBJECT: lequest for revision to the Bonne vue project on Lots AI , Az, 43,Lionsridge Filing Z and on Lot 6, Block'1, Lionsridqe Filinq 4 toredesign the housing units. Applicant: Reinforced-Earth.cdmpany
At the previous Planning-and Environniental commjssion meeting on July 9th, the
lpPl.icant decided to.table the project and resubmit design diawings ?or the July23rd meeting. The staff had retommended denial for the 4bZ stope-varianie. -irr!
recornmendation was denied for two reasons: I) First, the visuil impact of theunits would be sign'ificantly greater than the impact 6t ttre approved'unit dei{gn,2) Secondly, because'the project-reflected more of a conventioiral housing desi!ncreating.yisYgl. impacts, the staff felt that the relief from the strict inteipieta-tion of t:\e 40"/2 g.lopg_legylation was no longer warranted. A primary factor oithe granting 0f the 40% slope variance was ihe minimal visual'impaci of the prnposal .It was felt that a precedenl could be set by allowing the projeci to be buill oirslopes of 40% and above.
In response to the P1 anning. and Environmental Cornmission suggestions, the applicanthas revised the design of ihe housing units. ite ioiiot^iiii"itung"t nave ueLh maaeto the design of the units (please iee enclosed drawingsji
REVISIONS TO UNIT DESIGN
l. Change of roof materials from metal to cedar
?. Modification and lowering of roof resu'ltingand incorporation of planter into roof
3' Elimination ofmajor portions of metal roof on the first and second leyels.4. Modification of floor plan due to
The total GRFA does not exceed the 30,000 square feet allowed.
TO:
FROM:
DATE;
GRFA ATLOWED
30,000 sq
235 sq
29,265 sq
I,829 sq ft
15 units
.il\
ftftft
total
manager's unit
al I owed per un.itproposed
MEM0RANDUM uuotvrq_
P1 anning and Environmental Commission
Community Development Department
July .|9, 1984
PROPOSED GRFA
30,000 sq ft tota'l- 735 sq ft manaqer,s unit291265-sq ft attoied
29,120 sq ft proposed
I,820 sq ft per un.itl6 units proposed
shakes
in flat roof over the master bedroom
Reinffed Earth -2- 7/1s/84
Credits Given:
Mechanical 28Storage 183Air Lock 40
5. Elimination of large chimney termination
It should be noted that lf+rJ:g_9ll_Ieinforced earth teeh4ql-gj@ for the.project isthesameasattheJune]lthP@Commissionmeeting.
The staff has received a'letter from-Reinforced Earth Company from James -
Merk]e, research engi.neer, that states ,'The use of reinforrced earthon the earth-integrated structures planned for the Bonne Vue project has notchanged at al'l from the previously ipproved design." Please iee-the enclosedletter in your packet.
CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
review of Criteria and Findinqs. Section 18.62.060 of icipal Code,t ve lopment rtment recorme uested varianceactors:
Consideration of Factors
INDIVIDUAL UNIT GRFA
Lower level 7?0
Upper level I,.|00
sq
sq
ftft
1,820 sq ft proposed sq ft
sq ft
sq ft
0n
e
se
tlU;L
Visual and aesthetic considerations have always been an important part of theBonne.Vue project's design.In Lbe E.I.R. it wis clearly ctiJed thal because tbonne vue proJect's desiqn. In the E.I.R. it was clearly qtated that because thissitelis very visible, it was --iln-F-ortanf-t-heg-tftd-units be-tesigned:-to-Te lowprorrbe-lJnlls.Dlending into the hillside. In addition, when the project was approvedg,s a-.:f_*_.111 development district, it was reviewed against the SOb d&rigLstanithrds.Ine proposat was reviewed favorably because the buildings were appropriate to thesite and the orientation, spacing,-rii"iials, corors, aio iexture of the unitsblended into the hiIlside. 'stafi-now feels ihat the-revised unit design maintainsthe design considerations that ailowed itre-project to te'ipp"on*.i;rigi;ai'it..--in"visual ]mpact of the.revised_proposal ii no" aitnost as minimai ;; ii;'i;r,iiproposar.The applicant has made_an effbrt'to respono"tJ trre etanning'and Environmental Commis:sion's concerns as well as staff con.""[s nv-irranging in" iopp"" roof to a shake -
lggl_l99jlg_the,planters to the roof u""us", aer6urins it'"-iiope oi 11," iooi,'anaellmlnat'lng portlons of the roof altogether. The unit design that was presenied
Ref rced Earth -3- 7 /19184
on July 9_showed approximately 13 feet of roof area above grade. The revised proposalnow show 9 feet of roof area above finished grade. A portion of the 9 foot arbais.also_a roof top planter. As was stated in ttre previous memo dated July 5, theoriginal reason for approving the 40% slope variance was not only because-of thetechnology to be used on the project, but also because the project would be built'lnto the hillside creating a 1ow profile design with minima'l negative impacts onthe view of the hillside.- The staff feels thit the applicant his minimiied thevisual impact to such an extent that it no longer greiity impacts other uses andstructures in the vicinity.
The de
as ec't r
rant o
The staff hashjl'lside, and
which relief from the strict or literal inte retation and rceilenE
ati on s necessa toa
tes itle
Granting-of a 40% slope varjance could set major precedents for construction onVail's hillsjdes. The Bonne Vue proje f the unique
leqhnology that was hei.g rrsed nn the++oiect. tt strbu'la beEmphTffiTfiElJhdtechnoloqv that was @. tt shbuta b"ffirth iec-Fio'loov has not-J"noFiTffinm rhp nriuse o=F-7gTn'fdfGd earth technology has not chanqed sal
the reinforcEdTechEoTogffor the entire project, staff-feels that the relief fromthe strict or litera'l interpretation of the 40% slone-+esdn-LilLis warrantedthe strict or I itera'l interpretation _of the 40% sland no specllgjrilege would resutt-iFi,ffivEd
The effect of the uested variance on li hta alr distribution of ul ati on ,transportat utilit blic
stated previously that the technology seemsthat the stability of the slope will not be
to be workab'le for this
a problem.
Suclt other factors and criteria as the commiss'ion deems applicable to the proposed
vam ance.
FI NDI NGS
The P'lanning and Environmental Commission shall make the following findings beforegrantinq a variance:
That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege
inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district.
That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health,safety, or welfare, or materially'injurious to properties or improvements in the
vi ci nity.
on and traffic facilities, public facilities
Rei nforced -4- 7/|e/84Eo
That the variance is warranted for one
The strict or literal interpretationwould result in practical difficultvwith the objectives of this title. -
There.are e_xceptions or extraordinarythe site of the variance that do notSdrn€ Zol1o-. .'
or more of the follow'ing reasons:
and enforcement of the specified regulationor unnecessary physica'l hardship inconsistent
circumstances or condit'ions applicable toapply generally to other properties in the
The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulationwould deprive the applicant of privileges enjJyea ov ir,i ownbrs of ottrei propertiesin the same district.
sr4|t_BEgquuEllaMl!
Staff recommends approval of the revised housing unit design, 40% slope variance,as welt as the previous requests for afproval siated in-irrE June 7,_rbaq;"ro ii,atare required in order for the proiect lf proceed to tne iJin council. The applicanthas made a concerted effort io' iriJ"po".t" ,""orr"ndations'made by the pEC anb'planningstaff ' Staff believes that in" irt6ii"ity of the-pidj"it-nir been maintained wirhrespect to visual impact and the use 6r innovative'r.inio"."a earth technoloqv.It is felt that thesb.two p.imiry-.rii""ii i""-g"iti.e"il;;;ri;'ir""ir,l"p"ljiit(visual impact and reinfori"a eui.il''i;;;r"rogyJ have been adequately addressedby the applicant' The staff ".iorr.noii.io1 for approval includes the followinq lissues: I) request to rezone Lot e,-rjioir< r, iionliiJs" rii'i1s.+.from.single Fimity ,'.,it.,il{jto Residential cluster,2) requesi'tor-ipeciat Development D'istrict l4 for the abovelot and for Lots ot'^oi,til^Ai;-ii";;qrist tor a-rinol'iuuo]vis.ion in order to combinethese 4lots into one,.4) request for'a variance to the triiaro regulations to allowbuildings to be locateo on iiopeJ "i'qoz ana auove-ro"-roii-o and A3, and S)requestto revise thq housing unit design.-'
4\)o rr'crftP.cL\,fL\Jo?
/ h;
- $'J"
;#r
$,*$
ffi$
r*t
{/
I
!
f
(
L
oC
(o.
EEa
'
I5r\lJ1 o,1 ?a;i\Jza
=4
=>tu J-=t Do\t, :\Jt-- rr>* *),.esj
\- r>
(
L
2GE
B
VN6g
_1gz
t'F:.#,GEal
i'
'.!
go
(U
t7)(oo
E
R
t.
F
Ol
T$aEfr
\-,ll _)
zoE
.\.1IIJ
€[-2)
\---l
f^L,N
\X
r\
./:5
4-F
€r Q/\-T1c-E\
-'iL,L .\.i \J\{
sv, Eg
___s*-l*g$g
$$
fF
sR$
$$
(
2o-otJu*g
EFg
?ss'
oo
)
$$.
,ru
F€
$$
.
rrF\Hq-
a
E
\
\i[
I
N
b'$
't
tll
ce2o.Fu)
42a
t=,H
{
{
(
,st
ottl.d4
A\r)9p
sg
s
$
f|zag
T
Fi
F
TNl
n!
t
It
J!a{ '
s
\n
tl
+lt't! ll29AJ
^ihg"n€5I{
.*l{f,
.4.{
c
Il
I
I
I
f,
l'
rd-It
l$
6Iu
{tl
l0Iot
.u,
ir
The Reinforced Eqrth GornpunyRoislyn Cente?, ItOrO f,orth lf,oore Street, Arlfngton, U|}gtnia 22rO9-t9OO
tefephone: 7ott32r-',4t4telex: 9OIO7O REEAFTH AG'X
Other Offices
Atlanta, Georgia
Boston, Massachusetts
Chicago, Illinois
Cincinnati, Ohio
Dallas/Ft. Worth, Texas
Denver, Colorado
New York. New york
Sacramento, California
Seattle, Washington
Reply to:
JuIy 13, 1984
Vail Planreins StaffVail, Colorado
Dear Staff Menbers:
fhe use of Reinforced Eartl@ on the earth integrated structuresplanned for the Bonne.r,/ue project tras not charG;e-;; aii*irorn tirel:"y.ig: approved_design. 'Re-intorcea Earth will be used on bothot the lower 1eve1s wlth reinforced concrete brock-oi-reinlorceaconcrete or' the top wa1l. This is the sarne de;ign *"a-o"-ifr"previous design.
JAl"l:ec
Sincerely,
q,U//W,
Research
Merkel, P. E.
Engirreer
re
''Rernlorcad Earth'ard the Reintorced Earth togo ar€ regrstered tradem.rks ot Thc Rcrotoraed Earrh ComDanv.
d
iqfrH}"#roi\^/N
oF
AMENDMENT TO AR6HITERRA,/BONNUE VUE A(
The fotlowing section will revise the the ,rSU|Artqhsection of the Bonne Vue EIR tpg.26).
VISUAL AND AESTHETIC CONSIDERATIONS
CONSIQERATION
The locetion of Bonne Vue is on the sidesrope of the Gore Va ey at erevations of8'245 to 8'349 msr. As such, rhe proposed deveropment wiil be iighry visibrefrom many unobstructed views in the va||ey, by traverers on u.s. Interstate
19'"\d by skiers riding the Lionshead Goniora and skiing the rower sropes arL ionshead.
During construction. the site witl be almost fully cleared, \^/ith excavation holes,soils piles' materiars and equipment prevalent. creating a visua y ,npl.""rni Jgnt.
After Eonstruction' the Bonne Vue homes are designed to brend into the hilside.landscaped with a naturar mountain setting, and inlended to cre€te a visua[ypleasant residential community. The units-are designed to conForm with existingland contours as much as possible, and have ueen aelsignJ;ii;;il; topographyof the site- conventionat housing uni[s on a simirar stope wourd have a muchlarger prof ile.
From a distance, the site is typicar ofl Gore Vartey side-sropes and presents nosensitive or criticar scenic views. Hence, the proposed deveroprnent does notblock or intrude upon any such special views.
Bonne Vue witl be visibre to its immediate neighbors. However. no scenic viewsby nearby neighbors wi be blocked or intruded upon from the south. essr or west,due to the low profile, eafth-in te grated construction of uhe project.
From the Bonne vue residents' poin-t of view, the design of the units wifi providean excellent view of the va ey, whire providing visuaiprivacy f.om Bonne Vuene ighbors.
245VallejoSt.. San Francisco, Catifornia 941 11 . (4tS)433-2352P.O. Box6364 . Denver, Cotorado 80206 . 1SOS1 AOS-iOSS
-
1000So. Frontage Rd. West, Surte 100 . Vait, Cotorado g165/ . (303) 476_0g51
Berridge Associates, fnc. t
Planning . Landscape Architecrure
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
The Reinforced Eqrth comp.|nv
llosslyn center, Itoo rorah Hoone gtteet, arllngton, virganao 22209.1960
tefeFhonc3 ro.rlltzl.rd.ratebr: 9OIO?O REEARTH ACt[
August 3, L984
o
Other Offices
Allanta, Georgia
Boston, Massachusetls
Chicago, Illinois
Cincinnati, Ohio
Dallas/Ft. Worth, Texas
Denver, Colorado
New York. New York
Sacramento, California
Seattle, Washington
Reply to:
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
Re: Architerra/Bonne J/ue Project
Attention: Ms. Kristin Pritz
Dear Ms. Pritz;
This letter is to confirm our conversation of July 30, 1984. As discussed,
we agree that the hearing before the town council scheduled for Au_gust 7,
1984 lhouid be tabled until the dispute involving the enforcement of a
mechanicrs lien against Lot 3, Blocft A of the Lions Ridge subdivision is
resolved.
we hope to talk with all appropriate parties to see if we can devise a plan
as to how we may procede with the approvals for this project, while keeping
the legal rights of-all parties protectid. You will be advised as to our pro-
gress in this matter ,
I will be back in touch with you in the near future to reschedule this hear-
ing.
With best wishes, I am
JJM: swl
cc: Town Council
Lawrence A.
James Sack
Peter Jamar
'1r.,?.: Jr:l
:'i4tsid4':tl Feinfol.ced estthffi
t/
Eskwith
Sincerely,
Martell, Jr.
'Feinlorced Eafih and lhe Reintorced F3rth oao are regrstered traoemarks ol The nernlo.ced Earih Cornpany
o
Other Offices
Atlanta, Georgia
Boston, Massachusetts
Chicago, Illinois
Cincinnati, Ohio
Dallas/Ft. Worth, Texas
Denver, Colorado
New York, New York
Sacramenlo, California
Seattle, Washington
Reply to:
Rer Architerra/Bonne Vue Project
near future to reschedule this hear-
The Reinforced Edrth compony
noss8rn cente?, Itoo ltorth moore gtreet, artangton, yarglnlo 2raog.rgao
tefephone: rott52r-r4t4tercr: 9O3OtO REEAR?!| AGTII
August 3, 1984
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81557
Attention: Ms. Kristin Pritz
Dear Ms. Pritz:
This letter is to confirm our conversation of July 30' 1984' As discussed'
we agree that the hearing before the town council scheduled {or August 7,
1984 "should be tabled unlil th. dispute involving the enforcement of a
mechanicrs lien against Lot 3, Block A of the Lions Ridge subdivision is
resolved.
we hope to talk with all appropriate parties to see if we can devise a plan
as to how we may procede- with the approvals for this project, while keeping
the legal rights of-all parties protected, You will be advised as to our Pro-
gress in this matter.
I will be back in touch with you in the
ing.
With best wishes, I am
Sincerely,
JJM:swl
cc: Town Council
Larvrence A. Eskwith
James Sack
Peter Jamar
ames Martell,
OOOOO retnforcede3uth
'Reinforc€cl Earth and ihe Reinfo.ced €a(h logo are regislered trademarks oj The Reintorced Earlh Company.
/ ta
,
Planning and Environmental Comnission
July 24, l9B4
PRESENT
Gordon Pierce
Duane Piper
Howard Rapsonl'lill Trout
,lim Viele
ABSENT
Diana Donovan
Scott Edwards
The meeting was called to order by Duane
l. Approval of minutqs of Jul.v 9, .|9g4.
Pi peranl-TiEle ab-sEal n I ng.
at 3;00 pn.
approved3to0with
STAFF.PRESENT
Peter.'Patten
Tom Braun
Kristan Pritz
Betsy Rosolack
Piper, chairman,
The minutes were
2.st for isio ne Vue rth-shel housi n ect on
|rJill Trout removed hinm]}f+roil-T6e commission and sat in the audience. KristanPritz showed the submitted changes on eievitloni, sile ieripectives ino cioss -
kl
sections. Peter ilamap, representing the applicant, reviewed the presentationfron the previous PEC meeting ana aioeo-tniri ttre three ievets werb preity muitrthe same as before with: ttre Exception of the top roof. Now the rooi was-cedarshakes and the on'ly overhang was on ltre sides. He stated that he felt that theconcerns of the PEC had been met. vie]e asked why the f'lat roof concept hadbeen abandoned, and Jamar replied the reason had been econorii coniiaei'it{ons,that the, first presentation would have been difficult to construct, and also '
tney wi5hed to.ge! more vo] ume into each unit. Jim Merkel , engineer for theproJect' stated that they fe'lt units without the flat roof wouid sell better,but he felt that the nerpresentation still reflected earth integrated design.
Piper asked to see the original drawings and a drawing to show comparison ofreinforced earth on the fiist and last-proposal. Jamir stated thal the-iootprintwas the same, Merkel. showed drawings wittr i^ed over'l ay of the original project.Rapson asked.about the des'ign of tfie planters, and Mirk l'tare, arihiteci i6r-irreproject, stated that they would be trbditional planters. napson asked about--'ma.intenance, and Jamar rep'l ied maintenance free'plants wou'ld'be used nalive-tothe hillside. Piper asked how much'lower the robf line would be withoui ttre--ptanters' and ware replied "3 feet." piper questioned the merit of having theplanters. Jamar answered that they were'not'opposed to eliminat'inS th"r." pie"ce
agreed with_Piper and added that ii the plants'in the planters wer6 watered,they would look different from those on the hil'lside. He added that the overallcoloration of the project would have a much greater impact.
Vie]e stated that he preferred the orig'ina1 proposal, and felt that this prooosalwas not much different from conventional proposals. He felt thatlooked contrived. He.suggested returning'to'the original propoiil or elseuflns a single. pitched roof with sod. Viele felt th;t the'pllnter wouid-iattattention to the project.
Rapson_a_dded that he had stated concerns simi1ar to Viele's at the last meeting.Jamar felt that all the concerns were relative, point.ing out that the boardwas comparing this proposal wjth the first design, when-the board should rememberwhat could be built on the sites. Jamar then slaied that'lots AI and A2 c;uiahold 13 units, Lot 6 could have a 3500 square toot duplei, and A3 was allowed2 units by ordinance regardless of the siope. ue coniruaed that this siteoeslgn was much better than developing the three parcels without an inteqratedoeslgn. He added that no one wanted to see a project that wasn't succesiful .
Piper replied that the board understood, but were disappointed in the newproposal . ware stated that the cost factor was not thb'on1y concernn butthat earth covered roofs presented Iong term maintenance pr6blems. He iaaeathat they a] so felt that more glazing would present a comercial appearancerather than residential. Pierie felI that the present proposal wii'an improvementover the prrposal presented at the previous meeiing. Hb aiaea that from i
:]:!an.g',lhg, olly, advantage of the sod roofing wai in Iooking down on the project.Plerce telt that there wou'ld be no difference in appearance with the new prbpoialwhen driving down the street. He added that there wis a muctr better chanle iorsuccessful market'ing with the newer proposal.
Patten reminded the board that the issue wasas well as the SDD.
econded to a
an as-F wel, l as t
4 from Si i l.y to Res nti ament Dis c or Lo well as 0ra mlnor subdivis on ln to comb
a -z- 7/23/84 ,,
I
also the one of the 40% slope
rove the revised housinq desi the
s rezone Lot 6. Bloc onsri dqeuster, request for Soecia
ots
favor abstai ni n
3.st for a GRFA variance and side setback variances for Unit 'l 2 of
a1 | KOWnOuses ti on.cant: Nel son
Peter Patten stated that the board had visited the site. He reminded theloaf !ha! the,planning staff wus ur"llng toward a solution to the GRFA Jarianceprg?jeT.0r no-'rmpact type proposals. He asked the applicant to table thisunrlI the ordinance was passed. Nelson King, the applicant, stated that theowners wanted to go ahead now, and added thit the owirers wished to revisethelr requests to increase the size of the enclosure.. CIatg Snowden, representingthe Bridgewaters, neighbors of unit '12, stated that the Brijgewaters'werbsimply-curious to know how the pEC wouid react to the King pioposal, since
tl".PIi{sgryaters had been asked to reduce the size of their'"eirueit. xirig-ast<eoEo^EaDIe to 8/13. Rapson moved and viere seconded to tabr" io'8ija: voie wii5-0 in favor of tab
ARCHITERRA AT VAIL INC.
Program & Energy
InfornatioD
llsl
t
I Architerra At VaiL project
Architerra At Vai1, Inc. is proposing to construct a Lj unit single-farnily_residential cluster developnent on Sandstone Drive in Vai1,,Colorado with associated garages (Z cats/garage), tennis court, foun-tain, one yay road system, and pedesterian aciels waLkri.ays. This pro-jept will be Located on thro parcels of land (A-1 and A-Z) consistingof L.446 acres and 1.150 acres, respectivefy, *nd slopes-varying frorn
10% to 60t. Architerra At vaii is i^re1L-suit6a tor aitticurt'-tordevelophillsides -through the use of a proven soiLs engineering technology,Reinforced Earth. this technolbgy has provided us witfi an archiibitural
Landforn capable of stabilizing hillside conditions and thereby allorrsfor flexibility in the site plan desigrr. In addition, because-we havethis capability we can restore and/or revitilize land, providing an
enhancernent and quality of life not only to the resifunts of thepmject, but also as an aesthetic benefit to the surrormding connunity.
The following describes the prograrn for the Architerra At Vail project:
1. 6-3 BR Vloft e 1,840.00 g.s.fZ. 6-3 BR dloft @ 1,839.98 g.s.f.3. 1-4 BR Vloft @ 2,04A.L2 g.s.f.4. Total Gross Sq. Ft,5. Total I'lunber of hrrel"ling llnits6. Total Site Area7. Llnits/Acre8. Parking Garage($pical)
= 11,040.00 g.s.f.= 11,039.88 g.s.f.= 2,040.12 g.s.f.= 24 ,!20.00 g. s. f .= 13 D.U.= 21596 acres= $.007 units,/acres= 600 g.s.f./gaaage
To conpliment the above stated prcgrffi, the Ardriterra At Vail r_uritswill incorporate the benefits oi passive solar and earth-integrateddesign concepts.
The benefits to the residents are numy, including:
1. Efficient use of energy;2. Stabilization of weather, noise 6 fire;3. VaLue of Penrenance;
!. Phy,sical isolation, privacy G security; and5. Efficient life-cycle costs.
The benefits to the comnnity include, but not l"irnited. to:
1. Efficient use of land;2. Surface Presenration;3. Greater open space and usable land;4. Restoration and enhancement of laad;5. Integration of nan, comrnmity and envirorunent; and6. International recognition and publicity.
o
o
MEMORANDUM
DATE: April, 17, 1981
TO:C. Wood, J. Marte1l, G. Powell
FR0M: J. Merkel
SUBJECT: EnergyConservationsCalcul-ations
Attached are the energy caLculatlons developed for passive sol-ar
design of the Archlterra units. The design nas based on informstion
ard data presented Ln the Passive Solar Design l{andbook, Vol-. II: Passlve
Solar Design Aoalysls (1980) prepared by the Los Alamos Sclentific Lab
at the University of California.
The parameters used to arrlve at the deslgn l-oads vere:
Outside Temperature of OoFlnside Temperature of 70oF
Degree lleating Dgys = 10,147
Use of Thermopane glass 2.5
Use of Insulated Shutlers 5.0
V Special design features include:
1. Use of floors as solar coll-ectors;2. Use of a Trombe wall- as a solar cotlect.or and an actlve heatLng system at nLght;
3. Use of a rock stotage bed beneath the llving roon floor to work in con-
junction with the Trourbe wall; and
4. Use of the rock storage and Trombe wall as an active cooling systerl durlng
the sumer months.
The amount of the heat required per hour and aanual-1-y are glven in Table L.
Also provided is the energy savings and the cost to heat Per year.
The calculations are very conservative in that they:
1-. Do flot include any input generated by the heatilator; -and2. Use a design inside temperature of 70or instead of 654F.
TABT,E I
nelting Requirements
Heating Unit
Per Unit
Aux. Heat Pef,cent
Room
Rlght
Loft
B.R,
Left B.R.
l,la6ter B. R.
Livlng Roon/
Greenhouse
Dinlng Room
Kirehen
Bath/Entry
3,900
2,2OO
4,400
6 ;500
11,000
2 ,500
3,600
1,000
106 BTU/Yr
4.77
7 .39
5.72
5. 95
L4.L7
2.26
9.94
4.60
Sav
642
627,
60u
632
727"
L6%
35,100BTU/HI 55.79*o
*Does not account
At 90.040/K!r-hr -
for heat supplied by
Annual heating Cost
heat ilator.
= $656.00
"/,*
E. R.
Date f,
Initials
Night Insulation
R Value
4_-
R
PROJECT WORK $IEET
soeciflcatlons
hoject ttarrre ,4rrtr o N
Locatlon
tatitude
Passlve Svstem TyPe
D6 ilz
Thermostat Setting,
Intemal Heat Rate,
Deslgn lleating Load'
Design tenperature:
Glazino Area
-f
4--sq ft
sq ft
sq ft
9q ft
sq ft
4
R
Total Area Ae =
Iset 7o F
eirf" +a o4-d gtu/day
3, o-/ Btu/hr
lnside _.,_,,-.3d _ F,outside
Calculated Values
Building Load Coeffieient, LC /3/O Btu/DD, by Method lf] , Method 2 Rl
Load Collector Ratlo' LCR = BLC/Ac /6. y' Ftu/Do sq ft
Degree-Day Base Tenperature for Non-solar Bulldingr Tbns F
Oegree-Days for l{rn-solar Building, DOns DO
Degree-Oay Base Terperature for Solar Buildlng' Tbs
145
-
ot
--U
= /g/0 /th/oa
pLe/A. -#te.{ 0L/nP'tp'#/!
o
/ *t^*6 6atn U -Ve[$.urt.
€'gtoted fuifr r/6-ot-/.v
€5. kt*€{'a/ a-o'o J'/ 0,L 7t'*
4o o. a-I
D*u'*o 6)-I
lor* Cn/r;d)
/'"f ( €s)+/o e.f
ft<,nu €('r'4L l*a*e,{
/,,1&-*{i It, taaa
I 0-a6?{i / t-,8 / /dd
/1 Ik--{4!.' r
1F/,4 i JSiz-
?
IIo
ir
${
II
tt
II
(,
do|'|
Eo
rJU{l
oI
I':fl<l\olal
oo.>.l-t
ot'tlrl''oe
rTt
I d-l
o.g
+r
t,qt
Ff
{eo
Llr'ooA
9r&L!,dvt
&elr
clr:.A&I,c
el-a
HF.
e&
4{
H
ltr
a
li'
t
g\sl[
€
xvt
\s
h.t\
:\
\s
o'.}
s
N\
$
9otI
\t\
s
t
^is
.t-ic\
\.t
t-\
k\$
$\*t
€
aJ ql
UF{ t{9F{ O€('rr'o c,l}1 l+r qttr OF
\
\i \D\
t\
$'\
\'$
\
\o
d
I
\s
\\
s
\0
| .NE g-\.\s
\t*F\f{.
Fs\
F\\
\
\i
4\
s
l-
\
9s\\i
(}\\
.\.\J
.|r
uo6ls
I
tt.a.:
,i*\
oo
Y\
N.r s N
\a
\
\5s
\s
\9s
$
s
I $t'
s
r|
J
g8 tfi
fr;
.E !l;
s\$\
\s)+
L\
p-
||rl
\\\
\
r\
s
F\.
0\
.$\...t\
R
F\
h
g
rs\\N\"\
G
EFlo()
aId
oo
r€
t\
d
t,a
F"
t\-i
\o
ti\s
\5 \
s.s e\
tI
troE
rc,tt
,u
z
(,
ru t0h
€f !..Sz
h t\t!tr
h
146
a
I
!
\
$ld-!i >r'l= s
-$i i i'\-,{- \r\s
rBall1rtrltrl
h:lq
t5
I
T
0ll0!xttrfrl!* Fl8
-vrl .A AxFlt' 1..Ggro(n
ro
o
6>'ga l.rl- El
NKIf -r I -l| \l | \olr --t | . t
l\ll I
qt
G(,
aA
a
|;I
l"dl
()
FJto
l
I
I
'\oq
E
trul,\gt
trG
tU
t\t.t!
?1
x
o
gc
l
h:z
'r
H.l
x
2
2
l-.t
!r'
I'
2
V'
&{
ix
ta
Ff
-\b
1s
co
(!(,o'|
I
tr.'l
Gtcvo Ex\-
-qo3'^'r{ X rr.l' !q A I\,. qtfXo\o.Fl . OL-r r-{
L)\s
\
\F
s
oo
,flLi\
s\s\
i
$t.;
\
\
h\SS
{
FtrO
ls
b\Il\
s
\
a
\
o
s
s
\$\F.\i
rt
o r(t)-q D\+
0C \O Ct F{' 5E o.9 u f Ltd U O Cl/t-E (! ocnOF{ t i E|.tv(rt='
\.t\\
\
tcD
{
t
.s
\i
F:\
F
s
5
\
t{
\9d Hs
\
\$
s
\\
€
TJ
Ei
(-
'l-iNIFvoNA ir'r'r. A r{+t\' tElqt ltr
'{ lO!, lE
E \
\t'I
5 l-{'a \\
\t
In,.,
\
\c\+
N
L<{X D lc.Ft Gl A ClCE€3 A CIEoc Il. OLl& O.O
A
\b$.N
\
\e
l'\
\
t\\"\c\
^l s tF'.)
q
F'<or F\JI
O Fl :lsE-l .B sr qoo.o-r tal9(!Or. ltrr& t-rc| O B
|..ohrd
c.l
.$
a-
\
Nr\
..r.i
$\
$\\
D\\
slFil
$\
\a\\qi
\
I
s
,ui\
\
\
*
\\
\-
I
\s\
coEo o.{,(n
&r(,o oz
ooo nth
5
tUh 6t
l.A '\|!E
cei",
L47
o I
soeciflcations
ProJect Nare ,- 1,,,L-alr.,, @ [:n<
Location
Latitude
-
3?'4'
Passive Svstem TYPe
Total Area Ac =
Thermostat Setting' Tset
Intemal Heat Rate, Qint
PROJECT T{GK SHEET
Glazino Area
Btu/day
zz@ Btu/hr
lnslde 7 o F,
sq ft
9q ft
sq ft
9q ft
sq ft
o.rtside - o F
Date
Init ials
Night Insulation
R Value
R
F
Deslgn Heating Load'
Deslgn tenperature:
Caleulated Values
Buildlng Load Coefficient' BLC Btu/DD
F
, by Method 1[ , uethod 2l-l
Load Collector Ratlo, LCR = BLC/Ac Btu/tF sq ft
Degree-Day Base Tenperature for Non-solar Building' Tbns
Degree-Days for Non-solar Buildlng, 00ns Dt)
Degree-Day Base Tenperature for Solar Bullding' Tbs
145
Bte = a/(re*"/) ='/
l, //
Bh/oo
o
7zB
/ ,tl /-r. gft atc,/*
/Eh'/u - tp -#/il
[/0,t{7
I
Dp')
/ lt-,*'.6t*-U'Vr&,^L
trTo>ed tue#
8s. kJd.{.!,.+a.o 0.o s-J,//68
lu,r,Jnu,4; -3z O,L 7'L
/,"f ( €s)/8o o.o /
f/c,rt- €ft&
I1...| /f@ 0. aa r//J,{y'
n:l*iL!.' i 3d-1f
g fart_ Btu/hr
Deslgn terperature: lnside 7 A F,outside O F
Caler.rlated Values
Buitding Load Coeffieient, XC /7ff atu/DD, by Methocl ln , Method 2m
Load Collector Ratlo, LCR = BLC/Ac /{'6} atu/0o sq ft
Degree-Day Base Terperature for Non-solar Building' Tbns
Degree-Oays for t&rn-solar Building, D0ns /0i/f7 W
lera. lJ,/< -
:1 1.
ProJect Nam
Locatlon
Latttude J f.6
Passlve Svstem TYPe
-0Gr(l
I I
PFOJECT WORK g{EET
Date
Initials
Nlght Insulation
R VaIUCGlazino Area
/ry
-sq
Tota1 Area Ac=
ft
ft
ft
ft
9q
sq
9q
sq ft
Thermostat Setting' Tset
Intemal l-leat Rate ' Qlnt
0esign Heating Load'
7o
4q dta Btu/day
0egree-0ay Base Tenperature for Solar Building' Tbs
40. L'.'-4T6rs =' 70 - '-'---,// ft
7o
145
I
/-fut g./.
o
o
t
/ -/'t-',.*6"-r-U'Vet L u frftrl
trTceed t''a&){0-atf /'x s{
8s. kJ&L{'av0 0-aJ /;. 6
klnrhrrr4l ,6 c)f ,0--/ z"d
l)*'*'6A
d. a-/s. d
Eoof Cnt d).11 o.d{'o
l,* ( €s)o-a{//.s-7s/
ftr,*u Eft*l;r6 0, d"l-4
t / rl f "/ttJ.t l7-+-la.-r 'a){d o. oar{ar//,f 1j
7a {,&t'. ',,73,/{J 6 /
o
I.t
II
,
I I
GItrj
l .':l
o
t!o
1..
Eo
lr(,o
et)
kl\l
€l
{,e>rF
ot{
FoA
HoEau
rl(B
FI
{
H5
ETc
6tt
Etrlg
o5i|eEoutG
6F'Cr
Hc
&
E
r.lI('l
Ert:e
F
o
a ql.s f"t
Or
r.lJ€ *'1l!, laldX v: rrl (t)lqItcr-t lOv lE
1'-
\$
h.a
H\6i
s\
ssl
F\
t*.
(.\-\
sdt.:t.
"t
l\
,r.!
6$\
\xF.
oo's
/..r'
d
$i'
\\\(li
\..1
\s
\\*
\$tq
to
!6ur l..5Fl O€qt.JorJl{ t.a r!F ots
:d.
t{}
a
\s
a
f\
$:a
F
a
tO
\$
q
\s
\
Ir6
\
\
s\\
\J
\o
| * :..=,r a-t a}
a
o\.ta \
F--b
\
Fsi
ts\
\
rt
t\
{
1..,t\
\i,
oot6
$\\$
o
.n'
t)at!k
I .4 s-
ds$$
*).s
\
E
\\
ht N
s
F
o
$-\s
n
\s
\9
(I
\J\s
\J
N
a
*,
\J
(\
E8 tdb, E rl.'
E;
.$ *l;
Soo\}i
\9
+-
t.t
,d*D
s
\
.iF.
(\
&)
trs'
.!-\
$l-:t\
}'
\}\s
t..i-
s\>*\
+r
cAv''\-
q\
P
l\
E
o
oJ
qg
-$f5
t\
\€v'
{
E -i\s
s
rg
"qai.
\,.i\
ha\
S
a
\.t
coz OJu)
l.Uo oz
(,(}o
ca!h {Jh
t(g
=
lr&htdE
E
F,
146
I.t
Ito
a
t,
lal
&u
F:
qt
I
I t\lt\t
6
oa
aA
f;
I f 1l| -r\l
I t\tt{
uFrc
iJ.0o
lrqt
x
(lt
cct
eql
IJ]At\t)
Elc2IA
).c,{l{FIl-ax
z
2
Ht{(t
h
vt('zH
{
vi
EI
Irl
'.r,!l
Er
g
I('a
1ct
\$
,\'5.
:t;t\Flx
Nl t."
-l N-\sl ..:It-
tE
l
lgt|!la algxlc t^lF' :'lx \,lXGl3 hll()el d IFr
L,I lcr tFqr-r/'rll u,,{ r{}\r-{lf'L nlEQt t:
I
ln
(\t trvox\,r:33*3.t tq , F\,. 6fXc'\o-{. ot.J F{
ac
.s
$
s
N
cb
a\
coN
Ia
a\
.:.
t'-
\rr
{
\0tIq
\
\to
a
i\.
.$
{
\^loola
d
s
.t
O . |,'"if t\oc \g g B Ft.rl O -C:t:. O .rl l. rr fr..l, t, o cv,E o olnOrr ! r 5l. I Erft =-
s..
\
t
CD
\
J
\$s
a\*
a
a$
s
b
d
s\s\i
p
at
,t
\s
\
I-\s
\F
F
'liNIA\/oN Olll4. a .-F.EIut ltr,-l lO\J rE
tvr.ll
ne)
s.
r*T
\l-
\
so
N
\{
$*
L-
n \i\
cO
rl\
c\
A
l.\
\
r$
\
fl
r{** o b.'r $l A AnCEE= o .F
l.Okh ao
.d
\t!t\li\
\
*
.t
\s
qrt \5,s
^{
5,)\\
tpo
\rs "\
FJ<0\ F\-, IOF. lglEFr .3 (a rloO 'OF{ Cqk6O|- ltr3r.Foo lP
q\
\9
aY.\
t<1
.-f,
Q
$-'
\\\\
F
$.\'\
C\
li
\\\
A.i'{
I
\i
t,s\$
\"$\
$
\s
n}.
tro
=
ooC'I
(Je
>oz
ta,o qt aotr
trnl
=
L xl!E Jrt
r47
-e2
PROJECT SMK S{EET
Specifications
ProJect naae 4oArLra^-' rxl /ar-/
Location
Latitr.rde J ?.e
Passive Svstem TYPe Glazinq Area
9q ft
sq ft
9q ft
9q ft
Total Area Ac =sq ft
Thernostat Setting' Tset
Intemal Heat Rate' Qlnt
Oesign Heating Load'
Btu/day
6 fN Btu/hr
Design terperature:lnside 70 F,o.rtside F
7,jfu- d
Date
Inltials __
Night Insulation
R Val_ue
R
R
Caleulated Values
Building Lmd Coefflclent, B.C
m
Hay'atuloo, by l'bthod rn , method 2Xl
Load Collector Ratio, LCR = BLc/Ac /7'a'-' atu/DD sq ft
Degree-Day Base Terperature for Non-sotar Building, Tbns F
Degree-Days for Non-solar Euilding, ffits
Degree-Day Ehse Terperature for Solar Buildlng' Tbs
t4s
I p
/ qt, / /)hr/oo
t-/ 7'P 0L.-/PP -st-f,/{t
o
o
Aefl r
a/( roh.()
frte,/*/
o
/ -l c-^*,"f,ut -U -VvI^L u /l-.(r. or'-^:
t'tltcted futfi {3 o.0 )s, )-/r/
a re-o.0 J /J,L
fu,rrJo,-u-il vF o. +--'J,{
Dn-*'3b
noof Cn*d)ttf o ay'6. .6
/'t ( €s)r{b d'd y'
/6 ().>J-a'-
, / /t / c/ttlt i ?-*lo,a
i--I
Ii )>t/d o.oa? y')/,//{ 7/
*-&,'
"
t a t,a 6a6/
I
I
I
(\|
rx
t{ r
(,
60lt
Io
(,
ruFf
oq)
...-l\l
xl
oA>'F
oHalrFds
| \ll
I rilI t-tI na\l
oIt
.rr
r.,qlrf
{co
t,rn(,o
I
a
tsrB
Iqvt
gld9,
Ftr:la&ovtE
z
F4Hc
&
fr{o?t)
tsr
FTEI
F
r46
o
tr6{r
t\L(t
x
.o
Bc
ac
I\, I
l\l
| \tll{l
i)
tll
tr
\oq
trl
-l
fr-
S+
o
L'
oorf
n
U
I
IPOl O ,rlOXl tr ..frlOJlx \"1 xcrl3 htluCrl nt I Ff
!'. Hl€r lc!
tttll-v,
F{ .{
Flfl''.t!Eout
gt
axa(E \.€a rr
rFl tTtlil lrll:Jl'(.l|\il\l
ol
o()OFf
egl
6
v7
(,
z&.t
JlFlx
z
z
trc,
f
v)cz
(/|
cvt
NEi 'ox<.,-Cl .n --.\'r-a X }J\" lrf , Isqtlx cr \oF{, OFl
\\ot
\s
.\
i
}.'Fllst
\$
\
i
'{ls
s
h\x
s
,*!\
;
t-.r
$ts\
s
\o\\
$
rt
o.a.l' hoCO C 3 F.l.i o E=lr O.r{ |. uht,tro ctnE r! OE:od t r t\|lIrt(rt=
a\
\
ro
f$
\
Fo
a
a
b,
s
!
Y.s
F
n
tn
\
n
{
I
\
oro
\
q
al
€
E
AN
A tF.
tEl(n lctcrE
N
.-l
F;\\l-
a
3 v t{s \\
\
..\
4
'atD
\+{+
tr 6lcaqco trlE
l<<x.rt (\lE'o 3
}.qlr.
dt t N
\
Iq
A
\
!a\-\sn'\Svo sFv)
,fi
llJ<( FvlOFalgE Fr .3 Ul &loOt-{ qr.doL lct&Ft)o E
a.
.ls
'T,'.i
ar1
.$
3-
f\1t\
N*
F\
$1\\
t\\
s
l\
qr\\
\
\i
i'-"l\s
\ti\
\
\
$
s\
\-
\^
\5\
^n
oEo 4tUtn (,o oz
tiUo
ca AqJb
t'l
t
Io dE t
747
l,tnrg Eoarn -J*F;8{r -Csfec'tt4 t tta
],--v .F7
PrcJECT TORK *IEET
ProJect Nare
Glazino Area
Date
Initials
Nlght Insulation
R Va]ue
Location
Latltude
Passive Svstem TvPe
_
Thermostat Setting'
Intemal lleat Rate'
0eslg Heating Load'
Oesign terperature:
Total Area Ac =
Tset
Qint
sq ft
9q ft
sq ft
sq ft
sq ft
otrtside O F
Btu/day
!/, t+< Btu/hr
lnside 70 F,
Cllculated Val.ues
Euilding Lcd Coefficient' EI-C
DO
,J/
,6?
Btu/00, by Method l f] , ltetfnd 2 n
Load Collector Ratio, LCR = BLC/Ac Btu/F sq ft
Degree-Day Base Tenperature for Non'solar Building, Tbns F
Degree-Days for i,lon-solar Building, DOns
Degree-Oay Base Tenperature for Solar Building' Tbs
145
t
'|...
t
{rueoa Ko*x*t-o
614 ---=,/crei,t) = /7b7 nt-/oi
frLe,/p. -ffi =- lfr3 Ah-ina -if-#/r/)-/!
*yfi =
t
/'/t-"t"Ar."-tl 'Vo't^s.U ,+'
trTo:"d fut&ff 0-ai z'rlf
8s. klddi /ta t-0t 7, I
l,t/,url*'oa1 -7,0.L /f"8
l) rvn*'Je O,L 7t
{orf Cnt"d)/s/tt.of d.7 6 ,? a3
.t t ,/ a z'l'ft.c*-l- L C; J
F-/c,-,., E(fiL zr.f O, L 3a/
/,,tr/&*{;3 L*e 30,/L /OE
/-it-'!
i'l)i f 6zs i
,
> 2/_ JJQ
Gaee+ fr{aia
o
r-uo/
ds"i
o
/ lt!,nt"-U'VrA,'i.uft.
t'ytc*d fu.&
8s. tu&{;
rl
Wt tI (!<t-uLti 33L o. 71 b7 )-
l)+sn;'7--O 0. z /
loof Cn*d)
/,*( es)
ftc,ru 6tatl ff 0,d z 0'?a 6f
/',{,tfr.*{,.
i
iI 1 , aa i:f)i i;3 7?o
-ni
77 b*t'
Io
Nt,rta
Ll
t<tI\ t
IJ
6tt
t
o
lr(,o
o()
..i I
x
FTE
atIx
tsrr
Flriaa&ovlF
6l{F
l{
€g
fi
lrott
FT
FT,qfi
rutt
ll
tr(!lr
sl
q
tro
u, lltt,o
o
o\
rlrlO ll+{\rl 5l Ell( Er) aJlu!alItrF{ lovrE
\\\sl\
l-'
(t
t.i
\saf\
\
t\
$
N.
u.
.s
\
.n
\f\
\\
qt-
r.l
e
\'
c{
n(*
hs\s
*
\c
€o
5\
ro
{JOI F.l |{tFl OEduOUl.r u (l!r oh
t'
s i Fr
s
r\
$
ao
\1
d
\t
(l
L
:r..
\i s
\o
lf Nn s\t !a
s\\
F\\
r\Ps !t
s
4\a d
b\s
\
\9
a
.lf
!)ollh
I
(t)
$lls -s,9\K r\'
,"1
\s
.d
ao\9
\a
l\
a s \$
d
\4
Ts
s\$
d s
i\t\n
\l
(1
96 tfi5, {. rl.'
E;-$ *l;
$
rx
}F
ci
f\41
.1\J-
i\\
\r\
3.n
C..\
F
t"\
t.'\
sS.\:t
$\
t\+
l'-
,s
:t
F
$*
\.\
sl-
l.t
cc
r{
c,
FI b F.$
-t
P"'.D
F\
ft\0
$\\D
T
,")r.1
\4\
t{b
d\
b\\
Yr
;
oE
oov,
IJ
o F
(J(uo (!0,h
11d:f
lr.A ha6E
6
|.,
oo>.F{
ot{5lll{oO.
146
II
!
o\sl=xv,
r,|
\l \el ;i:l s Fl$l$
\N
N
\oalei\'
\,.
\...]
\
rF:
+.
hl r\l \r +.\ N'+l \
@
rllDU '.1 trto€ql!loot.r|.. Gter Otr Ht ron\
s \t $
!\lrt
\s
\
ta\
\\
\.
\
\l qll i
\o
E"$,v --t\rN
I
attr
s'\
\s
o
t-
c
T\--l F:l s t\q
et'\
a
s^\S
|!.-..s
\d
$*\$
$
\t
rit)(t
F.
I
ti \c.l
i.-.
\\{
\"
\
Ll
$
{)
\s,
\
?rn
(\|
li .i slr
q
*1rt{
\O-+
^\
..)
s\\
|}\
*
t$
tr
$
g
5
i$
E.$t\
r\-\u
*
Q\)'.
$
N
p
l<r
t"r.
tf\
r-{o
I
ss
.t!t\lI}v.
-{
sd''D
r\-t
\9
a\\D
\.!
.-t!!
\
,^i\i.s\
st.\-i,
:E
rov)
|.J
z
(J g
|ltt-:
F{,frl
l..!E
}]A (0E
(\I
rt{
lt I
|J
G
attr
co
uo
o()
Nlg.
>rF
oLIl,taA
t:llr;lI f 'l
o.q
*J
al6Ff
{
Go
lr6t,oFl
F6
I
crE
!tctth
&trrF.
Fts:!a&ov,
€
2o
El{aa
E
I
F.l
F!
F
ts
I
I o
146
\_
O\
\(D'
\s
i\t\_i2
t
!.€!,
hI
.x
dttr
tnlrt,
pL-\
r*'
\$
!r\it\tr.l
\.
IEt
IEolo ^lOxl c rfllF5l x \,,1 xdl J 3-:lOrsp ld
tatl
F{FIArrqlf{l u!
Ei!,
tl
(r)
l+{
It0t
E
rrF
--.
t ''l
IuFf
x(t
F
L+tI it
oco
oc
la
(J
z!r
4
l-l
>1t{x
z
zoHFc)
u,(.:z
&{
lal
J
Fr
o
tr(1
q
o
to
\g
xx3. *.it aA frJ qlrl X Ctl=r
cr
t--o
\J
\$st\
s
\\\$
.t
t-\:t.
aOt
\
\
\
\
\
at$\
\
o
R
\
I
N]
\
=i
q
5d
.3.
at . O.tt t\oc \o E t rl.F1 O t:tr O ."{ |r $lr{!uo cutE .! Ot'lOF{ t - =lJ 99! 3
\
s
\o
\{}
t
\
^l}.-{)\^
\
p
s
f\
s
rrt
s6\i
\a\s
G
F
. .l'iN|a\/UIN aiu,t, E t+ri
'c' lcF{tot', lE
\
tr)
$.
IF\
N
c.t
t\
4\
\.t
"i\
\.q
\
c1
i\
(-|.)
+\ss
.^[
\s
\tv
N JttrlE
t<<x ut+t (\l eE.o 3 A
lJ€rkE AO
l
\tiN
tcr F,t\
N
-!\1
Ia^t \\
Po
|}r<C^ F\JI0,1 Ft ,9E-{ .3 (a rloQ F-r aclL(!O!. ltrrr. F.(J o 19
(^
>
15
>:es.'
^l
s f\ol--
()
<5
\9-)
4S
ro-
\
]l
srt
\
^ll.r\
<s'
*
e"
'$.
*$-
troE
J {|ca
(J0 0z Uoa 64
ea,tr.
t{r{
=
t\
n a
F)
I47
r
t
t
l{oRKsHEET !n AREA-WEIGHTED SOLAR INPUT
FOR I{I'LTIPLE SOLAR APERTURES
Locatlon
ls4
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)
9yst D6 T"t )FIXSI +
F2xS2 +
Etc.lrea
s1 s2 s3 s4 5
lonst
F1-0.r/92-
d,6 f
F3=f4o
Sep zr l6f ffr.ot{a lt ,{tf
Oet vd brJ {2,*{3 c,dt{
Nov 71 771 32, ff ?l ,blL
Dec *Z Vtlo )r, ra z tit 0t1
Jan d8, v 74 1f,,7/f th, z0o
Feb s-9. t79 1l po jb7 $>
Mar L? toz 4 r{, oFJ 3\(r?
Apr r:1et t t7, trf 3A,dz{
Hay tf aa{/?/ 0t{3E ,'1aj
Jun n {cf lq o 5r./3s) N?
Surn
I
DE
WoRKSHEET W3l
. na-- |f,),'' Locatlon
ULU
SOLAR SAVINCS FNACTTONS
FOR ARBITRARY R-VALUE
OF NIGHT INSUI"ATION
(1)(2)(3)(4)
Table Bcol (3)
Fl x (2)
+
F2 x (3)
s
DD
No NI
ssr
D6
R9 NI
SSF
u\r
RgNr
lonst
FI-=
0,/6
F2=0.0/-/
sep f t,f 0,8)0.f4 0,f/
0ct fD-0 O'sE 0.b u 0.7 7
Nov d?- |0,t )d.J)0.rl f
Dec r -'r taqr (O,o F 6. ,{i 036
Jan ad. r'0,0 /0'(7 () {/
Feb ) 7'6 d.0b 0 .52 0'48
Uar td,/0'?-o 0,b3 0.fz
APr {f,7 CI{)o.8 7 0, 60
H"y { 6,}p-o{0'8 J r 8o
Jun t/4,0 0.t8 0.f8
Sum {{f 7,TT 7.0 7
ts6
TL4J.
WORKSHBET I,I3#OI.A,R SAVINGS FRACTIONS
FOR ARSITMRY R-VALUE
OT NIGHT INSUI"ATION
Locat ion
(1)(2)(3)(4)
lable B
Col (3)
F1 x (2)
+
F2 x (3)
-!.
DD
ssF
No NI
ssF
R9 NI
ssF
.RgNI
lonst
rl-
(),LL
F2=
d,78
seP f r'f d,8{0,q b 0.r1y'
Oct t?- d 0,t8 o,g I 0,7h
Nov )7./b-)o 0.57t a, Fi-
Dec 0-23 o-,{g o.r{_,
Jan L],f A,*3 0.5a 0,{ r'
Feb d 7.6 o. j d ^. {k ,F\
Mar j t, f a.J6 6.6 6 0.60
APr {f'7 o.f3 o,7 g a,7 3
Hay G('L 0,7 0 o-8 ?0,8{
Jun /N,6 o .?0 0 -9f
Sum 5-.4 7 7.o e)7./ o
o
156
T{ORKSIIEET I{4 SOLAR SAVINGS FRACTIONS
TOR UIXED SYSTE}IS
Locatlolr
(1)(2)(3)(4)(s)(6)
Syst
[rea
Table B
Col (3)
r1x(2) +rzx(3) +
Etc.
-g-DD
ssFl
n-fur
SSF2
na ur
ssF3
R_NI
ssF4
R- NI
ssF
Mlxed
Sys t en
lons t
Fl.=
6,)/
!2=0-6I
F3=F4=
seP ?5f a.?y'0fl /rl
0ct )-1 (]tJ 77 o- 76 a-76
Nov )7.1 d'r7 d .)-L t).fl
Dec da, I 4.vB o.lJ 4f/
Jan dd.J 0.r/0.ltf a./2
leb ) 7.6 e, f ,4 o ft-'0.{/
Mar
"35.7 d,\-7"0-6 0 0,{8
APr v{.7 o,80 o.7J 6.77
May 6t.*,J'$':]4.3 )-0.f 1
Jun i/ 4.1 0 .f,5 b.7g 0.f 6
Sun 7 07 7,/Lt 7.10
157
IJ/,t1/tut!i/#u4,
PFOJECT TORK SI.IEET
soecifications
. ,4,
ftoJect Nane l*a+l, L-u-t - 6 Va-z{-/
.f - lLocation l/ a,'!' A-La/
Latltude 3 ?:6
Passlve System TyPe
Date
Initials
Night InsuJ.ation
R Value
Tota1 Area Ac
Glazing Area
7d- q rt
Btu/day
e 1-trc Btu/hr
sq ft
sq ft
9q ft R
sq ft
outside A f
n-
R
Thermostat Setting, Tset
Intemal Heat Rate, Qint
Deslgn Heatlng Load,
Oeslgn tenperature: inside -J.,,!L-F'
Calcr.rlated Values
Building Load Coefficient, BLC Btu,/00, by t'tethod 1[ , ilethod 2 [J
Load Collector Ratio' LCR = BLC/Ae Btu/D sq ft
Degree-Day Ease Terperature for Non-solar Bullding' Tbns
0egree-Oays for l,lon-solar Buildlng' mns
Degree-Day Base Tenperature for Solar Buifding' Tbs F
145
oI
,-.
-
-.. fi4, =
/ /o t-,z*gf1 =
- a/( ro*,!),1 I I
7-7 0 _ lt /.,*/ pD'/
at ///, O lzt--/ Dfl -' Jf -F'lI,at /r /"t -7f op+/tia -- =/ tn
o
/4t*u Att".Q 'VGl.^r"uft.
trTc*d tut&*r'0,ttf /,L
8s. kt*L{'
JL a>
f) r-.---t'2t a7-7.P
toof CnH)/ry/0,0{
/,t ( €s)0.0{
ftc,ru €ft*L t*-a,)-'s.{
t / rl I "/ tt.!t I izt-fi a',r /43 y 4'0af y'i f,7
I ,i 7n a i\/... / i eg/7
t.>
-*l3
-lE n tii
urtlllr:r{F.LI\''?rrrll't{€r0J t/l
t,
o
hA€\.E1
F" ta
li\l | |l\| l.rlt\tt.lI stt {ll\lt I
oCBa()OFf
,a
f:]
()
FJfA
IJ
GIo
t\L(!
x
*lJEa
rots
I
f-tt\oq
(,
z&l
).d
l{JFIx
cz
zoHti(,
alt.
(r:(iz
u't
1c
fat
trl-l
F
Eollgt>\vt
\
$
co
llt
Uo':
$rg\Jo
Ex\-xBgli.s la A Ftv6ll X c/ \o
[F. , oFl
f\
\
s
"t\s\-i
p
lrba
s
t\lral3\
G.
R
$
A
\$
r$l
s
N\$-t :
$
cot
s
a
^lt
sl
.it
O . st\? hoC \O C 3 F{''i O Ii:ir. O ''{ lr tJ lrtl tl O trqDE t0 0!nO'{, . Et!. I Er(rl ='
\.)s
n
E
s
N
\i
a
\
a
\$
s
L
\s
a
't6
f.
s
ro
\
.[
\
$
c\
a
&JoF
( T
.Filcof\
F {r.\.4v, lctoIt
a\
F{
e d"\l.a
!F*
t{\\it
nA
su
4,'\
t
\q{'+
N
t<B<X u, tC.r{ Gl ll CICE!= e qEoc Il. O l.l
"t\eF N
\
tq
T
\
nr\-\9t
^l s sF
FJ<g\ F\rlQ,, '{ atlE ,-. .3 rA .{ooEFr A!(gOr. leLr-uo lg
a.l
tAl
l.f.'
!.1
|<r
.$
i\Nt\
.$:
..\
sl\\
N\
$t\
$\
\t\
cj
i
q!'
\tit
$\i
\
\\
\ls\
\.
\\tco
trozFtoCJ
goat
dtJo o2
uoo
E
r-l
Fob
La(!E
Lo h
E
147
I
PmJECT IORK slqI
,ViJ u,{*'*'
Date
Initials --
Night Insulation
R Value
R
R
q_
R
Specificatlons
proJeet n * lo*f,Ltilr, ,fr tr/o r.!l
, ,fLocation h, ; I 4r=t6 '
Latltude 7f E
Passlve Svstem TYPe , Glazlng Area
)+q ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
9q
sq
9q
Thenrostat Setting, Tset
Intemal Heat Rate'
Deslgn Heatlng Load'
Design terperature:
Total Area Ac =J.l-"sq
Qint 8tu/day
3 Aoa Btu/hr
lnside 3r,o;tside O 7
Calcr-rlated Values
Building Lmd Coefficient, BLC
Load Collector Ratlo, LCR = BLC/Ac
I / c t' etulu), by Method lD , Frethodt?.Fl
f-J Btu/ffi sq rt
Degree-Day Base Terperature for Non-solat Bulldlng' Tbns F
Degree-Days for Non-solar Building, DDns
Degree-Day Base Tenperature for Solar Building' Tbs
145
II
^U
i
6 **-, =a/(n*,{)/_/a{,Bh/ao
AA-/nP -er#/tlrUfi =PLc /iL =g : 5J//
o
/'/e-*+6uto'U -l/et J.u*.
I
tytc*d hd zta o.o )-/o'8
€S- hsa-{"
hl'rtJor,-g v )-'b,J-9,,{
I) otnu'*;-.o,>
loof CnM)5a
fu"f(€sS o.a y'r/r'
f/<,rt' $lnll 3)-AP 6.y'
. /.t/ / c/tr* Ifz*t--t lzgo o-ao?// d, /
' +g,i 3 jf0
LnI-
'loff
-g .o
n
Elln
,rto qt3 IDo
zo o(:t't
Uto1'
f:o=oa
\\q
c\
I
t\\\l\
\\\
\
$i$
ti
\
St
\i\
\qc
\tg
N
\
e
\,\..
\J{
.c,
s.
\t
t,lri
\dG\
il or:F.,51 7to$'1
"F ,n €:'g gAtstsol^-l \D>rrl r'/
\"
q
qc
s.
Q.cb h,l.c\s
*
Y
b-<i.t q,
I
\
v
ItoFtto
=64lr, r-rx>>l
O '1,
gt
J"f\,
t:
iN
\,
Y'
Y
.sc
\-s \t
*l n \s
s-
"f\
-l +J
:''6l P
'l U1 \r
F\-r+tt lt -1.rrE l,N ta ..'rrrl r.r
9
\rtr
It,o
\
{
F
q.r
C}
s
F.
Cr si
1$.,
:vc
c\
rl
F
..1Lr.J
:ar).atn-B r d r'Orao o =u:, O rt r?EIr? FtFO-J:t 0 F.F El6\iql< s{trr lt
s
:q
\N
I
)
tr\.h
ct
qt,
!\
:s
\
>
,L"\
>
tJ{\
)
f\
\it
N
)
G,q\l tt
\x
:
ar?I\t
Y
\,i(r,
L
ItN
_tJo- D x'ilDr .a]6 C ErEilET'\xr|o2 t\,I
r.oo0,al
oa
\?\f
t!
fr
EE
'J)
bv
(,r
z
Ch
'1tn
rrFt
o
z
€x'71FH
r€
t'IzFI
6)r, Gt
:l0t!
HH
id t!
cr. clD \,
rt
o
Fc'F
tl- l(\ |' lult-J
t!n\.
a
FNft
Bf'ql qrittr.?
FF U'rrgFt €15Flx slEgls ata
al
I
ilhrl\t\t\
I
\
\.\
\
$
\
c0,
x
l.J
FlY
ol)n
Icy'L""n-*-t E-T
Date
Initlals
Nlght Insulation
R Value
R-
R
PROJECT TNRK S{EET
Soeclfications
ProJect Nare ,4rcL,y'r'*r'- ^ ,or,
r ^ n,Location l/a.,| , UJ:j
Latltude
Passive Svstem TvPe
D 6 f(f
Glazino Area
Zd sq ft
.sq ft
sq ft
Fq ft
sq ft
F
Btu/day
R
Thermostat Setting, Tset
lntemal Heat Rate, Qint
Deslgn Heating Load,
Total Area Ac =
lm Btu/hr /* /*t'{ 'a "r/
cr.rtside O rDesign terperature: lnside --J.-,Q- F,
Degree-Oay Base Tenperature for Non-solar Buildir€'
Calculated Values
Building Lmd Coefficient, El-C tu/Do, by lsrethod lf] , uethod 2l-l
Load Collector Ratio, LCR = 8LC/Ac Btu/0D sq ft
Tbns
Degree-Days for Non-solar Building, DOns 00
Degree-Day Base Tenperature for Solar Building' Tbs
145
I
-
oi --=
,-vft =
a/( rre*/) =
E4,/H./
/r h/ oo
o
/ /l-*a,A,rt*.U -Ve[^r-ufr.
tytc*d brfi 3a a.e f 1.i
€s. ud.r!'8o 0'oT r
d)@
l) *..--*'ri o,J-l -.1
foof Cnkd){z /.3I
/,.* ( €s))o O-, /l.>
?a'>/.s /L4
t tt tl / "/4-+t I iz.e-trt-4 -frL o,0a?/){a
' /8.83
ii /J/?
L
lr*or* u
Ardrit€rra,Inc, Rosilyn Center, ITOO orth Moor" Stre?t, Adington Vlrginia ZlZ09
o03) 521-5558
Pf,oltcr No: O()I-$l
DRAWN 8Y: ft.d,!'.
scar.t, U,tg. 3fiE€T
Cll(D: 0ATE:
lor
4-27-at
pRortcr: AttrCl.ltfEhftA AT VAIL
zuBJCCT: 9OLA6 AIJ(hLE
I
tq,n ro.r'"{f-
sx =(tqn t6. r') ( H )
s.267 (6)
. ?.??L.F.t
19 la.n 2Q.9"t v;o-
dtcE-
drsE s w'o'
tprl 26.9'
a rn'
=-9::3L.91
zh.o fL.o
thi|'dt.w.ng(drtinrinfor}.riodp'op'bt..ytorh.x.|riof!dt.r1tt(o.nr[ny..ndbbg.r9|u'ni*€d,Drth.u'.o'A'drf.'rr,}'C'o'''i'.g'r''d|o.rth.|''lo'''D|ion.o'|t.i'i.dhaninBnorbb.l'.'dntGadtornyoth.'on9rn,zeii<rnunt.'rgia{r<r{yrutrrorr*dhwriti"gdyniindinr<i<ra:r'tr'co-pl''y.fi6dErnhco|hF*ryj5ttduriYtinth.Unitrd5t.|Gund.tprtrnr:ls.tcdtoxirivid.|,.fdthttu6'thing."tthi'g'n,in9,;'i;.toi#rua-lrrprto,it|\nti.r'|i(tir|lthvnl.l jrrttntr ltir d..wirg_ in- d.egn rd detrit ti r|ri pm;vq of Ardrircrrr, fr, rna m"n mt dur.d rr..frt l"-cm.rc.&; *idr-thi ti;igt rul ;;*h;; J;&-;.nvantiard ar. '!r.nd @t987, l/dtieqt..tnL
)
" f'03) 522-5s5S
paorecr:AhCHlTehAA AT VAIL pRorEcrNo:OOt.El scar-e, !.f.3. sxerr I ot
suBrrcr: \vlhlTeA F{gaTtLIe DRAW{BY: pr.d.A.. o{Ko, DArE: {- Z7-Al
VrFJTeh HEATIHG
vHeu TEMFehaTuhE Fit9,e? ..rcve 1d'?. ralJ o{-J,
coHTrrJuc6 uultL 3|ju *eTb, 1r{€1, rAu oFr
wltEFr ieflfeF'$Tuhe orcF Io QE" r. rau o|-l,
coulruues uFrTrL p'osn eloPlAee TesF. giF,ofbTO e'?.
Thi|.draYiing.<ontfnEifl$rE.tiofip'oP''r|etytoThGh'hto.<GdE..thcoripany,.nditb.in9f.n}*{dfo'th.'Jc.otA'd|,t.'r.,tnc,oi|ym€o'l6.clionw,.EoC|n|ol'|.tEnon|a|n.€ncrC'n|tno|to1'Ct'.f'ttt.dto..yotlElor9rf:.tionU.|.r6*'i.ifio||Y.uthorE.dinwritii'byrhckiJrio'QdErdrCo'nD3'.lh.E.l'rh!otiPayjcxClt,!ivGi^thGunitGd3t'r6u'd.rP.t.nl'it'{.dtoH.n'ivid.l,.ndthr'u'n6hii9itttirdrrrrrn5aocrril'ao''stltrrtrrnrrprcrrorV|dr|P.|.ntt'Thi'd?ewm9.'nd.rrgn.ndder.ilLthap9F.rtyofAr<hik.',.|'x...rddrdiotb.'.|s.d.r<G'ri;co.mG<tioriwd|trtrerr*rrt.rtlcrirytieirlv nio.E.ra rllrved 9l9gt, rkchrrcr.a, hc.
o.Al4leF'
H,' : veuT cLoeea, D6,}.4.feft ofEU , F,c.O? VeuT ofeu
oAYTT fE ; veuT oreu, DAMFeh cLo€#,O ,lfr,f veLtT OFEH
^-
u ofchltgffci Y",u"o,* D
Architerra. lnt., Rocrlyn center, t 700 North Moore street, Adington, virginia 22209. l7o3) 522_s558
pnorcr: AftCllllePtaA q VltL
suBrecr: gtJMVreF, COOL|U@
Sll-MFaen CooLtue
pRorEcrr,fo: O()I-trt raLr, p.f.tr,
DRIWN BY: Fr.d,A. cHro'
sHErr I or
DrrE: 4 . e7.91
Thi'd.awi'lg.o'I.ialtnfoh.tio'lp'!D]ft''ytoTheR.inforccd€.nhconpty'|nd[tnh9fU.ni.h.d'orth.u'.olA,thitcrr.,|.|G.'ottl'h@n'l'<t|o'rwi..d
9.-f!9_T1!" T:ii1't{ h.-fi.! lor.!9 b.irarEm{t.d to.nr othroreaiiaiionu"ics$;dtt ry rurhonr.d in stt'.g uy n n:i!"r#ilaiiiil-i#ij;. fr:ili;ift;LiS 9l?Tv-p!{!"yc I ItT ul'ficd slrF unaor eflmrr r,rirco to rciiiv'c.i, "nc ir'itirir*i";;ili';;;.s;l;;;'ofti.rt - "*,"o- impti.d ltrvrr. 'dr*rthtvEi.|p.!.nE.|l'||s!'.v.xI,no|${F.nd.bta||Elh.p'oFrtyo'A]drihrr.'|nc,.^dduifotbcg{do.cr?tin<drn.<ti'nwiththbP'oi<t.l'tttoi.4igrrsrcinvlrtionr r'! rr-.Yld O | 98 t. Ardritarrr, Inc.
l='r I
SHERTFF'S NOTICE OT SALE
u". SS BLJ:?*
IN THE DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR THE
COUNTY OF EAGLE, AND STATE OF COLORADO.
Civil Action No. 2402
W. TROUT, ARCHITECT. INC.. an Ohio corporation, Plaintiff,
vs. I,IOUNTAIN PROPERTIES, LTD., a Colorado corporation, Defendant.
2Oth, LgB4, inthe following
Lot 3, Block ALionrs Ridge Subdivisionaccording to the recorded plat thereof
also known as:
Lot A-3, Lions Ridge Subdivision,accord,ing to. the recorded plat thereof
also described as follows:
Lot A-3 of Lion's Ridge Subdivision, County of Eagle,State of Colorado, nore particularly described asfollows:
Commencing at the Southwest corner of the Southeastone-guarter of the Southeast one-quarter of Section 1,?ownship 5 South, Range 81 West to the 6tb P.M.; ThenceNorth 0" 03' 25" East along the West Line of said
Southeast One-Quarter and along the Westerly boundaryof said Lion's Ridge Subdivision a distance of 677.75feet to the intersection with the Southeasterly eight-of-way line of Lionrs Ridge Loop, said point of inter-section being on a non-tangent curve whose center bear
South 53o 28' 49"; Tllence Northeasterly along saidSoutheasterllt aln1tt-of-way of Lion's Loop the followingcourses: I) along the arc of a curvc to the righthaving a radius of 428.00 feet and a central angle of
30o 52t 49", a distance of 230.93 feet to a point of
Under a decree of foreclosure entered Julythe above entitled action, I am.ordered to sellreal property in Eagle County, Colorado:
-r-
tangency; 2) North 67" 24r O0* East a distance of150.00 feet to a point of curver said poinL beingthe true point of beginning; 3) along the arc oi acurve to the leftf said curve having a radius of100I.64 feet and a central angle of 16" 52' 37", adistance of 295.04 feet; thence departing said South-easterly right-of-way of Lionr s Ridge Loop. South57o 37 I 39rr East a distance of 126.58 feet to theintersection with the Northwesterly right-of-way ofSandstone drive; thence South 49" 35r IOU West along saidSouthwesterly right-of-way a distance of 2l-6.95 feetto a point of curve; thence continuinq along saidNorthwesterly right-of*way and along the arc of acurve to the left, said curve having a radius of 4ll_6,93feet:and acentral angle of l" 21r 52.', a distance of98.04 feet; thence North 44o 37 t 06" West a distanceof 170.34 feet to the true point. of beginning,containing 4I ,114 square feet or 0.944 acres.
I shall offer for public sale to the highest bidder I forcash, at public auction, all of the right, t.itle and j_nterest
of the defendant in that property at the time to which thesubject mechanic's l-iens relate back, as well as the ensuingperiod, and as well as the time the above captioned action wasconmenced. This sale shall be held at the hour of 10:00 A.M.,on the l4th day of September., 1984, at the front door of the EagleCounty Courthouse in Edgle, Colorado.
A. J. JOHNSON
SHERIFF OF EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
ckn
-2-
I I
Planning and Envi ronmental Cormission
July 23, 1984
PRESENT
Gordon Pierce
Duane P'iper
Howard Rapsonlli'l'l Trout
rlim Viele
ABSENT
Diana Donovan
Scott Edwards
STAFF PRESENT
Petern Patten
Tom Braun
Kristan Pritz
Betsy Rosolack
The meeting was called to order by Duane piper, chairman, at 3:00 pm.
L_ . The minutes were approved 3 to 0 with11 per and v'tele abstaining.
2.s
A
t
I
for revisions to the Bonne Vue earth-sheltered housinq pro
ock Li onsri d
unl t
Earth nyo
l{i'l I Trout removed himself from the cornmission and sat in the audience. KristanPritz showed the submitted,changes on elevations, site peripeciivei inA ci^oii--'sections., Peter 'Jamar, representing the applicant, revieweii the presentitionfrom the previous PEC meeting and added.ttril ttre ttrree leveis werb pretty muihthe same as before with the exception of the top roof. ttow ttre rooi was'cedaishakes and the only overhang was on the sjdes, 'He stated-itrit-tre-i"ri-ihit-tneconcerns of the PEC had been met. viele asked why the flat roof concep{ nad- -
been abandoned, and Jamar replied the reason trao been-econorii coniiJel'itiJns,that the first presentation would have been difficuit io Const"rit, ino-ijiij-'
!!9q wlshg{ !o,S9l more voturne into each unit. Jim Merkei, engineer for theproJect' stated that they felt units without the flat roof wouid se11 better,but he felt that the new presentation still reflected earth fntegiitea Aejign.
Piper asked to see the original draw'i ngs and a drawing to show comparison ofreinforced earth on the first and last-proposal. Jamir statea ttrif the-footprintwas the same, Merkel, showed drawings with ied overlay of the original projecl.Rapson asked about the design of the planters, and Mirk waie, aritriteci i6i-itreprgiect, stated that they would be trirattionai planters. naison-isreo auout-'-maintenance, and Jamar replied maintenance free'plants would'be used naiive-tothe hillside. Piper asked how much lower the robt line wou'ld be withoui the--pjanters' and hjare replied "3 feet." P'iper questioned the merit,of havlng theplanters. Jamar answerqq !hl! they were'not opposed to e'liminating ihem,- Fie"ceagreed with_P'iper-and added that i-f the plants'in the planters wer6 watered,they would look different from those on the hillside. 'He added that the overallcoloration of the project would have a much greater .impact.
PEco2- 7/23/84
Viele stated that he prefemed the original proposal, and felt that this proposalwas not much different from conventional profosals. He fett thatlooked contrived. He .suggested returning' to' lhe originat -pioiijiit' or etseuljns.a single.pitched roof with sod.' viete fett tMt the'plinter woutd callattention to the project.
Rapson-added that he had stated concerns similar to Viele's at the last meeting.Jamar felt that all the concerns were relativeo pointing out that the boardwas comparing this proposal with the first design, when'the board should rememberwhat could be built on the s'ites. Jamar then siated that 'lots A] and A2 couldhold 13 units, Lot 6 could have a 3500 square foot duplex, and Ai was a'llowed2 units by ordinance regardless of the siope. He conbluded that this sitedesign was much better than develop'ing the'three parcels without an integrateddesign. He added that no one wantid io see a project that wasn't succesiful.
Piper repl'ied that the board understood, but were disappointed in the new
proposa'l . Ware stated that the cost factor was not the only concern, butthat earth covered roofs presented long term maintenance prbblems. He addedthat they also felt that more glazing would present a conrnercial appearancerather than residential. Pierie feli that the present proposal was'an improvementover the proposal presented at the previous meeting. He added that from adistance,_the only advantage of the sod roofing was in looking down on the project.
Pierce felt that there would be no difference in appearance with the new prbposal
when driving down the street. He added that there was a much better chance for
successful marketing with the newer proposal.
Patten rem'inded the board that the issue was also the one of the 40% s'lopeas well as the SDD.
and P
Sinqle
vt s'ron
nded to ro
nti a
the revised housi desi the
oc onsri d
cl
oT
se
s
st for S
ots ]nto one.
The vote was 3 in favor, Rapson against, and Trout abstajnjng.
3. Request for a 9RFA variance and side setback variances for Unit l2 of---the Vafl Rolhous n.
Peter Patten stated that the board had visited the site. He reminded the
board that the plann'ing staff was working toward a solution to the GRFA varianceproblem of no-impact type proposals. He-asked the applicant to table thisuntil the ordinance was passed. Ne] son King, the appiicant, stated that theowners wanted to go ahead now, and added that the owners wished to revisetheir requests to increase the size of the enclosure. Craig Snowden, representingthe Bridgewaters, neighbors of Unit 12, stated that the Brijqewaters were
simply-curious to know how the PEC would react to the King pioposal, s.incethe.Brldgewaters had been asked to reduce the size of their'rebuest. King askedto_table to 8/13. Rapson moved and Viele seconded to table to'g/l 3. Vote was5-0 in favor of tab
Planning and Environmental Connnission
July 23, 1984
Site Visits
I,lork session on A & D Building
t,lork session on Vail Ath'tet.ic
Public hearing
at the site
Club Hotel condominium conversion
Approval of minutes of ,July g, l9g4
for exterior alteration inthe Sunbird Lodge buiding.
Request for revisions to the Bonne vue earth-sheltered housing ',
Pfoigc! on Lots Al,4?: 43 Lionsridge Fi'ling 2 and on f_oi e,
?1gg! ],-Lionsridse Filins 4 to redisisn th6 r,ouiini'uniis.Applicant: Reinforced Earth Company
Request for a setback variance and a concuruent density controlvariance in order to enclose an existing first flooi aicr-ireawith-glass on unit .|2, Vail Rowhouses at SOf East Gore Creei-Drive.Appl icant: Nelson King
Reguest for exterior alterations and for a conditional use permit forthe Sitzmark Lodge in order to devetop corrnercriai ipiie-iou*r of therooge and to put a new plaza with a swimming pool aiid rooftop gardenabove the cormercial spice. Applicant: Siizmark ioOge-- -I
Planning and
PRESENT
Diana Donovan
Scott Edwards
Gordon Pierce
Howard Rapsont'fill'Trout
ABSENT
Duane l'iper
,lim Viele
'The meeting was called to order atfor Duane Piper, chainnan, and Jim
Envi ronmental Conrmi ssion
July 9, 1984
STAFF PRESENT
Peter Patten
Kristan Pritz
Larry Eskwith
Betsy Rosolack
3:00 pm by Gordon Pierce, who was substitutingVieIe, vice-chairman.
1. Approval of minutes of meeting of June 25, 1984.
Edwards movqd and Rapson seconded to approve the minutes.The vote was4-0 tvith Pierce abstainino.
2.uest for revisions to the Bonne Vue earth-shelteon lots A2 L ions rid and on Lotrrlrng 4 to redesign the housing unit.
Kristan Pritz explained the proposed changes thatime this project had come before the PEC and was gexplained that the revisjons affected the overall p
r-fl{ar_3pployil----5 n e
sa'l in such a significantway that it now warra.nted review again by the PEC to ine if the 401 slopewdJ LfrcrL tL fluw wdrrd.nfeo revtew agaln Dy Ene rEL r,o oe.tennlng lr f,ne +uE slvariance was sti'l'l justified for the project. she showed site perspectives,site p1ans, sections of the site and cross sections of the uniti of'both theapproved proposal and the revised proposal. pritz stated that staff now feltthat the project did have strong visual impacts on other structures in the vicinity.
She added that in the previous memos, staff had stated that if the housing were
more conventional , the 40% slope variance would not be approved, and the stafffelt that the new design was much more conventional , and therefore recommendeddenial
Peter_Jamar, representing Eerridge Associates, fe] t that the redesign was not assignificant.a factor as the staff seemed to fee'l that it wdS,: sj1ss it was onlyon the third story, and the major part of the proposal was still earth shelteri:d.
He said that the roofs would be weathered copper. Jamar felt that there that
i.tere two issues: l) whether or not there was'the technology to build on a 40%
s1ope, and 2) whether or not there was a visual impact. He-wondered if a visua'linpact had any bearing on granting a hazard variance. (Patten stated that itdid. )
housi nq pro.iect
been made since the 'l
JEc 7/sl$4 -2-
the applicant could lower the roof peak 3 feet which would
ano adibd that the perspective shown'was 3 feet Jower than
added that 13 units could be bui'lt on Al and A2, with 2 on
al1ow a duplex of 5,000 square feet, so the applicant was
the amount of density he would be a'llowed and volunteering
Jamar stated thatlower the pitch,proposed. Janar
whi]e Lot 6 wou'ldactually reducing
43,
to
do earth she'ltered structures which stabilized the hillside.
Jim Merkel of Reinforced Earth, stated that the project was stil'l as earth integrated
as before. Patten asked if the reinforced earth technology was sti'l'l behind each
level and Merkel replied that it was reinforced only behind the lowest and highest
I evel s.
Temy Quinn, an attorney representing llill Trout (who sat inthis proposal) stated that there was a cloud on the title ofstill owned this lot. Qtt'i,fin was putting the Town of Vail on
concern and that they could not vacate the lot line without
and Trout could not give his permission until the title was
Larry Eskwith statedthat there was a law
he did not know how
the subdivision. He
hasn't said that the
the audience throughoutlot A3, that Trout
notice abcut this
Trout's permission,
cl eared.
that if a Liz Pendens had been fi'led,.it told all the wor'ldsuit, but not who would wjn the suit. Eskwith stated thatto stop the subdivision, since the owner of record was proposing
explained that the Liz Pendens put a cloud on the tit'le, but
land could not be sold.
Jamar stated that the applicant preferred to take a risk and proceed w'ith the
request.
Donovan felt that the project was too visible and too high on the hil'l. She felt
that it looked too conventional , and pointed out that one purpose of the hazard
regu'lations was to keep people off the sjdes of the valley. Rapson fe'lt that there
shou'ld be more earth she'l tered technique used above as well on the sides of eachstructure. He added that this was nice looking, but was no longer earth shelteredin quality. Edwards felt the DRB should be the ones to decide whether or not
the roof should be rajsed or not. Jamar stated that usually an SDD contains some
elements which are jockied around by DRB. Patten answered that if the PEC and
Council approved a specific design, the DRB could not violate the approval .
Edwards wondered if peop'le were ready to live jn caves, and added that he liked
the new proposal . Pierce wondered if it uas necessary to have the additional roof
above the lst and Znd levels. He felt that thjs simply made more roof to1ookat. Pierce suggested some compromise, suggesting that the roof be lowered to a2ll12 pitch which would enable a sod roof to be built. He was concerned that theproject not go "economically bad."
Jamar stated that the applicant would like to table for two weeks to try to uork
out a compromise to lessen the impact of the fasc'ia treatment.
Edwards moved and Donqlqn secllded tq table as per the applicant's request untjl
o
SHERIFF'S NOTICE OF SALE
W. TROUT, ARCHITECT, INC., an Ohio corporation, plaintiff,
vs- M0UNTATN PRoPERTTES, LTD., a colorado corporation, Defendant.
July 2Oth. 1984, insell the following
Lot 3, Block ALionrs Ridge Subdivisionaccording to the recorded plat thereof
also known as:
Lot A-3. Lions nidge Subdivision,according to, the recorded plat thereof
also described as follows:
Lot A-3 of Lionrs Riclge Subdivision, County of Eagle,State of Colorado, more particularly described as
- follows:
Commencing at the Southwest corner of the Southeastone-guarter of the Southeast one-quarter of Section L,Township 5 South. Range gl West to ttre 6th p.M.; ThenceNorth 0o 03' 25" East along the West line of saidSoutheast One-Quarter and along the l{esterly boundaryof said Lionrs Ridge Subdivision a distance of 677.75feet to the intersection with the Southeasterly eight-of-way line of Lion's Ridge Loop, said point of infer-section being on a non-tanqent curve whose center bearSouth 53" 28r 49ui Thence Northeasterly along saidSoutheasterllz pin6t-of-\^ray of Lionrs Loop the followingcourses: l) along the arc of a curve to the ricrhthaving a radius of 428.00 fect and a central anile of30o 52r 49", a distancc of 230.93 fcct to a poiit of
u". sS Btl -9
IN THE DISTRICT COURT IN
COUNTY OF EAGLE, AND STATE
Civil Action No.
Under a decree of foreclosure enteredthe above entitled action, I am.ordered toreal property J_n Eagle County. Colorado:
AND FOR THE
OF COLORADO.
2402
-1-
tangency; 2) North 67" Z4r 00' East a distance of150.00 feet.to a point of curve, s.ia-point Uei"g-the true pgi"! of beginning; Si "f";S-the arc of a. curve to the left, said curve having i radius of1001.64 feet and a central angle of-I6o 52' 37,,, adistance of 2g5,04 feet; then6e departing said iouth_easterly^right-of-way of Lion's Rj_&ge f_,oop. South57o 37' 3?" East a distance of l26.i8 feet to theintersection with the Northwesterly riffrt_of_way ofSandstone drive; thence South 49" 35r ig'r West ;to;g saidSouthwesterly right-of_way a distance of 216.95 feeito a point of curve; thence continuing along 3aidNorthwesterly right-of_way and along fhe arc of acurve to the Left, said curve having a radius of 4116.93feetandacentral angle of lo 21r 52i, a distance of98.04 feett thence North 44o 37 ' O6u west a distanceof 170.34 feet to the true point of beginning,containing 4L,114 square feet or 0.944 acres.
I shal1 offer for public sale to the highest bid.der, forcash, at public auction, a1I of the right, titLe and interestof the defendant in that property at the time to which thesubject mechanic's liens iel-ite Lack, as well as the ensuingperiod, and as well as the time the above captioned action wascommenced; This sale shalr be held at the h6ur of 10:00 A.M.,on the l4th day of.september; 1984, at the front door of the nagleCounty Courthouse in Ualqle, Colorado.
ckn
A. .T. JOHNSON
SHERTFF OF EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
-2-
fr
..1-tjx
oa
e
f riie I iF* igtE :E!€ Hie
..;1\Y0\\
+
l.
tllj)
UJ
Frt
rd
B
{j
t:
ll
-l_L___-_-_-=-.tl=-_-=_--
-1
.IalFIi"l
Iurlulz
>tql
llll. "1.-lyl-.-- r'--
IJI
url>l
"llJl
Inl
3
rl
ll
ll
ll
il
li
ti
ii
ti
rl
ll
*
It rl
tr---- -- - --
;tvl7l
ol-l
0l
?l)I*l
Irl
lltl>l
tdl,i
ul!Jlcl{Ll'l
a
II
Fi'i
-,:!J'?r'.. I3:J]l
g
ge
6!l.: r:3d 5 E9.Et t iIl' ti:E TFi€ sit-
,f.vi\
-4\-
o
-o
='t
€
xAlF
',|
7
:')
[lrtr
q
A)o
o
)
ld
ulzza
e
F
cr
u.l
LT'u
i
l'
\,
lx)il
Fod
)
-(
<l
tl
fg
COMMITMENT
TO INSURE
This commitment was produced and
issued through the office of
LAND TITLE
GUARANTEE COMPANY
lrX8n bnd ritle.Gur;""lt...ura.'*a t37
108 So. Frontage Rd- West
Va[ Colorado 81658
Cou n te rs ig ned ;
3rIrl
"(
^relerces
vrosr N N I [1ll ro
^Nvdt^rol
--=?-r''#re:
rcruvunsnl
recgSo Surleplp,r u ,{q pau8rsrelunoc usl{^\ plls^ sq 01 'V slnpeqts uI u,!\oqs elep eql uo $acgJo
olunoreq aq o1 l?es pu? etuuu alerodroc slt pasn?J s?q eloseuury4l ;o ,(ueduro3 ecu?lnsul alll1,
',{rotreu8ts pezlJoqlnu Jeqlo ro
pezrroqlne fpp s1y ,(q pexgge.COflTIAHA\ SSANIIAI NI
'luaulruruoS s1q1 i(q peraaoc uoareql a3e31roru ro lsaJalq ro alBlsa aql enFA
roJ procor 3o sarmbcu parnsur pesodord aqt atup eq1 o1 rorrd Inq Joereq etep e^nceJJe aq1 o1 luanbosqns 8u1qce11e
ro sproJat c11qnd aqr ur Euueaddu lsJU 'pal?arJ 'fuu Jr 'srauEur raqlo ro sluIelc eua^pB 'secuBJquntue 'suol 'slcaJeo '9
'sprocer c11qnd oq1 ,(q unoqs
tou pue
^\01
Iq pasoduu 'peqsrurnJ Jogaslaq ro sloJoleroql Flroleu ro roqel'sstulos JoJ !ue11 e ol tqSu ro 'uaq fuy 'n
'sprocer cqqnd aqt ,{q u,noqs lou aft qcrql\ pue esoltslp plnolr sastu.ra:d ar{l Jo uotlcadsut
pire,{arrrns lJorlot B rlNrqa stroeJ lue pue 'sluourqceorJuo '?ore ul sB?lror{s'sou11 ,{repunoq ut slJruuoJ 'setcuedarlstq 't
'sprocer c11qnd eql ,(q u,toqs lou 'slueuros?e Jo sunelc Jo'sluaues?A 'Z
'sprocar c11qnd eql ,(q uaaoqs 1ou uolssessod ul seqr?d Jo sunelc ro slqEy I
:8ur,no11oy aql ol Pafqns osls sI tuaurl1utuoJ sF{l
'ol palraJar aaoqe atyraao3 uorJ suonnlf,xg pue suo11e1ndr1g pu? suortrpuoJ aql ul paulstuoc stalluu aql ol uolupp? uI
sNolrd3cxS 0uvoNVrs
'luatulturuoJ srql go suoyspord eql ol polqns eJ? puu uo pesBq
oq lsnu lueulluuroS sq1 ,(q peta oc uoorar{l ate8lrou oql Jo snlBls eql ro lsorelq Jo e}Rlsa 0q1 ol 011!} eql Jo sn}?N aql Jo lno
8dlsFe ,(usdudC aqt tsq;gu iulrq ,{uru ro eaiq ,(uu pamsriy lasodord aql l?ql uollc? Jo slqtu ro suotlce :o uol1ce ,(uy 't
'ulareq peglporu {prardxa se ldacxa
tuaugrrutuoJ stql Jo UEd D opBtu puB acuereJar ,tq polurodrorul ,(qaraq arc qrplrr! pernsul pasodord aql Jo to^q u loJ_peltFrl
-uroc iercllod ro ,(iqod 3o ulrbS aqi go atrla,r63 uorj suorsnlcxa aql'puu'suollqndlrs pus suolllpuoC eql pu? suo$t^ord iutmsul
aq1 o1 pelqns s1 dllpqcll q3m puu roJ peplururoc sagrllod ro {o11od aqt roy V elnpetps tn pal?ls lunoue aql paarxa
^Ulqefl
qcns
fieqs lue r ou uJ 'luarullruruoJ slql ,{q pararoc uoaraql aEeElrour Jo lsaratul ro alslse arll alsejc ro erlnbce o1 (c) Jo 'g eFpaqrs
u1 u,norp suolldaJxo olBulru;1a o1 (q) ro goa.raq sluauarnba: rql qll^\ flduroc o1 (e) qlpJ pooE ut tur-1u1rapun ul uoaraq eJuull
-al ur parlmu! ssol pnpp ro; Iluo pu? roJ pel1ru[uor sarcl;od ro IcJlod Jo urroJ aql w pernsul Jo uonrulJap 0q] rapun papnlc
-r4 seircd rlJns pue parnsul pasodord paruuu eql ol ,(1uo aq IIBIF luourlpuruoJ sr-ql repun ,{uedruo3 aq1 ;o ,t1q;qer1 '€
'suorlelndqg pue suollpuo3 osaql Jo € qderttrud ol luensrnd pallncul {lsnolr-ard
I14qe11 uro.ry Iueduo3 ar{l a elar lou [?tF luaupuoue rlrns ]nq '{lSurprocce lueulluruoC sFIf Jo g elnpegcs puau? ABru
uoitdo itl 1u
-r(uedruo3 aql irellerir raqlo io u4u1c aira,rpu 'aiuerquicua 'ueq 'lreJap qcns fw 3o a8palnoul pnlce sarlnbce asr,u
-reqlo ,(uudruoS aql JI ro'{usdruoJ erp ol atpapnoul qcns esopslp ll?qs pa.rnsul pesodord aqr 31 'atpalnou{ qtns asolJslp, os o}
parnsuy pasodold aqi 3o ernp3 fq pajrpnlerd sr fmdruoJ er{t lualxa aql ol uoareq o]u?Ilar Jo 1cu .{ue u.ror; tutllnsar a8eruep
ro ssol i{ue ro; {1mqeg1 urorJ pa efier aq erF {uedtuo3 aq} '8uJt1r,n u1 ,twduroS eq} ol e8pel,roll)l qtns osoltslp ol IIEJ fieqs puE
'loarai1 g apparpg ul ir,sorqs-asoq1 u[ql Jaqlo ]uaru]lururoC sr-q1 ,{q pa.raaoc uoareqt aEe8lrou ro tsoralu .ro alsNa aq1 Supra;;e
rirreurr5t{ro io rirri;c asreapu'ecuitquicue''uaJ1 '}cayap ,(ue ;o'a8pa1hou1 Jenlce sarrnbce ro sBq pemsq pesodo.rd eq1 g1 'Z
'luournrlsul Itunces reqlo ro'peep lsnrl'lsnrlJo paap opnlcur IIEr{s'ureraq pasn ueq/r ' ..a8u81ro ur,, ulsl aql 'I
sNorIV'rndrIS oNV sNorrroNoc
'fuuduloC eql Jo llnuJ aqtr lou sr sarcfiod ro ,(cJ1od qcns anss! ol arnI.BJ eql teql pap!^ord 'srncco ts4J ra^arlc1g,$ 'enssl Bqs
roJ prlllluuoJ saycllod ro,{cg1od eql uaq, Jo Jooreq elep alrloaJJa aql ralJB sqluoru xrJ aleulu[al pu? a$ao IIBqs raPunaraq suoll
.zft1qo puu {1gqe1| J1u puE acumsl4 o1lp go sapqod ro Icqod qcns Jo aruensq aql ot ,ftuu[u4ard $ lueurlluturoJ sltlf,-
'lueuaseropua luenD06qns Aq Jo
luau41uuroJ slql Jo eJuunssr er{l Jo eu4l aql tp rar{lra '{u?duroJ aql Iq ;oaraq y oFpeqcs u peuesul uaeq a Bq rgJ.PellFuulol
sercqod ro {c;1od aq1 yo lunouru a(1 pue pernsul pasodord aq1 go fig1uep1 aql uerlJr\ ,{1uo a llreJJe aq fipttrs lueurllwtuoj glq.1,
'yoeraq suollulndrls plr? suorllpuo3 eql ol pue g
pw V salnperps yo suolsprord aq1 o1 1calqns ge lro;e:aq1 saErer{c pu? srunrruald aq1 ;o luaufed uodn 'y alnpe{cg u! ol porraJor
io paqpcsap fuiiaql u1 fqareq pore oc lseralrn to atelsa ar{t Jo e6Se3uour ro reu,no s? 'v alnpaqts ul pewuu parnsuJ pesodord
arfl Jo ro^E u.r 'v alnpeqcs w paglluep! s? 'aouernsur apg 3o salc;1od ro fc1;od sl! enssr ot slrruluot fqaraq 'uollerappuoc
elgEnle^ e rog 'fueduro3 aql pefisr r4areq 'uorlerodroc ?losaurql^l B 'VIOSSNNIW dO ANVdy{OJ AJNWnSNI g'IJll
Btosauulw 'slpdeauull l lo Aueduroc lcols e
vrosrNNr[1ll ro
^NVd^ol
roNVUnsNl surl
'aeu 0z6 l' IN3 t ll l yUl,llOC NOIIVICOSSV l'tl ll O NVl NVO l U 3 l,llv gllz zgg? ErroJ htlf
A L T A G O t{ l,l I T t'{ g ttl T
EEHEDI.,fl.E A
Arrl lcrtlon ilr'. VOOOOS29
For, tnfonn*tlsn OnlY
- ghrt$rr -Lrndrr Fol lcv
PRE REFORT i!IO.S*-TOTAL*- t@,OO
hltth vour rcnlttrnel rrlmr* nrfrr to VOOO6S29,
L E#frctlvr Drtcl mY Of ' 198{ .t E|OO A.!1.
2. Pollcv to bc ltlurdn lnd FroForcd Inrurrdl
"SU-TAI Lo*n Pol icv l97O Flavlr{on.
Fnororrd Inrurfdl
$. Thr rrtrtc ot^ intimtt ln thc lrnd drecrlbtd on rcfrnnrd to ln thtrrG*mnltnqnt rnd cEvtr.ed hrrrtn irl
A FEE
4' Titlc to thc rrtrtr sl' l$tfnort rovrprd hcrcln lr rt th* *fflstlvrdrta htnrof vcrtcd tnl
$KY LIOt\t PANTIEF8' AN ILLIIIIOIS LIT.IITEI} FffiTTfiFlFTtIP
S. Thc lrnd rrfrrrcd to ln thlr Connltnont la drterlbcd u follourr
LOT A-3r H-OCK fi' LIOtlS RISG€ St BOMSlffrtr AG-EtffiDIt$ T0 TIE FL0T
ftGCmIEO r"llJLY tlr 1t69 IN ffi( 21!l AT FRe 64€r OH.S{TY tr Fffi-E'
STATE F CU-ORABO.
I
tt:,. -_---,
ALTA COiltttTtfE$fT
80!frrlfi.S E-r
(R*ruir*rrrntrI firel lsrtlrn llor ll0OOigEiS
Thr tollsrlnr ue thr nrrvlrm*ntr ta br colrllcd rlthr
l. Frvncnt *o or lrn thr rccsrmt of thf rrtht{rrl of ocFtr$or.r *i th*f{l I s*ntldr.rtl*n for thr *trt* er Intrreit to br thrunrd.
2' Fr-terr tnrtlumnt(tl cmrtlnt thr *rtrtt ar latr*rt to br Inrumdr*lrt bf rxraut** rnd d,ulv flted for' f.tcoFdr to-ultr
;
l
I
I
I
ALTA COT.IIIITT'IgNT
ffil€rln-g n-2
(Exccptlonr) Appllcntlon No. VOOS6$29
Thr rollcv or pollel.r tq be ls*ucd rulll contrln rxcrpttona tq thrt$lloutns uDlcrr thG rrni aFG dltnorcd c# to thc rcttrfrctttn cf th*
CqfiFaRYl
l. Strndrd Exccptlons 1 throush $ rrlntrd on thr cover th*ct.
6. Textr lnd trrcrrnrntr not yrt duc ot" rrvrblr *nd ltaclrl rrr{rfr;rnttnot vrt carttftrd to the Tcfuurcr'r afflca,
7. ftnv unprld trxcr or rrr;*rnentr *rtlnrt trld lrnd,
8. Ltcnr fon sntrtd Bater rfid satscr €trNr$ctr if tny.
9. RI6HT ffi PR(FftIETOR OF A VEIN OR LOE TO EI(TRNCT AND REIIOVE HI$ MS
TTGREFRtrI gT{ff.N-A TTE 8AI.IE gE FOUilN Tg FSI{ETRAIE sR IffTENSECT TTE
FREI'IISEE A8 R*$GRT'€B IN TJNITSD STATE$ PATSHT HEf;SftNHD SEC€HSSF ZfTl920r IN Bm( tA AT PAC€ +!.
IO. RISHT (F }NY Fffi BITCTGS ON CANA.S CS}&TfiIT,|CTED BY THE ATTTIffiITY OFT}€ I'!{ITED ATATEA AS RESSRVED IN UilIT€g STATES PATEIIT RECOfiDED
ffigEr,lFER 29f t9?Or IN AOnK ra AT pAE 4e.
ll. RESTRtr0TIVE CSrd'€NANTgr l*ll0t{ IIO NOT COr'lTAIltl A FOfiFETTURE OA fie\TGRTERCLfl.iSE' BttT SIITTINO REGTRICTTONS' IF ANYr EA$E ON ftACE' Cfl-Gft'
R€LIOIS,h OR NATIONAL ORISIN' AS Ctr{TAINED If{ lirSTRult€NT RgCffiffintL{-Y 2g' 196?r IN SO(I( "l! AT PA€E {.4t ANO AS fl1EHEED IN lN$TRutlSNTR€ffiDEb DECEI{BER O2r ltTO' IN BOOI( 219 AT FmE 2gg.
12. EASSHSTIITS AA fiE$€RI/ED Af{N EXCEPTSD TO FEgT IN IIIFTH ALOI'IO HffiH 8lffiff fl-L TNTEfiIffi LOT LIN€S $IN 20 Fg€Y IN I.ITOTH IiS4ARO FNOil TI€
IESTERLY 8AI'II( OF REB $AIIID6TOT'|E CNEEH FOft LITILITY SHB TIRAI}I$BT
PL'FFOSES AS SIOI.I}I ON THE PLAT Of LIOIII.|S RTDOE $UBDIVISION.
lA. "fiJIlOEl'IENT lltl FAVAR OF lC. TR(il.If r ARCHITEBT$I Il*C, r AN OHIO
CSRPORATI0N ASAINST I{SUHTAIT{ FROFERTIHS, LTD., A SS-ORAffi
COFFORATTON IN TI.IE AITOIJI'IT fiF XXX PI*US CNURT GffiTS ETTITERED OH TXX
TRAIiISCRIFT OF IS{ICH HAS RECORBSD FEFRI.'ARY 26, T97$, IN 8g0il 238 AT
FBE 7i?' CIVIL ACTION NO. 24O?, DISTHICT COI,f,RT TH AITID FOR TIS Tfl.SITY
OF EAALE.
COMMITMENT
TO INSURE
This commitment was produced and
issued through the office of
LANDTITLE
GUARANTEE CIIMPANY
lxi H tn?.%lixl,".?ro'od i37
16 So' Frontase !9t-!d-- Vl, Coto""Oo gt66a
.tnentafrr
"*U
fJelarceS--*Z_,r-Fe_
vrosrrururllf ro
^NVdwoN
rcruvunsrul rurl
'{ro}euErs pazuoqln€ reqlo ro
recggo Surleprp,r e ,{q pau8rsrelunoc uoq/$ prIE^ oq ol'V oinpeqrs ur u^\oqs alep oql uo srocuJo pozlrol{lne ,{pp s1t ,{q pexgie
olunaraq eq ol JBes pus au?u alerodroc str posnuc seq sloseuul111;o .{rnduro3 ocuurnsul anll 'COaUAHlt SSANIIAT NI
'luorulnuuoJ slqt .(q para,roc uoaraql aSu8uoru ro lsetolur ro a1?lse 391 enp^
roJ procol go serrnbcu parnsur pasodord eql el?p aql o1 roud lnq JooJeq el?p a^IlceJJe eql ol luonbosqns Eutqcelle
Jo spJocor clqnd eql ur turreedds lsrg 'po}?orc '.{u? Jr 'srellEur raqlo ro sulelt osro^pe 'sacu?JqrunJue 'sueTl 'sl3tJac 'S
'sp:ocar c11qnd sql ,(q uaoqs
tou pue ABI ,(q pasodur 'paqsrurng rou8ereq ro aloJolerogl IBIJalzur Jo roqel'soct^Jes ioJ 'uo{ e ol lqEP ro 'ua11 ,{uy 'n
'sproca: c11qnd aql {q u,noqs lou er? qtnll\ pu? esopsp ppon sesurard aq13o uoqcadsul
pue ,ta,r.rns lierroc B r{rrqrv\ slreJ ,(ue pue 's1uau.n{ceorcuo 'uare ur eEelrot4s 'seu![ fuepunoq u slclguot 'salsuedarJsl( 'E
'sproce.l c11qnd eql fq urtroqs lou 'sluellJeseo Jo slutBlt lo 's1uouas?g 'z
'sp.Iocar clqnd aqt ,tq u,moqs 1ou uotssessod ut senred Jo suplc ro qqSJg 'I
:8urmo1log aql ol teafqns osp s! lueulnruoJ sr-ql
'o1 paJJsJsJ a,roqe a8erairo3 ruorJ suorsnlJxg puu suor1u1ndrl5 pu? suolllpuoc aql u! pot4Bluos srelleu aql 01 uollJpp? uI
sNorrdScxr cuvoNVts
'tuaurlFmuo3 slql Jo suols!^ord aqt ot laafqns aru pu? uo pecuq
eq lsnu luaulluuro3 srgl {q paja^oc uoeraql e8EBlrour aqt Jo snleN eql Jo lsatelq ro alqs,e aql ol eIll eql Jo sn}B$ ar{l Jo Ino
Sdpge furduo3 aql lsq;E? iqrq ,(uur ro e,req ,(utu pernsul pasodord eql lpr{l uollt? Jo slqip ro suotlcu lo uolpe ,(uV 't
'ureJar{ poulpour ,(lssardxe 8B ldetxe
luaulltutuo3 srql;o gud B apetu puB oruereJal {q palerodrocur dqaraq are qtq_Ar pelnsul pasodord erll Jo ro^uJ u.t JoJ_ Pallltu
-uroc saloqod ro ,{iy1od go ur61 arf yo a3era,r63 ruorj suopnlcxa aql prn suollulndrlg puu suolllpuoJ erg puu suo-Isl^ord Srnmsul
aql ol lcafqns sr dl1gq?[ gcns pu? IoJ pellrunuoc sarcllod ro ,(c[od aqt roJ V alnpeqrs ut pelsls lunoure eql Paat-le ^ll[qeJ[
qons
eqs luora ou uI 'lueurlrunuo3 sr-q1 {q pero oc uoareql aSu8uoru ro tsaralu Jo alelse eql oleerc ro srpbcu o1 (c) ro 'g alnpolps
ur u,roqs suondacxa oleulurlo o1 (q).ro loeraq queurarrnbat aql rJll/$ {ldruoc o1 (E) r{}pJ pooE ut Suqelrapun ul uo?req etu?[
-er tn peunour ssol Isnlc? ro3 {1uo pu? roJ pellruuoo sercglod ro ,,(c11od Jo uroJ eql ul palnsul Jo uoqnlJep eql repun pepnlt
-ur sa$red qcns pue parnsul pecodo.rd parueu er$ ol ,(po aq [eqs ]uaulnuruoJ slrlt rapun ,(ueduro3 aqt go {tJ1tqet1 't
'suot1r1ndn5 pus suotllpuoJ esaql Jo t qderterud ol luensrnd palrntul i(lsnoneld
flpqen ruorg,{ueduro3 eql eAeJIaJ lou 1?rF luaupuoun qcns 1nq ',{18u-rprocca luaulruruo3 sltll Jo g elnpaqrs puaure {eul
uoii<io'itl 1u
-fuedruo3 aql -'ra11zrir raqgolo -rurzlc airaapu ' o5uerqurircu5 'uiq 'loayap qcns fue go atpel,roul pnlce sarlnbce asrm
-raqlo .,(uudruoS eq1 g! ro 'l(u?duioC aql ol atpalnou{ qcns asolcslp ?qs pernsul pasodord aqt;1 'a3pa1,nou1 qons asolcslp os ol
parirsul pasodoid aq1 jo arqpg fq poilpnferd sr ,(usdruoJ aql lualxo eql ol uoaraq eruuJler Jo 1ct Iue urorg tuppser aEeuep
ro ssol i{ue ro3 ,(1ygqq1 urorl pe^olar eq leqs {ueduo3 aql '8u!t!JA\ ur ,{ueduro3 eqt ot a8pal,tou1 qcns asoltslp 01 IIq lJEqs pus
';oaraq g alnparpg u1 ir,t'oqs asoql ucql reqlo lueulruruoJ sJrll ,(q para,roc uoareql a€eSlrout .ro lserelul Jo alulsa aql Sutlca;3u
rllieu rJqtb io urpulc asre,rp'e'acuirqurncua 'ua;1 '1ca3ep {uu go a8pal,nou1 1en1oe sortnbce ro suq pomsul pasodotd aq1;1 'Z
'luelunl$ul ,{lpncas raqto ro 'p3ep lsnrl 'lsnrl Jo peap apnlrur lpr{s 'ularaq pesn uaq,n '..e3eE1rou,, ulel oqJ, 'I
sNotrvlndtrs oNV sNotrtoNoc
',{ueduro3 eql Jo llnq aql }ou s! serclod ro rcrtod qcns ensq ol ernlrcJ oq] t?ql pappord 'srncco lsrlJ raAeqcFlxr 'ansst leqs
toJ palllturuoc sagcqod ro {c11od eq1 ueq^\ ro Jooreq elep a^rlcoJJa oql ralJe srlluot! x$ aluulrura} pue_es?ai IFqs rePunareq suo$
.e8Jlqo pue /qlllqull IIB pu? ocuBrnsr4 altn Jo senlod ro ,{c11od qrns Jo acuBnssr eql ol ,{:eurunlerd sl luourlltutuoC slgJ
'luaruasaJopuo luanbasqns ,(q ro
luarul.nuuoC slrp Jo eru?nssr eql Jo aurl aql tz raqlla 'i(uudruoJ or{t fq yoeraq y alnpaqJs uI pauosul uaeq a Br{ roJ paluuurot
sarcllod ro {c11od aql go lunoruE aql pu? pansul pasodord aq1 3o Ilyluepr eql uoq \ dpo ea11ce;30 aq IIErls luaul$ruoC sIqJ,
';oaraq suollrJndlls pue suonlpuoJ eql ol puE g
pue V seppeqrs 3o suospord aql ol lca[qns IIs :roJeraqt sa6r?r{i pue surnrurard eql Jo luau^ud uodn 'y alnpeqJs uI ol porraJer
io paqpcsap fuifaqr q Iqaraq pare,roJ lsarelu ro alstsa eqt;o a5se8lrour ro rau,no sB 'V alnpeqts u! peqeu pernsul pasodord
erp Jo toAEJ u! 'V olnpaqcs w peu$uopr se 'aouernsur a1l1l .;o sarcJlod ro {crTod stl anssr ol slJtuluoc fqoraq 'uotleraplsuoc
alq?np^ ? IoJ 'r{uEduroc eql palpc u1a:eq 'uollErodror ?losauulll B 'YJ,osgNNIy{ go INV,IWOS iICNYUnSNI A'IIII
stosauulw'sllodeeuull l lo Aueduroc lcols I
vrosrNNr[,1] ro
^NVd^ol
icNvunsrul nrrl
'^aU oLOl - lNlt{lltltlloC NOIMCOSSV 3lJ'll ONV] NVClU3llV
aLIZ Zg9Z rurol tAtl
ALTA CftHI"IITHENT
S*HENULE A
Appl icatic,n No. VCtOtt6S2?
For Infqcmation Bnl v
- Eharges -Lender' Pol icv
PRE REPORT 'T5O.OO--TOTAL-- $50.00
[.lith voun remittance please refen to VOOO6$2?,
l. Effective Bate: HAY 01' 1994 at S:O0 A.H.
2. Pal icv to be issued' and Froposed Insured:
Loan Po I i cv l?7O Revi s i c,n. TFB
Proeosed I nsur.€d !
3. The estate ae inter.est in the land descrited or referred to in this
f,omrritment and cc,vered herein is:
A FEE
4. Title ta the estate cir. irrter.est c<,vered henein is at the effectiveda.te here*f v€sted in!
SHY LION PARTNERS, AN TLLINOIS LIHITET' FARTNERL1HIP
5. The land referned to in this Cc,nmitment is degcribed as f ol I orrrst
LCIT A-3' BLOCI{ A, LICINS RIDGE SUBFIVISION, ACTBFIIINC{ TQ THE PLAT
RECORBED .IULY 25, I?69 IN BFfrIT 21,5 AT PAGE 64S, CBLINTY OF EAELE'
STATE BF CCILOFANO.
ALTA COHFIITFIENT
SCHEBULE B-1
. (Requirements, AFFIics,tion No. VOOO6529
Thefollotoinsaretherequirenentgtobccompltedrrrtthl
l. Pevment to or for the account of the en*ntore oF mortsasors of theful I considrration for the estate or inter€st to he insur€d.
?, . Proper instrumant{s} creatins thc, estate or int€rest to be insuredttust be executed and dulv ftled for record' to-oit:
T
Appl ication Nr_,. V0(tO65??
The pal icy or :'{. I icies ts be issued rrr i I I c,:ntain €xceFtions ta t l-refollauine urrless the same ar.e disposed af to the satisfaction c,f the
llrrrrPanY:
1. $tandar.d Exceptions I tfrr.sush F pr'irrted on the cover sheet.
6. Taxes aod aSsessrrents rrot yet due or rnavat,le and special assessfiierrtsn+t vet cer'tified ta the Tr'easur.er./$ affice.
7. Anv unpaid taxes or' assessmerrts asainst said land.
B, Liens f or unpaid urater' arrd seuer cfrar'sesr i f arrr'.
ALTA CLfH''I IT
StrHEEIULE B-2
(Exceetions)
RIGHT OF PRtrFRIETOR trF A VEIN OR LONE
THEREFROI'I $HfiULN THE SA]"IE FE FOUNN TO
PREI"IISE:} AS RESERVEN IN LINITEN STATES
1??O, IN BEII-]H F3 AT PAGE 4?.
I"IENT
Ttr EXTRACT ANF RET4OVE HIS fiRE
PENETRATE NR INTERSECT THE
PATENT REf,frRFEF NEtrEMEER 29"
9.
10. RIGHT OF I.JAY FOR NITCHES C'R CANALS CSN$TRLICTEN FY THE AUTHORITY CIF
THE UNITEtr 5TATES AS RESERVEN IN UNITEE STATES PATENT RECOREEN
BECEHBER ?P, 1??O, IN BOffI{ ?3 AT FAFE 4T.
11. RESTRIITIVE f,$VENANTS, HHIf.H DO NOT |]ONTAIN A FERFEITURE FR REVERTER
CLALISE, FUT TIPIITTINIJ RESTRICTIONS, IF ANY, BASEE flN RACE' CSLNR'
REL16ITIN' CIR NATIONAL ORISIN, A,T T:DNTAINEN IN INSTRLII"IENT RECORDEE
..ILILY 35' 1?6?' IN BCICIH =I-5 AT PAGE &49 AND AS AHENtrEN IN INSTRUI'IENT
REf,ffRNED BEf,EHBER 02, 1970, IN FOOI{ 21? AT PA6E ?35,
13. EASEMENTS AS RESERVED ANTI EX':EPTED lCI FEET IN WILITH ALONG EACH SIFEI]F ALL INTERIRR LOT LINES AND ?O FEET IN HINTH INh'ARTI FRIf,H THE
hIESTERLY FANI{ I]F RETI SANT:ITCINE C:REE}': FSR UTILITY ANN BRAINASE
PURFLISEE: AS $HFWN ON THE PLAT CIF LION"5 RINGE SUBNIVISINN.
13. .IUIIGEf'IENT IN FAVC'R C'F [.I. TRIIUT" ARf,HITECTS, INC. ' AN gHIO
f,ffRPtrRATIL'IN AGAINST I{ALINTAIN FRT'PERTIES, LTF, T A CCILORADCI
CIIRPIIRATINN IN THE AHOLINT NF XXX PLUS trOURT CS5T5 ENTEREN BN XXX
TRANSCRIPT EF I.JHILIH I"IAS RECC'RIIEN FEBRUARY 26, 1975, IN BOOI( 23* AT
PGE 75?, L1IVIL ACTITIN Nfi. "4O?" NISTRITT CI:IURT IN ANN FffR THE CtrUNTY
CIF EAISLE.
oi
TERENCE J. QUINN P. O. Box 1110
Eagle, Colorado 81631
Telephone: 303-328-71 16ATTORNEY AT LAW
JuIy 17, L984
Town Council
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage RoadVai-1, Colorado 81657
Re: Trout/Mtn Properties,/Reinforced Earth/Bonne Vue
I represent W. Trout Architects, Inc., which is the Plaintiff inan action in Eagle County District Court, concerning Lot 3, Block A,Lions Ridge Subdivision. My client claims a mechanicrs lien onthis property.
This property, as well as some adjacent lots, is also the subjectof a proceeding with the Town of Vail known as Bonne Vue. The applicantis Reinforced Earth Company, which appears to be a contract. purchaser
of this property.
The status of the lawsuit is that it has gone to trial , and thejudge instructed me to draw up a proposed judgment to the judge, but
have not heard back what he thought of it.
The status of the proceedings with the Town of Vail appears to bethat the applicant has tabled its applicationat the Planning & Environmental
Commission because of a problem with the design of the proposedbuilding. I say "appearsrt because it is unclear to me whether this
means the entire application is stil-l- incomplete, or just the buildingdesign part.
I und.erstand that under your regulations it is not reguired thata lien holder be notified of proposed action which might affect thelienholderrs rights, such as the erasure of one of the lot lines ofLot 3, which is part of the Reinforced Earth Company proposal. Ialso understand that a party in my clientrs position does not havestanding to appeal a decision of the PEC to erase a lot line, butthat the Town Council does have such standing.
On behalf of my client, I reguest that the Town appeal the actionof the PEC to the extent of the lot line erasure. If that erasurehas not yet become a final action, I ask that the TOWN APPEAL thisaction after it is taken bv the PEC.
Terxc:ce J. QuiWill Trout
Bob Horen
fr
\;
LLA-
Very truly yours,
rJQl11-w
Planning and Environmental Conrmission
July 23, l9B4
I :00
2:00
2:45
3:00
pm
pm
pm
pm
't.,
2.
Site Visits
l'Jork session on A & D Building at the s.ite
work session on vail Athletic club Hotel condominium conversion
Public hearing
Approval of minutes of .luly g, l9g4
Request for revisions to the Bonne vue earth-sheltered housingproject on Lots Al, 4?, 43 Lionsridge Filing e inJ-on-t"i-e,
P]99 t,.Lionsridse Fitins 4 to reddsisn th6 r,oJiin!'uniir.'Applicant: Reinforced Earth Company
Request for a setback variance and a concuruent density controlvariance in order to encrose an existing first flooi aici-iieawith.glass on unit 12, Vail Rowhouses at gOf East Gore Creek Drive.Applicant: Nelson King
Request for exterior alterations and for a conditional use permit forthe_sitzmark Lodge in order to develop cormercrial ipice iJu[rr of the
]Plg9 9ld to put a new plaza vrith a swinrning pool aird rooftop gardenabove the cormercial space. Appl icant: Siizmark Lodge
5. Request for exterior alteration in commercial core II in order toremodel the Sunbird Lodge buiding. Applicant: SuntirO Loage
3.
4.
MEMORANDUM
T0: P1 anning and Environmental Commission
FROM:
DATE:
30,000 sq ft
735 sq ft
29,265 sq ft
1,829 sq ft
16 units
Conrnunity Development Department
rluly 19, 1984
SUBJECT: Request for revision to the Bonne vue project on Lots Al , Az, A3,Lionsridge. Filing-2 and-on Lot 6, Block l, Lionsridge Fiiing 4 toredes'ign the housing units. Applicant: Reinforced"Earth.cdmpany
At the prev'ious Planning and Environniental Commission meeting on July 9th, the
fqR1.'icant decided to.table the project and resubmit design diawings ior the July23rd meeting. The staff had retommended denial for the 4O% stope-variance. Th;recommendation was denied for two reasons: 'l ) First, the visuil impact of theunits wou'ld be significantly greater than the'impact 6t ttre appiovea'untt Oeiign,2) Secondly, because the project_reflected more of a conventional housing desi!n
91eatil9.yisYl]. impacts, the staff felt that the relief from the strict interpieta-tion of the 40% lJopq^lesytation was no Ionger warranted. A primary factor ofthe granting of the 40% slope variance was ihe minimal visual'impaci of the proposal .It was felt that a precedent could be set by allowing the project to Ue Ouiti ohslopes of 40% and above.
In response to the P'l anning and Environmental Commission suggestions, the applicanthas revised the design gt ing housing units. ihe rotiowini=itung"s have uebh maoeto the design of the units (please iee encloseO drawingsji
REVISIONS TO UNIT DESIGN
l. Change of roof materials from
2. Modification and lowerinq ofand incorporation of plaiter
3. Elimination of major portions
metal to cedar shakes
roof resulting 'in flat roofinto roof,
of metal roof on the first
over the master bedroom
and second I eve] s.4. fvlbdification of floor plan due to revised design
The total GRFA does not exceed the 30,000 square feet allowed.
GRFA ALL0I^JED PROPOSED GRFA
total
manager's unit
allowed per unitproposed
30,000 sq ft total- 735 sq ft manager,s unit
29,265 sq ft allowed
29,120 sq ft proposed
I,820 sq ft per unitl6 units proposed
Reinfo{} Earth -2- 7/lg/84
Credits Given:
Mechanical 28Storage .|83
Air Lock 40
5. E'limination of large chimney termination
It should be noted that the use of reinforced earth teehnolo-gy for the project isthe same__as at the,lune llth Planning and Environmental Commiision meetingi-The staff has received a letter from-Reinforced Earth Company from James -
Merkle, research engineer, that states ,'The use of reinforrced earthon the earth-integrated structures planned for the Bonne Vue project has notchanged at all from the previously bpproved design." Please iee-the enclosedletter in your packet.
CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
n review of Criteria d Findings, Section 18.62.060 of the Municjpal Code,
ommunit ve lopmen approval of t vari ancepaseo upon the following factors:
fhe relationship of the requested variance to other existin@and structur
Visual and aesthetic considerations have always been an important part of theBonne-Vue project's design.In the E.I.R. it wis clearly stbted thal because itr.issite-is very visible, it-was important that the uniis be designed to be lowprofile units blending into the hiilside. In addition, when the-project was ipproved
9,9 a sqegial developmdnt district, it was reviewed against the SDb d6sign stanhirds.Ine proposat was reviewed favorably because the buildjngs were appropriate to thesite and the orientation, spac'ing,*materials, corors, iia texture of the units-blended into the hillside. 'Stafi-now ieets tnat the-revised unii o"rign *alniatnsthe design considerat'ions that al'loweo ihe project to be afproveo oiiginaiiv.--1revisual impact of the.revised_proposal ii now aimost as minimar as iire"ijr,siiroposat.The applicant has made-an effbrt'to respono to ttre etanning and Environmental Comm.is:.-sion's concerns as wert as stiri ioni*"is by changing the copper roof to a shake -roof' adding the planters to the roof r."ui", iJireasing ir'e-iiope oi th" ioJil'inaeliminating portions of the tooi.iiog"it"". The unit design that was presented
INDiVIDUAL UNIT GRFA
Lower level
Upper, l evel
720 sq
I,100 sq
ftft
1,820 sq ft proposed sq ft
sq ft
sq ft
Rforced Earth -3- 7/1s/84
on July 9 showed approximately l3 feet of roof area above grade. The revised proposal
now show 9 feet of roof area above finished grade. A portion of the 9 foot arbais.also_a roof top planter. As was stated in ttre previous memo dated July 5, theorl 9'i nal reason for approving the 40% slope variance was not only because of thetechnology to be used on the project, but also because the project would be builtlnto the hillside creating a 1ow profi'le design with minimal negative impacts onthe view of the hillside.- The staff feels thit the applicant his minimiied thevisual impact to such an extent that it no longer great'ly impacts other uses andstructures in the vicinity.
The d
the
and
Granting,of a 40% slope variance could set major precedents for construction onVail's hillsides. The Bonne Vue project was liveh approva'l because of the uniquetechno-logy that was being used on the project. It shbuld be emphasized that tlieuse of reinforced earlh technology has'noi chanq sal
to which relief from stri ctoTaecifiedation is n
amonq s tes}.Jithout grant of spec prr v eqe.
a roved on June ll,
the
the or l iteral 'i nte retati on and enforcement
es to ach ieve atib a 1t itle
cause of the revis
will not constitute a grant of specia'l privilege
on other properties classified in the same district.
will not be detrimental to the pub]ic health,
injurious to properties or improvements in the
ovgq_on uune il, t984. Hecause of the revrsed design of the unit areinforced_technology for the entire project, staff feels that thestrict or Iiteral interpretation of the 40% slope requlation is war
that the relief fromstrict or Iiteral interpretation of 40% slope regulation is warrantedno special privilege would result if approved.
The effegt,gf theJgquelled=va!!?nce on tisht and air, distribution of population,
transportation and traffic facilffi
The staff has stated previously that the technology seems to be workab'le for thishillside, and that the stability of the s'lope wili-not be a problem.
Such other factors and criteria as the comm'ission deems appljcable to the proposed
vari ance.
FI NDINGS
The Planninq and Environmental Commission shall make the following findings beforegranting a variancer
That the granting of the variance
inconsistent with the limitations
That the granting of the variancesafety, or welfaren or materially
vi ci nity.
Reinforced tu0-o- 7/19/84
That the variance is warranted for one or more of the
The strict or literal interpretation and enforcementwgy]d.result in.pract.ical difficulty or unnecessarywith the object'ives of this title. -
fol lowing reasons:
of the spec'ified regulationphysical hardship inconsistent
There.are except'ions or exlraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable tothe site of the variance that do not apply generally to other propei"tiei in-thesame zone.
The strict or litera'l interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulationwould deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of ottrei-propertiesin the same districr.
s r4[t_BElqu{glqallQ N s.
Staff recornmends approval of the revised housing uni.t design, 40% slope variance,as well as the previous requests for approval siatea in-inE'.lune 7,_'l gg4 memo that \lare required in'order ror ttre-proj"lt-i5 proceed to the iown councjl. The applicantli:r1.l" ir:??.f;:*:,,:ltl[:,i:":;::li::ii: "".",.",0iiion,",u0. by ths pEC and planninsstarr . starr beri":::^tll! ir," iriSg;"i-tv or tlre-p.oj"il-r,"lT":il ;ffir;:ln:1"*11f,""'nn ,,respect to visual'impact and the use 5t iirnovative'r"inio"l.o earth technoloqv.It is rett that thesb.two pri.mary-iriie"iu i."-g"itiil";;;;;"i;' iir"iil,"p"iji.t(visual impact and reinforbea eai'ilr'i"ir,norogy) have been adequatety addressedby the applicant. The staff [;;*;.il;ljo! rgt approval incrudes the forlowinq :iissues: 1) request to rezone roi e ,-iiioir. i, lioniijis.'rji'ing +.from.single Fimily .fij,i,i.1;to Residential cluster, z).requesi'tor-ipeciat Development District l4 for the abovelot and for Lots Al, R2."na Aj'-ii ""qr.it ro" u-min6i'iunaivision in order to combinethese 4 lots into one,,4) "equesi'ror'a-variance to the rrizaro regulations to allowbuildings to be rocateo on iiopeJ oi'qOz and above tor-roii-o and 43, and 5)requestto revise the housing unit deslgn.-'
\)o(r(tsF
rcL
TJCrPs/fl,llr
ffi
eirl
'r\dlRl
(65#c=
VA
(
(
(
I
oo
..o
Es'
P
I
i
I*--9'ltrf=T-.r--+
- t_-l
o
tl N
(u
Ctlatt
D,OF7-ilF-
FEIzF4q
\IJ
V
€
-f
@
(uctla6
CL
E
E
b
E
Z or'
a,E6FE5 .{-z$
t
\-*
[*
:1.
t
arnf,'>-J \-\
{
$v
Ec
_o**s$F
$$
$$
a
$
$
E
Bq,\
C
f$p
EEr)4
$g
e\\J.
;
au
?_-
=
oo o
Itrb3''z.tF
F
.!a.t
E.Itt
oEl
.=l-=
)
E
$*
E
R@s
qtri
R
=$$
B-
-.r ez..o
h^
G=SE
\)o(rF
tr9-
2
E
se2O.
-\Jr,D
4
at-hl
(
(\l
c,
CDdg
A\L]9g
s€
s
s
\rl
6g
V
t\
\5t
\
\
\t
It
H+
-r!*{sh-€4
\tLFi(
Tll.f
ai
Yt{v
Iro
.|\
I!P*Ei
€---;€hi{
-€i:c;e, \ffi
\,
\
i
I
\
\
t;rh
ut
6IT
t
lfrI rl,
d
T
I
rl
o
Research
A//kW.
I{erkel, P. E.Engineer
JA}I:ec
|ac)oere
The Reinforced Etlrth Gomp3lnylosslyn c€nter, Itoo l|ofth noor€ stteet, artington, vargtnio 2r2o9-t96o
tefephon€: ro,rta2r-14r4telex: gototo REEAFTH AGr
Reply to:
July 13, 1984
Vail Plannins StaffVail, Colorado
Dear Staff Mernbers:
Itre use of Reinforced Eartl@ on the earth integrated structuresplanned for the Bonne.vue project rr"i-"ot chanled ai "ii--rio* tir"!:"5o": approved-desiq. 'Reintoriea rarth will be used on bothot the lower levels wiih reinforced concrete b1ock or ieiniorceaconcrete on the top walt. This is the same design *"a-*-tfr"previous design.
Other Offices
Atlanta, Georgia
Boston, Massachusetts
Chicago, Illinois
Cincinnati, Ohio
Dallas/Ft. Worth, Texas
Denver, Colorado
New York, New york
Sacramento, California
Seattle, Washington
Sincerely,
ssrrlrt
'Re'ntorc€c, Eadh and the Reinto.ced Ea.ti tooo af! registerad lraoemarts of Th. Ronrorced €arth Cotnlrany.
o
ffiiHu"#qp'wN
oFVA'|L
AMENDMENT TO ARCFITERRA/BONNUE VUE
VISUAL ANp AESTHETIc coNstDERATIoN
VISUAL AND AESTHETIC CONSIDERATIONS
The location oF Bonne Vue is on the sidesrope of the Gore vafley et elevations of8,245 to 8,349 msl. As.such, rhe proposed development will be -trighly visiblefrom rpany unobstructed views in the valrey. by traverers on u.s, Incergtate
79''lo by skiers riding rhe Lionshead Goniora and skiing rhe rower sropes ar'Lionshead.
During construction' the site will be almost fully cleared, with excevation holes,soils piles. materials end equipment prevalent. creating a visually unpteasant sight.
After construcrion, rhe Bonne Vue homes are designed to brend into the hiltside.lbndscaped with a naturar mountain setting, and intended to create a visue[ypleasant residenrial community. The unitJare designed to eonform with existingland contours as much as possible. and have been designed to fit the topographyof the site. conventionar housing units on a similar srope would heve a muchlarger prof ile
From a distance, the site is typicar of Gore Valey side-sropes and presents nosensitive or critical scenic views. Hence, the proposed deveropment does notblock or intrude upon any such special views.
Bonne vue will be visibre to its immediate neighbors. Horaever, no seenic viewsby nearby neighbors will be blocked or intruded upon from the south, easr or west,due to the low profile, earth-integrated construction of the project.
From the Bonne Vue residents,point of vieru,, the design of the units will providean excellenE view of the va ey, whire providing visuaiprivecy from Bonne Vueneighbors.
245 V_allejo SJ . San Francisco, Catitornia 94.t 1 1 . (4t S) 433-2352P O. Box 6364 . Denver, Colorado 80206 . (303) e63_i0S91000So. Frontage Rd. West, Suire 100 . Vait, Cotorado 81657 . (303) 476_0g51
Berridge Associates, Inc.
Planning LandScape Architecture
MEMORANtrUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
The Following secrion will revise rhe thesection of rhe Bonne Vue EIR tpg. 261.
The Reinfolced Esrth Compony
IOssfVn C€nter, I'OO ltorth moore Street, arlangton, vlrganio z2zog_lgco
tefephone: rotla27-r4r4
TEIEX: 9O'O'O RCEARTH AGTI|
Research
JuLy 73, 7984
Planning Staff
Colorado
Dear Staff Members:
The use of Reinforced Eartl@ on the earth integrated structures
planned for the Bonne Vue project has not changed at all frorn the
previous approved design. Reinforced Earth wi.11 be used on bothof the lower levels with reinforced concrete block or reinforced
concrete on the top wa11. This is the same design used on the
previous design.
l-I
I Other Offices
I Atlanta, Georgia
I Boston, Massachusetts
I Chicago, Illinois
I Cincinnati, Ohio
I Dallasr Ft. Worth, Texas
I Denver, Colorado
I New York. New York
I Sacramento, California' Seattle, Washington
Reply to:
VaiI"
Vail-,
Merkel , P.
Engineer
F
JAM:ec
Sincerely,
]€lnfo}ted eo"th
' Retntorced Earth anO the Retnlorced Eanh loga are regtstered tnteme s ot'fhe Reinforced Earth Company
O-s]
;qiiii}""#ru,wN
oFVA'L
AMENDMENT TO ARCHITERRA/BONNUE VUE
VIAUAL AND AESTHETIC CONSIDERATION
VISUAL AND AESTHETIC CONSIDERATIONS
The location of Bonne Vue is on the sideslope of the Gore Valley at elevations of
B,2r+5 to 8,349 msl. As such, the proposed development will be highly visible
from many unobstructed views in the valley, by travelers on U.S. Interstate
70, and by skiers riding the Lionshead Gondola and skiing the lower slopes at
L ionshead.
During constnuction, the site will be almost fully cleared, with excavation holes,
soils piles, materiels and equipment prevalent, creating a visually unpleasant sight.
After construction, the Bonne Vue homes are designed to blend into the hillside.
landscaped with a natural mountain setting. and intended to create a visually
pleasant residential community. The units are designed to conform with existing
land contours as much as possible, and have been designed to fit the topography
of the site. Conventional housing units on a similan slope would have a much
larger profile,
From a distanee, the site is typical of Gore Valley side-slopes and presenis no
sensitive or critical scenic views. Hence, the proposed development does not
block or intrude upon any such special views.
Bonne Vue will be visible to its immediate neighbors. However, no scenic views
by nearby neighbors will be blocked or intruded upon from the souuh, east or wEst,
due to the low profile, earth-integrated construction of the project.
From the Bonne Vue residents'point of view. the design of the units will pnovide
an excellent view of the valley, while providing visual privacy from Bonne Vue
ne ighbors.
245VallejoSt.. San Francisco, California941 11 . (415\ 433-2357
P O. Box6364 . Denver. Colorado80206. (303) 863-1059
1 000 So. Fronlage Rd. West, Suite 1 00 . Vail, Colorado 81 657 . (303) 476-0851
Berridge Associates, I nc.
Planning . Landscape Architecture
MEMORANDUM
Tn.
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
The following section will revise the the
section of the Bonne Vue EIR tpg. 26).
Berridge Associates, I nc.
Planning . Landscape Architeclure
July 16. 1984
Peter Patten
Town of Vail
75 S. Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
Dear Peter,
Attached are revisions to the Bonne Vue/Architerra at Vail project which
resulted from comments heard at the last Planning and Environmental
Cornmission review as well as commentg from the Community Developrnent
Department Staff.
The changes which have been made and that are represented in the drawings
are the following:l. Change of roof material from metal to cedar shakes;
2. Modification and lowering of the roof resulting in f lat roof over the
master bedroom and incorporation of planter into roof;
3. Elimination of portions of metal roof on the first and second levels,
4. Modifications of floor plan due to revised design. The total GRFA
does not exceed the 30,000 sq.ft. allowed.
5. Elimination of large chimney termination.
\de believe that these modifications to the design of the project will respond
positively to the concerns of both the PEC and Staff with regard to the
previous design.
Please let me know if I can answer any questions thst you might have regarding
these revisions.
Berridge Associates, Inc.
PJ:pm
245 Vaf leto Sl. . San Francisco, Calitornia 941 1 1 . (41 5) 433'2357
P. O, Box 6364 . Denver, Colorado 80206 . (303) 863-1059
1 000 So. Frontage Rd. West, Suite 1 00 . Vail, Colorado 81 657 . (303) 476-0851
Peter Jemai
2: 00
3:00
pm
pm
l.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Planning and Environmental Commission
July 9, 1984
Site Inspections
Public Hearing
Approval of minutes of meeting of June 25, .|9g4.
Request for revision to the Bonne vue earth-sheltered housing project
91_Lots_Al, A2, 43 Lionsridge Fi'ling 2 and on Lot 6, Block tl L.ioisridgeFiling 4 to redesign the housing unit. Applicant: 'Reinforced Earth c6.
lgcuest to rezone Lots 2 and 3, cliffside Subdivision, from Residentialcluster to single Family Residential. Applicants: Divid Cole andDary'l Burns.
Request to-rezone Lots 1,4,5, and 6, Cliffside Subdivision, fromResidentia] cluster to single Fam'ity Residential. Applicanl: Town of vail
Request for exterior alteration to the vail 2l building in order to remodelthe entry of Gore Range Properties. Applicant: Gore flange properties.
Request-for revisions to the zon'ing code regarding outside vending whichwould allow outside vending on'ly under a special events permit withspecific criteria for its locatjon. Applichnt: Town of i/ail
I'.1.
T0: Planning and Environmental Comm.ission
FR0M: Community Development Department
DATE: July 5, 1984
SUBJECT: lgcuest for revision to the Bonne vue project on Lots AI, Az,A3 Lionsridge, Fi1ing.2, and on Lgt g, bfoi[-i,-fionsridge Frrfing tt0 redesign the housing units. Applicant: n6lniorceo Earttr ioripinv
After the June llth Planning and Environmental Commission meeting at whichthe project was given its fina'l approval, ttre appiiiuni-lrlritted a revisionlg t!" hgy;ins uiit_desisn. ihe-;i;ii-reets that this revjs.ion affectstne.overalI proposal .in such a significant way that it now warrents reviewagain bv the PEC ro determine'if ihe +oz itopL ul"ian.. ii sfitt iust.irieafor the-project. In the staff memJ-daied ;uhe 7,1984; ii is stated thatlT!: 40% slope.variance
"equesi iin-u" made under section I8.69.060 whichstates that variances to thd master hiiard orctnance-iin-oe appiiea-ror -
under.the usual ru]es and. regulations.- Moreover, section 1g.69.060 of thehazard ordinance states that-ihe tmaiier hazardpiuniiin'Ui altered fromtime to time to conform with new information or'existing ionditions.'Thus' it was the intent of the-ordinance that it not Ue"a ioncrete-document,
ll:l^lgl_!.chnolosies or-chansins .onaitions should be recosnizea as poiiinieE^sepLr'rs. A primary factor in the granting of the 40% siope varJance wasthe'-minimat visuii !1ni.1 of ttre proioiar. Iideed, ine-ioitowing statementmade,in the EIR on page e-l aodiels"!-ini=,"rne proposed units will be constructed directly into the hi'l lsideusing-the hitlside il:glt as support and insurlti"r. ir," oeiignis well suited for difficutt to'itevetop hiliiiaei-ihroush the useof proven soils engineering technologyi feini6ri"a-;;ilf, (aesiriuea
,in detail in Appendix n.) itris tectrno-t6gy provid; ;; irchitecturalrand torm capabre of, stablizing site conditions and thereby al lowingfor flexibility in the site p'lin Aeiign.,'
The staff indicated that..they felt strongly that this variance would notbe a special privilege.',This is a uniqu6 proposal for a site which is ippropriatefor. applyi ng the spei_ifi c technol ogy oding'p"5p"sea. -' Elritr-snet tered housi nqis increasing in.popularity, ana o[-trer-sifr.iiar' propo.uii' ;;ri;-;;; ;;.";;;"'consideration this one has-received. Earth-sheiteiea-airoras s6m" ;;;y--"'significant energy-cost savings and often provides Jitiicrit-to-deveroisites with a workab]e sotutioi. If conveniionat rrouiing-iere uetng'prbposed,the staff woutd most likely reconunend denia't., (meroliieiJrn" +,-rieiil-.--'
The staff feels that.lh".pfoje.t now reflects more of a conventional housingconcept than the earth-sheltered.concept. The follow.ing-ihanges have beenmade to the project (prease see the coi""rponJiil';;;;i;s;"in tne packet):
t Reinforced t1} -r- 7/5184
Site Perspective (pages 1 and 2)
Notes on changes:
I ryqft are highly visible where.y-rey were ,,non-existant,, before" sides of the units are now visible" "-
" the design and visual appearance of the project no longer follows thecontours of the siteo the proposed units are no longer "low profile units, blending into the hi'l ]side"
and now have a much larger profile very similar to conventional housing
Conceptual Site Plan (pages 3 and 4)
Notes on changes:
o parking and clubhouse have been moved to the west; parking spaces remainthe same
o pool and clubhouse design have been changed and reflect the design of thehousing units.
Unit Cross Section (pages 5 & 6)
o roofs.are_highly visible whereas before only a smalI portion of the fascia, was visible
o the sides and the backs of the units' third level is exposed and is no longerearth she'l tered
Unit Elevations (p.7&8)
o roofs are completely exposed to view
o "chimney terminations" are larger and impact views to a greater extent
SectionsA&B (p.9&10)
Notes on changes;
o exposed roof is very visible whereasr. before the roof was entirely earthrshel tered.
" back of the building is exposed, whereas before it was earth she'l tered
" units are bui'lt into the existing grade using the reinforced earth technoloqy--however the roof form extends above the exisling grade creating a strongvisual impact
Due to these changq!, tlle staff feels that the project shou'ld be reviewedonce agaln by the planning and Environmental Commission.
L
Reinforced farth] 7/S/g4
CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
review of Criteria and Findings, Section .|8.62.060 of the Mun i ci pal Code,ty Deve nt Department recohmerxis-EeniaT oFT revt ousapprovedvariancebaseduponthe--FoflowTng-J:tTT*
The relationshio of the requested variance to other existin
Since the beginning of this project, v'isual and aesthetic considerations haveDeen an^'lmportant part of the overall project's design. In the Environmentalrmpact Keport for Bonne Vue (on page 28), an entire iection is devoted to visualand aesthetic considerations. The-visuii and aesthetii considerations sectiongllh:^llR bggjlr bv statins how the pieposed aeveroiment-wirr-oe-rrighry-viii6r"rrom.many unobstructed views in the valley, by travelers on Interstale 70,and bv-skiers riding the Lionshead Gondoil'unf itciing-l[e-ior". stopei ai-Lionshead.if-fgllrying quotation .emphasizes why Bonne vue wtit ue designed lo be low-prorlte untts that do not_destroy the views from other parts oi the vlille.y:'rAfter construct.ion, the Bonne v'ue hores are aesigntJ t6-Li'ro*.ir"iiii'Iiitr,b'lending into the hi'l'lside_,_landscaped with a natiral mouniain sbtiing, ina '
intended to create a.visually pleashnt residential conununi[y. ltre pr6iiteof the units are designed to cbnform with existing tind-iontours as much asqossip19, and, as previously stated, have been "edesigned-lo iit itre iopoeraphyeven better than the previous design. Conventional h6using units on a smallerslope would have a muih larger proiile...Bonne vue wili be-vlslute to its irmediatene'i ghbors. " I ., .
Also, jn the June 7,1984 staff memo in Section VI, Special Development District
f:gi"_*,^s?D ,Des'ign standards, .the project was r"n jewba-agatnit ttrL erirdindIypeano.tsuitoing Design criteria. under the Building Typi section, the men6states "The buildins lype has been the greatest concirn-br tne project, andthe appropriateness-ot ine buildings to-the site is ine major fict6r in firesuccess of the development." undei the Building Design seition, the memo states:lf-?!i1dilg.,!"sig! is most appropriite ror th6 sitel ihe orientiiion,-spiiing,maEerlals' color ancl texture all blend into the hillside. AII exterior-wai lswill be of a color to match the earih tone of the site. Maximization of ioiirexposure is a key factor in the design of the units."
The.revised project will have much more of an impact on surround'i ng structuresin the vicinitv. The roofs and enas or th; buiidi;gi wiii be mucfi more-visiut"tg-.People looking up_at the hiilside. ttre origina'i iealin-ror approving tte -
40% slope was not oirty becaus" oi ir,. technololy neing-ui;a on the project,but also because the.project was beins buitt iiio-ir'""r'iiiiia" ci.uling-i-iovnprofile and would not impact the viewi ot ttre-rTTtiiu.."'i..uur" the disignof the project has changed to such an extent tn reipeii to-ilre oesign Ji ihehousing units.n the staff now feels that the project'ooes-trave stron! visual-impacts on other structures .in the vicinity.
Reinffed Earth -4- 7lSlB4
to which lief from the strict or I I inte retationotaied requla n is necessarv to ac e L tof treatment anonq s n the vicinit.v or to atte ntheotitte w'ithout srant of ateal;T-pFitll;ga
only reTevent factor iir :thisstability. The staff has
workable for thjs hillside,
probl em.
In the-June 7, 1984 memo, as wel] as in the June 4, 19g1 memo, it was statedby gtaff that if the.houiing were more conventionai, the +OZ itope viriirie-would not be aooroved. Beciuse the project utei *o""-oi u-.onueiriionui-trousinqdesisn that ci^i:ites visuai-imilcf;, Siuir re.ii-t'riii-*re ;"ii;i-;ffi";h"";;;j;i0r literal interpretation of ttre c0z-iiope reguiation-ii no longer warranted.Due to the feeliirq that this is-muih morb a c6nventionai unit design, a majorprecedent could b6 s"l pt, aifowing-tte-project to fj"-t"ifi on slopes of 40%and above. The Gore Va.liey's flodr ii basicaily built out, but much hillsidelfgS iq undeveloped. It'g iomnunity wiil face rinv-Cr'aif"ng'"s to open ourhi l l sides to additionar . developmeni. 9p_.lilg the dil;' io "cly" siopt-varianceswill compound the efforts to kbep our rriiisidei'is-ipen-ipii".
The gffect.gf the.rgquested var!uge on light and.?ir, distribution of population
and enforcement
ormi t
Asmentioned in a previous memo (June 4, lgBI) thesection is public safety in terms of the hillsidestated previously that the technology seems to beand that the stability of the slope will not be a
RECOMMENDATION
staff recommends denial of the 40% slope variance request for Bonne vue.The hous'ing units' proposed design wouid be appropridte on another site thatdidnot require a 4a%_s1ope variance. However,'given the fact that the projectis located on a high'ly visibte site having 40% itopes, the staff feels ttralthe conventional housing design impacts the project insuch a way that a 40%slope variance is no 'longer wirranled.
G
rJ$e
-lld.-cl-o-4
JH,
\$
H
s
luE
r'{," lii'
.lriiii r*.
,)itt.t
l{,t..''fli'i\tlf.. F,
[r.$t.El3
I\fi
$E
1...'EItl
fotriTi.4iitl
litri\.\i) \
t"..
,i '''
tr'1lr \ll't-
$,i i
,f
t\ f .
I
!
I
'c6d
GB()-&A-,ffi
ffi
r&$
fn
F\-
49,s=
,Ho
e*.Ee
as
l
/I
1dr+
E5a5gE&ZCLg CA-
a
tnz
.o
oo7{o
ta
q-t
q
.,, ,L
s
t
t
I
1I
;
t
\t-
i
LtA:
II
dIT
tiid
@
c=
H=,
H€vz.
EU
I
7
^:
I
I
I
I
it
,-.o
z crj
EU?oEHpe
=e.
,tr
B\o€l
*!
*'s
-I
./--.*.:
t\
s\'Frss^
-**r\ti+\\E:$''^!9fqtG
.k
$&
$
HIqt
o
$
I
€+63*
frag=
€H
$n
\u0
slY€t
8$a
is!
*fil
t,s
rt!brf
\r
351
jnl
H'
6t
sfrJl
"Jl
r-l
,/l
VI
f,l
il
5r
T
./\^ /^^-
H
flr
!
l
.1
I
t
Il
II
t
:if-:lll I-{[ ,Jilllill
JilI
tfr
tfl
ffi
il.c
il$i
il f$ili
ff.i
li.'frllL -'-r
[6
I
I
l-
?:6E
tst
(^I
i+-t il hlil ,lriIE loxirr iili.ITIi
$!l
sl
dn
,,aij
(
I
I
I
II
I
I
{
Lo
!
I
I
II -lrltin ic l!ilI i3r,Ip@\
\Y
'f
loES I
$t i@
+
..!Oflti 4.tra@
Jolsr I,$1,6\\z r@
@is
fri:{t
r\.1
i:r d
t
F-
!-i-f
r- 1
t:l\'
lt-r
l?.l(\
3{J ;i!
--"'j;eiIi d!.
'.t
-t
!
ilql
rl
j' jll,t D"dit;r=
!:
lF-
t--l
9f d{$
-+--pf lf, r$ *\d
F=HFr--ilts!
F=Et-
:
--l
!{
dE V*
{-.t-}R.F+t zdtN-t'v
l1 ttl'
I s$i_i!
\t^
.iF
.l
-tI
.t
I
.:i.
l
:fl -:
:i1$rkL
:${Ft
It
i: \-\ '-
fi
ill
ti
$N
,t$
+-at
ruY. [\
l,
I
-.,-r--j-.ixFFri--\ A
si1, 1*
t-
I
l
t_I lrfi:
| '*-:
E --:,Ill-l' :--i:l. -.:---., i.-:l
;
I
I
J
iiljlc
i5
a
:.--.F av \ !lF-iill i {rF=11.,.+-.==;
$d i@
' |l lHlu;J 1
-'--g.ll-llr
;:i11$_uu-'
.,1.i:i f i
:Fls,i
:i iir i*.'',tii ij
'r -1' \ ,l
+-Tis 4D
--i
tisli;f I...+-_.
$@ T-tiliffi
!l rt
I
a
-cp4o
!l kwuBzo
=4>
t+.1_r ,^\rr h3inu&etr
c.-c*d)
=*a2,Vt q!.1
-dFzF(lU'HV-€-
{
F
1rt
IJ
T
t
It{?
I
.(tl
Tll$t
$l
a
0
A
J
{
1
$ii{
r
6
tit
t'IIi"{ t-, T 'T
6
I4.
-rV(.)q-
e,af
2
E
trl
1l
$o$\6_x,
cc2o.Fs
<t
a
F
c. \t I
(TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
VIEMORANDUM
Planning and Environmenta'l Commission
Cotttnunity Development Department
June 7, 1984
Request to rezone Lot 6, Block I, Lionsridge Filing 4 from Single
Family to Residential Cluster and a request for Specia'l DevelopmentDistrict 14 for the above lot and Lots Al , A2 and A3; also a requestfor a minor subdivision in order to combine these 4lots into one.
Also, a request for a variance to the hazard regulations to allow
bui'ldings to be located on slopes of 40% and above for'lots 6 andA3. This 'is a revision and expansion of the Architerra-at-Vail project
approved in 1981 nov{ to be called Bonne Vue,Applicant: Reinforced Earth Company
I. BACKCROUND
In June of l98l the Rejnforced Earth Company applied for and received a
variance (from PEC and Council)to Section 18.69.040 (no bujlding allowedon 40% slope or more) of the Vail Municipal Code whjch granted approvalto construct 13 earth-sheltered dwelling units upon Lots Al and A2, Lions-ridge Subdivision, Filing 1. The applicants now wish to revise the previous
approval and expand the project. The purpose of this environmental impactreport is to present new and updated information regard'ing expans'ion ofthe prevously approved development. This expansion consists of the additionof property adjacent to the development both on the east and west. Theresults of the expansion are the addition to the development of three (g)
dwelling units and a clubhouse/recreational facility containing a.manager'sunit (aPplicant has agreed to standard employee unit restrictions), Thisfacility contains a lounge area, a ski storage and maintenance area, and,
on the lower level a garage area which will help to facj1 itate servjceto the project. Adjacent to the recreational building, a swinrning pool
has been provided (see sjte plan in Exhibit l).
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed dwelling units will be constructed directly into the hillside
using the hillside jtself for support and insulation (see Exhibits 2 and3), The design is well suited for hil'lside development and incorporatesthe same proven soils engineering technology, Reinforced Earth, as did
the _previous'ly approved Architerra Project. This technology, descfibedin detail in Section V of the EIR provides an architectural-'land foym
capable of stablizing hi1'lside conditions.
The site plan for Bonne Vue is attached (see Exhibit 1). The arrangernentof units consists of groupings of attached dwellings of two and threeunits together. There are two unit typesi a convex unit and a cancave
L
o eonn0r* -z- 6/7/s4
unit. The architectural desfgn contained in the Appendix is typical ofboth unit types.
One of !h9 mgjol changes in the design of the project since its initia]approval 'in l9B1 has been the architectural Aeiign of the units themselves.
The units have been altered dccordingly:
A. Entrances--the entrances have been changed from the side to the front.
Impact:
The impact of these changes are:
l. Reduces the excessive sidewall
?. fncorporates structure more effectively into the3. Lends itself to more natural landscap.iitg.
hi't't .
(
B. Greenhouses--fhe greenhouses have been reduced to small glass enclosureslocated beneath the parapet.
Impact:
l. Reduces visual impact of glass and glare2. Reduces problems that may-be encouniered with snsw and ice.
c- unit Desiqn--the units have been designed to retain the curved fascia,but with a rectilinear interior design.
Impact:l. A continuous s-curved fascia that fits nicely into the landscape.?. A smaller parapet that reduces the visual .im!act.
l. Rectangular rooms that are more functional aird easier to construct.4. Sloping sidewalls made with exposed aggregate that blends withthe natural color of the soil.5. 0utside stairs constructed with stones that blend with landscape.
These-unit design changes were rev'iewed by both the P'lanning and Environ- ,:,,1mental conmission and ihe Design Review B6ard in lgBZ and eidorsedvery highly.
construction of the units will take place by excavation of a holeinto the hi]]side extend'ing rrom ttre'front -of the unit to a pointbevond the rear wail of th6 unii. ihe Reinfori"J ilrir,-,ieiai-siirpswill be set on ravers.of compacted granurar irii-w[ict'wiir m piaieain the excavation behind the'waii. "si*_o" eigtrt itiu;t;rar atrip;,--in two rows of three or four iirips,-witt .rppdrt-.i.[-Ioncrete wailpane1, which wiil be 4 or 6 feet in',uiott .nll'wiir,-r,eigii ur requiredbY the terrain. 'r M' r'v ' r"r
The Bonne vue units will incorporate passive solar and earth-'integratedconcepts. These features wirl providb for efficient use or eneigi ----
Bonne|} -3- 6/7/84
and economical liv'ing for the residents. Other benefits to the resi-dents i ncl ude .physical, i sol ati on, . prl yacy, _noise reduction, greateropen space and usable 1and, minimi2ation 6r tne eriecii oi'wEatherand outside temperature, fire-proof construction, anO-iong projectedlife.
The-site plan for the project has been greatly enhanced due to theadditional properties acquired on the eist ani west of thJ site. Theportton of the site which once contained alt l3 dwelling units nowFl oltv 7 units situated upon it plus the ,".i"ilionii"niiia.ins.
I!1. l.: freed up,much of the s.ite'for open space and lanOscapiigand minimized much re-grading of the site.
Access to the development wi] I be from sandstone Drive, and a driveaccessing the individual units wil'l traverse the site io both theeast and west boundaries.
III.ZONING INFORMATION
Total
Area
The Bonne Vue site consists of Lots Al , AZ, and A3 of Lionsridgesubdivision., Fililg I and Lot 6, Block l, [ionsridge sutdivistonrrnltg 4. Lots At-3 are zoned Residential Cluster, and Lot 6 is zonedsingle Family_Res_idential. The proposal is to re-ione t[e-propertyto a special Development District with an underlying zone disti^ict-or Kesldentiat ctuster.. An analvsis of the Residential cluster zoninginformation is contained in Tabll l.
TABLE 'I
Area Under
40% Slope
(Rc )
GRFA Al 'lowed No. Units
A1'lowedLot
Al, A.21
A3
6
2.59
.944
.727
2.21
.364
.17
24,067
3,964
I,849
sq ft
sq ft
sq ft
13
22
l+13
ac.
ac
ac
ac.
ac
ac
Tota'ls: 29,879 sq ft '16+l
Notes: l. Lots Al and Az have been previously combined lnto oneparcel and approved by pEC.
Lot 43.is restricted to a maximum of 2 dwelling unitsby ordinance.
Lot.Q, Alogk ], Lionsridge 4 was zoned Singte FamilyResidential plus the opportunity to add an employee lonq-term rental unit under'0rdinancl 13, t98l lseb rlntuit 4).
2.
3.
TABLE I
Bonne Vge Development
Total Number Dwel'ling Units:
TOTAI GRFA:
Total site Area:
Total Area Less than 40% Slope:
Total number enclosed parking spaces:
uonn. t -4- 6/t/84
l6
29,879
4.26 acres
2.595 acres
o
34
IV.(40% SLOPE VARIANCE
The following is an excerpt from the June 4, lggl staff memorandum tovtu regarding the previous request for a 40% slope variance;
40% Slope Variance
This is the first request for relief to construct residential unitson slopes of 40/. or more in the Town. The app'rtcant reeii that thetechndlogy and construction techniques involvbo in irre-Arihiterra/Reinforced Earth system.specificat iy aoaft tr,emseivei-to' very steepslopes and that thA finishea proJuci icilatrv.impr6ves-ahe stabitizationof the hillside. I will revibw this request-firit aocreising the masterhazard ordjnance and secondly, wrjth regard to the normal faitors bt-which we review variance requLsts. Thii request can be made undersection 18.69.060 which stades that variances to the *iri"" hazardordinance can be applied for under the usual rules ano requlations.Moreover' section 18.69.060 of the hazard ordinance iiatei that the
lmasle1 hazard plans may be altered irom time to time to conform withnew information or existing cond.itions.', Thus,-ii *is-ine .intent orthe ordinance that .it not be a concrete document, lf,it-n.* technologiesor changing conditions should be recognizea is foisioie eiceptions.i"
In the same section as.the above quote, the ordinance states, ,The
purpose of the master hazard plan'is to identjiy ino-aiieviaie presentgll I!!!lg problems.created !v ttre construction-of improvements intne hazarcl areas within the.Town by means of presentiirg in an orderlyfashion the general data and information whicir are ess6ntial to the -
understanding of the relationship between the hazards and improvementslocated within said areas.,
(
|nne vue -5- 6/7/84
'This points to the-potential problems of constructing lmprovements in4u% slope areas. 40% slope was chosen because the studibs the ordinancewas based upon generally concluded that that vlas $re poini at whichpotential environmental 91d site planning problems occurred. However,these studies were not. able to fuily stuEy'how eirttr:itriiteieo rrousingand its associated technologies would affict these steep slopes.
'The Environmental Impact Report (on page B-1) for the project states that;
'The proposed_units will be constructed directly into the hillsideusing_the hillside i.!r-glr for support and insuiation. The designis well suited for difficult-to-itbvelop hiltsides through the uieof a proven soils engineering.technology, Reinforced Eaith, (deiiribedin de-tail in Appendii A). Tfris technoT6iy proviaei an-arctritecturatlandform capable of.stabiliz'ing hi.llside conditions and thereby a'llowingfor flexibjlity in the site plln design.,-
The staff has no reasons to believe that the above claim is not true.The track record is one of success for both Architerra and ReinforcedEarth Company.
CRITERIA ANO FINDINGS
n reyiew of Criteria and Findings, Section 19.62.060 of the muni ci oa'lthg Community Dev orequested variance based@
Ernsideration of Factors j
The relationshio of lhe requested variance to other exist
The ree to wh lief from the strict or literal inte retationorcementsations necessa to ac
0rm treatment sites in e vlc orto attain t ves o this title thout qrant o sDect a vi I eqe.
(
The-project whould not. have any negative effects on other properties.During construction, the erosion and sedimentation controlb pi^oposedin the EIR should be^strictly followed so that adjacent aowniiiti-propertiesare not adversely affected.
This' of course' is the crux of the issue. The staff feels stronqlvthat. granting of rhis variance wouia nol-ue a'ipeiiai piiuitudl-iFii""to,the above discussion.addressing the hazard oiatnincb). This is aunique-proposat for a site whjch is ippiopiiite ior-ippivtng the.ipec.itic
f:T?1?gI b9ir1s RroRosed._ Earth-srreiterbu housins ii'i"ncr6asins inpopularlty' and other similar proposals would get ihe same consiierationthis one has received. Earth-;heiteiea -nousrns aiiordi"'iome very sig-
l]11!u.r!-:rergy-cost savings and often provides'dirricuit-io-deve-rop'"srtes with a workable solution. If conirentional housing were being'proposed, the staff would most likely recommend denial .-(
lnne vue -G- 6/7 /84
The effect of the requeftgg variqnce o ibution
iesand utilities, and public safety.
Il'g-oll.v relevant factor here would be public safety in terms of theh'illside stability. Again, we feel that tne technoiogy rtnvolved canwork 0n that hillside and that stability of the slope-wi]l not be aprobl em.
RECOMMENDATION
'The community Development Department recommends approval of the 401,slope variance request for Architema at vail. wb'teel very positivelyabout the ppiect.and feel the developers are a competent giolp whocan make this project work. The ever-changing technologiei in'ttrenousing construction industry must be recognized. The long term energyproblems of our country must- be recognizedl and we as a stitf must beflexible and open to n-ew ideas. }Je 6ack with enthusiasm this proJect."
don't.feel that anything has changed with the new proposal in relationtne above statements. l,le recommend approval of the slope variancebe expanded to Lot 6 and Lot A-3.
V. MINOR SUBDIVISION
The staff feels that the minor subdivision approval meets the criteriaoutlined in Section 17.16.110 of the Subdiviiion negulations, and werecorrnend approval of the minor subdivision request to make these 4 totsinto one.
o
hIe
.to
to
{
l/T
A.REASON FOR SDD REQUEST
The apR'l icants are requesting an sDD because there exists two differentunderlying zone districtsonlhe properties involved-(RC and SFR). - - -
They wish to have a uniform undei-lying zone of RC foi the sDD t6 haveconsistent development standards a-na io avoid confusion over the zoning.
DENSITY PROPOSAL
The density proposed is consistent with the existinq allowable onthese.parcels- No increase in number of units is rdquested. TheGRFA is-actual 1y.being. reduced by 2195 square feet over the totalallowable,.including the employeL/careta(er unit. The sDD providessite-planning-f'lexibility and a detailed review and adoptioh of thedevelopment plan, appmpriate for this specific proposai.
B.
Bonne Vue 6/7 /84
c.SDD DESIGN STANDARDS
The following is an analysis of how thedards criteria (Section I8.40.080) for
l. Buffer Zone
project meets the design stan-
SDD proposals:
The.project is basicalJy consistent with the densities of adjacentprojects and technically is not a high-density project 'locatid
adjacent to low-density residential_use districis. The topographyof the site is such that actual dwelling units are stgnifibaitly -
separated both by distance and by a landscape buffer irom thedwe]ling unjts across the road t6 ttre south. 0pen space areasare located to the east and north of the site. 'singie familylots are located to the west of the site and are noi. negativityinpacted by the pnoject due to the low density and a 70-foot sEtbackwhich has been provided on the western property boundary.
2. Circulation S.vstem
The circulation system has been designed for the type of trafficexpected to be generated by the sjte and the needs- bf emergencyvehicl es.
3. Open Space
The plan has provided areas of open space for the purpose of landscaping,preservation of views, snow storage areas, and recrealional features.
4. Privacy
The needs of individuals, familiesn and ne.ighbors in tems ofprivacy have been met.
Building Type
The building type has been the greatest concern of the project,and.the.appropriateness of the buildings to the site is'thi majorfactor in the success of the developmeit.
Buildjng Design
The building design is-most appropriate for the site. The or.ientation,spacing, materials, color and texture all blend into the hillside.All exterior wa] ls will be of a color to match the earth toneof the site. Maximizaton of so'lar exposure is a key factor inthe design of the units.
Landscapi ng
The 'l andscaping of the total site has been desisned to enhancethe area and serves several purposes including iisual screening
5.
6.
7.
.t
D. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
l. Lot Area
eonn.G -8- 6/7/84
of walls, wind breaksr €t'gSion control , revegetationo and visual. enhancement of the area. The area now is cumently scamed withvarious road cuts, and minimal ,vegetation other than sage exists.The final.product will be maintained by a full time on-iite managerand will be an enhancement to the neighborhood.
2.
The lots in the SDD and total acreage shall be as follows:
Lots. A-.|, A-2, and A-3, B'lock A, Lionsridge Subdivision, accordingto the plat recorded jn Book 215 at Rage 648 in the offjce ofthe Eagle Cggnty Colorado, Clerk and Recorder (C1 erk's Records),and Lot 6, Block l, Lionsridge Subdivision Filing No. 4, accoriingto the map recorded in the Clerk's Records. The total area ofthe four lots is 4.2676 acres, more or less.
Setbacks
Setbacks shall be as indicated on the development plan, exceptthat there shall be a front setback of 20 feet adjacent to sindstoneDrive.
3. Heisht
Maximum height shall be 33 feet.
4. Density Control
A maximum of 17 units shal'l be al]owed. One of the 17 units shallbe a-managerts unit restricted to the regulations prescr.ibed inSection 18.13.080(B) t0(a-d) of the Vait l{unjcipat'Zoning Code.No more than 30,000 square feet of GRFA shall bb al]owed.
5. Site Coveraqe and Landscapinq
s'ite coverage and landscaping sha'l I be as indicated on the develop-ment plan.
6. Parking
Each dwell'ing unit shal'l have an attached two-car garage, plusthere shall be a minimum of nine surface spaces wtintn-ttre'projectas indicated on the development p'ran. No iarking shalr be iociieain a front setback area.
(
7.
eonn{}e -s- 6/7/84
Permitted Uses_
The followfng uses shall be permitted in the RC district:
1) Single-family residential dwe'tlings
2) Two-family residential dwellings
3) Multiple-family residential dwellinqs, includinq attachedg! rory dwellings and condominium dwellings with'no morethan 4 units in any new building.
b. Conditional Uses
The.fo'llowing.conditional uses sha'll be permitted in the RCo]strtct, subject to issuance of a condjtiona'l use pennitin accordance with the provis.ions of Chapter 1g.60:
l) Public utility and public service uses
2) i Pirblric; buildings, gry.oundsaandrfaciltt4es
3) Public or private schools
4) Fkblic pank;and recreation facilities
5) Ski lifts and tows
6) Private clubs
4..
(
c. Accessorty Uses
The following accessory uses shall be permitted in the RC
di stri ct:
l) Private greenhouses, toolsheds, playhouses, attached garagesor carports,.swimming poo1s, patios, or reireation taiilii;escustomarily incidenti'l' to single-tamily, iwo-tjmiiy or1ow-density multiple-family rEsidentiai'uits
2) Home.occupations, subject to issuance of a home occupat.ionpennit in accordance with the provisions or ieitiini'ra.sri.rsothrough 18. 58. 190
3) 0ther uses customarily i.ncidentar and accessory to pennittedor conditional uses, and necessary for itre opei.aiioi'thereof
(
B$ Vue -10- 6/7/84
VII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The community Development Department recommends approval of the variousrequests for sDD 14. t.le were,disappointed that the original projectwas not constructedr as we believe it to be a beneficial deveiopmentto the Town. There is a certain amount of faith in the proposed earth-sheltered housing technology involved with our support, but'we feel thatt,hese applicants have demonstrated their ability to perform. Earth-sheltered housing is a technology and housing type whictr is suitabletor_our energy deficient future. It also blends in aesthetically verywell with its sumoundings and presents very minimal visual hitl;ide'impact once it and the landscaping are conpieted. We sincerely hopethe project will more forward to ionstruction from this point.
Conditions of approval :
1. The Environmental Impact Report for Bonne vue by Berridge Associates,Inc. dated May 4, 1984 shalI be followed throughout the-course ofthe project
2. Rockfall mitigation as recommended in woodward-clyde consultants'letter to Ronald A. Todd dated May 9, l9g0 (ExtriU.it 5) be completed(certification of completion as plr ine tetier to be ieieived'bythe Cornmunity Development Department) before a building perm.it isissued for the project.
3. Sections 18.40.040(C)(C)(E) of the SDD Chapter of the Vail Zoningcode regarding fol Iowing the development, amendnents to the deveiopmentplan and Design Review Board review shall apply to the project.
4- section .|8.40.100 (A)(B) of the sDD chapter of the Town of vail Zoning
Code-sha1 1 apply regarding time requirements for construction ofthe SDD.
(
t,
a
e
iiJI
6sSiI siElir*!
EXHIBIT I.
\
I$sIti
lPifr
t'Ftl
-{\
\)
/
IIt?fr
i$,
I
titltl
I
I
I
I
i
o#i]
$ iiri iri"$i
d
i'iiiis. )16
NS
$$dr'
U$
:i$t F5;,t6I!'t[ r f,sIrii SI{i$ } }}T{$ iirr: t i
$iie-'
tT"+it!-
F:
N
EXHIBIT 2.
Il!t
l!
$t
r1l
1t(
{1
t
t$'l
qI
6
ffle.I
5
i
u
II
f
7t
s!
s
n
$
I
I
F
Tt{a
'.tt
+
t\
\
\
$\
lii}[I$i$r
rl$ E;li
(4) \tail fntelmountain Srvim and Tennis C1ub.
(5) Briar Patch, Lots G-2, G-S and G-6
Lionsridge Subdivision Filing No. 2.
(6) Casa Del So1 Condomlniums.
For any zoning purpose beyond the Eagle county commissloners, approvals,
agreements or acti-ons, the developments and parcels of property specified
in this subsection (e) shall be zoned Residential cluster (RC).
f- Lionsridge subdivision, r'iling l,io. 4, sha11 be subject to the
terms of this ordinance. For any zoning purpcse beyorid. the Eagle county
commissioners' approl'a1, agreernent or action, this parcel 0f property
sha11 be zoned single Family Zone District (sFR) with a special pro-
vision that an emploSrse uni.t (as defined and restricted in Section 1g.18-.gC
of the vail trlunicipal code) wir,l be'subject to approvals as per section
18-13-080. The secondarl' ur11 may not exceed one third of the total
Gloss llesidentral rlcor A:'ea (G$FA) al1ol,red on the lot as pel the
single Far:rily Zone Di-strlct Density control (section lg.l_0.090 or trre
vail Llunicipar code) aud Greenbelt & Natural open space (Gl{os).
g. Lot G-4, Lionsridge Subdivision, Iiling No. 2, has been the
subject of litigation in the District court of Eagle county, and a cqrrt
order lras been issued r'egarding flre dev*eloprnent of this property. ?he
Torvn has further approved Resolution #5 oi 1gs1 in regard to a sulrse-
qrreni agreement rvith the owner. The Residential cluster (RC) Zone
District ivi11 be tbe appli-cabIe zone on this pr.operty to guitie tbe
future cievelopment of the p.arce1, rvor!:ir-rg rvitirin the bounds s,et bytthe Court Otder and Rcsolution jio. 5, Serics of 1gg1
wo o * vtDBf Lfi vFfr -
:ffiyr,.
n ts
MAY 1J iSBO
Den!er Coioraclo 80:0.1
I 1303-s73.;882rt
Q\\"*u, e, teBo
?909 VJesl Tlir Avenire
P O Bo\ {036
Arch i tect
P.O. Box I753
Vail , Colorado
{;vt
?,t.i
Mr. Ronald A. Todd
816 57
Re: Engineering Geologic Consultation, Lions Ridge
Subdivision, Filing No.4. Vail' Colorado.
Job No. 20004-19570
Dear Mr. Todd:
This ]etter report will confirm engineering geologic opinionsgiven to you by the undersigned during the course of his geo-logic reconnaissance of Lions Ridge Subdivision, Filing No.4ron Friday, May 2, 1980. Our objective was to evaluate therisk of rockfalls fron ledges cropping out across the property
and to recommend a means to reduce that risk, if appropriate.
Filing No. 4, situated within the SW I/4 SE l/4, Section I,T. 5 S., R.8l W., occupies a sector of,.ihe northern slope ofthe Gore Creek Valtey between Red Sandstone Creek Valley on :the east and Buffer Creek Valley on the west. Ground : . . 'l
elevation ranges from about 8200 f eet at the southeastern :- '-,,,-:.
corner of the f iling to about 9080 feet at the northwestern , ,,.-'::::.'
corner of the f i1ing. vie understand you propose to construct ..:,',.1 ,
single-f amily residentiaL un j-ts within the southeastern third li',i;i,'of Lnis 43 -alre parcel ",.;-,,1;,,.. .. :..... . ..,.:,.1.,-:;Geologic conditions across this sector of the northern slope , ,,i'i;,'r'I;
of the Gore Creek Valley are relatively simple. Sedimentary ''. r".''rock strata of the Minturn Formation, mainly interbedded sand- , . .-iistones and shales, but including a few Limestone units as . ,::'"
welI, constitutes bedrock but, for the most part, the strata -::1r:.;.
areb1anketedbyrnoraina1soi1sacroSsthe]'owerquarterofthe filing, and by slopewash soils acrcss the uPper three ;.'quarters of the fifing. ldithin this filing the bedrock strata ', .,i
a'.'':.. : t! til i' tt 3t: " :t'1 1, ( "'., 1, .. ..,:
O1:'^.5 t', (i',!tt rt,Li. | .-
t{-*rry
nftward.Clyde Consultants
Mr. Ronald A. Todd
May 9, 1980
Page 2
strike north-northeastward and dip about 30 degrees west-northwestward thus into, rather than out of, the hillside.within the filing the hillside slopes generally from north-
The exceptions to that evaluation are few but are prominent,Four blocks of limestone are loosely perched on the sandstone
o
(
(,
r*estward to southeastward at about 7/2:1 to 2:I, alt.houghVariationsfromthatrangeIoca11yarecommon.
The bedrock strata crop out as one continuous band fgrming a 5to. 15-foot-high cliff approxirnately paralleling elevationcontour 8950 feet, and as several discontinuous bands formingcliffs 5 to l0 feet hi.gh between Elevat.ions 8?00 feet and
8470 feet. For the most part, that rock i5 well cemented,widely jointed sandstones ranging from thick bedded to thin orflaqgy bedded, but locally these sandstones include thin bedsof dark gray microcrystalline limestone that is rnoderatelyhard but very strong. With rare exception, the rock of thesevarious ledge-forming rock units appear to be well_ knittogether and have not been appreciably effected by erosionalprocesses that in other areas have resutted in detachment ofblocks from similar ledges. We conclude from the evidence weobserved that the risk of rockfalls from Lhese ledges, withcertain exceptions, is low. We would judge it, moreover, tobe.considerably lower than
Creek Valley.in many other sectors of the Gore
ledge near the top and at the rrrestern boundary of the filing.These blocks are 18 to 24 inches on a side and appear to bebalanced precariously. Two of those blocks lie west of yourboundary in the neighboring tract, but if they should fall ;..Lhey could travel southeastward into your filing. Three othercubical blocks of rock lie loosely on the ground surface tothe west and east of a rock outcrop in Lot 9, and a large slabofrockisba1ancedprecarious}yonarockknobnearthe
rra^l-^-R l'^.-^,1 -'.- ^4 r-l-^ a:1:-- .:- !t-^ --: --:-.!!-- --western boundary of the filing in the vicinity ofrys - LsI- rr r.r\rrtrrr\re.LI \Jr. gtrg I I'l. rrty J.tl Lltg v l(.; ItlI Ly tJ J_ELevation 8700 feet. Several other loose rock blocks werenoted during the course of our reconnaissance Uut i'e a*l"cteathose and let then roll down the hill-side where they no longerconstitute a rockfall hazard. We would suggest that youfol.low that praciice with the rest of the loose blocks nobedabove. Once those are removed, the risk of rockfalls shouldremain low for many years. lrle would be happy to help you withtbat work if you desire.
t
UlToodward.Clyde Consultants
,H*,
FrankVice P
Mr. Ronald A. Todd
May 9, 19B0
Paqe 3
In summary, we believe that Lhe risk of rocltf all-s across'Filing-FIo. 4 is generally low but could be improved by theremoval of I to 10 small btocks of rock that lppear t6 be'loosely perched on the hillside. Those consritute a higherLever of rockfall- hazard but risk inherent to those individualblocks could be eliminated by pushi.ng those bl-ocks f rom theirpresent sites and allowing tttem to rol] down the hill-to anatural resting place. Otherwise, the rock forming theseveraL ledges and cliffs across the filing appear- to bestabl e.
You arso asked that we comment on the geotechnicar feasibilityof the proposed 300-foot-Iong eastern extension of yourproject access roads. This road wourd require a cut no morethan 10 feet high for a few tens of feet. The logs oftest pits excavated in the vicinity by chen and Aisociatesearrier this year, and our own observations, indicate thacsoil's, inainly silts and sands, nantling bedrock shourd be lessthan 15 feet thick along the access road extension.
Those soils shourd create no unusual cut srope or road founda-tion problems. For your initial designs, \re suggest that you( I ) plan for l-:1 cut slopes in the =oil; (.2 ) plln for draiiageditcbes at the tops of slopes to catch \^/ater ind to route itaround the slopes, and pl_an to revegetate those slopesimmediately, and (3) plan for I/4zl- slopes in the rock.Revegetation not only should rninimize the visua.l. inpact of theroad cut, but also should improve cut-bank stability. Theroad base coarse and surface courd be designed to acconmodatesubsoi.].conditionsevidentat'thetiinethe-workisdone.
Ite have appreciated the opportunity to work vrith you on thisproject. rf you have any guestionl, or wou).d likl to discussany aspects of our report, pl ease feel free to call.
(;
by
HollidayRobt. James f ri-shSenior Associaie andGeology Divj,sion
(3 copies sent)
b s ident
'+. lir
:l
MEMOiIANDUM
TO: Planning and Environrnental Commission
FROM: Department of Conmunity Dcveloprnent/peter patten
RE: Variance requested to build residences i\ 40ro slope areas in aResidential Cluster Zone District and review of tire Environmentalrnpact Report for Architerra at vail on lots A-1 and A-2, LionsritlgeSubdivision, Filing No. l.
DATE: June 4, 1981
BACKGROUND
Architerra at vail and the Reinforced Earth cornpany wish to construct a lsunit earth-sheltercd housing project on lots A1 , A2 in the Lionsridge subdi-vision, Filing 1, above the existing Licrnsnane project. The d.escriptianof the original proposal is contained in detail in the Environnrentai InpactReport. However, you should note that the tramrvay, water system and paikingstTucture have all been dropped and ttre proposal now includes a one-way roadlooping the project and two-car garages for each unit.
the proposal is a unique one in that it represents Architerrars first residen-tiaL project in the united states. A 47 unit project in Nice, France wasconstructed on a steeP slope and has proven to be a success. The constrtrctioutechnoiogy and housing design is purposely directed at being compatiblewith 51ssp1y stoping sites.
PREVIOUS PEC REVIEI1I
The^PEC saw a presentati.on by the Architerra, Reinforced Earth company groupon April 27, 1981. Generally, the PEC had a positive attitude towirdtheproposal and the concept with the following conments and eoncerns:
1. Why so nuch of the hotrse was not underground?
2. Concern over the tining and anount of landscaping rrlith mention of escrowingfunds.
3. Conccrn about thc ability of the site to handle the road constructj-onin regard to the initial access fron sandstone Drive and the cuts andfills required to nake the road work. A request rvas nade by pEC to scea detailed grading plan along with profilcs and scctions of the roatl.
4. A- perspcctive was requested showing the appcarance of the project. fronrthe Frontage Road.
Architcrra -r-Q"f'., tsst lg
ENViRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT REVIEW
The Staff required an environrnental irnpact report stressing hydrologic, geologic,
biotic and visual conditions as they relate t.o the earth-shcltered housing
construction. This has been submitteC and the PEC received copies previous
to the April 27 neeting. Although the site plan and proposed facilities
have significantly changed since the EIR was prepared, the nrain points
covered irr the report renain intact.
The Staff reconnends approval of the EIR for Architerra at Vail with the
condition that the following further information be subnitted, reviewed and
approved by either Staff or DRB (Whichever is the appropriate approval level):
l. The report speaks of pedestrian walkways throughout the project, butStaff has not received a site plan, at the time of this writing, which
shows the walkways.
2. A potential problern exists with shalLow subsurface drainage, especially
during construction. How will this be ilritigated?
3. Retainage of as nany trees as possible should be an objective. The EIR
states all trees will be renooved.
4. TinJ.ng of revegation was not addressed in the EIR.
5. The pond near Sandstone Drj.ve, part of the original proposal , has been
removed. The EIR stTesses this is a major sourcc of sedirncnt contro!.
during construction. 'llhat is the alternative plan now?
6. Visual conditions with respect to the retaining wal1s for the road systen
shoul d be carefully reviewed.
40 PERCENT SI,OPE VARIANCE
This is the first request for relief to con stTuct residential units on
slopes of 4O% or more in the Torm. The applicant. feels that. the t.ech-nollgy and construction techniques involved in the Architerra/Relnforeed
Earth system specifically adapt themselves to very stecp slopes and thrtthe finished product actu.llly improvcs the stabilization of the hillside.
I wiII review this rcquest first addrcssing the lrlaster llazard Ordinance
and sccondly, with regard to the normal factors by ruhich h'e review variancerequests. Thi.s ,.-equest can be nade under Section 18.69.060 lr'h ich statcsthat variances to thc }taster Hazard Ordinancc can be applied for unde.rthe usual variancc rulcs and regulations. [{oreover, Scction 18.69.030of thc llazard Ordinance states that the t'master hazanl plans may be lltercd
frorn tirnc to timc to conform with ncrv infornation or cxi.sting conditions. t'
Thus, it wls thc i.ntc.lnt of the ordinancc that it not be a con(:rete dot:unrcnt,that ncrv technologics or changing conditions should be recogniled aspossibIe exccpti.ons.
Architerra -J- ;Q O, ,rn
The Staff has no reasons to believe that theThe track record is one of srrccess for bothEarth Conpany.
In the sane section,as, thc above quote,-the pl.dinance statcs, ,,.11hc purposeof thc mastcr hazard plans is to ia"niiry and alreviatc prescnt and futureproblems crcated bt, tirc "onrt*"tion-oi-i*proucments in lhc hazard areaswithin the town bv means "r pr"ru'iini-ir, r'orderly fashion the generaldata and information whrch are e"r.^ii"r to the ,^a!rii""aing of the reration_ship between the hazara" u"J-io,pt;;;;;;tr rocated within said areas.,l
This points to the potential problerns of constructing irnprovements in 4Dzslope areas ' 40e, siop" was chos"n tec.rrr" the studies the ordi.nance wasbased upon generalrv concluded ttrat that was the- point at which potentialenvironnental and site planni"c-pt"ti"rc occurred. However, these sutdiesutere not able to fully ltudy tto* """tr,-rtreitereJ ho""iri'."a its associatedtechrrotogie; woutd afiect ti,"r*""i"_p"riop"u.
The Environrnental rnpact Report (on page B-1), for the project statesthat:
I'Tle prgposed units will be constructed. directly into the hillside. using the hillsi.de r,tlglf for support and insulition. ih" ;;;ic"-is well-suited for difficult-to-divetop hirlsides through the uieof a proven soirs engineering technololy, Reinforced iarth, (describedin detail in Appendix A). This technorogy provia", "r,-ut"hit*"i"""i
--
Landform capable of stabilizing hillside-tonditiorrs and therebyallorving for flexibility in the site plan design.'r
?
above claim is not true.Architerra and Reinforced
CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
vatiance ba upon
Consideration of Factors :
rgyiew of Criteria and Findin s, Section 18.62.060 of I'funici CodeItnent of Communi Devel o ment recommends a rov;rl of the r
ac tors :
ue st ed
During
EIR
not
S+^."1+tlfrhtp "f tn" t rt"d uoriorg" to oth", "*irti'guses ang_stiuCtrffi
The project should not.have any negative effects on other properties.construction' thc erosion and sedinrcntation contrors p"o1roi.a in the:*:19 Y: strictly foltorved ,o ttor-*iiacent dor,nhill proi;crties areauversely affected.
Thejgglce to which reli€ fron the strict or: titcral int c tation andentOrCcmcntaspccificd r.cgulation rs necessar.y to ach i. eve conlpat liand rrnifoirnii,u iffi to attain
This, of rroursc,granting of thisabove d i scussionfor a sitcr which
is the cnr.r of
vn liancc rvotr L darldlessing thois rr p.propriate
thc isstrc. Thc Staff fccls stronglynot bc a spccial privilege (rcfcr tolhz:rld 0t'dinuncc). This i.s a uniqrrcfor :.rpplying the spccific technology
th:rt
3hc
ploPo:;tr 1
br:in!i
Architerra -4Or,{ i, lgel t(
proposed' Earth-sheltcred housing is increasing in popurarity, and othersinilar proposals would gct tn"-.ir"-.Jnsideration thii onu has received.Earth-shertcred ho*sing affords ;";; ;;;y significant "n".gy-.ort savingsilu":fi:;.fil:io;;,ll_rFi."rt-tr-i"""r"p"rit", "iii-.""""r,"ii" sorution.
recorunend denial. ilng were being proposed, the staff ,o.ria *o"t fikeiy
t arrd air 4istribution ofl ities ic facititiEFTi-dut it it ic s,-anEluElii s#e ti
The only relevantstability. Again,hillside and that
Such otl-rer factors and crit eria as
factor here would be public safety in terns ofwe_ feel that the technology involved can workstability of the slope will'."t;;';;;lur"*.
the hillside
on that
osed variance.the conmission deems applicable to the
FINDINGS:
That the grantins of the-variance witrr not constitute a grant of speciall;t#:"ff :"::::il:;:. *iir,-ir,""ii,ir*.'i,,, on oir,"r-p,oi"iti"" cltssified
That the grantine of the variance wilI not be detrimentar to the publicl3iiln;,'lf!tl;"l,lrlr?1r"",-"i"ii.i,,i"riv iniurious'io-p,op",tr"s or irnprove-
That the variance is warranted for one or more of the follorving reasons:
there are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicabreff :i: :*: ;fr::" variance tr,.t-Jo-not appty g",,"""iiy-io-oti,u, properties
RECOIII{ENDATION
T'he comrnunity Dever opme't Department r.ecoruncnds approvar of the 40% slopevariancc rcquest for-Arcrrite;t; ;; i"ii. we reer very positively abouttne projecr and feel th" aev.iop;;r';;;,a conpetent group *rho can rnake thisproject rvork. The cver-crra'gini io.iinJrogros in t'e housing constructionxrdustry nrust be recognized.'- rt" rorig-t".,n. cncrgy probJcms of our countryrntrst be'ecognized, ancr rvc ur o.t"ri"r,rurt bc rr"iifi" ouJ-opon to ncw idcas.ne Dack with enrhrrsiasn ttris p;"j;;;: "'-
l I
6/11184
Peter Patten presented the.request and reviewed the history of the parking exceptionrequest as.wel] . He stated that if 4 spaces were removed, they wou'ld hav6 tobe rep'laced either on site or via a parking fund. Patten'siated that the CouncilTjglt appreciate it if the PEC wou'ld want io address the parking tiiue. -He iaaeathat the Town Council cou'ld be resolution make parking exiepttois with certaincri teri a.
6.A est for exterior al terati
PEC 5
for the Antlers L Lot 3, Block I,a ons J nq.uet roomorarox'imate uare nium Association
Donovqn moved and Pierce seconded to rove the uest for exterior a'lterationstaff memo une n tavor.
uest for exterior alteration of the Lionshead Arcade Bui]di nq at 483onsnand relocate entrance doora's ppl'rca na s oT vat l,
Donovan moved and son seconded to
e'l
rove the uest with the conditionsttetter of a rova r0m assoct ati onn c00e be con
8.A uest to rezone Lot Block 'l , Lionsridqe Fil i 4 from Sinq'le Famil
or the above lot an ots Al, A2, and A3. and a
or a var
0rc
rerno-T
Kristan Pritz presented the request and showed floor and site plans and e'levations.Dave-Peel ' architect for the proiect, answered questions, Priiz pointed out thatthe Town had not yet received'a letter of approval from the Condominium nsiociiiionand that should be a condition of approval ."
ce
arttr
Peter.Patten gave the-background of the application and explained thit this wasa feViSiOn and exOansion of tho Arnchitav.na-af-\/ril hFtrioz.+ :nnv.nrrar{ in 'roa]a revision and expansion of the Architerrilat-Vail projeit'approved in lgB], indnow t0 be called Bonne Vue. He stated that it was'foi lO uhits and an empioyeeunit. He stated that there would be an 70 foot buffer to the west, that the'vege-tation existing in the draw would not be disturbed and poinied out the 4 conditionsof approval in the memo.
,lim Merkelr oh€ 0f the applicants, explained that they wanted to increase thenumber of units to l6 for'economii pui^poses, decrease-the entrances to one, keepal'l of the units on the upper ridge, ahA aaa a clubhouse, swim pool and caietakbr'sunit. He showed sections ana poiit6d out that the numbei ot retiining walls hadbeen reduced. Each unit would'be three stories with the garages on tie bottom,the living and dining areas on the second level, and the 6Jar6ors-on-ilre-iof-iever.The clubhouse at first.was not planned to be eaith snelteieo and was revised to makeit earth sheltered, and it woutI ue'one-stoiv-in-ippli"inie.
fc 6 6/11/s4
Pierce asked if the project would_be bui1t all at once or would be phased. Merkelstated that he wou'ld'like to do ail at once, but ff they did not hale time thisbuilding season, tlrey planned to do one or two duplexes. pierce stated that he wouldhate to see it built partially,_and asked if the fjnancing was contingeni on resates.Patten said that the Council w'i1'l probably require some tJpe of assurance thatfinancing would be available.
,Jim Martell, one of the applicants, stated that it was extreme'ly important to buildtwo unlts to show potential clients what the project would looitikb, anA tnesefirst units would look good so that the rest will sell. Patten stated that DRBguidelines also addressed phasing. Piper asked to send a directive to ORs oi ltrePEC's concerns about tearing out-and pirtting back together the property and the
iry9?9tt this might have.on appearance. Mar[ell stat6d that they wbuta oisiuiu-aslittle as possible in phases.
Viele stated that he had the same concerns because this development would have more
lmpact on,sjte work, His concerns included phasing, financing, and two statementsfrom the EIR in which the necessity for further siie specific-geotechnical siudieswere stressed and that some rock fall study was cursory. He falt that mud flow androck fall should be studies further, since-there had b-een huge mud flows on eitherside of this project. He questioned the effect'iveness of cuiverts and wonderedwhether or not storage of water should be part of the EIR.
l4artel'l stated that many of the projects done by Reinforced Earth Company had beenused to correct mudslides, but piper replied thlt the board was concernei with muds'lides which initiated off of thi! site. Rapson asleO-aUout technique used ifthey should run into stone, because blasting could start a rock slide. Martellanswered that the test cores indicated that rock outcroppings were not significant.
Donovan was concerned that if there were a mud slide it may not go through theplanned culvert. Piper suggested that perhaps one unit cl-ose to-the drai wouldhave to be omitted.
Peter-,Jamar, representing the applicant, said that he checkedMark Garrison who designed compiete rockfa'l I mitigation whenLionsridge Filing 4 to Eagle County, but that ne Aia not do a
Viele reconmended a supplemental report be made on a site specific study. ,lamarstated that that several site speciiic studies were completbd, Out thafthey wouldprobablv_go. into more a"!g!l be?ore applying for a builhing pennit-:inut pei'tripithis could be made a condition ot appi"bvit.-
(
Pierce moved and Donovan seconded to aoprove the
a ons to a ow Du nqs to 0cateny on lo and lotst, w rout absta n
with Jeff Selby and
applying for
supp'lemental report.
uest for a vari nce to the
on stopes o ano aDove
The vote was n tavor, none
PEc ] un tto
Pi erce moved and Rapson seconded to rove the varl0usIncnq the conditions of aporova thru sted 'i n ttion: 5) A site s c qeo-nical stor to issuance of a blwith Trout abstainlnq.
to approve the rezoninq of lot 6, Block I
qe cnese lots into one.Ine vote was 5 in tayor, none agginst h,ith TrOUt
ests
sEaf
must
for SDDI4
memo
9. Pre'l iminary review of exterior aI!e.!"ationl for.:
a. The Vail 2l Building (Gore Range Properties) 60 daysb. The Sjtzmark Lodge 90 daysc. The A & D Bui'lding 90 daysd. The Hi I 1 Bui'ldi ng 90 days
Patten stated that there would be a Town council hearing on rJune 19, '1984 onthis SDD.
t
vgF, nollg against,
Viele moved and Piergg_Segqldgd !o aplrqve the rezoning of 1ot 6, Block l,L]onsrrdge Ftttng 4l!:gqr lingte Family to Residential Cluster and a minor sub_orv'tston in order to combine the above lot and Lots Al , Az and A3 in oider to
MEMOITANDUM
T0: Planning and Environnental Corunission
FR0M: Departnent of Comrnunity Developrnent/Peter Patten
RE: Variance requested to build residences in 40or slope areas in a
Residential Cluster Zone District and review of the Environrnental
Impact Report for Architerra at Vail on lots A-1 and h-2, Lionsriilge
Subdivision, Filing No. 1.
DATE: June 4, 1981
BACKGROUND
Architerra at Vail and the Reinforced Earth Company wish to construct a 13
unit earth-sheltered housing project on lots 41 , A2 in the Lionsridge Subdi-
vision, Filing 1, above the existing Lionsmane project. The descripticnof the original proposal is contained in detail in the Environmental Impact
Report. However, you should note that the tran'Jay, water system and parking
stTuctur.e have all b e.en dropped and the proposal now includes a one-way road
looping the p"oject and two-car garages for each rurit,
the proposal is a unique one in that it Tepresents Architerrats first residen-
tial project in the United States. A 47 unit project in Nice, France t{as
,bonstructed on a steep slope and has proven to be a success, The construction
technology and housing design is purposely directed at being compatiblewith steeply sloping sites.
PREVIOUS PEC REVIEI\I
The PEC saw a presentation by the
on April 27, 198L. Generally, theproposal and the concept with the
Architerra, Reinforced Earth Company group
PEC had a positive attitude toward the
following connents and concerns :
1. Why so much of the house was not underground?
2. Concern over the tining and anount of landscaping with mention of escrowing
funds.
3. Concern about tfrc+trflity of the site to harrdle the load constructionin tegard to the ili{ial access from Sandstone Drive and the cuts andfills required to nake the road work. A request was nade by PEC to see
a detailed grading plan along with profiles and sections of the road.
4. A perspective was requested showing the appearance of the project flon
the Frontage Road.
(o
Architcrra -2- Junb 4, 198I
IINVTRONMENTAL IMIACT REPoRT REVIEW
The Staff required an envitonmental irnpact repolt sttessing hydrologic, geologic,
biotic and visual conclitions as they relate to the earth-shcltered housing
construction. This has been subnitted and the PEC reeeived copies PTevious
to the April 27 meeting, Although the site plan and proposed facilities
have signj.ficantly changed since the EIR was prepared, the nain Points
covered in the report renain intact.
The Staff recommends approval of the EIR for Architerra at Vail with the
condition that the foliowing further infornation be subnitted, reviewed and
approved by either Staff or DRB (Whichever is the appropriate approval level):
l. The report speaks of pedestrian walkways throughout the project' bP! .Staff has not received a site plan, at the tine of this writing, which
shows the walkr+ays.
2. A potential problern exists with shallow subsurface drainage, especially
during construction. How will thls be nitigated?
3. Retainage of as rrany trees as possible should be an objective. The EIR
states all trees will be removed.
4. Tining of revegation was not addressed in the EIR.
5. The pond near Sandstone Drive, part of the original proposal , has been
rernoved. The EIR stlesses this is a major source of sedinent control
during construction. ltlhat is the alternative plan now?
6. Visual conditions with respect to the retaining wa11s for the road systen
should be carefully reviewed.
40 PERCENT SI.OPE.VARIANCE
This is the first Tequest for relief to construct residential units on
slopes of 40% or moTe in the Torr'n. The applicant feels that the tech-
nology and constxuction techniques involved in the Architerra,/Reinforced
Earti' systen specifically adapt thenselves to very stecp slopes and that
the finished pioduct actually inproves the stabilization of the hillside.
I will review this request first addressing the I\laster Llazard Ordjnance
and sccondly, with regard to the norrnal factors by rchich n's review variance
rcquests. This request can be nade under Section 18.69.060 r,''h ich statcs
thit variances to thc ltaster Hazald ordinancc can be applied for under
the usual variancc rules and regulations. lrloreover, Section f8.69.030
of the Hazard Ordinance states tfiat the rrnaster hazard plans may be altcred
from tine to tirnc to conforn with ncr.r infornation of cxistilrg conditiolls.rl
Tl'rus, it trcs thc intent of the ordinance that it not bc a concretc docunlcnt,
that ncr,r technologics or changing conditions should bc recognized as
possible exceptions.
Architerra -s- .l(1, rsar
In thc same section,as.the above quote, _the ordinance states, ,The purposeof the niasrer trazard plans is to ia"ntify una uil;;i;;" pi"r""t and furureproblems_ created by thc constnrction of improvements in itre hazard areaswithin the toun by means of presenting in an orderly fashion the generaldata and infornation whi.ch aie essential to the undlrstanding of the relation-ship between the hazards and irprou"^"nis rocated within said areas.'
$^i1 n1,i"t. .o.ll" potential probrems of constructing improvements in 40%slope area-s - 40% slope was chosen because the studies tle ord,inance wasbased upon generally concluded that that was the point at which potentialenvironnental and site planning problems occurredl However, these sutdieswere not able to furly study how earth-sheltered r'o"ri"g a"d its associatedtechrrologies would affect tirese steep ,iop"..
The Environmental Impact Repoxt (on Page B-l), for the project statesthat:
IThe proposed r,rnits wilL be constructed directly into the hillside
. using the hillside itself for support and insulation. The designis well-suited for difficult-to-develop hillsides through the useof a proven soils engineering technology, Reinforced Earth, (describedin detail in Appendix A). This technology provides an architecturallandforrn capable of stabilizing hillside conditions and therebyallowing for flexibility in the site plan design.'r
The staff has no reasons to believe t.hat the above claim is not true.The track record is one of success for both Architerra and ReinforcedEarth Conpany.
CRI'IERIA AND FINDINGS
revielr of Criteria and Findin Section 18.62.060 of l{unici Code
:T::re11ti?nship o existing or potentialuses and structures in the vicinitv.-
The project should not have any negative effects on other properties. Duringconstruction, the erosion and sedinrentation controls proposed- in the ErRshould be strictly follorrred so that arljacent downhill properties are notadversely affected.iI
I
The degree to rr'hich relicf from the strict o:: literal intcr-pretation anclent orccnrent a specifi on ls necessat'y to achi.eve c
$h9,D!p"T*"ll '{ c. avarrance based upon the fol l owing-Fact ors :
Consideration of Factors:
and trn i f orrnit Ot -11'eS.tmelrt amon sitcs in thc vi.cinity or to attain tectives o thi.s ti.tlc withcrut nt of spcciirl privi l clc.
This, of course,grant j.ng of this
abovc di scussionfor a site which
is the crux of
va.riance wou ld
addressing thcis lrirpropriate
thc issuc. Thc Staff fccls stronglf thatnot bc a spccial privilege (rcfer to theIlazlrd Oldirrancc) . This is a unique propo:iir 1for aplrlying thc spccific technology bcin,rl
Architerra -4- ;u,(f rsar
proposed. Earth-sheltercd housing is incrcasing in populari.ty, and othersirnilar- proposals would get the same consideration this one his received.Earth-sheltered housing affords some very significant ene-.,.-gy-cost savingsand oftcn provides diffic*lt-to-devclop sites nith a worltable solution.rf conventional housing were being proposed, the staff 'ou1d rnost rikeryrecornrnend denial.
The effect of the sted variance on I t and air distribution ofic facilities
The only relevant factor here wouldstability. Again, we feel that thehillside and that stability of the
be public safety in terns of the hillsidetechnology involved can work on thatslope will not be a problern.
Such other factors and 5:riteria as the conmission deens a licable to theproposed variance.
F.INDINGS:
*3+++:g+g,EnvtTonment"l shal1 make the foU_q$,tng qngltss.betoTe gTanting a variance:
That.the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of specialprivilege inconsistent rvj.th the limitations on other proferties classifiedin the sane district.
That the granting of the variance will not be detrirnental to the publichealth, safety, or welfare, or materialry injurious to properties or inprove-nents in the vicinity.
That the variance is wa*anted for one or more of the folrorving reasons:
lher-e are exceptions or extraotdinary circumstances or conditions applicableto the site of the variance that do not appJ.y generarly to other pripertiesin the sane zone,
RECOMMENDATION
Thc.community Development Departnent recorunends approval of the 40% slopevatiance request for Architcrra at vai1. It|e feel-irery positively aboutthe-project and feel thc developers are a conpet.ent group who can make thisproject urork. The cver-changing technologies in the lrousing constructionindustry must be recognized. The 1o'g terrn encrgy problcrns of our country
111l.l b: recognized,.and we as a staff nust be flexible and open to new icllas.rve DacK with enthusiasrn this project.
tion and traff ic I ities
TERENCE J. QUINN
ATTORNEY AT LAW
,June 21, 1984
Peler PaLten
Town of Vail
Department of Community Development75 South Frontage Roadvai1, co 81557
Re: Trout/Mtn Properties
Dear Mr. Patten:
This will confirm our telephone conversation,that I represented W. Trout Architects, Inc., whichin Lot. 3, Block A, Lions Ridge Subdivision.
P. O. Box 1110
Eagle, Colorado 81631
Telephone: 303-328-7116
in which I relatedclaims an interest
This witl confirm that you have advised me of the presently scheduled
hearings on the Reinforced Earth Co.,/Bonne Vue propertyr in which my
client claims an interest - the Planning Commission is to consider it on
July 9th, at about 3:00 P.M., and the Town Council is supposed to takeit up at 7:30 P.M. on July l7th.
I plan to attend and speak on behalf of my client. Please adviseif there are any changes in this schedule.
TJQ/1Iwxc: Will Trout
Bob Horen
truly yours,
lmn
75 south frontage road
yail, colorado 81657
(303) 476-7000
,lune l3, 1984
e.
otflco ot communlty dcyclopmont
Mr. Peter Jamar
Bemidge Associates'1000 South Frontaqe RoadVail, Colorado 91657
Re: Bonne Vue
Dear Peter,
This is to confirm that changes_in the Bonne vue project with regardto the architectural design witt le required to gb bick to tne pEcfor its review. hje feel that since an architectural design and aspecific 9eSFe of earth integration was approved by the FEC, anychanges should be reviewed by-thg pEC befoi^b sendin-g it on t6 co-uncil.I presented your letter of Ji.rne '12 to the council t6day at work session,and.they-agreed to send the project back to planning cbnrnission fortheir July 9 meeting.
ll.9'.as we have agreed, a'll material relating to the revision shallbe into our.office by 5:00 pn June Zg, 1gg4,5ut preferabTy earlier.If yori or the Reinforced Earth Company reprisentaiives havl anyquestions, please get in touch with mb.
.r I
APP: bpr
Berridge Associates, Inc.
Planning . Landscape Architecture
June 12, l9E4
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL
IOOO S. FRONTAGE RD. V/EST
vAtL, CO 8t657
Dear Council Members,
Due to the desire to improve the project even further, the Reinforced Earth
Company has proposed to revise the architecturel design of the Bonne Vue/
Architerra project. Due to this change we request that the PEC review the
change for their approvel on their July I agende. Sinee we are scheduled
on your June l9 agenda, please send the project back to PEC for further
review at that uime. Thank you.
PJ:pm
245 Valleio St. . San Francisco, California 941 11 . (415) 433-2357
P. O. Box 6364 . Denver, Colorado 80206 . (303) 863-1059
1 000 So. Frontage Rd. West, Suite 1 00 . Vail, Colorado 81 657 . (303) 476-0851
Petetr Jailrar
Berridge Associates, Inc.
TERENCE J. QUINN
ATTORNEY AT LAW
June L4, L984
Peter PattenDirector of Community Development
Town of Vail75 South Frontage RoadVail, Colorado 81657
P. O. Box 1110
Eagle, Colorado 81631
Telephone: 303-328-7116
Re: Trout vs Mountain Propert.ies/Reinforced Earth Co - Bonne Vue
Dear Mr. Patten:
I represent 't^7. Trout, Architects, Inc., which is the Plaintiffin Eagle County District Court Action IiIo. 2402. W. Trout Architects,Inc. vs. Mountain Properties, Ltd., et a1 . This is an action toforeclose a mechanicrs lien which my client claj-ms encumbers Lot 3,Block A, Lions Ridge Subdivision, in Vai1, Eagle Countlz, Colorado.
I understand that you are considering the application of ReinforcedEarth Company formerly known as Architerra - At - Vail, and now knownas Bonne Vue, which involves vacating lot lines between some parcelsof ground, including the above described Lot 3.
The status of my clientrs lit.igation in this matter is that a noticeof 1is pendens was filed in early L975, when Mountain Properties ownedthis lot. For reasons too involved to go into here, the trial of myclientrs claim did not finish until about a monLh acro. The Judqe hasnot rendered a decision as of this date.
The amount which may be awarded to my client will exceed $100,000,if all of our positions are accepted by the Court. I realize lhat thejudqment may come in at some lower fi-gure, or even a finding that we
have no lien at. all; but I would like to advise you of the possible
dimensions of our i-nterest in this property. I do this because based
on incomplete information, it appears that you may believe that a judgment
lien represents my clientrs claim to this property.
f could be wrong, but the only judgment lien of which I am aware,involving this property and the litiqation described above, representsthe judgment entered in favor of a co-defendant of Mountain Properties,Frasier - Gingery. That lien is for a face amount of about $6,000.00'and is recorded in Book 248, Paqe 2L3, Ln the records of the Eagle
County Clerk and Recorder.
I would appreciate hearinq from you about this matter, such as
when it will next be considered, and what position the Town will takein light of my clientts claim. Right now, f understand that a revised
proposal is scheduled to be heard on iluly 9th in the afternoon. We donot wish to impede any proceedings concerning this property' except tothe extent that they could eloud the lien we claim, and which we hopewill be eonfirmed by the judgrnent to be entered in the pending litigation.
-t-
[-l-
II ,June 14, 1984Peter Patten
Page 2
As long as adequate measures are taken to avoid prejudice to my clientrsposition in this rnatter, we have no further opposition to any planswith which you may be presented.
Very truly yours,n'\\,IKLRI/,k/
Terence J. Quinn-
xc: Will Trout
Bob Horen
TJQI1Iw
-2-
a Stock Company of Minneapolis, Minnesota
TITLE INSUMNCE COMPANY OF MINNESOTA, a Minnesota corporation, herein called the Company, for a valuable
consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the
proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or
referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefor; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and
B and to the Conditions and Stipulations hereof.
This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and the amount of the poliry or policies
committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, either at the time of the issuance of this Commitment
or by subsequent endoresement.
This Commitment is preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and all liability and obliga-
tions hereunder shall cease and terminate six months after the effective date hereof or when the policy or policies committed for
shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the Company.
l The term "mortgage", when used herein, shall include deed of trust, trust deed, or other s€curity instrument.
2. If the proposed Insured has or acquires actual knowledge of any defect, lien, encumbrance, adveffe claim or other matter
affecting the esiate or interest or mortgagl thereon covered by this Co'mmitment otler than those shown in Schedule B hereof,
and shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall be relieved from liability for any loss or
damage resulting from any act of reliance hereon to-the extent the Company is prejudiced ty failure of the proposed Insured
to solisclose such knowledge. If the proposed Insured shall disclose such knowledge to the Company, or if the Company other-
wise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company-at its option
may amend Schedule B of tfus Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability
previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions and Stipulations.
3. Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named proposed Insured and such parties in-
cluded under the definition of lnsured in the form of policy or policies committed for and only for actual loss incurred in re-
liance hereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in
Schedule B, or (c) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. In no event shall
such liability exceed the imount stated in Schedule A for the policy bi policies committed for and such liability is subject to the
insuring provisions and the Conditions and Stipulations and tfie exilusi-ons from Coverage of the form of policy- or policies com'
mittedTor in favor of the proposed lnsured which are hereby incorporated by reference and made a part of this Commitment
except as expressly modified herein.
4, Any action or actions or rights of action that the proposed Insured may have or may bring against the Company arising
out of the status of the title to the estate or inlerest or the status of the mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment must be
based on and are subject to the provisions of this Commitment.
TfM Form 25SZ Z/7A
AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION COMMITMENT - 1970 Rev.
In addition to the matters contained ifl the Conditions and Stipulations and Exclusions from Coverage above referred to,
this Commitnrent is also subject to the following:
1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records.
2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records.
3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, and any facts which a correct survey and
inspection ofthe premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records.
4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material theretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not
shown by the public records.
5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, hrst appearing in the public records or
attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for
value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Title Insurance Company of Minnesota has caused its corporate name and seal to be hereunto
affixed by its duly authorized officcrs on the date shown in Schedule A, to be valid when countersigned by a validating officerorotherauthorizedsisnatory'
iiMpANy or l[llruuesorai lll
iid'* N EsorA
-Z4ir,-e.f"fu
o
ALTA COT.IiltTI{ENT
SS{EDIJLE A
APFI lcrtton No. VOOo0fi!9-z
For Infornrtlon OtrlY
- Chmttr *
Lrndcr Fol lcv
PRE NEF(fiT I$O.OO-*TOTAL-- ASO,OO
lflth vour. F.olttrncf plrrlr rafar t* VOOOGS29-?.
l. Effrctlvc llrtrr nAY Ol, 1984 rt B|OO A.Ft.
2, Pol lcv to ba lrruad' rnd FroFolrd Insurrdl
"ALTA' Lors Faltcv l97Q Rcvl*len, TgD
Prsrated tnrur*adl
3. Thc cqtrte oF lntcrcrt lh thc lend dererlbcd or rrfrrrrd to ln th{rCormttnrnt rnd eoyfFrd hrrcln lrl
A FEE
4. Tttlc to thc trtrtr oF lntcFrrt cov*rrd hrr'rln lr at th* rffrctlvcdrtr h*reof vattad tnt
AXY LICN FARTIGRST Af{ ILLINOIS LIIIITED PARTI€RGI{IP
S. Thr lrnd rrfcnnrd to 1n thlr Co*rmltncnt 1r drr€rlbcd rr follourt
LOT A-3' H-OCK Ar LION$ RTDBE SUBDM$IOHr ACgFR&lnm TO TIE PLAT
RgCffiDED .,JI,LY 2ir I96P,IN BSOX 2IS AT PA6E 646, CCflJI{TY OF Ef,$.Er
STATE OF G$-OREDO.
ALTR COTTTIITTI
|crfrnr.6 Fr
{irculF$rntr}
GIIT
Apil firtl.il lfrD. t/sOOatrt 4
a.
I
I
T[tr
l.
a
frllortm rfr the FrrNtlrrtlfntr tc br scnrllad rlth.
h?trm tc or frn ttrr rt6a{nt of thr rFrnterl sF roFtnroFr af thefel I conrl{rr.rtlcn for. thr rrtrtr or lnttrtrt to br lnrumdr
P|.ra|} lhrtFntntfrl cr*rtlnr thr crtrtr oi l$t.r'rrt ta Dr lnf$?rdiilft Dr fFt€ut.{ rod dt'ly filrd for r{cordr to-.lltr
:.':|......'.
ALTA CO}IIIITI.IENT
SCHEDULE B-2
(Excrrtlonr) Aprltcrtion No. VOOO6S2?-2
Tha tolicy ol. pollclcc to be lrrurd ulll contlln Gxcerrtionr to thrfolloulns unlcrr thr trn* rFG dlrpoacd ef to thc nttgfrctlsn af thcConllnvr
l. $tendrrd Excrrtlanr I throush E rrlntrd on th* csver theot.
6. Trxca rnd ttrcrrncntt not yct dur op pryrble rrrd EFG€lal rsr*rrsanttnot vct contlficd to thc Trcrtuncr'r offtcc.
7. Anv unrrld ttxcl oF rararrncnts rttlngt trld lrnd.
A. Llcnr for unprid sntcl- *nd reucr chtrrrg, lf rny.
9. RIOHT OF FROPBIETOR OF A VEIN OR LOBE TO EXTRACT ANII REfIOVE HIS ONE
T}€REFROilI SHR.H-D THE gAt{E E€ F(}UNF TO PEI'ETRATE OR INTER$ECT THE
FRET.IIS€A A8 RE€ERV€N IN UNITEO STATES PATENT R€CORDED DECENBSR 2P't920, IH BOO( ?3 AT FAOE 42,
IO. RISHT OF I.IAY FOR NITCI{ES OR CANALS C.ANSTRTICTED BY THE AUTIERITY tr
ThIE UNITED STATE$ A8 RESERVED IN UNITED STATES PATENT REGOf,DED
DECEI.IBER ?9, TPzO, IN BOOK ?B AT FA6E 4?.
It. RESTRICTIVE CoVSNf,NTSr I*IIGH FO NOT COT.ITAIN A FORFEITLNE OR R€VERTER
CLAUSE' 8UT OTIITTING RESTRICTIONS. IF ANY, EASED &fl RACE, COLOft,RELIOION' ffi NATttr{A- ORTOIN' A$ CONTAII€D IN INSTRUF1ENT RECORBED
rLJLY 2$' 1969' IN BOU( 215 AT PA6E 649 sfn fi6 AIiENDED IN INSTRTFIENT
RECORDED DECEI'BER 02, I'7O, IN BOOK 2T9 AT PAGE 23I,
1?. EASET1ENTS Ag REGGRVED ANN EXCEFTES IO FEET IN I.IIDTH ALONO EASH $Iffi
OF F[.L INTERIOR LOT LINE$ AND 20 FEET IN T{IITTH INI{ARD FROT.I THE
}IE$TERLY BANI{ OF RED SANNSTCINE CREEI( FOR UTILITY ANN NRAINACIE
PIJfiFOSES AS SIfrHN OI{ THE FLAT OF LION"S RIBSE SUBDIVISICN.
13. LIS PENHNB IN THE DI6TRICT COIST IN AND Fffi THE COUilTY OF EAGI.E
ENTITLE0 lf. TROUT ARCHITECTS' INC. ' At'l OHIO CORFORATIONTPLAINTIFF{S,' VB l'lOthlTAIN PROFERTIES, LTD.' A COI-ORADO CORFORATION'
D€FENEAI{T(S} ' N€CSRNEE FSBRUARY 261 1975, IN BOOK 238 AT PAO€ 7$''CIVIL ACTION NO. ?4O2,
Berridge Associates, I nc.
Planning . Landscape Architecture
May 16, l984
Peter Patten
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81 657
Dear Peter,
In accordance with our discussion regarding the Bonne Vue project yesterday
I am providing you with fesponses to the "Design Standards" section of the
Special Development District Section of the Zoning Code. I have also included
information regarding the inclusion of the caretaker apartment/emp loyee
unit,
SDD Design Standards
A. Buffer Zone
The project is basically consistent with the densities of adjacent projects
and technically is not a high-density project located adjacent to low-density
residential use district. The topography of the site is such that actual
dwelling units are significantly seperated both by distance and a landscape
buffer from the dwelling units across the road to the south. Open space
areas are located to the east and north of the site. Single family lots are
located to the west of the site and are not negatively impacted by the
project due to the low density and a 7O' setback which has been provided
on the western property boundary.
B. The circulation system has been designed for the type of traffic expected
to be generated by the site and the needs of emergency vehicles.
C. The plan has provided areas of open space for the purpose of landscaping,
preservation of views, snow storage areas, and recreational features.
D. Not app licab le
F. The needs of individuals, families, and neighbors in terms of privacy have
been met.
F. Not applicable
245ValleioSt.. San Francisco, Calitornia 941 l1 . (415) 433-2357
P. O. Box 6364 . Denver, Colorado 80206 . (303) 863- 1 059
1 000 So. Frontage Rd. West. Suite 1 00 . Vail, Colorado 81 657 . (303) 476 0851
PAGE 2
G. The building type has been the greetest concern of the project and the
appropriateness of the buildings ro the site is the major factor in the
success of the develooment.
H, The building design is most appropriate for rhe sire. The orientation,
spacing, materials, color and texrure all blend into the hillside. All
exterior walls will be of a color to match the earth tone of the site.
Maximization of solar exposure is a key factor in the design of the units.
l. The landscaping of the total site has been designed to enhance rhe area
and serves several purposes including visual screening of wells, wind
breaks, erosion control, revegetation. and visual enhancement of the
area. The area now is currently scarred with various road cuts and
minimal vegetation other than sage exists. The final product will be
maintained by a full time on-site manager and will be an enhancement
to the neighborhood.
Caretaker/Employee Unit
The applicants wish to provide an on-site dwelling unit to be utilized for afull time caretaker of the development. This apartmenr would be located in
the lower level of the Club Building and would be approximately 1000 squarefeet. As you mentioned the Staff supports this request due to the obvious
benefits which result from on site earetaker. The applicant agrees !o restrict
this unit in accordance with Eection 18. | 3.080.
Please let me know if you have any questions or if lcan furnish you with sny
additional information.
PJ:pm
is to seek abandonment of the easementsof Lionsridge Subdivisions, Filing #'l,
oilLq
PJli a c
I, the undersigned, as a
acknowledge that we have
as platted and approve of
Representative of MOUNTAIN BELL,
no need for these easementstheir abandonment.
Signature:
245 Vallejo St. . San Francisco, California 941 I 1 . (415) 433-2357.- P.O Box6364 . Denver, Colorado80206 . (303)863-1059\ 1000 So. Frontage Rd. Wesl,Suite 100 . Vail, Colorado 81 657 . (303) 476-0851
Berridge Associates, I nc.
Planning . Landscape Architecture
May 8, 1984
Mr. Ken Freeman
MOUNTAIN BELL
P. 0. Box 3050Dillon, Colorado 80431
Dear Ken:
The purpose
shown on the
of th i s 'l etter
attached plats
These easements were p1 atted along interior lot lines and were
designated for the purpose of dra'inage and utilities. The ownersof these lots are applying to the Town of Vail for a Minor Sub-division which wou-ld consolidate IlILots A l-3 into one
Parcel for the purpose of constructing 16 earth sheltered dwe'lling
un-its. upon the.s'ing1e parcel . Therefore, lhe jnterior lot lines
wrr l De vdcilLeu dno rnus rne neeo itrso ro ffi.
Your prompt attention to this matter wil'l be appreciated and I haveprovided a space below which, when signed, will acknowledge your
approval of the abandonment.
Please contact me 'if you have any questions.
S i ncerely,
1t\ll"SOCIATES,
I
Berridge Associates, I nc.
Planning . Landscape Architecture
May 8, .1984
Mr. Gary Ha1l
PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY
P. 0. Box 430
Minturn, Colorado 81645
Dear Gary:
The purpose of this letter js to seek abandonment of the easements
shown on the attached plats of Lionsridge Subdivisions, F'i1ing #'1,
--rThese easements were platted along 'interior lot lines and were
designated for the purpose of drainage and utilities. The ownersof these lots are applying to the Town of Vail for a Minor Sub-division which would consolidate Lot 6 and Lots A l-3 into oneparcel for the purpose of constructing 16 earth sheltered dwelling
units upon the single parcel . Therefore, the interior lot lineswill be vacated and thus the need also to abandon these easements.
Your prompt attention to this ratter will be appreciated and I haveprovided a space below which, when signed, will acknowledge your
approval of the abandonment.
Please contact me if you have any questions.
S i ncere ly ,
I NC.
PJ/jac
I, the undersigned,
acknowledge that we
as a Representative
have no need for theas platted and ap ve of their ndonmen
S i gnature:DATE:
245 Vallejo St. . San Francisco,a 94111 . (415) 433-2357
P.O. Box6364 . Denver, Colorado80206 . (303) 863-1059
1 000 So. Frontage Rd. West, Suite 1 00 . Vail, Colorado B1 657 . (303) 476-0851
IATES,
Planning . Landscape Architecture
May 8, .|984
Mr. Jeff Hughes
HERITAGE CABLEVISION
P. 0. Box 439
Avon, Colorado 8.|620
Dear Jeff:
The purpose of this letter is to seek abandonment of the easements
shown on the attached plats of Lionsridge Subdivisions, Fi'ling #1
and FiIjng #4.
These easements were p1 atted along interior lot lines and were
designated for the purpose of drainage and utilities. The ownersof these lots are applying to the Town of Vail for a Minor Sub-division which wou'ld conso.lidate Lot 6 and Lots A l-3 into one
parcel for the purpose of constructing 16 earth sheltered dwelling
units upon the single parce'l . Therefore, the jnterior lot lineswill be vacated and thus the need also to abandon these easements.
Berridge Associates, I nc.
Your prompt attention to thisprovided a space be1ow which,
approval of the abandonment.
Please contact me if you have any quest'ions.
Sincerely,
Peter Jamar
PJljac
I, the undersigned, as a
acknowledge that we have
as p1 atted and approve of
ReDresentati ve
no need for thetheir abandonment.
matter will be appreciated and I have
when signed, will acknowledge your
oerc: 5'- /4 -4L/S i gnature :
245ValleioSt.. San Francisco, California94l 11 . (415) 433 2357
P. O. Box 6364 . Denver, Colorado 80206 . (303) 863-1059
1 000 So. Frontage Rd. West, Suite 1 00 . Vail, Co orado 81 657 . (303) 476-0851
HERITAGE CABLEV
I
Recorded rt -..-........,...-.-.......|to"0............frn
Made tlrig day of
HOLY CROSS ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION,a Colorado Corporation
of t}le courty of Eagle snd State ol
Colorado, of the ftrst part, and REf NFORCED EARTH COIvIpANy;a Virginia Corporation, 1700 N. i4o.ore St.Arlington, VA 22209 acorPoration
organized and exiating undc. and by virtue of the laps of the State of
Virginia , ol tbe aecond pgrt:
IVITNESSETII, fhat the said part y of the first part, for and in consideration of the eum of
Ten Dollars and other qood and sufficient consideration DOL'LARS,
to tbe aaid part y of the first part in hand paid by the raid party of the seeond pgrt, the receipt rpbereof
ir hereby conJessed and acknowledged, hag r'emised, releesed, eold, coaveyed and QUIT CLAIMED, aad by
these presents do rcmise, release, aelt, convey gld QUIT CLAIII unto the said party of the second pari'! its
succ€saors and assig:ns forever, all right, title, int*rest claim and demand which the said part y of tle
firrt part ha g in snd to the following described
situate, lying and being in the County of EagIe
Any and all rights relating to utility easements located:
10 feet in width.along each side of the interior lot linesof Lot A-I, Lot A-2, and Lot A-3, Block rrA't, Lion's RidgeSubdivision, according to the recorded plat thereof recordedJuly 25, 1969 in Book 215 at Page 648 at Reception No. L11156'
County of Eagle, State of Colorado; and
12.50 feet in width along the easterly boundary of Lot 6,Block 1, Lionrs Ridge Subdivision, Filing No. 4, accordingto the recorded plat thereof recorded August 1, 1980 in Book
306 at Page 411 at Reception No. 202794, County of Eagle,State of Colorado-
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same together wiih all and singular the appurtenanc€s and privileges thereunto
belonging or in anywise tbereunto appertaining, arrd all the estate, right, title, interest and claim whatsoever, of the
soid part cf the first part, eitber in larr or equity, to the only proper use, benefit and behoof of the said party
of the second part, its luccessors and assigns forever.
IN WITNESS WRDREOF, ?he said party of the first part hag
gnd seal the day and year first above written.
Signed, Sealed and Delivered in the Pregencc of
- : 3e{cptlon
Tnrs Dnrn,
tg 84 between
STATE OF COLORADO,
County of
The forrgoln3 tnrtrument was acknowledged
19 , by.a Colorado Corporation
My commission elpireq
and State of Color*do, tl rrit:
hereunto set it6 bsnil
]*
before me this dey ofof Holy Cross Electric Association
, f9 . lyitness my hand and official segl.
}{ot tt PuDIic-
I
lllhr $r.r.{rh 4t€nue (,.rldfn (rr,,,.d(rk{trll rto!'1"1. on44 .^.t0
IL
No. 522.
\)
\eUtT CLA U DEED TO CORpOnAttON. , B,&r.rij tut\l"r*IL-
oDate of Application
APPLICATION FORM FOR SPECIAL DEVEIOPMENT
DISTRICT DEI/ELOPMENT PLATiI
r. This procedure is required for any project that would go throughthe Special Development District Froceiure.
The application will not be accepted untiL all information is submitted,.
A.NAME oF AppLrcANT The Reinforced Earth Conoaly 1,1 ,\
ADDRESS
B. NAME OF
ADDRESS
APPLICANT' S REPRESENTATIVE
uoNn t/74 AZt7
C. AUTHORIZATION OF PROPERTY
SIGNATURE ,i-l
ADDRESS
/* 272-. j
t?//42.21611sy2/et */
ADDRESS ?64 *q
LEGAI DESCRIPTION
$100. 00
the zoningunless waived
/A'U/VGTv/6
LOCATION OF PROPOSAID.
F r{+,3 e {,s, E**,4j--.
F. A list of the nane of owners of all property adjacent to theSubject property and their miling a.ddr6sse!.
II. Four (4) copies of the following information:. A, Detailed writt en,/graph ic description of proDosal .B. An environmentar- impact re'po-rc ;hiir'b;-in-u*itt"d toadministrator in accordance with chapter 18.56 hereofby Section 19. 56.030, exempt project-s;
c. An open space and recreational plan sufficient to meet the demandsgenerated by the deve]-opment without undue burden on availableor proposed public facilities;
(0vER)
i.
!r Application fe special Development uistft Development Plan
D.
G.
Existing contours having contourfeet if the average slope of theor with contour intervals of notslope of the site is greater than
intervals of not more than fivesite is twenty percent or less,more than ten feet if the averagetwenty percent-
A proposed site plan, at a scale not smaller than one inch equalsfifty feet, showing the approximate locations and dimensions ofall build.ings and structures, uses therein, and all principal sitedeveropment features, such as randscaped areas, recreational facj-li-ties, pedestrian plazas and walkways, service entries, d.riveways,and off-streel parking and loading areas with proposed contoursafter grading and sit.e development;
A preliminary land.scape plan, at a scale not smaller than one inchequals fifty feet. showing existing landscape features to be retainedor removed, and showing proposed landscaping and landscaped sitedevelopment features, such as outdoor recreationar facilities,bicycle paths, trails, pedestrian plazas and walkways, water features,and other elements;
Preliminary building elevations, sections, and floor plans, ata scale not smaller than one-eighth equals one foot, in sufficientdetail to determine floor area, g'ross residential floor area, interiorcirculation, locations of uses within buildings, and the generalscale and appearance of the proposed development.
III . Time Requirements
The Planning and Environmental Commrlssion meets on the 2nd and 4thMondays of each month. An application with the necessary accompanyingmaterial must be submitted four weeks prior to the date of the rneeting.
NOTE: It is recomrended that before a special development district applicationis subnitted, a revi"ew and comrnent meeting shoutd be set up wiih theDepartment of Corununity Development.
Berridge Associates, I nc.
Planning . Landscape Architecture
APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
The Reinforced Earth Company is applying for the formation of Speciel
Development District to eneompass what is now known as Lot 6, Block l,
Lionsridge Subdivision, Filing {}4. Lot A1 ,2. Lionsridge Subdivision Filing tll,
and Lot A3, Lionsridge Subdivision Filing {l l. lt is intended that through the
process of Minor Subdivision concurrent with this application for an SDD that
these parcels will be consolidated into one.
An Environmental lmpaet Report has been prepared and accompanies this application.
The site plan, preliminary landscape plan, architectural plans and other plans
eontained within the EIR will constitute the development plan for the site.
The reason that an SDD is being requested for the site is that there now exist
two underlying Zone Districts: Residential Cluster and Single Femily, Lot 6 is
the only lot that is zoned SFR and allows under current restrictions a single family
home with a c€retaker unit with a total GRFA allowed of 5043 square feet. Lots Al,
A2 and A3 are zoned Residential elugter and allow a total of l5 units and 28,088
souare feet.
The applicant desires to create an underlying zone of RC for the SDD in order to
have uniform development standards apply to the entire project. In actuality the
GRFA is reduced due to the chenge in zone on Lot 6 and the slope factor being
utilized.
One development standard of the RC District that is requested to be varied from is
the rear setback requirement of 20'. Due to the nature of the development end
the ability for a better site arrangement the rear setback is shown as 5' in one
location [to the rear of unit l6]. Since the rear of the property sbuts a easement
60' in width and open space it is essumed that there would be no negative impact
of the reduced setback requiremenE.
245 Vallejo St. . San Francisco, California 941 1 I . (41 5) 433-2357
P. O. Box 6364 . Denver, Colorado80206. (303) 863-1059
1 000 So. Frontage Rd. West, Suite 1 00 . Vail, Colorado 81 657 . (303) 476-0851
LC]TS I AND 5, BLOCK I, LIONSRIDGE FILING {1'{:
Jeffery B. Selby
Box l52B
Vail. CO 81658
LOT A-'{, LIONSRIDGE SUBDIVISION
Merv Lepin .l
232 Vest Meadow Drive 6o\ t -',-'t' t
Vail, CO 81657
LOT A5-I
Li onsmane Condominium Association
Aex.€9C- {" Uo -! 3o.!< ra -1. /')> > +
|Vaif,Co.8+R56 SD y €'Cd C,,- - ta r'
LOT 46-4
Homestake Condominium Assoeiation.Bex-ECg- l)ttV aJ Vi.i*: Qr-' '-^--
Vail, BO affir58- f t 6{1
CASOLAR
BONNE VUE - LIST OF ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS
LOT I3
Alme Jean E William H. Cetoe
Tine E James W. MacDonald Jr.
Box 1290
Homestead, FL 33030
LOT IqA
Diane E Charles P. Gallegher
96 | 2 South Vine Way
Englewood, CO 80110
LOT I4B
Mertin E Craig Rubenstein
I I tl8 Sandstone Drive
Vail, CO 81657
\9 tlz,ls,t ). u f ,1t{l
PAG}E 2
LOT I5A
Jim E Tina MacDonald
Box 1290
Homestead, FL 33030
LOT I5B
George Vega Jr.
2660 Airport Road
Naples, FL 33St{2
Ft o
DA
APPL ICANT
APPLICATION FOR
MiNOR SUBDIViSION RIViEt,l
(4. or fevrer 'l ots)
Thc Reinforced Earth Cornpany
ADDRESS 1700 N. Moore Street, Suite 2200 Arlington, VA
TE
A.PHONE
B.
c.
NAMT OF
MAIL ING
NAI,IE OF
MILING
NAI"IE OF
OhlNER'S
MA IL ING
APPLICANT' S REPRISENTATIVE
ADDREii l(fro s,Fbtffi PD, t-.ne+r pH}NE ol76-OESI
PROPERTY
S I GNATUR
A DDRE SS
Ol,lNTR (prrnt
D.LOCATION OF PROPOSAL
A//4,*3 L//.r,utnQ(4 *+l
L0TS_2________BL0CKS__/_ SUBDIUTST}N L//N5/W6C IFILING'*T
E. FEE $r 00.00 PAID
F. MATERIAL TO BE SUBMITTED
The subdivider shal'l submit three (3) cop'ies, two of which must be my1 ars,of the proposal following the requirements for a fjnal plat as found- inSectjon 17,16.'l 30 of the Subdivision Reguiatjons, Certajn of these requirements
Itay qe waived by the zoning administrator and/or the planning and EnvironmentalCommjssjon if detenmined not applicable to the project.
G. An environmental report may be required if so stipulated under Chapter 18.56Environmental Report of the zoning code.
H. The Department_of Community-Deve1 opment will be responsible for seeing thatthe approved plat is promptly recorded with the Eagie County Clerk ani Recorder.
I. Include a ljst of all adjacent property owners and their mailing addresses.
Berridge Associates, I nc.
Planning . Landscape Architecture
APPLICATION FOR MINOR SUBDIVISION
In order to essist in the efficient, or'derly, and integrated development
of a project tci be known as Bonne Vue, this application for a minor
subdivision is being filed. The subdivision consists of consolidating
three lots into one percel. The existing parcels are Lot 6, Block l,
Lionsridge Subdivision Filing lf 4, Lots Al and A,2, Lionsridge subdivision,
Filing lt | [already approved as a minor subdivision by Town of Vail],
and Lot A3, Lionsridge Subdivision, Filing ltl.
245 Valleio St. . San Francisco, California 941 1 1 . (41 5) 433-2352
P. O. Box 6364 . Denver, Colorado 80206 . (303) 863 1059
1 000 So. Frontage Rd. West, Suite 1 00 . Vail, Colorado 81 657 . (303) 476-0851
1,.-
Berridge Associates, Inc.
Planning . Landscape Archilecture
Application for a variance to Section 18.69.0q0 - Vail Municipal Code in
order to build structures on 40% slope
In l98l the Reinforced Eerth Company received a variance from the Town
of Vail to eonstruct earth sheltered dwelling units upon Lots Al and A2 of
Lionsridge Subdivision. The veriance was granted by the Town due to the
demonstration by the Reinforced Earth Company of a unique, pfoven
engineering design concept called Reinforced Earth. The excellent structural
performance of the more than 2,000 Reinforced Earth structures completed
during the past 11 years demonstrates more than any other fact that these
structures have been sefely designed, Not only are these stfucturBs the
state-of-the-art in soil stabilization and reinforcing but they are also one
of the most aesthetically pleasing methods of hillside construction,
Since the approval of the Architerrs at Vail project in 1981, the Reinforced
Earth Company has been faced with e down turn of the Vail real estste
economy and their hope of constructing their First housing project in the
United States to use as a model for earth sheltered housing which provides
the highest standsrds of quality and environmentally accepted practices
rn/as not able to be realized. The posiuive aspect of this delay, was thst gome
of the architectural design of the structures was re-evalu€ted snd today's
design is an improvement upon earlier designs.
Fortunately, the developer has been able to acquire two adjacent sites enabling
an expansion of the project by three dwelling units and providing room upon
the site to construct a limited amenity area for the use of the residents.
Because of this expansion, it is necessary to expand the srea for which the
previous variance was granted and to update the Planning and Environmental
Commission as to the status of the project.
In conjunction with and for the purpose of the Town of Vail's review of the
expanded development en Environmental lmpact Report has been prepared
which updates the existing EIR which was completed in | 98 l. The EIR points
out that all existing conditions f or the new parcels of land are exactly similar
to those for the previously approved projeet and that basically the impacts
of the expanded project are the same as those of the previous project.
245 Vallejo St. . San Francisco, California94l 11. (415\ 433-2357
P. O. Box 6364 . Denver, Colorado 80206 . (303) 863-1059
1000 So. Frontage Rd. West, Suite 100 . Vail, Colorado 81 657 . (303) 476-0851
PAGE
The one aspect of the development which probably changes the most wilt be the
visual impact, Due to the redesign of the architecture the units will now fit evenfurther into the hillside. The addirion of land to the project provides an opporrunityfor greater amounts of open space and landsceping along the road. A rendering of
the entire site is being prepared End will be presented to the PEC for their review.
It should be pointed out that Lot 6 is currently zoned Single Family Residental
and currently can be built upon by right. Lot A3 hes been previously grsnted by
the Town a right to construct two units by Ordinance, We believe that integrsting
these development sites into the earth shelEered concept grEatly enhances the
future appearance of the hillside in terms of unit design and access.
o
2
t
PETITION FORM FoR AI.{ENDMENT
OR
Petition Ae
TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE
I.
REQUEST FORA CHANGE IN DISTRICT BOTJNDARIES
any amendment to theboundary change, A. NAME OF PETITIONER Earth Conpany
ADDRESS 1700 N. Moore Street,suite 2200, Arlington, VA
B.NAITIE oF PETITIoNER'S REPRESENTATIVE
This proced,ure is reguired. foror for a reguest for a ai"tii"t zoning ordinance
PI{ONE
'M'G#"/rt'
ADDRESS
c.NAME 0F OWNER (print or type)
SIGNATURE
ADDRESS
LOCA?ION OF PROPOSAJ-,
ADDRESS
TEGAL DE9CRIPTION lor
E. FEE $100.00. PAIo
PIIONE
all property adjacent to the
addresses .
HoN"(/ft:q
D.
P.A list of the narnes of owners ofsubject property, and their ,"lri*
block / filinqCrariS,etfuT-f
(0vER)
Petition form for o*".Lo zoning ord or Requesr ,?, "n.r,ne in no$i8:ri.,
II' Four (4) copies of the following information:
A' The Petition shall include a aununary of the proposed revisionof the regulations, or a complete d-escription of the proposed,chanses in disrrici bound,ar:.Ls ina ;-;;;-;;i"Iii"'g-tfil"Eli!Ii"nand proposed district boundaries_. applicint mrst submit r,rritten ar.d/otgraphic materials stating the reasons for ilquest.
,III. lime Reguirements
The-Planning and Envi-ronmental commission meets on the 2nd and 4thMondays of each rcn.S: e p.liti"n with the neces*u,.y u."ompanyj.ngmaterial must be submit,ted,- tour--weeks prior to the date of the meet_ing' Following tire. Fianni"g-l"a Enviroimentai-conuuission meeting,all amendments to the "o"i"6 oioirrrrr.. or district boundary changemust go to the Town Council for iinat action.
May 4, 1984
TO WIIOM IT MAY CONCERN:
This is to advise you that, pursuant to an executed option
agreement, The Reinforeed Earth Courpany/Architerra Inc. and its
representatives Jack Studnicky, James J. Martell-, Jr. and James
Merkel are hereby authorized to apply for and to seek approvals
of building permits, zoning variances and related governmental
authorizations for certain real property more particuLarly
described as:
ttlot 3, Block
County, State
A,
of
Lions Ridge Subdivision, Eagle
Colorado. t'
This authorizatLon
effect unless and until
shal1 continue
it is revoked
in fuIl force and
in writlng.
SKY LION PARTNERS AT VAIL,an Illinois Linited Partnership
By
BONNE VUE - LIST OF .ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS
LOTS I ANB 5, BLOCK I, LIONSRIDGE FILING I}4:
Jeffery B. 9elby
Box l52E
Vail, CD 81658
LOT A-IT, LIONSRIDGE SUBDIVISION
Merv Lapin
232 West Meadow Drive
Vail, EO 81657
LOT A5-1
Lionsrnane Condorninium Association
Box 699
Vail, CO Bl658
LOT 46-4
Homesbake Condominium Association
Box 699
Vail, CO Bl658
CASOLAR
LOT 13
Alma Jean B William H. Catoe
Tina E James W. MacDonald Jr.
Box 1290
Homestead, FL 33030
LOT IqA
Diane E Charles P. Gallagher
4El2 Bouth Vine Way
Englewood, CO B0l l0
LOT II+B
Martin G Craig Rubenstein
I l4E Sandstone Drive
Vail. CO 81657
PAGE 2
LOT I5A
Jim E Tina MacEonald
Box 1290
Homestead, FL 33030
LOT I58
George Vega Jr.
2660 Airport Road
Naples, FL 339t{2
/"{tf
COMTVIITMENT
TO INSURE
This commitment was Produced and
issued through the office of
GUARANTTE COMPANY
3665 CHERRY CREEK NORTH DRIVE, DENVER, COLORADO 80209
Telephone (303) 321-1 880
LAND TITtffi
\'/.lidrring Otf icer
-ptJ Cl-r-'.2-
\=,
i-;^
,l--j -l-.la
R epresenting:
Jrn-r l t*su nar.rce [o r,,r earuv o r ff] r ru r.r EsorA
a ' r --!n^ iurlir'rEsofA'lrrle lNsuRANct-UoMPANY oF l[1"8'! rb- -
I I
a stock cornpany ol Minneapoli:' Minnesota
EF€dOR5trEYitrE\ET
Item 3' Schedule B-1 is hereby deleted'
Item 4, Schedule B-1 is hereby amended to read:
4. HARRANTY-DE:'^il;i-v:^i"hit[!lTF +['^.lT?l^i'h'!B-Fi-?ffi{t'?i-L[[t;Ti[E
8iu:ltYTlS|,kl'
rh e totar r i abil i tv o r the com p' nv un d !r ^l"d-1, ;'Jil*iln'"i#T.fl
t;fi :il iil: 3;#:':J il';i:
J-i"""i, rt trte aggregate' the face'amo"'nt ol"3
gated under the' ConotrrJns and Stipulations theicof to pay'
This endorsement,- wrren counrcrsigncd .bv.i-1 authorized qf.fi":'.:t.i:tl.tnIo,Tr"r1ta1,fi'Tn't;! t;'il
i.-*x*.,, ", ?t :ff:T?*fit4"'.",:"-'T:1:l^::^fr::?::l;"J'; i.Jii*a bv the provisions
Stipulations and bxctusruls rr 'rrr - t Ihereor-
lrrr-e [rusunnr*ce f,'orvrenr'rY
oF M'NNES.TA
v-2209
jk
of Title Insurance
Item
z.
To be attachecl to and becomc a part of Commitment No'
ComPanY of Minnesota'
2, Scn*edule A is hereby amended to read:
" ALTA" 'ry19' ,: -i:llit r o-rr-rolForm B-1970 (Arnenoe'
ProPosed Insured:
A.A.V. LIMITED PARINERSHIP
$850,000.00
'i{
a SLck Company of Minneapolii, Minnelot
EF\5DSRSEft?EFdT
To be attached to and become a part of Commitment No. U -2709
Company of Minnesota.
)
Item 5, Schedule B-1 is hereby amended to read:
5. DEED OF TRUST FROI'i A.A.V. LIMITED PARTNERSHIP TO THT
COUNTY FOR THE USE OF DUANE S. CARLING AND THOHAS N.
CARLING-I'ICKEE CONSTRUCTION COI'iPANY, A PARTNERSHIP TO
$262 ,500.00.
w
Jrl-r l*ruRANcE f,o*pAruy oF [{|'*NESorA
Page 2
jk
of Title Insuiarce
PUBLIC TRUSTEE OF EAGLE
MCKEE D/B/A
SECURE THE SUM OF
The following is hereby added as Item 5 to Schedule B-1:
6. CERTIFICATE OF LIMITED PARTNTRSHIP FOR A.A.V. LIMiTED PARTNERSHIP
TO Bg FILED iN EAGLE COUNTY.
A.A.V. LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
3/11/8r
Thc tot:rl li:rbility of thc Compuny undcr said commitmcnt and any cndon;ement thcrcto shall not
cxcccd, in thc aggregate, the face amount of said commitment and costs which the Company is obli-
gated under the Conditions and Stipulations thereof to pay-
'fhis enrioruement, when counlersigneri by an authorized officer or agent, is made a part of said
commitment as of the commitment date thereof and is subject to the Schedules, Conditions and
Stipulations and Exclusions from Coverage therein contained, except as modified by the provisions
hereof.
{rn-r lr,rsuearuce f,ontenr,rv or [!lrNNESorA
a- .-.t - ,-----:---.-4l-..f/- /4-<-
Sccretary
{"o
fl
li i- I t ,r:tJlll,llr
:.'HEU,ILE B_1
t Fie'r u i r'enrents )
i',1
di
Fl El'lT
AepI icaiir'rr No, VO??I)P
*,:, l l,:u-rirrg ar'€ the r'e.ruirenrerris to t'e r'-1rTrP1 ied uiiir:
F.a.irrerri tr, or. f ,:,r tfrc, .ti,:Duiri c,f ti-le sFarrtor'3 Gl* lTrr-trt'gaeoPS Gf tl'r€
f r.r i i {c,rrgloer'at r r:, rl f rjr' iire t-st.:te ar' irrter'esi to ::' e irrsur'ed
F'r-t,pe'r. irrstr'ur,ent ( s ) cr'eaiifrg ii"re estaie t'r' irri€r'est tG I'e insured
rrtist t'L: e:lecu1-rrd a rll ,iuir f i I r.'d f or nec['rd' to-uiil
EV I Lr!.l.Jr:E !,f:lI l SFtlLT trRY TtJ l Hc. L:frl'lPf-;N y ]-HAT RE i NFOF:L Efr EAFTTH rl:O ' '
r!\ir:. A IrELrlllr:iiiE gr-rRF. I5 F)N bl{TIl'Y L:FTPABLE UF F\cr-:i'JliiIhjl; TiTLE TD
a,-i-.-lEr::l F..qrlF ER'l-Y.
i,JfrRFiANtY trEEL' FRnH.IiUrlNE S. LAftLiNG AND THLrfli'js N' i'lr::|'lEE t'/B/A
LrifiLIhlG-l"u-FtE|]r:rf{',J1-Ruf,l'IOhlccri'iF',a:tl{Y'APAiiTI{ERSHIPTBRfINFLiRC'EB
EAF:TH if'., iirjr-., 11 trELAi,lf-)RE f,tlRP. r:ETNVEYt*6 5,gF-lErl.'i FFOPEFiTY.
I.ltED trF: 'iiiL|:j:i FRUI'| f{LrhjFl]ric:ED EAR].H |::D. ' INt]. A IIELAI.JAFiE U['RP. -rg
IHEF,L|E'L]LTi.iLisTb'EL|FLAGLEL;i:ll.|NTYFSRTHELI-iEUFIIUHNES.CARLIN|J
frlrlfr THr-r|,fu)S l.{. l{r-riEE D/BiA f:flr{LING-|'1LKEE L'Ul\lSTRUtlTIt-'N tl0l"iPAltlY' A
FARTNERiIi1F ]-r:t 5g;t-lFiE l-iJE gUFl irF *1L'?' 5CrCt'tlc)'
r.ior-E! r.HI5 rrri:ipERTy l'lAy BE gLrB-rECr ro rHE REAL ES'fA'i- roo,uttE6 -fAX
LlY VIRTLIE LtF INr::Lu..:;1r-rN IN -lHE 1r:ti'iN DF VAIL. PLEA:',g cilNTACT THE ]'Ot',JN
Lti Vt-\IL F'-rR E.AiD Ai.:'E';:5i{El"lT.
it
No, V(',z?ut
,i':. poiici rrr pc, licic,:i '!o t,e issue,l u.rii I corrtairr ex(eptiorrs to tfra
-,-,i i ourirre urrl r:s.s the ,amrr ara disrc,sL"d of io the saiisiactjon of ihe
:-,n:Fafr.|':
-{,iarr,iar'd L:l r i, p t i. (' r':. I thr.r"'r.lsir 5 pr''i nted c'n the cr,ver' sfreet,
I'a.':es arrd as.ses:rra,rrrs !-rr:,t ret ,jue (rr' P.ryabl e arrd special asgegsn,er,tsrr{,t Yet a€r't1rrr"r tt, t l-rg 'i reas,UFef''-s t,f tirc-,
FrI:1' uf;Fai.'l ta.,.ts 'li ii!:.g5:tttrr:5 a:rgin:; :.ai,l .l ar|i.
:LrerrS i r:, t-' r-Jrrn.t i c ur.ittr ;i'ra 5L'u!sf ch,fr:te9: is arri'.
. iiit:iHT uF j-'Rr:'Fii1L-fL1|1 LtF ri VEIhI r-r,1 LUt'E l-U EXfRAt'f i.)l"lLt llEl'1t-JVE Hi:.
'JKE TH-fiE'FF\L-Ifl::;.-I!LIL[I IiJ.E:iAiIE IE FOLIND TI:I F.EJ.JETF;A.'E LIF JNTEESEL-.I'1 HE
,-'r:L'gr::;rl:. r-i:r hE:,b"nV:i-r Ilrr Uhi rIEIt:::'fr\'l'Eg FATEN-f BF FiL.l:r-j,;iLt IN il'.15-t-RUl'iEFlT
r.-itr:.LlftLl:Lf LrEr_.L"FJBER '.ir, 1 :/:{} 1N L'il:,r:rii ?-:: {+T F AbE 4?.
. i-; I r-.li'i'::. r_rF i,..t::r r r-r-rti L, i 1-r-. jf :;; Lid r:.tii.lr+Lt CLrl'j:. ir-lr_lL1 LLI Hr fl-ii HUI ht-tF( J'i Y uF
: HL l-il.i 1 I LLr :, tnl Et., ril:i: hE!,EkVEl-r i N UN l]'EI' 5.-f FlTg!, F r rl ENT RECLTHITEt
:_rr-r_.LlidCii ,;, , 1 ;/ jrj, i 1r.1 5.r-tt_tl.i ',JJ fiT PAt:iE 4 j.
I- '-.iL:.] h.ia.lI!-rt{!., t.rHii.i-1 Lru t\iuT f:;r;116;111 A FrrFiFEI-tUFE t:rFi REVERTLk L:LAL':;E,
$Li t L,l'rlii. ll.:t: xL:; irir|- r'ir-ri'J!,, jF iit{i', EASEIJ rJN RACE' [r:rLuf{, f{ELiblr:rhl LtR
Nrj'r'ILtNAL r:rhILiif,,J, i]!: L.irl.jTrilf'lED 1N iNSTFUFIENT RECfiRiTED'.IULY ;i, l9l:,9
lr{ t,u}-*i:r5 r-iT r'r:ibE' c,rl:i rinv'l ri}lENlrE! I,'l IhjS'i'RLltlENT REr.lL'RnEiJ LEUEI1BER
(.1; r I '.?7r-r ] N Lt!:r-ri, !l'a.t {r'l ;:'669 , i;5,
LiiiLITY ANI ul-iriINirr-,'t E',r:,fr.Lhll-b r() FEET iN i,JiFTH ALirNr-i EACH g,IL'E IrFiiLL INI.EIiIUR LLIT LJI.IE:. ri* nN:T;EftVFL_I ON THE FLAT DF LIUN,s F.ITIL]E
':,LrLiu I V I ::. i r_tl'J.
LrtiLt Ui: j RU:; i L!r{ [LLr r-,r-.'1 r-rgri; !(,, 197t Fftr:im ttUANE :.. L:']RLiNG ANLI'iHt-ttlti::: N. t.lL:i,tr.8 Il.i1-r 1t7 I tri,lriLLY l\hlIr tr./B/A r::r-\HLIhl6 l.lLl.iEE LUNSrRlJt:'l"IBhl
r_.LrFlFr.ll'lY, r-r L,LrLr-,iirirLr Fi:i|-i rNFi::;HlF TD -fHE Fl_rFLiil TRLi::'l'.EE uF EATTLE
r-.r,rUtrll-Y FLrrl -r'FrC r-!::.t LrF L. rl . F. r-:Lrl.iPAhiY, A I:OLDFIALIU Pr-''ril'NER';HIP'fu
::,ELL'RC l-HE tLir'l Lt-i *:t87, :'L,rr. ()i:) Fi.cLORfrEIr L'aTulrER ?J, l97iJ IN E'-rrrfi .:ltl3
'.t i' f t)l-.: f .jl:'.
r ,, Lt Fl l"l
:,,- | if frLlLE
.(ExcePtiorrs
lTl'lEi.{
B-2
i Reel ication
iiu-i-E: THE pLihi:hr'ri,En !.rrr-,LiLI' L.':ti.i:.ULT i,jITH
- trlirats r ELlt!r-:_.5 1.t- tii-lF.iU ri!, I tlr tH€ I'ERt4i fiNt
r r::.=ut'lF f I r_rN u;, 5ri i ir i NL|L.E i Eirr{EE g.
-r L-lc. L.rr-'i r':- i. i'tr T L.|E
[,-rr'JlrITiL,rt:,, lF {iNi., Fu|( l'FiE
a
t
75 south lrontage road
xall, eolorado 81657
(303) 476-7000
Apri'l 18, '1984
Peter Jamar
Bernidge Assocates, Inc.
1000 South Frontage RoadVail, Colorado 81657
2. Subnrjttal Requirements
A. Slope Varianc'b '
1) Update and amend the previous EIR to
area plus to make the EIR consistent
otflce of eommuni$r devetopment
Re: Architema Revi sions
Dear Peter,
As discussed last week, the following will be the process and associatedsubmittal requirements to incorporate Lot A-3 jnto the previousty approvedArchiterra project.
1. Approval Processes
l) Variance to the hazard regulations to al'l ow construction on slopesaf 40% or more.
?l A minor subdivision to eliminate the lot line between A-2 and A-3.
3) A dens'ity control variance for the ernployee/caretaker unit.
include the entire new
w'ith what was formerly
approved.
2) Written and/or graphic informationples of the previous slope varianceproposal for Lot A-3.
showing that the same princl-
apply similarly to the
3) A reyised vjsual perspective.
4) Revised grading and drainage plan (should be a part of the EIR).
a
I
I .Iamar -2- 4/1e/e
Minor Sybd,iv'ision
l) utility company sign-offs on the vacation of easements as required.
2) A final pl.at_completety signed by all parties except Zoning Adminis-trator and C'lerk and Recorder cei^titicite.
3) l,lqitten staternent Why the request is being made.
EmPI oyee,/Caretaker Uni t
l) variance application-form completed accompanied by written statementand site and f'loor plans. This should tni:luCe leiter statinq aareementto employee housing restrictions as found in section ra.ig.05o(6)iil:;.
Progf_gf-gwlership.of Lots A-.l, A-2, A-3 and property owner's signature(s)on apptications.
l.
B.
c.
D.
I believe the best process would beand Environmental Comrisslon at oneup by Council, PEC would have fina'l
I sincerely hope that this renewed
owners will cause the project to beto unrking with you and -)im Merkel
to take al l above requests totime. Unless appea'led by you
say on these requests.
interest in the projectbuilt this time. I'm
the Planning
or called
property
forward
by the
l ooki ng
on the proJect.
As a'lways,
A.P PATTEN, JR.Director ofAs s i stant
APP: bpr
Pl anni ng
I
B@NNE VUE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
BONNE VUE, VAIL, COLORADO
BERRIDGE ASSOCIATES, INC,
IOOO SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD, WEST
SUITE 1OOvAtL, coLo R A Do, 81657
(303) 476-0851
MAY 4. 1984
I
I
I
BONNE VUEI
I
ENVTRONI4ENTAL TMPACT REPORT
I
I
I
I
I PREPARED FOR:
I rHE RETNFoRcED EARrH coMPAI.IYr
^ll?$.il3$T#g3lfi,i'li!il,
T
t
I PREPARED BY:
| ',3f;-t8ilfifi titrfitri'fiao$*f",,
vArL, 3'9i3Ho*3ott*t(303) 476-08sr.I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I r. BA'KGR.'ND, puRposE, Ar{D scopEr. 1
t rr. PRoJEcr DESCRrprroN: z
I III. DESCRIPTION oF EXISTING CONDITIONS:. . L4
I
IV. IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT, MITIGATION:. . 24
_ V. APPEMIXT. , 37
I- - srrE Pi.AN
- CROSS-SECTIONS OF SITE.
' - TYPICAL TLOOR PLANS
I - TYPICAI, BUILDING ELEVATION.-)
I - TYPICAL CROSS-SECTION
I . GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN
I
- CHEN A}TD ASSOCIATES SOIL REPORTr
!
- REI.NFORCED EARTH TECiINICAI, INFORMATION.
-i-
TABLE OF GONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
t
I
I
I BA'KGRo'ND, PuRPosE, AND scoPn
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
T
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I. BACKGROUNp, pttRpOSE, At{D SCOPE
In June of L98L the Reinforced Earth Cornpany applied for,
and received, a variance to Section 18.69.040 of the VaiL Muni-
cipal Code which granted approval to construct 13 earth-shel-t,ered
dwelling units upon Lots 41 and A2, Lionsridge Subdivision, Fil-ing
#L, The purpose of this Environuental Impact Report is to present
new and updated information regarding expansion of the previousLy
approved development. This expansion consists of the addition of
property adjacent to the developnent both on the east and west.
The results of the expansion are the addition to the deveLopment
of three (3) dwelling units aad a clubhouse/recreational faeil-ity.
This facility contains a lounge area, a ski storage and mainten-
ance area, and, on the Lower level a garage area which will help
to facilitat.e service to the project. Adjacent to the recreational
building a swimming pool has been provided (see site plan).
Basically all hydrological , geological , and biologieal con-
ditions of the expanded site are identical- Lo those studied in
Ehe previous Architerra Environmental Impact Report. Much of
that previous information has been reproduced in this documeat.
I'he main focus of this Environmental lupact Report is to present
the revised devel.opment p1an. The name of the project has been
changed to Borrne Vue.
-1-
t
I
I
I VICINITY MAP'BONNE VUE
I
I
I
I
I
l
t
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,lII
I.
rt II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
I
The Bonne Vue Development is proposed Lo be a 15 dweLLingIf unit project located on SandsLone Drive in Vail , Colorado. Ttre
I DevelopnenE will also contain a clubhouse/recreational faciLity
t intended t.o meet some of the recreational demand generated by
I residents of the project!
The proposed dwell-ing units w111 be constructed directly
t lnto the hillside using the hillside itself for support and
I insulaEion. The design is r,re1l--suited for hil.Lside development
t and incorporates the same pf,oven soiLs engineering technology,
t Reinforced Earth, as did the previously approved Architerra
Project. This technology, described in detail in Section V,
I provides an architectural land form capable of stabilizing
hillside conditions.
I The site plan for Bonne Vue is contained in the Appendix.
I The arrangement of units consists of groupings of attached
I dwellings of two and three units together. There are tr,'zo unit
I types; a convex unit and a coneave uniu. The architectural-a
design contained in the Appendix is typical- of both unit types.
I The only structure upon the site which is not earth sheltered
I is the clubhouse. This structure, however, is not l-ocated upon
I slopes in excess of 407..
f One of the major changes in the design of the projecr sinceIits initial approval in 1981- has been the architecturaL design
I
a
I
T
-?-
I
a-
I
I of the units Lhemselves.t fhe units have been altered accordingty:
II A. Entrances -- :|.rf;:tiffii: have been ehanged from the side
I IMPACT:t
The impact of these changes are:
-t 1. Reduces the excessive sidewall.
I 2. Incorporates structure more effectively into the hill .
l' 3. Lends itseLf to more naturaL landscaping.
I B. Greenhouses -- the greenhouses have been redueed to smaI1glass encl.osures located beneath the parapet.
I IMPACT:
1. Reduces visual impact of glass and gLare.
I 2. Reduces problems Ehat may be encounEered with snow and ice.
t C. Unir Design -- the units have been designed to.retain thecurved fascia but wittr a rectilinear interior
- design.
I IMPACT:
I 1. A contj-nuous S-curved fascia that fits nicely into the
t landscape.
I 2. A smaLler paraDet that reduces the visual impaet.
I 3. Rectangular rooms thaL are more funetional and easierto co[rstrucE.
I 4. Sloping sidewalls made with e:cposed aggregate thar bLendswlth the natural col-or of the Eoil .
-I s. ff:;l:;r::airs consrrucred wirh sr,ones rhar blend wirh
I These unit design changes were reviewed by both the Planning andtEnvironnental Cormission and the Design Review Board in 1982 and
Ia -3-
I
I
t
t
I
I
T
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l
I
t
I
I
t
endorsed very highly.
Constructlon of the units will take place by excavation of
a hole into the hillside extending from the front of the unit to
a point beyond the rear wa11 of the unit. The Reinforced Earth
metal strips wiLL be set on layers of coupacted granuLar f111
which r,sil-l be placed in the excavation behind the wa1l . Six or
eight sEruetural strips, ln two rows of three or four strips, wii-1-
support eaeh concreEe wall panel , which will be 4 or 6 feet in
width and wich height as required by the terrain.
The units will be waterproofed on all sides for protection
from water seepage. The back wa1ls wilL be protected by a 1/4 inch
thiek troweled layer of impermeable bentonite clay near the waLl
combined with a 10 foot width of compacred granular fiLl- behind the
wal1 which wilL provide free drainage to a formdation drainage
Eile systern. The roof rorill be of standard outdoor roofing construc-
tion, and will slope 1/8 away from the unit. The unit foundations
will include a one foot layer of granular fill for free dralnage
overlain by a 6 or 8 mj-t polyeEhylene sheet to prevent intrusion
of moisEure. The foundation wilL include a draLnage tile system
at the perirneter of each unit to caxry water away from the unit.
AlL water drainiirg away from the units as weLL as alL surface rvater
d.rainage fro,n the site will be directed through a systen of drain-
age paths on the site which wi1l. be incorporaced into the final
landscaping of the site.
The Bonne Vue unLts will incorporate passive solar
and earth-integrated design concepts. These features will provide
-4-
EO
t
I
t
t
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
t
I
I
I
I
for efficient uae of energy and economical living for che
residents. Other benefits to the residents inelude physical
isoLation, privacy, security, noise reduct,ion, greater open
space and usable land, minimization of the effeets of weather
and outside temperature, fire-proof eonstruction, and long
projeeted 1ife.
?he site pLan for the project has been greatly enhanced
due to the additional properties acquired on the east and rreaE
of the site. The portion of the site wbieh once conEained aL1
13 dwelling units now has only 7 units situated upon it plus the
recreational building. This has freed up mueh of the site for
open space and landscaping and roinimized much re-grading of the
site,
'Access to the Development will be frorn Sandstone Drive and
d.rive accessing the individual units wiff traverse the site
boch the east and \rest bolrndaries.
ZONING INFOR}'TATION
The Bonne Vue site consists of Lots A1 , 42, and A3 of Lions-
ridge Subdivision, Filing #1 and Lot 6" BLock 1, Lionsridge Sub-
division, Filing #4. Lots 41 - 3 are zoned Residential cluster
and Lot 6 is zoned singl-e Fanily Residential . The proposal is to
re-zone the property to a special Devel0pment Distrlct with an
underlying zone DisLrict of Residential cluster. An analysis of
the Residential cLuster Zoning inforsration is contained in Table 1..
-5-
l
I
I
t
l
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
t
TABLE 1
AREA I]NDER40u si,oPELOT
1A1, A2-
A3
6
TOTAI. AREA
2.59 Ac.
.944 Ac.
.727 Ac.
2.2L Ac.
.364 Ac.
.02L Ac.
GRFA ALLOIIED
24,L20 Sq. Ft.
3,968 Sq. Ft.
2,366 Sq. Ft.
NO. T'NITS
ALLOT'IED
1A.LJ
,
z.
!
NOTES: l-.
Lot 6 is currently zoned Single Family Residential and allowed a
total of 5,043 square feet GRFA. Thus by using Lhe Residential
Cluster Zone as an underlying zone the GRFA for Lot 6 is reduced
by 2,677 square feet. The only requesc co vary any of the provi-
sions of the RC Zone District is to reduce the rear setback require-
ment of 20 feet to 5 feet. The reason this setback is reguested
to be varied is Eo enable the $tructures co fit into Ehe hillside
in an appropriate Eranner. The portion of the units which are in
the setback are underground and also adjacent to a property
whieh r,'ri11 remrain as open space. Therefore, the reduced setback
shoul.d not result in any negative impacts.
HrsToRy 0F IIIE RETNFORCEp EARTH CoMpAt{y A}lp ARCIiITERRAT INp.
Rei.nforeed Earth was developed by a French Archi.tect and
TOTAL, 30,454 Sq. Fr.
Lots A1 and A2 have been previously coribined intoone parcel and approved by PEC.
Lot A'3 is restricted to a maximum of 2 dwe11"ingunits by Ordinance,
-6-
l
I
I
I
l
I
t
I
Total Ntrnber Dwelling Units:
I Total G.R.F.A.:
- Total Site Area:
I Total Area Less Ttran 402 Slope:
TABLE 2
BONNE VI'E DEVELOPMENI
L6
30,454
4.25 Acres
2.,595 Acres
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Total Nnmber Enelosed Parking Spaces r 34
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
t
I
I
T
I
t
I
I
I
I
t
T
Engineer, Henri Vidal , in Ehe late 1950's and early 1960's.
Ttre first actual struetures using Reinforced Earth were built
in France in 1964. Frorn 1.964 to 1967 , Vidal built severaL rypes
of structures ineluding retaining waL1s, docks for sma1l boat
marinas, for.ndaLion slabs and other structures which clearLy
demonstrated the technical and economical- merits of this
materlal . During this same period, Vidal-'s activities evoked
the interest of the French Transporgation t.linistry, especially
the englneers of the Central Laboratory of Roads and Bridges
(LCPC) who carefutly monitored his structures and condueted
indepe:rdent research of thelr or,'rn. In late 1967 , after a
thorough evaluation by LCPC, Vidal was awarded a conlract to
design and supply materials for several- retaining walls on an
autoroute rr:rrning east from Niee to the French/Italian border
town of Menton. These structures were relaining r^rall-s which
varied from 15 to 75 feet in height, built on highly complex
and often marginally stable foundations. The projecE, which
uook three years Eo construst, was a technical and economical_
success. Vidal continued developuental work in France, build-
ing major industrial struetures in the Port of Dunkergue, and
other htghway sLf,uctures in other parts of France. By the end
of L971", Bome 75 rnajor slructures had been completed in France
and other cor$rtries ineluding retaining wa11s for a major high-
way interchange in Quebec. l4any of these structures had been
carefully monitored, and struetural performance as pred,icted by
Vidal's theorlea $as verified.
-8-
II
II
I In 1969, Vidal's work in France came to the attention ofIthe technical press in the United State$. In 1969 and !970,
I
I EnFineerlng-News Record and Civil Engineering magazines (Lhe
foremost publieations in the civil engineering and construc-II tion industries) published feature articles on the Reinforced
I Earth reraining wa11s on rhe Nice-Menron Highway. In Lg6g,
! Gerard Godet, ol,te of Vidal-'s close assoeiates, made a presenta-
t tion aE The Transporcation Research Board AnnuaL Meeting in
WashingEon, D. C. These report,s and articles stimulaged the
I interest of several highway engineers, parEieularly in the
I California Department of Transpoxtation (Caltrans) and in the
I Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) in Washington, D. 6.
I In 1969 a mud stide in the Angeles Crest National Foresr
northeast of Los Angeles closed a principal access highway,
I California Highway 39. Calrrans engineers had invesrigated
several methods of reopening the highway, but Ehese methodsII were either environuental-1y unacceptable or too costly. Afuer
I reading the previously referenced arEicles, Galtrans engineers
' contact.ed Vidal in France for additional informagion and pre-
t liminary designs for a Reinforced Earth solution to the problem.
A Caltrans engl-neer vislted the Nice-ltrenEon construction in L970II during a vacation in Europe and was convinced that Reinforced
r Earth nas the soLution for the Highway 39 probleur.
I CalLrans diseussed a Reinforced Earth solution with the
I FHI,IA and the U. S. Forest Service, and Vidal and his associatesIwere invited to the U. S. to visit Ehe site and propose aI-9-
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
definitive soLution. As a result of Ehese discussions, FIIWA
accepted a Reinforced Earth structure as the Eost economical ,
Eechnically feasible and l-east environmentally damaging
solution.
The Highway 39 diseussions pt'onpted FIIWA to look further
into Reinforced Earth as a possible construetion method for
the entire Federal Highway Program. In the suurner of 197L,
David Gedney, then Chief of the Bureau of Soil and Rock
Mechanics, Office of Construction and Maintenance, visited
Franee. During this visit, FI{WA reviewed many of the 75
compleEed structures, 15 of which had been completely instru-
mented and field-tested, as well as the results of over 5 years
of theoretical and applied research conducted by Vidal and,
independently, by LCPC,
Vidal's and LCPC's research prograns were primarily ained
at theory, design and fietd performance. The only other major
research area, corrosion of the buried meEal strips, had been
addressed by the U. S. National Bureau of Standards in studies
which span over 50 years of field testing of the exact type of
materials used in Reinforced Earth structures.
In spite of this substantial background, FI{[{A decided to
iniciate a DemonstraLion Program in Reinforeed Earth in order
to fu11y evaluate lEs (Relnforced Earth's) sultability for
U. S. Highway construction. Under Lhe DemonsEration Program,
FIIWA encouraged the use of Reinforced Earth by the states for
certain projects. Candi.date proJects were initialLy voLume
- t_0-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
t
I
I
highways. Ln 1972, one project wag consEructed (Ilighway 39).
In 1973, tllo additional landslide repair projects were built,
one in the Olympic National Park in Washington and one on
Interstate Route 40 in Teruressee. Tn L974, four projects were
built under the Demonstration program, including the first
project in Georgia, the Newcastle street Extension in Brrrnswick.
The FHWA carefully monitored this program, and, in November of
Lg74, released Retnforced Earth from the "experinenLal category,'
and approved its use without restricEion for all federaLLy frrnded
highway projects. r,n the period from irgTz to Lg74, Tlre Reinforced
Earth cornpany also furnished designs, materials and construction
services for an add.itional 11 projects for non-fed,eral-Ly funded
highway, eonmercial and industrlal projects.
A recent project co'urplet.ed by The Reinforced Earth Company
rras a retaining wa11 system at vail- pass. Tbe normal- reguirements
of adequate soils analysis, structural design, and econony in
cost, the rugged scenic terrain and the short construction season
at the high altitude of vail pass imposed strict requirements on
the retaining wa1l system. The wall had to be aestheEically com-
patibLe with the environment. since some of the fill sl-ope walls
are qutte high (60 to 70 feet) a vertical wal1 was considered
undesirable. A stepped wa11-, built in 8-foot lifts with a 4 to 6
foot setback between tiers was deemed architecturaLLy desirabLe.
The wa11 had to be modular and prefabricated to expedite con-
struction. cast-in-p1ace eoncrete r,ras ruLed out because of the
couplexity in formlng, especially in the hlgh walLs, and the curing
-11-
I
I
I time required before backfilling operations could begin.
The waLl panels are parabol_ic in shape. In addition,
I the design is considered to be superior to other shapes from
I an aPPearance sEandpoint. Some wa11s were constructed vertical
I due to lirniued area available for the fills. A final touch was
I the addition of iron oxide to the cement to produee a reddish-r Ean color thar wouLd blend into the natural surroundings on
I vaii pass.
Since L974, acceptance by the industry has grown steadily
I
t based on demonstraEed performance - technically, econourically
I and from a constructability standpoint. In 1940, 85 projects
I were completed in 27 states and the Districr of Colunbia. These
I projects included major transportation, indusrrial and comanercial
sEructures.
II The Reinforced Earth Company is the parent company of
Architerra, Inc. Architerra housing was devel-oped by HenriIt Vidal in the 1970's. The first acEual Architerra structures,
I using the Reinforced Earth technology, were built in Spain as aIpilot project, a single fanily owner-occupied residence in
I Valbonne, France; and, mo6t reeenLl-y, Ehe world,s Largesta
energy-efficient developmenL, 47 r.rnits at St, pierre de Ferie,
I France. In addltion, there are two projeets which have just
- been compl-eted; an 18 unit deveLopment at Grenoble, Franee and
r a 13 urrit development in Spain.
I In 1980, Vidal's work in France came to the attention of
the Developnent/Building couunrnity at the Earth-sheLtered
I -L2-
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
Houslng Conference in Minneapolis, Minnesota. The housing
and technical" press introduced a larger aud.ience to Archit,erra
through articLes in the Netional Association of Houe Builders
Builder MagazLne, Multi-HousLng News t"Iagazlne, Concrete Con-
struction I'fagazine, Popular Science, and, more recentLy, Home
Energy Digest. These articLes generated over 5,000 requests
for further information from the East to West Coasts and from
Canada to South America. Approximauely 102 of these reguests
were for potential deveLopment.s.
Architerra, Inc. has chosen Vail , Colorado, as its first
area for a sma1l but high quality development of 16 single-farnily
residential units. Archicerra at Vail , Inc. was forned in L98l
f,o uldertake this developmenf. Architerra, Inc. is greatly
interested in ehe construction of this, their first project
in the United States, providing rhe highest standards of quality
and environmentally accepLed practices, In addition, they wish
to demonstrate that. their design Bystem benefits both the olrner
and coruruni-ty, and that certainty earth-integrated housing is
not only aestheticaLly pleasing, but that. it is also a viable
alternative eo conventional housing.
- 13_
DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING CONDITIONS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I III. DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING CONDITIONS
I S]TE DESCRIPTIONI
I Topography
I The sice is loealed on the south faclng slope on the north
I
side of the Gore Va1-ley. The site is presently undeveloped and
is couprised of 4,26 aexes. The sice rises from Sandslone Drive
I approximately 104 vertical feet from an elevacio,n of 8,245 feet
to 8,349 feet. Slopes range from less than LOZ to greater than
I 6AZ. The site is biseeted by a drainage s!,raLe which drains rhe
L.: ^l^ ^^..-a--- -^-r1- ^!
I high country norLh of the site towards Sandstone Drive. This
r northern site boundary is adjaeent to a revegetated utility eorri-
I dor (Lionsridge Loop). ?tris corridor has been fiLled to cross the
drainage swale and the swale above the northern site boundary.
I The ucility line corridor is located north of che property in a
-^-^1lel line with the norEhern site boundary and revegetated
I
y4L4L ttul. LrtErtt Drt_E lJ(,
I utility cut. Existing utilities are included on the Eopographic
I
survev map.
Eeorogz
t Geologie information pertinent to the proposed site was forxrd
in the map series, "Bedroek Geologic, Surficial Deposits and
I Potential Geologic Hazards Maps, Eagle Cor:nty, Cotorado" and "Snowt :::il::"-:""".:: :.;",';",::':;:,:"il.".i":,,':il:L'li ,o.",".
t S. Robinson and Assoeiates, Inc. (1976), and in "Preliminary
Engineering Geology Report, Lots A-1 and A-2, Lions Ridge, Vail-,
I _14 _
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
Colorado" by Robert K. Barrett, Professional Geol-ogist.
Gore Valley was scoured into a classic "U" shape by the
most recent mountain glaeier whieh left the floor covered with
deep morainal deposits. The valley walLs exhibit a variety of
lateral- glacier features.
At the proposed site the glacier scoured on bedrock as it
advanced and then deposited morainal- boulders, gravel , sand. and
fine-grained soils as iE retreated (or nelted). Following that
sequence, the surface was modifi-ed to present day appearance by
a1luvial fan deposltion frorn Ehe sma1l drainage that divides the
uwo 1ots, and by col1uvia1 deposition from the hillside above
the property.
Bedrock aE the site is from the MinEurn Formation from the
Pennsylvanian and Permian age which ineludes medium to very
coarse-grained, gray to reddi-sh-brown sandstone, congl-o,meratic
sandstone, thin beds of reddish-brown siLtstone and sandy and
silty shale and prominent pinkish-gray to gray liuestone beds.
The underlying bedrock surface at the site is probabLy much sEeeper
than the ground surface and should be quite deep.
SurficiaL deposits at the site are glacial moratne which
consists of boulders, gravel, sand and eilt deposited by glaciers.
These deposits are generally less than 100 feet in thiclsress but
may reach up to 200-300 feet thick, consisting of precambrlan
granites and gneisses.
The site is not in an area of rockslides, landslidee, slope
- !)-
t
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
failure or other geologic hazard.. The site
susceptible to avalanche. In additlon, the
Robinson and Associates indicate that. there
or other geoLogic resources present on the
Soils
is in an area Least
investigations by
are no minerals
site.
The U, S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation
Servi.ee (SCS) has rnapped and classified the soils in the Gore
Valley to determine the nature of the soil mantel and to develop
an undersranding of interactions with proposed uses. In addi-
tion, a sol1s report for the proposed site was developed by Chen
and Associates of Denver and is included in the Appendix.
The soil in the site area has been classified by SCS as
Argic Cryoboroll and Typic Cryoboro11 . Tlrese soils are found
on alluvial fans and mountain side slopes and are deep and welL
drained. The surface layer is fine sandy loam and typically
averages 3 inches rhick. The subsoil is made up of stony sandy
clay loam and is about 22 inches thlck. The substratuu is very
suony fine sandy loam extendlng beLorr 60 inches. Permeability
is moderat,ely rapid to rapid.
The Soil Conservation Service uses hydrologic soil groups
to esLimate potential- runoff from rainfall in watershed planning.
It has classified the soit present on the site in the B Hydrologic
Group. T'hese soils have a moderateLy 1ow rrrnoff potentiaL and a
moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly $retted. They consisc
chiefly of moderately deep to deep, moderatsely wetl to we1l, drained
-16-
I
I
I
t
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
soi1s. Soil textures range from moderately fine to moderately
coarse. These soiLs have.a moderate rate of \,,rater Eransmission
wlth moderately rapid perneability.
In the soil investigations performed on Lots A'1 and A2 by
Chen and Associates, six test holes were drilLed in the general
area of the proposed buiLdings to deter:mine the subsoiL condi-
tions .
In general , the subsoils consisted of a shallow, 4 co 5
feet deep, loose tayer of soil overlying a dense to very dense
sand, gravel- and cobble stratum. fioo of the test holes encor:ntered
a different type stratum below the coarse granular soi1s. rn Test
Hole 2 a siltstone mixed colluvium 'liras apparent and in Test Hole
4 apparently a siltsEone bedrock formation was encountered. Ttre
coll-uvium material consists of sil.tstone pieces in a silt and sand
matrix. Presence of large cobbles and boulders wa6 indicated by
the difficult drilling condit.ion and the presence of large rock
on the surfaee. Gradation analysis of sampLes obtained from the
standard split spoon are shown on Figures Z0 Einrough 22. These
represent only the 1t inch fraction of uaterial recovered in the
sarnpling process. No fTee water was encountered in the test holes
aL the tiue of dri1ling.
Chen and Associates has also prepared a soil investigation
for Lionsridge Subdivision, Filing #4 which included Lot 6.
Robert w- lhompson, rnc. has performed a soil investigation for
I-.ot A3. chen and Associat.es has reviewed Ehese studies and has
presented their concl-usions in tshe Appendix.
-L7 -
I
II
I HYdrolosy
! There is very Little published hydrologic inforrqation
I available for the Vail area and the proposed site. However,r
some hydrological facts were uneovered during this investiga-II tion to make some general observations.
' cite investigations conducted by Chen and Associates in
I
Lr6q,L.rlruD \.e,rr\rrrr, r-err vI wlt
- January, 1981 , included driLling of six geologic test holee,
I in which no free water was found up to a depth of 35 feet in oneIhole. However, these hoLes were dug in winter, Low ground wager
t conditions, and do not necessarily reflect conditions which oecur
i-n spring when the ground water table is higher.l-e--__-I A general observation by the U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation
I Service indicates that soils of the type formd at the site have
a a ltraEer table at or near the J-and surface.
I The Colorado State Engineer has a record of al-1 ground lrater
we11s in the st.ate, which are required by law Eo be regisEered
I with chac office. The local well records include inforrnation on
- well depth, yield and depth to water 1evel which can be inter-I- preEed Eo give a profile of 1ocal ground water condltions.
t Unfortunately, no wel.ls exist in the imrediate area of the site.
The closesE existing well is co the east of the site across Red
-f Sandstone Creek, in an area which is known to have a high watert
I cabLe, The depth to the water table in this well is nine feet
I (a high \rarer rable is expecued), with a yiel<i of 50 gp,n. Sinee
a this well is across Red Sandstone Creek, ground warer 1eve1s andt
Ir -18-
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
l
T
I
I
I
movement cannot be correlated with that of the site.
Other registered wel1s located approximately a miLe
southwest of the site, but north of Gore Creek, mlght have
better correl-ation with site hydrologic condiLions, except
that they are Located in the valley bottom cl"ose to the creek
instead of the va11ey side slope where the site is located.
Five we11s located in this area have depths to water tabLe
ranging from 7 feet to 62 feet, and well yields ranging
fron 15 gpm to 300 gpn.
Mr. Ed Drager, the Manager of Lionsmane Condominiums
directly down slope from the proposed site, has been closely
observing the siEe for evidence of ground water seepage or
surface r,rater since L97L arrd. has reported seelng no \,rater on
the site during rhis period.
Both che U.S.D.A., S.C.S. and Chen and Associates have
observed that the soil at the site is highly permeable and very
well drained. ?he o1d road fill from abandoned Lionsridge Loop
blocks the main drainage swal-e, imnediately north and uphill of
the site. Ponding of any 1oca1 surface drainage behind the road
fill will occur, preventing free drainage of storm nrnoff over the
site. Due to the soil petaeability at the site and the 6 foot
height of the road fill blocking the drainage, any water draining
here will- percol-ate into rhe soil . This agrees with Mr. Drager's
observation that the drainage swale on the site has been dry sinee
- 19-
I
I
I he has observed it.
I The watershed which the on-slte swale drains, has been
I estimated to be 74.6 acres.
A bioLogical indicator of Low surface water on the site
I is the size of the ta1l sagebrush (18 to 24 inches), which
| ;:::::t..
that growth of the sage has been sEunted bv lack of
I The general, conclusions which can be drawn from the above
information are as foLlows: No surface water flows on the site
I due to the high permeability of the soiLs and relatively srnall
I drainage area. The gror:nd rraLer table is relatively deep at the
I site during dry periods (greater than 35 feet), but may rise to
I
higher 1eve1s duriug wetter seasons or years.
I Biology
| ?he major vegetative types present on the aite are listed
I in rabte 3.
The vegecation on the site is classified within the
I Aspen/Sage corunrnity or ecosystem.
There are 93 Quaking Aspen between one lrrch and Len inches
t in diameter.
I The highest percentage of the pLant coununitv is sagebrush,
t followed by rabbitbrush and wild rose, mohonia repens (acting as
t ground cover) and serviceberry. Canada thistle is en introduced
species and very r:nfavorable weed, which is displacing native
I species. There are a few sma1l snowberry plants and assorted
- weeds.
t _20_
T
t
I
I The wild flowers and grasses Listed in Table 3 are
scatt.ered and none dominate the area.
I The dominant plant on the site is the woody Big Sagebrush,
which grohrs to a height of Lg to 24 inches on the site.
I Sage is gray-green in appearanee and is dormant in the hot
I
sl rmer r:tn"-:" n:.:"r"e lrater. When in bloon, the floners are
very smal1- ye1low buds.
I Sage is wind polinated and can cause aLlergi-es in some
people.
I fhere are no Ehreatened or endangered bird, mrr4mal , or fish
I
species in this area.
t
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I _z!_
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l
I
I
I
I
t
t
I
I
I
TABLE 3
etative Connuni Identified at Bonne Vue Site
Trees:
Populus trenuloides
Shrubs:
Aroelanchier alnifolia
Rosa woodsii
Mohonia repens
Artemisia tridentata
Syutphortcarpos oreophilus
Ghrysotharrrus nauseosu6
Forbe:
Aqutlegia caerulea
Lupinus sp.
Erigeron eximius
Mohonia repens
Fragarie ovaLis
Quaking Aspen
Serviceberry
Itlild Rose
Creeping Mohonia
Big Sagebrush
Snowberry
Rabbit Brush
Colrmbine
tupine
Daisy
Creeping Mohonia
Wild Strawberry
-22-
I
I
I
t Vegetative Gonsunitv l$entified at Bonne Vue Site
TASLE 3
I weed:
I Cirsium arvense
t Gror'md covers:
Mohonia repens
Fragarie oval-is
Arctostaphylos uva-urs i
I
I
Canada Thistle
Creeping Mohonia
Wild Strawberry
Kinnikinnick
I ' Gr""""",
I I;::, -,":"::"" il:':;"'"
Bluegrass
I lrrr"t"r, Needle Grass
Wtreat GrassI Agropyron sp.
I
l
I
I
I
I
-23-
IMPAC?S OF T1IE PROJECT, MITIGATION
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I rv. rMpAcTS 0F THE pRoJEcT, Mrrr.cATroNI
I Tttis section of the report assesses the probable environ-I mental impacts Ehat would result fron construction of the
I proposed developmenE. Two major developmental- phases are
addressed, which include impacts during construction andII iupacts after consuruction has been courpleted.
I PHYSIOGRAPHY
I *" *rposed project w111 have a significant effect upon
I the surface geology, t.opography and soils on the site, Thet
type of construction of the Bonne Vue units dictaEes that up
I to 952 of the site will be disturbed during consEruction.
,- However, topsoil from disturbed areas will be stripped and stock-
It piled for reuse in reclaiming the disturbed 1and.
I The immediace homesites will be excavated from the hillsidetincluding excavation behind each unit for placement of rhe
I "Reinforced Earth" wal1-support strips, This area behind each
unit will be fi1led with a well-drained ganular fi1l material to
t provide good drainage arday from the unit. It has not yet been
I determined if the highly perneable on-sire soils qualify ro be
r used for chis function.
I A t inch layer of bentonite clay will be imported fromIoff-siLe to be placed on the outside of the rear wal-1 of each
I unit to prevent seepage.
I The surface topography of the site will be changed to
t accormodate the earth-integrated housing. Cross-sections of the
-24-
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
l
I
I
I
T
I
t
I
I
T
I
I
conpleted project are presented in che Appendix. Ttre final
site Grading Plan ls also presented.
Bedrock at the site is deep bel.ow the ground surface and
excavation into or near bedrock will not occur.
Slope stability at the site will be maintained by the
innovaEive consEruction technique called Reinforced Earth
(described in detail in the Appendix). This type of construe-
tion has a well documenEed record of successful slope stabil-iza-
tion and will eliminate the possibility of rockslide, landslide,
slope failure, or other geologic hazard on the site after
eonstruetion of Bonne Vue.
In conclusion, the proposed development will create changes
upon the 1ocal surface geology, topography and soil-s at the siLe,
but no detrimental or hazardous effects due to these changes have
been identified. Also, lto unique geological features or attrac-
tions which could be al-Eered, damaged or lost by this development
have been idenuified on the siEe.
I{YDROLOGY AI{D WATER QUAi,llY
The exist.ing major drainageway on the site wil-l be retained.
A system of drainage ditches and drainage gutters, dolonspouts and
tile systems for individual unifs will serve to keep the r.rnits
water-free, and repl-ace on-site localized drainage patterns. Con-
sequently, no additional- surface runoff will be discharged off the
site due to eonstruction of hard, i-upervious surfaces at Borrne Vue.
Since off-site drainage is cut off above rhe site by the oLd
-25-
I
I
t road fill (Lionsrldge Loop), very lirt1e off-site surface
drainage i-s expected to enter the site drainage system.
I Potable qrater and landscape irrigation water will be
I supplied to Bonne Vue by the Upper Eagle Va11ey Water and
t Sanitation District. An estimated 6,400 gallons per day
I for domestic purposes is expected based on four residenLs/nnit
and 100 gal-l-ons user per capita per day, Lrrigation require-
I ments are expected to be a maxim:m of 7,500 gallons per day
I during l^rater periods. Since the building site is incorporated
t in the Town of Vail and zoned residential , it is presumed that
I the waLer and sewer systems have sufficient capacity to handJ.e
this additional Loading. An additional sewer loading to''the Vail
I sehrer system of 6,153 gallons per day is also expeetedtIn conclusion, Bonne Vue wilL atter l"oca1 surface drainage
t patterns and shallow subsurface drainage patterns on the irnmediate
- building site on1y. However, impacEs upon area hydrology and
t water quality due to construction or operaEion of Bonne Vue are
I expeeted to be negligible.t
- BIOLOGYII The construction phase, from initial ground breaking to
I finished product, is rhe most critical ti"ne relative to biological {;I
impact on the area. Lmpact from construction ls initiaLl.y very
t high negatively, since up to 957. of the site will be eleared and
I none of the initial vegetation will remain except some smal1 areas
t along rhe perimeter of the site. This is due to the type of con-
I structi-on used for Bonne Vue. Recovery wiLl resuLt frou .Land
-26-I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
reclamation and landscaping during and afEer construction. Any
off-site areas disturbed must be restored with the final land-
scaping, and restored to a natural staEe. Landscaping and
revegetation can work to improve the overal-l site both aesthet-
ically and physically.
Post-construction planting will include pl.acement of native
shrubs, plants and trees producing a natural mountain setting of
equal quaLity to that of the undisturbed site. Vegetation to be
planted during final landscaping includes evelgreens, aspen,
flowering shrubs, wild floners, native low-growing grasses and
lar^m grass, if desired" in selected areas.
When the topsoil is respread it will be mixed with introduced
soil to give a cover of four i-nches. The end result will improve
general productivity by combining the existing sandy loam roith the
finer sized partieles of introduced topsoil., therefore redistributing
available nutrients
Placing homes ln this area will affect r:ndisturbed pl.ants
because of increased use of the area by humans and pecs.
Ttre problem of "wind throw" (i.e- trees being damaged because
other trees are removed) to existing Erees is very 1ow negative
effect because of the searcity of the number of trees in the stand
at present. Existing, healthy aspens can stend alone and have Lo,r,r
canopies.
Potent.ial adverse effects on sma11 animals ln the area will
occur due to the stress frou dogs and noise.
There are no Ehreatened or endangered species of vegetation
-27-
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
t
or wildLife identlfied on the site or the iurediate surrormd-
Lrrg area.
VISUAL AND AESTHETIC CONSIDERATIONS
Ttre l-ocation of the Bonne Vue is on Ehe sideslope of the
Gore Valley at el,evations of 8,245 to 8,349 rnsl. As such, the
proposed development will be highl-y visible from many unobstructed
views in the val1-ey, by Eravelers on U, S. lnterstate 70, and by
sklers riding the Lionshead Gondola and skiing the lower slopes
at l,ionshead.
During construction, the site wilL be almost fu11y cleared,
with excavation holes, soils pi1es, material.s and equipment
prevalent, creating a visually unpleasant sight.
After construction, ttre Bonne Vue hones are designed to be
low-profile units, blending into the hil1side, landscaped with a
natural mountai-n seEting, and intended to create a visually
pleasant residencial cormrunity. The profile of the units are
designed to eonform with existing land eonEours as much as
possible, and, as previously stated, have been redesigned to fit
the topography even better than the previous design. Conventional
housing uniEs on a si-milar slope would have a much larger profiLe.
From a distance, the site is Lypical of Gore Valley side-
slopes and presenEs no sensitive or critical seenic views. Ilence,
the proposed development does not, block or intrude upon any such
special viervs.
Bonne Vue will be visible
ever, no scenic views by nearby
to its iunediate neighbors. How-
neighbors will be blocked or
-28-
lr
T
I or intruded upon from the soulh, east or r.7est, due to theI
low profile, earth-j-nt.egrated constructlon of the projecc.
I From the Bonne Vue residents' point of view, the design
I of the nnits will provide an excellent view of che valIey,
I while providing visual privacy from Bonne Vue neighbors.
I oTflER TMPACTS
Itrhicular Eraffic on Sandstone Drive, Red Sandstone RoadlvrI and the SouEh Frontage Road and U. S. Interstate 70 wiLl iacrease
I during cons:ructi.on and occupancy of Bonne Vue. On a percentageIbasis, slgnifieant increases will occur on Sandstone Drive and
I Red SandsEone Road. Construction of the proJect will result in
rDovement of heawy equipment, trucks and materials, as we1l" asII the workforce. During occupancy, increased traffic is expected
I from occupants' travel and normal del-iveries.
' During construction of Bonne Vue, fugitive dust emitfed
I to the air will result from eonstrucLion activities such as elear-I
, ing;, excavation and vehicular traffic. Measures taken during con-
I strucEion to reduce this amounf are outlined.
I During occupancy of the units, firepl-aces will contribute
I to smoke emissions in the Gore Valley,
I llowever, the high elevation of the site and good air circula-
tion near a side va1-ley somew?rat rritigate these effects
t Nomal eonstruction noise from heavy equipmenE and trucks
is expected during construction.
t
I
t -2e-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I.ANDFORM D ISTURBAIiICE
During the initial construction sequence 957" of the site
will be disturbed. Vegetation will be removed, topsoil- wil1"
be stripped and stockpiled and a series of terraces will be cut
int.o the hillside to accorulodate Ehe construction of the units.
CONSTRUCTION
As a result of the vast physical disturbance on the site,
Ehe project will be visually unpleasant during construction.
Ihere w111 be an increase in heavy equipment traffic along with
an assoeiated increase in dust and noise.
SOCIO-ECONOMICS
After eonstruction
increased demand on the
since Ehe site is zoned
cipated.
has been completed there will
Town's water and sewer system,
for developmenE, this increase
be an
However,
is anti-
-30-
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
MITIGATION MEA,ST]RES PROPOSED TO MINII".TIZE IMPACTS
This section will discuss the mitigation measures
necessary to avoid or minimLze potentiaL adverse inpaets of
the proposed development. T?rree rnajor nirigation measures
vil-1 be implemented in the development of the proJect to
reduce impacts. These include slope stabilization, erosion
control , and revegetation.
MITIGATION OF SLOPE S?ABILI TIIROUGH RSINFO
During the constructlon sequence of che project the
terrain will be disturbed, greatly reducing slope stability,
Slope stability wl11 be reestablished through Reinforeed
Earth's conslrucEion technology. Over 3,500 projeets utilizing
Lhis technology have been completed worldwide. These have
included oi1 and liquified naEural gas terminals, coal storage
facilities, and highway as well as residential housing.
A Eechnical paper entitled Reinforced Earthr AppLication
of Theory and Research to Practice has been included in Appendix
A. Written by David P. McKittrick, president of the Reinforced
Earth Company, the paper outlines the basic mechanics of Rel_nforced
Earth technology and exampl-es of field experience. Ttre Reinforeed
Earth Ecompany's technology and experienee will demonstrate that
fron all eonsiderations of perfor:mance and stress, an extremely
safe and suable slope wilL result.
MITIGATION MEASURES TO MINIMIZE EROSION
Soil erosion is the removal and loss of soil by the action
- 3L-
T
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
t
t
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
of water, ice, gravity, or wind. To achieve concrol of poten-
tiaL soiL erosion, it is important to understand the basic
factors which determine erosion potential . These factors
include: the characteristics of the soiL, the vegetative
cover, topography, and climate.
The most effective erosion control is the reestablishment
of a vegetative cover. This vegetative cover witl shield the
soil surface from the impaet of falling rain, slow the velocity
of runoff, hold the soil parEicles in place, and maintain the
soiL's capaeity to absorb water. Revegetation is discussed in
greater detail in Ehe next secCion.
Before permanent revegeuation techniques ca.Il become est.ab-
lished, there are three major principal"s of erosion and sedimen-
tation conurol which will be implemented prior to and during
construction.
PROTECTION OF DISTURBED AREA FROU OFF-SITE STORM WATER RI]NOTF
Protection of the disturbed areas is accomplished through
the colLeetion and channelization of off-site storm water arou,nd
the siEe or the interception of the runoff and its diversion frorl
the slope's face, Clear water diversions are constructed along
the high end of the disturbed- area or wherever significanE amounts
of water wiLL drain into the area.
Surface drainage from Ehe major dral-nage area norLh of the
site is cut off and retained by the oLd road fill (Llonsridge
Loop). Due to the high permeability of the soils, this lrater
percolaEes inEo the soil . ShouLd an excess of sto::ur luater
-32-
lr
Ill
I
lr
t
t
I
t
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
ItIt
llll
collect in this area, a hose-siphon system wil.1 be used to
transport the water arornd the site.
If Loc.al off-site drainage from the side slopes near Ehe
slce is signifieant, the following nat,er diverslon technique
wl-ll be used.
A temporary barrier of hay bales eombtned. wirh a pl-astic
liner material cen be placed along the upper site perimeter,
will divert, water away from che sice but will not pea'sanently
disturb the natural watershed.
STABILIZE AND PROTECT DISTURBED AREAS
Stabilization and protection of disturbed areas will be
accomplished through at-source abatement techniques irrplemented
as soon as practieable.
Fugitive dust will be controlled through wind fences, on-site
maintenance and oecasional- watering during windy periods
Surface scarification will be used as an effeetive runoff
control cechnique during construction. Searification is
accomplished by creating a series of closely spaced ridges
roughly paratlel to Ehe contour lines, The ridges reduce !,rater
velocity and cause part of the settlement load to setcle out in
tbe adjaeent lorps. Scarification is performed by any means of
abrading Lhe surface parallel to the contour. Scarification
further serves to concentrate trater in the low spots wtrich ls
he1"pful in est,ablishing vegetation in artd areas.
Topsoil stockpile areas present the same erosion probl-ems
as cut and fill slopes, As an importanc resource for reclamation
-33-
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
t
of the eite, these stockpiles must be protected. I'he esLablish-
ment of vegetation is Ehe most effective rr:noff control for the
sEockpiles. Temporary seeding, nuLching or other erosion eontrol
methods will be used on sEockpile areas to prevent topsoil loss
to water or wind.
MITIGATION OF VEGETATION DISTURBN{CES THROUGH REVEGETATION
Revegetation t.echniques will be used to encourage the
establishrnent of a vegefative cover on the site. Ground cover
material stabiJ.izes the surface with its root system and reduces
the velocity of surface rr:noff. After construction is completed
permanent revegetation Beasures wiLl be implenented to reestab-
lish the vegetative cornmunity.
During construction, topsoil at the site will be stockpiled.
Temporary revegetaEion measures, such as seeding, mulch aod/ or
erosion control blanket, will be used on stoekpiled topsoil.
Ttre regraded surface texEure is an irrrporEant. consideration
in reestablishing permanent revegetalion. The surface wil-1 be
raked and smoothed to remove as much rock as possibl"e and to
reduce the average grain size. Coupacted surfaces are not con-
ducive to plant growth and should be scarified before seeding.
Soil supplements are ofEen required for eetabLishment of a
good vegetative cover. A soiL analysis will determine pH; salte;
pereent organic matter and lime; and nitrate, phosphorus, potassilrm,
zinc, and iron in parts per ni1Lion. The soiL test reporE will
also nake recousrendations for fertilizer application. These
services are avallabl-e through the cooperative Extension services
I
t
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I - 34-
t
t
I
t
t
t
I
t
I
I
T
I
and Experiment Station, So11 Testing Laboratory at Col,orado
State University, Fort Co1lins, Colorado 80521.
Careful consideration will be given Eo selectlon of
species to be planEed for permanent revegetation. Species
will be selected on the basis of Che site environment and pro-
posed.uses. When reestablishing the vegeLative cover, the site
environment will determine the types of pLant material,s avail-abl-e.
These materials will be selecEed fro,sr the sagebrush-aspen-juniper-
pine-spruce plant couuunity.
Revegetation of arid and semi-arid environments deserves
special conslderation beeause of the difficulty of establishing
vegetation, PLanting techniques will be incorporated with these
considerations to achieve optiuum vegetation reestablishment.
Seeding techniques include broadcasting (scattering seed
directly on the surface wiEhout subsequent soil cover), drilLing
(seed deposited in an artificially for:ured surface depressibn and
subsequently covering the seed with so11 material), and hydroseed-
ing (seed, fertilizer, water, and in some cases a rnrlch tacking
agent, is sprayed directly on the slope).
Planting in Ehe direction of suspected evolution and sunmer
color is suggested by considering differerrt vegetative ty?es. T?re
site should contain evergreens, a6pen, flowering shrubs, wiLd
flowers, native 1ow growing grasses and, if desired, lawn grass.
In the case of trees and shrubs, transplanted material are the
most desirable.
Exanples of consideration which will promote vegetative
I
I
I
I
I
T
I -35 -
!
II
t suecess concentrate on moisture retention techniques. Mois-
Eure retention utilizes entrapmenl, concentration and preserva-
I Eion of water within a soil structure to support vegecation. One
I
technique used is mrlching. Mulching is the application of various
I soil covers such as strarT, wood chlps or other suiEabLe material ,
I to promote collection and retention of moisture. A mulch blanketIcreates a resistance to surface rdater rrrnoff which facilitates
I infiltration and, because of its cover, moisture loss through
evaporation reduction. Mulching also creates a resistance to wind
I and water erosion,
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
t
I
I -3G-
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
-;;-
t4.^,"
-_---..--..\I -'--rI r \\\\\
III L .r".'vc a.Jdseq -t\-.\
| .1+ 6ltL9aba.!?<a --\
i
i
I
T
II----..- __//
ffffiary se*'z'a
\)!J *rzt,e .*eea
"'Fsa \ #?ed
S ** t*r"
Sl *o,unr""
C:P o*,,or"s
t.{.vtb
t'9t lTAt.l vOvBdlTtt-lA!-eee'.Jtiz(brerfrta-A '
4!i/4i\tD'RA./Sft,Aa,AvEe-eaRt.f
W-8|'= r*u
ut\tu 4t €&,.tu
?4 b, a\ an,,+rt,t oN64()Ae qua ov,aaN, FtHrJar.t
Wr+V 4 tW
Av4 f.zo' a-r4'i F i--! \.// \,rr hl | -<__J. t. ,t ao ,i ,{eR r{
.-----6
t244fdN r4{E1
.+p
"-y{".tr!a|.4t4-).-.
/@ ,i
+l4tt,3c4)suz.-Tr.'i{ +.L+iTH6
66taFb
?at Ne \rUe
VAlt-ALM
r4l4 Q,jJ|'.z^+Wr&W, eJAa\,.|'!r {, F-'t!-Jrb}l
tA-&tr'b?s ttut4rea / F.,'r.,l.E!&,A&tWe W4r4 tsr'-w atftl Fca*fxa @e ,/e6t.t^tv&Oe&O
Pu,l a qol
q6aL6: 'ld ' fi. orffi^w
I
tl
-.---i.-\)
-
||,llliil
iilr
riit \F'rl *,-
I
;;-dl
Idl
tJ
lit
UI
fAu
$.n
ifr
zoc,,{.
J
Fztl
s
t+ l'
.,1ril -r||i tHttJ Iflll
il'tllfi
l, il:l ll:rliif.'lil
:!- Icr-{ 1
L--- Jl in '"tl retlih e,-';t i _-,_
I jl
rl
$l
iil
:ii
ili
iti
t
T
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
t
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
l
ll
,llill
ti
I
ri
il
ii!t
lrlI
t*i.iig
rit
i;I,rifl! i"
'li.!r,l :t
!lit I
I
IF'fir
,//tl
-,t | \lla-t
L
J.i :'lljl
I
I
'\
)l
J
ti
q
\q:
l'ltl
-'
t
i'
'.tI
1i
q l' 'oi |'
t:(
x'rlli': i
.l
ql
il1
,l.l
f1
'.1.l
.rltr
J
-){;s-
ui
o19i
ra_ l
fi
-.rl
9l5lr
d,l ,
xr,,,i
i
{
\
,I
t ,\
l.\-.
i '.a l
lh\
lf t'r
I
.l
--1
if\.,li\" \ '"1[\iNri
I
I
,l
.t
I
Jl
ri
t-
't
l'
)
ilj'
td;'
'lr I
rrl
:f
t:
i.\Iti ',i;" : iIt.
'r, i -r
i,,rii
l''l 't i r ,:'
lt
I
t
I
t
I
I
I
I
t
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
$il.!ii
ItilI
TE
'!--!Srrt
T-
*$$
i{RtIr
!:!-
$
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
t
I
I
t
I
I
I
T
t
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
,i\
J't
a
z
F
!U
t7l
ta
T.l{l:):l
19i
z'.
+
t
t
-.--=_-=:j=-=\--i.--
, +-_-Ja.
N
=
:::E-l===EF--.-.--i.-::- -
t2'tt c,,^l,/..2,Ftv;o,h?bE aJ.ev+to4, tt;r.E,. I
:!?4ft ^k.rftJ..> / p-,++.t es,e7cqec At*,t4tEr? ipff,!fi.i:W 4e vre'r
flx 14 no+
d?4aNg- ?L,1xltuaaePOe.-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
chen and associates
CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS
soao RD rs4 G|-€tewooD spnrNcs. coLoRAoo 61601 303/9.5-7.54
I
May 9, 1984
Subject: Review of Prelftni.nary
Design Concept, Proposed
ResidentLal Earth Shel Eers,
Lots A1, A2, and A3, Llons
Ridge, Fillng 1 aod Loc 6,
tions Rldge, Filing 4, Vail ,
Colorado.
Job No. 21,285A
Berridge Assoclates, Inc.
1000 S. Frontage Road west, Sulce 100
vai1, C0 81657
Atcn! Peter Jamar
Gent Leuen:
As requested, we have reviewed geotechnical lnvesti.gatlons performed
at the subJecc site for earller proposed developmenEs with respect t.o
Ehe current proposed developneat. We have been provided with a preliminary
site pLan of the project daced May 9, L984 prepared by Berridge Associaces,Inc. our f lndings are as f oll-ovs:
Preglgus Stgdieg: Chen & Associatee, Inc. and others performed geotechnlcal
ffi' f"r 'Fi"us cypes of proposed deveLopmeuts. These consist of :
L) 'tGeotechnical Investigatlon Skylion Project, Llons Ridge" Robert W.
Thompson, Inc., Job No. 1698, July 1, L974 (Lot A3 Lions Rldge,Filing I).
2) "Prelininary Subsoil and Geological Investigation for tions Ridge
Subdivislon Ftling 4", Chen & Associates, Inc., Job No. 19,418,
November 30, 1979.
3) "Engineerlng Geologic Consultation, Llons Ridge Subdivision, Filing
4", Woodward Clyde Consultants, Job No. 20004-19570, May 9,
1980.
4) So11 and Foundation Investlgatlon for Proposed Earth Incegrated
Shelters Lots AL and A2, Llons Ridge, Fillng .L", Chen & Assoclates,
Inc. Job No. 21,285, February 6, 1981.t
I
t OFFICES: CASPER . COLORAOO SPRINGS . DENVER . SALT LAKE CITY
t-
I
CHSN
I
I
I
t
I
I
t
t
T
t
I
I
I
I
t
T
t
Berridge AssoeLaEes, Inc.
May 9, 1984
Page 2
Proposed Conatruccton: We understand Ehe proposed development r.ril1
consist. nainly of residential units eut Lnto che hlllside to Eorm "earthshelters". Conslderable gradlng, both cuE and fill, wlll be required,
This type development is like that previously proposed on Locs A1 and A2
(Chen & Associates, 1981). The size of che projecc will be increased to
inelude Lot A3 ro the east and Lot 6 Co the west.
Discusaion and Reconmendatlons: Based on our review of the general
subsurface and surficial geologic lnformation presented in the previous
engineering studies performed at the slte, we believe the developuent to
be feasible based on geoteehnical consideraEions. Because of chenatural sceep site grade and. Ehe extensive proposed gradlng, special
design and construction considerations will be required. These pertain
nainly to cuE and fill slope stability and design of building to supportearth 1oads. Rockfall Bitigatlon uithin porElons of Ehe site nay also
be needed, We expec!' these considerations can be satisfactorily addresseduith approprlaEe engLneering design typical for this area.
Crileria presented ln the previous engineeri.ng sEudies are considered
appropriaEe for prelirolnary deslgn and planning purposes. We reconunend
a supplemenEal geoEechnical study be perforrned once more specific
developmen! plans have been decermined.
If you have any questions with regard to the conLents of this
reporE or we can be of further sexvi.ce, please feel free to conEact
llle.
very truly yours,
AllD ASSOCIATES, INC.
SLP/dc
ffi"i.f;U),?:l'utE;;;.l[+i;ietsrta;--.:*i(aj€- -ba.'(i 18222 i
$,;h**
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
T
t
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
3r4/45 =Fs:5:FF7r4. /r.fi a- -', .- s \\A$[5--$!1\]{',a?:-'-I.-\il-.,s.R}11
fr*_t;;ffi
7:j-*=-:-1-$;;\:=-ll_-::=----:-;_--------+I >l' - )i: f= :- --\;-:J- : : i - - i -:--:T
- -- ='-1-4
,eeffi
-E'4lr-4
F-t
F- - -{
tua{e 1bt4 +rae6
8,ev'l{ r+t 6voee
vrl,. e4agtco
,ur+ eA,4a.or-|9r{terfttai 6tBaE'W i), C.-.&}t
-atWOAze ttaaiEc,l2 / ?,}._r!ee+E eazaw, 4+ataf 2f. Er,.'W,TSJW) ae@ ws?r
wl,r.f 14 rlfi
aa-pLE I l',/.j ffi\flFJ ai a'wi | '<Jo to 4o .o io ,,.EtsH
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
T
T
I
I
t
I
AND RESEARCH TO PRACTICE
David P. McKittrick*
APPLICATION OFTHEORY
REINFORCED EARTH':
This technical paper was presented as the keynote address at
the Sympuium on Soil Reinforcing and Stabilising Techniques
sponsored by the New South Wales lnstrtUe of Technology and
the Universw ot New South Wales on October 16, 1978 in
Sydney, Australia.
In the eleven years since the first commercial use ol Rein-
forced Earth@, ovet 2,2OO structures have been comoleteo.
These structures have included: retaining walls and bridge
abutments for transportation applications; induslrial structures
including material processing and storage facilities; contain-
ment dikes lor crude oil and liquified natural gas storage; and
foundation slabs and hydraulic structures such as seawalls,
flood protection structures, sedimentation basins and dams.
Structures have been completed in all parts ol the world in a
variety ot environmental settings; structures have been design-
ed lor, and been subjected 10, a variety ol loading conditions
including static, moving and dynamic loads, thermal stresses
and hydraulic and seepage forces. The performance ot these
structures has been closely monitored, either through gross
observation or by precise instrumentation. This experience has
provided the opportunity to critically examine theoretical and
applied research, to compare predicted with actual perfor-
mance, lo refine design procedures, and to improve construc-
tion methods and technology to optimize economiGs. This paper
reports on the present state of the art frorn a practicing
engineer's viewpoint and proposes design procedures thal are
consistent with both basic soil and structural mechanics theory,
as well as observed behavior of comDleted structures.
INTROOUCTION
In his "State-of-the-Art" address prepared for the American
Society of Civil Engineers (A.S.C.E.) Symposium on Earth
Reintorcement, our late colleague, Dr. Kenneth Lee (1),
reviewed not only the papers that had beeil subntitted for pubL-
cation but also the status and results ol research programs that
he had actively directed, supported or reviewed during the
several years that he and his associates had been involved in
this topic. In his paper he listed several topics that he believed
were in need ol further study and advised caution in "drawing far
reaching conclusions from limited basic researcfr data" (this list
is reproduced in Table l). A conscientious reader of his paper
might, however, be somewhat puzzled by what would appearto
be a contradiction contained therein; that is, his acknowledg-
ment that "today (1978) the practice of using Re,inforced Earth
tor appropriate geotechnical engineering projects is well estab-
lished, and rational design procedures have been developed
and dernonstrated on many successful projc'cts" and his
admonition that " . . . the behavior of Reinforced Earth is actually
very complex and . . . many more years will elapse belore the
basic mechanisms are clearly established to everyone's satis-
faction." The same conscientious reader must then ask from
what sources do practicing engineers derive the confidence and
experience to design and construct civil and industrial works
using this new material, knowing lull wellthatthe failure ot these
structures could imperil the public safety and cause signiflcant
economic disruption and monetary loss. These sources are, of
course, the same theoretical and experimenlal studies known to
and reviewed by Dr. Lee, augmented and interpreted in the light
of experience with the design, conslruction and constant sur-
veillance of actual Reinforced Earth structures. In this paper, I
will attempt to re-examine those severaltopics c,ited by Dr. Lee
in light of actual field experience in the United Slates and other
countries, in an attempt to demonstrate that Reinforced Earth
structures are designed on the basis of rational and usual
engineering procedures and thal, while certain behavior
mechanisms may be complex, they still may be explained by
basic soil mechanics theory and appropriately conservativeparameters can be selected to account for these behavior
mechanisrns in ihe design of actual structures.
Proposed by Kenneth L. Lee, 1978
1 . Sliding shear resistance between soil and reinforcing
material
2. Fundamental behavior mechanisms and practical design
paramelers
3. Long term durability or corrosion of reinlorcing
materials
4. Backfill of cohesive soil or soil with fines
Table l: Reinforced Earth Toplcs for Furthel Study
(Beginning with lhe most important)
Reflecting on the present state-of-the-art from a practitioner's
standpoint and reviewing the amount ol published data now
available, I cannot disagree with the content of Dr. Lee's table. I
would, horvever, rearrange and combine some of the topics.
Table ll contains a somewhat parallel listing of the factors or
topics dealing with Reinforced Earth r'/hich are most important
from a design and performance viewpoint. The order is derived
not only from personel experience but also from the expressed
concerns ot the engineers with whom we deal on a daily basis.
I
T
t 'Presldenl, The Fleintorced Eanh Company, Arlington, Virqinia
TECHNICALSERIES o REPORTT9-l
T
Because they are interrelated, I have chosen to discuss items la
and b and lll in sequence. The durability question will be pre-
sented last, not because it is unimportant, but because it can be
conveniently separaled.
l. Basic Mechanics o{ Reinforced Earth
a. State of Stress in a Fleinforced Earth Struclureb. Frictional Relationship between Soil and
Reinforcements
ll. Durability ol Buried Metal Reinforcements
lll. Selection of Soil lor Us€ in Reinforced Earth
Structures
Table ll: Topics of Maior lmportance to the Safety and Economy of
Reinlorced Earth Structures
In all project specific drscussions of Reinforced Earth, the lirst
question asked is "how does it work?". Having explained that
the basic working mechanism depends on lhe efficient combi-
nation of metallic reinforcements and granular soil, the engr-
neer's concern immediately shifts to the durability or service life
question because it appears that most engineers, eitherthrough
their work or educational experience, have concluded that metal
buried in the earth will corrode in a time period inversely propor-
tional to their years of experience. Engineers believe they
understand the concept of friction and they have apparently
decided ftat the complexities in data published by the re-
searchers are the result of bad testing. They seem less inter-
ested in the selection of the backfill, believing this question to be
one merely of economic con@rn. Beiore reviewing the status of
research on the listed topics, it is important to understand the
basic mechanics of the material under consideration.
l. Basic Mechanics of Reinforced Earth
The basic mechanics of Reinforced Earth were well under-
stood by Vidal and were explained in detail in his early publica-
tions. A simplification ol these basic mechanics can be
illustrated by Figure 1 . As shown in Figure 1a, an axial load on a
sample of granular material will result ln lateral expansion in
dense materials. Because of dilation, the lateral strain is more
than one-half the axial strain. However, il inextensible horizontal
reinforcing elements are placed within the soil mass, as shown
in Figure 1b, these reinforcements will prevent lateral strain
because ol friction between the reinlorcing elements and the
soil, and the behavior will be as il a lateral restraining lorce or
load had been imposed on the element. This equivalent lateral
load on the soil element is equal to the earlh pressure at rest
(K.lo,r). Each element of the soil mass is acted upon by a lateral
strEss equal Koau. Therefore, as lhe vertical stresses increase,
the horizonlal restraining stresses or lateraltorces also increase
in direct proportion. Thus, for any value of the angle of internal
lriction, d, normally associated with granular soils, the stress
circle lies well below the rupture curve at all points. Failure can
occur only by loss of friction between the soil and the reinlorce-
ments, or by tensile failure of the reinforcements. This funda-
mental principle was examined and conlirmed by Schlosser and
Longe (2), Hausman (3) and others. Theoretical relationships
were developed between the spacing and tensile resistance of
the reinforcements and the increase in "anisotropic pseudo-
cohesion" of the reinforced materials. Finding conclusions from
this earlier research restrictive of wider applications of earth
reinlorcing, Bassett and Last (4) have turther investigated this
concept with analyses of a non-cohesive soil reinforced with a
uni-directional reinforcement system subiected to plane strain.
Using a Mohr circle of strain rate, Figure 2a, the investigators
have determined the direction of the maior and minor principle
strains, €1 and €3, and also the direction of the zero strain
planes, a and B, which define an arc segment containing the
minor principle strain direction eq, within which all nonnal strains
would be tensile and reinforce;lent horizontal in line with the
maximum principle tensile strain. This direction is used in actual
Beinforced Earth retaining walls. Figure 3b shows the effect on
the same strain fields and potential failure planes when rein-
forcements are inserted in the soil matrix in a direction parallelto
e3. Since the modulus of the reinforcing material is generally
very much greater than that of the soil and as efficient frictional
bonding occurs between the soil matrix and the reinforcements,
the direction of the reinforcement must be aligned with one o{
the zero extension characteristics. Reierring to Figures 2b and
3a, the 6 characlerislics oI a composite malerial would be
rolated to become very nearly horizontal and lhe d charac-
teristics are forced to follow. The potential rupture or failure
mechanism would also attempt to re-align wilh these new
characteristics. Such a re-alignment is in substantial conformity
to the locus of maximum tensile strains measured in several
Jull-scale slructures, Schlosser et al (5), Figure 23. Vidal
assumed that this comoosite material could be used to conslruct
a coherent gravity slructure, and that the properties of the
structure would be similar to that ot the theoretical and exoeri-
mental models. Certainly, empirical adjustments would have to
be made to account for horizonlal and vertical discontinuity of
the reinforcemenls. Adjustments would also be made for
boundary conditions at the facing of lhe structure, point and
magnitude of applied loading, foundalion conditions, lhrust of
the backlill and other project-specific conditions.
ln most research programs involving a study ol the mechanics
of materials, a lundamental behavior or failure mechanism is
assumed. All studies thereafter build from that initial hypoth-
esis. Experiments are designed to examine properties or indi-
vidual components of the material, and very often many years
are spent trying to rationalize and modily data to tit the initial
assumption. Such has apparently been, and unfortunately con-
tinues to be, the case with Reinforced Earth. Many researchers
have embarked on extensive research programs using the
hypothesis that Beinlorced Earlh structures, in particular relain-
ing structures, are analogous to tied-back walls. The lilerature
on Reinforced Earth is replete with references 1o "lie-forces,"
Rankine failure planes, and othertopics relevant to the analysis
and design of anchor systems. These conscientious investi-
gators have apparently neglected or misunderstood the basic
mechanics of the material or the significant and substantial
T
t
I
I
I
T
t
I
t
I
I
T
I
I
I
I1
I
I
t
16'T
i-Tmioi Fdl,r. ol Beintoci"o s1, o-2 Fnclion Faiurealona FclnroEino3 Beanng Fa l!.e at Tde ol Wa|| (dbtkr|E Lo6dmq)
dH Kodvnlr srNodv
Fig 1 : Slate ot Stress in Reinforc€d Eartl
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
T
I
t
t
T
I
I
documentation that has existed for several vears that shoulo.
when seriously considered in the light of aciual stluctural per-
formance, eliminate the tie-back or anchor aooroach as a
conceivable lailure mechanism. Belore investigating structural
behavior in more detail, I believe it is uselul to compare the two
hypotheses, i.e., composite material and tie-back, to determine
if , in fact, they are so different.
-112/- e o
(\
\ v,2
\ tu.,1
Fig 2: Mohr Circle ol Strain Rate
(a)dand B characterislics dd lens eacs tFh .d a canli eler wall(afle. Mr lcan []97all
Fig 3: Strain Field Orientalion-Cantllever and Feinforced Earth
Betaining Walls
_L
-0.3H--_ L.
(a) Coherent Gravity Struct!re
Hypolhesis
dh= K (1 r Ka) yH
L=Le=L 0.3H
for Q 30"1
0h-1.33K.YH
Fig 4: Design Hypolheses for Reinlorced Earth walls
Figures 4a and b demonstrate the significant differences in
fundamental dime sions and stresses which can be obtained
by use ol he design procedures ordinarily usedlorthe two basic
mechanism theories. (The derivation of the design procedure
and dimensions from the "coherent gravity structure" hypoth-
esis will be developed later in this paper.)
For the same earlh pressure coeflicients, the use ol Vidal's
approach would require more reinforcements to resist the
higher calculated stresses; but the required length of the rein-
lorcemenb would be shorter than that calculated by lhe anchor
theory. Re{erring briefly 10 a published case study reported by
Al-Hussaini (6), Figure 5 demonstrated that use ol the "coherent
gravity structure" analysis would have predicted a conservative
and safe design. lt would not have been necessary to rely on
empirically adjusted values.
Fig 5: Measured Lateral Pressures W.E.S. Wall
(after Al-Hussaini, I 978)
Wilh the potential for calculating divergent answers to the
important questions which govern safety and eoonomics, it is
important to determine what hypothesis can be supported by
field experience. Unfortunately, we have convincing answers to
this query. Field experience strongly supports the coherent
gravity structure theory, as demonstrated by gross foundation
failures under structures at Aguadilla, Puerto Rico, and
Roseburg, Oregon.
(b)Tie-Back Structure
Hypothesrs
dh = K. YHL>Le=L H lan (45" 0/2)
Ior 0 30':L-Le-L 0.58H
Larera press! € Due ro Soit ana Sur0hdqe. KN,'|JI'
E
i
,"t(''" \. "* *o''"| \i\ \ "...\ tr. i,=,'")-.. "..\),\'\rx,'\\'\ ," \r 1^-ka(r + Ka)line \,4 t,
€
Lal.ral pr€ssu@ Due lo So land Surcharge
Prio.lo Fa h/"^, PSF
At Aguadilla a nine-meler high retaining slructure, presum-
ably founded on rock, was instead conslructed on a compacted
structural fill placed on a clay loundation. Unknown to The
Reinforced Earth Company and in violation ol the specifications
of the Puerto Rico Departmenl of Public Works, the loundation
had not been benched and so it sloped down and away from the
rear of the structure. The backfill used to construcl the struclural
fill and wall was a clean, uni{orm beach sand and the fill within
the wall was compacted by ponding. As the structure neared
completion, the reduced shear strength of the salurated and
presumably remolded clay foundalion was not suflicient to resist
the mobilizing force ol the mass, and the structure moved out-
ward as a unit approximalely two meters. The wall lace
remained essentially vertical during wall movemenl and no
slructural distress was evident in the precast concrete panels.
The strucfure remained croherent, and itwas Dossible to dissas-
semble the structure and salvage all wall panels wilhout danger
to the workers. The initial and final localions of the structure are
shown in Figure 6. Photographs taken before and after sliding
occurred are shown in Figures 7 and 8.
F(, 6: Movement of Structure al Aguadilla, P.B.
In Roseburg, Oregon, a 1o-meter high Reinforcdd Earth re-
taining wall had been constructed to reduce the amount of fill
required for a highway embankment and lo prevent encroach-
menl ot the embankment on a river which paralleled the high-
way. A cross-section showing the wall and its relative position in
lhe embankment is shown in Figure 9a and b. As the embank-
ment above the wall was nearing completion, a slide occurred atthe wall location. The slide lailure plane, which was positively
identified through continuou$ sampling, and by the use of
inclinometers, passed behind and beneath the slructure. The
top of the Reinforced Earth wall was displaced seven meters
horizontally and the wall dropped approximately 3.7 meters
vertically. The final location of the wall and the location ot the
slide plane are shown in Figure 10. Remedial measures are also
shown. In spite of these large movements, the structure
remained intact as shown in Figures 11a, b and c. Subsequent
analysis revealedthatthe slidewas caused by overstressing the
weak foundalion soils located approximately six meters below
lhe base of the wall.
Fig 7: Aguadilla Slructure Betore Movemenl
I
t
t
I
I
T
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
t
t
rl
I
t
tFig 8: Aguadilla Structure After Movemenl
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
l
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
T
t
I
In its report on the Roseburg landslide, the Federal Highway
Administration (7) concludes, " . . . it shoutd be ernphasized that
the subjed problem was a landslide problem and not a Rein-
forced Earth wall failure. Unfortunate as it wasi. the slide dioprovide a dramatic full-scale test ol a Reinforced Earth wall (the
first we know ol in the world) and demonstrated (1) the inteinal
stlength of a Reinforced Earth structure and (2) that a
Reinlorced Earth wall does, in fact, pedorm arr a (coherent)
gravity strucfure."
Fig 9: Posilion ol Feintolced Earth Wall Betore Slope FailurE
Fig 9: Roseburg Structure befoae Movement
ln other cases, when Reinlorced Earth struclures have
experienced important and expected settlements, carelul
measuremenls have confirmed that the reintorced volumes
reacted as coherent masses.
Fig 10: Roceburg€oos Bay Highway Oregon Floute 42
In light of substantial theoretical analyses supported by actual
field perfomance, it seems reasonable to adopt the @herent
gravity structure theses as a basis o{ design and tc re-examine
experimental data derived or interpreted on the basis of a 'ti+
back" or anchor wall failure mechanism.
(a) State ot Stress in a Reinforced Eanh Structure
The essential calculation in designing Reinforced Earth struc-
tures is thecalculation determining the lateralortensile stresses
which must be resisted by the reinforcements. Overstress could
promote tensile lailure of the reinlorcerner which in tum would
produce a catastrophie structural collapse. The calculation
regarding the sliding shear resistance between the soil and
reinfor@rnents is less critical since slippage will cause only
re-distribution ol stress and a slo/v deformation of the mass.
Instrurnentation of Feinforced Earth structures has shown
that the state ol stress with in these structu res varies and cannol
be consistently predicted using, for example, a single earth
pressure assumption adiusted as required for the effect of the
thrust of the backfill. Schlosser (8) has previously reported in
this conference a summary of eadh pressures calculated from
,slrain gauge measurements made in actual structures. This
data, whicfr is repeated in Figure 12 and is consislent with
Vidal's early qualitative observations, as shown in Figure 13,
can be explained by the relationship between the critical void
ratio and applied stress. Studies such as those by Castro (9)
have shown that the critical void ratio decreases with increasing
stress. Acmrdingly, relative extension ol the soil compared with
the reinforcing strips becomes less for higher walls with their
corresponding higher stresses. Thus, for higher structures the
efleclive lateral stress is reduced and approaches an active
state.
Fig 11 : Roseburg Structul€ alter MoverEnt
The ellect of the Factor of Safety in designs is to move the
Mohr circle away from the failure envelope, in effect designing
for a coefficient of earth pressure K, greater than the active
coeificient Ka.
Fig 12: Earth Pressure Variation in Reinforced Earth Structures
This phenomenon was reproduced experimentally by
Hausmann (10) and he reports similar observations during
measurements of fulFscale slructures at Dunkirk, Thionville,
and Granbn.
The empirical distribution shown in Figure 14 has been
developed to conform to observed stress distributions in Rein-
forced Earth structures and is consistent with results of theorer-
ical analyses.
(b) Frictonal Relationship Between Soil
and Rei nforcement
Having determined appropriate @nservative values for the
horizontal slresses in a Reinforced Earth mass and propor-
tioned the cross-section and horizornal and vertical spacing of
the reinforcements therein, the designer must satisty himself
that the hodzontal stress can be efiectively and efficiently trans-
ferred lo these reinforcements. The designer must also be able
to predict, within cerlain limits, the margin of safety available in
the completed structure.
Mohr circle at rest (Ko)
K.Ka
Fig 13: Stal€ of Stress ln a Reintorced Earth Wall (after Vidal, 1969)
T
I
t
l,
I
Fig 14: Earth Pres.sure Distribution ina Reinlorced Earlh Structure
Equations governing the lrictional relationship are presented
in Figure 15.
Where:(1) FSeonA = 3bf- L"du b width or reinforcement
(K' 0y) SxSy I- : qlpaPJnt coettr)ent ot fr[;tjt'/
L. length ol reinforcement elf€clive
Whrch can be rewritten as follows. - in stress lransfer
(2\ FsBort:2bf^Le K: earth pressure coelficient
K'A Sr ' S, = infhrg6ce a,aa of.einfoacement
Fig 15
The solution ol equation (2) in Figure 15 requires not only
knowledge o{ the geometry of the structure, but also the selec-
tion ol appropriate values for the apparent friction coefficient, 1.,
the effective length of the reinforcement, Le, and the earth
pressure coefficient, K. Let us examine lirst the apparent friction
coetficient.
(b-1 ) AFarcnt Friction Coettic'tent, ,' .
The topic of sliding shear resistance between the soil and
reinforcements has been the subject ol numerous research
studies in several countries. These studies have produced
abundant data that on lirst examination are ditficull to explain
but wilf , after more detailed scrutiny, gene'ally yield to the usual
concepts of the shear strength properties of granular materials
and sliding lriction between malerials. Several types ol tests
have been used to measure the value ol f.. These include:
(1) Direct shear (sliding shear) tests between soil and rein-
Jorcing materiaf-model and prototype scale.
(2) Rein{orcing strip pullout from a Beinforced Earth wall-
model, prototype and full scale.
(3) Reinlorcing strip pullout tests from embankments.
(4) Reinforcing slrip
model scale.
(5) Reinforcing strip
scale.
pullout tests from a rigid moving wall-
pullout tests during vibratioft-model
Of all the testing procedures used, the direct or sliding shear
test is the one most available to practicing engineers for the
evaluation of design parameters. Other lesting procedures re-
quire more specialized. equipment, and generally involve higher
cost which may not be justified by eitherthe size of the proiecl or
T
I
T
I
I
I
t
I
t
t
l'
I
I
I
4ir5t=*-iE
'=*-i
f ''
I
I
L,
""
var al'on oi x ior seled ,.sr'ume.ied wdrs
I
I
I
I,
I
I
t
t
I
Q
1.50m 3.10m 4.6om
Length of the Reinfo fcement
the econornic gain that may result from more refined and exten-
sive data. From a designer's standpoint, therefore, it is impor-
tant to kno\ ' if direct shear tesl results can be used with
reliability. Let us tirsl generally examine the results ot the other
testing programs. In the following discussions, the terms
"apparent lriclion coefiicient," "pullout resistance," and "shear-
ing resistance" will be used interchangeably to describe the
frictional bond between soil and reinforcement.
Beinforcing strip pullout lesls in the laboratory and in full-size
structures have shown the peak and residual shearing resis-
tances to be dependent on the density of the soil, the etfective
overbuden pressure and the geometry and surface roughness
ol the reinlorcemenb. Some typical resuhs from field pullout
tests are shown in Figures | 6 through 1 9a, b and c.
Flg 16: Pull-out Tesls: Apparent Friction Coefilcienl (lnlluence ot
th6 Length of the Reinforcernent)
Data from field pullout tests have shown lhe shearing resis-
tance developed by reinforcements to be directly proportional to
length. Results from both the Satolas (1 1 ) and Highway 39 (12)
tests show that the apparent coefficient ol lriction reaches a
maximum value at a strip length of about eight meters. For
longer lengths, strips experience ductile tlow and, therefore, the
testing procedure is no longer relevant to the determination of
the sliding shear resistance.
The surface roughness has an obvious and long-underslood
effect on the sliding shear resistance. Schlosser and Vidal (13)
reported resuhs ol direct shear tests pertormed on samples of
leucate and calcareous sand sheared along, and in contact
with, smooth and roughened reinforcements. The resulls ol
these tests are shown in Figure 20. Examination of the rein-
forc€menB after shearing revealed striations on lhe smooih
strip orienbd in the direction of the displacement. This is evi-
dence that sliding of the soil parlicles along the strip had
occurred. Examination of the roughened reinforcement did not
reveal sucfr striations, evidenc€ that shearing had taken place
along a soil-soil interface. Examinalion of the high adherence
reinforcernents now in use tested in prototype direct shear and
full-scale field pullout tests reveals similar evidence. Thus, it is
reasonable to assume that the use of reinforcements with
appropriably designed surface roughness can result in an
apparent ftiction coefficient approximately equal to the shear
strength of the soil as determined by direct shear or sliding
shear tesb.
Fig 17: Pull-out Test in Reinlorced Earth Walls (influence of the
Nature of the Strip Surtace)
The relationships shown in Figure 19a, b and c are calculated
using the expression T : cru tan !y ' 2bL to determine the
apparent lriction coetlicient f. (i.e., f' : tan 1P). As shown in
these Figures, frictional values exceed those which could be
calculated using a value of V or d determined by direct shear
testing procedures. Since these results could strongly influence
overall safety and economy, il.is important io determine il they
are a {unction of the testing procedure or in fact represent a
phenomenon which can be expected in the performance ol
actual structures, To more easily understand the influence of
density and overlrurden pressure on a Reinforced Earth mass,
let us first examine the intluence ol these parameters on the
shear strength of a granular material. Figure2l shourslhe effect
of density on the stress-strain-volumetric relationships in gran-
ular soils tested under drained shear conditons. Dense sards
exhibit a high peak deviator stress al lovt, strains, and a residual
deviator shess, less than the peak stress, at high strain. The
dense material expands, or dilates, during shear. The loose
sand exhibits a much low€r devialor stress, no peak value, and
a volumetric contraction or compression during shear. A turther
insight is gained by examining the same stress-strain-relation-
ships during undrained shear where no volume changes are
allorared to occur. This restriction of rclumetric expansion is a
condition like that which exists in an actual structure. The un-
drained relationships are shown in Figure 22. The negative pore
pressureswhich are induced in asaturated sampleduring shear
may be used qualitatively to estimate the apparent increase in
overburden stress when volumetric expansion in unsaturated
samples (or structures) is not allowed to occur (a localized
I
l
t
I
I
I
T
I
I
t
Slrip 6Ox 5 rlrn
f
2t
F
lJ.
rE
Displacement
smooth stip 6ox3 mm
t:f
" Reduced Scaled i{odelitd 17.3kNh" Lstnp Length. rm Srrip Width: 1.5cm,h Iscm Fontarneblea! Sand
= 15 3 kN/m3 h= 1scm
0 5 10 15 N 25
AL(cm)
Flg 1 I : Influence of rhe Density in Pull-out Test
Fig 25: Tensile Forces Distribulion Along the Reinforcements
(b-3) D€s,ign Prccedures.
Based on these foregoing discussions, it is possible to form-
ulate design procedures to adequately (and safely) proportion
the reinforcement surface area. This procedure is shown
schematically in Figure 28a and b. For granular backfills (com-
pacted to at least 90 percent standard Proctor density) and
ribbed reinforcements, lhe use of values lor f- indicaled in the
figure can be supported by empirical data. However, one may
also select a value ol f- S: tan d' (peak stress determined from
plane compression tests) approximately adjusted iorlhe etfects
ol dilatancy. For nondilatanl soils, avaluetor f- = tan V (direct
shear test value) should be used lor both ribbed and smooth
reinforcements. Appropriate safety factors should be used.
Fig 26: Hypothetical ldeal Distributions ot Shear Stress Along
Reinlorcing Strip & Tie-Back (after Hausman, 1978)
ll. Selection of Soils For Use in Reinlorced Earth
Construction.
Three principal considerations which influence the selection
of soils for use in Reinlorced Earlh structures are:
(1) Long-term stability oi the completed structure
(2) Short{erm (or conslruction phase) stability
(3) Physiochemical properties of the materials.
It is evidenl from the previous discussions that granular soils
comoacted to densities that result in volumetric exoansion
during shear are ideally suited for use in Reinforced Earth
structures. Where these soils are well-drained, eflective normal
stress transter between the strios and soil backfill will be
immediate as each lift of backlill is placed, and shear strength
increase will not lag behind vertical loading. In the range o1
loading normalty associated with Reinforced Earth structures,
granular soils behave as elastic materials. Therefore, for struc-
tures designed at working stress levels, no post-construction
movements associated with internal yielding or readiustments
should be anticipated.
Fig 27: ldealized Reinforced Mass
On the other hand, fine-grained materials are not especialy
suitable lor Reinforced Earth structures. They are normally
poorly drained, and effective stress transler will not be immed'-
ate, thus requiring a greatly slowed construction schedule or an
unacceptably low factor of safety in the construction phase.
Fine-grained materials often exhibit elasto-plastic or plastic
behavior, thereby increasing the possibility of post-contruction
movemenb. In addition, it a significant portion of the strength ol
the fine-grained material is derived from its clay content, the
rational design procedures used heretofore to evaluate the
safety of the structure will not be applicable. With such sharply
contrasting pertotmance, it is necessary then to define clearly
the boundary between granular and fine-grained soils, as this
boundary or limit applies to Reinforced Earlh construction.
Fig 28: Design Method$ for Evaluating Safety Against Failure by
Lack ot Adherence
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
T
I
I
I
t
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
Case
Shear
, l*-t--|_F-
t;=; '-]
L'.*l-"i-t
.f\
:' t
F;lE-
/\
-t.T-l: --
lt\f-
Ll \
0 5 Tma]
0
I 0 A
Tmax - Mar, TieTens|on
Ft - Tje Force al wall Fa.e
,( - Eouivalenl Skin Friclion Ano e'e icbmpuiedlmml)|o- i.2 | .€cu rRibbedstLtrl
l. o.4 (sm@lnsldpt
r -'110 (R bbed stiP6)
r'=0419@lhsrps)
(a)Varoii.ndApp.rcnl FrcllonC!.llicair l' w'lh o€pri
(Dlvenrc.rmol Efi*rve St D Lengih
t * ,r!rl
r K- crrn+
I
] wheB, H= s". sy A
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
t
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
Writers of the first specificalions for Reinforced Earth proiects
(including, of course, Vidal) clearly understood the shearstrength, density and dilatancy relationships and specifieo
clean granular materials for use in all structures. Rellecting on
this, it is interesting to note that by specifying such a materiat,
they virtually eliminated from concern such problems as drain-age, corrosion and post-construction movements. The first
speci{ication published by the U.S. Federal Highway Adminis-
tration in 1974 was derived lrom the early French specification
and allowed the following limiting gradation:
F.H.W.A. Specification Fp-74(i 7)
In addition, the specification further required that all backfi
material exhibit an angle of inlernal friction of 25 degrees as
determined by standard triaxial or direct shear testing methods.
This caveat was added in recognilion of the facl that many
gravels in the western part of the United Stales are highly
degradable and normal design assumptions would nol be
applicable to lhem. The specifications were appropriately con-
Servative given the state-ol-the-art at the time lhey were pub-
lished. However, as more experience with actual struclures was
gained and as the results of theoretical and applied research
were analyzed, it became evident thal a significant relaxation
and broadening of these specifications could be done safely,
thus extending the spectrum of usable materials and further
improving the potential for e@nomy to users of the system.
From 1970 Io 1974 an extensive research program was
carried cut by Schlosser and Long (18) lo study the relationship
between the fine-grained portion ol a soil and the development
of the angle of internal lriction. In this study two types of soil test
were conducled: (1) an artilicial soil made with a mixture ofglass balls and powdered clay and (2) mixtures ot naturat soils.
Saturated soil samples of both types with varying amounts of
fines were tesled in a direct shear box. Resufts were conclusive
in demonstrating that the parameler controlling shear strength
is the relative volume of the fine-grained portion to the granular
portion. Some typical results are shown in Figure 29. Addilional
tests have shown that the grain size which separates the fine
grained portion from the granular portion is 15/r.
While this theoretical research was carried on, several oro-
Jects were constructed using materials which differed from the
original specification in the amount ot fines passing the 75p
sieve. These materials were typically nonplastic residual soils
such as those derived from decomposed graniles and meta-
sedimentary formations high in quartz and mica content
(schistose and schistose gneisses of the Piedmont Plateau).
Fine content (percent greater than 75p) varied from the allow-
able 15 to as much as 40 percent. This field experience was
generally favorable but did require the designers to tocus more
closely on questions ot short-term stability, and to develop
conslruction procedures necessary to effectively incorporate
soils with higher f ine contents into Reinforced Earth structures.
Two examples illustrate this point.
At C,ove Point, Maryland over 800 linear meters of single and
doublejaced Reinforced Earth containment dikes 3 to 5 meters
high were constructed using sandy silts, with as much as 40
percent passing a 75/, screen. Extensive laboratory tests were
conducted to evaluate the apparent coefficient of friction be-
tween the aluminum reinforcements and the sandy silts. These
test results were used lo determine safetv factors for the com-
pleted structures, which were designed wilh the usual working
slress lactor of saiety allowed by U.S. practice. Wall backlill had
previously been excavated and stockpiled at luture tank loca-
lions. During construction o1 the walls, work was stopped for one
week due to heavy rains (which eventually totalled 25cm forthe
week) after which construction was immediately re-started.
Backfill was brought to the wall location with 25cu meter self-
loading soapers. Two days after construction had resumec,
outward deflections were noticed in several areas along the
dikes. Conslruction was stopped so that the situation could be
assessed.
Fig 29: Evolution of lhe Angle ot Internal Friction and Cohesion
(after Schlosser and Long, 1974)
At another project along Interstate Route 70 near Vai.,
Colorado, a similar but slightly more dramatic episode occurred.
The construction of the highway through the highly scenic Vail
Pass in the Colorado Bockies required the construction of
approximately 27,000 square meters of retaining wall to control
embankment encroachmenl on streams and wilderness areas-
Ol the total, approximately 75 percent or 20,000 square meters
were Reinforced Earlh structures built using conventional, as
well as curved panels. Wall heights varied from 3 to 26 meters,
and walls were built vertically in a single step or in tiers. Typical
structures are shown in Figures 30 and 31. Due to the short
conslruction season, conlractors often worked 20-24 hours per
day on a six-day work schedule. Wall bacHill was a decom-
posed granile with up to 25 percent passing a 75p screen, the
normal requirement for structure backfill in the State ol
Colorado. Early in November of 1975 as lhe contractor was
nearing completion of a Reinforced Earth structure. a section of
wall 300 feet long tilted outward during placement of the backfill.
Some panels were cracked and broken, and the reinforcing
strips had obviously been drawn oul ol the fill. As in the case at
Cove Point, construclion was halted and an invesligalion
underlaken.
The two cases are, quite obviously, relaled to the water
content and loading conditions of the soil which was placed
within the ReinJorced Earth structures. At Cove Poinl, the
loading from the scrapers was far greater than the loading
considered in static wall designs. This increase in overall loao-
ing, combined with a temporary decrease in shear strength
caused by the higher water content and poor drainage charac-
teristics of the soil, combined to create a marginally stable
situation. Thus, ouward movemenl oJ the panels occurred.
Review of the calculalions showed no problem with long-term
stability, and construction was allowed to continue atter the soil
had dried out and lighter equipment was brought in. Continuing
observation showed no further movement of the walls.
Sieve Qpeninq or percent passing
Screen Size (By Weight)
10 inches (254mm) 100
4 inches (101.6mm) 100-75
No.200 (75 U m) 0-15
Table lll: Specificalion for Select Granular Backfill Material lrom tl
i:I
, c-r'c
l:"
t"'
t;;
__l
"'- i
Ht ANGL€ OI NTFANAL FR CT ON
Fig 30: Vail Pass-Tiered Wall
Fig 3l : Vail Pass-Standard Panel Wall
At Vail Pass, investigations revealed that the filling operation
had been intermittently shul down for several days prior to the
wall deflec'tions due to snow and lreezing temperatures. lt was
not possible to determine if the contractor had cleaned, scariiied
and recompacted the fill surface after lilling operations
resumed. However, samples taken in several locations in the
enibankment and wall after the failure, showed water contents
of 6 to I percent over optimum. lt was, therelore, reasonable to
deduce that high pore pressureswere created in thewallbackJill
under the influence ol the heavy haul equipment. Shear stren-
gth, as well as sliding resistance, were drastically reduced and
the panels moved outlvard virtually without restraint. At Vail, the
affecled portion oI the wall was removed, and construclion
resumed with proper atlention to compaction water content. To
completely eliminate such occurrences in the lulure will proba-
bly be impossible. However, if specilications are correctly
written, many similar problems can be avoided.
Drawing on these and other experiences, as well as an
underslanding of the basic mechanics of Reinforced Earth, it
has been possible to detine a wider spectrum of materials
suitable for use in Reinforced Earth structures. These broader
limits are shown in the new F.H.W.A. specification which will be
issued at the end of 1978.
F.H.W.A.. 1978)
When the percent liner than 75v is greater than 1 5 percent,
special attention to moisture-density relationships is required.
The compaction speciJications should include a specified lift
thickness and allowable range of moisture content above and
below optimum. Special atlention must also be focused on
design details such as internal and extemal drainage.
Fig 32: La€e Direct Shear Box with Creep Test Setup
The broader soecifications still restrict the speclrum of suit-
able materials to those which are non-plastic and whose
detormation properties will be essentially elastic in the normal
load range ol Reinlorced Earth structures. Even assuming that
a rational design procedure could be developed for cohesive
soils, we believe that the potential for large post-construction
movements due to creep would be significant. A laboratory
testing program is now in progress to evaluate this
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
t
t
t
I
I
I
I
Sieve Size Percent Passing
6" 1003', 75-100No.200 O'25
and P.l. < 6
OR if percent passing No. 200 is greater than
25 percent, and percent finer lhan 15 U is less
than 15 percent, material is acceptable if
0:30' as determined by AASHTO T-236
P.l, < 6
Table lV: Minimum Specilication lor Select Backfill (Adopted by
o ^dcrucuwRsMsPdr oo n€{rNFiME @@d,mvducEwRsM**€, oo sf6{AdErisMsFdr @o 1'mHDMFtr$*'Mr*NnG @o wd&.,chtrFoi$*irvN6 @
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
phenomenon. Testing pro@dures are shown in Figure 32. pre-
limindry results of a reinforcing strip pullout test in residual silts
with between 70 and 90 percent passing a 75p sieve are shournin Figure 33. The tests show signilicantly lower values olapparent friction are obtained with these materials and, more
importantly, the values are signilicantly less than the shear
resistance of the soil, even with deformed or ribbed strips.Figure 34 shows the result ol two creep tests conducted at
stress levels which varied from 34 to 49 percent of measured
peak load. High deflections are seen lo continue after 50 hours
loading. Other testing programs now in progress will evaluatethe possibility of using admixtures such as llyash, lime or
cement to reduce the plasticity of cohesive soils to etiminate orminimize creep. We hope to be able to report on the results of
these tests in one or two years. At the presenl, however, it is not
possible to use such soils reliably in permanent structures.
In addition to the mechanical complexities, as soils become
more fine{rained, their resistivity generally decreases. Soil
resistivity is an important factor controlling the rate ot gatvanic
corrosion, and low resistivity is often associated with aggressive
soils. This topic will be discussed in greater detail in the fo,-
lowing section.
Fig 33: Strip Pullout Tests-Fine Grained Soits
lll. Durabillty of Buraed Metal Reintorcements.
In the many discussions we hold with potential us€rs ot
Beinforced Earth, the most frequently asked question is "How
long will it last?" Everyone knows that ferrous and other metals
corrode and that metallurgists might spend whole careers creat-
ing a single exotic alloy to resist the aggressive attack of a
predictable environmental setting (such as aluminum boats in
sea water). Reinforced Earth structures are normally designed
for a service life of 75 to 100 years. Reinforcements are typically
thin metal strips varying in thickness from 3 to 9 mm thick
depending on the physical lorces to be resisted and environ-
mental setting in which the structure will be erected. What
special information, therefore, is required to salely proportion
the structural components to resist a physical phenomenon that
is as undeniable as it is seemingly unpredictable? What margin
will exisl and what will be the consequences if the predictions
are incorrect?
To atternpt to answer these questions we must again reflect
on the mecfianism ofcorrosion,lhe resuhs of theoretical studies
and whatever actual performance dala exists. In interpreting
these studies and data, we must be carelul to interpret them in
the lighl of our own concerns. For example, a buried melal
conduit might be considered to have failed if a pitting type
corrosion completely penetrates the conduit wall and fluid or
pressure is lost. In conlrasl, pit type penelrations of a sheet or
strip may do little to reduce the eflective cross-section resisting
stress. Therefore, lor the same corrosive eftect, the strip is
serviceable and the conduit is not. With this in mind, let us
examine the phenomenon ol corrosion as il applies to the
serviceability of Reinlorced Earth structures.
The conosion process is essentially an electrochemical
process. For conosion to occur there must be a potential dif-
ference between two points that are electrically connected in the
presence of an electrolyte. A typical galvanic cell is shown in
Figure 35. Current tlows from the anodic area through the
electrolyte to the cathodic area and back through the metal to
complele the circuit. In the case ol buried metals, the electrolyte
consists of waler rich in oxygen and dissolved salts wetting the
soil particles in contact with the metal. Among the factors that
govem corosivity ol a given soil are (1) porosity (aeration) (2)
electrical conductivity (3) dissolved salts, including depolarizers
or inhibitors (4) moisture and (5) acidity or alkalinity (pH). Let us
look at the influence of each of these oararneters.
A porous soil may retain moisture over a longer lime or may
allow maximum aeration, both factors which tend to increase the
initial corrosion rate. The siluation is complex, however, be-
cause conosion products formed in an aerated soil may be
more orotgctive of the base metal than those formed in an
unaerated soil. In addition, it is orobable that aeration of soils
may affect conosion not only by direct action of oxygen in
forming protective films, but also indirectly hrough the influence
oJ oxygen reacting with an decreasing concentration ot the
organic complexing agents or depolarizers naturally present in
some soils which greatly stimulate localization cells. Another
factor to be considered is that in poorly aerated soils mntaining
sulfates, sulfate-reducing bacteria may be found. These
organisms often produce the highest corrosion rates normally
experienced in any soil. However, the beneficial effect ot aera-
lion extends to soils that harbor sulfate-reducing bacleria
because these bacteria become dormant in the oresence of
dissolved oxygen.
The electrical continuity allows currentto llow between anodic
and cathodic zones on the metal surface. The loss ot metal from
the anode is proportional to the intensity of the currenl which in
turn is directly proportional to lhe conductivity of the electrolyte
behveen the two poles o{ the electrochemical cell. Normally, the
method used to measure this important soil parameter is the
resistivity, the direct inverse of the conductivity. Resistivity is
deDendent on the soil's content of soluble salts and varies
0t
.E
o)Eo
-g
i5
@o
o
5
qt
Eq)
-a
oo-o
E
o.o2
0.04
0
o.o2
0.04
Fig 34: Creep Tests-Ribbed Strips
Eleclrolyte
i anode i
,,^\ | 7^\Cathode t '+ r Cathodes{z_\\_(r\\-
Metal
(a)
greatly with degree ot saturation.
For pu rposes of determining service lile, the resistivity of a soil
at 100 percent saturalion, the worst case, is always used.
Generally a high resistivity is associated with a slightly aggres-
sive soil. Table V shows some typical resistivities o{ soils.
Moisture, even in small quantities, is a necessary agent in
corrosion. Usually the speed oI corrosion increases with in-
creasing water content of the soil. The conductivity of water
increases with increasing con@nlration of dissolved salts,
again increasing the potentral lor increased corrosion.
The acidity or alkalinity (pH) of a soil also controls lhe rate of
corrosion. Certain Drolective oxides that form on the surface of a
metal are insoluble within certain pH ranges. For example,
experiene has shown that the by-products of the corosion of
zinc are irsoluble within a 5 to 12 pH range.
In the NBS study, samples of ferrous and nonterrous metals
were buried at 128 sites. Plain and galvanized sleel specimens
were buried at 47 sites where the soil-water environments were
different, but representative ot soil conditions in the United
States. The resistivity and pH were measured at each site in an
attempt to determine a quantitative correlation between these
measurable (but somewhat time- and environment-dependent)
parameters and metal loss. Romanoff (19) the author oi the
NBS study, demonstrated that lhe rate of corrosion is greatest in
the lirst few years after burial and decreases to a much lower
conslant rate thereafter. He indicated that this damping of cor-
rosion was a more significant parameter than the initial rate. He
proposed quantitative empirical relationships to calculate
average loss of thickness of plain steel as a function ol time.
Darbin (20), in his comprehensive review of the NBS data,
has selected burial site data more or less consistent with the
normal range of environments for buried reinforcing strips and
extended this data in accordance with Romanoff's proposals.
He compared the results o{ this extended or exkapolaled data
with other pertinent studies such as the performance of sheet
piles and culverts. This comparison lor galvanized steel sam-
ples and metal culverts is shown in Figure 36. This data demon-
strales that even in an aggressive environment (p : 13,000 O
cm, pH = 4.7), the galvanized steel reinforcing strips currently
in use would have a service lile of 120 years.
:Ii1.9.g.ll1!!.jjiM!i!!!! trgl'Mqc]ll9
Fig 36: Synthesis of Extrapolaled NBS and Metal Culvert Data
(after Oarbin el. al., 1978)
The extrapolation of the Romanotf data requires the solution
ol the exoonential eouation:
X:kTn
where: X - average loss of thickness wilh time
k = a site characteristic
T = time in years
n : site dependent and is always less than 1.0
Since selection of k and n requires some subjectfue inter-
pretation, it is useful to see if some more general quantitative
conclusiors can be drawn lrom the Romanoff daia. In an
attempt to obtain this, the NBS datafrom lhe 47 sleel burial sites
has been re-plotted. Figure 37 is an attempt to show a relalion-
ship between metal loss and resistivity. The figure shows that a
well-defined relationship does not exist, but clearly demon-
strates a trend of smaller melal losses with increased resitivity
lor sites whose pH is greater than 5- Figure 38 is an attempt to
show a relationship between metal loss and pH. The tigure
again demonstrates that a welFdefined relationship does not
exisl. Hol'vever, rt does show greater metal losses at sites with
pH values less than 5. Using pH as the only guide, it is ditlicult to
draw a mnclusion. However, if only well-drained sites are
plotted as in Figure 39, it can be concluded that metal losses at
such sites will not exceed 0.15 oz./sq.Il./yt.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Fig 35: ldealized Galvanic Cell in Buried Melals
DESCBIPTION I Pg RESISTIVITY^AT SATURATION
( 0-cm)
Sands and Gravelly Sands 5.6 1 1,700
Silty Clay 4.3 3540
Sihy or Clayey F|re Sand . 8 2300
Fifl (Derved From Naturalsoils) 7.1 1000
O'ga,]rc Clay 8 Sr t (A' uv'unr 3 I 1000
Table V: Some Physiochemical Properties of Soils in the
Washington, O.C. Area
The potential difference between lhe poles of a galvanic cell is
dependent upon the nature ol ion concentrations on the sudace.
Certain ions, such as chlorides and sulfates, are aggressive;
others such as magnesium and calcium are inhibitors of cor-
rosion-
Thus, the high number of interrelated factors which influence
the initial and long{erm corrosion rate makes the sudy ol
corrosion and service life an inexact science, especially when
one considers that many of the parameters will most cerlainly
change wrth the passage of time. As in olher sciences where
exact solutions are not possible, and I suggest that so,,
mechanics is certainly one, it is necessary to determine the
possible upper and lower limits to the effects or results under
study and then, using prudent engineering judgment, to provide
lor a reasonable margin ot safety. This approach is applicable to
the study of corrosion of buried metals.
The most extensive series of field tests on various metals and
coatings in all types oJ soils was begun in 1910 by the U.S.
National Bureau ol Slandards. (NBS). These tests continued
until .1955 and now constitute the most important sources of
comprehensive data available in the field of underground cor-
rosion. This information, therefore, constitutes the data base of
the entire sub-science, and it is against this data that all new
experience and subsequently derived empirical relationships
must be mmpared and contrasted. lt is usetul, therefore, to
briefly review the results of this study.
Ndi.n.r au@u ot 9.^d.d6Msbr 16. srudy (.n.r Rmrno4 1e57)
1 000 2 000FEsrsrr!rY - I /cM
LEGEND . ] OZ /SO FT. COATI G
.3 0z /so FT coaTrNG
t- t-"..
'"".:".
Fig 37: Weight Loss versus Resistivity
I
T
I
T
I
I
I
t
I
t
I
I
I
t
t
I
I
I
I
The abundance and reliability ol this data and the abiliw to
extrapolate it to the time period normallv associated with
engineering works has led to the selection of galvanized steelasthe material most commonly used for Reinlorced Earth slruc-
tures. The zinc mating on galvanized steel lorms a sacrificial
anode which corrodes while protecting the base metal. In addi-
lion, zinc promotes a more uniJorm corrosion by preventing thelormation of pits during the highly aggressive initial stages of
burial.
Fig 38: Metal Loss ve6us pH
Other materials currently used Jor reinforcements include
plain carbon steel for lemporary struclures and some marine
structures, and a fusion-bonded epoxy-coaled steel reinforce-
ment tor highly acidic or warm marine environments.
Other materials have been used as reinlorcements witn
mixed resulls. Stainless steel was used in ten structures in
France. Nine of these structures showed no evidence of corro-
sion when examined several years after completion. In one
structure, there was some evidence of surface corrosion andpitting. Aluminum magnesium reinJorcements were used onseveral structures in France and the United States. When
placed in clean, well-aerated backtills, this material demorr-
strated excellent perlormance. These passive metals such as
stainless steel and aluminum, are highly reactive in the
presence ol oxygen, and under favorable conditions are rapidly
coaled with a protective film of oxides thal prevents corrosion of
the base metal. However, when this protective layer is destroy-
ed, either by physical or chemical processes, rapid corrosion
can occur.
Plastics and other synthetics have also been used as rein-
forcements, but their performance has been disappointing.
These materials are too brittle or too flexible to withstand and
sustain the construction loads, and their corrosion performance
is unpredictable (but in our experience unilormly poor).
In summary, we can slale that there is sufficient data available
to permit the selection of the cross-section and coating weight of
galvanized steel reinforcements to insure a minimum service
life. Design procedures for this important determination include
the tollowing:
(1) the calculation ol anticipated weight loss, based on labo-
ratory or field measured values of resistivity and pH al
saturaled conditions.
(2) the selection of suitable site-dependent characteristics for
precise calculation according to Romanoff's formula.
(3) comparing answers found in (2) with upper limits inferred
by a broad interpretation ol the Romanoff data.
(4) proportioning the strip dimensions such lhat the slresses
in the equivalent cross-section at the end of the antici-
pated service life will be less than or equal to the yield
stress.
(5) applying whatever factor of salety to calculation (4) is
required by the sile and prqect characteristics.
National Bureau ol Standards
Metal Loss Sludy (after Romanoft, 1957)
LEGEND . 1 OZ.,/SO.FT. COATING
9
I
7
pH
4
3 o.o5 0. I o.15 0.20
METAL LOSS - OZ,/SO.FT.,/YR.
/
T...1
It
I
a
oaa a I\
a
Fig 39: Metal Loss versus pH-Well Drained Sites Only
National Bureau of Standards
Metal Loss Study (after Romanoft, 1957)
LEGEND . 1OZ./SO,FT. COATING
o 3 02./so.FT. coATrNG
pH
o.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
METAL LOSS - OZ./SO.FT./YR.
coNcLUsroNs
The excellent structural pedormance ol the more than 2,000
Reinlorced Earth structures completed during the past 11 years -
demonstrates more lhan any other fact that these slructures
have been salely designed. Measurements and observations of
movemenb and stresses confirm thal the working stress design
procedures derived on lhe basis of a coherent gravity structure
analysis, accurately predict subsequent performance. As im-
provements are made in the technology, such as the recent
introduction ol high adherence reinlorcemenls, basic soil
mechanics theory, supported by laboratory and field testing, can
be used to modify design procedures to anticipate the effects oi
these improvements.
This exoerience has demonstrated that from all considera-
tions of performance, stress, structural detormation and cor-
rosion, the use of wall backfill that is a well-drained granular
material, compacted to a field density that resulls in dilation
during shear, will resuh in an extremely sate structure with a
long and highly predictable service life. As backfill materials
becbme more fine-grained, caution must be exercised in select
ing design parameters and faclors ol satety lo allow torthe more
cohplex shear strength and corrosion characteristics ol these
finer grained matenals. However, even with these finet grained
elastic materials, adequate designs can be developed.
At present, at least, plastic materials should not be used for
Reinforced Earth structures. No rational design procedure
exisb and their anticipated long{erm performance, even
assuming an adequate structural design, cannot be assured.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
aoooffi
OOOO rne Fe,ilotcm Eann \.ontpa,,y
Rosslyn Center
1 700 Norlh Moore SlreetA ington, Virginia22209
TeleDhone: 703/527-3434
Telex: 903070 REEARTH AGTN
" Reinlorced Earth and the Reinlorced Eadh logo are lhe registered lrademarks of ihe Reinforced Ea(h Company
Regional oftices in Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Oa as/ Ft. Worth,
Denver, Los Angeles, New York, Sacramento and Seanle.
REFERENCES
(1) Lee, K.L., "Mechanisms, Analysis and Design ot (1 1)
Reinforced Earth, State of the Art Report,"
A.S.C.E. Symposium on Earth Reinforcement,
Pittsburgh,
1978.
(2) Scfrlosser, F., and Long, N.T., "Comportement de la (12)
Terre Armee a I'Appareil Triaxial," Acfivlty
Repo4 Laboratoire Central des Ponts et
Chaussees, 1969.
(3) Hausmann, M., and Lee, l.K., "Strength Characteristics (13)
ol a Reinforced Soil," Proceedings, lnternational
Symposium on New Horizons in Construction
Materials, Lehigh, 1 976.
(4) Bassett, R.H., and Last, N.C., "Reinforcing Earth Below (14)
Footings and Embankments," A.S.C. E.
Symposium on Earth Reinforcement, Pittsburgh,
1978.
(5) Scfrlosser, F., and Juran, 1., "Theoretical Analysis of (15)
Failure in Reinforced Earth Structures," A.S.C.E.
Symposium on Earth Reinforcement, Pittsburgh,
1978.
(6) AFHussaini, M., and Perry, E.8., "Field Experiment of (16)
Reinforced Earth Wall," A.S.G.E. Symposium on
Earth Reinlorcement, Pittsburgh, 1978.
(7) Federal Highway Adminislration, "Report on the
Landslide Vicinity Reinforced Earth Wall,
Roseburg-Coos Bay Highway, Oregon SF42,"
1977 Unpublished.
(8) Sdrlosser, F., "La Terre Armee: Historique,
(17)
(18)
Development Actuel et Futur," Proceedings,
Symposium on Soil Reinforcing and Stabr/,sirg
Techniques in Engineering Practice, Sydney,1378. (19)(9) Castro, G., "Liquefaction of S ands," Harvard Soil
Mechanics Se/es No. 87, January 1969, Pierce tDn\Hall, Harvard Universily, Cambridge, \cv'r
Massachusetts.
(10) Hausmann, M.R., and Lee, K.L., "Rigid ModelWallwith
Soil Reinforcement," A.S.C.E. Symposium on
Earth Reinforcement, Pittsburgh, 1 978.
Almi, 1., Bacot, J., Lareal, P., Long, N.T., Schlosser, F.,
"Etude d'adherence Sol-Armatures,"
Proceedings of the Ninth lnternational
Confercnce on Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineeing, Moscow, I 973.
Chang, J.C., and Fo6yth, R.A., "Design and Field
Behaviour ol Beinlorced Earth Wall, "Journal ot
the Geotechnical Engineeing Divisrbn, A.S.C. E.,
July 1977, pp.677$92.
Schlosser, F., and Vidal, H., "Reinforced Earth,"
Bulletin de Liaison des Laboratohes Routierc'
Ponts et Chaussees Number 41 , November
1969.
Bolton, M.D., Choudhurry, S.P., and Pang, P.L.R.,
"Reinforced Earth Walls: a Centrifugal Model
Study," A.S.C.E. Symposium on Earth
Beinforcement, Pittsburgh, 1 978.
Ponce, V.M., and Bell, J.M., "Shear Strength ol Sand at
Extremefy Low Pressures," Journal ol the Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Divisbn, A.S.C.E.,
Aprit 1971, p.625-638.
Cornforth, D.H., "Prediction ol Drained Strengths of
Sands {rom Belative Densitv Measurement,"
A.S.T.M. STP 523, 1973.
Federal Highway Administration, "Standard
SDecilications lor Construction of Roads and
Bridges on Federal Highway Proiects," FP 74,
1974.
Schlosser, F., and Long, N.T., "Recent Results in
French Research on Fleinlorced Eafth," Journal
of the Construction Division, A.S.C.E., September
1974, p.223-237 .
Romanott, M., "Underground Corrosion," National
Bureau ol Standards Circular 579, 1957.
Darbin, M., Jailloux, J.M., and Monluelle, J.,
"Performance.and Research on the Durability of
Reinlorced Earth Reinlorcing Strips".
t TERRE AITMEE
REI]IFORCED EARTH
t
I
T
I
t
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
t
t
T
T
t
Les prcmie's ouwages en Tere Arm6€o eE rcallsds en montagne, comme
ceux de I'auloroute Bllbao-Behobie en
Espagne.
The lirct arylications ol Reinlorced Earth
were in mountainous tefidin llke these re
taining walls on the BilbaoBehobla Ex.
pressway in Spain.
urre Tecrrrrrque rfulo foltses Pneuues
Depuis une quinzaine d'anndes,
des mill iers d'ouvrages, construits
dans le monde entier, illustrent les
avantages techniques de la Terre
Armde et les €conomies con-
sid6rables qu'el le procure.
Inventee oar Henri Vidal. in-
g6nieur et architecte frangais, la
Terre Armde est un materiau com-
posite original. Son principe est
simple : les eftorts de f rottement,
qui se developpent au contact
terrearmature, donnent naissance
A ce nouveau matdriau coherent et
tres rdsistant.
Les ouvrages en Terre Arm6e
peuvent Ctre dimensionn6s pour
r€sister a tout eflort staiique ou
dynamique et se prCtent bien a une
grande vari6t6 d'applications dans
les domaines les plus divers.
Ce matdriau de construction,
ddsormais classique et uni-
versellement accept6, est inclus
dans les sp6cifications de toutes
les grandes administrations.
A PFOUENconstrlfction
TechnologtY
During the last fifteen years the
technical advantage and consider-
able savings provided by Reinforced
Earth@ have been Droven in thou-
sands of structures around the
world.
Invented by the French engineer-
architect Henri Vidal, the basic
principle of Reinforced Earth is
simple: the frictional association o{
granular soil and linear reinforce-
ments creales a new cohesive
material, highly resistive to lateral
forces and loads.
A Reinforced Earth structure can
be engineered to meet any static or
dynamic loading requirement and
to fulfill a wide range of structural
reouirements.
Universally accepted as a stand'
ard construction material, Rein-
forced Earth is now included in the
technical specificalions of govern'
ment agencies and administrations
around the world.
Dans les autotoutes utlalnes telles oue
la Voie bxptess La Pazaulou de Madna,
la Teffe Anee a pemis une metlleurc in-
t6gtdtion dans Ie site et d'imponanEs
economtes.
Fot aban highways, like the La Paz Ex-
pressway arcund Mad d, Reinlorced
Earth designs have solved site problems
and saved millions ol dollars.
Une 6caille sdclale a eG mise au Dolnt
pou construire les parois inclinees des
grands stockages de charbon, tels que
cet ouvrage d'uno capaciE de 1m.0@
lonnes aux Etats"Unis.
A soecial Danel was invented to build lhe
inclined walls ot large coal storage
lacilities, This 1@,)ooton capacity slot
is at the Cotdero Mine in the United
Slates.
La ftsistance des owtages en Teffe
Atmee aux ellets de la houle est illustfte
pat ce mu( littonl en Gaspesie, au
Canada.
The ability ol Reintorced Earth sttucturcs
to withstand hydrodynamic torcea is ex'
enplilied by this seawall on Canada's
Gaspe Peninsula.
ffi In tlounttrl hous f errq in
A Reinforced Earth mass.
conesive and yet tlexible, transmits
uniform pressures to the founda-tion soils, improving the stability of
slructures built on unslable slopes.
In mountainous terrain. Rein f orc-
ed Earth allows construction of
large retaining slructures withour
the need for making permanent.
unstable culs into h illsides.
And where signif icant differen-
tial setllements are predicted, such
as along the Frejus Tunnel accesshighway, Reinforced Earth struc.
tures can be designed using a
series of vertical sliding joints atintervals lo compensate for
movement.
Coupetype d'un mur de
soutenemenl en ferre Amee.
Typical section al a Reinforced
Eanh rchning wall.
A Mut su la route
d'acci,s au tunneldu
Frejus dans les Alpes
(France).
B Murs de soutinement
avec patement archi-
tectural Sur I'autoroule
Pa s.Strcsbourg.
C Mut de souEnement
su I autoroute Nicf;^
Menlon (France).
D Cul4e de Pont e Field
River Crcssing,
Austrulie
E Murc en Tetre Armee b
long de la route Vasco"
Aragonaise (Espagne)
F Mur de 20 m de hauteur
sur la rcute d'accds e
I Academie militatre
King Abdulauz en
Arabie Saaudite.
G Muts
'tages
compor
tanl une peau en
eEmenls courbes dans
les Montagnes
Rocheuses (USA).
^ ?;i:#ir,xii:;I: I
B Archlecturally I i nished
rctainine walls and bul
'{7:":,:;;':;fl :!;-:i:l
C Retaining wall suppott-
,!i;"",",il:i::' a
Field River Crcssing,
Austtalia.
':;!i#:!!:7#;{:'l
Spain.
'i!"',#!:i:!:'ilw'l
Abdulaziz Military
Academy in Saudl
" :ii:,r,;,:,,,:,- |
panels, suppon a high
waV lhrouah the Vail
eais. unrria srares.
!
t
9.F'r"-
-^.,-#'
B c
D E F G
Les massifs en Terre Armde,
cohdrents et souples, transmettent
au sol de fondation des oressions
uniformement reparties, ce q!
am6liore la stabilitd des ouvrages
sur pentes peu stables.
En site montagneux, ils se pre
tent bien d la rdalisation d'impor-
tants ouvrages en remblais et
oermettent ainsi d'6viter les
grandes fouilles permanenles,
sources d'inslabilite.
Lorsqu'on attend des tasse
ments ou mouvements ditf6rentiels
troo severes. comme dans le cas
de la route d'accds au tunnel du
Fr6jus, il est tacile de r6aliser une
s6rie de joints verticaux qui
oermettent aux massifs de
s'adapter sans desordre a ces
mouvements.
Dans cette val6e etoite tres
fteouenlae. une nouvelle
autoroute e deux niveaux a
ete construite su un anclen
glissenent de terain, e Sec.gnd Nanows sur la ivrcrc
Snake aux Etals-Unis.
En Reg,lon tontqgneuse
ln this conlined, high-trullic cor'
doa a new, twolevel highwaY
was built Ectoss the lailure Plane
ol an ancient landslide at the
Second Naffows ol the Snake
RiveL United States.
1r
11
II
i
Iii1tint I| ':*il
,i" l-
I
I
I
t
T
T
T
T
neftrmfno wnlFs ond Bridg,eAbutments for Urbqn Highwoys
j l_l I I 1--. -.L :r tl
I
I
In urban environments, de
signers are faced with restricted
sites, diff icull scheduling, and
limited rights.oiway. Since Rein.
forced Earth requires no formtng,
pouring or curing. construction is
rapid and schedules short. All con-
struction takes place behind the
wall face, with no scaffotding or
formwork to interruDt traffic. Struc-
tures can be designed within a few
centimeters of property lines and
bui11, without additional cost, tolollow curving alignments.
Architectural f inishes are also
available to better integrate slruc-
tures into urban surroundings.
A Reinforced Earth structure can
support heavy loads by distributing
the weight within the mass and
transmitting uniform pressure to
the foundation soils. Reinlorced
Earth's inherent flexibility, in most
cases, eliminates the need for
foundation piles and large cast.in-
place footings. These advantages
are illustrated, in particular, by the
hundreds ol bridge abutmenls now
in service around the world, some
built on very compressible founda-
tion soils.
Dans les cubes en Teffe Arm6e, les
aeacttons du pant sorl r.ansmlsespat le somfiier au volume ame
Cette culee sur une section 6largie
de Iautorcute 135 aux Etals Unis
rcmplace une anctenne culee con-strutte sur pteux
ln Reinforced Ea h abutments. loads
are !tansmttted by the bidge seat to
Ihe reinlarced volume. This abut
ment, on a wtclened sectian of lnler
state 85 in the United States.
rcplaced an old ple suppaned
abutmenl.
Coupetype d'une cuEe de pont
en Tefte Atmee
fypical seclion ol a Reinlorced
Earth btidge abuttuent.
;::t
tl
r-l
rl
rl
T
t
I
Dn
T
I
:r"l i;#
A c
D EI
t
I
I
t
t
I
I
A Aux Etats-Unis, cette cul6e a
eG construlte sans genet la
circulatlon.
B Ces murc de soutinement en
Grande Bretagne ont Pemis
une Aconomie de 28 pou cent.
C Sur I'autotoute 1f6 aux F als.
Unis,la feffe Armee a permis
d'economiset plus de I
millions de dolla$.
D Su I'autotoute 446 autour de
Paris,3O,OOO m2 de murs et
culaes ont dAE 6b ftalis6s.
L,.':-.ii
A ln the United States, ftls abut-
ment was built without inter-le ng with local lrcflic.
B These wing walls on a highway
bypa$ in Arcat Brltain rc-
duced costs by 28 percent,
C On Intestate 66 outside
w as h i ngton, D.C., Rel nl orced
Earth saved over I million
do arc,
D fhiny thousand squarc meterc
ot Relnlorced Earlh walls and
abutments have alrcady been
completed on Autotoute 4€6
arcund Paris,
E ln Madrid, over 20,000 squarc
meterc of walls and abutmenls
cut costs on this circum-
tercntial highway.
Many architecturcl tacings arc
available including exposed
aggregate, high rcliet, and
geomet c design.
En ville, les emplacements dis-
ponibles sont rares, et les perturba-
tions du traf ic mal supportees. La
Terre Armde apporte une solutlon
sdduisante A ces orobldmes: con-
struction tris rapide, grAce d la
pref abrication des composants,
occuoations de sol limitees au con-
tour des ouvrages, grdce A la sup-
pression de tout 6taiement et de
tout coffrage.
La Terre Arm6e oermet en outre
de concevoir des murs courbes
sans co0t suppl6mentaire et de
r6aliser des parements architec-
luraux qui am6liorent I'intfuration
des ouvrages d I'environnement.
La Terre Armee peut supporter
des surcharges tres important€s,
assurer leur diff usion dans le
massif et transmettre au sol
porteur des pressions uniformes.
Ainsi, grace A la soupless€ des
massils. il est possible dans la
plupart des cas de supprimer les
fondations profondes (pieux, bar-
rettes . . .). Cel avantage €st illustr6
en particulier par des centaines de
culees r6alisees dans le monde en-
tier, certaines sur des sols tr6s
comoressibles.
E A Madid, N.000 nf de nurs et l:"",
de culaes ont 6te consruils sur '.-,
De nombrcux parcmenls at-
ch itectu rcux so nt Doss i b les :
grcvillon hve, bossages
parements I nti g nll i a i s,
Resisting Hydlodynqmic dnd Hydiost rtic Forces
il,' i. .=-l i'L-- - )rlr
Rernforced Eanh technology has
been used to build a wide range ot
seawalls. bulkheads, quays, and
dams. These slructures, because
of lheir flexibility and mass, are
capable ot withstanding the severe
forces imposed by storm wave
action and currenls, exceptional
tides and floods, driven pack ice.
and even the impact of boats and
oarges.
The speed ol Reinforced Earth
construction. using all pre-cast
components, along with its capac-
ity to stage conslruction in small
seclions it necessary, reduce lhe
risk ot slorm or f lood damage dur.
ing construclion.
Coupetype d un mut en Tefte
Amee en bord de mer.
Typical section ol a Reinlorced
Earth sea all with t ave
A Ce mu de 12 km de
Iongueu sut la rcute lit
torale de l'lle de la
Reuntan est saumts A
des effods violenls en
cas oe cyclanes.
B Ce barnge, construit
dans ]e cadrc d un
amenagement oe pra
lecltan conlre les ctues
a Austin tUSA), a deje
suppotl6 une uue de
100 ans.
C Ces murs cdtie's en
Teffe Armee prctaigent
d tnpodantes roules lit.
totales en Gaspeste,
Canada.
D Ce mur en Terrc Amee,
le long du lac Pend
Orcille aux Ftafs-Urls,
e.5 | corsl/u// sua des
sols de londation tes
colrpress/D/es
E A Peachland, au
Canada, ce barrcge en
Ieffe Armie a pemis
d econamiset 30 pour
cent sur Ie coul lolal de
louvrage.
^',;rxxl:rirt"l
cyclones
"r{:!f*#,f:l
been subpcled la d.
":""!#:::,'":;","..awalls are prctecling tm
portant coaslal htgh
,it::,":t::i:!*:,,,,"1
wallalong Lake Pt'nd
'.:t:.iffii;i
1
E Cosls werc rcdu.ed by
'i!i,--t;{!tiii;,,1
at Peachland. Candd,)
06Lr 6 Ptss cdE&3a.E I
t
I
B c
D E
En Site Fluulo[ ou motffilm
?.-Yp
? -..*...-ll,]r"..-,,t
:q_ida
I
T
I
I
t
t
T
I
La Terre Armee permet de
r6aliser des ouvrages trds vari€s:
soutdnements de routes littorales,
murs de quai, barrages deversants,
ouvrages en bordure de rividre. lls
resistent bien, grAce A leur
souplesse et A leur masse, aux
sollicitations trrbs sdvdres en
pr6sence d'eau: etfets de la houle
et des tempates, etforts de la
glace, crues et mar6es exception'
nelles, chocs de bateaux.
En cours de chantier, la rapiditd
d'exdcution est un avantage aP
or6ciable: travail d la mar6e, suP'
oression, ou du moins rdduction,
bes risques de ddgAts par
lempates ou crues Pendant l6s
travaux.Ce quai en Teffe Amee, aux
Ftats-Unis, coneu pou tesistel
aux va ations de niveau de la
vii.e, pemet au terminal de
continuet a operer notmalanena
oendant les Deriodes de crue.
Designed to withstand drcwdown
lorces ol the iveL this Reinlorced
Earth bulkhead in the United
Stales allows the leminal to
m ainta in lull operction duting
lloods.
PilOfession.ll Englneering qnd comprehensine serrices
Professional engineers of the
Reinforced Earth companies work
closely with consultants. owners,
and their contractors. The tech-
nical staff prepares feasibitity
stud ies, cost estimates, detalled
designs, and provides expert
advice during construction. The
Company provides the specia lized
construction components, manu-
factured to strict quaiity control
slandards.
An inlensive program of re-
search, testing and development is
on-going. lmproved pre-cast panels
and high-adherence reinforce-
ments. sophisticated methods of
calculation. the precise specifica.
tion of backfill, as well as develop,
ment of the engineering criteria to
design for exceptional loading con-
ditions, have all been refined by
this research and improved by thepractical experience gained on
thousands of projects.
'?f*t
Des essais en vraie grcndeul
sods charge dynami .aue ant 6te
aealises pau 6valuet le camporte.
ment ales ouvtages.
F u ll-sca le oynam rc iaadi ng
lests have been conducled lo
eva I u ate s t ru c I u rc rcspa n ses.
A Prccas! concrete
panels meet slrict
qualtty conttal
slanoards
B Long.tem tests have
been canducled on the
dutabtlily ol butied
C Complete desryn and
engtneenng se'Vices
at'e provtdeo
D Campulerc are widely
used in calculations
and to produce design
and engtneeflng
orawtngs
E High adherence ren
rorctng stnps are nat
dippeC, galvanized
stee/
F Feastbtltly sludtc-s and
cosl estimates 3re pro-
vtded on al! proiects.
G Reinlarced Edt!h L.an'
tainment dikes wcrc
selected loa tne ilan
lor de Bretagne I NG
Terrninai F rcnae.
H Burn-afl ol LNG n futl
scale lield tests
I Chilldown to - 165'C
J along with the Du,ti all
tests ta t 804'C
demonsltated ihat g€:
inforced Ea h salcty
dtRes could wttns.and
an LNG spill w"thout
loss of contatnneni
I
I
II
jj
{i1.
iil.iilr],.,
iriiiiijiiiili
lllijiiiiiliiii;
liitifiiililiin
iil:iijiiiliiii;lI/I'ijlri'J
lti
;;i[:
I
I
I
I
I
t
''*"J"lf i'i"',ii""Eil"r::,:::""1Reinlorced Eanh h tghway
structutes.I
B C H
D E F J
une Gqmme colnp|ete ge serurces
is$Ab. **{+'? ' * "
':i .*
A LesAcailles en b6lon sont fabriquees et
comrArces sulvant des normes st ctes.
B Essais de longue dufte su la du,ab iae
des materiaux entet6s.
C Une gamme compldte de prcstations est
ollede en ma Are de conception et
d'etudes.
D Les ordinateurc sont utilises pou les
calculs et le dessin aulomatique.
E Les armatures d hauta adhatence sont en
acier galvanise a chaud,
F L'etude de faisabilite avec estimatlon des
coats est lounie pout chaque avant proiet.
G Digue de Etention en Tere Amee pur Ie
terminel m'thanier de Montoit-d+
Bretagne.
H lncendie dans un bass/n d'essais er Tere
Arm6e Empli de gaz naturcl qquide (GNL}
l, Des essais de rempllssage du Dassit enJ CLN (-165") puis pendant la combustion
(plus de 800") ont demont4 que Ia Teffe
Atmee pouvait t6'lster au d'versement de
GNLen conseryant ses ptopi'tes.
Des essais de croc ont permis d'ameliorcl
la conceptlon des bafii'rcs de secu E sut
les ownges en Teffe Armee pour autoroutes
Les soci6t6s Terre Armde
emploienl des ing6nieurs et lechni-
ciens, trds sp6cialis€s, qui
travaillent en collaboration 6troite
avec les maitres d'oeuvre, les
ingenieurs-conseils et les en-
treoreneurs. Elles rdalisenl les
dtudes de faisabilit6 avec estima-
tion des co0ts, les etudes d'execu'
tion et I'assistance technique en
cours de travaux. Elles fournissent
en outre les 616ments pr6fabriqu€s
sp6cifiques, aprds un contrOle
rigoureux de qualit6.
C,es soci6t6s poursuivent un Pro'
gramme intensif d'essais, de
recherche et de d6veloppement.
Les dcailles de beton €t les ar-
matures a haute adh6rence, les
methodes de calcul soPhistiqu6es
tenant compte des sollicitations
exceptionnelles, les criteres de
choix des remblais ont 6t6 mis au
point grace a ce programm€ de
recherche et b6n6flcient de I'ex'
p6rience acquise au @urs de la
construction de milliers
d'ouvrages.
A B H
D E F I
T
T
t
I
Dynqmic Loards
I
t
rlI]
: :-,
ft'i[it;It!t*
l. ;,, r .li:.rl*.l,, r+*fiftt:"tft "
At Pottllaldez, terminDs of the
Trcns Alaska Pipetne, Rejnforced
Eanh slructures suppon the tanklarm Dlatfoms and pravide con
tainment prctectton. FUll scale
dynantc l.:sts. includtng sophts.
ticated computer anatvsts wcre
used to deyeiop rattanal scismic
Drocedurcs with wtde coelftctcnts
of salety far earlhqudkes as latgc
dsSSRtchtermaqnilude
As a coherenl yet flexible gravity
mass, Reinforced Earth is parlicu-
larly well suited tor construction rn
seismically active regions. These
struclures provide the high degree
of structural damping needed to
absorb large energy releases
associated with earthquakes.
And, because this unique mate-
rial can be designed to any static
or dynamic loading condition, Rein,
forced Earth has proved effective in
supporting high-speed railway
lrnes, the heavy and shifling loads
of haul vehicles at mines and
crushing or sampling plants, and
as blast protection slructures al
military installations and munirrons
plants.
Ttain a grande vitesse su la tigne
fokaido au Japon; les ouvrages
en Terre Atmee r€sistent tAs bien
aux chatges dynamtques et auxvibntions.
,i,',',r''.l,,tft"
Reinforced Earth sltucturcs prc.
vide superior damping fot tmproved
track bed stability tike this watl
on the high-speed Tokaida Line
tn Japan.
t
t
I
T
-:'!
et .|ux Tremblements de Terre
- -S^'irh*
t-_
A la centtale nu.ledtrc Palo vetde (USAt, ces
murc de soulenement suppodanl de tfts
lones surcharges ont permis la construction
simultanee de I enceinte du ftacteut et clu
be ment des tuhines, t6duisant ainsi de
plusieurs mots les delais d execution.
At the Palo Verde
^!uclear
Generating Slalton
IUSA), Reinlarced Eanh walls, suppontnq
very heavy loads. sharlened consttuclton
schedules by permilling simultaneaus con
sttuctton of the turblne butlding and lhe
teactot conIatnment vesseL
_._.:trs*-
A Part Valdez point d'aboutisse'
ment de l'orcoduc Trans Alaska.
des ouvrages en Terte Atmee
suppanenl les plates lormes des
ft$eNoirc dans cetb ftgion oi
/es secoL/sses s/sm,ques sonl fre
qDentes. Un progtamme d essa,s
en vraie grandeut et d'analyse sur
atdinateur a petmis de dimen'
sionnet ces auvrages avec de
Iarges coellicients de s6cutilE
paur un lremblement de lerre
d une lorce de 8,5 su I echelle de
Richler.
La Terre Armee, qui Permet de
r6aliser des massifs souples el
cohdrents, est particu lierement in-
t6ressante en zones sismiques. Ce
type d'ouvrage a un coefiicient
d'amortissement dleve, qui lui
permet d absorber les quantites
considArables d'energie lib6r6e
pendant les tremblements de terre.
Comme la Terre Armde peut dtre
dimensionn6e pour toute sur'
charge statique ou dynamique. elle
est bien adapt6e au trafic fer-
roviaire a grande vitesse. aux cir'
culations minieres ou industrielles
lourdes, aux installations de
criblage ou concassage, aux
merlons de proteclion contre les
exprosrons,
.l:
rs:
1 {i
a':r!
I
I
Euil|lrng ll|rge€cqle
In the conslruction of largescale
industrial pOects Reinforced Earth
construction has economicallv
solved a variety of technical,
logistical, and scheduling
problems.
An inclined wall technology has
been developed for building barn-
covered storage f acilities. Called
slots, these structures are well
adapted to storing coal, minerals,
and other bulk materials. At mines
and power generating stations, slol
storage ol large volumes of coal is
economical and provides excellent
operational characteristics in.
cluding load€ut rates of 4,000 tonsper nour.
For secondary containment of
liquefied natural gas (LNG), Rein.
forced Earth dikes offer a desirable
structural geometry while f ulfillingall safety requirements. In full-scare
tests conducted by Gaz de France,
Reinforced Earth dikes were subjected to the thermal extremes ot a
hypothetical accident. Ch ill-down
and then burnoff tests verified that
there would be no loss of contain-
ment and function in the event of a
maior spill.
Enelgy cnd lndustrial Prclects
A Cuvettes de ftlention
autout des t6seryolts
de GNL du Tetminal
methanietde Montoit.
deBEtagne (France).
B Les murs des con.
casseurs soal corgus
pour suppner des
aquipements louds et
de gms eftotls dynami
ques.
C Oars /es mnes, /es
gnnds stockages in-
clin6s, comme a Cbvis
Point (USA), pemettent
de charyet npidement
Ies trcins.
D Les stockages couvens
des centeles thetmi-
ques ptotegent le char
bon des lntempe $ et
petmettent des manu-
lentions laciles et
rcpides. (Main+USA)
E Des ouvnges de
stockage en lorme de
cAne sont agalemenl
,eal/sds arcc des
6cailles incllnAes-
A Reinforced Eadh con
7!#:'""ildlii:#fl
the Montoit de
Bretaone LNG Ter
'iiii"t"it;t r"l
heavy equipment and
"i#i,iiii:rr" I
States, coal sto/age
slols Dtovide npid
Coupe-type d'un ouwage de
stockagc a parcis inclinees en
Te e Anee,
fypical section ol a Reinlorced
Eaih bulk storage slot.
Its speed of construction. flexi-
bility of design in height and geG
metry, lower costs, and capacity to
be dismantled and relocated have
made Reinforced Earth a material
of choice tor many industrial
applications.
loading ol unit ttains.
D Batftcovered stotage
power plants insures a
weathet prctected luel,
which is easily and
economically drawn.
This 23,m bn struc.
turc is at ?he Coyote
Station in the United
States.
E Conical s?orage struc-
auleq used as surgep es lot sutrounding
mines, arc built with in.
cl ined pane I technology.
B
D tr
De Glqnds
'S*;*"'-
Amendgements pour l'=n€rgie ciff'lnduFfrie
,"i,.' ,tl
,:-.4
I
T
I
I
i,a .,.) r)ail rriii i.' c,na.J)1.1, xttoe tiaita) al))
.:ttLt',t oa.t )jtqe,.na' tta.,,tOc at. t tt tt t.l
100.1U) iai) ld.,)tir .t lh. i-:'-t'Jt,to Mtaic tn inP
La Te e Ar|ee est argement
r.tiliqg- d 1-s le.. Drnjets i.uust'elS,
ou e e resoud e(lonom lquement
des pioblcmes tecnIiques ct
logist alues tres r'ar cs;
- les parois ncl nees des
g rar ds stockagers cou vens Dlcn
adaptis a.r cas r.iu cFarbon oti
d artres pr-rrdererux Pres des
rr,, r?) ,JJ lel CC.",re5 IhC'ln
qt-]es. ces stockages offrertt dc
qros avanlaqes et notanrmcnt des
iade'r -is lr'ra1ul,'-'iar de lD'
(lre de 4 000 I/heure
cs parois a.es cuvettcs de
relcnt on aL,iour aes reservo rs de
e.r, r'rl IJl | 0L^-rc GNt\ , o r-
foflre|nent aux fttg r)s de sicuriti.
-es essals en vrt. e grar'ldeuT
rea isds car Gau le fr'ance
(remclissaqe de (iN t - ncendie)
. orrli|l]el] qllc l', cr.vell- Lle'etc1
t on remtllra t aofieiternenl son
'o c en cas d acc dent majerr
f)<,t, r'd r,,tr'' l, -tr''F A 'l ee
es1 apL)reciic cn ra son de sa
rap c ta ai exaajullon, de sa
souplesse et de la poss b te de
demonler lacr ement es structures
pour les aoaptcr ;r levolut on
rlterieure dcs :rsta lat ofrs.
4
,t
\)recc A t,t rttt tt, po tti ala'aaa t11tt5 ttc'134';
t;1 cat)sltrclitan Cc qtJatls sttt:AaQFa oa' i a-)
inl 7 acmfita a ta n ae ate Cotoetr
l-l5! e.i'ip,pr-a e'laD t: a1 air'a
t(qptq qns stmpte constructton
Bepandage et compactage du
rcmblai sur les amalures en
actet galvanise.
Backftll $ sTead and campacted
over galvanized steel rcinforcing
s rrlps
A key factor in the acceptance
of this technology has been the
simplicity and speed of Reinforced
Earlh construction.
lnterlocking facing panels are
easily handled and positioned, with
no need f or scaf folding or form,
work.
Reinforcing strips and com-
pacted backfili are placed jn suc-
cessive layers. Standard earth mov.
ing and compactlon equ ipment,
along with a light crane, are used.
Depending on the size of the struc.
ture and rate of backfill placement,
production rates from 50 to 100
square meters of wall face can be
achieved by a crew of 4 or 5
laborers per shilt.
The Reinforced Earth Company
delivers facing panels, reinforce-
ments, fasteners and loint mat+
rials lo the job site and provides
expert advice during construction.
The contractor provides the re-
quired backfjll material, labor and
equipment to build the structure.
1,.
It
T
I
Les ecailles en bbton se mettenl
en place lras taptdemenl.
Ptecast conctele panels arc
eastly handled and quickly
posntaneo
Le$ atmaturcs sont ftxees aux
ecailles par un seul baulon ahaub restslance.
A sngle, t|gh sttength baI con.
nect6 the reinlarcng strip to lhe
facing panel.
une construction Simple et R.rpide
't ,d't
lt
|["
li
ll
I
I
I
I
;l{&
La simpl cite et la rapidite de
construction ont etd les facteurs
essent els CLr developoement dc la
Terre Arnee
Les ecarlles dc la prenrere
'a1gee sont ilacies sur unc
sernellc de req aqe en biton non
armo. Les ecar les dcs rangies
superieures s imb'iquext dans es
ecarlles CclA en place si b cn que
leu r positronnenrent ne neccssite
ni cchafaudaqe, ri itaLement.
La miso en oeuvre des ar
matures et du rembla . a nsi que le
COrTr p<,L I dqe. !OTI 'cl-l',sPS Jir'
coucnes success ves oorf mc 00u r
uf remb ai tradit onnel, on ut rsant
lc:r tj rLlll r Uri lY ldriHrrrrr L
hab tuels. Unc grue ,rgere sert i a
man utention des ecailles.
Les rendements depcndent de a
tai e de la)uvragc et ces carjences
d approv s onnement en rerrb ai lls
va renl dc 50;r IUU ||r 0r. par^nc']l
car pcste de lrava (8 hcLrrest poul
unc ecuipe de 4 a 5 homrnes.
Les Soo etis Terre Artnee four
nisseri les eca les. es armaturL's.
les tiou,o'ls '^c io 1lb L ent'e
preneur fournit les rernblais et con
struit ouvrage.
Le; t,toniiFra:: ct raot)ttgt- de ld
Soctale La ;e.te Aimcc caordor'
acnt ia t,,ti.)tt1n LtLs e ztilelti3
prelnbriqi)Es cl dortnenl tat5
-.anaa 6 u! te) ra.'t'Ja',1 ta
ll -- | n la t.:. C E r | | 1,, )o,1 s I ! u c ! i o n
it .)' r-Qe'a i:a .t1)a,!ie 1F'ttatli -l
n.t n L, f ar'l t ) : i. : I I t't' i aattt nl s 2 no
Dil', !,ale Piteil )a"iat 'iuttt,u
I I r',aitral.j 7-L a1n,',ti\t,l a,r tJas
tituts !nattiPs r,al Setnbla\1e n
a-t .: :t;: ,n',rs ,,Pi1 at)':
aarttat,,,atra-t !t- -t:n Uoea 'a' : tae
tttr) tiatls 3re stfiilat io pi)
'.alr'ta Lr3,aI ta, lprttaat'"i) ai
I
La Tefte Arm6e peut Etrc utilsee su les
sols en pente pout la construction de
m alsots en tefrassos aooeldes
" A rch ite rrc" (m arq ue deposee).
La hauteu des mu6 de soutdnement en
feffe AmOe est illimi6e. A Tweepad(Ahique du Sud), ces ouwages d'une
hauteu de 40 m lont parlie d'une impor-
tante insta||ation de concassage.c btage.
neinlorced Eanh rchlning walls are used
to crcate teraces lot construction ol
ea ft h- i nteg ra ted rc s i d en t i a I deve I otr
ments called ArchiteffaTM
un lobel de Goluntie
La Terre Armee est mise en
oeuvre oar I'interm6diaire d'un
reseau international de soci6t6s
I icenci6es par I'inventeur.
Depuis sa fabrication jusqu'A sa
livraison, la qualitd de chaque
piece est 6troitement contr0l6e.
Depuis la conception jusqu'A la
construction, en passant par l'offre,
ces soci6tes fournissent les con-
seils et les services professionnels
necessaires. Toutes ces inter-
ventions sonl r6mun6r6es par un
prix unique inclus dans celui des
foumitures.
Cette prdsence A tous les stades
de la conception, de la fabrication
et de la construction est le meilleur
garant de la qualit6 des ouvrages
en Terre Armde,
An Acceplted CiuilEngineerlng
Technology
The Reinforced Earth technology
is provided through an inter-
national group of companies
licensed by the invenlor.
From project conception through
delivery of specialized components
to the complelion of the structure,
every aspect is closely monitored.
The Reinforced Earth comoanies
ensure competent design and
engineering high quality com-
ponents, and complete profes-
sional service . . . all within the cost
of the specialized materials.
This process, at all stages oi
design, fabrication, and construc-
tion, has led to the material's
worldwide acceDtance as the
standard civil engineering
technology, and stands as the best
guarantee of a structure built with
Reinforced Earth.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
Therc arc no height limitations in Rein-
lorced Earth conslruction. At Tweepad,
South Al ca, these 40 meter high sttuc-
turcs wete built as paft ol a large, mining
lacilitv.
j.tir.:a.i, #;-
Des centaines de culAes sont en sevice
dans le monde entiet comme dans cet
owrage permettant le hnchissement de
voies lentes par une autorourc AAntoing-Belgique.
Les mu6hl'Otaloire St. Joseph a Montdal
(Canada) compoftent des 6cailles architea
tunles s&ciales. Les agdgats apparcnls util-
isOs pmviennenlde la caffidrc, eule loutniles
pieres employees pout construirc la cath6dnle.
Hundrcds ol bridge abutments arc in ser
vice arcund the world, like lhese sttuc.
turcs supop ing a hlghway over a new
commulet nilway at Anloing, Belgium
Special panels were labticated tot this
wall at St. Joseph's Oratory in Montreal.
The exposed aggrcgate was taken lrom
the same quarry that prcduced the stone
lot the cathedral.
'*P
O Situation des SiCges ou pdnclpales
Agenc€s des Socldtds Tene Annda.O Pays ou ont 6t6 construits des
ouvragies en Tene Armde,
O Beinlorced Earth comDanv and
otfi ce locations woddwiiJd.D Oiher countries with compteted
Relntorced Earth structures.
Companies and Offices Worldwide
NORTH AMERICA EU ROPE MIDOLE EAST
UNITED STATES OF AMEBICA
The Reinforced Earth Company
Rosslyn Centcr
1700 North {\4oore Street
Ar/rnqlon Vrrqinra 22209'1 960Iel. 743 527 343,1
Tc -.x 903070 IIEEARTH AGTN
Otfices. At anla. Boston. C nctnnat . Cnrcago.
Dallas Ft \lorih Denver. Nevr York.
Sacranrenlo Seall e
CANAOA
Reinlorced Earlh Company Ltd.
1lO Clhurch Slreet Seco|d Floor
Toronlo Ontaro MSC] 2G7
Te 416 869 3323 TeLexr 065 23135
C)tf rces. Varxrouver Monlrcal
MEXTCO
Tierra Armada S.A.
Kelv n No 8 40 Piso
N4ex co Ciiy 5. D F.
Tel ar3r '4573 or 531 4078
Telex: 017 72208 TIAR ME
SOUTH AMERICA
A-RGENTINA -
Tierra Armada S.A.
C Utrg]ay 772
Piso 10 Oficioa 102
Buenos Arres 1015
Tol /5-l2 o I or 46 53-47 or 46-3J 0l
.
BRAZIL
Terra Armada S.A.
Aven da Treze de Maio 44 A 16 .
Andar-Cenlro
R o de Janciro-RJ
Tel 22O 9587 Terer (021, 2-359 TLAR BR
O'1(es Sdt Pluro. Be o Ho.rlo-te
VENEZUELA
Tierra Armada C.A.
Edrtrcio Oficentro-Ptso 5 Derecha
Avenue El Parque Cruce Avcnoe Andres Bello
San Bernardino Caracas-er 52 J0.98 Telex. 28466 IACA VC
FBANCE
La Terre Arm€e S.A.
Tour Honzon-52. quar de Dton Bouton
92806 Putca{rx Cedexrel 11) 776.43.24
Telcx: TEBRARM ti10386 F
Otiices Aix cn Provence Bruxeltes. Rotterdam
SAUDI ARABIA
La Terre Arm€e
Posl Olfice Box 15108
RiyadhIe 401 36/2 Telex 200959 SJ TERRARM
Ot|ces: Kuweil. Qalar. Oman
SPAIN
l'ie.ra Armada S.A.
.luan Hurlado de /enooza N I
N4adrid 16fel 457-44 50 Telex a3344 TIAR
a)fl ces: Barcerone Erlbao
UNITED KINGDOM
Beinforced Earth Company Ltd,
Walker Holrse. Malins ee
Te ford Shropshrre TS3 4HA
Tcl 0952 502533 or 502558
Telex: 35226 REUK G
GEFMANY
Bewehrte Erde
Verlr ebsgesel scnah rnbH
Ma nzer LandstrarJe 37
6000 Franklurt a M 1
]l 06 rf23 61 72 Tetc. 41? 77 /
SWITZERLANO
Terre Arm6e AG
Mylhenstrassc I
CH-6003 Luzern
Te r 41,23 55 65 Telex.862725 TERR CH ASIA
LEBANON
Societe Arabo Europdene de La Tere Arm6e
lmme!ble Trad
Rue lssa Ma/out
Archfafreh B.P. 165275, Beirut
Tel 961-336 055 Te ex: SAETA 22425 LE
SOUTH AFRICA
Reintorced Earth Pty Ltd.
Fourth Floor, Marcuson Center
5lMenton Road Rlchmond 2092 Johannesburg
Posl Ollice Box 9!231 Auckland Park
2006 Johannesburg
Telr 726-6180 Tele{ 4-24247
OCEANIA
AUSTRALIA
Reinforced Earth Pty. Lld.
38 Wc worlh Slreel
C/yde NSW, Australia 2142
Tel: 682-4099 Telexi AA25113
Olflces Br sbane and Melbourne
Auckland. New Zealand
-
AFRICA
ITALY
Terra Armata S.R.L.
Vra Achil e Eanlatti 57
00144 Roma
Tel:06€9836T6 or 5984OOO r'. *UOOa _
POBTUGAL
Terra Armada, Empresa de Fornecimento
Para Construcao LDA
Av. Do Brasrl N I I
I700 Listlonne
Te: 73 35 7l ot 73 47 41
Telex 12326 WICLIS P
SINGAPORE
Reintorced Eafih (SEA) Pte, Ltd.'Hume House 13.7 Km.. Bukit Timah Road
Singaporc 2158 Telex: RS 22110 HUMEFAFI
Tel: 4693134 or 663288
Oltrces: Malaysia and Hong Kong
JAPAN
Japatent Kabushiki Kaisha
c,o Tokyo Aoyama Law Otfice
Aoyama Building 410
2 3. Kila Aoyama 1 Chome Minato Ku
Tokyo
Tel 403-5281 Telex. J 28249
REINFORCED EARTH'
WALL CONSTRUCTION
MANUAL
(coNcRETE FACTNG)
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
t
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PREFACE
This manual has been prepared as a guide for building
Reinforced Earth@ structures.
Its contents should be thoroughly reviewed by the
Contractor and the superintendent responsible for con-
struction priortothedeliveryof Reinforced Earth materials
to the jobsile.
The Reinforced Earth Company will provide on-site
assistance lo help the Contractor implement correct con-
struction procedures.
Compliance with the guidelines herein does not relieve
the Contractor of lhe responsibility to adhere to contract
plans and specifications.
The information contained in lhis manualis providedas aguide{ine lorthe construction ol Reinforced Earth structures comprisedof materials supplied by
The Reinforced Earth Company. This manual is not to be used lor any other purpose. Reproduction of the contants of this manual, in whole or part,
wilhoul the express written consent of The Reinlorced Earth Company is prohibited.
@1983 The Reinforced Earth Company. All rights reserved. "ReinJorced Earth" and lhe Reinlorced Earth logo are registered trademarks of The
Reinforced Earth Company.
-
-
t)
t-
-
-
-
t-
-
rt
-
-
-
O
-
-
ar
-
-
CONTENTS
Page
PART|:fNTRODUCTION..... ...........2
Components .......... 2
Materials and services supplied by The ReinlorcedEarthCompany .......2
Equipment, tools and materials suppliedbyContraclor ........2
Worktobepertormed byContractor ... ........... 3
PARTIf:HANDLINGREINFORCEDEARTHMATERIALS ........... 4
Facingpanels .........4
Reinforcing strips, fasteners and loint materials ..... .... ... 5
PARTIII:CONSTRUCTIONPROCEDURES ........6
Settingandpositioningpanels ...........6
Sitepreparation..... ..........8
Constructing initialcourse .......8
Constructing second and subsequent courses . ..... .... .. .11
Completion ol wall . ............'12
PARTIV:SUMMARYOFCONSTRUCTIONPROCEDURES .........13
APPENDIX:FACINGPANELTYPESANDNOMENCLATURE .......14
REINFORCED EARTH WALL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL
Ltrar a r r ttALL \r!rrtr, I irr^r l r\Jrl ltaFll!lrral
Page 1
PART TI:
HANDLING REINFORCED
EARTH MATERIALS
FACING PANELS
Panel delivery. Before construction begins, the Con-
tractor should establish a paneFdelivery schedule. This
advance planning and scheduling will allow The Rein-
forced Earth Company's precast operation to match the
construction sch edu le.
Panels are usually delivered in stacks of four or five on
flatbed trailers. The delivery point is made as near to the
slructure as the truck can be driven under its own power.
Unloading panels. Under normal conditions, a two-
hour unloading limit is allowed for each delivery. In this
time, panels may be placed directly in the structure or
stacked on the ground using any ol three methods:
1) by using the lifting eyes to handle the panels individ-
ually (figure 3),
2) by using a four-point cable lift (figure 4) to handle the
panels individually, or
3) by using cloth or nylon slings to handle panels individ-
ually or in stacks (figure 5).
Care musl be taken to protect the panels from damage
during handling.
Panels can be stored by re-stacking on dunnage. Place
the panels tace down on the nylon pads ot the dunnage
(figure 6). Panels should be stacked no more than five high
on firm, level ground.
Nole: All dunnage is the property of The Reinforceo
Earth Company and must be returned as soon as it is no
longer required for storage.
FOUR.POINTCABLE LIFT
Figure 4
'ii:liiiii'E#
ATTAGHMENT AND USE OF LIFTING EYES
Swift Lift System shown here.
Alternate Rapid-Lift Svstem used on some
5%-in. paneli.
Flgure 3 Figure 5
Page 4 REINFORCED EARTH WALL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TYPICAL STACK
Figure 6
REINFORCING STRIPS, FASTENERS
AND JOINT MATERIALS
Note: To prevent theft of maierials that can be carried
by hand, supplies should be secured in a locked storag€
yard.
Reinforcing strips. Strips are supplied to the construc-
tion site in bundles of either 50 strips each (if strips are 60
mm wide) or 75 each (if strips are 40 mm or 50 mm wide).
Strips may be up to 40 ft long, and each bundle weighs
approximately 85 lb per ft of length. Storage in the open is
acceptable; bundles should not be placed directly on the
ground. See figure 7.
Fasteners. Sets of 500 bolts, nuts and washers are
packed in wooden crates, each weighing 103 lb.
Polyether foam. Foam strips for vertical joints are sup-
plied in plastic bags, each containing up to 100 of the S to
12-ft strips. In addition to normal security, foam must be
stored in a sheltered location, protected from sunlight.
Figure 8.
Cork strips. Cork is cut to length and banded to pallets.
Figure 8.
Filter cloth. lf the project requires filter cloth to cover
panel joints, the cloth will be supplied in rolls 6 ft wide and
must be cut to width as shown on the contract drawings.
Adhesive for the iilter cloth is supplied in Sgallon pails.
Foam may not be required when filter cloth is used.
Page 5
Frgure 7 Figure 8
REINFORCED EARTH WALL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
t
I
I
I
I
PART III:
GOI{STRUGTIOI{ PROCEDU RES
SETTING AND POS]TIONING PANELS
The finished appearance of a Reinforced Earth structure
depends largely on the care taken in erecting and position-
ing facing elements. For this reason, particular attention
must be paid to the initial course of facing panels and to
backfill placement.
Close aftention to detail and accuracy at this point will
help ensure trouble{ree, rapid construction lor the re-
mainder of the structure.
Lift panels from the horizontal (stacked) position directly
to the vertical position by attaching a lifting eye to each of
the two cast-in-place lifting inserts at the top edge of the
panel (figure 9). Use dunnage as blocking to prevent dam-
age when rotating panels from horizontal to vertical.
When placing panels, match the dowel of one panel to
the corresponding tube in the adjacent panel (figure 10).
Once a panel is lowered into place, gauge the correct
distance between the new panel and the existing adjacent
panel of the same course by setting a spacer bar into posi-
lion between the panels (figure 11). The bar remains in
place as the new panel is positioned.
A series of simple steps ensures proper panel position
and alignment.
Check alignment. Wsually check the alignment of lhe
panel in relalion to the control line on the leveling pad for
the initial course of panels or to the panel below lor subse-
quent courses. Make adjustments with a crowbar on the fill
side of the panel (figure 12) so that the surfaces of suc-
cessive panel courses are aligned. Do not attempt to ad-
iust the panel by using the crowbar on the front
side-unacceptable chipping or spalling may result.
I
I
I
I
I
Figure 10
uft
t
,tlt$*d
l##r.l*f-rcGs
.c(;'.i:-@4:,[g" UHE+4,
Truck bed or ground
PANEL LIFTING
Lifi
t
Figure 9
Note: NumbeG in squares
show order of placem ent.
Direction ot construction --->
USE OFSPACER BARS
TO CHECK PANEL SPACING
Figurc 11
Adjust panel base
lo the tront
Adjust panel base
to lhe rear
MAKING AOJUSTMENTS IN ALIGNMENT
Figure 12
Page 6 REINFORCED EARTH WALL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL
ql
I
T
T
T,l
I
I
I
I
t
t
i
I
T
I
I
Gheck horizontal level. The horizontal level of the
panels should be checked and adjusted to assure uniform
appearance and even joints throughout the structure.
As shown in figure 13, use a tl-ft level to verity that the
panel is level. Then sight back along the tops of the panels
to ensure that the panel is at the elevation of the others in
the course.
lf the leveling pad is designed with a slight slope, panels
must be set with the same slope. Verify lhis by shimming
one end ol a 4-ft level such that it will read level when set at
the conect slope. After verifying that the panel top has the
correct slope, sight back across panel tops to ensure a
uniform slope along the wall.
Correct any variations by lifting the new panel and insert-
ing wedges (initial course only) or adiusting the thickness
of the horizontal joint material below. Re-check the hori-
zontal spacing after any sucfr adjustment.
Set batter, Panels must be given a slight batter toward
the backfill to compensate for outward movement caused
by backfill placement and compaction, which will tend to
push the wall to a true vertical position. Batter can be
measured using a zl-ft level (figure 14).
To maintain desired batter, drive hardwood wedges inlo
the shori horizontal panel ioints at the tace of the wall
(figure 15). Wedges for each course of panels should re-
main in place during the construction of three subsequent
courses, then promptly removed. lf wedges remain in
place for more than three courses, they will be very difficult
to remove.
The amount of batter will vary and will depend on the
type of backfill, moisture content of backfill, required com-
paction, type of equipment, and length of the reinforcing
strips. A batter ol 112-in. in 4 ft is generally used as a slart-
ing point. Coarse backfills such as crushed slone may
require less batter while ftne backfills such as sand may
require more batter.
Monitor tne actual movement of panels during the initial
and early courses, and adjust the amount of batter consis-
tent with field conditions to produce verticality.
During construction, check the overall verticality of the
strucfure daily using a plumb bob. By adlusting wedges,
make any adjustments to batter necessary to assure thal
final verticality is within specified tolerances.
Direction ot constru€tion --->Sight alongpaneltops
VERIFY
HORIZONTAL LEVEL
Figure 13
USE WEDGE TO SET PANEL BATTER
Figurc 15
I
I
I
I
Figure 14
REINFORCED EARTH WALL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL Page 7
A. SITE PREPARATION
Step A-l: For the length of the wall section to be built,
excavate the site to the depth and width specified on the
contract drawings, removing all unsuitable material and
replacing it with compacted fill, il necessary.
Step A-2: Proof-roll the foundation in accordance with
the project specif ications.
Step A€' Install drainage systems as required.
Step A4: Pour the concrete leveling pad. The pad
should be cured for 12 hours, or longer if required by the
contract specifications, prior to use. The concrete finish
must be smooth and flat and must not vary from the design
elevation more than 1/4 in. in any 1O-ft length.
lf plans call for the wall to have a step-up in elevation,
pour the higher leveling pad so lhat its surface is 2.ffi lt
(0.75 m) above that of the lower pad. Leave a $in.
(23&mm) gap between the new pad and the centerline of
the dowel of the last panel of the lower course (figure 16).
Step A-5: Snap a chalk line on the surface of the leveling
pad to eslablish a control line for the wall.
B. CONSTRUCTING INITIAL COURSE
Panel layout usually begins at the lowest leveling pad.
_T
i.ag' I
a\
_J r'
tlt
LEVELING PADS AT STEP.UP
Figure 16
Step &1 : Placethefirst Bn (half) panelflon the leveling
pad (figure 17). Align the face ot the panel along the chalk
line; and, using hardwood wedges, set the batter of the
oanel.
Step B2: Place the second Bn panel@lon the leveling
pad. Align it with the control line, and set it the oorrect
distance from panelfllusing the spacer bar. Leave the
spacer bar in place. Set the batter of the panel.
Step B3: Remove the spacer bar and set the first An
(full) panel E betweenlhe two hall panels El and E.
Center the panel to ensure equal venical joints. Set the
panel's batter as before. Clamp the panel to panels [l
and El as shown in figure 1 8. Tighten clamps sutficiently to
hold the panel in position without movement.
Step &.4: Place a third B', panelEl, aligning the panel
with the control line and using the spacer bar lo ensure
spacing. Setthe panel's batter.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
Di rection ol co.istruction --.>
FullorAn panels
leveling pad ;;;- Hall or' Bn ' panels Note: NumbeG in squares- show order ofolacement.
PANEL PLACEMENT
FOR INITIALCOURSE
Figure 17
Page I REINFORCED EARTH WALL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL
I
T
t
t
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
T
Step B'S: Remove the spacer bar and set the second A^
panel@, using the spacer bar to ensure the conect dis-
tance between lhe new full panel@and the previous full
panel El . Set the batter ol the panel, and clamp it to the two
adjacent hall panels @and @.
Check the horizonlal level of the two full panels@
and@ (figure 13).
Step &'6: When ten panels have been set, re-check wall
alignment by sighting along the wall face. lf necessary,
adjust panels to obtain a true line.
Begin bracing the course of panels. Use a 2 x 4 lumber
brace foreach tull panel (figures 19 and 20).
Step B-7: Install vertical joint material. Vertical joint
material prevents the loss ol fine backfill particles, while
still allowing water to drain lreely through the structure. To
determire which material is used on a particular project,
refer to project drawings and specifications. Always install
joint materials from the backfill side of the structure. One of
the following materials is commonly used.
o Polyether loam supplied in 2-in.-square strips, 6-1 2 ft
long, is used for all applications except marine structures.
Push the foam strip into the running vertical joints (includ-
ing the short horizontal section) with a hardwood wedge or
similar implement (figure 21).No gluing is required.
t Fifter cloth is normally used in marine and other
structures subject to flooding. A pressure-sensitive adhe-
sive is used to affix this cloth to the backfill side of both the
vertical and the horizontaljoints ofthe structure (tigure 22).
BRACE INITIAL COURSE OF PANELS
Flgure 20
Step &8: Begin backfilling. Place approved backfill up
to the bottom row of panel tiestrips (figure 23a). Always
backfill in the direction of panel placement. Note that this
first lift of bacHill is not placed directly against the panels.
This prevents panels from being pushed otf line. Only after
Cork horizontal
joint material
(Nottoscale - joint spacing expanded lor illustration)
VERTICAL JOINT MATEHIALS
Figure 22
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Figure 21
Figure 19
REINFORCED EARTH WALL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL Page 9
the first layer of reinlorcing strips has been connected and
backfill placed over them is backfill placed and compacted
against the panels.
Backfill can be compacted to within 3 ft of the panels by
a large vibratory roller. A small handoperated compactor
must be used within 3 ft of the panels to avoid undue panel
movemenl.
Check wall alignment visually and with a level; adjust
paners as necessary.
Step &,9: Place reinforcing strips on the compacted
backfill. Position strips perpendicular to panels, unless
shown otherwise on the contract drawings.
lnsen the reinlorcing strip end into the tiestrip gap,
matching the holes (figure 24). Push a bolt through the
holes from below; put a washer on top; and thread on a
nut. Tighten the nut with a socket wrench to complete the
@nnecllon.
Step &10: Backfill to the full height of lhe half panels
(figure 23b). Dump backfill onto the reinforcing strips so
that the toe of the backfill pile is $4 tt from the panels.
Spread backfill by pushing the pile parallel to the panels
and windrowing it toward the panels and toward the tree
ends of the strips (see figure 25). lf strips are long, a
second load may be required to backfill to the ends of the
strips. lf so, dump and spread this load only after
spreading the first.
Metal tracks of earthmoving equipment must never
come in contact with the reinforcing strips. Rubber-tired
vehicles, however, can operate directly on the exposed
strips if backfill conditions permit and care is exercised.
lf required, make a step-up in elevation at this point,
using the following procedure:
Snap a chalk line on the upper leveling pad to establish
a wall-face control line. Place a half panel on the control
line, using the spacer bar to establish the proper dislance
from the last panel of the lower course. Set the panel's bat-
ter. then set a full panel between the half panel and the last
full panel of the lower course, placing it along the control
line and setting its batter (figure 26).
Continue construction of the upper @urse using the
procedure used on the lower course.
CONNECT STRIP TO PANEL
Figure 24
SEQUENCE OF PANEL PLACEMENT AT STEP.UP
Figure 26
t
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
figurefr
Oo not backtifi against panel
until connecting first layer of strips
and bacHillir€ overthem.
(a) First lilt ol backlill
(b) Second lilt ot backlill
INITIAL BACKFILLING
Figure 23
Page 10 REINFORCED EARTH WALL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL
t
I
I
I
C. CONSTRUCTING SECOND
AND SUBSEQUENT COURSES
Only after backfill has reached the top of the B. (half)
panels can construction of the second course begin.
Throughout construction, always set panels at grade;
never set a panel onto one that has not been complete.
ly backfilled. Begin the second and subsequent @urses
of panels at the end of the wall where construction began
(tigure 27).
Step C-1:lemove thelwo clamps holding An
panels@and@to Bn panel E]. (As each course pro-
ceeds, remove only two clarnps at a time to allow for set-
ting a new panel.) To prevent concrete-to{oncrete contact
at horizontal joints, set a precut corkboard strip onto the
top edge of half panel @ (figure 28). Cork is supplied in
standard 3/&in.-thick strips. Supplies also include several
thinner strips to compensate for minor variatiOns in height.
For high walls, 1-in.-thick c-ork may be supplied to compen-
sate for greater vertical loads.
Direction of construction -->
PLACEMENT SEOUENCE
FOR SECONO PANEL COURSE
Figure 27
Step G-2: Set \ panel @l onto B" panel @ (figure
24, centering the panel to ensure equal verticaljoints and
matching the panel's front face to that of panel@ . Set the
batter of the panelas done for the panelso{ the firstcourse,
and clamp the new A, panel ffull to the initial-course
panels@ and@ .
Step G3: Remove the neld pair of clamps; place cork
joint material onto the half panetEl ; and set An panel @l
onto it. Use the spacer bar to obtain the correct spacing
between Ah panels @l and li62| . (Leave the bar in place
until ready to set the next panel.) Match the face of the
panel just placed to that of the panel below, and set its
batter. Clamp the panel liGl to adjacent panels@ ando
Continue to set An panels in the same sequence. As
work proceeds, check the wall's alignment frequently. In-
stall verticaljoint material, as in step B-7.
Step G4: When the course of panels is complete and
vertical joint material installed, backfill up to the tiestrip
level. Figure 29 shows the sequence for backlilling the
second and subsequent courses.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
Figure 28
Top row ot liestrips,
lirst course ol full panels
1) BacKillfrcrn lops ol hafi panels
uo to next rq,oltiestrios.
2) Bac*lilllo tcps of full panels.
Top row ot
tiestrips, second
Figure 29
REINFORCED EARTH WALL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL Page 1'l
Step G5: Atter backfilling, recheck the batter and align-
ment of the wall, then place and connect the next layer ol
reinforcing strips, as in Step B-9.
Step G6: BacKill up to the top of the An (full) panels of
the initial course. Remove bracing from the initial course.
lf panels of the first row did not become almost vertical
after backlilling to lhe tops of the An panels of the initial
course, adjust the amount of batter so that the second row
will be vertical after backfilling.
At this point, construction of part or all ol a berm, or
backfilling in front olthe wall, can begin (figures 30and 31).
Reinforced Eadh structures with a leveling pad at or
above grade require placement of an earth berm as toe
protection along the face. Structures with a leveling pad
below grade require the backfilling of an embedment in
front of the wall.
The height of the berm or the depth ol the embedment
depends on the design height of the structure and is shown
on the contract drawings.
(a) Berm ln tront ot wall
Original
grade
(b) Embedment
WALLTOE PROTECTION
Figure 30
The berm or embedment must be placed either before
the wall reaches 50% of its height or when it has reached a
height of 15 ft, whichever is less.
Step G7: When backfill reaches the tops ot the initial
course of full panels (haltway up the second course), begin
construction of the next course of full panels. Repeat steps
C-1 through C-6, placing panels, spreading and compact-
ing backfill, and connecting reinforcing strips, for each addi-
tional course until the wall is ready to be topped otf.
Figure 31
D. COMPLETION OFWALL
Step II.1 : In placing the last or top course of panels, the
construction sequence continues as previously outlined.
However, top-course panels have a flat or a sloping top
edge and may be supplied in varying heights to meet
linished-elevation requirements.
The location ol specific top panels is shown on the
contract drawings.
Step D-2: After backfilling is complete, remove all
clamps and hardwood wedges from the wall.
Step D-3: Install a coping, if required. Two types are
commonly used:
. Cast-in-place. Necessary attachment details, fre-
quently including a barrier or paved ditch, will be shown on
the contract drawings. Rebar will protrude from the tops of
the panels for connection, if required.
. Precast. lf required, precast ooping will be supplied.
Attachment details will be shown on the contract drawings.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
tPage 12 REINFORCED EARTH WALL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL
I
I
t
I
t
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
t
I
PART IV:
SUMMARY OF GOiISTRUCTION
PROCEDURES
A. PHEPARE SITE
StepA-1: . .. .. ...Excavatesitetodepthandwidthspecifiedon contractdrawings.
StepA-2: ......Proof-rollfoundation.
StepA-3: .. ... ..tnstall drainagesystems, as required.
Step A-4: .Pour leveling pad.
Step A-5: . . .Establish wall control line on leveling pad.
trlli:
BcoNsr.ucrt-'"t*:'::;',*1",*::#:i:ii
Step B-4: . . . .Place third half panel.
Step B-5: . .Set full panel between second and third half panels.
Step 86: . . .Brace panels.
Step B-7: ...... .lnstallverticaljoint material.
Step B{: . . . .When course is complete, backfill to bottom row of tiestrips.
StepB-9: ........lnstall firstlayerof reinforcingstrips.
Step B-10: . . .Backfill up to top of hall panels.
C. CONSTRUCT SECOND AND SUBSEOUENT COURSES
Step C-1: . . . . . . .Remove first two clamps; place horizontal joint material.
Step C-2: . . . . . .Set lull panel onto half panel.
Step C€: . . . . . . . .Set second and subsequent full panels onto half panels.
Slep G4: . . .When course is complete, backfill up to next row of tiestrips.
Step C-5: . . . . . . .Check wall alignment and batter, then place next layer of reinforcing strips.
Step C-6: . . . .Backfill to top of full panels in initial coure; remove bracing from initial course.
Step G7: . . . . .Repeat Steps C-1 through C-6 for each additional course.
D. COMPLETEWALL
Step IFl: . .. ..Constructtopcourse.
Step O-2: . . .Remove all clamps and wedges lrom wall.
StepD-3: . .......lnstallcoping, if necessary.
REINFORCED EARTH WALL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL Page 13
I
APPENDIX
FACING PAI{EL TYPESAND
NOMENGLATURE
T
t
I
t
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
t
I
DESIGNATION
A"
Bn
c"
Dn
En
Fn
STANDARD
FULL PANEL
SURFACE
AREA
24.2 sq ft
12.1 sq ft
8.8 sq tt
12.1 sq ft
14.9 sq ft
17.9 sq ft
DESIGNATION
Gn
Hn
G
Ln
Pn
Qn
SURFACE
AREA
20.9 sq ft
24.2 sq ft
27.0 sq ft
30.0 sq ft
30.0 sq ft
17.9 sq ft
Nole: n : rumber of tiestrips per panet.
A) Standard and top panels
The following table lists the designations of standard
and top-course panel types and their surface areas. The
standard panel width is 4.92 ft, measured trom pin center-
line to sleeve centerline.
G) Cut panels
Any standard panel may be cut vertically to provide for
specific field or design conditions.
Panels so cut are indicated by the letter L (left) or R
(right) after the panel designation (e.9., An L, An Fl). Widths
and areas of cut oanels are indicated on the contract
drawings.
x:width shown
on contract
drawings
D) Variable-width panels
Any standard panel may be supplied more wide or
narrow than the standard width. Panels so manufactured
will be indicated by the letter W after the panel designation
(e.9., A.W). Their widths and areas are shou/n on the
contract drawings.
min. w:2.0 ft
m€x. w:6.1 tl
E) Sloping panels
Panels whose lops slope downward from right to left
(when vbwed from in front of wall) are designated Mn
panels. Panels with opposite slope are Nn panels. Both
panel tops slope a12.1 , and the surface area is 19.6 sq ft.
(front view)
F) Blocked-out panels
Any standard panel may require some portion ot its area
to be blocked out to meet specific jobsite conditions or
requirements.
ffi
(front view)
W
(tront yiew)
STANDARD
HALF PANEL I-ARGE FIRST
COURSE PANEL
SMALL FIRST
@URSE PANEL
SMALL
TOP PANELS
B) Bentpanels
A bent panel is any slandard panel that has been casl
with a bend along its vertical centerline. Bent panels are
used to form inside and outside corners, as shown below.A bent panel is indicated by the letter B in the panel
designation (e.9., A"B). Angles ol bends are shown on the
contract drawings.
LARGE
TOP PANELS
REINFORCED EARTH WALL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL
..9
INSIDE COBNER OUTSIDE CORNER
Page'14
Reinforced Earth Company Offices
The Reinforced Earth Company maintains
oftices throughout the United States:
Gorporate & Mid-Atlantic
Flosslyn Center
1700 North Moore Street
Arf ington, V irginia 22209
(703) 527-3434
Northeast
10 Tower Office Park, Suite 502
Woburn, Massachusetts 01801
(614 e3'3-8774
Metrcpolitan New York
580 Sylvan Avenue, Second Floor
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey 07632
(201) s69-3502 or (212) 73il2ao7
Ohio Valley
4100 Executive Park Drive, Suite I
Cincinnati, Ohio 45241
(513) 56+7786
Southeast
3401 Norman Berry Drive, Suite 251
East Point, Georgia 30344-5191
(4Aq 76&4020
Midwest22 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 104
Lake Forest, lllinois 60045
(312) 23+7994
Southwest
1901 Central Drive. Suite 610
Bedford, Texas 76021
(814 283-5503
Focky Mountain
3333 Quebec Street, Suite 4020
Denver, Colorado 80207-2326
(303) 3995500
West
555 Capitol Mall, Suite 750
Sacramento, California 9581 44572
{916) 441€550
Northvvest301 1161h Avenue, S.E., Suite 365
Bellevue, Washington 98004
(206) 4s+227O
t
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
t
T
I
I
I
I
t
t
P.inted in U.S.A.
t
PI."ANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMJSSION
Monday, February 8, 1982
2:00 p,m.
Work session, Architerra project revisicns
3:00 p,rn,
Public Hearing
1.. Approval of ninutes of January 25 neeting.
2. Request for a denslty control varj.ance in gross residential floor areato construct lofts in 20 units and a request for a parking variance forthe Sandstone Creek Club Condorni.niums on lots 84 and BS, Block B,tionsridge Subdivision, Filing No. I Applicant: Vail Ridge partnership--' Jack Perlmutter.
3. Reguest to amend Special Development Distri.ct 4 to subdivide lot 39,Glen Lyon subdivision into 2 single family lots fron one Prinary,/Secondary
duplex lot. A seeond anendment requested is for a setback €hangefton the SDD4 requirenent for Area A to enable construction of the parkingstructure/athletic club to encroach on the north side. Applicant: -Andrew
Norris,
4, Request for a conditional use permit to opera.te a real estate officeon the basenent level of the Mountairt Haus at 292 East Meadow Drive,Suite #2. Applicant: Earth Sheltered Rea1ty and Investments, Ltd.
5. Request for exterior alteration and modification in Corrunercial Core Ifor the Lodge at Vail to construct Harryts Bar. Applicant: Lodge Properties Inc
6. .Request for exterior alteration and rnodification in Conmercial Core Ito allow the Red Lions Inn to enclose with glass the northern portionof their front deck on the west side of the buildi_ng. Applicant:Jeff Selby.
Published in the Vail Trail February 5, 1982.
I
NOTICE IS IIEREBY GIVEN thAt
of the Town of Vail will hold a
18.66.060 of the Zoning Code of
in the Town Council chanbers in
FUI;t.rc No'f lct
the Planning and Environmcntal Conunission
public hearing in accorcl:rnce with Section
the Tor+n of Vail on February 8, 1982
the Vail Municipal Building.
)
1.
2:00 Work Session Architerra Project Revisions
3:00 Public Hearing
Request for a density control variance in Gross Residential Floor Area
to constluct lofts in 20 units and a request for a parking variance in accordance
ilith Section 18.62 of the Vail Municipal Code. The requests are for the
Sandstone Creek Club Condoniniums located on iots 84 and 85, Block B,
Lionsridge Subdivision, Filing No. 1. Applicant: Vail Ridge Partnership--
Jack Perlmutter.
Request for a conditional use perrnit in accordance with Section 18.60 of
the Vail Municipal Code to operate a real estate office oo the basenent level
of the Mountain Haus, located in a Public Accomnodation Zone District at 292
East Meadow Drive, Suite #2. Applicant: Earth Sheltered Realty and
Investnents, Ltd.
Request to anend Special Development District 4 to subdivide tot 39, Glen
Lyon Subdivision into 2 single fa:nily lots--it is now a Primary,/Secondary duplex
lot. A second anendnent requested is for a setbback variance from the SDD4
requirenentforArea Atqenable construction of the parking structure/athletic
club to encroach on the north side. Applicant:. Andtew Norris.
4. A request for exterior alteration and modification in Conunercial Core I
qone district for the Lodge at Vail to construct Harry?s Bar. This is in accor-
dance with Section 18.24.065 of the Vail Municipal Code. Applicant: Lodge
Properties, Inc.
5. Request for exterior alteration and modification in Comnercial Core I zone
district in accordance with Section 18.?4.065 of the Vail Municipal Code to
aLlow the Red Lion Inn to enclose with glass the northern portion of their
front deck on the west side of the buildj.ng. Applicant: Jeff Selby.
The applications and j.nformation relating to the proposed changes are available
in the Zoning Adnrinistratorrs office during regular business hours for reviow
or inspection bY the Public.
TOWN OF VAiI.
DEPARTIvIINT OF COI'llqtIN ITY DEVELOPMT|NT
A. Peter Patten, J r'.
Zoning Administfator
2.
3.
Published in ths Vail Trait Jcnrrary 22, 1982,
t
*,+,#-/'/Trv'r
'aa'/
4rr t,4-S + ,fus ah..-
h-J- a u,vofr / - t -4 /arry*/u //,rx. / ;d CL,.^ u
'4rt;n ,fu ie'.rr'ri--- a!r-l'l'./
? /"*r./r'-rf-.*'a'Xr'r- /*1/q * .fuosh- ,-'r/-s .& ,/as o./,1 fuo*z
\rW r/-*tz/fot-, ?*zt";;*
//
"^," 4y'/{2
./^
owner, Address and phone: (fA/tr frzuEZt-
Architect, Address and Phone:
''ftrr Project Application
Proiect Name:
Proiect Description:
Contact Person and
Legal Description: Lot atins@,zone-
Comments:
Design Review Board
.^,. 4tr/r*
Motion by:
Seconded by:ftu RttA/{Fr.)
DISAPPROVAL
Sum mary:
AuAt-tu
E Statt Approval
I
1t'tq.
ME}4ORANDUM
TO: Planning and Environrnental Connission
FROM: Departrnent of Cornnunity Developrnent/Peter Patten
DATE: FebruarY 1, 1982
RE: Revisions to Architetra-at-Vai1
Recently, the developers of Architerra-at-Vail informed the staff of sorne nnjor
revisions to the project. The staff net with the developels on January 15,to
examine the changis in detail . The following is a list of the revisions along
with a brief analysis of the impacts of these changes '
I. The Site
The site plan has been altered accordingly:
Ai Nuirber of units has been reduced fron 13 to 72,-
B' Units have been joined together forming one single, four duplexes'
and one triPlex.c.. Buildings are positioned with 9 units above and 3 units below the road'
Inlact:
The inpact of these changes o:r the site are:
A. Creation of more green area, especially below the road'
B. Elirnination of all retaining "ui1s e*.upt for those shaping the switchbacks'' C. Provides ample parking spaces.D. Elininates 3 garages that protruded above the landscape'
E. Allows site lines through the project,
r{. Ihe_ Ulits
The units have been altered accordingly:
A. Entrances-.the entTances have been changed from the side to the front'
Impec!:
The inpact of these changes are:
1. Reduces the excessive sidewall'2. Incorporates structure nore effectively into the hill'
3. Lends itself to more natural landscaping.
f{l:':'.t,a B. Greenhouses- - the greenhouses
located beneath
I
dthave been teduce
the Parapet.
Architerra-at-Vail 2
o snall glass enclosures
Inlpgct i
l. Reduces visual impact of glass and glare'
2, Reduces problens that nay be encountered with snow and ice.
C. Unit Design--the units have been designed to retain the curved fascia
but with a rectilinear interior design.
IIpact:
1. A continuous S-curved fascia that fits nicely into the landscape.
Z, A snaller parapet that reduces the visual inpact.
3. Rectangular rooms that are nore functional and easier to construct.
4. Slopi-ng side walls nade with exposed aggregate that blends with the
natural color of the soi1.
5. Outside stairs constructed with stones that blend with landscape.
The originally proposed GRFA of 23,835 sguare feet wj.11 be retained j.n the
new plan, resulting in an average GRFA of 1986 square feet Per unit.
As a reminder, the Architerra project was approved for a hazard ordinance
variance by the Planning Connission on Jrure 8" 1981 by a vote of 3-2, A
subsequent review by Town Council resulted in a 5-1 approval of the variance.
Sone of the concerns from Planning Corunission, Councj.l and Design Review
Board centered around height and visual impact of retaining wal1s, visual
impact of the large greenhouses and amount of actual eai:th- shel tering of
the project. A1 1 of these conccrns have nor.r been addressed and either elimina-
ted or nitigated. With regard to visual irnpact, the elimination of a tre-
nendous anount of retaining walls is the nost noticcable improvement in the
new ssheme,
The staff feels that there has been a lot of work acconplished by the developers
since the Design Review Board approved the project last August. I4any of
the concerns of the Torr,n boards have been successfully addressed resulting
in a far more earth- integrated and aesthetically pleasing proposal for this
highly visible site, The staff, therefore, highly endorses the new plan
and Tegards the variance.approval as being just as valid for the new design
as for the original proposal (probably even more so), We ask the Planning
and Environmental Commission to listen to the presentatj.on of the new scherne
at the neetj.ng ds an inforrnational itern. If there are no major concernswith theirprbposal., it would just go to the Design Review Board for their
review and approval .
F
a
luun
75 soulh tronlage rd.
vall, colorado 8iG57
(303) {76-70dt
department of community development
January 28, L982
To adjacent property owners of Lots A.l and A-2n Lionsridge Filing #lI
Architema at VaLI, a project on the above lotso will presentrevisions to the Vai-l Planning and Environmental Comrission
on February 8, 1982 at 2:00 p,m. and to the Vail Design ReviewBoard at 2:O0 p.m. on February I7, 1982. Both neetings will bein the Vail Council Chambers in the Vail lftrnicipal Building.
I
c
tnwn
75 south lrontage rd.
vall, colorado 81557
(303) 476-7000
department of community development
January 27, 1982
Marti.n Jaffe, Editor
Land Use Law and Zoning Digest
1513 East 60th Street
Chi.cago, IlIinois 60657
Dear Mr. Jaffe,
For approxinately the last year, our planning staff has been worki-ng with
two grouPs naned Architerra-at-Vail and Reinforced Earth Conpany on a earth-
sheltered housing project in the town of Vail. Architerra, Inc. is a Paris
based firm which has desigrred several successful projects involving earth-
sheltered housing in Europe under the auspices of Henri Vidal ,
Their project in Vai.l has undergone nany changes in the past year, and
as a matter of fact, is recently experiencing alnost a total re-design
not involving the French people any longer. The project is now a 12 unit
(formerly 13 units) residential development located on a steep slope facing
south above the valley floor. It utilizes a conventional one-way loop
road for access to the double garage each unit;is provided, Above the
garage are two living levels, with only the south facing walls of the structurenot undergound.
There were two regulatory issues involved in the project beyond our normal
Design Review Board review. The first was the need for a variance to our
hazatd regulations to allow then to constTuct stTuctures on slopes of '4O%
or more. This is prohibited in any rnulti-family zone district. With the
planning staff's support, the PLanning Conmission and the Town Council
approved the variance (the first of this nature ever grantedJ mostly dueto the superior technology of the reinforced earth systetn to stabilize
the steep slope and because of the gteat energy effici.ency.
The second regulatory requirement was a full-scale environmental impact
rePort on the project. Because this was a new concept with regard to our
planning staffrs experience, we felt the EIR was necessary in our decision-
making Process. We do have a provision in our zoni.ng code for reguring
an EIR and exercised it in this case.
tionlage road. vail colorq0o 81657
303 476-7000. exl 237
Peter Patten
Senror Ptenner
Deparlment of Community Devetopment
Jaffe -2-
Other development standards (i.e. setbacks, coverage, floor area, etc.)
vtere covered by the Residential Cluster Zone District in which the devel oprnent
took place, Since the final plan has not received final approval , thebuilding code issues have not been addressed on a detailed basis as ofyet, We have not adopted any special codes or regufations addressing earth-sheltered houslng, but look forward to other proposals near the site ofArchiterra in the near future. I hope this information helps your study,and Ird be glad to answer any further questions you night have.
Town of Vail, Col orado
APF:bpr
Sincere ly,
- (-A. PETER PATTEN, J
Senior Planner
MB,ORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROII{:
SUBJECT:
JANUARY 27,7982
Peter Patton
James A. l,Ierkel 9Ar14t ,
ARCHITERM AT VAIL
The Architer"ra at Vail plans approved by the PEC on June 8, 1981 and bythe DRB on August 5, 1981 were reviewed extensively by our staff duinb thefa11 of 1981. As a resuLt of the review, a nunber of changes were madethat vastly inproved the visual appearance of the project.
The design of the road, as presented to the PEC and the DRB, rernains r.rr-changed. It should also be noted that the change of the back wal1 fromcurvilinear to linear has no effect whatsoever on the structural paranetersof the design.
The changes and their effect on the project are as follows:
1. The Site
The site plan has been altered accordingly:
A. ltrmber of urits has been reduced frorn 13 ta L2.B. Ltrits have been joined together forming one single,four dr.rplexes, and one triplex.C. Buildings are positioned with 9 tmits above and 3 rnits
bel"ow the road.
Impact:
The ilpact of these changes on the site arei
Creation of more green area.Elimination of all retaining wa11s except for those shapingthe swi.tchbacks.
Provides ample parking spaces.Ellninates 3 garages that protruded above the landscape.'
3. The lhits
The units have been altered accordingly:
A. Entrances - The entrances have been changed frorn the side to thefront.
Inpact:
1. Reduces the excessive sidewall.2. Incorporates structure more effectively into the hi11.3. tends itself to inore natural landscapiag.
A
B.
C.
n
I -2-I
B. Greenhouses - The greenhouses have been reduced to srnalL glass
enclosures located beneath the parapet.
Impact:
1. Reduces visual impact of glass and glare.2. Reduces problerns that may be encormtered with snow and ice.
C. tlnit Design - The units have been designed to retain the curvedfascia but with a rectilinear interior design.
Impact:
1. A continuous S-curved fascia that fits nicely into the 1and-
scape.2. A srnaller parapet that reduces the visual impact,3. Rectangular rooms that are more firnctional and easier to
construct.4. Sloping side wal1s made with eiposed aggregate that blends with
the natural color of the sail.5. Grtside stairs constructed with stones that blend with Landscape.
it
-
TO: Dick Ryan, Peter Jamar, File
FROM: Jiur Sayre {6
DATE: January 15, 1982
RE: Architerra Revisions
Today we net to discuss the revisions to the Architerra project.
Present at the neeting were Gene Powe11, Jin Martel, Jin Merkel,
Gary Larsen, Rich Matthews, Jirn Sayre and Pet,er Patten.
The plan has gone through substantial structural, naterial and landscaperevi:sions. The reinforced-earth concept has been retained, but therear walls of the rmits have been changed from curves to straightlines. The road has retained exactly the sane configuration. The
nudber of units has been reduced from thirteen to twelve. The walkways
and high wal ls between units have been eliminated, as well as nostof the retaining walls. guilding and landscape naterials have alsochanged. The result is that the urits are nuch nore sheltered bythe earth than in the previous proposal .
The staff menbers present at the meeting agree that the current proposalis a better one than the previous proposal . But since there were
numBroqs. significant changes, we thought that the new plan shouldbe reviewed by both Planning Comnission and DRB.
Peter decided that the review by the Planning Conunission should be
acconplished in a work session--no formal vote will be taken. TheTational is that the variance for buildi.ng over 40 per cent was granted--
the reinforced earth concept--has not changed in the current plan.
Hovrevet, there have been some changes in the site plan and the PlanningCorutission shoul.d have a chance to see them. The work session shouldbe scheduled for February 8th.
The DRB should review, approve or disapprove the new Architerca pTan
on February 17. The presentation should enrphasize the changes nadein the plan.
Peter set February lst as a deadline for nrost of the naterials tobe subnitted. 0n this date a prelininary floor plan, a site plan,
including an analysis of the anount of 40 percent slope to be influenced,a perspective of the new wits, and a written report outlining the
changes irt the plan are due. By February 8th a final landscape planis to be subnitted.
Ir{ailing Li"t f}Architerra
Jeff Selby
Box 1528
Vailn Co 81658
Bureau of Land lilanagernent
Colorado State Office
1600 Broadway
Denvet, Co 80202
A 5 Skyline Partners
c/o First City Resources Corporation . A
9933 Lawler Avenue t ,, 'nf Iskokie, rtl 60076 i d r'$/a-4 )" 'lJ !
A5*1 Sbo*icrxRxrttrErs
Lions Mane Condo Assn
Box 1669 -Bex-69+--va1T-_
A7 Casolar Del Norte Horneowners Assoc Inc,
P.O. Box 5796Vail Co 81657
Janes W. l,lcDonald
Casolar Def Norte Homeownets Assoc, Inc,
P.O. Box 1290
Homesteadn FL 33030
luttn
box 100
vail, colotado 8165?
1303) 4765613
December 11, 1981
TO: ARCHITERRA FILE
FROM: Peter Jamar
department of community development
CalIed Gary Larsen of Matthews & Associates and
he assured me that the Architerra site would be
revegetated in a more complete manner including
the upper road bank. He also stated that if theproject was not proceeded with next building
season, the road wou'ld be regraded and revegetated.
box lfi)
vail, colorado 81657
(3031 476€613
department of community development
October 20, 1981
Mr. Gene PowellArchiterra at Vail, Inc.
1700 North Moore Street
Rosslyn CenterArlington, Virginia 22209
Re: ArchiterraDear Gene :
llle rve been anxiously awaiting the start of construction ofthe Architerra project and are disappointed to hear there maybe sone problens preventing the project fron getting off theground. In light of the fact that there wonrt be any constructionon the site this fall, we would respectfutly request that youfulfill your corunitnent to revegetate the road Cut "s per the(enclosed) January 29, 1981 letter from NeiI Wood to me.
there is still time to do this, and we would very much like tosee this taken care of very soon, due to our initial concern whenthe cut was made without contacting our department. We renainvery supportive of Architerra and anxious for its constructionin the Spring of 1982. Give me a call !
A, PETER PAT-TEN, JR
.Senior Planner
APP:bprcc: Neil Wood
Rich l*latthews, Matthews Q Assoc.
j
i-?orchiterro
January 29' l98l
Mr. Peter Patten
Senior Pl annerP.0. Box .|00
Vail, C0 81557 i
REFERENCE:GroundRestorationArchiterraatVail
Deai l1r. Patten '
P'lease be advised that Architerra
aorees to restore Lots A-1 , A-2,. Lions
- ifreir original -condition, prior to the
winter seison, if proiect construction
to that time.
Si ncerelY , '1h;,t\{ rbr}
Cornelius C. llood
Vice President
CCl.|:dla
Devel oPment CorPorati on
Ridqe Subdivisjon' tostait of the 198'l-82
has not commenced Prior
1700 North Moore Street Arlington, VA 22209 7031522-5558
-rrd|iicnl- ii a rtrdlrn <t d Atdrir.rrr, k-
Architerra. Inc Ro*lYn Center
lnwn |ltl
box 100
vail, colorado 81657
(3031 476-5613
August 11, 1981
Neil Nood
Architema at Vail, Inc.
Dear Neil:
At the Autust 5 meeting
was given final approval
possib'if ity of removing
and concrete color more
co'lor.
Si nce
Peter. Jamar
Town Planner
Prl:df
department of community development
RE: DRB Submittal of 8-5-81
of the Design Review Board, your sub.mittal
with the fsl'lowing stipulatlons: examine
stairway between units 4 & 5, match stuccoto earth tones on site rather than Vail Pass
lnun
box 100
vail, colorado 81657
{303) 476-5613
ARCHITERM FILE
Peter Jamar
9-25-81
Building plans for Architerra
Total floor area for project: 23,835 sq.ft.
A Unit: 1816 sq.ft.
B Unit: 1820 sq.ft.
C Unit: 2022 sq.ft.
D Unit: 1817 sq.ft.
department of community development
B and on upper level
not be instal]ed.
Kitchens on lower level of Unit
Unit D are not allowed and must
of
l
f\tI'J..,:fi
l)ttt I aE:t I" a I ,'ife,e /-a'fu"rzott,;t r orchftgffa i r' ,I !--
--
-!!'rt- - f-i.,. . .. - - *- --. .- Architerra,lnc, Rosslyn Center. |700 North*- - - . . - Architerra, lnc, Rosslyn Center. | 700 North Moore Stre€t
.. - r, F.JpRoncr: //rs"/2rteyra q r'ai/ pRo.,EcrNo: ss*2,6/'OO/ sueet / or q.EtE/.oO/ sHEEr / or 4PROr€CTNO: 9CAt
. DRAWNEY: otro:e,d.4. oere, l7-/8.61
--- I --,,-t/ail / 'bonr { uffer /eae/s : 1&/6.i1 fia.trti i;
tr/,-/3--e.e.a/t-/'- 54246'82/!'
' 4a'' 23-e/3? ' -'
, I - ttEr , 5?.2oA3' 1 -- 6?.3674'
--\ Ez = /?.6647t , 62 e /6-2801 ' ',
I ro- I'I'i i-'-l^hilarrdv: i I ctfcnlleffcl. l i f ro- *t ,-i :,. i i - ofcnlteffa.,i
.--.:'-.'-j.....Ar<triterra,|nc.RoJ'|yncenter.|?(}oIroM
o03) 522'5558
, ' .- .' i 1 :, .- :' i 1:.
pRorEcr: /rcLilerra @ 6;/ pRorEcrNo: 8/'OO/ x.ete, snerr , ? oF 4
.,,",.-. / t/,,t t, E 4 -,,-^.D )4 A- JA.A/
(s, +12) '
' 70.03€)
4z . /?. btdT 4z - 2r.5(32'
' t rr- I..ii r i ; OfGnltgffO :i , i :' -'i.
t',t'' pRorEcr: /rChr&rfA @ fri/ prorrcr No,t{-@/ scAL€: ' ., sxenl / , o, 4./ ',suuEcr: (nT 'r p r' DnlwNBy: cHro,,h./..4' oarr, 8n /8-&/
; : . : ' '-:
Uni/ "A' /auer I uaaer /ette/ : 1elV.42 sg.{A I
# 4=6763' f i7: Et = 6?.oaggt 5t - 41.8874'
2A' af ,d&67t
'oo';35 #
a t/b/.a
II
..-;1 kJ"ll - 5{)/.^- u t?L4L?'/-a-d
/-.2 * L,9t *r;,.- / so-'*a/
WMW
//P/6a0qs
L
(/ttuLf N
'r{t''-
fr?."' i v Llsr ot: t-t^1't:Rl^t,s o
NAME oF PROJECT Architerra at Vail. Inc.
Ridqe Subdivision, Fil in
development located at
LEGAT DXSCRIPTI0N: LOT AlsA2 BLOCK A FILING Lio!!:
DEScRIPTION OF PROTDCT Al 3 unit 1i1sle-faln! lly !eJj!g$ig"l
Sandstone Drive in Vail, Color.ado with associated parkin for each . un it.
'Ilre fotlowing information is rcquired for submittal by the applicant to the
Board beforc a final approval can be given:
A. BUILDINC MATERIATS
Roof
Siding
Other hrall Materials
Fasc ia
Soffits
Nindovrs
Window Trin
. Doors
Door Trin
Hand or Deck Rails
Flues
Flashings
Chimneys
Trash Dlcl osures
Greenhous es
Other
B, PTANT I'IATERIALS
(Yegetativc, Landscal:ing
Botan i.cal Flanc
Ceda r Stain #717
Stain #717
Stucco (Smooth Vail Pass Colo "lr)
tain #7'17
Stucco (Smooth Vail Pass Color \
I umin i um Clad Wood Medium Bronze
Same As Door Color
l.leta I Fieldstone
Haterial
Fie ldstone al Material
Concrete w,/f ractured f in Vail Pass Color
Aluminium Hedi um Bronze
Garage EntrY Road . Rubberized AsPhal t
.Steel w/Gal y; !J i_re, Soacers Green
Typ.e of Matgial.
Quarry Tile
Color
Sahara Ti le
Barbecue - FieldstoneA|flq-
!r!aterials including
Corsnon l,lame
Trees, Shrnbs, aud
Quan'city
Glcl*:ri Covcr)
Size
REFER TO DRAWINGS BY MATTHE!/S O ASSOCIATES
cedar sfu
nze
Sol id eore Med ium Bronze
Il'I !'rFIt
I
c. olu:R t.ftqnscnp.r rnrr.rurrrs
(Retaining WaIls, Fcnccs, Swimrning pools, etc.) please spccify.
inq Walls - Fractured Fin Concrete - Same color as the
wal I system.{rqand Deck - Redw<rod
Project Applicalion
.f o
public Service Companl' qF Collommdlo
Minturn, CO 81645
July 28, 1981
Archeterra At Vail Inc.
1700 N. Moore St.
Rosslyn CenterArlington, VLrginta 22709
Attrn: Mr. Gene Powell
Re: Lots Al & A2, Liono Ridge Subdivision, Vail (13 Units)
Dear Sir:
Publl,e Servlee Company of Colorado w111 serve the above. referenced project
vith natural gas eervice, based on the rules and t'egulations for gas service
extensions and the gas attachment schedullng program on flle wlth the
Public Utill-ties ComLsslon of Colorado.
New custoners and cus tomers deslring additional amounts of natural gas are
connected to the Coupany system folloraing the appllcation for the required
amosnta of natural gas, vla the ternporary gas at tachment schedullng Program.Currentl-y, there is no waLtlng llst for gas corunitments.
Upon receipt.of an appl-ication for natural gas servlce, I w1lJ- lnltiate the
process to construct the neces.sary faciJ.ities. I have enclosed a guide to
the lnforaration that ni1l be needed to complete your application.
Due to constructlon backlogs and an abbreviated construction season, pronpt
attention to the service application w111 be greatly appreciated.
If I can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact me.
S incerely,
J*+ klptt
cary n$r JU t*
District Repreaentative
cH/Jn
Enclosure: Conuoercial- Gas Iaformatlon Form
-/l// ec. Ur, Bilt Andrews
Toun of VailP. O. Box 100Vail, Colorado 81658
?. O. Box 430 949-5781
"l
Project Applicatlon
Project Name:
Project Description:
Contact Person and Phone
Owner, Address and Phone:
Architect, Address and Phone:
Legal Description: Lot
Comments:
Design Review Board
,/)
Morionby: frrcg
Seconded by:
DISAPPROVAL
pub[ic Sc'rvice Contpanl' QF Collomdo
P. O. Box 430 Minturn, CO 81645 949-s781
July 28, 198I
Archeterra At Vall Inc.
1700 N. Moore St.
Rosslyn CenterArlington, Virginia 22209
Atttn: Mr. Gene Powel-l
Re: Lots Al & A2, Lions Ridge Subdivision, Vail (13 Units)
Dear Sir:
Public Service Company of Colorado w111 serve the above. referenced proJect
rd. th natural gas servlce, based on the rules and regulations for gas service
extenslons and the gas attachuent schedullng program on file wLth the
Public Utl-lLties Cormlss l-on of Colorado-
Nerr customere and customers desirlng atltlitional amounts of natural gas are
connected to the Company aystem fol"lowing the appllcatlon for the required
amounts of natural gas, vla Ehe temporary gas at tachment scheduling program.
Currently, there l-s no waitlng 1lst for gas comrnltrnents.
Upon receipt.of an application for natural gas service, I will l-nitiate the
process to construct the necessary facllities. I have enclosed a guide to
the information that wll1 be needed to complete your application.
Due to construction backlogs and an abbreviated construction season, prompt
attentLon to the servlce application will be greatly appreciat.ed.
If I can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact me.
S incerely,
"b,+ khu
cary na(t-r 4 i-Dlstrict Representative
cIIlJn
Enclosure: Corirnercial Gas Inforrnation Form
Mr. Bill Andrews
Town of VailP. O. Box 100Vail, Colorado 81658
1r/""'
t I
Project Application
Project Name:
',€E
Proiect Description:
Contacl Person and Phone
Owner, Address and Phone:
Architect, Address and Phone:
,r,^n /-t aAJJ E/&t , ,o,"
Design Review Board
&Aft?rc*Rr V*rc
A z (fr,rs eW,€ SiB.
51NG{^6 funlct UI\|IS
.|t /.r'u6
/fZ ltse &-e,s?LF\vvrE E t &d/u-EE - e,erlft
/ S strt/rfr
4(tza sr'#.
/fr{'ory/P741 &t6t4:
{&A€5: faorT- do'
spES - /fl
- /r'
fc.'tr Z@F: 3e'
'frvi t as z
&%
&s%
Frt//,
6q+ @seo:
/86? f
/sqo f,
&o(o (o
EtaH - /r/d{ &At/€flarnu @e €d/u/a/a
u1/ {o% t*(&rrtl)
/ t-//
//rotl
/ i, o{o
^ouo
_ew 6,.--
Lfr*-:
a.$t:
Ar?
:lg
LE(g
RC
l€era, SfuN
6 A"dArtGQ
6 6" l,utrsA
7 ,C., /)V/44
^
LEr *e?*"
---r--
t?-
ENGINEERING CHECK LIST
Subdivision
Lot
Bl ock
Filing
1. Submi tta'l Items
2. Engineering Requirements
(Acceptable) CIot Acceptable)
l,/-
Olo€zt:/ae ?n E€ &&.t't t^t(l
greement
(A) Topo Map(B) Site Plan(c) utility Plan(D) Title Report(E) Subdivision A
(A) Culvert Size
(B) Driveuay Grad
3. Source of Utiliti
o
c
D
E
F
(if applicable)
- ,1.lS_ ore@-
e (8% max) (Actual )
es
El ectri c
Gas
Sewer
llater
Tel ephone
T. V.
OL
4- Cornments: A- Ta Dtya.Ge r*tll7&-
Q)pe-< 7h Z?EP <41s 6F aE,^t*t o^t 4.sT S@
Approved:
Di sapproved:
//6/re / er
2n,6@DeDartmcnffi
Sit I Anareh,s
P
PEc -3- 7/rs/sra
5. A request.for anendment in accordance with Sections 18.66.110 through 18.66.160
to thA-zonilg ordinance fron Residential Cluster to Residential Prinary,/Secondary
in order to build a residential unit together with a caretakerts unit.
Applicant: Doyle HoPkins.
After beginning discussion, it was discovered that there were sone adj acent
property owners on the Ridge who weren't notified of the meeting. Ed Drager
lskea to table the iten until the next meeting. Duane noved and Jin seconded
to table this until the next regular neeting. Vote was 4-D (Dan had left.)
A.minor subdivision st to vacate a lot. line between lots A-l and A-2,
e FiIing Applicant: AA
Peter Patten explained the meno, and Dave Green representing Architerra saic
that this was really overlooked at the previous neeting when the project had
been approved, Gerry White stated that, while he was opposed to the project
itself, this point was a ninor one.
Duane noved and Jim seconded to glant the request to vacate the lot line.
The vote was 4-0 in favor.
7. A reouest for sn exterior alteration and nodification in Corunercial Core II,
under Section fA
3,950 square feet of office space to the Lionshead Gondola Building, and a request
for a variance to Section 18,26.1S0 to waive the requirenent of including one
half the parking within the nrain building. Applicant: Vail Associates.
Peter Patten explained the request, including an exPlanation of the nurnber of
' parking units that Vail Associates have for their enployees, which the stdff
lelt was adequate. Ton Leonard of Vail Associates explained that they did not
have sufficient office space for their enployees. Dr. Steinberg of the Town
Council wanted to be assured that the parking lois were zoned for parking only,
and Dick Ryan assured hin that they were. Scott was concerned that in future
years, it night not be remenbered that this variance was granted on the basis
bf th" existing spaces. Ton Leonard reninded thern that VA had 140 extra parking
spaces. Discussion of the one condition, that the applicant agrees to Parti-cipate in and not remonstrate against a special irnprovernent district when one
is formed for the Lionshead area, followed.
Jim moved and Duane seconded to approve the request as stated in the staff nemo
of July 6, 1981 including the condition described above. The vote was 3-1,
Scott opposed because he wasnrt comfortable with the parking situation.
8.. Pub lic. heasing and consideration of an exterior
sPace and a retract-
abie glass enclosure over the existing swirruning pool at the Lodge at Vail.
Applicant: Lodge ProPerties, Inc.
Dick Ryan explained that the applicant had decided to ask only for the restaurant
addititn. KLn Wentworth, architect for.the applicant showed plans and stated
that the festaurant addition would require 2 to 4 more parking sPaces. He
emphasized that his firm felt that nothing is happening around this edge of
thl open area and that pedestrian activity would be increased. Duane agreed
and added that hj.s concLrn was with quality instead of quantity. Gerry White
alterati.on and nodif ication
?
I'
department of community development
July 10, 1981
Mr. Gene Powell, President
Architerra-at-Vai1, Inc.
1700 North Moore Street
Arlington, Vi.rginia 22209
Dear Mr. Powell,
On Jr,ure 8, 1981, the Planning and Environrnental Conmission
approved by a vote of 3-2 a variance request for Architerra-
at.Vail to construct some of the 13 proposed earth-sheltered
dwelling units in areas of 409o slope or greater' according
to the proposed site Plan. Also approved at that meeting
was the Environmental Inpact Report subnitted to the Touin
for the project. This EIR was approved 5-0 with 6 conditions
primarily addressing revegetation and erosion conttol neasures.
The Town of Vail's Design Review Board has granted prelininary
approval to the project, and I anticipate that final approval
will be granted shortly.
If you have furhter questions or wish more information' Pleaselet me know,
A. PETER PATIEN,
Scnior Pl anner
APP: bpr
a I*l
t[Ht|,I l|at
box l OO
vail, colorado 81657
(3031 476-5613
-Archit erra
JR
4.
i . l,llirrovul oI tn jnutc:; of .Junc 22, 1$8I,
2. A rcqircst for a sctb:lck vlri:llco to nr:rl,t: I r':1lrI atr cx.i:;t ilrli l:tri.lding which
cncrorrchcs 4r i rrt o tlic s idc sctbar:k ol) 5010 l.l:ri.n Gorc i.)r'ivc rvhiclt is part ol'
an unl)latted parccl in lli1,,hot'n, titlcd Strntl j ll., l)ha:;c lL /qrplicant: lrcttttcr
Construction iulana ilcmcn t, Inc,
Appeal of adninistratj.vc dccision concerninl), the color rif a resj.dence on Lot
20, Potato Patch. Applicant: Jonine and,l .,1 . Col 1irrs.
Rcquest to table density varience application for 1ot 12, Biock A7, Caso.l ar
Vail II at ll0l Vail Vio.r Drive. Applicants: Jean and Janes l'{. McDonald,
Jean Catoc, et al .
5. A requcst for amcndlrent in accordancc wjth Scctj.ons 18,66.110 through 18.66,160
to the zoning ordinance frorn Residentjal Cluster to Rr:sidcntial Prinary/SeconCary
in ordcr to build a residential unj.t together with a caretaker:ts unit, Applicarrt:
Doyle Hopkins.
A ninor subdivision request to vacate a lot 1lne betwecn lots A-l ard A-2,
Lionsridge Filing #1. Applicant: AAV Limited Partnership.
7.. A request for an exterj.or lltcration and rnodification iu Conutercial Corc II
under Scction 18.26.0.15 on lot 4, Block 1, Vail Llonshcad 1st Filing,
to add 3,950 square fcct of office spRcc to thc Lionshead Gondola Building,
and a reqrrest for a varilnce to Section 18.26.150 to wi\;ve the rcquircnrc:rtof inclrrdinS one-half thc pirlking Nithin thc ntain building. .^-11'r j111t '
\tai 1 Associatcs.
8. A r-eque:;t for an extelior alte'r-.ation and rnodif icatiorr j tr ConLntercial CoIc I
under Section 18.2.1 .065 on Tl'acts A, B, C, Block 5C, Vail Village lst Filing,
lTzl East Gore Crcck lhive, the Lodge at Vail., in ordcr to. adcl a 618 sqttare
foot rcstaurant addition au<l a ret]'actable glass encl.osure ovel' the existinsl
swinrning pool. Appl ic:rnt: . Lodge Propcrties, Inc.
9. A request for approval to replat Highland lleadorvs, Lots 26-42, the Highlatrd
park Spccial Dcvel opnl('nt Dist::ict 11. The aPploval is requested to al.lot+ ucw
road declications and vlcetions and lot linc rcno'rals. This j.s a major sub-
divi-sion I'equestccl undcl Chapter 17.04 of thc Vai-t i'{unicipal Code. Applicant:
Surr Teclr i'ui i dcr's, Inc.
10. A requcst for a variancL. to Sc'ction lS. i4.090 of the Vail I'tunici.pal Codc to
allorri thc appliclnt to irtclrrdc- flood plrrin arca in calculating allorvablc clcnsity
in detcrmini.ng thc nunrbe.r' of utrits al Iot"t.d on the sitc of thc Internounta in
Sr,lin ancl Tcnnis CIub, :rn utl)lJtt('d P:t|cr'l .in Vail Irltcrlroulltain Subdivisi.otr.
The appl i.cants atc tl)c Illt.('r'nlount:tin Sr.'int :rnd 'l'cnnis Clrrll rr'ho r,lish to cor)stI'tlct
2 additionll units ovcr the |rcviotts :t1lPr.ovitl b1' Iiaglc Courlty.
l)i.AN;,j lNt; /Vil) l:NVl jlfJ);ili ,li1Al, (l0i'l:.'llliSl(.rli
,ft .July l:i, tgrjl 'ir00 1-..r*. ft
11. A requcst utrder Ortlinlncc 13, Scries ol' l$Sl , for Thc Vallcy,
Phase (r for rnajor'. r'r'r'isiotts to ;ttl lrP1t1'1rVcd sjtc plitn. 'l'hc ploposal
is to rc-dcsigrr thc btriltlirlli locltt trrrts.;trtd ttttit dcsigns, atong with
pol.tiol) of ttrc r.olrtl luyor,rt. lhtrr:ry I'r'rrIg1'11s5 l)artrrcl.ship of Dallas.
6.
lublishctl in tlrc Vli I 'l'r:ri I July l0' t 9SI
ot
METORANDT'M
TO: Town Cor:ncil
FRoM: Comnmity Development Departnent
DATE: June 18n 1981
RE: Architera
Enclosed is the meno for Architerra at Vail and the ninutes ofthe Jrme 8 neeting. rn our offices are copies of the EnvironnentalImpact Report, if you would like to look at it. Wefll be happy toanswer questions you may have.
r,,/
Project Application
Proiect Name:
Project Description:
Contact Person and
' 13 SttldE FAnru/ F' ' Shf t@tn )nrrS
Phone
Owner, Address and Phone:
Archilect, Address and Phone:
Legal Descriplion: Lot Block ,,,,^n LION\ Pt\bE 9'tr',,zon"
-
Comments:
Design Review Board
Motion by:
Seconded by:
APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL
Summary:
Planner E statt Approval
t
Dear l,{r. Wood,
At the June 8, 1981 meeting ofthe Environmental hnpact Reportvote of 5*0, with 6 concerns asfol lows :
box 100
vail, colorado 81657(303) 476.5613
Cornelius C. Wood
Vice PresidentArchiterra, Inc,
Rosslyn Center
1700 North Moore StreetArlington, Virginia 22209
department of community development
June 17, 1981
Re: Architerra
Lots A-1,A-2, LionsridgeFiling #1
the Planniag and Environnental Connissionfor the above project was approved by alisted in the memo of June 4, l98l as
2.
The ^report speaks of pedestrian walkways throughout the project, butstaff has not received a site p1an, at the tini of this i*liing, wrrichshows the walkways.
A potential problem exists with shallow subsurface drainage, especiallyduring constTuction. How will this be nitigated?
5. Retainage of as nany trees as possible should be an objective. TheEIR states all trees will be renoved.
1.
4, Tining of revegetation was not addressed in the EIR,
The pond near Sandstone Drive, part of the original proposal., has beenremoved ' The EIR stresses this is a najor source of- sediment contTolduring construction. l{hat is the alternative plan now?
Visual conditions with respect to the retaining walls for the road systemshould be carefully reviewld.
5.
6.
'.z.
Wood-Archit"ttu, I -Z^ June 17, 1981
At the sane neetinB, the variance request to build on a sloPe of 40% in
a Residential Cluster Zone District was approved by a vote of 3-2 contingent
upon three itens:
1. That the tot Line between lots Al and A2, Lionsridge Filing #l be vacated.
2. That p variance be considered for retaining walls over 6r,
3, That the findings on page 4 of the staff rnerno concerning variance criteria
were found by the PEC.
-aThis approval fias for 13 units of earth sheltered housing.
Sincer_5dy,
,/ -/-ffi
PETER PATTEN
Zoning Administrator
PP:bpr
F,
Vai]. lfor,r'n Council
Council- Chambersvai1, Colorado 4165?
Dear Si.rs:
:The *ime has ccnne for me to protest the approval. by the P.E.C.
on June 8, 19Bl-, of the variance request by Architerra to.build on t'he 408 slope abowe f;iorrs Ridge,
!l)' obr""aion lo the approva-l j.s not due to.a safet.y factor'the Rej.nforced Earth Company seems to have a record of
accomplishment in dealing with steep slope development, bulrafher the concept of developing land wherever and in whateverform .it .may occur is a contrad-j.etion to proper conmunity'planning jn terms of the w:Lsual impact created by steep slope
development as'well as enviormeYrLal impact created by erosionsuffounding the development.
The aesthelic .lnlsual impacts involrring Vail Valley have alhrayslreen a concern and were aalilressed in the "Goals Statemenls"tifled :Envirutrental Eth:lc- - -- We feel it is imperative thatan .errviormental. i:nage-e tJr:ics b.e esLablished for the community$o ,engr::e ihat. the :r,ar€ enrri;o:trrLe.nta]- gualities that are Vailare not ,erorletd - -
She trece.s.sts:ry steppi:ng of s-fsrlctures built on a steep hillsidepreileterrnines ttrat the sanne G- .F..A.. permitted on a level lotcan :become :v:j-s.ucLlay olfe:lgj:sre wh.ich I f,hink is exactly thesittra:ion t-o b€ ,considered in the Architerra project and a
tr*el-a clesi.gned project bu-i-1t on that portion of the lot with
.l.ess than a -401t sfope wos:-Ld Jrave less visual impact. We would
ibe rnak-ang a ttig m-istake jloy lrot .aillowing our natural typographytto deterrnine fhe {rarartret€trs of r3evelgpmentA\in Vail Valley.
Si:nrrer,el-y,,
ALJrcrrt G- slhi"te
Wej:-l trLanni-ncr
!"*1"*"1 l"- nm
il L..'-1"r.,,*,I It
v.A.lL, coLcFrADo a1b5'i'
PHONE (3C3) 4 /6-5646
,eGiq/crS
ot
t
t
I
I
I
Lesal Description, rotfl, 4..?ro.t
?0t{[ c[ffx
for.. , sFR, .R, R P/S Zoi{t:D I STRICTS
Filins Lt#|.s.AtM S"t6o!ru!w
Architect
Setback.s : Front-Requii-J,j-io r'*pr;ijiroposed oK%r.-..-_.-Sides-Required 'lS, pr^oposecl . - OE .
Rear -Requirec. l5' proposed
_ 0 h.
lla terccu r.s c- rcqu i rc d 'proposed
GRFA: . Al'loued *z4zs
. GRFA : .Pri mary A'l 'l oued
Secondary ir'll or.ied
' Primlry
Secondary
rr(,lre -.J2-/{W|EEI.- 44
Prr,l
Dr^n '
A(qL-Lte /.
Site Covcrage: Al'loirecl 28-t.27 O _ . . _" _ pro; . qf HqTUNA__Lanclscaping: Requirecl 6?, gqq _ * pro; -_gE--.Parking: . Requirecl LLI Dr.;": '
,r"n" ;:*r"r;= ---."---_*.
Pt'or' *3r
' _--Slope lrct Ol-...
Environircntal/llazar.cls: .Avnlanche
Flood P,'ain
rre P,'MPa' 4a,r-n?,FgfA _:/t*l1L) L-E*___
Corrncnts:
l).i t r: :
-&#oeq,
Tttltinir : /l1rpl.Or.,lif,/l).i::i.il!ri.0.,{:ti
f)oza
-.1nco.{
oz
'omn
=-{
d
@mt-rnr-'r I *.- i1::Pe l: 3
=Hni l* I ;
=!i l9 s I
=Q6r lr = 3!/P lm !F- l=[ gt=P 5untr i5aE !:.z=ot0@ a g
=e s!z filo-ntm
3{
!mF
=
zI
s
Hft
t-
f oate 6/,,/r,
APPTICATTON FORM FOR A SUBDJVTST0N_REQUEST
A. Nane of Applicant AAt/ & P*fi.,q--sL,'p
l^ou.rg
li*iT.o Vr l'7i,.-,ic*-
Address phone/-8oo J)6-.lorJ
c.
tot
g-t.
I
I
6.
B. Name of Appticantrs Represent"tinu G.-'. b C.*eJ
-Authorization of lroperty er Ger-n- h.--.lr pr=i$--rr
Signature
A.ld""r" .Foo !j.^,J* t.\e, I hote 1>(- Y336
D. Location cf Proposal
rui"g L.,..s.. f$e- 5-.Ld,.,lsr:"o s'.f,y / -
{r+ecdNl0=R"ni37-r ua^cGfieo 6€ TIE 6f l,;^ d;-et t-tr6- g-/d
F. $pe of Subdivision: (check one)
Major (involving nore than 4 lots)
Minor (involving 4 or fewer lots)
Duplex (splitting a duplex stTuct.ure and,/or lot)
Procedures for najor and ninor subdivisions are as defined in the Town of Vail
Subdivision Regulations on pages 9 through 20.
H. Dupl.ex subdivision requires the sane infornation as a minor subdivision with the
requirenent that the following statement ilust appear on the plat before receiving
Town of Vail approval:
For zoning or other land-use regulations of the Town of Vail, the two parcels
created by this subdivision are deemed to be one lot. No more than one two-fanily
residence shall be allowed on the conbined areas of the two parcels. Allowable
Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) for the two-farnily resi.dence shall be,
calculated using the conbined area of the two parceLs.
Tine Requirenents: lrtajor and minor subdivisions nust be approved by the Planning
and Environtnental Corunission. The PEC neets on the 2nd and 4th lr&cndays of each
month. An appl icat ion with the necessary acconpanying material must be subnittedfour (4) weeks prior to the date of the meeting,
r)',
Own
I.
J.
PLANNINO AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION AGENDA
Monday, June 8, 19Bl
2:00 p.m. STUpI SESSION
Gore Valley Water Issues
3:00 p.m.
'1. Approval of minutes of May 25, 1981.
2. A request for a variance to b0ild on a slope in excess of 4011 , another
variance to bui'l d withjn a set-back on lots A-l and A-2, Lionsridge,
between Sandstone Drive and Ljons' Ridge Loop. App1icant: AAV Limited
Pa rtnersh'i p.
3. Applicat'ion for a density variance in gross residentia'l floor area inorder to bujld a duplex on Lot .l2, Block 47, Casolar Vai'l II at 110lVai'l View Drive. Applicants: McDonald, Catoe, etc.,Pension
Retirement Trust.
4. Preliminary revjew ot CCI and CCII Urban Design Guide Plan Projects
1. Hill Buildinq additions
2. Lodge at vafi, swinming pool enclosure and restaurant addjtion.
3. Casino Building remodel
4. Concert Hall Plaza Bu'i1ding, interior and exterior remodel
5. Lionshead Gondola Building, add office space and convert 3 officesto cormercial .
6. Lionshead Study Area No. 5
Published in the \tail Trail June 5. lg8l.
of ol
Planning and Environnlental Comrnission Meeting
June B, 1981
PRESA\T STAFF PRESI]NT
Scott Edwards
Gaynor MilIer
Gerry l{hite
Dan Corcoran
Duane Piper
ABSENT
Dick Ryan
Peter Janar
Peter Patten
Betsy Rosolack
COITNCIL REPRESENTATIVE
Bil 1 Wilto
Roger Tilkemeier
Jirn Morgan
The neeting was called to orcder at 3:00 p.m. by Gemy White, chairman.
l. Appr.olral of pinute_s of M3y.26., 1981-
Scott noved and Gaynor seconded to approve the ninutes. Vote was 5-0 in favor.
_?.:_4_rgq".:!_for_a-v3l1g!Sg, to b*ild o-n_ a s_lgpe in excess of 40% in .a Residential
-cf.rsteArchiterra at Vail on lots A-1 and A-2, Lionsridge Subdivision, Filing #1.
Peter Patten presented the i"nfornation in the memo, stating that there vlere
two itens to be considered: the variance request and the EIR. Gerry White
wondered if they were to be granted a variance on a steep slope sirnply becausethey ggl! build--had the technology. Peter answered specifically becausethe tEffiii6logy would help stahiliLy--of,the-hr-i-!:i3e. Gerry felt that no develop-nent would be better in areas above 40% slope,
Gene Powell of Architerra presented slides showing construction sequence, appli*cation and incorporation of design into Architerra concepts, uses, methods,
elements used, and energy conservatio . Gary Larson of lv{at thews Associates
showed the landscape plan demonstrating erosion control and revegetation. He
showed the use of clear water diversion, sedinentation contTol with a stormwater retention on the bottorn of the site, heavy equipment grading with .Eemporary
scarsr erosion blankets, and use of a jute naterial with nulch (though he statedthat this nethod would probably not be used here). They would need ForestService or BLM permissi-on to tenporarily divert water above the site. He addedthat they had a $100,000 landscape budget, that they would hope to seed andsod this falln and that possibly would be able to plant large plants this fall.
Discussion follor+ed concerning the vacation of the 1ot line, the height ofthe retaining walls (10 feet highest), the grade of the road to be 8"r. Gerrystated that 13 units could be built and not go into the 40% grade at all.
Upon looking at the nodel , Gene reninded then that the upper floors were tobe nostly glass, Gerry felt that the irnpact visually on-ihe va1ley was notin keeping with the best interests of the area. Dick Ryan felt that this use
ffi-'
PEc -2- rune 8Ot ot
of the hill was a more sensitive treatnent of the 1and, and added that the
developers had a right to use the land. lle felt this use would have less impact
than a conventional development would have. Gerry rcpeated that the inpact
on the valley would be enormous, and that he did not like building on a 40%
slope. Dan Corcoran felt that 10' walls on the entire west end would not be
hidden by aspcn trees, and added that this would have rnore irnpact from across
the valley than a lower building built on the lower part of the site, Scott
and Gaynor felt that if this project could be done safely, that it was better
than conventional constnuction, and that they liked the overall plan.
Duane asked why the units werentt buried nore as they had been originally--b-een
prbsented. Neil Woodts reply was that they wanted to reduce the anount. -of
walls and wanted to have cioss ventilation, Dqane felt the treatment itas--l4.illy
sensitive, using existing contours and blending.into the swales. He was concerned
wiih the height of the vialls with reipect to the Town of Vail restrictions
(the 6r linitation), Peter P, said the intent of the tegulation was visual
itrpact, and that he would have to consult with an attorney regarding this issue.
.Lester Cufaude in the audience stated that he was fair:ly knowledgeable on earth
shelters and felt that this was handled nicely, The six concerns listed in
the neno were addressed, with the 6th one stil1 not resolved, Gary Larson
stated that he could r,sork with the staff or the DRB to solve problens in greater
detai 1 .
Dan Corcoran noved and Scott seconded that the staff approve the EIR for
Architerra at Vail with the inclusion of the 6 concerns listed in the nemo
of June 4, 1981, The vote was 5-0, unanimous for approval of the EIR'
Discussion of the. lot line vacation followed, and whether or not 13 units could
have been constructed if setbacks and steepness had been considered. Peter
Jamar stated the nunber would have been 15, the only question was whether or
not l3 would have been possible physically considering setbacks and steepness
of slope, Dan added that with the height restrictions, steepness of road,
spaces between units, it would be difficult to get 13 units.
Peter felt the question was whether the lots were best developed as 2 lots
or as one lot? Duane said one reason for vacation of lot lines is to improve
the use of the landn and felt thi.s project was better without the lot line.
Duane rnoved that the variance to build on the 40.% slope be approved contingent
upon three items: 1. that the lot line between lots Al and A2, Lionsridge
Filing #1 be vacated; 2. that a variance be considered for retaining walls
over 6r; and 3. that the findings on page 4 of the staff memo concerning
valiance criteria were found by the PEC.
This notion was secondedby 6aynor. The vote was 3-2 in favor. Dan and Gerry
voted against the motion. The motion passed. Gerry was against building on
a 40% slope, and Dan felt the inpact of the walls would be too great.
' PEC -3- Jrure 8, t; f
3. Appli"cg.tion for a {ensity variance in g-ro-ss residential floor_area in orderto build a duplex on lot 12, Block A7, Casolar Vail II at ll0l Vail View Drive.Applicants: McDonald, Catoe, etc, Pension Rctirenent Trust,
The applicant asked to table this item. Dan moved and Scott seconded to table.
Vote was 5-0 in favor of tabling.
Dan noved and Gaynor seconded to adjour the meeting. Vote was 5-0.
The aneeting adjourned at 5:00 p.m.
o?
(Wtsrys: fu A<-*ttOfft /oi /{' o F
/q/r?,{n: E6 s/t"Ei
o
I
o
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Environnental Corunission
FROM: Departnent of Cornrnunity Developnent/Peter Patten
RE: Variance requested to build residences in 40% slope
Residential Cluster Zone District and review of the
Impact Report for Atchiterxa at Vail on lots A-1 and
Subdivision, Filing No. l.
DATE: June 4, 1981
BACKGROUND
areas ]"n a
EnvironrnentalA-2, Lionsridge
Architerra at Vail ancl the Reinforced Earth Cornpany wish to constluct a 13
unit earth-sheltered housing project on lots A1 , A2 io the Lionsridge Subdi-
vision, Filing 1, above the existing Lionsmane proiect. The description
of the original proposal is contained i.n detail i-n the Envj.ronmental InPact
Report. However, you should note that the tranlvay, water system and parking
stlucture have all- been dropped and the proposal now includes a one-way toad
looping the project and two-car garages for each unit.
the proposal is a unique one in that it repTesents Architerra's first residen-
tial-project in the United States. A 47 unit project in Nice, France was
construcied on a steep slope and has proven to be a success. The constrUctio:r
technology and housing design is purposely directed at being conpatible
with steeply sloping sites.
PREVIOUS PEC REVIEW
The PEC saw a presentation by the Arcl:iterra, Reinforced Earth Conpany Sroup
on April 27, 1-981. Generally, the PEC had a positive attitude toward the
prop;sal and the concept with the following corunents and concerns:
I. Why so nuch of the house was not underground?
2. Concem over the tining and anount of landscaping with nention of escrowing
funds.
3. Concern about the ability of the site to handle the road construction
in regard to the initial access from Sandstone Drive and the cuts and
fills required to nake the road work. A request was nade by PEC to see
a detailed grading plan along with profiles and sections of the road.
4, A perspective was requested showing the appearance of the Ploject fr.'om
the Frontage Road.
Architerra -2-,.,J0, ,nut
f
gNVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT REVIEW
The Staff required an environmental i:npact report stlessing hydrologic,,geologic,
biotic and visual conditions as they ""lute to the earth-sheltered housing
construction. This has been submitted and the PEC received copies previous
to the April 27 neeting. Although the site plan and_proposed facilities
have significantly changed since the EIR was.prepared, the nain Points
covered in the teport rema in intact.
Ilhe staff recommends approval of the EIR for Architerra at Vail with the
condition that the fotiowing further infornation be subnitted, revi'ewed and--
6t;;;; by either siarr or-nnB (whichever is the appropriate approval level) I
1. The report speaks of pedestrian walkways throughout !1" ptgi::!' -bl:^,Staff iras not receivei a site plan, at the tirne of this writing, wnrcn
shows the walkwaYs.
?. A potential probleur exists with shallow subsurface drainage, especially
dui'ing construction. How will this be nitigated?
3. Retainage of as nany trees as possible should be an objective. The EIR
states all trees will be removed.
4. Timing of revegation was not addressed in the EIR'
5. The pond near Sandstone Drive, part of the original proposal ' has been
remoied. The EIR stresses this-is a major source of sedirnent cont1'ol
during construction. What is the alternative plan now?
6. Visual conditions rnrith respect to the retaining walls for the road system
should be carefullY reviewed.
40 PERCENT S.LOPE VARIANCE
This is the first request for relief to construct residential units on
stopes of 40% o" *or* i.n the Town. The applicant feels that the tech-
nology and construction techniques involved- i., the Afchiterra/Reinforced
Earth systero rp""ifi""lly adapt thenselves to very steep slopes -a!9 tltlt
the finished product actually inproves the stabilization of the hillside'
I rsill review this request first- addressing the l{astef tlazard Ordjnance
and secondly, with regard to the norrnal factors by which we review variance
requests. iliu r"qrr*it can be rnade under Section 18.69.060 which states
that variances to the Master Hazard Ordinance can be applied for under
the usual varial)ce rules and Tegulations. Moreover, section 18.69.030
of the Hazard Ordinance states that the rrnaster hazard plans.may be altered
frorn tirne to tine to conforn with new inforination or existing conditions ' "
Thus, it was the intent of the ordinance that it not be a concrete docunent,
that new technologies or changing conditions should be recognized as
possible excePtions.
Architera -3- .lf +, tsar
The Environrnental lrnpact Report (on Page B-1), for the project states
that:
ItTtre proposed units will be constructed directly into the hillside
using the hillside itself for support and j-nsulatj.on. The designis well-suited for difficult-to-develop hillsides through the useof a proven soils engineering technology, Reinforced Earth, (described
in detail in Appendix A), This technology provides an architectural
landfonn capable of stabilizing hillside conditions and thereby
allowing for flexibility in the site plan design."
The $taff has no reasons to believe that the above clain is not true.
The ttack record is one of success for both Architerra and Reinforced
Earth Company.
CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
It In the same section -as_ the above quote, the ordinance states, ,Fltre purposeof the naster hazard plans is to identify ana atieviai"-p"e"""t and rutureplgPlems. created by the constmction of improvenents in ine hazard areaswltnrn the town by neans of presenting in aa orderly fashion the generaldata and information which aie essential to the understanding of the relation-ship between the hazards and inprovements located. within said areas.rt
This points to the potential problems of constructing improvenents rn 40%slope areas. 40% slope was chosen because the studies the ord.inance wasbased upon generally ioncluded that that was the point at which potentialenvironnental and site planning problems occurred. However, the-se sutdieswere not able to fully study how earth-sheltered housing and its associated.technologies would affect these steep slopes.
UPon=review of CT s, Section 18.62.060 of l4unicipal Code,'l'he
=IlePar_lqent of Comlnunity Developrncnt reconrnends approval of the requestedvarrance based upon the following factors:
Consideration of Factors :
The relqtj-olship of the requested variance to other existing or potential
uses anjl.structures in the vicinity.
Ihe project should not have any negative effects on other properties. Duringconstruction, the erosion and sedimentation controls proposed in the EIRshoutd be strictly followed so that adjacent downhill properties are notadversely affected.
ee to which relief fron the strict or literal inte tation and
orcement ified re on ls necessary to eve compat
and uni.f o treatnent among sitcs in thc vicinit or to atta
ectr-ves of t s titlc without PTant o spccifll privil euc.
t This, of course,granting of this
above discussionfor a site which
is the crux of
varianc-e woul.d
addressing theis appropriate
the issuc. The Staff feels stronglynot be a special privilege (refer to
Hazard Ordinancc). This is a uniquefor ayrirlying the specific technology
that
the
propo sr I
br;ing,
Architerra -4- Jurf, toer
proposed. Earth-sheltercd housing is increasing in popularity, and othersimilar proposals would get the same consideration tli; one has received,Earth-sheltered housing affords some very significant encrgy-cost savingsand often provides difficult-to-develop sitei r+ith a workabie solution.If conventional housing were being proposed, the staff vrould nost likelyreconmend denial.
The comnnunity Developrnent Departnent Teconmends approval of the 40% slopevariance request for Architerra at vail . hle feel very Positively aboutthe project and feel the developers are a conpetent group who can nake thisproject work. The ever-changing technologies in the housing constructionirdustry must be recognized. The long term energy problems of our country
Iust b9 recognized, and we as a staff must be flexiLle and open to new ideas.
We back with enthusiasm this project.
The effect of the sted variance 1i
ac
t and airities 1ic facilities and
distribution ofation. tfan atlon and tra
The only relevant factor here would be putrlic safety in terms of the hillsidestability. Again, we feel that the technology involved can work on thathillside and that stability of the slope will not be a problen.
Such other factors and criteria as the conmission deems applicable to theproposed varj_ance.
LrNprNG$:
S9-lleEiryg,glsl-.EnviTonnental Corunission shall nake the following findingsbefore granting a variance :
That-the granting of the varianee will not constitute a grant of specialprivilege inconsistent with the linitations on other properties classifiedin the same distri ct,
That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the publichealth, safety, or welfare, or naterial ly injurious to properties or irnprove-nents in the vicinity.
That the variance is \,rarranted for one or nore of the following reasons:
Ther-e are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicableto the site of the variance that do not apply generally to other propertiesin the same zone.
RECOMMENDATION
on
ntroducing tfie g"E-F
LowLevel Floodlight
A E<H FEr-eA
Patent Pending
1l
.t
t
I
II
I
II
Ill
I
rl
TffFS LIG&{TING
s!bs'!ia.y ol wan.r xrdde a cot9a.v. IncKFE
16555 E. Gale Avenue
P.O. Box 1275
GN ol Industrv, Calito(nia 91749
Ter'epnone (2f3) gGB-5666
Telex 67-0491
Cable KIMLTG-INDUSTRY
@1979 Kim Lighting, Inc.
Other Kim Products
Streel and Area Lighttng
Environmenlal Lighting
Landscape Lighting
Swimming Pool Lighing
Fountain Lighting
Custom Architectural l-ounlans
Architectural Founlain Kits
Fountain ComPonenls
Contenls
1-7 Suggested uses8-9 LightingPedormanc€10 Features
1 | Installalion delail
12-13 suggested csncrele pedestals1a Fixture details15 Specilicalions and ordering
16-18 system 1 photomelrics
t9-ZS System2ahd3Photometrics26-27 Fecommendedspaclngs28 Surlace reflections
t.Details o #":'"^v"*,svtr{ |'|^, I I Symmetricright-left
$ eAn View, Syslem e S,| | LeftAsymmetric
$ elanView, System 3I I RightAsymmetric
S)
Lighl
Center
T--
I
i
In
\v
System 1 'f-vl
tt
B4G1{
g'
Ordering guide for complete fixture
Housing shall be a one-piece aluminum casting of an alloy
containing less than 0.37o copper to prevent corrosion when cast
in concrete. A cast aluminum J-box of the same alloy shall be
attached to the underside of the housrng and shall be enclosed by
a removable cover Interior volume of the J-box shall be 22 cubic
inches, and shall contain four (4) :/+" N.P.T. conduit taps. There shall
be two taps in the bonom and one in each end, each tap with a
removable plug. A panicb-board cover shall be furnished to
keep the housing clean until the electrical components
are to be installed.
Door Frame shall be a one'piece alurninum casting with a fine
pebbled texture on the outer surlace. Trapezoidal outer contour
shall tilt the lens 1ff lrom vertical.
l-grs shall be temDered borosilicate olass with a smoolh outer
surface flush with ihe door frame, and-vertical inside flutes. For
Systems 2 and 3, a shield shall be provided behind the lens, to
. A conlrol lhe fixture brightness when viewrng up the stairway. FortJ impact resistance, an optional iniection molded Lexan@ (in lieu
- of glass) lens can be provided. lt shall be identical in appearance
io the glass le.s and contain a UV inhibitor.
Gasketing bei\,/een lhe lens, door frame, and housing shall be
silicone rubber- A neoprene gasket shalt be provided bet'rveen the
J-box and the housing. The entire lixture shall be weathertight.
Bellector shall be one-piece hydroformed aluminum with an
Alzak@ finish. The bottom surlace shall be linished in matte black to
prevent any escape of upward light.
Electrlcal Components shall be mounted as seltcontained
subassembly. All electrical subassemblies shall be mounted to the
housing using key slots, and all lamp modes shall be
interchangeable within a sihgle housing. Ballasts shall be
high power laclor for -2CP starling.
Wdng ot the electrical components shall be done at the factory
using high temperature leads. A ground lead shall be furnished
between the housing and J-box.
Sockets shall be UL approved for appropriate lamps with high
pressure sodium sockets rated for 4 KV.
Finlsh shall be clear anodized lighl gray on the housing and door
trame. Black or dark bronze baked enamellinishes shall be applied
over the clear anodized base.
Photometrlcs shall be provided by an established and certified
independent laboratory.a,\, A?a* is a trademad( of Alcoa.
Fixture and Reflector System
Cat. No. Description
LLF1 System 1, symmetric righl-left lighl distribution, vertical
lamp position.
LLF2 System 2, lett asymmetric. light distribulion, horizontal
lamp position. /LLFS System 3, right asymmetric light dislribution, horizontal
lamp position.
Electrical Components (BallasVSocket Assembly)
Cat. No. Descriotion
Line Max.
Volts Amps
50HPS120 50W. High Pressure Sodium (E 231/2)
50HPS2Z/ Same
70HPS120 70W. High Pressure Sodium (E-23y2)
70HPS208 Same7OHPS240 Same
7OHPS277 Same
100HPS120 100W. High Pressure Sodium (E-23V2)
100HPS208 Same
100HPS240 Same
120
277
120
208
240
277
120
208
240
277
120
208
240
277
.120
208
240
277
120
0.65
0.30
0.81
4.47
0.40N?E
1.30
o.76
0.66
U.OU
0.82
0.48
0.41
0.36
1.05
0.60
0.52
0.45
NA
75MV120
75MV208
75MV240
75W. Mercury Vapor (E-17)
SameSame -/
100MV120 l00W,MercuryVapor(A-23)
10OMV208 Same100MV240 Same100MV277 Same
'116lNC I 16W. lncandescent (A-21)
Lamos bv others.-A-2i Clriar Traffic Signal Lamp - 8000 Hrs. Average Life
Finishes
Cat. No.Description
-.A
BLE
DBE
Clear anodized light gray aluminum.
Black baked enamel over clear anodize.
Dark Bronze baked enamel over clear anodize.
Resembles Duranodic@ 313 in color:
Optional
Lens
Cat. No.Description
Iniection molded Lexan@ lens, identical configura-
tidn as standard olass lens. CAUTION: Use only
when vandalism is-anticipated to be high. Useful lile
is limited due to yellowtng caused by UV from sun-
Lexan
840,t5
,4v"
, i :.?,T# T,1[1"1]";:"il[:l' : f :'J ffi p
. ,^ in'g
LRP.5
LRP-5 with 6" radius
PARTS LIST
I' rt LRP.S
' ''{. iltsr .; I ro hold plexiglasr ., rtet r."o tT6'r OC Bay.
.,. i 3[. ?0 Watt)
Sect. A-A
A rcHirER(.A
6oI.LAR D L I
Cor'nPLerE 1*rtfH
coucPETE tsAsE
GaTS - +2"
. i:' 3'_.. _ .. _.!':" '".., ... ,i:F,.{;*:4
l
:''.;..::r|i|jii:'-]',.,.,,.'''';iX!;\.';:|'.;1'.*''.....,..:'....-'
, ,-''i ,!lir' -'
-,r i': . '.7:.' ':,.,'1 :' . l_., '..,.,'.ti.
The Optical Louver
patent pending
nisn Perrormte
High Visibility
Low Glare
One of the highest Performing
compact optical systems ever designed
Reflective
Function
Louver
Function
No,malMewing An0l6s
o Paak Candtepoweri! very high.drrc lo.cdl€cti\c aetion
ol pr€cisbn
2-sided. -ratlscto,s.
'.dllustration for 70 watt High Pressure Sodium lamp
'in 8" round bollard'
.251c
40'
830-tKim Lighling, Inc,
Fhotorhetrics
)
lsofoolcandle Diagram
Lamp3 Horironlal Initial Foolcandles
Candela Diagrams
' Difluse Coated Lamp
I
150W. Incandescent
75W. Mercury Deluxe White
100W. Mereury Deluxe White
70W. Hiqh Pressure Sodium '
150 W. Incandescent
A-21 LF. 2850 lumens ) *., ?.s .7a .40
75 W. Mercury Deluxe White
E- 17 2800 lumens ) u.. 1.e .rz .s3 .08lq
100 W Mercury Deluxe While
E-23!, 4200lumens ) 0.. 2.7 .e6 .44 .12
70 W .ligh Pressure Sodium
E-23% idilfusel 5400 lumens ) tt 4.2 l.s .64
0' 3', 6', S', 72'
Longiludinal Distsnce in Feet
.18
l'r-ar"1ffif
Ret. page 4 and 5
24'21',18'15',
3',
6'
a'
12'
-':i i!t!
j.!
j:t;
,|',
'/l'
,'./
:.;j'',i:
,,it''
".,j,
,t/'
,;'t
15'
('(,g
|q
d
ooI
-', t,..1/
'/,.i'
,,/,,/"
.r l'
1a'.
21'
24'
Typical
Ouadrant
..--::.:."- -:::''-'
,.''....
R:1fi*1?
I
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GMN that the Planning and Environnental Commission of the
Town of Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with Section fS.66.060 of the
zoning code of the Town of Vail onVlay 26, 1981 at ?:00 p.n. at the Torrn of Vail
Council Charnbers in the Vail ltwricipal Building.
Public hearing and consideration of:
1. Request for a conditonal use peflnit under Section 18.24.030 C of the Torm of Vail
zoning code, to operate a beauty shop on the street level of the Golden Peak House,
Parcel B, Block 2, Vail ViLlage lst Filing. Applicant: Karl Hoevelnann.
2. Contiluance of an application for exterior alteration or nodification in Conrnercial
Cone I, wrder Section 18.24.065 of the Vail l"ftrnicipal Code, to al1ow an office buildjng
to be constructed on the 2nd and Srd levels of the alley between the Plaza and Casjno
Buildings, leaving the street level open for pedestrian traffic. Proposal is located
on a part of Lot F' Block 5-C, Vail Village lst Filing. Appticant: Parnel.a Te1leen.
3. A request for approval of Special Devetopnent District 11 and the vacation of lot
lines thereof for an area of Highland Meadows Subdivision, Filing No. I, Lots 26 through
42. ?his application is in accordance with Seetion 18.40 of the Vail Zqring Code and
the Toun of vail subdivision Regulations. Applicant: sun Tech Builders, rnc.
4. A request for a variance to coRstruct residentiaL dwellings on slopes in excess
of.40% in a Residential Cluster Zone District on lots A-1, A-2, Lionsridge Subdivision,
Filing No. 1. This application is nade in accordance with Sections 18.69.060 and
18.62 of the Vail Zoning Code. The request is to al1ow constTuction of an earth-
sheltered housing proposal . Applicart: Architerra at Vail (MV) Lj-uited Partnership.
5. Request for two side setback variances for the Storey/Oglesby residence located
on lot 13, block 5, vail village lst Filing to construct two additions to the
residence. Request is in accordance with Section 18.62 of the Vail Zoning Code.
Applicant: Charles P. Storey and Enslie Oglesby, Jr.
6. A request for amendnents to the density control section of the zoning code that
the second unit shaLl not exceed 40% of the total Gross Residential Fl.oor Area (currently
this figure 33%) allowed on the lot in the Prinary,/Secondary residential district.
ALso, lots in the residential district containing less than 15,000 square feet of site
area shall not have a second unit exceed 40% of the total GRFA allowed on the lot."
In addition, lots in the residential district with development proposal.s whereby
the average slope beneath the structure and parking area is in excess of 30eo shall
not have a secondary unit exceed 40% of the total GRFA allowed on the lot. These
changes would result in a new 60/40 allocation of GRFA wherever rhe 66/53 allocation
plesently is in effect. Theapplictr}J.e sections of the Vail Zoning Code are as follows:
sections 18.13.080, 18.r2.090 and 18.69.050. Apirlicant: A. peter patren, Jr,
Zoni.ng Administrator, Town of Vail.
[Pl4nning and Envir.onnentaI Cornrnission, con,t).,_ t t7' A request for anendrnents to sections 18.12.090 and lg.r5,0go concerning the process
and criteria for granting exceptions to the density control regulations in the Residentialand Primary/secondary Zone Districts for lots of less than 1s,000 square feet so thatthese lots may receive a secondary unit for employee housing use. Appticant:A. Peter Patten, Jr, Zoning Adrninistrator.
The apptications and infornation relating f,o
Zoning Adninistratorrs office during regular,
by the public.
the proposed changes is available in the
business hours for review or inspeetion
I
I
I
TOIO{ OF VAIL
DEPARR{E}IT OF COMMUNITYA. Peter Patten, Jr.
Zoning Adninistrator
DEI/ELOPMENT
Published in the Vail Trail on !{ay 8, l98t
ffi ffiNW ffir@
SUITE3O2, 1760 SOLANOAV., BERKELEY, CALIF.94707 USA PHONE (415) 527-3586 /7,TELEX330 402
..-,\, .1. ' -)--6t'j ''-'
.,.€..*,'""Y!'" .i3\
^. l. -'. "''';,; i' " ..-:\t.' .-\ il-
.*..11{.r.n . ..^fki\r -
Ff'"'
:
Mr. Jim MerkLeArchiterra, Inc
1700 North lloore StreetArlington, vA 22209
fl
It
'1'
','^.
CALIFOFINIA OFFICEArE, April 24, 1gg1 KL:AP
Dear Mr. Merkle:
we are sending enclosed a proposal with some prelirninary
drawings and layouts. for a Manorail type conveyance
'People Porter[ to be used, in your residential development.
Per our discussion we propose a short train of two carswith three passengers per car. lhese cars would move backand forth in a shuttle type fashion and would be of auto-matic operaLion.
Although in most cases the rail would be supported aboveground on columns as shown on drawings *1032, 1033 and 1034,per your regu€st we have planned it sunk into the ground sothat the car floors would be level with grade. We have an
approximate layout for this type of arrangenent in drawing*1035. we have also shown a fence or barrier to prevent
peopJ-e from getting too close to the track, unless you canprovide other means of preventing suctr access.
Automatic doors or barriers are provided at the points in-dicated.
The system would. function automatically tike a horizontalelevator, with call buttons at the outside of the doors andwith four destination buttons inside of the cars.
The arrangement shown on drawing *1035 is a preliminary
suggestion only, the system is very flexible and other
arrangementg or rnethods can be used.
IXTA|!,|IN tNO - NT'W \^'ITH OFFICE6| IN T'{E EAET AND TI{E |vEA'
CALlFORNt.a,t SUTTE 3O2. t760 SOLANC} AV., BER<ELEV, CALIF.94"02 USAPHONS C4l5) 527-3ss6/7. TELEX 33O 4O2
P,O.B, 284. MILLERSVILLE. MO. 21108 USAPHONE C3O1) 987-54c,4, TELEX €74 OO
I
I
gWTqB&WE E$F@
o
w
o
Mr, Jjin Merk1eApril 24, 1981
The rails and other parts to be embedded in the groundcan still be supplied in fall L981
The ad,vantage of such a system over a conventionaL road
.with cars or buses is obviousl-y as follows:
I. Electrical operation, quiet and without exhaust fumes.
2. Automatic operationr no driver needed, great savingin rnanpower.
3. Automatic safety features as described.
,!lr. Merkle, we would. be very interested in working out a
standard, system for your residential applications togetherwith you.
Will you please call me as soon asformation and f would like to planfurther discussions. Thank you for
Kur! E. LukasPresident
EncL.
Page 2
you receive this in-to visit with you foryour interest.
I
I
I
I
EWIWAS&E Ilsr@
a
sr
o
PEOPLE P
smatl l4onorail
ORTER
for Residential Transportation
PROPOSAL
General
The People Porter is a monorail conveyance designed especially
for use with exhibitions and other recreational occasions and
residential applications. For the design of this very flexible
people conveyance system, the following criteria has been con-
sidered:
(r)Extrene adaptabiLity to existing grades, with a climbing
capabil-ity of up
Fast installation and dismantling by use of "Erector Set
System" with light components in order to eliminate damage
to the landscape as much as possible.
(2)
o
&srqryeMusr E$rf@
People Porter
(3) Sinple foundations for the columns
from standard components which can
renoved.
(4) "Friendly to the envixonment", wiLhout exhaust fumes and
noise. The system blends well into the landscape estheti-
cally, can be routed. around existing trees' etc. hecause
of the flexibility of design and small dimensions qf track
,
and support columns.
Page
the track, assembled
easily installed and'
of
be
(5) The track is removed from all other traffic, no
with streets, therefore safe transportation for
and high transportation capability.
t ntersecctons
r.laa r.rr F I i.ru|.r\; !/qrr&re
Vehicle
The new design of this monorail with electricaL drive consists of
four selfpowered units for three persons each, that means 12 seats
per train. Motors and drive wheels are designed in such a way
that continued, aperation with a grade uP to 20 percent is per-
missible. the operation is automatic, this means the vehicles
will be slowed down automaticatly near the stations and automati-
BSA S$Ut@
Feople Porter Page 3
cal1y stopped for loading and unl-oading. The trayel speed
on the track is approximately three meters per second (approx.
10-11 km per hour) or 10 ft. per second and approx. 6-8 miles
per hour. The electrical power is conducted to the trains
through a power bus raiL along ttre whole track.
The automatic trains which operate without operating personnel
are eguipped with a safety system which stops each train as soon
as any obstructiott is present on the track ahead. In addition,
the whole track is equipped with a safety block system whieh
prevents collisions of trains.
The individ,ual paasenger compartnents are equipped with safety
bars-which close automatically when the train l-eaves the station.
Track
The track consists of a rectangular tube of 30 x 20 cm (12 x 8
inches). They are supported every J-l meters (36 ft.) by tubular
columns with a diameter of I inches. The columns are designed as
tel-escopes so that for installation they can be easily adpated to
the grade.
I
ESTTSASffi 8Nq
o
ssut
People Porter
Electrical Powen Supply
Feeder lines for every 600
Technical Data
Track length
Shape of track
tt
AbiJ-ity to climb
Stations
Passenger car
Length of train
width of train
TraveLing speed
TraveL time
Power requirements
of track are required..
Page 4
meters
345 fr.
Single lane, sl-ightly curved,
shuttle operation
20 percent
Total of 4 loading and unloading
poi-nts
2 cars for 3 persons each hooked
together
Approximately 9 ft.
Approximately 4'6"
10 ft. per second on the
5 ft. per second i-n the
Approximately 30 second.s
whole stretch
10 KW
open track
stations
for the
ENtrBA$&S$T EST.$
People Porter
Material- suppl-ieS by InFarnin
l. Track
Approxirnately 345 ft. of
Page 5
raiL rrith support column connections
and. foundation pJ-ates every 36 ft.
The track consistg of a rectangular steel tube of
(12 x I inches). Electrical bus bars are mounted
for sliding po!'rer pickup to the cars.
I
Cars
Two self propelled vehicles hooked together,
per carf total of six per train. Electricat
pickup. Control and safeLy sensing devices.
Cars are open with shelter roof.
30x20
to the
cm
track
2.
three passengers
drive, power
3.Automatic doors or barriers
Five sliding doorslbarriers
equipped with caLl buttons.
at the unloading/toading Points
4.Foundation plans and installation ilrawings.
Po!"er SuppJ-y Eguipment
Transformer with associated switchgear
20 arnp to the power bus on the track.
safeLy devices.
to supply 500 volt
ControL voltage for
f.
O
&srwa&89$8 gsr@
People Porter
Parts and items not included in th-is proposal
Foundations, exeavation, concrete work, fences, etc.
El-ectrical and,/or hydrauLic connection lines between the individual
devices. Cab1es, conduits, pipes and accessories other than the
poqrer bus mounted to the rails
Foundations and other equipment may have to be verified by loca1
registered engineers.
No fees for plan check or building perrnits are incLuded.
Supervision of eonstruction not incl-uded in this proposal , but
Intamin will make available for separate charges and standard
rates, technicians and engineers on reguest to assist with in-
stallation. inspection and startup, and training of personnel
Warrantv
Intamin lrereby warrants the workmanship, factory construction,
rnaterial and component parts of the eguipment furnished by
Intamin if installed according to instructions. If, after the
equipment has been installed and is properly operating, the same
Page 6
sw@
o
sa
Page 7
or any part hereof is found defective because of inferior material
or workmanship, excl-uding normal wear, Intarnin, at its oltD expense,
will provide the manufacturing service and component parts necessary
to correct the faiLure, after written notice by Buyer to Intamin.
The guarantee shalL be in full force for a period of one operating
season. but not longer than 12 months after detivery. Costs for
freight, customs and installation labor for any defective parts to
be repLaced under guarantee are to be met by Buyer'
These conditions are based on the general conditions of Intarninrs
standard warranty procedures.
Price and Deliverv
Frice for material and equipment as described
f.o.b. factory Europe, crated for shipment Swiss francs 345'000.00
People Porter
Delivery: Rails and embedded items
Cars and other equipment
KL:AP
4/24/8r
Fall 1981
To be negotiated.
I
o
3o
al
o!l
r!tl
I
!
I
II\f
I
I
I
i
I
I
t
I
I
I
l
.. -,1 : ,
-1
:
I
I
I
:l'
'1'..
II...| '
I\ls-l
o
I
i
II!
I
A
I
It
It
ItIttt
llIT
ilI
tIat
t
I
T
I
I
iI
l
irIEItqt
tt!t
a
TI
iiir !
TtI
I
tII !I6
2I
Ti
Ta
I
&{
$
Ia I i
I
I
l.I
It.
I
| ...t;
I
Ir.
r (stl
Jtt,-xt: 7.
: ilf-. .:f.:
-
r -
t
our
E
il*-l
fr.i+i
tre.f\
o
'\{
Eo-!r)!-.' '- (\.'
I
I
I
II
I
r:!S
o
;r
1
x
(5zlF
u
CE
F
ettz.E
#j)
I
a
co
o:eHt*&r
€'T-*
I
I
I
=3
t
II
i
I
I
I
ti
it!irl
II
a
5t;Ii
.t
Iig,
tI
aI
It
III
t
EI
r
riii
I
aIfI
II
att
3t
Tit t
r
I
E
t
Ul
N
P
!
alI 1Ii
a
t
'.e'€ip#
ih
so
s
L
Mountain BellApril 2lr 1981
David Green
P.O. Drawer W"
Vail, Colorado
81658
De sr Sir:
As requested in our telephone conversatioa Wednesdayl April 15, L981
Ttre infornation required by Eagle County follows.
Ttre development known as Architerra At Vail located in Lioasridge
Subdivislon, Filing Ir Lot A1 and A2, in Vail, Colorado s'ill be provlded
telephone service from the Vail Exchange of Mountain States Telephone
Company.
Mountala Bell is a public utillty subject to regulatioo by the colorado
pubtic Utiltties Coimission and the Federal Corrnunications Cormission.
Telephone facilities have not been exteoded to this Developmentt nor can
any lomitment be rngde as to when they will be available. Extension of
our plant into this area depends uPoa numerou$ factors, such as our capital
r"q,ri..r.rrts and abllity to raise capital. Ttrla would also depend on the
r.rril"bility of manpor*er aod supPlies, potential use of the facilltlest
and the economic feastbility of providing the servlce.
Ilue to the locatioo of Ttre Lionsridge subdivision withln the vail rate
area of the Vail Exchange, Construction cha:ges will not aPply'
If additional information is needed, please call tJade causey at 636-4806.
Yours trulY,
UJ"J'$' e--1
llade CauseY
Supervlsor Res idence
I{c/bt
Mountain Bell
April 2O' 1981
David Green
P.O. Drqwe r West
Vall., CoLorado
81658
De ar Sit:
As requested in our telephone conversation Thursday, March 19, 1981".
The lnformation required by Sunrni t County foll.ows.
fire develo nt known as Ar Vail looated in
u Dc 1v1s 10n wtLl be rovided
ephone service from the Vail Exchange of Mountain States Te le ne
.:ompanY.-. .--:----"t: *
Mountain EelL is a public utility subject to regulation by the CoLorado
Public Utilities Cousnission and the Federal Conrnunications Consaisslon.
Telephone facilltles have not been extended to this Developoent, nor can
any comni tment be made as to when they will be avail"able. Extensl-on of ourplant into this area depends upon niimerous factors, such as our capltal
requlrements and abiLity to raise capital. Thls would also depend on theavaiLability of manpower and supplies, potential" use of the facilities, andthe economlc feasibiLity of providing the service.
Due to the location of Ttre Springer Development within the Keystone rategrea of the DiLlon Exchange. Construction charges w.ill not apply'.
If additional informatloo is needed, please caLl l.lade Causey at 636-4806.
Yours truly,'.J"LS-
Wade Causey
Supervisor Residence
wc/br
€,
ta-.
z.', ,, -:, .
1,.:/
\o-
t'
\.je-
H:^\J
F,<
PP
4t:.o
{t'- ,-.,C"
.l'
,Y"t' G""-4\" -_. *1,"
t/cq\
,-_"t \
I
NLrons Marvm Assocrlrro
P. O. BOX 110
r/AIL,
April 17, 1981
Design Review Board
Town of Vail
Box 100Vai1, Colorado 81658
Re: Architerra at Vai1Lots A-1 & A-2, Lions Ridge
Gentlemen:
The Board of Directors of Llons Mane Association, the Associatj"onof unit owners of Lions Mane Condoininiurns, has been given a setof plans for the above project adjacent to our condorninium property.
The plans dated April 13, 1981 are acceptable to our Assoctation-
We l"ook forward to having a well done project in our neighborhood.
Very truly yours,
DMC/mc
rager,
S e creta
I I)iltd
llJbehmDerebwnent
Gorponalion
Apri'l l7 , 'l 981
Mr. Peter rlama rc/o Town of Vai'lP.0. Box 100Vail, Colsrado 81658
Dear Peter,
Encl osed p'l ease f j nd theare requi4edn plus the Sepiasession t{ overlay for slope
Th'efol'lowing
"{a)
arrived y t. ltlr
on Moget it out
inmedi atel uFon
Ib)Casalcr a
commeRt oasettoh
(c) T
samples boeTth, I981
If yo
DRB Presentation materials thatrequested duri ng our informal work
analys i s .
David H. GProject Ma
temg s
tter
een,
a ger
ubmitted are complete wlth the exception of the
of available service from Mountain Bell has not. Don Capron, (1-636-4280), indicated he wsuldnday, AprlI 20, 1981. I will submit it to youreceipt.
. rJanes !lacDonald, an adjacent property owner ln thea of Llonstidge, is in Florida and did not wish tothe proJect without reviewing the plans. I f,Erwarded
m through lvlark Donaldson who is his local architect,
e 'l ist of materia'l s is complete, however the co'l orrds will not be available for submission until April
have any guestions, please don't hesitate to call me.
sonal regards,
I.
I
I
I
Proiecl Coftsr{k|g
Sna D€u€lopmenl
Condrttfion ilemgF|nent
Foet Olfrce &arei W
t/b!, cob'8do al€57
303/476-1883
Ki ndert pa
\
luwn It
box
vail,
department of community development
81657
476-5613
Apri'l l$,1981
Mr. Dav
Daval
Dear
After
des i gn
the fo
d Green
stern Deve'lopment Corp.rMlorado 81657
P.0 . DrVail, C il Development
lowing corrnents.
1.structi on of a street through the project is a dramatic
original concept. Concerns and corments on p'lac'ingfrsn the
through the site are noted below.
The visua'l impact of adding the road and garages to
site.
Having adequate turning radius jnto the garage with
rrow street.
The Staff does not agree with a heated
Concerns with adequate guest parkf ng.
Mjnimum wjdth for a one'way road is 12
roved road surface.
Road should be 8% grade.
2.7
Some of the garages seem too close to the street
have adequate turning radius.
Concerns with adequate areas to plow snow on street.
Staff is still concerned with the rec'irculating pond. Ue are not convinced that this is the most desirablethis point of the site. With potential water restrictionsplace this year and future years, we should be promotlng
change
a road
A.
conc
use
taki n
water
3. A
ene
4.
r preliminary review the other day regarding the revisedf your project the Corrnunity Deve'lopment Department has
road.
foot of
servati on .
upplement to the environmental 'impact report js needed on
conservati on.
t are the amenities proposed for the site?
Architerra
a
\
{
The Sta
i rmedi a
Si ncerel
?,.-.
Dick
Depar
DR:df
Page 2
needs to have the plans and written informationly to review.
<r-, Di rectornt of Conrnunity Development
I '1w o
-t-,i
)t i /,tL ENVIRON[{ENTAL IIvIPACT RITOR'I'S
/t'/''
,\l/* /
WF,
18.56.010 PurPose.
l8.56.020,r.Pirlic:rbi!itY.
1S.56.030 ExernPt Prr.rjects.
18.56.0':0
18.s6.0s0'-"'r8.s6.05C: l8.5o.o'ro
18.56.CS0
Stutlies ltrd da ta rcrluircd.
Rcport - Corttctrts-
iicport -Ati <ii t ioireI rtrrtcrial.
Ti:nc sr:!.,:ii'.r!c.
l. ec-
t8.56.-090 Rcview-Submission'
i g.36. i 0o P.evicw -Tirne lirnit-supplemctrlary informalion'
t8.56.100 Revicrv-Actiorr by coutmission'
18.56.1 l5 Apireal 1o the toltn cotincil'
18.56.1?0 Pl'rnri1 is:uatrce-
18.56.010 PrrrPose.
Subntission ontl rcvierv of an envirotrmetrtal imprct relrort
on an5' privatc dcvelo;rinent proirosal or public project which
irty ifi-., to any signiliclnt degre.e thc quality of the
env-irOunreu{ in the to$'n or itr sttrrounding areaS iS required to
achieve the follorvi ng otrjectives:
A, To enstrre that conrpl"te infornration on the envirotr nrert tal
. effccrs of thc proposcct project is avuil;rble to tlte los':r
couticil, ihe pl:nillirrg cotr':mii'"iotl' lnd thc gcnerll public;
B. To cnstire tliet long-ternr protcction of thc euviroltnrrrrt is a-- g,iioing critcrion i,i projet:t planrting, altd tlrat land use and
icvclc,ltrrrent rlecisions. both prrblic and private' lrrke into
. ac"nu,il the rchlivc nrerits of possible allcrtrative actionsl
C.. .To proviclc lrroccritrres for locil review rnd cvaluation of the-
anuiron,lt.,.ti 3l efl'ects of proposcd proiects prior to grltrting
. oi pcrnrits or ollt*r outlioriz':rtions for contmencr'ntcnl of
dcv( lttit rtr;tt t :
D. io c,rt,rr. tllrr t brrildilrgs arc nQt corrslruclctl itr gt'.ltrgic
'hazartl lrrc::s. lry .u,iy oi illrrstrarion, floodlrl.ins' a'',ll:trlchr"
p:rths, roclllu)l rrrcas, s{lcrc srtch hazard c::rnnot practicllll'
(Yail d'l t-79|
I
454-t
I
ENVIRONMENTAL IhIPACT REPORTS
Chaptcr | 8.56
ENVIRON}*TENTA L Ih{PACT RETORTS
Sections:
18.55.01 0 PurPose.
18.56.020 APPlicabilitY' -- 18.56.030 ExernPt lirojects'
t 8.56-0'10 Studics and dat:r requircd'
18.56.050 RePort-Contents'- "18.56.050 i].cport--Atidilionelrnctevial'
18.56.0?0 Tiine scl'eirrlc'
18.56.0t0 Fec'
18.56.090 Review-Submission'
i S.sO. f O0 Review-Time limit-supplernentary infonnation'
iS.Sg.f OO Revierv-Actiotr b)' contmission'
i g.Se .t t S Appeal to tlre torvn corrncil'
18.56.120 Pcttrrit issuatrce'
18.56.010 PtrrPose'-Sublnission antl relierv of an environmc tal im1>act report
on rny p,iutt" dcuelop'nt'it proposal or prrblic project which
may affect to any significent riegree thc quality of the
envirotrment in the torvn or in surrounding areas is required (o
achieve the follorving objectives:
A. To enslrre that comilete irrforrnation on the environmental'-'
"fftttt of thc prol'csed project is avrihble to thc lorvn
council, the plannilig cornrii:;siorr' and thc gcneral public;
B' i; ensure that longlttt"l protcction of the environment is a- guiOing criterion in'- project planning' and that land use and
developtnent <tecisions" both prrltlic and private' t'lke into
accounl the relative rnerits of possible allcrnative actions;
C- To provide ilrocedttrts for local review and evaluation of tlte-- .nui.onnr.rrtal eflects of proposed projects prior to g'rnting
. of pernlits o' ortit' autliorizltions fot commencctlcnt of
dcveltlPtnenl;
D. To errstrre that huildings are not coustrucied in gcologic
hazartl areas' by w;))' oi illustration' flocdplains' aval;rnc')rr"'
prli,r. to.r''fort i,"as' rvitcre such hazard c'annot Fracticall!'
\
454-l (Vail 4-15-79|
fNVIRONhIIjiiTAL IMPACT IIEPOI{TSal
.rnitigatcd to the satisfaction of the plarrning connission and the to\rl council'
(ord. 19(1976) Par 14: Ord. 8(r973) par 16'100)
i E. To ensure that the quality of surface and ground water uithin the Town wiLl be pro-
tected from adverse
-irnpacis and/or degradation due to construction activities.
(Ord. 37 1e80)
18.56.020 APP1icabilitY
An environmental inpact report shall besubnitted to the zoni-ng adrninistrator for
*y pto5""t forwhich r,tih " relort is requiredby federal .or state law, or for any
proil.t-nftich the zoning adrniniitrator deternines nay significantly char-ge the. environnent'
$ither d,uring construction or on a contiruing basis, in one or nore of the following
respects:
A. Alters an ecological unit or land form,. such as a ridgeline" saddle, draw, ravine,
hillside, cliffr-siope, cleek, narsh, ltatelcourse, or.other naturaL larlil forn feature;
B. Directly.tr indirectly affects a wil<11ife habitat, feeding, o]' t)esting grourd;
C. Alters or renoves native grasses, trees shrubs, or other ve8ctative covex;
D. Affects the appearance or character of a-significant scenic a]:ea or fesource' o!
i:rvofves buildings or other structures that are of a size, bulk, or scale that
r.;oul d be ir matked contrast to natural oI existing urban featurcs;
E. Potentially results in avalarrche, landslide, siltation' settletneilt, flood' or other
land forn thunge or hazard to health and safety;
F. .Discharges toxic or thermally abnormal substanqes, or involves use of hcrbicides'or pesticiaes, o! ernits srnole, gas, steam, dust, or other particulate natter;
6. Involves any process which results in odor that rnay be objeclionable or danaghg;
It. Rcquires any waste tfeatment, cooling, or settlelRent Pond' or requires transportation
of solid or liquid nastes to a trcatne'nt or disposal site;
I. Discharges significant volumes of solid or liquid wastes;
J. Has the potential to strain the capacity of existing or planned sewage disposar,
stotm drainage, or other utility systems;
K. Involves any process which generates noise that nay be offensive or danaging;
be.
I
L
4s5
,
ZONING
L. Either displaces significanl numbers of people or results in a
significant increase in population;
M. Preempts a site rvith potcntial recreational or open space
valrt e :
N. Alters locat traffic patterns or causes a signilicant increase in
traffic volume or transit service needs;
O. Is a part of a targer'project rvhich, at any future stage, may
involve any of the impacts listed- in this section.
(ord. 8(19?3) $ 16.200.) )
18.56.030 Exemplprojects.
An environmental impact report shall not be required for
the following projects:
A. Altr.'ration, repair rnd maintenance of existing structures
and site inrprovements;
B. A plrasc of a prcjcct for which an euvit'ontrlental irnpact
report previously rvas submitted arrd reviewed covering the
entire project, provided that the proJect rvas approved and
not subsequentll, altcrcd;
C. A projoct which. on the basis of a preliminary
environmental asscsstnctrt covering each of the factors
prescribed in Section 18.56.020, is found to have an
insignificant irnpact on the environmcnt. The preliminary' environmcntal assessntent atrd thc finding on environmental
inrprct slurll bc madc t.ry the zoning rdministrator-
(Ord. 8(1973) $ 16.300.)
18.56.040 Studies and d:rla required.A The crrvironmenlal irnpact report shall be based on
systcmatic stttdics conducted by the torvn staff or by
profcssional constrltlnts, as detcnttined by the zoning
ad mirr ist r;rt or. Tlte e nvironmental impact.report on a public
projcct ma1' be' lrcPtlcd by thc rcsponsible putrlic ag,ency or
by profcssiorrtl cousultants it englgcs. Tttc rarrge of studies
neccletl to tlcvelop lhc technical data for an environmental
irrrrract rcDort inclttdcs tlrc follorving natural systems nnd
,-Q1rcr slrrdics:( l-l llyttrologic cortditions, such as surface drainage and
\-/
4!.,6
f";\,'t'
I
I:NVI RONh{ENTAL l},f PACT REPOI{'fS
tvalershed cliaractcristics, F.rolindn'alcr irnd soil
penncability charactcristics, nrlurll r,,,a'Lcr fcaturcs lrnd
charactcljslics, and any potcntial charrgcs or intpacts;
2. Alnrosphcric conditions, such as airslrcd clraractcrislics,potcntirl cirissions, and any poiential changcs or
,.q lnr pacts i3. Gcologic conditions, such as land
ch ara ct cristics, potential hazarrls,
formS, slope, soil
and any potential
<:h angcs or irnp: cts;
Iliolic cor,liiions, srrrh as vc!ri-r';i c clrarlct,'ri.;ics,
t''ilrllifc Jrr[.,jtlts, ancl :rly potcr'.i:.:i i]iiilt:,3s or j;nrrlt:ls;
Othcr cnvironnrental co;rditions, sirclr as noisrr letels and
odor ch ara cteris tics, and any potential changcs or
. irn pact s ;' \/istral contlitions, sucli us viervs rrnd scenic valucs, lnd
lutty potcntill cltlng':s. ilrpecls. oi:l :it l.:r'cl colirlsts:
Llnd usc coirriitions. sllcl.i as chr'r,ctcrislics of usrs.
conrpatilrility s,ith oft-iciali), iipprlnysi Irnd usc alrd
opcn sp:rcc policies arrd ob_icctjt,cs, and polcntial
7.
changcs ol int lracts;8. Cilculation and trrns|crl atiorr co;rrlitions, such as
volumcs lnt-l traffic flor',, prl tcms, trensit st-n,ice nccrls,
altcrnalivc transit sysfcnrs, ancl polclitial changcs or
im pl cts;
9. Populllion cltaracteristics, such as icsicdntial deirsities,
neighborhocrcl pattrrus, Llotrutial Cispllrrrnent of
residcnts or birsinc:;s'.'s, arrtl l.;ientixl clianges or
im pacts.
B. l}c cnvilorrnrcntal irnp:rct lcport shali sr.r:nrnarizc tlre
findings lnd rccommencla t joris of tirc Iechnica] and otlrt:r
st.tlll)ot'lino sl Lrdics in lcrrns tltat cati bc ,)s\tssc(l l''tr'l
cvaluated b1, 1ov,n oii-ici;rls :rnd lhe gcncr:rl pLrlrlic.
Tcchnical rlula shall bc subnrittcd as sirl)l)ort ng
docui.ncr;tation. Tc,:hnicll data prcp;rrcd as a l)rr{ of ln1,
othcr plrrct'rJr-r|c or lrqUii.lrreDt oi lliis chlpl'.'i. or of riny
otlrcr orrlinanco or le(i iirl, statc or ilr$n Icgullrtitrn, :rlso
lnit)'bc ttscd to support un cnrironrn r:ni ltl irnpecl rcl)ort.
(Ord. h(1973) S i6.401.)
.+J I
|jNVllrC:.:.11:li',l'AL ]l'iPACf I<l:r'()l{',l'S
18. 56.0s0
A. The envjronncntal irnpact rcport shall cont-ain j-nform.'rt ion ard analysis, inisuff jciclrt
detail and adequately supported by tcchnical studies, to enatrle the towi-l courc j:l
to judge the cnvironnent:rl impact of the project and to judgc nreasures ploposed
to reduce or negate any halnful_ impacts.
The environncntal iirpact report shal1 include a general statc)llcnt, describing thc
Proposed project and its purpose, identifying the oli'ner and/ol sponsors, and, if
a public project, identifying the fundi-ng source and time schedule. De-scriptive
rraterials, naps, and plans shall be submitted showing the follorsing infor:nation:
- tzl . Project borr:rCaries aud bounCaries of the area within which environri:ental ir.lact
.,/ is l ike1y to l-,e signif icant;w27 .Present and proposed uses of the site;
W) Present and prsp65gd zoning of the site;
V{. QJantitative inforrnation relative to ttre ploject, such as rsite atea, nu.rbeLs
of residential units, proposed height and bulk of buildings, building floor
: area in square feet. and such other data as will corrtribute to a clear
urdelstandirrg of the sca1e of the pr-oj ect;
A list of r'cgulatory or rerriel: agenclc:i- i-r-rC t-!te sPecific ;;,-r1tr13fi.r;ns to t;]''i.ch
the projcct lij.Il I'c :riibjcct;
l/. Copies of subdivision mlps, tlerrelopnent pi.,*ir5, or other- pelLi,nent docurents
illustratjng the proposed proj cct.
ProXirnity to ]r'ater bodies--the distance fr:on the centerline of liVe creeks
or stTeans to an)' proposcd structural icTelop:rrcnt uith-ln the project.
Soil ty'pcs bascd rrpon the Natiolal Coopr:r:ative Soil Survey, IJSDA, Soi"1 Ccrser-
vation Service and ini elpretat ions of so j,- 1 ti'pes, \reget?.l.rr Lrn sha11 be descri5cd
and .thre e Jria s s es shotvn .
The environnental i-npact rcport sha1l inclr-t.je an environnental intrentoty, pror.iding
complete infornation on tle environrncntal sctting exi-sting prior to the proposed
project and corrLa-ining sufficient inforr:ation to pcrmit I-nuc;,errdent evalui Lion
Ly revier"ers of factors that could be affec.tcd by t)re proposed Project. The envi-
ronnental inventory sl'ra11 include nraps, photographs, or other applopriate illustra-
tive material -
Areas categorizcd according to t)'pe of possi j)le inlact shall bc idcntif j"cd' The
environmenta 1 invcntorl' slra1l describe bot-l: thc phy'sical ald T--.iological natural
setting, and the rnannade setting of the site and its surrounCir:gs-
The environmental inrpact Teport shall include a co:nprehensive, o,ualitative and
quantitative analysis of any si-gnif icant irrp:ct tlrat the proposed projcct will
have on the environncnt. lhe anal;'sis sha11 de.scribe tenporary effccts t"at wj.lf
prevail during construction, and 1or)g-ter:n cffect-s that rt'ill plevail aftcr conplc-
tion. Thc ana11'sis shtl I descriirc hot-li br::rr;f lcial cffects and dct::inentai eff e.:rs,.
The ana11'sis shal l. considcr prirnar'1' effects a,l-''d sccondar)' eff c.:ts which ttill r''suLt
frorn the projcct. The anall.si s poltion of tire enviroDme)ltal i.npact repott shall
fully asscss the followinS items:
Advelse effccts r.'hich cennot bc avoidcrl it the p: crpo-sai is irnPlcnentcd;
I'titigition r:Lrsuies l)r'ol)oscd to ntinini::'; thc i;?ect, incllr'iin8 lraf c'r qu2lity,
erosion cont r';l :rnd r'.r'c:lctatjcll n:c:su,'. s.; I G*
Possilllc alit"l'::Li*cs trr 1'ltc l)i ollo:;c:i " 'ttn "':l't*nl't " at **tq t : a'xSlyu4*drl'
l'cl'..,i-:.^t l.i.: l',1'.:-',;f r-r ::l l:'-u-,l'::-, ::r..l ' '.r^j i':,0'.s ci .''' '-f il-'rl 'lnl;
Lj:r,r,:,-r -, , .,-,-,: ., rr a-.i -,. r , j:: ri, i .t: a,: '. 1
--,,-.^-. 1 .
l.,rL,l,!r-r.r: ,'Groi.:th-inclrtci.ng irnpacts of tire Ir'o.j cct . (Crd. E I 973)
Rcport-CorOts.
5.
6.
EU{o)iMIrNlnL I.1p CI' r{Er'0RTS
f 8.'56.060 Rcport Aclditional l.laterial.
the zoning a:drninistrator nay furhtcr prescribc the form ancl content of an cnvi-ronncntalinpact report, settjng forth in greater detail the factors to bcconsidered and thc
trtElnner in which thc rcport sha11 be prcpared, and may r:equire -subrnis,sion of infornationin addition to that requircC by Section 18.56.050. (0rd. S 1973)
18.56.070 Tine schcdule.
the environnental irnpact report requircd irnder this chapter -shal1 br p::epared l.rithj-nthirty d.ays of the date that plans are subnitted for design reirier.; i:s prescribed furSections 18.56.040 through 18.56.060, subject to extension of the tine period to a
nax inun of ninety days be the planning commission. The time period riay be extendedto a nax imun of one hurrdred eighty days j"f seasonal conditj-ons pt'<:1'grt a conrpr^ehens j-ve
analysis. (0rd. 16 (1978); ord. 8(1973).
I8.56.090 Revierv-Strbnti-ssion.
, ^l zonin;; adrlirtislrator. The z-ortin.[ ::drninistrl{ot' s}ir'l! pr-:r^cribe
i': F tltc rt.trttl't'r ofcolri'5 {..r L. srrl'ti.ilr,'r! l l.c inrrir'; r'l'l i lt:'lor
/ ' , shali ;rotify tlrc tcrwtL coLtt'Lcil. ll:e l,Lr;rllj'l' collllli: ' 'i'i. l.,rtl r'iie
t f ,.+l.t..r design rcvicrv boartl of teceipt of rit crrviialut)frttxi inipact
1,
t'" r report, arrd sltall transrnit col)ics of the rc;rort ttpott tt'quest.\'. Environrnctrtal impact reports shall bc availablc for ptlblic
revi*v in thc offices of thc torvn. (Ord. 8(19i3) 5 16.501.)
ZONING
18.56.080 Fee.
In thc cvont that thc towrl clrgirgcs profcssional con::trl{lnts
to preparc an cnvirorln,: n t:il itttPirct rcport, the cost shlr'll be
paid by thc sponsor of tJrc prcrjccl. TIte sponsor n'ray bc
rcquircd to deposit a fixcd su;ir iti aJvance to co','irr thc cost of
the report, rvith thc uncxpcndcd blrlance rcturrrrble to the
sponsor. (Ord.8(1973) $ 16.405.)
1 8.56. 1 00 Rcvietv- Tintc lilrit-Sttirirlerttt:tlllrt' iirforlillirtn'
A. The pllrrnirrg conrrnission shull rcvicrv tlre rcport rvithin
thirty days of subirtission srrl:r.icct to att c>:tr:nsjotr of tlte
time pcriod tlriity e(lditjonal days in ortlcr to oblairi
additional inforr;ralion frorn the torvn siaff, fronr the
spousor of the projcct, or thc itrilhor ol^ lny porlion of the
l eport.
B. -l'he conrurissior nray reccivc additionrl staturclrls or
su1-rporting rnatt'rirls froin tlrr siro)lsor of a proie ct, fro;n thc
torvn staff, frorl lrrof.'ssio;rll co:riuJit:tts. or Jrt::n oiltlts.
Such ldrlilio:ial rllrlt'ri:ls ;'ir:v ire cortsirleiecj lts sttplrlc-
mentary or amcntlrtlory to 1hc cnvirorririe nill iurpact Icport.
(Orci. l6(1978) |s :(b) (part). Ord. 8(19i3) S i6.502.)
I8.56.I l0 Revieu'-,,tcti,on bv corlnrirsiorr.
A, Frillorving lcvit'*' of tlrr e rrv jrorri:rcnirl i:,-rpact rt|ort. tlte
plli.trrit:g cournrjs:;jon sliiill :rtrIio..'r'. rJis:r;.1,ro"'e, or retltlest
changrs in lh!' Ir'oiccl irr v.'ri1irtg. -l J:c pLlnlrirg c()ult,tission
shull lpprove tirc pr-oj.'ct trnicss i{ flnils lhlt eithcr tlre
(\rlil 9.15-lE)460
Project Application
--!-r-F!r-,-\
o
't /'t':i' !'i
Proiect Name:
Proiect Descrip{ion:
Owner Address and
Architect Address and Phone:
p1.'en", lA'; ;?{ k';;"..-:ri-.,
./-, .r,)-, -. u; ( ;.,-..._ r_)
/'tl il"'";T r"......-..{..,...*., b,- f,..itj,-i
-/l.'+r I
Legal
Zone;
Doscription: Lot Block
Zoning Approved:
Design Review Board
Motion by:
Seconded hy:
APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL
Summary:
r'
Date:
Zoning Administrator
Date:
Chief Building Official
ilJ OF PHOJECT Archlterra A{rall fnc
-U-LEGAL DEscRIpl'ION: [p1Al e a2 tr-ocx A rri.rHc Lions Rtdee ,Jor"*"". **-Dl;scRIPTIoNoFPnotE%es1dent1a1dcve1opmentro.u.Jl
Sandstone Drlue..in. Val.li Colorado vith associated parklnq for each unit.
ff'ft;H:t"li;:1":;;:,i:,':,0;t;:ori:rnsubmittar bv thc appricant to the -,tr" o",,*
A. BUILDING I.IATERIALS
. Roof- -.
iolorf7.pc bf l,latcrial
Sahara Tile
Fascia
'-Soffits " '-- - -:.--:--- ---- -- -- c6nirete
Greenhouses A.1uminuu
Cqn:=e Vail pass Color
Vail Pass Color
Terratone
Fieldstone
. Staio:ln35- tvDt- :-and Groririd Cover)
Si ze
4 J-/2Ln. cal.
?J/2in. cat.
L l/2in- cal.
3 L/zin- caL-
f5
20
5
2:]/4n. cal.
10-12 rt-
8-1O Ft-
6-8 Ft-
10-12 Ft"
t
eopts'us''!'remurg si:. % c:2d.- ,-.- -c-r:?-rci i,-- 3 r/2in- cal -Aspen
-
35
Aspenru l-5O
%woodtt1 %oa
Enqleman Sprure
Enqleman Spruce
!oa_gepele_!:r"_
5
10
-_Lo
Botanical Name
Pinus
Pinus
Pinus
Pinus
Pinus
Shrubs
Seed
Sod
contorta
contorta
ari_stata
aristata
aristata
Conunon Name
Lodgepole pine
Lodgepole pine
Foxtail pine
Foxtail pine
Foxtai-l pine
QuantitV
10
10
5
5
10
600
50,000 sq.ft.
20,000 sq. ft.
Size
8-10 Ft.
6-8 Ft.
10-12 Ft.
8-10 Ft.
6-8 Ft.
C. OlllER I,ANDSCAPI: I;l:A'l'URIIS
(Retaining Walls, Fcnces, Swinming Pools, ctc.) Plcase spccify.
Ret aining/Land scaping l'lal1s - Concrete - Same color as the Vall Pass wal1 system
I{ot Tub and Deck - Redwood
NEl|' CONSTRUCTION
DRB SI]I]MITI'AI, CIIICK LIST
Proj
a'r-^,-r-- I L.,\.ll(;ur\ t;g uv
Dat e
nt
1. Stanped topographic map (2 copies
;-7
2. Site plan showing utilj.tics (2copies). .-_"-.:?
5, Utillty location verification
4. . Prelirnina.ry title report (1 copy)
5. Landscape 'PIan (2 c.opies)
6. Architectural plans (2 <:opies)(al1 floors and all elevations)
7, Material s list (1 -set)
8. Color Samples (1 set) "'11," i , ;i '.
g. Subdj-vision agreenents (if applicatrlc) I '
MINOR ALTERATIONS TO THE E,T'T'ERIOR OF BUILDINGS
1. Photo or sl<etch shcuing alteratiors
(2 copies)
2. Site plan (2 copjes)
3. Matelial specificat-ions (2 setsj
4. Color samples (2 sets)
5. Letter of approval fron corCo zr-ssoc.(if applicablc)
ADDITIONS * RES]DENT]AI, OIt COhfhIERCIAL
l. Stamped topographic survey
2. Original floor plan (2 copies)
3" New floor plan (2 copi.es)
4. Site plan (2 copi,es)
5. Elevations (2 copies)
6. Photos of existir.rg strr-rcture (1 sct)
7. Material speci.fi cat.ions (1 setJ
B. Color samples (l set)
box 100
vail, colorado 81657
(3031 476-5613
April 10, 1981
Mr. David Green
Dava'l hlestern Deve'lopment Corp.
P.0. Drawer l.l
Vai l, Colorado 81657
Mr. Jim Martell
Mr. Neil Wood
Architerra, Inc.
Rosslyn Center
Arlington, Virgjnia 22209
department of community development
RE: Architerra Vail Deve'l opment
Dear Mr. Green, Martell and Wood:
Tne Town of Vai'l CommunitytDevelopment Department and our consultantfor 'land p1 ann'i ng have reviewed your pl ans and environmental impact
report and have the following corrunents. The staff considers the
proposal one of the effective methods of constructing on steep slopes,
reduce the vjsual impacts of constructing buildings on these sites
and if revegetated properly insuring the site blends in with the
surrounding natural landscape.
1. This wjll be the first deve'lopnent jn this zone district that the
Cormunity Development Department is supporting for units on over 40
percent slope. Because of the type of constructjon, reports on the
viabiljty of your units on steep slopes, reduced visual impact and
no automobjles on the upper portion of the s'i te, the Staff considers
your proposal a good exception to the ordinance.
2. Regarding the site plan the Staff would like to see clustering of
units instead of each bejng 'individual separated units. At the north
east corner of the site there are two units somewhat clustered. Instead
of disrupting 95% of the site we would like to see if the trees in the
center can be saved while clustering on the east and west part of thesite. Trash dumpstersandcluster mail boxes will also be needed and at
this tjme not shown on the site p1 an.
3. You will need to shora why the vari ance reguest for the parking
structure should be within five feet of the night-of-way. There was
no djscussion in the E.I.R- If the vaniance has merit, the structure
must be screened from the street.
Page 2
4. Reading over the report there is not much discussion on energy
conservation. With earth sheltered housing there must be actual
energy sav'i ngs. In the report there was an article where solar
panels were part of the house design. With the so1 ar exposure of
this site we would recommend use of several energy conservation
measures. Further discussjon is reconunended on energy conservation.
5. The electric tramway is another concern. I'le have not seen any
information on the system and question the econom'ic feas'ibility of
only serving nine units. Sections in the report do not show the
walkway for residents if the system is not working.
6. The design of the structure seems to be a departure from the
earth shelter housing depicted in the E.I.R. There would only be
about t, the home or less in the ground and the remaining more
traditional in nature. h|e need an explanation on why this conceptis being proposed for Vail.
7. The report seems to indicate that there is very little water on
the site or flows from above the site. In addition, the report
indicates soils are fairly permeable and there is no indjcatjon
that the water feature will work.
B. A very crit'i cal element of the success of the entire developmentis the revegetation plan. With almost total disruption of the site
proposed ground cover and trees need to be re-established inrnediately
irfter conitruction wjth a bond to guarantee the iob is done and held
fior I year to insure the vegetation is estab'l 'ished.
Si ncerel y,
,--:-\ / |
7
U...', f .'i .t',n--
qJ
Dick Ryan, Djrector
Department of Community Development
DR; df
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE IS IJEREBY 6IVEN that. the Planning and Environmental Corunission of
the Town of Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with section 18.66.060' of the Zoning Code of t-he Town of vail on April 27, lgBL at i:00 p.m. at the Tcwnof Vail Council Chambers in the ltunicipal Buiiding.
Pub1ic Hearing and Consideration of:
t. A request for trr'o variances for Lots A-1 and A-2, Lionsridge Subdi.,rision, Filirrg
No. l. one request is to build on a slope in excess of 40e,, the other is a setback
variance on the south side of the property on sandstone Road. Applicant: AAV
Limited Partnc::ship
2, A request for ancndmcnts to the density control section of the zonin! code that the
second unit shal I not exceed 40% of the toal gross re-sidcntial floor area allori,ed onthc lot in the Prirna::y,/secondary resiclcntial di.strict. In addition, lots in the
residential dist::jct Jess than 15r000 sguarc fect shall not ha,re a second unir excecd
40% of the total GI1FA allowcd on the lot. A,oplicant: A. pete:: patten, Jr.3. Anending the !'loor Area, Gross Resicicntial definitj.on of tlie zoning code dealing
with storage area. Applicant: A. peter patter, Jr.
fnforrnation relating to the requcst is at the coinnunity llevelopment office in the
Municipal Buitding during rcgular business hours for review by the public.
TOhN OF VAIL
DEPARI}'ENT OF COI'T,LINITY DIVELOPI,IENT
A. Peter Patten, Jr.
Zoning Administrator
I'ublishcd in thc Vail Trail April 10, 1981.
NOTICE IS HE}TI:I}Y
Town of Vail will hold
Zoning Code of the Town
Council Chanbers in the
PUBLIC NOTIUE
GIVEN that thc Planning and Environmental
a public hearing in accoldiurce with Scction
of Vail on April 13, 198L at 3:00 p.n. at
Municipal Building.
Conrnis s ion of the
18.66.060 of the
the Town of Vail
- Public Hearing and Consj.deration of:
I' A request for a front setback variance at 153 lJeaver Dan Road, lot 37, BJock 7,
Vail Village First Filing, in order to build a deck, new entry area, and stone wa11.
Applicant: Mr. G Mrs. Bo Pri-ce, I'tr, & Mrs. John lrlisenbaker.
2. A request for front and side setback variance on the south and west property lj,nes
of a residence at 765 Forest Road, Lot B, Block 2, VaiI Village 6th Filing, in
order to build a garage. Applicant: Tom and Cindy Jacobson.
A request for two variances for Lots A-1 and A-2, Lionsridge Subdivision, Filing
No,l. One request is to build on a slope jn excess of 40e,; the other is a setback
variance on the south side of the propcrty on Sandstcne Road. Appiicant: AAV
Limited Partnership.
Request for a condjtional use perrnit to a1lon installation and u,qe of an I8 hole
rniniature golf course on Lot 4, Block 1, Lionshead 1st Filing a:td Tract H, Lions-
head 3rd Fililg. Applicant: Bud and l,{a,-:cei Benedict.
A request for a condi.tional use pernit for 10 years at 100 North Fiontage Road,
the Spraddle Creel< Ranch, to construct barns, .orrafs, fcnces, cir.bins, etc. to
accorunodate from 40 to 60 horses and the peopte necessary to opet:atc thc busj-ness
of a livery stablc. stabling of horses for tlaj.l rides, uagon r:i dt:s, slcigh riCes
and other related activitics. Appli-cant: Rogcr Tilkerncicr.
Il.fonnation relating to 1.he requests i-s at the Cori.nunity Devclopment- office in the
I'tunicipal Building dur ing regular business hours for revicvr by the public.
TOHI{ OF VAIL
DEPARII'IENT 0F COI$ll.Jrr' i fi DIIVELOPI.{FNI'
A. Peter Pattcn, Jr.
'oning Adrnini-strator Published in the Vail 'I'rail I'lalcir 27, 1981 .
J.
4.
5.
box 100
vail. colorado 81657
(303) 476-5613
Apri'l 10 , 1981
Mr. David Green
Daval Western Development Corp.
P.0. Drawer W
Vai'l , Co'lorado 81657
Mr. Jim Martell
Mr. Neil Wood
Architerra, Inc.
Rosslyn Center
Arlington, Virginia 22209
department of community development
RE: Archi terra Vai I Devel opment
Dear Mr. Green, Martell and Wood:
Tne Town of VaiI CommunityrDevelopment Department and our consultantfor land planning have reviewed your plans and environmental impact
report and have the following conrnents. The staff considers the
proposal one of the effective methods of constructing on steep slopes'
reduce the visual impacts of constructing buildings on these sites
and if revegetated proper'ly insuring the site b'lends in with the
surround ing natural landscape.
1. This will be the first development'i n th'is zone district that the
Community Development Department is supporting for units on over 40
percent s1ope. Because of the type of construction, reports on the
viability of your units on steep slopes, reduced vjsual impact and
no automobiles on the upper portion of the site, the Staff considers
your proposal a good exception to the ordinance.
2. Regarding the site plan the Staff would like to see clustering of
units instead of each being individual separated units. At the north
east corner of the site there are two units somewhat clustered. Instead
of disrupting 951, of the site we would like to see if the trees 'i n the
center can be saved while clustering on the east and west part of thesite. Trash dumpstersandcluster mail boxes will also be needed and at
thjs time not shown on the site p1an.
3. You will need to show why the variance request for the parking
structure should be w'i thin five feet of the right-of-way. There was
no discussion in the e-I.R. If the variance has merit, the structure
must be screened from the street.
Page 2
4. Reading over the report there is not much discussjon on energy
conservation. l.lith earth sheltered hous'ing there must be actual
energy sav.i ngs. In the report there was an article where solar
panels were part of the house des'ign. l.,lith the so1 ar exposure of
this site we would recommend use of several energy conservation
measures. Further discussion is reconrnended on energy conservatjon.
5. The electric tramway is another concern. l,,le have not seen anyjnformation on the system and question the economic feas'i bility of
on'ly serving nine un'its. Sections in the report do not show the
walkway for residents jf the system is not working.
6. The design of the structure seems to be a departure from the
earth shelter housing depicted in the E.I.R. There would only be
about % the home or less in the ground and the remaining more
tradjtional in nature- l,Je need an explanation on why this conceptis being proposed for Vail.
7. The report seems to indicate that there is very little water 0n
the site or flows from above the site. In addition, the report
indicates soils are fairly permeable and there is no indication
that the water feature will work.
8. A very critical element of the success of the entire developmentis the revegetation p1an. l,,|ith almost total d'i sruption of the site
proposed ground cover and trees need to be re-establjshed inrnediately
iltbr conitruction wjth a bond to guarantee the iob is done and held
fior l year to insure the vegetation'is established.
Si ncerely,
J/r,. ', t -1 -'--'--
D'i ck Ryan , Di rector
Department of Cornmunity Development
DR: df
box 100
vail, colorado 81657
{3031 476-5613
April 10, 1981
Mr. David Green
Daval l^lestern Development Corp.
P.0. Drawer W
Vai'1, Colorado 81657
Mr. Jim Martell
l'lr. Nei l Wood
Architerra, Inc.
'Ross'lyn Cente r
Ar'lington, Virginia 22?09
department of community development
RE: Architerra Vai I Develooment
Dear Mr. Green, Martell and Wood:
The Town of Vail Community;Development Department and our consultantfor land p1 anning have reviewed your p'l ans and environmental impact
report and have the following conrnents. The staff considers the
proposal one of the effective methods of constructing on steep slopes'
reduce the visual impacts of constructjng bui'ldings on these sites
and if revegetated properly insuring the sjte blends jn with the
surrounding natural landscape.
1. Thjs will be the first development jn thjs zone district that the
Corrnunity Deve'l opment Department is support'i ng for units on over 40
percent s1ope. Because of the type of construction, reports on the
viabjlity of your units on steep slopes, reduced visual impact and
no automobiles on the upper portion of the site, the Staff considers
lilrr*ljroposaT a good exception to the ordinance.
2. Regarding the site plan the Staff would'l ike to see clustering of
units instead of each be'i ng individual separated units. At the north
east corner of the Site there ar€ two units somewhat clustered. Instead
of disrupting 95/" of the site we would like to see if the trees in the
center can be saved while clustering on the east and west part of the- site. Trash dumpstersandcluster mail boxes will also be needed and at
th'i s time not shown on the site plan.
3. You will need to show why the varjance request for the park'ing
structure should be within fjve feet of the ri ght-of-way. There was
no djscussion in the E.I.R. If the variance has merjt, the structure
must be screened from the street.
\,P-,u"^,, l- t.t
{
i;
Page 2
4. Read'i ng over the report there js not much djscussion on energy
conservation. Wjth earth sheltered housing there must be actual \energy savings. In the report there was an artjcle where solar ,j-'.panels were part of the house design. Hjth the so1 ar exposure of ',.i''":i.
this site we would recommend use of several energy conservat'i on r'
measures. Further discussion js reconunended on energy conservation.
tSl The electri c tramway is another concern. hle have not seen any
\ihformation on the system and question the economic feasibil'i ty of
only serving nine units. Sections in the report do not show the
walkway for residents if the system is not working.
6. The design of the structure seems to be a departure from the
earth shelter housing dep'icted in the E.i.R. There would only be
about 2 the home or less in the ground and the rema'i ning more
traditional in nature. We need an explanation on why th'is conceptis being proposed for Vail.
7. The report seems to indicate that there is very little water
the site or flows from above the site. In addition, the report
ndicates soils are fairly permeable and there is no indication
that the water feature will work.
8. A very critical element of the success of the.entire development
on
i s the revegetati on p'lan.
proposed ground cover andafter construction with afior 1 year to insure the
Si ncerel y ,'/ {''J/-o t' L't1 l.^--
\L!
Dick Ryan, Director
Department of Community Development
DR: df
l^|ith almost total disruption of the site
trees need to be re-established inrnediately
bond to guarantee the iob is done and held
vegetation is estab'l ished.
/,4*fr" ^
r(
\,.4, F"-'*!
I
f
t.
I
tuun box 100
April 6, 1981
Dick Ryan
Director of Community Development
Town of Vail
Re: Architerra at Vail
F'i re Protecti on Recommendat'i ons
Dear D'ick,
Upon review of the Environmental Impact Report for Architerra ar,
Vai'l , I have found only a coup'l e of certjan aspects that need to be
addressed from the life safetv standpoint.Fire department access to t-he projbct will be severely ljmited in
the cument design proposal . Therefore, it js my recommendat'ionthat the entire project be equipped with residental sprinkler systems.Th'is spri nk1 er system concept has been recently adopted by ihe Nat'ionalFire Protection Association in Standard 13 D . The Federal Government
has done extensive research on the concept and has strongly endorsedfire sprinkler systems for the home. The cost has been estimated to
be about 1% of the total cost of the structure ( based on a natjonal
average ). The technology has been deve'l oped and is being used.In addjtion, due to the access problem, a yard hydrant system should
be installed at 100 foot spac'ing, Each hydrant would be equipped with
two 2 7/2 inch outlets and a system boost at the parking structure
would insure proper residual pressure for fire fight'ing app'l ication 'if
the water system was down, a grass fire was in progress, or a fire onthe exterior erupted. I do not see a need to sprinkler the parking
structure due to the class of fire and the size of the structure.A remote fjre alarm panel to monitor the sprinkler system should beinstalled at the parking structure and should be tit\d into the Central
Receiving Statjon. Thi s would jnsure automatic dispatch of the F'i re
Department'i n the event of spri nkler discharge.I will offer my assistance on the technical aspects of the design andinstallation of such systems. Please contact me for more informat'i onif desired.
Sincerely,
..,-jZzZ- ... ..."
Michael McGee
Assistant ChiefVail Fire Department
vail, colorado 81657 303-476-7000
ti.
I
F.
iL, i:
)- t'/- t//'/{/
Mll'lO
TO:
FROM:
DICK RYAN
JEFF WINSTON
tining of the
variances to
revegetation. It
establish a clear
RE: ARCHITERM AT VAIL - PROJECT/EIS REVIEW COMMENTS
In general, Irrn rather intrigued with the concePt. The site appears to be a good
"lpii.rtion of the concePt, and the submitttal sccms to be fairly complete and
wlif ttrougfrt-out. t stiil have a few misgivings, however, which center primarily
aro'nd siie disturbance,/restoration; site drainage and the recirculating strean'
and the electric tramway, I will try to elaborate on these and a few other ninor
items below.i
A.
According to the report, "95% of the site will be disturbed" during the initial
construciion sequence. Essentially, the entire site will be altered to create
af,"-aurt"."s foi the units. Although the applicants present a rather thorough
U"i g"""t.f discussion of the rcevegetation which they intend to do' I think
several consi derations remain:
be several ays to accomPlish thi's:
/Re-adjusting the locations or configuati'ons of several of the units
I\ Rather than working frorn one side of the site to the other, the construction
/ coufa be coordinated to proceed toward the middle frorn either side
{ lconnecting across at the toP or botton of the site) '
i Identifying areas where no regradi.ng is required (existing grade=proposed
\grade) and protecti-ng those areas frorn construction activity.
)T;
l.Can the extent of disturbance be reduced? In think we nright like to see
an attempt to preseTve the existing grades and vegetation on a grea:,er ntr:(;uportion of the-site. specific attention should be given to:gYln8 jry"4,u
/^r-..L -+--l- i- ,t}.- l*-inaoaue\, th-nrroh the ccnter of Vixistine aspen /shrub siand!-.in the drainageway through the ccnter.=of-
-"-.----=.#ri: -T--
^ "-ii-TFa t -tiil. is the str-onsest character area and wctiti]dlt€=-iC appears tfi-ai-titG-is the strongest character area and would_y:"__':::r ' - -rIAaa-er-.tfy to the rtnaturity" of the ploject when conpleted. There night
The revegetation should be oriented toward re-establishing the existing
1r.rtto""[i"g) landscape with as little introduced naterial as possible
io ninirnj-ze-the visual inpa?i'---
a . #:-H -qre-l+ff#rtsni-*3'rH#
i#'a-& fcEi-:.., "E.
-1- ru#" ft-"ii't'"; il v,'o' t o i th e sp e -e- 5'.;a-T o;-
-ncoip#i6n-oi-ihe site are indigenous and very appropriate I an
.not ittti*"tely faniliar wi-th the site. however, it seems that Pine'
ifr.r"" and flowering shrubs nay be sonewhat out of character. The floriering
sirrub s and sod could be used rrre1l in the courtyard sPaces (as indicated
in s".,'rerat of the sections) where they uroul d not be obtrusive or in
contrast to the dryland background'
7
b. A related concern has to do with the
nay be i.rnportant as a condition of the
-sborf ---Ligrejrarne-fqf,-gr-g-reJe!et4-!ion'Admittedly, the site will be
Architerra P"C"O
an eyesore r';hile under.:?";,:'::tlii; ili.iillan eyesorc. "nil:^'l1"lr;:^il::;:iil"i_ *"ar_.iqn. suggcstion:ft* **ii::-+il::*[* :ril],n:?:::T'::,
r.t wrrr ul' rur-- are VEii-competent -r 'n surs' v
Matthews Associates -. . -L^.' --^.l,rc? ot acceptable
H: j :*:,, y::Hl:'H;"ii" l' i'i^
"1:u:. :l? ui:'
":;ihe owner':*S:'.':iruS!tia-:vir-E;;-qglr-ps-eEa!l--'SOme SOrt ot agJeEf \<'-': - "-::"-: ' -- ---
cffort should be made to
rcquire concurren
the site, tne
con structron 'ffi:'::i[.:il;i:.:l"";;,i-i".eo-a"vu.afterfinal
last revegetatlon DerrrE t-r'r'r}""---
etat ion standardF for the
I think it wilr b9 i'p:1:ilt^:"- :***'Eh*'"v"visual qualitY,6-fo insure
c.
.{i.t'ir. nona,''
r,^ h^r qr*e how much water that will be; tni:,-:::-ntw cirtical it
,*,i\ ,,":'."ti :1';1ii",iri:.i:lthi"it -:";l;i;i*:lif.*,,:*iiii:,,:f lin,,,
o' .. u il^otr generated b{ in: ":l:';l;";;.arirr i" tt
r-ilr.t ittr,'"e" is inpo'ndeu ot tn:.,:':,."
-,..:"."r.o the detenti:i lild in ics Present
ti;.' t secondly, though, to drain,+,:::,':l:.i:::i":' il: i:::in:?i?1-:i:ti:-;'*;:,\t'i *=rr,*',r***t; n ir?i"*rli:,it;*Flii""$ij?:ivil:if"'i"'il-'i'"-ii
, i crearrv in a dirrer"l' 1:?',":::.:i':: i:"1":::':l;"ifi"i:tllt":hi?:ii:l; 'iliii:lt''' rocaLrr''''^vl'-lirr"'"''t.i:?i"::;":?':: i:"1":;";;; io 'ak" ll:-'::?;';l?l; 'i:T;;;\
:
F*ii::if#iiltlru:!i*ii::* :l1,""'. ;m a;';*+',-ii*'*#"*,;*?#'l;: :li::.?:';:-i?1**"'+*F# "'
(Itrs possirtii"i it'" aeu"roped conditionJ"l't.."ti*zed holding areas would De :- If so, perhaps dry wells or llror'ts rr-rv*'^--
r :+ lra filled after the,If so, perhaPs ory wEr ,.,irl it ue fillej_eEg+Le
t-l?::'-iT:.?'H::;il}:l"ilffi '!:$i;#"".ii$F*;rr*lgffi i
*::i': ::::'':"'f :"iil"o" " ''
If one attenpts to nalrl:i1:"'i-,-".".tion,ale.-a-(if necessar/'.,:::;; *"ern to be nost
ror the wat er ausunen..""' ;gggffi :{t' "S UttUf:: : : I'13!"-.-
a ll'Li]i'ilcG":v-:4ll---9yll:-gt ngg= ) !i::-:- = -'
,/*n t luLc-t-ieDqJ' . r -_: -d L,ar er svstem has sone nice images, ^i'-r"::i.:ur:l:l.l:i ?llr*.r.\ z. The recircutating water-s"*sL-n"f.-ro*""t,rl ll..;r";m coning uuruptiy'o.rt.or_
;ll#;::' i"3'ni"l"li"l::: "'l'n;'h;;' -
s t' et'h
"t-^;
; i ;- ;'i v'pp' 3 :l ^., :":"Ui* r:
the drv ni'i"u""tt"*s^ ?'ti:.::" incongruous "no T""';;;t-io'u"^asking f
i!:,rji:^i#[l'*jll:*:"H::*lli{i"<r':;#ffi"":mm'+*''r'r'
woul d s eern
Review of EIS--Archi*0.." at Vail 3l l"trrch I98l
B.l
Vail Project Reviews
1.Site excavation - what will be excavation
lrhat erosion control ln€asures, what will
l{hat will visual imPact b. -;!
topsoil extensively darnaged?l How lon
Can anything be done to reduce hi.llsi
Jeft wins ton
rnethod--how rnuch damage to the hillsi
bc timing and nethods of revegetation?
end back into the terrain aftgr
to achieve natural appearance again?
sruPt 10
consruction? Drawings show sod roof.
walls...absorb and *ore heat from
5.
4,
2. Inclined Lift Systen--nechanics, rneintenance, energency evacuation capability--
back-up? Winter oPerat ion ?
llnits- roofs-- standard outdoor roofing
Solar Desi.grr - "concrete roof, floor and
the sun...release it during the evening.
Drawings show roofl covered with sod.
Not imnediately clear which walls would be exposed to sunlight--the exposed
ones will no doubt be insulated or will release heat to outside- -atronbe wall
inside gTeenhouse would work well if that's what's intended--but noT muEh-
analysis to show that construction- -nor any indication of how the passive
solar has been sized to meet the needs of the house '
5. Recirculating Purnp syst en
a. l|ihy? just to have a waterfal 1? A waterfall ovell the inclined trarnway
tunnel seerns to be asking for leakage problerns--no matter how well the sqale
is lined.
that that little bit of strean will look consist
of nowhere (a drY swale).
c. Just an observation, but for a fair expense, only seens to benefit a very
few units.
d----$[rer$ Will the w3!er cone from to run !b-c it's dry (August) ?
e, t{ould like to see a grading plan to see how the
created- - susPect
there will have to be a rather substantial dike (to
Sandstone Drive' How will that be handled vi-sua1ly
retention Pond
hold the water)
engineered ?
will be
along
f . what oveJfl-ow-qyst-eg- is.-desie-led lS:-!lt:Jong? Where does the water go
if it exceeds the pond caPacitY?
h. rtAll water draining away fron the units, as well as all surface water
drainage from the site wi.ll be directed to the sotrn wate; detention pond"
Donrt see how that's physically possi.ble according to the site Plan--the pond
ir tp ott the hill--higher than the swale along Sandstone Drive' Don't see
.ny irrorririon for crols-slope drainage. (I don't know how nuch vrater tras to
be'retained. lrlhether all oi it nust-just pointing out theyrre not doing what
the text indicates, )
6,
Review page 2
Eleclric T."t
a, hlhat kind of systcm--tested elsewhere?
q. cost-short-term/long-terrn--how long will.to naintain it ?
it last, can the residents afford
Crl.B. Geology
looks very conpl ete and no major problerns encountered.
C. l.C. Soils
no significant prob I ems
C.2 Hydrology
no groundwater encountered in test rvells.'evaluation
unable to ascertain whether the "high ground.water,' condition associ-ated withthis soil typically applies to this siie. An evidence suggesrs no groundwaterproblem. May want to verify in spring/early summer when water tables reachtheir peak.
C.3 Biology
introduced trees ? evergreens ?
guarantees that revegetation will--be consistent--be completed
Arch iterra Pace 5 o
C. Eletric Tramway ,'l.,fr-,. ' ':"' :.-l
The rnere fact that an inclined tram is proposed as the Lr-ng:L cj.rculation systerD
and that it is justi.fied by less 13 units leave ne with several questions:
1. l{hat are the perfornance exPectations for the tran?
-. Initial and life-cycle costs (costs to home owners)--can they be expected to
naintain it (afford it) ?
A related question--how nany units will actually suPPort the tram systen?
Since several of the units do not use it, will they stj.ll pay for i.t? If not'
can the renaining few units afford it?
, Has one operated successful 1y elsewhere in sinilar conditions - -what i.s its rec
(both nechanically and economically) ? l{hat nanufacturers are they actually
propos ing?
2, What contingency capabilities arelshould be provided?
. footpaths are proposed as the alternate access. What if there is a lengthy
down-tine for ihe tram--wi11 the residents carry groceries uphill by foot?
. what about energency evacuation--say, in case of a brush fire? -dontt think
the pathways are adequate. Perhaps a case could be made for the path inside
the iran tunnel--but that doesnrt serve all the units and then still nust get
to tran tunnel by Pathway.
. how will fire pro t ection/acce s s be provided? (fire trucks and/ ot pressurized
water)
D. Miscellaneous Itens
l. - Energy Conservation - the proposal states that nconcrete roof, floor and walls-
absorb and store heat fron the sun.. release it during the eveni-ng". This is
not clearly dernonstrated in the drawings
. Toofs are shown covered wi.th sod
, walls in the sections appear to be insulated only a very snrall interior wall
surface appears to be susceptible to absorbing solar heat.
Again, the drawings may not be exhaustive or even tyP j-cal of every condition.
There nay be portions of the house where roof, wal ls, and floors would indeed
act as therrnal nass, it i5 :just not very apParent'
A trombe uall inside the greenhouse would apPear to be the best solution - but
thilretS not sluch evidence that thatrs whatts intended. If so, I think it
would be instructive to see sone aralysis and connitnents as to the Portion of
the heating requirenent that will be provided by passive solar neans.
2, Roof Design - The report states that the roofs will be of "standard outdoor
roofing construction" and yet the drawings indicate sod roofs. Would there be
no sPecial roofing requirenents for sod roofs?
Architerra
oge4Pa
Insumnary,itappcarsthatallofthccnvironmcntalanaiysisiscompleteand
nornajorProblensu'"-.obcanticipatcd.lamratherintriguedbytheSysteflt
and its potential upJ.".i"tion for thc mountain s - - deve I opment on the slopes,
lcaving open the "i;ilfi;";;itiii""-""ri"v"' I do not'-l'o'e"tt' feel that the
nechanics of siting and access h"tre b""n '"iplored satisfactorily here' I woulci
really like to ,u" tJ*"tfi"! rt" than 95% ^of tttt site disturbed' and would
ilnticipate a \tery.iot" t"ul"w of the revegetation concePt and schedule when
thatrs appropriate, -i guu* my biggest riigl" concern is that of access--I an
not yet convinced that the tram, as pr.t"niiy proposed, is the ultimate solution
in terrns of Practicality, cost, and emergency access.
box 100
April 6, 1981
D'ick Ryan
Director of Community Deveiopment
Town of Vail
Re : Architema at VailFire Protection Recomrnendations
Dear Dick,
Upon review of the Environmental Irnpact Report for Architerra at
Vail, I have found on'ly a couple of cert'i an aspects that need to be
addressed from the life safety standpoint,
Fire department access to the project will be severely iimited in
the current design proposal . Therefore, it is my recofllmendation
that the entire project be equipped with residental sprinkler systems.
This sprinkler system concept has been recently adopted by the I'lational
Fire Protection Association in Standard 13 D The Federal Government
has done extensive research on the concept and has strongly endorsedfire sprinkler systems for the home. The cost has been estimated to
be about 1% of the total cost of the structure ( based on a national
average ). The technology has been developed and is being used.In addition, due to the access problem, a yard hydrant system should
be installed at 100 foot spacing. Each hydrant would be equipped with
tuto 2 UZ inch outlets and a system boost at the parking structure
would insure proper residual pressure for fire fighting application if
the water system was down, a grass fire was in progress, or a fire on
the exterior erupted. I do not see a need to sprinkler the parking
structure due to the class of fire and the size of the structure.
A remote fire alarm panel to monitor the sprinkler system should be
installed at the parking structure and should be titld into the Central
Receiving Station. This would insure automatic dispatch of the Fire
Department in the event of sprinkler discharge.I will offer ny assistance on the technical aspects of the design and
installation of such svstems. Please contact me for more informationif desired.
Si ncerely,
Michael McGee
Assistant ChiefVail Fire Department
vail, colorado 81657 303-476-7000
O ROUGH DRAFT
ltryt 4/3/8r
TO: DICK RYAN
FROM: JEFF WINSTON
RE: ARCHITERM AT VAIL - PROJECT/EIS REVIEW COMMENTS
In general, Itm rather lntrigued with the concept. The site appears to be a good
application of the concept, and the submitttal seems to be fairly cornplete andwell .thought-out. I still have a few nisgivings, however, which centex prirnari.ly
around site disturbance,/restorati on; site dralnage and the recirculating stream;
and the electric tranway, I will try to elaborate on these and a few other ninor
iterns below.
A. Site Disturbance/Revegetation
According to the report, "95% of the site will be disturbed" during the initj.al
construction sequence, Essentially, the entire site will be altered to create
the terraces for the units. Although the applicants present a rather thorough
but general discussion of the revegetation which they intend to do, I think
several considerations renain:
l. Can the extent of disturbance be reduced? In think we might like to see
an attempt to preserve the existing grades and vegetation on a greater
portion of the site. Specific attention should be given to saving theexisting aspen ,/shrub stands in the drainageway through the center of
the site. It appears that this is the strongest character area and would
add greatly to the rlnaturityt' of the project when conpleted. There nj-ght
be several ways to accomplish this:
Re-adjusting the locations or configuations of several of the unlts
Rather than working fron one side of the site to the other., the construction
could be coordinated to proceed toward the middle from either side
(connecting across at the top or bottom of the site).
Identifying areas where no regradi-ng is required (existi.ng grade=proposed
grade) and protecting those areas frorn construction activity.
2. The revegetation should be oriented toward rre-establishing the existing
(surrounding) landscape with as 1itt1e introduced naterial as possible
to ninimize the visual impact.
a. A prirue objective of the project is to be "low profile units, blending
into the h1llside." A too dorninant or contrasting landscape could foil
these objectives. More specifically, rnost of the species listed for
incorporat ion on the site are indigenous and very appropriate . I an
€mot intimately farniliar with the site. however, it seems that pine,
spiuce and flowering shrubs rnay be somewhat out of character, The flowering
shrubs and sod could be used well in the courtyard spaces (as indicatedin several of the sections) where they would not be obtrusive or in
contrast to the dryland background.
b. A related concern has to do with the tining of the revegetation. It
rnay be iffportant as a condition of the variances to establish a clear
short.time frame for the revegetation. Adnittedly, the site will be
ArchiterrjaSe 2
an eyesore whi.le under construct j-on, and every effort should be nade to
mininize the time it h'i11 be in that condition, Suggestion: require concurrent
rehabil itation/revegetat ion. As the construction proceeds on the site, the
last revegetat ion being cornpleted within 60 days after final construction.
c, I think it will be irnportant to establish revegetatj.on standards for the
project. Matthews Associates are very competent Irm sure, but to j-nsure
the ownerrs commi.trnent to a 'fj,nishedr product of acceptable visual quality,
some sort of agreement and even bond might be appropriate,
B. lite Drainag.e an{ Recirculatin.g., Wate.L Syste,m
water draining away fron the units, as well as a1I
site will be directed to the stornwater detention
I. The report states that "al. 1
surface water drainage from the
pondtr .
First of all, Itn not sure how nuch water that will be; that is, how cirtical it
is, all of the evidence suggests that there will not be a substantial anount of
nrnoff generated by the developnent. The soils are fairly perneable, and the uphill
drainage is inpounded by the o1d roadfill in the drainageway above the site.
Secondly, though, to drain all the si-te water to the detention pond ir-r its present
location looks to be very difficult physical ly. The southwest. I/2 of the site is
clearly j.n a different drainage basin from the one that feeds the pond. A number
of cross-slope swales would appear to be necessary to make the connection. Sinilarly'
a rather elaborate systern (apparently) of roof drains and pipes will bring the water
frorn the units to .1he pond. Question: How nuch water is it-is all of that necessary?(Itts possibbthat the developed condition will not have nore runoff than the undeveloped one?
ff so, perhaps dry we1ls or more Tocalized holding areas would be feasible,)
I have some other reservations about the pond. How will it be filled after the
spring runoff has evaporated? With treated domestic water? If great water leve1
fluctuations do occur, cracking rnud and dying vegetation could becorne eyesores.
If one attenpts to maintaln a constant level, what will be the cost to the homeowners
for the watei augunentation? A retenti-on area (j.f necessary) that fil1s from spring
rruroff and heavy rains, but is otherwj.se just a glassy bow]., would seem to be nost
functional .
2. The recirculating water system has some nice images associated with it, but
cones across as a bit forced, perhaps sonewhat out of place, and a potential fj-nancial
burden for the honeowners, That short stnetch of stream coni-ng abruptly out of
the ilry hillside seems a litt1e incongruous and really only appears to benefit a
few units. The waterfall over the tramway tunne 1 seens to be asking for leakage
problerns, no natter how well detailed, To recirculate water for irrigation purposes
would seen to be appropriate and could justify the aesthetic dimenSlfiS-6-f,-lt also.
. r Architerra Pug" I
t C.- Eletric Tranway
lbe nere fact that an inclined tran is proposed as the pffryery circulation systen
and that it is justified by less 13 units leave ne with several questions:
1. What are the perforrnance expectations for the tran?
. Initial and life-cycle costs (costs to hone olmers)--can they be expected to
lEintain it (afford it) ?
A related question--how rnany units will actually supPort the trarn systen?
Since several of the units do not use it, will they stilt Pay for it? If not,
can the renraining few units afford it?
. Has one operated successfully elsewhere in sinilar condit ions - -what is its record
(both nechanically and economicallyJ? What rnanufacturers are they actually
ProPos ing?
2. What contingency capabilities are/should be provided?
. footpaths are proposed as the alternate access. I{hat if there is a lengthy
down--tine for ihe-tram--wiI1 the residents carry groceries uphi-l1 by foot?
. what about energency evacuation- - say, in case of a brush fire? -dontt think
- the pathvrays are adequate. Perhaps a case could be made for the path inside
the i.ran tunnel--but that doesnrt serve all the units and then still nust get
to tran tunnel bY PathwaY.
. how will fire protection/acces s be provided? (fire trucks and/or pressurized
water)
D. MiscelLaneous Itens
l,- Energy Conservation - the proposal states that ''qoncrete roof, floor and walls...
absoiL and store heat from the sun., release it during the evening". This is
not clearly denonstrated i.n the drawings
. roofs are shown covered with sod
. walls in the sections appear to be insulated only a very srnall i-nterior wal 1
surface aPPears to be susceptj-ble to absorbing solar heat'
Again, the drawings nay not be exhaustive or even typical of every conditior.'
Th"tu- nay be portions of the house where roof, walls, and floors would indeed
act as thermal nass, it j5;just not very aPparent'
A trornbe wall inside the greenhouse would aPpear to be the best solution - but
ther6-t s not ruch evidence that thatt s what I s intended. If so, I think it
rvould be instructive to see some analysis and comrnitments as to the portion of
the heating requirement that will be provided by passive solar neans.
Z. Roof Design - The report states that the roofs will be of "standard outdoor
roofing construction" and yet the drawings indicate sod roofs. Would there be
no sPecial roofing requirenents for sod roofs?
Architerra Page 4
Insummary'ltapPealsthatallofthecnvironmcntalanalysisiscornpleteandnomajorProblems"""*.obeanticipatt'<I.Ianrathcri-ntrigucdbythesysten
and its potential "pir".iotion for thc. raountains- -development on the slopes,
leaving oPen the.'ir'u"iiy sensitive valleys' I9o not'^however' feel that the
rnechanics of siting ,r,a ...".= have bcen explore<l satisfactorily here' I-would
reallyliketo'"".o'".t'inglessthang5%ottt'"sitedisturbed,andwould
dnticipate a very aror" ."ul"w of the revegetation concept and schedule when
thatrs appropriate. I guess my biggest siigle concern is that ef asss55--I am
not yet convinced that the tram' as presently proposed' is the ultimate solution
in tlrrns of practicality, cost, and energency access '
MTMO
T0: DICK RYAI'I
FROM: JEFF II'INSTON
t //- ,7/',/ r ,t
-J-r i,l
RE: ARCHITERRA AT VAIL - PROJECT/EIS REVIEIII COMMENTS
In general, Itn rather intrigued with the concept. The site apPears to be a good
6pii;;;i;; of the concept, and the subl1itttal scems to be fairly conplete and
wlif thought-out. t stlif have a few misgivings, however, which center prinarily
arognd Siie disturbaace/restoration; site drainage and the recirculating strean'
anil the electric tranuay. I r^rill try to elaborate on these and a few other rninor
itens below,
A.
According to the report, "95% of the site will be disturbed" during the initial
construction seguence, Essentially, the entire site will be altered to create
th" t"tru."s for the units. Although the appl i-cants Present a rather thorough
u"i g"r"t.r discussion of the revegJtation wrricir they intend to do, I think
several considenations remain :
1. Can the extent of disturbance be reduced? In think we night like to see
anattemPttopreselvetheexistinggradesandvegetationonagreaterlortion of the site. Specific atteniion should be given to saving the
'"-irlirg "rpen /shrub stands in the drainageway through the center of
the site. It appears that this is the strongest character area and would
add greatly to t'he "naturity', of the project when cornpleted. There night
be sJveral uays to accomPlish this:
Re-adjustingthelocationsorconfiguationsofseveraloftheturits
Rather than working from one side of the site to the other, the construction
could be coordinat;d to proceed toward the niddle fron either side
(connecting across at the top or botton of the site) '
IdentifyingareaswherenoregradingisTequired-(existinggrade=proposedgrade)and-protectingthoseareasfronconstf-uetionactivity.
2, The revegetation should be oriented toward re- estab l ish j-ng the existing
1r.rr"o..rrlirrg) landScape with as little introduced naterial as possible
to ninimize the visual imPact'
a,Aprirneobjectiveoftheprojectistobe''lowprofileunits,blendinginto the hillside.'r A too dominant oI contrasting landscape could foil
'.theseobjecti'ves.MoTespecifically,nostofthespecieslistedfor' incorporlt ion on the site are indigenous and very appropriate I an
Jrot int irnatel y faniliar with the site. however, it seens that Pine,
spruce ana ffo'w.ring shruUs nay be somewhat out of character. The flowering
shrubs and sod coulJ be used well in the courtyard spaces (as indicated
in several of the sections) where they would not be obtrusive or in
contrast to the dryland background '
b.Arelatedconcernhastodowiththetiningoftherevegetation.ItrnaybeifiPortantasaconditionofthevaliancestoestabllsha.cleal
short time frane for the levegetation. Adlnittedly, the site will be
o!rchiterra P"Ot
an evesore-qt: "i1";,ilT:i:'iil; lll.iii;l,'lili!:;i::11;:"tlti:'i;:'""""'
T:Hilii:.:H":iT:':;"1:i i::,*, ::"',,::l; :'ffi ' il;,n:fi ::'?,1" -;;';.ruc, ion
last revegetatron oerrrE vv''r^----
standards for the
c. r think ir wirl be irnportant t".".=^liul;;l"l:l:t;:itlll", but to insure.
project' Mattnews Assoiiates are ver)
"t"i".i "t "t""pt"bl" visual quality '
ihe owner,s conn*Inent to .a 'f i"lt^lSorrl;:";:";;t.pii'..".
sone sort of tg"tt;!*t and even bond might be approprrate
I. The report states that "all water
l"tt."" rltier ataittage from the sjte
the \rnits, as well as.all
the storrnwat e'r detent ron
to
B.,ilraining awaY fron
will be drrected to
(It t s
il: or alr' r'lm not :l':"1::-T:"1"::':i"::"l"li'1"?";" Iti:i:*i::"il:il?"i'
is. a1r or "ti "','ia"n'e.suc$e:::"'i'"i"ir'"'" Yiti i":'l:t; i:li:t!lii'"1'i";;; uphili
r,norr *u,,"'"ila"i;-iili u:l:i:YT"il;urfii ;ltf""::"i;;;;'; above the site'
il;;;c; is irnPo'nded bY the oto
secondrv, though' :" 9:i1",+,:|;.';l;'i::iir:' ;|,i::::l;:tt-j?l:*:i:';lj*:'
:n*il""1Y;rl?"::"1':l"ti:;:';::'i'''r"' 'i't :T :y;"i:"ii:::hil:ii:" sirn'arrv'
F;:ii:t:"1#'""1ffi*"tt*t;":,:**ll,r. *'." r :tlq4;:6' {+;;'*?".r-tft" units to 'd're Pond' aY?l
possibbthat the .eveioila 'onhi'ion r'rir1,:::ri?:: il:l:t:"J:;:.'"i'""ia be reasible')
If so, PerDaPs
-dry wel I s or llrore
t have sone-other reservation' ftor:il'.:::'iri;-"TlT'\ll"i!:it:ij|;j i:::l l::"t
',it*:ft r*'*'ul,ilui"*l,fl *-''lffi ft []ii]:*il:#L].ryru'
for the *"""tr""rrrg*"ntation?.^ rtherwise just a ur"]:;';;;i','uro"ra seeln to be nost
ti"tii-^"a heavY rains' but ts <
r *"'l"t-t^^ircuratins
lrater systern has some.'i':..:':?';r"'.ll"llititn:l:l.i:i ?11.""'"
z. The recirculating lrater -sys'--tr"pr-ror"*tttl lTt-,a-";n corning "urrrp.-,f
-o.rt^.or
cones a*oss as a bit forced' li';ffi;t";;'et'n or t:::'i-::'*i::'":?:"0.;'benefj't a
["iat" for the honeowners;,.-:i:
the dry hilrside seems :.'t't".illll**;;X"i":::1,"1:to3nn"3ilrt'?"r reakage
few units' The saterfall :Y"1 'pro!r.ens'.-n:Ji:'ilpH'H:::#:*ilil#ti":x'l':l::"nmtt'*"lp'"=?"''
would seem
MTMO
TO:
FROM:
o ',/./ t ,
DICK RYN{
JEFF WINSTON
;;;";;i -
"t"s iderat ions rernain :
can the extent of disturban"".!:.1:d:::1:. j:rtl:::J:r:it:: lt::"::";"":r":iill';:'n::.:*:"ill::'::':!-!:1g;' .Ild u"e"'"'ion on a greater ' 't'"u
poxtion or the :':: "'.' :i ii liii";ii:':i:l;*ll H,:l;t.iG#i€'lt"::llt:l,' :,;:ilSl'j;; L:. j r : " *-- !x*: ::+i :il#::. :i "
"
lil ! i-l o'In
ffi;:""1fl:"I;.;lii:i:'::.. ir'"'p'.: """when cornpl eted' rhere ni ght
il-"$;;;iways to accomPrish this:
Re-adjusting the locations or configuations of several of the units
Rather than working fron one side^of-:n:r:t:?r:?"tl:";t:iii"ln!ri!"tructiontfiti::ll"::#"lli'iil'l'"ir'i^i'p-" botton or the site):ilH":'::"::il:l:.'i:'nil: "
;;";::il-;:: li:' ::. :i:' e i ther s ide
rdentirying areas where. "" ':g1i1i1:^:'^::::ii:irj;liil:il!.$'"a"=n'ono'"ugtta"f and-Protecting those ;;;;;-i;"t construction activity'
RE: ARCHITERRA AT VAII - PROJECT/EIS REVIEW COMMENTS
Ingeneral,ItnratherintrigueclwiththeconcePt'Thesiteappearstobeagood
application of tne t;t";;'-;;a tr'"^''t'utit;;;i ^sccms to be fairiv complete'and
well thought-out. .r stitl have a f"",ritei"ilCtl h:1:u:1, which center primarilv
arormd site disturo*..7t"ri"ration; site drainage and the recirculating strean'
antt the electric ar"rr"y. I will aty a.-"i"Uotul" ot' these and a fer^i other rninor
iterns below.
Site Disturbance/Revegetat ion
According to the rePort' "95eo of'the site will be distur'bed" during the ini'tial
constructior, ,"qr"r,.!i Essentialry,. tt"-""iire site will be altered to create
the terraces for the-;iitl- nftf'"ign tn" applicants present a rather thorough
but general discussron tf -:l:.t"u"gettti;t-;tt;;;ev'intend
to do' r thjnk
A.
1.
The revegetation should
f surrounding) landscaPe
io rnininize the visual
be oriented toward re- estab l ishing
with as Iittle introduced*,ry!"tg
the exi.sting
',as possible
impact .
iect is to be trlow Pl9!:L"-l*ltil-g+croti'"-9?if !li',"'E-!,Fl*l#J#:.y"kiinl:'*n,"'nffi fr iff ii'+'ffq"+ir""r-or-;;"-::':T!*S-,"ff *::#?#i#,iiF.::;:y?:'::iil::-',:'"*:':":t":*:*:il:'ll:':'ffi#ffij';: i;';'ii: l*':i::"'.:l:,:::',i':::H'iffi ,' n,i"l-ncorPoratlon-tn":1:1-i;;";;; ii," it."- however, it seens that pine'
lot intinately fanll , __-. r-- .^*o-xrt olrt_ of character. The floweri:ng
S::" :":il"fi ;'.";il ;^ ;t: :,;::, I ", : "l;:n ::"::;.:5 !illi!' il ;'ifi .:i :l:il$: :H :::-::il: ;l';id *ll ]l^:n:^:?:':'"?'$"'ffi:fi'li: ;l'l:il':5"ili :;"';:"::.;:;;;""il;;.,ihey woutd not be obtrusive
"itit"i.-t" the dryIand background'
b. A related concern has to do with the
"'*, O" irnportant as a condition of the
.t'"ti tit"-franeifgr the -revegetat ion'
tining of the revegetation - It
variances to estab!1,s-[-4- cl:ar
AdnittedlY,the site will be
Arch ite rr a o
an evesore whi I e under, ::";:'::' lil; illi.!i!:i ."ti:;!:l!: tii,litii:'i,;:';:l:'lill illi,!l!:i,'-!:ii:::l:l',n:':li:: :::""""',HH##;;:"i il i*ft'*:}"'inii ,;;i ::;,' i?: : :; ;, ::,' : l "
i i li r' i ; iii#iifia=" I;f:nt ::htl.ll",i?l;;';;' ;;;
"
ait er r ina t c on st ruct i 3n'
last revegetatlon usrrr6 '-"'r ^-:^n ct".rlards for thelaStr rv'"5----- standar
be jmportant to 1-s't:-abl ish rev-9>9:loll
c. I think it Hill- ^.c.,.iates are t"ti9."*p;i;;i"i'* t"^t";-Uu-f, I think i.:-:l:],.b" i mport ant' o r=i9j."ll;i:x:T:+*#^'""ff, i" ;:;i'p,ii""il .*.:X::*:::"::"1-iril:,Iil{ illiiii' ;"^:::l:::
n:, :H::, F ::"|* *l * .: "kil i * f,iir\;.;-*fi 1 e v i s u a I qua I i'i v'
ili"tg:l'r$UA;ilAf ""*d's:drl-o-:-rosgtl*:'
$'L, tonu"'
- rr rr," not sure hor.r rnuch water that will be; thi:-l::'how cirtical it
3r)$'*-#ai:*i,:-i:j'''#ffi
="-:::.,11"*1*i*i*ii;''*:l*-i:1.:+rf n"'
,-ir{j drainage t' t"::-:;,:;r,
the site \^rater to the detenti:r y?}u"i".i:=rli:'::t\]S g:!!ir;1.ffirm:v-'+":ili ;ilh.iilt "'$:'i1;;i:*"4i.n:ti." :.i*i;;r*;' ii:iiitr,,:s:;H';;':*it.ilhlilit,:"^lp'ix':: :::'#:':;ri;";;;;; '!he
ria'ier
a rattrr,.,iirhri;"qi,q4-#**g,r*****i4#,vri:*rv,:##'l
(rt's possibnll":":";";"p,-i,v """, :;"::;:":;: ""*.,*lilr.,_#,":i?:i#jk,,*",* t,sPrinfluctIf oit
for t
,,{uj1.ffi-----::-n^.'o'"niceinages-",,o::1,:o.l}ll'ilio,ll"'.,
B. S.ite Drainage and Recirculating YJater Systen
i;,#3 *i:"'.::?::;"'1*;' il: :ll*ll'l'"" :'i::" ":':: :l: H llil'i l"::1 "::'#
6{r;'r' T:T":: :" ::, ""' ilt ;".: ::.;:i:: il;' *?*h *, + l* f| *",-i mlili, il:"
"'
cones acrost- "t, "_::.:_^1.- - - .ri,'rt short stretch.or >urs.o^-1',/
"o"""rs to benefit a
;;;;" for thg.honeowners'.i.i'il't"l"rg"o,rt and reallv-'l:v":"::;;i*-io' Ieakage
ir,"-i'v h'rside*seerni"i,'l,lil,#:*;;;l'.i*"1":::l"tlto:n::il;" ation purpo-ses
feu units '
f"lll"t'"1'"#:r:;'1il;:ii*i:i:it' i*';1'nt"""""13"1? lil''1#H;!; ;]5"'
Review of EtS--Ar0crra at Vail 5l l''l;r rch I 9c l
Vail Projcct Reviews Jcff }{insto;r
8.1 Project Description
l. Site excavation - what will be excavation method--how nuch darnage to the hillsidwhat erosion control neasures, what will bc timing and net.hods of revegetation?
what will visual impact be.-p+Ll-Lt-r:uly_b*l_erri_*u_4c!1n.1,o- the--terrain aftwhat wrlr vlsuar lmpact be -;lfll-r--Lt_t-n:I_y_blgnd back into the terrain aftertopsoil extensivcly danaged{ Hor{ long to achievJ naiuiai-appeJi]icEJs;in?-appearance again ?Can anything be done to reduce hiltsT?E-?fsilptib-n1
Inclined Lift Sy st en- -rnechanics, meintenance, energency evacuation capability--
back-up? Winter operation?
Units- roofs-- standard outdoor roofing consruction? Drawings show sod roof.
Solar Design - I'concrete roof, floor and walls...qbsorb and $re heat fronthe sun...release it during the evening. r'
Drawings show roofs covered with sod.
Not inmediately clear r^rhich walls would be exposed to sunlight--the exposed
ones will no doubt be insulated-6r will release heat to outside - - atrombe wa1l.inside greenhouse would work well if thatts what rs intended--but not-rnuch_-analysis to show that construc t ion- - nor any i-ndication of how the passivesolar has been sized to meet the needs of the house.
5, Recirculat j,ng punp systen
a. TJhy? just to have a waterfal l ? A waterfall over the inclined tranHay
tunnel seens to be asking for leakage problens--no m"tter how well the sqaleis lined.
2.
J.
4.
that that little bit of streamof nowhere (a dry swale).
c, Just an observation, but for a fair expense, only seens to
few units .
will look cons isten
benefit a very
d--&ere--:Ci4llt-e.--V4t-e-I-qA_ne*lretn_!q_ry! the syqtprn L,hen itrs dry fAugusr) ?
e. would like to see a grading plan to see how the retenrion pond will becreated- - susPect
there will have to be a rather substantial dike (to hoLd the waterl along
Sandstone Drive. How will that be handled visually engineered?
f. Itlhat overflow sj_qt-941"_i,s,_desi-eneQ for the pond? Where does the water go
if it exceeds the pond capacity?
h. "Al 1 water drai-ning away fron the units, as well as all surface water
drainage from the site will be directed ro the sotrn war;;-d.etenti.on pond"
Donrt see how that's physically possible accordi.ng to the sire plan--the pond
is up on the hill--higher than the swale along Sandstone Drive. Don,t see
any provision for cross-slope drainage. (i don't know how rnuch water has to
be retained. Whether all of it must-just pointing out they're nor doing xhat
the text indicates, )
6.
Rcvicw page 2
Electric rt}y
a, What kind of system--testcd elscwhere?
b. cost-short-term/long-term--how long wil Ito rneintain it?it last, can the resi"dent s afford
Cr1.9. . GeoloFy
C,1.C. Soils
looks very courpl ete and no najor problems encountered.
no significant prob I ens
C.2 Hydrology
no groundwater encountered in test wells.
eva luat ion
unable to ascertain whether the "high groundwater" condition associated withthis soil typical'ly applies to this site. Ar evidence suggesrs no groundwaterproblem. May want to verify in spri-ng/early sunmer when water tables reachtheir Peak.
C.3 Biology
introduced trees? evergreens ?
guarantees that revegetation will--be consistent--be completed
, Architerra pug" L
C. Eletric Tranway
the nere fact that an inclined tram is proposed as the !f,IIqII circulation systeln
and that it is justified by less 13 units leave me with several questions:
1. What are the performance expectations for the trarn?
. Initial and life-cycle costs (costs to home owners)--can they be expected to
naintain it (afford i-t) ?
A related question--how many units will actually support the tran system?
Since several of the units do not use it, will they still pay for it? If not,
can the remaining few units afford it?
. Has one operated successfully elsewhere in sirnilar conditions - -what is its recordi
(both nechanical ly and economically) ? What nanufacturers are they actual Iy
proposing?
?, What contingency capabilities are,/should be provided?
. footpaths are proposed as the alternate access. What if there is a lengthy
doun-tine for the trann--wil1 the residents carry groceries uphill by foot?
. what about emergency evacuation-- say, in case of a brush fire? -don't think
the pathways are adequate. Perhaps a case could be made for the path inside
the tran tunnel- -but that doesntt serve all the units and then still nust get
to trarD tunnel by pathway.
, how will fire protection/acces s be provided? (fire trucks and/ or pressurized
water)
D. Miscellaneous Items
1. Energy Conselation - the proposal states that "concrete roof, floor and wa11s.,.
absorb and store heat from the srm.. release it during the eveningr'. This is
not clearly denonstrated in the drawings
. roofs are shown covered with sod
, walls in the sections appear to be insulated only a very srna1l interior wall, surface apPears to be susceptible to absorbing solar heat.
Again, the drawings nny not be exhaustive or even typical of every condition.
There rnay be portions of the house where roof, walls, and floors would indeed
act as thermal mass, it i5 rjust not very appatent.
A tronbe wall inside the greenhouse would appear to be the best solution - but
theieiinot much evidence that that's whatrs intended' If so, I think it
woul d be instructive to see some analysis and commitments as to the portion of
the heating requirenent that will be provided by passive solar neans.
2, Roof Design - The report states that the roofs will be of I'standard outdoor
roofing construction'f and yet the drawings indicate sod roofs. Would there be
no special roofing requirenents for sod roofs?
Architerra G"+
fn summaryo it appears that a7I of the environrnental analysis i-s cornplete and
no major problerns are to be anticipated. I am rather intrigued by the system
and its potential appreciation for the nountains- - devel oprnent on the slopes,
leaving open the visually sensitive valleys. I do not, however, feel that the
mechanics of sj.ting and access have been explored satisfactorily here. I would
rea11y like to see something less than 95eo of the site disturbed, and would
dnticipate a very close review of the aevegetation concept and schedule when
thatrs appropriate. I guess rny biggest single concern is that of access--I arn
not yet convinced that the trarn, as presently proposed, is the ultinate solutionin terns of practicality, cost, and emergency access.
r3OT GRAND AVENUE
P. O. DRAWER 250
GLENIVOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 8t60r
April 2, L98L
RE: Lions Ridge,
Dear Mr. Green l
Be it knormr that the abovecertified service area of
t-/'/l -- ./ /- / IJ /.4.1 -/--r e-ar ,/JL<*2,,44+Ted Huskey, St5king
TH:lsz
Engineer
HOLY CROSS EDtrCTRIC ASSOOIATION, INC.
AREA CODE
303
945 - 3491
94s - 6056
AAV Limited Partnershinc/o David GreenP.O. Drawer WVail, CO 8L657
Lots A-1 and A-2
mentioned development is within theHoly Cross Electric Association, Inc.
Be it further known that Holy Cross Electric Associaticln, Inc.has an existing underground three-phase 24.9 kv power linelocated adjacent to the southerly side of Sandstone Drive acrossfrom Lot A-2. This line is capable of supplying el-ectric powerto the aforesaid lots A-1 and A-2 subject to the tariffs, rulesand regulations on file with the Public Utilities Commission ofthe State of Colorado, and to appropriate contractual arrangementswith Holy Cross Electric Association, fnc. It will be thedevel^operrs responsibility to extend, enlarge or alter theexisting power line to the desired locations within the abovedescribed lots.
If you desire any further information, please feet free to call
me at 949-5892.
Sincerely,
IIOLY CROSS EI,DCTRTC ASSOCIATTON, TNC.
t
UPPER EAG
o o\D
March 31 , 1981
AAV, Ltd.c/o Mr. David GreenDaval llestern Realty of VailP. O. Drawer WVail, Colorado 81658
D^.Wastewater Service to13 single family units;Lots A-1 and A-2, Lion'sRidge Subdivision
Dear Mr. Green:
The Upper Eagle Val1ey Sanitation District can andwill provide the above referenced development wastewatertreatment services. The District has excess capacity toprocess wastelvater at the present time and the expanded fac-
i1 ities at Avon will more than double the capaci-ty of theDistrict to serve its constituents. AdditionalLy, the treat-
ment plant expansion at Vail will further enhance the com-bined Districtsr eapability of providing service.
VA Ltr,ll1" SANTIT"ATI t)
01<15 Avon Road
P.O. Ilox Y
Avon, Colorado 81620
(303) 9,19-5274
IS"ilRNCT
Sanitation Dlstriet
compliance with the
and the payment of
Accordingly, Upper Eagle Va1leywill provide wastewater treatment uponrules and regulations of the Districtappropriate tap fees.
ames P.District Col l i,ns
Managet
Jpc /db
cs: Duane Davis
S incer
Re:Domestic lfater Service13 single family unitsLots A*1 and A-2, LionRidge Subdivision
District can and will provide
above referenced development.
James P.District s
Manager
uil's RfDGE wArER DrsrRrct
c/o James P. Collins
445 Union Blvd., Suite 123
Denver, Colorado 80228
(303) 986-15s1
March 31 , 1981
AAV, Ltd.c/o Mr. David GreenDaval ltfestern Realty of VaiIP. O. Drawer IgVail, Colorado 81658
Dear Mr. Green:
The Lion's Ridge lfaterdomestic water servi"ce to the
JPC/dh
ce: Duane Davis
The Distriet has excess capacity to process domes-tic water at the present time to its constituents. Accord-1ngly, upon compliance with the rufes and regulations andthe payment of appropriate tap fees, the Lionts Ridge IfaterDistrict will provide domesti r service,
Sinc elY t
o,,
i,i
il.I]Y L0CA']"] ON VJiRtF iCATI0N
SUBDIVISION
F ILING
ADDRESS
The location of util.ities, whether they be :nain trunk llnes or proposed
lines, $ust be approved and verified by the following utili.ties for the
accornpanying site pLan.
Authorized
Fignature
ii-
Date
l,lountain Bel1
llestern Slope Gas
Public Service Conpany
Holy Cross Electric Assoc.
Vail Cable T.V.
Upper Eagle Valley lllater
and Sanitation District
,\r:)
--77- ,/{ /t t ./1- ./_ !_:2-r-/. r
NOTE: Tirese verifications do not relieve the co:rtractor of hi.s
responsibility to obtain a street cut pcrnit from the
Torrm of Vail, Departrnent of PubI i c llbrk s and to obtain
utility locations before digging in rny public right-
of-way or easenent in the Tor.n of Vail.
Yr.,!.
tig. 24
fig.25
tis.26
tls.27.
tis. 2a
!
oJ EFFREY B. SELBY
P. O. BOX 1s2A
vA tL. coLoRADO A1657
April 15, 1981
Design Review Board
Town of VailVail , Colorado 81657
Dear Sirs:
I am the owner of Lionrs Ridge Subdivision Filing No. 4
which is l-ocated irnmediately adjacent to Parcels A-I
and A-2 of Lionts Ridge Subdivision Filing No. 1.
f have reviewed the proposed development plan of the
Architerra project and support the concept and proposed
development as presented to the Town of vai1. I think
this concept is excellent for Vail and architecturally
soLves many problems of development on slopes.
I look forward to the addition of this project to Vail
and hope you will support it.
JBS:Pm
Sincerel
* ,l-
r-ion?nioge Land Investment co. rnf,
P.O. Drawer W . Vail, Colorado 81657
303.476'4883
Apri I l6, 'l 981
Design Review Board
Town of VailP.0. Box I00
Vai l , Col orado 81658
Gen t'l emen :
I have been appraised of the proposed Architerra atVail Project and have no objections to the concept ordevelopment of single farnily, earth-integrated housing.
S i ncerely,
Dean Knox'
Verbal approval of this Ietter given 4/16/81 to DavidH. Green by Dean Knox via telephone.
DK:dla
fis. 31
tis.32
II
fig,38
f ig.39
COMMITMENT
TO INSURE
This commitment was produced and
issued through the office of
LAND TITLE
Validating Otficet
GUARANTEE COMPANY
3665 CHERRY CREEK NORTH DRIVE, DENVER, COLORADO 80209
Telephone (303) 321-1880
\9counl€nigned: qJ A,r.r.r.+__
\_,,
I
a--.e._"
Representing:
f rrr-e
|
ru s u naruc e [o rvr enruv or flfl r r'r r'r ESorA
r"ru
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
'RANJ: C'*PANY o' [VF*NEsorA
. Stock ComPany of Minneapolis' Minnesota
."2 t ro a
rl
Itrue lNslr
EUOONSEMENT
To be attached to and become a part of commitment No' Y'2209
ComPanY of Minnesota'
Itern 2, Sc*dule A is hereby amended to read:
2 - 'r n;1n' j6vner ' s Pol i cYL' ro-*'e-lSfO (Arnended 10-17-70)
Proposed Insured:
A.A.V. LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
Item 3, Schedule B-1 is hereby deleted'
Item 4, Schedule B-1 is hereby amended to read:
4. ,TARRANTY DEED FR'M DUANE s'-cAl!lf: o*o rH'MAs-N'-H9-'ot^-?(u,i*t'!l-tiili;Y?[Et4'
lilltt"hll['bilHl*V]"1'pinlliiiiHip
T0 A'A'v' LTMITED'
rhe totat riabilitv of the compunv 1l9l'^li:Hgil*ilff;iX1i"j":,:t;fi:i:il:ff'#:#llt#i:
;-;-"J'in;ilags'regate' the face arnount oI sarc
Affi;ff;t " 6n'oitid"i ano stiputations thercof to pav'
This endorsement, w-hen countersigned by.an authorized officer. o,.llt*t' is made a parr of said
commitment ", o, *"'.olririi*"ii-ar,"'trt",eoi--ro-is subject to trt"'d"'n"oules' conditions and
Stjpdations "na exctusil;r'H;-6;;;c. tt'"'"ti"-"i"i^i*O' except as modifred bv the provtstons
heieor'
Jrrr-e l*suna*ce f,onnenuv or ffirHr'rEsorA
jk
of Title lnsurance
4
$850 ,000 . 00
-&'.^#
@
President
:/z*_
Secretary
Page 2
jk a
of Title Insurance
EAGLEPUBLIC TRUSTEE
MCKEE D/B/A
SECURE THE SUM
OF
OF
The
6.
Schedule B-1:
A.A.V. LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
A.A.V. LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
3/tll8r
Thc total liability of tho Company undcr said commitmcnt and uny endonemcnt thcrcto shall notexcccd, in the aggregate, the face amount of said commitment and costs which the Company is obli-gated under the Conditions and Stipulations thereof to pay.
This endorsement, when countersigned by an authorized officer or agent, is made a part of saidcommitment as of the commitment date thereof and is subject to th; Schedules, Conditions andStipulations and Exclusions from Coverage therein contained, except as rnodified by ttre provisionshereof.
T-_-_t-__ _ n t,
ltrLE lNsuRANcE UoMpANy oF lyf rNNESorA
-B*^y*:E-=-
Secretary
@
Jmr-e lr-rsuRANce [oMpANy or |1/|TNNESoTA
a St'ock Comp3ny of Minneapolis, Minncsota
ENDORSE]$IENT
To be attached to and become a part of Commitment No. V-2209
Company of Minnesota.
)
Item 5, Schedule B-l is hereby amended to read:
5. DEED OF TRUST FROM A.A.V. LIMITED PARTNERSHIP TO THE
COUNTY FOR THE USE OF DUANE S. CARLING AND THOMAS N.
CARLING.MCKEE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, A PARTNERSHIP TO
$262,500.00.
fo'llowing is hereby added as Item 6 to
CERTIFICATE OF LIMITEO PARTNERSHIP FOR
TO BE FILED IN EAGLE COUNTY.
Countcrsiened: z------<r
__ Q.{'j{r\ J\
Auriorizcd Offi ccr brfucirt
-\
I
@n
ri L i L L 'r rl l'l 1 t l'i E t{ i
I.I:]HELtL,ILE F- I
(Requir'€nrertts) APPlitatir'rr Nc', VOI?I)?
rhe iol l,rrrrirrs a.re the r'+.rurrettrents t+ t'e csft!)l ie'l rlitiri t
l. Pavmerrt tc, or' f r,r- tfrc ar:{ount ': l- thc' lrrantc'r'5 t'r nrftrt-3agc'r'g c't the
tr:11 C C' n s i d e r'a 't i r' n t,.'r' tire e:-. irate c'r ir,t'lr'est tr:' i:'* insr'lred
J. f-'roper' irrstrunrent(si ir.eatirrs tl-rL" estate c'r" irrter"rr,t t'r be irrsur'ed
nrust be e:lecutgd an,l dulT tilcd far rLrc$rd' ta-urtr:
.-,; . EViUENLE 5AT I:.FAT.TORY -i rJ 1i-ir LLTNPf-INY 1Hr\] FlEINFuFrt.[11 f 1:1ft1 1-i r-tl. r
rhll. A nELr\i.,J:\RE tuRF,. I:i frN ENl'I]'Y tAi',AELE. LrF t'1uril-i JfiIl'J'r Ti fLH TlJ
!.Ur-{JEf,-I' F F?tiF'ERTY.
. HARRANTY trEEiJ FROI-',1 ,LTLIANE 5;, LARLiNb ANir lHol4tig N' r.'li::|',;EE b/H/{\
rl6rRLlN6-f4uKE€, CuNSrFtLtt;l-Ir:iN cgfiFt'i$lY, A PARl't{fRSHIF''iO llEINFr]RCEiJ
EARTH CfI. , INL. A L'ELAI.ITJRE C.ORP. I:ONVEYING 5U8JEI:."I' i'RLItsfF;TY,
::-,. trEELt sfj fRU$I Fftotl Fielh,iFtrfit:En EitrR]H [:O., 1NL. A nh.LAl,ARE utriiP. 1L'
lHE F.UBLIU 1HUSTEE LIF EfILJLE L:I:ILiNTY FOI1 THE LISE UF UUAI(E 5. L:ARLINIJ
ANE THBl,lr\S N. l,lElrEE Lr/B/A l.r\RLlNij-l'll;KEE L:DI{E-fftUr:'l'Il-rhl C1:l}'lF,-\hl'Y ' {-t
FARTNERSHIP 1-O 5Er:.LlRE l"HE suf'l ilF *76?,:'0()-u0.
r{BTEr l'Hl,; THTSPERTY I'ifiY BE riul3-lEl-r l'fi rHE ftEAL b*-rA'iE lu'to'u*tER f-i\;'i
8y vIRTUE r:rF INCLUL:,1uN IN THE lt:ri,iN l-rF vAIL. FLEAbE [Oi-,1'fAl-:1" -1 HE 'l'uiri:i
uF VCTIL FLlft L,AIIJ A:_i5Eir;ltEl{l'.
,r*/r L.Lr l'r Pl tt'i,t tt'itS
SLHEI]ULF: g-I
, tExcseti,rns) l\ppl icotic,n Irlc,. VCttiU:r
I I'r.J l'ol ic'r rr pr, li,:ies 'f,r he i::,suE,l uriil cc,rrtairr exrellti,rrrs to tfre:':i louing unless the sanre ar.e dist'ogLld c,f t r_, the satis,facti,ln af tne-' !:'nil:rlrlY:
.i.. Standard E:<ce'pti c,nl l t'hr.c'usfr 5 r*rirrted r'rr tf,e .:,1,'7s r-. srteet.
':. laxeE arrd assessnerrts, rrt,t let due {'r' r"arabie arrd rrpeciaI assessnrentsrrat r.et cer.tif i€'i t'r tl-r r=: 'lreagrurer,'s r,if ire.
Flrrir tJr-rpi.id ta:ros *r. aFsessnrents agairrst s.ai,l .land.
I.:.! Lierrs i.nr.' urrr",t i,J uja'f c.r. arlj g. L", ujr-, r. ctiar.ses, it .:rr', "
H.iUHl- [rF r]FtLrF,-rIb. l lrj-l r_iF: /.1 vEJJ'j LrH LtrlrE I L! HX j'FiAL. I i':lijlr i-{El'lu!,E i11:,URE THEREFFiI:II4 !:HI..IL!LLI ]HT !:'.IFIE BE FILiNLI -IfI F'ENETFiAIE. I-IFI INTEFi:JEi:'f'lHEl-r{EmrSb.t r-\:; hC"Eitt/Elr li\i Lrhl r't Ett ir'frll'gr;: i-'r\"fENl uF r:r-r-:r-rilLr IN il{s"iilUl,jElJf
HE.L:UF|L|ELr LtEL.LFIBER r';r , I ,i):{_} I N Br:||:ttr. ,;,: t:r 1 F fihE /'i:.
:, j. lilrrHl-:t t-lF trtry Fr-rR Lr,i iL.FiL:i r..lR l_./\hi/_il5 L.'_11\jt:,JriJ_lr_. 1hL' i:l I l'hE trl-l iFjlir{"i 1v llF..
I HE UN I T Ltt !. i"A-f EE,, /-)::, hE!,EkVLi:r 1N L.lN I l Etr r;. I triT U:, F r:rl Hlrll' REt.r_rfttrfilr
i-reL.El,l8EF( .1,/, l,;)f i-), i hl Hr_ _lF. ':lJ rt.f pAr,;E 11-.
r1. HtriTRiL.iruNi, TJHILH Lrr-r I{r:rl ':rii{l-fiIN f-r Fr-TRFEIlURH Lrir HEVEhTtk L.Lfrr_i!;b.,HUI ul'lllitfrrt-r HESfF(.ir:iir-rhi5r iF r\NY, EASHLT uN R/luL, L.LILUH, iiL.Lli-.1t:iFJ iJR
Nril-lONi-tL uRItiIf.t , lr::. L.r:rf.lTAINEtl 1N INgl-F.:Ul.1EN-f RECOiilrEl-r Jr-tLy rt," I,-JL,,/
I hl Btl'lft ,l 15 ,-rT F'ALic /:4't rllrli-r r-\f{EhluEij i N I hi5l RUHEN T HHul:rRtrLu LrEL.F--F1BER{):, I t7C) I N Bljtrl. :] 1,;, i) i F.AL'E ':,;:j.
r.:. UIiLITY ANIJ LiRrlINFir.'H F-r-t:j;Cllb:t\il.:j 1rj re.fI rt{ WIb"lH r}Lr:if.rij E,IL:H::,iL'r: LrF,.ILL IN'I'ERIUR LLI-I LlNTT, i:i]j FESERVE.I.I UN"IHE F'LFIT I-IF LIUN:I fiTLtLiL,r:;UHttIVISir_rl{.
.i. ii. Llt.Etl OF 1RU5"i Lrri itL' Lil- tr-rHLFi .1./r? l:,7? FRLtf,l ITUANE :," L:r.\kLINL; l,\NLl
l"HLrl'li\li N. I'ltjl.."EE ihlr-r ivILri-ti\LLY {iNO t),/B/A r::r)HLit.,l$ llL.i':F"E L.ON::; fkuul. ILlhl
UUPIFANY, A LLrLLiAr.lLI-r i: {ri.i I i\HRtH I F, 'f rl 'l HE F,r-rlL I L -i RU--;t EE LrF EtrrbLE
LLrtlhl f y FLrli l'Hu r-t::,r r_rF r_. H. Li. r_:t-rl,lpAl,,|,r, A L.tilr-ri-iALir:r F Ai{]'hlERTH i F 'l',u
5EI-URE ]"HH SLlltl r-rF $ jr!:,, , :ir-){_,. [)rj iiEL.URLrLIr Lri::-i r:JtsER !.:r . 1:/7';) I N BLierJ".. t?l
r..}f fjtltie rt5,
N|JI-E: THE PLrki:Hfi::,Eii r,Hr:ilii.tr L.ui'j5UL'i HITH 'tHE iiui-lraR uF THE
IhiugHlELrhiEE;5 i;€r::t_thtLi f,i:j lrj iHE IEilf{E r-lNfr [.r:rt,jLr I f IL!t.J::,, rF r:rN.r'" FLrii "i-Ftf
/1:r:JUMP.T I UN UF g/) I LI i NLIEF I b.I.INEI,i;.
\
Matthews & Associates
LAND RECLAMATION SPECIALISTS
P.O. BOX 3567
VAIL, COLORADO 8I657
i303) 476,08 t5
March 23, r.gBL
Tornrn of Vail Planning Commission
75 Frontage Road
VaiI, colorado 81657
Dear Sirs:
Two variances are requested for the Architerra at Vail project, zoned
Residental Cluster" The first is to build on slopes in excess offorty percent, as stated in section 18.69.040. The second is a requesu
for a variance to al1ow parking within the twenty foot front setbackrequirement, as stated in 18.14.060.
The reasons for these variances, to prevent practical difficulties,
are discribed in the accompanying Envirormental Impact Report.
Thank you.
Sincerely yours,AJtpr,-,m
Richard T, Matthews
tfhews & Associates
AND RECLAMATION S P EC IAt ISTS
P.O. BOX 3567
VAIL, COLORADO 8I657
(303) 476-08 t5
March 23, 19Bf
Planning and Environmental
Commission
Town of VailVail, Colorado 81657
Gentlemen:
We are pleased to submit herewiLh the Environmental ImpactReport prepared for the Architerra at Vail, fnc. proposed
13 unit single family residentail cluster development on
Sandstone Drive in Vail, Colorado.
The report sets forth the results of investigations madeto determine the environmental impacts associated with theconstruction of the earth-integrated development. The
development will utilize innovative earth-sheltered design
and Reinforced Earth structural components.
We gratefully acknowledge cooperation and contri-but.ion inthe development of this report by Mr. Neil Wood, Archi-terra,Inc.; Mr. Richard Hepworthr Chen and Associates, Inc.iMr. David H. Green. Daval Western Development Corp.; Mr.
Roger Hocking, Eldorado Engineering Co.i Mr". cene E. Powell,
New West Development; Mr. Robert K. Barrett, Consultant inEngineering Geologyi and Mr. Ed Drager, Lawyer.
Respectfully submiLted,
Matthews & Associates
4.r/r\\4-.i.*'?*\*--G. M. LarsonDirector, Land
and Consulting Recalamation
Services
/-), i/ t?'L--
MARr!t ?? 'l oe'l"L,
/,,1
I.This procedure
The appLication
hpplication o]
APPLICATION FORI{ FOR A VARIANCA
is required
wil,l not he
for any project reguesting a Variance.
accepted until all information is srii:rnitted.
A. NAME OF APPLICANT AAV LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
ADDRESS ROSSLYN CENTER, ITOO NORTH MOORE' ST.,p11clh'6800-336-3093
ARLINGTON, ViRGINIA ?22
B. NAI4E OF APPIrCT\N?'s REPRESENTT\TI!,I, DAVAL I,JESTtRN REALTY 0F. VAIL, LTD"
ADDRESS't 4 t _ E __IIEA-A!X_!3_J rj_r T E E :aQ9 . VA r L, C 0 _piloi(5. 4 7 6. {qs 3
81657
C. AUTHORIZATION OT P.ROPERTY OI,{T.{ER
SIGNATURE 9.11 ,-id' i+"
ADDRESS pHCrl{B t 1'sl-. 'r!::_7}
LOCATTON OF PROPOSAL
ADDRESS LOTS A-I. A:2, LIONSRIDGE SUBDIVISION, VAIL, CO. 8I657
T,EGAtr DESCRIPTION 1ot A-.l. block Fili.ng #1
A-2
FEE. $100.00 plus l-ES for each properry owner to .be notif i.ed.
A list of the names of or^mers of all- property adjacent-lbo thesubject property.
,4 // \/,/<-( t->-1 't.,4l--ty'/)o{. ti Lt(l'
D.
E.
F.
Bz4 'J^d.I,L
o )*- d'* {/t /t '66 57,( *
/6 ou .A o o *. (" u..1
l-"--- r--- /t s>'c' z tt 4
'i -!r i
o ,d
?h'e,'t*+<*
t .*"{'< ,'-J)-'-
y'-r R'f /-"'( d--'- S c- CT
('s'-*-a Jr-
'. Rerriew of EL9--Architerra at Vai 1 31 March l98l
Des cri
Vail Project Reviews Jeft- Wi.nston
Site excavation - what will be excavation nethod--how nuch damage to the hj.IIside,what erosion control measures, what wi1 1 be tlming and methods of revegetation?
hthat will visual inpact be --wi11 it truly blend back into the terrain after
lopsoil extensively danaged? How long to achieve natural appearance again?
Can anything be done to reduce hillside disruption?
Inclined Lift Syst em- -mechanics, meintenance, energency evacuation capability--back-up? Winter operation?
Units- roofs-- standard outdoor roofing consruction? Drawings show sod roof,
Solar Design - rtconcrete roof, floor and walls...obsorb and sore heat fronthe sun...re1ease it during the evening."
Drawings show roofs covered with sod.
Not irmediately clear which wa11s would be exposed to sunlight--the exposed
ones wi.ll no doubt be insulatEE-or will release heat to outside- -atronbe wal1inside greenhouse would work well if thatrs what's intended--but noilnuEfi---analysis to show that construction- -nor any j.ndication of how the passivesolar has been sized to neet the needs of the house.
5. Recirculating punp systen
a. Wlty ? just to have a waterfall? A waterfall over the inclined trarnwaytunnel seens to be asking for leakage prob I ens - - no--rnatter how well the sqaleis lined.
b. Would like to be convinced that that little bit of strearn will look consistenton the hil l side- - starting out of nowhere (a dry swale),
c' Just an observation, but for a fair expense, only seens to benefit a veryfew units .
d. Where will the water cone fron to 11rn the systen when itts dry (August) ?
e. would like to see a grading plan to see how the retention pond will becreat ed- - suspect
there will have to be a rather substantial dike (to hold the water) along
Sandstone Drive, How will that be handled visually engineered?
f. What overflow systen is designed for the pond? Where does the water goif it exceeds the pond capacity?
h. I'A11 water draining away from the units, as well as all sufface waterdrainage from the site will be directed to the sotrrn watEi-detention pond'r
Donrt see how that's physically possible according to the site plan--the pondis up on the hill--higher than the swale along Sandstone Drive. Dontt see
any Provision for cross-slope drainage. (I donrt know how rmch water has to
be retained. Whether all of it must-just pointing out theyrre not doing whatthe text indicates.l
1.
2.
3.
4,
l
Review nu*" I6, Elecpric Tramway
a, Mrat kind of systen--tested elsewhere?
b, co st-short - t errn/l ong- t ern--how Iong will it last, can the residents affordto rnaintain it?
C:l..8. Ceqlegy
looks very complete and no rnajor problens encountered.
C.1.C. Soils
no significant problerns
C.2 Hydrol_ogy
. no groundwater encountered in test wells.
evaluat ion
unable t.o ascertain whether the "high groundwatert' condition associated withthis soil t1ryical1y applies to this site. An evidence suggests no groundwater
problen. May want to veri-fy in spring/ear1y surnrner when water tables reachtheir peak.
C. 5 Bjo.l-ogy
introduced trees ? evergreens ?
guarantees that revegetatj-on will--be consistent--be sonpleted
It
Mat$he rvs & A.ssoci*fes
LAI.ID RCCTAMATION S PTC IAL IS TS
P.o. ROX 3567
vAtL, coLoRADQ 8r657
(r0l ) 476,081 5
I'1a-.-ch 23, 19el-
Flanning and Bnr':1::onmerttal
Commission
Town of vai.l-Vail , Colorado 'r11657
Gentl.emen:
I,(e are plea sec1" 'r: t-r sLlblLri.t 1r e::r':',v -i, i.:li
Report preparocl ,iorr i:he Architt.':'"t;r
I3 irnit sirrgle f i:.ini.ly t:es j.Cent-i: -: I
Sandstone D::irre in Vai1, Coloi:l.rc-i.l.',
i:he ll1l..':!-r'onnen f.r-J' -r,l rri:;' g E
;;-i: Va j- J- , T uc " P::rtr:r'i:; t- "'i
C ILr,e'i.:c:: devel<; j:,ruttliL Or:r
The report sets f c'rth the rer-;ul i.:-. oJ-- irrveetigal-i ons iirati"e
to detefrnine t-ire eiiv j-r:Or,"liren La-l .1.:,t1:;;c l-S i,is,":joci:LLed li:i-tl.r |he
construct.iorr of ',..;:e ea::1-:h"-.ii.-.:.t eq:'::' i: i':ci de':e -l-opilrr::r 1--" " Tlhi:
deveJ-oprneni: t.'i.-t.1- rr.L-.tJ- i.ztr in::o':;,:"i..r.ui-': ca:li:h'.-shel-i-crcil ri-r,r i-i 'i'<;n
and Reinforcr:ci" En::ih sLru"cturc,.i, '.:t.itiipone .rl Lll "
Ws gra ir(i l,:i1-1,-l \': .:ir:i: , " .l '.'-:r, :, (. ,','"' ' i tl:, i',::'t1 co]ti-L.i iti:'i::ir'':, .i :',
ths cleve]. i:1i)r'1i;11 ''.: i;i i--h,i.:; L- {::1,-'',) 1"i.. l'''.' i'ir:r':. iii,., -i' Irir-ii-:tj-. ;1:i i;j'i '' ' l.:'r::e 'l:nc"; ltr" liiciri:,,a- l:.1a) j)\r,i].'-'i-:l ,' i].i.:..r1, ..ral ;'- :'r:;--:tt.';, .1 lii: ' l
Mi-. David i{, Greet-;, L,a\,;.: i lriie,r:.t,+.::i.i! jJ e\.r (:r j. \:);,)11ii C n.i: COr:i,r. ; I'1 ,""
T1,1.1r'r. Fr'r'l- i*,.. r'' , -,.y-algrrl J n1.--rir,, '. Cf i. i .lt'-- Gr,.: J l)i'ic-r.1,,
Neld West Dsrre.i,O j-r:r' i,,;l t ; Ifi:" Rollc,' L ii" ilar'::i:r'i:i'. Ci)l)$1
Enqineering Geo.l-Oq;,\' ; anC l{r. Ec1 },liaqer ' Lal"iyer "
ll{:i,illect f L. l- 1.y subrt-Lttc';i,
lji:: i..i:.l.Lerrrt [:' Assclci.rtel'';
G. i'i. La,': i;on
Di:r:{}c.L'o.r, I-and
ond Consulting
Re ca l atiia t" i-cin
S 'J:: rr i" c c s
C.R. Coll. lnl. Renlorcement des So/s. pa s 1979.
HANNA B.E.
The Reinlorced
et McKITTRICK D.P.
Eadh Co, U.S.A
Reinforced earth retaining walls
Murs de soutenement en terre arm6e
/- i '? -,r,,
!'lgure I.Locai:ion of Interstate Route 70 & Vail pass
One recentfy corpleted section of l_70 tra_verses Vail pass rn Coloraclo. At te west tool ofthe Pass lles U1c inter-nationally famous st<i ."so.toE Vail, and cLosc to the eastern foot of the passis a s[a1ler resort cdmunity cqrprised. of sever:alski ar:eas and yea-r-rorxtd recieatiln facilities. rl iu:previously o<isting road through thc pass]'".. unarro\,r t o-lane highway carrying a signifj cantvolLnne ot cars and trucks up rather stcep gracles,often resul-ting in severe d-lays to notoiiit", -
. Enginer.ring bcgarr on Lhe ej<t,-nsron of l_70Urro.rgh Vd j.l pdss tn the e,rr] v 70 ' s an: ,r, .r"ry
cette corununication d6crit f'utilisat-ion de terre arm5e pour fe dimcnsionnement et la cons-truction db murs de soutEnenent sur I'autoroute rntcr Etats r7o, ctans le colorado.Le problame qui se posait, 61-ait cle tracer et de constr:uire une route a quatre voies awec urrminimum d'impact sur I'environnement et de r6soudrc lcs probldmes cle stabil_i.t6 cies taLusaussi bi-en en hiver qu'en 6t6. En cons6qucncc .ra r"r"Ll"i,-r"tJlrrr" . targement utiLis6e lesstructures pr6fabriou6es qui comprenneni u" grand nombre cle murs c1e soutEnenent, Le soucrsesth6tlque n'a pas dt6 absent }ors d.u d.imensionnement .cette communication pr6sente une conparaison entr:e les structures en terre arm6e et -Les mursde goutcnement initi;remcnt Drevus pour 1.'aut.rroute r7o dans le cL6fil-6 de va1l pass ; erredc:rne des indications sur fes €cononies dues au choix de la terre arm6c et sur le cldlai d,ex6-cution .
*":n:*^::s 6cailles courbes (murs en gradins) ou d.roites (murs de sourdnement) esr egale_
4!.ye4.!,:.1o,1
.The plirpose of this paper is to briefly descrihthe invoLvsnent of the Reiniorccd Ear:th Con;anv otthe Unitcd SLates in Lhe nrass;ve construction ofInterstate Highway 70 on the west sidc of Vail- passrn the State of Calorado.
Th6> i nl.erq+.+a hi ^t-".rr-Lgrrway ':onstr-uc Lion program w.rsbegun rn the I950's to l_jrJ< all major citles of tneUnited States with four-lane dividerl highway syst€r.nsof Limited access. Some of these were continuousroutes across the country in either north_south oreast-rrest general directions. In thc \,r'.st centr-alUnited States, Crlorado j,s trave,rsed bi' three ofthese major routes: I-70 and I-76 run :ast-wcst and.1-25 runs north- south, I-70 is thc principal rouLertrlat ul-tillately connects Ballh1ore, Llan.land , withcentral Utah (fiq'.rre l) , About 9g? of the work ()nInterstate 70 is ccnpl-et-e with only a fet{ sectionsof minor distance to yet be built to interstatestandards. These ranaining, g.aps are :i.n tie norntarn_ous terraiJ| of the states of Coloraclo and Utah.ConstrucEion tl:rough these areas rs exLremelv expen_sive, invoLving massive earth vrcrk, lonq and- corilexear Lh retai-rlj-ng arxi bridge stnrcttres, and venzclose at Lention to enviroruTrental concel-ns Lo nre-gerve ltre natural beauty and eca logy ot thc Rocl<yqountains. Although short in ccarpar-ison with thetotal length af Interstate 70, these remaining gapsrepresent sj-gnificant projects yet to be constrxcterlrn order to ccfiplete this section of the int-,erstatesysten.
2 93
ea.rly put to the Lest of the public hearing process.
lthe Colorado oivision of HiglNays ruorked cooper-
atively w'ith tnany environmental groups to design a
roacir,Jay that did not detract fron the natural beautyof the scerdc nnuntain environnent (figrrre 2) and didnot, in any way. harm the dclicaLe eco Lo3y o' 'J"area. Very unusual design solutaot)s wcre aIri.led at
whereby cut and fill slopes wete either compl-etely
el jnrhated or vet1 carefulfy done so U'rat t:cvccjc-
tat.ion could be established alnnst inmediately- Toplace a four-lane higfway tJrrougir such ruggcd rrxr n-tain terrain within these envirolxr.cntal constraints
Presentd a Verlz challengi-ng probl an; a.nC tlie sol,,r-
tion rnvolved scxrE very r.m j-que structules, inclucling
bridges (sone of the first scarnentnl brtdges LJUTIL ft.l
the United States) and retaininq wa_Lls.
In Lhis npuntain region the constr-uction scasonis very Ljmited, ard the structures had to ke design-
ed so ttlat they oouLd be prefa,bricatal. Lr-uck-.d tothe site, and erected in eitler surr:ner or winter,
The precast concrete for these st-ructlrles also I-Lad tobe fabricated with a color which lvoutd blend inLo the
natural- srjrrorjndings. For this, a reddish-brown
col,oration r]/as selected wl.rich was close to the colorof t]le natur:al sandstone outcr:oltrpinqs alonq the Cbre
Creek Canyon,
In the retaj-ning wall projects, The Reinforced
Earth Ccnpany becarne siqnificanr Iy :rvo lr,'eC :nd
constructed 14 of these structures, sorne of r"'hich
were vetlt extensive in terrns ot ncignt 4d lr-rgLh.
This paper touches upon the ccnllarison between
Reinforced Eartjl@ StructLlres ar]d the retaininq wall
sys i:€xn Ulat was initialLy dcsrqned for use on inter-state 70 tlrrougtr the Pass, on the economies tiatresultcd frorn the inclusion of Reinforced EaIthslmcLures rn tltc contract b-idding process, and onthL- Lix*r frame of construction, 'lhe desicrn of theItelnforcal E.rrth \^/a l f s, l_rcLh for thc uniauc cr-lrvcd 1
| ,rncL, tierL\l ,,,rf Is u cl for {,r, st rai9l.- pate',vcrtically faced walls will be discussed.
Scr:nic Eqvi.rcnmentr of VaiI Pass.b lqu-e r.
Table 1
PBOJECT SUMMARY-I.70 RETAINING WALLS, VAIL PASS
Sudace Area
Projecl #Letting
Dale
Curved PanelWalls Vertical
RE Wa ls Remarks
Tie Back Rernforced Earth
COOH #RE#Sq. Fl M2 Sq. Ft.rv2 M2
r-70.2(s3)192
l-70-2(49)19r
t-70-2(48)189
r.70-2(50)192
r.70-2(65)191
r-70-2(61)192
r.70-2(50)r 92
r-70-2(5r )193
r57
158
223
227
257
233
Jan 75
Mar 75
Mat'75
Oct 75
Apr' 76
June 76
Sept 76
June 76
29,772
3r,463 2,923
65,2,15
83.866
6,061
7,791
8,010
13,179
6129
744
2.B35
1 .224
569
569
Sta 450-500, MedLan
walls plus 6-tler wall
Sta 390-450. Median
pius 2 malor lill rct. walls
/7-tier wall and "399"
wal ).
Sta 95-390. Predomr-
nantly medran ulalls.
Sla 547-566. Fet. wall
to catch till at MrlierCr.
ancrent slide.
Sta 408-413. Ret v/all,
casl approach
2nd Black Gore Cr.
Bridge.
Sta 562-565. Flet. wall
at easl approacn
Polk Cr. Bridge.
Sta 562-565. tret. wall
east appfoach,
Polk Cr B.rdge
S1..575-687. Low
median walls including
Jersey barrier secll{]ns.
TOTALS 16.235 5,689 149,1 1 I 13,852 64.491
294
the pa.per revier,Ts the cDnstrllction of the v,,alls, theunrque solutions incorporateo on sqre of the p-ro_lects, and out of the ordinary construction event swh-ich rdere en@untered.
Backqrotatd
Several nnnths prior to thc acLivc de_s_rgn of
ts9 t9f+$nS structures at VaiI pass, a sysian of":t-b"+i retaining walts was developed by thcs tat-e of Oolorado in con.jrLncl ion w itb the icdcralHigfnday A&rLinisftation ana tne rnternationai-rngin-eerirq Ccnpary.,
_ act.r.ng as a consul-tant. this sisternanvolv-ed variabLe length L-shaped legs Llral werlpraced rn an excavation and lacXg111"6. Active earrnpressures idere to bear on eliptically curved faci,rrqeLsnents ttlat htted j.nto the verti"af f"g= of tf,LIrshaped Uie-backs or cor.rnterforts. tfre ienq$ ott]€ horizo,ntal, Iegs of tlre cormterfort was AJsicmedbas€d on tlre arrcunt of frictional resistance ne6cs_sary to anchor ttre facing systsn and to resiit thepressures at tlle face. This concept is il-Iustratelin fj-gr:res 3 and 4.
The tie-back walL was specified on thefirsr Vaif pass rctarning wall pro.lect co qo t]]bid jn Januaqz, 1975. fhis was- Ocsigrrated proj ect#f-70-2(53) t92 (L.-bIe I, and flqure 5) . r-treriwere severaf wa]ls invol-ved., the fargest beino astr-uctlrre six ticrs in height crlnpriil,.,rq * u#ro*_;rrlate su.rface arca of 30,000 sq.ii. f\,'tgo n-j'.Untrl this job was let, The Heinforced EarthConpany was not aware of the req-uirenents forretaininq wal I s on t.ris project and l]Jd nol l}enaskcd for any opjn:ons or preJ imir:a,^7 dr.s.ors bveiU-rer L:he Coloccrdo Division of lljghways ": tlr.i,consulLants. At the ti_rne this projecCwas bid,there was no tirne availa_ble to prepare an alter_nate design or to ,'va.Luc cngincer', a solution inReinforced Earur. It bcc.Trle quite appa-rent tothose in the Canpany who o<anrined the project anrlthe results of the bidding Urat an alteinale usingReinlorced Earth muld be vety cqq)etrtrve. ThcCopanyrs engincering staff had not previouslydesigned a facing sysl-un sjrnilar to ihat bein;specrfied but fclt that such a facing for neiiforc_
€yri trarth could be easily deveJ.oped.
qaLVA\lrzED 3iEEL ?El[]FOeCtuG 5lalps \
Fi$r6 3.
l-70 Vail pass-West
PNOJECTS INVOLVING BEINFORCED EARTH
RETAINING WALLS
BlqHo?N
To VAIL vllLAGE
r-to
rq9eE
CPEEK
I
,o*ud(y'
VTU s|.L'AE€,A
TO LEADVILLE
r
FfuNTORCEO €AN IH IIJAL-
Secthn at Sta 441+(x)Altenrab Desigrs
Figure 4.
Figure 5. Specific Retaining Wall proiectlocations on Vai l pass.
Al-so at the tirre of the Conpa-ny's firstaoquaintance wit]. this project, anoUtrcr Vailproject having a ntunber of retaininq walls wastaking its final engineering form. ihis was r_70*2(49) which involved over 65,000 sq. f 1.. (6.000 m?)of retaining walls of the curvcd panel, t_i e_backd91igr. The Cc'npany was successfll in beingalfowed to sLtJnit an alter-nate design for tiis
NEBACK WAIL
295
r^iork in Reinforced Earth which incorl'.,i'rtcc a c-urvetl
panel tiered arrallgcxrent sjnrilar in most outwa.rd
respects to the tie-back wall (fiqurcs 3 6. 4). Thrs
was bid in lr'larch, 1975, arnd the dif fr.:rencer in bicl
price bettJeen ttre Reinforced Ear.th systa-n and t1te
lie-back \dal-l- was significant -- on the orcet: of
55,00,/sq'ft. Subsequently, scvcr:r-L lrcrc froj,-cl s
were brought to the biddjxq table "fj 1:1^. Rcl nlor('\l
trarth specified eittler as an altcrtlatc or as tlc
pr5mary systan of constrdction (in rreriical walls) 'fn all, a total of 275,000 sq.ft. (25,600 mr) of
retaj-ning wall were constructed o[ rvhic]r 210,000
sq.ft, (19,509 m') were of the cun/ed panel tl?e ;ud
65,000 sq.ft. (6,000 m'?) of str:aiqht vertrcle. of
this anpunt of curved panel wall, Thc Reinforcccl
Earth Colpany was awarded contracts on 149,000
sq,ft, (13,500 m') or 7l? of those \aalls (figurc
6), of course, Reinforced Earl-h v"as select-cd for
construction of all the vertical wal Is (figlrre 7) -
rt is estilnated that the savings b)' using ll.linForr(lc{l
Earth in the curved panel wall-s \,Ias on thL: order of
q-tqn nnn Thi q f i.nrr,. i " de::iven | -.)n I n- hi,l
talxrlations ccnparing prices bid fol: Reinforced
Earth witl: those actu;rily bid on Lhc aitcrnate
system.
'I ht U€S LQII
-
-*^^o..1
rho annincerinn cf , R, irtnrcrvlf L I Yu'!rEarth wall involves the calculation oi ]1o:izc]nLal
str.esses within a wide nlass of grinular material
outwardly conforlrling to the shape oi tlrc rel-ajn ng
walt being designed. fhrouql ) corqrutltions of these
st-resses, a suf licienl derrsrl]' or .jL .gl :cjnlorcjnct
strips can to be incorporated in thc inass |-o carq'r
in tension these horizontal stresses v.,l-Lich are Lr.ins-
ferrcd by fricLion beLween Lhe .1r:nu1:r hcl;f '.lL
m.rtcrial alrd the strips. The cunrtl pluc1 L-i,:r-r.x1
wall , although sr:nr-what of a departi rr.: f rom Ulc
standard cross-section of a Reinforced Earth lvaLL
and a definite innovation in th.r ge-3rr1.1-r':,v of Llrc:
facing systen, is l-nsically thi: s,rJri(r irs .rny ()t-il(rr-
Heinforced Earth wall. 1'lre large,'rt "rf tlte cu|vcrl
panel retaining walls designed for. Vail P.rss rncor-
porated seven tiers of I feet (2.44 t;t) effect],vc
height per tier, for a maxj-mm hcr.r'llL of 56 fect
(17,07 rn). Each ticr was stcppLd bacl< 6 fcct (I.83
n) so that ef fectivcly a rctaininq \n'a.i.l virth a s lope
of 3/4tL was des.igned - Total tict: hc'rghb was 10
feet (3,05 m); however, 2 feet (0.6L m) of en'Llrcdment
per tier was incorpora ted. A comparrson of Lhc
design of the tie-back wal1 with ttr.et of tile .l:oss-
scction of the Reinforced Ear-h w,' I 's qrr-r..,r itt
figure 4. Basically, the Reinforced Eat:th cross-
scctiona-l design was then a rrapezotd mrc[] as that
of the tie-back wall; however, tcclmrcall)' thc tvro
syst-srls are cafipletely dissirnilar. Differrnccs ur
the tacing systqns can be sccn .Ln frqure 3 :s prc-
viousl-y dj-scusscd.
The vertical wafls were desi gnccl in a conven-
tional marDer having a constant rect-.lllq\114r st:cLitlit.
Sorne r,mique geotechnical cr.rnsiderat ion.'< vrert: it-lvol -
vcd in thc retaininq wall- at l\[ill.r Crc(rk, ( I-70-
2 (50) f9?) . This is a 30,500 sq. ft. (2,815 m') wall
which r^/as desigTled to span a gcotechn-ically Lmstable
side hill \,"tlich had been thc site of an ancicnL
slide. It was feared thaL excessfvc cxcavatron at
this location wculd trigger a ncw ft)vcf.rent of thrs
slide lry unloading the m,trterial at thc to. lvhich
provided tJte present stabi.lity. In ordr:r to rninimi ze
I'1gurn 6. seven-tier:ed airrrvad iraDe1n:lr'th Sial I on I,roiech I-74-2 \49)
f agure /
Vert-icaL lieillforced !larth i{alf on
Reinfora:a'C,.91 (Rn '.'157).
296
sr arna! l)fo t.rct-
this danger, a design was called for rrhich tjculclallora'only short incrsnents of thc cxcavaLion l_o lxlopened at any one tirne a$- f.9r a rcL.rining wall t_pbe staged across the landsl.ide in drscretel sections.The for,ier Levef to this rval] l..'as to be constructedd'Jrjrg the fall and r^/inter rcnr-hs when thc watcrtab.Le is loei and rost ardenabfe ta this t),pc ofconstruction (fiqure B). I beca,,nc appai<It d.rat
F" o.lJy system of retaining vrall colrltnrctronfeasible for staging of fti; nat Lrre w.rs lteinl.or.x{tEarth.
. Probably the nN3St note\,,,orthy fca,.urc of thcReinforced Earth design for Vail pass '\",as thc rc-sFonse ture that was exhibited in preparir-rg fir_raLdesigns for construction- Since fhe enfry-of rl r,eReinforced Earth Company \^/as sdnewhat beLateci in thedes1g'n sequence. its first project r_j0_2(A9) t9l (trx+157) had to be tumed arourd in final forrn in tlueeweeks. D:ring this three week spar, re cuLvcdpanel facing systqn had to be corq.l.rel\. .^est oncdand a large surface a.rea of rvart lo:,zls .q.ii. t(6,06I m'?) had to be conputed, clesigned, anc actarf-ed. In subseguent jobs, precious liLt,le aCdj Lronaltrm3 \^Jas avai lable to The ReinfcJrcr,rl l:tar- r Corrp.rn.,,gver -ldficf to spread the deslgn; l-hr: trrasl r ingt_oir lt-.C.based design staff was required to w:rrk cxtrlllr..{rlLvlong hor.rrs with essentially no tjme off. The secondproject, which invofved t}le preparation of ftnaldcsign for scnre 83,866 sq.tt. 17,;lf m:) of waLLsurface, was also ccnpletecl td sulrriital ir1 tlrcc
pLrtr:.1: Xisvit & Sons, f nc. , as .slrix_trn_tr..cLor tor ,^r:rll cr. c.irr. 6i.21- ;,rIr. iL,06 I m,; o. c.,,.,j rol'.' ;" '2l,ig9 sr1.ft. (1,969 mr) cf strarcihtw rLl.
'i'lresc contracLors util izcd aciui EtenL andu.periencc gained Ovcr many yaars of lrlglr ntr)Lrnt_.1-LrLconstnction and thcir abrlit-v to ft,v.r Jar_-h rntlrat clvironrnant, pal:Licularl:,. in wjn[i]r carnsl:frc_tron, was iq:res::ive . Mucl r of t_ri: ,,vcri: ,r" paol n"taR[ + L]7 ar-rd #195 i.;:rs acrrr_nqrl i sh,,<t in ,,".intrr, inpart i crrlar the ,rij l.kr Creck walL (R: nl95) onwlr j r:lr onr.:-lh irrl of th.r si:mcture r,ras stagad al.t,fInriLt drt ing the rr'inter of L9't5 {f i!|:l:c d) . --'..
llec"luse Rernfc]:ccd Earch lcnds ltscif tc stag.:rlconslructt-on / this v,all coulC Jr bulll in a !on_strauctf on scqucncc r,,"'hich inv-olv-cd qurcl:ly exca\"/.r_ting 20 ft- (6. L m) segrncn-ls anC rcptaciirg t_her'.rncvcd m.:\tl.ri"aL lvith sltor t secL;c.,r-ri oi liiiniorr:ciE:t-rth r\'?f f , The t1,i,e of backfitl spccrf i t:cl ior:Lhis "1,Jll w*s Lo r., Lal=n t- o.. a .o,,,,, ir,Jq-fock local-ed near Breckerv irlge sonr 4 :, ntLlr.s I ,'ti. IKr,.l citst over tl-c ?ass. I t v",.l s .ut axcc.l.Lent roa:.:.,,t ,rt . rirI, insnnsrt_vr t. s-(.\,r .t.j ! t ,.t r.1 ., i rI,ias placcd in tl1e €jnltan]flent. 1.hc rraii wais stacllcl1n short secj'rnents as descriFd and bui]t to onclthird of its finaL height during -Lhc \,iit-rtcr c:197'., Conl -. LrL,n rr L). r_tlrtn jr J .L!,-. t.. rC.::...1-.
3!!l 'ld j r. I .u -. Lc sr.rrr nq rnd _ r: l slrr.! r o .
J 975 (fic1t-c ,r1 ,
Figure B.
Miller Creek Walt (RE ji1g5) aL l/3 height.
Constructton
.. As previously stated, the Varl pass .l:ctaininqwaII prolecLs rrere IeL in cLghL sepJrit,. cor)Lr.r.(l-of which six incorporated Rejnfor-ccrl llart_ir as L]lccnosen alternate. These were awa rtlrrl as follo,ns:
1) To H.E, Loudennill< cqnpanl,,, gcncralcontractor, with J.M, Kerur/ as sul:ccln_tractor for wall erecl-ion 93,g66 sc1.ft. (7,791 6?1 cu rvt-rl parel -rnd 4 i, i02sq.ft. (4,023 m /; oF s, , ri 1l , w.r - 1-
2t To Green Constructlon icb.loracto Con-structors) , general contt:actoj:s, with
Ii.Jure 9. Mtller Cleek t'all Conr)li)teC.
For thc nbst p.u:t, thc errccLion ot r_hc 27:,0011)st1.ft. (25,000 m1 of Iie:iniorced t ar*_h went snr:ru.rIy; however, there lrerc three "ve|ts ia,hlch lrercout of the ordi.nary a.lcl ,rorthv of nc:o.
Thc irrst unusual cvcnt occr.urci on the pJ+158 proicct r"tcrd some cracking on Lhc facc oi atcw of the concrctc pat\cls rras notcq. Tltc c,robl ernr,vas ,rnafyzed as a corrcctible flah, .ncl not r:r:latecl1-o tho structural- integri,ty of the LarL. Tjtelrturals ncrc r:epart:cd arld tie problc.m clrcl not ]:._O(liur on Lhe prolecL.
Tttc scc;or-rd was encourtered d,.ri:iltq constrr-tcL_u'r ')',1. ,... , <:-l r,,lai rirrg ...,'l1 ti .lr,*- ..tStation 399+C0. This vertical stl)lctr-lrc 1",:s 56 iL(I7.1 ) h jgl at its ccnLcr. 1'lte Prc)l)l(trn invoh.edi:hr: l'erlicalit)' toleranc€.-s a<;h l<_-vtrl lll., tltq' c.Jntrac_
!or: In onc Fortlon of 1_he wall, a Jr.llgf, rn th.facing systdn cf approxir&ately 5 inchcs (15 crnl i",asfounC. In this cas., thc problem cf txcccdingwall tolcr.x'iccs causccl onl.y a surf.lcc cffcct iot
297
related to the streng:th or service Iife of t]}e
structure. Several- panels aPpear to *r- out-ol-line
on the face of the wall. Thj.s problerl rv.rs probablv
caused by excessive Gcnpactive effort. For example,
the contractor o$ypacted onc ]ift of ttre backfilf
for over sev€:n hor.rrs with I rear.y vrbratotl' equi pnent .
It shoufd be noted that on occasion, the rcspon-
sibilities of the various p:.rties invol\"'ed tcnd to
becorc confused or arnbignrous, The Reinforce.l llartlt
Conpany provides education to thc contractors'
inspecLion personnel, arld Lhe resid-nc pr)lech
personnel. Its role is to assist the statc ot: o$inerj-n the proper i nLerpreLation of the 1, c-jc, L's socci-
fications and ta assist the contractor in thtr proper
selection of labor force, construction ec1'ai'-ment ar-id
tools, etc,, so that he can build tllc strrrcturcs
accordinq to the specificarjons. Horvevcr, drc
enforcdrent of the specificatj ons lies r,.rith the
owner.
Figure 10, Moisture contents well above optimum coi-
tributed to tolerance problems at L.his reCian wal1.
The rcst aru-roying of thesei unusLral construction
events occarral on contract I-7A-2(49)19\ {RE +L57)
on a section of the curved panel, me<1ian htright
retaining wa11s (flgure 10) ' Here, tlre cor)Lrilclor
was att€trpting to ccrnpl€te thc waLL's constrLrcLl.on
before winter weather forced hilr to shut down 'There were occasions when the bacl<fill vras beccni ng
excessively wet due to snowfaLL. During +'he enb.r,rk-
ment placsrent operations, the face of a 300 ft.
(91.4 nD long section wall rcv€d out of alignrncnt '
Re ixforcel Earth rePresenLat ivc s ..'f-rL' Lo Lhc sit.
imrediately ard identifled the probl em as one of
excessive rcistllre in the backfill. Uncler those
condj-tions. the construction loads due to compactron
eguiprent were far in excess of th-'lisign in-
service loads. Because of the excessive noisture,
the panels nrrved r.rnder the loads. Slrbseqiucnt tests
shctu ed that the gradation of the backi.irl \,,/as within
the design criteria and would have been adccFate
given proper moisture control.
The Col-orado Departrent of Hiqhways ccnducted a
thorough inl.rouse investigation incluclinq she.lr. t.rsl.s
and conpaction tests, and conc Ludt--cl that "the Prob-lsn with the wall was caused by o c'rmbin-rtion of
factors:
'1 . I4ateriat consi derably or/Lr ol ,l iflim mois-
ture.
2. I4aterlal with high (18-24) passinq #200
sieve.l. rr4atcrial compacted tvith a vibratory
rollcr.4. tr{eL, cold neather whlch dj.d not allow
drying of matcrials, coupled wrth reLative-
ly rapicl construction" .
'the Statc concludr:d " that the elirnination of
aJry one of thcse factors could have resulted in no
irovonent of tlre r^.ra11 during construc t-ion" .
The Rcinfor:cL{ Larth Company was foln]d Lc b': rn no
way responsibte for this failure. 'llierl-e was no
rluestion of long tell.l stability.
wir-h regard to the question of backfill sPeci-
ficar-ions, the s t-r-uctural backfil.l. specification
for Rcinf orc,n1 Earth structures used br" thc Stal--e
of Colorado was aclequatc. ft w.rs sifi-ifar ln alL
respecls to a back1-i 1l spccrfication ti.lt hac been
r:sed for structlurcs in oLller western states rnclud-
ino t.' fornia and Ncvo l;.
It nrrst le noted Lh;lt l-hese thrce Lurlrsu.ll
cvents involveci appr-oxilately 3,000 sq.ft. (279 trt: t
of thc Reinforced Earth 'rr'alls or '1 .4? of the total
cor]str-uct€d.
.';t1rr: t I j!!!
il]e Rc.inforced Darth Ccrnpa'ny is -./.r)'proud of
ils participation ane contrrbutlon to the Int-er-
state 70 projecl- ovel: VaiL Pass. Wc h'ere greatLr-
inpressecl wit-} capal:'ilities oi thc State of Colorado
trcparUnent of Highways and their consuLtants, .rnd
we apprcciate their coaperation. we wcre cqna]ly
impressed. w.rth the high quality of tie contractors
ruho wr:rk ln Lhese rrpuntains; these Peop1e n3ke
difficull, problcms scein ordinarl.
At the Vail Pass, Re.inforced Ear:th w.ts selccl-
€d .ccause it couli respond to the difficuLt teclulr -
cal r:tlluircrnents, provide constructrj on efficicncies,
and offer a srgnificanl- overaf.l cosL savrngs.. In
tol,al, approxi-rrrately 2I4,000 sq.ft. (19'900 rrr')
of Reinfor-cecl Earth lvalls were constructed; and i-n
spii-e of m.j nor and ulusLlal cons t-r-uction events,
th.is .r,o!ult o f erlgericnce ar'd i nvolvcment stands
clcarly as a Lmique dcnr:nstration of th. desrqrr
flt-xibility and cost effcctrvertess of Reinforced
Btb-Li oitgP!'y
(t)t-70 in a Mruntain Environment, Vail Pass,
Colorado, ITHI'A-TS-7 B-2 08 .
(z)
coloraclo Federal Aid Project No- r-70-2(53)192(49)I91, (50)r92, (6s) l9l-, (6L)792, and (sl')193'
Plans and contract- Docrmcnts, Warren Brobn, er-. al.
gi ghway Dcsigirer, CoToraAc DsparLTrejrt of }lirlht"ays '
(1,
ReinforcecL EaLth Retai-ning Walls, "I'iiLll ReFort on
Constructi.on Phase Inst-ability, " Project r-70-2
(49) , Albert c. Rucl.rnan, R.K. B.rrr:ctt r Coloradc
Depar.trnent of Highways, June, .L975'
orchiterro
ilanuary 290 1981
Itlr. Peter Patten
Senior Pl annerP.0. Box .|00
Vail, C0 8.|657
REFERENCE: Ground Restoration Architerra at Vail
Dear Hr. Patten,
Please be advised that Architerra Development Corporation
agrees to restore Lots A-.|, A-2, Lions Rjdge Subdjvision, totheir orlginal condition, prior to the start of the l98l-82winter season, if project construction has not commenced priorto that time.
Si ncerely,( kh')
Cornel i us C. l,loodVice President
CCbl: dl a
Architera, lnc. Rosslyn Center lT00NorthMooreStreet Arlington,VA22209 703/522-5558
"archit€rra" is a trademark ot Ar.hiterra, In(,
A I c.-,.,6.{'i
. il Irr.-,1,.i-i.( t c ii.- .'.:li I
tuwn n
T
box 100
vail. colorado 81657
(3031 476-5613
department of community devclopment
8 Januar-y 1979
John Nilsson
Box 1908Vail , Colorado 81657
Ile: Lots A1 and, A2, Lionsridge Filing Number 1
JAR/gew
Derr John:
The above-mentioned lots have a combined acreage of 2 '596
acres. On these lots, there is 16,600 sq' ft' of slope in
excess af 4O%, This leaves a builclable aereage of 2'2149 acres
BeinginaResidentialClusterzonervithadensityof6 units per buildable acre, there rvoulcl be l-3 units a l-lorved
on these two 10ts. The al10r,rable Gross Residential F100r
Area (GRFA) v;ould be 24,120 sq. ft.
you have any further questions, pleasc contact me'
SiucerelY,
n A n y'\yP.*""" ft I ti,,-'-^---...
Yames A. Rubin
Zoning Administrator
t'
I
I
J8 , lq?g
IMPACT REP0Rr.
LloN'S srpcE SUBpIV.ISION
PROPOS Ep F ILING__N0..,__3
EAGLE CouNfi, 00LoRADO
Preparecl for:
Jeffery B, Selby and Maro SelbyP.0. Box 1528
Vail , Colorado 81657
Prepared by:
Allen Gerstenberger Associa Ees2040 14rh Srreer Suire 100Bouldcr, CoTor ada 80302
28 August 1979
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Int roduc t i-on .
OVERVIEW
THE Pfu\N
rHE rMPACrS
Social- & Economic Irnpacts
Popula t ion
S choo lsFire Protection
Police protcction
Recrea t ion
Visual Impac ts
Xnp loymen cRetail Sales
Govbrnmental Revenues
' Physical Impacts
Vege ta t ion
Geology, Soi1s, Drainage,
& Slope Srabiliry
Water
Sewe rAir QualityTraffic
Transi t
6
o
6
'l
B
o
B
t0
l0
l0
l0
10
1l
t2
}lITIGAT]ON MEASURES ..... 12
rrv LED .IJ
I7
IB
Bibliography
Int ervier^/s
INTRODUCTIgN
This report revi.ews the uraj or issues i urpactecr r_ry the zoni'g of theproposed Lionrs Ridge subdivislon Filing No. 3. rmpacts resulting frorn thezoning of the 43 acres, rather than environmental lmpacts resurtlng frornthe specific site design, fr.ve leen "a,rai.a. T,hese inclrrdc Lhe social,economic, and some physlcal lssues. Detailecl analysis of sitc: speci-fl cenv'ironmental iupacts (such as srope siabilJry or ;;;itt;;"t have ^or 'eenconpleted at this tirne. Engineering reporc^s on the geology, drainagc,
i:1":";l:":re beLng prepared and wiil be subrnittea to dre"Lounry at a
The format of thls report ls sirnplet br j,ef corrunentsthe major Lssues are presented, summarizing the pertl.nentsup-porting reports and calculaiions have not been includedalthough some explanaEory r.nformation has been incruded atreport.
about each ofpoints. Thein the text,
the end of the
Note that the figulss presented are appr<;xima t ions.are estimates, intended to represent the order of magnifude
Projected lmpactsof the impact.
7
I
Inpact. Repo r E
Page 2
The proposal is for the subdivision and zoning of approxinraLcJ.y 43.33acres, located about I! rniles west of Vail above tht North l.'rontaBeRoad_. The property is accessed fronr Saudstone Dri.ve and BuffherCreek Road,
flg reeuested zoning r^roulcl permrt 13 single faniry rots and 5 crupl.ex r.otsl677' of the site would remain ." opon space or resource zonlng,
aE full build-out wi j.l be about 76 persons;\i'l of the effectlve poprrlation of fhe Gore
An estimated 3 to 10 1ew students might be added to the schoor discrict;the capacity is available to rneet rhis demand.
There would be lictle negative irnpact on thc servi.ce ability of thefire department; the sitc is not presently :in a fire dlstrlct.
th:t-"- r^rill be negligible visual impact from the hj.ghway or otherneighborhoods because of Ehe elevition of the site abtve the highwaya1d lhe topography of the site itself; onlv 6 unJ.rs will be visible fromthe hlghway,
l.{| n:t permanent Jobs w111 be created by rhis developmenr; abour100-150 person-years of consEruction ernployment will be ge'eratecr.
There will be one-rime fces of about $60,000 and about $108,000 ofannual revenues generated at fult bu11d_out (received by all 1oca1govenmenEal enEities) .
For Eagle County a1one, one-tiue fees worrld total about $20r000 andthe annual revenues would be about $16r000.
The water and sewer districts have sufficient suppries and capaclciesto rneet the addif.ional de,lands.
OVERVIIlW
The projected populationthis represenLs less thanVa11ey.
The projcct will represent aboutWest Vail airshed ancl about lZ ofairshed -
additional traffic,
A demand for about 35 bus ridesful1 development; this alone is
lZ of the fireplace pol-1_ution in thethe autonobile alr pollutlon ln the
An additional 140 vehicle rrips daily willthere will be about g0 frips rlaily ontrips on Sandstone Drive. BoEh roacls irave
be generated by the developrnent IBuffher Creek Road and 60the capacity to handle the
daily (wlnter) could be generaled atinsufficient to merit bus service.
Impact Repo r tPage 3
rrLr1_ILAN
The property being reviewe. i.nvolves the su'<livlsi.o' a.ri zonri,'g ofapproximately 43 acres of nneadow ona tri ff"i_ae property, located aboutIt miles west of Lhe, rnain Vail irrtur.lrnngu ulrnr.. llr. f,fo.t l, lfrontagcRoad, accessed frorn.Lion's RiJg; -;;;;:
rr r.,out<t be <tescribcrct asLionrs Ridge Subdivision uii"ii."."5, nro.,t.r 1 and 2.
The proposed land. rrse is residential and open space. It wil.I incl.ucle13 singla family-and ft"---;;pi;x tors for a roral of 23dwelling units at ruir rurra-o";. *Tti.=
dens;lLv is co'sisr.*L urit:hneighboring developnrenrs.
The site includes a variety of lana forms ir-rcluding meadous, .spengroves, and steep hillsides.
ll;f"tt""tng exhibit surunarizes rlara aboul r:lre prc,trose<l clevetoprrrenr
LIONIS RIDGf, FILING NO.3 (PRoPosED)
STJM,IARY OF LAND USE DATA
Area of Block IArea of Block 2Wafer sEorage siteArea to remain t'Resource Zone,'Open spacc
TOTAL
Area
3. BB acres
9 .46
1 .27
r9.00
O 't,--za.5i-l?'""23 units
Units
l0
l3
Design,Solut.io-g
tr The intent of rheland use plan is to rninirnize inrpacts to the exis.ingland form anrl yeg6g31ion, and to conceal as much of tf,n'developrnentfrom ot'er neigrrbor'ooa" - ot i.o* o"uri. access "or.iJo* as possrbre.* The large lots provitle for good builr]ing sites; this was done to eli_minate unnecessary disruptiJn to itr. "it..* Road designs, vidrhs, and locations have been base<J on tlre existingropography and vegeLation so as Lo minimize eartlrr+ork requirerl.
* ftoo-thircls of the site has been designated as open space, i,Iuch is excel_lent for hiking and passive ".ri"iiil"; it will also provlde an imporrantvisual opcn area (on visible t iii"ii".l from the va11ey floor.
'Impact
Page 4
\o
i.
()l]o.
o,r-l$Uw
'F{(n
'.J
an
cl (71
bo.d..HQ-dMz
q,(/)otloO -. l:O. tr 'riO O r'ltr ..1 .Fl
A{ Fl tr..t
$
Ar
HF{
(J
tf
E
'P
NN
t
-. r' .i.'..
ri:,:.1---..iir:l
a.
.,
t{
1r
!lsl!l
j
1l
slti
n
T
I
IA
..il
-.t: u
.ri It.in
ji IiiI$$i gi 5Br:..I -r--.'.ttI
I
i e-l'^-rl
"! ' .'" 4q}l 1!\${r l.l"r}i' ttti"or rSf,JS
-1i d'io P'rS I rt,7
,hl ,(${l$
Y"
[",*\N
i
F
5
8s
!o
B!
;-'t7qJ
i:
{
3 $ fc?*lilu'\.' ! leih
li i: iii{.
5i l; vliBt
ilr$iilil
$i i$ $:i;r
g
t
.1
}l
JS q
.1 q {
$l
T
!t{''' zEo3oo>6
=LHa if,Z.n' 3 li
^s!.- P1 I a i- i* In$ riP e- 16s ;l'6
u 6: iiri lir(/, rl! d1 JJ
I
a
q
d
ii
ii
{l
'.ri, ,.: ,'r. i:- ii:;1.*,rfi. : ,'.,:;
*
fmpact Report
Page 6
TTiE I}TPACTS
SOCIAL IMPACTS
Popula t i-on
* F-o. purposes of projeccing populatf.on, iEthe population resultir.g i.o.- this projecc(This will noc be the cise .* ,..ru..I, ifdeveloped by exi.sEing permanent resj.dents.
. this study, the rrworsE case'r situati<;tr was
S chools
Red Sands tor-re Elcmentary SchoolBattle Mountain Elementary SchoolMinturn l,Liddle SchoolBattle Mountain lligh Schoo_l_
TOTALS
Fire Proteq tion
h.rsi been assumed that all ofis ner,r Lo the Gore Va11ey.not all of the lots, will beIlohrever, for purposes of
,'r ss ume d )
Although all units are classified as "long-rerrn reside.tlal,, unr-ts, wehave assumed rhat about one-thitd of thern wi1l be rented on a short-terrn basis.
The projected population at furr build-out. and fur-l occupancy is csLi- rnated to be approxinnteTy 76 persons (at an averap,e of 3.3 persous/d.u.).-
The-present overni.ghL popuration of the Gore valrey (residents andvisitors) i-s esrin*Led to bc between 17,500 a.d 22,000 (depending uponthe estirnaEed number of persons per dwelling unit).
In:.,t:ai developnenr of this site as proposed would represenL abour-u.4z r.ncrease in Ehe_ total overni.ghE poprrlation in the Gore Valley,if.nothing else in the area develJped. AL the projecLed ultimaLe popu_lation of the Vall ey,rthis project wiJ.l only constitute about O.2Z ofthe total populati on.
* Tf-ris projecr is noE expected ro generate morc than 3 to l0 studencs.The School DistricE can easily hindle this increased <lemand.
* The follorving chart indicaEes enrollment and capacities for the schoolsserving this site:
430
0
230
r< The 43 acrc site ispresently served as
noL presently locaEed ina "courLesyt' by the Vail
1,9 30 l, 002
a fire district, It isFire Proteccion Distrlct.
Capasi'1y En rollmen L
500
430
500
500
Inpact Report
Page 7
Based on an interview with Fire Chj.ef Gordarr Swanson,3 therc is noreal problem in serving tlte area. lle reco ntcnded that the area bean'exed into the Fire protection Districr,. rnclusio' in the Districtwould improve the fire insurance raLing, rf the site is located outsideof a districr, ir will be a class t0 (i'o service); if they join Wes(:Vail fire District, thcir class would be an B; :.. L wou1.d clrop to 6if in the Fire protection District.
The response time would be longer than to lnost oEher areas in thecoomunity, but would not be longer than some areas Lll Bighotn. (Seethis page for discussion of ,'ReJponse Tinc,r.) lne U"iri"i is pur_suing the construction of a substation in l^resL vail that cour<r re-duce the response tiroe required.
*
* No additional equipmeqt or manpower would be required to serve theproposed developmenE..
Police Protec Eion
Regreat l.on
The development of the 43 acre siLe would mar:ginally increase thej:::l!,:". che Counry Streriff's DeParrmenr. The acrual manpor,rerqerermrnation r'rould be based on tlre level of service requirea by thedevelopmenc of other projects in the Idesc vair area after addirionalprojects are built- A project of this size and nature wil1, practical.lyspeaking, require infrequenE service calls.
The site rvil1 have a Long response rime f rorn the CounLy Sherlff,s officein E4g1.e and could possibly negativcly affect the response timcto other areas of the counEy, depenrling upon service requirements.
The lntersecEion of Buffher Creek Road and Li.onrs Ridge Loop is pre_sontly a relatively dangerous rnterseccion. Ilowever, if r^rill be up_graded as a part of the dcvelopment of parcels C, Dr& E of Lion,sRidge 2nd Filing.
rL is recommended by the Recreation Director 5 thaE this area beannexed inEo the Vail Metropolitan RecreaEion District as soon aspossible.
Vis u.r I Irnpelc ts
llhere will be a marginal increase inas Ehe rcsult of full clevelopment ofto quantify the cxtent of hhe clemand,
The projecE has been sircdtraffic on the 1n t crs ta te
demand for recreational facilit iesthe projccE; btrt iE is impo.ss iblc
so as fo lrave minimal visual exposure Eoor l'rontage Road- This is possible because
of the land forms and elevati'n changcs irrvolvetl, o'ry fo*r loLs arceasily visible from ouEsicle Ehe projec.t.
* Six lots will be visible from areas out.side of the 1>roposed site.These lots are all visible for both easEbouna ancl westbou'cr crafficon the rnterstate. The siEing an <i desi.g. of the buildi'gs on theselots ls cricical to their impicc. Thcy have the poLential to be cx_tremely visible and "loucl" buildings, or uuobtr,r"i.r., r,quiet,, bulld_lngs, The sitlng, relatlonship ro"thu slope, coloru, etc. wl-lJ. be ver.yinportant in making.the bulldings as subcle as possible. The lssue.of design review and control is extretnely inportant:. ;l
Enrp loyrnen c
* The developnent wjll have no significant impact on empJ.oynent. Neinr"loca1 service jobs', will .rot lJ .."oa.a.
InpacI Report
Page B
S eas on
[,
* Ternporary, direct constructiorr employnenc100-150
^
pe rf; on-years of ernp loynreni spreaaouE period. "
Retail Sales
* At-fu11 devel0pment, increasecl retail sales arc projected Eo be appro-xi ately $50'000,00. annually. (This is basecr on one-third of the unitsbeing r:entcd on a shorc-tcrrm tasis.) Thc followir13 exhibit
'rcsentsthe estimated rcEail sales bv ".o"oru
i.s estimated to be aboutover the 5 to 15 year build-
Occupancy Average Expenditure Nurnber of UniLs y'nnua1Rate by Croup/Day (Short_Lerm 6 lxpencli_
2nd home owners) tures
Winter 60 days(150 days) (4OZ)Suuuner 18 days, (120 days ) (I5"1)
TOTAL
$100
$70
L (332)
| (33"t)
$1r2,000
_-q,$!
$50,800
would beThe sales tax (aE 4i!) generated by this leveL of expenditure$2,000.00 per year.
Gov,er_nmentzrl Revenues
x The esEimated annual revcnues Eoproposed is (aC completion) $108,
all governmental entities servinq the000.00 per year.
The one-time rcvenrres (frorn consErucE:ion) for arr governrnenral entitiesis $61,000.
Impact Report
Page 9
* The annual revenues to [ag1e County a):e estilnat_ca t:.
'c. a'out $J.61000per year at ful1 developrnent.
* One-tirne revenues for Eagle County are projccted to bc about $20,000.
* The following tables sunmarize the carculatr'-or-r..j, sources, and reeipientsof revenues resulting fron this developnrent:
ESTII'IATED ASSESSED VALUATION OF LIONG RIDGE SUI}DIVISION ITILING NO. 3
Type Nunb e r Es t. Value To taL l.fa rke t
Va luc
Assessed
@ $110/sf laluarion (22%
Single Family(ave 2500 sf)
13 $2 75
" 000 $3,575,000 $ 786,500
Dup lexe s
(av-e 3500 sf) 5_ .$381000 $1,rr5.
TOTAL 23 d. u.$5,500,000 $1,210,000
REVENUff ESTIMATES" FTINDS -r'oR EAGLE COTJNTY, SPECTAL Dmfor LIoNSRIDGE SUBDIVTSTON FILTNC No: 3
En fi ty /S ource / Funcl Basis Annually @!'ull Devel-
One- t ime
ConsLruction
EAGLE COUN'IY1. County General
Property Tax
2. Construction permits
Sub-total; Eagle CounLy
IJPPER EACLE VAI,LEY SANITATTON1. Property tax2. Scwer user clrarge3. Connec tior-r cha rge
r,I p[w^-!QL_r{AI!-\_!!!!(L crr. r,roperty tax
2 . Wa tc r use r char:ge3. Connection charge
vArL IrIRll PROTECTI0N DISTRTcT(assumcs ;.rnnexa Liorr
oDment Cha r r'-e
$16, ooo
l?q,000
$l-6, 000
$1o, ooo
$ 2, ooo
$20r 000
$18, 000
$1o, ooo
$ 3,500
$ 4,ooo
$23,000
12. 78 mills
8.0 mills
$7.40/mo/nu
$800/DU
8.0 mils
$12.50/mo/DU
$1000/DU
3.25 mi11s
qgl_o-B4ag_[qq!r s4rN co LLrcB
Rn50J S(:ilooL t)ts'fRIc't
TOTALS
5.36 rnills $ 6,500
45.94 mitls $56,000 _$108,000 $61,000
ImpacC Repor LPage l0
Vegetation
* Vegetation
and aspen
* Because of
ma1 change
sLted so as
Wate r
PIIYSICAI IMPACTS
generally consists of grasses, sagellrush,trees.
extremely 1ow density of the pr:ojecE,vegetation patterns; roads and builcli.nghavc little affect on existj.ng trees.
Most of the south facing slopes, generally covered wi_th aspens and lnatural grasses, will be dedicated as oPen space.
and S.lope .Srablliry
thein
Eo
wJ.llows, evergreens,
there r,rill be lrrir-ri*sitcs lrave been
which prcsently
per day, Fol-
be able to treat
should be no
:
li
:
* At the tirne this inpact report was prepared, .o engineeri'g studics hadbeen conducted regard.ing gtologic, soi1s, drainage, or slope stabilityissues for this sire-. The dev;lo;er is in the piocess of obraining riresereporLs and copies should be subrniEEed to the county staff for revi_cr,rwhen comple ted.
* The property is in_ the Lionrs Ri dge I{ater DisErict.
* The District has tl-re capacily fo serve about 900 r:o 1000 clruel-liug, units;about 480 DU are presently being served and an additio'ar ,'coupre ofhundrcd" are being added this "rr....7* Jim collins, manager of .rhe Districtts af fai_rs, staEed that. at thistime, ther:e should be no problem supplying \,ratcr for the auu"rop*rni. z
Sewe r
* The properLy is in the Upper Eagle Valley Sewer Distric[has a capacity of treating 1.1 rnillion gallons of sewagelowing the planr expansion (ro begin shortly), they riflabout 3.5 nrillion ga llons / <Iay .
* According to Jim Collins, nurnager of the DistricE, thereprobLern serving the proposed <levelopmenf.
Air Qu4ity
* The l.les t Vai.l airshed h:rs an escim:rtccl
lirn. Assuming that the dwelling units(in fact, the avcrage is slightly lessnumber of fireplaces is projecu.i to b.I'Iest Vail.B
900 to 1000 fireplaces ar rhisaverage one fireplace eachthan one/DU), then the ulEimate
2,265 at ful1 development of
Impact ReporEPage I I
If . developed in the County, each <Jr.zell:iand, townhou"" *,"fLy1s wour<r p.or,"bi; il:"i"i,l"ti,iliril.1i""ilr"llljl"t"r""
:;Hilt;:",:;ii.:::tttator tresign,-"'1,],'"" aoo* t,, "ou"..-uo e'crsy
At fuIl build-ouE, the. proposed developrnent r,rotrl<l constitute abotrt l.Zof the fireplaces in the w;";-;"ii";irii"n arr<l abouL 0.27" ot Llre Lorarnumber of fireplaces in the G";^;Ji;;:
This -project rqill represent about l.42
3 tm=,* : l; i i::=:: l:ij" I:ii. 6l;i,; ". :
"
;1"" ; :;:.'b .1?1.,.: f
.. *: : I ;, ilt;
TraJfic
* The development "f !h]g site will result in abotrt: 1/r0 vchicleday and an es.imated 560 vehili;_-.i;" per day r,/'rhin rhe Gore.
I::.:".+il::.":fl:;i:v*:t-:h:. t':nrase .tur.d i" ahour 2,000to handle .n"-i.jilrl"r:;"::;::.ilr"1;1,.1:.;::l]., oi,,u
trips pcr
Yn11sy.l0
vehicles per
Frontage Road
The Trafflc frorn the,project wilr increase the use of severar existing;ff;i:1.;:l.i.ijl;, Auoui B0 "aJi.i.""i'dai1y uips "rii.i. n,ade onsorh roais ;.;;";;; "]i:"ili':"flr.oo"il".i';n.l: i;:r**r:jii;;.,,"",, .The followine diaHrarnr::ll:::::^the disrril_ruEion of rhe daily rrafficat completioa of the uevelopment^.1
euFFHEle Q<EEK FJt-
60 UPD
70 Vpa
TRAFFIC
RESULTING FROM
DISTRIBUTION AT FULL DEVELOPIIENT],ION'S RIDGE SUBDIVISION FILING NO.3
VPD = Vehicles pcr day
Impact Report
Page 12
Trans i t
* The project could generate a demand for 35 bus tril)s
-trips during the peak hours. lThi" assumes fhe saneBighorn).12 This -area is noL presently serviced by athe linited demand, it alone would not merit $er:vice,
MITIGATION I.IEASURXS
per day and onJ_y 4level of scrvice asbus sys tern and given
residents of the area ancl to )
the arcas should be annexed
Vail Metropolitan llecreationthe additional recreati.on demand
To improve the insurance rating for thegenerate revenues for the fire districtinto the Vd.i1 Fire protection District.
The area should a1'so be annexed into theDistrict to assist in paying for some ofthat will res ult ,
The vlsual impacts of the six lots locaEed on Sandstone Drlve Lsof concern, rt is irnportant that design conErors be irnposed Lo ensurethat the buildings are compatible with the surrounaing resiaences andthe character of the neighborhood.. The devel0per shoJld estabrishprotective covenants that provide for architecturar and design revievrcontrols .
Firep-laces should be limited to one per dwelling unlt and energyconservation measures should be required, incluJirrg the use of cxternar.combustion air, hearilator design, ancl glaqp .loorsl
I
lll
Inpact Report
Page 13
1.The actual occupancy of dwetling uniLs i-' trrc Gorc Varley has not bee'accurately deternined. The Vail Depart.menL of (iornmunity Development alrdthe Growth Management study assumecl 4,4 perso's/clwelli.rrg untt. A prronesurvey of 550 Eagle count.y residents indicat:cd or-r rr"rr!" of 3.2 plrsons,/llu.According to Terrill Knight, county rlanning Director, ih" cuu.rtyuses aa average of 3.3 pe rsons /dwel1ing unit. It ts believed fhat theestinated 3.3/DU j.s most representatlve of t:he permanent populationand even of the second horne or^mers. rt shoul.d be nocecr ti.rat, at best,the population projections tndicate only a relative 'umber of people,and not the exact or annual occupancy -1eve1s.
The present popul-ation of the Gore valley es[imates are based on infor-nation from the Vail DepartmenE of Comnruni ty Development (SllSlTg).The projected population is based on a soon'-Lo-be ptrblished reporL forthe nTater districts by the firm of camp Dresser & McKee of Denver.rt should be noted that the percentage of population represented bythe development of the Lionrs Ridge parcels is consistent whether thef'per dwelling unic" population is assumed to be 3,5 ot 4.4. The follorv-ing table sumnarizes the information in the camp Dresser iIcKee popula-tion study. (The present number of t'existrrrli u'itsrt is estimated tobe closer to 5,000 than the 1977 figures presented in their report.)
NOTES
SUI'OTARY OF PI{OJTCTED DEVtsLOPM]INTfor the GOI{E VALLEY
Camp Dresser & Mcl(ee
2.
Water Dis tric L a)Exis ting Total Ultimate Ul timate
Gore Valley
Blghorn
Vail
Lionrs RidgeVail Village West
Units (b
450
2I5
2748
365
61s
160
4422
27 54
1B410
4242
7080
2886
Units (c. d PonulaEion
1005
626
4184
964
1.609Vqil InEe rmountain
Tot a1s 656 (t
4553 9044 39794
(a) Includes all areas served by that water rlistrict.(b) Based on Latest f igure.s where known, otherwise based on May L977figurcs.(c) A unit i.s I res idence, or
accomodati,ons.(d) Based on GrorvEh }lanagenentwith Vail planning staf f ,engineers.
(e) Unit times 4.4 persons per(f ) Includcs ll iZh lirrrcl t4e.rcloi,,s
2 overnight rooms, or 2 cmployec housing
Sub-CommirEee Ileport, and coorclination
and waeer district represcnfatives and
unit, with 100 pcrcent occupancy,Fif ings 1 and 2.
Inpact Report
Page 14
3' ;l"ffi*:::'il;;: "trn chief Gordon swal)son, vail trire prorccLirn r)isrricL,
4.
5.
6.
7.
Interview with paL Dodson, Director of the Vaj.l l<ecreat.ion DePartment.
The construction erqpl0yment estinates are basecr o'Lhe raur.e of thumbthat there are ld rulr-time .q"i""i"ttt-jobs per rnillion crollars of saresvalue of construction. Given the revel 0f lt'owJ.eclge abou. the actualnunber of units that will be built after subdivision, tlre v61us of thebuildings, etc., the estirnaEed number of constructlon jobs creat.ed Jspresented only as an extrernely rough esfJ_mate.
Phone lnterview wirh-James collins' ma*ager: of the Lionrs rticrge ttraterDistricr, 20 August 1979.
The unpublishet reoort prepared for the water ,rstricts by carnp Dresserand McKee was used as the Lasis for the numter of awelling units yet tobe consEructed in the west vail airsheJ. Refer to the notes on popura-
ntliluf"t more information about the number and locarion of u'lrs antici-
Impact Report
Page 15
8.:lr::::::,:. .|^"Tf:
":.ohy:-Envtronmenral rrr:atr:rr officer, r)elarrrnenL
!::ri*"",::- :: ze' ;";;;;'';;; #1"#'il.'*":*l:':::'^p;g' nr-rz-' -.r,co .*Gi#"1.";ii';;;"';;;'";,,il"':i'.";u'ilo,"n,,
;f".1*:.0::j-.:..^:':-l:1ed on "";;;i;;;;a^iio'""i'i"i.""irili',,1:";il:eu*.qo_ri._in ii ;; i J' i" ii ll.'r\i ,-; ^.t ^-9i vi gi-q.. Qo s,p : s i.! e r"re r o r :". r " r. r.i" "Fif ilffi ;lliiii;" a"a;
:::l^': :i1: i:'T; Y1*Eir""ip"i ;;;.;;";;; ;;;;. "=ii;"i.iiJ,i','n
tab 1e s ummararized the daEa used:
VEHICLE EMISSION FACTORS AND CAI,CUI,ATIONSfor l,ionrs Ridse S-rrbdivision Fi lirre No, 3 ;
t,Ca rb on
Monoxide
Ni trogen
Oxide
Ilyd ro
Ca rbonsUnit emissions
G 30 rnph in
(kiJ.ograrns per of le 0. 0811
560
45
0.0012
560
0.(r7
0.0064
560
J,O
winEer)
Est. vehicle rniles per day at fu11build our
Wj.nter daily emissions(kglday)
Est. wint.er emissions Gout 'of Vail VillageVail
o Present emissionso Presen t dr.rellingo Emissl.on/d. u,o Ful1 build ouc ofo Futurc emissions
for project
full build
& I^/est
uni ts
d. u. ts
93 4343772
r666
3BB8
o.428
74r3
49
3BBB
0.0726
74r3
228
3BBB
0. 0586
74r3
3172 93.4 434,4
Z increase dueVillage &
ful1-b ui 1d
project (in Vail-
Vail) ar
The vehiclc-mi1es per day assutnesaverage trip diqtan ce of 4 miles.with Rob Tcnnsy, Traffic ConErolsllighways on 11r I'Iay 1979.
1-47"o.17" o.B"t
6 tr.ips/day/dwe1ling unit with anThis is ba-secl on phone in tervicwD.ivision, Colorado DeparEment of
to
i,les t
ouE
9.
10. A number of assumptions \./eretraffic on thc cxisting roadthe number: of daily vehicletraffic fron the parcel, and
made on each road.
required to project the distribution ofsysLem. The following table indicaEestrips, Ehe assumed dj.rectional flow ofthe resulting number of vehicle trips
Impact Repo rt
Page 16
TRAFFIC FI OI,T ANAI,YSIS
Parcel D.U.'s Es timated
Daily Auto
Trip s
Buf fhe r
Crk Rd.
Iron t a ge
Iias t Itoad
hrest
FiIing
llz
56023 r00 xq .9!z 2.80 to% 2Bo.
11' Calculations of the ^transit demand are based orr data collectecl ancl prcr-
:::!.1_i" the Eagle Cqtrnry ang Tor,,nl of Vail Transir t)evel{lplne_q,r- plan,
{v-l6-8.3, May 1978, DeparEment of Community l"v.lop*errt, Torn of Vail.1.978-83
Rldership characteristics have been assumed to be consistent with thoseof the Red Sandstone area.
Based on the factors used in the study and historical ridersrrip data forthe sandstone bus route, the projectei rrclershi.p denand is car.culaterlto be only four bus trips during the peak hour arrcl only 35 per day.
Impact Repor t
Page 17
BIBI.I OGRAP}IY
The John Ryan
Colorado.
.The .{ohn Ryan
for Glen
Company, Denver. Impa.ct S,t at_emcn t- f o:_fhe potato ))atclt, Vail,February 1974.
Company and THK AssociaLes, Denver, Envir:o.nmental .Impa,ct l{epor:LLyon, Vail , Colorqdb. September Lg77,
fggil-D-gYgfsq vail, Deparrmenr ofCommunity Development, Toron of Vaif, fCZA.
camp Dresser McKee, Denver. selected pages of report to be released forwater districts in the Gore Valley. LIav 1979.
;
I
a
I
Impact Rcport
Page 18
INTERVIEI.]S
Jeff Selby
Ronald Todd
TOWN OF VAIL
Gordon SwansonPat Doclson
Deniris Murphy
EAGLE COUNTY
Terrill Knighr
UPPER EAGLE VALLEY SANIT.\TION DISTRICTLIONIS RIDGE I\IATER DIS TRI CT
Jarnes Collins
Owne::
Proj ec t A::chitect /planrrer
Chie f , Ltire DepartrnenuDirector, Recreatiou Depart:men EEnvironmental. Ilealth 0f fi cer
Director, Department of lrlanning
and Buildirrg Inspection
District Manager
1)
I
I
l;