Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0 Application  Buffalo Valley Apartments  Limited Impact Review Application – 12/22/14       Table of Contents    General Application Materials          Tab 1  o Cover Letter  o Pre Application Conference Summary  o Application Form  o Payment Agreement Form  o Statement of Authority  o Special Warranty Deed  o Mineral Rights  o Thompson Glen Ditch Company shares  o Driveway Permit Application  o Source Gas Will Serve  o Xcel Energy Will Serve  o Century Link Will Serve  o Comcast Will Serve  o Technically Complete Correspondence and Attachments  Vicinity Maps            Tab 2  o Vicinity map  o 3 mile Radius  o Adjacent Uses  Site Plans            Tab 3  o Site Plan  o Utility Plan  o Grading and Drainage Plan  o Stormwater Management Plan  o Snow Storage Plan  o Details  o Lighting Plan  o Landscape Plan  o Floor Area Ratio Calculation  Erosion and Sediment Control          Tab 4  Impact Analysis              Tab 5  o Property Owners   o Adjacent Land Use  o Preliminary Geotechnical and Geological Review  o Groundwater and Aquifer Recharge  o Radiation Potential   Traffic Study            Tab 6  Water Supply Plan           Tab 7  o Will Serve Request Letter  o Will Serve Letter, City of Glenwood Springs  Standards            Tab 8  o Drainage Report  o Wildfire Hazard  o Architectural Drawings  o Parking Waiver Request         BUFFALO VALLEY APARTMENTS To: Ms. Tamra Allen From: Planning Manager Garfield County, Colorado tallen@garfield-county.com Norman Bacheldor Managing Member Partners Ill, LLC December 12, 2014 Dear Ms. Allen, We are pleased to submit our application of a Limited Impact Review for the redevelopment of the Buffalo Valley restaurant and motel property located 3637 County Rd 154, Glenwood Springs, CO. We wish to build and operate 54 apartments of 1, 2, and 3 bedroom configurations. Our research and experience of living in the Roaring Fork Valley indicates that there is a high demand for residential rental apartments. This project will help to meet housing need of the southeast area of Garfield County. Thank you for your consideration . Sincerely, Norman Bacheldor Partners Ill, LLC normbacheldor@gmail.com 970-379-7874 Community Development Department 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 945-8212 www.garfield-county.com PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY TAX PARCEL NUMBER: 2185-271-00-029 DATE: November 21, 2014 PROJECT: Buffalo Valley Apartments OWNERS/APPLICANT: Partners III, LLC REPRESENTATIVE: Norm Bachelor (Owner’s Rep) /Chris Hale (Engineer) PRACTICAL LOCATION: 3637 Highway 82, Glenwood Springsalso accessed off of County Road 154 ZONING: Commercial Limited TYPE OF APPLICATION: Multi-Family Residential, Limited Impact Review I. GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Applicant will be submitting an application for a Limited Impact Review for a proposed multi-family apartment development on the existing Buffalo Valley Restaurant site of approximately 2.2 acres. The Applicant has represented that the project will include removal of all existing buildings and the construction of two 3-story apartment buildings with a total of 54 units. The units will vary in size including one, two and three bedroom units. The Applicant submitted a similar application to the County in July of 2013. The Board of County Commissioners reviewed the application at a meeting held on April 14, 2014 and voted to deny the application. Resoluton 2014-23 memorialized the action and included justification that the application failed to demonstrate compliance with the Land Use and Development Code in regard to Section 7-302, Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards. The resolution also included information that the proposed land use would negatively impact the intersection of SH 82 and CR 154 and other driveways and intersections on CR 154 with the amount of traffic generation and parking issues. The Applicant is now proposing to decrease the unit count from 57 to 54 units as well as to increase parking to 128 stalls, including 7 tandem parking stalls. Other modifications include a realignment of the buildings to improve the efficiency of the space, revisions to the grading, drainage, landscaping plans as well as the traffic study based on their revised proposal. 1 The property is zoned Commercial Limited (CL) and the County’s Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Urban Growth Area within the City of Glenwood Spring’s Comprehensive plan. The City of Glenwood Springs Future Land Use Mapping shows the site as primarily mixed use with a low density residential and hillside preservation designation at the rear of the site II. REGULATORY PROVISIONS APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO ADDRESS  Garfield County Comprehensive Plan 2030  Glenwood Springs Comprehensive Plan  Garfield County Land Use and Development Code  Section 4-104, Limited Impact Review  Table 4-102, Common Review Procedures and Required Notice  Table 4-201, Application Submittal Requirements  Article 7, Divisions 1, 2 and 3 III. REVIEW PROCESS The process to accommodate these requests shall require a Limited Impact Review process. (4-104) process pursuant to the Land Use and Development Code, as amended. A. Pre-application Conference. B. Application Submittal. C. Determination of Completeness. (20 days for staff review, 60 days for applicant to correct any deficiencies in the submittal) D. Schedule Public Hearing, (30 days prior to hearing) provide documentation regarding notice requirements (written, mailed and posted). E. Additional Copies requested and sent to referral agencies. F. Evaluation by Director/Staff resulting in a Staff Report to the Board of County Commissioners. G. Public Hearing before the BOCC, resulting in a final approval, approval with conditions or denial. H. Recording of decision in an approved Resolution I. If approved, issuance of a Land Use Change Permit based on demonstration of compliance with any conditions of approval. IV. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS Please refer directly to Table 4-201 and the list of General Application Materials in section 4-203. These application materials are generally summarized below:  4-203.B. General Application Material o Application Form o General project description – include a description of the project as well highlighting what has changed in the proposal since the previous application. o Ownership Documentation (deed) and title information indicating if there are any lien holders and/or encumbrances (a title commitment may be necessary) o Statement of Authority – Partners III, LLC granting Norm Bacheldor authority to act on behalf of the LLC. o Letter of Authorization, as necessary o Fee Payment and Payment Agreement Form o Pre-Application Conference Summary o Names and addresses of all property owners within 200 feet of project site and all mineral owners of the subject parcels (demonstrated through a search of Clerk and Recorders database and/or Assessors database).  4-203.C. Vicinity Map 2  4-203.D. Site Plan – Include all items as listed in 4-203.D as well as where future structures will be developed, parking areas and location where activities take place  4-203.E. Grading and Drainage Plan  4-203.F. Landscape Plan  4-203.G. Impact Analysis - Respond to the identified impacts in this section o Sections on Archeology, Wildlife Habitat/Impacts, and Reclamation may be waived upon request.  4-203. J. Development Agreement - May be waived upon request (section 4-202)  4-203. K. Improvements Agreement - May be waived upon request (section 4-202)  4-203.L. Traffic Study – Current traffic counts are available from the County Road and Bridge Department and the study should be updated based on the revised project.  4-203. M. Water Supply/Distribution Plan – Information about current water supply system should be included as well as a “will-serve” letter from the City of Glenwood Springs.  4-203.N. Wastewater Treatment Plan– Information about existing sanitation facilities should be included as well as a “will-serve” letter from the City of Glenwood Springs.  4-203.O. Floodplain Analysis – May be waived upon request (section 4-202)  Any additional materials to demonstrate compliance with Sections 7, Divisions 1, 2, and 3. o 7-101 – Zone Distsrict Regulations - include information about FAR compliance as well as building height and setbacks o 7-107, Roadway Standards – include information on:  The roadway dimension for the “urban” type roadway proposed. Include a waiver request for any deviations as well as a statement justifying the waiver as required in 4-118.  Application from County Road and Bridge for a Driveway Permit o 7-302, Off-Street Parking and Loading – include information about the proposed parking (154 stalls) and the proposed definicency (7 stalls). Include a waiver request for the deviation as well as information justifying the waiver as required in section 4-118 (e.g. parking management plan, tandem spaces, etc) Submit three paper copies and one CD for applications. Additional copies will be requested upon determination of completeness. See the land use code for additional information on submittal requirements. V. APPLICATION REVIEW A. Review by: Staff for completeness recommendation and referral agencies for additional technical review B. Public Hearing: __None (Director’s Decision) __Planning Commission _X_ Board of County Commissioners __ Board of Adjustment C. Referral Agencies: May include  City of Glenwood Springs (including Public Works Department)  County Road and Bridge Department  Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT)  County Consulting Engineer  County Building Department  Roaring Fork Transit Authority  Glenwood Springs Fire Department 3 VI. APPLICATION REVIEW FEES A. Planning Review Fees: $ 400.00 B. Referral Agency Fees: $ TBD – consulting engineer/civil engineer fees C. Total Deposit: $ 400.00 (additional hours are billed at $40.50 /hour) General Application Processing The pre-application meeting summary is only valid for six (6) months from the date of the written summary. Disclaimer The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the County. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. This summary does not create a legal or vested right. Pre-application Summary Prepared by: November 21, 2014 ___________________________________________ _____________ Tamra Allen, Planning Manager Date 4 c:G Garfteld County Community De velopment De partment 108 8 1h Street, Su ite 401 Glenwood Spring s, CO 81601 (970) 945-8212 www.garfield -countv .com TYPE OF APPLICATION D Administrative Review Iii Limi ted Impact Review D Major Impact Review D Amendments to an Approved LU CP D LIR OM IR OsuP D Minor Temporary Hou sing Facility D Vacation of a County Road /Publi c ROW D Lo cation and Extent Review -----D Comprehensive Plan Amendment D Major 0Minor D Pipeline Development LAND USE CHANGE PERMIT APPLICATION FORM D Development in 100-Year Floodplain D Development in 100-Year Floodplain Variance D Code Te xt Ame nd ment D Rezoning D Zone District O PUD D PUD Amendment D Administrative I nterpretation D Appeal of Administrative Interpretation D Areas and Activities of State Interest ---D Accommodation Pursuant to Fair Housing Act D Variance D Time Extension (also check type of original app li cat ion ) INVOLVED PARTIES Owner I Applicant Name: Partners 111, LLC Phone: (970 )379 -7874 Mailing Address: 353 Goose Ln. City : Carbondale State: CO Zip Co de : 81 623 E-mail:normbacheldor@gmail.com Representative (Authori zation Required) Name : Norman Bacheldor Phone: (970 )379-7874 Mailing Address: 11 Riversedge Ct. city : Basalt State : CO Zip Code : 81621 E-mai l: normbacheldor@gmail .com PROJECT NAME AND LOCATION Project Name: Buffalo Valley Apartments Assessor's Parce l Number: 218271002J:L_ ----------- Physical/Street Address: 3637 Highway 82, G lenwood Springs, CO, 81601 Lega l Description : See survey by S urvco , Inc. Dated 06May2013 , Samuel D. Phelps, PLS zone District: Commercial Limited Property Size (acres): 2.2 acres - r-;;··-------·-·------·-·-··--··-·-·----·---·· PROJECT DESCRIPTION Existing Use: Restaurant and Motel I i Proposed Use (From Use Table 3-403): _D_w_e_lli~ng~,_M_u_lt_i·U_n_it ________________ _ Description of Project: A proposed residential development of 54 apartment units. REQUEST FOR WAIVERS --··~-·-~ .... ~~~-·-~-··---·---.. ···---·-· Submission Requirements D The Applicant requesting a Waiver of Submission Requirements per Section 4-202. List: Section: _____________ Section: ______________ _ Section: Section:--------------- Waiver of Standards D The Applicant is requesting a Waiver of Standards per Section 4-118. List: Section: Parking Requirements, Section 7~304 Section: ______________ _ Section: _____________ Section:--------------- ~~ifrients above and have provided the required attached information which is e to the best of my knowledge. December 12, 2014 Signature of Property Owner Date f :~:::'°"" -:---l ______-:::::=::=::= ------ ----------====1--------- Fee Paid:$ _______ _ ----------- cG Garfield County PAYMENT AGREEMENT FORM GARFIELD COUNTY ("COUNTY") and Property Owner ("APPLICANT") Partners Ill, LLC ------------------------------agree as follows: 1. The App licant has submitted to the County an application for t he follo w ing Project: __ _ Buffalo Valley Apartments 2. The Applicant understands and agrees that Garfield County Resolution No. 2014-60, as amended, establishes a fee schedule for each type application, and the guidelin es for the administration of the fee structure. 3. The App li cant and the County agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain t he full extent of the costs involved in processing th e application. The Applicant ag ree s to make payment of the Base Fee, established for the Project, and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to t he Applicant . The App lican t agrees to make additional pa yments upon notificatio n by the County, w hen they are necessary, as costs are incurred. 4. The Base Fe e sha ll be in additi on to and exclusive of any cost for publication or cost of consulting serv ic e determined necess ary by the Board of County Commissioners for the consideration of an application or add it ional County staff time or expense not covered by the Base Fee. If actua l recorded costs exceed the ini tial Base Fee, the Appl icant sha ll pay additional billings to t he County to reimburse th e County for the processing of th e Project. The Applicant acknowledges that all billing sha ll be paid prior to the final considerat ion by the County of any Land Use Change or Division of Land. I hereby agree to pay all fees related to this application: Billing contact Person: Norman Bac heldor Billing Contact Address: 11 Riversedge Ct City: Basalt Billing contact Email: normbacheldor@gmail.com (Signature) Phone: (970 )379 -7874 State: CO Zip Code: _8_1_6_2_1 ___ _ December 12, 2014 (Date) cE Garfield County STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY Pursuant to C.R.S. §38-30-172, the undersigned executes this Statement of Authority on behalf of Partne rs Ill , LLC , a limited liability company (corporation, limited liability company, general partnership, registered limited liability partnership, registered limited liability limited partnership, limited partnership association, government agency, t rus t or other), an entity other than an individual, capable of holding title to real property (the "Entity"), and states as follows: The name of the Entity is _P_art_n_e_rs_l_ll_, L_L_C _____________________ ~ and is formed under the laws of _C_ol_o_ra_do _____________________ _ The mailing address for the Entity is 353 Goose Ln, Carbo ndale , CO 81623 The name and/or position of the person authorized to execute instruments conveying, encumbering, or otherwise affecting title to real property on behalf of the Entity is Norman C. Bacheldor, Managing Member The limitations upon the authority of the person named above or holding the position described above to bind the Entity are as follows (if no limitations, insert "None"): _N_o_ne ___________ _ Other matters concerning the manner in which the Entity deals with any interest in real property are (if no other matter, lea ve this section blank): _A_ll _ot_h_er_s _________________ _ Signature: _______________ _ Name (printed): Norman C. Bacheldor Title (if any): Managing Member I 2014 , sTAnoF ColCYadu i G (."> )SS. COUNTY OF Q 'fh C l 0 ) The f ?r,egoing instrument WJJiS acknowledged before me thi s ~ay of Dec e mbec I 20 & by N O'{'(Y\Q 'y) c t;Q c\.\ e \dx::: on behalf of ---+=Ur-l-n P6 111 l L C.. I a My Comm. Exp. 0812.9/2 01 ~ 835570 05/20/2013 04:38:52 PM Page 1 of 2 Jean Alberico, Garfield County, Colorado Rec Fee: $16.00 Doc Fee: $0.00 eRecorded 111111111~ 11111111111111111111111 . . STA'IEMENT OF AUTHOR.n'Y (§38-30-172. C.R.S.) 1. This Statement of Authority reliltes to aa eatity1 named PARrNERS lil, U.C 2. Tb~ t e of enlity is a: C.Orporation Nonprofit Corporation X Limited Liabili.t}• Company General Partnership Limited Partnti'Sbip § Registered Ll.lllited Liabihty J>artne~hip Registered Limited Liability Llmitffi P11rtne-rship Limit.eel Partnership Association Govmunent or Govemmental Subdivfsion or Agency TlU5[ 3. The entity is formed under the laws of COLORADO J., 4 . Thernailingaddresstortheenti.tyi.s 35"3 Goose Lql"'Jf!, Ctirb<'Ja J Co 5. Tue X ntlllle X positior1 of eacb person autboi.izcd to execute Inst~ conveying, encumbering or otherwise affecting title to real pl'op~ey 011 behalf oI cbe e11ti1Y is NORMAN BA~OR. MANAGER 6. Th~ 1111thorlry of tilt foregoing pimon(s) to bind tbl' entity: X isl not llmlled _ is limited d.s follows: 7 . Otht>r matters coocmning the mitnner in which tl1e entity deals wtdl interests in real p1upttrty: 8 . This Statement of Authority i'I f'~enJtl'(i on behalf of the entity pursuant to the provisions of ~30-30-1 n, C.R.S.l 9. This Statemeot of Authority 11mPTlds and snpPrst'Clt!S in all respects any and all prior datt!Cl Statemenrs of Atlfhority exPn1t1:>d on behalf of the entity. ! u, A .A Ali: Execuced rhis ....... ~ .............. -__ day of 00. V-20 tl / ,,..;;?;~-:;?' /;t}J!?-----·-· NORMAN HA.cft'Er.i>_o_R_,_MA_N_A_G_ER ______ _ 1 'Th.I:. fonu shou Id not be u:;ed unless the entity Is capable of holding title 10 l'l'Ul property. i The a!Jbe11ce of any llmltlltion sh.ill bl! 1ir111.w (llci~ ~vidtnce tbat no such limitation cxl:it:s. a ·1 he 8filtt'mcnt uf autl\Ol'!ty mnst be rccurdcd to obtain tlW b\.ufi'IS of the NtirM~. Form 13759 0312005 soa.udt ABC630D7700 {10028604} )lg l Of 2 835570 05/20/2013 04:38 :52 PM Page 2 of 2 Jean Alberico , Garfield County , Colorado Rec Fee : $16.00 Doc Fee : $0.00 eRecorded State of COLORADO ) )ss Cu Wlty of GARFIELD ) , The foresDing instromont wa• ocknowledged before 1111! this / tf'-day of J'l1 ~& d'o/ ..3 by NORMAN BACUELDOR AS MANAGBR OF PARTNERS Jll, LLC, A COLO UMITIID LIABILITY COMPANY Witness my hand and officiill ~V _ I . / My colllDlisslon expires: jJfj!J-okL WHEN RECORDED rumJltN lU: Fonn 13759 0312005 soo.c>dt ABC6J007700 JAN•CE L. JOHNSON NOTARV PUBUC STA-re OF COL~DO ~'°~19,2016 MY . (16628604} pg 2 ot 2 835572 05/20/2013 04:38:52 PM Page 1 of 4 Jean Alberico, Garfield County, Colorado Rec Fee: $26.00 Doc Fee: $96.00 eRecorded 111111111111111111111111111111 I Ill Special Warranty Deed (Pursuant to 38-30-115 C.RS.) State Documentary Fee Date: May 14, 2013 $96.00 TlilS DEED, made on May 14, 2013 by ROARING FORK REAL ESTATE SOLUTIONS, LLC A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY Grantor(s), of tl1e County of PITKIN and State of COLORADO for the consideration of ($960,000.00) ••• Nine HWidred Sixty Thousand and 00/100 •••dollars in hand paid, hereby sells and conveys to PARTNERS III, LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY Grantee(s), whose strel't add!1'ss is 353 GOOSE LANE CARBONDALE, CO 81623, County of GARFIELD, and State of COLORADO, tl1e following real property in the County of Garfield, and State of Colorado, to wit: SEE AlTACHED "EXHIBIT A" ulso known by street and number as: 3637 HIGHWAY 82 GLENWOOD SPRINGS CO 81601 with all its appm~enances and warrants the title against all persons claiming wider the Grantor(s) GENERAL TAXES AND ASSESSMENTS FOR THE YEAR 2013 AND SUBSEQUENT YEARS A.'ID SUBJECT TO THOSt: 11'EMS AS SET FORIB ON EXHIBIT "B" ATIACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN. ROARING FORK REAL ESTATE SOLU'IIONS, LLCA COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY /,.,,,-:-; <'"2 ---·-·-----.. R ,,,_.,,~f" p -~.,. ,._, __ TONY THOMPSON, MANAGER State of COLORADO ) ) ss. ) JANICE L. JOHNSON NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF COLORADO NOTAFIY 10 19964006618 My Comml!!Sion Eicplres AprH 19, 2016 County of GARFIELD Tiie foregoing insn"Ulllent was acknowledged before me on this day of May 14, 2013 by TONY THOMPSON AS MANAGER OF ROARING FORK REAL ESTATE SOLUTIONS, LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY I ' Witness my hand and official seal. /../, I My commission expires _____ '+'-+f-~;)-0,~~/J When Recorded Return to: PARTNERS.Ill, LLC A COLORADO LIMITED-LIABILITY COMPANY 353 GOOSE LANE CARBONDALE, CO 81623 J'.orm 13773 10/2010 swd.open.rev.odt Special WaITanty DeC"d Open (Photographic) ABC63D07700 {16628501} ~ land Title CU/\ClollTL!o;tl"·W.r 835572 05/20/2013 04:38:52 PM Page 2 of 4 Jean Alberico, Garfield County, Colorado Rec Fee: $26.00 Doc Fee: $96.00 eRecorded EXHIBIT A A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THEE 112NE1/4 OF SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 89 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, GARFIELD COUNTY, STATE OF COLORADO, DESCRIBED AS BEGINNING AT CORNER NO. 1 BEING A POINT WHENCE THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 27 BEARS S. 12 DEGREES 17' E. 1195.036 FEET; THENCE S. 35 DEGREES 21' W. 301.61 FEET TO CORNER NO. 2; THENCE S. 66 DEGREES 21'W. 77.25FEETTO CORNER NO. 3; THENCE N. 60 DEGREES 02' W. 93.09 FEET TO CORNER NO. 4; THENCE N. 41DEGREES07'W. 68.23FEETTO CORNER NO. 5; THENCE N. 44DEGREES 02'W.149.17FEETTO CORNER NO. 6; THENCE N. 63 DEGREES 16' E. 116.41 FEET TO CORNER NO. 7; THENCE N. 61DEGREES10' E. 262.53 FEETT01HE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF FORMER STATE HIGHWAY NO. 82 (PRIOR TO RECONSTRUCTION AND REALIGNMENT THEREOF BY PROJECT NO. 50130 (7) AS DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO. 177553 RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK AND RECORDER, GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO) TO CORNER NO. 8; THENCE S. 55 DEGREES 07' E. 100.00 FEET ALONG THE ABOVE DESCRIBED WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF FORMER STATE HIGHWAY NO. 82 (PRIOR TO RECONSTRUCTION AND REALIGNMEN1) TO CORNER NO. 9; THENCE S. 53 DEGREES 41' E. 55.40 FEET ALONG TllF. ABOVE DESCRIBED WESTERLY RIGHI" OF WAY LINE OF FORMER STATE IDGHW A Y NO. 82 (PRIOR TO RECONSTRUCTION AND REALIGNMENT) TO CORNER NO. 10; THENCE S. 39 DEGREES 40'34" E. 22.78 FEET TO COR.."IER NO. 1, THE POINT OF BEGINNING. COUNTY OF GARFIELD STATE OF COLORADO Fonn 13773 1012010 swd.open.rev.odt Special Warranty D•ed Open (Photographic) ABC63007700 {16628501) 835572 05/20/2013 04:38:52 PM Page 3 of 4 Jean Alberico, Garfield County, Colorado Rec Fee: $26.00 Doc Fee: $96.00 eRecorded EXHIBITB Property Address: 3637 IIlGHWAY 82 GLENWOOD SPRINGS CO 81601 TIIE EFFECT OF INCLUSIONS IN ANY GENERAL OR SPECIFIC WATER CONSERVANCY, FIRE PROTECTION, SOIL CONSERVATION OR OTHER DISTRICT OR INCLUSION IN ANY WATER SERVICE OR STREET IMPROVEMENT AREA. RIGHT OF PROPRIETOR OF A VEIN OR LODE TO EXTRACT AND REMOVE ms ORE THEREFROM SHOULD TIIE SAME BE POUND TO PENETRATE OR INTERSECT THE PREMISES AS RESERVED IN UNITED STATES PATENT RECORDED APRIL 29, 1894, IN BOOK 12 AT PAGE 318. RIGHT OF WAY FOR DITCHES OR CANALS CONSTRUCTED BY THEAU'l110Rfl'Y OF THE UNITED STMESAS RESERVED IN UNITED STMES PATENT RECORDED APRIL 29, 1894, IN BOOK 12 AT PAGE 318. TERMS, CONDffiONS AND PROVISIONS, EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY AS CONTAINED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED DECEMBER 12, 1963 IN BOOK 354 AT PAGE529. EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY AS CONTAINED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED JUNE 4, 1962 INBOOK342ATPAGE 301. EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY AS RESERVED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED MAY 28, 1965 IN BOOK 366 AT PAGE 294. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF AGREEMENT RECORDED March 24, 1993 IN BOOK 863 A:f PAGE 375. EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY AS CONTAINED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED DECEMBER 2, 1993 IN BOOK 884 AT PAGE 548 AND INSTRUMENT RECORDED DECEMBER 6, 1993 IN BOOK 884 AT PAGE 751. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS, EASEMENI"S AND RIGHTS OF WAY AS CONTAINED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED NOVEMBER 16, 1993 IN BOOK 882 AT PAGE 178. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF AGREEMENT RECORDED October 05, 1993 IN BOOK 877 AT PAGE 594. EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY AS CONTAINED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED SEPTEMBER 22, 1993 IN BOOK 876 AT PAGE 229. Form 13100 08/2008 b2exhibit.cscrow.odt ABC63007700 {16628500} 835572 05/20/2013 04:38:52 PM Page 4 of 4 Jean Alberico, Garfield County, Colorado Rec Fee: $26.00 Doc Fee: $96.00 eRecorded TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS, EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY AS CONTAINED IN AGREEMENTS RECORDED MAY 24 1993 IN BOOK 863 AT PAGE 392 AND RECORDED MAY 24, 1993 IN BOOK 863 AT PAGE 380 AND AMENDED AGREEMENT RECORDED JULY 16, 1993 IN BOOK 868 AT PAGE 828 AND INSTRUMENT RECORDED JULY 10, 1995 IN BOOK 946 AT PAGE 133, TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS, EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY AS CONTAINED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED SEP'IEMBER 24, 1949 IN BOOK 245 AT PAGE210. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF AGREEMENT RECORDED January 10, 2008AT RECEPTION NO. 740912. ANY FACTS, RIGHTS, INTERESTS OR CLAIMS WJilCH MAY EXIST OR ARISE BY REASON OF THE FOLLOWING FACTS SHOWN ON SURVEY DATED May 06, 2013 PREPARED BY SURVCO, INC., JOB# 13.002: A. ENCROACHMENT OF SHED OVER PROPERTY LINE B. ENCROACHMENT OF ASPHALT ONTO ADJOINING PROPERTY. C. UTILITY POLE AND LINES LYING OUTSIDE OF UTILITY EASEMENT Form 13100 0812008 b2exl1ibit.cscrow.odt A BC63007700 {16628500} Subject: Mineral Rights at the Buffalo Valley Property 3637 Highway 82, Glenwood Springs, Colorado Garfield County To Garfield County Community Development Report prepared on September 20, 2013 Norm Bacheldor researched the mineral rights on the subject property. The research was through the title commitment on the property and the Garfield County Assessors office. No mineral activity was reported on the title commitment. There has been no indication of mineral rights ownership or sales of mineral rights. The Garfield County Assessors office assisted with investigating mineral rights and and historical activity of the subject property. Three Assessor office employees helped with the search. Allison Arias, Robin Dalessandri and Carol Hopkins. They were unable to locate mineral rights transactions on the subject property or surrounding area. The closest activity mentioned was the Cardiff Glen area, and that dated back about a century. In conclusion, there is no evidence in the County Records or Title work of mineral rights owners who need to be notified. Norman C. Bacheldor Partners III, LLC Managing Member THOMPSON GLEN DITCH COMPANY PO Box 2794, Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 N o r m B a c h e l d o r 9 August 2013 Partners III, LLC 353 Goose Lane Carbondale, CO 81623 Dear Mr. Bacheldor: I am pleased to inform you that four shares of the Thompson Glen Ditch Company have been officially transferred to you, and are successfully recorded in our books as Shares Number 7627 Partners. The shares are recorded as owned by: Partners III, LLC 353 Goose Lane Carbondale, CO 81623 Phone: 970-379-7874 Location of property served: 3637 Highway 82 G l e n wood Springs, CO 81601 If you have questions or would like more information, please don’t hesitate to contact us by phone (505-699-2904) or email (drjim@rof.net). Y o u r s t r u l y , J a m e s C a mpbell, PhD S e c r e t a r y , T G D C GARFIELD COUNTY DRIVEWAY PERMIT REQUIREMENTS Information required by Garfield County Road & Dridge for driveway permits or exemption letters: >-State your request (drive,vay per1nits vs. exentption). >-LegRI dcscriptionj lot & block# preferred, 111eets & bounds if necessary );;> Plrtt or sketch, sho,ving: clrive\vay location and any easc1ncnts (inust sho\v nc:-u·cst County ltoacl and be easily readable). >-O\vner of record (as appears on the tax roll). >-o,vner's ntailing address, phone, fax (&cell iFapplicable). »-Subcontractor (if applica blc) \vi th contact person, ncldrcss, phone, fax & cell. >-Be prepared to sho\v your p1·011crty pins/contcrs. Quick refe1·ence guideline for new or change of use driveways: ~ Only one access per parcel (unless den1onstrated need) >-90 degree intersection \Vith County road for first 30 feet ~ 3 o/o n1axinnuu grade for first 30 feet ~ 4n thick hot asphalt/concrete apron if County road is paved. )> 300 feet visibility in both directions ~ Corrugated steel culve11 ifa road ditch is crossed (15'1 n1in, no plastic or alu1ninu1n) }> Drive\vay runoffn1ust nol reach County road! ~ Obtain pcnnit before con11nencing \vork, pay fee & sign, keep on site )> Complete the driveway within 30 days of pulling permit. DO NOT DELAY! Contact: Road & Bridge Main Office: 0298 CR 333A, (Hunter Mesa Rd), Rifle, Co 81650-Ph 625-8601. Office homs are 7:00arn to 4:00pm Monday through Friday. The Road & Bridge office \Viii issue the pennit. II can be picked up at the above address, or faxed upon receipt ofpay1nent. Pr1yn1e11t cr1n be 111ade \Vith a check or credit card. Gal'fielcl County Road & Bridge 0298 CR 333A//PO Box 426 Rifle, CO 81650 PH: 970 -625 -8601 FAX: 970-625-8627 roadandbridge@gal'field-county.com Dl'iveway Permit Application 1. Permit Owner : I ~t.JW;? J{L, ~1-C..,, 2. Mai li ng Address: I '3" 3 T l'\(1 ~fl vJA.y 62 I 3. City: Ca rbondal e 81623 D Glenwood Springs 81601 ~ New Castle 81647 D Silt 81652 D Rifle 81650 D Parachute 81635 D Other.__ ________ ___, 4. PhoneNo:l t:fW "314 _JB "f~I Fax No:.____ ____ ____, 5. County Rd. No: ._I _l 5-'--"tf__.___ ___________ _, 6. Nearest Intersection or add ress: : ~RI~~~} /Jlf,f!W/..YB:J. : 7. Distance from In t. or address: . ~ 4 _ 8. Direction from Int. or address: N lKJ E D S D W D 9~ideofroad: N D E_D s D w!XI 10. Width of driveway: 30-foot D 40-foot BJ 100 -foot D 11 . Culvert required : Yes D No BJ 12. Size of culvert required : 12 -inch D 15 -inch D 18 -inch D Other: "t-J7A. I 13 . Length of culvert required: 30-foot D 40-foot D othe1~ 14 .~or concrete pad required: Yes ~ No D 15. Size of pad: 30-foot wide X 10 -foot long X 4 inches thick: Yes D 40-foot wide X 10 -foot long X 4 -inches thick: Yes~ 100-foot wide X 20-foot long X 4 -inches thick: Yes D Other: 16. Gravel portion req uired: Yes D No IRJ 17. Length of gravel portion: 40-foot D 50-foo t D 100-foot D 18. Trees or bru s h removed for v isib ility: Yes D No~ 19. Distance and direction from driveway to be removed: I ~ 2 0. Driveway must be no more than 3 % s lope away from County ro ad . 2 1. Drive must be con st ru cted so no drainage accesses Co unty road from driveway. 22. Certified traffic control req uired: Yes D No LB 23 . Work zone signage only requ ired: Yes~ No D 24. Stop s ign requ ired at entrance to County Rd. Ye s ~ No D 25 . Inspection of driv eway will required upon completion a nd must be approved by p erson iss ui ng permit or representat ive of person issuing permit. 26. Person Requesting Permit: 27 . Person fos ui ng permit: 28 . District permit issued in: 29. Date checklist completed: O ch eek 1 ~ 30 Payment Information 0 Visa 0Mastercard Canl Number:_/_/_/ __ /_/_/ __ /_/_/ __ !_/_/_ Expiration Date:_/_ Vco cle: (last 3 or 4 numbers on back of card) ____ _ Signature Required _______________________________ _ Authorized Credit Card Signature October 7, 2013 From: Carla Westerman SourceGas 0096 County Rd. 160 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 970-928-0407 To: Chris Hale Partners III, LLC 353 Goose Lane Carbondale, CO 81623 RE: Buffalo Valley site 3637 Hwy 82, Glenwood Springs, CO Dear Chris: The above mentioned development is within the certificated service area of SourceGas. SourceGas has existing natural gas facilities located on or near the above mentioned project. At this time it appears that these existing facilities have adequate capacity to provide natural gas service to your project, subject to the tariffs, rules and regulations on file. Any upgrading of our facilities necessary to deliver adequate service to and within the development will be undertaken by SourceGas upon completion of appropriate contractual agreements and subject to necessary governmental approvals. Please contact us with any questions regarding this project, and with a timeline of when you would like to proceed with your project. Sincerely, Carla Westerman Field Coordinator fl Xcel Energy· RESPONSIBLE BY NATURE'v 09/17/2013 Partners 111 , LLC Norm Bacheldor 353 Goose Lane Carbondale, CO 81623 Subject: Service A vailabi lity Dear Mr. Bacheldor: 2538 Blichmann Avenue Grand Junction, Colorado 81505 In accordance with our tariffs filed with and approved by the Colorado Public Utilities Commi ss ion, gas and /or el ectri c facilities can b e made availabl e to serve yo ur project al 363 7 Highway 82 (Buffalo Valley Site). Upon receipt of an Application for Servic e and appropriate building plans, the cl is tribution and/or servi ce(s) will be d esig ned. Once th e design has been approved, applicable costs have b een paid and applicable contract have be e n s ig n ed and returned, th e construction work will b e schedule d. Du e to workload , material availability and desi g n complexity, des ign and construction lead tim es may vary. Please contact the Builde rs Call Line at 800-628-2121 and s ubmit your application at the earlies t opportunity to bet1er assure meeting your proposed schedule for receiv ing serv ice. 0 Gas cos t s will be calculated in conformance with our filed SERVICE L ATERAL CONNECTION AND DISTRIBUTION MAIN EXTENSION POLICY. cg] E lectric Costs for the project will be calculated in conformance with our filed SERVICE CONN EC TION AND DISTRIBUTION LINE EXTENSION POLICY. If you have any ques tions or comments, or if I can be of further assistance, please call me at th e number listed below. My normal work hours are 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through Thursday. Designer-Engineering 970.244.2695 office ti I lmon.mcschooler@xcelen e rgy.com ntu Linik'N Stronger C'onnectedm 10/08/2013 Attn: Norm Bachelder Partners Ill, LLC 353 Goose Lane Carbondale, CO 81623 Re: Buffalo Valley Qwest Corporation d/b/a Centurylink QC will provide telephone facilities to Buffalo Valley as defined by the current PUC Tariffs. Jason Sharpe Senior Field Engineer 970-384-0238 October 9, 2013 Partners Ill, LLC c/o Norm Bacheldor 353 Goose Lane Carbondale, Colorado 81623 RE: Buffalo Valley Apts Glenwood Springs, Colorado Please accept this letter as confirmation that Comcast of Colorado has the ability to provide cable service to the captioned location. The provision of service is contingent upon successful negotiations of an Agreement between the developer and Comcast Cable Communications, Inc. Should you require additional information, please contact Michael Johnson. I can be reached at (970) 930-4713. Sincerely, ~ cJ-SJJL~---- Michael Johnson Construction/Engineering Comcast Cable Communications This letter is not intended to give rise to binding obligations for either party. Any contractual relationship between the parties will be the result of formal negotiations and will only become effective upon execution of the contract by representatives of the parties authorized to enter into such agreements. During any negotiations, each party will bear its own costs and will not be responsible for any costs or expenses of the other party, unless separately agreed to in writing. December 29, 2014 Norm Bacheldor 11 Riversedge Court Basalt, CO 81621 RE: Completeness Review Buffalo Valley Apartments Limited Impact Review (File LIPA-8179) Dear Norm: Garfield County has reviewed your application materials, submitted on behalf of Partners III, LLC for a Limited Impact Review for a Multi Family Dwelling Development known as the Buffalo Valley Apartments, located at 3637 Highway 82, Glenwood Springs, CO, 81601. Our completeness review included input from the County Attorney’s Office and has noted several items that need to be addressed prior to a determination of technical completeness. In accordance with the Garfield County Land Use and Development Code, please respond to the following items: 1. The application needs to contain information adequate to demonstrate compliance with all Zone District Dimensional standards including but not limited to lot coverage, building heights, setbacks, and floor area ratio. Please include information on the proposed building heights. These are most easily shown in building elevations with the proposed height labeled. 2. The application indicates that some functions of the site will be managed. Please provide in narrative form, information about how the proposed apartment complex will be managed, including information pertaining to maintenance, rental and other site-related issues. 3. This application is similar to the previous Buffalo Valley Apartment application submitted to the County in 2013. Please provide in narrative form, a summary of how this application deviates from the previous submittal. Community Development Department Once the above information/topics are addressed the County will finalize its completeness review, request additional copies, schedule a date for a public hearing with the Board of County Commissioners, and proceed with the public notice and referral requirements. Please note that the Garfield County Land Use and Development Code requires that the technical completeness issues be resolved within 60-days of the date of this letter, otherwise the application will be deemed withdrawn unless a request for extension is submitted and approved. Please feel free to contact me any questions on the completeness topics noted above. We look forward to scheduling your public hearing as soon as possible. Respectfully, Tamra Allen, AICP Planning Manager PARTNERS III, LLC     From:    Norm  Bacheldor   Managing  Member   normbacheldor@gmail.com   11  Riversedge  Ct.   Basalt,  CO    81621       To:      Tamra  Allen    Planning  Manager    Community  Development    Garfield  County       Response  do  information  request  in:      Completeness  Review  Buffalo  Valley   Apartments  Limited  Impact  Review  (File  LIPA-­‐8179)     Italicized items 1,2,3 are requests from Tamra Allen.  Item  1.          “The  application  needs  to  contain  information  adequate  to  demonstrate   compliance  with  all  Zone  District  Dimensional  standards  including  but  not  limited  to  lot   coverage,  building  heights,  setbacks,  and  floor  area  ratio.  Please  include  information  on   the  proposed  building  heights.  These  are  most  easily  shown  in  building  elevations  with  the   proposed  height  labeled.”     The  lot  coverage,  setbacks  and  floor  area  ratio  is  included  in  the  application.       Buffalo  Valley  Apartments  application  is  compliant  in  all  these  areas.    The  only   waiver  we  are  requesting  is  a  slight  waiver  from  the  parking  standards.         We  have  included  the  building  height  cross  section  for  further  clarity   The  cross  section  below  shows  the  new  building  elevations  from  the  mean  ground   elevation  of  building  One.    Building  one  is  closest  to  Hwy  82,  therefore  the  upper   most  of  the  two  buildings.      Building  2  is  very  comfortably  below  the  40  ft  elevation   maximum  and  therefore  it  was  not  shown.          BUILDING  ONE  HEIGHT  CROSS  SECTION.     The  new  building  height  as  measured  from  the  midpoint  of  the  roof  is  36’-­‐4.5”.      The   previous  site  plan  had  a  building  height  of  38’.                   Item  2.  “The  application  indicates  that  some  functions  of  the  site  will  be  managed.     Please  provide  in  narrative  form,  information  about  how  the  proposed  apartment   complex  will  be  managed,  including  information  pertaining  to  maintenance,  rental   and  other  site-­‐related  issues.”     There  will  be  a  Community  Manager  assigned  to  the  Buffalo  Valley  Apartments.     That  manager  and  staff  will  be  responsible  for  leasing,  ensure  that  the  site  will  be   clean  and  well  maintained.    He  or  she  is  fully  accountable  for  the  day-­‐to-­‐day   property  operations  overseeing  and  enhancing  the  value  of  the  property.    The   manager  must  embrace  the  ideals  of  community-­‐building  and  servant  leadership.     The  management  of  parking  and  compliance  with  parking  policy  is  also  included  in   the  duties.         Property  management  standards  will  be  compliant  with  industry  standards  and   HUD  requirements  for  fair  housing  standards.    Additional  focuses  of  continuing   education  are  Occupancy  Training,  Fair  Housing  Compliance,  Real  Estate  licensing   as  it  applies,  Basic  Property  Management  Best  Practices.       The  Community  Manager  may  reside  at  the  Buffalo  Valley  apartments  or  may  live  off   premise  and  maintain  an  office  at  the  site.    The  office  will  be  a  bedroom,  partitioned   off,  with  an  outside  entrance.         The  conduct  of  the  Community  Manager  is  required  to  be  professional  at  all  times.     Core  values  and  principles  are:       1 Fair  and  Honest   2 Respectful  and  win-­‐win  focused   3 Competent   4 Professional   5 Drive  and  tenacity         Item  3.    “This  application  is  similar  to  the  previous  Buffalo  Valley  Apartment   application  submitted  to  the  County  in  2013.    Please  provide  in  narrative  form,  a   summary  of  how  this  application  deviates  from  the  previous  submittal.  “     The  Buffalo  Valley  application  made  changes  to  address  the  areas  of  concern   expressed  by  the  public  and  GarCo  Board  of  County  Commissioners.         We  significantly  increased  the  number  of  parking  stalls.    The  parking  was  increased   by  reconfiguring  the  site  and  realignment  of  the  buildings.      Our  previous  application   had  117  parking  stalls  and  the  new  application  has  128.    The  effect  of  the  11   additional  stalls  is  further  enhanced  because  we  reduced  the  number  of  apartments   by  3  (now  54  units).    The  parking  ratio  has  significantly  increased  from  2.05  parking   stalls  per  dwelling,  to  2.37  parking  stalls  per  dwelling.           The  new  application  has  reduced  the  number  of  units  from  57  to  54  apartments.         We  have  relocated  the  designated  area  for  a  playground  to  a  better  location.    The   new  location  is  in  the  back  right  portion  of  the  property.    It  is  in  a  quiet  area  and  is   shaded  by  some  deciduous  trees,  thus  it  will  be  more  enjoyable  during  the  summer.         The  new  application  has  added  the  infrastructure  for  3  electric  charging  stations.     America  is  trending  to  an  increasing  percentage  of  electric  cars.    The  commuting   range  for  electric  vehicles  is  about  80  miles  up  to  300  miles.    Electric  vehicles  should   be  ideal  for  valley  wide  transportation  and  we  want  to  encourage  it  by  providing   charging  stations  for  tenants  of  Buffalo  Valley.                 January 16, 2015 Norm Bacheldor 11 Riversedge Court Basalt, CO 81621 RE: Buffalo Valley Apartments Limited Impact Review (File LIPA-8179) Dear Norm: Garfield County Community Development Department has reviewed your application and supplemental materials, submitted on behalf of Partners III LLC for a Limited Impact Review for a Multi Family Dwelling Development known as the Buffalo Valley Apartments, located at 3637 Highway 82, Glenwood Springs, CO, 81601. The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the application has been deemed technically complete. Please understand that a determination of technical completeness by this office shall not be deemed a recommendation of approval, finding of adequacy of the application, or a finding of general compliance with any goal or objective of the Garfield Land Use and Development Code or the Comprehensive Plan 2030. The application will be reviewed by Staff and a staff report will be generated and sent to you prior to a scheduled hearing. The Board of County Commissioners will discuss and review the application at a public hearing which has been scheduled for Monday, March 2, 2015 at 1:00 p.m. The public hearing will be held in the County Commissioners Meeting Room, Garfield County Plaza Building, 108 8th Street, Glenwood Springs, Colorado, 81601. The Board of County Commissioner’s public hearing will be duly noticed and advertised in accordance with the Land Use and Development Code. The Applicant shall be solely responsible for the publication, property posting, and mailing of all notices. The Applicant shall present proof of publication, mailing, and posting at or before the meeting. The item cannot be heard if correct noticing requirements have not been met. The standard notice procedures for the public hearing shall be given as follows pursuant to Table 4-102 and Section 4-101 (E) of the Land Use and Development Code. Notice shall be provided as follows: a. Notice by Publication. At least 30 but not more than 60 calendar days prior to the date of a scheduled Public Hearing before the Planning Commission or BOCC, the Applicant shall publish notice of a Public Hearing in a legal publication, unless otherwise specified by State law. (Note: The Rifle Telegram is the newspaper for publication of legal notices and publishes only weekly on Thursdays) b. Written/Mailed Notice to Adjacent Property Owners and Mineral Owners. (1) Written notices shall be provided at least 30 but not more than 60 calendar days prior to the date of a scheduled Public Hearing. (2) The Applicant shall send written notice by certified mail return receipt requested to all Mineral Owners. The Applicant shall send written notice by certified mail to all Adjacent Property Owners. (3) Written notice shall be provided to the owners of record of all adjacent property within a 200-foot radius of the subject parcel as shown in the office of the County Clerk and Recorder or Assessor at least 15 calendar days prior to sending notice. (4) Written notice shall also be provided to owners of mineral interests in the subject property (other than construction materials as defined in C.R.S. § 34- 32.5-1, in accordance with C.R.S. § 24-65.5-101, et seq., as such owners can be identified through records in the office of the Clerk and Recorder or Assessor, or through other means. c. Posting of Notice. At least 30 and not more than 60 calendar days prior to the date of a scheduled Public Hearing, the Applicant shall post a notice of the Public Hearing on the property. Posted notice shall consist of at least 1 sign facing each adjacent road right-of- way, and located so as to be fully visible from the road right-of-way generally used by the public. The notice signs shall be provided to the Applicant by the Community Development Department. Attached to this email correspondence is a suggested public notice form. Please review the required information and insert additional details or make corrections, as necessary. A poster to accomplish the posting portion of the notice requirements is available for you to pick-up as soon as possible in our office. These posting and public notice documents are provided as a courtesy and it is your responsibility to verify that all information provided in these documents is correct. It is the obligation of the Applicant to correct any deficiencies such that proper notice in form and substance can be established. All notice including publication, posting and mailing must be completed by January 31, 2015. Submission dates do change for the publication in the Rifle Telegram but the deadline is generally Friday at noon prior to publication the following Thursday. In order to meet this general publication deadline your request must be submitted to the Rifle Telegram no later than noon on Friday, January 22nd. The mailing must be by certified return receipt requested and the receipts must be provided to the County Prior to the hearing. Providing photographic evidence of the posting on the property is also recommended. In addition, you will need to submit 12 extra copies (6 CDs and 6 hard copies) by no later than Wednesday, January 22, 2015 for referral agencies and the Board of County Commissioners. Please contact this office if you have any questions regarding the processing of your application, the hearing schedule or public notice requirements. Respectfully, Tamra Allen, Planning Manager 2 PUBLIC NOTICE TAKE NOTICE that Partners III, LLC has applied to the Board of County Commissioners, Garfield County, State of Colorado, to request approval of a Land Use Change Permit, Limited Impact Review (File No. LIPA-8179) for a Multi-Unit Dwelling, known as the Buffalo Valley Apartments. The site is located within the County of Garfield, State of Colorado, to-wit: Legal Description (See Attached Exhibit “A” ) Practical Description: The property is located approximately 1 mile south of the City of Glenwood Springs, located at 3637 Highway 82. The site is 2.2 acres in size and is accessed off of County Road 154. It is located in Section 27, T6S, R89W on property known by Assessor’s Parcel No. 2185-271-00-029. Request: The application proposes a residential development on the site of 54 apartment units in two buildings. The project will involve removal of existing improvements including a restaurant and motel/lodge units. Site improvements include parking areas, drainage, access improvements, and landscaping. The buildings will be served by central water and sewer. The property is zoned Commercial Limited (C/L). All persons affected by the proposed use are invited to appear and state their views, protests or support. If you cannot appear personally at such hearing, then you are urged to state your views by letter, as the Board of County Commissioners will give consideration to the comments of surrounding property owners, and others affected, in deciding whether to approve, approve with conditions or deny the request for a Land Use Change Permit. The application may be reviewed at the office of the Community Development Department located at 108 8th Street, Suite 401, Garfield County Plaza Building, Glenwood Springs, Colorado, 81601, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. A public hearing on the application has been scheduled for Monday, March 2, 2015 at 1:00 PM and will be held in the County Commissioners Meeting Room, Garfield County Plaza Building, 108 8th Street, Glenwood Springs, Colorado, 81601. Community Development Department Garfield County EXHIBIT “A” LEGAL DESCRIPTION - Vicinity Map Buffalo Valley MOUNTl\IN CROSS ~NGIN~~RING, INC. Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design 1121112 Grand Avan• Glenwood 8Plln111. co 111G1 1111lml.145.55441Kt711.1145.55511-.mo1.ualllllmw...,1.- Mii 10/10/20131 1" • liOOO' Vicinity Map Buffalo Valley MOUNTl'\IN CROSS !111111~---4\ EN61NEERIN6, INC. Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design 828 112 Grand Avenue Glenwood Sprlnga, CO 81101 pll 17D.NS.9544t'x8T0.141.SSSll www.mountlln~.com -°"" ..... _,.. ~ - Adjacent Uses 300' Radius Buffalo Valley MOUNT/\IN CR055 ~ t:N61Nt:t:RIN6, INC. Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design 828 112 Grand Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81801 ph 970.845.5544 fx 970.945.5558 www.mountaineroM4ng.eom                                                                                                                                                                     p h 9 7 0 . 9 4 5 . 5 5 4 4 f x 9 7 0 . 9 4 5 . 5 5 5 8 w w w . m o u n t a i n c r o s s - e n g . c o m 8 2 6 1 / 2 G r a n d A v e n u e G l e n w o o d S p r i n g s , C O 8 1 6 0 1 E N G I N E E R I N G , I N C . C i v i l a n d E n v i r o n m e n t a l C o n s u l t i n g a n d D e s i g n M O U N T A I N C R O S S                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    A L T E R N A T E L E A D / L A G P U M P T U R N O N L A G P U M P " F I R S T P U M P O N " F L O A T S W I T C H : T U R N L E A D P U M P O N T U R N S O N D O E S N O T T U R N O N " P U M P O F F " F L O A T S W I T C H : T U R N P U M P ( S ) O F F T U R N O N A L A R M D O E S N O T T U R N O F F " H I G H L E V E L A L A R M " F L O A T S W I T C H :                              " S E C O N D P U M P O N " F L O A T S W I T C H : T U R N L A G P U M P O N T U R N S O N D O E S N O T T U R N O N                p h 9 7 0 . 9 4 5 . 5 5 4 4 f x 9 7 0 . 9 4 5 . 5 5 5 8 w w w . m o u n t a i n c r o s s - e n g . c o m 8 2 6 1 / 2 G r a n d A v e n u e G l e n w o o d S p r i n g s , C O 8 1 6 0 1 E N G I N E E R I N G , I N C . C i v i l a n d E n v i r o n m e n t a l C o n s u l t i n g a n d D e s i g n M O U N T A I N C R O S S                                                                 K n o w w h a t ' s R                                                                                                                                                                      p h 9 7 0 . 9 4 5 . 5 5 4 4 f x 9 7 0 . 9 4 5 . 5 5 5 8 w w w . m o u n t a i n c r o s s - e n g . c o m 8 2 6 1 / 2 G r a n d A v e n u e G l e n w o o d S p r i n g s , C O 8 1 6 0 1 E N G I N E E R I N G , I N C . C i v i l a n d E n v i r o n m e n t a l C o n s u l t i n g a n d D e s i g n M O U N T A I N C R O S S                                                                 K n o w w h a t ' s R                                                                                                                                                                                    p h 9 7 0 . 9 4 5 . 5 5 4 4 f x 9 7 0 . 9 4 5 . 5 5 5 8 w w w . m o u n t a i n c r o s s - e n g . c o m 8 2 6 1 / 2 G r a n d A v e n u e G l e n w o o d S p r i n g s , C O 8 1 6 0 1 E N G I N E E R I N G , I N C . C i v i l a n d E n v i r o n m e n t a l C o n s u l t i n g a n d D e s i g n M O U N T A I N C R O S S                                                                                                                   K n o w w h a t ' s R                                                                                                                                                                             p h 9 7 0 . 9 4 5 . 5 5 4 4 f x 9 7 0 . 9 4 5 . 5 5 5 8 w w w . m o u n t a i n c r o s s - e n g . c o m 8 2 6 1 / 2 G r a n d A v e n u e G l e n w o o d S p r i n g s , C O 8 1 6 0 1 E N G I N E E R I N G , I N C . C i v i l a n d E n v i r o n m e n t a l C o n s u l t i n g a n d D e s i g n M O U N T A I N C R O S S                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  p h 9 7 0 . 9 4 5 . 5 5 4 4 f x 9 7 0 . 9 4 5 . 5 5 5 8 w w w . m o u n t a i n c r o s s - e n g . c o m 8 2 6 1 / 2 G r a n d A v e n u e G l e n w o o d S p r i n g s , C O 8 1 6 0 1 E N G I N E E R I N G , I N C . C i v i l a n d E n v i r o n m e n t a l C o n s u l t i n g a n d D e s i g n M O U N T A I N C R O S S                                                    / I I I I - # DATE ISSUED FOR 06.24.13 C 1 a i .... .,.... llmlllllllTlll: 8 ~ z ~ c I LIGHTING & TRASH LOCATIONS PLAN -· -- 5 8 6 0 5 8 7 0 As h , M a r s h a l l Fraxinus pennsylvanica ‘Marshall'18 2" Cr a b a p p l e , S e n t i n e l Malus 'Sentinel'4 2" Is a n t i D o g w o o d Cornus sericea 'Isanti'29 5 Gal.Legend Co m m o n N a m e Botanical Name Qty Size Ri v e n d e l l ' s N a t i v e L o w - G r o w G r a s s M i x Ke n t u c k y B l u e g r a s s L a w n 11,600 s.f.8,772 s.f. Ri v e n d e l l ' s N a t i v e L o w G r o w M i x 20 % B l u e F e s c u e 15 % B l u e G r a m a 1 5 % R o c k y M o u n t a i n F e s c u e 1 5 % C a n b y B l u e g r a s s 1 0 % I n d i a n R i c e g r a s s 1 0 % S a n d b e r g B l u e 1 0 % S i d e o a t s G r a m a 2 . 5 % B o t t l e b r u s h S q u i r r e l t a i l 2 . 5 % A l p i n e B l u e g r a s s S e e d i n g R a t e : 1 / 2 l b s . p e r 1 , 0 0 0 s . f . la w n la w n la w n la w n Ex i s t i n g v e g e t a t i o n t o r e m a i n ex i s t i n g v e g e t a i o n t o r e m a i n Lo w - G r o w N a t i v e G r a s s e s Ex i s t i n g v e g e t a t i o n t o re m a i n Raw water to be used for irrigatioin entering site from N.E. cornerProject signage within county r.o.w. .final location t.b.d. in compliance with county sign and lighting code e x is t in g 8 " c o t t o n w o o d ex i s t i n g 7 " c o t t o n w o o d to b e r e m o v e d ex i s t i n g 8 " m u l t i - t r u n k c o t t o n w o o d to b e r e m o v e d ex i s t i n g 9 " s p r u c e to b e r e m o v e d R iv e n d e l l ' s N a t i v e L o w G r o w S e e d M i x R iv e n d e l l ' s N a t i v e L o w G r o w S e e d M i x R iv e n d e l l ' s N a t i v e L o w G r o w S e e d M i x R iv e n d e l l ' s N a t i v e L o w G r o w S e e d M i x Landscape Plan:Buffalo Valley Apartments 3 6 3 7 H w y . 8 2 G l e n w o o d S p r ings, C O 8 1 6 0 1 Scale:1 " = 2 0 ' 9 /1 7 /2 0 1 3 Revision #:D a t e :Landscape Design by:P .O . B o x 7 4 0 B a s a l t , C O 8 1621 (9 7 0 )9 2 7 -5 0 2 5 Lo w - G r o w N a t i v e G r a s s e s Lo w - G r o w N a t i v e G r a s s e s BUILDING 2-TYPIGAL UPPER LEVEL PLAN BUILDING 1-TYPIGAL UPPER LEVEL PLAN O' 10' .20' 80' 40' 50' ~ 5TORA6E: UNITS + 2 1JNOEF. LANOINe BUILDING 2-LOV'iER LEVEL PLAN O' 10' .20' 90' 40' 50' O' 10' .20' 80' 40' 50' 51 5TORA6E: UNITS BUILDING 1-LOV'iER LEVEL PLAN O' 10' .20' 80' 40' 50' -LIVABLE SQJJARE FOOTAGE SEE CHART FOR SQUARE FOOT AGE CALCULATIONS -JJTILITY SQUARE FOOTAGE HALL, BALCONY AND STORAGE SQUARE FOOT AGE '-""' ...... :::z:: LLI ::E: ...... .::ii::: <C c.... <C >-LLI ___. ___. <C >- 0 ___. <C u... u... :::::> CQ Seal: # DATE ISSUED FOR 06.24.13 Construction Issue Date: Drawing Title: 0 u ui C!l z a:: 0.. en Cl 0 0 :s: z w ...J C!l FLOOR AREA CALCULATION Sheet#. copyright 2010 Z-Gro~ Archit9cts Stormwater Management Plan for: Buffalo Valley, GARFIELD COUNTY, CO Prepared for: Partners III, LLC 353 Goose Lane Carbondale, CO 81623 Prepared by: Date: November, 2014 MOUNT/ilN CROSS ENGINEERING. INC. Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design 826112 Grand Avenue Glenwood Springs, co 81601 ph 970.945.5544 fx 970.945.5558 www.mountaincross-eng.com MOUNTAIN CROSS ENGINEERING, INC. Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design 826 Y:i Grand Avenue, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 P: 970.945.5544 F: 970.945.5558 www.mountaincross-eng.com Table of Contents Introduction .........................•.............................................................................................................................. I SWMP Administrator ....................................................................................................................................... 2 Sequence of Major Activities ............................................................................................................................ 2 Identification of Potential Pollution Sources .............................................................•.................................... 3 Allowable Sources of Non-Stormwater Discharge ........................................................................................ 3 Storm Water Management Plan ...................................................................................................................... 4 Best Management Practices (BMPs) .......................................................................................................... 4 Erosion, Drainage, and Sediment Control BMPs ....................................................................................... 4 Non-Stormwater Control BMPs ................................................................................................................. 5 Phased BMP Implementation .......................................................................................................................... 5 Materials Delivery and Storage ........................................................................................................................ 5 Vehicle Cleaning, Fueling, Maintenance, and Tracking Controls ............................................................... 6 Waste Management and Disposal .................................................................................................................... 6 Dewatering ............................................................................................................................................... 6 Inspection aud Maintenance ............................................................................................................................. 7 Inspection Schedule ..................................................................................................................................... 7 Areas for Inspection .................................................................................................................................... 7 Maintenance ................................................................................................................................................. 8 Documenting Inspections and Maintenance ............................................................................................... 8 SWMP Plan Revisions ....................................................................................................................................... 8 Inactivation Notice ................................•............................................................................................................ 9 Appendix A ..................................................................................................... General Permit Application Appendix B ............................................................................................................................... SWMP Plan Appendix C .......................................................................................................................•...•.. Details Sheet Appendix D ............................................................................. Inspection and Maintenance Report Form Appendix E ..................................................................................................................... Inactivation Form MOUNTAIN CROSS ENGINEERING. INC. Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design 826 Yi Grand Avenue, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 P: 970.945.5544 F: 970.945.5558 \VW\v.mountaincross-cng.con1 Introduction Stormwater Management Plan Buffalo Valley November, 2014 This Stmmwater Management Plan (SWMP) is intended to satisfy the requirements of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) pe1mit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activities (Permit). This is the SWMP that was prepared to fulfill the requirements of the application to CDP HE; a copy of the application is attached in the appendices. The objectives of this SWMP are: 1. Identify potential sources of pollution which may reasonably be expected to affect the quality of stormwater discharges associated with construction activity within the project site. 2. Explain the methods that will be used to reduce the pollutants in stormwater discharges of construction activity on the project site using Best Management Practices (BMPs). 3. Ensure that BMPs are selected, installed, and maintained using good enginee1ing practices. 4. Maintain compliance with the terms and conditions of the Permit. 5. Serve as a reference for the anticipated stormwater management expected on the project site for the owner, contractors, architects, engineers, and others involved with the construction of the project. Site Description The project is a redevelopment of the Buffalo Valley site in Garfield County, Colorado. The existing site has a restaurant and motel with parking and infrastructure and is located at 3637 Highway 82. Proposed plans are the construction of site constrnction to contain two buildings that have a total of 54 apartments. The project elevation is approximately 5880 feet above sea level and located at Latitude 39°30' 19. l" Nmth and Longitude 107°18'24. l" West. The prope1ty area is approximately 2.204± acres and the approximate area of disturbance due to construction activities is approximately 2.01± acres. Stmm water will drain into the Roaring Fork River through a series of ditches and culverts approximately 250' to the east. The soils survey performed by the USDA identifies that most of the area to be disturbed is comprised of Atencio-Azeltine Complex, 1 % to 12% and hydrologic group "B". Estimated existing SCS runoff curve number before construction activities is 89.37 and estimated SCS runoff curve number after construction is completed is estimated to be 94.5. The existing vegetative ground cover of the area to be disturbed is a mixture of mature native vegetation or existing grasses most of the site is covered with impervious paving and building roofs. The receiving waters of the project will drain into the Roaring Fork River approximately 250 feet to the east through a series of ditches and culve1ts. A copy of the SWMP Plan Maps are attached in the appendices. MOUNTAIN CROSS ENGINEERING, INC. Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design 826 Y2 Grand Avenue, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 P: 970.945.5544 F: 970.945.5558 \.VWw.mountaincross-eng.com Page I of 9 SWMP Administrator Stormwater Management Plan Buffalo Valley November, 2014 The SWMP Administrator is responsible for the process of developing, implementing, maintaining, and revising this SWMP as well as serving as the comprehensive point of contact for all aspects of the facility's SWMP. For this Permit, the responsibility of the SWMP Administrator must be shared. The entity responsible for the developing the SWMP is the Preparer described below. The entity responsible for the implementation, revisions, and maintenance of the SWMP will be the Manager who shall also be the general contractor of the construction project. The contact information for the Manager shall be completed below by the project Owner once the general contractor is dete1mined. The Point of Contact duties will be divided to either the Preparer or the Manager depending on the reason or need for the contact. Preparer: Manager: Mountain Cross Engineering, Inc. Chris Hale, PE 826 Yi Grand Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Ph: 970.945.5544 Fx: 970.945.5558 Company: ______________ _ Contact: ---------------- Address: ----------------City, State, Zip: ____________ _ Ph: ------------------ F x: ------------------ Sequence of Major Activities The major construction activities are generally described below and are generally completed in the following sequence: 1. Survey: Survey infmmation is located for project control, limits of disturbance, excavation, and/or cut and fill staking. 2. Installation of Temporary BMPs: Temporary sediment controls are placed, such as straw bales and silt fence and/or other as necessary. 3. Vegetation Clearing: Vegetation is cleared/grubbed and disposed of in an appropriate manner and/or chipped to create mulch for soil stabilization. 4. Diversions: Diversions are placed as necessary to prevent concentrated flows from discharging onto the area of disturbance. Diversions are culverts, ditches, etc that are used to convey site water to discharge points. Diversions likely require temporary BMPs such as silt fence or straw bales along the length of the diversion to trap sediment or diversions may direct flows to detention or retention BMPs such as check dams or sediment traps. 5. Stripping Topsoil: All topsoil is removed from areas that are to be excavated, filled, covered with hardscape, or turned into stabilized, temporary surfaces. Topsoil is to be stockpiled in areas sufficient to accommodate the quantities of topsoil being generated. 6. Demolition and Major Grading: Existing strnctures, appmienances, and hardscape are demolished and removed. Trash and debris is salvaged as much as practical and the rest is MOUNTAIN CROSS ENGINEERING, INC. Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design 826 Yi Grand Avenue, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 P: 970.945.5544 F: 970.945.5558 www.mountaincross-eng.com Page 2 of 9 Stormwater Manage1ncnt Plan Buffalo Valley November, 2014 disposed of in an appropriate and approved manner. The project site is graded and areas of cut and fill are removed and placed to provide rough surface elevation of planned project elevations, temporary construction staging, construction vehicle traffic, and/or building sites. 7. Gravel Surfacing: Areas used for access, parking, or materials staging is gravel surfaced. 8. Foundation Construction: Foundations of the buildings are constructed. 9. Building Construction: Buildings, hardscape, utilities etc. are constructed. 10. Reclamation of Unused Areas: Areas not needed for facilities, roads, parking, or materials staging are reclaimed. Salvaged topsoil is spread and revegetated. 11. Finished Grading: Finished grading is perfmmed to create the landscape features and the proposed project topography. Irrigation systems are installed. 12. Cleanup: All construction-related deb1is is removed and disposed of in an appropriate and approved manner and disposal facility. 13. Topsoil Placement: Stockpiled topsoil is evenly spread over the finished grades. 14. Vegetation: Landscaping is installed per the landscape plan and any remaining disturbed areas are revegetated with an approved native grass seed mix. 15. Project Stabilization: Revegetation progress is reviewed and project erosion stability is evaluated. Additional measures, revegetation, and/or stabilization are implemented until the project site reaches 70% vegetative cover. At that time the SWMP Manager removes all temporary erosion and sediment control measures and the project no longer requires coverage under the Permit. The Manager submits an Inactivation Notice that closes the Pe1mit with CDPHE. Identification of Potential Pollution Sources Potential sources of pollution are associated with all phases of the project from the start of construction though project stabilization. The most common source of pollution during construction is sediment resulting from the erosion of recently cleared and/or graded areas, such as cut/fill slopes and soil stockpiles. However, there may be many locations of potential pollution sources at any given time. The following items are potential sources of pollutants: • Disturbed and stockpiled soils. • Vehicles tracking mud. • Storage of materials (construction materials, aggregates, fuel, chemicals, etc.) • Vehicle and equipment maintenance and fueling. • Site maintenance where fertilizers, pesticides, detergents, paints, etc. are used. • Construction material waste piles, dumpsters, etc. • Asphalt and concrete construction including truck and equipment washing • Employee trash and biological waste. Allowable Sources of Non-Stormwater Discharge Allowable sources of non-stmmwater discharges include the following: Uncontaminated Springs: There may be seasonal springs within the project area. MOUNTAIN CROSS ENGINEERING, INC. Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design 826 Vi Grand Avenue, Glenwood Spring<;, CO 8160 I P: 970.945.5544 F: 970.945.5558 www.mountaincross-eng.com Page 3 of 9 Stormwater Management Plan Buffalo Valley November, 2014 Landscape Irrigation: There are several locations where pipelines and ditches cross through the project for inigation of neighboring properties. Construction Dewatering: Construction dewatering may be necessary. Concrete Washout: Concrete washout may be necessary. Emergency Fire Fighting Water: Water used to put out any type of fire. No other discharges are allowed under the Pem1it. Any other non-stmmwater discharge would require a different permit. Storm Water Management Plan A copy of the SWMP Plan Maps are attached in the appendices. Existing and proposed contours, drainage patterns, site features, property lines, and proposed construction are included on the SWMP. Locations of temporary and permanent BMPs are also shown. Details of correct BMP installation are included on the details sheet that is also attached in the appendices. Best Management Practices (BMPs) A key component of this SWMP is employing BMPs to improve stormwater quality. The construction site will be continually evaluated to determine what BMPs are suitable and practical at different locations. BMPs will be employed in different combinations during construction activities and phases as conditions warrant. Erosion, Drainage, and Sediment Control BMPs The primary method for controlling erosion, drainage, and sediment transport consists of minimizing initial disturbance of the soil and ground cover. However, many other methods can also be used. All stormwater-related BMPs will fall under at least one of the following three types of controls: • Erosion Control. Any source control practice that protects the soil surface and/or strengthens the subsurface in order to prevent soil particles from being detached by rain or wind, thus controlling raindrop, sheet, and/or rill erosion. • Drainage Control. Any practice that reduces or eliminates gully, channel, and stream erosion by minimizing, diverting, or conveying runoff. • Sediment Control. Any practice that traps the soil particles after they have been detached and moved by wind or water. Sediment control measures are usually passive systems that rely on filtering or settling the particles out of the water or wind that is transporting them prior to leaving the site boundary. BMPs may also be classified as either structural or non-structural controls: • Structural Control. Handles sediment-laden stormwater prior to it leaving each site. Structural BMPs are used to delay, capture, store, treat, or infiltrate stormwater runoff. Some examples of structural BMPs include sediment traps, sn·aw bales, and silt fences. • Non-structural Control. Reduces the generation and accumulation of pollutants, including sediment, from a construction site by stabilizing disturbed areas and preventing the occurrence of erosion. Some examples of non-structural BMPs include revegetation, mulching, and surface roughening. These types of stabilization techniques are not only the most effective MOUNTAIN CROSS ENGINEERING, INC. Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design 826 Yi Grand Avenue, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 P: 970.945.5544 F: 970.945.5558 \VWw.mountaincross-eng.com Page 4 of 9 Stormwater Management Plan Buffalo Valley November, 2014 method for reducing soil loss, but they are also nmmally the most cost effective because they have low construction costs, are easy to construct, and have low maintenance requirements. The SWMP, in the appendices, shows the proposed locations of all erosion, drainage, and sediment control BMPs (both structural and non-structural). Construction details are shown on the detail sheet, also in the appendices. Maintenance infmmation for BMPs is provided later in this document. Non-Stormwater Control BMPs Non-stmmwater controls include general site and materials management measures that indirectly aid in the minimization of water pollution. Types of pollution sources include, but are not limited to, litter, oil and grease, hazardous material spills, and sediment. Phased BMP Implementation Various BMPs will be implemented and maintained during different phases of the project: • Preconstruction. Install BMPs around site perimeter, conveyances, and at discharge points such as silt fencing, straw balls, ditches, sediment basins, etc. • Construction. Install BMPs to control erosion and sedimentation such as fencing around stockpiles, vehicle tracking pads, construction of roadside channels, culverts, riprap, etc. • Interim Reclamation. Install BMPs of surface roughening, mulching, erosion control blankets, seeding of all disturbed areas, etc. Also install pe1manent BMPs such as detention ponds, spill structures, and hardscape. • Final Reclamation. Remove all temporary BMPs, cleaning of any sediment from pem1anent BMPs, reseeding of areas not properly vegetated, installation of additional BMPs deemed necessary, etc. Final reclamation also involves the continued maintenance and inspection of all BMPs until final stabilization occurs. Final stabilization occurs once all surfaces are built on, hardscaped, or landscaped to a vegetative cover with a density of 70 percent of pre-disturbance levels. Materials Delivery and Storage The good housekeeping practices listed below shall be followed on site during construction and operation: • All materials stored on site will be stored in a neat and orderly marmer in appropriate locations and, where possible, under a roof or other enclosure, to avoid contact with stormwater. • Products will be kept in their original containers with the original manufacturer's label. • Whenever possible, all of the product will be used before disposing of the container. • Manufacturer's reconnnendations for proper use and disposal will be followed. Material Handling and Spill Prevention In addition to the material storage practices listed above that will be used to reduce the risk of spills or other accidental exposure of materials and substance, clean-up any spills with the use of spill kits and absorbents, and ensure that materials and wash water can not discharge from the site, and never into a stream. MOUNTAIN CROSS ENGINEERING. INC. Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design 826 Y. Grand Avenue, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 P: 970.945.5544 F: 970.945.5558 www.n1ountaincross-eng.con1 Page 5 of 9 Stormwatcr Management Plan Buffalo Valley November, 2014 Vehicle Cleaning, Fueling, Maintenance, and Tracking Controls In the event that maintenance is required on construction equipment, all fluids transfeJTed must utilize secondary containment and drip pans to capture materials so that they may be properly disposed of or recycled. Dispose or recycle fluids in compliance with local, state, and federal guidelines. While on site, constrnction equipment and employee vehicles should be parked, serviced, and/or fueled within designated areas. Periodically inspect constrnction equipment for lealrn. Vehicle tracking of sediments onto public roads is not allowed. Construction equipment should remain on site throughout earth-moving activities and reduce mobilization operations as much as possible. All other vehicles are to remain in stabilized areas and should not enter disturbed areas until that area is revegetated, hardscaped, or otherwise stable. Vehicle tracking pads shall be utilized to minimize sediment tracking. Waste Management and Disposal A few of the waste management procedures that shall be followed include the following: • Proper bins for trash collection and disposal in compliance with local, state, and federal guidelines. • The contractor will provide pmiable toilets. Sanitmy waste will be regularly collected by a licensed sanitary waste management contractor and disposed of in an approved manner. • In the event that sediment is inadve1iently transpmied off the constrnction site, it will be properly cleaned up. Dewatering Dewatering refers to the mechanical removal of water from an excavation or other structure. Both groundwater and stormwater may require dewatering during constrnction. Groundwater Dcwatering Non-stormwater construction dewatering of groundwater can NOT be discharged to surface waters or to storm sewer systems without separate permit coverage. However, discharges to the ground of water from constrnction dewatering activities may be authorized, provided that: 1. The source is groundwater and/or groundwater combined with stmmwater that does not contain pollutants exceeding the State standards; 2. l11e source is identified in the SWMP; 3. BMPs are included in the SWMP; and 4. These discharges do not leave the site as surface runoff or to surface waters. Dewatering shall be pumped or dive1ied to a sediment control BMP prior to discharge to the ground. Locations of groundwater dewatering, as well as any BMPs utilized, shall be noted on the Site Plan as soon as such dewatering occurs. Stormwater Dewatering The discharge to surface water of pumped stmmwater from excavations, ponds, silt traps, or the like, is allowed, as long as the dewatering activity and associated BMPs are identified in the SWMP and BMPs are implemented. Stormwater that collects in open depressions or trenches MOUNTAIN CROSS ENGINEERING, INC. Civil and Environmenbtl Consulting and Design 826 Y. Grand Avenue, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 P: 970.945.5544 F: 970.945.5558 vAvw.mountaincross-eng.com Page 6 of 9 Stormwater Management Plan Buffalo Valley November, 2014 dming construction activities may be dewatered into an adjacent BMP, such as a pond or a check dam. Inspection and Maintenance The Contractor will inspect and maintain all BMPs that are constructed in accordance with governing specifications and good engineering practices. All employees on the site shall be trained as to the proper location, installation, and use of the BMPs so that anyone can recognize deficient installations, remedy the situation, and minimize the potential off site transpmi of sediment and other pollutants. Inspection Schedule A first inspection will occur upon installation of any BMPs. An inspection is required as soon as the first soil disturbance occurs at the site. Dming Construction: The minimtnn inspection schedule during construction activities must be at intervals no greater than 14 calendar days or within 24 hours of any precipitation event or any snowmelt that causes surface erosion. If construction effmis are halted, post-storm event inspections must be conducted prior to restaiiing construction activities at the site, but no later than 72 hours following a stonn event. Routine inspections still must be conducted at least every 14 calendar days. During Interim or Final Reclamation: The m1mmum inspection schedule during reclamation activities must be at intervals no greater than monthly. This includes a thorough inspection of the site stormwater management system. This will continue until final stabilization occurs. During Winter Condition: Inspections are not required where construction activities are halted due to snow cover over the entire site for an extended period. But if melting snow poses a risk of soil erosion then the minimum inspection schedule must be at intervals no greater than 14 calendar days or within 24 hours of any precipitation event that causes surface erosion. Significant potential for erosion and BMP failure exists when melting begins. Areas for Inspection Inspections will be conducted by qualified personnel on the following areas: • All vegetated areas tn1til 70% of pre-disturbance vegetation levels are reached. • All BMP measures identified in this document. • Construction site perimeter and discharge points. • All disturbed areas. • Areas used for storage of material/waste that are exposed to precipitation. • Any other area that has a significant potential for pollution Areas are to be inspected for sediment leaving the project boundaries, entering a stormwater drainage system, or discharging to state waters. All BMPs are to be inspected to dete1mine if they are still perfmming cmTectly and are in working order by adequately control sediment. Any BMPs not operating cmTectly are to be repaired or replaced as soon as possible. MOUNTAIN CROSS ENGINEERING, INC. Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design 826 ~i Grand A venue, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 P: 970.945.5544 F: 970.945.5558 www.mountaincross-eng.com Page 7 of 9 Stormwater Management Plan Buffalo Valley November, 2014 Maintenance Maintenance activities are to ensure that all BMPs are functioning as intended. Any maintenance, repairs, or replacements deemed necessary after required inspections will be corrected as soon as possible. Maintenance will include, but is not limited to: • Pickup or prevent trash, construction materials, and chemicals from being carried away by runoff from stmm events. • Removal of sediment from silt fences, sediment traps, and other sediment controls. • Reseeding of any bare spots where vegetation has failed to establish. • Repairs, additions, and/or adjustments to any erosion and sediment control that is deteriorating or found to be perfo1ming inadequately. The following steps will usually be followed: I. Perfonn inspections according to the inspection schedule discussed above. 2. Note any BMPs that need maintenance on the inspection and maintenance repmi form. 3. Obtain materials needed to perfmm maintenance on the BMPs. 4. Perfmm maintenance and note the date perfmmed on the inspection and maintenance report fmm. Documenting Inspections and Maintenance The Contractor shall document inspection results and maintenance activities. These records shall be maintained for a pe1iod of 3 years following expiration or inactivation of the SWMP permit coverage. Inspection repmis will include the following: • Date of inspection, name of inspector, title of inspector, project inspected, and construction phase. • Observed conditions including: o Discharges of sediment or other pollutants from the site. o BMPs that need to be maintained. o BMPs that failed to operate as designed or proved inadequate. o Any BMPs that were added. • Description of any maintenance and date pe1f01med. Any locations necessary to be described for the above reports shall be hand drawn on the SWMP plan. The locations shall be included as necessary to document observations. After an inspection or after maintenance has been perfmmed to complete an inspection report, the Contractor shall sign the repmi with a statement that the site is in compliance with the permit to the best of the Contractor's ability. SWMP Plan Revisions From time to time site conditions or BMPs may need to be changed. Changes necessary to the SWMP shall be made and noted on the SWMP plan and the Inspection and Maintenance fonn to match the project site. Any changes necessary shall be made first to the SWMP Plan then incorporated into the project site. Any emergency SWMP changes made in the field shall be added to the SWMP plan within 72 hours after the change. MOUNTAIN CROSS ENGINEERING, INC. Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design 826 Y2 Grand Avenue, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 P: 970.945.5544 F: 970.945.5558 \Vww.n1otmtaincross-eng.com Page 8 of 9 Stormwater Management Plan Buffalo Valley November, 2014 This d ocument a nd the SWMP Plan and the Inspection and Maintenan ce records shall be kept at the proj ect site during co nstru ction an d until fi n a l stabilization. These docum e nts will be retained for a pe riod of three years at the office of th e Co ntrac tor following rece ipt of the Inactivation Notice, di scussed below. These rep01t s wi ll be made available to the CDPHE or the EPA upon re quest. Inactivation Notice Final stabili zation occurs once all s urfaces are built on, ha rd scaped, or landscap ed to a vegetative cover wi th a den sity of 70 percent of pre-d isturbance levels. Once this i s reached, the project no longer needs pe1mit coverage . All temporary erosion and sed iment control measures a re to be removed. The Contractor shall submit an Inacti vat ion N otice to the CDPHE. Upon receipt of the Inactivation Notice, the CDPHE wi ll provide written confirmation that coverage h as b een te tminated. The reco rd s will be maintained fo r a period of three year s fo ll owin g receipt of the Inac tivation Noti ce . A blank copy ofthis fo rm is attached in the appendi ces. Thank yo u for the opportunity to provide thi s r eport. Feel free to call if you have any questions, co ncerns, or comments. Ch ri s Hale, PE MOUNTAIN C ROSS ENGINEERING, INC. C ivil and E nvironm ental Co nsulting and Design 826 Y, Gra nd Aven ue, Glenwood Spr ings, CO 8 160 1 P: 970.945 .55 44 F: 970.945.5558 www.mounlaincross -cng.com Page 9 of 9 Appendix A General Permit Application STATE OF COLORADO Dedicated to protecling and improving the health and environmen l of the people of Colorado 4300 Cherry Creek Dr. S. Denver, Colorado 80246-1530 Phone (303) 692-2000 TDD Line (303) 691 -7700 Located In Glendale, Colorado htlp://www.cdphe.state.co.us Colorado Departm ent of Public Heal th and Environme nt For Agency Use Only Permit Number Assigned COR03- Date Received __ / __ / __ Month Day Year COLORADO DISC HARG E PERMIT SYSTE M (COPS ) STORM WATER DISCHARGE ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES APPLICATION PHOTO COPIES, FAXED COPIES, PDF COPIES OR EMAILS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. Please print or type. Original signatures are required. All item s must be completed accurately and in th e ir entirety f or the appli cati on to be deemed complete. Incomplete applications will not be proc essed until all informatio n is r eceived wh ic h will ultimately delay the is suance of a permit. If m ore space is req uired to answer any question, please attac h additional sheets to the application form . Applications must be subm itted by mail or hand delivered to : Colorado Department of Public Hea lth and Env i ronment Water Qual ity C ontrol Divis ion 4300 C herry Creek Driv e South WQCD-P-82 Den v er, C olorad o 80246-1530 Any additional information that you woul d like the Divis ion to consider in developing th e permit should be provided with th e application. Examples include effluent data and/or modeling and plann ed pollutant removal strat eg ies. PERMIT INFORMATION Reason for Application: 0 NEW CERT D RENEW CERT EXISTIN G CERT# _______ _ Applicant is: D Property Owner D Contractor/Operator A. CO NTACT INFORMATION -NOT ALL CONTACT TYPES MAY APPLY *indicates required *PERMITTEE {If more than one please add additional pages) *ORGANIZATION FORMAL NAME: ------------------------------ 1) *PER MITTEE the person authorized t o sign and certify th e permit application. Th is person r eceives all permit co r res pondences and is legally responsible fo r compli ance w ith the pe rmit. Responsib le Position (Titl e): ------------------- Cur rently He ld By (P e rso n): __________________ _ Tel e ph one No : _____________ _ email addres s _____________ _ Organization:------------------------ Mai lin g Address: ----------------------- City: __________ State: ______ Zi p: ____ _ This form must be signed by the Permittee {listed in item l)to be considered complete. Per Regulation 61 In all cases. it sha ll be signed as fo ll ows: a) In the case of corporations, by a responsible corporate officer . For the purposes of thi s sectio n, the responsible corporate officer is responsib le for the overall o peration of the facility from w hich the discharge described in the application originates. b) In the case of a partnership, by a general partner. c) In the case of a sol e propr ietorship, by the proprietor. d) In the case of a municipa l, state, or other public facility, by either a principal executive officer or ran kin g elected official page 1 of 5 rev ised Apri l 2011 2) DMR COGNIZANT OFFICIAL (i.e. authorized agent) the person or position authorized to sign and certify reports required by the Division including Discharge Monitoring Reports *DMR's, Annual Reports, Compliance Schedule submittals, and other information requested by the Division. The Division will transmit pre-printed reports (ie. DMR's) to this person. If more than one, please add additional pages. Same As 1) Permittee D Responsible Position (Title): -------------------- Currently Held By (Person): --------------------- Telephone No: ______________ _ email address. ______________ _ Organization:------------------------- Mailing Address: ------------------------ City: ___________ State: ______ Zip:------ Per Regulation 61 : All reports required by permits, and other information requested by the Division shall be signed by the permittee or by a duly authorized representative of that person. A person is a duly authorized representative only if: (i) The authorization is made in writing by the permittee (ii) The authorization specifies either an individual or a position having responsibility for the overall operation of the regulated facility or activity such as the position of plant manager, operator of a well or a well field, superintendent, position of equivalent responsibility, or an individual or position having overall responsibility for environmental matters for the company. (A duly authorized representative may thus be either a named individual or any individual occupying a named position); and (iii) The written authorization is submitted to the Division 3) *SITE CONTACT local contact for questions relating to the facility & discharge authorized by this permit for the facility. D Same As 1) Permittee Responsible Position (Title): ___________________ _ Currently Held By (Person): --------------------- Telephone No: ______________ _ email address. ______________ _ Organization:------------------------- Mailing Address: ------------------------ City: ___________ State: ______ Zip: _____ _ 4) * BILLING CONTACT if different than the permittee Responsible Position (Title): ----------------- Currently Held By (Person): ----------------- Telephone No:. ______________ _ email address. ___________ _ Organization:---------------------- Mailing Address: --------------------- City:. ___________ State: ______ Zip: ____ _ Page 2 of 5 revised April 2011 5) OTHER CONTACT TYPES (check below) Add pages if necessary: ResponsiblePosition (Title): _P_r_e_p_a_r_e_r _______________ _ Currently Held By (Person): _C_h_r_is_H_a_le-',_P_E _____________ _ Telephone No: 970.945.5544 email address chris@mountaincross-eng.com Organization: Mountain Cross Engineering, Inc. Mailing Address: 826 1/2 Grand Avenue City: Glenwood Springs state:_c_o _____ Zip: 81601 0 Pretreatment D Inspection Facility Contact Coordinator D Consultant 0 Environmental Contact D Compliance Contact 0 Biosolids Responsible Party 0 Property Owner D Stormwater MS4 Responsible Person D Stormwater Authorized Representative D Other Engineer B. Permitted Project/Facility Information Project/Facility Name Buffalo Valley Redevelopment Street Address or cross streets 3637 Highway 82 ---"--~'------------------------ (e.g., "S. of Park St. between 5111 Ave. and 10th Ave.", or "W. side of C.R. 21, 3.25 miles N. of Hwy 10"; A street name without an address, intersection, mile marker, or other identifying information describing the location of the project is not adequate. For linear projects, the route of the project should be described as best as possible with the location more accurately indicated by a map.) City, Glenwood Springs Zip Code _8_1_6_0_1 ___ County Garfield County Facility Latitude/Longitude-(approximate center of site to nearest 15 seconds using one of following formats 001A Latitude Longitude ____ _ degrees (to 3 decimal places) or _____ (e.g., 39.703", 104.933"') degrees (to 3 decimal places} 001ALatitude~ 0 ~· ~" Longitude 107 ° -2.!3__· 24.1"(e.g.,39'46'11"N, 104'53'11"W) degrees minutes seconds degrees minutes seconds For the approximate center point of the property, to the nearest 15 seconds. The latitude and longitude must be provided as either degrees, minutes, and seconds, or in decimal degrees with three decimal places. This information may be obtained from a variety of sources, including: o Surveyors or engineers for the project should have, or be able to calculate, this information. o EPA maintains a web·based siting tool as part of their Toxic Release Inventory program that uses interactive maps and aerial photography to help users get latitude and longitude. The siting tool can be accessed at www.epa.gov/tri/report/siting_tool/index.htm o U.S. Geological Survey topographical map(s), available at area map stores. o Using a Global Positioning System (GPS) unit to obtain a direct reading. ~: the latitude/longitude required above is not the directional degrees, minutes, and seconds provided on a site legal description to define property boundaries. C. MAP (Attachment) If no map is submitted, the permit will not be issued. Map: Attach a map that indicates the site location and that CLEARLY shows the boundaries of the area that will be disturbed. Maps must be no larger than llx17 inches. D. LEGAL DESCRIPTION Legal description: If subdivided, provide the legal description below, or indicate that it is not applicable (do not supply Township/Range/Section or metes and bounds description of site) Subdivision(s): Lot(s): ___________ _ Block(s): _______ _ OR I./ I Not applicable (site has not been subdivided) page 3 of 5 revised April 2011 E. AREA OF CONSTRUCTION SITE Total area of project site (acres): __ 2_.2_0_4~(_+_/-~)_Area of project site to undergo disturbance (acres): _2_._0_+_i_-__ _ Note: aside from clearing, grading and excavation activities, disturbed areas also include areas receiving overburden (e.g., stockpiles), demolition areas, and areas with heavy equipment/vehicle traffic and storage that disturb existing vegetative cover Total disturbed area of Larger Common Plan of Development or Sale, if applicable: (i.e., total, including all phases, filings, lots, and infrastructure not covered by this application) Provide both the total area of the construction site, and the area that will undergo disturbance, in acres. Note: aside from clearing, grading and excavation activities, disturbed areas also include areas receiving overburden (e.g., stockpiles), demolition areas, and areas with heavy equipment/vehicle traffic and storage that disturb existing vegetative cover {see construction activity description under the APPUCABI UlY section on page 1). If the project is part of a larger common plan of development or sale (see the definition under the APPLICABILITY section on page 1), the disturbed area of the total plan must also be included. F. NATURE OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY Check the appropriate box{s) or provide a brief description that indicates the general nature of the construction activities. (The full description of activities must be included in the Stormwater Management Plan.) Single Family Residential Development Multi-Family Residential Development ../ Commercial Development Oil and Gas Production and/or Exploration (including pad sites and associated infrastructure) Highway/Road Development (not including roadways associated with commercial or residential development) Other-Description: G. ANTICIPATED CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE Construction Start Date: March 2015 Final Stabilization Date: Fall 2016 ----------~ -----------~ •Construction Start Date -This is the day you expect to begin ground disturbing activities, including grubbing, stockpiling, excavating, demolition, and grading activities. •Final Stabilization Date -in terms of permit coverage, this is when the site is finally stabilized. This means that all ground surface disturbing activities at the site have been completed, and all disturbed areas have been either built on, paved, or a uniform vegetative cover has been established with an individual plant density of at least 70 percent of pre-disturbance levels. Permit coverage must be maintained until the site is finally stabilized. Even if you are only doing one part of the project, the estimated final stabilization date must be for the overall project. If permit coverage is still required once your part is completed, the permit certification may be transferred or reassigned to a new responsible entity{s). H. RECEIVING WATERS (If discharge is to a ditch or storm sewer. include the name of the ultimate receiving waters) Immediate Receiving Water(s):_d_it_c_h_e_s_a_n_d_c_u_lv_e_rt_s ________________________ _ Ultimate Receiving Water(s):_R_o_a_ri_n~g_F_o_r_k_R_iv_e_r _________________________ _ Identify the receiving water of the storm water from your site. Receiving waters are any waters of the State of Colorado. This includes all water courses, even if they are usually dry. If stormwater from the construction site enters a ditch or storm sewer system, identify that system and indicate the ultimate receiving water for the ditch or storm sewer. Note: a stormwater discharge permit does not allow a discharge into a ditch or storm sewer system without the approval of the owner/operator of that system. page 4 of 5 revised April 2011 I. REQUIRED SIGNATURES (Both parts i. and i i. must be signed) Signat ure of Applicant : The applicant must be either t he owner and/or operator of the construction site . Re fer t o Part B of the instructions for additional information . The app lication must be signed by t he appli can t to be considered complete. In all cases. it shall be signed as follows: (Regu lation 61.4 (1ei) a) In the case of corporations, by the responsible corporate officer is respon sible for the ove rall operation of the facility from whic h the discharge described in the for m originates b) In the case of a partnership, by a general partner. c) In the case of a sole proprietorship, by the proprietor. d) In the case of a municipa l, state, or other publi c fa cil ity, by either a principal executive offi cer, ranking elected official, (a principal executive officer has responsibi lity for the overall operation of the facility from which the discharge originates). STOP!: A Stormwater Management Plan must be completed prior to signing the following certifications! i. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CERTIFICATION "I certify under penalty of law that a complete Storm water Management Plan, as described in Appendix A of this appli cation, has been prepared for my activity. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly r esponsi bl e for gathering the i nformation, the Stormw ater Management Plan is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accu rate, and complete. I am aware that there are sign ificant penalties for falsely certifyi ng the compl etion o f said SWMP, including t he possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations." xx Signatu r e of Lega lly Responsible Person or Authorized Agent (submission must include original signature) Date Signed Name (printed) Titl e ii. SIGNATURE OF PERMIT LEGAL CONTACT "I certify under penalty of law t hat I have personally examined and am familiar w ith the information submitted in this appli cation and a ll attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsib le for obtaining the i nform ation, I believe that the information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possib ility of fine or imprisonment. "I understand that submittal of this appli cation is for coverage under the State of Co l orado General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity for t he entirety of the construction site /project described and applied for, until such time as the application is amended or the certification is transferred, inactivated, or expired." xx'-'-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Signature of Lega l ly Responsible Person (submission must include origina l signature) Da t e Signed Name (printed Title DO NOT INCLUDE A COPY OF THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN DO NOT INCLUDE PAYMENT -AN INVOICE W I LL BE SENT AFTER THE CERT I FICAT I ON IS ISSUED . page 5 of 5 revised April 2011 AppendixB SWMP Plan Map qi Know what's below. Call before you dig. EROSION CONTROL LEGEND ) / c I / / / / I / ·"11'\ I I r- / ' \\\ '../ \ . I I . / I \ I \ I I \ (' \ ..... I I \ \ \ I I \ \ I I I I I ) " I • I I \ I \ I \ I I \'"'o _:-=;~~ill'; \ I ' \ \ \ I \ \ I I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ I \ \ I I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ I I I I I I I \ 1, -, ...... I I en -c: c: Cl> ell E Cl.. --c: () lo.. Cl) cu E ..J a. Cl) ..J <( gi ->-c: Ill Cl> ell .... -:::ii: Cl) -.... c: cu Cl) -> -.... ell ell 0 $: Cl.. E cu ... -0 --:::::s (J) Ill 11/14/14 ENGINEER C. HALE OWG FILE BuffValteySite 554-001 SHEET 4 Appendix C Details Sheet < :;j ::1,J,. I ('.) II :-1 c ~! ~tJJ 1!11 J . 1 Iii ~ 111 v! 1; < I 1 TI! ~ ·1 ~l~."' 0 iu ., ®•••''< ~ e iii , . ·· Iii! :, 11'-ii1 Sl)I ····. 1i.'.\ \•:I ~I! ~ ~ '!11!>·' ii! ~ ~1 ~ I; IBJI -'"' ®IJ' I @ ~ i ~ { :;11!'1:~~! . .•· ·. i!l'1i~ '" ·.•p.· ·II'• ~ I I~ ' ,·~1•1:j;! : .•.•. / '! :1! " I r.P.!!"1il"' .. --:=:=·=·,. ti ~ i ., !•iql ""' aa I ! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 REVISIONS > E "', pj D-'TE BY COt.IMENTS 01 s. i;; "~ ~ en "' ~ <f -:::-t ~ I "· 0 ~ ~ ~ -:; ~ w .. 'ti z r ~ ~ cJ ~ ~ s C PJ g z ~ "1 ~ ~ I d '" " ,. o r > m C <D l;; " m ,, ! 0 ,,, ,,. I~ c m ~ r m I ? ~I II; ll!I l,11!1 1•11 il•1: ~I ~ 00 ~ ~ '!/ n m = jl ! i ~~11: ~ ~"'~? ~~ :f~t:i&'. -~~r ~-~ ~~~ ~99 '®~i~ ;~~~~ .,,:i!.,,!ll~ ~~~--~ go!i!g ~ ~ !'il1; li 1 7~~, l!j ;~ ~~ ~ \<i~t\~ llJ~1i""'"'J" /-" I ' 1-•---i ; 1-J' -. "".'".__,..._, l .f.D!WID I '\!"'~.. \ :•1• "~' 1\j! I ~11; Iii I~ I~ I 00 ' :;: . ~ ~ r m ~ " z c ~e .. ~~ ~ • ., z~ • I ·~ i~ \ c~ ~ -• o~ .. / 0 E +tel'< ,, 3 ' • ' i I~ 1r7:1"11n :r: i ~ ,. r r 0 ~ r I -iS! :!! ffi:!! ;s ill ~.,,ill :iu ~ l!!~e { ~ -~~ ~ ;; z < •--'ffi=I ''n'l.' -11=111=u ·=w-'=m;f11. =111=111=~U=illm=~• =, - _ ~rn=m!Ilmg~n\lirn=n~mr1" ~ !·~=-111=n~=lll=ill=Ii,-lli=\ 0 •t '=m=•u=ill=~·W"=m'\ , ~~ '~"F' I l'Tlljl~III=k t .; ~· ~ 'c;::ID=111Mlm.i • • • 1-111-1\ i '~ill=ill= t @ 11 ,1 ,. 1! '=111=11\ IJ=ill=11 ·1f1:_111-l e 11 • 11 ~ , e . •"' 11' ! ~ iC\f I i lr~\ Buffalo Valley Apartments ENGINEERING, INC. e MOUNTl'IIN CROSS Details Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design Partners Ill, LLC 8261/2 Grand Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 ph 970.945.5544 fx 970.945.5558 www.mountaincross.,,ng.com AppendixD Inspection and Maintenance Report Form Weather: Most Recent Storm Details: Description of construction activities and approximate acreage disturbed: Description of observations of BMPs, location, type, etc: Description of maintenance activities, repair, replacement, when, where, by whom, etc: Inspector Signature: Cc: f-"-'-'--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--i "This site is in corn liancc with the Permit to the best of m abili " Re ortNo.: Pictures Taken: AppendixE Inactivation Form STATE OF COLORADO Dedicated to protecting and improving the health and environment of the people of Co lorado 4300 Cherry Creek Dr. S. Denver, Colorado 80246-1530 Phone(303)692-2000 TDD Line (303) 691-7700 Located in Glendale, Colorado http://www.cdphe .state.co.us Colorado Water Quality Control Division Notice of Termination Construction Stormwater Inactivation Notice www .coloradowaterpermits.com Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Print or type all information. All items must be filled out completely and correct ly . If the form is not complete, it will be returned. All permit terminations dates are effective on the date approved by the Division . MAIL ORIGINAL FORM WITH INK SIGNATURES TO THE FOLLOWING ADDRESS : Colorado Dept of Public Health and Environment Water Quality Control Division 4300 Cherry Creek Dr South, WQCD-P-82 Denver, CO 80246-1530 FAXED OR EMAILED FORMS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. • PART A. IDENTIFICATION OF PERMIT Please write the permit certification number to be terminated Permit Certification Number (four digits, not "0000"): COR03 ___ _ • PART B. PERMITTEE INFORMATION Mailing Address ----------------------------------- City --------------State ---------Zip code ____ _ Legal Contact Name _____________ _ Phone number --------------- Title Email ----------------------------- • PART C. FAC ILITY/PROJECT INFORMATION Facility/Project Name ---------------------------------- Location (address) ---------------------------------- City -------------County ________ _ Zip code ____ _ Local Contact Name Phone number -------------- Title Email -------------- Page 1 of 2 form last revised May 2010 COLORADO WATER QUALITY CONTROL DIVISION NOTICE OF TERMINATION www .coloradowaterpermits.com • PART D. TERMINATION VALIDATION CRITERIA One of the criteria (1,2, or 3) below must be met, th e appropriate box checked, and the re quired additi ona l information provided. Part E includes a certification that the criteri a indicated has be e n m et . 0 1: FINALLY STABILIZED OR CONSTRUCTION NOT STARTED -The permitted activities covered under the certification li sted in Part A meet the r equirements for FINAL STABILIZATION in accordance with the permit, the Stormwater M anagement Plan, and as described below . This criterion shou ld also be selected if construction was n ever started an d no land was disturbed, and an explanation of this co ndition provided in the desc ription below. Final stabilization is reached when : all ground surface disturbing ac tivities at the site have been completed including removal of all temporary erosion and se diment control measure, and uniform vege tative cover has been est abli shed with an individual plant density of at least 70 percent of predisturbance levels, or equivale nt permanent, physical erosion reduction methods have been employed. REQUIRED -Describe the methods used to meet the final stabilization c descri bed above (include additional pages if nemmy) I ~-------------------------------------~ D 2: ALTERNATIVE PERMIT COVERAGE OR FULL REASSIGNMENT-All ongoing con st ructi on activities, in cluding all di sturbed are as, cove r ed under the permit ce rtifi ca tion listed in Part A have coverage und er a separa t e COPS storm wate r construction permi t, including the permit certifica t ion issued w hen Divisio n's Reassignment Form was used by th e permittee to r eass ign all areas/activities. REQUIRED -Provide the permit certification number covering the ongoing activities: COR03 ___ _ D 3: PERMI TTEE IS NO LONGER THE OWNER/OPERATOR of the site and all efforts have been made to transfer the permit to appropriat e parties. Pl ease attach copies of reg ist ered mai l r ece ipt, letters, etc. STOP! One of the three criteria above MUST BE CHECKED an d the required in formation for that criterion prov id e d, or this form will not be pro cesse d and the permit will remain active. • PART E. CERTIFICATION SIGNATURE (Required for all Termination Requests) I understand that by subm itting this notice of inactivation, I am no longer authorized to disc harge stormwater associated w ith co nst ruction activity by the ge neral permit. I understand that discha rging pollutants in stormwate r assoc iated with constr uction activities to the waters of t he State of Colorado, w here su ch disc harges ar e not authorized by a COPS permit, is unlawful und er t he Colorado Water Quality Con trol Act and the Clean Water Act. I certify und er pena lty of law that I have persona ll y exam ined and am fa miliar w ith the information submitted herein , and based on my inquiry of those ind ividual s im mediately r es pons ible for o bta ining the information, I be li eve that the inform ation is t r ue, accurate and co mplet e. I am aware that t her e ar e significant penalties for submitting false information, including t he pos sibility of fine an d imprisonment. (S ee 18 U.S.C 1001 and 33 U.S.C. 1319.) I also certify that I am a duly authorized representative of the permittee nam ed in Part B. Signature of Legally Res ponsible Party Date Signed Name (printed) Title Signatory requirements: This form shall be signed, dated, and certified for accuracy by the permittee in accorda nce with the foll owin g criteri a: 1. In the case of a corpora t ion, by a pr inci pa l executive officer of at least the level of v ice -pr esident, or his or her du ly authorize d represen t ative, if such representative is r es pons ible for the overall operation of the o peration from which the discharge descr ibed he r ein or iginates; 2. In the case of a partnership, by a gener al partner; 3. In the ca se of a so le proprietorsh ip, by the proprietor; 4. In the case of a municipal, state, or other public ope rati on, by wither a principa l exe cutive officer, rankin g el ec t ed official, or ot her duly au thorized employee. Page 2 o f 2 form l as t r evised May 2010 Buffalo Valley Apartments Limited Impact Review Application. Impact Analysis. The Impact Analysis shall include a complete description of the how the Applicant will ensure that impacts will be mitigated and standards will be satisfied. The following information shall be included in the impact Analysis: 1. Adjacent Property. An address of real property adjacent to the subject property and the mailing address for each of the property owners. See list provided by Garfield County Assessors office. 2. Adjacent Land Use. Existing use of adjacent property and neighboring Properties within 1500 – foot radius. See Mountain Cross Engineering GIS zoning map, dated July 15, 2013. 3. Description of the site features including streams, areas subject to flooding, topography etc. See Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical report dated April 30, 2013 titled “Preliminary Geotechnical and Geological Review, Proposed Redevelopment, Buffalo Valley Property, 3637 Highway 82, Glenwood Springs, Colorado” 4. Soil Characteristics. A description of soil characteristics of the site that have a significant influence on the proposed use of the land. See Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical report dated April 30, 2013 titled “Preliminary Geotechnical and Geological Review, Proposed Redevelopment, Buffalo Valley Property, 3637 Highway 82, Glenwood Springs, Colorado” 5. Geology and Hazard. A description of the geologic characteristics of the area including any potential natural or manmade hazards, and a determination of what effect such factors would have on the proposed use of the land. See Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical report dated April 30, 2013 titled “Preliminary Geotechnical and Geological Review, Proposed Redevelopment, Buffalo Valley Property, 3637 Highway 82, Glenwood Springs, Colorado” 6. Groundwater and Aquifer Recharge Areas. See Mountain Cross Engineering letter dated July 16, 2013, titled Ground Water Aquafer Recharge Areas, Buffalo Valley. 7. Environmental Impacts a. Determination of long‐term and short‐term effect on flora and fauna; No Impacts: The existing uses of the site have very similar disturbance areas as the proposed re‐development. The steep slopes to the West and Southwest on the property will not be affected. The construction management plan will address construction storm water management and fugitive dust control during construction in order to protect the relatively undisturbed steep slopes on the Buffalo Valley property. As well, the best practices construction management plan will be designed to have none to minimum impact to neighboring property flora and fauna. The landscape plan will not increase wildlife attractant species of fauna. The landscaping will be typical to residential development. Fauna. It is not anticipated that additional disturbance of fauna will occur in the proposed re‐development compared to the existing land use. Therefore we anticipate no to minimal impact on fauna. b. Determination of the effect on significant archaeological, cultural, paleontological and historic resources. No Impacts: There will materially be the same disturbances to the site as currently exists. This will, therefore, will not introduce negative impacts or disturbance that would affect the aforementioned resources. c. Determination of the effect on designated environmental resources, Including critical Wildlife Habitat. There will not be habitat disturbance differing from current use of the property. Existing two motel structures, a restaurant, parking lots and volleyball area occupy the gently sloping and terraced bench on the property. The new site plan will not be materially different. The steep hillside to the West and Southwest is the only relatively undisturbed zone within the property, and there will not be added disturbances there. The existing vegetation on the hillside, which probably supports wildlife habitat and grazing, will continue in its present form. d. Impacts on Wildlife and domestic animals through creation of Hazardous attractions, alteration of existing native vegetation, blockage of migration routes, use patterns, or other disruptions; There will not be creation of Hazardous attractions, alteration of existing native vegetation blockage of migration routes, use patterns or other disruptions. The historic development pattern of the site will continue substantially the same in the proposed development as the existing uses and impacts. e. Evaluation of any potential radiation hazard that may have been Identified by the State or County Health Departments. See HP Geotech letter dated July 11, 2013, titled Radiation Potential. The EPA recommends that radon mitigation be implemented if the radon is tested at 4pCi/L, or higher. In this geographic area, and in “heated air climates”, such as in Garfield County, the most common Radon Mitigation is Active Soil Depressurization. Passive Soil Ventilation can also be effective for lower levels of radon, and the passive system can become active depressurization with the addition of a fan designed for Radon mitigation systems. The proposed development will implement Radon Mitigation should the radon levels warrant it. f. Spill prevention control and counter measures plan, if applicable. Not applicable. 8. Nuisance. Impacts on adjacent land from generation of vapor, dust, smoke, noise, glare or vibration, or other emanations. The long term proposed use of the property would not create such nuisances. The Construction management plan will address short‐term containment of fugitive dust, silt and other nuisances. 9. Reclamation Plan. A reclamation plan consistent with the standards in Section 7‐212. Reclamation Plan Not Applicable. However, the site will be completely landscaped. See landscape plan. Ac c o u n t  Nu m b e r O w n e r N a m e I n  Ca r e  O f Ad d r e s s  2 C i t y S t a t e Z i p C o d e s  Ho u s e  Nu m St r e e t  Na m e D e s i g n a t i o n C i t y Z i p  Code R0 6 0 0 4 2 E L ‐RO C K O  MO B I L E  HO M E  PA R K  LL C 23 0 7  CO U N T Y  RO A D  15 4 G L E N W O O D  SP R I N G S C O 8 1 6 0 1 2 3 0 7 1 5 4  CO U N T Y R D G L E N W O O D  SPRINGS 81601 R0 6 0 0 4 2 E L ‐RO C K O  MO B I L E  HO M E  PA R K  LL C 23 0 7  CO U N T Y  RO A D  15 4 G L E N W O O D  SP R I N G S C O 8 1 6 0 1 2 3 0 7 O L D  HI G H W A Y  82 G L E N W O O D  SPRINGS 81601 R0 6 0 0 3 9 P A R T N E R S  II I  LL C 3 5 3  GO O S E  LA N E C A R B O N D A L E C O 8 1 6 2 3 3 6 3 7 8 2 H W Y G L E N W O O D  SPRINGS 81601 R0 8 0 0 6 8 D U P L I C E ‐MC G O W A N    FA M I L Y  TR U S T  DA T E D  12 / 0 2 / 9 8 1 2 1 7  CO U N T Y  RO A D  11 6 G L E N W O O D  SP R I N G S C O 8 1 6 0 1 1 2 1 8 1 1 6  CO U N T Y R D G L E N W O O D  SPRINGS 81601 R0 6 0 0 7 5 M O U N T A I N  VI E W  CH U R C H  OF  GL E N W O O D PO  BO X  22 2 G L E N W O O D  SP R I N G S C O 8 1 6 0 2 ‐02 2 2 2 1 9 5 1 5 4  CO U N T Y R D G L E N W O O D  SPRINGS 81601 R0 6 0 0 4 8 V C P  I  LL C WI L L I S O N ,  LI N D A  L 3 4 4  CO R Y E L L  RI D G E  RD G L E N W O O D  SP R I N G S C O 8 1 6 0 1 ‐96 6 9 3 7 1 0 8 2 H W Y G L E N W O O D  SPRINGS 81601 R0 6 0 0 1 5 J A N U S Z ,  CH R I S T O P H E R  M    & AS T R I D  B 3 6 4 2  HI G H W A Y  82 G L E N W O O D  SP R I N G S C O 8 1 6 0 1 3 6 4 2 8 2 H W Y G L E N W O O D  SPRINGS 81601 R0 6 0 1 0 4 R O A R I N G  FO R K  TR A N S P O R T A T I O N  AU T H O R I T Y 5 3 0  E  MA I N  ST R E E T A S P E N C O 8 1 6 1 1 R A I L R O A D  R. O . W . G L E N W O O D  SPRINGS 81601 r - .... _.._ - Zoning Map, Garfield County, CO RtaourceLam Im 1\\1.llllla~Hamel'rJtt .. blustlial .. ~ 1m ~ c-i ~ -1----i -Planned Del alapnM L___j Clly ZDdng l::J PJannat um Dcw:/opmctlf RfDllt-GJWlly .. ~ ,_zarenotJvtllflfmd ~ USEOFGROUNDWATERPROHlelrED (RllelAllRA SllleJ ond Id tf!fll-*d an Nr map 154 Adjacent Land Use Garfield County GIS ----26 I MOUNTt\IN CROSS t-------1. EN61NEERIN6. INC. CMI and Envlronmantal Consultlng and DBSlgn 826 112 Grand Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 ph 170.9411.11144 fx 170.941.1111111-.mountalnctOM«lg.com ~tech HEPWORTH -PAWLAK GEOTECHNI CAL April 30, 2013 Partners III , LLC Attn: Nonn Bacheldor 353 Goose Lane Carbondale, Colorado 81623 ( nonnbacheldor@ gmail.com) I I.:1'111111'1 I' mink u~ t<<l"'1c 1', Inc Sl'20 < 11111 R I I 14 ( lkll\rnud '11 111 s, ( , !or J11 Cl I ( 'I Plwnt 910-941-7%~ F,1-.: 970-94'i-:-.4'i4 t:nrnd:hr•<•l'th1 c r• 1i, 1'l Job No. 113 106A Subject: Preliminary Geotechnical and Geological Review, Proposed Redevelopment, Buffalo Valley Property, 3637 Highway 82, Glenwood Springs, Colorado Dear Mr. Bacheldor: As requested, we are providing a preliminary geotechnical and geo logical review for the proposed redevelopment at the subject site. This report is based on a review of geotechnical and geo lo gical conditions for nearby s ites , a site reconnaissance of the subject property o n April 24, 2013, and our experience with similar projects in the Glenwood Springs area. The review has been performed in general accor dance with our Professional Services Agreement, dated April 22, 2013, but excluding subsurface conditions evaluation at this time. Proposed Construction: Specific details of the proposed construction were unavailable at the time this report, but as discussed in yo ur email to us on April 19, 2013, we assume that the site will be developed as medium density residential with relatively lightly lo aded structures. Associated drives and parking areas will also be constructed. We expect site grading to be relatively minor w ith possible cut and fill depths les s than 10 feet. Site Conditions: The s ite is currently occupied with a vacant restaurant and two hotel buildings and an asphalt paved parking lot. The site s lopes moderately down from the northeast to the southwest w ith a ten-aced parking area in the middle of the property. A small drainage ditch drains to the southwest along the north side of the property. The property s lopes relatively steeply down to an adjacent property on the west and southwest sides. Where not occupied by buildings or parking lot, the s it e is moderately vegetated with grass, shrubs and trees. The s ite is generally bordered to the east by County Road 154 and Highway 82, to the north b y the Mountain View Church property, to the west by resid entia l properties and to the south by a trailer park development. Preliminary Geotechnical Review: Soils encountered at nearby sites and our geotechnical experience in the area, suggest that the native site soils should consist of a relatively thin layer of topsoil underlain by si lt y sand with gravel alluvial fan deposits above sandy gravel, cobble and boulder river terrace deposits that form the steep, west slope of the property. Due to the previous development on the site, fill soils are like ly to Parker 30 3-8 4 1-711 9 • Co lnra d1i S rrings 7 19-633-556:?. • S ih-c rth orn e 970-46 8-1989 Partners III, LLC April 30, 2013 Page 2 be encountered during construction and should be evaluated at that time for suitability as structural fill or foundation bearing materials. After removal of the topsoil and unsuitable fill soils, the natural granular site soils should be suitable for the support of relatively lightly loaded structures on shallow foundations, pavements and retaining wall footings. The alluvial fan deposits are likely susceptible to moisture related settlement that could impact building performance. Areas of unsuitable soils at the site and the construction of moderate to heavily loaded structures or structures sensitive to movement may require a deep foundation system bearing on suitable underlying soils. Structure specific subsurface evaluations should be performed for foundation, pavement and retaining wall design recommendations. Preliminary Geological Review: Although the site does not appear to hold significant geological risk, some possible geologic hazards at the project site include seismic activity, potential rockfall, debris flows, and slope movement. Seismic activity: Historical earthquakes in the project area, although infrequent, have been moderate to strong in strength. Based on the project location relative to known active faults capable of producing damaging earthquakes, the risk of damage by ground shaking to buildings designed to withstand moderately strong ground shaking with little or no damage and not to collapse under stronger ground shaking is low. Rockfall Potential and Debris Flow Hazards: The site is bordered to the east and northeast by Highway 82 and County Road 154. Highway 82 is bordered to the east by an escarpment rising approximately 700 feet at an average slope of approximately 70 percent with near vertical cliffs in the top portion. The toe of the slope on the east side of the highway is approximately 200 feet east and 20 feet higher than the property line at the Buffalo Valley site. The slope is composed primarily of the Pensylvanian age Maroon Formation sandstone bedrock and colluvium, with numerous small drainages visible in the lower slope colluvium. The upper slope has moderately fractured cliff faces and has a history of sporadic rockfall onto Highway 82, as well as localized mud and debris flows onto the highway during extreme storm events. Although the possibility of a rockfall or debris flow at the subject site exists, due to the distance of the site from the slope and the presence of Highway 82 and County Road 154, we believe that the risk ofrockfall and/or debris flow from the slope into the project site is low. Slope Movement: The site is bordered on the west and southwest by an approximately 35 foot high, 25 degree, heavily vegetated slope down to adjacent residential properties. Based on the anticipated soil type, slope angle and the vegetated nature of the slope we believe that the hazard of movement of the slope in its current state is low. Construction activity on the slope that alters the current conditions may change the existing low potential for movement of the slope and Job No. 113 106A ~tech Partners III, LLC April 30, 2013 Page 3 an appropriate geotechnical evaluation should be performed prior to altering the slope. Our assessment of geologic hazards at the subject site is preliminary and based on limited site reconnaissance, aerial photo, geo logical report and geologic map review. If the level of risk from geo logical hazards is of concern, detailed assessments can be undertaken to obtain more specific data for the subject property. Conclusions: The Buffalo Valley sit e is located near relatively recent ly developed sites in which we have geotechnical and geological experience, and the general geotechnical and geo logi c conditions for those sites should pertain to the Buffalo Valley site. In those evaluations and in this preliminary evaluation of the Buffalo Valley site we conclude that there are no geotechnical or geological conditions that would make the proposed development infeasible. Additional geotechnical serv ic es should include s it e specific subsurface exploration and project report for foundation, pavement and retaining wall design when preliminary development plans are available. If you hav e any questions or need further assistance, please call our office. Sincerely, James A. Parker, P.E., P.G. Rev. by: SLP JAP/lj g cc: Ken Ja nckila (ken@janckil aconstruction.com) REFERENCES Tweto , 0. and Others, 1978 , Geology Map of the Leadville 1 ° X 2 ° Quadrangle, Northwestern Colorado: U .S. Geological Survey Map I-999 . Elevations and distances interpolated from project site map and Google Earth Job No. 113 106A ~tech ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 826 ½ Grand Avenue, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 P: 970.945.5544 F: 970.945.5558 www.mountaincross-eng.com July 16, 2013 Partners III, LLC c/o Norm Bacheldor 353 Goose Lane Carbondale, CO 81623 RE: Groundwater and Aquifer Recharge Areas: Buffalo Valley Dear Norm: This purpose of this correspondence is to evaluate the Buffalo Valley Site for potential impacts to groundwater and aquifer recharge areas. The existing site has a restaurant and motel with parking and infrastructure and is located at 3637 Highway 82. Proposed plans are the construction of two buildings that have a total of 56 apartments. The project elevation is approximately 5880 feet above sea level and located at Latitude 39°30’19.1” North and Longitude 107°18’24.1” West. The property area is approximately 2.204± acres and the Roaring Fork River is approximately 250’ to the east. Attached is a FEMA map showing the mapped floodplain and associated elevations. The project sits on a bench above and to the east of the floodplain and will not impact it. The site is planned to have sewer disposal by City of Glenwood Springs and no waste disposal is proposed on site. The site soils will not be impacted by sewage effluent. The site has moderate to gentle slopes of ten percent or less over a majority of the site. There is a hillside on the west of the property that has very steep slopes, on average 50% slopes. The hillside is to remain undisturbed. The existing site is largely covered with paving and buildings and an existing drywell infiltrated runoff to groundwater. The proposed site will be largely the same materials however, runoff from the proposed project will be conveyed into a sedimentation and detention pond that will remove pollutants prior to draining into an existing grassed swale. The grassed swale then conveys water to the Roaring Fork River. The proposed stormwater plan would reduce the potential of converting runoff into groundwater. However, the existing drywell is full of debris and it is unlikely that any substantial amount of water was actually introduced as groundwater. The drywell was the only treatment of the runoff from the sands and oils from the parking areas. Buffalo Valley July, 2013 Page 2 of2 The s urrounding properties are served by water from the City of Glenwood Springs and no domestic wells arc being used by this project or adjacent properties to our knowledge. Any domestic wells would really on the aquifer created by the Roaring For k River water table and any contribution s from the site drywell would be insignificant. HP Geotech has performed a site soil investigation and detai ls their findings in a letter dated April 30, 2013. Refer to thi s letter for details on the natu re of si te soi ls and subsoils. Based on the above, it is our opinion that the proposed project will have no substantia l impacts to groundwater or aquifer recharge areas. Fee l free to call if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely, Mount in Cross E~ Attachment Mountai n Cros s Engineering. Inc. Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design 826 1/z Grand A venue, Gle nwood Sp ring s , CO 8 16 01 P: 970.9 4 5.5544 F: 970.94 5 .5558 www.m ounl aln cross-en g .com \ \ <' <o'O ZONE B ZONEC ZONEB ~ ZONE C "S ZONED APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET 500 0 500 E:.L:: F3 F3 l FIRM FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO (UNINCORPORATED AREAS) PANEL 1453 0 F 1900 (SEE MAP INDEX FOR PANELS NOT PRINTED) COMMUNITY ·PANEL NUMBER 080205 1453 B MAP REVISED: JA~UARY 3, 1986 Federal Emergency Management Agency This is an official copy of a portion of the above referenced flood map. It was extracted using F-MIT On-Line. This map does not reflect changes or amendments which may have been made subsequent to the date on the title block. For the latest product information about National Flood Insurance Program flood maps check the FEMA Flood Map Store at www.msc.fema.gov ~ech HEPWORTH -PAWLAK GEOTE C HNIC AL July 11 , 2013 Partners III, LLC Attn: N01m Bachelder 353 Goose Lane Carbondale, Colorado 81623 normbacheld or@gmail.com fk 1 \\or h (' 1d1k(1, I, I 11, J 'i1.12L' t , 111111 \ I\,• ,.I I )..I lll~ll\I< ,,,) '°'J'rlll •. l • [, ri 111 'ii(l'I Pl11 ne· 'l1l' 'l-1) i'h" f IX lj,) l)-} 5 'i.f~.f ..-111111 h1 '" 0 hr:..u inh um Job No. 113 106A Subject: Radiation Potential, Proposed Redevelopment, Buffalo Valley Property, 3637 Highway 82, Glenwood Spring, Colorado Gentlemen: As requested, we have reviewed geologic information in the area with respect to radiation potential at the subject site. We understand that the radiation potential of the project site is required for the proposed development application. The current review should be considered as an addendum to our previous geotechnical review report to Partners III , LLC dated April 30, 2013, Job No. 113 106A. Regional studies by the Colorado Geological Survey (Nelson-Moore and Others, 1978) indicate the project site is not in a geologic setting that would have high concentrations of radioactive minerals in the near surface soils and formation rock. However, there is a potential that radon gas could be present in the area. It is difficult to detect radon gas in open areas before buildings are constructed. Testing for radon gas levels could be done when the buildings and other occupied structures have been completed. New buildings are often designed with provisions for ventilation of lower enclosed areas should po st construction testing show unacceptable radon gas concentrations. If you have any questions or need fmiher assistance, please call our office. Sincerely, Reference: Parker 303 -8 41 -7119 • Co lnrnd u Spring-. 719 -6 3 )-556 2 • S ilverthorne 97 0-46 8-19 89 Traffic Impact Study Buffalo Valley Apartments Prepared for: Partners III, LLC © Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2013 TRAFFIC IMPACT S T U D Y Buffalo Valley Apartments Garfield County, Colorado Prepared for Partners III, LLC 50 Sunset Drive Suite 3 Basalt, Colorado 81621 Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 990 South Broadway Suite 200 Denver, Colorado 80209 (303) 228-2300 December 2013 This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrnment of seroice, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. shall be without liabilih; to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 096337000 – Buffalo Valley Apartments Page i TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................ i LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................................... ii LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................... ii 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................1 2.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................3 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS....................................................................................................5 3.1 Existing Study Area .................................................................................................................... 5 3.2 Existing Roadway Network ....................................................................................................... 5 3.3 Existing Traffic Volumes ............................................................................................................ 6 4.0 FUTURE CONDITIONS ......................................................................................................9 5.0 PROJECT TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS ....................................................................... 12 5.1 Trip Generation ......................................................................................................................... 12 5.2 Trip Distribution ....................................................................................................................... 13 5.3 Traffic Assignment.................................................................................................................... 13 5.4 Total (Background Plus Project) Traffic .................................................................................. 13 6.0 TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS ............................................................................... 18 6.1 Analysis Methodology ............................................................................................................. 18 6.2 Intersection Operational Analysis ........................................................................................... 19 6.3 Auxiliary Turn Lane Analysis along SH-82 ............................................................................ 22 7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................... 25 APPENDICES Appendix A – Intersection Count Sheets Appendix B – CDOT SH-82 Traffic Information Appendix C – Trip Generation Worksheets Appendix D – Intersection Analysis Worksheets Appendix E – Site Plan Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 096337000 – Buffalo Valley Apartments Page ii LIST OF TABLES Table 1 – Buffalo Valley Apartments Trip Generation Comparison .............................................. 13 Table 2 – Level of Service Definitions ............................................................................................... 18 Table 3 – SH-82 and CR-154 LOS Results ......................................................................................... 20 Table 4 – CR-154 and Project Access LOS Results ........................................................................... 21 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 – Vicinity Map ........................................................................................................................ 4 Figure 2 – Existing Lane Configuration and Control ......................................................................... 7 Figure 3 – Existing Traffic Volumes .................................................................................................... 8 Figure 4 – 2015 Background Traffic Volumes................................................................................... 10 Figure 5 – 2033 Background Traffic Volumes................................................................................... 11 Figure 6 – Project Trip Distribution................................................................................................... 14 Figure 7 – Project Traffic Assignment ............................................................................................... 15 Figure 8 – 2015 Background Plus Project Traffic Volumes .............................................................. 16 Figure 9 – 2033 Background Plus Project Traffic Volumes .............................................................. 17 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 096337000 – Buffalo Valley Apartments Page 1 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Partners III, LLC is proposing a new multi-family residential development referred to as the Buffalo Valley Apartments. This development is to be located along the southwest side of SH-82 at the CR-154 intersection in Garfield County, Colorado and is proposed to include 57 apartment units divided between two buildings. The project site is currently developed with a previous 9,700 square-foot restaurant and a 14 unit motel. Both the restaurant and motel buildings will be demolished with the proposed project. The Buffalo Valley Apartment development is anticipated to be constructed over the next few years. For purposes of this traffic study, analysis was completed for development of the project in 2015, as well as the 2033 long-term horizon to determine intersection and roadway configurations needed for both planning years. The purpose of this traffic study is to identify project traffic generation characteristics, to identify potential project traffic related impacts on the local street system, and to develop mitigation measures required for identified impacts. The SH-82 and CR-154 intersection was determined to be the key intersection for this traffic impact study. Regional access to the project will be provided by SH-82. Primary access to the proposed development will be provided by CR-154. Direct access is proposed from a private access drive at the northernmost end of the property along CR-154 right-of-way. The proposed access is in the relatively same location as the existing access drive to the property. The Buffalo Valley Apartments project is anticipated to generate approximately 468 daily weekday trips. Of these, 32 trips are expected to occur during the morning peak hour, while 49 trips are expected during the afternoon peak hour. Distribution of site traffic on the adjacent roadways and through the key intersections was based on the area street system characteristics, existing traffic patterns, surrounding area Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 096337000 – Buffalo Valley Apartments Page 2 employment and retail information, anticipated surrounding development areas, and the proposed access system for the project. Assignment of project traffic was based upon the trip generation described previously and the distributions developed. The traffic assignment was added to the background traffic volumes to determine future traffic projections with the project. Based on the analysis presented in this report, Kimley-Horn believes the proposed Buffalo Valley Apartments project will be successfully incorporated into the existing roadway network. Analysis of the existing street network and the proposed project development with the expected traffic volumes resulted in the following recommendations: ·It is recommended that the project access drive approach to CR-154 operate with stop control. Therefore, it is recommended that a R1-1 “STOP” sign be posted on this approach out of the property. ·Redevelopment of this Buffalo Valley site to apartments is anticipated to generate less traffic than the previous Buffalo Valley restaurant and motel. Therefore, it is believed that CDOT will not require an access permit application. ·All on-site and off-site roadway improvements should be incorporated into the Civil Drawings, and conform to standards of CDOT, the City of Glenwood Springs, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), and the Manual on Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) – 2009 Edition. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 096337000 – Buffalo Valley Apartments Page 3 2.0 INTRODUCTION Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (Kimley-Horn) has prepared this report to document the results of a Traffic Impact Study of future traffic conditions associated with the proposed Buffalo Valley Apartments project to be located along the southwest side of SH-82 (Grand Avenue) at the CR-154 intersection in Garfield County, Colorado. A vicinity map illustrating the project location with respect to the surrounding area is shown in Figure 1. The multi-family development project is proposed to include 57 apartment units divided between two buildings. The project site is currently developed with a previous 9,700 square- foot restaurant and a 14 unit motel. Both the restaurant and motel buildings will be demolished with the proposed project. The project site plan is provided in Appendix E. The Buffalo Valley Apartment project is anticipated to be constructed over the next few years. For purposes of this traffic study, analysis was completed for development of the project in 2015, as well as the 2033 long-term horizon to determine intersection and roadway configurations needed for both planning years. The purpose of this traffic study is to identify project traffic generation characteristics, to identify potential project traffic related impacts on the local street system, and to develop mitigation measures required for identified impacts. The SH-82 and CR-154 intersection was determined to be the key intersection for this traffic impact study. L ·--/ BUFFALO VALLEY APARTMENTS VICINITY MAP ~ 11"'.J c:> Ft-Y t-11 NTS 096337000 FIGURE 1 PROJECT LOCATION ........--... Kimley-Horn ~---------------, ........__, .., an d As sociate s, Inc. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 096337000 – Buffalo Valley Apartments Page 5 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS The following sections outline existing conditions in the vicinity of the Buffalo Valley Apartments development. 3.1 Existing Study Area The project site is currently developed with a 9,700 square-foot restaurant and a 14 unit motel. The Mountain View Church of Glenwood is directly to the north of the site. The El Rocko Mobile Home Park is directly south and west of the site. CDOT right-of-way exists to the north across CR-154, with the Rio Grande Trail between CR-154 and SH-82. 3.2 Existing Roadway Network Regional access to the project will be provided by SH-82. Primary access to the proposed development will be provided by CR-154. Direct access is proposed from a private access drive at the northernmost end of the property along CR-154 right-of-way. The proposed access drive will be in relatively the same location as the existing access drive to the property, approximately 125 feet south of the SH-82 and CR-154 intersection. The Rio Grande Trail, a multi-use trail facility, crosses CR-154 between the project access drive and its intersection with SH-82. SH-82 SH-82 is functionally classified as a principal arterial through its intersection with CR-154 at milepost 3.6. The roadway has a posted speed limit of 55 miles per hour, although it is identified as a 65 mph roadway in CDOT OTIS. The existing SH-82 and CR-154 intersection is signalized. The SH-82 southbound approach to CR-154 contains designated right and left turn lanes. The northbound approach to this intersection contains a designated left turn lane. The westbound approach is unpaved and on private property. CR-154 CR-154 adjacent to the project is a two-lane undivided roadway with double yellow markings and a posted speed limit of 35 miles per hour. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 096337000 – Buffalo Valley Apartments Page 6 The existing intersection lane configurations and control for the study area are shown in Figure 2. 3.3 Existing Traffic Volumes Existing peak hour turning movement counts were conducted at the key intersections on Wednesday, November 20, 2013. The counts were obtained during the morning and afternoon peak hours of adjacent street traffic in 15-minute intervals from 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM and 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM, respectively. The turning movement counts are shown in Figure 3 with count sheets provided in Appendix A. XX 5 5 3 5 1 6 ( 4 0 ) 0 ( 2 ) 0 (0 ) 4 3 (2 7 ) 1 (0 )0 (0 ) 2 9 (3 2 ) 7 5 0 ( 1 , 4 8 8 ) 1 , 1 5 2 ( 8 3 0 ) 1 5 ( 1 6 ) 0 ( 0 ) 0 (0 ) 0 ( 2 ) 0 (1 ) 1 (2 ) 2 7 ( 4 1 ) 4 7 ( 3 6 ) 3 ( 1 ) Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 096337000 – Buffalo Valley Apartments Page 9 4.0 FUTURE CONDITIONS This section of the report details conditions that are expected in the future with development of the Buffalo Valley Apartments project. In order to obtain traffic volumes for the future build out 2015, and 2033 twenty-year horizons, future traffic volume projections were evaluated from CDOT traffic information. According to information provided on the CDOT website, SH-82 carried approximately 21,000 vehicles per day in 2012. The 20-year growth factor along this segment of the highway, 1.47, equates to an annual growth rate of 1.94 percent per year. CDOT SH-82 growth information is provided in Appendix B. The existing traffic volumes along both SH-82 and CR-154 were grown at this annual rate and twenty-year growth factor in order to determine future 2015 and 2033 background traffic at the key intersections prior to the addition of project traffic. Background traffic volumes for 2015 and 2033 are shown in Figures 4 and 5, respectively. 1 7 ( 4 2 ) 0 ( 2 ) 0 (0 ) 4 5 (2 8 ) 1 (0 )0 (0 ) 3 0 (3 3 ) 7 8 0 ( 1 , 5 4 6 ) 1 , 1 9 7 ( 8 6 3 ) 1 6 ( 1 7 ) 0 ( 0 ) 0 (0 ) 0 ( 2 ) 0 (1 ) 1 (2 ) 2 8 ( 4 3 ) 4 9 ( 3 7 ) 3 ( 1 ) 2 4 ( 5 9 ) 0 ( 2 ) 0 (0 ) 6 3 (4 0 ) 1 (0 )0 (0 ) 4 3 (4 7 ) 1 , 1 0 3 ( 2 , 1 8 7 ) 1 , 6 9 3 ( 1 , 2 2 0 ) 2 2 ( 2 4 ) 0 ( 0 ) 0 (0 ) 0 ( 2 ) 0 (1 ) 1 (2 ) 4 0 ( 6 0 ) 6 9 ( 5 3 ) 3 ( 1 ) Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 096337000 – Buffalo Valley Apartments Page 12 5.0 PROJECT TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS 5.1 Trip Generation Site-generated traffic estimates are determined through a process known as trip generation. Rates and equations are applied to the proposed land use to estimate traffic generated by the development during a specific time interval. The acknowledged source for trip generation rates is the Trip Generation Report1 published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). ITE has established trip rates in nationwide studies of similar land uses. For this study, Kimley- Horn used the ITE Trip Generation Report fitted curve equation that applies to Apartments (ITE Land Use Code 220) based upon 57 dwelling units. As previously noted, the existing site is developed with a 14 room motel and a 9,700-square foot restaurant. The trip generation for the existing development was calculated for comparison purposes using the ITE Trip Generation Report average rate equations that apply to Motel (320) and High-Turnover (Sit Down) Restaurant (932). The existing motel and restaurant uses were calculated to generate 114 and 104, morning and afternoon peak hour weekday trips, respectively.Table 1 summarizes the estimated traffic generation for the existing development. The proposed Buffalo Valley Apartments development is anticipated to generate approximately 468 daily weekday trips. Of these, 32 trips are expected to occur during the morning peak hour, while 49 trips are expected during the afternoon peak hour.Table 1 summarizes the estimated traffic generation for the proposed development. The proposed development is anticipated to generate 894 fewer trips during the average weekday than the existing development. Compared with the existing development, 82 and 55 less morning and afternoon peak hour trips are anticipated, respectively. The trip generation worksheets are included in Appendix C. These calculations illustrate the equations used and directional distribution of trips based on the published ITE Trip Generation Report. 1 Institute of Transportation Engineers,Trip Generation: An Information Report, Ninth Edition, Washington DC, 2012. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 096337000 – Buffalo Valley Apartments Page 13 Table 1 – Buffalo Valley Apartments Trip Generation Comparison Use Weekday Vehicle Trips AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily In Out Total In Out Total Motel (14 rooms)128 3 6 9 4 4 8 Restaurant (9,700 SF)1,234 58 47 105 58 38 96 Existing Development Total 1,362 61 53 114 62 42 104 Apartments (57 dwelling units)468 6 26 32 32 17 49 Difference between Existing and Proposed Developments -894 -55 -27 -82 -30 -25 -55 5.2 Trip Distribution Distribution of site traffic on the adjacent roadways and through the key intersections was based on the area street system characteristics, existing traffic patterns, surrounding area employment and retail information, anticipated surrounding development areas, and the proposed access system for the project. The directional distribution of traffic is a means to quantify the percentage of site-generated traffic that approaches the site from a given direction and departs the site back to the original source direction.Figure 6 illustrates the expected project trip distribution for the Buffalo Valley Apartments development. 5.3 Traffic Assignment Traffic assignment was obtained by applying the distribution of Figure 6 to the estimated traffic generation of the project shown in T a b l e 1. The Buffalo Valley Apartments project traffic assignment is shown in Figure 7. 5.4 Total (Background Plus Project) Traffic The Buffalo Valley Apartments project traffic volumes were added to the background volumes to represent estimated traffic conditions for the 2015 build out horizon and long term 2033 horizon.Figure 8 illustrates the background plus project traffic volumes for the 2015 horizon at the key intersections. The 2033 background plus project traffic volumes are shown in Figure 9. 4 0 % 4 0 % 2 0 % 4 0 % (4 0 %)(4 0 %) 4 0 % 8 0 % (8 0 %)(2 0 %) 2 0 % 2 ( 1 3 ) 1 0 (7 ) 1 0 (7 ) 2 ( 1 3 ) 5 ( 2 6 ) 2 1 (1 4 ) 5 (3 ) 1 ( 6 ) 1 9 ( 5 5 ) 0 ( 2 ) 0 (0 ) 5 5 (3 5 ) 1 (0 )0 (0 ) 4 0 (4 0 ) 7 8 0 ( 1 , 5 4 6 ) 1 , 1 9 7 ( 8 6 3 ) 1 8 ( 3 0 ) 0 ( 0 ) 0 (0 ) 5 ( 2 6 ) 2 1 (1 4 ) 5 (3 ) 2 8 ( 4 3 ) 5 0 ( 4 3 ) 1 ( 6 ) 2 6 ( 7 2 ) 0 ( 2 ) 0 (0 ) 7 3 (4 7 ) 1 (0 )0 (0 ) 5 3 (5 4 ) 1 , 1 0 3 ( 2 , 1 8 7 ) 1 , 6 9 3 ( 1 , 2 2 0 ) 2 4 ( 3 7 ) 0 ( 0 ) 0 (0 ) 5 ( 2 6 ) 2 1 (1 4 ) 5 (3 ) 4 0 ( 6 0 ) 6 9 ( 5 3 ) 1 ( 6 ) Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 096337000 – Buffalo Valley Apartments Page 18 6.0 TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS Kimley-Horn’s analysis of traffic operations in the site vicinity was conducted to determine potential capacity deficiencies in the 2015 and 2033 development horizons at the identified key intersections. The acknowledged source for determining overall capacity is the Highway Capacity Manual2. 6.1 Analysis Methodology Capacity analysis results are listed in terms of Level of Service (LOS). LOS is a qualitative term describing operating conditions a driver will experience while traveling on a particular street or highway during a specific time interval. It ranges from A (very little delay) to F (long delays and congestion). For intersections and roadways in this study area, common traffic engineering practice recommends intersection LOS D as the minimum desirable threshold for acceptable operations.Table 2 shows the definition of level of service for signalized and unsignalized intersections. Table 2 – Level of Service Definitions Level of Service Signalized Intersection Average Total Delay (sec/veh) Unsignalized Intersection Average Total Delay (sec/veh) A £10 £10 B >10 and £ 20 >10 and £ 15 C >20 and £ 35 >15 and £ 25 D >35 and £ 55 >25 and £ 35 E >55 and £ 80 >35 and £ 50 F >80 >50 _______________ Definitions provided from the Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 2010. 2 Transportation Research Board,Highway Capacity Manual, Washington DC, 2010. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 096337000 – Buffalo Valley Apartments Page 19 Study area intersections were analyzed based on average total delay analysis for signalized and unsignalized intersections. Under the unsignalized analysis, the level of service (LOS) for a stop controlled intersection is determined by the computed or measured control delay and is defined for the minor movement. Level of service for a stop-controlled intersection is not defined for the intersection as a whole. Level of service for a signalized intersection is defined for each approach and for the intersection. The intersection analysis was conducted using Synchro software with the analysis results reported using the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) procedure. 6.2 Intersection Operational Analysis Calculations for the level of service at the key intersections identified for study are provided in Appendix D. The analyses are based on the lane geometry and intersection control shown in Figure 2. The existing SH-82/CR-154 traffic signal cycle length of 100 seconds was used in the analysis as obtained from RFTA Corridor Traffic Analysis prepared for the City of Glenwood Springs. The existing signal phasing was also used in the traffic analysis. These analyses determine what improvements may be needed at the intersection and access to handle background traffic growth and project related traffic in the two study horizons. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 096337000 – Buffalo Valley Apartments Page 20 SH-82 and CR-154 The existing intersection of SH-82 with CR-154 operates with a traffic signal. The westbound and eastbound left turns from the highway operate with protected only left turn phasing. The intersection currently operates acceptably with a LOS A during both morning and afternoon peak hours. The intersection is anticipated to continue to operate at LOS A in 2015, with or without the addition of project traffic. In 2033 the intersection is anticipated to continue operating at LOS A during both peak hours, with or without the addition of project traffic. Table 3 provides the results of the level of service analysis conducted at this intersection. Table 3 – SH-82 and CR-154 LOS Results Scenario Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour Delay (sec/veh)LOS Delay (sec/veh)LOS 2013 Existing 4.7 A 4.8 A 2015 Background 4.8 A 5.0 A 2015 Background Plus Project 5.6 A 5.7 A 2033 Background 6.9 A 8.1 A 2033 Background Plus Project 7.8 A 9.2 A Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 096337000 – Buffalo Valley Apartments Page 21 CR-154 and Project Access The existing unsignalized T-intersection of CR-154 with the access drive to the project site currently operates with assumed stop control on the northbound access drive approach to the intersection. With this configuration, all movements are anticipated to operate acceptably throughout the 2033 horizon, with or without the addition of the Buffalo Valley Apartments project traffic. It is recommended that a R1-1 “STOP” sign be installed on the access drive approach of the intersection for traffic exiting the property.Table 4 provides the results of the LOS analysis conducted at this intersection. For the purpose of the analysis, the access drive approach is considered the “northbound” approach. Table 4 – CR-154 and Project Access LOS Results Scenario Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour Delay (sec/veh)LOS Delay (sec/veh) LOS 2013 Existing Westbound Left Northbound Approach 0.0 8.9 A A 7.3 8.8 A A 2015 Background Westbound Left Northbound Approach 0.0 8.9 A A 7.3 8.8 A A 2015 Background Plus Project Westbound Left Northbound Approach 7.3 8.8 A A 7.4 8.8 A A 2035 Background Westbound Left Northbound Approach 0.0 9.1 A A 7.3 9.0 A A 2035 Background Plus Project Westbound Left Northbound Approach 7.4 8.9 A A 7.4 8.8 A A Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 096337000 – Buffalo Valley Apartments Page 22 6.3 Auxiliary Turn Lane Analysis along SH-82 Redevelopment of the site is anticipated to decrease the trip generation of this parcel. Therefore, it is believed that new CDOT access permit applications won’t be necessary. It is assumed that the CR-154 access to SH-82 has been permitted for a higher traffic volume previously. Garfield County should work with CDOT to verify the existing permitted traffic volume. An auxiliary turn lane analysis has been performed for the SH-82 and CR-154 intersection. CDOT identifies vehicle volume thresholds for warrants of auxiliary turn lanes along state highways. These thresholds were applied as it relates to the weekday peak hour volumes at the SH-82 intersection with CR-154. The CDOT State Highway Access Category Schedule categorizes the segment of SH-82 through the intersection with CR-154 as E-X (Expressway). At this intersection, SH-82 provides two lanes of through travel in each direction with a posted 55 mile per hour posted speed limit. For the E-X category, SHAC turn lane threshold requirements are as follows: ·A left turn deceleration lane and taper with storage length is required for any access with a projected peak hour ingress turning volume greater than 10 vph. The taper length is to be included in addition to the required deceleration length. ·A right turn deceleration lane plus taper is required for any access with a projected peak hour ingress turning volume greater than 10 vph. The taper length is included in addition to the required deceleration length. ·A right turn acceleration lane plus taper is required for any access with a projected peak hour right turning volume greater than 10 vph. The taper length is to be included in addition to the required acceleration length. Based on these thresholds from the SHAC, all possible auxiliary turn lanes are warranted at the SH-82 and CR-154 intersection based on existing traffic volumes. The following turn lane improvements are warranted at the SH-82 and CR-154 intersection: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 096337000 – Buffalo Valley Apartments Page 23 ·A westbound to southbound left turn deceleration lane along SH-82 is warranted today based on existing traffic volumes during both the morning (16 vph) and afternoon (40 vph) peak hours having traffic volumes greater than the warrant threshold of 10 vph. Based on the SHAC, this lane should provide deceleration, plus storage, plus taper length. The left turn traffic volume is projected to be 72 vehicles per hour in 2033, so 75 feet of storage length is required. The deceleration length is 600 feet, plus the 18.5 to 1 bay taper based on the 55 mile per hour speed limit of SH-82 through this intersection. Therefore, per the SHAC, this lane should provide a left turn lane length of 675 feet plus a 225-foot bay taper. This left turn lane exists today and has been constructed at a length of approximately 350 feet with a 120-foot bay taper. It is believed that lengthening this left turn lane is not feasible or desirable since it has been designated as a back-to-back left turn lane for the eastbound left at Red Canyon Road intersection further to the southeast. ·An eastbound to southbound right turn deceleration lane is warranted today based on existing morning (15 vph) and afternoon (16 vph) peak hour traffic exceeding the warrant volume threshold of 10 vph. Based on the SHAC, this lane should provide deceleration plus taper length. The deceleration length is 600 feet, plus the 18.5 to 1 bay taper based on the posted 55 mile per hour speed limit of SH-82 through this intersection. Therefore, per the SHAC, this lane should provide a right turn lane length of 600 feet plus a 225-foot bay taper. This right turn deceleration lane exists today with a length of approximately 250 feet plus a 200-foot bay taper. Therefore, the existing lane does not meet current SHAC standards. It is believed that this right turn deceleration lane length may have been constructed at the existing length due to a pullout that exists along eastbound SH-82 approximately 450 feet west of the SH-82 and CR-154 intersection. ·An eastbound acceleration lane along SH-82 for right turning traffic from CR-154 is warranted based on existing traffic and SHAC thresholds. The morning peak hour right turn volume is 43 vph and the afternoon peak hour right turn volume is 27 vph, which are both greater than the 10 vph threshold volume. A right turn acceleration lane along Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 096337000 – Buffalo Valley Apartments Page 24 eastbound SH-82 at this CR-154 intersection has not been constructed, although warranted based on existing traffic volumes. It is possible that the requirement was waived by CDOT due to topographical constraints. If constructed, an acceleration lane length of 960 feet plus a 225-foot taper would be required to meet SHAC requirements. However, an access to Holy Cross Energy is located approximately 700 feet east of the SH-82 and CR-154 intersection. So, if this acceleration lane were constructed, it is believed that it would be a combination acceleration/deceleration lane between CR-154 and the Holy Cross Energy access along eastbound SH-82. Of note, it is believed that if traffic volume counts were conducted at the SH-82 and Holy Cross Energy access, a right turn deceleration lane may be warranted as well. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 096337000 – Buffalo Valley Apartments Page 25 7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the analysis presented in this report, Kimley-Horn believes the proposed Buffalo Valley Apartments project will be successfully incorporated into the existing roadway network. Analysis of the existing street network and the proposed project development with the expected traffic volumes resulted in the following recommendations: ·It is recommended that the project access drive approach to CR-154 operate with stop control. Therefore, it is recommended that a R1-1 “STOP” sign be posted on this approach out of the property. ·Redevelopment of this site to apartments is anticipated to generate less traffic than the previous Buffalo Valley restaurant and motel. Therefore, it is believed that CDOT will not require an access permit application. ·All on-site and off-site roadway improvements should be incorporated into the Civil Drawings, and conform to standards of CDOT, the City of Glenwood Springs, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), and the Manual on Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) – 2009 Edition. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 096337000 – Buffalo Valley Apartments APPENDICES Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 096337000 – Buffalo Valley Apartments APPENDIX A Intersection Count Sheets RIDGEVIEW DATA COLLECTION 6392 Starlight Drive Morrison, CO 80465 File Name : CR154andSH82AM Site Code : IPO 20 Start Date : 11/20/2013 Page No : 1 Glenwood Springs Buffalo Valley Apartments AM Peak CR 154 and SH 82 Groups Printed- Unshifted CR 154 Eastbound CR 154 Westbound SH 82 Northbound SH 82 Southbound Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 0 0 11 11 000 04 110 0 114 0 259 0 259 384 07:15 AM 108 9000 02 131 0 133 0 276 3 279 421 07:30 AM 6 0 16 22 000 00 195 0 195 0 291 0 291 508 07:45 AM 10 0 7 17 100 15 238 0 243 0 328 0 328 589 Total 17 0 42 59 1 0 0 1 11 674 0 685 0 1154 3 1157 1902 08:00 AM 6 0 10 16 000 04 151 0 155 0 272 5 277 448 08:15 AM 7 0 10 17 000 07 166 0 173 0 261 10 271 461 08:30 AM 4 0 13 17 001 12 142 0 144 0 212 3 215 377 08:45 AM 6 0 13 19 000 02 161 0 163 0 194 4 198 380 Total 23 0 46 69 0 0 1 1 15 620 0 635 0 939 22 961 1666 Grand Total 40 0 88 128 101 226 1294 0 1320 0 2093 25 2118 3568 Apprch %31.2 0 68.8 50 0 50 29 8 0 09 8 . 8 1 . 2 Total %1.1 0 2.5 3.6 0000 . 10.7 36.3 0 37 0 58.7 0.7 59.4 RIDGEVIEW DATA COLLECTION 6392 Starlight Drive Morrison, CO 80465 File Name : CR154andSH82AM Site Code : IPO 20 Start Date : 11/20/2013 Page No : 2 Glenwood Springs Buffalo Valley Apartments AM Peak CR 154 and SH 82 SH 82 C R 1 5 4 C R 1 5 4 SH 82 Right 25 Thru 2093 Left 0 InOut Total 1335 2118 3453 R i g h t 1 T h r u 0 L e f t 1 O u t T o t a l I n 0 2 2 Left 26 Thru 1294 Right 0 Out TotalIn 2182 1320 3502 Le f t 40 Th r u 0 Ri g h t 88 To t a l Ou t In 51 1 2 8 1 7 9 11/20/2013 07:00 AM 11/20/2013 08:45 AM Unshifted North RIDGEVIEW DATA COLLECTION 6392 Starlight Drive Morrison, CO 80465 File Name : CR154andSH82AM Site Code : IPO 20 Start Date : 11/20/2013 Page No : 3 Glenwood Springs Buffalo Valley Apartments AM Peak CR 154 and SH 82 CR 154 Eastbound CR 154 Westbound SH 82 Northbound SH 82 Southbound Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:30 AM 07:30 AM 6016 22 000 00 195 0 195 0 291 0 291 508 07:45 AM 10 07 1 71 00 1 5 238 0 243 0 328 0 328 589 08:00 AM 6 0 10 16 000 04 151 0 155 0 272 5 277 448 08:15 AM 7 0 10 17 000 07 166 0 173 0 261 10 271 461 Total Volume 29 0 43 72 1 0 0 1 16 750 0 766 0 1152 15 1167 2006 % App. Total 40.3 0 59.7 100 0 0 2.1 97.9 0 0 98.7 1.3 PHF .725 .000 .672 .818 .250 .000 .000 .250 .571 .788 .000 .788 .000 .878 .375 .889 .851 SH 82 C R 1 5 4 C R 1 5 4 SH 82 Right 15 Thru 1152 Left 0 InOut Total 779 1167 1946 R i g h t 0 T h r u 0 L e f t 1 O u t T o t a l I n 0 1 1 Left 16 Thru 750 Right 0 Out TotalIn 1196 766 1962 Le f t 29 Th r u 0 Ri g h t 43 To t a l Ou t In 31 7 2 1 0 3 Peak Hour Begins at 07:30 AM Unshifted Peak Hour Data North RIDGEVIEW DATA COLLECTION 6392 Starlight Drive Morrison, CO 80465 File Name : CR154andSH82AM Site Code : IPO 20 Start Date : 11/20/2013 Page No : 4 Glenwood Springs Buffalo Valley Apartments AM Peak CR 154 and SH 82 Image 1 RIDGEVIEW DATA COLLECTION 6392 Starlight Drive Morrison, CO 80465 File Name : CR154andSH82PM Site Code : IPO 20 Start Date : 11/19/2013 Page No : 1 Glenwood Springs Buffalo Valley Apartments PM Peak CR 154 and SH 82 Groups Printed- Unshifted CR 154 Eastbound CR 154 Westbound SH 82 Northbound SH 82 Southbound Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 04:00 PM 5 0 12 17 000 013 274 0 287 0 206 2 208 512 04:15 PM 405 9000 010 336 0 346 0 205 4 209 564 04:30 PM 18 0 8 26 000 08 337 1 346 0 189 4 193 565 04:45 PM 309 1 2000 09 378 0 387 0 199 5 204 603 Total 30 0 34 64 0 0 0 0 40 1325 1 1366 0 799 15 814 2244 05:00 PM 605 1 1000 013 374 0 387 0 224 4 228 626 05:15 PM 505 1 0000 010 399 1 410 0 218 3 221 641 05:30 PM 107 8100 110 322 0 332 1 207 5 213 554 05:45 PM 407 1 1000 011 290 0 301 0 191 3 194 506 Total 16 0 24 40 1 0 0 1 44 1385 1 1430 1 840 15 856 2327 Grand Total 46 0 58 104 100 184 2710 2 2796 1 1639 30 1670 4571 Apprch %44.2 0 55.8 1 0 000 3 96.9 0.1 0.1 98.1 1.8 Total %10 1 . 32 . 3000 01.8 59.3 0 61.2 0 35.9 0.7 36.5 RIDGEVIEW DATA COLLECTION 6392 Starlight Drive Morrison, CO 80465 File Name : CR154andSH82PM Site Code : IPO 20 Start Date : 11/19/2013 Page No : 2 Glenwood Springs Buffalo Valley Apartments PM Peak CR 154 and SH 82 SH 82 C R 1 5 4 C R 1 5 4 SH 82 Right 30 Thru 1639 Left 1 InOut Total 2756 1670 4426 R i g h t 0 T h r u 0 L e f t 1 O u t T o t a l I n 3 1 4 Left 84 Thru 2710 Right 2 Out TotalIn 1698 2796 4494 Le f t 46 Th r u 0 Ri g h t 58 To t a l Ou t In 11 4 1 0 4 2 1 8 11/19/2013 04:00 PM 11/19/2013 05:45 PM Unshifted North RIDGEVIEW DATA COLLECTION 6392 Starlight Drive Morrison, CO 80465 File Name : CR154andSH82PM Site Code : IPO 20 Start Date : 11/19/2013 Page No : 3 Glenwood Springs Buffalo Valley Apartments PM Peak CR 154 and SH 82 CR 154 Eastbound CR 154 Westbound SH 82 Northbound SH 82 Southbound Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:30 PM 04:30 PM 18 08 26 000 08 337 1 346 0 189 4 193 565 04:45 PM 309 12 000 09 378 0 387 0 199 5 204 603 05:00 PM 605 1 1000 013 374 0 387 0 224 4 228 626 05:15 PM 505 1 0000 010 399 1 410 0 218 3 221 641 Total Volume 32 0 27 59 0 0 0 0 40 1488 2 1530 0 830 16 846 2435 % App. Total 54.2 0 45.8 0 0 0 2.6 97.3 0.1 0 98.1 1.9 PHF .444 .000 .750 .567 .000 .000 .000 .000 .769 .932 .500 .933 .000 .926 .800 .928 .950 SH 82 C R 1 5 4 C R 1 5 4 SH 82 Right 16 Thru 830 Left 0 InOut Total 1520 846 2366 R i g h t 0 T h r u 0 L e f t 0 O u t T o t a l I n 2 0 2 Left 40 Thru 1488 Right 2 Out TotalIn 857 1530 2387 Le f t 32 Th r u 0 Ri g h t 27 To t a l Ou t In 56 5 9 1 1 5 Peak Hour Begins at 04:30 PM Unshifted Peak Hour Data North RIDGEVIEW DATA COLLECTION 6392 Starlight Drive Morrison, CO 80465 File Name : CR154andSH82PM Site Code : IPO 20 Start Date : 11/19/2013 Page No : 4 Glenwood Springs Buffalo Valley Apartments PM Peak CR 154 and SH 82 Image 1 RIDGEVIEW DATA COLLECTION 6392 Starlight Drive Morrison, CO 80465 File Name : CR154BuffaloValleyBarAM Site Code : IPO 20 Start Date : 11/20/2013 Page No : 1 Glenwood Springs Buffalo Valley Apartments AM Peak CR 154 and Old Buffalo Valley Sports Bar Groups Printed- Unshifted Old Buffalo Valley Sports Bar Eastbound CR 154 Northbound CR 154 Southbound Start Time Left Right App. Total Left Thru App. Total Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 03 314 580 8 16 07:15 AM 00 002 270 7 9 07:30 AM 00 000 015 1 16 16 07:45 AM 00 001 1 1 1 50 5 16 Total 0 3 3 1 17 18 35 1 36 57 08:00 AM 10 106 614 2 16 23 08:15 AM 00 001 0 1 013 0 13 23 08:30 AM 00 013 412 0 12 16 08:45 AM 01 103 311 0 11 15 Total 1 1 2 1 22 23 50 2 52 77 Grand Total 14 523 9 4 185 3 88 134 Apprch %20 80 4.9 95.1 96.6 3.4 Total %0.7 3 3.7 1.5 29.1 30.6 63.4 2.2 65.7 RIDGEVIEW DATA COLLECTION 6392 Starlight Drive Morrison, CO 80465 File Name : CR154BuffaloValleyBarAM Site Code : IPO 20 Start Date : 11/20/2013 Page No : 2 Glenwood Springs Buffalo Valley Apartments AM Peak CR 154 and Old Buffalo Valley Sports Bar CR 154 O l d B u f f a l o V a l l e y S p o r t s B a r CR 154 Right 3 Thru 85 InOut Total 40 88 128 Left 2 Thru 39 Out TotalIn 89 41 130 Le f t 1 Ri g h t 4 To t a l Ou t In 5 5 1 0 11/20/2013 07:00 AM 11/20/2013 08:45 AM Unshifted North RIDGEVIEW DATA COLLECTION 6392 Starlight Drive Morrison, CO 80465 File Name : CR154BuffaloValleyBarAM Site Code : IPO 20 Start Date : 11/20/2013 Page No : 3 Glenwood Springs Buffalo Valley Apartments AM Peak CR 154 and Old Buffalo Valley Sports Bar Old Buffalo Valley Sports Bar Eastbound CR 154 Northbound CR 154 Southbound Start Time Left Right App. Total Left Thru App. Total Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:30 AM 07:30 AM 00 000 015 1 16 16 07:45 AM 00 00 11 11 50 5 16 08:00 AM 1 0 1 06 614 2 16 23 08:15 AM 00 001 0 1 013 0 13 23 Total Volume 1 0 1 0 27 27 47 3 50 78 % App. Total 100 0 0 100 94 6 PHF .250 .000 .250 .000 .614 .614 .783 .375 .781 .848 CR 154 O l d B u f f a l o V a l l e y S p o r t s B a r CR 154 Right 3 Thru 47 InOut Total 28 50 78 Left 0 Thru 27 Out TotalIn 47 27 74 Le f t 1 Ri g h t 0 To t a l Ou t In 3 1 4 Peak Hour Begins at 07:30 AM Unshifted Peak Hour Data North RIDGEVIEW DATA COLLECTION 6392 Starlight Drive Morrison, CO 80465 File Name : CR154BuffaloValleyBarAM Site Code : IPO 20 Start Date : 11/20/2013 Page No : 4 Glenwood Springs Buffalo Valley Apartments AM Peak CR 154 and Old Buffalo Valley Sports Bar Image 1 RIDGEVIEW DATA COLLECTION 6392 Starlight Drive Morrison, CO 80465 File Name : CR154BuffaloValleyBarPM Site Code : IPO 20 Start Date : 11/19/2013 Page No : 1 Glenwood Springs Buffalo Valley Apartments PM Peak CR 154 and Old Buffalo Valley Sports Bar Groups Printed- Unshifted Buffalo Valley Sports Bar Eastbound CR 154 Northbound CR 154 Southbound Start Time Left Right App. Total Left Thru App. Total Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 04:00 PM 11 201 4 1 413 0 13 29 04:15 PM 10 121 1 1 3 60 6 20 04:30 PM 00 008 890 9 17 04:45 PM 00 008 881 9 17 Total 2 1 3 2 41 43 36 1 37 83 05:00 PM 01 111 4 1 5 60 6 22 05:15 PM 00 007 730 3 10 05:30 PM 00 011 3 1 4 80 8 22 05:45 PM 00 009 910 0 10 19 Total 0 1 1 2 43 45 27 0 27 73 Grand Total 22 448 4 8 863 1 64 156 Apprch %50 50 4.5 95.5 98.4 1.6 Total %1.3 1.3 2.6 2.6 53.8 56.4 40.4 0.6 41 RIDGEVIEW DATA COLLECTION 6392 Starlight Drive Morrison, CO 80465 File Name : CR154BuffaloValleyBarPM Site Code : IPO 20 Start Date : 11/19/2013 Page No : 2 Glenwood Springs Buffalo Valley Apartments PM Peak CR 154 and Old Buffalo Valley Sports Bar CR 154 B u f f a l o V a l l e y S p o r t s B a r CR 154 Right 1 Thru 63 InOut Total 86 64 150 Left 4 Thru 84 Out TotalIn 65 88 153 Le f t 2 Ri g h t 2 To t a l Ou t In 5 4 9 11/19/2013 04:00 PM 11/19/2013 05:45 PM Unshifted North RIDGEVIEW DATA COLLECTION 6392 Starlight Drive Morrison, CO 80465 File Name : CR154BuffaloValleyBarPM Site Code : IPO 20 Start Date : 11/19/2013 Page No : 3 Glenwood Springs Buffalo Valley Apartments PM Peak CR 154 and Old Buffalo Valley Sports Bar Buffalo Valley Sports Bar Eastbound CR 154 Northbound CR 154 Southbound Start Time Left Right App. Total Left Thru App. Total Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:00 PM 04:00 PM 11 20 14 14 13 0 13 29 04:15 PM 10 12 11 13 60 6 20 04:30 PM 00 008 890 9 17 04:45 PM 00 008 88 1 9 17 Total Volume 2 1 3 2 41 43 36 1 37 83 % App. Total 66.7 33.3 4.7 95.3 97.3 2.7 PHF .500 .250 .375 .250 .732 .768 .692 .250 .712 .716 CR 154 B u f f a l o V a l l e y S p o r t s B a r CR 154 Right 1 Thru 36 InOut Total 43 37 80 Left 2 Thru 41 Out TotalIn 37 43 80 Le f t 2 Ri g h t 1 To t a l Ou t In 3 3 6 Peak Hour Begins at 04:00 PM Unshifted Peak Hour Data North RIDGEVIEW DATA COLLECTION 6392 Starlight Drive Morrison, CO 80465 File Name : CR154BuffaloValleyBarPM Site Code : IPO 20 Start Date : 11/19/2013 Page No : 4 Glenwood Springs Buffalo Valley Apartments PM Peak CR 154 and Old Buffalo Valley Sports Bar Image 1 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 096337000 – Buffalo Valley Apartments APPENDIX B CDOT SH-82 Traffic Information ROUTE REFPT ENDREFPT LENGTH UPDATEYR AADT AADTYR YR20FACTOR LOCATION 082A 2.194 7.824 5.544 2013 21000 2012 1.47 ON SH 82 GLEN AVE S/O BLAKE AVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 096337000 – Buffalo Valley Apartments APPENDIX C Trip Generation Worksheets Project Buffalo Valley Apartments Subject Trip Generation for Apartment Designed by BP Date November 27, 2013 Job No.96337000 Checked by CR Sheet No.1 of 1 TRIP GENERATION MANUAL TECHNIQUES ITE Trip Generation Manual 9th Edition, Fitted Curve Equations Land Use Code - Apartment, (220) Independant Variable - Dwelling Units (X) X =57 T =Average Vehicle Trip Ends Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. (page 334) Daily Weekday Directional Distribution:20%ent. 80%exit. T = 0.49 (X) + 3.73 T =32 Average Vehicle Trip Ends T = 0.49 *57.0 + 3.73 6 entering 26 exiting 6 +=32 Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. (page 335) Daily Weekday Directional Distribution:65%ent. 35%exit. T = 0.55 (X) + 17.65 T =49 Average Vehicle Trip Ends T = 0.55 *57.0 + 17.65 32 entering 17 exiting 32 +17 =49 Weekday (page 333) Daily Weekday Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting T = 6.06 (X) + 123.56 T =468 Average Vehicle Trip Ends T = 6.06 *57.0 + 123.56 234 entering 234 exiting 234 +234 =468 26 Project Buffalo Valley Apartments Subject Trip Generation for Motel Designed by BP Date December 02, 2013 Job No.096337000 Checked by CR Sheet No.1 of 1 TRIP GENERATION MANUAL TECHNIQUES ITE Trip Generation Manual 9th Edition, Average Rate Equations Land Use Code - Motel (320) Independant Variable - Rooms (X) X =14 T =Average Vehicle Trip Ends Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. (page 655) Average Weekday Directional Distribution:36%ent. 64%exit. (T) = 0.64 (X)T =9 Average Vehicle Trip Ends (T) = 0.64 *(14.0)3 entering 6 exiting 3 +6 =9 Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. (page 656) Average Weekday Directional Distribution:53%ent. 47%exit. (T) = 0.58 (X)T =8 Average Vehicle Trip Ends (T) = 0.58 *(14.0)4 entering 4 exiting 4 +4 =8 Weekday (page 654) Average Weekday Directional Distribution:50%ent. 50%exit. (T) = 9.11 (X)T =128 Average Vehicle Trip Ends (T) = 9.11 *(14.0)64 entering 64 exiting 64 +64 =128 Project Buffalo Valley Apartments Subject Trip Generation for High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant Designed by BP Date December 02, 2013 Job No. Checked by CDR Date Sheet No.1 of 1 TRIP GENERATION MANUAL TECHNIQUES ITE Trip Generation Manual 9th Edition, Average Rate Equations Land Use Code - High Turnover Sit-Down Restaurant (932) Independant Variable - 1000 Square Feet Gross Floor Area (X) Gross Floor Area =9,700 Square Feet X = 9.700 T =Average Vehicle Trip Ends Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. (Page 1886) Average Weekday Directional Distribution:55%ent. 45%exit. T = 10.81 (X)T =105 Average Vehicle Trip Ends T = 10.81 *9.700 58 entering 47 exiting Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. (page 1887) Average Weekday Directional Distribution:60%ent. 40%exit. T = 9.85 (X)T =96 Average Vehicle Trip Ends T = 9.85 *9.700 58 entering 38 exiting Weekday (page 1885) Average Weekday Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting T = 127.15 (X)T =1234 Average Vehicle Trip Ends T = 127.15 *9.700 617 entering 617 exiting 96337000 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 096337000 – Buffalo Valley Apartments APPENDIX D Intersection Analysis Worksheets HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 2013 Existing AM Peak 1: SH-82 & CR-154 12/5/2013 12/5/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h)29 0 43 1 0 0 16 750 0 0 1152 15 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow veh/h/ln 190.0 186.3 190.0 190.0 186.3 190.0 186.3 186.3 190.0 186.3 186.3 186.3 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 Cap, veh/h 96 5 59 164 0 0 28 3123 0 2 2884 1226 Arrive On Green 0.06 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.84 0.00 0.00 0.77 0.77 Sat Flow, veh/h 538 82 910 1185 0 0 1774 3725 0 1774 3725 1583 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 79 0 0 1 0 0 17 815 0 0 1252 16 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1530 0 0 1185 0 0 1774 1863 0 1774 1863 1583 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 3.7 0.0 0.0 9.4 0.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.8 3.7 0.0 0.0 9.4 0.2 Prop In Lane 0.41 0.59 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 161 0 0 164 0 0 28 3123 0 2 2884 1226 V/C Ratio(X)0.49 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.61 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.43 0.01 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 391 0 0 371 0 0 129 3123 0 86 2884 1226 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 38.1 0.0 0.0 36.2 0.0 0.0 40.4 1.4 0.0 0.0 3.2 2.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.9 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile Back of Q (50%), veh/ln 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.4 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.0 Lane Grp Delay (d), s/veh 40.4 0.0 0.0 36.2 0.0 0.0 60.3 1.6 0.0 0.0 3.7 2.1 Lane Grp LOS D D E A A A Approach Vol, veh/h 79 1 832 1268 Approach Delay, s/veh 40.4 36.2 2.8 3.6 Approach LOS D D A A Timer Assigned Phs 4 8 5 2 1 6 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.4 9.4 5.3 73.3 0.0 68.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.0 18.0 6.0 66.0 4.0 64.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.2 2.1 2.8 5.7 0.0 11.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 0.2 0.0 22.4 0.0 21.5 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 4.7 HCM 2010 LOS A Notes HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 2013 Existing PM Peak 1: SH-82 & CR-154 12/5/2013 12/5/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h)32 0 27 0 0 0 40 1488 2 0 830 16 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow veh/h/ln 190.0 186.3 190.0 190.0 186.3 190.0 186.3 186.3 190.0 186.3 186.3 186.3 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 Cap, veh/h 107 1 36 0 98 0 54 3174 4 2 2890 1228 Arrive On Green 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.85 0.85 0.00 0.78 0.78 Sat Flow, veh/h 796 19 675 0 1863 0 1774 3720 5 1774 3725 1583 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 64 0 0 0 0 0 43 810 809 0 902 17 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1489 0 0 0 1863 0 1774 1863 1862 1774 1863 1583 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 9.6 9.6 0.0 6.1 0.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 9.6 9.6 0.0 6.1 0.2 Prop In Lane 0.55 0.45 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 144 0 0 0 98 0 54 1589 1589 2 2890 1228 V/C Ratio(X)0.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.51 0.51 0.00 0.31 0.01 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 345 0 0 0 350 0 125 1589 1589 83 2890 1228 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 39.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 41.0 1.6 1.6 0.0 2.8 2.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 22.6 1.2 1.2 0.0 0.3 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile Back of Q (50%), veh/ln 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 1.2 1.2 0.0 1.5 0.0 Lane Grp Delay (d), s/veh 42.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 63.6 2.8 2.8 0.0 3.1 2.2 Lane Grp LOS D E A A A A Approach Vol, veh/h 64 0 1662 919 Approach Delay, s/veh 42.0 0.0 4.4 3.1 Approach LOS D A A Timer Assigned Phs 4 8 5 2 1 6 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.5 8.5 6.6 76.6 0.0 70.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 16.0 6.0 68.0 4.0 66.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.6 0.0 4.0 11.6 0.0 8.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 0.0 0.0 29.6 0.0 30.0 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 4.8 HCM 2010 LOS A Notes HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 2015 Background AM Peak 1: SH-82 & CR-154 12/5/2013 12/5/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h)30 0 45 1 0 0 17 780 0 0 1197 16 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow veh/h/ln 190.0 186.3 190.0 190.0 186.3 190.0 186.3 186.3 190.0 186.3 186.3 186.3 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 Cap, veh/h 98 6 62 167 0 0 29 3110 0 2 2867 1218 Arrive On Green 0.07 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.83 0.00 0.00 0.77 0.77 Sat Flow, veh/h 531 85 915 1171 0 0 1774 3725 0 1774 3725 1583 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 82 0 0 1 0 0 18 848 0 0 1301 17 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1532 0 0 1171 0 0 1774 1863 0 1774 1863 1583 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 4.0 0.0 0.0 10.1 0.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.3 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.8 4.0 0.0 0.0 10.1 0.2 Prop In Lane 0.40 0.60 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 165 0 0 167 0 0 29 3110 0 2 2867 1218 V/C Ratio(X)0.50 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.62 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.01 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 395 0 0 373 0 0 152 3110 0 87 2867 1218 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 37.6 0.0 0.0 35.6 0.0 0.0 40.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 3.3 2.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile Back of Q (50%), veh/ln 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.4 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 Lane Grp Delay (d), s/veh 39.9 0.0 0.0 35.6 0.0 0.0 59.4 1.7 0.0 0.0 3.9 2.2 Lane Grp LOS D D E A A A Approach Vol, veh/h 82 1 866 1318 Approach Delay, s/veh 39.9 35.6 2.9 3.8 Approach LOS D D A A Timer Assigned Phs 4 8 5 2 1 6 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.5 9.5 5.3 72.3 0.0 67.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.0 18.0 7.0 66.0 4.0 63.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.3 2.1 2.8 6.0 0.0 12.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 0.3 0.0 24.1 0.0 22.7 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 4.8 HCM 2010 LOS A Notes HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 2015 Background PM Peak 1: SH-82 & CR-154 12/5/2013 12/5/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h)33 0 28 0 0 0 42 1546 2 0 863 17 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow veh/h/ln 190.0 186.3 190.0 190.0 186.3 190.0 186.3 186.3 190.0 186.3 186.3 186.3 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 Cap, veh/h 109 1 37 0 101 0 58 3165 4 2 2871 1220 Arrive On Green 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.85 0.85 0.00 0.77 0.77 Sat Flow, veh/h 789 24 678 0 1863 0 1774 3720 4 1774 3725 1583 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 66 0 0 0 0 0 46 841 841 0 938 18 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1491 0 0 0 1863 0 1774 1863 1862 1774 1863 1583 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.2 10.4 10.4 0.0 6.5 0.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.2 10.4 10.4 0.0 6.5 0.2 Prop In Lane 0.55 0.45 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 147 0 0 0 101 0 58 1585 1584 2 2871 1220 V/C Ratio(X)0.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.79 0.53 0.53 0.00 0.33 0.01 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 348 0 0 0 353 0 147 1585 1584 84 2871 1220 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 39.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 40.5 1.7 1.7 0.0 3.0 2.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.9 1.3 1.3 0.0 0.3 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile Back of Q (50%), veh/ln 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 1.3 1.3 0.0 1.7 0.1 Lane Grp Delay (d), s/veh 41.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 61.4 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.3 2.3 Lane Grp LOS D E A A A A Approach Vol, veh/h 66 0 1728 956 Approach Delay, s/veh 41.6 0.0 4.5 3.2 Approach LOS D A A Timer Assigned Phs 4 8 5 2 1 6 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.6 8.6 6.8 75.8 0.0 69.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 16.0 7.0 68.0 4.0 65.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.7 0.0 4.2 12.4 0.0 8.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 0.0 0.0 31.5 0.0 31.8 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 5.0 HCM 2010 LOS A Notes HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 2015 Total AM Peak 1: SH-82 & CR-154 12/5/2013 12/5/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h)40 0 55 1 0 0 19 780 0 0 1197 18 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow veh/h/ln 190.0 186.3 190.0 190.0 186.3 190.0 186.3 186.3 190.0 186.3 186.3 186.3 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 Cap, veh/h 107 8 75 177 0 0 33 3054 0 2 2807 1193 Arrive On Green 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.82 0.00 0.00 0.75 0.75 Sat Flow, veh/h 541 99 893 1080 0 0 1774 3725 0 1774 3725 1583 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 103 0 0 1 0 0 21 848 0 0 1301 20 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1532 0 0 1080 0 0 1774 1863 0 1774 1863 1583 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 11.1 0.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.5 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 1.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 11.1 0.3 Prop In Lane 0.42 0.58 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 190 0 0 177 0 0 33 3054 0 2 2807 1193 V/C Ratio(X)0.54 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.64 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.46 0.02 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 388 0 0 352 0 0 149 3054 0 85 2807 1193 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 37.5 0.0 0.0 35.1 0.0 0.0 40.8 1.8 0.0 0.0 3.9 2.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile Back of Q (50%), veh/ln 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.8 0.0 0.0 2.9 0.1 Lane Grp Delay (d), s/veh 39.9 0.0 0.0 35.1 0.0 0.0 59.7 2.0 0.0 0.0 4.5 2.6 Lane Grp LOS D D E A A A Approach Vol, veh/h 103 1 869 1321 Approach Delay, s/veh 39.9 35.1 3.4 4.4 Approach LOS D D A A Timer Assigned Phs 4 8 5 2 1 6 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.1 11.1 5.5 72.5 0.0 67.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.0 18.0 7.0 66.0 4.0 63.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.5 2.1 3.0 6.4 0.0 13.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.3 0.4 0.0 24.1 0.0 22.6 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 5.6 HCM 2010 LOS A Notes HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 2015 Total PM Peak 1: SH-82 & CR-154 12/5/2013 12/5/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h)40 0 35 0 0 0 55 1546 2 0 863 30 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow veh/h/ln 190.0 186.3 190.0 190.0 186.3 190.0 186.3 186.3 190.0 186.3 186.3 186.3 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 Cap, veh/h 115 4 47 0 125 0 77 3118 4 2 2784 1183 Arrive On Green 0.07 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.84 0.84 0.00 0.75 0.75 Sat Flow, veh/h 737 61 705 0 1863 0 1774 3720 4 1774 3725 1583 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 81 0 0 0 0 0 60 841 841 0 938 33 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1503 0 0 0 1863 0 1774 1863 1862 1774 1863 1583 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 11.2 11.2 0.0 7.2 0.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 11.2 11.2 0.0 7.2 0.5 Prop In Lane 0.53 0.47 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 166 0 0 0 125 0 77 1561 1561 2 2784 1183 V/C Ratio(X)0.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.78 0.54 0.54 0.00 0.34 0.03 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 349 0 0 0 354 0 189 1561 1561 84 2784 1183 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 38.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 39.9 2.0 2.0 0.0 3.6 2.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.4 1.3 1.3 0.0 0.3 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile Back of Q (50%), veh/ln 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 1.7 1.7 0.0 2.0 0.1 Lane Grp Delay (d), s/veh 41.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 55.3 3.4 3.4 0.0 3.9 2.8 Lane Grp LOS D E A A A A Approach Vol, veh/h 81 0 1742 971 Approach Delay, s/veh 41.0 0.0 5.1 3.9 Approach LOS D A A Timer Assigned Phs 4 8 5 2 1 6 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.6 9.6 7.7 74.7 0.0 67.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 16.0 9.0 68.0 4.0 63.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.5 0.0 4.8 13.2 0.0 9.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 0.0 0.0 31.4 0.0 31.1 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 5.7 HCM 2010 LOS A Notes HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 2035 Background AM Peak 1: SH-82 & CR-154 12/5/2013 12/5/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h)43 0 63 1 0 0 24 1103 0 0 1693 22 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow veh/h/ln 190.0 186.3 190.0 190.0 186.3 190.0 186.3 186.3 190.0 186.3 186.3 186.3 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 Cap, veh/h 106 9 84 175 0 0 38 3046 0 2 2799 1190 Arrive On Green 0.09 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.82 0.00 0.00 0.75 0.75 Sat Flow, veh/h 526 101 907 1013 0 0 1774 3725 0 1774 3725 1583 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 115 0 0 1 0 0 26 1199 0 0 1840 24 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1535 0 0 1013 0 0 1774 1863 0 1774 1863 1583 Q Serve(g_s), s 5.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 7.7 0.0 0.0 21.6 0.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.5 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 1.3 7.7 0.0 0.0 21.6 0.3 Prop In Lane 0.41 0.59 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 199 0 0 175 0 0 38 3046 0 2 2799 1190 V/C Ratio(X)0.58 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.69 0.39 0.00 0.00 0.66 0.02 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 330 0 0 290 0 0 99 3046 0 80 2799 1190 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 39.6 0.0 0.0 36.7 0.0 0.0 43.3 2.2 0.0 0.0 5.4 2.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.9 0.4 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile Back of Q (50%), veh/ln 2.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 1.5 0.0 0.0 6.4 0.1 Lane Grp Delay (d), s/veh 42.2 0.0 0.0 36.8 0.0 0.0 63.2 2.6 0.0 0.0 6.7 2.8 Lane Grp LOS D D E A A A Approach Vol, veh/h 115 1 1225 1864 Approach Delay, s/veh 42.2 36.8 3.9 6.6 Approach LOS D D A A Timer Assigned Phs 4 8 5 2 1 6 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.3 12.3 5.9 76.9 0.0 71.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 16.0 5.0 68.0 4.0 67.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.5 2.1 3.3 9.7 0.0 23.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 0.4 0.0 42.0 0.0 33.7 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 6.9 HCM 2010 LOS A Notes HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 2035 Background PM Peak 1: SH-82 & CR-154 12/5/2013 12/5/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h)47 0 40 0 0 0 59 2187 2 0 1220 24 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow veh/h/ln 190.0 186.3 190.0 190.0 186.3 190.0 186.3 186.3 190.0 186.3 186.3 186.3 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 Cap, veh/h 123 6 53 0 145 0 82 3085 3 2 2741 1165 Arrive On Green 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.83 0.83 0.00 0.74 0.74 Sat Flow, veh/h 743 73 688 0 1863 0 1774 3722 3 1774 3725 1583 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 94 0 0 0 0 0 64 1190 1190 0 1326 26 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1504 0 0 0 1863 0 1774 1863 1862 1774 1863 1583 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 25.9 25.9 0.0 12.5 0.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 25.9 25.9 0.0 12.5 0.4 Prop In Lane 0.54 0.46 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 182 0 0 0 145 0 82 1544 1544 2 2741 1165 V/C Ratio(X)0.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.78 0.77 0.77 0.00 0.48 0.02 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 344 0 0 0 348 0 186 1544 1544 83 2741 1165 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 38.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 40.4 3.5 3.5 0.0 4.6 3.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.4 3.8 3.8 0.0 0.6 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile Back of Q (50%), veh/ln 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 5.3 5.3 0.0 3.5 0.1 Lane Grp Delay (d), s/veh 41.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 54.8 7.2 7.2 0.0 5.3 3.1 Lane Grp LOS D D A A A A Approach Vol, veh/h 94 0 2443 1352 Approach Delay, s/veh 41.1 0.0 8.5 5.2 Approach LOS D A A Timer Assigned Phs 4 8 5 2 1 6 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.7 10.7 8.0 75.0 0.0 67.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 16.0 9.0 68.0 4.0 63.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.2 0.0 5.1 27.9 0.0 14.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 0.0 0.0 36.9 0.0 44.0 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 8.1 HCM 2010 LOS A Notes HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 2035 Total AM Peak 1: SH-82 & CR-154 12/5/2013 12/5/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h)53 0 73 1 0 0 26 1103 0 0 1693 24 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow veh/h/ln 190.0 186.3 190.0 190.0 186.3 190.0 186.3 186.3 190.0 186.3 186.3 186.3 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 Cap, veh/h 116 10 96 185 0 0 40 2993 0 2 2746 1167 Arrive On Green 0.11 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.74 0.74 Sat Flow, veh/h 553 95 882 973 0 0 1774 3725 0 1774 3725 1583 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 137 0 0 1 0 0 28 1199 0 0 1840 26 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1530 0 0 973 0 0 1774 1863 0 1774 1863 1583 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 8.5 0.0 0.0 23.3 0.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 7.9 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 1.4 8.5 0.0 0.0 23.3 0.4 Prop In Lane 0.42 0.58 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 223 0 0 185 0 0 40 2993 0 2 2746 1167 V/C Ratio(X)0.61 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.71 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.67 0.02 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 324 0 0 273 0 0 98 2993 0 78 2746 1167 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 39.6 0.0 0.0 36.2 0.0 0.0 44.1 2.6 0.0 0.0 6.2 3.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.6 0.4 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile Back of Q (50%), veh/ln 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 1.8 0.0 0.0 6.9 0.1 Lane Grp Delay (d), s/veh 42.3 0.0 0.0 36.2 0.0 0.0 64.7 3.0 0.0 0.0 7.5 3.2 Lane Grp LOS D D E A A A Approach Vol, veh/h 137 1 1227 1866 Approach Delay, s/veh 42.3 36.2 4.4 7.5 Approach LOS D D A A Timer Assigned Phs 4 8 5 2 1 6 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.9 13.9 6.0 77.0 0.0 71.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 16.0 5.0 68.0 4.0 67.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.9 2.1 3.4 10.5 0.0 25.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.3 0.5 0.0 41.7 0.0 32.7 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 7.8 HCM 2010 LOS A Notes HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 2035 Total PM Peak 1: SH-82 & CR-154 12/5/2013 12/5/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h)54 0 47 0 0 0 72 2187 2 0 1220 37 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow veh/h/ln 190.0 186.3 190.0 190.0 186.3 190.0 186.3 186.3 190.0 186.3 186.3 186.3 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 Cap, veh/h 129 7 63 0 168 0 101 3043 3 2 2663 1132 Arrive On Green 0.09 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.82 0.82 0.00 0.71 0.71 Sat Flow, veh/h 728 80 699 0 1863 0 1774 3722 3 1774 3725 1583 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 110 0 0 0 0 0 78 1190 1190 0 1326 40 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1507 0 0 0 1863 0 1774 1863 1862 1774 1863 1583 Q Serve(g_s), s 5.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.8 28.0 28.0 0.0 13.7 0.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.8 28.0 28.0 0.0 13.7 0.6 Prop In Lane 0.54 0.46 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 200 0 0 0 168 0 101 1523 1522 2 2663 1132 V/C Ratio(X)0.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.77 0.78 0.78 0.00 0.50 0.04 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 340 0 0 0 344 0 205 1523 1522 82 2663 1132 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 38.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 40.4 4.0 4.0 0.0 5.5 3.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.9 4.1 4.1 0.0 0.7 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile Back of Q (50%), veh/ln 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.9 6.0 6.0 0.0 4.1 0.2 Lane Grp Delay (d), s/veh 41.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 52.3 8.0 8.1 0.0 6.2 3.7 Lane Grp LOS D D A A A A Approach Vol, veh/h 110 0 2457 1366 Approach Delay, s/veh 41.0 0.0 9.5 6.1 Approach LOS D A A Timer Assigned Phs 4 8 5 2 1 6 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.8 11.8 8.9 74.9 0.0 66.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.0 16.0 10.0 68.0 4.0 62.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.2 0.0 5.8 30.0 0.0 15.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 0.0 0.0 35.2 0.0 42.2 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 9.2 HCM 2010 LOS A Notes HCM 2010 TWSC 2013 Existing AM Peak 2: Access & CR-154 12/5/2013 12/5/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 0.1 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Vol, veh/h 47 3 0 27 1 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None -None Storage Length ----0 - Veh in Median Storage, #0 --0 0 - Grade, %0 --0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, %2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 51 3 0 29 1 0 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 54 0 82 53 Stage 1 ----53 - Stage 2 ----29 - Follow-up Headway -- 2.218 -3.518 3.318 Pot Capacity-1 Maneuver -- 1551 -920 1014 Stage 1 ----970 - Stage 2 ----994 - Time blocked-Platoon, %--- Mov Capacity-1 Maneuver -- 1551 -920 1014 Mov Capacity-2 Maneuver ----920 - Stage 1 ----970 - Stage 2 ----994 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 8.9 HCM LOS A Minor Lane / Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h)920 -- 1551 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.001 ---- HCM Control Delay (s)8.9 --0 - HCM Lane LOS A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0.004 --0 - Notes ~ : Volume Exceeds Capacity; $ : Delay Exceeds 300 Seconds; Error : Computation Not Defined HCM 2010 TWSC 2013 Existing PM Peak 2: Access & CR-154 12/5/2013 12/5/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 0.5 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Vol, veh/h 36 1 2 41 2 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None -None Storage Length ----0 - Veh in Median Storage, #0 --0 0 - Grade, %0 --0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, %2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 39 1 2 45 2 1 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 40 0 89 40 Stage 1 ----40 - Stage 2 ----49 - Follow-up Headway -- 2.218 -3.518 3.318 Pot Capacity-1 Maneuver -- 1570 -912 1031 Stage 1 ----982 - Stage 2 ----973 - Time blocked-Platoon, %--- Mov Capacity-1 Maneuver -- 1570 -911 1031 Mov Capacity-2 Maneuver ----911 - Stage 1 ----982 - Stage 2 ----972 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.3 8.8 HCM LOS A Minor Lane / Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h)948 -- 1570 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.003 -- 0.001 - HCM Control Delay (s)8.8 -- 7.296 0 HCM Lane LOS A A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0.01 -- 0.004 - Notes ~ : Volume Exceeds Capacity; $ : Delay Exceeds 300 Seconds; Error : Computation Not Defined HCM 2010 TWSC 2015 Background AM Peak 2: Access & CR-154 12/5/2013 12/5/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 0.1 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Vol, veh/h 49 3 0 28 1 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None -None Storage Length ----0 - Veh in Median Storage, #0 --0 0 - Grade, %0 --0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, %2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 53 3 0 30 1 0 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 57 0 85 55 Stage 1 ----55 - Stage 2 ----30 - Follow-up Headway -- 2.218 -3.518 3.318 Pot Capacity-1 Maneuver -- 1547 -916 1012 Stage 1 ----968 - Stage 2 ----993 - Time blocked-Platoon, %--- Mov Capacity-1 Maneuver -- 1547 -916 1012 Mov Capacity-2 Maneuver ----916 - Stage 1 ----968 - Stage 2 ----993 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 8.9 HCM LOS A Minor Lane / Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h)916 -- 1547 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.001 ---- HCM Control Delay (s)8.9 --0 - HCM Lane LOS A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0.004 --0 - Notes ~ : Volume Exceeds Capacity; $ : Delay Exceeds 300 Seconds; Error : Computation Not Defined HCM 2010 TWSC 2015 Background PM Peak 2: Access & CR-154 12/5/2013 12/5/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 0.5 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Vol, veh/h 37 1 2 43 2 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None -None Storage Length ----0 - Veh in Median Storage, #0 --0 0 - Grade, %0 --0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, %2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 40 1 2 47 2 1 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 41 0 92 41 Stage 1 ----41 - Stage 2 ----51 - Follow-up Headway -- 2.218 -3.518 3.318 Pot Capacity-1 Maneuver -- 1568 -908 1030 Stage 1 ----981 - Stage 2 ----971 - Time blocked-Platoon, %--- Mov Capacity-1 Maneuver -- 1568 -907 1030 Mov Capacity-2 Maneuver ----907 - Stage 1 ----981 - Stage 2 ----970 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.3 8.8 HCM LOS A Minor Lane / Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h)945 -- 1568 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.003 -- 0.001 - HCM Control Delay (s)8.8 -- 7.299 0 HCM Lane LOS A A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0.01 -- 0.004 - Notes ~ : Volume Exceeds Capacity; $ : Delay Exceeds 300 Seconds; Error : Computation Not Defined HCM 2010 TWSC 2015 Total AM Peak 2: Access & CR-154 12/5/2013 12/5/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 2.4 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Vol, veh/h 50 1 5 28 5 21 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None -None Storage Length ----0 - Veh in Median Storage, #0 --0 0 - Grade, %0 --0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, %2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 54 1 5 30 5 23 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 55 0 96 55 Stage 1 ----55 - Stage 2 ----41 - Follow-up Headway -- 2.218 -3.518 3.318 Pot Capacity-1 Maneuver -- 1550 -903 1012 Stage 1 ----968 - Stage 2 ----981 - Time blocked-Platoon, %--- Mov Capacity-1 Maneuver -- 1550 -900 1012 Mov Capacity-2 Maneuver ----900 - Stage 1 ----968 - Stage 2 ----978 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 1.1 8.8 HCM LOS A Minor Lane / Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h)988 -- 1550 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.029 -- 0.004 - HCM Control Delay (s)8.8 -- 7.331 0 HCM Lane LOS A A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0.088 -- 0.011 - Notes ~ : Volume Exceeds Capacity; $ : Delay Exceeds 300 Seconds; Error : Computation Not Defined HCM 2010 TWSC 2015 Total PM Peak 2: Access & CR-154 12/5/2013 12/5/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 2.5 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Vol, veh/h 43 6 26 43 3 14 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None -None Storage Length ----0 - Veh in Median Storage, #0 --0 0 - Grade, %0 --0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, %2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 47 7 28 47 3 15 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 53 0 153 50 Stage 1 ----50 - Stage 2 ----103 - Follow-up Headway -- 2.218 -3.518 3.318 Pot Capacity-1 Maneuver -- 1553 -839 1018 Stage 1 ----972 - Stage 2 ----921 - Time blocked-Platoon, %--- Mov Capacity-1 Maneuver -- 1553 -823 1018 Mov Capacity-2 Maneuver ----823 - Stage 1 ----972 - Stage 2 ----904 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 2.8 8.8 HCM LOS A Minor Lane / Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h)977 -- 1553 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.019 -- 0.018 - HCM Control Delay (s)8.8 -- 7.361 0 HCM Lane LOS A A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0.058 -- 0.056 - Notes ~ : Volume Exceeds Capacity; $ : Delay Exceeds 300 Seconds; Error : Computation Not Defined HCM 2010 TWSC 2035 Background AM Peak 2: Access & CR-154 12/5/2013 12/5/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 0.1 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Vol, veh/h 69 3 0 40 1 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None -None Storage Length ----0 - Veh in Median Storage, #0 --0 0 - Grade, %0 --0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, %2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 75 3 0 43 1 0 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 78 0 120 77 Stage 1 ----77 - Stage 2 ----43 - Follow-up Headway -- 2.218 -3.518 3.318 Pot Capacity-1 Maneuver -- 1520 -876 984 Stage 1 ----946 - Stage 2 ----979 - Time blocked-Platoon, %--- Mov Capacity-1 Maneuver -- 1520 -876 984 Mov Capacity-2 Maneuver ----876 - Stage 1 ----946 - Stage 2 ----979 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 9.1 HCM LOS A Minor Lane / Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h)876 -- 1520 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.001 ---- HCM Control Delay (s)9.1 --0 - HCM Lane LOS A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0.004 --0 - Notes ~ : Volume Exceeds Capacity; $ : Delay Exceeds 300 Seconds; Error : Computation Not Defined HCM 2010 TWSC 2035 Background PM Peak 2: Access & CR-154 12/5/2013 12/5/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 0.3 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Vol, veh/h 53 1 2 60 2 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None -None Storage Length ----0 - Veh in Median Storage, #0 --0 0 - Grade, %0 --0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, %2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 58 1 2 65 2 1 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 59 0 128 58 Stage 1 ----58 - Stage 2 ----70 - Follow-up Headway -- 2.218 -3.518 3.318 Pot Capacity-1 Maneuver -- 1545 -866 1008 Stage 1 ----965 - Stage 2 ----953 - Time blocked-Platoon, %--- Mov Capacity-1 Maneuver -- 1545 -865 1008 Mov Capacity-2 Maneuver ----865 - Stage 1 ----965 - Stage 2 ----952 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.2 9 HCM LOS A Minor Lane / Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h)908 -- 1545 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.004 -- 0.001 - HCM Control Delay (s)9 -- 7.333 0 HCM Lane LOS A A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0.011 -- 0.004 - Notes ~ : Volume Exceeds Capacity; $ : Delay Exceeds 300 Seconds; Error : Computation Not Defined HCM 2010 TWSC 2035 Total AM Peak 2: Access & CR-154 12/5/2013 12/5/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 1.9 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Vol, veh/h 69 1 5 40 5 21 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None -None Storage Length ----0 - Veh in Median Storage, #0 --0 0 - Grade, %0 --0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, %2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 75 1 5 43 5 23 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 76 0 130 76 Stage 1 ----76 - Stage 2 ----54 - Follow-up Headway -- 2.218 -3.518 3.318 Pot Capacity-1 Maneuver -- 1523 -864 985 Stage 1 ----947 - Stage 2 ----969 - Time blocked-Platoon, %--- Mov Capacity-1 Maneuver -- 1523 -861 985 Mov Capacity-2 Maneuver ----861 - Stage 1 ----947 - Stage 2 ----966 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.8 8.9 HCM LOS A Minor Lane / Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h)958 -- 1523 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.029 -- 0.004 - HCM Control Delay (s)8.9 -- 7.372 0 HCM Lane LOS A A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0.091 -- 0.011 - Notes ~ : Volume Exceeds Capacity; $ : Delay Exceeds 300 Seconds; Error : Computation Not Defined HCM 2010 TWSC 2035 Total PM Peak 2: Access & CR-154 12/5/2013 12/5/2013 Baseline Synchro 8 Report Page 1 Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 2.1 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Vol, veh/h 53 6 26 60 3 14 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None -None Storage Length ----0 - Veh in Median Storage, #0 --0 0 - Grade, %0 --0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, %2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 58 7 28 65 3 15 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 64 0 183 61 Stage 1 ----61 - Stage 2 ----122 - Follow-up Headway -- 2.218 -3.518 3.318 Pot Capacity-1 Maneuver -- 1538 -806 1004 Stage 1 ----962 - Stage 2 ----903 - Time blocked-Platoon, %--- Mov Capacity-1 Maneuver -- 1538 -791 1004 Mov Capacity-2 Maneuver ----791 - Stage 1 ----962 - Stage 2 ----886 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 2.2 8.8 HCM LOS A Minor Lane / Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h)958 -- 1538 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.019 -- 0.018 - HCM Control Delay (s)8.8 -- 7.385 0 HCM Lane LOS A A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0.059 -- 0.056 - Notes ~ : Volume Exceeds Capacity; $ : Delay Exceeds 300 Seconds; Error : Computation Not Defined Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 096337000 – Buffalo Valley Apartments APPENDIX E Site Plan p h 9 7 0 . 9 4 5 . 5 5 4 4 f x 9 7 0 . 9 4 5 . 5 5 5 8 w w w . m o u n t a i n c r o s s - e n g . c o m 8 2 6 1 / 2 G r a n d A v e n u e G l e n w o o d S p r i n g s , C O 8 1 6 0 1 C i v i l a n d E n v i r o n m e n t a l C o n s u l t i n g a n d D e s i g n S i t e P l a n P a r t n e r s I I I , L L C B u f f a l o V a l l e y A p a r t m e n t s 1 November 21 , 2014 Mr. Robin Millyard Public Works Director 101 West gth MOUNTl\IN CROSS fN<ilNff RIN<i, INC. Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Request for Sewer and Water Service to Partners III, LLC: Buffalo Valley Dear Robin: This purpose of this correspondence is to obtain a can and will serve letter for potable water service and sanitary sewer service to the Partners III , LLC parcel formerly occupied by Buffalo Valley. The letter will be used in a Limited Impact Application to Garfield County where the project proposes to switch the uses from restaurant and motel into apartments. Two buildings will contain a mixture of 11 one-bedroom, 37 two-bedroom apartments, and 6 three-bedroom aprutments for a total of 54 apartments . Garfield County has requirements for the content of the letter that are detailed in Section 4- 203 .M.1 on page 4-33 of the Unified Land Use Resolution. Let me know if you wou ld like a hard copy for your reference. Thanks in advance. Feel free to call if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely, Mountai Cross Engine er 'ng , Inc. 826 % Grand Avenue, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 P: 970.945.5544 F: 970.945.5558 www.mountaincross-eng.com December 2, 2014 Mr. Chris Hale, PE Mountain Cross Engineering, Inc. 826-1/2 Grand Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Re: Water & Sewer Service to 3637 Highway 82, Glenwood Springs -Partners III, LLC Parcel To Whom It May Concern: The purpose of this letter is to confirm the City's ability and intention to provide potable water and sanitary sewer utility services for the proposed apartment development, located on the parcel designated as 2185-271- 00-029 on the Garfield County Assessor Parcel Maps, and known as 3637 Highway 82, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601. This parcel is historically known as 'Buffalo Valley'. This property is currently served water and sewer by the City of Glenwood Springs. The proposed development will need to be evaluated regarding water consumption as it relates to System Improvement Fees for water and sewer. The existing Pre-annexation Agreement remains in full force and effect. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me. Sincerely, .... ~c:. ~'11M-~ Robin Millyard Public Works Director 101 WEST gm STilEET, GLENWOOD SPRJNGS, CO 81601 970 384-6400 970 945-2597 FAX WWW .COGS .US Responses to “Article 7: Standards” are below the applicable sections in blue. ARTICLE 7: STANDARDS DIVISION 1. GENERAL APPRANDARDS. The following standards apply to all proposed Land Use Changes, including divisions of land, unless elsewhere in this Code a use is explicitly exempt from one or more standards. 7-101. ZONE DISTRICT USE REGULATIONS. The Land Use Change shall comply with Article 3, Zoning, including any applicable zone district use restrictions and regulations. The proposed apartments are an allowed uses in the Commercial Limited zone district. 7-102. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTS. The Land Use Change is in general conformance with the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan and complies with any applicable intergovernmental agreement. The proposed apartments are in general conformance to the Comprehensive Plan since they are an allowed use in the Commercial Limited zone district. In meetings with staff, the City of Glenwood Springs has no comments either for or against the project. 7-103. COMPATIBILITY. The nature, scale, and intensity of the proposed use are compatible with adjacent land uses. The proposed apartments are compatible with adjacent land uses. Across the river is the airport, a church is to the north, a mobile home park is to the south with Holy Cross Energy complex past that, and a commercial area of stores and warehouses across Highway 82 to the east. An Adjacent Land Use map is provided in the application materials. 7-104. SOURCE OF WATER. All applications for Land Use Change Permits shall have an adequate, reliable, physical, long-term, and legal water supply to serve the use, except for land uses that do not require water, or that contain Temporary Facilities served by a licensed water hauler. A. BOCC Determination. The BOCC, pursuant to C.R.S. § 29-20-301, et seq., shall not approve an application for a Land Use Change Permit, including divisions of land, unless it determines in its sole discretion, after considering the application and all of the information provided, that the Applicant has satisfactorily demonstrated that the proposed water supply will be adequate. Nothing in this section shall be construed to require that the Applicant own or have acquired the proposed water supply or constructed the related infrastructure at the time of the application. B. Determination of Adequate Water. The BOCC’s sole determination as to whether an Applicant has an Adequate Water Supply to meet the water supply requirements of a proposed development shall be based on consideration of the following information: 1. The documentation required by the Water Supply Plan per section 4-203.M.; 2. A letter from the State engineer commenting on the documentation provided in the Water Supply Plan per section 4-203.M.; 3. Whether the Applicant has paid to a Water Supply Entity a fee or charge for the purpose of acquiring water for or expanding or constructing the infrastructure to serve the proposed development; and 4. Any other information deemed relevant by the BOCC to determine, in its sole discretion, whether the water supply for the proposed development is adequate, including without limitation, any information required to be submitted by the Applicant pursuant to this Code or State statutes. The existing site is served by water from the City of Glenwood Springs municipal water system. The City has provided a “Will Serve” letter for the proposed apartments that is included in the application materials. 7-105. CENTRAL WATER DISTRIBUTION AND WASTEWATER SYSTEMS. A. Water Distribution Systems. The land use shall be served by a water distribution system that is adequate to serve the proposed use and density. 1. Where water service through a Water Supply Entity is not physically or economically feasible, a central well and distribution system is preferred over individual wells. 2. A Central Water Distribution System is required if: a. The property is located within 400 feet of a Central Water System, the system is available and adequate to serve the proposed development, and connection is practicable and feasible; or b. The residential development consists of 15 or more dwelling units. The existing site is served by water from the City of Glenwood Springs municipal water system. The City has provided a “Will Serve” letter for the proposed apartments that is included in the application materials. B. Wastewater Systems. The land use shall be served by a wastewater system that is adequate to serve the proposed use and density. 1. Every effort shall be made to secure a public sewer extension. Where connections to an existing public sewer are not physically or economically feasible, a central collection system and treatment plant is preferred. 2. A central wastewater system is required if a. The property is located within 400 feet of a Sewage Treatment Facility, the system is available and adequate to serve the proposed development, and connection is practicable and feasible. b. The property is not suitable for an OWTS. Septic systems are not permitted on parcels less than 1 acre in size. SE The existing site is served by a force main sanitary sewer by the City of Glenwood Springs. The City has provided a “Will Serve” letter for the proposed apartments that is included in the application materials. 7-106. PUBLIC UTILITIES. A. Adequate Public Utilities. Adequate Public Utilities shall be available to serve the land use. B. Approval of Utility Easement by Utility Company. Utility easements shall be subject to approval by the applicable utility companies and, where required, additional easements shall be provided for main switching stations and substations. The Applicant shall work with the utility companies to provide reasonably- sized easements in appropriate locations. C. Utility Location. Unless otherwise provided in this Code, the following conditions shall apply to the location of utility services. 1. Underground Location. All utilities except major power transmission lines, transformers, switching and terminal boxes, meter cabinets, and other appurtenant facilities shall be located underground throughout the development unless it is demonstrated to the satisfaction of the BOCC that compliance is impractical or not feasible and will result in undue hardship. 2. Easement Location. As applied to Subdivisions and Exemptions, all utility lines, including appurtenances, shall be placed either within roads or public rights-of-way. 3. Dimensional Requirements. a. Easements centered on common Rear Lot Lines shall be at least 16 feet wide. b. Where an easement abuts a Rear Lot Line that is not the Rear Lot Line of another lot, or that is on the perimeter of the development, the easement width shall be a minimum of 10 feet. c. Where inclusion of utilities within the Rear Lot Line is impractical due to topographical or other conditions, perpetual unobstructed easements at least 10 feet in width shall be provided alongside Lots Lines with satisfactory access to the road or Rear Lot Line. d. Where easements are combined with a water course, drainage way, channel, or stream and the use would be in conflict with drainage requirements or Wetlands, an additional utility easement of at least 10 feet in width shall be provided. e. Multiple use of an easement is encouraged to minimize the number of easements. D. Dedication of Easements. All utility easements shall be dedicated to the public. Drainage easement may be dedicated to either the public or to an HOA. E. Construction and Installation of Utilities. Applicants shall make the necessary arrangements with each service utility for the construction and installation of required utilities. Utilities shall be installed in a manner that avoids unnecessary removal of trees or excessive excavations, and shall be reasonably free from physical obstructions. F. Conflicting Encumbrances. Easements shall be free from conflicting legal encumbrances. The existing site is served by gas from SourceGas, power from Xcel Energy, phone from Century Link, and cable television from Comcast. All these services will remain for the proposed apartments. 7-107. ACCESS AND ROADWAYS. All roads shall be designed to provide for adequate and safe access and shall be reviewed by the County Engineer. A. Access to Public Right-of-Way. All lots and parcels shall have legal and physical access to a public right-of-way. B. Safe Access. Access to and from the use shall be safe and in conformance with applicable County, State, and Federal access regulations. Where the Land Use Change causes warrant(s) for improvements to State or Federal highways or County Roads, the developer shall be responsible for paying for those improvements. C. Adequate Capacity. Access serving the proposed use shall have the capacity to efficiently and safely service the additional traffic generated by the use. The use shall not cause traffic congestion or unsafe traffic conditions, impacts to the County, State, and Federal roadway system shall be mitigated through roadway improvements or impact fees, or both. D. Road Dedications. All rights-of-way shall be dedicated to the public and so designated on the Final Plat. They will not, however, be accepted as County roads unless the BOCC specifically designates and accepts them as such. E. Impacts Mitigated. Impacts to County roads associated with hauling, truck traffic, and equipment use shall be mitigated through roadway improvements or impact fees, or both. F. Design Standards. Roadways, surfaces, curbs and gutters, and sidewalks shall be provided as follows: system shall be mitigated through roadway improvements or impact fees, or both. D. Road Dedications. All rights-of-way shall be dedicated to the public and so designated on the Final Plat. They will not, however, be accepted as County roads unless the BOCC specifically designates and accepts them as such. E. Impacts Mitigated. Impacts to County roads associated with hauling, truck traffic, and equipment use shall be mitigated through roadway improvements or impact fees, or both. F. Design Standards. Roadways, surfaces, curbs and gutters, and sidewalks shall be provided as follows: The site has an existing access to South Grand Avenue. The access point will remain but will be improved. The access to the site will be 24’ wide with curb and gutter and a 10% maximum grade. Internal circulation allows for emergency vehicle turning movements and internal sidewalks allow for pedestrian access with minimal vehicle conflicts. Drainage structures are designed to be integral with roadways. See Site Plan sheets for driveway profile and typical section that is included in the application materials. 7-108. USE OF LAND SUBJECT TO NATURAL HAZARDS. Land subject to identified Natural and Geologic Hazards, such as falling rock, landslides, snow slides, mud flows, radiation, flooding, or high water tables, shall not be developed unless it has been designed to eliminate or mitigate the potential effects of hazardous site conditions as designed by a qualified professional engineer and as approved by the County. The proposed project has been evaluated for natural hazards. See Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical report dated April 30, 2013 titled “Preliminary Geotechnical and Geological Review, Proposed Redevelopment, Buffalo Valley Property, 3637 Highway 82, Glenwood Springs, Colorado” 7-109. FIRE PROTECTION. A. Adequate Fire Protection. Adequate fire protection will be provided for each land use change as required by the appropriate fire protection district. B. Subdivisions. All divisions of land must be reviewed and approved by the appropriate fire protection district for adequate primary and secondary access, fire lanes, water sources for fire protection, fire hydrants, and maintenance provisions. The existing site is served by water from the City of Glenwood Springs municipal water system with an existing fire hydrant at the entrance. The existing hydrant will remain. Internal roads allow for emergency vehicle turning with an additional fire hydrant proposed. The City of Glenwood Springs will maintain the fire hydrants. The following resource protection standards apply to all proposed Land Use Changes, including divisions of land unless elsewhere in this Code a use is explicitly exempt from 1 or more standards. 7-201. AGRICULTURAL LANDS. A. No Adverse Affect to Agricultural Operations. Land Use Changes on lands adjacent to or directly affecting agricultural operations shall not adversely affect or otherwise limit the viability of existing agricultural operations. Proposed division and development of the land shall minimize the impacts of development on Agricultural Lands and agricultural operations, and maintain the opportunity for agricultural production. B. Domestic Animal Controls. Dogs and other domestic animals that are not being used to assist with the herding or the care of livestock shall not be permitted to interfere with livestock or the care of livestock on Agricultural Lands. The County shall require protective covenants or deed restrictions as necessary to control domestic animals. C. Fences. The County is a Right to Farm County consistent with section 1-301. Fences shall be constructed to separate the development from adjoining Agricultural Lands or stock drives as required to protect Agricultural Lands by any new development and to separate new development from adjoining agricultural operations. All parts of the fencing including such items as gates, cattle guards, boards, posts, and wiring shall be maintained by the owner, HOA, or other responsible entity. D. Roads. Roads shall be located a sufficient distance back from the property boundaries so that normal maintenance of roads, including snow removal, will not damage boundary fences. Dust control shall be required, both during and after construction, to minimize adverse impacts to livestock and crops. E. Irrigation Ditches. 1. Maintenance. Where irrigation ditches cross or adjoin the land proposed to be developed, the developer shall insure that the use of those ditches, including maintenance, can continue uninterrupted. 2. Rights-of-Way. The land use change shall not interfere with the ditch rights-of-way. 3. Maintenance Easement. A maintenance easement of at least 25 feet from the edges of the ditch banks shall be preserved and indicated on any Final Plat for the division of land or for the final development plan for any other land use. When agreed to in writing by the ditch owner(s), that distance may be decreased. Not Applicable. The proposed site is not adjacent to agricultural operations. 7-202. WILDLIFE HABITAT AREAS. The Applicant shall consult with the Colorado Division of Wildlife or a qualified wildlife biologist in determining how best to avoid or mitigate impacts to wildlife habitat areas. Methods may include, but are not limited to, 1 or more of the following: A. Buffers. Visual and sound buffers shall be created through effective use of topography, vegetation, and similar measures to screen structures and activity areas from habitat areas. B. Locational Controls of Land Disturbance. Land disturbance shall be located so that wildlife is not forced to use new migration corridors, and is not exposed to significantly increased predation, interaction with vehicles, intense human activity, or more severe topography or climate. C. Preservation of Native Vegetation. 1. Proposed Land Use Changes are designed to preserve large areas of vegetation utilized by wildlife for food and cover, based upon recommendations by the Colorado Division of Wildlife. 2. When native vegetation must be removed within habitat areas, it shall be replaced with native and/or desirable nonnative vegetation capable of supporting post-disturbance land use. 3. Vegetation removed to control noxious weeds is not required to be replaced unless the site requires revegetation to prevent other noxious weeds from becoming established. D. Habitat Compensation. Where disturbance of critical wildlife habitat cannot be avoided, the developer may be required to acquire and permanently protect existing habitat to compensate for habitat that is lost to development. E. Domestic Animal Controls. The County may require protective covenants or deed restrictions as necessary to control domestic animals by fencing or kenneling. A wavier for evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Areas is requested. The existing site contains motel and restaurant buildings with paved parking. An existing vegetated hillside of native scrub oak and grasses is along the east side. Any proposed disturbance to the site will be in areas that hold existing pavement and buildings. The native vegetation on the hillside is proposed to remain undisturbed. Since any wildlife habitat areas that would exist on site are most likely on the vegetated hillside that is proposed to remain undisturbed, a waiver for consulting the DOW or hiring a consultant is requested. 7-203. PROTECTION OF WATERBODIES. A. Minimum Setback. 1. A setback of 35 feet measured horizontally from the Typical and Ordinary High Water Mark (TOHWM) on each side of a Waterbody is required. 2. In the case of entrenched or incised streams, where the vertical distance from the bank exceeds 25 feet, all activities, except for those referenced in section 7-203.A.3, will adhere to a setback of 2.5 times the distance between the TOHWMs or 35 feet, whichever is less. 3. A minimum setback of 100 feet measured horizontally from the TOHWM shall be required for any storage of hazardous materials and sand and salt for use on roads. B. Structures Permitted In Setback. Irrigation and water diversion facilities, flood control structures, culverts, bridges, pipelines, and other reasonable and necessary structures requiring some disturbance within the 35 foot setback may be permitted. C. Structures and Activity Prohibited in Setback. Unless otherwise permitted or approved, the following activities and development shall be prohibited in the 35 foot setback: 1. Removal of any existing native vegetation or conducting any activity which will cause any loss of riparian area unless it involves the approved removal of noxious weeds, nonnative species, or dead or diseased trees. 2. Disturbance of existing natural surface drainage characteristics, sedimentation patterns, flow patterns, or flood retention characteristics by any means, including without limitation grading and alteration of existing topography. Measures taken to restore existing topography to improve drainage, flow patterns, and flood control must be approved. D. Compliance with State and Federal Laws. Any development impacting a Waterbody shall comply with all applicable state and federal laws, including, but not limited to, CDPHE water quality control division regulations and the Army Corp of Engineers regulations and permitting for waters of the U.S. The proposed site is 250’ (+/-) away from the Roaring Fork River and on a bench above the River. No incised steams exist across the project. 7-204 DRAINAGE AND EROSION. A. Erosion and Sedimentation. Excluding Grading activities for agricultural purposes, development disturbing 1 acre or more is subject to the CDPHE National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit, unless otherwise exempted by CDPHE. B. Drainage 1. Site Design to Facilitate Positive Drainage. Lots shall be laid out to provide positive drainage away from all buildings. 2. Coordination With Area Storm Drainage Pattern. Individual lot drainage shall be coordinated with the general storm drainage pattern for the area. a. Drainage ditches shall have a minimum Slope of no less than 0.75%. Energy dissipaters or retention ponds shall be installed in drainage ditches where flows are in excess of 5 feet per second. Ditches adjacent to roads shall have a maximum Slope of 3:1 on the inside and outside edges, except where there is a cut Slope on the outside edge, in which case the edge of the ditch shall be matched to the cut Slope. b. Subdrains shall be required for all foundations where possible and shall divert away from building foundations and daylight to proper drainage channels. c. Avoid Drainage to Adjacent Lots. Drainage shall be designed to avoid concentration of drainage from any lot to an adjacent lot. See the included Drainage report, Drainage Plan, and Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP). Since the proposed will disturb more than 1 acre, an application to the CDPHE for permitting is included in the SWMP. The CDPHE permit application will be completed and submitted prior to construction. C. Stormwater Run-Off. These standards shall apply to any new development within 100 feet of a Waterbody and to any other development creating 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surface area. 1. Avoid Direct Discharge to Streams or Other Waterbodies. Stormwater Runoff from project areas likely to contain pollutants shall be managed in a manner that provides for at least 1 of the following and is sufficient to prevent water quality degradation, disturbance to adjoining property, and degradation of public roads. a. Runoff to Vegetated Areas. Direct run-off to stable, vegetated areas capable of maintaining Sheetflow for infiltration. Vegetated receiving areas should be resistant to erosion from a design storm of 0.5 inches in 24 hours. b. On-Site Treatment. On-site treatment of stormwater prior to discharge to any natural Waterbody by use of best management practices designed to detain or infiltrate the Runoff and approved as part of the stormwater quality control plan prior to discharge to any natural Waterbody. c. Discharge to Stormwater Conveyance Structure. Discharge to a stormwater conveyance structure designed to accommodate the projected additional flows from the proposed project, with treatment by a regional or other stormwater treatment facility. 2. Minimize Directly-Connected Impervious Areas. The site design shall minimize the extent of directly- connected impervious areas by including the following requirements: a. Drainage Through Vegetated Pervious Buffer Strips. Runoff from developed impervious surfaces (rooftops, Parking Lots, sidewalks, etc.) shall drain over stable, vegetated pervious areas before reaching stormwater conveyance systems or discharging to Waterbodies. b. Techniques Used in Conjunction with Buffer Strip. The requirement that all impervious areas drain to vegetated pervious buffer strips may be reduced if the outflow from the vegetated pervious buffer strip is directed to other stormwater treatment methods. Examples of other potential techniques to be used in conjunction with vegetated pervious buffer strip are: infiltration devices, grass depressions, constructed Wetlands, sand filters, dry ponds, etc. c. Grass Buffer Strip Slope Design. When impervious surfaces drain onto grass buffer strips, a Slope of less than 10% is encouraged, unless an alternative design is approved by the County. 3. Detain and Treat Runoff. Permanent stormwater detention facilities are required to be designed to detain flows to historic peak discharge rates and to provide water quality benefits and maintained to ensure function. Design criteria for detention facilities include: a. Detention facilities shall ensure the post-development peak discharge rate does not exceed the pre- development peak discharge rate for the 2-year and 25-year return frequency, 24-hour duration storm. In determining Runoff rates, the entire area contributing Runoff shall be considered, including any existing off- site contribution. b. To minimize the threat of major property damage or loss of life, all permanent stormwater detention facilities must demonstrate that there is a safe passage of the 100-year storm event without causing property damage. c. Channels downstream from the stormwater detention pond discharge shall be protected from increased channel scour, bank instability, and erosion and sedimentation from the 25-year return frequency, 24-hour design storm. d. Removal of pollutants shall be accomplished by sizing dry detention basins to incorporate a 40-hour emptying time for a design precipitation event of 0.5 inches in 24 hours, with no more than 50% of the water being released in 12 hours. If retention ponds are used, a 24-hour emptying time is required. For drainage from Parking Lots, vehicle maintenance facilities, or other areas with extensive vehicular use, a sand and oil grease trap or similar measures also may be required. To promote pollutant removal, detention basins length- to-width ratio should be not less than 2, with a ratio of 4 recommended where site constraints allow. A sedimentation “forebay” is recommended to promote long-term functioning of the structure. Access to both the forebay and pond by maintenance equipment is required. e. Culverts, drainage pipes, and bridges shall be designed and constructed in compliance with AASHTO recommendations for a water live load. Site runoff is directed through a system of conveyances to a detention pond. The detention pond is proposed to limit runoff to existing flowrates for the 2-year and 25-year storms. The detention pond will remove pollutants and release detained flows into a grass swale. See the included Drainage report, Drainage Plan, and Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP). 7-205. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY. A. Air Quality. Any Land Use Change shall not cause air quality to be reduced below acceptable levels established by the Colorado Air Pollution Control Division. B. Water Quality. At a minimum, all hazardous materials shall be stored and used in compliance with applicable State and Federal hazardous materials regulations. The Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) addresses storage of hazardous materials during construction. The management of the apartments will store materials in compliance with regulations although very little hazardous materials will be stored on site; anticipated small amounts used for property maintenance of weed control, pest control, paints, and/or fuels for maintenance equipment. Air quality will likely only be affected by dust during construction. Dust control will be mitigated by watering and the project will not reach the threshold for an APEN permit. 7-206. WILDFIRE HAZARDS. The following standards apply to areas subject to wildfire hazards as identified on the County Wildfire Susceptibility Index Map as indicated in the County’s Community Wildfire Protection Plan. A. Location Restrictions. Development associated with the land use change shall not be located in any area designated as a severe wildfire Hazard Area with Slopes greater than 30% or within a fire chimney as identified by the Colorado State Forest Service. B. Development Does Not Increase Potential Hazard. The proposed Land Use Change shall be developed in a manner that does not increase the potential intensity or duration of a wildfire, or adversely affect wildfire behavior or fuel composition. C. Roof Materials and Design. Roof materials shall be made of noncombustible materials or other materials as recommended by the local fire agency. The project is in an area of low Wildfire Hazard. A map showing Wildfire Hazard is included. 7-207. NATURAL AND GEOLOGIC HAZARDS. A. Utilities. Above-ground utility facilities located in Hazard Areas shall be protected by barriers or diversion techniques approved by a qualified professional engineer. The determination to locate utility facilities above ground shall be based upon the recommendation and requirements of the utility service provider and approved by the County. The proposed project has been evaluated for natural hazards. See Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical report dated April 30, 2013 titled “Preliminary Geotechnical and Geological Review, Proposed Redevelopment, Buffalo Valley Property, 3637 Highway 82, Glenwood Springs, Colorado”. Utilities will not be affected. B. Development in Avalanche Hazard Areas. Development may be permitted to occur in Avalanche Hazard Areas if the development complies with the following minimum requirements and standards, as certified by a qualified professional engineer, or qualified professional geologist, and the plan approved by the County. 1. Building construction shall be certified to withstand avalanche impact and static loads and otherwise protected by external avalanche-defense structures that have been similarly certified. 2. Driveways and Subdivision roads shall avoid areas where avalanches have return periods of fewer than 10 years. 3. Clear-cutting or other large-scale removal of vegetation is prohibited in avalanche path starting zones, or in other locations that can increase the potential avalanche hazard on the property. 4. Extractive operations in Avalanche Hazard Areas are prohibited when snow is on the ground unless a program of avalanche control and defense measures has been approved by the County to protect the operation. The proposed project has been evaluated for natural hazards. See Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical report dated April 30, 2013 titled “Preliminary Geotechnical and Geological Review, Proposed Redevelopment, Buffalo Valley Property, 3637 Highway 82, Glenwood Springs, Colorado” C. Development in Landslide Hazard Areas. Development may be permitted to occur in Landslide Hazard Areas only if the development complies with the following minimum requirements and standards, as certified by a qualified professional engineer, or qualified professional geologist, and as approved by the County. 1. Development shall comply with recommended construction practices to artificially stabilize, support, buttress, or retain the potential slide area and to control surface and subsurface drainage that affects the slide area. 2. The following development activities shall be prohibited in Landslide Hazard Areas: a. Activities that add water or weight to the top of the Slope, or along the length of the Slope, or otherwise decrease the stability of the Hazard Area. Measures and structural improvements to permanently control surface and subsurface drainage from the development shall be required. b. Activities that remove vegetation or other natural support material that contributes to its stability. c. Activities that increase the steepness of a potentially unstable Slope. d. Activities that remove the toe of the landslide, unless adequate mechanical support is provided. The proposed project has been evaluated for natural hazards. See Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical report dated April 30, 2013 titled “Preliminary Geotechnical and Geological Review, Proposed Redevelopment, Buffalo Valley Property, 3637 Highway 82, Glenwood Springs, Colorado” D. Development in Rockfall Hazard Areas. Development shall be permitted to occur in rockfall Hazard Areas only if the Applicant demonstrates that the development cannot avoid such areas and the development complies with the following minimum requirements and standards, as certified by a qualified professional engineer, or a qualified professional geologist, and as approved by the County. 1. Development shall comply with recommended construction practices to minimize the degree of hazard. Construction practices may include: a. Stabilizing rocks by bolting, gunite application (cementing), removal of unstable rocks (scaling), cribbing, or installation of retaining walls. b. Slowing or diverting moving rocks with rock fences, screening, channeling, damming, or constructing concrete barriers or covered galleries. c. Installation of structural barriers around vulnerable structures to prevent rock impact. 2. The following development activities shall be prohibited in rockfall Hazard Areas: a. Activities that add water or weight to, or otherwise decrease the stability of, cliffs or overhanging strata. b. Activities that will reduce stability, including activities that remove vegetation or other natural support material, or that require excavation, or cause erosion that will remove underlying support to a rockfall Hazard Area. The proposed project has been evaluated for natural hazards. See Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical report dated April 30, 2013 titled “Preliminary Geotechnical and Geological Review, Proposed Redevelopment, Buffalo Valley Property, 3637 Highway 82, Glenwood Springs, Colorado” E. Development in Alluvial Fan Hazard Area. Development shall only be permitted to occur in an alluvial fan if the Applicant demonstrates that the development cannot avoid such areas, and the development complies with the following minimum requirements and standards, as certified by a qualified professional engineer, or qualified professional geologist, and as approved by the County: 1. Development shall be protected using structures or other measures on the uphill side that channel, dam, or divert the potential mud or debris flow. 2. Disturbance shall be prohibited in the drainage basin above an alluvial fan, unless an evaluation of the effect on Runoff and stability of the fan and on the ground water recharge area shows that disturbance is not substantial or can be successfully mitigated. The proposed project has been evaluated for natural hazards. See Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical report dated April 30, 2013 titled “Preliminary Geotechnical and Geological Review, Proposed Redevelopment, Buffalo Valley Property, 3637 Highway 82, Glenwood Springs, Colorado” F. Slope Development. Development on Slopes 20% or greater shall only be permitted to occur if the Applicant demonstrates that the development complies with the following minimum requirements and standards, as certified by a qualified professional engineer, or qualified professional geologist, and as approved by the County: 1. Building lots with 20% or greater Slope shall require a special engineering study to establish the feasibility of development proposed for the site. The study shall address feasibility of construction required for the use and describe the mitigation measures to be used to overcome excessive Slope problems. 2. Development shall be permitted to occur on Slopes greater than 30% only if the Applicant demonstrates that the development cannot avoid such areas and the development complies with the following minimum requirements: a. Cutting, filling, and other Grading activities shall be confined to the minimum area necessary for construction. b. Development shall be located and designed to follow natural grade, rather than adjusting the site to fit the structure. Roads and driveways built to serve the development shall follow the contours of the natural terrain and, if feasible, shall be located behind existing landforms. 3. Development on Unstable or Potentially Unstable Slopes. If a site is identified as having moderate or extremely unstable Slopes, then development shall be permitted only if the Applicant demonstrates that the development cannot avoid such areas and the development complies with certified geotechnical design and construction stabilization and maintenance measures. a. Cutting into the Slope is prohibited without provision of adequate mechanical support. b. Adding water or weight to the top of the Slope, or along the length of the Slope, is prohibited. c. Vegetation shall not be removed from the Slope unless the integrity of the Slope can be adequately maintained. 4. Development on Talus Slopes. Development shall be permitted to occur on a Talus Slope only if the Applicant demonstrates that the development cannot avoid such areas, and the development complies with the following minimum requirements and standards, as certified by a qualified professional engineer, or a qualified professional geologist, and as approved by the County: a. The development shall be designed to withstand down Slope movement. b. The design shall include buried foundations and utilities below the active Talus Slope surface. c. Site disturbance shall be minimized to avoid inducing slope instability. d. The toe of a Talus Slope shall not be removed unless adequate mechanical support is provided. The proposed project has been evaluated for natural hazards. See Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical report dated April 30, 2013 titled “Preliminary Geotechnical and Geological Review, Proposed Redevelopment, Buffalo Valley Property, 3637 Highway 82, Glenwood Springs, Colorado”. No development is proposed on slopes 20% or steeper. G. Development on Corrosive or Expansive Soils and Rock. Development in areas with corrosive or expansive soils and rock shall be designed based upon an evaluation of the development’s effect on Slope stability and shrink-swell characteristics. Development shall be permitted only if the Applicant demonstrates that the development cannot avoid such areas and the development complies with design, construction stabilization, and maintenance measures certified by a qualified professional engineer, or qualified professional geologist, and is approved by the County. 1. Surface drainage shall be directed away from foundations. 2. Runoff from impervious surfaces shall be directed into natural drainages or otherwise on-site in a manner that does not create or increase adverse impacts to the development site or to adjacent or other property. The proposed project has been evaluated for natural hazards. See Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical report dated April 30, 2013 titled “Preliminary Geotechnical and Geological Review, Proposed Redevelopment, Buffalo Valley Property, 3637 Highway 82, Glenwood Springs, Colorado” H. Development in Mudflow Areas. Development shall be permitted in a mudflow area only if the Applicant demonstrates that the development cannot avoid such areas, and the development adequately employs, construction stabilization, and mitigation and maintenance measures as designed by a qualified professional engineer, or qualified professional geologist, and as approved by the County. The proposed project has been evaluated for natural hazards. See Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical report dated April 30, 2013 titled “Preliminary Geotechnical and Geological Review, Proposed Redevelopment, Buffalo Valley Property, 3637 Highway 82, Glenwood Springs, Colorado” I. Development Over Faults. Development shall be permitted over faults only if the Applicant demonstrates that such areas cannot be avoided and the development complies with mitigation measures based on geotechnical analysis and recommendations, as certified by a qualified professional engineer, or qualified professional geologist, and approved by the County. The proposed project has been evaluated for natural hazards. See Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical report dated April 30, 2013 titled “Preliminary Geotechnical and Geological Review, Proposed Redevelopment, Buffalo Valley Property, 3637 Highway 82, Glenwood Springs, Colorado” 7-208. RECLAMATION. A. Applicability. These standards shall apply to any development that requires a Land Use Change Permit, including divisions of land, as well as to the following activities: 1. Installation of ISDS. Installation of a new or replacement ISDS. 2. Driveway Construction. Any driveway construction that requires a Garfield County Access Permit or a CDOT Access Permit. 3. Preparation Area. All areas disturbed during development that do not comprise the longer-term functional areas of the site but are those areas used for the short-term preparation of the site. B. Reclamation of Disturbed Areas. Areas disturbed during development shall be restored as natural-appearing landforms that blend in with adjacent undisturbed topography. 1. Contouring and Revegetation. Abrupt angular transitions and linear placement on visible Slopes shall be avoided. Areas disturbed by Grading shall be contoured so they can be revegetated, and shall be planted and have vegetation established and growing based on 70% coverage as compared with the original on-site vegetation within 2 growing seasons, using species with a diversity of native and/or desirable nonnative vegetation capable of supporting the post-disturbance land use. To the maximum extent feasible, disturbed areas shall be revegetated to a desired plant community with composition of weed-free species and plant cover typical to that site. 2. Application of Top Soil. Top soil shall be stockpiled and placed on disturbed areas. 3. Retaining Walls. Retaining walls made of wood, stone, vegetation, or other materials that blend with the natural landscape shall be used to reduce the steepness of cut Slopes and to provide planting pockets conducive to revegetation. 4. Slash Around Homes. To avoid insects, diseases, and wildfire hazards, all vegetative residue, branches, limbs, stumps, roots, or other such flammable lot-clearing debris shall be removed from all areas of the lot in which such materials are generated or deposited, prior to final building inspection approval. 5. Removal of Debris. Within 6 months of substantial completion of soil disturbance, all brush, stumps, and other debris shall be removed from the site. 6. Time Line Plan. Every area disturbed shall have a time line approved for the reclamation of the site. The proposed project will be graded per the Grading Plan and will be revegetated per the Landscape plan that is included in the application materials. These standards apply to all residential uses, excluding single-family, commercial and industrial uses, and divisions of land unless elsewhere in this Code a use is explicitly exempt from 1 or more standards. 7-301. COMPATIBLE DESIGN. The design of development associated with the land use change shall be compatible with the existing character of adjacent uses. A. Site Organization. The site shall be organized in a way that considers the relationship to streets and lots, solar access, parking, pedestrian access, and access to common areas. B. Operational Characteristics. The operations of activities on the site shall be managed to avoid nuisances to adjacent uses relating to hours of operations, parking, service delivery, and location of service areas and docks. 1. Dust, odors, gas, fumes, and glare shall not be emitted at levels that are reasonably objectionable to adjacent property. 2. Noise shall not exceed State noise standards pursuant to C.R.S., Article 12 of Title 25, unless the use is regulated by the COGCC. In this case, the use shall be subject to COGCC Rules regarding noise abatement. 3. Hours of operation shall be established to minimize impacts to adjacent land uses. C. Buffering. Buffering shall be installed to mitigate visual, noise, or similar impacts to adjacent property whenever adjacent uses are in a different zone district. D. Materials. Exterior facades shall be constructed with materials that do not detract from adjacent buildings or uses. The proposed project will be compatible with adjacent land uses. The organization provides logical circulation for vehicles and pedestrians. No noises, odors, or hours of operation are applicable with apartments so buffering is not necessary, although landscaping is proposed per the attached landscape plan. Building materials are architecturally selected and renderings of anticipated exterior finishes are attached. 7-302. OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING STANDARDS. A. Off-Street Parking Required. All land uses shall be required to provide the number of off-street parking spaces set forth in Table 7-302.A. Any use not specifically listed in Table 7-302.A. shall be determined by the Director. 1. A parking or loading space that is required by this Code shall not be a required parking or loading space for another use unless it can be shown that the shared use will not result in a shortage of parking at any time. Use of approved shared parking or loading spaces, based upon the following conditions, may reduce the number of off-street parking spaces by up to 20% of the total required for all uses. a. The peak use periods for the required parking or loading space will not overlap with one another. b. The shared use arrangement for parking or loading spaces shall be for 2 or more uses located on the same site or adjoining sites. 2. When any calculation of the number of required off-street parking spaces results in a fractional space being required, such fraction shall be rounded up to the next higher number of spaces.7- B. Off-Street Loading Required. Buildings or structures that are designed or that are substantially altered so as to receive and distribute materials and merchandise by truck shall provide and maintain off-street loading spaces in sufficient number to meet their need. Where the property or use is served or designed to be served by tractor-trailer delivery vehicles, the standards in Table 7-302.B. shall be used in establishing the minimum number of off-street loading berths required. Of C. Continuing Obligation. The provision and maintenance of off-street parking and loading spaces that comply with this Code shall be a continuing obligation of the property owner. D. Location of Required Parking Spaces. Required off-street parking spaces shall be located on the same lot or the adjacent lot proximate to the business they are intended to serve. E. Loading and Unloading. Loading and unloading of vehicles serving commercial and industrial uses shall be conducted in a manner that does not interfere with the proper flow of traffic. F. Parking and Loading Area Surface. 1. Surface Materials. Off-street parking areas, loading areas, aisles, and access drives shall have a durable, all-weather surface made of materials that are suitable for the uses to which the parking area will be put. 2. Grading and Drainage. Parking and loading surfaces shall be design by an engineer to ensure proper drainage off surface and stormwater. 3. Striping. Paved surfaces shall be striped to demarcate the parking spaces for all commercial lots and for residential lots containing over 4 contiguous spaces. G. Minimum Dimensions of Parking Areas. The minimum dimensions of parking spaces, aisles, and back-up areas are specified in Figure 7-302. The length of a parking space may be reduced to 18 feet, including wheel stop, if an additional area of 2 feet in length is provided for the front overhang of the car, provided that the overhang shall not reduce the width of the adjacent walkway to less than 4 feet. H. Compact Car Spaces. In parking areas containing more than 10 spaces, up to 20% of the number of spaces over the first 10 spaces may be designed and designated for compact cars. 1. Minimum Dimensions. A compact car space shall have minimum dimensions of 8 feet in width by 16 feet in length. 2. Signage. Compact car spaces shall be designated for exclusive use by compact cars and identified by stencil signage or a raised identification sign not to exceed dimensions. I. Minimum Dimensions of Loading Berths. The minimum dimension of any loading berth shall be 10 feet wide by 35 feet long, with a vertical clearance of 14 feet. If the typical size of vehicles used in connection with the proposed use exceeds these standards, the dimensions of these berths shall be increased. J. Handicapped or Accessible Parking. Accessible parking shall comply with the County’s construction codes and the adopted or most recent edition of CABO/ICC ANSI A 117.1. K. Unobstructed Access. Each required parking space shall have unobstructed access from a road or Alley, or from an aisle or drive connecting with a road or Alley, except for approved residential tandem parking. L. Tandem Parking. Tandem parking (a vehicle parking directly behind another) that meets the following conditions may be applied to meet the off-street parking standards of this Code: 1. The space does not impede the movement of other vehicles on the site; 2. Tandem spaces serving multi-family dwelling units are assigned to the same dwelling unit; and 3. Valet parking shall be provided for tandem spaces serving commercial uses. M. Backing Onto Public Streets Prohibited. All parking areas shall be located and designed in conjunction with a driveway so that vehicles exiting from a parking space shall not be required to back onto a public road. Vehicles exiting from a parking space for a single-family or duplex dwelling unit may back onto a residential street. Vehicles exiting from a parking space for any use may back onto the right-of-way of an Alley adjacent to the property. N. Access Driveways. Access driveways for required off-street parking areas shall be designed and constructed to facilitate the flow of traffic, provide maximum safety of traffic access and egress, and the maximum safety of pedestrian and vehicular traffic on the site. 1. Minimum Width. a. The minimum width of the access driveway for a commercial or industrial use shall be 12 feet for a 1-way drive and 24 feet for a 2-way drive. b. The access driveway for a residential use shall be 10 feet for a 1-way drive and 20 feet for a 2-way drive. 2. Clear Vision Area. Access driveways shall have a minimum clear vision area as described and illustrated in section 7-303.I. O. Parking and Loading Area Landscaping and Illumination. Off-street parking and loading areas for nonresidential uses located adjacent to residential uses or Residential Zoning Districts shall be landscaped to minimize disturbance to residents, including installation of perimeter landscaping, proper screening of loading areas with opaque materials, and control of illumination. The parking lot is designed to have 26’ for two-way traffic in parking areas with an access driveway of 24’. 128 total parking stalls are provided: 114 regular stalls and 7 tandem stalls. Regular stalls are 18’ by 9’ when they have 2’ of overhang available with any adjacent 6’ sidewalk or 20’ by 9’ when not adjacent to a sidewalk. Tandem stalls are 36’ by 10’ and have two spaces each for 14 total spaces. A waiver is requested from the number of parking stalls. A parking management plan is proposed to support the waiver. See the attached documents pertaining to parking. 7-303. LANDSCAPING STANDARDS. These standards apply to all residential uses, excluding single-family and ADUs, public/institutional uses, commercials uses, as well as residential or commercial Subdivisions and PUDs, and Rural Land Development Exemptions. A. General Standards. 1. All portions of the site where existing vegetative cover is damaged or removed, that are not otherwise covered with new improvements, shall be successfully revegetated with a mix of native, adaptive, and drought-tolerant grasses, ground covers, trees and shrubs. The density of the re-established vegetation must be adequate to prevent soil erosion and invasion of weeds after 1 growing season. 2. Landscaping shall not obstruct fire hydrants or utility boxes and shall be installed so it will not grow into any overhead utility lines. Trees and shrubs shall not be planted within 4 feet of existing overhead or underground lines B. Multi-Family Development. Lots in a Residential Zone District that contain multi-family dwellings shall be landscaped in the areas not covered by impervious materials. C. Subdivision, PUD, and Rural Land Development Exemption. Landscaping in a residential Subdivision, Planned Unit Development, or Rural Land Development Exemption shall be consistent with the character of the development, the unique ecosystem, and specific environment in which the development is located. D. Plants Compatible with Local Conditions. All plants used for landscaping shall be compatible with the local climate and the soils, drainage, and water conditions of the site. When planting occurs on hillsides, Slopes, drainage ways, or similar natural areas, plant material should duplicate adjacent plant communities both in species composition and special distribution patterns. Whenever possible, drought-resistant varieties of plant materials shall be utilized. Xeriscape design principles and the use of native plant species shall be used when appropriate. E. Existing Vegetation. Healthy trees, native vegetation, natural or significant rock outcroppings, and other valuable features shall be preserved and integrated within planting areas. F. Minimum Size. To ensure healthy plant materials are installed in new development, trees and shrubs shall comply with the quality standards of the Colorado Nursery Act, 1973 C.R.S. Title 35, Article 26. 3. Deciduous Trees. Deciduous trees shall be a minimum of 1-1/2 inches in caliper, measured at a point 4 inches above the ground. 4. Coniferous Trees. Coniferous trees shall be a minimum of 4 feet in height, measured from the top of the root ball to the top of the tree. 5. Ornamental Trees. Ornamental trees shall be a minimum of 1-1/2 inches in caliper, measured at a point 4 inches above the ground. 6. Shrubs and Vines. Shrubs shall be a minimum of 1 foot in height at time of planting. Vines shall be in a minimum 1 gallon container. G. Minimum Number of Trees and Shrubs. Trees and shrubs must be grouped in strategic areas and not spread thinly around the site. Where screening is required, plant materials must be sufficient to create a semi-opaque wall of plant material between the property and the adjoining area to be screened. H. Parking and Storage Prohibited. Areas required as landscaping shall not be used for parking, outdoor storage, and similar uses, but may be used for snow storage if designed in compliance with section 7-305, Snow Storage Standards. I. Clear Vision Area. A Clear Vision Area is the area formed by the intersection of the driveway centerline road right-of-way, the other road right-of-way line, and a straight line joining said lines through points 20 feet from their intersection as illustrated in Figure 7-303.A. Within a Clear Vision Area, plant materials shall be limited to 30 inches in height to avoid visibility obstructions or blind corners at intersections as illustrated in Figure 7-303.B. J. Landscaping Within Off-Street Parking Areas. 1. All off-street parking areas containing 15 or more spaces shall provide landscape buffers when adjacent to a public road. Landscape buffers may be achieved through the use of earthen berms, shrubs, trees, or other appropriate materials to effectively screen the parking area from the right-of-way. 2. Interior Parking Areas. Planting shall be established to break up the interior of all parking areas. Landscape planting islands shall be a minimum of 8 feet in width, as shown in Figure 7-303.C, to ensure adequate room for planting. The proposed project will be landscaped per the Landscape plan. 7-304. LIGHTING STANDARDS. Any exterior lighting shall meet the following conditions: A. Downcast Lighting. Exterior lighting shall be designed so that light is directed inward, towards the interior of the Subdivision or site. B. Shielded Lighting. Exterior lighting shall be fully shielded or arranged in a manner so that concentrated rays of light will not shine directly onto other properties. C. Hazardous Lighting. The direct or reflected light from any light source shall not create a traffic hazard. Colored lights shall not be used in such a way as to be confused or construed as traffic control devices. D. Flashing Lights. Blinking, flashing, or fluttering lights, or other illuminated device that has a changing light intensity, brightness, or color, shall be prohibited in all zone districts. E. Height Limitations. Light sources which exceed 40 feet in height shall not be permitted except for temporary holiday displays or as required by local, State or Federal regulations. Lighting will comply with the above standards. See the Lighting plan. 7-305. SNOW STORAGE STANDARDS. The following standards apply on any property that contains commercial or industrial uses, multi-family residential, or that have a common outdoor parking area: A. Minimum Area. A designated area sufficient to store snow from the entire parking area shall be provided. As a general guideline, and considering the varying elevations and snowfall amounts throughout the County, it is anticipated that a minimum area equivalent to 2.5% of the total area of the required off-street parking and loading area, including access drives, shall be designated to serve as a snow storage area. B. Storage in Parking Spaces Prohibited. Required off-street parking and loading areas shall not be used for snow storage. C. Storage in Yards and Open Space Permitted. Snow stored in a yard or Open Space shall not be located in a manner that restricts access or circulation, or obstructs the view of motorists. D. Storage on Public Roadways Prohibited. Public roads shall not be used for snow storage. E. Drainage. Adequate drainage shall be provided for the snow storage area to accommodate snowmelt and to ensure it does not drain onto adjacent property. Snow storage is provided between the eastern parking area and the east property line. Additional snow storage areas are available throughout the parking areas in various islands and yard areas. See the Snow Storage plan. 7-306. TRAIL AND WALKWAY STANDARDS. A. Recreational and Community Facility Access. A multi-modal connection, such as a trail or sidewalk, shall be provided in a development where links to schools, shopping areas, parks, trails, greenbelts, and other public facilities are feasible. 1. Trail Dedication Standards. Trail rights-of-way for dedicated park lands and Open Space shall conform to the following criteria: a. The land required for trails or walkways shall be set aside as an easement or separate fee interest. b. All easements for trails and walkways will be dedicated to the public. c. The width of the easement shall be adequate to handle the proposed use based on the particular reasonable needs of the trail, its location, the surrounding terrain, and the anticipated usage. The minimum width for the trail easement shall be 8 feet. d. Public access to the trail shall be provided within the subject property. e. Any easement may overlap and include property previously included in other easements, such as ditch, canal, utility and Conservation Easements, and public or private open space. However, the trail easement shall not compromise the functional use of any other easement. B. Safety. Special structures and/or traffic control devices may be required at road crossings to avoid unsafe road crossings. C. Maintenance. Suitable provisions for maintenance of trail and walkway systems shall be established through a perpetual association,  corporation, or other means acceptable to the County.  No connections to offsite trails or sidewalks are proposed. Drainage Report for: Buffalo Valley, GARFIELD COUNTY, CO Prepared for: Partners III, LLC 353 Goose Lane Carbondale, CO 81623 Prepared by: Date: November, 2014 MOUNT/\IN CROSS ENGINEERING, INC. Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design 826112 Grand Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 ph 970.945.5544 fx 970.945.5558 www.mountaincross-eng.com MOUNTAIN CROSS ENGINEERING, INC. Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design 8261;2 Grand Avenue, Glen\.vood Springs, CO 81601 P: 970.945.5544 F: 970.945.5558 www.mountaincross-eng.com TABLE OF CONTENTS Drainage Report Page 1-5 Aerial Image & Vicinity Map. Figure I Existing Basins & Time of Concentration Figure 2 Proposed Basins & Time of Concentration . Figure 3 Offsite Basin & Time of Concentration Figure 4 Sheet 3 -Drainage & Grading Plan 24"x36" . Under Separate Cover Sheet 6 -Details 24"x36" Under Separate Cover Report Calculations Appendix Purpose and Scope of Report Drainage Report Bulfalo Valley November, 2014 This study evaluates Buffalo Valley from a storm water management perspective. It supplies data, calculations, and design criteria that will be used to mitigate the site concerning stmm runoff and erosion control. Runoff from snowmelt is typically very large in volume but because it happens over a much longer time period, the peak flows are generally much less than a rainfall event. Therefore storm water is defined in this study to be surface water that is a direct result from a rainfall event. Storm water management in this study is concerned with managing the quantity of water expected from the site in accordance with typical engineering and hydrologic practices as well as protecting site discharge by means of best management practices for erosion control. All flows are listed in units of cubic feet per second (cfs) nnless otherwise noted. This study will provide a project overview, a brief description of the methodology, a discussion of the analysis perfmmed, a description of the erosion control anticipated for the site, and the results of the analysis. Project Overview The project is a redevelopment of the Buffalo Valley site in Garfield County, Colorado. The existing site has a restaurant and motel with parking and infrastructure and is located at 3637 Highway 82. Proposed plans are the construction of site construction to contain two buildings that have a total of 54 apartments. The project elevation is approximately 5880 feet above sea level and located at Latitude 39°30' 19.1" North and Longitude 107°18'24. l" West. The prope1iy area is approximately 2.204± acres and the approximate area of disturbance due to construction activities is approximately 2.01± acres. Storm water will drain into the Roaring Fork River through a series of ditches and culverts approximately 250' to the east. It is the intent of this Drainage Plan to: 1) Convey the captured runoff flows through the project site, 2) Provide detention sufficient enough that rnnoff from the proposed site does not exceed the calculated flows for the existing condition, and 3) Reduce the pollutants in stormwater discharges from erosion associated with construction activity. Methodology The design of a stmm water management plan begins with a calculation of the volume of water that will be produced from a rainfall event. The SCS TR-5 5 method was used for estimating the amount of rnnoff that will occur from larger basins. This method calculates runoff from SCS curve number, basin area, precipitation, and time of concentration. MOUNTAIN CROSS ENGINEERING, INC. Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design 826 Yi Grand Avenue, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 P: 970.945.5544 F: 970.945.5558 www.mountaincross-cng.com SCS Curve Number Drainage Report Buffalo Valley November, 2014 A curve number is assigned to a basin that gives a relationship between the amount of precipitation that becomes surface water and the amount of water that is lost to infiltration, evaporation, or transpiration. The SCS curve number is a function of soil type, vegetative-cover/land-use, and antecedent moisture conditions. Becanse the land-use and the soil types vary through the drainage basin, a composite curve number is assigned based on the weight of the area and its respective curve nnmber. Basin Area Drainage basins have the characteristic that any precipitation falling within that area will drain to the same point of discharge. Basins were delineated from project topographic maps. Precipitation Extreme runoff events from urban areas in western Colorado are caused by cloudburst type st01ms that are characterized by short periods of high intensity rainfall. The SCS Type II 24-hour distribution reflects this and was used for this study. Estimating rainfall for engineering applications is based on the probability of the magnitude of a stonn occurring within a return period. Volume III of the NOAA Atlas 2 maps for Colorado was used for defining design storm rainfall depths. The NOAA Atlas Maps are attached in the Appendix. Time of Concentration Manning's kinematic flow equation was used to estimate flow velocity. Length and velocity of flow are used to calculate time. Three flow elements are used: overland- flow, collector-channel flow, and main-channel flow. The parameters needed to dete1mine the flow elements include length, slope, Manning's "n" value, and channel shape. These parameters were determined from topography. For smaller basins, the Rational Method was used to estimate the amount of runoff that will occur. This method calculates runoff (Q) in cubic feet per second (cfs) from basin area (A) in acres, runoff coefficient (C), and rainfall intensity (I) in inches per hour: Q=C*I*A When acres and inches per hour are used as the units, the conversion into cubic feet per second is 1.008 but is usually ignored and it has been in this report. The runoff coefficient is a dimensionless coefficient. Basin Area Drainage basins have the characteristic that any precipitation falling within that area will drain to the same point of discharge. The project basins were delineated from project topography, project site plan, and building architecture. MOUNTAIN CROSS ENGINEERING, INC. Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design 826 Yi Grand Avenue, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 P: 970.945.5544 F: 970.945.5558 www.mounlaincross-eng.com 2 Drainage Report Buffalo Valley Nove1nber, 2014 Runoff Coefficient A runoff coefficient is assigned to each basin that gives a relationship between the amount of precipitation that becomes surface water and the amount of water that is lost to infiltration, evaporation, or transpiration. The runoff coefficient is a function of surface and/or land-use. Because the land-use and the surface cover often vary through the project and from the pre-project and post-project conditions, a composite coefficient is assigned to each drainage basin, based on the weight of the areas and their respective coefficients. Rainfall Intensity Rainfall intensity is determined from intensity duration frequency curves, or IDF curves. IDF curves are graphs of, more or less parallel, frequency curves that yield rainfall intensities based on storm durations. Analysis Frequency: The return frequency of a rainfall storm is the statistical probability that a given storm event will occur on average in a given period. For instance a 100-year stmm has the statistical probability of occurring once in a I 00 year span or it has a 1 % chance of occurring in any given year. It is important to emphasize that it is based on probability statistics and therefore does not reflect actual storm frequency. Storms of a I 00-year magnitude can occur in sequential years, even in the same year. The return frequency of design is chosen and then referred to as the design storm. Duration: The duration of a storm is chosen to coincide with the time of concentration. Length of flow path and velocity of flow are used to calculate time. Two flow elements are used: overland-flow and channel flow. The parameters needed to determine the flow elements include length, slope, a channel roughness coefficient, and channel shape. The theory states that if the duration is equal to the time of concentration, the length of time will be adequate for the entire basin to contribute flow. Basin areas were determined based on architectural design, proposed grading, and project topography. A site visit helped delineate areas where topographic detail was not sufficient. The project has a relatively large basin directly above it that drains into a culvert that daylights into a ditch on the north prope11y line. The offsite basin has poor vegetative cover and steep slopes. There are tluee onsite basins: Basin 1 is the largest and contains most of the impervious areas in the buildings and the hardscape. Any landscape in this area is primarily grasses. Basin 1 drains into an existing drywell with questionable integrity and infiltration capacity. Basin 2 is the basin that sheet flows into the ditch along the northern property line. Basin 3 drains to the east and sheet flows onto the steep hillside heavily vegetated with oak brush and grasses. A small amount of roof area drains to the hillside also. MOUNTAIN CROSS ENGINEERING, INC. Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design 826 \/2 Grand Avenue, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 P: 970.945.5544 F: 970.945.5558 \.VWw.mountaincrossweng.con1 3 Drainage Report Buffalo Valley November, 2014 Runoff coefficients and SCS Curve numbers were detennined from descriptions of land use and/or ground cover for the basin. The vegetation is a mix of Scrub Oak, Pinyon, Sage brush, grass, and brush understory. Composite numbers were calculated by weighting the respective soil cover over the basin area. Based on the SCS study, the site soils are hydrologic group B and the offsite soils belong to hydrologic groups B and C. The parameters for calculating the time of concentration were dete1mined from the site topography. The flows for the basins were calculated using the SCS and Rational methods described above. All calculations are attached for review in the Appendix. Minimum pipe sizes to convey the runoff flows were determined using the Manning's equation for open channel flow. Minimum pipe slope of 0.5%, 18" diameters, smooth pipe material, and project flows were used to compute pipe sizes. Pipe sizing calculations are attached in the Appendix. The channel shape is a "V" type ditch with 2: 1 horizontal to vertical side slopes, with minimum slope of 1 %, and with a depth of 12". The erosive flow velocity for vegetated, em1h channels is between 5 and 6 feet per second (fps). Slopes greater than 4% generate erosive velocities and will need to be armored. Riprap is usually the prefeJTed armor due to its natural appearance and availability. In flatter m·eas (<4%) of turf or landscaping, a more gradual swale can be used. Calculations are provided in the Appendix. Existing flows were compared to the proposed project flows. If proposed exceeds existing levels detention is necessary. The detention volume was estimated using the FAA method and is only necessary for Area I with a 2-Year volume of 240 cubic feet and a 25-yem· volume of 437 cubic feet. Areas 2 and 3 have less contributory area and/or less impervious areas. Runoff flows are proposed to be less than the existing. Therefore detention is not waJTanted and sheet flow per historic paths are to be maintained. Erosion Control Construction activities can be expected to increase the potential for storm runoff to erode the site. Temporary structures have been designed to contain sediment on the site and to mitigate erosion from construction activities. Straw bale check dmns are placed in drainage swales and ditches. Inlets are protected with straw bales. Riprap is placed on the outlet sides of culverts. Silt fencing is shown downhill of construction activities. The permanent structures will be riprap protection at outlets and on ditch thalwegs for slopes where velocities are erosive. Also, revegetation and landscaping is planned with turf, landscape plants, and/or native grasses per a native grass seed mix. CuJTently the existing vegetative cover is mature native materials. The proposed revegetation is expected to match the coverage percentage and therefore the quality of the storm water discharge from the site is expected to meet existing levels. The project disturbs greater than 1.0 acre and will therefore require a permit from CDPHE. Refer to the Stormwater Management Plan associated with that pe1mit for greater detail concerning erosion control. MOUNTAIN CROSS ENGINEERING. INC. Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design 826 112 Grand Avenue, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 P: 970.945.5544 F: 970.945.5558 WW\v.n1ountaincross-eng.com 4 Results Drainage Report Buffalo Valley No vember, 2014 An inlet and cu lve1i are sized to accommodate flows from the impervious areas of the s ite to the detention pond. Swal es, valley pans and curb and gutter convey runoff through the site. The culve1i has a diameter of 18 " and flows the 100-yr st01m. Point discharges of concentrated flows from the site have been avoided by means of riprap aprons to spread flows and reduce vel ocities. Calculations show erosive velocities at swale slopes of 4% or greater. Proposed improvements slightly increase the anticipated flows into Area I. Detention for Area 1 will be provi ded by means of a detention pond on the north property line that will drain into the drainage ditch. An outlet release structure will be designed to re strict flows to 5.45 cfs for the 25 -year storm and to 2.53 cfs for the 2-year storm. These outlets will limit the flows from all the basins to less than or equivalent to the existing levels. Calculations are attached in th e Appendix. Because the constructi on on the s ite i s anticipated to di sturb more than one acre , a permit for stormwater discharge is required from the State. A Sto1mwater Management Plan has been prepared to meet these requi rements and is under a separate cover. Recommendat ions of the geotechnical engineer are to be used in conjunction with the drainage p lan and if a confl ict arises sho uld be brought to our attention to revise the re commendations accord ingly. AJthou gh this study refers to a 100 -year storm, it is speaking from a statistical standpoint that the flood has a 1 % chance of occUITing within any given year. It do es not actually relate to the frequency of flood occmTence. Also the 100 year flood can be exceeded in any given year, and it can occur more than once in any year , and can happen in sequential years. Thank you for the opp01iunity to provide this report. Feel free to call if you have any que stions, concerns, or comments. Sincerely , Moun ta ·n Cross En MOUNTAIN CROSS ENGINEERING, INC. C ivi l a nd Environmental Consu lt ing a nd Des ign 826 V2 Grand Av enu e, Glenw oo d Sprin gs, CO 8 16 01 P: 970.94 5.55 44 r : 970.9 45.555 8 www .mount aincross -c ng.co m 5 07/18/13 FIGURE 1 ,. -1000' Aerial Image & Vicinity Map Buffalo Valley MOUNT/\IN CROSS EN<iINEERIN<i, INC. Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design 8261/2 Grand Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 ph 970.945.5544 fx 970.945 .5558 www.mountalncross-eng.com .. ,. 07/18/13 ....... Chrto ..... ...... JOB EXISTING FIGURE 2 Existing Basins & Time of Concentration Buffalo Valley MOUNT/'\IN CROSS fN<iINff RING, INC . Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design 8261/2 Grand Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 ph 970.945.5544 fx 970.945.5558 www.mountalncross-eng.com .. ,. 11/14/14 111 .. 100' """""' 01111 Hole ...... BuffaloValeyStte ... PROPOSED FIGURE 3 Proposed Basins & Time of Concentration Buffalo Valley MOUNT/1\IN CR055 fNCilNff RINCi, INC. Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design 826 1/2 Grand Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 ph 970.945.5544 fx 970.945.5558 www.mountaincross-eng.com 1" -200' """"" Chlil Hale OFFSITE FIGURE 4 Offsite Basin & Time of Concentration Buffalo Valley MOUNT/'\IN CROSS EN<iINEERIN<i, INC. Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design 8261/2 Grand Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 ph 970.945.5544 fx 970.945.5558 www.mountaincross-eng.com Appendix Report Calculations Hydrologic Soil Group-Rifle Area, Colorado, Parts of Garfield and Mesa Counties 39' 30' 29" 0 O> "' "' ~ ~ "' "' [:; .... 0 ill .,. ~ 0 "' ;,,; . .... ~ 0 ::;: .,. [:; .... ~ ., . .... "' .... 0 .... N ;... N "' .... ~ 301750 301820 301890 301960 302030 302100 39' 30' 14" ::;· .... 30f750 30f820 30f890 301960 30:2030 302100 Map Scale: 1:3,330 if prin ted on A size (8.5" x 11") sheet N A ........ -=======::::::i ................ -===============::::::i Metern 0 45 90 180 270 ........ -========= .................. ================~Feet 0 150 300 600 900 USDA Natural Resources """' -Conservation Service Web Soil Survey Nat ional Cooperative Soil Survey 302170 302240 302170 30:2240 30:2310 302380 "' "' ::: .... ~ 7/9/2013 Page 1of4 39' 30' 30" 39' 30' 15" USDA ~- Hydrologic Soil Group-Rifle Area, Colorado, Parts of Garfield and Mesa Counties MAP LEGEND Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils _J Soil Map Units Soil Ratings D A D ND D B D BIO D c D CID DD Not rated or not availa ble Political F eatures o Cities Water Featu res Streams and Canals Transpo rtation ++"!; """" /\./ Y..% .,,...,. Na t ural Re s ources C o n se rvation Service Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads local Roads MAP INFORMATION Map Scale: 1 :3,330 if printed on A size (8.5" x 11 ") sheet. The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1 :24,000. Warning: Soi l Map may not be valid at this scale . Enlargement of maps beyond the sca le of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soi l line placement. T he maps do not show the s mall areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for accurate map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs .usda .gov Coordinate System: UT M Zone 13N NAD83 Th is product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. So il Survey A rea: R ifle Area, Colorado, Parts of Garfield and Mesa Counties Survey Area Data: Version 6, Mar 25, 2008 Date(s) aerial images were photographed: 8/6/2005 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and dig itized probably differs from the background imagery d isplayed on these maps. As a result , some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Web So il Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 7 /9/2013 Page 2 of 4 Hydrologic Soil Group-Rifle Area, Colorado, Parts of Garfield and Mesa Counties USDA ""£ Hydrologic Soil Group Hydrologic Soil Group-Summary by Map Unit -Rifle Area, Colorado, Parts of Garfield and Mesa Counties (C0683) Map unit symbol j Map unit name I Rating [ Acres In AOI [ Percent of AOI i 2 I Arie-Ansari-Rock outcrop complex, 12 to 65 i D i I percent slopes is ! ----t------ 0.0 i 0.1% i 54.2% i 1-8 ------------r;~~~i~-Azeltine complex, 1 to 3 percent I slopes ' i i 1 i 0----------------:-----------------4.6 i -45.-7-~1o-i i e7-------------r-r~~;rthents-Rock outcrop complex, steep f J ---:-------I ----10.0: -------------100.0°1o I i Totals for Area of Interest Description Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long-duration storms. The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups {A, B, C, and D) and three dual classes (AID, B/D, and C/D). The groups are defined as follows: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate {low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (AID, B/D, or C/D), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their natural condition are in group Dare assigned to dual classes. Rating Options Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 71912013 Page 3 of 4 Hydrologic Soil Group-Rifle Area, Colorado, Parts of Garfield and Mesa Counties USDA '9ffi Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified Tie-break Rule: Higher Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 7/9/2013 Page 4 of 4 INTENSITY -DURAT/ON - FREQUENCY CURVES 6 i' I I 'I • I I • I I I t-t-t-t-~-t-t-t-+-+-+++~'+++++++++-H-T~~H-rr-t--t-1-T-~+++-!-++++~' --.. t+t+-t-+fti-++H-++++~:++-t++++++++t+++-1--+-t-+-t-+-++++t-+-H++++++++++~,~· a: 5 I t " I . ; . : : : ~ I I I 4 . 3 j' ' ' I ' ' I ' "'-I..., '> I I "' I I I I ,..., ~ I I I t . I I . i I I I I I I .o 20 30 40 (T I ME MINUTES) I I I I ; i ; ; I ·<: -....__ >-t--(/) ~ t- <: - I I • .-.....J : -; ~ I I ; .;_ .....J .1_ ·~ ·~ ~ i <: !I ......... . · <:( a:: .. ; ' I' : i . 50 60 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 109 10 8 107 106 105 COLORADO 10 0 10 20 30 40 ~~E3M I LES. 109 104 -71--lt r ' I I I : SIER ll ~/ ---•-, FlgUl926 ISOPLUVIALS OF 2-YR 24·HR PRECIPITATION IN TENTHS OF AN INCH 37 109 108 107 106 105 41 4 . ' 10 10 20 30 40 E3 E3 F3 MllES. 109 108 107 106 105 10 4 104 103 102 SHRllN!l r I . I __ J F11ure 27 ISOPLUVIALS OF S·YR 24·HR PRECIPITATION IN TENTHS OF AN INCH 103 I I 41 37 102 108 107 106 105 4 . 109 108 107 106 105 104 21 ___ _ 104 Fl1ure28 102 -...,.. --1L --.+---i 41 I I I . r ; ---1 I I J~-----~ I I ISOPLUVIALS OF IO·YA 24-HA PRECIPITATION IN TENTHS OF AN INCH 103 109 COLORADO 10 D 10 20 ~ 108 107 HOAKAnAS 2, VollJIM 111 PrfP'tecl b'; U.S. DtpM1mtnt of Convnltct ffttiQAllOc"1*•ncfAvnotPhtncAdmlftlttt1&n Ht.-l Wnthof '°"'b, OftQ of..,.,...., ~C:.:.':i!, ~=~c':t:b, 106 105 104 102 -....+---141 I -1 I -----~ I I I _1 I I '~ I } I _ J. _ -;. /··----1- 1 . Fisure29 ISOPLUVIALS OF 25-YR 24-HR PRECIPITATION IN TENTHS OF AN INCH 103 37 108 COLORADO 10 0 10 20 30 4-0 ~-c:::=r--=..::E:3 MILES. 109 108 107 107 106 NO ATlAS 2, Volumt nl ~:C:~~~!'/::~:::.uOfl ff•l~I WttthtrSfn'ke,, Otftctof t4'dt•IY .... _torU.S.-lof ........... Sol ConMrwOon s.Mc' fftllnttml OM*n 106 105 102 -.l-~....,41 I I ---'-1 I ... _:. I I I I I I A1ure31 ISOPLUVIALS OF lOO·YR 24·HR PRECIPITATION IN TENTHS OF AN INCH 104 IO:J 102 '<~H) MOUNTl'\IN CR055 liil~,l ~~n~E~~o~~t~~~~~ an!~~~ 'Wi"' 826 112 Gron<! Av<>nue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 ------ph9T0."45.M44 Ix 970Jl4•.55'Swwwmoun!aln<rn•""""!l-""tn Drainage Area : E1 Surface description: Existing restaurant, motel buildings, and parking wl grass open space PROPERTY GENERAL SURFACE DATA Total Drainage Area: 72,312 sq. ft. 1.66 ac. Land Use est. o/o acres factors Building Roof 11655 0.27 0.95 Scrub oak grass understory 0 0.00 0.2 Hardscape and Paving 39843 0.91 0.95 Landscaped turf and planters 20,814 0.48 0.3 Pine and Aspen Oo/o 0.00 0.2 Sage and Grasses Oo/o 0.00 0.4 TOTAL BASIN ACERAGE 1.66 TIME OF CONCENTRATION Overland Flow Time Length Slope c Tc Upstream Elevation 5889.0 250 0.07 0.76 5.11 Dnstream Elevation 5872.0 Channel Flow Time Length Slope K Tc Upstream Elevation 5872.0 0.0 1.00 7.000 0.00 Dnstream Elevation 5872.0 Total 5.11 min RUNOFF Intensity Flowrate (in/hr) (els) 2-yr Storm 2.0 2.53 10-yr Storm 3.4 4.31 25-yr Storm 4.3 5.45 100-yr Storm 5.5 6.97 -Soils are hydrologic soil group B -Conveyance coefficient K is based on "lawn" or vegetation lined channel ,11 MOUNTl'\IN CROSS .--~! ~~n~E~~o~~t~C~~~~ an~~S; 8261'2 Gr3nd Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81\i01 -----' ph 97D.!lll5.55441x 9TO.~U5'S wwwmounlalnOH> .. -<.og.eom Drainage Area : E2 Surface description: Existing grass open space flowing into drainage ditch. PROPERTY GENERAL SURFACE DATA Total Drainage Area: 7,680 sq. ft. 0.18 ac. Land Use est. o/o acres factors Building Roof 0 0.00 0.95 Scrub oak grass understory 0 0.00 0.2 Hardscape and Paving 0 0.00 0.95 Landscaped turf and planters 7,680 0.18 0.3 Pine and Aspen 0% 0.00 0.2 Sage and Grasses 0% 0.00 0.4 TOTAL BASIN ACERAGE 0.18 Overland Flow Time Length Slope c Upstream Elevation 5894.0 200 0.10 0.30 Dnstream Elevation 5874.0 Channel Flow Time Length Slope K Upstream Elevation 5874.0 0.0 1.00 7.000 Dnstream Elevation 5874.0 Total 9.55 min Intensity Flowrate (in/hr) (els) 2-yr Storm 1.6 0.08 10-yr Storm 2.8 0.15 25-yr Storm 3.4 0.18 100-yr Storm 4.5 0.24 NOTES: -Soils are hydrologic soil group B -Conveyance coefficient K is based on "lawn" or vegetation lined channel Tc 9.55 Tc 0.00 Drainage Area : E3 Surface description: Existing restaurant and motel buildings wl scrub oak hillside PROPERTY GENERAL SURFACE DATA Total Drainage Area: 24,606 sq. ft. 0.56 ac. Land Use est. o/o acres factors Building Roof 5410 0.12 0.95 Scrub oak grass understory 13,301 0.31 0.2 Hardscape and Paving 2,435 0.06 0.95 Landscaped turf and planters 3,460 0.08 0.3 Scrub oak grass understory 0% 0.00 0.2 Sage and Grasses 0% 0.00 0.4 TOTAL BASIN ACERAGE 0.56 TIME OF CONCENTRATION Overland Flow Time Length Slope c Tc Upstream Elevation 5872.0 70 0.39 0.45 2.93 Dnstream Elevation 5845.0 Channel Flow Time Length Slope K Tc Upstream Elevation 5845.0 0.0 1.00 7.000 0.00 Dnstream Elevation 5845.0 Total 2.93 min RUNOFF Intensity Flowrate (in/hr) (els) 2-yr Storm 2.0 0.51 10-yr Storm 3.4 0.87 25-yr Storm 4.3 1.10 100-yr Storm 5.5 1.41 -Soils are hydrologic soil group B -Conveyance coefficient K is based on "lawn" or vegetation lined channel Drainage Area : P1 Surface description: Proposed improvements with apartment buildings, parking, and landscaping PROPERTY GENERAL SURFACE DATA Total Drainage Area: 76,463 sq. ft. 1.76 ac. sq. ft. or Proposed Land Use est. 0/o acres factors Building Roof 13340 0.31 0.95 Scrub oak grass understory 0 0.00 0.2 Hardscape and Paving 49645 1.14 0.95 Landscaped turf and planters 13,478 0.31 0.3 Pine and Aspen Oo/o 0.00 0.2 Sage and Grasses 0% 0.00 0.4 TOTAL BASIN ACERAGE 1.76 Weighted C: 0.835 Overland Flow Time Length Slope c Tc Upstream Elevation 5893.00 170 0.07 0.84 3.22 Dnstream Elevation 5880.50 Channel Flow Time Length Slope K Tc Upstream Elevation 5880.50 320 0.02 20.000 1.70 Dnstream Elevation 5872.60 Total 4.92 min **use 5 min Tc RUNOFF Intensity Flowrate (in/hr) (els) 2-yr Storm 2.0 2.93 10-yr Storm 3.4 4.99 25-yr Storm 4.3 6.31 100-yr Storm 5.5 8.07 -Soils are hydrologic soil group B -Conveyance coefficient K is based on paved channel Drainage Area : P2 Surface description: Proposed grass open space flowing into drainage ditch. PROPERTY GENERAL SURFACE DATA Total Drainage Area: 3,590 sq. ft. Proposed Land Use Building Roof Scrub oak grass understory Hardscape and Paving Landscaped turf and planters Pine and Aspen Sage and Grasses TOTAL BASIN ACERAGE Overland Flow Time Upstream Elevation Dnstream Elevation Channel Flow Time Upstream Elevation Dnstream Elevation RUNOFF sq. ft. or est. 0/o 0 0 0 5,165 0% 0% 5894.00 5889.00 5889.00 5872.00 -Soils are hydrologic soil group B acres 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.08 ac. factors 0.95 0.2 0.95 0.3 0.2 0.4 Length 20 Length 260.0 2-yr Storm 10-yr Storm 25-yr Storm 100-yr Storm Slope 0.25 Slope 0.07 Total Intensity (in/hr) 2.0 3.4 4.3 5.5 -Conveyance coefficient K is based on paved channel c 0.30 K 7.000 4.65 min Flowrate (els) 0.05 0.08 0.11 0.14 Tc 2.23 Tc 2.42 ,~~,n ·~ MOUNTAIN CR055 fi~:! ~~n~E~~o~~1~c~~~~an!~S~ ,.,,, 826 112 Grand Avenue Glenw<iod Springs, CO 81601 -~----ph 970.!>15 5544 r. 970.9'15.5"'awwwmmmt••ncrn•• ... ng.«>m Drainage Area : P3 Surface description: Proposed building and landscaping w! scrub oak hillside PROPERTY GENERAL SURFACE DATA Total Drainage Area: 24,800 sq. ft. 0.57 ac. Proposed Land Use est. o/o acres factors Building Roof 5060 0.12 0.95 Scrub oak grass understory 14,070 0.32 0.2 Hardscape and Paving 0 0.00 0.95 Landscaped turf and planters 5,670 0.13 0.3 Pine and Aspen Oo/o 0.00 0.2 Sage and Grasses Oo/o 0.00 0.4 TOTAL BASIN ACERAGE 0.57 Overland Flow Time Length Slope c Tc Upstream Elevation 5873.00 115 0.37 0.38 4.28 Dnstream Elevation 5831.00 Channel Flow Time Length Slope K Tc Upstream Elevation 5831.00 0.0 1.00 7.000 0.00 Dnstream Elevation 5830.99 Total 4.28 min **use 5 min Tc RUNOFF Intensity Flowrate (in/hr) (els) 2-yr Storm 2.0 0.43 10-yr Storm 3.4 0.73 25-yr Storm 4.3 0.92 100-yr Storm 5.5 1.18 -Soils are hydrologic soil group B -Conveyance coefficient K is based on paved channel Drainage Area : 01 Surface description: Off-sight basin into culvert wl mostly native vegetation PROPERTY GENERAL SURFACE DATA Total Drainage Area: 195,223 sq. ft. 4.48 ac. SGS Cn COEFFICIENT sq. ft. or Cn Proposed Land Use est.% acres factors Roof and Paving 620 0.01 98 Gravel Roads 3870 0.09 85 Hardscape & Paving 5910 0.14 98 Landscaped turf and planters 0 0.00 69 Pinyon and Juniper C Soils, Poor 64% 2.89 85 Pinyon and Juniper B Soils, Fair 13% 0.00 58 Sage and Grasses B Soils, Fair 30% 1.35 51 TOTAL BASIN ACERAGE 4.48 Cn: 75.1 Drainage Area : P1 Surface description: Proposed improvements with apartments, parking and landscaping PROPERTY GENERAL SURFACE DATA Total Drainage Area: 76,463 sq. ft 1.76 ac. sq. ft. or Proposed Land Use est.% acres factors Roof and Paving 13340 0.31 98 Gravel Roads 0 0.00 98 Hardscape & Paving 49645 1.14 98 Landscaped turf and planters 13,478 0.31 69 Pinyon and Juniper B Soils, Poor 0% 0.00 51 Sage and Grasses B Soils, Fair 0% 0.00 58 TOTAL BASIN ACERAGE 1.76 92.9 :4, ) ~~~~~~~~N~~?~~. Iii~~-~-Civil and Environmental Consulting and Design ~ 626112 Grand Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81501 , ___ __, ph 870.845.5544 f>8TO.El<\5,5"5Bwwwmoun!aincrnu<>ny.com Drainage Area : E1 Surface description: Existing restaurant, motel buildings, and parking wl grass open space PROPERTY GENERAL SURFACE DATA Total Drainage Area: 72,312 sq. ft. 1.66 ac. sq. ft. or Proposed Land Use est.% acres factors Roof and Paving 11655 0.27 98 Gravel Roads 0 0.00 98 Hardscape & Paving 39843 0.91 98 Landscaped turf and planters 20,814 0.48 69 Pinyan and Juniper B Soils, Poor 0% 0.00 51 Sage and Grasses B Soils, Fair 0% 0 00 58 TOTAL BASIN ACERAGE 1.66 Weighted C: Hydrology Report Hydraflow Express Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 30® 2013 by Au todesk, Inc. Thursday, Jul 11 2013 25-year Culvert Hydrograph type Storm frequency (yrs) Drainage area (ac) Basin S lope (%) Tc method Total precip . (in) Storm duration (hrs) = scs = 25 = 4.480 = See Worksheet = TR55 = 2.20 = 24 Peak discharge (cfs) Time interval (min) Curve number (CN) Hydraulic length (ft) Time of cone. (min) Storm Distribution Shape factor = 2.727 = 1 = 75 = See Worksheet = 13 = Type II = 484 Hydrograph Volume= 7,734 (cuft); 0.178 (acft) Runoff Hydrograph a ( cfs) 25-yr frequency a ( cfs) 3.00 -.----..---.------.----.-------.-------.---..-----r---..---~--..-----y-3.00 1~ ---·---------1-------___ , ___ , ---------------- ------___ , __ _ --1~---1--- 2 .00 -1----+---+-----+--+---+-------+---+-----+---+----+---t-----t-2.00 ---1-- ------- -----1--·---------·----~-----1 --.-------·1-----~ ---- --·-·----1~--------------------------- 1.00 -l----+---+-----+--+---+---11+----+---+-----+---+----+---t-----t-1.00 --------------·---.. - -------1------1----1---1---1---------1 -----1----1·-----~-----·=:=---=--- 0.00 __________ _.... __ ...__ ...... ___ ...__ _ __,_ __ ....__ _ __,_ __ ..__ _ __._ __ u,., _ __,__ 0 .00 0 .0 2.0 4 .0 6 .0 8 .0 10.0 12 .0 14.0 16 .0 18.0 20.0 22.0 24.0 26 .0 Time (hrs) -Runoff Hyd -Qp = 2.73 (cfs) TR55 Tc Worksheet Hydraffow Express by lntelisolve scs 25-year Culvert Description A B c Totals Sheet Flow Manning's n-value = 0.240 0.011 0.011 Flow length (ft) = 200.0 0.0 0.0 Two-year 24-hr precip. ((in)) = 1.20 0.00 0.00 Land slope (%) = 50.00 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (min) = 11.20 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 11.20 Shallow Concentrated Flow Flow length (ft) = 865.00 0.00 0.00 Watercourse slope(%) = 36.00 0.00 0.00 Surface description = Unpaved Paved Paved Average velocity (ft/s) = 9.68 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (min) = 1.49 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 1.49 Channel Flow X sectional flow area ((sqft)) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Wetted perimeter ((ft)) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Channel slope(%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Manning's n-value = 0.015 0.015 0.015 Velocity (ft/s) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Flow length (ft) = 0.0 0.0 0.0 Travel Time (min) = 0 + 0 + 0 = 0.00 Total Travel Time, Tc .............................................................................. 13.00 min Hydrology Report Hydraflow Express Exten sion for AutoCAD® Civil 30® 20 13 by Autodesk, Inc. T hursday, Jul 11 2013 100-year Cu lvert = scs = 100 = 4.480 = 4.241 = 1 = 75 Hydrograph type Storm frequency (yrs) Drainage area (ac) Basin Slope (%) Tc method = See Worksheet = TR55 Peak discharge (cfs) T ime interval (min) Curve number (CN) Hydrau li c length (ft) T ime of cone. (min) Storm Distribution Shape factor = See Worksheet = 13 Total precip. (in) Storm duration (hrs) = 2.60 = 24 = Type II = 484 Hydrograph Volume= 11,361 (cuft); 0.261 (acft) Runoff Hydrograph Q (cfs) 100-yrfrequency Q (cfs) 5.00 ....,-----,.--..,.--~--~-~--~-~--~-~--~-~--~-~ 5.00 --·-------------------__ , __ -~ 1----___ , ___ ---------------- _, ___ _ 4.00 -+----+---+-----+--+----+---+----+---+-----+---1-----+---1---~ 4 .00 ·~------·--------,_ ------------- --~ ----___ ,_ 3.00 3.00 -- ---·------·-------, ____ , ___ ----- ---1.........___ ----- ---~--- 2.00 -+----l----+----+---+-----+-------+---+----+---+-----+---1-----+-2.00 -·------------------,_ -,_ ---.... --·-_,_ 1.00 -i-----;---;-----r---r-----t-----1tt1----t----t----+----t---T----t---t-1.00 __ , _____ , __ ::..==: -~----_ _,--1 ~- -------·----------------F:.:...:;~--=.--1_.:_.J-=--l 0.00 _.__ _ _.... __ ...._ _ __... __ ...__ ........ ____ _,__ _ __._ __ _,__ _ __,_ __ .L.._ _ __L_ __ a,__ _ __._ 0 .00 0.0 2 .0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16 .0 18.0 20 .0 22.0 24.0 26.0 Time (hrs) -Runoff Hyd -Qp = 4.24 (cfs) TR55 Tc Worksheet Hydraflow Express by lnteliso!ve scs 1 OD-year Culvert Description A B c Totals Sheet Flow Manning's n-value = 0.240 0.011 0.011 Flow length (ft) = 200.0 0.0 0.0 Two-year 24-hr precip. ((in)) = 1.20 0.00 0.00 Land slope (%) = 50.00 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (min) = 11.20 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 11.20 Shallow Concentrated Flow Flow length (ft) = 865.00 0.00 0.00 Watercourse slope (%) = 36.00 0.00 0.00 Surface description = Unpaved Paved Paved Average velocity (ft/s) = 9.68 0.00 0.00 Travel Time (min) = 1.49 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 1.49 Channel Flow X sectional flow area ((sqft)) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Wetted perimeter ((ft)) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Channel slope(%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Manning's n-value = 0.015 0.015 0.015 Velocity (fUs) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Flow length (ft) = 0.0 0.0 0.0 Travel Time (min) = 0 + 0 + 0 = 0.00 Total Travel Time, Tc .............................................................................. 13.00 min 4 /~ MOUNTf\IN CROSS ,.,; ~~"~'~~o~~•~c~~~; Ji:-!~; 826 112 Gran<l Avenue Glenwood Spnngs, CO 81601 ------·-----ph970 945."5"4 r. 970 MS 555Swww.moun1o;ncrno,....ng.com DETENTION CALCULATIONS for Area 1 Buffalo Valley, Garfield County, CO 11/17/2014 Area = I. 7 6 acres Tc = 5 minutes Release rate = 5 .4 5 cfs c = 0.835 25-yr Detention Duration I Release Volume Inflow Volume Volume Difference (min.) (in./hr.) (ft3) (ft3) (ft3) 5 4.40 1635 1956 321 10 3.25 2453 2890 437 15 2.75 3270 3668 398 20 2.40 4088 4268 180 25 2.15 4905 4779 -126 30 1.95 5723 5201 -521 35 1.75 6540 5446 -1094 40 1.60 7358 5690 -1667 45 1.45 8175 5801 -2374 50 1.35 8993 6001 -2991 55 1.30 9810 6357 -3453 60 1.25 10628 6668 -3959 Maximum Volume Difference= Required Detention= 437 Release rate = 2.53 cfs c = 0.835 2-yr Detention Duration I Release Volume Inflow Volume Volume Difference (min.) (in.flu-.) (ft3) (ft3) (ft3) 5 2.00 759 889 130 10 1.55 1139 1378 240 15 1.30 1518 1734 216 20 1.15 1898 2045 147 25 1.00 2277 2223 -54 30 0.90 2657 2401 -256 35 0.80 3036 2490 -546 40 0.75 3416 2667 -748 45 0.70 3795 2801 -994 50 0.65 4175 2890 -1285 55 0.60 4554 2934 -1620 60 0.55 4934 2934 -1999 Maximum Volume Difference= 240 Cubic Feet Cubic Feet 525.00 424.00 474.5 0.5 237.25 354.00 389 0.5 194.5 Cubic Feet 1.00 177.5 0.2 35.5 242.00 1.00 121.5 0.4 48.6 Cubic Feet Orifice Calculations = · 2 year Q= 2.422 els < 2.53 els C= 0.600 A= 0.601 sq. ft. 10.5 diameter H= 0.700 ft Orifice Calculations = · 25 year Q= 3.172 els 2.278 els C= 0.600 A= 0.601 sq. ft. H= 1.200 ft 10.5 diameter Plus Q= 2.247 els < 5.45 els C= 0.600 A= 0.660 sq. ft. H= 0.500 ft 11 diameter Channel Report Hydranow Express Extension for AutoCAD® Civil 3D® 2013 by Autodesk, Inc. Thursday, Jul 11 2013 25-Year P1 Swale Triangular Highlighted S ide S lopes (z: 1) = 2 .00 , 2.00 Depth (ft) = 0.94 Tota l Depth (ft) = 1.00 Q (cfs) = 6.620 Area (sqft) = 1.77 Invert E lev (ft) = 1.00 Velocity (ft/s) = 3.75 Slope(%) = 1.00 Wetted Perim (ft) = 4.20 N-Value = 0.022 Crit Depth , Ye (ft) = 0.93 Top Width (ft) = 3.76 Calculations EGL (ft) = 1.16 Compute by: Known Q Known Q ( cfs) = 6.62 Elev (ft) Section Depth (ft) 3.00 ---..----,------..----...-----.-----.---~---..-----..----~---.--2.00 -------------------·------------ 2.50 --+----+----+------+-----t----+----+----+----+----t---+--1.50 -----------------1------ ------1------------------------ -------·-----·---·----- 2.00 -t----1o11 ....... ~--+----+---t---"liijjll'----+----t----+------:~..t---+-1.00 1.00 -' -------==--·------/ ------~----·-----------~ / -~ -=~-~-y 1.50 --+----+--~--~~----+---~---~~~-~~-~----+----+-0.50 ----1-" -=-~-=-~ ~= ------ ---------=-"''/---====---- 0.00 --------+---1----------1--------1 0.50 ~--~--~--~--~--~--~--~--~--~--~ -0.50 0 .5 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Reach (ft) ... -Clllll ..... .... - Wildfire Hazard Garfleld County GIS Relaflw Wildfire Huard MOUNT/\IN CROSS i----1. EN<ilNEf RIN6, INC. CMI and Envlronmantal Consulllng and Design 826 112 Grand Avenue Glenwood Sprtnp, CO 81801 ph 170.148.11144 fx 970.9411.551111-.mounblln~g.com • • BUFFALO VALLEY APARTMENTS BUFFALO VALLEY APARTMENTS - ---'-!--~ - BUFFALO VALLEY APARTMENTS u D BUILDING 1-TYPICAL UPPER LEVEL PLAN I o• 1 o• 20• 30' 40• 50• I~· --... e r • ~ I I • • I I a::? 8 :z: i ..... z:: ~ ~ ll; if: I < ~ -~ ..... ;:: 9 < ..... ..... = m - -,_ ---SCHEMATIC FLOOR PLANS -· A I. I -- BUILDING 2-TYPICAL UPPER LEVEL PLAN I o• 1 o• 20• :so• "'1-0' 50• I ~· -- l~~I~ !:::? 8 :z: 1i LLJ ~ z:: ! == ; ~ < -~ ~ 9 < ..... ..... = m - -,_ ---SCHEMATIC FLOOR PLANS -· A 1.2 -- D BUILDING 1-LOWER LEVEL PLAN I o• 1 o• 20• 30• 40• 50• u I ~· -- WOOi' • r • ~ I I e • I I a::? 8 ::z: I ..... E .. ~ il; if: ~ < ~ -~ ..... ::: 9 < ..... ..... :;:) 1111:1 - -,_ - -SCHEMATIC FLOOR PLANS -· A 1.3 -- fl?~. -·-'r'4.../j-....,. • r e ~ 1 1 • e ! 1 !:::? 8 :z: i LLI E "' !iiiC il; if: I < ~ -LLI ..... ..... ;:: 9 < ..... ..... = 1111:1 D - BUILDING 2-LOWER LEVEL PLAN #"" ...... IUlll o' 1 o' 20' 30' 40' 50' -- KHEHATIC FLOOI PLANS -· A 1.4 - - Buffalo Valley   Parking  Waiver  Request     Buffalo  Valley  proposes  to  provide  128  parking  stalls  for  our  54  unit   medium  density  residential  project.    The  GarCo  code  section  would   indicate  135  spaces.    The  applicant  proposes  to  meet  the  standard  by   implementing  a  controlled  parking  permit  process  to  manage  all  on  site   parking  and  mitigate  unnecessary,  unwanted  or  degenerate  vehicles.    A   draft  of  the  parking  plan  is  submitted  with  this  application.  We  believe   this  plan  creates  the  compliance  intent  of  the  parking  code.         The  GarCo  parking  code  does  not  provide  an  automatic  recognition  of   two  stalls  per  tandem  configuration.    The  active  parking  management   plan  will  create  effective  dual  utilization  of  the  space.    We  believe  based   upon  empirical  evidence,  the  assigned  tandem  spaces  will  be  a  sought   after  configuration.         We  ask  for  a  parking  waiver  from  Garfield  County  Land  Use  and   Development  Code  Section  4-­‐118,  subsection  C,  and  to  define  tandem   parking  as  two  stalls.      DRAFT          DRAFT    DRAFT     Buffalo  Valley  Parking  Regulations.             1)  Each  residential  unit  will  have  a  minimum  available  parking  for  two  (2)  vehicles   per  two  or  three  bedroom  unit,  one  (1)  vehicle  per  one  bedroom  unit  are  permitted   on  the  property  without  specific  permission  of  management.    There  are  additional   parking  spots  available  on  a  first  come  first  served  basis.         2)    There  are  tandem  spaces  which  may  be  available.    These  spaces  will  be   specifically  assigned  to  the  resident  and  are  first  come  basis.    A  wait  list  may  be   available.     3)  Residents  shall  park  in  Buffalo  Valley  designated  parking  places  and  each  vehicle   shall  be  registered  with  the  Management  by  type,  year,  color,  license  number,  etc.   3)  No  trailers,  boats,  trucks  (larger  than  1  ton),  motor  homes,  snowmobiles,  jet  skis,   or  any  other  recreational  vehicles  /  commercial  vehicles  may  be  parked  at  the   property  without  written  approval.     4)  No  abandoned,  unlicensed/non-­‐registered,  or  inoperable  vehicles  are  permitted   in  the  Community.  Abandoned  vehicles  are  those  that  have  not  been  driven  under   their  own  propulsion   for  more  than  three  weeks  and  have  been  stored  on  the  property.   5)  Vehicles  not  removed  within  seventy  two  (72)  hours  after  notification  will  be   towed/booted  at  the  unit/vehicle  owner’s  expense.   6)  No  maintenance,  repair,  dismantling  or  servicing  of  any  kind  to  vehicles,  boats,   motorcycles,  recreational  vehicles  etc.  may  be  performed  or  conducted  at  the   property.   7)  Park  only  on  the  Buffalo  Valley  property.    No  parking  on  the  church  property  or   county  road.      Violators  are  subject  to  towing  and/or  booting.   8)    Guest  parking  areas  are  intended  for  temporary  guests,  not  extra  vehicle  use  by   residents.   ·  All  vehicles  parked  in  guest  parking  spaces  are  required  to  have  guest  parking   permits  displayed  on  the  rear-­‐view  mirror  of  the  car  between  the  hours  of  10pm  –   6am.  Guest  parking  permits  are  available  at  Management  offices.   Guest  parking  tags  will  be  issued  for  72  hours  and  must  be  returned.   ·  Vehicles  parked  in  guest  parking  spaces  from  10pm  –  6am  without  guest  parking   permits  may  be  booted  and  or  towed.     9)    Enjoy  your  time  staying  at  the  Buffalo  Valley.    Be  considerate  of  others,  and  they   will  probably  do  the  same  for  you.