Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1.00 General Application Materials
July 29, 2025 Garfield County Planning and Zoning Department 108 8th St #401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Dear Planning and Zoning Staff, On behalf of Harvest Roaring Fork, LLC, we are pleased to submit our Planned Unit Development application for review. This application represents our work with staff to create a regulating document outlining our intent and vision for Harvest Roaring Fork, a mixed-use community designed to meet Garfield County's needs for sustainable growth, environmental stewardship, and attainable housing options consistent with Garfield County Comprehensive Plan. The application follows the structure outlined in the pre-application summary received from the county. and is updated to also respond to both the NTC review letter we received on March 10, 2025, and the preliminary referral comments from the Town of Carbondale . To provide a detailed understanding of our goals, the narrative attached as Exhibit A highlights not only our approach to conservation, including preserving wildlife habitats, but also our commitment to building workforce housing that aligns with sustainable principles. Homes in Harvest Roaring Fork will be designed with downsized footprints, efficient construction methods, and community-centered landscaping to reduce environmental impact, while still meeting the needs of all residents, alike delivering attractive and diverse product types that will appeal to new and existing Garfield County residents. Pursuant to initial discussions with Garfield County management, t he application document also includes the Harvest Roaring Fork PUD Guide as Exhibit D, which establishes zoning, permitted uses, development standards, and density limits for each parcel, providing a regulatory framework to govern future phases of development. The PUD guide uses a form-based-zoning outline that is intended to be able to adjust to both market needs and jurisdictional approvals that will take place after the Board of County Commissioners considers approval of this zoning request. Our approach prioritizes clarity and compliance, ensuring that all aspects of the proposal meet Garfield County’s requirements and reflect our dedication to creating a vibrant, well -rounded community consistent with the approved Garfield County Comprehensive Plan. Concurrently with this application, and at the request of County staff, we have submitted a formal request to revoke the existing Planned Unit Development that was previously approved for the property. To assist staff in their review, this application has been bookmarked in both the Table of Contents and the Exhibits Outline. We appreciate your time reviewing this application and look forward to working together to bring Harvest Roaring Fork to life. Thank you, Timothy Coltart Manager Harvest Roaring Fork, LLC 214.578.1314 Garfield County, Colorado Parcels 239307200031, 239501400161, 239307300032, 239307200001 and 239307300033 Updated Planned Unit Development Application – July 29, 2025 Submitted July 29, 2025 for: Harvest Roaring Fork Contact: Timothy Coltart 5 Tree Farm Drive Basalt, CO 81621 214.578.1314 Planned Unit Development Application Table of Contents Application Team ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……....….6 Pre-Application Conference Summary .......................................................................................................................7 Application Form ....................................................................................................................................................16 Payment Agreement Form......................................................................................................................................18 4-203. B.2 - Ownership Information .…………………………………….……………..………...………………………………….……..…...….…19 4-203.B - Project Description………………………….……………………………………………………….……………..……………….………..…..19 4-203. - B.3 - Adjacent Property Owners Within 200 Feet ........................................................................................20 4-203. - B.3 Mineral Owners and Lessees...............................................................................................................24 Statements of Authority.........................................................................................................................................28 4-203.C - Vicinity Map .............................................................................................................................................29 4-203.D - Site Plan ..................................................................................................................................................30 4-203.G - Impact Analysis ........................................................................................................................................30 4-203.H - Rezoning Justification Report ...................................................................................................................30 4-203.J - Development Agreement..........................................................................................................................30 4-203.L - Traffic Study .............................................................................................................................................30 4-203.O - Floodplain Analysis ..................................................................................................................................30 6-202.C - Review Criteria .........................................................................................................................................31 6-301 - Application Materials………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………....31 6-302.A – PUD Plan ..................................................................................................................................................31 6-302.B - Amendment Justification Report ...............................................................................................................33 6-401 – Development Standards………………………………………………………….……………………………………………………...….....…..33 7-105 – Wastewater Facilities………………………………………………………………….……………………………………………………....….…34 7-104 – Water Facilities…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………………………......34 7-109 – Fire Protection…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………………....…..34 Responses to Standards in Article 7, Division 1. General Approval Standards ............................................................34 7-101. Zone District Use Regulations ............................................................................................................................34 7-102. Comprehensive Plan and Intergovernmental ....................................................................................................34 7-103. Compatibility ....................................................................................................................................................34 7-104. Source of Water ................................................................................................................................................34 7-105. Central Water Distribution and Wastewater Systems .....................................................................................34 7-106. Public Utilities....................................................................................................................................................34 7-107. Access and Roadways.......................................................................................................................................34 7-108. Use of Land Subject to Natural Hazards............................................................................................................34 7-109. Fire Protection....................................................................................................................................................34 Responses to Standards in Article 7, Division 2. General resource Protection Standards ……………………….…................35 7-201. Agricultural Lands ...........................................................................................................................................35 7-202. Wildlife Habitat Areas....................................................................................................................................35 7-203. Protection of Waterbodies..............................................................................................................................35 7-204. Drainage and Erosion ......................................................................................................................................35 7-205. Environmental Quality………………………………….. ..............................................................................................35 7-206. Wildfire Hazards..............................................................................................................................................35 7-207. Natural and Geologic Hazards.........................................................................................................................36 7-208. Reclamation………………………………....................................................................................................................36 Responses to Standards in Article 7, Division 3. Site Planning and Development Standards .....................................36 7-301. Compatible Design...........................................................................................................................................36 7-302. Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards ......................................................................................................37 7-303. Landscape Standards ......................................................................................................................................37 7-304. Lighting Standards ..........................................................................................................................................37 7-305. Snow Storage Standards .................................................................................................................................37 7-306. Trail and Walkway Standards .........................................................................................................................37 Responses to Standards in Article 7, Division 4. Subdivision Standards and Design 7-401. General Subdivision Standards .........................................................................................................................37 7-402. Subdivision Lots ................................................................................................................................................37 7-403. Survey Monuments ...........................................................................................................................................37 7-404. School Land Dedication ....................................................................................................................................37 7-405. Road Impact Fees ............................................................................................................................................ 37 Article 8 – Inclusionary Zoning for Housing …………………………………………………………………………………………….……..…..… 38 Exhibits ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..... 40 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U Harvest Roaring Fork Project Narrative Comprehensive Plan Analysis Rezoning Justification Report Harvest Roaring Fork Planned Unit Development Guide Sopris Engineering Engineer Report Phasing Plan Development Agreement Colorado Wildlife Science, LLC Ecological Assessment of Property Kimley Horn Harvest Roaring Fork Traffic Assessment Impact Analysis Waterlaw Water Supply Letter Not Applicable RFTA Crossings Safe Routes to Schools Map Conservation and Sustainability Noxious Weed Compliance Title Commitments Affordable Housing Plan Funding for Common Use Areas Carbondale & Rural Fire District Letter Viewpoints Application Team Applicant: Harvest Roaring Fork Contact: Timothy Coltart 909 Lake Carolyn Parkway Suite 150 Irving, TX 75039 214.578.1314 Legal Counsel: Johnston | Van Arsdale | Martin, PLLC Contact: Chad J. Lee, Esq. 901 Grand Ave., Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 970.893.8242 Civil Engineering/Survey: Sopris Engineering Contact: Yancy Nichol 502 Main St #a-3 Carbondale, CO 81623 970.379.4891 Land Planning: Roaring Brook Development Company Dan Quinto Colleyville, TX The Land Studio, Inc. Contact: Doug Pratte 365 River Bend Way Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 970.927.3690 DHM Contact: Jason Jaynes 225 Main St Unit 201 Carbondale, CO 81623 970.963.6520 Noxious Weed Management: Eco-Right Solutions Contact: James Lewis 167 Redstone Blvd. Redstone, CO 81623 970.319.4197 Traffic Engineering: Kimley Horn Contact: Curtis Rowe 1125 17th Street #1400 Denver, CO 303.228.2300 Water Use Counsel Patrick, Miller, and Noto Contact: Scott Miller 229 Midland Ave. Basalt, CO 81621 970.920.1030 Environmental Engineering SME Environmental Engineering Contact: Sean Moore 679 E 2nd Ave. Durango, CO 81301 970.259.9595 Pre-Application Summary Application Form See Attached 283 Acres +/- Commercial/General 4-203.B.2 - Ownership Information Proof of Ownership Harvest Roaring Fork, LLC purchased parcels 239307200031, 239501400161, 239307300032, 239307200001 and 239307300033 in March 2024. See attached Title Commitment attached as Exhibit Q to this application. 4-203.B - Project Description Harvest Roaring Fork, LLC, consists of parcels 239307200031, 239501400161, 239307300032, 239307200001, and 239307300033, located in The Roaring Fork valley in Garfield County totaling >283 acres. The project site includes a mile of frontage along the Roaring Fork River to the west and a mile along the Rio Grande Trail, and Highway 82 to the east, providing both natural amenities and access to recreational corridors. The Roaring Fork conservancy holds a 54-acre easement on the property along The Roaring Fork River and Cattle Creek. Apart from the land and vegetation that’s been protected from the easement, the property was denuded in 2005, leaving the property in poor condition. As part of the development, restoration efforts will focus on reestablishing native vegetation and enhancing the riparian areas during development phases. The PUD application includes the Harvest Roaring Fork PUD Guide, which will govern the future development of this community. This guide establishes zoning for each neighborhood within Harvest Roaring Fork, setting forth specific regulations, development standards, use restrictions, and density limits for each neighborhood. The PUD Guide will serve as the regulatory framework guiding the community’s growth and ensuring alignment with Garfield County’s vision for balanced, responsible development. This mixed-use community is thoughtfully designed to meet Garfield County’s housing, environmental, and economic needs. It will include a mix of residential unit types, open space, and preserved natural areas, integrating neighborhood-serving amenities for a walkable and inviting community. With more than 25% of the land dedicated to conservation, open spaces, and trail networks, Harvest Roaring Fork emphasizes environmental stewardship and community connectivity. For more information see the project narrative, attached as Exhibit A to this application. 4-203.B.3 - Adjacent Property Owners Within 200 Feet Parcel: 239512124002 Owner IRONBRIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOC INC Physical Address Not available GLENWOOD SPRINGS 81601 Mailing Address PO BOX 1315 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 Land Acres 7.11199999 2024 Mill Levy 79.9180 Parcel: 239501424007 Owner IRONBRIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC Physical Address Not available GLENWOOD SPRINGS 81601 Mailing Address PO BOX 1315 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 Land Acres 22.94799995 2024 Mill Levy 79.9180 Parcel: 239512124001 Owner IRONBRIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOC INC Physical Address Not available GLENWOOD SPRINGS 81601 Mailing Address PO BOX 1315 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 Land Acres 16.65600014 2024 Mill Levy 79.9180 Parcel: 239501400087 Owner GOLUBA, NICHOLAS W JR Physical Address 485 167 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS 81601 Mailing Address PO BOX 931 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602 Land Acres 14.56999969 2024 Mill Levy 72.5180 Parcel: 239501400086 Owner OSTERMILLER, ROBERT D JR & LAURIE M Physical Address 329 CORYELL RIDGE RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS 81601 Mailing Address 275 MEADOW WOOD ROAD GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 Land Acres 7.20800018 2024 Mill Levy 72.5180 Parcel: 239501400085 Owner CASTILLO, HUGO A Physical Address 327 CORYELL RIDGE RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS 81601 Mailing Address PO BOX 1477 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 Land Acres 2.50600004 2024 Mill Levy 72.5180 Parcel: 239501400137 Owner CAVERN SPRINGS MHC LLC Physical Address 5387 154 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS 81601 Mailing Address 2151 PRIEST BRIDGE DRIVE, SUITE 7 CROFTON, MD 21114 Land Acres 13.85000038 2024 Mill Levy 72.5180 Parcel: 239501400082 Owner K & L LLC Physical Address 5451 154 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS 81601 Mailing Address 108 CROWN MOUNTAIN DRIVE BASALT, CO 81621 Land Acres 0 2024 Mill Levy 72.5180 Parcel: 239328300024 Owner ROARING FORK TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY Physical Address RAILROAD R.O.W. GLENWOOD SPRINGS 81601 Mailing Address 1340 MAIN STREET CARBONDALE, CO 81623 Land Acres 0 2024 Mill Levy 72.5180 Parcel: 239307206005 Owner HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF THE ROARING FORK VALLEY INC Physical Address 53 CALAWAY CT GLENWOOD SPRINGS 81601 Mailing Address 53 CALAWAY COURT GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 Land Acres 4.38500023 2024 Mill Levy 72.5180 Parcel: 239318400106 Owner GARDNER DYNASTY TRUST, DATED 7/29/2021 Physical Address 9171 82 HWY CARBONDALE 81623 Mailing Address PO BOX 1943 EAGLE, CO 81631 Land Acres 31.13999939 2024 Mill Levy 72.5180 Parcel: 239318400104 Owner JERONIMUS, MICHALEEN & MICHAEL Physical Address 9173 82 HWY CARBONDALE 81623 Mailing Address PO BOX 1318 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 Land Acres 22.14800072 2024 Mill Levy 72.5180 Parcel: 239318300366 Owner GLEASON, WALTER M ESTATE OF Physical Address 109 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS 81601 Mailing Address 2273 RIVER ROAD GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81505 Land Acres 120.11299896 2024 Mill Levy 79.9180 Parcel: 239318201068 Owner HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AT ASPEN GLEN Physical Address Not available CARBONDALE 81623 Mailing Address 0080 BALD EAGLE WAY CARBONDALE, CO 81623 Land Acres 6.53800011 2024 Mill Levy 79.9180 Parcel: 239318201067 Owner HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AT ASPEN GLEN Physical Address Not available CARBONDALE 81623 Mailing Address 0080 BALD EAGLE WAY CARBONDALE, CO 81623 Land Acres 7.24399996 2024 Mill Levy 79.9180 Parcel: 239512402001 Owner HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AT ASPEN GLEN Physical Address Not available CARBONDALE 81623 Mailing Address 0080 BALD EAGLE WAY CARBONDALE, CO 81623 Land Acres 6.94299984 2024 Mill Levy 79.9180 Parcel: 239318200416 Owner ROARING FORK WATER & SANITATION DISTRICT Physical Address Not available CARBONDALE 81623 Mailing Address PO BOX 326 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602 Land Acres 5.41699982 2024 Mill Levy 79.9180 Parcel: 239512400005 Owner SHERICK, GEORGE W & JERI L Physical Address 2550 109 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS 81601 Mailing Address 2550 COUNTY ROAD 109 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 Land Acres 7.19999981 2024 Mill Levy 72.5180 Parcel: 239512400008 Owner CLAASSEN, TERRENCE C & LARA Physical Address 650 LARIAT LN GLENWOOD SPRINGS 81601 Mailing Address 650 LARIAT LANE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 Land Acres 3.25999999 2024 Mill Levy 72.5180 Parcel: 239512400012 Owner JWK INVESTMENTS LTD Physical Address 1750 109 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS 81601 Mailing Address 1750 COUNTY ROAD 109 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 Land Acres 2.01999998 2024 Mill Levy 72.5180 Parcel: 239512401021 Owner CHRISTOPHER BUTLER AND STACEY Y CAMPOS Physical Address 652 LARIAT LN GLENWOOD SPRINGS Mailing Address 652 LARIAT LN GLENWOOD SPRINGS Land Acres 10.98999977 2024 Mill Levy 72.5180 4-203.B.3 - Mineral Owners and Lessees Estate of T.M. Sanders Heirs of Ella J. Chase Chad J. Lee, Laurel Quinto, and Quentin Morse 901 Grand Ave, Ste. 201 Glewood Springs, Colorado, 81601 (970)922-2122 chad@jvamlaw.com; laurel@jvamlaw.com; quentin@jvamlaw.com March 25, 2025 Via Email Garfield County Community Development c/o Glenn Hartman, Director 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood springs, Colorado 81601 Re: Harvest Roaring Fork PUD - Mineral Owner Notification Research Dear Glenn: The Garfield County Land Use Code requires the Applicant to provide notice to Mineral Owners underlying the subject property. Colorado Revised Statute § 24-65.5-103 requires that a land use applicant notify a mineral estate owner who either (1) is identified as such by the county tax assessor’s records or (2) has filed in the Clerk and Recorder a request for notification. If such records do not identify any mineral estate owners, including their addresses of record, “the applicant shall be deemed to have acted in good faith and shall not be subject to further obligations….” C.R.S. § 24-65.5-103 (2)(b). In accordance with the GCLUR and Colorado Statute, we conducted the following tasks for the Applicants’ properties, Parcel Nos. 2393-073-00-032, 2393-073-00-033, 2393- 072-00-001, 2395-014-00-161, 2393-072-00-031, and legally described in that certain Special Warranty Deed recorded March 12, 2024 in the records of Garfield County, Colorado as Reception No. 994230: 1.We spoke with Casey Lawrence at the Garfield County Assessor’s Office on March 24, 2025 who confirmed that the Assessor’s records for the respective parcels do not list any active or inactive mineral owners and that there are no separate tax accounts for mineral owners per C.R.S. § 24-65.5-103(I)(A); 11 2.We researched the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder’s index of mineral owner requests for notification per C.R.S. § 24-65.5-103(a)(I)(B) and confirmed that no mineral owner for the subject properties has filed a request for notification as of March 24, 2025; and 3.We conducted a reasonable investigation of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder’s public records and determined that the severances are as follows: (a)A life estate in and to one half of all the net royalty payments was reserved by Gisella Fiou in deed recorded September 28, 1965 in Book 370 at Page 69 Reception No. 231765. I found obituaries for two of her sons in the local newspaper that stated that Gisella Fiou Myers had predeceased the sons. Because Gisella Fiou is now deceased, the life estate returns to the surface estate. (b)T. M. Sanders acquired a six and one-fourth percent royalty interest in the mineral estate pursuant to that certain Quitclaim Deed from Neil S. Mincer and Erven T. Larson recorded December 17, 1964 in Book 362 Page 445 Reception No. 228037. The reserved interest was not conveyed further by T. M. Sanders. T. M. Sanders a/ k/ a Thomas M. Sanders a/ k/ a Thomas Milbern Sanders passed away March 7, 1970 in Orange County, California. His will was recorded in the records of Garfield County on November 19, 1971 in Book 425 Page 1 Reception No. 251765. The will states that his wife is named Pearl M. Sanders, and that he leaves two children David R. Sanders and Marva Sanders Brown. Lucile M. Johnson was appointed as trustee. There are no deeds either to any of the above parties or out from any of them which means that the reservation was not conveyed further. (c)Ella J. Chase reserved an undivided one-fiftieth of all oil and gas under portions of the subject property in that certain Warranty Deed, recorded June 12, 1951 Book 258 Page 594 Reception No. 176326. There is no recorded document conveying Ms. Chase’s interest away in the Garfield County Records. Ella J. Chase passed away in Iowa on April 10, 1964 and her will was recorded in Garfield County on February 24, 1965 in Book 364 Page 143 Reception No. 228828. She left any real property to her niece Gladys Zook Smith. There are no deeds to or from Gladys Zook Smith which refer to the reserved mineral interest. (d)In 2011 Carbondale Investments, LLC (CI) purported to reserve part of the mineral estate to itself in that certain Correction Deed recorded June 22, 2011 as Reception No. 804201. At the same time, Carbondale Investments reserved a portion of the mineral estate in that certain Correction Deed to Garfield County Commercial Investments recorded June 22, 2011 as Reception No. 804202. However, in 2024 both of these entities 12 conveyed their interest in the property without reservation to Harvest Roaring Fork, LLC in that certain Bargain and Sale Deed recorded March 12, 2024 as Reception No. 994231. Therefore, CI and GCCI’s interest in the mineral estate merged with the surface estate. This satisfies Applicants’ obligation under the applicable Colorado statute, and no mineral owner notification is required. Best regards, JVAM PLLC By: Chad Lee Partner 13 4-203.C - Vicinity Map Article 4: Application and Review Procedures. 4-203.D - Site Plan See concept plan in the attached PUD guide included as Exhibit D to this application , along with the DHM Illustrative Neighborhood Exhibit included in the PD, attached as Exhibit D to this application. 4-203.E – Grading and Drainage Plans Refer to Sopris Engineering’s report attached as Exhibit E to this application. 4-203.F – Landscape Plan Refer to the PUD guide for landscape requirements attached as Exhibit D to this application. 4-203.G - Impact Analysis Refer to the Impact Analysis, Exhibit J, and Sopris Engineering Engineer’s Report attached as Exhibit E to this application. 4-203.H - Rezoning Justification Report A Rezoning Justification Report has been provided by JVAM and is included as Exhibit C to this Application. 4-203.I – Statement of Appeal Not applicable 4-203.J - Development Agreement A draft Development Agreement is included as part of the Harvest Roaring Fork PUD Application and is attached as Exhibit G to this Application. 4-203.L - Traffic Study Kimley Horn has prepared a Harvest Roaring Fork Traffic Assessment that is attached as Exhibit I. 4-203.M – Water Supply Distribution Plan See attached letter from Waterlaw, Exhibit K, and Sopris Engineering’s Engineer Report, Exhibit E. 4-203.M – Wastewater Management and System Plan See attached Sopris Engineering Engineers Report, Exhibit E to this application. 4-203.O - Floodplain Analysis The floodplain analysis is included in Sopris’ Engineering Report, Exhibit E, a map is included and discussed in the Impact Analysis, Exhibit J included in this application. Article 6: Planned Unit Developments 6-202.C - Review Criteria 1.Purpose and Applicability. The PUD meets the purpose and applicability of this Code, as provided in section 6-101.A. and B. See Conformance with the Comprehensive Plan letter included as Exhibit B to this Application. 2.Development Standards. The PUD meets the Development Standards as provided in section 6-401. 6-401. A. Permitted Uses 6-401. B. Off-Street Parking 6-401. C. Density 6-401. D. Housing Types 6-401. E. Transportation and Circulation System 6-401. F. Recreational Amenities 6-401. G. Building Height 6-401. H. Lots 6-401. I. Phasing The above Standards have been addressed in the PUD Guide included as Exhibit D to this application. 3.Standards, Article 7. The PUD meets the standards within Article 7, Division 1, excluding 7-101. 7-101. The Land Use Change shall comply with Article 3, Zoning, including any applicable zone district use restrictions and regulations. Refer to the Rezoning Justification report prepared by JVAM attached as Exhibit C to this Application. 4.Rezoning Criteria. The PUD meets the Rezoning Review Criteria in section 4-113.C. Refer to the Rezoning Justification report prepared by JVAM attached as Exhibit C to this Application. 5.Established Zoning Standards. The PUD Plan adequately establishes uses and standards governing the development, density, and intensity of land use by means of dimensional or other standards Refer to the PUD guide attached as Exhibit D to this application. 6-301 – Application Materials Harvest Roaring Fork complies. See attached Exhibits and below. 6-302 – Description of Submittal Requirements 6-302 A.1. PUD Plan 1.a. General project concept and purpose of the request See Section 4-203.B, Project Description and refer to Project Narrative attached as Exhibit A to this application. 1.b. Explanation of how the PUD is in general conformance with the Comprehensive Plan See JVAM Conformance with the Comprehensive Plan letter included as Exhibit B to this Application. 1.c. Description of how the proposed development departs from the otherwise applicable standards of this Code but meets the intent and purpose of this Article The PUD approach allows greater design flexibility than the Residential Suburban base zone enabling a thoughtful response to local housing, environmental, and community needs. This application complies with the proposed zoning standards as detailed in the Harvest Roaring Fork PUD guide, aligning with Garfield County's Comprehensive Plan . 1.d. Relationship of the proposed PUD development to the existing land uses and adjacent property land uses With a mile of frontage along the Roaring Fork River to the west and another mile along the Rio Grande Trail to the east, the Harvest Roaring Fork PUD will blend residential and community spaces with preserved natural areas, creating a thoughtful relationship with the surrounding land uses. A 54-acre easement along the river and Cattle Creek demonstrates our commitment to stewardship, conservation, and community engagement, fostering a relationship with nature alongside development. Additionally, Harvest Roaring Fork will provide water to neighboring properties to the north and be a considerate neighbor by preserving view corridors . This balanced integration of land use and open space aligns with Garfield County's goals for responsible growth and sustainable community development. 1.e. Phasing and timing for the proposed development including the start and completion date of construction of each phase See Harvest Roaring Fork PUD Phasing Plan letter included as Exhibit F to this Application. A.2. PUD Plan 2.a. Method and calculation used to determine overall project and specific use type densities. See the attached PUD Guide, Exhibit D, for specific use type densities and floor area calculations. 2.b. The PUD shall demonstrate how common wastewater facilities will be controlled or governed by the future owners within the PUD See the attached engineering report provided by Sopris Engineering for discussion on wastewater facilities and how these will be governed or controlled by future owners within the PUD. 2.c. The PUD shall demonstrate how common water facilities will be controlled or governed by the future owners within the PUD See the attached engineering report provided by Sopris Engineering for discussion on water facilities and how these will be governed or controlled by future owners within the PUD. . 2.d. Method of adequately providing other necessary public utilities See the attached engineering report provided by Sopris Engineering for discussion on public utilities. 2.e. Type or method of fire protection Fire Protection is provided by Carbondale Fire District. We have discussed in detail with the Carbondale Fire District including street types and facilities to serve the community. 2.f. Description of whom or what entity shall be responsible for the provision of and payment for any facilities available to the community, including but not limited to open space, common areas, and structures The open spaces, common areas, and community facilities within Harvest Roaring Fork will be governed and maintained by a Property Owners Association which will be established prior to the filing of the final plat. 2.g. Discussion of impacts on County services, schools, town services and any other unique operation that may be pertinent to a review of the proposed zone change and methods for mitigation Sopris Engineering has provided an Engineering Report that is included as Exhibit E to this Application. 2.h. Documentation showing legal access or documentation demonstrating the likelihood of achieving legal access See attached Harvest Roaring Fork Traffic Assessment, Exhibit I, prepared by Kimley Horn and engineer report, Exhibit E. Additionally, we are actively working with CDOT and anticipate receiving the required access permits in the coming weeks. A.3. PUD Map 3.The intent of this application is to establish a form-based code within the Harvest Roaring Fork PUD Guide. This guide will serve as a set of rules for the property, allowing the planning staff to use these standards as a framework for evaluating and approving future development within the PUD. The PUD Illustrative Neighborhood Exhibit, PUD Map, and Illustrative Concept Map is included in the PUD, attached as Exhibit D to this application. A.4. PUD Plan Guide 4.The Harvest Roaring Fork PUD Guide is included as Exhibit D to this application. The PUD addresses regulations and standards, landscape guidelines, and signage standards. 6-302.B - Amendment Justification Report Not Applicable 6-401 Development Standards Permitted uses, standards, parking, housing types, transportation, heights, and amenities within the community are compatible with both the underlying zone district and the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan, as detailed in the PUD Guide attached as Exhibit D to the application. Article 7: Standards Article 7, Division 1. General Approval Standards 7-101. Zone District Use Regulations The Harvest Roaring Fork PUD complies with Article 3 Zoning regulations, ensuring that all proposed land use changes align with applicable zone district restrictions and standards. The PUD zoning for Harvest Roaring Fork is specifically tailored to allow a flexible yet compliant mix of residential, commercial, and open space uses within the designated parameters, ensuring adherence to both current zoning requirements and the broader goals of the Garfield County land use code. 7-102. Comprehensive Plan and Intergovernmental Refer to Comprehensive Plan Analysis attached as Exhibit B to the application. The proposed Land Use Change is in general conformance with the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan and complies with applicable intergovernmental agreements. 7-103. Compatibility The nature, scale, and intensity of the Harvest Roaring Fork PUD are designed to be fully compatible with adjacent land uses. Additionally, Comprehensive Plan Analysis has been addressed by JVAM and is included as Exhibit B to this Application. 7-104. Source of Water See attached water supply letter completed by Waterlaw, Exhibit K, and engineering report completed by Sopris Engineering, Exhibit E. 7-105. Central Water Distribution and Wastewater Systems See attached engineering report completed by Sopris Engineering, Exhibit E. 7-106. Public Utilities See attached engineering report completed by Sopris Engineering, Exhibit E, along with the Impact Analysis, Exhibit J, attached in this application. 7-107. Access and Roadways Kimley Horn has prepared a Harvest Roaring Fork Traffic Assessment that is attached as Exhibit I. 7-108. Use of Land Subject to Natural Hazards See attached Impact Analysis report attached as Exhibit J. 7-109. Fire Protection Per the Colorado Forest Atlas, the Harvest Roaring Fork site has a low to moderate fire intensity rating. Fire Protection is provided by Carbondale Fire District. We have discussed in detail with the Carbondale Fire District including street types and facilities to serve the community. Please see Exhibit T, a letter from Carbondale Fire District with more information . Article 7, Division 2. General Resource Protection Standards 7-201. Agricultural Lands Harvest Roaring Fork is located on land zoned as Residential Suburban and is not designated as agricultural land. Harvest Roaring Fork will maintain any required setbacks, dust control, and drainage measures as necessary to minimize potential impacts on surrounding agricultural lands and protect local water resources. 7-202. Wildlife Habitat Areas The Harvest Roaring Fork community is committed to minimizing impacts on wildlife habitat areas. The project team has consulted various wildlife consultants, including our Roaring Fork Conservancy partners, as it pertains to their 54-acre easement on the property. Visual and sound buffers, including topographic and vegetative screening, will be established to protect habitat areas. Protective covenants will be created at final plat in alignment with the LUDC and the Roaring Fork Conservancy easement. These measures align with recommendations in the Colorado Wildlife Science report, the PUD guide, and comply with Garfield County’s resource protection standards for wildlife. Refer to the Colorado Wildlife Science report attached as Exhibit H, along with the PUD guide included with this application. 7-203. Protection of Waterbodies. The Harvest Roaring Fork community complies with setback requirements by maintaining a 35- foot minimum setback from the Typical and Ordinary High-Water Mark (TOHWM) along all applicable waterbodies. We have coordinated with the Army Corps of Engineers for necessary permits and approvals. Refer to the attached Sopris Engineering Engineers Report, Exhibit E and Waterlaw Water Supply Letter, Exhibit K. 7-204. Drainage and Erosion. The Harvest Roaring Fork community is in compliance with the Garfield County code regarding drainage and erosion control, as outlined in the Sopris Engineering Report, Exhibit E, attached as to this application. 7-205. Environmental Quality. All land use changes will ensure that air quality is maintained at acceptable levels as established by the Colorado Air Pollution Control Division. Additionally, hazardous materials will be stored and used in accordance with applicable State and Federal hazardous materials regulations to maintain water quality. 7-206. Wildfire Hazards. The community is listed as low-moderate for fire intensity in the Colorado Forest Atlas. Additionally, roof materials will be made of noncombustible materials or other materials recommended by the local fire agency. See PUD guide for roofing materials used within the community. Harvest Roaring Fork Property Location and Wildfire Risk 7-207. Natural and Geologic Hazards. Refer to the attached engineering report completed by Sopris Engineering for further details on compliance with these standards. 7-208. Reclamation We are coordinating with the Colorado Department of Transportation and the Roaring Fork Transportation Authority for necessary access approvals. A noxious weed management plan is in place, as outlined in the Eco-Right Solutions letter provided as Exhibit P to the application. Additionally, the site will be reclaimed progressively as development advances, ensuring that disturbed areas are restored in accordance with Garfield County standards. The timing and phasing of reclamation will align with the approval of final plats and/or individual phases of the project. Article 7, Division 3. Site Planning and Development Standards. 7-301. Compatible Design. The development prioritizes thoughtful site organization, addressing the relationship to streets and lots, pedestrian and vehicular access, parking, and connections to common areas. General Comprehensive Plan Analysis has been addressed by JVAM and is included as Exhibit B to this application. The PUD Guide, attached as Exhibit D, provides detailed standards for site organization, buffering, and operational compatibility to guide the future development of the property. 7-302. Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards Refer to the Harvest Roaring Fork PUD guide attached as Exhibit D for parking and loading standards. 7-303. Landscape Standards Refer to the wildlife study performed by Colorado Wildlife Science, Exhibit H, the noxious weed management plan by Eco-Right solutions, Exhibit P, and the PUD guide provided as Exhibit D. 7-304. Lighting Standards The Harvest Roaring Fork community will adhere to lighting standards designed to protect the rural character of Garfield County and minimize the impacts of light pollution. Refer to the PUD guide attached as Exhibit D to this application for more details regarding lighting standards. 7-305. Snow Storage Standards Harvest Roaring Fork will comply with all snow storage standards as outlined in the LUDC. 7-306. Trail and Walkway Standards The Harvest Roaring Fork community will comply with all trail and walkway standards, with a strong focus on connectivity and accessibility. The trail network is a key amenity for residents, promoting active transportation and recreation. Additionally, the Rio Grande Trail runs the length of the property, offering a valuable connection for future residents to enjoy. Refer to the PUD guide attached as Exhibit D for additional information regarding the trail network. Refer to the Safe Route to School Plan attached as Exhibit N to this application to the Riverview K-8 school. Article 7, Division 4. Subdivision Standards and Design Specifications. 7-401. General Subdivision Standards. The Harvest Roaring Fork community will conform to all subdivision standards, including the establishment of a POA with appropriate covenants that complies with Garfield County code and the Roaring Fork conservation easement. Please see Exhibit S, attached to this application. The developable property is not located in the floodplain; please refer to the Sopris Engineering Engineer’s Report, Exhibit E, for a floodplain analysis. 7-402. Subdivision Lots. Please refer to the attached PUD guide as Exhibit D for conformance to subdivision lots. 7-403. Survey Monuments. The Harvest Roaring Fork development will comply with all survey monument requirements as outlined by C.R.S. §§ 38-51-104 and 38-51-105. 7-404. School Land Dedication. The Harvest Roaring Fork development will comply with school land dedication requirements. If land dedication is not feasible, we will provide the required payment-in-lieu to the appropriate school district as specified. Please see the attached Exhibit N, which includes the impact on the school district and the Safe Routes to Schools Map. 7-405. Road Impact Fees. The Harvest Roaring Fork project is located within the East Benefit Area. See development agreement, Exhibit G attached to this application, regarding road impact fees. Article 8: Inclusionary Zoning for Housing Harvest Roaring Fork will comply with Article 8 standards. Please see attached Exhibit R for Harvest Roaring Fork’s affordable housing plan. Exhibits A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T Harvest Roaring Fork Project Narrative Comprehensive Plan Analysis Rezoning Justification Report Harvest Roaring Fork Planned Unit Development Guide Sopris Engineering Engineer Report Phasing Plan Development Agreement Colorado Wildlife Science, LLC Ecological Assessment of Property Kimley Horn Harvest Roaring Fork Traffic Assessment Impact Analysis Waterlaw Water Supply Letter Not Applicable RFTA Crossings Safe Routes to Schools Map Conservation and Sustainability Noxious Weed Compliance Title Commitments Affordable Housing Plan Funding of the Common Use Areas Carbondale & Rural Fire District Letter Exhibit A Harvest Roaring Fork Project Narrative Contents A.PURPOSE ................................................................................................................ 2 B.PREAMBLE .............................................................................................................. 2 C.FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION ............................................................................... 3 D.URBAN GROWTH AREAS (UGA) & INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ....................... 3 E.HOUSING ............................................................................................................... 3 F.TRANSPORTATION ................................................................................................... 4 G.ECONOMICS, EMPLOYMENT, AND TOURISM ................................................................ 5 H.RECREATION, OPEN SPACE, AND TRAILS ...................................................................... 6 I.AGRICULTURE ......................................................................................................... 6 J.WATER AND SEWER SERVICES ................................................................................... 7 K.NATURAL RESOURCES, HABITAT, AND WILDLIFE ............................................................ 7 L.RENEWABLE ENERGY................................................................................................ 7 A.PURPOSE The purpose of this project narrative is to describe the alignment of the Harvest Roaring Fork Planned Unit Development and Garfield County’s Comprehensive Plan 2030 (the “Comp Plan”). The relevant goals and strategies within the Comp Plan are studied closely in this narrative, providing critical insights into the project-specific opportunities that Harvest Roaring Fork offers. In the interest of providing a succinct and clear message, this narrative is designed to be read in conjunction with the Comp Plan and the Comprehensive Plan Report attached as Exhibit B. The chapters and sections with the greatest relevance to the project are commented on with greater detail, while the less applicable chapters and sections are briefly discussed or excluded from this narrative entirely. B.PREAMBLE Harvest Roaring Fork is a 283-acre Planned Unit Development (PUD) designed to address Garfield County's housing shortage while preserving some of the most distinct characteristics and existing natural landscapes. The project proposes a variety of neighborhoods and housing types to meet the growing demand, reduce exiting commute times, and enhance the quality of life for residents. By focusing on the "missing middle" demographic, including workforce employees, young professionals, families, service workers, seniors, and outdoor enthusiasts, Harvest Roaring Fork aims to provide affordable, sustainable housing options for diverse groups essential to the local economy. The development team recognizes the opportunity for Harvest Roaring Fork to make a substantial impact on the current housing crisis and proposes implementing standards that go above and beyond the County’s current requirements. Strategically located between Carbondale and Glenwood Springs, the development efficiently uses existing infrastructure, minimizes environmental impact, and supports the county's vision for responsible growth. The design incorporates input from local stakeholders and wildlife groups, dedicating over 25% of the land to conservation, open spaces, and trails throughout the project and along the Roaring Fork River. These features promote pedestrian connectivity, reduce traffic congestion, and support outdoor activities. Key design features include compact homes that reduce material use and environmental impact, efficient construction methods to minimize waste, and innovative storage solutions to optimize living space. The project also emphasizes community-centered open spaces with native plant landscaping and shared green spaces, fostering social interaction and environmental stewardship. The 54-acre conservation easement will protect natural habitats, support biodiversity, and provide residents with access to nature for recreation and education. Harvest Roaring Fork’s commitment to sustainability and smart growth aligns with the goals of Garfield County’s Comprehensive Plan 2030, offering a balanced solution to the housing crisis while preserving the region's unique landscape and character. C.FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION The Garfield County Comprehensive Plan 2030 designates the Harvest Roaring Fork property as Residential High (RH), with a density range from 1 dwelling unit per 7,500 sq. ft. (5.8 units per acre) to 1 unit per 2 acres. This density was determined based on public benefits such as affordable housing, diverse housing types, parks, energy conservation, fiscal impacts, and community needs like schools and open space. D.URBAN GROWTH AREAS (UGA) & INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION Although these policies primarily apply to local governments, the development team has actively engaged with the public, local shareholders, and the municipalities of Carbondale and Glenwood Springs, and have incorporated their feedback into the planning process. Additionally, Harvest is coordinating water and sewer service with the Roaring Fork Water and Sanitation District, as supported by the attached "will-serve" letters regarding the project. Policy 1: Growth in UGA and within 3-Mile Areas of Influence should be closely coordinated with the affected municipality. With the property located between the 3-Mile Areas of Influence of Glenwood Springs and Carbondale, the development team has proactively engaged with leaders from each community and will continue to collaborate with them through Garfield County’s referral and entitlement process. Policy 2: Development adjacent to neighboring municipalities should attempt to minimize impacts on municipalities and should not do irreparable harm to existing thriving economies including existing businesses within the neighboring municipalities and unin corporated areas Since the Harvest Roaring Fork District has no direct municipal street connections, the project's street plan should have minimal impact on surrounding municipalities' thoroughfare plans. The development will align with local land use plans to ensure consistency. The primary benefit to neighboring municipalities will be the addition of a broader range of workforce housing options, which will support local businesses while attracting and retaining employees, sponsoring the growth of Garfield County as contemplated in the Comp Plan. In addition, the improved water and sewer service will extend to neighboring development operating on outdated and inefficient utility systems including the opportunity to provide reliable water service to the Carbondale Rural & Fire Protection facility. E.HOUSING Harvest Roaring Fork is designed to help address numerous key issues outlined in Section 2 of the Comp Plan. Each of the most applicable policies are studied in greater detail below. Policy 1: Ensure that current land use planning objectives promote affordable housing. The proposed project introduces innovative land use concepts to create a high-quality, livable community focused on workforce and affordable housing. The PUD standards call for additional dwelling units on the expansive property, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's density guidelines. It also proposes flexible development standards, including potential density and height bonuses and modified parking requirements to encourage the inclusion of affordable and workforce housing as supported by the Comp Plan. Modified parking requirements are due to pedestrian-friendly design of the neighborhoods, which encourages the residents to walk or ride a bike to the commercial uses. Policy 2: Encourage affordable workforce housing to be located near regional centers. The tract's central location between the Roaring Fork Valley's two main regional centers makes it attractive for both market-rate and deed-restricted housing units. This will allow a more significant portion of the workforce to live within the valley, reducing the need for workers to commute from western Garfield County through Glenwood Springs. As a result, traffic engineers have agreed that the development will help alleviate congestion in Glenwood Springs and along the I-70 corridor, promoting a more sustainable transportation dynamic. Policy 5: Assure that adequate housing options for Senior Citizens are available. The Harvest Roaring Fork community includes 2 neighborhoods with options for senior housing. The proposed Planned Unit Development (PUD) will provide a range of housing options, including market-rate, affordable, attainable, and deed-restricted units. This initiative ensures diverse housing solutions, with options specifically designed to meet the needs of senior citizens, offering accessible and comfortable living environments. F.TRANSPORTATION Harvest is highly unusual when considering the amount of workforce housing that is being proposed in such close proximity to existing employment centers, utilities, and transportation networks. No other undeveloped land parcel has the same degree of potential to alleviate traffic congestion. Through significant consultation with CDOT, the Harvest project will also provide significant safety improvements to Highway 82 through a unique combination of limited access options combined with a protected U-turn that will facilitate traffic movements along the projects frontage. Policy 1: Ensure that county roads are constructed and maintained on a safe, and fiscally sustainable basis. The proposed project directs development to areas that minimize strain on county infrastructure, freeing up resources for other needs in Garfield County. A key benefit to the County’s transportation system will be the creation of housing for a large portion of the workforce, reducing daily commutes and traffic on Highway 82, through Glenwood Springs, and across the Colorado River Basin. In combination with Harvest’s pedestrian-oriented community design, this could help reduce the frequency of road repairs and the overall long-term infrastructure expense for the County, while increasing commuter safety. Policy 2: Support public transit services as well as alternative modes of transportation, when and where feasible. The project should include multiple entry points to the RFTA Rio Grande Trail, which is designed to provide residents with ease of access to the nearby RFTA transit stops. G.ECONOMICS, EMPLOYMENT, AND TOURISM Harvest complies with and advances several of the policies and strategies outlined in Section 4 of the Comp Plan. This multi-billion-dollar project has the potential to diversify Garfield County’s economy, strengthen current employment opportunities while generating new jobs, and both directly and indirectly support the County’s tourism industry. Policy 2: The county recognizes that the tourism industry is an important part of the regional economy and the county recognizes that the tourism industry is enhanced by: (1) open space and scenic vistas; (2) public trails and other recreational opportunities; (3) public access to public lands; (4) a healthy environment and habitats for hunting and fishing; (5) green belts and open area between communities; (6) clean air and water; and, (7) local foods and local produce. The proposed project prioritizes preserving open vistas and key viewsheds for the public, including those from Highway 82, the Roaring Fork River, and the Rio Grande Trail, which are valuable to both residents and visitors. To protect the area’s natural beauty and ecological integrity, 54 acres along the river are designated as a conservation easement, complemented by additional parkland along Cattle Creek and a small farm on Highway 82. Building heights along Highway 82 are limited based on topography and sightlines to protect views of the valley and mountains. Located outside of municipal boundaries, the project increases housing availability without adding density to existing municipalities, preserving the community character that tourists so frequently choose to visit. Policy 4: Strengthen Garfield County’s economic resiliency for employment and income generation by continuing to diversify the economy. Harvest is poised to generate substantial job opportunities, both during construction and in long- term employment, directly benefiting the local community. By offering up to 50,000 square feet of centrally located commercial space, the project will attract new offices, shops, and restaurants that will diversify Garfield County's economy. Moreover, Harvest's commitment to expanding the County’s workforce housing supply will further strengthen its role as a catalyst for sustainable, broad-based economic growth. H.RECREATION, OPEN SPACE, AND TRAILS Recreation, open spaces, and trails are fundamental to the PUD, with the development plan including eleven distinct types of open space that support conservation and offer a variety of recreational opportunities. Diverse recreational facilities and conservation areas help create a cohesive community that enhances the quality of life for all ages. Policy 1: Where appropriate, new residential development should provide recreation opportunities for residents that are appropriate to the density and type of development or that contributes land and/or funding to county-wide trail and recreation system. Large developments should provide recreational/transportation facilities internal to the development and connections to external recreational/transportation facilities as appropriate. The 283-acre Harvest property will feature several miles of new trails, providing improved pedestrian access to transit stops, employment hubs, and nature. Low-impact amenities, such as benches, playgrounds, and lawns are thoughtfully incorporated to create an engaging recreational environment that advances the objective of this policy. Policy 5: Promote public health and well-being through the promotion and support of recreational facilities. Over 25% of Harvest is dedicated to open space, with at least 5% of each neighborhood reserved for green areas. By linking all eleven types of open spaces with trails, Harvest encourages residents and the public to reduce their reliance on vehicles, fostering a healthier, more active lifestyle while enhancing connectivity throughout the community. I.AGRICULTURE In this predominantly residential development, land along State Highway 82 will be dedicated as a community farm, honoring the Roaring Fork Valley's agricultural heritage. The iconic red barn, torn down by a previous development, will become the centerpiece of this space, located near the Rio Grande Trail and the village center. This farm will provide residents with access to fresh produce, foster community engagement, and offer educational opportunities in sustainable agriculture. While the farm may not directly impact the broader agricultural industry, it significantly enhances residents' quality of life by promoting healthy, collaborative practices and environmental awareness. By integrating agriculture into the development, the project highlights the value of productive green spaces in urban living, enriching community well-being and underscoring a commitment to sustainable, innovative planning. J.WATER AND SEWER SERVICES The project is within the Roaring Fork Water and Sanitation District’s service area and holds significant water rights, ensuring minimal impact on other properties in the valley. The District has the capacity to meet the community’s needs. To promote water conservation, the homeowners’ association will further regulate irrigation systems by encouraging native plants around buildings, limiting rear yard sizes, and preserving ample public open space. Building design guidelines, enforced through the homeowner’s association and deed restrictions, will also incorporate water-saving strategies, including compliance with municipal conservation standards. These measures will encourage sustainable water use and align with the project’s broader environmental goals. K.NATURAL RESOURCES, HABITAT, AND WILDLIFE The development incorporates measures to safeguard critical wildlife habitats by establishing a designated buffer zone between the river conservation easement areas and the developed areas. This buffer is designed to minimize potential conflicts and help protect sensitive wildlife habitats. The riverbank habitat is more than a mile along the Roaring Fork River, with an average width of over 300 feet. A wildlife expert has identified probable wildlife movements, which have been integrated into the project’s design through the strategic placement of green belts and linear parks. These elements are intended to facilitate wildlife movement and enhance habitat connectivity, thereby supporting the ecological integrity of the area. Most of the 283-acre property outside of the conservation easement area has been disturbed by a previous developer who stripped and stockpiled the topsoil in preparation for development. While this previous project did not materialize, the stockpiled soil remains, and the stripped areas have yet to be revegetated. Harvest will work to reclaim these disturbed areas of land as each neighborhood is developed. L.RENEWABLE ENERGY While the project is not ideally suited for energy generation through renewable sources such as solar or wind, energy conservation will be a key consideration in the development of individual buildings. To this end, the project will establish certain standards that may include the use of LED lighting, Energy Star-rated appliances, and minimum efficiency standards for building envelopes. Although these requirements will need to be balanced with the objective of maintaining affordability, they will be effectively addressed within the design guidelines to ensure that sustainability measures are incorporated into the project. Exhibit B Comprehensive Plan Analysis Page 1 of 9 HARVEST ROARING FORK PUD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS NOVEMBER 18, 2024 A.Consistency with Garfield County Comprehensive Plan The general purpose of PUD zoning is to permit greater design flexibility than is allowed by the base zone district or subdivision regulations, as those objectives are identified in the Planned Unit Development Act of 1972, C.R.S. § 24-67-101, et seq. The Harvest Roaring Fork PUD (“Harvest PUD”) is in general conformance with the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan as required by Article 6-101 of the LUDC. 1.Vision For Garfield County “Garfield County is dedicated to managing growth to dedicated Urban Growth Areas and other areas that can accommodate growth cost effectively, in order to create thriving communities while promoting a diverse, sustainable and healthy economy, protecting wildlife, maintain or improving the quality of our natural environment, and preserving the county’s rural and western heritage.” (GarCo Comp Plan, Page 9). “Most new growth should occur in areas that have or can easily be served by urban services.” From this simple, yet fundamental directive, the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan contains direction for growth in various areas, including specific directives for growth in unincorporated areas. Various growth plans on the parcel have been considered over the past two decades, and the parcel has been graded and scraped of native vegetation by a prior owner in the recent past. Most of the topsoil has been removed or stockpiled, rendering the property unusable for agriculture without significant investment. This parcel has always been anticipated for a significant level of growth, which is reflected in the Comprehensive Plan’s designation of Residential High designation. The property currently consists of an approved PUD, Residential Suburban, and Commercial zoning. The Comprehensive Plan contains several strategies for growth in unincorporated communities, the key to which is the ability to be served with urban services. Here, the Roaring Fork Water and Sanitation District can and will serve the PUD with central water and sewer services. Specifically, the Harvest PUD meets several of the “Growth In Unincorporated Communities” Policy 1 strategies for unincorporated communities (GarCo Comp Plan, Page 11), including: ✓Majority of property is not located within the UGA of existing municipalities. ✓Served with urban services by a special district (Roaring Fork Water and Sanitation District). ✓Proposed internal commercial is primarily for the convenience of area residents (minimizing competition with existing communities) ✓Transit opportunities will be provided ✓Recreation and other public amenities will be provided Page 2 of 9 The proposed Harvest PUD will create a thriving, diverse and sustainable community in a location identified by Garfield County as optimal for residential high density development. It seeks to thoughtfully redevelop property along CO 82 that currently is underutilized and rundown—this development aims to not only boost the local economy but the quality of the natural environment in the area. The proposed PUD pays homage to the County’s rural and western heritage by reconstructing the beloved Bair 76 Barn. The barn will serve as a centerpiece to the community and contribute to a “farm to table” feel by providing access to fresh produce. The Property has excellent highway access, and will finally provide residents with a signal light near the Cattle Creek intersection, improving the safety and quality of life for all surrounding residents and commuters. It is also flat and does not have topographic constraints. 2.Future Land Use Designation. The Future Land Use designated in the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan 2030 for the Harvest PUD property is Residential High (RH). The residential density for the RH future land use is (1) dwelling unit per 7,500 sq. ft. (i.e. 5.8 dwelling units per acre to one (1) dwelling unit per two (2) acres).When the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan was developed, the criteria for determining this RH density were based on the degree of public benefit, including affordable housing, mix of housing types, parks/trails/open space, energy conservation, fiscal impacts, preservation of views, and providing for schools and other public needs. 3.Urban Growth Area and Intergovernmental Coordination The Harvest PUD is located in between Glenwood Springs and Carbondale, with the edges of the parcel being within each municipalities 3 Mile Area of Influence. The Applicant has proactively engaged each community as part of its pre-application procedures. For these parts of the PUD, Garfield County must consider each municipality’s comments, though Garfield County is the ultimate decisionmaker on the application. 4.Housing Garfield County’s Comprehensive Plan emphasizes the need for creative solutions to the housing crisis, with an eye towards denser new development. Indeed, “[t]he demand for housing exceeds local supply. As of 2017, there was a shortfall of approximately 3,600 housing units in Garfield County. This demand is projected to increase over the next decade.” (GarCo Comp Plan, page 29). An updated Regional Housing Study published in April 2019 cites the 2017 findings again, stating the region had a 2,000-unit shortfall for households at 60 percent AMI and below, a 700-unit shortfall for those at 100 to 120 percent AMI, and a 1,200-unit shortfall for the “missing middle”—households between 120 and 160 percent AMI. By 2027, it is projected that the shortfall of units affordable to households at or below 100 percent AMI will balloon to 5,700 units, and the shortfall for the missing middle will remain the same. (Regional Housing Study, p. 5). The plan challenged local governments, quoting “Government officials in the area need to look at the long-term big picture and decide if they want to attract young professionals who will stay to raise families or just cater to the wealthy…”. (Id. at p. 6). Based on market trends since 2020, we know that affordability has increased even further at Page 3 of 9 a rate that could not have been predicted in 2019.1 Prior to COVID, the Roaring Fork region had an affordability gap between household ability to pay and the cost of housing amounting to a shortfall of 4,000 units in the greater Roaring Fork region. At that point, about 40% of households in Garfield and Pitkin County were “cost-burdened” by housing, meaning they were paying more than 30% of their income for housing costs. COVID started a chain of events that have contributed to a rapid widening of the gap between housing costs and ability to pay. Real estate sales volumes escalated dramatically during 2020 and 2021 sending prices up sharply. The number of out -of-area buyers increased in both Pitkin and Garfield County, adding extra competition to the market. In Glenwood Springs, where rental prices have been tracked over several years, rents for apartments increased by 42% in just two years. Average wages have increased as well, but not nearly at the rate of housing costs. COVID has rapidly accelerated the trends that have made it more difficult for working households to afford to live in the valley. 2022 Housing Data Supplement, page 3. Vision & Key Issues (GarCo Comp Plan, page 29): • Vision = To bring about a range of housing types, costs, and tenancy options that ensure for our current and future residents affordable housing opportunities in safe and efficient residential structures. • A significant amount of the county’s employment is found in the upper Roaring Fork Valley, whereas a larger supply of lower cost homes are found in the western part of the county. • The current development approval process requires a substantial up-front expenditure for developers, yet lacks any certainty that their project will be approved. This is a disincentive to the market playing a role in addressing the need for workforce housing. The Harvest PUD will provide an attainable and diverse stock of housing. Rather than creating 1-2 acre lots with large homes and a golf course (as previously approved), this PUD will immediately result in greater options for housing variety and density consistent with one of the Comprehensive Plan’s main housing policies. Future phases of the PUD could provide condominiums, townhomes, single family homes, and live, work, and reecreation options for residents. The PUD contains an impressive potential for a diversity of attainable and affordable housing types, complimented by outdoor recreation and light commerce within biking distance. Developing housing in Western Colorado is difficult, not just due to the substantial up-front costs and political uncertainty, but also due to Colorado’s sometimes harsh construction defect laws. The Harvest PUD is uniquely poised to provide exceptional housing variety, both for-sale and rental, within our County. The Harvest PUD is also subject to Garfield County’s Inclusionary Housing obligation, which requires 10% of units to be developed as Affordable Housing Units as defined by the Garfield County Code. This project will comply with the requirements for affordable housing, and likely exceed it. Relevant Housing Policies (GarCo Comp Plan, page 30-32): 1 The West Mountain Regional Housing Coalition published a Housing Data Supplement in August 2022, available at: chrome- extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://cms5.revize.com/revize/eagle/Document%20Center/Depart ments%20&%20Services/Housing/Housing%20Guidelines%20&%20Studies/2022%20WMRHC%20Housing%20Dat a%20Supplement.pdf. Page 4 of 9 • Policy 1: Ensure that current land use planning objectives promote affordable housing. o Strategies: ▪ Work with … Planned Unit Developments (PUD) to encourage amendments of PUD regulations that will create opportunity for more housing options within the PUDs such as Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) and density requirements. ▪ Explore changes to the approval process to provide more certainty to developers wishing to develop workforce housing. Response: PUD zoning approved for part of the property allows for 366 units of prescribed variety with no flexibility to account for market conditions.2 The Comprehensive Plan encourages PUDs to be amended to creation more opportunities for housing options and density. • Policy 2: Encourage affordable workforce housing to be located near regional centers. o Strategies: ▪ Incentivize the development of workforce housing in areas that are adjacent to, or in close proximity to (1) Incorporated Garfield County, (2) Employment Centers, (3) Bus Stops, (4) Key amenities, such as grocery stores, schools, recreation facilities, (5) central water / wastewater. ▪ Potential incentives could be density bonuses, reduction in setbacks and simplified approval process. Response: The Comprehensive Plan encourages development of workforce housing in the Harvest PUD because it is in close proximity (within 3 miles) of both Glenwood and Carbondale, is close to bus stops, schools, recreational facilities, regional bike trails, and will be on central water and sewer. The Applicant is open to discussing incentives to ensure the project is successful. • Policy 3: Support efforts by both the private and public sector to reduce … housing construction costs and carrying costs. o Explore the possibility for public/private partnerships in the production of workforce housing. o Work with water and sewer providers to change fee structures to that they are assessed to reward small-scale, highly efficient units and possibly reduce or waive fees for workforce housing projects. Response: The Harvest PUD is exploring a possible public/private partnership for the production of workforce housing, likely exceeding the county’s minimum inclusionary housing requirement. • Policy 5: Assure that adequate housing options for Senior Citizens are available. o Strategy: Provide incentives, including but not limited to density bonuses, and parking space reductions for projects geared toward our aging population. 2 The Harvest PUD consists of the former River’s Edge PUD, entitled for 366 units, as well as approximately 122 acres of adjacent property zoned Residential / Suburban and 1 acre zoned Commercial / General. Page 5 of 9 Response: Harvest PUD has a diverse range of housing options. Two neighborhoods in particular are well-suited for senior housing. With its diversity, open space, critical location, the Harvest PUD is well placed to provide much needed senior housing in a key location in our County. 5. Transportation. The proposed PUD will provide desirable attainable and affordable housing for Garfield County residents and employees who would otherwise be commuting from north/west Garfield County, through Grand Avenue, to the “up-valley” communities for work each day. This relocation of a significant portion of the region’s commuting work force will relieve traffic congestion on Grand Avenue, targeting a worsening core transportation issue for the City’s community. State Highway 82 (“CO 82”) accommodates an average of 25,000 to 29,000 cars and trucks daily. (Glenwood Springs Comp Plan, page 29). It is also Glenwood Springs’ historic downtown main street (“Grand Avenue”). Because of this, traffic on Grand Avenue is a “core transportation issue” for the City. Analysis of mobile device origin destination data in vehicles traveling on the Grand Avenue Bridge in the peak periods show that about 45% - 60% of traffic in the morning peak southbound and 40% in the afternoon peak northbound is pass-through traffic, mostly from trips between western Garfield County and Carbondale, Basalt, Snowmass, and Aspen. (Glenwood Springs Comp Plan, page 29). Additionally, nearly 60% of employed residents who live in Glenwood commute out of the City, mostly up-valley. This dynamic creates a condition of heavy southbound traffic congestion on CO 82 in the morning (from people commuting into, out of, and through Glenwood Springs), and heavy northbound congestion in the afternoon for the same reason. Due to geographic constraints, there is little room to provide alternative relief valves for traffic on CO 82. Additionally, the parcel offers unmatched access to Highway 82 and the Rio Grande Trail, providing a commuting option to either Glenwood Springs or Carbondale by bicycle, instead of automobile. CDOT has approved the two access locations for the Harvest PUD. 6. Economics, Employment, and Tourism Garfield County’s Comprehensive Plan encourages economic development. For instance, the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan attempts to balance all community factors: “Ultimately, the intent of the Future Land Use Map is to preserve the “livability” of Garfield County over the coming years. A “livable” county means different things to different people. For some, it means retaining open space, for others, planning for a range of development densities and for still others, it means allowing flexibility to accommodate economic development in the county. This Plan seeks to achieve a broad range of “livability” in a balanced manner.” (GarCo Comp Plan, page 9). From the Comprehensive Plan, it is clear that housing and economic development are intertwined. This PUD will create workforce housing, which will encourage businesses and employees to locate in and invest in Garfield County. Page 6 of 9 7. Recreation, Open Space, and Trails Garfield County’s Comprehensive Plan recognizes the value of open lands, recreational opportunities, parks, trails, and rivers. Access to these amenities contributes to quality of life, and is important to County residents and the tourism sector of the local economy. • Policies (GarCo Comp Plan, Pp 43-44) o Where appropriate, new residential development provides recreation opportunities for residents that are appropriate to the density and type of development or that contributes land and/or funding to a county-wide trail and recreation system. Large developments should provide recreational/transportation facilities internal to the development and connections to external recreation/transportation facilities as appropriate.” (GarCo Comp Plan, Pp 43). o Support the protection of public access to rivers, streams and public lands along with the preservation of valuable outdoor recreation and open space lands. The proposed PUD is bisected by the Rio Grande Trail providing regional connectivity from Glenwood Springs to Aspen, and will have an internal trail system for residents and patrons to enjoy, and proposes enhancement and enjoyment of the conservation easement on the Property.. 8. Agriculture • Vision: Promote and protect local agriculture through the adoption of policies designed to strengthen the agricultural sector of the economy, conserve agricultural lands for agricultural uses, protect the natural resources that sustain agriculture in Garfield County and preserve Garfield County’s rural character. Response: This property is no longer suitable for commercial agricultural due to prior grading activities, which stripped the property of topsoil and vegetation. It has not operated as a viable ranch for over 30 years, so it cannot be consider “existing” agricultural land for purposes of the Comprehensive Plan. Given the parcel’s proximity to Highway 82 and central utilities, the property’s highest and best use in order to provide the most community benefits is housing with neighborhood commercial, which is exactly what the Harvest PUD is providing. Nonetheless, in providing these community benefits, the Harvest PUD is committed to honoring the parcels, and this County’s, agricultural heritage by re-constructing the barn, and incorporating a neighborhood specifically designed to contain a community barn and community farm. Incorporating these elements will ensure the next generation of Garfield County residents is familiar with farming and gardening activities. 9. Water and Sewer Services The Comprehensive Plan highly encourages development located in water and sanitation districts. This property will be served by the Roaring Fork Water and Sanitation District. 10. Natural Sources, Habitat, and Wildlife Page 7 of 9 The wildlife conservation easement on the property is one of the central features of the Harvest PUD. Utilizing Garfield County’s wildlife strategies, the Harvest PUD is the product of working collaboratively with land trusts, conservation organizations , wildlife experts and governmental entities to support efforts in preserving wildlife habitat. (GarCo Comp Plan, pages 54- 56). 11. Three-Mile Area of Influence When a property is within the Three Mile Area of Influence of an adjacent municipality, the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan requires the county to consider that municipality’s comprehensive plan, though the County is not bound by the plan (“Three-Mile Area”)3. The majority of the proposed PUD is located neither within with City of Glenwood Spring’s nor the Town of Carbondale’s 3-Mile Areas of Influence. There is a small portion of the northerly part of the parcel that is included in Glenwood Springs’ Three Mile Area. i. Consistency with Glenwood Springs Comprehensive Plan Because the proposed PUD is within the City of Glenwood Springs’ Three-Mile Area, Garfield County considers the City of Glenwood Springs Comprehensive Plan for guidance. “Glenwood Springs is experiencing significant growth pressures, traffic congestion, a deficit of attainable and affordable housing… .” (Glenwood Springs Comp Plan, page 27). This proposed PUD seeks to address all of these concerns and more. 1. Local Economies & Economic Development Economic Development (GWS Comp Plan, Pp 64-65) • Influence of mining, oil and gas, and construction related industries has made City susceptible to boom and bust economic cycles. “Glenwood Springs benefits from its economic diversity in terms of added resilience against boom-bust business cycles and a wider range of possible wages for local workers than would be available under a strictly hospitality-based economy. Maintaining adequate housing supply is a critical factor in the City’s economic sustainability.” • Continually evaluating and updating incentive programs and other public subsidies (such as city-funded road, sewer, and transportation infrastructure) can help attract new housing supply within reach of local employees. This is increasingly vital to maintaining a functioning local economy. From both Comprehensive Plans, housing and economic development are intertwined. This PUD will create workforce housing, which will encourage businesses to locate in and invest in Garfield County. 3 The Town of Carbondale’s Comprehensive Plan was not incorporated because (1) the Project is not included within the Town of Carbondale’s own area of influence, known as its 2-mile “Review Area,” See Pages 72 & 73 of the Carbondale Comprehensive Play (January 2013), and (2) only a small portion of the proposed PUD is located with Garfield County’s noted 3-Mile Area of Influence for the Town of Carbondale on Garfield County’s Future Land Use Map. Page 8 of 9 2. Traffic The proposed PUD will provide desirable attainable and affordable housing for Garfield County residents and employees who would otherwise be commuting from north/west Garfield County, through Grand Avenue, to the “up-valley” communities for work each day. This relocation of a significant portion of the region’s commuting work force will relieve traffic congestion on Grand Avenue, targeting a worsening core transportation issue for the City’s community. 3. Housing The City’s Comprehensive Plan contains several provisions encouraging the creation of attainable housing. “Identified as the most critical issue facing the Glenwood Springs region, housing affordability has become an even more urgent crisis in recent years. … One of the most challenging impacts of this rapid housing inflation for Glenwood Springs has been an increasing difficulty in hiring and retaining workers who can afford to live within commuting range of town. In addition, between 2009 and 2019, the number of people needing to commute into Glenwood Springs from outside the city limits to fill healthcare and education jobs (a staple of local middle income employment), has increased by 47 percent.” Housing availability “is a regional problem in need of regional solutions.” (Glenwood Springs Comp Plan, page 30). “Adding new housing supply across a variety of price and rent points will be critical to stem imbalances in affordability and reduce the need for in-commuting.” Although some residential development sites remain within Glenwood Springs, the long-term capacity of housing land will be increasingly constrained by terrain and infrastructure, so adaptability and creativity in development patterns will be key to maintaining housing supply growth. (Glenwood Springs Comp Plan, page 75). Glenwood Springs adopted a few relevant strategies to address these growing and critical housing pressures: Increase Density (Glenwood Springs Comp Plan, Page 76-77) • Identify opportunities to increase allowable unit density in areas where supporting infrastructure (transportation, sewer, public safety) is adequate and impacts on aesthetic and safety for surrounding residents can be mitigated. • Identify opportunities to build a mix of housing typologies of affordable and workforce through land banking, public private partnerships, and non-profit organizations. • Maintain regular feedback with developers and property owners to ensure inclusionary targets encourage, rather than deter new housing development (both affordable and overall). • Criteria should include proximity to employment areas, access to new or planned public transportation options, and compatibility with well-designed higher-density development. Regional Approach (Glenwood Springs Comp Plan, Page 77) • Because a portion of affordable housing demand is created in large part by regional conditions (employment and the spread of high housing costs from “up-valley” locations), the responsibility for community housing should also be addressed regionally. Thus, the City should work with Garfield, Pitkin and Eagle counties to Page 9 of 9 combine resources, share strategies, and jointly seek funding and land for community housing projects. • Glenwood Springs should continue to support and advocate for multi-county, multi- municipality approaches that can broaden the regional approach to better match the emerging housing market and commuting realities across the Roaring Fork and I-70 west region. 4. Development South of Glenwood Springs According to the Glenwood Springs Comprehensive Plan, the area South of Town has been “under-utilized’ and has the potential to include “higher density” residential uses, at least higher than the “large lot residential subdivisions” approved by Garfield County south of town. In order words, the City and the County desire higher density housing options and types within the City’s UGB and the City’s 3-Mile Area of Influence. The Comprehensive Plans for both jurisdictions specifically advise against large lot residential subdivisions. 5. Conclusion. With its substantial increase in the diversity of available housing stock, economic opportunities, and recreational amenities, the Harvest PUD responds to the goals and needs expressed in both the Garfield County and Glenwood Springs Comprehensive Plans. Rather than proposing single family homes on large lots with a private golf course, the PUD has the opportunity for apartments, townhomes, condominiums, single family homes, and live/work units integrated with easy outdoor and river access. In this way, it not only meets the needs of the community, but also meets the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. Exhibit C Rezoning Justification Report Page 1 of 6 HARVEST ROARING FORK PUD REZONING JUSTIFICATION REPORT (4-203 H) NOVEMBER 18, 2024 This Rezoning Justification Report is required by Sections 6-301 and 4-203 of the Garfield County Land Use and Development Code (“LUDC”) for an application for a Planned Unit Development. This report explains how the proposed PUD zoning satisfies the approval criteria for a rezoning set forth in Section 4-113C. See LUDC Article 6-202.C., Review Criteria. A.Rezoning Criteria Garfield County Land Use and Development Code Section 4-113. Rezoning … C. Review Criteria An application for rezoning shall … meet the following criteria: 1.The proposed rezoning would result in a logical and orderly development pattern and would not constitute spot zoning. 2.The area to which the proposed rezoning would apply has changed or is changing to such a degree that it is in the public interest to encourage a new use or density in the area; 3.The proposed rezoning addresses a demonstrated community need with respect to facilities, services, or housing; and 4.The proposed rezoning is in general conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and in compliance with any applicable intergovernmental agreement. B.PUD Application Satisfies the Rezoning Criteria 1.The proposed rezoning would result in a logical and orderly development pattern and would not constitute spot zoning; a.Logical and Orderly Development Pattern The Harvest PUD will create a well-planned, logical, and orderly development on a key parcel of land between Glenwood and Carbondale, which was already approved for a major development. The PUD will be a thriving, diverse and sustainable conservation community in a location identified by Garfield County as optimal for higher density residential development. The PUD will offer a diverse mix of housing types with market-rate, affordable, and attainable options that address the County’s workforce housing needs in a key location. The PUD Guide submitted with the application will govern the orderly development of the property into various neighborhoods, each of which are subject to specific development rules to ensure a diverse mix of housing and local commercial. The PUD Guide will govern permitted uses, housing types, street cross sections, minimum open space Page 2 of 6 requirements, minimum building standards, and parking standards, all in detail that is either equal to, or more detailed than, any zone district within the Garfield County Code. The property is also subject to a Roaring Fork Conservancy easement, which will be a centerpiece of the project and preserve the conservation values of the community in perpetuity. The PUD will provide a variety of housing types, costs, and tenancy options to accommodate a diversity of residents and incomes, including students, families, regional employees, and Roaring Fork RE-1 School District teachers, first responders, hospital workers, and senior citizens. This housing will be located near existing infrastructure and amenities so that families can live, work, and play in their communities. This attainable housing will be mid-valley and offers the benefit of being close to up-valley work locations without having to pass through the traffic bottleneck of Glenwood Springs’ Grand Avenue. The PUD will also promote fresh dining options, markets and walking/biking trails and conservation areas to serve the community—enhancing the live, work, play environment and reducing daily traffic trips for the PUD residents. For these reasons, the proposed PUD results in a logical and orderly development pattern. b. Not Spot Zoning Approval of this PUD would not constitute spot zoning under Colorado law. The test for determining whether a particular action is spot zoning is whether the action is designed to relieve a certain piece of property from zoning restrictions in spite of, rather than in conformance with, the County’s Comprehensive Plan. Clark v. City of Boulder, 362 P.2d 160, 162 (Colo. 1961). In other words, spot zoning “creates a small island of property with restrictions on its use different from those imposed on the surrounding property,” and which are not consistent with the County’s Comprehensive Plan. Whitelaw v. Denver City Council, 405 P.3d 433, 445 (Colo. App. 2017). If the rezoning is for the purpose of furthering a comprehensive zoning plan or based on changed conditions, the rezoning is not spot zoning. Id. (citing King's Mill Homeowners Ass'n v. City of Westminster, 192 Colo. 305, 312, 557 P.2d 1186, 1191 (1976) and 3 Arden H. Rathkopf & Daren A. Rathkopf, Rathkopf's The Law of Zoning and Planning § 41:8 (4th ed. 2016)). This PUD is consistent with the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan (see below, and the Comprehensive Plan Analysis submitted with the Application), is compatible with surrounding land uses, and is not intended merely to relieve a small island from the restrictions of zoning regulations. Instead, this PUD is a systematic and thoughtful revitalization of the entire area as one contiguous developed community. Indeed, the entire point of a PUD is to provide Counties with greater flexibility than traditional zoning, with more detailed site planning than would otherwise occur in traditional zone districts. The Garfield County 2030 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates the site as partially within the 3-Mile Areas of Influence for the surrounding municipalities, but largely as unincorporated Garfield County. The Garfield County Code allows a density of up to 15 dwelling units per acre where there is access to public water and sewer systems. (6-401(C)(2)). The proposed PUD will connect into the Roaring Fork Water and Sanitation District public water and sewer system. Therefore, the density is entirely appropriate within the limits of the Garfield County Code, which will result in logical and orderly development consistent with the development to the north, south and west of the site. Page 3 of 6 The proposed residential and neighborhood commercial uses are a response to changing surrounding land use in the south Glenwood Springs area and rises to meet critical community demands. The uses will be compatible with the surrounding area, will result in a logical and orderly development pattern, will have significant public benefit (see section 3 below), and are consistent with the goals and policies of the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan. 2. The area to which the proposed rezoning would apply has changed or is changing to such a degree that it is in the public interest to encourage a new use or density in the area;1 This area of Garfield County has changed significantly in the past two decades, and even more so in the past few years. These changes have included the development of Ironbridge, Aspen Glen, Coryell, and Westbank neighborhoods. Further south we’ve seen the construction of a new K-8 Riverview School to serve this area of Garfield County, as well as newly approved industrial and commercial uses. Although the character of the area has been steadily changing over the past few decades, the most recent changes concern the cost of living and critical demand for housing that has emerged since the previous PUD was approved (the River Edge PUD) in 2011. Indeed, in May 2024, NBC News determined that Garfield County was the most difficult county in the entire country in which to purchase a home.2 A seminal regional housing study determined that, in 2017, that the Roaring Fork Valley region has a shortfall of over 3,900 units and projected that this shortfall would increase to over 5,700 units by 2027.3 The housing shortfall detrimentally impacts the local and regional economy in various ways, and presents an existential threat to the short and long term economic viability of the region.4 One important component of that shortfall is housing demand for the “missing middle”—that is, households between 100 and 160 AMI. The housing emergency has not abated, and continues to be an issue. For example, in a letter from the Glenwood Springs Senior Planner to the Glenwood Springs Planning and Zoning Commission regarding recommended updates to the 2023 Strategic Housing Plan presented at the September 24, 2024 P&Z meeting, Mr. Fulk-Gray cited that between 2015 and 2022, the Plan Update found that the average home sale price increased 93% and the affordability gap increased from $49,000 to $293,000. The Plan Update notes that only new homes that are affordable to people making 30% to 150% AMI or existing homes in which the affordability is improved will satisfy the identified housing need. The resulting recommendation includes the use of density bonuses in new development. Thus, large-lot estate style homes will not keep up with the changing character and need of the region, nor are they supported by changing policy. These findings are echoed in the Greater Roaring Fork Regional Housing Study published April 1, 2019; and the COVID-19 pandemic’s further exacerbation of has the housing crisis is discussed in The West Mountain Regional Housing Coalition Housing Data Supplement published in August 2022.5 1 Keep in mind, “it is only when rezoning is in violation of the master plan that there must be some change in the conditions of the neighborhood to support a zoning change.” E.g., Applebaugh v. BOCC of San Miguel County, State of Colo., 837 P.2d 304, 309 (Colo. App. 1992). 2 https://www.nbcnews.com/data-graphics/home-buyer-difficulty-index-findings-rcna152273 3 2017 Regional Housing Study, pp. 34-36 4 2017 Regional Housing Study, pp. 16-17 5 Available at available at: chrome- extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://cms5.revize.com/revize/eagle/Document%20Center/Depart Page 4 of 6 Unfortunately, development in the Valley has not kept pace with these changing circumstances. For example, in Glenwood Spring only been an average of 81 units have been created per year since 2016—only a fraction of which fall into the missing middle—and that, in general, production has been “fairly low.”6 Thus, the area seeking a revised PUD has absolutely changed, and continues to change, to such a degree that a change in zoning to permit denser, more community style living, is in the public’s best interest, iswhat the community is asking for, and is consistent with the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan. These statistics were only exacerbated during COVID, when the Valley saw a major influx of residents fleeing more urban areas, further constraining housing supply. For these reasons, Garfield County took the initiative to amend its Comprehensive Plan in 2020 to explicitly encourage amendments to PUDs within the County to permit ADUs, and denser residential development. (Policy 1, Strategy vi). The County has a great opportunity to implementing this directive in approving the Harvest PUD Application. The drastic change in affordable living options in the Roaring Fork Valley has pushed most regional workers to relocated to the Colorado River Valley—increasing commuter traffic through Glenwood Springs to the jobs located south on Highway 82. The PUD will attempt to alleviate traffic through Glenwood Springs by providing substantial housing options mid-valley for Garfield County residents. Given the regional nature of travel in Glenwood Springs, locating new development south of the City and near high frequency regional transit will help reduce vehicle travel and congestion on Grand Avenue. Areas of change, such as this site, are therefore targeted for growth to address workforce housing demand and provide a mix of uses that are compatible with existing character and meet local demand. In the same vein, sound land use and community planning generally promotes the concepts of walkable communities, appropriate densification, and absorption of growth in areas that have, or can easily be served by urban services. At the other end of the spec trum is the concept of “sprawl” which describes development characterized by low density and inefficient infrastructure—which leaves no room for public open space. The Harvest PUD proposes to develop a community in keeping with the principles of the former, which is in line with the goals and concepts identified in the Comprehensive Plan. The PUD will produce several additional uses in high demand, including workforce housing, multi-family residential development, dining and café options within walking/biking distance for the local residents, accessible public river access and management, and expansion of the safe routes to school and regional bike trails through the site. Perhaps the most important changed circumstance is the formation and implementation of the Roaring Fork Water and Sanitation District, which can provide clean and regulated water and sewer services to the PUD. The property has already been the subject to multiple preannexation agreements with the RFWSD. As part of these agreements the RFWSD has already determined that the Harvest PUD property constitutes “real property capable of being served by the facilities of the District,” as such phrase is used in C.R.S. 32-1-104, for purposes of inclusion of real property within ments%20&%20Services/Housing/Housing%20Guidelines%20&%20Studies/2022%20WMRHC%20Housing%20Dat a%20Supplement.pdf. 6 City of Glenwood Springs City Council Meeting, October 17, 2024 (minute 21). Page 5 of 6 a special district. The Harvest PUD will also, at Applicant’s expense, provide benefits to the Fire District such as a new location for a first station within the PUD. The property already has sufficient legal water rights to support the PUD zoning for both potable and irrigation water. These surface and ground water supplies are dependable physical and legal sources of supply for the project, which can and will be treated to meet water quality standards. Additionally, residential development uses much less water than agricultural uses, and the Harvest PUD is designed to promote conservation of the available water resources. Additionally, beyond what has been protected within the conservation easement area, the entire property has been virtually denuded of any viable or native vegetation and most of its topsoil by a previous owner, which has left the property in poor condition with little environmental value. Indeed, the poor condition of the land, removal of top soil and other grading activities, the inundation of noxious weeds, and general disrepair of the property and improvements thereon, the property will never be suitable for commercial agriculture without substantial investment. Thus, the Harvest PUD proposes a productive use of this otherwise abandoned property, and seeks to revitalize the land with native plants and landscape materials that are adaptable and appropriate for the local environment. The remaining value as a wildlife and conservation area will be maintained and prioritized by the Harvest PUD with the help of wildlife specialists. Moreover, there is already a conservation easement on the most environmentally sensitive areas of the site. The previous landowner also demolished the iconic Bair 76 barn. The Harvest PUD seeks to reconstruct this iconic and historic part of mid-valley. Also, the old Sopris restaurant located on the site has been abandoned and dilapidated for nearly two decades, becoming an eye-sore and health hazard for the community. The Harvest PUD will meet community demands to finally remove this asbestos-laden hazard. In sum, the proposed PUD will revitalize the site to better conform and integrate with the changing character of its neighbors. 3. The proposed rezoning addresses a demonstrated community need with respect to facilities, services, or housing; and The proposed uses within the PUD are in high demand within Garfield County and the surrounding region. The proximity of these facilities, particularly the workforce housing component, is well located as it is close to the new Riverview School, near central water and sewer, and proximate to Highway 82. Facilities and Services: The PUD will expand the infrastructure and services provided by the Roaring Fork Water and Sanitation district. This expansion will allow neighbors to the north and east currently not connected to public services the opportunity to connect, as well as bolster the District’s resiliency and expand the District’s capacity for future development. Expanded services and benefits for the First District will also be provided by the PUD. Access to the Roaring Fork River currently located on private land will be appropriately managed and opened to a greater portion of the Garfield County community, expanding public access to nature trails and river enjoyment. The intersection of Highway CO 82 and Cattle Creek Road has been the site of several vehicle collisions resulting in serious bodily injury. The most recent of which occurred in September 2024 with two residents being air-lifted to Denver. This PUD will finally trigger a signal light at a new and more thoughtfully designed intersection, which should drastically improve the safety for residents and commuters. If not funded Page 6 of 6 by the Harvest PUD, installing the much-needed signal light at this segment of Highway 82 will become the burden of the general public or not be available at all. Housing: Identified as the most critical issue facing Garfield County and the greater Roaring Fork Valley, the lack of attainable housing within any reasonable proximity to jobs is a central focus in both the Garfield County and Glenwood Springs comprehensive plans. This PUD’s central focus is to provide the critically needed attainable housing for Garfield County. 4. The proposed rezoning is in general conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and in compliance with any applicable intergovernmental agreement. The proposed PUD is in general conformance with the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan, as detailed within this report, and a separate attachment to the Application. The uses and densities are well within those prescribed by the County’s Future Land Use Map, and are ready and capable of being serviced by the Roaring Fork Water and Sanitation District with central water and sewer service. There is direct access to Highway 82, regional transit (which may also be expanded with this PUD), a variety of housing options and types, and much needed community services. More analysis is contained within the Comprehensive Plan Analysis submitted with the Application. Exhibit D Harvest Roaring Fork Planned Unit Development Guide A DEVELOPMENT BY Realty Capital Management, LLC 5 Tree Farm Dr Basalt, Colorado 81621 970 279 1805 sbrown@realtycapital.com HARVEST ROARING FORK PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO July 30, 2025 v2 Planning by Dan Quinto, R.A. danquinto@rbdc.biz 817 706 8353 HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 2 ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN: This plan depicts the design intent of the development but shall not constitute a regula- tory document. HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 3 NEIGHBORHOOD CONCEPT MAP: This map depicts two conceptual designs aligned with the proposed form- based code. This map is not a regulatory document. The Applicant and County recognize that detailed site investigations and iterative planning are needed to address neighborhood form, livability, grades, views, and environmental conditions to achieve best-in-class development. HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 4 SITE CONDITIONS MAP: This map depicts general site conditions, including possible geotechnical conditions typical for this area. It is provided for informational purposes only and is not a regulatory document. Given the significant amount of site grading that is contemplated, this map should not be relied upon as the basis for design, permitting, or construction decisions. Full size scalable copies of this information have been sub-mitted with this application. The Applicant's development team will conduct additional testing and site assessments with each proposed development phase to identify specific issues and mitigation methods that will be implemented to address conditions identified during the development process. HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS Article I Defining the Neighborhoods A. Harvest Neighborhoods Overview B. North Frontage Neighborhood C. The Farm D. Village Neighborhood E. Village Center F. Creekside Neighborhood G. Sopris H. South Riverfront I. North Riverfront J. North Central Neighborhood K. Nature Area Article II Land Use (Applicable to all Neighborhoods) A. Permitted Uses B. Vehicular Network and Street Standards C. Parking Standards D. Lot Standards E. Open Space Standards F. Pedestrian and Bicycle Trail Network G. Architectural Standards H. Dark Sky Standards I. Signage Standards J. Alternate Transportation K. Viewshed Protection HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 6 1. The Harvest Roaring Fork PUD defines a zoning dis- trict that consists of approximately 283 acres locat- ed in Garfield County Colorado, between State Highway 82 and the Roaring Fork River, just south of Glenwood Springs. The zoning district, hereafter referred to as ‘Harvest’ is subdivided into various neighborhoods which are each subject to develop- ment rules specific to the particular Neighborhood. 2. Harvest shall comply with Article 8 of the Garfield County Land Use Development Code (LUCD), Inclu- sionary Zoning for Housing., except as noted in the Housing Mitigation Plan. 3. The area of each Neighborhood shall be flexible and may vary by 20% of the estimated areas, ex- cept the Village Center which may increase up to 50%. The areas may be calculated from the bound- aries of Harvest, the boundaries of adjacent Neigh- borhoods, and the centerlines of the Primary Streets. 4. This Development Ordinance is structured as a Form Based Code which establishes allowable forms for streets, open spaces, lots, buildings, and other items to allow development to be both flexi- ble and predictable. Both the Applicant and the County desired this structure as appropriate for a large, long term development. 5. The rules within this Development Ordinance gov- ern the permitted uses, the types of housing and/or commercial uses that may be permitted within each neighborhood, the street sections, the re- quired open space area and the types of open space required, the building standards, and the parking standards, among other regulations. 6. The Floor Area Ratio (FAR) and the lot coverage ratio shall be calculated for Harvest as a whole, and not for each individual lot. The FAR and Lot Cover- age shall not exceed 50% of Harvest. 7. Discrepancies: In the case of a discrepancy between this Development Ordinance and the current Gar- field County Land Use Development Code, this De- velopment Ordinance shall govern. 8. Minor Changes: Minor Changes to the standards shall not constitute a Zoning Change or a Variance. 9. The Planning Director shall, in their sole discretion, review proposed Minor Changes and approve, ap- prove with conditions, or deny such requests within 30 calendar days of submittal. Minor Change deni- als by the Planning Director may be appealed to the Board of County Commissioners. 10. Minor changes shall: a. Conform to the Comprehensive Plan; b. Be consistent with the efficient development and the preservation of the character of the development; c. Not increase the residential density; d. Not decrease the amount of dedicated Open Space; e. Not change the use category of the PUD be- tween residential, commercial, or industrial us- es; f. Not be granted solely to confer a special benefit upon any person; g. Not affect the rights of the residents, occu- pants, and owners of the PUD to maintain and enforce those provisions at law or in equity. 11. Minor Changes may include: a. Altering the illustrated alignment of the primary streets; b. Increases of 5% or less of the maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) or Lot Coverage; c. Increases of up to 5,000 square feet or 50% of the limits of commercial space within any neighborhood, which ever is smaller; d. Allowing up to 20% more single family drive- ways on Primary Streets; e. Permitting alternative street drainage to curb- and-gutter storm water collection such as bar ditches; f. Allowing streets to be divided along the center- line to employ two different street types; g. Allowing tree spacing within required streetscapes to be increased; h. Allowing an increase of one story to one build- ing within one lot, excluding the North River- front and South Riverfront neighborhoods; i. Permitting a decrease in building setbacks pro- vided the buildings comply with local building codes; j. Altering the alignment of the Community Trail network; k. Granting exceptions to the Dark Sky standards; l. Permitting uses not listed and/or defined in the Permitted Use Table in the LUDC; m. Allow increase of 20% or less of the maximum area for irrigation; Article I Defining the Neighborhoods A. The Harvest Neighborhoods Overview HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 7 TABLE I1 - NEIGHBORHOOD STANDARDS NEIGHBORHOOD STANDARDS NO R T H FR O N T A G E NO R T H CE N T R A L TH E F A R M VI L L A G E NE I G H B O R - HO O D VI L L A G E CE N T E R NO R T H RI V E R F R O N T CR E E K S I D E SO U T H RI V E R F R O N T SO P R I S NATURE AREA TO T A L TR A N S I - TI O N CO N S E R V A - TI O N E A S E - ME N T ESTIMATED AREA, AC 25.7 39.1 19.1 22.4 14.5 19.5 45.3 26.8 12.3 3.1 55.2 282.8 PERCENT AREA 9.1% 13.8% 6.2% 7.9% 5.7% 6.9% 16.0% 9.5% 4.3% 1.1% 19.5% 100.0% MAX COMMERCIAL, SF 5,000 0 5,000 2,500 35,000 0 0 0 5,000 2,500 0 55,000 MIN OPEN SPACE 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% NA MAX RES. DENSITY 15 12 9 15 7 8 9 7 8 6 0 MAX RES.UNITS 1500 1500 RU n. Other issues of comparably minor impact. 12. Private Deed Restrictions: Harvest shall also be subject to deed restrictions applicable to all residential and commercial lots within the development. The deed restrictions shall, at a minimum, address: a. design guidelines for residential and commercial buildings; b. additional standards for private landscaping and public open spaces; c. the review and approval process for planned im- provements; d. maintenance of common areas and common infra- structure. 13. Open Space: Required open space shall include existing easements within Harvest. Surpluses of required open space in any Neighborhood may be applied to deficien- cies in other neighborhoods, except open space within the Conservation Easement cannot be allocated to oth- er neighborhoods. 14. The following sections summarize the character and prominent features of each neighborhood. 15. Submittals: Due to the number of jurisdictional entities and requirements, and that Harvest is large and will develop in phases over a period of years, not all of the information normally submitted with a zoning applica- tion is known or available at the time of submittal. For this reason the following items shall be included at the time of the application for a plat approval of a subdivi- I. The Harvest Neighborhoods Overview sion or a site plan approval. a. Phasing Plan: A phasing plan delineating the stages of the expansion of the infrastructure and the identification of current and future phases of development. b. Open Space: The standards for the Commu- nity Open Spaces, including location and minimum areas, are included herein. The standards for the Neighborhood Open Spac- es are also included but the locations and final areas of the Neighborhood Open Spac- es shall be provided with the plat applica- tions for each neighborhood. c. Rights-of-way: Although we are providing the general network of primary streets, the final alignment, ROW width, and total area shall be provided as each phase plat applica- tion is submitted for approval. d. Easements: Existing easements affecting de- velopment are included herein and in the current survey, but future easements for access or utilities shall be provided as each phase plat application is submitted for ap- proval. e. Lot Acreage / Buildings: The pattern of lot development that includes the gross and net acreage of each individual lot shall be pro- vided at with the application for future phas- es. Building plans would be provided with a site plan application. HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 8 I. The Harvest Neighborhoods Overview NORTH FRONTAGE Figure I.A.1 Regulating Plan VILLAGE CENTER CREEKSIDE SOPRIS THE FARM VILLAGE NEIGHBORHOOD NORTH CENTRAL NORTH RIVERFRONT SOUTH RIVERFRONT NATURE AREA HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 9 B. NORTH FRONTAGE NEIGHBORHOOD DESCRIPTION: The North Frontage Neighborhood borders the northern entrance from SH 82 and includes a mix of small-scale neighborhood retail goods and services as well as primarily affordable and workforce housing. BOUNDARY: The North frontage Neighborhood shall be bounded by Harvest property line to the north, SH 82 ROW to the east, the Primary Street Segment 1 to the south and the Rio Grand Trail ROW to the west. The Neighborhood may be accessed by two intersec- tions on the Primary Street Segment 1. REQUIRED OPEN SPACE: OS-5 Existing Greenbelt along Rio Grand Trail 20’ wide; OS-3 Frontage Buffer along SH 82, an average of at least 25’ wide; OS-7 Central Green, and OS- 9 Playground. RESTRICTIONS: Any three story land use shall occupy no more than 35% of the gross neighborhood land area. The Neighborhoods Photographs included herein are intended to provide a sense of the quality and character of the pro- posed development and are not in- tended to depict specific fauna, flora, or architectural detail that is likely to be employed in the development. HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 10 C. THE FARM DESCRIPTION: The Farm Neighborhood nestles between SH 82 and the Rio Grande Trail, and contains the community Barn a community garden, a small amount of commercial space, as well as a variety of housing types. BOUNDARY: The Farm Neighborhood is bounded by the Primary Street Segment 1 to the north, SH 82 ROW to the east, and by the Rio Grand Trail ROW to the west. REQUIRED OPEN SPACE: OS-5 Existing Greenbelt along Rio Grand Trail 20’ wide; OS-3 Frontage Buffer along SH 82, an average of at least 25’ wide; OS-7 Central Green. The Central Green shall be agricultural in nature, adjacent to the signature barn. RESTRICTIONS: The neighborhood shall be accessed by an intersection on the Primary street Segment 1. The Neighborhoods Photographs included herein are intended to provide a sense of the quality and character of the pro- posed development and are not in- tended to depict specific fauna, flora, or architectural detail that is likely to be employed in the development. HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 11 D. VILLAGE NEIGHBORHOOD DESCRIPTION: The Village Neighborhood is the most central neighborhood and the clos- est residential neighborhood to the Village Center. It offers housing options appropriate to households wishing to be easy walking distance to the goods and services offered in the Village. The urban form of this neighborhood is the predominant characteristic. BOUNDARY: The Village Neighborhood is bounded by the Glenwood Ditch to the west, the North Central Neighborhood to the north, the Rio Grande Trail ROW to the east and the Village Center to the south. The Primary Street Segment 2 runs through the neighbor- hood from north to south. REQUIRED OPEN SPACE: OS-5 Existing Greenbelt along Rio Grand Trail 50’ wide; OS-6 Pocket Park, and OS-4 Linear Park. RESTRICTIONS: Any three story land use shall occupy no more than 30% of the gross neighborhood land area. The Neighborhoods Photographs included herein are intended to provide a sense of the quality and character of the pro- posed development and are not in- tended to depict specific fauna, flora, or architectural detail that is likely to be employed in the development. HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 12 E. VILLAGE CENTER DESCRIPTION: The Village Center is the heart of Harvest and the main gathering place for all the separate neighborhoods. Offering shopping, restaurants, limited professional ser- vices, it provides the basics for the community to avoid unnecessary trips outside the com- munity. BOUNDARY: The Village Center is bounded by the Village Neighborhood to the north, the Rio Grande Trail ROW to the east, the North Riverfront to the west, and the Nature Area to the south. The Primary Street Segment 2 runs through the neighborhood from north to south, and the street section may be modified to accommodate on-street parking for the segment through the Village Center. REQUIRED OPEN SPACE: OS-5 Existing Greenbelt along Rio Grand Trail 50’ wide; OS-7 Cen- tral Green that may be used as an informal gathering area for residents. RESTRICTIONS: Any three story land use shall occupy no more than 45% of the gross neighborhood land area. The Village Center shall include no more than 50 dwelling units. The Neighborhoods Photographs included herein are intended to provide a sense of the quality and character of the proposed development and are not intended to depict specific fauna, flora, or architectural detail that is likely to be employed in the development. HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 13 F. CREEKSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD DESCRIPTION: The Creekside Neighborhood, closest to the south entry from SH 82, is one of the largest and the most diverse neighborhood offering a variety of housing op- tions within a single neighborhood. BOUNDARY: The Creekside Neighborhood shall be bounded by the Rio Grand Trail ROW to the east, The Nature Area to the north, the South Riverfront Neighborhood to the west and Sopris Neighborhood to the south. The Primary Street Segment 3 runs along the western boundary. REQUIRED OPEN SPACE: OS-5 Existing Greenbelt along Rio Grand Trail 50’ wide; Two OS- 6 Pocket Parks, and OS-4 Linear Park with a trail connecting to the Community Trail net- work. RESTRICTIONS: Any three story land use shall occupy no more than 30% of the gross neighborhood land area. The Neighborhoods Photographs included herein are intended to provide a sense of the quality and character of the pro- posed development and are not in- tended to depict specific fauna, flora, or architectural detail that is likely to be employed in the development. HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 14 The Neighborhoods G. SOPRIS NEIGHBORHOOD DESCRIPTION: Sopris is on a bluff overlooking the Roaring Fork River and Mount Sopris. Separated from the rest of the community by the access ramp from SH 82, it offers a quiet corner of Harvest for more exclusive housing options and some hospitality amenities for the residents. BOUNDARY: Sopris Neighborhood shall be bounded by the Conservation Area to the west, South Riverfront and Creekside Neighborhoods to the north and the Rio Grande Trail ROW to the east and the Roaring Fork River to the south. Access may be provided by secondary streets from the northwest. REQUIRED OPEN SPACE: OS-5 Existing Greenbelt, 50’ in width, along the Rio Grande Trail RESTRICTIONS: In addition to the commercial space permitted, the Neighborhood shall permit an hotel of not more than 120 rooms which shall count as 27 Residential units. The maximum height of the hotel shall not exceed 3 stories, or 55 feet, above the 6066 contour line, or the elevation of finished grade at the south entry from SH 82, whichever is higher. Photographs included herein are intended to provide a sense of the quality and character of the proposed development and are not intended to depict specific fauna, flora, or architectural detail that is likely to be employed in the development. HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 15 H. SOUTH RIVERFRONT NEIGHBORHOOD DESCRIPTION: The South Riverfront Neighborhood occupies the largest length of river- front of any neighborhood and offers views through the Conservation Easement to the Roaring Fork River. The Neighborhood offers larger homesites as well as other housing options. BOUNDARY: The South Riverfront Neighborhood is bounded by the Nature Area to the north and the west, the Creekside Neighborhood to the east and Sopris Neighborhood to the south. The Primary Street Segment 3 runs along the eastern boundary. REQUIRED OPEN SPACE: OS-2 Wildlife buffer abutting the Conservation Easement, OS -4 Linear Park including a trail connecting to the Community Trail Network, OS-6 Pocket Park. RESTRICTIONS: Maximum building height shall be two stories. The Neighborhoods Photographs included herein are intended to provide a sense of the quality and character of the proposed development and are not intended to depict specific fauna, flora, or architectural detail that is likely to be employed in the development. HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 16 I. NORTH RIVERFRONT DESCRIPTION: The North Riverfront Neighborhood faces the Roaring Fork River and the Nature Area and is adjacent to the North Central Neighborhood, the Village Neighborhood, and the Village Center. Homesites are smaller than the Riverfront to the south and offer a variety of housing options. BOUNDARY: The North Riverfront Neighborhood is bounded by the Glenwood Ditch to the east, the Nature Area to the west, and the Village Center to the south. The neighborhood shall be accessed by secondary streets from the east, south, or north. REQUIRED OPEN SPACE: OS-2 Wildlife Buffer along western boundary with The Nature Ar- ea, OS-5 Greenbelt along length of the Glenwood Ditch. RESTRICTIONS: Maximum building height shall be two stories. The Neighborhoods Photographs included herein are intended to provide a sense of the quality and character of the proposed development and are not intended to depict specific fauna, flora, or architectural detail that is likely to be employed in the development. HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 17 J. NORTH CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOOD DESCRIPTION: The North Central Neighborhood, tucked into the northern corner of Har- vest is the largest neighborhood and offers the most extensive application of affordable, attainable, and workforce housing options. BOUNDARY: The North Central Neighborhood shall be bounded by the Harvest boundary to the north and west, the Glenwood Ditch to the west, the Village Neighborhood to the south and by the Rio Grand Trail ROW to the east. The neighborhood shall be accessed by an intersection on the Primary Street Segment 1 plus another access on a secondary street. REQUIRED OPEN SPACE: OS-5 Existing Greenbelt along Rio Grand Trail 50’ wide; OS-7 Central Green; OS-9 Playground. RESTRICTIONS: Any three story land use shall occupy no more than 30% of the gross neighborhood land area. The Neighborhoods Photographs included herein are intended to provide a sense of the quality and character of the pro- posed development and are not in- tended to depict specific fauna, flora, or architectural detail that is likely to be employed in the development. HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 18 K. NATURE AREA NEIGHBORHOOD (NA) DESCRIPTION: The Nature Area is a combination of private parkland and land that has been set aside as a dedicated easement for habitat preservation. BOUNDARY: The Nature Area is bounded by the Roaring Fork River and 3rd party land to the west, and by the North and South Riverfront Neighborhoods to the east. The Nature Area is comprised of the Conservation Easement, the Heron Rookery Zone, and private parks. See Figure below REQUIRED OPEN SPACE: The Nature Area consists of OS-1, the Conservation Ease- ment approximately 54 acres, and OS-2, and OS-3 which are private parks, open to the public on the north and south banks of Cattle Creek, and the Rook- ery exclusion zones. RESTRICTIONS: Within the Conservation Easement, no residential or commercial de- velopment is permitted. Within the Conservation Easement boundaries, no improve- ments are permitted without the approval of the Conservation Authority. The Neighborhoods Conservation Easement Conservation Easement Transition Area Photographs included herein are intended to provide a sense of the quality and character of the proposed development and are not intended to depict specific fauna, flora, or architectural detail that is likely to be employed in the development. HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 19 Article II Land Use Standards (Applicable to all Neighborhoods) A. Permitted Uses 1. Harvest is envisioned as a mixed -use development con- sisting primarily of housing with enough commercial activi- ty to provide convenience goods and services to the resi- dents to reduce the need for vehicle trips. The most suita- ble zoning category of the Garfield County Land Use Devel- opment Code (LUDC) for this purpose is CL, Local Commer- cial. 2. Permitted Uses: All uses listed under the Local Commercial (CL) zoning category as ’P’ or ’A’ under the July 15, 2013 Garfield County Land Use Development Code (LUDC), shall be permitted by right. 3. Permitted Uses Residential: All Residential uses listed in the July 15, 2013 LUDC under the ‘Household Living’ zoning category shall be permitted by right. 4. Because housing units shall be smaller in square footage and some single family homes may not be equipped with enclosed garages, then common parking areas, resident storage facilities, and a community car wash facility shall be permitted by right. 5. Prohibited Uses: Commercial Uses that are more industrial in nature shall not be permitted. Specifically, the following uses permitted under the CL Zoning category are not per- mitted in Harvest: a. Foster Home, Group Home b. Equipment, Machinery, Lumber Yard c. Vehicle & Equipment Sales d. Hydraulic Fracturing, remote surface facility e. Oil & Gas Drilling 5. The types of residential uses permitted within each neigh- borhood is established by the type of residential lot that is permitted. The lot types permitted are noted in Table II.A1. Definitions of each lot type are provided in section D Lot Types. 6. Except for common public assembly spaces, no single re- tail establishment shall exceed 10,000 square feet of con- ditioned, indoor space. 7. Permitted uses shall also include a maximum of one hotel. 8. New uses or uses requiring clarification may be approved by the Director of Planning provided that the use is con- sistent with the intent of serving the residents of Harvest. 9. Temporary Employee Housing: For reasons stated below, the Applicant may submit a separate Special Use applica- tion for temporary employee housing conforming to Sec- tions 7-704, 7-705, 7-706 as applicable, subsequent to consideration for this zoning approval. If requested, this Special Use Permit would help to reduce construction traffic, and optimize construction operations with the goal to help permit the delivery of housing product at a pace and price pursuant to the needs of Garfield County. If Re- quested, such a Special Use application would specify the maximum number of individuals to be housed, the loca- tion and type of the proposed housing, the required infra- structure and the specific duration of the temporary hous- ing. 10. Where three-story land uses are limited by area, the per- centage shall be calculated by dividing the lot area of the three-story land use by the gross area of the neighbor- hood. Example: 30% of a 30 acre neighborhood would equal a maximum lot area of 9 acres. TABLE II.A1 - NEIGHBORHOOD STANDARDS DEFINITION OF LOT TYPES ARE INCLUDED IN ARTICLE ii, SECTION D, LOT STANDARDS NO R T H F R O N T A G E NO R T H C E N T R A L TH E F A R M VI L L A G E N E I G H B O R - HO O D VI L L A G E C E N T E R NO R T H R I V E R F R O N T CR E E K S I D E SS O U T H R I V E R F R O N T SO P R I S NATURE AREA TR A N S I T I O N A R E A CO N S E R V A T I O N EA S E M E N T CM LOT Commercial only P P P P P MX LOT Mixed commercial and residential P P P P P MF-1 Multifamily , vertically stacked dwelling units L L L L L L MF-2 Bungalow court, attached on common lot P P P P P MF-3 Cottages, detached units on a common lot P P P P P SF-1 Townhomes P P P P P P P P P P SF-2 Zero-lot-lines P P P P P P P P P SF-3 Mid-size w alleys P P P P P P P P P SF-4 Large w alleys P P P P P P P P P SF-5 Large w front driveways P P P P P P P P P P = Permitted; L = 3-story land use limited to a % the of neighborhood area, specified in Article I, Sections \ Restricti ons HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 20 B. Vehicular Network and Street Standards STREETS 1. All Lots shall front onto a street ROW or onto a qualified open space. 2. All streets shall include a Streetscape as defined in Article II, Section B Streetscapes. A street may omit the adjacent Streetscape provided a qualified open space is located in place of the Streetscape. 3. Streets are divided into Primary, Secondary and Tertiary roadways. Primary Roads are required connections as indicated in Figure B1. Secondary Roads are shown to indicate probable access routes that provide access for fire apparatus and to avoid long dead end streets. Tertiary streets and alleys are not shown but would be defined in future Site Plan submittals. 4. Single Family driveways on Primary Streets shall be limited to 10 driveways per 1000’ of street frontage. 5. The Primary Roads are defined by the connection points. The final alignment shall be defined by the start and end points rather than by the alignment between points. a. Primary Road Segment 1: Connects SH 82 north access to Primary Road Segment 2 b. Primary Road Segment 2: Connects Primary Road Segment 1 to Village Neighborhood c. Primary Road Segment 3 connects Primary Road Segment 2 to SH 82 south access inter- section. 7. Single Loaded Streets are contemplated especially for lots abutting the Conservation Easement to the west. These may be single loaded streets with driveways or they may be pedestrian trails with rear alleys providing vehicular access to lots. 8. On-street parking is permitted in all residential Neighborhoods. 9. Streets are defined by the standards in Table B1. Dimensions provided are minimum dimensions and may be increased. The variety of street sec- tions and curb styles are intended to unify each Table B1 Street Standards - Curb-to-Curb ST R E E T LA B E L DESCRIPTION FL A T C U R B RO L L E D C U R B ST A N D A R D CU R B IN V E R T E D CR O W N S-60 Commercial / multifamily A A A A S-40 Commercial / multifamily A A A A S-30 Primary Street A A A S-25 Medium residential A A A A S-20 Small residential A A A A S-15 One –Way A A A A A-20 Commercial alley A A A-12 Residential alley A A A = Allowed; Blank = Prohibited Neighborhood and distinguish it from other neighbor- hoods. 10. Street connections to existing streets outside Harvest, to the north through the North Central Neighborhood or to the south through the Sopris Neighborhood, shall be permitted pending the consent of the adjacent landown- ers. 11. In general, cul-de-sacs and dead ends should be avoided where possible. Where a cul-de-sac is used, a pedestrian connection from the cul-de-sac shall be provide to con- nect to the community trail network. HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 21 B. Vehicular Network and Street Standards 12. Primary Street Definitions a. Road A: From the North Entry, through The Farm Neighborhood, to intersect with Road F. b. Road B: From the intersection with Road E at the boundary of the North Central Neighborhood, through the intersection with Road F, over Cattle Creek to connect with Roads C and D. c. Road C: From the intersection with Road E within the North Riverfront Neighborhood, through the optional intersection with Road F, over Cattle Creek to connect with Roads B and D. d. Road D: From the intersection with Roads B and C via a 1-way or 2-way road to loop through the Sopris neighborhood, to return to the intersection with Roads Band C. e. Road E: From the intersection with Road A in the Farm Neighborhood, under the RFTA trail, through the intersection with Road B to the intersection with Road C. f. Road F: From the South Entry through the intersec- tion with Road A, through the intersection with the RFTA trail, through the intersection with Road B and optionally, to connect to Road C. g. Primary roads shall use Street types S-60, S-40, S30, or S25. Figure B.1 Primary Street Schematic HIGHWAY 82 ROAD A ROAD B ROAD C ROAD D RO A D E RO A D F CA T T L E C R E E K North Entry South Entry North Entry South Entry ROAD A ROAD B ROAD C RO A D E Figure B.2 Primary Street Map HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 22 B. Vehicular Network and Street Standards So u t h E n t r y Figure B.3 Highway 82 Access No r t h E n t r y Tu r n -ar o u n d Hw y 8 2 CATTLE CREEK ROAD Hw y 8 2 1. North Entry from southbound Hwy 82 consists of a right-in/right-out. No left turn out of Harvest is per- mitted. 2. North Entry from northbound HWY 82 consists of a signalized left turn into Harvest and a U-turn for Cattle Creek traffic to travel southbound on Hwy 82. 3. South Entry from southbound Hwy 82 consist of Right-in/right-out only from Harvest. 4. The south Turnaround allows the southbound Hwy 82 traffic to turn northbound to access Cattle Creek Road. 5. There is no median break between the north signal and the south signal. HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 23 STANDARD MINIMUM DIMENSION ONE TRAVEL LANE, WIDTH 10’ A BOTH LANES, WIDTH 20’ B DEDICATED PARKING LANE 18’ TYPE OF PARKING ANGLED C CURB WIDTH, MINIMUM 0.5’ D TREE WELL/PARKWAY WIDTH 4’ E SIDEWALK MINIMUM WIDTH 6’ F MIN B-B STREET WIDTH 57’ G MIN STREETSCAPE WIDTH 10’ MIN ROW WIDTH 77’ H MIN CURB RADIUS 15’ - 25’ MIN INTERSECTION SPACING 100’ MIN SINGLE FAMILY DRIVEWAY SPACING NOT PER- MITTED S-60 STREET STANDARD 1. The S-60 Street Section is designed for the higher intensi- ty of commercial and multifamily land uses. On -street parking is preferable to parking lots because it is more convenient and more attractive. 2. The street type is intended for use in the Village Center as B. Vehicular Network and Street Standards well as neighborhoods with higher density residential uses.. 3. Alleys and commercial driveways are permitted but sin- gle family driveways are not permitted. A B C D E F G A B H G HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 24 STANDARD MINIMUM DIMENSION ONE TRAVEL LANE, WIDTH 10’ A BOTH LANES, WIDTH 20’ B DEDICATED PARKING LANE 8’ TYPE OF PARKING PARALLEL C CURB WIDTH, MINIMUM 0.5’ D TREE WELL/PARKWAY WIDTH 4’ E SIDEWALK MINIMUM WIDTH 6’ F MIN B-B STREET WIDTH 37’ G MIN STREETSCAPE WIDTH 10’ MIN ROW WIDTH 57’ H MIN CURB RADIUS 15’ - 25’ MIN INTERSECTION SPACING 100’ MIN SINGLE FAMILY DRIVEWAY SPACING NOT PER- MITTED S-40 STREET STANDARD 1. The S-40 Street Section is designed for the moderate in- tensity of commercial and multifamily land uses. This street section may be appropriate for townhomes as well B. Vehicular Network and Street Standards as multifamily and commercial uses. 2. Single family driveways are not permitted. A B C D E F G A B H G HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 25 B. Vehicular Network and Street Standards STANDARD MINIMUM DIMENSION ONE TRAVEL LANE, WIDTH 15’ A BOTH LANES, WIDTH 30’ B DEDICATED PARKING LANE NONE TYPE OF PARKING INTERMITENT C CURB WIDTH, MINIMUM 0.5’ D TREE WELL/PARKWAY WIDTH 4’ E SIDEWALK MINIMUM WIDTH 5’ F MIN B-B STREET WIDTH 31’ G MIN STREETSCAPE WIDTH 9’ MIN ROW WIDTH 49’ H MIN CURB RADIUS 15’ - 25’ MIN INTERSECTION SPACING 100’ MIN SINGLE FAMILY DRIVEWAY SPACING 5’ S-30 STREET STANDARD 1. The S-30 Street Section is designed for use as the Primary Streets. 2. The street section allows for more efficient traffic flow allowing limited single family driveway access. 3. The wider section also provides space for cyclists to be passed by vehicles. 4. Intermittent parking is defined in Article II, Section C Parking. A B C D E F G A B H G HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 26 B. Vehicular Network and Street Standards STANDARD MINIMUM DIMENSION ONE TRAVEL LANE, WIDTH 12’ A BOTH LANES, WIDTH 24’ B DEDICATED PARKING LANE NONE TYPE OF PARKING INTERMITENT C CURB WIDTH, MINIMUM 0.5’ D TREE WELL/PARKWAY WIDTH 5’ E SIDEWALK MINIMUM WIDTH 5’ F MIN B-B STREET WIDTH 25’ G MIN STREETSCAPE WIDTH 9’ MIN ROW WIDTH 43’ H MIN CURB RADIUS 15’ MIN INTERSECTION SPACING 100’ MIN DRIVEWAY SPACING 5’ S-25 STREET STANDARD 1. The S-25 Street Section is designed for use as a 2-way street section serving SF-5 lots with driveway access from the street. Streets may use the rolled curb to allow drive- ways to connect to the street without curb cuts. 2. Intermittent parking is defined in Article II, Section C Parking. A B C D E F G A B H G HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 27 B. Vehicular Network and Street Standards STANDARD MINIMUM DIMENSION ONE TRAVEL LANE, WIDTH 10’ A BOTH LANES, WIDTH 20’ DEDICATED PARKING LANE NONE TYPE OF PARKING INTERMITTENT C CURB WIDTH, MINIMUM 0.5’ D TREE WELL/PARKWAY WIDTH 5’ E SIDEWALK MINIMUM WIDTH 5’ F MIN B-B STREET WIDTH 21’ G MIN STREETSCAPE WIDTH 9’ MIN ROW WIDTH 39’ H MIN CURB RADIUS 15’ - 25’ MIN INTERSECTION SPACING 100’ MIN DRIVEWAY SPACING 5’ S-20 STREET STANDARD 1. The S-22 Street Section is designed for use as a 2-way street section serving the residential neighborhoods. 2. Intermittent on-street parking may be limited. 3. Intermittent parking is defined in Article II, Section C Parking. A C D E F G A B H G HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 28 B. Vehicular Network and Street Standards STANDARD MINIMUM DIMENSION A ONE TRAVEL LANE, WIDTH 15’ BOTH LANES, WIDTH NA DEDICATED PARKING LANE NONE TYPE OF PARKING NONE C CURB WIDTH, MINIMUM 0.5’ D TREE WELL/PARKWAY WIDTH 5’ E SIDEWALK MINIMUM WIDTH 5’ F MIN B-B STREET WIDTH 16’ G MIN STREETSCAPE WIDTH 9’ MIN ROW WIDTH 34’ H MIN CURB RADIUS 15’ - 25’ MIN INTERSECTION SPACING 100’ MIN DRIVEWAY SPACING 3’ S-15 STREET STANDARD 1. The S-15 Street Section is designed for use as the a 1-way street section. 2. Two 1-way street sections may be combined to create a two-way boulevard with a median. 3. Intermittent parking is defined in Article II, Section C Parking. A C D E F G A H G HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 29 B. Vehicular Network and Street Standards STANDARD MINIMUM DIMENSION ONE TRAVEL LANE, WIDTH A BOTH LANES, WIDTH 15’ PARKING LANE NONE DEDICATED PARKING LANE NONE CURB WIDTH, MINIMUM 0’ TREE WELL/PARKWAY WIDTH 0’ SIDEWALK MINIMUM WIDTH NA F MIN B-B STREET WIDTH 15’ MIN STREETSCAPE WIDTH NA MIN ROW WIDTH 15’ H MIN CURB RADIUS 15’ - 25’ MIN INTERSECTION SPACING 100’ MIN DRIVEWAY SPACING NO MIN A-20 ALLEY STANDARD 1. The A-20 Alley Section is designed for use as the mini-mum commercial alley serving commercial uses. A F A H HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 30 STANDARD MINIMUM DIMENSION ONE TRAVEL LANE, WIDTH 12’ A BOTH LANES, WIDTH 12’ DEDICATED PARKING LANE NONE TYPE OF PARKING NONE CURB WIDTH, MINIMUM 0’ TREE WELL/PARKWAY WIDTH 0’ TREE SPACING NA SIDEWALK MINIMUM WIDTH NA F MIN B-B STREET WIDTH 12’ MIN STREETSCAPE WIDTH NA MIN ROW WIDTH 12’ H MIN CURB RADIUS 15’ - 25’ MIN INTERSECTION SPACING 100’ MIN DRIVEWAY SPACING NO MIN A-12 ALLEY STANDARD 1. The A-12 Alley Section is designed for use as a residential alley serving single family lots. 2. The 12’ width works as a 2-way alley provided the alley B. Vehicular Network and Street Standards serves only a limited number of dwellings. If the alley serves more than 65 lots between intersections, it shall be increased by 3’ in width. A F A H 3’ SETBACK LINE / UTILITY EASEMENT HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 31 B. Vehicular Network and Street Standards CURBS 1. The following types of curbs may be used as appropriate, provided they comply with traffic safety standards. 2. Exact dimensions of the curb sections shall be provided in final construction documents. 3. Table B1 indicates permissible use of the curb types. A Fire Lane B Parking Lane C Streetscape / Linear Park D Setback E Maximum distance from Fire Lane, 60’ B C D A E Figure B4: Maxim distance to Fire Lane Figure B5: Cul-de-sac Turnaround Types FIRE SAFETY 1. All Neighborhoods shall have a minimum of two ap- proved fire apparatus access roads where possible. Some Neighborhoods cannot comply with Sections D104.3, D106.3, and D107.2 of Appendix D of the Inter- national Fire Code (IFC) which requires 2 access roads “placed a distance apart equal to one half of the length of the maximum overall diagonal dimension of the lot or area to be served.” STANDARD CURB Standard curb for use with storm sewer and infrequent curb cuts, typical of an urban street pattern. ROLLED CURB Rolled curb for use with storm sewer and frequent drive- way curb cuts, indicating a more suburban character. FLAT CURB Flat curb for use with bollards and sidewalks for a mod- ern urban appearance. INVERTED CROWN The Inverted Crown allow the collection of storm water in the center of the roadway rather than the curbs. Figure B3: Curb Types 2. In the Neighborhoods where compliance is difficult, unfeasible, or impossible, the Neighborhoods shall include two access points separated by not less than 100 feet and configured as a loop through the Neigh- borhood. 3. Dead-end streets shall comply with the IFC turna- round standards. See Figure B3. 4. Although any Lot Type may front onto any Street Type or qualified Open Space, buildings greater than 2-stories or 30’ in height may not be separated from the adjacent fire apparatus lane by more than 60 feet without the approval of the Fire Marshall. See Figure B3. 7. Deviations from the IFC may be approved by the Fire Marshall having jurisdiction. HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 32 Commercial Streetscape (CS) 10’ 10’ min TREEWELLS SIDEWALK 6’ MIN BULBOUT Residential Streetscape (RS) 9’ PARKWAY SIDEWALK 5’ MIN BULBOUT Figure B6: Streetscape illustration STREETSCAPE 1. The Streetscape, as used in this document, is the space between the street curb and the private lot line. It establishes the transition between the street and the private lots and can define the character of the neigh- borhood. 2. The commercial streetscape is primarily used in the Village Center and may be used in the denser multi- family portions of the development. 3. Residential streets consisting primarily of single family lots shall require a sidewalk on at least one side of the street. Street fronting multifamily and commercial oc- cupancies shall have sidewalks on both sides of the street. 4. Where a street is located adjacent to a qualified open space, the streetscape may be omitted. 5. Trees shall be located approximately 2 to 3 feet behind the curb approximately 45’ on center, but spacing may be adjusted up to 30% in accordance with the adjacent lot type, obstructions, utilities, signage, visi- bility angles and other requirements. 6. Continuous parkways shall be not less than 4’ in width. 7. Treewells shall be not less than 4’ wide by 4’ long. 8. Bulbouts are optional extensions of the sidewalk to wrap the on-street parking at intersections. They are recommended but not required at S-60 and S-40 in- tersections. 9. Notes on Figure B6 a. The indicated Streetscape width is the minimum width; b. The sidewalk width indicates the clear path of travel. B. Vehicular Network and Street Standards HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 33 TABLE C1: MINIMUM PARKING STANDARDS LAND USE PARKING RATIO CM LOT 1 space / 1000 sf of enclosed space MX LOT 0.5 spaces / 1000 sf of commercial + 1 space / unit MF-1 1 space / unit MF-2 1 space / unit MF-3 1 space / unit SF-1 2 spaces / unit SF-2 2 spaces / unit SF-3 2 spaces / unit SF-4 2 spaces / unit SF-5 2 spaces / unit 1. The parking demand in Harvest shall be primarily residential and commercial demand for parking shall be substantially from community residents. Consequently, commercial parking ratios may be reduced from standard municipal ratios. 2. On-street angled parking (S-60 street) and parallel parking (s-40 street) shall count toward minimum parking requirements. 3. Intermittent parking is on-street parking without a dedicated parking lane for use on streets where off -street parking has satisfied the required parking. 4. Intermittent on-street parking shall not count to- ward minimum parking requirements. 5. On-street parking shall be available for multifamily and commercial occupancies and may be supple- mented by off-street parking lots. 6. Off-street parking lots shall not be located be- tween a building the adjacent streetscape front- age. Exceptions to this rule shall include occupan- cies that require drive-up access to the building such as a day care facility, package/postal deliver and pickup, or banks. Such exceptions are limited to a maximum of 15,000 SF of enclosed, ground floor building area. 7. Dimensions of parking lot spaces shall be a mini- mum of 9’ x 18’. 8. On-street parking spaces shall be a minimum of 8’ x 22’ for parallel parking and 9’ x 18’ for angled-in parking spaces. See Figure C1. 9. Intermittent on-street parking shall be permitted but may be restricted for narrow or single-loaded streets. 10. Parking lots shall provide snow removal storage areas as well as visual curb markers in accordance with standard practice. 11. Snow removal for streets shall use the available streetscape for snow storage. 12. The Hotel shall provide 1 parking space per room. 13. Parking lots shall provide a minimum of 1 tree for eve- ry 15 parking spaces. Figure C1 On-Street angled-in Parking Configuration C. Parking Standards 18’ HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 34 D. Lot Standards 1. The Lot Standards define the permitted land use as well as the minimum dimensional requirements includ- ing width, depth, setbacks, and maximum height of the buildings. 2. The Lot types, permitted or prohibited, in each neigh- borhood, determine the character and density of the neighborhood. 3. Maximum height shall be established in both stories and in feet. 4. All buildings shall be limited to 2 stories except for buildings on CM Lots, MX Lots, and MF-1 Lots which are limited to 3 stories above the highest perimeter grade. 5. Three story buildings may include a story below grade where the topography permits access to both upper and lower levels. The story below grade shall be called the “Basement Level” which shall not exceed 65% of the exterior wall above grade. A three story building shall mean a building not exceeding 3 stories above the highest finished grade around the building perime- ter, and may not exceed 55’ from finished grade to the bottom of the eave or to bottom of the parapet wall as depicted in Figure C1. 6. Two story buildings may include habitable attic space. The roof eave may not exceed 30’ in height as shown in Figure C2. 7. All Lots shall front on streets or on qualified Open Space. 8. Commercial Occupancy shall be limited to CM Lots and MX Lots. Non-commercial occupancy shall in- clude residential dwelling units, ancillary uses such as leasing offices, exercise rooms, mail rooms, meeting rooms, or other similar uses. 9. CM Lots are permitted to include commercial occu- pancy but no residential occupancy. Commercial oc- cupancy shall include retail, restaurants, or office space. 10. MX Lots are permitted to include a mixture of resi- dential and commercial occupancy. 11. MF Lots include multiple residential dwelling units on a single lot, but may not include an auxiliary dwelling unit. 12. SF Lots are limited to single family dwelling units which may include one auxiliary dwelling unit. 13. Off-street parking between the building and the street frontage is prohibited for Lot types CM, MX, and MF-1. 14. Single Family (SF) lot types, are not required to in- clude enclosed garages. For any SF lots without en- closed garages, the minimum parking requirements may be met with on-street parking using S-60 or S-40 street sections. 15. For alley-loaded single family lots without enclosed garages, the rear setbacks shall be increased to 20’ to provide a driveway for at least 2 parking spaces. 3rd FL 2nd FL 1st FL Basement Level A B C D A Maximum height from grade to eave = 55’ B Street and/or fire lane C Streetscape D Setback Figure D1: 3-story Buildings height Eave A Maximum height from grade to eave = 30’ B Street and/or fire lane C Streetscape D Setback B C D A Figure D2: 2-story Buildings height Eave Attic space HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 35 D. Lot Standards 4. The rear setback allows for an alley to serve the rear of the buildings. 5. Commercial lots may be developed as a single multi- tenant building or may be multiple buildings with common party walls. 6. The Maximum front set setback may be increased with the addition of a Plaza or Courtyard (OS-10) open space in place of the adjacent streetscape. 1. CM Lot refers to any non-residential lots, regardless of height, that are used for retail, office or other commercial or civic use. 2. Commercial lots shall be used primarily in the Village neighborhood and the zero setbacks allow the devel- opment of a downtown character. 3. To a very limited extent, CM Lots may be used in cer- tain residential neighborhoods. See Table A1 for square footage limits. MINIMUM DIMENSION MID-BLOCK LOT CORNER LOT MAXIMUM HEIGHT 3 Story / 55’ 3 Story / 55’ LOT WIDTH W 20’ 20’ LOT DEPTH D 20’ 20’ SETBACKS FRONT MINIMUM SF 0’ 0’ FRONT MAXIMUM 8’ note 8’ note SIDE SS 0’ 0’ SIDE CORNER MINIMUM SC 0’ 0’ SIDE CORNER MAXIMUM 8’ 8’ REAR SR 10’ 10’ GARAGE DOOR, FRONT SG Not Permitted Not Permitted GARAGE DOOR, REAR SG 3 from alley 3’ from alley Note: See Article II, C.11 for commercial exceptions allowing front yard parking LOT LOT LOT w SF D w w PARKING OR ALLEY SS SC SR STREETSCAPE CM LOT STANDARDS HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 36 D. Lot Standards 1. MX Lots are lots permitting buildings containing both commercial and residential occupancies. Typi- cally, commercial uses are located on the ground floor with residential units above, but some residen- tial units may be located on the ground floor. 2. MX Lots may be located within the Village Center or some other Neighborhoods providing essential local goods and services. See Table A1 for square foot- age limits. 3. The accompanying illustration of a mixed-use building is diagrammatic of multistory, mixed-use buildings with residential occupancy above commercial. Alt- hough this example is not regulatory, it is intended to illustrate the location of the regulatory setbacks. 4. The maximum front set setback may be increased with the addition of a Plaza or Courtyard (OS-10) open space in place of the adjacent streetscape. MX LOT STANDARDS MINIMUM DIMENSION MID-BLOCK LOT CORNER LOT MAXIMUM HEIGHT 3 Story / 55’ 3 Story / 55’ LOT WIDTH W 20’ 20’ LOT DEPTH D 50’ 50’ SETBACKS FRONT MINIMUM SF 5’ 5’ FRONT MAXIMUM 15’ note 15’ note SIDE SS 10’ 10’ SIDE CORNER MINIMUM SC NA 5’ SIDE CORNER MAXIMUM NA 15’ REAR SR 10’ 10’ GARAGE DOOR, FRONT SG Not Permitted Not Permitted GARAGE DOOR, REAR SG 3’ from alley 3’ from alley Note: See Article II, C.11 for commercial exceptions allowing front yard parking UNITS TENNT TENANT SF D W PARKING OR ALLEY SC SR STREETSCAPE HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 37 1. MF-1 Lots are lots that permit buildings in which dwelling units may be stacked vertically. Dwelling units may be accessed via interior corridors, exte- rior corridors, or common stairways. Illustrative examples below are provided but are not regula- tory. 2. MF-1 Lots may include non-residential/non- commercial uses which are ancillary to the prima- ry use, such as fitness rooms, lobbies, rental office, mail room, or meeting rooms. D. Lot Standards 3. Covered parking may be provided on the ground floor within the building envelope. 4. Examples below depict a building with interior corri- dors and tuck-under parking on the ground floor and buildings with exterior corridors which provide access to upper floors. 5. The maximum front set setback may be increased with the addition of a Plaza or Courtyard (OS-10)open space in place of the adjacent streetscape. MF-1 LOT STANDARDS MINIMUM DIMENSION MID-BLOCK LOT CORNER LOT MAXIMUM HEIGHT 3 Story / 55’ 3 Story / 55’ LOT WIDTH W 60’ 60’ LOT DEPTH D 80’ 80’ SETBACKS FRONT MINIMUM SF 5’ 5’ FRONT MAXIMUM 20’ 20’ SIDE SS 10’ 10’ SIDE CORNER MINIMUM SC NA 5’ SIDE CORNER MAXIMUM NA 20’ REAR SR 10’ 10’ GARAGE DOOR, FRONT SG Not Permitted Not Permitted GARAGE DOOR, REAR SG 3’ from alley 3’ from alley W SF SS SC D W D SF SC UPPER FLOOR EXTERIOR CORRIDOR TUCK-UNDER PARKING SR ST R E E T 1 ST R E E T 1 STREET 2 STREET 2 SR HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 38 MF-2 LOT Standard 1. Bungalow Courts: Attached units on a common lot that are accessible from a sidewalk. 2. Common parking lots, garages and carports are permitted. 3. A common open space of 100 square feet mini- mum per dwelling unit shall be provided and shall be accessible from all units. 4. The examples depict a plan using on-street park- ing to satisfy the parking requirement and a plan using a private common parking lot on the MF-2 lot. D. Lot Standards MINIMUM DIMENSION MID-BLOCK LOT MAXIMUM HEIGHT 2 Story / 30’ LOT WIDTH W 60’ LOT DEPTH D 60’ SETBACKS FRONT SF 5’ SIDE SS 5’ REAR SR 5’ GARAGE DOOR, FRONT SG Not Permitted GARAGE DOOR, REAR SG 3’ from alley ST R E E T ST R E E T SF SR D W SS W D SF SS SS SS SR Common open space mini-mum 25’ wide. HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 39 MF-3 LOT Standard D. Lot Standards STREET STREET CO M M O N P A R K I N G L O T CO U R T Y A R D CO U R T Y A R D ST R E E T W W SS SS Common open space mini-mum 25’ wide. ST R E E T SF SR D SS D SF SS SR MINIMUM DIMENSION MID-BLOCK LOT MAXIMUM HEIGHT 2 Story / 30’ LOT WIDTH W 60’ LOT DEPTH D 60’ SETBACKS FRONT SF 5’ SIDE SS 5’ REAR SR 5’ GARAGE DOOR, FRONT SG Not Permitted GARAGE DOOR, REAR SG 3’ from alley 1. Cottages: Detached dwelling units on a common lot that are accessible from the sidewalk . 2. A common open space of 100 square feet minimum per dwelling unit shall be provided and shall be ac- cessible from all units. 3. Common parking lots, garages and carports are per- mitted. 4. The examples depict a plan using on-street parking to satisfy the parking requirement and a plan using a private common parking lot on the MF-3 lot. 5. Manufactured Homes also known as “Mobile Homes” complying with the Federal HUD definition shall not be permitted within Harvest. 6. Small homes, manufactured off-site and delivered either as components or as completed homes and secured directly onto a full perimeter concrete foun- dation, shall be permitted. SS HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 40 MINIMUM DIMENSION MID-BLOCK LOT CORNER LOT END LOT MAXIMUM HEIGHT 30’ 30’ 30’ LOT WIDTH W 20’ 30’ 25’ LOT DEPTH D 65’ 65’ 65’ SETBACKS FRONT SF 5’ 5’ 5’ SIDE 1 S1 0’ 0’ 0’ SIDE 2 S2 NA NA 3’ SIDE CORNER SC NA 5’ NA REAR WITH GARAGE SR 3’ 3’ 3’ REAR WITHOUT GARAGE SR 20’ 20’ 20’ GARAGE DOOR, FRONT NOT PERMITTED FRONT PORCH (OPTIONAL) SP 2’ 2’ 2’ TOWNHOME LOTS - WITH ALLEYS SF-1 W D SF S1 SC W SR S1 S1 S2 W W CORNER LOT MID- BLOCK MID- BLOCK END LOT Garage / Carport attached or detached D. Lot Standards HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 41 MINIMUM DIMENSION MID-BLOCK LOT CORNER LOT MAXIMUM HEIGHT 30’ 30’ LOT WIDTH W 30’ 35’ LOT DEPTH D 75’ 75’ SETBACKS FRONT SF 7’ 7’ SIDE 1 S1 1’ 1’/5’ SIDE 2 S2 5’ NA SIDE CORNER SC NA 5’ REAR WITH GARAGE SR 3’ 3’ REAR WITHOUT GARAGE SR 20’ 20’ GARAGE DOOR, FRONT NOT PERMITTED FRONT PORCH (OPTIONAL) SP 2’ 2’ ZERO LOTLINE LOTS - WITH ALLEYS SF-2 W D SF SF S1 S2 SC W SR S2 SP S1 SC W D. Lot Standards Garage / Carport attached or detached HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 42 MINIMUM DIMENSION MID-BLOCK LOT CORNER LOT MAXIMUM HEIGHT 30’ 30’ LOT WIDTH W 40’ 45’ LOT DEPTH D 85’ 85’ SETBACKS FRONT SF 10’ 10’ SIDE SS 5’ 5’ SIDE CORNER SC NA 5’ REAR WITH GARAGE SR 3’ 3’ REAR WITHOUT GARAGE SR 20’ 20’ GARAGE DOOR, FRONT NOT PERMITTED FRONT PORCH (OPTIONAL) SP 3’ 3’ MID-SIZE LOTS - WITH ALLEYS SF-3 W D SR SF SS SS SC W SR SS SP D. Lot Standards Garage / Carport attached or detached HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 43 LARGE LOTS - WITH ALLEYS SF-4 W D SR SF SS SS SC W SR SS SP MINIMUM DIMENSION MID-BLOCK LOT CORNER LOT MAXIMUM HEIGHT 30’ 30’ LOT WIDTH W 45’ 50’ LOT DEPTH D 95’ 95’ SETBACKS FRONT SF 12’ 12’ SIDE SS 5’ 5’ SIDE CORNER SC NA 5’ REAR WITH GARAGE SR 3’ 3’ REAR WITHOUT GARAGE SR 20’ 20’ GARAGE DOOR, FRONT NOT PERMITTED FRONT PORCH (OPTIONAL) SP 5’ 5’ D. Lot Standards Garage / Carport attached or detached HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 44 MINIMUM DIMENSION MID-BLOCK LOT CORNER LOT J-DRIVE LOT MAXIMUM HEIGHT 30’ 30’ 30’ LOT WIDTH W 45’ 50’ 55’ LOT DEPTH D 100’ 100’ 100’ SETBACKS FRONT SF 15’ 15’ 15’ SIDE SS 5’ NA 5’ SIDE CORNER SC NA 5’ 5’ REAR SR 10’ 10’ 10’ GARAGE DOOR, FRONT SG 20’ 20’ NA FRONT PORCH (OPTIONAL) SP 8’ 8’ NA LARGE LOTS - FRONT DRIVES SF-5 W D SR SF SS SS SG SC W SR D. Lot Standards Garage / Carport attached or detached HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 45 PARKS AND OPEN SPACE 1. The open spaces within Harvest are organized by types of open spaces which serve various purposes. Broadly defined, open spaces may serve as buffers, greenbelts, recreation areas, and/or habitat. The open space types are listed in Table E1 defining the mini- mum standards for a Qualified Open Space. Open Spaces include the existing easements. 2. Community Open Spaces include the open spaces that span across multiple neighborhoods and constitute the community open space network. These spaces primarily serve to act as buffers and provide areas of natural habitat around and between the neighbor- hoods. 3. Neighborhood Open Spaces include the public open spaces for people to gather and enjoy passive recrea- tion as well as informal games and pastimes. These spaces are not shown in Figure E1, but the minimum requirement for each type of open space is indicated in Table E1, and the requirement for each neighbor- hood is indicated in Table E2. 4. No additional parking shall be required for any open space. 5. OS-1: The existing conservation easement consists of approximately 54 acres preserved as wildlife habitat. 6. OS-2: The park includes the banks of Cattle Creek and is not included within the Conservation Easement. 7. OS-3: The Frontage Buffer lies between the Communi- Pocket Park E. Open Space Standards ty and State Highway 82, to provide a natural sepa- ration and allow for the accommodation of the slope. 8. OS-4: The East RFTA Buffer lies on the east side of the RFTA trail through the North Frontage and The Farm neighborhoods. 9. OS-5: The West RFTA Buffer lies on the west side of the RFTA trail and extends the entire length of the Community. 10. OS-6: The Glenwood Ditch is a greenbelt carrying water in both an open trench and enclosed pipe. It also serves as a wildlife habitat and a buffer be- tween neighborhoods. 11. OS-7: The Wildlife Buffer lies between the Conser- vation Easement and the rest of the Harvest Com- munity. It varies in width and provides a landscaped green screen between the conservation land the developed land. 12. OS-8: Central Parks serve as a primary focus and gathering space for some of the larger neighbor- hoods. The space includes a turf area suitable for gatherings. 13. OS-9: Pocket parks are freestanding public open spaces within neighborhoods to provide a local area for outdoor activity. They should be easily accessible from public sidewalks or trails and be a short walk from the homes in the Neighborhood. 14. OS-10: Playgrounds are parks geared toward active TABLE E1 OPEN SPACE STANDARDS MI N W I D T H MI N A R E A ( A C ) MA X S L O P E TR E E S IR R I G A T I O N PA V I N G GR O U N D CO V E R FU R N I S H I N G S LI G H T I N G Community Open Spaces OS-1 Conservation Easement NA 54.2 NA NA NONE NONE NA NONE NONE OS-2 Cattle Creek Park 0'/10' 0.5 NA 0 P P NAT/TURF P P OS-3 Frontage Buffer 12'/25' 2.3 66% 1/30' NONE NONE* NATURAL NONE NONE OS-4 East RFTA Buffer 20' 1.8 50% 1/100' NONE NONE* NAT/TURF NONE NONE OS-5 West RFTA Buffer 50' 8.8 50% 1/100' NONE NONE* NAT/TURF NONE NONE OS-6 Glenwood Ditch 25' 2.1 66% 0 NONE NONE* NATURAL NONE NONE OS-7 Wildlife Buffer 6'/12' 2.0 NA 1/100' NONE NONE NATURAL NONE NONE Neighborhood Open Spaces OS-8 Central Park 30' 0.2 5% 1/1200 SF P P TURF P P OS-9 Pocket Park 20' 0.1 5% 1/1200 SF P P NAT/TURF P P OS-10 Playground 20' 0.1 5% 0 P P TURF P P OS-11 Linear Park 10' 0.1 5% 1/30' P P NAT/TURF P P * Except for road crossings and trails P = Permitted HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 46 TABLE E2 - NEIGHBORHOOD OPEN SPACE STANDARDS R= REQUIRED OS TYPE DESCRIPTION NO R T H F R O N T - AG E NO R T H C E N - TR A L TH E F A R M VI L L A G E NE I G H B O R - HO O D VI L L A G E C E N - TE R NO R T H R I V E R - FR O N T CR E E K S I D E SO U T H R I V E R - FR O N T SO P R I S NA T U R E A R E A OS-8 Central Park 1 1 1 1 1 OS-9 Pocket Park 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 OS-10 Playground 1 1 OS-11 Linear Park 1 1 E. Open Space Standards recreation by children. They should include play equipment such as swings, slides and climbing struc- tures. 15. OS-11: Linear Parks are for trails. The linear park should be wider than the trail and include trees placed at regular intervals along the path. 16. Table E1 columns: a. Width: the column indicates 2 numbers that set a minimum width and the overall average width of the open space. The Open Space shall comply with both requirements. b. Area: Sets the minimum area for the open space or the park type. c. Max Slope: Sets the maximum slope of the open space as measured from opposite sides of the open space. d. Trees: Minimum tree planting may be specified by spacing for linear open spaces or by area for parks. e. Irrigation: Because Irrigation is limited, most spaces shall not use an automatic irrigation system. The table indicates which open spaces permit irrigation. f. Paving: Paving, other than trails, within open spaces is limited to neighborhood parks. g. Ground cover: Ground Cover may be natural with native species or mulch, or turf which is to be irrigat- ed and mowed. Turf is generally limited to the Neighborhood Open Spaces. h. Furnishings: Furnishings may include benches tables, bike racks, trash cans, water fountains etc. Generally Furnishings are limited to the Neighborhood Open Spaces. 1. Lighting: Lighting shall generally be the minimum necessary and shall comply with the Dark Sky re- quirements in Section H. The Community Open Spaces shall not include lighting except for security, but the Neighborhood open spaces may include evening ambient lighting. LANDSCAPE STANDARDS 1. The landscape standards govern primarily the planting of trees. Shrubbery and ground cover are not regulated in order to: a. minimize the areas requiring an automatic underground irrigation system; b. provide a natural appearance where feasible; c. and minimize the landscape maintenance responsibility on the HOA and homeowners. 2. Street Tree species shall be selected from the Glenwood Springs Landscaping Guide. Street trees shall be limited to species iden- tified as appropriate for streets and sidewalks. 3. The minimum size of street trees shall be 1.5 inch trunk diame- ter. 4. Street tree spacing shall not exceed 45’ on center unless noted otherwise. 5. The Irrigated areas on lots shall be limited in accordance with the limits defined in Table E3. TABLE E3 IRRIGATION COVERAGE LIMITS BY LOT MAX SF COVERAGE CM LOT Commercial 20% of lot area MX LOT Mixed 15% of lot area MF-1 Multifamily 200 SF / DU MF-2 Bungalow court 200 SF / DU MF-3 Cottages 200 SF / DU SF-1 Townhomes 400 SF SF-2 Zero-lot-lines 600 SF SF-3 Mid-size w alleys 900 SF SF-4 Large w alleys 1300 SF SF-5 Large w front driveways 1500 SF HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 47 Figure E1 Community Open Space Network E. Open Space Standards RIO GRANDE TRAIL CATTLE CREEK PARK OS-2 GLENWOOD DITCH OS-6 NATURE AREA OS-1 WILDLIFE BUFFER OS-7 WILDLIFE BUFFER OS-7 FRONTAGE BUFFER OS-3 EAST RFTA BUFFER OS-4 WEST RFTA BUFFER OS-5 WEST RFTA BUFFER OS-5 CATTLE CREEK PARK OS-2 HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 48 TRAILS 1. Figure F1 illustrates the Community Trail Network encompassing approximately 2 miles of trails. Alt- hough the illustrated alignment is not regulatory, the connection points indicated below are required. 2. Trails shall be paved, and a minimum of 6 feet in width unless otherwise noted. 3. Community Trail 1 shall join the North Frontage Neighborhood to Community Trail 2. 4. Trail 2 shall join Trail 1 to Trail 3 and shall be located either within the Wildlife Buffer bordering the Con- servation Easement or along the Street bordering the Conservation Easement. See Figures F2 and F3. 5. Trail 3 shall join Trail 2 to the Village Center. 6. Trail 4 shall join Trail 2 to Trail 5 and shall be located either within the Wildlife Buffer bordering the Conser- vation Easement or along the Street bordering the Conservation Easement. See Figures F2 and F3. 7. Trail 5 shall join the Rio Grande Trail to Trail 4, pursu- ant to the approval of the RFTA access plan. 8. Additional trails may be added in any common area, and may be constructed with or without any connec- tions to the Community trail network. F. Pedestrian and Bicycle Trail Network Figure F2 Trail Location with Single-loaded Street CONSERVATION EASEMENT STREET HOUSE LOT ST R E E T S C A P E Community Trail 2 and/or Community Trail 4 shall be located either within the Wildlife Buffer or the Streetscape. WI L D L I F E B U F F E R CONSERVATION EASEMENT WI L D L I F E B U F F E R ALLEY HOUSE LOT TR A I L Figure F3 Trail Location with House Lot fronting onto the wildlife Buffer Community Trail 2 and/or Community Trail 4 shall be within the Wildlife Buffer Open Space. HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 49 Figure F1 Community Trail Network F. Pedestrian and Bicycle Trail Network CATTLE CREEK EAST BRIDGE COMMUNITY TRAIL #4 COMMUNITY TRAIL #2 COMMUNITY TRAIL #5 COMMUNITY TRAIL #1 COMMUNITY TRAIL #3 RIO GRANDE TRAIL CATTLE CREEK WEST BRIDGE HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 50 F. Pedestrian and Bicycle Trail Network TRAILS 1. The Trail network shall be continuous throughout the community, meaning that trails shall connect to sidewalks to make the community accessible by foot or bicycle. 2. Community Trails indicated in Figure F1 shall be a min- imum of 6’ in width unless noted otherwise. 3. Community Trails may be located within a Linear Park or a Streetscape, or may be located on land with a public access easement. 50’ RFTA Buffer 100’ RFTA Trail ROW 20’ RFTA Buffer Split Rail Fence Rio Grande Trail Optional Trail Figure F4: Section through the RFTA Rio Grande Trail and adjacent open spaces. HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 51 Figure F2 Public Transit Access Map F. Regional Trail Access RFTA TRAIL ACCESS 2 RFTA TRAIL BYPASS RFTA TRAIL ACCESS 5 NOTES 1. The Applicant has multiple ac- cess and crossing rights outlined in a separate agreement or agreements between the Land- owner and RFTA. 2. Any proposed additional access to the RFTA trail right-of-way is subject to an agreement and ap- proval by the Roaring Fork Transit Authority. 3. If approved by RFTA, access from Harvest to the RFTA Rio Grande Trail ROW will conceptually fol- low this plan. 4. Connections north of Cattle Creek and south of Cattle Creek are proposed. 5. One at-grade vehicular crossing at RFTA Trail access #3 is pro- posed. 6. A grade separated bypass under the Harvest south entry road is proposed to allow RFTA trail us- ers to bypass vehicular traffic crossing the RFTA ROW. RFTA TRAIL ACCESS 4 RFTA TRAIL ACCESS 6 RFTA TRAIL ACCESS 1 RFTA TRAIL ACCESS 3 Cattle Creek Road Harvest North Entry Harvest South Entry Road from Hwy 82 HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 52 J. Architectural Standards The building standards may differ for each building type so the standards are grouped into 3 categories: Single Family, Multifamily, and Commercial. Buildings are sub- ject to review by the community architectural review committee. Single Family 1. The minimum habitable, conditioned area for single family lots shall be 700 square feet per home. 2. Single family buildings and 1 or 2-story multifamily buildings (MF-2, MF-3, SF-1, SF-2, SF-3, SF-4, SF-4 SF-5) shall comply with the following standards. a. Permitted materials for finished exterior walls in- clude brick, stone, stucco, clapboard, vertical tongue & groove, metal cladding, and cementi- tious clapboard. b. Permitted roofing materials for pitched roofs in- clude asphalt shingles, standing seam metal roofing, simulated and authentic slate roofing, and roofing tiles. Flat roofs are permitted using TPO membrane. c. Windows shall be wood or vinyl-clad frames with a thermal break. d. Garage doors shall be painted aluminum, wood, or simulated wood. Multifamily 3. The minimum habitable conditioned area for a multi- family dwelling unit shall be 400 square feet. 4. Multifamily buildings shall comply with the following standards. a. Permitted Materials for finished exterior walls include brick, stone, stucco, clapboard, vertical tongue & groove, metal cladding, and cementi- tious clapboard. b. Permitted roofing materials for pitched roofs include asphalt shingles, standing seam metal roofing, simulated and authentic slate roofing, and roofing tiles. Flat roofs are permitted using TPO membrane. c. If the building includes a flat or low-slope roof, the roof shall include a parapet wall around the roof perimeter high enough to screen rooftop equipment. d. Common entries shall include a covered or re- cessed entry. e. Garages and carports shall not front onto public streets. Commercial 5. The commercial and mixed-use buildings in the Vil- lage shall comply with the following standards. These standards apply exclusively to the commercial components within the Village Center. a. Window Display: The interior window display is to be visible from the sidewalk. The display should be lighted. b. Window Display Lighting: Lighting should be warm in color. c. Window Display Window Coverings: If the ground floor space is occupied by a retail tenant, no cov- erings should be applied such as blinds, or dra- peries. If the space is occupied by an office or residential occupant, window coverings shall be permitted. d. Display Window, Glass: Clear glass is recom- mended, insulated low-E glass is permitted. Heav- ily tinted or reflective glass is prohibited on retail display windows. Glass panels should have a gen- erally vertical proportion. e. Window Pediment: This is the section of wall un- der the display window elevating the glass above the sidewalk. Permitted materials include all ma- terials in the materials section except glass. The minimum height is 6 inches; maximum height is G. Architectural Standards NORTH RIVERFRONT 2-Story Maximum Figure G1: Height Restricted Neighborhoods SOUTH RIVERFRONT HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 53 39 inches. f. Entry Doors, Transom: A transom or transom- type panel is recommended above the entry door(s) but is not required. g. Entry Doors, Canopy: If an awning or canopy is used over the entry doors, the canopy may ex- tend into the Public ROW and may be supported on columns. However, the columns may not in- terfere with the clear path of the travel on the sidewalk. h. The Sign Band is required above the windows to display the identity of the business and express in graphic form the character of the business. i. Sign Band Maximum Height: The maximum J. Architectural Standards Window pediment Entry door, not part of the storefront glazing system Display window Sign Band Figure G2: shopfront architectural Standards G. Architectural Standards SHOP SIGN height that is uninterrupted by a change in plane, change in material or a change in color, is 3 feet. j. Maximum Length: The maximum length of the building sign band is 20 feet. k. A base or water-table, the lowest element on the building façade, establishes a visible base for the materials above, is recommended but not re- quired. l. Awnings: Retail shopfronts are encouraged to have awnings. Office street level windows within the Village Center do not require awnings. m. Lighting: Any lighting that creates glare, exposes the light source, or up-lighting, or shines light onto neighboring properties, is prohibited. HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 54 1. As part of the Harvest’s commitment to preserve wild- life habitat and views of the natural landscape, enforc- ing some common sense dark sky policies is consistent with Harvest design intent. The following policies will be part of the PUD and shall extend into the design guidelines for property owners. 2. Street lights: Street lights may be used on residential streets within the community. The Village Center and some common areas within other neighborhoods may include street lights. Where street light are used, they shall a. not be taller than 12’ in height, b. use LED fixtures, c. employ full cut-off shielding to prevent any spill- over lighting, d. be warm in color, not to exceed 3000 K, e. be the minimal illumination for the purpose. 2. Signage: Signage lighting shall employ indirect lighting, such that the light source is not visible, and does not include up-lighting. Signage lighting shall typically be illuminated for not more than 6 hours per night. 3. Home lighting may include low-lumen front door sconces or porch lighting, or down-lighting but may not include “Hollywood” uplighting as depicted in figure H2. Figure H1: Example of light pollution without full cutoff fix-Figure H2: Example prohibited uplighting on homes Figure H3: H. Dark Sky Standards HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 55 1. Harvest signage shall comply with the CG/CL Sign cate- gory within Article 11 of the 2013 Garfield County LUDC, except as noted below. 2. There shall be a maximum of 4 Entry Monument Signs, one sign on each side of each entry. 3. There shall be a maximum of 4 Temporary Develop- ment signs. 4. All signs, excluding temporary decorative holiday lighting, shall have shielded and covered light bulbs and shall not blink or flash. 5. Sandwich board signs are permitted on sidewalks in front of commercial buildings provided they do not block the clear path of travel. 6. Wayfinding signage shall be permitted within the street rights-of-way, provided they do not create an obstruction for traffic visibility or create any hazard for motorists, cyclists, or pedestrians. Figure I1: Maximum Entry Monument signs Fig I. Signage Standards HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 56 7. Retail Sign Standards a. Wall Signs: Wall signs are located above the first floor entry, and below the second level windows and are mounted on the face of the building. Businesses are per- mitted one sign per frontage. The maximum rectangle encompassing all the letters within a facia sign shall not exceed 30 inches in height or 40 square feet of total area, calculated as the height of the tallest letter multiplied by the length of the sign. The sign will consist of individual letters, not panels or boxes. b. Blade Signs: Blade Signs are double faced and are orient- ed perpendicular to the face of the building. Each face shall not exceed 8 square feet. c. Awnings: An Awning is located at or above the windows and/or doors of the building facade. Awnings shall be constructed of matte fabric with a free bottom edge or may be a sheet metal canopy. Letters on the bottom hanging edge of the awning shall be 6" or less in height. Letters on the inclined surface may be up to 30” in height. Artwork may exceed 30”. Awnings may located on all windows and doors. d. Building Signs: Signage identifying the building may be placed on each building frontage. The maximum rectangle encompassing all the letters within a facia sign shall not exceed 30 inches in height or 40 square feet of total area, calculated as the height of the tallest letter multiplied by the length of the sign. I. Signage Standards e. Marquee Blade Signs: Marquee Blade Signs project from the face of the building and are double sided. The may be up to 15 feet in height and up to 40 square feet on each side. f. Window Signs: These are signs applied to the glass sur- face of windows. Signs shall not obscure more than 50% of the glass area. g. Illumination: Signs may be illuminated using any of the following methods i. Halo Lighting: Neon hidden behind a solid, opaque letter, and lighting the background wall. ii. Up lighting: Projecting fixtures attached to the build- ing under the letters and arranged to project the light upward onto the letters. Lights shall be shielded or designed in order that there is no glare into the sky or upper level windows. iii. Down lighting: Projecting fixtures attached to the building over the letters and arranged to project the light downward onto the letters. Lights shall be shielded or designed to avoid street-level glare. h. Prohibited Signs: i. Internally illuminated, face-lit, channel cut letters. ii. Internally illuminated face-lit boxes. iii. Neon signs iv. Flashing, rotating, blinking, or moving signs. v. Exposed electrical raceways or buses. BLADE SIGN Figure I2: Retail Signs HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 57 1. Harvest provides direct access to the RFTA Rio Grande Trail connecting to up-Valley and down-Valley transit stops for both Spring Valley, approximately a half mile north of Harvest and Aspen Glen, about 1.2 miles south of Harvest. Figure J1: Maximum Entry Monument signs J. Alternative Transportation, Transit Stops BUS STOP: Spring Valley Rd stop accessible via the Rio Grande Trail from Harvest. BUS STOP: Aspen Glen stop accessible via the Rio Grande Trail from Harvest. HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 58 Figure K3: J. Alternative Transportation, Safe Route to School Inset below HARVEST SITE HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 59 1. The protection of the viewsheds is important not only to the greater community but to Harvest as well. In order to preserve the views from SH 82 and from the Roaring Fork river banks, the building heights and building locations are subject to review of sight lines to determine the impact of building height and place- ment. The development uses this tool to minimize the impact of the development on the greater community. 2. Figure K1 is an excerpt from the LUDC defining the por- tions of the viewshed. The following analysis focuses on the view angles that would preserve views of the Plateau, the Escarpment and also the steeper portions of the Talus Slopes. 3. Figure K2 is a map of the Garfield County portion of the Roaring Fork Watershed. The map indicates that the topography is steeper toward the west than it is toward the east of the Roaring Fork River. 4. Figure K3 is a photo of the site looking to the north capturing the mountains to the east and west of the Roaring Fork River. 5. The following documents include a typical section through the Roaring Fork Watershed north of Cattle Creek in order to demonstrate the approximate view angles from SH 82, and from the west bank of the Roaring Fork River over the proposed development. The analysis assumes that two-story structures are between 25’ and 35’ in height and 3-story structures are between 35 and 45 feet in height. 6. Understanding that the analysis does not constitute a comprehensive study of all views from all angles, it is intended to provide preliminary insight into the proba- ble impact to the viewshed. 7. Figure K4 is the plan view of the section through the Roaring Fork Watershed and Figure K5 is the raw data of the section profile shown to scale, with the Roaring Fork River, the SH 82 and the Rio Grande Trail indicat- ed. 8. Figure K5 shows the cross section through the water- shed with the Harvest site, Roaring Fork River, Rio Grande Trail, and SH 82 indicated. The west and east view angles, designed to meet the Talus Slope, are la- belled and quantified as 1° and 3° above horizontal. 9. The line indicating 35’ above the existing grade over the Harvest site is shown in violet. The view angles pass above the 35’ line indicating that the views are generally preserved. HARVEST SITE Figure K2: Map of the Garfield County portion of the Roaring Fork Watershed Figure K3: Photo of the Harvest site looking north, down the Roaring Fork Valley Figure K4: Section through Watershed K. Viewshed Protection HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PAGE 60 RIVER TRAIL SH 82 HARVEST SITE WEST VIEW ANGLE = +/- ONE DEGREE ABOVE HORIZONTAL EAST VIEW ANGLE = +/- THREE DEGREES ABOVE HORIZONTAL LINE INDICATING 35’ ABOVE EXISTING GRADE, BELOW VIEW LINES Figure K5: Section with east and west view angles Figure K6: Photo of the Harvest Site from SH 82 looking west RIVER TRAIL SH 82 K. Viewshed Protection Note, please see Exhibit U attached to the PUD application for a further viewpoint analysis. Exhibit E Sopris Engineering Engineer Report Harvest Roaring Fork – SE Job # 34010 November 18, 2024 1 502 Main Street, Suite A3, Carbondale, CO 81623 970-704-0311 Harvest Roaring Fork Zoning Application Engineering Narrative November 18th, 2024 Revised April 14, 2025 Prepared For: Realty Capital Management 909 Lake Carolyn Parkway, Suite 150 Irving Texas 75039 Prepared By: Sopris Engineering 502 Main Street Suite A3 Carbondale, CO 81623 ________________________________ _____________________________________ Yancy Nichol, P.E. Colby Christoff, P.E. Harvest Roaring Fork – SE Job # 34010 November 18, 2024 2 502 Main Street, Suite A3, Carbondale, CO 81623 970-704-0311 Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION 3 2. PROJECT SUMMARY 3 3. UTILITIES 3-6 4. ACCESS 6-7 5. RFTA CROSSING/ACCESS 7-8 6. GRADING/DRAINAGE 8-9 7. GEOTECHNICAL 9 8. FLOODPLAIN 9-10 9. CONSTRUCTION PHASING 10-11 10. FIRE SERVICE 11 11. CONCLUSION 11 Appendix A: Overall Map – Zoning District & Access Appendix B: Wil Serve Letters Appendix C: Exhibit 1 – Overall water and sewer map Exhibit 2 – Geotechnical Information Harvest Roaring Fork – SE Job # 34010 November 18, 2024 3 502 Main Street, Suite A3, Carbondale, CO 81623 970-704-0311 1. INTRODUCTION: This report is written to coincide with the upcoming land use submittal for Harvest Roaring Fork community. Over the past years we have been coordinating with numerous entities to gather information and begin to pull together necessary information primarily related to infrastructure to the site, as well as access. We have been coordinating with other consultants such as traffic engineers, environmental engineers, contractors and our design team members in order to determine what is necessary to support the proposed development. SE has also been coordinating with Roaring Fork Transit Authority (RFTA), Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) Roaring Fork Water and Sanitation District (RFWSD) to understand and create preliminary designs for access, RFTA crossings and offsite infrastructure necessary to service the Site. We have also been working with the project’s planner to give feedback on the conceptual zoning standards. 2. PROJECT SUMMARY The property is 283 acres. It has a 54+- acre conservation easement bordering the Roaring Fork River on the west side of the site and running up Cattle Creek in the center of the site. The existing Site has been disturbed by earthmoving based on previous approvals but has sat generally untouched for the last +/- 10 years. 3. UTILITIES: We have separated utilities into water and sanitary sewer to be supplied by RFWSD, as well as shallow utilities (electric, gas, telephone, cable, fiber etc). Our emphasis is to highlight that all necessary utilities are available to provide service to the Site. Based on our analysis we understand all utilities are available and we have received will serve letters from the utility providers which are attached in Appendix B. Water and Sanitary Sewer - (RFWSD) Our team has had several meetings with the district staff, attended board meetings and in coordination with the district engineer on multiple occasions. We understand that there will be numerous infrastructure upgrades in order to serve the proposed development. Some of the key components are listed here and given further details below: · Roaring Fork River Crossing- Sewer & Water · Water Storage Tanks · Water surface treatment · Future water connections · Sewer plant treatment expansion · Sewer plant lift station Harvest Roaring Fork – SE Job # 34010 November 18, 2024 4 502 Main Street, Suite A3, Carbondale, CO 81623 970-704-0311 Water At this time SE understands a great deal about the water infrastructure needed to the Harvest this project. Through coordination with the district staff, and review of past approvals and plans we have a clear understanding of the infrastructure required to serve the proposed project. The individual phasing of when each of these items is constructed will continue to be evaluated with the district engineering staff once we have obtained zoning approval, which will allow us to estimate the exact number of units and square foot of development we anticipate within each phase. Roaring Fork River Crossing – Currently we have a design and contractor contracted to construct the Roaring Fork River crossing, we have done geotechnical investigations on both banks of the river to determine the most practical depth to cross the river and we’ve had a hydrologist review the scouring based upon surveyed cross sections of the river. We expect to have the Army Corp Permit in the coming months and have an approved construction window obtained through coordination with Colorado Parks and Wildlife. At this time, we intend to construct the river crossing August and September of 2025. The tie-in point on the western side of the river is up near County Road 109. The intent is to follow the existing road and utility easement down the access road to the sewer plant with a new proposed water main. Once on the sewer plant site we would cross the river in our proposed trench to serve the subject site. It is important to note that these improvements will be required to serve the site regardless of final zoning approval. Water Storage Tanks – Currently we have preliminary sizing done for the tanks based off our anticipated zoning approvals. We have reviewed the existing easement currently in place for the size of the proposed tanks and the grades of the existing tanks in the district systems as well as the proposed site elevations. The current easement appears to be able to fit the required tank sizes and further design efforts will be completed with preliminary plan application. Water surface treatment – The district is currently completing analysis on their existing wells, and well capacity. That study will help us determine when or if/when an additional surface water treatment plant may be required. We have identified options on both our site as well as the districts site to house a water surface treatment plant if needed. Further design and coordination will happen once the zoning approval is completed, and the preliminary plan application is prepared. Additionally, it should be noted that water and sewer infrastructure sizing is also being considered for surrounding properties that want and/or need to connect to the District water and sewer(including the Carbondale & Rural Fire Protection District site), that are within the District service area (Cattle Creek and Thunder River). We have reviewed a master plan to take into account these existing uses what additional parcels might connect and or change uses, and potential future uses. Sanitary Sewer: Harvest Roaring Fork – SE Job # 34010 November 18, 2024 5 502 Main Street, Suite A3, Carbondale, CO 81623 970-704-0311 Through coordination with the district, we understand the sewer plant has surplus capacity currently. However, as other projects develop the plant capacity will decrease. Below is additional information about the key sewer elements to provide service to this project: Roaring Fork River Crossing – as mentioned above in the water section we currently have a design for the Roaring Fork River Crossing and anticipate construction August and September of this year. Sewer lift station – A sewer lift station on the property will be required for the first phase of construction. The site development will gravity flow to the lift station. The lift station will pump the sewage across the Roaring Fork River to the existing sewer plant. The sewer lift station will be planned with multiple sized pipes, and capacity in order to ensure peak flows are able to be pumped at various phases of the development. Sewer plant expansion – Currently there is capacity at the district sewer plant to begin this development. We are working with the district to prepare different trigger mechanisms for when plant expansion happens. Those triggers are based upon a design flow but actual plant capacity will have to be monitored to set determine the actual sewer plant expansions schedule. It is intended that each phase will be evaluated at preliminary plan to ensure and warrant sufficient capacity. As mentioned above in the water section it should be noted the sewer infrastructure is being design for consideration of serving the districts service area beyond just the Harvest Project. Shallow Utilities: We have coordinated with each of the utility providers to understand where our connection points are and what service is available to the project. Currently, all shallow utility providers have said they have infrastructure in the area and gave us an understanding of where their facilities are and how we’d access them. Below is a brief description of the information we received from each provider: Holy Cross Energy (HCE) – Currently HCE runs down the west side of HWY 82 with overhead lines which can provide both single phase and 3 phase to the Site. There is a single phase service that currently services and old single family home near Cattle Creek on the property. HCE has capacity to serve this project and we will continue to work with HCE as we establish unit mix, load capacity and begin to look at potential electrical infrastructure layout. All new electrical infrastructure will be placed underground. Holy Cross currently provides service to the property as noted above. Black Hills Energy (BHE) – BHE has some current service just north of the project which are smaller 2” lines. The main connection to serve this development will need to cross the river with the sewer and water crossing. The intended crossing is directly across from the RFWSD waste water treatment plant. From there the line would need to extend up the plant access road to CR 109 where a new regulator station would be installed. Once across the river the routing on site would extend north to tie into the smaller 2” lines at the north end of the site to make the system more redundant and Harvest Roaring Fork – SE Job # 34010 November 18, 2024 6 502 Main Street, Suite A3, Carbondale, CO 81623 970-704-0311 resilient. We will continue to work with BHE as we understand the final Site density and begin providing BHE with load calculations to further design the onsite system. Comcast – Currently Comcast nearest connection point is just north of the property. Comcast has fiber available with sufficient capacity, so we would tie onto their facilities and extend south into the project Site. Similar to HCE all new utilities will be run underground following the general electrical layout. Lumen – Coordination with Lumen indicated that their service is on the east side of HWY 82. At this time, we understand Lumen’s facilities are minimal. Lumen telephone may not be necessary, but we will continue to coordinate with them as the project moves forward. SE will continue to coordinate with each utility providers as additional site planning, layout and density all comes together. We will continue to ensure our design accommodates each utility provider and follows their rules and regulations in terms of bury depth, pipe material, bedding requirements etc. All proposed shallow utilities will be installed underground. 4. ACCESS - CDOT Through investigations and coordination with CDOT, SE has identified access locations to best serve this site. Based upon analysis of HWY 82 in terms of grades and distances from existing access the potential access points really reduce to just a few locations. CDOT Access Code sets spacing between access points, highway designation and speed limit set acceleration and deceleration lengths, existing highway grades from north bound and south bound lanes as well as the RFTA trail all play critical rolls in our proposed access points. These factors have all been critical to finalizing access points which then allow our design team to begin looking at the potential neighborhood layout and zoning for the site. Through coordination with CDOT and numerous back and forth meetings at this time the project has received both access permits from CDOT, our northern ¾ movement intersection and our southern right in right out access. For site design it was very important to coordinate directly with CDOT prior to having any land use approvals because the access is too important to the Site to have not confirmed. The access points dictate where specific development on the Site needs to be, so it was critical to know CDOT was in support of our locations and our proposed accesses prior beginning the site zoning application. This process has highlighted the importance of a form-based-code for this project as supported by the applicant and the County to ensure that the proposed zoning is flexible enough to address access and other jurisdictional approvals that will be required during development of the project. The CDOT approvals are summarized on Exhibit 1, and include a 3/4 movement intersection as well as a right in right out onto SH 82. The proposed right in right out in is located 500’ north of the existing Cattle Creek intersection at mile marker 7.76 While the 3/4 movement intersection is located on the northern Harvest Roaring Fork – SE Job # 34010 November 18, 2024 7 502 Main Street, Suite A3, Carbondale, CO 81623 970-704-0311 end of the Site at mile marker 7.38. Both accesses will have full length acceleration and deceleration lanes as dictated by the State Highway Access Code and highway category. These two access points will provide the circulation for the proposed development, providing appropriate access to SH 82 for daily traffic as well as emergency vehicles. A signal light will be installed at the ¾ movement on HWY 82 south-bound lanes to allow north-bound vehicles to either make a left turn into the project or make a U-turn south on HWY 82. For all vehicles exiting the Harvest project at either the ¾ movement or the right-in-right out who want to go north-bound (towards Glenwood Springs), those vehicles would head south-bound and make a U-turn at mile marker 8.21 which is about 1800’ south of Cattle Creek. A signal light will be installed on HWY 82 North-bound lanes to allow south-bound cars to make a U-turn. The two separate signal lights will allow the Harvest Project to have access in both directions along HWY 82 without having the typical left-turn issues onto HWY 82 which reduces the delays on HWY 82 that a full movement intersection would have. See attached exhibit 1 that shows the ¾ movement and right-in-right out locations and the two proposed signal lights. The two signal lights would be required to be installed with the first phase of construction. No traffic warrants are required before the signal lights are installed. The two signal lights will also allow Cattle Creek to become a right in right out intersection, increasing the safety at that intersection by eliminating left-turns. The vehicles at Cattle Creek that need to go south make a right-out onto HWY 82 and then make a U-turn at the new ¾ movement light. 5. RFTA SE has been coordinating directly with RFTA as they play a key role in this project’s development because the Rio Grande Trail cuts directly through the property for approximately one mile. Additionally, this development is trying to provide workforce housing and we are further trying to coordinate with RFTA to see how we can utilize the existing bus stops for the development, and we anticipate working with them to determine if additional bus stops along the Highway 82 frontage would be beneficial as the development builds out. It is important to note that the project has existing easements in place with RFTA to permit the following crossings over the Rio Grande Trail: 1. The most northern vehicle crossing of the Rio Grande Trail will pass under the Rio Grande Trail, and 2. The southern vehicle crossing (near Cattle Creek) will be at grade with future rail and the applicant is proposing the Rio Grande Trail will be in an underpass to avoid conflicts between trail users and vehicles accessing the site. Through our conversations with RFTA their biggest concern was the trail crossing for our main access to the Site. From reviewing existing easements, past submittals and coordinating with RFTA we understand Harvest Roaring Fork – SE Job # 34010 November 18, 2024 8 502 Main Street, Suite A3, Carbondale, CO 81623 970-704-0311 that we have several utility crossings and 2 vehicle/pedestrian crossings of the trail. One of the crossings needs to be grade separated and the other could be at grade with future rail. With that criteria in mind, we will continue to coordinate with RFTA to understand how we could make our proposed CDOT access points work with RFTA’s criteria. We have provided our preliminary design for the underpass to RFTA and received their initial feedback about what areas we need to adjust to meet the RFTA standards as well as the Colorado Railroad PUC requirements. The northern access will be an underpass from ¾ access and the right-in-right-out movement. However, the “at grade” crossing would only be used in the event that a train track is placed in the Rio Grande Rights of Way. Design and development of the trail would be sloped below the roadway and then back up to once again avoid vehicular/pedestrian conflicts. Through our coordination with RFTA, we know that we have access across the trail to the western portion of the property, which was extremely important to confirm prior to moving forward with our application. We will continue to work with RFTA on the crossings as the preliminary plan application is being prepared. 6. GRADING DRAINAGE Currently SE hasn’t completed full drainage or grading plans for for the Site as the applicant is considering multiple phase options depending on County approvals. However we have reveiwed past drainage studies, concepts, grading plans, road plan and profiles for this Site. From our past experience in Garfield County and their code, we have outlined a brief description of our overall grading and drainge concepts below. Grading: Currently the Site generally drains from east along HWY 82 to the west down to the Roaring Fork River. We will ensure our roads are graded to be below the 8% grade on collectors and 10% grade on secondary access. Establishing vegetation on such a large site after disturbance can be very important so we will work to ensure our slopes are not steeper than 2:1 so that vegetation can more easily be established. We will also work to balance our site grading and cut fill as a whole to reduce impacts to the Site and additional construction traffic in the area. It will also be important to balance the cut fill on individual phases so we do not have to disturb more area then necessary until we are ready to move construction to that next phase. Drainage: Drainage for such a large development can often be complicated, however on this project the intent is to maintain a lot of open space or green space. Those large areas of open space can be excellent areas to provide stormwater quality before it is release downstream. Typically the drainage plan would require a project such as this to analyze the 25 and 100-yr storm events for detention of increased stormwater impacts and safe routing of larger storm events. However common engineering practice suggests that properties directly adjacent or in close proximity to the ultimate receiving water body should release storms above the water quality storm directly to the receiving body. Reasoning behind this concept is to prevent runoff from the lower basin from lagging and combining with the peak runoff from the upper reaches of the design basin, which would increase the peak runoff for Harvest Roaring Fork – SE Job # 34010 November 18, 2024 9 502 Main Street, Suite A3, Carbondale, CO 81623 970-704-0311 the design basin. This concept attempts to maintain the runoff hydrograph for the design basin and reduces the potential impacts to downstream properties. This concept has been utilized on multiple projects which have been adjacent to the river. Since this is such a large proejct the stormwater system will need to be planned for the entire site then see how it can be broken up per phases to ensure adequate stormwater is met throughout the project. The other consideration of stormwater is the construction phase of stormwater drainage. We intend to show numerous Best Management Practices (BMP’s) for the construction phase such as silt fence, vehicle tracking pads, straw waddles, inlet protection and many others. It is critical to ensure that during the construction phases as vegetation is being established, that the stormwater is closesly monitored. This Site will have well over an acre of distrubance, so once construction of accesses and initial phases has begun, either the contractor or the owner will apply for a Storm Water Management Permit with the State which will be held throughout the course of the project. 7. GEOTECHNICAL Sopris Engineering has reviewed 3 different preliminary geotechnical investigation reports for the subject property. Below is a list of those reports: · YEH and Associates Inc Dated 12, 2014, 18 test holes · HP Geotech dated November 15, 2010, 21 test holes · CTL Thompson dated September 16, 2021, 12 test holes Each of these reports were prepared as part of different deveopment plans in the past. Based upon the three previous investigations and SE’s experience in the area, the proposed form-based-zoning application can mitigate or/or avoid Geotechnical Hazards outlined. Between the three studies, 51 borings and test pits have been completed throughout the subject site (see appendix 3 exhibit 2 for boring and test pit locations). SE’s opinion is that updated geotechnical investigation reports will be provided as part of the preliminary plan application for each phase of development. To be clear, there is little value in preparing a geologic study without the new P.U.D. zoning in place and a preliminary plan concept as road and structure locations have yet to be determined. As the subject sites prelminary plan develops, we will continue to coordinate on the Geotechnical hazards and work to develop a site plan that avoids and mitigates hazards to the extent possible. 8. FLOODPLAIN The ALTA survey has delineated the floodplain for the project. We have also studied the FEMA FIRM maps for our own understanding and knowledge. The project really will have very little to no impact on the floodplain because the floodplain largely conisides with the conservation easement which largely can not Harvest Roaring Fork – SE Job # 34010 November 18, 2024 10 502 Main Street, Suite A3, Carbondale, CO 81623 970-704-0311 be developed within. The only impacts our project will have to the floodplain are temporary disturbance when we cross the Roaring Fork River and Cattle Creek with utilities. These disturbances will include removing material to trench across the creek and river then the material will be placed back at the same grade as before construction. The development will also have a bridge across Cattle Creek in order to connect the northern portion of the Site to the southern. We know the proposed bridge across Cattle Creek will have to span the Floodplain so any disturbance for the bridge will once again be temporary. We have studied the Cattle Creek crossing closely in order to determine what we believe to be the best crossing. To determine the best crossing we look at the following criteria, existing topography, existing conservation easement, floodplain mapping, wetland mapping and the existing river channel elevation. We attempt to pick a location where the flood plain is the shortest length and the topography on either bank allows for a bridge with plenty of clearance above the anticipated BFE. In this way we ensure we can span the entire flood plain and therefore have zero rise. At this time we do not anticipate any additional distrubance to the floodplain throughout the site. 9. CONSTRUCTION PHASING The phasing of such a large project is very complicated as our development team submits for a zoning application we can only speak to the project on a large scale. Additional phasing information and construction scheduling will be deterimined as preliminary plans for each neighborhood develop. The development team has outlined that the old Sopris Resturant would be one of the first construction phases to move forward. A brief outline of what we anticipate for the intial civil infasturture phases of the project. We know each phase will need access from HWY 82 or another part of the subdivision, access across the Rio Grande Trail and utilities. Our initial assumptions for some of the early stages of construction are outlined below. In the first phase of construction, the ¾ movement, right-in-right-out and both signal lights will be constructed. This will provide not only improved construction access to the site and significantly improved safety at the Cattle Creek intersection, but it will also deliver the main project access to serve the various anticipated development that will happen throughout development. Along the same timeframe that the Highway 82 access is being installed we anticipate that all utilitiles will be completed to start serving the development. . A river crossing across the Roaring Fork River will provide the conduit/sleeve for sewer, water and gas service to the project. Additional water and sewer connections Harvest Roaring Fork – SE Job # 34010 November 18, 2024 11 502 Main Street, Suite A3, Carbondale, CO 81623 970-704-0311 and the sewer lift station will need to be constructed in the first phase. Other shallow utilities will be brought onsite including new electrical service, and Comcast and Lumen. Future phases will include onsite road, expansion of utilities, bridge(s) across Cattle Creek. Along with the initial preliminjary plan we will complete a master drawing showing anticipated roads, utilities, trail connections for each phase which will be updated /revised to best serve future phases of development. 10. FIRE SERVICE The development team and SE have held multiple meetings with the Carbondale & Rural FIre Protection Distirct management team to discuss emergency and general access, the provision of water services, and to discuss street sections, fire access and provision of emergency services to the Project. Carbondale & Rural Fire Proection Distirct will also be included as a referral agency and will be expected to provide further commet upon review of this application. 11. CONCLUSION The above reported is intended to support our development teams application to Garfield County for zoning. This report is intended to show that our client has thoroughly examined the infrastructure needs and site requirements to ensure there that their proposed project can meet the County standards, be served by utilities and has adequate access. SE will continue working with CDOT, RFTA, utility providers, our design team, and the county to ensure we are meeting required standards. At this time we do not see any major unforseen hurdles which would restrict the development of this site. Once we have further direction on final densities we can continue to refine this report and further refine our engineering plans to support the project. If you have any additional question or need further clarification please do not hesitate to reachout to either myself or Yancy Nichol. Yancy Nichol ynichol@sopriseng.com Colby Christoff cchristoff@sopriseng.com Harvest Roaring Fork – SE Job # 34010 November 18, 2024 502 Main Street, Suite A3, Carbondale, CO 81623 970-704-0311 APPENDIX A OVERALL MAP Zoning Districts & Access PROPERTY LINE ROARING FORK RIVER EXISTING CALAWAY CT. INTERSECTION CENTERLINE @ SH-82 MILE MARKER 6.96 EXISTING CR-154/CR-114 (THUNDER RIVER MARKET) INTERSECTION CENTERLINE @ SH-82 MILE MARKER 6.68 EXISTING CR-113 (CATTLE CREEK ROAD) INTERSECTION CENTERLINE @ SH-82 MILE MARKER 7.85 TO BE REVISED TO RIIGHT IN RIGHT OUT SH-82 MILE MARKER 7 SH-82 MILE MARKER 8 PROPERTY LINE P R O P E R T Y LI N E P R O P E R TY LIN E PROPOSED 3 4 MOVEMENT (LEFT IN AND RIGHT-IN/RIGHT-OUT INTERSECTION CENTERLINE @ SH-82 MILE MARKER 7.38 PROPOSED RIGHT-IN/RIGHT-OUT INTERSECTION CENTERLINE @ SH-82 MILE MARKER 7.76 PROPOSED SOUTH U TURN INTERSECTION CENTERLINE @ SH-82 MILE MARKER 8.21 3 4 M O V E M E N T T O RIR O = 2 0 0 4' (9 6 0' A C C EL + 2 2 2' T A P E R + 6 0 0' D E C EL + 2 2 2' T A P E R) CALAWAY CT TO 3 4 MOVEMENT MIN LENGTH = 2004' (960' ACCEL + 222' TAPER + 600' DECEL + 222' TAPER) (*ACTUAL 2220') E XISTIN G C A TTLE C R EE K T O 3 4 M O V E M E N T M IN LE N G T H = 2 3 6 0' (9 6 0' A C C EL + 8 7 5 D E C EL + ST O R A G E) M IN (* A C T U A L 2 5 0 0') RIR O T O P R O P O SE D U- T U R N M IN LE N G T H = 2 3 6 0' (9 6 0' A C C E L + 9 7 5' D E C EL+ST O R A G E) M IN PROPOSED RFTA CROSSING, DEVELOPMENT ACCESS ROAD GOES UNDER RFTA TRAIL PROPOSED RFTA CROSSING, DEVELOPMENT ACCESS ROAD CROSSES RFTA @ GRADE EXISTING RIO GRANDE TRAIL TO PASS BELOW GRADE NORTH CENTRAL NORTH RIVERFRONT VILLAGE NEIGHBORHOOD NORTH FRONTAGE THE FARM VILLAGE CENTER SOUTH RIVERFRONT CREEKSIDE SOPRIS NATURAL AREA DATE REVISION XXX C-1.0 DRAWING NO. TITLE RE G I O N A L STAM P G: \ 2 0 2 4 \ 3 4 0 1 0 - R E A L T Y C A P I T O L R I V E R E D G E \ C I V I L \ C I V I L D W G S \ P L O T \ 3 4 0 1 0 - C 0 . 0 - C D O T . D W G - A p r 1 4 , 2 0 2 5 - 1 0 : 5 4 a m NORTH 00/00/00 HARVEST INTERSECTIONS OVERALL HA R V E S T GA R F I E L D C O U N T Y , C O L O R A D O EX H I B I T MEMBER UTILITIES FOR THE MARKING OF UNDERGROUND BEFORE YOU DIG, GRADE, OR EXCAVATE CALL 2-BUSINESS DAYS IN ADVANCE Know what's R 34010JOB NO. DATE:04/14/2025 DESIGNED BY DRAWN BY CHECKED BY XXX 00/00/00 XXX 00/00/00 XXX 00/00/00 SO P R I S E N G I N E E R I N G L L C 50 2 M A I N S T R E E T S U I T E A 3 C A R B O N D A L E C O 8 1 6 2 3 (9 7 0 ) 7 0 4 0 3 1 1 s o p r i s e n g i n e e r i n g . c o m 1 inch = ft. ( IN FEET ) GRAPHIC SCALE 0250 250 500 250 1000125 Harvest Roaring Fork – SE Job # 34010 November 18, 2024 502 Main Street, Suite A3, Carbondale, CO 81623 970-704-0311 APPENDIX B WILL SERVE LETTERS Improving life with energy www.blackhillsenergy.com October 21, 2024 Re: Harvest Roaring Fork Project Dear Colby Christoff, Black Hills Energy 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 Black Hills Energy 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, Mark Fadick Utility Construction Planner Black Hills Energy Mark Fadick Utility Construction Planner mark.fadick@blackhillscorp.com 96 County Road 160 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 P: 970.914.8326 10-21-2024 Colby Christoff, PE Project Manager/Principal Sopris Engineering, LLC RE: Harvest Roaring Fork Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Colby Christoff: Please accept this letter as confirmation of Comcast Cable Corporation 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 Corporation. If you have any questions at all, please contact me with the information below. Sincerely, Kody Davis Network Project Manager (970) 618-0483 Kody_Davis@cable.comcast.com 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. 3799 HIGHWAY 82·P.O. BOX 2150 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602 (970) 945-5491·FAX (970) 945-4081 A Touchstone Energy→ Cooperative 10/1/2024 HARVEST ROARING FORK RE: HARVEST ROARING FORK, Dear COLBY CHRISTOFF, The above-mentioned development is within the certified service area of Holy Cross Energy. Holy Cross Energy has adequate power supply to provide electric power to the development, subject to tariffs, rules and regulations on file. Any power line enlargements, relocations, and new extensions necessary to deliver adequate power to and within the development will be undertaken by Holy Cross Energy upon completion of appropriate contractual agreements and subject to necessary governmental approvals. Additionally, due to current economic conditions, Holy Cross Energy is not stocking the quantity of construction materials as in past years. If your project is slated for construction this year, please advise us as soon as possible. You will need to enter into agreements with Holy Cross Energy, and pay for the project, sufficiently in advance of construction to avoid possible delays while materials are procured. The currently estimated lead time for procurement of materials is around 12 weeks. Please advise when you wish to proceed with the development of the electric system for this project. Curt Hanson HARVEST ROARING FORK– Map Loc-65-66 10/02/2024 Colby Christoff, PE Sopris Engineering, LLC 502 Main Street Suite A-3 Carbondale, CO 81623 PH 970.704.0311 RE: Rivers Edge To whom it may concern: Your request for facilities to Rivers Edge is within CenturyLink’s serving area and will be provided in accordance with all the rates and tariffs set forth by the Colorado Public Utilities Commission. Connections to CenturyLink facilities are contingent upon the customer meeting all the requirements of the Utilities tariffs that are in effect for each requested utility service at the time the application for service is made by the customer and formally accepted by CenturyLink. Connection requirements may include provisions for necessary line extensions and/or other system improvements, and payment of all applicable system development charges, recovery agreement charges and other fees or charges applicable to the requested service. Although CenturyLink diligently seeks to expand its facilities as necessary to meet anticipated growth, CenturyLink services are provided to eligible customers at the time of connection to the facilities on a “first come, first served” basis after acceptance of the customer’s application as described above. In certain instances, our facilities and capacities may be limited. Accordingly, no specific allocations or amounts of CenturyLink facilities or supplies are reserved for service to the subject property, and no commitments are made as to the availability of CenturyLink service at future times. Sincerely, Jason Sharpe Senior Field Engineer 970-328-8290 Scott A. Grosscup Direct Dial (970) 928-3468 sgrosscup@balcombgreen.com SERVING COLORADO SINCE 1953 818 Colorado Avenue | Post Office Box 790 | Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602 | 970.945.6546 | BalcombGreen.com November 20, 2024 Via Email Mr. Glenn Hartman Principal Planner Garfield County Community Development ghartman@garfield-county.com Re: Harvest Roaring Fork LLC Dear Mr. Hartman; Harvest Roaring Fork LLC (“Harvest”) approached the Roaring Fork Water & Sanitation District (“RFWSD”) to request the RFWSD provide domestic water and sanitary sewer service to its proposed development on several parcels located between Highway 82 and the Roaring Fork River, between the towns of Glenwood Springs and Carbondale (“Harvest Property”). The Harvest Property is located within the RFWSD’s expanded service area boundary and is included within the RFWSD’s master plan to one day be provided service. At this time, no water or sanitary sewer service is extended to the Harvest Property. The RFWSD can and will provide water and sanitary sewer service to the Harvest Property subject to the terms of this letter. The RFWSD entered a Pre-Inclusion Agreement with a former owner of the Harvest Property, recorded at Reception Number 05161201 in the records of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder. Depending on Harvest’s development plan approvals, Harvest will either need to comply with the terms of that Pre-Inclusion Agreement prior to receiving service from the RFWSD or renegotiate the terms of that agreement with a new agreement acceptable to the RFWSD. In either case, Harvest will be required to pay for the design and construction of infrastructure necessary to serve the development and then dedicate it to the RFWSD. This may include extending water and sanitary sewer lines from the RFWSD’s existing infrastructure to the Harvest Property including through a crossing of the Roaring Fork River, constructing water storage tanks, expanding existing sanitary sewer facilities, a new surface water treatment plant, sewer lift station(s) to serve the development, and other infrastructure necessary to serve the proposed development. Such infrastructure shall be constructed to the specifications of the RFWSD, its rules and regulations, and approval by the RFWSD’s Board of Directors. Harvest Roaring Fork LLC November 20, 2024 Page 2 of 2 SERVING COLORADO SINCE 1953 818 Colorado Avenue | Post Office Box 790 | Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602 | 970.945.6546 | BalcombGreen.com Harvest will be required to petition for inclusion of the Harvest Property within the RFWSD’s taxing boundaries. It will need to provide security in a form acceptable to the RFWSD necessary for completion of the infrastructure. And it will be subject to the service and use fees set by the RFWSD after connection. Harvest will be required to dedicate water rights necessary to serve the Harvest Property and consistent with the RFWSD’s rules and regulations and subject to approval from the RFWSD’s Board of Directors. At the time of dedication of facilities and infrastructure to the RFWSD, Harvest will also be required to dedicate utility easements and provide “as -built” construction drawings of the utilities conveyed. Please let us know if you have any questions. Sincerely, BALCOMB & GREEN, P.C. By: Scott A. Grosscup cc: Roaring Fork Water & Sanitation District Harvest Roaring Fork LLC Harvest Roaring Fork – SE Job # 34010 November 18, 2024 502 Main Street, Suite A3, Carbondale, CO 81623 970-704-0311 APPENDIX C EXHIBIT 1 – OVERALL WATER AND SEWER MAP EXHIBIT 2 – GEOTECHNICAL INFORMAITON S H -8 2 S H -8 2 EXISTING WATER TANKS PROPOSED WATER TIE-IN POINT PROPOSED WATER MAIN PROPOSED SEWER TIE IN TO EXISTING WWTP PROPOSED UTILITY CROSSING OF ROARING FORK RIVER & ENTRY ONTO SITE PROPOSED WATER TANK(S) WATER TANK EASEMENT ACCESS EASEMENT WATER MAIN CROSSING OF HWY 82, FINAL LOCATION TBD EXISTING WATER TANK PROPOSED UTILITY CROSSING OF CATTLE CREEK PROPOSED LIFT STATION CR-109 CR-113 CR-114 R O A R I N G F O R K R I V E R CR-110 EXISTING WWTP PROPOSED POTENTIAL EXPANSION OF WWTP APRROX POTENTIAL SURFACE WATER TREATMENT INTAKE LOCATION PROPOSED WATER MAIN TO TANKS PROPOSED 3 4 MOVEMENT ACCESS INTO PROPERTY PROPOSED RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT ACCESS TO PROPERTY DATE REVISION XXX EXHIBIT-1 DRAWING NO. TITLE RE G I O N A L STAM P G: \ 2 0 2 4 \ 3 4 0 1 0 - R E A L T Y C A P I T O L R I V E R E D G E \ C I V I L \ C I V I L D W G S \ D E \ 3 4 0 1 0 - D E - U T I L B A S E M A P . D W G - A p r 1 4 , 2 0 2 5 - 1 1 : 1 2 a m NORTH 00/00/00 OVERALL UTILITY BASEMAP 1 inch = ft. ( IN FEET ) GRAPHIC SCALE 0500 500 1000 500 2000250 MEMBER UTILITIES FOR THE MARKING OF UNDERGROUND BEFORE YOU DIG, GRADE, OR EXCAVATE CALL 2-BUSINESS DAYS IN ADVANCE Know what's R 34010JOB NO. DATE:04-14-25 DESIGNED BY DRAWN BY CHECKED BY XXX 00/00/00 XXX 00/00/00 XXX 00/00/00 HA R V E S T GA R F I E L D C O U N T Y , C O L O R A D O EX H I B I T SO P R I S E N G I N E E R I N G L L C 50 2 M A I N S T R E E T S U I T E A 3 C A R B O N D A L E C O 8 1 6 2 3 (9 7 0 ) 7 0 4 0 3 1 1 s o p r i s e n g i n e e r i n g . c o m ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!! !!! !!! B103B102 B101 B106B105B104 B109B108B107 B110 B004 TP-3 TP-2 TP-1 TP-4 TP-5 TP-6 TP-7 TP-8 TP-9 TP-12 TP-11 TP-10 TH-7 TH-5 TH-6 TH-4 TH-8 TH-3 TH-9 TH-2 TH-1 TH-11 TH-10 TH-15 TH-17 TH-16 TH-14 TH-13 TH-12 TH-18 C ATTLE C R EE K R D 82 ´0 500 1,000250 Feet 1 inch = 500 feet ENGINEERING STUDIES: HP 2010, YEH 2014, CTL 2021 PARCELS : GARFIELD COUNTY GIS AERIAL : NAIP 2023 USDA 34010_TestHoles-All-NZ_250414 TEST HOLE LOCATIONS STUDIES 2010, 2014, 2021 !TEST HOLES - HP 2010 !TEST HOLES - YEH 2014 "TEST HOLES - CTL 2021 <<<<< e-mailed >>>>> April 18, 2025 Permit No. 325027 Harvest Roaring Fork, LLC 909 Lake Carolyn Parkway Irving, Texas 75039 Dear Permittee: 1.Please review the attached State Highway Access Permit (Form #101) and all enclosed attachments 2.If you ACCEPT the Permit and its Terms and Conditions (and are authorized to sign as legal owner of the property, or as an authorized representative), please complete the DocuSign process within 60 days of the transmittal date on the permit. Your signature confirms your agreement to all the listed Terms and Conditions. 3.If you fail to complete the DocuSign within 60 days, the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) will consider this permit withdrawn. 4.You may use the PayPal link to pay for this permit or send a check or money order made payable to “CDOT” for the total amount due of $300.00 to our office. 5.If you wish to APPEAL the Terms and Conditions of the permit, please refer to the attached Form 101, Pages 2 and 3 for an explanation of the appeal procedures. 6.As described in the additional attached Terms and Conditions, you must make a written request to obtain a Notice to Proceed. DO NOT begin any work within the State Highway Right-of-Way without a validated Access Permit and Notice to Proceed. Use of this permit without the Colorado Department of Transportation’s validation shall be considered a violation of State Law. If you have any questions please call Kandis Aggen, Asst. Access Manager, at (970) 683-6270 or Brian Killian, Region 3 Access Program Manager, at (970) 683-6284. If you choose to return the signed permit and/or check by mail, please send to: Region 3 Access Unit Attn: Kandis Aggen, Asst. Access Manager 222 S 6th St, Rm 100 Grand Junction, CO 81501 Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STATE HIGHWAY ACCESS PERMIT CDOT Permit No. 325027 State Highway No / Mp / Side 082A / 7.772 / Right Permit Fee $300.00 Date of Transmittal 04/18/2025 Region / Section / Patrol / Name 3 / 02 / 2K12 Melissa DeAndrea Local Jurisdiction Garfield County The Permittee(s): Harvest Roaring Fork, LLC 909 Lake Carolyn Parkway Irving, Texas 75039 The Applicant(s): Sopris Engineering, LLC 502 Main St., Suite A-3 Carbondale, Colorado 81623 is hereby granted permission to have an access to the state highway at the location noted below. The access shall be constructed, maintained and used in accordance with this permit, including the State Highway Access Code and any attachments, terms, conditions and exhibits. This permit may be revoked by the Issuing Authority if at any time the permitted access and its use violate any parts of this permit. The issuing authority, the Department and their duly appointed agents and employees shall be held harmless against any action for personal injury or property damage sustained by reason of the exercise of the permit. Location: This access is approximately 4,076-ft east of mile post 7 at approximate mile post 7.772 Access to Provide Service to: (Land Use Code) (Size) (Units) 210 - Single-Family Detached Housing 450 Units 220 - Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) 625 Units Affordable housing, 225 units (ITE #223); Strip retail plaza, 40 ksf (ITE #822) Hotel, 90 rooms (ITE #310); Small office building, 10 ksf (ITE #712); Single family attached housing, 200 units (ITE #215) Total Peak Hour Traffic: 534 DHV Additional Information: Please read the terms and conditions of the permit to obtain the Notice to Proceed. This permit and Permit 325028 were issued together for the same development and shall be constructed simultaneously. MUNICIPALITY OR COUNTY APPROVAL Required only when the appropriate local authority retains issuing authority. Signature Print Name Date Title Upon the signing of this permit the permittee agrees to the terms and conditions and referenced attachments contained herein. All construction shall be completed in an expeditious and safe manner and shall be finished within 45 days from Initiation. The permitted access shall be completed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the permit prior to being used. The permittee shall notify Jorge Centino 2K2 with the Colorado Department of Transportation, at (970) 309-3338 at least 48 hours prior to commencing construction within the State Highway right-of-way. The person signing as the permittee must be the owner or legal representative of the property served by the permitted access and have full authority to accept the permit and its terms and conditions. Permittee Signature: Print Name Date Co-Permittee Signature: (if applicable) Print Name Date This permit is not valid until signed by a duly authorized representative of the Department. COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Signature Print Name Title Date (of issue) Copy Distribution: Required: 1.Region 3.Staff Access Section 2.Applicant 4.Central Files Make copies as necessary for: Previous editions are obsolete and may not be used Local Authority Inspector Page 1 of 3 CDOT Form #101 5/07 MTCE Patrol Traffic Engineer \s1\ \n1\ \d1\ \s2\ \n2\ \t2\ \d2\ Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 4/18/2025 | 12:51 PM PDTRichard Myers Brian Killian Access Manager 4/21/2025 | 7:31 AM MDT State Highway Access Permit Form 101, Page 2 The following paragraphs are excerpts of the State Highway Access Code. These are provided for your convenience but do not alleviate compliance with all sections of the Access Code. A copy of the State Highway Access Code is available from your local issuing authority (local government) or the Colorado Department of Transportation (Department). When this permit was issued, the issuing authority made its decision based in part on information submitted by the applicant, on the access category which is assigned to the highway, what alternative access to other public roads and streets is available, and safety and design standards. Changes in use or design not approved by the permit or the issuing authority may cause the revocation or suspension of the permit. APPEALS 1.Should the permittee or applicant object to the denial of a permit application by the Department or object to any of the terms or conditions of a permit placed there by the Department, the applicant and permittee (appellant) have a right to appeal the decision to the [Transportation] Commission [of Colorado]. To appeal a decision, submit a request for administrative hearing to the Transportation Commission of Colorado within 60 days of transmittal of notice of denial or transmittal of the permit for signature. Submit the request to the Transportation Commission of Colorado, 4201 East Arkansas Avenue, Denver, Colorado 80222-3400. The request shall include reasons for the appeal and may include changes, revisions, or conditions that would be acceptable to the permittee or applicant. 2.Any appeal by the applicant or permittee of action by a local issuing authority shall be filed with the local authority and be consistent with the appeal procedures of the local authority. 3.In submitting the request for administrative hearing, the appellant has the option of including within the appeal a request for a review by the Department’s internal administrative review committee pursuant to [Code] subsection 2.10. When such committee review is requested, processing of the appeal for formal administrative hearing, 2.9(5) and (6), shall be suspended until the appellant notifies the Commission to proceed with the administrative hearing, or the appellant submits a request to the Commission or the administrative law judge to withdraw the appeal. The two administrative processes, the internal administrative review committee, and the administrative hearing, may not run concurrently. 4.Regardless of any communications, meetings, administrative reviews or negotiations with the Department or the internal administrative review Committee regarding revisions or objections to the permit or a denial, if the permittee or applicant wishes to appeal the Department's decision to the Commission for a hearing, the appeal must be brought to the Commission within 60 days of transmittal of notice of denial or transmittal of the permit. PERMIT EXPIRATION 1.A permit shall be considered expired if the access is not under construction within one year of the permit issue date or before the expiration of any authorized extension. When the permittee is unable to commence construction within one year after the permit issue date, the permittee may request a one year extension from the issuing authority. No more than two one-year extensions may be granted under any circumstances. If the access is not under construction within three years from date of issue the permit will be considered expired. Any request for an extension must be in writing and submitted to the issuing authority before the permit expires. The request should state the reasons why the extension is necessary, when construction is anticipated, and include a copy of page 1 (face of permit) of the access permit. Extension approvals shall be in writing. The local issuing authority shall obtain the concurrence of the Department prior to the approval of an extension, and shall notify the Department of all denied extensions within ten days. Any person wishing to reestablish an access permit that has expired may begin again with the application procedures. An approved Notice to Proceed, automatically renews the access permit for the period of the Notice to Proceed. CONSTRUCTION 1.Construction may not begin until a Notice to Proceed is approved. (Code subsection 2.4] 2.The construction of the access and its appurtenances as required by the terms and conditions of the permit shall be completed at the expense of the permittee except as provided in subsection 2.14. All materials used in the construction of the access within the highway right-of-way or on permanent easements, become public property. Any materials removed from the highway right-of-way will be disposed of only as directed by the Department. All fencing, guard rail, traffic control devices and other equipment and materials removed in the course of access construction shall be given to the Department unless otherwise instructed by the permit or the Department inspector. 3.The permittee shall notify the individual or the office specified on the permit or Notice to Proceed at least two working days prior to any construction within state highway right-of-way. Construction of the access shall not proceed until both the access permit and the Notice to Proceed are issued. The access shall be completed in an expeditious and safe manner and shall be finished within 45 days from initiation of construction within the highway right-of-way. A construction time extension not to exceed 30 working days may be requested from the individual or office specified on the permit. 4.The issuing authority and the Department may inspect the access during construction and upon completion of the access to ensure that all terms and conditions of the permit are met. Inspectors are authorized to enforce the conditions of the permit during construction and to halt any activities within state right-of-way that do not comply with the provisions of the permit, that conflict with concurrent highway construction or maintenance work, that endanger highway property, natural or cultural resources protected by law, or the health and safety of workers or the public. \i1\ Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 5. Prior to using the access, the permittee is required to complete the construction according to the terms and conditions of the permit. Failure by the permittee to abide by all permit terms and conditions shall be sufficient cause for the Department or issuing authority to initiate action to suspend or revoke the permit and close the access. If in the determination of the Department or issuing authority the failure to comply with or complete the construction requirements of the permit create a highway safety hazard, such shall be sufficient cause for the summary suspension of the permit. If the permittee wishes to use the access prior to completion, arrangements must be approved by the issuing authority and Department and included in the permit. The Department or issuing authority may order a halt to any unauthorized use of the access pursuant to statutory and regulatory powers. Reconstruction or improvement of the access may be required when the permittee has failed to meet required specifications of design or materials. If any construction element fails within two years due to improper construction or material specifications, the permittee shall be responsible for all repairs. Failure to make such repairs may result in suspension of the permit and closure of the access. 6. The permittee shall provide construction traffic control devices at all times during access construction, in conformance with the M.U.T.C.D. as required by section 42- 4-104, C.R.S., as amended. 7. A utility permit shall be obtained for any utility work within highway right-of-way. Where necessary to remove, relocate, or repair a traffic control device or public or private utilities for the construction of a permitted access, the relocation, removal or repair shall be accomplished by the permittee without cost to the Department or issuing authority, and at the direction of the Department or utility company. Any damage to the state highway or other public right-of-way beyond that which is allowed in the permit shall be repaired immediately. The permittee is responsible for the repair of any utility damaged in the course of access construction, reconstruction or repair. 8. In the event it becomes necessary to remove any right- of-way fence, the posts on either side of the access shall be securely braced with an approved end post before the fence is cut to prevent any slacking of the remaining fence. All posts and wire removed are Department property and shall be turned over to a representative of the Department. 9. The permittee shall ensure that a copy of the permit is available for review at the construction site at all times. The permit may require the contractor to notify the individual or office specified on the permit at any specified phases in construction to allow the field inspector to inspect various aspects of construction such as concrete forms, subbase, base course compaction, and materials specifications. Minor changes and additions may be ordered by the Department or local authority field inspector to meet unanticipated site conditions. 10. Each access shall be constructed in a manner that shall not cause water to enter onto the roadway or shoulder, and shall not interfere with the existing drainage system on the right-of-way or any adopted municipal system and drainage plan. 11. By accepting the permit, permittee agrees to save, indemnify, and hold harmless to the extent allowed by law, the issuing authority, the Department, its officers, and employees from suits, actions, claims of any type or character brought because of injuries or damage sustained by any person resulting from the permittee's use of the access permit during the construction of the access. CHANGES IN ACCESS USE AND PERMIT VIOLATIONS 1. It is the responsibility of the property owner and permittee to ensure that the use of the access to the property is not in violation of the Code, permit terms and conditions or the Act. The terms and conditions of any permit are binding upon all assigns, successors-in-interest, heirs and occupants. If any significant changes are made or will be made in the use of the property which will affect access operation, traffic volume and or vehicle type, the permittee or property owner shall contact the local issuing authority or the Department to determine if a new access permit and modifications to the access are required. 2. When an access is constructed or used in violation of the Code, section 43-2-147(5)(c), C.R.S., of the Act applies. The Department or issuing authority may summarily suspend an access permit and immediately order closure of the access when its continued use presents an immediate threat to public health, welfare or safety. Summary suspension shall comply with article 4 of title 24, C.R.S. MAINTENANCE 1. The permittee, his or her heirs, successors-in-interest, assigns, and occupants of the property serviced by the access shall be responsible for meeting the terms and conditions of the permit, the repair and maintenance of the access beyond the edge of the roadway including any cattle guard and gate, and the removal or clearance of snow or ice upon the access even though deposited on the access in the course of Department snow removal operations. Within unincorporated areas the Department will keep access culverts clean as part of maintenance of the highway drainage system. However, the permittee is responsible for the repair and replacement of any access-related culverts within the right-of-way. Within incorporated areas, drainage responsibilities for municipalities are determined by statute and local ordinance. The Department will maintain the roadway including auxiliary lanes and shoulders, except in those cases where the access installation has failed due to improper access construction and/or failure to follow permit requirements and specifications in which case the permittee shall be responsible for such repair. Any significant repairs such as culvert replacement, resurfacing, or changes in design or specifications, requires authorization from the Department. Form 101, Page 3 \i1\ Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 1.This permitted access is only for the use and purpose stated in the application and permit. This permit is issued in accordance with the State Highway Access Code (2 CCR 601-1), hereafter referred to as the “Access Code”, and is based in part upon the information submitted by the Permittee. 2.Any subsequent relocation, reconstruction, modifications, changes in the type of traffic using the access or 20% increase in volume to the access shall require a new application and coordination with Colorado Department of Transportation, hereafter referred to as “CDOT”. Any changes causing non-compliance with the Access Code may render this permit void, requiring a new permit. 3.This permit replaces any and all additional access permits that may be in existence for this access. 4.This permit is for Single family detached housing, 450 units (ITE #210); Single family attached housing, 200 units (ITE #215); Low rise multi-family housing, 625 units (ITE #220); Affordable housing, 225 units (ITE #223); Hotel, 90 rooms (ITE #310); Small office building, 10 ksf (ITE #712); Strip retail plaza, 40 ksf (ITE #822). Parcel #’s: 239307300032, 239307300033, 239501400161. 5.The traffic volume shall be 534 DHV (Design Hourly Volume). 6.The highway access category is E-X. 7.This access shall be a Right-In-Right-Out only access. 8.This access permit is in conjunction with the permit for the eastern access to the same parcel, Permit # 325028. 9.The Permittee shall design and construct the following in accordance with section 4 of the Access Code. (a)Construct a southbound right turn deceleration lane. (b)Construct an eastbound-to-southbound right turn acceleration lane. (c)Restrict access at the Cattle Creek Rd/CR 113 access (approx. MP 7.87) to right-in right-out only by removing the paved median. Remove the pavement and regrade to reestablish drainage. (d)The following improvements shall be constructed off-site, at a new median crossover at approx. MP 8.178. These improvements shall be constructed in conjunction with the requirements of Permit # 325028 to create a full RCUT-style intersection incorporating the northern access, Cattle Creek Rd, and both U-turn locations. (e)Construct a left turn/U-turn median crossover at approx. MP 8.178. This U-turn location shall be spaced far enough for a full length eastbound-to-southbound right turn acceleration lane, enough merging and lane change length, and a southbound left turn deceleration lane to be built back-to-back. (f)Construct a southbound left turn deceleration lane. (g)Construct a signal to protect the southbound left turns. (h)Construct a U-turn bulb-out to accommodate WB-67 design vehicles. Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 10.All other accesses to this parcel shall be closed. Remove the driveways and regrade to reestablish drainage, remove any gates and cattle guards, mailbox’s etc. to ensure the access cannot be used again. 11.All mainline auxiliary lanes shall be designed and constructed with a 2-inch overlay or other method to ensure there isn’t striping conflicts or ghosting of the old striping that was removed. 12.This access shall be designed and constructed to CDOT’s standards and may be required to include sidewalk, trail, curb and gutter. 13.A design meeting is required before proceeding with the construction design. Required personnel for this meeting are: Design Engineer, Professional Engineer of Record (i.e., the person who will sign and seal the plan set), and Permittee or Representative. Please contact Nick Nordquist at 970-683-6280 for scheduling this design meeting. 14.A Notice to Proceed (NTP) is required before beginning construction on the access or any activity within the highway right-of-way. To receive the NTP the applicant shall submit a complete packet to CDOT (to Nick Nordquist - 970-683-6280, nicholas.nordquist@state.co.us) with the following items: (a)Scheduled pre-construction meeting – a preconstruction meeting is required before the issuance of a NTP. Required personnel for this meeting include, but are not limited to: Professional Engineer of Record, construction inspector, construction personnel, Permittee or Representative, CDOT representative and traffic control supervisor. (b)A construction schedule – also required at the pre-construction meeting. (c)A cover letter or email requesting a NTP. (d)Certificate of Insurance (COI) for liability as per section 2.3(11)(i) of the Access Code, naming “CDOT as additional insured for general liability”. (e)A certified Traffic Control Plan (TCP) in accordance with section 2.4(6) of the Access Code. The TCP shall provide accessibility features to accommodate all pedestrians including persons with disabilities for all pathways during construction. (f)Electronic copy of construction plans stamped (11”x 17” with a minimum scale of 1” = 50’) by a Colorado registered professional engineer in full compliance with the Access Code. (g)Signed and sealed NTP checklist. (h)Signed and approved performance bond. (i)Signed and sealed drainage report or narrative. 15.Access width, geometry, and radii shall be determined by designing the access for the largest vehicle using the access on a consistent basis. This design shall be in conformance with Section 4.5(5) of the Access Code. A turning template shall be required with the final plan sets for review prior to the issuance of a NTP. 16.The horizontal axis of the access to the state highway shall be constructed perpendicular to the centerline of the highway and extend from the edge of the roadway a minimum distance of 40 feet, Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 or to the property line, whichever is greater. This design shall be in conformance with section 4.9(4) of the Access Code. 17.Side slopes shall be at a 4:1 slope on the highway access. The roadway shall slope away from the highway at a -2% grade for the first 20 feet of driveway. This design shall be in conformance with section 4.9(8) of the Access Code. 18.Immediately upon completion of earthwork the access shall be hard-surfaced a minimum distance of 50 feet from the traveled way, or to the CDOT right-of-way, whichever is greater. Where the hard surface ties into the existing pavement, the existing pavement shall be saw cut and removed to a minimum of the full depth asphalt section or until an acceptable existing cross slope is achieved. The saw cut shall not be located in the wheel path. Surfacing shall meet CDOT’s specifications with minimum surfacing to be equal to, or greater than, existing highway conditions in conformance with section 4 of the Access Code. 19.The permittee shall provide a performance bond that will insure completion of the required highway and all related intersection improvements in conformance with all CDOT’s standards and specifications. The bond must be at least 110% of the estimated total highway construction cost and the bonding agency must be surety licensed to do business in the state of Colorado. A thorough construction cost estimate sealed by a Colorado registered professional engineer and a draft of the bond must be provided and approved by CDOT before acceptance of the final bond and before construction is approved to commence. 20.Materials, Placing, and Compaction The specifications for materials and compaction shall be discussed and determined at the pre- design meeting with the CDOT Construction Project Manager. Unless the Permittee has approval from the CDOT Access Manager who may state otherwise, the following are minimum requirements for the highway access construction: Hot Mix Asphalt Option (HMA): compaction of the subgrade, embankments and backfill shall comply with sections 203 & 304 of the Colorado Highway Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction. Concrete Pavement Option: Portland Cement (PCCP): compaction of the subgrade, embankments and backfill shall comply with sections 203 & 304 of the Colorado Highway Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction. 21.The materials requirements listed above are for the access/driveway construction. If improvements are required on the highway, CDOT can provide the Permittee with a materials section for the highway improvements, however, CDOT will assume an R-Value of 5 for the design. Alternatively, the Permittee may obtain a geotechnical report, stamped by a professional engineer, that provides an adequate materials section for CDOT’s review and concurrence. 22.If the access is, or is planned to become a local road (i.e. city or county street), the accesses shall be designed per local ordinances, or per a geotechnical report signed and sealed by a professional engineer. 23.This permit allows for onsite construction as long as such use does not violate any terms of the permit. Permittee shall coordinate with CDOT for onsite construction and shall provide a traffic Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 control plan and proof of liability insurance. If the access location, volume, or turning movement for onsite construction is different from the permitted access, a new temporary construction permit may be required. 24.No drainage from this site shall enter onto the state highway travel lanes. The Permittee is required to maintain all drainage in excess of historical flows and time of concentration on site. All existing drainage structures shall be extended, modified or upgraded, as applicable, to accommodate all new construction and safety standards, in accordance with CDOT’s standard specifications. 25.Open cuts, which are at least 3 inches in depth, within 30 feet of the edge of the state highway traveled way, will not be left open at night, on weekends, or on holidays, or shall be protected with a suitable barrier per state and federal standards. 26.Nothing in this permit shall prohibit the Chief Engineer from exercising the right granted in CRS 43- 3-102 including but not limited to restricting left hand turns by construction of physical medial separations. 27.Under no circumstances shall the construction of a private driveway by a private interest interfere with the completion of a public highway construction project. 28.Any current or proposed cattle guard shall be maintained fully within the property boundaries and all repairs are the sole responsibility of the property owner. 29.Backing maneuvers within and onto the state highway right-of-way are strictly prohibited. All vehicles shall enter and exit the highway right-of-way in a forward movement. Backing into the right-of-way shall be considered a violation of the terms and conditions of the access permit and may result in the revocation of the permit by CDOT and/or Issuing Authority. 30.No additional accesses will be granted for these parcels or any future parcels as a result of splitting or dividing land. All accesses to newly created parcels shall be provided internally from this access. (This is only for FW, EX, R-A and NR-A) 31.The Permittee assumes responsibility for any and all easements that are associated with this access. If an easement is part of this access permit, CDOT is not liable for incorrect information in the easement documentation. It is the Permittees responsibility to ensure all applicable laws and regulations have been followed pertaining to easements and subdivision law. 32.The Permittee is responsible for obtaining any necessary additional federal, state and/or city/county permits or clearances required for construction of the access. Approval of this access permit does not constitute verification of this action by the Permittee. Permittee is also responsible for obtaining all necessary utility permits in addition to this access permit. 33.All workers within the state highway right-of-way shall comply with their employer’s safety and health policies/procedures, and all applicable U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations - including, but not limited to the applicable sections of 29 CFR Part 1910 - Occupational Safety and Health Standards and 29 CFR Part 1926 - Safety and Health Regulations for Construction. Personal protective equipment (e.g. head protection, footwear, high visibility apparel, safety glasses, hearing protection, respirators, gloves, etc.) shall be worn as appropriate for the work being performed, and as specified in regulation. Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 34.The Permittee shall provide accessibility features to accommodate all pedestrians including persons with disabilities for all pathways during and after construction. 35.The Permittee is required to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG) that have been adopted by the U.S. Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board), and incorporated by the U.S. Attorney General as a federal standard. These guidelines are defining traversable slope requirements and prescribing the use of a defined pattern of truncated domes as detectable warnings at street crossings. The new standards plans can be found on the design and construction project support web page at: https://www.codot.gov/business/designsupport/standard-plans. 36.When it is necessary to remove any highway right-of-way fence, the posts on either side of the access entrance shall be securely braced with approved end posts and in conformance with CDOT’s M-607-1 standard, before the fence is cut, to prevent slacking of the remaining fence. All materials removed shall be returned to CDOT. 37.It shall be the responsibility of the Permittee to maintain adequate sight distance for this driveway. Trimming of vegetation or trees to maintain adequate sight distance is the sole responsibility of the Permittee. 38.CDOT will determine the extent of inspection services for the work. A daily inspection may be done by CDOT from the time work begins inside the highway right-of way until the job is completed and right-of-way restored to its original condition. 39.CDOT’s plan review is only for general conformance with CDOT design standards and Access Code requirements. CDOT is not responsible for the accuracy and adequacy of the design. All dimensions and elevations shall be confirmed and correlated at the job site. CDOT, through the approval of this document, assumes no responsibility for plan omissions or errors. 40.The CDOT inspector may suspend work due to: 1) Noncompliance with the provisions of this permit; 2) Adverse weather or traffic conditions; 3) Concurrent highway construction or maintenance in conflict with permit work; 4) Any condition deemed unsafe for workers or the general public. The work may be resumed upon notice from the CDOT Inspector. 41.The Permittee, his or her heirs, successors-in-interest, assigns, and occupants of the property serviced by the access shall be responsible for meeting the terms and conditions of the permit. This includes, but is not limited to, the repair and maintenance of the access beyond the edge of the roadway including any cattle guard and gate, and the removal or clearance of snow or ice upon the access even when deposited on the access during CDOT’s snow removal operations per section 2.7 of the Access Code. 42.The Permittee is responsible for the repair and replacement of any access-related culverts within the right-of-way. Within incorporated areas, drainage responsibilities for municipalities are determined by statute and local ordinance. CDOT will maintain the highway including auxiliary lanes upon final acceptance. In cases where the access installation has failed due to improper access construction and/or failure to follow permit requirements and specifications the Permittee shall be responsible for such repair. Any significant repair such as culvert replacement, resurfacing, or changes in design or specifications, requires authorization from CDOT. Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 43.Any damage to present highway facilities including traffic control devices shall be repaired immediately at no cost to CDOT and prior to continuing other work. 44.During access construction, no construction-related or personal vehicles will be permitted to park in the state highway right-of-way. 45.Any mud or other material tracked, or otherwise deposited, on the roadway shall be removed daily or as ordered by CDOT’s inspector. If mud is an obvious condition during site construction, it is recommended that the contractor build a stabilized construction entrance or scrubber pad at the intended construction access to aid in the removal of mud and debris from vehicle tires. Details of the stabilized construction entrance can be found in the M & S Standards Plan No. M-208-1. 46.A fully executed, complete copy of this permit and the Notice to Proceed must be on the job site with the contractor at all times during the construction. Failure to comply with this or any other construction requirement may result in the immediate suspension of work by order of the CDOT inspector or the issuing authority. 47.No work will be allowed at night, Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays without prior authorization. CDOT may also restrict work within the state highway right-of-way during adverse weather conditions, seasonal changes and if safety and operational issues occur. 48.The access shall be completed in an expeditious and safe manner and shall be completed within 45 days from initiation of construction within the state highway right-of-way or in accordance with written concurrence of the Access Manager. All construction shall be completed in a single season. 49.All costs associated with any type of utility work will be at the sole responsibility and cost of the Permittee and at no cost to CDOT. 50.Areas of roadway and/or right-of-way disturbed during this installation shall be restored to their original conditions to insure proper strength and stability, drainage and erosion control. Restoration shall meet CDOT’s standard specifications for topsoil, fertilization, mulching, and re- seeding. 51.Permittee is required to complete the construction according to the terms and conditions of the permit prior to using the access. If the access is used prior to CDOT final acceptance, CDOT may suspend or revoke the permit, until construction is completed per the terms and conditions of the permit. 52.All construction and inspection work must be under the direction of a Colorado Registered Professional Engineer (PE). The PE’s responsibilities include, but are not limited to ensure compliance with plans and specifications with regard to the roadway improvements within the State right-of-way. The PE shall carefully monitor the contractor’s compliance on all aspects of construction, including construction zone traffic control and shall sign and seal the acceptance letter upon completion of the work. 53.If this permit requires a traffic signal installation, the Permittee accepts all responsibility of the traffic signal(s) and operations of the intersection from the start of work on the signal until the signals are accepted by CDOT, City/County, Police/Sheriff and State Patrol. Uniformed traffic control is required for all traffic signal projects and shall be scheduled and paid for by the Permittee. Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 Construction Completion & Final Acceptance 54.The Permittee shall notify the Access Manager within 10 working days to request a final inspection. This request shall include signed and sealed certification that inspections, materials, materials testing, and construction methods conform to the plans, specifications and purpose of design; and have been completed in accordance with all applicable CDOT Standards and Specifications; and that the access is constructed in conformance with the State Highway Access Code, 2 CCR 601-1, and the terms and conditions included in this permit. The engineer of record shall be present for this inspection. The access serviced by this permit may not be opened to traffic until the CDOT Access Manager provides written initial acceptance. 55.Following the final inspection, CDOT will prepare an access construction inspection summary letter and send it to the applicant, Permittee, and engineer of record. If additional items are required to complete the access construction, a list of these items will be part of the access construction inspection summary letter. All required items and final as-built survey shall be completed within 30 days from receiving the access construction summary letter. When all work is complete and in conformity to these terms and conditions, an initial acceptance letter will be sent to the Permittee and this access may be opened for traffic. 56.The 2-year warrantee period will begin when the initial acceptance letter is issued. In accordance with section 2.5(6) of the Access Code, if any construction element fails within two-years due to improper construction or material specifications, the Permittee shall be responsible for all repairs. Failure to make such repairs may result in suspension of the permit and closure of the access. The letter of final acceptance will be issued once the access has been inspected and is found to comply with all material and construction in accordance with all applicable CDOT standards and specifications approx. 2 years after initial acceptance. Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 Environmental Clearances Information Summary Page 1 of 3 Colorado Department of Transportation July 2020 COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Environmental Clearances Information Summary PURPOSE - This summary is intended to inform entities external to CDOT that may be entering the state highway right-of-way to perform work related to their own facilities (such as Utility, Special Use or Access Permittees), about some of the more commonly encountered environmental permits/clearances that may apply to their activities. This listing is not all-inclusive—additional environmental or cultural resource permits/clearances may be required in certain instances. Appropriate local, state and federal agencies should be contacted for additional information if there is any uncertainty about what permits/clearances are required for a specific activity. IMPORTANT: Please Review The Following Information Carefully – Failure to Comply With Regulatory Requirements May Result In Suspension or Revocation of Your CDOT Permit, Or Enforcement Actions By Other Agencies. CLEARANCE CONTACTS - As indicated in the permit/clearance descriptions listed below, the following agencies may be contacted for additional information: • Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE): General Information – (303) 692-2000 Water Quality Control Division (WQCD): (303) 692-3500 Environmental Permitting Website https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cdphe/all-permits • CDOT Water Quality Program Manager: (303) 512-4053 https://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/water-quality • CDOT Asbestos Project Manager: (303) 512-5519 • Colorado Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation: (303) 866-5216 • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, District Regulatory Offices: Omaha District (Northeastern CO), Denver Office (303) 979-4120 http://www.nwo.usace.army.mil/Missions/RegulatoryProgram/Colorado.aspx Sacramento District (Western CO), Grand Junction Office (970) 243-1199 http://www.spk.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory.aspx Albuquerque District (Southeastern CO), Pueblo Office (719) 543-9459 http://www.spa.usace.army.mil/Missions/RegulatoryProgramandPermits.aspx • CDOT Utilities, Special Use and Access Permitting: (303) 757-9654 https://www.codot.gov/business/permits Wildlife Resources - Disturbance of wildlife shall be avoided to the maximum extent practicable. Entry into areas of known or suspected threatened or endangered species habitat requires special authorization from the CDOT permitting office. If any threatened or endangered species are encountered during the progress of the permitted work, work in the subject area shall be halted and the CDOT Regional Permitting Office and Region Planning and Environmental Manager shall be contacted immediately. Authorization must be provided by CDOT prior to the continuation of work. Information about threatened or endangered species may be obtained from the CDOT website, http://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/wildlife/guidelines, or the Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) website, http://www.cpw.state.co.us/learn/Pages/SOC-ThreatenedEndangeredList.aspx. Additional guidance may be provided by the appropriate Region Planning and Environmental Manager (RPEM). Cultural Resources - The applicant must request a file search of the permit area through the Colorado Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (OAHP), Denver, to ascertain if historic or archaeological resources have previously been identified (https://www.historycolorado.org/file-access; 303-866-5216). Inventory of the permit area by a qualified cultural resources specialist may be necessary, per the recommendation of CDOT. If archaeological sites/artifacts or historic resources are encountered as the project progresses, all work in the subject area shall be halted and the CDOT Regional Permitting Office and Region Planning and Environmental Manager shall be contacted immediately. Authorization must be provided by CDOT prior to the continuation of work. Additional guidance may be provided by the Regional Permitting Office and RPEM. Paleontological Resources - The level of effort required for paleontological resources is dependent on the amount of ground disturbance, including rock scaling, digging, trenching, boring, ground leveling, and similar activities. • If the permit will involve extensive ground disturbance (generally involving more than one mile of CDOT ROW), a full review will be required by a qualified paleontologist, including map, file, and locality searches, with final recommendations provided by the CDOT paleontologist upon receipt of the report. Based on results of the review, a survey or inventory of the permit area may be necessary. • If the permit will involve a small amount of ground disturbance (less than one mile of ROW), the applicant must request a fossil locality search through the University of Colorado Museum of Natural History (https://www.colorado.edu/cumuseum/research- collections/paleontology/policies-procedure) and the Denver Museum of Nature and Science (https://www.dmns.org/science/earth-sciences/earth-sciences-collections/). The museum collections manager will provide information about localities in the project area. If there are no known localities, the permit requirement for paleontology is complete upon submitting that information to CDOT. If there are known localities, the CDOT paleontologist will be contacted by the museum with details, and additional recommendations will be made if necessary. Note that museum staff are not required to disclose the details of fossil localities to the permit applicant, nor is detailed locality information required for the permit application to proceed. • If the permit does not involve ground disturbance, no action is required for paleontological resources. If fossils are encountered during the permitted action, all work in the immediate area of the find should stop and the CDOT Staff Paleontologist and the Region Environmental Manager should be contacted immediately. Authorization must be provided by CDOT prior to the continuation of work. Additional guidance may be provided by the Regional Permitting Office in the Permit Special Provisions. Contact Information: See the museum websites listed above. The CDOT Paleontologist is not able to conduct locality searches independently. For further information contact CDOT Paleontologist Nicole Peavey at nicole.peavey@state.co.us or (303) 757-9632. Environmental Clearances Information Summary Page 2 of 3 Colorado Department of Transportation July 2020 Hazardous Materials, Solid Waste - The Solid Wastes Disposal Sites and Facilities Act C.R.S. 30-20-100, et al, and Regulations Pertaining to Solid Waste Disposal Sites and Facilities (6 CCR 1007-2), prohibit solid waste disposal without an approved Certificate of Designation (a landfill permit). The Colorado Hazardous Waste Act C.R.S. 25-15-301 et al, and the Colorado Hazardous Waste Regulations (6 CCR 1007-3) prohibit the transfer, storage or disposal (TSD) of hazardous waste except at permitted TSD sites. There are no permitted landfills or TSD sites within the State Highway Right of Way. Therefore, all solid or hazardous wastes that might be generated by the activities of entities entering the State Highway Right of Way must be removed from the ROW and disposed of at a permitted facility or designated collection point (e.g., for solid waste, a utility or construction company’s own dumpster). If pre-existing solid waste or hazardous materials contamination (including oil or petroleum contaminated soil, asbestos, chemicals, mine tailings, etc.) is encountered during the performance of work, the permittee shall halt work in the affected area and immediately contact the CDOT Regional Permitting Office for direction as to how to proceed. Contact Information: Theresa Santangelo-Dreiling, CDOT Hazardous Materials Management Supervisor: (303) 512-5524. Asbestos Containing Materials, Asbestos Contaminated Soil - All work on asbestos containing materials (ACM) must comply with the applicable requirements of the CDPHE Air Pollution Control Division’s (APCD) Regulation 8. Disposal of ACM, and work done in asbestos-contaminated soil, must comply with the CDPHE Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division’s (HMWMD) Solid Waste Regulations. The application for any CDOT permit must specifically identify any ACM involved in the work for which authorization is being requested. Additional guidance or requirements may be specified in the permit special provisions. Contact Info: CDPHE APCD and HMWMD Regulations can be accessed via the CDPHE Environmental Permitting Website listed above. Additional information concerning clearance on CDOT projects is available from the CDOT Asbestos Project Manager (303) 949-2729, or Theresa Santangelo-Dreiling, Hazardous Materials Management Supervisor: (303) 512-5524. Transportation of Hazardous Materials - No person may offer or accept a hazardous material for transportation in commerce unless that person is registered in conformance with the United States Department of Transportation regulations at 49 CFR, Part 171. The hazardous material must be properly classed, described, packaged, marked, labeled, and in condition for shipment as required or authorized by applicable requirements, or an exemption, approval or registration has been issued. Vehicles requiring a placard, must obtain authorization and a State HAZMAT Permit from the Colorado Public Utilities Commission. Contact Information: For authorization and more info call the Federal Motor Safety Carrier Administration, US DOT for inter- and intra- state HAZMAT Registration (303) 969-6748. Colorado Public Utilities Commission: (303) 894-2868. Discharge of Dredged or Fill Material – 404 Permits Administered By the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and Section 401 Water Quality Certifications Issued by the CDPHE WQCD - Clean Water Act section 404 permits are often required for the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the U.S., including wetlands. Several types of section 404 permits exist, including nationwide, regional general, and individual permits. Nationwide permits are the most commonly authorized type for activities with relatively minor impacts. If an individual 404 permit is required, section 401 water quality certification from the CDPHE WQCD is also required. Contact the appropriate Corps District Regulatory Office for information about what type of 404 permit may be required (contact information above). Contact the CDPHE Water Quality Control Division at (303) 692-3500. Working on or in any stream or its bank - In order to protect and preserve the state’s fish and wildlife resources from actions that may obstruct, diminish, destroy, change, modify, or vary a natural existing stream or its banks or tributaries, it may be necessary to obtain a Senate Bill 40 certification from the Colorado Department of Natural Resources. A stream is defined as 1) represented by a solid blue line on USGS 7.5’ quadrangle maps; and/or 2) intermittent streams providing live water beneficial to fish and wildlife; and/or 3) segments of streams supporting 25% or more cover within 100 yards upstream or downstream of the project; and/or 4) segments of streams having wetlands present within 200 yards upstream or downstream of the project measured by valley length. The CPW application, as per guidelines agreed upon by CDOT and CPW, can be accessed at https://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/wildlife/guidelines. Erosion and Sediment Control Practices - Any activities that disturb one or more acres of land require a Stormwater Construction Permit (SCP) from the CDPHE-WQCD. Erosion & sediment control requirements will be specified in that permit. In situations where a stormwater permit is not required, all reasonable erosion and sediment control measures should be taken to minimize erosion and sedimentation. Control practices should be in accordance with CDOT Standard Specifications 107.25, 208, 213 and 216 (https://www.codot.gov/business/designsupport/cdot-construction-specifications). The CDOT Erosion Control and Stormwater Quality Guide (website: https://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/landscape-architecture/erosion-storm-quality) can also be used to design erosion/sediment controls. Contact Information: Contact the CDPHE-WQCD at (303) 692-3500. Website: https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cdphe/wq-construction-general-permits Site Stabilization - All disturbances require a stabilization plan, native seeding or landscape design plan according to applicable CDOT Standard Specifications 212-217 and 623. The CDOT Erosion Control and Stormwater Quality Guide should also be used to plan restoration of disturbed vegetation. Website: https://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/landscape- architecture/erosion-storm-quality Stormwater Discharge From Industrial Facilities - Discharges of stormwater runoff from certain types of industrial facilities, such as concrete batch plants - require a CDPS Stormwater Permit. Contact Information: Contact the CDPHE-WQCD at (303) 692- 3500. Website: https://colorado.gov/pacific/cdphe/wq-commerce-and-industry-permits Concrete Washout - Waste generated from concrete activities shall NOT be allowed to flow into the drainage ways, inlets, receiving waters, or in the CDOT ROW. Concrete waste shall be placed in a temporary concrete washout facility and must be located a minimum of 50 feet from state waters, drainageways, and inlets. Concrete washout shall be in accordance to CDOT specifications and guidelines at https://www.codot.gov/business/designsupport/cdot-construction-specifications and refer to the specifications and their revisions for sections 101, 107 and 208. Construction Dewatering (Discharge or Infiltration) and Remediation Activities - Discharges of water encountered during excavation or work in wet areas may require a Construction Dewatering or Remediation Activities Discharge Permit. Contact Environmental Clearances Information Summary Page 3 of 3 Colorado Department of Transportation July 2020 Information: Contact the CDPHE-WQCD at (303) 692-3500. For Applications and Instructions: https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cdphe/wq-construction-general-permits. Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Requirements - When working in a MS4 area, discharges to the storm sewer system are subject to CDOT’s or other municipalities’ MS4 Permit. For activities within the boundaries of a municipality that has a MS4 permit, the owner of such activity should contact the municipality regarding stormwater related requirements. All discharges to the CDOT highway drainage system or within the Right of Way (ROW) must comply with the applicable provisions of the Colorado Water Quality Control Act, the Water Quality Control Commission (WQCC) Regulations (https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cdphe/wqcc-regulations-and-policies-and-water-quality-statutes) and the CDOT MS4 Permit #COS-000005 (https://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/water-quality/documents). Discharges are subject to inspection by CDOT and CDPHE. For CDOT-related MS4 programs and requirements, go to: https://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/water-quality/stormwater-programs. Post-Construction Permanent Water Quality - When working in a CDOT MS4 area and the activity disturbs one or more acres, permanent water quality control measures may be required. Information on the requirements can be found under the CDOT Permanent Water Quality MS4 Program at: https://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/water-quality/stormwater- programs/pwq-permanent-water-quality Discharges to Storm Sewer Systems Prohibited Discharges - All discharges are subject to the provisions of the Colorado Water Quality Control Act and the Colorado Discharge Permit Regulations. Prohibited discharges include, but are not limited to, substances such as wash water, paint, automotive fluids, solvents, oils or soaps and sediment. Allowable Discharges - The following discharges to stormwater systems are allowed without a permit from the CDPHE-WQCD: landscape irrigation, diverted stream flows, uncontaminated ground water infiltration to separate storm sewers, discharges from potable water sources, foundation drains, air conditioning condensation, irrigation water, uncontaminated springs, footing drains, water line flushing, flows from riparian habitats and wetlands, and flow from firefighting activities. Contact Information: Contact the CDPHE-WQCD at (303) 692-3500. Information can also be found in the CDOT Illicit Discharge MS4 Program PDD at: https://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/water-quality/stormwater-programs/idde.html. Spill Reporting - Spills shall be contained and cleaned up as soon as possible. Spills shall NOT be washed down into the storm drain or buried. All spills shall be reported to the CDOT Illicit Discharge Hotline at (303) 512-4426 (4H20), as well as the Regional Permitting Office and Regional Maintenance Supervisor. Spills on highways, into waterways, any spill in the highway right-of-way exceeding 25 gallons, or that may otherwise present an immediate danger to the public shall be reported by calling 911, and shall also be reported to the CDPHE at 1-877-518-5608. More information can be found at https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cdphe/emergency-reporting-line. Disposal of Drilling Fluids - Drilling fluids used in operations such as Horizontal Directional Drilling may be classified as “discharges” or “solid wastes,” and in general, should be pumped or vacuumed from the construction area, removed from the State Highway Right of Way, and disposed of at permitted facilities that specifically accept such wastes. Disposal of drilling fluids into storm drains, storm sewers, roadside ditches or any other type of man-made or natural waterway is prohibited by Water Quality Control and/or Solid Waste regulations. Small quantities of drilling fluid solids (less than 1 cubic yard of solids) may be left on-site after either being separated from fluids or after infiltration of the water, provided: 1) the drilling fluid consists of only water and bentonite clay, or, if required for proper drilling properties, small quantities of polymer additives that are approved for use in drinking water well drilling; 2) the solids are fully contained in a pit, and are not likely to pose a nuisance to future work in the area, 3) the solids are covered and the area restored as required by CDOT permit requirements (Utility, Special Use, or Access Permits, etc.). Contact Information: Contact CDPHE (telephone #’s listed above). Noxious Weeds and Invasive Species Management Plan - Noxious Weeds and Invasive Species guidance can be found by contacting the Colorado Department of Agriculture (https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/agconservation/noxiousweeds) and the Colorado Division of Parks and Wildlife (http://cpw.state.co.us/aboutus/Pages/RS-NoxiousWeeds.aspx). In either case, management plans involving the control of noxious weeds associated with the permitted activity and cleaning of equipment will be required. CDOT has a Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System permit, otherwise known as (MS4) from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. The permit states that only stormwater can be discharged from CDOT’s storm drain system As part of the permit, CDOT has several different programs to prevent pollutants from entering into the storm drain system: Construction Site Program New Development Redevelopment Program Illicit Discharge Program Industrial Facilities Program Public Education and Outreach Program Pollution Prevention and Good Housekeeping Program Wet Weather Monitoring Program What is stormwater runoff? Stormwater runoff occurs when precipitation from rain or snowmelt flows over the ground. Impervious surfaces like roads and sidewalks prevent stormwater from naturally soaking into the ground Why is stormwater runoff a problem? Stormwater can pick up debris, chemicals, dirt and other pollutants and flow into CDOT’s storm drain system or directly into a stream, river, lake, wetland or reservoir. Anything that enters CDOT’s storm drain system is discharged untreated into the waterways we use for fishing, swimming, and providing drinking water. For more information on CDOT Utility Permits: https://www.codot.gov/business/permits/utilitie sspecialuse For more information on CDOT Access Permits: https://www.codot.gov/business/permits/access permits For more information on CDOT Water Quality Program: Water Quality Program Manager 4201 E. Arkansas Ave. Shumate Building Denver, Colorado 80222 303‐757‐9343 Water Quality Program Industrial Facilities Program Dredged spoil, dirt, slurry, solid waste, incinerator residue, sewage, sewage sludge, garbage, trash, chemical waste, biological nutrient, biological material, radioactive material, heat, pH, wrecked or discarded equipment, rock, sand, any industrial, municipal, or agricultural waste. Tips for Reporting an Illicit Discharge Call the illicit discharge hotline at (303) 512‐4426 From a safe distance try to estimate the amount of the discharge. Identify characteristics of the discharge (color, odor, algae, etc.). Obtain information on the vehicle dumping the waste (if applicable). Do not approach! Call *CSP for illicit dumping. If possible, take a photo, record a license plate. REMEMBER: Never get too close to the illicit discharge, it may be dangerous!!! Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 Industrial Facilities Program Elements: 1.Educate and outreach to owners or operators that have potential to contribute substantial pollutant to water. 2.Report and include information on discharge and water quality concerns. Provide written notification within 15 days of discovery to CDPHE. 3.Submit an annual report to CDPHE containing the number of informational brochures distributed; name and title of each individual trained. Education There are instances when a utility company or other entity doing work in the state highway right‐of‐way will require some type of environmental permit or clearance for that work. CDOT has put together an Environmental Clearances Information Summary for those applying for a CDOT Utility and Special Use Permit or Access Permit to obtain all required clearances. This fact sheet is given to each permittee and is available at: http://www.coloradodot.info/programs/ environmental/resources/guidance- standards/Environmental%20Clearances% 20Info%20Summary.pdf Industrial facilities can use control measures (CM) otherwise known as Best Management Practices (BMP) during the construction of a facility and when operating the facility. Control measures are schedules of activities, maintenance procedures, and other management practices to prevent and reduce pollution entering into CDOT’s storm drain system. Control Measures also include treatment, operating procedures, and practices to control site run off which can include structural and non‐structural controls. Control Measures for Industrial Facilities CDOT defines a utility, or utility facility as any privately, publicly, or cooperatively owned line, facility, or system producing, transmitting or distributing the following: Communications Cable television Power Electricity Light Heat Gas Oil Crude Products Water Stream Waste Stormwater not connected with highway drainage Similar Commodity Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 Permits 325027 & 325028 Legend 3000 ft N ➤➤ N Image © 2025 Airbus Image © 2025 Airbus Image © 2025 Airbus Highway 82 Approximate access location for RIRO Movement. Permit 325027 Approximate access location for 3/4 Movement access. Permit 325028 Cattle Creek Rd Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 R3 Traffic Section, Access Unit 222 S 6th St, Rm 100 Grand Junction, CO 81501 PH (970) 683-6284 FAX (970) 683-6290 R3 Traffic Section, Access Unit, 222 S. 6th Street, Rm 100, Grand Junction, CO 81501 PH (970) 683-6284 www.codot.gov <<<<< e-mailed >>>>> April 18, 2025 Permit No. 325027 Harvest Roaring Fork, LLC 909 Lake Carolyn Parkway Irving, Texas 75039 Dear Permittee: 1.Please review the attached State Highway Access Permit (Form #101) and all enclosed attachments 2.If you ACCEPT the Permit and its Terms and Conditions (and are authorized to sign as legal owner of the property, or as an authorized representative), please complete the DocuSign process within 60 days of the transmittal date on the permit. Your signature confirms your agreement to all the listed Terms and Conditions. 3.If you fail to complete the DocuSign within 60 days, the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) will consider this permit withdrawn. 4.You may use the PayPal link to pay for this permit or send a check or money order made payable to “CDOT” for the total amount due of $300.00 to our office. 5.If you wish to APPEAL the Terms and Conditions of the permit, please refer to the attached Form 101, Pages 2 and 3 for an explanation of the appeal procedures. 6.As described in the additional attached Terms and Conditions, you must make a written request to obtain a Notice to Proceed. DO NOT begin any work within the State Highway Right-of-Way without a validated Access Permit and Notice to Proceed. Use of this permit without the Colorado Department of Transportation’s validation shall be considered a violation of State Law. If you have any questions please call Kandis Aggen, Asst. Access Manager, at (970) 683-6270 or Brian Killian, Region 3 Access Program Manager, at (970) 683-6284. If you choose to return the signed permit and/or check by mail, please send to: Region 3 Access Unit Attn: Kandis Aggen, Asst. Access Manager 222 S 6th St, Rm 100 Grand Junction, CO 81501 Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STATE HIGHWAY ACCESS PERMIT CDOT Permit No. 325027 State Highway No / Mp / Side 082A / 7.772 / Right Permit Fee $300.00 Date of Transmittal 04/18/2025 Region / Section / Patrol / Name 3 / 02 / 2K12 Melissa DeAndrea Local Jurisdiction Garfield County The Permittee(s): Harvest Roaring Fork, LLC 909 Lake Carolyn Parkway Irving, Texas 75039 The Applicant(s): Sopris Engineering, LLC 502 Main St., Suite A-3 Carbondale, Colorado 81623 is hereby granted permission to have an access to the state highway at the location noted below. The access shall be constructed, maintained and used in accordance with this permit, including the State Highway Access Code and any attachments, terms, conditions and exhibits. This permit may be revoked by the Issuing Authority if at any time the permitted access and its use violate any parts of this permit. The issuing authority, the Department and their duly appointed agents and employees shall be held harmless against any action for personal injury or property damage sustained by reason of the exercise of the permit. Location: This access is approximately 4,076-ft east of mile post 7 at approximate mile post 7.772 Access to Provide Service to: (Land Use Code) (Size) (Units) 210 - Single-Family Detached Housing 450 Units 220 - Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) 625 Units Affordable housing, 225 units (ITE #223); Strip retail plaza, 40 ksf (ITE #822) Hotel, 90 rooms (ITE #310); Small office building, 10 ksf (ITE #712); Single family attached housing, 200 units (ITE #215) Total Peak Hour Traffic: 534 DHV Additional Information: Please read the terms and conditions of the permit to obtain the Notice to Proceed. This permit and Permit 325028 were issued together for the same development and shall be constructed simultaneously. MUNICIPALITY OR COUNTY APPROVAL Required only when the appropriate local authority retains issuing authority. Signature Print Name Date Title Upon the signing of this permit the permittee agrees to the terms and conditions and referenced attachments contained herein. All construction shall be completed in an expeditious and safe manner and shall be finished within 45 days from Initiation. The permitted access shall be completed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the permit prior to being used. The permittee shall notify Jorge Centino 2K2 with the Colorado Department of Transportation, at (970) 309-3338 at least 48 hours prior to commencing construction within the State Highway right-of-way. The person signing as the permittee must be the owner or legal representative of the property served by the permitted access and have full authority to accept the permit and its terms and conditions. Permittee Signature: Print Name Date Co-Permittee Signature: (if applicable) Print Name Date This permit is not valid until signed by a duly authorized representative of the Department. COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Signature Print Name Title Date (of issue) Copy Distribution: Required: 1.Region 3.Staff Access Section 2.Applicant 4.Central Files Make copies as necessary for: Previous editions are obsolete and may not be used Local Authority Inspector Page 1 of 3 CDOT Form #101 5/07 MTCE Patrol Traffic Engineer \s1\ \n1\ \d1\ \s2\ \n2\ \t2\ \d2\ Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 4/18/2025 | 12:51 PM PDTRichard Myers Brian Killian Access Manager 4/21/2025 | 7:31 AM MDT State Highway Access Permit Form 101, Page 2 The following paragraphs are excerpts of the State Highway Access Code. These are provided for your convenience but do not alleviate compliance with all sections of the Access Code. A copy of the State Highway Access Code is available from your local issuing authority (local government) or the Colorado Department of Transportation (Department). When this permit was issued, the issuing authority made its decision based in part on information submitted by the applicant, on the access category which is assigned to the highway, what alternative access to other public roads and streets is available, and safety and design standards. Changes in use or design not approved by the permit or the issuing authority may cause the revocation or suspension of the permit. APPEALS 1.Should the permittee or applicant object to the denial of a permit application by the Department or object to any of the terms or conditions of a permit placed there by the Department, the applicant and permittee (appellant) have a right to appeal the decision to the [Transportation] Commission [of Colorado]. To appeal a decision, submit a request for administrative hearing to the Transportation Commission of Colorado within 60 days of transmittal of notice of denial or transmittal of the permit for signature. Submit the request to the Transportation Commission of Colorado, 4201 East Arkansas Avenue, Denver, Colorado 80222-3400. The request shall include reasons for the appeal and may include changes, revisions, or conditions that would be acceptable to the permittee or applicant. 2.Any appeal by the applicant or permittee of action by a local issuing authority shall be filed with the local authority and be consistent with the appeal procedures of the local authority. 3.In submitting the request for administrative hearing, the appellant has the option of including within the appeal a request for a review by the Department’s internal administrative review committee pursuant to [Code] subsection 2.10. When such committee review is requested, processing of the appeal for formal administrative hearing, 2.9(5) and (6), shall be suspended until the appellant notifies the Commission to proceed with the administrative hearing, or the appellant submits a request to the Commission or the administrative law judge to withdraw the appeal. The two administrative processes, the internal administrative review committee, and the administrative hearing, may not run concurrently. 4.Regardless of any communications, meetings, administrative reviews or negotiations with the Department or the internal administrative review Committee regarding revisions or objections to the permit or a denial, if the permittee or applicant wishes to appeal the Department's decision to the Commission for a hearing, the appeal must be brought to the Commission within 60 days of transmittal of notice of denial or transmittal of the permit. PERMIT EXPIRATION 1.A permit shall be considered expired if the access is not under construction within one year of the permit issue date or before the expiration of any authorized extension. When the permittee is unable to commence construction within one year after the permit issue date, the permittee may request a one year extension from the issuing authority. No more than two one-year extensions may be granted under any circumstances. If the access is not under construction within three years from date of issue the permit will be considered expired. Any request for an extension must be in writing and submitted to the issuing authority before the permit expires. The request should state the reasons why the extension is necessary, when construction is anticipated, and include a copy of page 1 (face of permit) of the access permit. Extension approvals shall be in writing. The local issuing authority shall obtain the concurrence of the Department prior to the approval of an extension, and shall notify the Department of all denied extensions within ten days. Any person wishing to reestablish an access permit that has expired may begin again with the application procedures. An approved Notice to Proceed, automatically renews the access permit for the period of the Notice to Proceed. CONSTRUCTION 1.Construction may not begin until a Notice to Proceed is approved. (Code subsection 2.4] 2.The construction of the access and its appurtenances as required by the terms and conditions of the permit shall be completed at the expense of the permittee except as provided in subsection 2.14. All materials used in the construction of the access within the highway right-of-way or on permanent easements, become public property. Any materials removed from the highway right-of-way will be disposed of only as directed by the Department. All fencing, guard rail, traffic control devices and other equipment and materials removed in the course of access construction shall be given to the Department unless otherwise instructed by the permit or the Department inspector. 3.The permittee shall notify the individual or the office specified on the permit or Notice to Proceed at least two working days prior to any construction within state highway right-of-way. Construction of the access shall not proceed until both the access permit and the Notice to Proceed are issued. The access shall be completed in an expeditious and safe manner and shall be finished within 45 days from initiation of construction within the highway right-of-way. A construction time extension not to exceed 30 working days may be requested from the individual or office specified on the permit. 4.The issuing authority and the Department may inspect the access during construction and upon completion of the access to ensure that all terms and conditions of the permit are met. Inspectors are authorized to enforce the conditions of the permit during construction and to halt any activities within state right-of-way that do not comply with the provisions of the permit, that conflict with concurrent highway construction or maintenance work, that endanger highway property, natural or cultural resources protected by law, or the health and safety of workers or the public. \i1\ Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 5. Prior to using the access, the permittee is required to complete the construction according to the terms and conditions of the permit. Failure by the permittee to abide by all permit terms and conditions shall be sufficient cause for the Department or issuing authority to initiate action to suspend or revoke the permit and close the access. If in the determination of the Department or issuing authority the failure to comply with or complete the construction requirements of the permit create a highway safety hazard, such shall be sufficient cause for the summary suspension of the permit. If the permittee wishes to use the access prior to completion, arrangements must be approved by the issuing authority and Department and included in the permit. The Department or issuing authority may order a halt to any unauthorized use of the access pursuant to statutory and regulatory powers. Reconstruction or improvement of the access may be required when the permittee has failed to meet required specifications of design or materials. If any construction element fails within two years due to improper construction or material specifications, the permittee shall be responsible for all repairs. Failure to make such repairs may result in suspension of the permit and closure of the access. 6. The permittee shall provide construction traffic control devices at all times during access construction, in conformance with the M.U.T.C.D. as required by section 42- 4-104, C.R.S., as amended. 7. A utility permit shall be obtained for any utility work within highway right-of-way. Where necessary to remove, relocate, or repair a traffic control device or public or private utilities for the construction of a permitted access, the relocation, removal or repair shall be accomplished by the permittee without cost to the Department or issuing authority, and at the direction of the Department or utility company. Any damage to the state highway or other public right-of-way beyond that which is allowed in the permit shall be repaired immediately. The permittee is responsible for the repair of any utility damaged in the course of access construction, reconstruction or repair. 8. In the event it becomes necessary to remove any right- of-way fence, the posts on either side of the access shall be securely braced with an approved end post before the fence is cut to prevent any slacking of the remaining fence. All posts and wire removed are Department property and shall be turned over to a representative of the Department. 9. The permittee shall ensure that a copy of the permit is available for review at the construction site at all times. The permit may require the contractor to notify the individual or office specified on the permit at any specified phases in construction to allow the field inspector to inspect various aspects of construction such as concrete forms, subbase, base course compaction, and materials specifications. Minor changes and additions may be ordered by the Department or local authority field inspector to meet unanticipated site conditions. 10. Each access shall be constructed in a manner that shall not cause water to enter onto the roadway or shoulder, and shall not interfere with the existing drainage system on the right-of-way or any adopted municipal system and drainage plan. 11. By accepting the permit, permittee agrees to save, indemnify, and hold harmless to the extent allowed by law, the issuing authority, the Department, its officers, and employees from suits, actions, claims of any type or character brought because of injuries or damage sustained by any person resulting from the permittee's use of the access permit during the construction of the access. CHANGES IN ACCESS USE AND PERMIT VIOLATIONS 1. It is the responsibility of the property owner and permittee to ensure that the use of the access to the property is not in violation of the Code, permit terms and conditions or the Act. The terms and conditions of any permit are binding upon all assigns, successors-in-interest, heirs and occupants. If any significant changes are made or will be made in the use of the property which will affect access operation, traffic volume and or vehicle type, the permittee or property owner shall contact the local issuing authority or the Department to determine if a new access permit and modifications to the access are required. 2. When an access is constructed or used in violation of the Code, section 43-2-147(5)(c), C.R.S., of the Act applies. The Department or issuing authority may summarily suspend an access permit and immediately order closure of the access when its continued use presents an immediate threat to public health, welfare or safety. Summary suspension shall comply with article 4 of title 24, C.R.S. MAINTENANCE 1. The permittee, his or her heirs, successors-in-interest, assigns, and occupants of the property serviced by the access shall be responsible for meeting the terms and conditions of the permit, the repair and maintenance of the access beyond the edge of the roadway including any cattle guard and gate, and the removal or clearance of snow or ice upon the access even though deposited on the access in the course of Department snow removal operations. Within unincorporated areas the Department will keep access culverts clean as part of maintenance of the highway drainage system. However, the permittee is responsible for the repair and replacement of any access-related culverts within the right-of-way. Within incorporated areas, drainage responsibilities for municipalities are determined by statute and local ordinance. The Department will maintain the roadway including auxiliary lanes and shoulders, except in those cases where the access installation has failed due to improper access construction and/or failure to follow permit requirements and specifications in which case the permittee shall be responsible for such repair. Any significant repairs such as culvert replacement, resurfacing, or changes in design or specifications, requires authorization from the Department. Form 101, Page 3 \i1\ Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 STATE of COLORADO HIGHWAY ACCESS PERMIT ADDITIONAL TERMS and CONDITIONS PERMIT No. 325027 April 18, 2025 Permittee(s): Harvest Roaring Fork, LLC Location: Garfield County on CO Highway 082A, near Mile Ref. Pt. 7.772 Right 1.This permitted access is only for the use and purpose stated in the application and permit. This permit is issued in accordance with the State Highway Access Code (2 CCR 601-1), hereafter referred to as the “Access Code”, and is based in part upon the information submitted by the Permittee. 2.Any subsequent relocation, reconstruction, modifications, changes in the type of traffic using the access or 20% increase in volume to the access shall require a new application and coordination with Colorado Department of Transportation, hereafter referred to as “CDOT”. Any changes causing non-compliance with the Access Code may render this permit void, requiring a new permit. 3.This permit replaces any and all additional access permits that may be in existence for this access. 4.This permit is for Single family detached housing, 450 units (ITE #210); Single family attached housing, 200 units (ITE #215); Low rise multi-family housing, 625 units (ITE #220); Affordable housing, 225 units (ITE #223); Hotel, 90 rooms (ITE #310); Small office building, 10 ksf (ITE #712); Strip retail plaza, 40 ksf (ITE #822). Parcel #’s: 239307300032, 239307300033, 239501400161. 5.The traffic volume shall be 534 DHV (Design Hourly Volume). 6.The highway access category is E-X. 7.This access shall be a Right-In-Right-Out only access. 8.This access permit is in conjunction with the permit for the eastern access to the same parcel, Permit # 325028. 9.The Permittee shall design and construct the following in accordance with section 4 of the Access Code. (a)Construct a southbound right turn deceleration lane. (b)Construct an eastbound-to-southbound right turn acceleration lane. (c)Restrict access at the Cattle Creek Rd/CR 113 access (approx. MP 7.87) to right-in right-out only by removing the paved median. Remove the pavement and regrade to reestablish drainage. (d)The following improvements shall be constructed off-site, at a new median crossover at approx. MP 8.178. These improvements shall be constructed in conjunction with the requirements of Permit # 325028 to create a full RCUT-style intersection incorporating the northern access, Cattle Creek Rd, and both U-turn locations. (e)Construct a left turn/U-turn median crossover at approx. MP 8.178. This U-turn location shall be spaced far enough for a full length eastbound-to-southbound right turn acceleration lane, enough merging and lane change length, and a southbound left turn deceleration lane to be built back-to-back. (f)Construct a southbound left turn deceleration lane. (g)Construct a signal to protect the southbound left turns. (h)Construct a U-turn bulb-out to accommodate WB-67 design vehicles. Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 STATE of COLORADO HIGHWAY ACCESS PERMIT ADDITIONAL TERMS and CONDITIONS PERMIT No. 325027 April 18, 2025 Permittee(s): Harvest Roaring Fork, LLC Location: Garfield County on CO Highway 082A, near Mile Ref. Pt. 7.772 Right 10.All other accesses to this parcel shall be closed. Remove the driveways and regrade to reestablish drainage, remove any gates and cattle guards, mailbox’s etc. to ensure the access cannot be used again. 11.All mainline auxiliary lanes shall be designed and constructed with a 2-inch overlay or other method to ensure there isn’t striping conflicts or ghosting of the old striping that was removed. 12.This access shall be designed and constructed to CDOT’s standards and may be required to include sidewalk, trail, curb and gutter. 13.A design meeting is required before proceeding with the construction design. Required personnel for this meeting are: Design Engineer, Professional Engineer of Record (i.e., the person who will sign and seal the plan set), and Permittee or Representative. Please contact Nick Nordquist at 970-683-6280 for scheduling this design meeting. 14.A Notice to Proceed (NTP) is required before beginning construction on the access or any activity within the highway right-of-way. To receive the NTP the applicant shall submit a complete packet to CDOT (to Nick Nordquist - 970-683-6280, nicholas.nordquist@state.co.us) with the following items: (a)Scheduled pre-construction meeting – a preconstruction meeting is required before the issuance of a NTP. Required personnel for this meeting include, but are not limited to: Professional Engineer of Record, construction inspector, construction personnel, Permittee or Representative, CDOT representative and traffic control supervisor. (b)A construction schedule – also required at the pre-construction meeting. (c)A cover letter or email requesting a NTP. (d)Certificate of Insurance (COI) for liability as per section 2.3(11)(i) of the Access Code, naming “CDOT as additional insured for general liability”. (e)A certified Traffic Control Plan (TCP) in accordance with section 2.4(6) of the Access Code. The TCP shall provide accessibility features to accommodate all pedestrians including persons with disabilities for all pathways during construction. (f)Electronic copy of construction plans stamped (11”x 17” with a minimum scale of 1” = 50’) by a Colorado registered professional engineer in full compliance with the Access Code. (g)Signed and sealed NTP checklist. (h)Signed and approved performance bond. (i)Signed and sealed drainage report or narrative. 15.Access width, geometry, and radii shall be determined by designing the access for the largest vehicle using the access on a consistent basis. This design shall be in conformance with Section 4.5(5) of the Access Code. A turning template shall be required with the final plan sets for review prior to the issuance of a NTP. 16.The horizontal axis of the access to the state highway shall be constructed perpendicular to the centerline of the highway and extend from the edge of the roadway a minimum distance of 40 feet, Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 STATE of COLORADO HIGHWAY ACCESS PERMIT ADDITIONAL TERMS and CONDITIONS PERMIT No. 325027 April 18, 2025 Permittee(s): Harvest Roaring Fork, LLC Location: Garfield County on CO Highway 082A, near Mile Ref. Pt. 7.772 Right or to the property line, whichever is greater. This design shall be in conformance with section 4.9(4) of the Access Code. 17.Side slopes shall be at a 4:1 slope on the highway access. The roadway shall slope away from the highway at a -2% grade for the first 20 feet of driveway. This design shall be in conformance with section 4.9(8) of the Access Code. 18.Immediately upon completion of earthwork the access shall be hard-surfaced a minimum distance of 50 feet from the traveled way, or to the CDOT right-of-way, whichever is greater. Where the hard surface ties into the existing pavement, the existing pavement shall be saw cut and removed to a minimum of the full depth asphalt section or until an acceptable existing cross slope is achieved. The saw cut shall not be located in the wheel path. Surfacing shall meet CDOT’s specifications with minimum surfacing to be equal to, or greater than, existing highway conditions in conformance with section 4 of the Access Code. 19.The permittee shall provide a performance bond that will insure completion of the required highway and all related intersection improvements in conformance with all CDOT’s standards and specifications. The bond must be at least 110% of the estimated total highway construction cost and the bonding agency must be surety licensed to do business in the state of Colorado. A thorough construction cost estimate sealed by a Colorado registered professional engineer and a draft of the bond must be provided and approved by CDOT before acceptance of the final bond and before construction is approved to commence. 20.Materials, Placing, and Compaction The specifications for materials and compaction shall be discussed and determined at the pre- design meeting with the CDOT Construction Project Manager. Unless the Permittee has approval from the CDOT Access Manager who may state otherwise, the following are minimum requirements for the highway access construction: Hot Mix Asphalt Option (HMA): compaction of the subgrade, embankments and backfill shall comply with sections 203 & 304 of the Colorado Highway Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction. Concrete Pavement Option: Portland Cement (PCCP): compaction of the subgrade, embankments and backfill shall comply with sections 203 & 304 of the Colorado Highway Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction. 21.The materials requirements listed above are for the access/driveway construction. If improvements are required on the highway, CDOT can provide the Permittee with a materials section for the highway improvements, however, CDOT will assume an R-Value of 5 for the design. Alternatively, the Permittee may obtain a geotechnical report, stamped by a professional engineer, that provides an adequate materials section for CDOT’s review and concurrence. 22.If the access is, or is planned to become a local road (i.e. city or county street), the accesses shall be designed per local ordinances, or per a geotechnical report signed and sealed by a professional engineer. 23.This permit allows for onsite construction as long as such use does not violate any terms of the permit. Permittee shall coordinate with CDOT for onsite construction and shall provide a traffic Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 STATE of COLORADO HIGHWAY ACCESS PERMIT ADDITIONAL TERMS and CONDITIONS PERMIT No. 325027 April 18, 2025 Permittee(s): Harvest Roaring Fork, LLC Location: Garfield County on CO Highway 082A, near Mile Ref. Pt. 7.772 Right control plan and proof of liability insurance. If the access location, volume, or turning movement for onsite construction is different from the permitted access, a new temporary construction permit may be required. 24.No drainage from this site shall enter onto the state highway travel lanes. The Permittee is required to maintain all drainage in excess of historical flows and time of concentration on site. All existing drainage structures shall be extended, modified or upgraded, as applicable, to accommodate all new construction and safety standards, in accordance with CDOT’s standard specifications. 25.Open cuts, which are at least 3 inches in depth, within 30 feet of the edge of the state highway traveled way, will not be left open at night, on weekends, or on holidays, or shall be protected with a suitable barrier per state and federal standards. 26.Nothing in this permit shall prohibit the Chief Engineer from exercising the right granted in CRS 43- 3-102 including but not limited to restricting left hand turns by construction of physical medial separations. 27.Under no circumstances shall the construction of a private driveway by a private interest interfere with the completion of a public highway construction project. 28.Any current or proposed cattle guard shall be maintained fully within the property boundaries and all repairs are the sole responsibility of the property owner. 29.Backing maneuvers within and onto the state highway right-of-way are strictly prohibited. All vehicles shall enter and exit the highway right-of-way in a forward movement. Backing into the right-of-way shall be considered a violation of the terms and conditions of the access permit and may result in the revocation of the permit by CDOT and/or Issuing Authority. 30.No additional accesses will be granted for these parcels or any future parcels as a result of splitting or dividing land. All accesses to newly created parcels shall be provided internally from this access. (This is only for FW, EX, R-A and NR-A) 31.The Permittee assumes responsibility for any and all easements that are associated with this access. If an easement is part of this access permit, CDOT is not liable for incorrect information in the easement documentation. It is the Permittees responsibility to ensure all applicable laws and regulations have been followed pertaining to easements and subdivision law. 32.The Permittee is responsible for obtaining any necessary additional federal, state and/or city/county permits or clearances required for construction of the access. Approval of this access permit does not constitute verification of this action by the Permittee. Permittee is also responsible for obtaining all necessary utility permits in addition to this access permit. 33.All workers within the state highway right-of-way shall comply with their employer’s safety and health policies/procedures, and all applicable U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations - including, but not limited to the applicable sections of 29 CFR Part 1910 - Occupational Safety and Health Standards and 29 CFR Part 1926 - Safety and Health Regulations for Construction. Personal protective equipment (e.g. head protection, footwear, high visibility apparel, safety glasses, hearing protection, respirators, gloves, etc.) shall be worn as appropriate for the work being performed, and as specified in regulation. Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 STATE of COLORADO HIGHWAY ACCESS PERMIT ADDITIONAL TERMS and CONDITIONS PERMIT No. 325027 April 18, 2025 Permittee(s): Harvest Roaring Fork, LLC Location: Garfield County on CO Highway 082A, near Mile Ref. Pt. 7.772 Right 34.The Permittee shall provide accessibility features to accommodate all pedestrians including persons with disabilities for all pathways during and after construction. 35.The Permittee is required to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG) that have been adopted by the U.S. Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board), and incorporated by the U.S. Attorney General as a federal standard. These guidelines are defining traversable slope requirements and prescribing the use of a defined pattern of truncated domes as detectable warnings at street crossings. The new standards plans can be found on the design and construction project support web page at: https://www.codot.gov/business/designsupport/standard-plans. 36.When it is necessary to remove any highway right-of-way fence, the posts on either side of the access entrance shall be securely braced with approved end posts and in conformance with CDOT’s M-607-1 standard, before the fence is cut, to prevent slacking of the remaining fence. All materials removed shall be returned to CDOT. 37.It shall be the responsibility of the Permittee to maintain adequate sight distance for this driveway. Trimming of vegetation or trees to maintain adequate sight distance is the sole responsibility of the Permittee. 38.CDOT will determine the extent of inspection services for the work. A daily inspection may be done by CDOT from the time work begins inside the highway right-of way until the job is completed and right-of-way restored to its original condition. 39.CDOT’s plan review is only for general conformance with CDOT design standards and Access Code requirements. CDOT is not responsible for the accuracy and adequacy of the design. All dimensions and elevations shall be confirmed and correlated at the job site. CDOT, through the approval of this document, assumes no responsibility for plan omissions or errors. 40.The CDOT inspector may suspend work due to: 1) Noncompliance with the provisions of this permit; 2) Adverse weather or traffic conditions; 3) Concurrent highway construction or maintenance in conflict with permit work; 4) Any condition deemed unsafe for workers or the general public. The work may be resumed upon notice from the CDOT Inspector. 41.The Permittee, his or her heirs, successors-in-interest, assigns, and occupants of the property serviced by the access shall be responsible for meeting the terms and conditions of the permit. This includes, but is not limited to, the repair and maintenance of the access beyond the edge of the roadway including any cattle guard and gate, and the removal or clearance of snow or ice upon the access even when deposited on the access during CDOT’s snow removal operations per section 2.7 of the Access Code. 42.The Permittee is responsible for the repair and replacement of any access-related culverts within the right-of-way. Within incorporated areas, drainage responsibilities for municipalities are determined by statute and local ordinance. CDOT will maintain the highway including auxiliary lanes upon final acceptance. In cases where the access installation has failed due to improper access construction and/or failure to follow permit requirements and specifications the Permittee shall be responsible for such repair. Any significant repair such as culvert replacement, resurfacing, or changes in design or specifications, requires authorization from CDOT. Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 STATE of COLORADO HIGHWAY ACCESS PERMIT ADDITIONAL TERMS and CONDITIONS PERMIT No. 325027 April 18, 2025 Permittee(s): Harvest Roaring Fork, LLC Location: Garfield County on CO Highway 082A, near Mile Ref. Pt. 7.772 Right 43.Any damage to present highway facilities including traffic control devices shall be repaired immediately at no cost to CDOT and prior to continuing other work. 44.During access construction, no construction-related or personal vehicles will be permitted to park in the state highway right-of-way. 45.Any mud or other material tracked, or otherwise deposited, on the roadway shall be removed daily or as ordered by CDOT’s inspector. If mud is an obvious condition during site construction, it is recommended that the contractor build a stabilized construction entrance or scrubber pad at the intended construction access to aid in the removal of mud and debris from vehicle tires. Details of the stabilized construction entrance can be found in the M & S Standards Plan No. M-208-1. 46.A fully executed, complete copy of this permit and the Notice to Proceed must be on the job site with the contractor at all times during the construction. Failure to comply with this or any other construction requirement may result in the immediate suspension of work by order of the CDOT inspector or the issuing authority. 47.No work will be allowed at night, Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays without prior authorization. CDOT may also restrict work within the state highway right-of-way during adverse weather conditions, seasonal changes and if safety and operational issues occur. 48.The access shall be completed in an expeditious and safe manner and shall be completed within 45 days from initiation of construction within the state highway right-of-way or in accordance with written concurrence of the Access Manager. All construction shall be completed in a single season. 49.All costs associated with any type of utility work will be at the sole responsibility and cost of the Permittee and at no cost to CDOT. 50.Areas of roadway and/or right-of-way disturbed during this installation shall be restored to their original conditions to insure proper strength and stability, drainage and erosion control. Restoration shall meet CDOT’s standard specifications for topsoil, fertilization, mulching, and re- seeding. 51.Permittee is required to complete the construction according to the terms and conditions of the permit prior to using the access. If the access is used prior to CDOT final acceptance, CDOT may suspend or revoke the permit, until construction is completed per the terms and conditions of the permit. 52.All construction and inspection work must be under the direction of a Colorado Registered Professional Engineer (PE). The PE’s responsibilities include, but are not limited to ensure compliance with plans and specifications with regard to the roadway improvements within the State right-of-way. The PE shall carefully monitor the contractor’s compliance on all aspects of construction, including construction zone traffic control and shall sign and seal the acceptance letter upon completion of the work. 53.If this permit requires a traffic signal installation, the Permittee accepts all responsibility of the traffic signal(s) and operations of the intersection from the start of work on the signal until the signals are accepted by CDOT, City/County, Police/Sheriff and State Patrol. Uniformed traffic control is required for all traffic signal projects and shall be scheduled and paid for by the Permittee. Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 STATE of COLORADO HIGHWAY ACCESS PERMIT ADDITIONAL TERMS and CONDITIONS PERMIT No. 325027 April 18, 2025 Permittee(s): Harvest Roaring Fork, LLC Location: Garfield County on CO Highway 082A, near Mile Ref. Pt. 7.772 Right Construction Completion & Final Acceptance 54.The Permittee shall notify the Access Manager within 10 working days to request a final inspection. This request shall include signed and sealed certification that inspections, materials, materials testing, and construction methods conform to the plans, specifications and purpose of design; and have been completed in accordance with all applicable CDOT Standards and Specifications; and that the access is constructed in conformance with the State Highway Access Code, 2 CCR 601-1, and the terms and conditions included in this permit. The engineer of record shall be present for this inspection. The access serviced by this permit may not be opened to traffic until the CDOT Access Manager provides written initial acceptance. 55.Following the final inspection, CDOT will prepare an access construction inspection summary letter and send it to the applicant, Permittee, and engineer of record. If additional items are required to complete the access construction, a list of these items will be part of the access construction inspection summary letter. All required items and final as-built survey shall be completed within 30 days from receiving the access construction summary letter. When all work is complete and in conformity to these terms and conditions, an initial acceptance letter will be sent to the Permittee and this access may be opened for traffic. 56.The 2-year warrantee period will begin when the initial acceptance letter is issued. In accordance with section 2.5(6) of the Access Code, if any construction element fails within two-years due to improper construction or material specifications, the Permittee shall be responsible for all repairs. Failure to make such repairs may result in suspension of the permit and closure of the access. The letter of final acceptance will be issued once the access has been inspected and is found to comply with all material and construction in accordance with all applicable CDOT standards and specifications approx. 2 years after initial acceptance. Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 Environmental Clearances Information Summary Page 1 of 3 Colorado Department of Transportation July 2020 COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Environmental Clearances Information Summary PURPOSE - This summary is intended to inform entities external to CDOT that may be entering the state highway right-of-way to perform work related to their own facilities (such as Utility, Special Use or Access Permittees), about some of the more commonly encountered environmental permits/clearances that may apply to their activities. This listing is not all-inclusive—additional environmental or cultural resource permits/clearances may be required in certain instances. Appropriate local, state and federal agencies should be contacted for additional information if there is any uncertainty about what permits/clearances are required for a specific activity. IMPORTANT: Please Review The Following Information Carefully – Failure to Comply With Regulatory Requirements May Result In Suspension or Revocation of Your CDOT Permit, Or Enforcement Actions By Other Agencies. CLEARANCE CONTACTS - As indicated in the permit/clearance descriptions listed below, the following agencies may be contacted for additional information: • Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE): General Information – (303) 692-2000 Water Quality Control Division (WQCD): (303) 692-3500 Environmental Permitting Website https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cdphe/all-permits • CDOT Water Quality Program Manager: (303) 512-4053 https://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/water-quality • CDOT Asbestos Project Manager: (303) 512-5519 • Colorado Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation: (303) 866-5216 • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, District Regulatory Offices: Omaha District (Northeastern CO), Denver Office (303) 979-4120 http://www.nwo.usace.army.mil/Missions/RegulatoryProgram/Colorado.aspx Sacramento District (Western CO), Grand Junction Office (970) 243-1199 http://www.spk.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory.aspx Albuquerque District (Southeastern CO), Pueblo Office (719) 543-9459 http://www.spa.usace.army.mil/Missions/RegulatoryProgramandPermits.aspx • CDOT Utilities, Special Use and Access Permitting: (303) 757-9654 https://www.codot.gov/business/permits Wildlife Resources - Disturbance of wildlife shall be avoided to the maximum extent practicable. Entry into areas of known or suspected threatened or endangered species habitat requires special authorization from the CDOT permitting office. If any threatened or endangered species are encountered during the progress of the permitted work, work in the subject area shall be halted and the CDOT Regional Permitting Office and Region Planning and Environmental Manager shall be contacted immediately. Authorization must be provided by CDOT prior to the continuation of work. Information about threatened or endangered species may be obtained from the CDOT website, http://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/wildlife/guidelines, or the Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) website, http://www.cpw.state.co.us/learn/Pages/SOC-ThreatenedEndangeredList.aspx. Additional guidance may be provided by the appropriate Region Planning and Environmental Manager (RPEM). Cultural Resources - The applicant must request a file search of the permit area through the Colorado Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (OAHP), Denver, to ascertain if historic or archaeological resources have previously been identified (https://www.historycolorado.org/file-access; 303-866-5216). Inventory of the permit area by a qualified cultural resources specialist may be necessary, per the recommendation of CDOT. If archaeological sites/artifacts or historic resources are encountered as the project progresses, all work in the subject area shall be halted and the CDOT Regional Permitting Office and Region Planning and Environmental Manager shall be contacted immediately. Authorization must be provided by CDOT prior to the continuation of work. Additional guidance may be provided by the Regional Permitting Office and RPEM. Paleontological Resources - The level of effort required for paleontological resources is dependent on the amount of ground disturbance, including rock scaling, digging, trenching, boring, ground leveling, and similar activities. • If the permit will involve extensive ground disturbance (generally involving more than one mile of CDOT ROW), a full review will be required by a qualified paleontologist, including map, file, and locality searches, with final recommendations provided by the CDOT paleontologist upon receipt of the report. Based on results of the review, a survey or inventory of the permit area may be necessary. • If the permit will involve a small amount of ground disturbance (less than one mile of ROW), the applicant must request a fossil locality search through the University of Colorado Museum of Natural History (https://www.colorado.edu/cumuseum/research- collections/paleontology/policies-procedure) and the Denver Museum of Nature and Science (https://www.dmns.org/science/earth-sciences/earth-sciences-collections/). The museum collections manager will provide information about localities in the project area. If there are no known localities, the permit requirement for paleontology is complete upon submitting that information to CDOT. If there are known localities, the CDOT paleontologist will be contacted by the museum with details, and additional recommendations will be made if necessary. Note that museum staff are not required to disclose the details of fossil localities to the permit applicant, nor is detailed locality information required for the permit application to proceed. • If the permit does not involve ground disturbance, no action is required for paleontological resources. If fossils are encountered during the permitted action, all work in the immediate area of the find should stop and the CDOT Staff Paleontologist and the Region Environmental Manager should be contacted immediately. Authorization must be provided by CDOT prior to the continuation of work. Additional guidance may be provided by the Regional Permitting Office in the Permit Special Provisions. Contact Information: See the museum websites listed above. The CDOT Paleontologist is not able to conduct locality searches independently. For further information contact CDOT Paleontologist Nicole Peavey at nicole.peavey@state.co.us or (303) 757-9632. Environmental Clearances Information Summary Page 2 of 3 Colorado Department of Transportation July 2020 Hazardous Materials, Solid Waste - The Solid Wastes Disposal Sites and Facilities Act C.R.S. 30-20-100, et al, and Regulations Pertaining to Solid Waste Disposal Sites and Facilities (6 CCR 1007-2), prohibit solid waste disposal without an approved Certificate of Designation (a landfill permit). The Colorado Hazardous Waste Act C.R.S. 25-15-301 et al, and the Colorado Hazardous Waste Regulations (6 CCR 1007-3) prohibit the transfer, storage or disposal (TSD) of hazardous waste except at permitted TSD sites. There are no permitted landfills or TSD sites within the State Highway Right of Way. Therefore, all solid or hazardous wastes that might be generated by the activities of entities entering the State Highway Right of Way must be removed from the ROW and disposed of at a permitted facility or designated collection point (e.g., for solid waste, a utility or construction company’s own dumpster). If pre-existing solid waste or hazardous materials contamination (including oil or petroleum contaminated soil, asbestos, chemicals, mine tailings, etc.) is encountered during the performance of work, the permittee shall halt work in the affected area and immediately contact the CDOT Regional Permitting Office for direction as to how to proceed. Contact Information: Theresa Santangelo-Dreiling, CDOT Hazardous Materials Management Supervisor: (303) 512-5524. Asbestos Containing Materials, Asbestos Contaminated Soil - All work on asbestos containing materials (ACM) must comply with the applicable requirements of the CDPHE Air Pollution Control Division’s (APCD) Regulation 8. Disposal of ACM, and work done in asbestos-contaminated soil, must comply with the CDPHE Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division’s (HMWMD) Solid Waste Regulations. The application for any CDOT permit must specifically identify any ACM involved in the work for which authorization is being requested. Additional guidance or requirements may be specified in the permit special provisions. Contact Info: CDPHE APCD and HMWMD Regulations can be accessed via the CDPHE Environmental Permitting Website listed above. Additional information concerning clearance on CDOT projects is available from the CDOT Asbestos Project Manager (303) 949-2729, or Theresa Santangelo-Dreiling, Hazardous Materials Management Supervisor: (303) 512-5524. Transportation of Hazardous Materials - No person may offer or accept a hazardous material for transportation in commerce unless that person is registered in conformance with the United States Department of Transportation regulations at 49 CFR, Part 171. The hazardous material must be properly classed, described, packaged, marked, labeled, and in condition for shipment as required or authorized by applicable requirements, or an exemption, approval or registration has been issued. Vehicles requiring a placard, must obtain authorization and a State HAZMAT Permit from the Colorado Public Utilities Commission. Contact Information: For authorization and more info call the Federal Motor Safety Carrier Administration, US DOT for inter- and intra- state HAZMAT Registration (303) 969-6748. Colorado Public Utilities Commission: (303) 894-2868. Discharge of Dredged or Fill Material – 404 Permits Administered By the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and Section 401 Water Quality Certifications Issued by the CDPHE WQCD - Clean Water Act section 404 permits are often required for the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the U.S., including wetlands. Several types of section 404 permits exist, including nationwide, regional general, and individual permits. Nationwide permits are the most commonly authorized type for activities with relatively minor impacts. If an individual 404 permit is required, section 401 water quality certification from the CDPHE WQCD is also required. Contact the appropriate Corps District Regulatory Office for information about what type of 404 permit may be required (contact information above). Contact the CDPHE Water Quality Control Division at (303) 692-3500. Working on or in any stream or its bank - In order to protect and preserve the state’s fish and wildlife resources from actions that may obstruct, diminish, destroy, change, modify, or vary a natural existing stream or its banks or tributaries, it may be necessary to obtain a Senate Bill 40 certification from the Colorado Department of Natural Resources. A stream is defined as 1) represented by a solid blue line on USGS 7.5’ quadrangle maps; and/or 2) intermittent streams providing live water beneficial to fish and wildlife; and/or 3) segments of streams supporting 25% or more cover within 100 yards upstream or downstream of the project; and/or 4) segments of streams having wetlands present within 200 yards upstream or downstream of the project measured by valley length. The CPW application, as per guidelines agreed upon by CDOT and CPW, can be accessed at https://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/wildlife/guidelines. Erosion and Sediment Control Practices - Any activities that disturb one or more acres of land require a Stormwater Construction Permit (SCP) from the CDPHE-WQCD. Erosion & sediment control requirements will be specified in that permit. In situations where a stormwater permit is not required, all reasonable erosion and sediment control measures should be taken to minimize erosion and sedimentation. Control practices should be in accordance with CDOT Standard Specifications 107.25, 208, 213 and 216 (https://www.codot.gov/business/designsupport/cdot-construction-specifications). The CDOT Erosion Control and Stormwater Quality Guide (website: https://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/landscape-architecture/erosion-storm-quality) can also be used to design erosion/sediment controls. Contact Information: Contact the CDPHE-WQCD at (303) 692-3500. Website: https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cdphe/wq-construction-general-permits Site Stabilization - All disturbances require a stabilization plan, native seeding or landscape design plan according to applicable CDOT Standard Specifications 212-217 and 623. The CDOT Erosion Control and Stormwater Quality Guide should also be used to plan restoration of disturbed vegetation. Website: https://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/landscape- architecture/erosion-storm-quality Stormwater Discharge From Industrial Facilities - Discharges of stormwater runoff from certain types of industrial facilities, such as concrete batch plants - require a CDPS Stormwater Permit. Contact Information: Contact the CDPHE-WQCD at (303) 692- 3500. Website: https://colorado.gov/pacific/cdphe/wq-commerce-and-industry-permits Concrete Washout - Waste generated from concrete activities shall NOT be allowed to flow into the drainage ways, inlets, receiving waters, or in the CDOT ROW. Concrete waste shall be placed in a temporary concrete washout facility and must be located a minimum of 50 feet from state waters, drainageways, and inlets. Concrete washout shall be in accordance to CDOT specifications and guidelines at https://www.codot.gov/business/designsupport/cdot-construction-specifications and refer to the specifications and their revisions for sections 101, 107 and 208. Construction Dewatering (Discharge or Infiltration) and Remediation Activities - Discharges of water encountered during excavation or work in wet areas may require a Construction Dewatering or Remediation Activities Discharge Permit. Contact Environmental Clearances Information Summary Page 3 of 3 Colorado Department of Transportation July 2020 Information: Contact the CDPHE-WQCD at (303) 692-3500. For Applications and Instructions: https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cdphe/wq-construction-general-permits. Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Requirements - When working in a MS4 area, discharges to the storm sewer system are subject to CDOT’s or other municipalities’ MS4 Permit. For activities within the boundaries of a municipality that has a MS4 permit, the owner of such activity should contact the municipality regarding stormwater related requirements. All discharges to the CDOT highway drainage system or within the Right of Way (ROW) must comply with the applicable provisions of the Colorado Water Quality Control Act, the Water Quality Control Commission (WQCC) Regulations (https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cdphe/wqcc-regulations-and-policies-and-water-quality-statutes) and the CDOT MS4 Permit #COS-000005 (https://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/water-quality/documents). Discharges are subject to inspection by CDOT and CDPHE. For CDOT-related MS4 programs and requirements, go to: https://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/water-quality/stormwater-programs. Post-Construction Permanent Water Quality - When working in a CDOT MS4 area and the activity disturbs one or more acres, permanent water quality control measures may be required. Information on the requirements can be found under the CDOT Permanent Water Quality MS4 Program at: https://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/water-quality/stormwater- programs/pwq-permanent-water-quality Discharges to Storm Sewer Systems Prohibited Discharges - All discharges are subject to the provisions of the Colorado Water Quality Control Act and the Colorado Discharge Permit Regulations. Prohibited discharges include, but are not limited to, substances such as wash water, paint, automotive fluids, solvents, oils or soaps and sediment. Allowable Discharges - The following discharges to stormwater systems are allowed without a permit from the CDPHE-WQCD: landscape irrigation, diverted stream flows, uncontaminated ground water infiltration to separate storm sewers, discharges from potable water sources, foundation drains, air conditioning condensation, irrigation water, uncontaminated springs, footing drains, water line flushing, flows from riparian habitats and wetlands, and flow from firefighting activities. Contact Information: Contact the CDPHE-WQCD at (303) 692-3500. Information can also be found in the CDOT Illicit Discharge MS4 Program PDD at: https://www.codot.gov/programs/environmental/water-quality/stormwater-programs/idde.html. Spill Reporting - Spills shall be contained and cleaned up as soon as possible. Spills shall NOT be washed down into the storm drain or buried. All spills shall be reported to the CDOT Illicit Discharge Hotline at (303) 512-4426 (4H20), as well as the Regional Permitting Office and Regional Maintenance Supervisor. Spills on highways, into waterways, any spill in the highway right-of-way exceeding 25 gallons, or that may otherwise present an immediate danger to the public shall be reported by calling 911, and shall also be reported to the CDPHE at 1-877-518-5608. More information can be found at https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cdphe/emergency-reporting-line. Disposal of Drilling Fluids - Drilling fluids used in operations such as Horizontal Directional Drilling may be classified as “discharges” or “solid wastes,” and in general, should be pumped or vacuumed from the construction area, removed from the State Highway Right of Way, and disposed of at permitted facilities that specifically accept such wastes. Disposal of drilling fluids into storm drains, storm sewers, roadside ditches or any other type of man-made or natural waterway is prohibited by Water Quality Control and/or Solid Waste regulations. Small quantities of drilling fluid solids (less than 1 cubic yard of solids) may be left on-site after either being separated from fluids or after infiltration of the water, provided: 1) the drilling fluid consists of only water and bentonite clay, or, if required for proper drilling properties, small quantities of polymer additives that are approved for use in drinking water well drilling; 2) the solids are fully contained in a pit, and are not likely to pose a nuisance to future work in the area, 3) the solids are covered and the area restored as required by CDOT permit requirements (Utility, Special Use, or Access Permits, etc.). Contact Information: Contact CDPHE (telephone #’s listed above). Noxious Weeds and Invasive Species Management Plan - Noxious Weeds and Invasive Species guidance can be found by contacting the Colorado Department of Agriculture (https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/agconservation/noxiousweeds) and the Colorado Division of Parks and Wildlife (http://cpw.state.co.us/aboutus/Pages/RS-NoxiousWeeds.aspx). In either case, management plans involving the control of noxious weeds associated with the permitted activity and cleaning of equipment will be required. CDOT has a Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System permit, otherwise known as (MS4) from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. The permit states that only stormwater can be discharged from CDOT’s storm drain system As part of the permit, CDOT has several different programs to prevent pollutants from entering into the storm drain system: Construction Site Program New Development Redevelopment Program Illicit Discharge Program Industrial Facilities Program Public Education and Outreach Program Pollution Prevention and Good Housekeeping Program Wet Weather Monitoring Program What is stormwater runoff? Stormwater runoff occurs when precipitation from rain or snowmelt flows over the ground. Impervious surfaces like roads and sidewalks prevent stormwater from naturally soaking into the ground Why is stormwater runoff a problem? Stormwater can pick up debris, chemicals, dirt and other pollutants and flow into CDOT’s storm drain system or directly into a stream, river, lake, wetland or reservoir. Anything that enters CDOT’s storm drain system is discharged untreated into the waterways we use for fishing, swimming, and providing drinking water. For more information on CDOT Utility Permits: https://www.codot.gov/business/permits/utilitie sspecialuse For more information on CDOT Access Permits: https://www.codot.gov/business/permits/access permits For more information on CDOT Water Quality Program: Water Quality Program Manager 4201 E. Arkansas Ave. Shumate Building Denver, Colorado 80222 303‐757‐9343 Water Quality Program Industrial Facilities Program Dredged spoil, dirt, slurry, solid waste, incinerator residue, sewage, sewage sludge, garbage, trash, chemical waste, biological nutrient, biological material, radioactive material, heat, pH, wrecked or discarded equipment, rock, sand, any industrial, municipal, or agricultural waste. Tips for Reporting an Illicit Discharge Call the illicit discharge hotline at (303) 512‐4426 From a safe distance try to estimate the amount of the discharge. Identify characteristics of the discharge (color, odor, algae, etc.). Obtain information on the vehicle dumping the waste (if applicable). Do not approach! Call *CSP for illicit dumping. If possible, take a photo, record a license plate. REMEMBER: Never get too close to the illicit discharge, it may be dangerous!!! Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 Industrial Facilities Program Elements: 1.Educate and outreach to owners or operators that have potential to contribute substantial pollutant to water. 2.Report and include information on discharge and water quality concerns. Provide written notification within 15 days of discovery to CDPHE. 3.Submit an annual report to CDPHE containing the number of informational brochures distributed; name and title of each individual trained. Education There are instances when a utility company or other entity doing work in the state highway right‐of‐way will require some type of environmental permit or clearance for that work. CDOT has put together an Environmental Clearances Information Summary for those applying for a CDOT Utility and Special Use Permit or Access Permit to obtain all required clearances. This fact sheet is given to each permittee and is available at: http://www.coloradodot.info/programs/ environmental/resources/guidance- standards/Environmental%20Clearances% 20Info%20Summary.pdf Industrial facilities can use control measures (CM) otherwise known as Best Management Practices (BMP) during the construction of a facility and when operating the facility. Control measures are schedules of activities, maintenance procedures, and other management practices to prevent and reduce pollution entering into CDOT’s storm drain system. Control Measures also include treatment, operating procedures, and practices to control site run off which can include structural and non‐structural controls. Control Measures for Industrial Facilities CDOT defines a utility, or utility facility as any privately, publicly, or cooperatively owned line, facility, or system producing, transmitting or distributing the following: Communications Cable television Power Electricity Light Heat Gas Oil Crude Products Water Stream Waste Stormwater not connected with highway drainage Similar Commodity Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 Permits 325027 & 325028 Legend 3000 ft N ➤➤ N Image © 2025 Airbus Image © 2025 Airbus Image © 2025 Airbus Highway 82 Approximate access location for RIRO Movement. Permit 325027 Approximate access location for 3/4 Movement access. Permit 325028 Cattle Creek Rd Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 Docusign Envelope ID: B7D7C26C-5572-43E7-BDA3-2D11C4B16AB9 Exhibit F Phasing Plan Harvest Roaring Fork Phasing Plan Initial Major Infrastructure Phase Timeframe: July 2025 to December 31, 2027 • CDOT improvements for Highway 82 access pursuant to the CDOT permit that was issued on April 18, 2025. This includes, but is not limited to, all the required CDOT improvements on Highway 82 for the “Michigan Left Turn”, including the two signalized locations for the U-turns and left turn and the median at Cattle Creek. This phase also will include the northern access point to the Harvest Roaring Fork (“Harvest”) community, which is located between the North Frontage Neighborhood and The Farm. • Construction of key initial utility infrastructure: o Water and sewer lines. This includes, but is not limited to, the main water and sewer line from the Roaring Fork Water and Sanitation District plant to the Harvest property. o Natural gas line connection to the Harvest property. o Lift station to serve initial phases. • Demolition of the former Sopris restaurant and closure of its three access drives to Highway 82. • The initial phase of development will also include the commencement of the initial riparian and environmental restoration work, particularly along Cattle Creek (work in the existing conservation easement is subject to the approval of the Roaring Fork Conservancy). The Farm Phase – Phase One Timeframe: PUD Approval to December 31, 2029 • This phase will include the construction of the Harvest barn, the Patio, the Harvest farm, and the Highway 82 access drive. It will also include the construction of the road crossing of the Rio Grande Trail (at the location of Harvest’s crossing easement and the re-construction of the trail to pass under the road. • The approved uses in The Farm will be constructed. At the same time, the open spaces, parks and trails as specifically required in the PUD shall also be constructed. • The supporting infrastructure and roads necessary to serve this neighborhood will be constructed, subject to review and approval by County (in each preliminary plan phase) and the Carbondale Fire & Rural Protection District. • Additional key Harvest utility infrastructure as required by separate agreement with the Roaring Fork Water and Sanitation District which may include water treatment system improvements, and storage tanks to ensure the adequate provision of utilities (to state required service standards) and required fire flow. North Frontage Neighborhood Phase Timeframe: PUD Approval to December 31, 2030 • The approved uses in the North Frontage Neighborhood will be constructed. At the same time, the open spaces, parks, trails as required in the PUD shall be constructed. • The supporting infrastructure and roads necessary to serve this neighborhood will be constructed. Village Center Timeframe: July 1, 2026 to December 31, 2035 • The approved uses in the Village Center will be constructed. At the same time, the open spaces, parks, trails as required in the PUD shall be constructed. • The supporting infrastructure and roads necessary to serve this neighborhood will be constructed. South Riverfront Neighborhood Phase Timeframe: January 1, 2027 to December 31, 2037 • The approved uses in the South Riverfront Neighborhood will be constructed. At the same time, the open spaces, parks, trails as required in the PUD shall be constructed. • The supporting infrastructure and roads necessary to serve this neighborhood will be constructed. Village Neighborhood Phase Timeframe: January 1, 2027 to December 31, 2037 • The approved uses in the Village Neighborhood will be constructed. At the same time, the open spaces, parks, trails as required in the PUD shall be constructed. • The supporting infrastructure and roads necessary to serve this neighborhood will be constructed. Creekside Neighborhood Phase Timeframe: February 1, 2027 to December 31, 2038 • The approved uses in the Creekside Neighborhood will be constructed. At the same time, the open spaces, parks, trails as required in the PUD shall be constructed. • The supporting infrastructure and roads necessary to serve this neighborhood will be constructed. Sopris Neighborhood Phase Timeframe: July 1, 2027 to December 31, 2039 • The approved uses in the Sopris Neighborhood will be constructed. At the same time, the open spaces, parks, trails as required in the PUD shall be constructed. • The supporting infrastructure and roads necessary to serve this neighborhood will be constructed. North Riverfront Neighborhood Phase Timeframe: November 1, 2027 to December 31, 2040 • The approved uses in the North Frontage Neighborhood will be constructed. At the same time, the open spaces, parks, trails as required in the PUD shall be constructed. • The supporting infrastructure and roads necessary to serve this neighborhood will be constructed. North Central Neighborhood Phase Timeframe: January 1, 2028 to December 31, 2042 • The approved uses in the North Central Neighborhood will be constructed. At the same time, the open spaces, parks, trails as required in the PUD shall be constructed. • The supporting infrastructure and roads necessary to serve this neighborhood will be constructed. Additional Phasing Plan Notes The time frame for each phase listed above is a good-faith estimate. The beginning date for each time frame is an estimate of the earliest possible start date for that phase; it is not a deadline to start that phase nor is it a prohibition to start development earlier than the beginning date. If the phase is not 100% complete by the estimated end date in the time frame, Harvest may extend that estimated time frame when it next submits a preliminary plan application for that phase or simply by informing the County of the new estimated time frame. Given the scale of the proposed project and the adaptable nature of the proposed PUD, any delay in completing a phase, change in phasing schedule/order, or a failure to proceed to a subsequent phase, will not have a substantially adverse impact on the prior and future phases of the PUD or its surroundings. As described in this phasing plan, it is acknowledged that detailed phasing for this project is subject to market influences that cannot be forecast with any relative certainty. The County and the developer agree that best planning practices are ensured/required by the proposed development approvals. Given the iterative nature of the proposed development, the time frames of the neighborhood phases will likely overlap with each other as they are developed. It is possible that multiple phases of Harvest may be simultaneously under development. As construction progresses in each neighborhood, the construction of the open spaces, parks, and trails required in that neighborhood by the PUD shall be constructed in such a manner that those community amenities remain equal to, or ahead of, the construction of buildings in that neighborhood. This shall be determined by the ratio of land area developed/constructed in that neighborhood compared to the land area developed for community amenities. For example, if 60% of the neighborhood has been developed, then at least 60% or more of the required land area for open space, parks and trails for that neighborhood must also be completed. Exhibit G Development Agreement 1 NOTE – This Draft Subdivision Improvements Agreement is a draft template for informational purposes only. It is anticipated the language within this document will be modified throughout the Application process. THE HARVEST ROARING FORK DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS AGREEMENT THIS HARVEST ROARING FORK DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS AGREEMENT (“SIA”) is made and entered into this ___ day of _________________, 2025, by and between Harvest Roaring Fork, LLC (“Owner”) and the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO, acting for the County of Garfield, State of Colorado, as a body politic and corporate, directly or through its authorized representatives and agents (“BOCC”). RECITALS 1. Owner is the owner and developer of the Harvest Roaring Fork Planned Unit Development (the “Subdivision”), which property is depicted on the ________________ Final Plat (“Final Plat” or “Final Plat of the Subdivision”). The real property subject to this SIA is described in that Final Plat, recorded at Reception Number of the real estate records of Garfield County, Colorado and incorporated by this reference. 2. On _________________, 2025, the BOCC, by Resolution No. ___________, recorded at Reception Number ____________of the real estate records of Garfield County, Colorado, and incorporated by this reference, approved the Final Plat which, among other things, would create ___ residential lots and ________ of commercial space. 3. As a condition precedent to the approval of the Final Plat submitted to the BOCC as required by the laws of the State of Colorado and by the Garfield County Land Use and Development Code (“LUDC”), Owner wants to enter into this SIA with the BOCC. 4. Owner has agreed to execute and deliver a letter of credit or other security in a form 2 satisfactory to the BOCC to secure and guarantee Owner’s performance under this Agreement and has agreed to certain restrictions and conditions regarding the sale of properties and issuance of building permits and certificates of occupancy, all as more fully set forth below. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and the mutual covenants and promises contained herein, the BOCC and Owner (each a “Party” and collectively the “Parties”) agree as follows: Agreement 1. FINAL PLAT APPROVAL. The BOCC hereby accepts and approves the Final Plat of the Subdivision, on the date set forth above, subject to the terms and conditions of this SIA, Resolution No. ___, the requirements of the LUDC, and any other governmental or quasi- governmental regulations applicable to the Subdivision (“Final Plat Approval”). Recording of the Final Plat in the records of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder shall be in accordance with this SIA and at the time prescribed herein. Additionally, the Final Plat constitutes a Site-Specific Development Plan, and approval of the Final Plat shall create a vested property right pursuant to Article 68 of Title 24, C.R.S., as amended. 2. OWNER’S PERFORMANCE AS TO SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS. a. Completion Date/Substantial Compliance. While the entire Property will be subdivided through the Final Plat, Owner intends to develop the Property in phases. Owner shall cause to be constructed and installed in multiple phases as described in Exhibit A the subdivision improvements, including off-site improvements, identified in the Exhibits defined in subparagraph 2.a.i, below (each defined “Phase [respective phase #] Subdivision Improvements,” “respectively, and, collectively, are the “Subdivision Improvements”) at Owner’s expense, including payment of fees required by Garfield County and/or other governmental and quasi-governmental entities with regulatory jurisdiction over the 3 Subdivision. The Subdivision Improvements, except for revegetation, shall be completed according to the schedule attached as Exhibit A.1. The Subdivision Improvements shall be constructed and completed in substantial compliance with the following: i. Plans marked “Approved for Construction” for all Subdivision Improvements prepared by Sopris Engineering and submitted to the BOCC on _______________, 202_, such plans being summarized in the list of drawings attached to and made a part of this SIA by reference as Exhibit A; the estimate of cost of completion, certified by and bearing the stamp of Owner’s professional engineer licensed in the State of Colorado (“Owner’s Engineer”), attached to and made a part of this SIA by reference as Exhibit B, which estimate shall include an additional ten (10) percent of the total of each phase for contingencies; and all other documentation required to be submitted along with the Final Plat under pertinent sections of the LUDC (“Final Plat Documents”). ii. All requirements of the Final Plat Approval. iii. All laws, regulations, orders, resolutions and requirements of Garfield County and all special districts and any other governmental entity or quasi- governmental authority(ies) with jurisdiction. iv. The provisions of this SIA. b. Satisfaction of Subdivision Improvements Provisions. The BOCC agrees that if all Subdivision Improvements are constructed and installed in accordance with this paragraph 2; the record drawings have been submitted upon completion of the Subdivision Improvements, as detailed in paragraph 3(c), below; and all other requirements of this SIA 4 have been met, then the Owner shall be deemed to have satisfied all terms and conditions of the Final Plat Approval, the Final Plat Documents, and the LUDC with respect to the installation of the Subdivision Improvements. 3. SECURITY FOR SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS (EXCEPT RE- VEGETATION). a. Subdivision Improvements Letter of Credit and Substitute Collateral. As security for Owner’s obligation to complete the Phase 1 Subdivision Improvements, Owner shall deliver to the BOCC, on or before the date of recording of the Final Plat of the Subdivision, a Letter of Credit in the form agreed to be acceptable to the BOCC, attached to and incorporated in this SIA by reference as Exhibit C (the “Phase 1 LOC”), or in a form consistent with the Uniform Commercial Code, C.R.S. § 4-1-101, et seq. and approved by the BOCC. The Phase 1 LOC shall be in the amount of $( full estimate for Phase 1 ), representing the full estimated cost of completing the Phase 1 Subdivision Improvements, with a sufficient contingency to cover cost changes, unforeseen costs, and other variables (10% of the estimated cost), as set forth and certified by Owner’s Engineer on Exhibit B to guarantee completion of the Phase 1 Subdivision Improvements. The Phase 1 LOC shall be valid for a minimum of six (6) months beyond the Phase 1 Completion Date set forth in Paragraph 2.a., above. As security for Owner’s obligation to complete each phase of the Subdivision Improvements beyond Phase 1, Owner shall, prior to commencement of construction of the respective phase of the Subdivision Improvements, either (i) deliver to the BOCC a Letter of Credit in the form of Exhibit C in an amount equal to the full estimated cost of completing that respective phase of the Subdivision Improvements, with a sufficient contingency to 5 cover cost changes, unforeseen costs and other variables (not less than 10% of the estimated cost and as approved by the BOCC), as set forth and certified by Owner’s Engineer on Exhibit B to guarantee completion of each phase of the Subdivision Improvements, or (ii) extend the Phase 1 LOC to a date that is at least six (6) months beyond the additional respective phase’s Completion Date and increase or decrease the amount thereof, if needed, to the amount set forth on Exhibit B for the respective phase of the Subdivision Improvements. The BOCC, at its sole option, may permit the Owner to substitute collateral other than a Letter of Credit, in a form reasonably acceptable to the BOCC, for the purpose of securing the completion of the Subdivision Improvements subject to this Paragraph 3.a. b. LOC Requirements and Plat Recording. Each LOC required by this SIA shall be issued by a state or national banking institution acceptable to the BOCC. If the institution issuing an LOC is not licensed in the State of Colorado and transacting business within the State of Colorado, the LOC shall be “confirmed” within the meaning of the Uniform Commercial Code, Letters of Credit, § 4-5-101, et seq., C.R.S., as amended, by a bank that is licensed to do business in the State of Colorado, doing business in Colorado, and acceptable to the BOCC. Each LOC shall state that presentation of drafts drawn under the LOC shall be at an office of the issuer or confirmer located in the State of Colorado. The Final Plat of the Subdivision shall not be recorded until the security for the Phase 1 Subdivision Improvements referenced in this paragraph 3 has been received and approved by the BOCC. c. Extension of LOC Expiration Date. If any Completion Date for any phase of the Subdivision Improvements, as outlined in Exhibit ___, is extended by a written amendment to this SIA, the time period for the validity of the applicable LOC shall be 6 similarly extended. For each six (6) month extension, at the sole option of the BOCC, the face amount of the LOC shall be subject to re-certification by Owner’s Engineer of the cost of completion and review by the BOCC. d. Unenforceable LOC. Should an LOC expire or become void or unenforceable for any reason, including bankruptcy of the Owner or the financial institution issuing or confirming the LOC, prior to the BOCC’s approval of Owner’s Engineer’s certification of completion of the respective phase of the Subdivision Improvements, as applicable, this SIA shall become void and of no force and effect and the Final Plat shall be vacated pursuant to the terms of this SIA. e. Partial Releases of Security. Owner may request partial releases of the LOC for any phase of the Subdivision Improvements and shall do so by means of submission to the Building and Planning Department of a “Written Request for Partial Release of LOC”, in the form attached to and incorporated by this reference as Exhibit D, accompanied by the Owner’s Engineer’s stamped certificate of partial completion of improvements. The Owner’s Engineer’s seal shall certify that the subject Subdivision Improvements have been constructed in accordance with the requirements of this SIA, including all Final Plat Documents and Final Plat Approval. Owner may also request release for a portion of the security upon proof that 1) Owner has a valid contract with a public utility company regulated by the Colorado Public Utilities Commission obligating such company to install certain utility lines; and 2) Owner has paid to the utility company the cost of installation as required by the contract. The BOCC shall authorize successive releases of portions of the face amount of the LOC as portions of the Subdivision Improvements, dealt with in this Paragraph 3, are certified as complete to the BOCC by the Owner’s Engineer and said 7 certification is approved by the BOCC. f. BOCC’s Investigation. Notwithstanding the foregoing, upon submission of the Owner’s Written Request for Partial Release of LOC, along with Owner’s Engineer’s certificate of partial completion of improvements, the BOCC may review the certification and may inspect and review the Subdivision Improvements certified as complete to determine whether or not they have been constructed in compliance with relevant specifications, as follows: i. If no letter of potential deficiency is furnished to Owner by the BOCC within fifteen (15) business days of submission of Owner’s Written Request for Partial Release of LOC, accompanied by Owner’s Engineer’s certificate of partial completion of improvements, all Subdivision Improvements certified as complete shall be deemed approved by the BOCC, and the BOCC shall authorize release of the appropriate amount of security. ii. If the BOCC chooses to inspect and determines that all or a portion of the Subdivision Improvements certified as complete are not in compliance with the relevant specifications, the BOCC shall furnish a letter of potential deficiency to the Owner, within fifteen (15) business days of submission of Owner’s Written Request for Partial Release of LOC, accompanied by Owner’s Engineer’s certificate of partial completion of improvements. iii. If a letter of potential deficiency is issued identifying a portion of the certified Subdivision Improvements as potentially deficient, then all Subdivision Improvements not identified as potentially deficient shall be deemed approved by the BOCC, and the BOCC shall authorize release of the amount of security related to the 8 Subdivision Improvements certified as complete and not identified as potentially deficient. iv. With respect to Subdivision Improvements identified as potentially deficient in a letter of potential deficiency, the BOCC shall have thirty (30) days from the date of the letter to complete the initial investigation, begun under subparagraph 3.f.ii., above, and provide written confirmation of the deficiency(ies) to the Owner. v. If the BOCC finds that the Subdivision Improvements are complete, in compliance with the relevant specifications, then the appropriate amount of security shall be authorized for release within ten (10) business days after completion of such investigation. g. BOCC Completion of Improvements and Other Remedies. If the BOCC finds, within the thirty (30) day period of time defined in subparagraph 3.f.iv. above, that the Subdivision Improvements are not complete, or if the BOCC determines that the Owner will not or cannot construct any or all of the Subdivision Improvements, whether or not Owner has submitted a written request for release of LOC, the BOCC may withdraw and employ from the LOC such funds as may be necessary to construct the Subdivision Improvements in accordance with the specifications, up to the face amount or remaining face amount of the applicable LOC. In such event, the BOCC shall make a written finding regarding Owner’s failure to comply with this SIA prior to requesting payment from the LOC in accordance with the LUDC. In lieu of or in addition to drawing on the LOC, the BOCC may bring an action for injunctive relief or damages for the Owner’s failure to adhere to the provisions of this SIA regarding Subdivision Improvements. The BOCC shall provide the Owner a 9 reasonable time to cure any identified deficiency(ies) prior to requesting payment from the LOC or filing a civil action. h. Final Release of Security. Upon completion of all Phase 1 Subdivision Improvements, and including off-site improvements, Owner shall submit to the BOCC, through the Building and Planning Department: 1) record drawings bearing the stamp of Owner’s Engineer certifying that all Phase 1 Subdivision Improvements, including off-site improvements, have been constructed in accordance with the requirements of this SIA, including all Final Plat Documents and the Final Plat Approval, in hard copy and digital format acceptable to the BOCC; 2) copies of instruments conveying real property and other interests which Owner is obligated to convey to any statutory special district or other entity at the time of Final Plat Approval [, unless escrowed in accordance with paragraph __ below]; and 3) a Written Request for Final Release of LOC, in the form attached to and incorporated herein as Exhibit E, along with Owner’s Engineer’s stamp and certificate of final completion of improvements, unless the Phase 1 LOC will be extended to cover the additional phases of the Subdivision Improvements, in which case the Phase 1 LOC will remain in effect, as amended and extended. The same procedure will be followed for the subsequent phases of the Subdivision Improvements. i. The BOCC shall authorize a final release of each LOC after the Subdivision Improvements that are the subject of the LOC are certified as final to the BOCC by the Owner’s Engineer and said final certification is approved by the BOCC. If the BOCC finds that the Subdivision Improvements are complete, in accordance with the relevant specifications, the BOCC shall authorize release of the final amount of security, within ten (10) business days following submission of the 10 Owner’s Written Request for Final Release of LOC accompanied by the other documents required by this paragraph 3.h. ii. Notwithstanding the foregoing, upon Owner’s Written Request for Final Release of LOC, accompanied by Owner’s Engineer’s certificate of final completion of improvements, the BOCC may inspect and review the Subdivision Improvements certified as complete. If the BOCC does so review and inspect, the process contained in paragraph 3.f., above, shall be followed. iii. If the BOCC finds that the Subdivision Improvements are complete, in accordance with the relevant specifications, the BOCC shall authorize final release of security within ten (10) days after completion of such investigation. iv. If the BOCC finds that the Subdivision Improvements are not complete, in accordance with the relevant specifications, the BOCC may complete remaining Subdivision Improvements, or institute court action in accordance with the process outlined in paragraph 3.g., above. 4. SECURITY FOR REVEGETATION. a. Revegetation LOC and Substitute Collateral. $____________ of the face amount of each LOC specified in Paragraph 3a, above, shall be allocated to revegetation of disturbed areas within each Phase (“Revegetation LOC”), the cost for which is detailed as a subdivision improvement in Exhibit B. The Revegetation LOC shall be valid for a minimum of one (1) year following the last phase’s specified Completion Date. The BOCC, at its sole option may permit the Owner to substitute collateral other than a Letter of Credit, in a form acceptable to the BOCC, for the purpose of securing the completion of revegetation. b. Revegetation LOC General Provisions. The provisions of paragraphs 3.b., 11 3.c. and 3.d., above, dealing with Letter of Credit requirements, extension of expiration dates, increase in face amounts, plat recording, and plat vacating shall apply to the Revegetation LOC. c. Revegetation Review and Notice of Deficiency. Upon establishment of revegetation, the Owner shall request review of the revegetation work by the Garfield County Vegetation Management Department, by telephone or in writing. Such review shall be for the purpose of verification of success of revegetation and reclamation in accordance with the Garfield County Weed Management Plan 2000, adopted by Resolution No. 2002-94 and recorded in the Office of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder as Reception No. 580572, as amended, and the revegetation/reclamation plan titled _____________ and dated _________________ for the Subdivision submitted as part of the Final Plat Documents. If the Vegetation Management Department refuses approval and provides written notice of deficiency(ies), the Owner shall cure such deficiency(ies) by further revegetation efforts, approved by the Vegetation Management Department, as such efforts may be instituted within the two (2) years following the Phase 3 Completion Date, as applicable. d. Single Request for Release of Revegetation LOC. Following receipt of written approval of the Vegetation Management Department, the Owner may request release of the Revegetation LOC and shall do so by means of submission to the BOCC, through the Building and Planning Department, of a Written Request for Release of Revegetation LOC, in the form attached to and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit E, along with certification of completion by the Owner, or Owner’s agent with knowledge, and a copy of the written approval of the Vegetation Management Department. It is specifically understood by the parties that the Revegetation LOC is not subject to successive partial releases, as 12 authorized in paragraph 3.e., above. Further, the Revegetation LOC and the BOCC ’s associated rights to withdraw funds and bring a court action may survive final release of the LOC securing other Subdivision Improvements, defined in paragraph 3.a., above. e. BOCC’s Completion of Revegetation and Other Remedies. If Owner’s revegetation efforts are deemed by the BOCC to be unsuccessful, in the reasonable opinion of the BOCC only upon the recommendation of the Vegetation Management Department, or if the BOCC determines that the Owner will not or cannot complete revegetation, the BOCC, in its reasonable discretion, may withdraw and employ from the Revegetation LOC such funds as may be necessary to carry out the revegetation work, up to the face amount of the Revegetation LOC. In lieu of or in addition to drawing on the Revegetation LOC, the BOCC may bring an action for injunctive relief or damages for the Owner’s failure to adhere to the provisions of this SIA related to revegetation. The BOCC shall provide the Owner a reasonable time to cure any identified deficiency prior to requesting payment from the Revegetation LOC or filing a civil action. 5. WATER SUPPLY AND WASTEWATER COLLECTION. As stated in paragraph 13, below, prior to issuance by the BOCC of any certificates of occupancy for any residences or other habitable structures constructed within the Subdivision, Owner shall install , connect, and make operable a water supply and distribution system for potable water in accordance with approved plans and specifications. All easements and rights-of-way necessary for installation, operation, service and maintenance of such water supply and distribution system(s) and wastewater collection system shall be as shown on the Final Plat. Owner shall deposit with the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder executed originals of the instruments of conveyance for easements appurtenant to the water and wastewater system(s), for recordation following recording of the Final Plat and this 13 SIA, unless such easements are established on the Final Plat. All facilities and equipment contained within the water supply and wastewater collection system(s) shall be transferred by Owner to the applicable special district or municipality by bill of sale. If a third-party water or sewer service entity requires warranty of the system(s), Owner shall provide proof to the BOCC that such warranty is in effect and, if necessary, has been assigned. 6. ROADS. Pursuant to the Final Plat Approvals, all internal roads within the Subdivision shall be dedicated to and owned by Garfield County for the public benefit. Garfield County shall be solely responsible for the maintenance, repair, and upkeep of said rights-of-way, including the traveled surface of the roadways and portions of the rights-of-way outside of the traveled surface. Neither Owner nor the Subdivision association shall be obligated to maintain any road rights-of-way within the Subdivision which are dedicated to the County. 7. PUBLIC UTILITY RIGHTS-OF-WAY. Whether or not utility easements exist elsewhere in the Subdivision, all road rights-of-way within the Subdivision shall contain rights-of- way for installation and maintenance of utilities. Public utility easements shall be dedicated by the Owner, prior to dedication of the road rights-of-way to the County, to the public utilities on the face of the Final Plat, subject to the Garfield County Road and Right-of-Way Use Regulations, recorded as Reception No. 643477, in the records of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder, as amended. The County shall be solely responsible for the maintenance, repair and upkeep of said public utility easements once dedicated, unless otherwise agreed to with the public utility company(ies). The Subdivision shall not be obligated for the maintenance, repair, and upkeep of any utility easement within the Subdivision after dedication of the underlying road rights-of-way to the County. In the event a utility company, whether publicly or privately owned, requires conveyance of the easements dedicated on the face of the Final Plat by separate document, Owner shall execute and record the 14 required conveyance documents. 8. INTENTIONALLY DELETED. 9. INDEMNITY. The Owner shall indemnify and hold the BOCC harmless and defend the BOCC from all claims which may arise as a result of the Owner’s installation of the Subdivision Improvements, including off-site improvements and revegetation, and any other agreement or obligation of Owner, related to development of the Subdivision, required pursuant to this SIA. The Owner, however, does not indemnify the BOCC for claims made asserting that the standards imposed by the BOCC are improper or the cause of the injury asserted, or from claims which may arise from the negligent acts or omissions of the BOCC or its employees. The BOCC shall notify the Owner of receipt by the BOCC of a notice of claim or a notice of intent to sue, and the BOCC shall afford the Owner the option of defending any such claim or action. Failure to notify and provide such written option to the Owner shall extinguish the BOCC’s rights under this paragraph. Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to constitute a waiver of governmental immunity granted to the BOCC by Colorado statutes and case law. 10. ROAD IMPACT FEE. Road Impact Fees will be due at the time of building permit and will be assessed in relation to the square footage and type of dwelling unit or other structure that is proposed. Owner shall receive a credit against any Road Impact Fees when due for all amounts that Owner expended on roadway and other infrastructure improvements conducted off-site. 11. FEES IN LIEU OF DEDICATION OF SCHOOL LAND. Owner shall make a cash deposit in lieu of dedicating land to the RE-1 School District, calculated in accordance with the LUDC and the requirements of state law. The Owner and the BOCC acknowledge and agree that the cash in lieu payment for the Subdivision is calculated as follows: (Unimproved Per Acre Market value of Land) x (Land Dedication Standard calculated pursuant to the Garfield County LUDC 15 Article 7-404.B.2) x (Number of Units) = Payment. Unimproved per acre market value of land, based upon an appraisal submitted to the BOCC by Owner, is $_________________. Land Dedication Standard is: (___ single family dwelling units x .020 acres) + (___ multi-family dwelling units x .015acres) equals ._____ acres; Number of Units is _____ Payment equals ________. The Owner, therefore, shall pay to the Garfield County Treasurer, at or prior to the time of recording of the Final Plat, _______________ ($___________) as a payment in lieu of dedication of land to the RE-1 School District. Said fee shall be transferred by the BOCC to the school district in accordance with the provisions of § 30-28-133, C.R.S., as amended, and the LUDC. The Owner agrees that it is obligated to pay the above-stated fee, accepts such obligations, and waives any claim that Owner is not required to pay the cash in lieu of land dedication fee. The Owner agrees that Owner will not claim, nor is Owner entitled to claim, subsequent to recording of the Final Plat of the Subdivision, a reimbursement of the fee in lieu of land dedication to the RE-1 School District. 12. FEE WAIVER FOR HOUSING MITIGATION. Owner is eligible for, and shall be granted upon application, fee waivers and incentives for (1) traffic impact fees related to construction of affordable housing units or Mitigation Units as defined by the Garfield County LUDC, (2) building permit review fees for the construction of any affordable housing units or Mitigation Units as defined by the Garfield County LUDC, and (3) be granted a density bonus for the construction of deed restricted units and Accessory Dwelling Units. 13. BUILDING PERMITS AND CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY. No building permit shall be issued unless the Owner demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Carbondale & Rural 16 Fire Protection District (“District”), if the District has so required, that there is adequate water available to the construction site for the District’s purposes [and all applicable District fees have been paid to the District]. No certificates of occupancy shall issue for any habitable building or structure, including residences, within the Subdivision until all Subdivision Improvements [, except revegetation] and including off-site improvements, have been completed and are operational as required by this SIA. 14. [INTENTIONALLY OMITTED] 15. ENFORCEMENT. In addition to any rights provided by Colorado statute, the withholding of building permits and certificates of occupancy, provided for in paragraph 13, above, the provisions for release of security, detailed in paragraph 3, above, and the provisions for plat vacation, detailed in paragraph 14, above, it is mutually agreed by the BOCC and the Owner, that the BOCC, without making an election of remedies, and any purchaser of any lot within the Subdivision shall have the authority to bring an action in the Garfield County District Court to compel enforcement of this SIA. Nothing in this SIA, however, shall be interpreted to require the BOCC to bring an action for enforcement or to withhold permits or certificates or to withdraw unused security or to vacate the Final Plat or a portion thereof, nor shall this paragraph or any other provision of this SIA be interpreted to permit the purchaser of a lot to file an action against the BOCC. 16. NOTICE BY RECORDATION. This SIA shall be recorded in the Office of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder and shall be a covenant running with title to all lots, tracts and parcels within the Subdivision. Such recording shall constitute notice to prospective purchasers and other interested persons as to the terms and provisions of this SIA. 17. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS. The obligations and rights contained herein shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns of the Owner and the BOCC. 17 18. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION AND NOTICE PROVISIONS. The representatives of the Owner and the BOCC, identified below, are authorized as contract administrators and notice recipients. Notices required or permitted by this SIA shall be in writing and shall be effective upon the date of delivery, or attempted delivery if delivery is refused. Delivery shall be made in person, by certified return receipt requested U.S. Mail, receipted delivery service, or electronic transmission, addressed to the authorized representatives of the BOCC and the Owner at the address or facsimile number set forth below: Owner: BOCC: ______________________________ ______________________________ ______________________________ ______________________________ w/copy to, JVAM c/o Chad J. Lee, Esq. 901 Grand Ave. Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 chad@jvamlaw.com; cc laurel@jvamlaw.com Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado c/o Building & Planning Dir. 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Phone: (970) 945-8212 Fax: (970) 384-3470 18 19. AMENDMENT AND SUBSTITUTION OF SECURITY. This SIA may be modified, but only in writing signed by the parties hereto, as their interests then appear. Any such amendment, including, by way of example, extension of the Completion Date, substitution of the form of security, or approval of a change in the identity of the security provider/issuer, shall be considered by the BOCC at a scheduled public meeting. If such an amendment includes a change in the identity of the provider/issuer of security, due to a conveyance of the Subdivision by the Owner to a successor in interest, Owner shall provide a copy of the recorded assignment document(s) to the BOCC, along with the original security instrument. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the parties may change the identification of notice recipients and contract administrators and the contact information provided in paragraph 18, above, in accordance with the provisions of that paragraph and without formal amendment of this SIA and without consideration at a BOCC meeting. 20. COUNTERPARTS. This SIA may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, and all of which, when taken together, shall be deemed one and the same instrument. 21. VENUE AND JURISDICTION. Venue and jurisdiction for any cause arising out of or related to this SIA shall lie with the District Court of Garfield County, Colorado, and this SIA shall be construed according to the laws of the State of Colorado. 22. VESTED RIGHTS. The Final Plat constitutes a Site Specific Development Plan. The BOCC agrees that Owner shall have a vested property right for a period of twenty-five years from the date of recordation of this SIA (the “Vested Rights Period”) to undertake and complete development of the Property in accordance with the Final Plat Documents and this SIA. In connection with the foregoing, (i) the maximum number of residential dwelling units and acres for residential use set forth in the Final Plat Documents, as such Final Plat Documents may be amended 19 from time to time upon County approval; (ii) the right to develop the Property in accordance with the uses, densities, and general locations set forth in the Final Plat Documents; (iii) the right to develop the Property in accordance with the design and development standards set forth in the LUDC and the terms and conditions set forth in the Final Plat Documents are hereby vested for the Vested Rights Period. Except as otherwise provided by statue, after the Effective Date, the County shall not take any zoning or land use action regarding the Property which would have the effect of altering, impairing, preventing, diminishing, imposing a moratorium on development, delaying, or otherwise adversely affecting any of Owner’s vested rights set forth in this Agreement. [Space intentionally left blank; signature pages follow] 20 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have signed this SIA to be effective upon the date of Final Plat Approval for the Subdivision. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTEST: OF GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO _________________________ By: ___________________________ Clerk to the Board Chairman Date: __________________________ OWNER By: ____________________________ ________________________________ (Name and Title) Date: __________________________ STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss. COUNTY OF GARFIELD ) Subscribed and sworn to before me by ________________________, an authorized representative of __________________, Owner of the Subdivision, this ___ day of __________________, 202__. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires: ____________________________ _______________________________ Notary Public 21 EXHIBIT A Phasing and List of Plans and Drawings of Subdivision Improvements : List of Subdivision Improvements Plans and Drawings [to be added] 22 EXHIBIT B Cost Estimate 23 EXHIBIT C Copy of Letter of Credit 24 EXHIBIT D Form Written Request for Partial Release of LOC Board of County Commissioners Garfield County, Colorado c/o Director of Community Development 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: _______________Subdivision This request is written to formally notify the BOCC of work completed for _____________________ Subdivision. As Owner [On behalf of the Owner], we request that the BOCC review the attached Engineer’s Certificate of Partial Completion and approve a reduction in the face amount of the Letter of Credit in the amount of $____________________, to a reduced face amount of $_____________________. Attached is the certified original cost estimate and work completed schedule, showing: Engineers Cost Estimate _____________ Work Completed, less 10% _____________ Reduced Face Amount of LOC _____________ Based on periodic observation and testing, the construction has been completed, to date, in accordance with the intent of the plans and specifications that were reviewed and approved by the BOCC’s representatives and referenced in Paragraph 2 of the Subdivision Improvements Agreement between the BOCC and the Owner. If further information is needed, please contact _________________________, at ___________. _____________________________ Owner or _____________________________ Owner’s Representative/Engineer 25 EXHIBIT E Written Request for Final Release of LOC/Revegetation LOC REQUEST FOR FINAL RELEASE OF LETTER OF CREDIT Board of County Commissioners Garfield County, Colorado c/o Director of Building and Planning 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: _______________Subdivision This request is written to formally notify the BOCC of work completed for _____________________ Subdivision. As Owner [On behalf of the Owner], we request that the BOCC review the attached Engineer’s Certificate of Completion and approve a full release of the Letter of Credit in the amount of $____________________. Attached is the certified original cost estimate and work completed schedule, showing that all [improvements] [revegetation] required by the Improvements Agreement and secured by the Letter of Credit have been completed. Also enclosed are the following, required by the Improvements Agreement dated _______ between Owner and the BOCC, recorded at Reception No. ____________ at the Real Estate Records of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder (the “SIA”): 1. record drawings bearing the stamp of Owner’s Engineer certifying that all [improvements] [revegetation] have been constructed/installed in accordance with the requirements of the SIA, both in hand copy and digital format acceptable to the BOCC; and 2. copies of instruments conveying real property and other interests which Owner was obligated to convey to the homeowner’s association or other entity at the time of final Plat Approval. If further information is needed, please contact _________________________, at ___________. _____________________________ Owner or _____________________________ Owner’s Representative/Engineer Exhibit H Colorado Wildlife Science, LLC Ecological Assessment of Property Wildlife Impact Report ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Harvest Roaring Fork Garfield County, Colorado November 20, 2024 Colorado Wildlife Science Wildlife Impact Report ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Harvest Roaring Fork Garfield County, Colorado November 20, 2024 Prepared for — REALTY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT 909 Lake Carolyn Parkway, Suite 150 Irving, Texas 75039 Prepared by — COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 0100 Elk Run Drive, Suite 128 Basalt, CO 81621 CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................. 1 3.0 METHODS .................................................................................................................... 1 3.1 DESKTOP ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................................... 1 3.2 SITE ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................................................. 2 4.0 SITE DESCRIPTION, LANDSCAPE CONTEXT, & EXISTING CONDITIONS ............................. 2 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - §4-203.G(6) ..................................................................... 2 5.1 DETERMINATION OF THE LONG-TERM AND SHORT-TERM EFFECT ON FLORA .................................... 2 5.1.1 Noxious Weeds ......................................................................................................................................... 5 5.2 DETERMINATION OF THE EFFECT ON WILDLIFE HABITAT .................................................................... 5 5.2.1 Federal Threatened & Endangered Species .............................................................................................. 5 Listed Species With Potential To Be Effected By the Project ................................................................ 7 5.2.2 State Listed Species ................................................................................................................................... 8 Bald Eagle ............................................................................................................................................ 15 North American River Otter ................................................................................................................ 18 5.2.3 Raptors, Birds Of Conservation Concern, & Migratory Birds ................................................................... 19 5.2.4 Other Species of Interest ......................................................................................................................... 20 Ungulates ............................................................................................................................................ 20 Black Bears .......................................................................................................................................... 26 Great Blue Heron ................................................................................................................................ 27 Other Species ...................................................................................................................................... 30 6.0 ADJACENT LAND USE - §4-203.G(1) ............................................................................. 31 7.0 DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................... 32 8.0 MEASURES TO REDUCE WILDLIFE & ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS ......................................... 32 LITERATURE CITED ..................................................................................................................... 36 APPENDIX A. PROPOSED SITE PLAN ........................................................................................... 43 APPENDIX B. PHOTOS ................................................................................................................ 45 APPENDIX C. CPW SAM DEFINITIONS FOR SELECTED SPECIES ...................................................... 55 APPENDIX D. U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE CONSULTATION LETTER ........................................................ 57 BACKGROUND & QUALIFICATIONS ............................................................................................. 65 MAPS Map 1. Existing Conditions .......................................................................................................................... 3 Map 2. Roaring Fork Conservancy map of Ute ladies’-tresses orchid occurrences ............................... 9 Map 3. CPW Mapped Bald Eagle Habitat at the Property ...................................................................... 16 Map 4. CPW Mapped North American River Otter Habitat at the Property ........................................ 17 Map 5. Field Verified CPW Species Activity Mapping – Mule Deer ............................................................ 23 Map 6. Field Verified CPW Species Activity Mapping – Rocky Mountain Elk ............................................ 24 Map 7. CPW Species Activity Mapping – American Black Bear ................................................................. 25 PHOTOS Photo 1. The disturbed bench portion of the property, the Project Area .................................................. 46 Photo 2. The Roaring Fork River, its riparian area, and the westerly facing slopes between the upland bench and the riparian system ........................................................................................................... 46 Photo 3. Big sagebrush ............................................................................................................................... 47 Photo 4. Yellow rabbitbrush growing amidst the cheatgrass and other non-native grasses ..................... 47 Photo 5. One of the non-native Siberian elms growing within the Project Area ....................................... 48 Photo 7. Crested wheatgrass is one of the introduced hay grasses growing on the site ........................... 48 Photo 8. Native needle and thread is one of the native grasses that has re-occupied the site ................. 49 Photo 9. Indian ricegrass is another native found in a few patches on the property ................................ 49 Photo 10. A few patches of native sedges (Carex spp.) were observed in swales on the north side of the Rio Grande Trail .................................................................................................................................. 50 Photo 11. A variety of trees and shrubs dominate the slopes down to the river including ponderosa pine, pinyon pine, Rocky Mountain juniper, Gambel oak, and big sagebrush ........................................... 50 Photo 12. The riparian area of the Roaring Fork River within the conservation easement supports a mosaic of riparian plant communities (adjacent to upland communities like the big sagebrush shrubland in the foreground) ............................................................................................................. 51 Photo 13. The lower sections of Cattle Creek on the bench are in reasonable condition with the exception of the prevalence of the non-native reed canarygrass ..................................................... 51 Photo 14. Other sections of Cattle Creek are in poor condition, absent of a riparian plant community other than a near monoculture of reed canarygrass ......................................................................... 52 Photo 15. The upper segment of Cattle Creek is paralleled by isolated patches of upland shrubs including Gambel oak, and riparian shrubs such as coyote willow, which provide limited wildlife habitat ..... 52 Photo 16. The invasive cheatgrass dominating most of the Project Area provides little to no wildlife value ............................................................................................................................................................ 53 Photo 17. Relatively recent elk sign observed within the project area during the November site assessment ......................................................................................................................................... 53 Photo 18. An elk day bed encountered in the Project Area in November ................................................. 54 Photo 20. A number of badger excavations were observed at the northeast end of the Project Area ..... 54 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents an analysis of the potential impacts to wildlife, wildlife habitat, and ecological resources resulting from the proposed development of parcels of land to be collectively known as Harvest Roaring Fork Planned Unit Development (PUD) in unincorporated Garfield County. This analysis addresses significant wildlife use of the property, evaluates potential effects of development on wildlife, plants, and other important ecological resources, and recommends actions to reduce ecological impacts. The analyses contained herein specifically address potential impacts to wildlife, plants and plant communities per the Garfield County Land Use and Development Code (LUDC) with particular attention to §4-203.G(6) Impact Analysis-Flora and Fauna and §7-202 Wildlife Habitat Areas. 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Harvest Roaring Fork PUD is proposed on the four undeveloped parcels (Parcels 239501400161, 239307200031, 239307300032, 239307300033) surrounding Cattle Creek at its confluence with the Roaring Fork River. The proposed PUD would be an approximately 283-acre mixed-use PUD that offers a diverse mix of housing types and densities consistent with or below the Comprehensive Plan's recommendations; this development aims to provide market-rate, affordable, and attainable housing options that address the county's workforce housing needs and reduce both the economic and quality-of-life burdens associated with long-distance commuting and increased housing costs on residents of Garfield County urban centers such as Glenwood Springs, Newcastle, Silt, and Rifle. The project team has consulted extensively with local stakeholders and wildlife groups to ensure that Harvest Roaring Fork meets and exceeds the county's expectations for responsible development. Approximately 25% of the project's acreage will be dedicated to land conservation, public open spaces, and trail networks, demonstrating a solid commitment to preserving the unique ecosystem along over a mile of Roaring Fork River frontage for the benefit of all residents of Garfield County. 3.0 METHODS This report is based on: (1) multiple 2024 pedestrian surveys of the property; (2) a desktop analysis of the property; (3) a review of current Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) Species Activity Mapping (SAM) (CPW 2023); (4) a review of Pitkin County wildfire hazard mapping; (5) consultation with the owner’s representatives; (6) consultation with the United States Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) via the IPaC system (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2022) regarding federally listed Threatened, Endangered, or Candidate species that may occur on or within proximity to the property or may be affected by implementation of the proposal; and (7) the author’s experience assessing wildlife habitat and ecological communities in Garfield County and western Colorado. 3.1 DESKTOP ANALYSIS A preliminary review of the property using the 2023 National Agricultural Imagery Program (NAIP) Garfield County mosaicked orthophoto was conducted to familiarize Colorado Wildlife Science (CWS) with the property and as an aid to help determine the presence of notable wildlife habitat and other resources of concern. The desktop analysis included the review of data from a variety of sources including: Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) SAM; National Wetland Inventory (NWI) wetlands mapping; USFWS critical habitat mapper; and U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) National Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) soil mapping. 3.2 SITE ASSESSMENT CWS conducted pedestrian surveys of the property to identify and locate wildlife, wildlife sign, wildlife habitat, plant communities, and other ecological features. Site surveys concentrated on habitat mapping, developing an ecological understanding of the property, field verifying SAM maps, searching for evidence of wildlife use (as described in species accounts, below), and assessing the plant communities, hydrological and geomorphic characteristics of the property. Raptor nest surveys were conducted on foot through suitable habitat on and in proximity to the property. Plant communities identified by the desktop analysis were ground-truthed through field identification of plants. Field data collected and photographs taken during the survey were georeferenced using a submeter GPS. 4.0 SITE DESCRIPTION, LANDSCAPE CONTEXT, & EXISTING CONDITIONS The property is located within the North-Central Highlands and Rocky Mountain Section of the Southern Rocky Mountains Steppe - Open Woodland - Coniferous Forest - Alpine Meadow Physiographic Province (Bailey 1976, 1995, Bailey et al. 1998). The property is situated on the east side of the Snowmass Creek valley at an elevation ranging from approximately 5,950 to 6,060 feet AMSL. It is situated within the Roaring Fork River watershed at the confluence of Cattle Creek with the Roaring Fork River. Most of the property is situated on a bench above the river that was graded for a previous development project (Photo 1). The property also includes approximately 1.3 miles of the Roaring Fork River, its riparian area, and the slopes leading from the bench to the river (Photo 2). A conservation easement held by Roaring Fork Conservancy (RFC) encumbers 53.6 acres paralleling the entire reach of Cattle Creek on the property from the point where it enters the property at the northern boundary to its confluence with the river, as well as most of the riparian zones of the creek and the river to the top of the slope separating the bench from the riparian area. The property is bounded on the east by the SH-82 right of way, on the southeast by a private residential-agricultural property, on the southwest by a commercial sand and gravel extraction site, on the west by a mix of private residential properties, PUD homeowners association common open space parcels, and a wastewater treatment facility; on the northwest by private residential parcels and a mobile home park; and on the north by commercial-industrial and commercial-retail properties, and an abandoned restaurant property (Map 1). The Rio Grande Trail (RGT) and its right of way bisect the property running north-northwest to south-southeast. The Project Area is that portion of the property not within the RFC conservation easement. 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - §4-203.G(6) 5.1 DETERMINATION OF THE LONG-TERM AND SHORT-TERM EFFECT ON FLORA 1 As described above, the Project Area was graded in 2005; most of the topsoil, non-native hayfields, and naturally occurring vegetation was removed. Since that time, a mix of native and non-native grasses, forbs, shrubs, and trees have reoccupied the site while, given the topsoil removal, many 1 See Section 5.2 for federal or state listed flora 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 2 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 2 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 3 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 3 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 4 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 4 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 5 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 5 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 1 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 1 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 2 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 2 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 3 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 3 0 " W 39°26'56"N 39°26'56"N 39°27'4"N 39°27'4"N 39°27'12"N 39°27'12"N 39°27'20"N 39°27'20"N 39°27'28"N 39°27'28"N 39°27'36"N 39°27'36"N 39°27'44"N 39°27'44"N 39°27'52"N 39°27'52"N 39°28'0"N 39°28'0"N 39°28'8"N 39°28'8"N 39°26'48"N Cattle Creek Underpass Remnant Big Sagebrush Shrubland Iron Bridge Subdivision Roaring Fork Riparian Area 2023 NAIP 3.75 Quarter Quadrangle Garfield County Mosaic Harvest Roaring ForkHarvest Roaring Fork COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE LLC Basemap Sources: Date Prepared: 18-NOV-2024 Map 1. Existing Conditions Legend: Coordinate System: NAD83 State Plane Colorado Central Project No. 24323 o Subject Property Garfield County, CO Wildlife Impact Report 0 500 1,000250 Feet 0100 Elk Run Dr, Ste 128, Basalt, CO 81621 970.618.4740 www.coloradowildlifescience.com ^ ^ Gravel Pits CattleCre ek R o a r i n g F o r k R i v e r Teller Springs Subdivision Elk Springs Subdivision Bare Stony Soils Roaring Fork Riparian Area Cattle Creek-Roaring Fork Confluence Bare Stony Soils Degraded Reach of Cattle Creek Riparian Area Higher Quality Reach of Cattle Creek Riparian Area H Lazy F Mobile Home Park Cattle C r e e k R o a d Rio Grande T r a i l Cheatgrass Dominated Big Sagebrush spp. - Rabbitbrush Mixed Shrub Ruderal Understory Shrubland Teller Springs Common OS RF SWA & RFC Burry CE Bureau of Land Management Bureau of Land Management Cattle Creek Bovee Property Golu b a P r o p e r t y Iron Bridge Common Area Top of Slope (Approximate) Subject Parcels Project Area RFC Conservation Easement areas remain ruderal with substantial representation of bare soil (Photo 6). Currently, a variety of early successional forbs, grasses, and shrubs such as varieties of big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) (Photo 3), rubber rabbitbrush (Ericameria nauseosa), yellow rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus) (Photo 4), and a few chokecherry (Prunus virginiana) and Saskatoon serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia), have reoccupied the site. The only native tree that was found consistently across the disturbed areas of the Project Area was narrowleaf cottonwood (Populus angustifolia), primarily in seedling form (Photo 6). The most common tree encountered in the graded area was the non-native Siberian elm (Ulmus pumila) (Photo 6). Grasses observed were primarily non-native, including agricultural cultivars such as crested wheatgrass (Agropyron cristatum) (Photo 7), smooth brome (Bromus inermis), and orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata), but native species such as bluebunch wheatgrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata), western wheatgrass (Pascopyrum smithii), native fescues (Festuca spp.), needle and thread (Hesperostipa comata) (Photo 8), and Indian ricegrass (Achnatherum hymenoides) (Photo 9) were observed as well. A few patches of hydrophytic sedges (Carex spp.) (Photo 10) were observed in swales created by the grading effort. Vegetation within the conservation easement is, for the most part, relatively undisturbed with a variety of upland native trees and shrubs (especially on the west facing slopes). Trees include pinyon pine (Pinus edulis), ponderosa pine (P. ponderosa), Utah (Juniperus osteosperma) and Rocky Mountain juniper (J. scopulorum) (Photo 11). Shrubs include Gambel oak (Quercus gambelii), serviceberry, chokecherry, bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata), mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus montanus), skunkbush sumac (Rhus trilobata), and sagebrush. Similarly, the portion of the conservation easement within the riparian area of the Roaring Fork River supports a mosaic of native riparian plant communities (Photo 12) dominated by narrowleaf cottonwood riparian woodlands with dense stands of coyote willow (Salix exigua), Rocky Mountain willow (S. monticola), river hawthorn (Crataegus rivularis), red-osier dogwood (Cornus sericea), river birch (Betula occidentalis), thinleaf alder (Alnus incana), and twinberry honeysuckle (Lonicera involucrata), with an understory of varied graminoids including field horsetail (Equisetum arvense), false Solomon's seal (Maianthemum stellatum), and an assortment of rush species (Juncus spp.). The riparian area of Cattle Creek within the conservation easement, on the other hand, varies quite a bit with some areas somewhat intact (Photo 13) and other areas in a degraded state dominated by Photo 5. Bare soils within the Project Area with narrowleaf cottonwood seedlings and sparse grasses and forbs a variety of invasive species (Photo 14). The substantial representation of non-native graminoids such as reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) and cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) is mixed with native upland (e.g., Gambel oak, Rocky Mountain juniper, serviceberry) and riparian (e.g., narrowleaf cottonwoods, willow spp.) overstory plant species (Photo 15). A variety of riparian wetlands dominated by native hydrophytic graminoids such as sedges and rushes mixed with substantial stands of non-native reed canarygrass occupies large portions of the Cattle Creek riparian area where it broadens just before dropping down toward the Roaring Fork on the west side of the property. 5.1.1 NOXIOUS WEEDS Cheatgrass is very common in the Project Area (Photo 16) and is one of the most common, if not the most common, grass. Other invasives and noxious weeds observed include houndstongue (Cynoglossum officinale), sweetclovers (Melilotus spp.), scentless chamomile (Tripleurospermum inodorum), musk thistle (Carduus nutans), plumeless thistle (Carduus acanthoides), Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), reed canarygrass, and tansy (Tanacetum vulgare). Impact Analysis. The proposed development will not result in the loss of high quality or intact native vegetation. The highest quality native plant communities occur within the conservation easement. The balance of vegetation (i.e., habitat) on the property is comprised of remnant patches of disturbed shrubland and ruderal mixes of native and non-native plants with substantial noxious weed occurrences. Habitat for and occurrences of Ute ladies’-tresses orchid (Spiranthes diluvialis) are also protected within the conservation easement. Development and implementation of a noxious weed management plan is necessary to eradicate or limit the spread of existing weeds and reduce the likelihood of new infestations. The weed management plan should be prepared in collaboration with the Garfield County Vegetation Management Coordinator. 5.2 DETERMINATION OF THE EFFECT ON WILDLIFE HABITAT 5.2.1 Federal Threatened & Endangered Species The subject parcel was submitted to USFWS via the IPaC system (http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/) on October 28, 2024, requesting an official list of Threatened, Endangered, or Candidate species that may occur on or within proximity to the Project Area or may be affected by implementation of the proposal. An official list was received and is attached as Appendix D. The species list fulfills the requirements of the USFWS under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). Per the consultation with USFWS, species protected under the ESA that may occur within the boundary of the property are listed below in Table 1. Also included are species listed as Endangered or Threatened by the State of Colorado that have the potential to be affected by the proposed project. Some of the species listed below are typically found within habitats that do not occur on the property or within areas that cannot be affected by actions associated with the project. There will be no effect on these off-site species. No designated critical habitat exists for any listed species within or adjacent to the property. Table 1. Threatened or Endangered Species that may occur on the property or may be affected by development therein Common Name Latin Name Occurrence Status‡ Potential Habitat w/in the Property Surveys Conducted? Habitat Effect BIRDS Mexican Spotted Owl Strix occidentalis lucida Occurs in forested mountains and canyonlands throughout the SW U.S. & Mexico. Ranges from UT, CO, AZ, NM & western portions of TX, south into several states of Mexico. Does not occur uniformly throughout its range. Instead, it occurs in disjunct areas that correspond with isolated mountain ranges and canyon systems. FT, ST No No Complex forest or rocky canyons that contain uneven-aged, multi-level and old-aged, thick forests below 9,500 feet elevation. Nests in standing snags and hollow trees (Rinkevich et al. 1995) No Effect Yellow-Billed Cuckoo Coccyzus americanus In western Colorado, was probably never common (Bailey and Niedrach 1965, Wickersham 2007) and is now extremely rare (Kingery 1998, Wickersham 2007). One confirmed nesting observation occurred along the Yampa River near Hayden during the Breeding Bird Atlas surveys conducted from 1987- 1994 (Kingery 1998) and one cuckoo, representing a probable nesting pair in surveyed lowland river riparian habitat along six rivers in west-central Colorado(Dexter 1998). There are no records of this species in the RF watershed. FT, SC No No Nest almost exclusively in low to moderate elevation riparian woodlands with native broadleaf trees and shrubs that are (50 ac) or more in extent within arid to semiarid landscapes (Hughes 1999, 79 FR 59992). Most commonly associated with cottonwood– willow–dominated vegetation cover, but the composition of dominant riparian vegetation can vary across its range (Halterman et al. 2016). No Effect MAMMALS Canada Lynx Lynx canadensis Colorado is the southern limit of the North American distribution of the species, and the population is considered isolated from those in the Northern Rockies (McKelvey et al. 2000). FT, SE No No Found primarily within the subalpine and upper montane forests zones typically from 8,000 to 12,000 feet in elevation. Early successional spruce/fir and lodgepole pine forests used for foraging, mature and old growth spruce/fir and lodgepole pine containing large downed woody debris used for denning. Riparian areas, mixed aspen/conifer, mature spruce/fir, and shrublands to forested lynx habitat also used for foraging. No Effect Gray Wolf 2 Canis lupus CO is part of the gray wolf’s native range, but wolves were eradicated by the 1940s. Individual wolves have ventured into CO from WY. Two packs have established in NW CO but have since disappeared; others may persist. It is possible that wolves from the south may do so someday as well. As the result of a statewide voter-led initiative passed in November 2020, CPW has reintroduced wolves in a portion of the species' historical range in Colorado. None have ventured into the Roaring Fork watershed to date. FE/EPNE SE Yes No 3 No particular habitat preference. In Minnesota and Wisconsin, usually occurs in areas with few roads, which increase human access and incompatible land uses (Thiel 1985, Mech et al. 1988, Mech 1989) but can occupy semi-wild lands if ungulate prey are abundant and if not killed by humans (Mladenoff et al. 1997). Young are born in an underground burrow that has been abandoned by another mammal or dug by wolf. In Minn., dens usually were not near territory boundaries; den use was traditional in most denning alpha females studied for more than 1 year; possibly the availability of a stable food supply source helped determine den location (Ciucci and Mech 1992). No Effect FISH Colorado pikeminnow Ptychocheilus lucius Large, swift-flowing muddy rivers with quiet warm backwaters in the Green, Yampa, White, Colorado, Gunnison, San Juan, and Dolores Rivers. FE, ST No4 No No Effect 2 This species should only be considered in an environmental review if the proposed activity includes a predator management program. 3 Predator control is not a part of this proposal, and no known den or rendezvous sites are present. Therefore, there would be no direct, indirect, or cumulative impacts to the gray wolf from implementation of this project. 4 The project is not expected to lead to new water depletions, water quality degradation, or regulated flows that affect these fish. Table 1. Threatened or Endangered Species that may occur on the property or may be affected by development therein Common Name Latin Name Occurrence Status‡ Potential Habitat w/in the Property Surveys Conducted? Habitat Effect Razorback sucker Xyrauchen texanus Often associated with sand, mud, and rock substrate in areas with sparse aquatic vegetation, where temperatures are moderate to warm within the Colorado River system. FE, SE No2 No No Effect Humpback chub Gila cypha Prefers deep, fast-moving, turbid waters often associated with large boulders and steep cliffs in the Green, Yampa, and Colorado Rivers. FE, ST No2 No No Effect Bonytail chub Gila elegans Large, swift-flowing waters of the Colorado River system. FE, SE No2 No No Effect INVERTEBRATES Monarch butterfly Danaus plexippus The monarch is globally distributed throughout 90 countries. They are well known for their long-distance migration in the North American populations. Descendants of these migratory monarch populations expanded from North America to other areas of the world where milkweed (Asclepias spp.; their larval host plant) was already present or introduced. The monarch is widely distributed across the United States. FC No No Monarchs occur in a variety of urban & rural habitat types especially those that have milkweed, Gomphocarpus spp., and Calotropis spp. (closely related genera), and other flowering forbs that are foraged upon for nectar. Monarchs lay eggs on plants in the milkweed family (Asclepiadaceae) and larvae feed only on milkweeds, primarily those in the genus Asclepias, of which monarchs are known to use more than 30 species in the wild (deRoode 2015). No Effect (No milkweed stands present outside the conservation easement) Great Basin silverspot Speyeria nokomis nokomis The Great Basin silverspot butterfly has a fairly restricted distribution in eastern Utah, western Colorado, northern New Mexico, and northeastern Arizona. It is known to occur on or near the Grand Mesa/Uncompahgre /Gunnison, San Juan, and Rio Grande national forests in Colorado and may occur north and south of the town of Rifle and far western Garfield, Mesa, western Pitkin [e.g., N. Thompson Ck drainage], and Rio Blanco counties. Does not occur in the Roaring Fork watershed. FC No No Associated with the Upper Sonoran (pinyon-juniper, various shrubs) and Canadian (fir-spruce, some pine, aspen-maple-birch-alder) Life Zones of the southwestern United States and northern Mexico. Habitats are generally described as permanent spring-fed meadows, seeps, marshes, and boggy streamside meadows associated with flowing water in arid country. No Effect PLANTS Ute ladies'-tresses orchid Spiranthes diluvialis Eastern slope of Rocky Mountains in southeastern WY and NE, north central and central CO; in the upper Colorado River Basin, particularly the Uinta Basin; and in the Bonneville Basin along the Wasatch Front and westward in the eastern Great Basin, in north-central and western Utah, extreme eastern Nevada and southeastern Idaho. Nearest location is near Catherine, CO. FT Yes No Subirrigated, alluvial soils along streams, and in open meadows, in floodplains. 4500 to 6800 ft. No Effect ‡Status: T = Threatened ; E = Endangered; EPNE=Experimental Population Non-Essential (In Colorado) P = Proposed; FC = Candidate for federal listing; SC = State species of concern *Effects: No Effect - The proposed action will have no effect on listed species, their suitable habitat, or critical habitat; May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect – the appropriate conclusion when effects on a listed species or critical habitat are expected to be discountable, insignificant, or completely beneficial; May Affect, Likely to Adversely Affect – the appropriate finding if any adverse effect may occur to listed species or critical habitat as a direct or indirect result of the proposed action or its interrelated or interdependent actions, and the effect is not discountable, insignificant, or beneficial. LISTED SPECIES WITH POTENTIAL TO BE AFFECTED BY THE PROJECT Although gray wolves are habitat generalists and have the potential to occur in any undeveloped area in Colorado, no reintroduced wolf has, as of October 22, 2024, ventured into the Roaring Fork watershed (CPW 2024a). In addition, the project does not include a predator management program, therefore, per federal guidelines, this species should not be considered for analysis. Great Basin silverspot, yellow-billed cuckoo, and Mexican spotted owl are not analyzed further since their current distribution does not include the Roaring Fork watershed. Monarch butterflies are not considered since no stands of milkweed occur on the Project Area. The endangered fish of the Colorado River were eliminated from further analysis since the project will not lead to new water depletions, water quality degradation, or regulated flows that affect these fish. The only species listed under the ESA that will be considered further is Ute ladies’ tresses orchid. Ute Ladies'-tresses Orchid Ute ladies’-tresses is a perennial plant species that blooms in the late summer to early fall with creamy white flowers arranged in a spiral around a central stalk. It requires pollinators, mainly native bees, for reproduction. Seeds are extremely small and are easily spread by wind or water. The exact details of the Ute ladies’-tresses life cycle are not fully understood, but it can remain dormant underground for 11 or more years, and it is likely dependent on symbiotic mycorrhizae (fungi) during all life stages. In addition to mycorrhizae, individual plant survival and recruitment depends on the presence of adequate ground or surface water during the growing season, the presence of appropriate pollinators, and adequate sunlight for photosynthesis (USFWS 2023). Ute ladies’-tresses is a terrestrial orchid found in the western United States and Canada. It inhabits early- to mid-seral stage wetlands along rivers, perennial streams, irrigation ditches, canals, lakeshores, and springs. It also occurs in wet meadows, both naturally occurring and human-created, borrow pits, and agricultural ditches (USFWS 1995, 2023). At the time of listing under the ESA in 1992, Ute ladies’-tresses was known to occur only in Utah and Colorado. Today, it is known to occur in eight states – Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming – as well as in southern British Columbia. This expanded known range is primarily due to the increased survey effort that occurred after listing. There are at least 71 historical occurrences spread across 19 watershed basins, at the 6-digit hydrological unit code (HUC) level (USFWS 2023). Ute ladies’-tresses orchids have a complex life history that is dependent on mycorrhizal infection, specialized pollination biology and a natural flooding regime that maintains the frequently disturbed (flooding) early seral habitat conditions upon which this species relies for reproduction (USFWS 1995). Anthropogenic alteration of both surrounding riparian habitat and hydrological processes renders local populations vulnerable to extirpation (CNHP 2016). Ute ladies’-tresses orchid generally blooms from late July through the end of August (USFWS 2010, 2023). Depending on location and climatic conditions, however, the blooming timeframe can vary considerably (USFWS 1995). It is adapted to early- to mid-seral sites with moist to wet conditions, where competition for light, space, water, and other resources is normally kept low by periodic or recent disturbance events (NatureServe 2023). In Colorado, the orchid is found along perennial streams or rivers, or in groundwater-fed spring or sub-irrigated meadows at elevations ranging from 4,560 feet to 6,260 feet (Fertig et al. 2005, Durkin 2009). Impact Analysis. These orchids have been documented on the property as recently as 2023 by RFC (Map 2). All occurrences, however, are located within the riparian area of the Roaring Fork River and within the RFC conservation easement (Andrea Tupy, personal communication). Development or other human activities on the property outside of the conservation easement (i.e., the Project Area) will have NO EFFECT on Ute ladies’-tresses orchids. 5.2.2 STATE LISTED SPECIES The Colorado Threatened and Endangered species and Species of Greatest Conservation Need Maxar Cattle Creek Confluence Burry Heron Point Spiranthes ¹Cattle Creek Confluence and Heron Point Conservation Easements Created on 9.13.23 0 0.2 0.40.1 Miles (SGCN; Tier 1 species only) was reviewed to determine if any species had potential habitat within or adjacent to the property. While all listed species were initially considered, an elimination of unlikely species from further consideration is provided in Table 2. These decisions are based on known range distributions being either outside of the Project Area or with complete habitat incompatibility. The Colorado River endangered fish species have already been addressed above and are not further considered in this section. Table 2. State Threatened or Endangered Species that may occur on the property or may be affected by development therein Species1 Occurrence Habitat Association Potential Habitat in Project Area? Potential Impact/Issue? MAMMALS American pika (SGCN) Ochotona princeps Throughout state in suitable habitats Alpine, rocky habitats No No Black-footed ferret (FE, SE) Mustela nigripes Rio Blanco & Moffat Counties Reintroduced to Rio Blanco County in white-tailed prairie doq colony No No Black-tailed prairie dog (SGCN) Cynomys ludovicianus Eastern plains Shortgrass prairies No No Botta's pocket gopher (SGCN) Thomomy bottae rubidus Northern Front Range Foothills No No Gray wolf (SE) Canis lupus Reintroduced, no individuals or packs in RF watershed Shrublands, forests and areas away from human habitation No No Grizzly bear (SE) Ursus arctos Extirpated from Colorado Forests, alpine and shrublands No No Fringed myotis (SGCN) Myotis thysanodes Throughout Colorado in suitable habitats Pinyon-juniper woodlands, ponderosa pine forest, and Gambel oak to 6,000ft. Roosts and hibernates in caves, mines, and buildings. Yes No* Gunnison prairie dog (SGCN) Cynomys qunnisoni Parks in central Colorado Shortgrass steppe, open shrublands in parks No No Little brown myotis (SGCN) Myotis lucifigus Throughout Colorado in suitable habitats Widespread habitat types. Yes No* Canada lynx (FT, SE) Lynx canadensis High mountain areas with large expanses of conifer forests in Colorado Spruce/fir and lodgepole pine forests, sometimes aspen, shrublands No No New Mexico meadow jumping mouse (FE, SGCN) Zapus hudsonius leuteus Southwestern counties in Colorado Wet, lush, grassy meadows and some hydric shrublands No No Olive-backed pocket mouse (SGCN) Peroqnathus fasciatus Southern grasslands in Colorado Arid and semiarid grasslands with sparse vegetation, sandy to clayey soils No No Preble's meadow jumping mouse (FT, ST) Zapus hudsonius preblei Front range of Colorado north into Wyoming Foothills riparian areas and along front range streams No No Spotted bat (SCGN) Euderma maculatum Throughout Colorado in suitable habitats Areas near cliffs, including pinon-juniper woodlands and streams or water holes within ponderosa pine or mixed coniferous forest. Usually captured around a water source, including desert pools or cattle tanks. No No Species1 Occurrence Habitat Association Potential Habitat in Project Area? Potential Impact/Issue? Townsend's big-eared bat (SGCN) Plecotus townsendii pallascens Documented in Colorado in several cave locations Semidesert shrublands, pinyon-juniper, open montane forests; caves and abandoned mine roosts. Yes No* White-tailed prairie dog (SGCN) Cynomys leucurus Western Colorado Arid grasslands and sparse arid shrublands in western CO No No North American river otter (ST) Lontra canadensis Throughout state in suitable habitats Larger rivers with high fish population levels; no confirmed population in the RF River Yes No Wolverine (FT, SE) Gula gulo Historical documentation several locations in Colorado-likely extinct Boreal forests and tundra, large ungulate populations important No No BIRDS Brown-capped rosy-finch (SGCN) Leucosticte australis High mountains throughout state Alpine and high-elevation coniferous forests No No Bald eagle (SGCN) Haliaeetus leucocephalus Throughout state near suitable habitats Larger rivers and streams, near prairie dog towns Yes No Burrowing owl (ST) lAthene cunicularia Mostly found in eastern grasslands, some occurrence on west slope Arid grassland and shrublands No No Columbian sharp-tailed grouse (SGCN) Tympanuchus phasianellus columbianus Mixed grassland/shrublands in northwest Colorado Mixed shrubland/grasslands No No Ferruginous hawk (SGCN) Buteo reqalis Eastern plains, larger parks Grasslands and extensive shrublands No No Golden eagle (SGCN) Aquila chrysaetos Throughout Colorado in suitable habitats Open habitats in alpine, shrublands, badlands, and qrasslands No No Greater sage-grouse (SGCN) Centrocercus urophasianus Northwestern Colorado Large sagebrush shrublands No No Sandhill crane (SGCN) Grus canadensis tabida Migrant through plains, west slope and mountain valleys, some nesting in northern parks Large wetlands No No Gunnison sage-grouse (SGCN) Centrocercus minimus Gunnison Basin and western counties Sagebrush shrublands No No Least tern (FE, SE) Sterna antillarum Eastern plains Larger rivers, larger reservoir beaches No No Lesser prairie chicken (FT, ST) Tympanuchus pal/idicinctus Extreme southeastern Colorado Great plains grasslands and shrublands No No Long-billed curlew (SGCN) Numenius americanus Eastern plains and larger parks Grasslands and sparse shrublands No No Mexican spotted-owl (FT, ST) Strix occidentalis lucida Southwest Colorado, and along Wet Mountains, Rampart Range Deep shaded canyons with closed canopy conifers and cliffs No No Species1 Occurrence Habitat Association Potential Habitat in Project Area? Potential Impact/Issue? Mountain plover (SGCN) Charadrius montanus Eastern plains of Colorado Summers on eastern plains in native short-grass steppe, winters in S. California & Mexico No No Peregrine falcon (SGCN) Falco peregrinus anatum Throughout state, but near cliffs and tall buildings Needs tall cliffs or buildings for nesting, usually occurs near water No No Plains sharp-tailed grouse (SE) Tympanuchus phasianellus Extreme northeastern Colorado Grasslands, river canyons No No Piping plover (FT, ST) Charadrius melodus circumcinctus Eastern plains Large rivers, sandy shores around reservoirs in plains No No Southern white-tailed ptarmigan (FP, SCGN) Lagopus leucura altipetens Southern Rocky Mountains Alpine habitats No No Southwestern willow flycatcher (FE, SE) Empidonax traillii extimus Extreme southwest Colorado, and Rio Grande River Brushy riparian habitats at lower elevations No No Western snowy plover (SGCN) Caradrius alexandrius Eastern plains Sandy bars in rivers and around reservoirs, playas No No Western yellow-billed cuckoo (SGCN) Coccyzus americanus North Fork of Gunnison, Colorado, Dolores, Yampa and Rio Grande rivers Large cottonwood stands along larger rivers; does not occur in the RF watershed No No Whooping crane (FE, SE) Grus americana Migrates through eastern plains, possibly San Luis Valley Migrant No No AMPHIBIANS Boreal toad (SE) Anaxyrus boreas boreas Small disjunct populations across higher elevations in the State Subalpine forest habitats with marshes, wet meadows, streams, beaver ponds, and lakes. No No Couch's Spadefoot (SGCN) Scaphiopus couchii Southeastern Colorado Sandy, dry soils with creosote bush and mesquite No No Great Plains narrowmouth toad (SGCN) Castrophryne olivacea Eastern Colorado Grasslands, edges of marshes, rocky hills No No Northern cricket frog (SGCN) Acris crepitans Eastern Colorado Edges of slow-moving bodies of water No No Northern leopard frog (SGCN) Lithobates pipiens Common throughout mid- and lower-elevations of Colorado Wet meadows, marshes, ponds, beaver ponds, streams; does not occur along the main stem of the RF River No No Plains leopard frog (SGCN) Rana blairi Eastern Colorado Sunny, grassy wetlands No No Wood frog (SGCN) Rana sylvatica Larimer and Grand Counties Forested wetlands No No FISHES Arkansas darter (ST) Etheostoma cragini Arkansas River drainage in eastern Colorado Clear, shallow, spring-fed streams with moderate current and lots of rooted aquatic vegetation No No Species1 Occurrence Habitat Association Potential Habitat in Project Area? Potential Impact/Issue? Bonytail chub⁺ (FE, SE) Gila elegans No known populations remain in Colorado Large, swift-flowing waters of the Colorado River system No No Brassy minnow (ST) Hybognathus kankinsoni Native to Republican and South Platte basins, possibly in Colorado River drainaqe Moderately clear tributary streams with sand or gravel bottoms, also in small ponds No No Colorado pikeminnow⁺ (FE, ST) Ptychocheilus lucius Colorado, Dolores, Green, Gunnison, San Juan, White and Yampa Large, swift-flowing rivers that are seasonally turbid with warm backwaters No No Colorado River cutthroat trout (SGCN) Oncorhynchus clarkii pleuriticus Widespread localized reaches Headwater streams and lakes; does not occur in the main stem of the RF River No No Colorado Roundtail chub⁺ (SGCN) Gila robusta Colorado River through Glenwood Canyon, downstream on White River, Milk and Divide Creeks Larger rivers of Colorado River basin No No Common shiner (ST) Luxilus cornutus South Platte basin Lakes, rivers and streams, most common in the pools of streams and small rivers No No Flannelmouth sucker (SGCN) Catostomus latipinnis Western Colorado rivers Utilizes mid-sized rivers and streams No No Flathead chub (SGCN) Platygobio gracilis Arkansas River basin Main branches of turbid streams and rivers, fast currents with sand or gravel substrates No No Greenback cutthroat trout (FT, ST) Oncorhynchus clarkii stomias Front Range mountain streams, recently on west slope Montane clear, cold streams; ; does not occur in the main stem of the RF River No No Humpback chub⁺ (FE, ST) Gila cypha Green, Yampa and Colorado Rivers Pools and eddies in areas of fast-flowing, deep, turbid water, often associated with cliffs and boulders No No Iowa darter (SGCN) Etheostoma exile Plains rivers Springs No No Lake chub (SE) Couesius plumbeus North Platte Gravel bottomed pools and streams No No Mountain sucker (SGCN) Catostomus platyrhynchus Numerous small to medium streams below 8600' elevation. Throughout west on both sides of Continental Divide-prefer clear cold creeks and small to medium rivers with rubble, gravel, or sand substrate No No Northern redbelly dace (SE) Phoxinus eos South Platte basin Small slow-flowing streams and connected lakes with vegetation No No Orangespotted sunfish (SGCN) Lepomis humilis Widespread across middle and eastern U.S. Shallow silt-laden waters, floodplain pools, backwater 1pools of larger streams on plains No No Species1 Occurrence Habitat Association Potential Habitat in Project Area? Potential Impact/Issue? Plains orangethroat darter (SGCN) Etheostoma spectabi/e Arikaree and Republican River drainages Small, clear, spring-fed streams with sand, gravel or rocky bottoms and no silt No No Plains minnow (SE) Hybognathus placitus Arkansas & South Platte basins Main channels of rivers, also in pools below diversion projects No No Razorback sucker (FE, SE) Xyrauchen texanus Lower Yampa and lower Colorado Rivers Deep, clear to turbid waters of large rivers and reservoirs, with silt, mud, or gravel substrate. Quiet, soft-bottom river backwaters No No Rio Grande Chub (SGCN) Gila pandora Rio Grande basin Pools and streams with gravel substrate and overhanging banks and brush No No Rio Grande cutthroat trout (SGCN) Oncorhynchus clarkii virqinalis Rio Grande basin Clear, cold, swift moving creeks and streams in montane environs No No Rio Grande sucker (SE) Catostomas plebeius Rio Grande basin Stream obligate using slow moving reaches No No Southern redbelly dace (SE) Phoxinus erythrogaster Arkansas River basin Small, low-order streams where the habitat includes permanent springs, seeps, and mats of vegetation No No Stonecat (SGCN) Noturus flavus South Platte and Republican basins Fast riffles and runs in streams with sand or gravel bottoms with some rocks- found under rocks and debris No No Suckermouth minnow (SE) Phenacobuis mirabilis South Platte and Arkansas River drainages Shallow, clear riffles with sand and gravel substrates No No REPTILES Triploid Checkered whiptail (SGCN) Cnemidophorus neotesselatus Arkansas drainage in Eastern Colorado Hillsides, arroyos and canyons associated w/ Arkansas River valley No No Massasagua (SGCN) Sistrurus catenatus Southeast Colorado below 5,500' Dry plains grasslands and sandhills No No MOLLUSKS Cylindrical papershell (SGCN) Anodontoides ferussacianus Boulder County Headwater creeks and streams with silty/muddy substrates No No Rocky Mountain capshell (SGCN) Acroloxus coloradensis Rocky Mountains into Canada 8,500 to 10,000' mountain lakes No No Source: CPW 2015 FE = Federally Endangered; FT = Federally Threatened; SE = State Endangered; ST = State Threatened; SGCN = Species of Greatest Conservation Need * = May occur on the property but not within the Project Area, implementation of the proposal will have NO EFFECT on this species; ⁺ = Addressed in Section 5, above The only species included on the list State of Colorado Threatened and Endangered species and/or as a Tier 1 SGCN with the potential to be affected by the proposal are bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and river otters (Lontra canadensis). BALD EAGLE Bald eagles are federally protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940. They are also protected under the International Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918. In addition, CPW tracks bald eagle populations, nesting sites, roosting habitat, and foraging areas and has developed protective stipulations for the species, with specific recommendations for nests, winter night roosts, and hunting perches (CPW 2024c). As currently mapped, the property is located within bald eagle winter range and winter forage habitat with a summer forage area paralleling the river (Map 2). Two roost sites occur, one centered on the Cattle Creek-Roaring Fork River confluence and another encompassing the east end of the property but centered on the Jeronimus parcel to the north. The property is also downstream from an historic bald eagle nest site at Aspen Glen, which was confirmed to be lost in a wind storm in 2018. That nest was replaced by a new nest further upstream and was active during the 2024 breeding season. The property is more than 1.5 miles downstream of the active nest. The mapped winter range and winter forage area overlap the Project Area because they are broad regions encompassing an area extending 2 to 5 miles from either side of the river west of Glenwood Springs (See inset of Map 2). In contrast, the summer forage area is merely an 80 meter band tracking the river, so it only encompasses the portion of the property encumbered by the conservation easement. The mapped roost sites also only occur within the conservation easement area since they encompass 0.25 mile buffer zones around the actual bald eagle roost sites (i.e., tall trees) occurring along the river identified by CPW staff. Impact Analysis. The proposed PUD will not result in the direct or indirect loss of bald eagle habitat. No bald eagle nests are currently located within or adjacent to the Project Area. There is no habitat of the type preferred by eagles for nesting or as roost sites (large deciduous tree adjacent to flowing water) on that portion of the property outside the conservation easement. Although the riparian area of the Roaring Fork River within the conservation easement contains larger ponderosa pines and narrowleaf cottonwoods that provide suitable nesting habitat and roost sites, no historic or active nests or roost sites are present, and no development is proposed or possible within the conservation easement. Although the property encompasses or borders over a mile of the north bank of the Roaring Fork River, proposed development is set back a minimum of 200 feet from the river, and most of the proposed development or other human activity use would occur even further from the river. In addition, the proposed PUD includes a vegetational visual buffer at the top of the slope between the bench and the riparian zone (i.e., the conservation easement) that will reduce visual disturbance of any eagles roosting in the cottonwoods or ponderosas occurring along the river at the property. Proposed development is not expected to directly affect any individual eagle that should occur in the vicinity. Development on the property is assumed to use constructed stormwater management basins under final development plans and would not impact water quality. Any increases in human activity that occur along the banks of the river would likely reduce habitat effectiveness for roosting and foraging bald eagles. The RFC conservation easement, however, prohibits recreational activity within that portion of the property encumbered by the easement. Although no bald eagle nest occurs on or adjacent to the property, the applicants should work with CPW to develop a mitigation plan to be implemented in the event that a pair of bald eagles establish a nest on or in proximity to the property. 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 2 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 2 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 3 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 3 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 4 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 4 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 5 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 5 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 1 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 1 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 2 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 2 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 3 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 3 0 " W 39°26'56"N 39°26'56"N 39°27'4"N 39°27'4"N 39°27'12"N 39°27'12"N 39°27'20"N 39°27'20"N 39°27'28"N 39°27'28"N 39°27'36"N 39°27'36"N 39°27'44"N 39°27'44"N 39°27'52"N 39°27'52"N 39°28'0"N 39°28'0"N 39°28'8"N 39°28'8"N 39°26'48"N 2023 NAIP 3.75 Quarter Quadrangle Garfield County Mosaic Harvest Roaring ForkHarvest Roaring Fork COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE LLC Basemap Sources: Date Prepared: 18-NOV-2024 Map 3. CPW Mapped Bald Eagle Habitat Legend: Coordinate System: NAD83 State Plane Colorado Central Project No. 24323 o Subject Property Garfield County, CO Wildlife Impact Report 0 500 1,000250 Feet 0100 Elk Run Dr, Ste 128, Basalt, CO 81621 970.618.4740 www.coloradowildlifescience.com ^ ^ CattleCre ek R o a r i n g F o r k R i v e r Cattle Creek Top of Slope (Approximate) CPW Mapped Habitat Subject Parcels Roost Site Winter Concentration Area Winter Range Summer Forage Area Winter Forage Area 1 in = 2 miles 0 1 20.5 Miles Inset Carbondale Glenwood Springs Subject Parcels RFC Conservation Easement 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 2 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 2 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 3 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 3 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 4 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 4 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 5 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 5 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 1 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 1 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 2 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 2 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 3 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 3 0 " W 39°26'56"N 39°26'56"N 39°27'4"N 39°27'4"N 39°27'12"N 39°27'12"N 39°27'20"N 39°27'20"N 39°27'28"N 39°27'28"N 39°27'36"N 39°27'36"N 39°27'44"N 39°27'44"N 39°27'52"N 39°27'52"N 39°28'0"N 39°28'0"N 39°28'8"N 39°28'8"N 39°26'48"N 2023 NAIP 3.75 Quarter Quadrangle Garfield County Mosaic Harvest Roaring ForkHarvest Roaring Fork COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE LLC Basemap Sources: Date Prepared: 18-NOV-2024 Map4. CPW Mapped Mule Deer Habitat Legend: Coordinate System: NAD83 State Plane Colorado Central Project No. 24323 o Subject Property Garfield County, CO Wildlife Impact Report 0 500 1,000250 Feet 0100 Elk Run Dr, Ste 128, Basalt, CO 81621 970.618.4740 www.coloradowildlifescience.com ^ ^ CattleCre ek R o a r i n g F o r k R i v e r Cattle Creek Top of Slope (Approximate) CPW Mapped Habitat Subject Parcels Summer Range Winter Concentration Area Winter Range Severe Winter Range Resident Population RFC Conservation Easement As a result, proposed development of the Project Area will have NO EFFECT on individual bald eagles, bald eagle populations, or their habitat. NORTH AMERICAN RIVER OTTER Although river otters have not established a reproducing population in the Roaring Fork drainage as of this analysis, individuals or small groups have been documented as far upstream as the river’s confluence with McFarlane Gulch (south of the City of Aspen) (J. Groves, personal communication; J. Mao, personal communication). CPW maps the reach of the Roaring Fork River at the property as otter overall range. Northern river otter inhabits riparian habitats that occur from low elevation deserts to high valleys of Colorado. Otters require permanent water of relatively high quality with an abundance of fish and/or crustaceans (crayfish; Cambarus sp.). Otters are usually found in streams with higher volumes (minimum of 10 cfs). During the winter months, otters also need streams with relatively high amounts of open, ice-free water, deep pools, and good access to the shoreline. The river otter once occurred in most of the major river drainages in Colorado but was considered extirpated from the state by 1907 (CPW 2003, Melquist et al. 2003). Starting in 1976, Colorado started reintroduction efforts in several drainages, with an initial goal of establishing two populations. In 1998 a more intensive reintroduction program was started by CPW (CPW 2003). Historically and currently in Colorado, otters are most commonly found in larger rivers at low or moderate elevations. Otters are also known to have colonized larger ponds, reservoirs, lakes, and flooded gravel pits. Fish are the primary food source for otters, particularly slow-swimming fish species. In streams where they are abundant, crayfish can make up a significant portion of otters’ diet. Most research indicates that abundant prey is needed to support otter use of an area (Melquist and Hornocker 1983, Mack 1985, Bradley 1986, Melquist et al. 2003). River otters are active year-round and do not hibernate. Otters in mid-elevation areas such as the Roaring Fork River at the property are mostly diurnal in winter and more nocturnal in summer, with the least activity in late summer and early fall. Otters use both terrestrial resting sites and dens when not actively moving (CPW 2003, Melquist et al. 2003). Beaver bank dens are particularly favored sites. Adult otters apparently have few natural predators, although individuals have been killed by bobcats, dogs, coyotes, and foxes (Melquist et al. 2003, Boyle 2006). Most mortality is thought to occur from trapping and road kills. Growth of human populations in Colorado is increasing urban and suburban development pressure and recreational use along rivers, and is likely to cause further otter habitat degradation and fragmentation (Boyle 2006). The section of the Roaring Fork River adjacent to the property remains at least partially ice-free during the winter months, and because of this, river otter activity in this area could occur year-round. In addition, ample prey is likely available due to CPW fish stocking. Otter use of this stretch of the river is likely to only be constrained by den site availability and human disturbance. Beavers and potential den sites do not occur in significant density on this stretch of the Colorado River, and hazards from dogs and road traffic are significant, which are likely to reduce habitat effectiveness and thus, the potential for otters to occur in this area on a regular basis. River otters have not been documented in the river reach at the property. Confirmed observations of individual or small groups of otters have, however, been documented five times by CPW (2024b) within 5 miles of the property since 2018 (Map 3): • Upstream of the property at Aspen Glen in 2019 and 2023; • Downstream of the property at the old Cardiff Bridge in 2021; • Upstream of the property at the Ranch at Roaring Fork in 2021; and • Upstream of the property at the Crystal River - Roaring Fork River confluence on two occasions in 2021. Impact Analysis. The proposal will not result in the direct or indirect loss of river otter habitat. While the property encompasses approximately 1.3 miles of riparian habitat and a reach of the Roaring Fork River, the proposed development is substantially set back from the river, and no development can occur within the riparian zone due to the RFC conservation easement. As described above (Section 6.1), the RFC conservation easement prohibits recreational activity within that portion of the property encumbered by the easement. In addition, the proposed PUD includes a vegetational visual buffer at the top of the slope between the bench and the riparian zone (i.e., the conservation easement) that will reduce visual disturbance of any otters occurring in the river or along its banks at the property. Grazing livestock has the potential to degrade riparian plant communities and river otter habitat, but the conservation easement also prohibits livestock within the conserved portion of the property. Accordingly, the proposed PUD will have NO EFFECT on individual river otters, otter populations, or their habitat. 5.2.3 RAPTORS, BIRDS OF CONSERVATION CONCERN, & MIGRATORY BIRDS CWS evaluated the property for raptor species that could potentially occur in the area (Andrews and Righter 1992, Righter 2004, Wickersham 2007, NatureServe 2020). A nest search was conducted on the property and no raptor nests were located. No active nest or roost sites for Accipiters (Accipiter spp.), bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), golden eagles (Aquila chrysaetos), ospreys (Pandion haliaetus), peregrine falcons (Falco peregrinus), red-tailed hawks (Buteo jamaicensis), or other raptors are known to occur on or within proximity of the proposed activity envelope. A solitary red-tailed hawk was observed thermal soaring over the property during two separate visits to the property. In addition to raptors, CWS evaluated the site for bird species which could potentially be affected by the proposal. Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) have been identified by the USFWS for priority conservation management in an attempt to prevent or remove the need to list additional species under the Endangered Species Act (Appendix F). Table 3. Raptors, Birds of Conservation Concern, and Migratory Bird Species Common Name Scientific Name Preferred Habitat BCC Habitat on the Property? Habitat in the Project Area? Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus See Section 6, above. No† See Section 6, above. Black Swift Cypseloides niger Cliffs with moss near open water; waterfalls. Yes No No Broad-tailed Hummingbird Selasphorus platycercus Broad generalist in w. Colorado. Habitat with woody component up to 10,500 ft. Yes Yes Yes Cassin's Finch Haemorhous cassinii Montane & subalpine cool conifer woodlands/forests. Strongly associated with spruce, fir, Douglas fir, ponderosa pine but can also in aspen or pinyon-juniper woodlands. Yes Yes No Nucifraga columbiana Pine forests, subalpine conifer forests. Elevational migrant. Yes Yes Table 3. Raptors, Birds of Conservation Concern, and Migratory Bird Species Common Name Scientific Name Preferred Habitat BCC Habitat on the Property? Habitat in the Project Area? Clark's Nutcracker No Evening Grosbeak Coccothraustes vespertinus Mature, open conifer forest, aspen with conifer component between 5,500 and 8,500 ft (Gillihan and Byers 2001). Yes Yes No Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos Open and semi-open country such as sagebrush, savannah or sparse woodland, and barren areas, especially in hilly or mountainous regions, in areas with sufficient prey base and near suitable nesting sites. Yes No Yes, foraging only. Lewis's Woodpecker Melanerpes lewis Three important habitats include open ponderosa pine forest, open riparian woodland dominated by cottonwood, and logged or burned pine forest. Their breeding distribution is widely associated with ponderosa pine distribution in western North America. Yes Yes No Olive-sided Flycatcher Contopus cooperi Mature spruce/fir, lodgepole pine, and Douglas-fir forests with preference for natural clearings, bogs, stream and lakeshores with water-killed trees, forest burns and logged areas with standing dead trees. Generally, from 7,500 to11,000 ft. Yes No No Pinyon Jay Gymnorhinus cyanocephal Pinyon-juniper woodland, sagebrush, scrub oak, and chaparral communities, and sometimes in pine forests. Yes No No Virginia's Warbler Leiothlypis virginiae Strongly associated with mature Gambel oak. Nest on the ground in dense shrublands and on scrub dominated slopes of mesas, foothills, open ravines, and mountain valleys in semiarid country. They also use scrubby brush, piñon-juniper woodland with a well-developed shrubby understory and Gambel oak component, ravines covered with Gambel oak, and dense shrublands – especially Gambel oak. Yes No No Western Grebe Aechmophorus occidentalis Large expanses of open water connected to emergent marshes (Wickersham 2007). Not known to breed in the Roaring Fork watershed or Garfield County. Yes No No † But warrants attention because of the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668-668c) or for potential susceptibilities in riparian areas from certain types of development or activities. 5.2.4 OTHER SPECIES OF INTEREST This section addresses present use of the study area by significant wildlife not listed by the state or federal government. The ‘significant’ wildlife use described herein refers to species of ecological, economic, regulatory, social, and/or political importance. UNGULATES Both mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) and Rocky Mountain elk (Cervus canadensis) have been documented on the property and within the Project Area. Sign in the form of pellet groups (Photo 17) and tracks observed in the summer and fall of 2024 confirms that the property is indeed actively used by both species. Browse observed on vegetation preferred as forage (e.g., young cottonwoods, chokecherry) was light to moderate with little observed clubbing within the Project Area, but substantially greater within the shrublands (e.g., Gambel oak, serviceberry, mountain mahogany, bitterbrush) on the westerly facing slopes down to the river. CWS observed recent pellet groups of both species as well as a recently used elk bedding area (Photo 18). CPW maps the property within North American moose (Alces americanus) overall range and summer range, but moose have not been documented on the property; CWS observed no moose sign during site surveys. Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis canadensis) do not occur on or within proximity to the property and CPW does not map any bighorn sheep habitat in the area. Human Influence In general, Colorado’s native ungulates have adapted to the increased human activity and habitat degradation resulting from recreation, residential, and infrastructure development in the area by altering diel activity patterns and spending a greater period of time during winter, migration, and transition (i.e., the period before significant snow accumulation in the late fall and early winter and the period in early spring prior to significant movement to production areas and summer range) in areas where human disturbance is relatively lower. This finding is as expected based upon peer reviewed literature (Edge and Marcum 1985, Edge et al. 1988, Morrison et al. 1995, Cole et al. 1997, Burcham et al. 1999, Phillips and Alldredge 2000, Conner et al. 2001). Limiting Factors Limiting factors are influences that determine whether a wildlife population increases, decreases, or remains stable. It is important to understand that there is seldom one factor that, by itself, causes a reduction or an increase in a deer or elk population. It is usually the interaction of several factors that determine the fate of a population. For example, predation may seem to be a factor causing an elk population to decline when in fact restricted winter habitat, deep snow or the lack of alternate prey may be what allows predation to have a major impact. Traditionally, we have looked at the concept of food, water, cover, and space as the primary components that determine how suitable a habitat is for wildlife. While this is true, it oversimplifies our understanding of how various factors affect habitat. Several other factors may not be as important on their own, but when combined with the four primary habitat components, the value of the habitat may be immediately enhanced or reduced. For example, other land uses can greatly impact use of suitable habitat. Limiting factors for bighorn sheep, elk, and mule deer in the Roaring Fork Valley most affected by residential and commercial development are winter concentration habitat, severe winter range, production habitat, and migration habitat (J. Groves, pers. comm.; K. Tesch, pers. comm.; J. Mao, pers. comm.; Mao et. al 2013; Mao et. al 2011).(Mao et al. 2011) Winter Range, Severe Winter Range, Winter Concentration Both elk and mule deer on winter range continuously seek the most moderate ambient weather conditions, and other factors influencing habitat selection are secondary (Toweill et al. 2002). In winter, both species move between foraging and bedding sites in response to changing ambient temperatures, increasing snow depths, and to enhance control of body temperature. On the coldest days and/or when snow depths are greatest, both species seek southerly and westerly facing slopes where snows typically melt quickly. Snow depths greater than 12 inches begin to reduce the available winter range (USFWS 1982). In general, mule deer and elk do not tolerate snow depths greater than chest height and are impeded when snow is knee-deep (Loveless 1967, Kelsall and Prescott 1971, Parker et al. 1984, Toweill et al. 2002, Ungulate Winter Range Technical Advisory Team 2005). Consequently, winter range of larger elk covers a greater areal extent of lands with greater snow depths than that of mule deer (Parker et al. 1984). Mule Deer. Although deer are active on the property in the non-winter months (i.e., summer and the spring and fall transition periods), it is not within CPW mapped or otherwise known mule deer winter range, severe winter range, or winter concentration areas (Map 4). Elk. The property is, however, mapped and documented within elk winter range (Map 5) but does not encompass any portion of elk severe winter range or winter concentration areas. Elk are present on the property in relatively low numbers throughout most moderate to light winters, moving back and forth across the river. Impact Analysis. The proposed development will have NO EFFECT on elk or mule deer severe winter range or winter concentration areas. In addition, the development is proposed in a previously disturbed site cleared of native vegetation and within the zones of influence of existing development and SH-82. As such, implementation of the proposal will not result in the direct or indirect loss of mule deer or elk severe winter range or winter concentration areas. The project will result in the direct loss of winter range, but as described above, the Project Area is highly disturbed and only provides marginal winter range. The area protected by the conservation easement provides limited but effective winter habitat for both species. The westerly-facing slopes remain relatively snow-free throughout the winter, and the vegetation is dominated by species preferred as winter forage by both deer and elk. In addition, the PUD proposal includes measures to augment the Cattle Creek riparian area and buffer the slopes down to the Roaring Fork River and its riparian ecological community. Elk Production Areas Elk calving grounds or production areas are carefully selected by cows and are generally in locations where cover, forage, and water are in close proximity (Seidel 1977, Phillips and Alldredge 2000, Barbknecht et al. 2011, Rearden et al. 2011). Calving sites occur in the lower to middle portions of summer range and often occur in the same general area each year. Although selected sites are used for a brief period in the spring or early summer, elk production habitat is often a limiting factor for a given population. Sites must provide security from harassment and be within or adjacent to high quality summer range. Elk are considered a hider species because the calf remains bedded at a location and responds to threats by remaining prone while the female moves away to forage, returning periodically to nurse (Altmann 1963, Phillips 1974, Boyce and Sauer 1978, Toweill et al. 2002, Barbknecht et al. 2011). Webb et. al (2011) found that female elk show high levels of site fidelity even in the presence of increasing annual land development. Females did not appear to abandon previously established areas, but used ranges in a manner that minimized interaction with development within these areas based on reductions in range use size and fidelity as land development increased. Phillips and Alldredge (2000), however, found that reproductive success and calf survival decreased during years of disturbance suggesting a significant impact on population growth. In Colorado, habitat fragmentation as a result of housing developments and associated road and infrastructure construction may cause elk to avoid patches of habitat less than 0.04 km2 (9.88 ac). Elk prefer habitat patches greater than 0.24 km2 (59.3 ac) with available hiding cover (Wait and McNally 2004). Impact Analysis. The property does not encompass elk production habitat, and the nearest mapped elk production areas are approximately 2.9 miles to the west-southwest on Crystal River Ranch, 1.3 miles to the east-southeast between Sutey Ranch and Cattle Creek, and approximately 1.6 miles to the northeast at Spring Valley (Map 5). Accordingly, implementation of this proposal will have NO EFFECT on elk production areas. 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 2 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 2 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 3 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 3 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 4 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 4 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 5 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 5 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 1 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 1 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 2 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 2 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 3 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 3 0 " W 39°26'56"N 39°26'56"N 39°27'4"N 39°27'4"N 39°27'12"N 39°27'12"N 39°27'20"N 39°27'20"N 39°27'28"N 39°27'28"N 39°27'36"N 39°27'36"N 39°27'44"N 39°27'44"N 39°27'52"N 39°27'52"N 39°28'0"N 39°28'0"N 39°28'8"N 39°28'8"N 39°26'48"N 2023 NAIP 3.75 Quarter Quadrangle Garfield County Mosaic Harvest Roaring ForkHarvest Roaring Fork COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE LLC Basemap Sources: Date Prepared: 18-NOV-2024 Map 5. CPW Mapped Mule Deer Habitat Legend: Coordinate System: NAD83 State Plane Colorado Central Project No. 24323 o Subject Property Garfield County, CO Wildlife Impact Report 0 500 1,000250 Feet 0100 Elk Run Dr, Ste 128, Basalt, CO 81621 970.618.4740 www.coloradowildlifescience.com ^ ^ CattleCre ek R o a r i n g F o r k R i v e r Cattle Creek Top of Slope (Approximate) CPW Mapped Habitat Subject Parcels Summer Range Winter Concentration Area Winter Range Severe Winter Range Resident Population RFC Conservation Easement 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 2 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 2 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 3 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 3 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 4 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 4 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 5 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 5 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 1 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 1 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 2 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 2 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 3 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 3 0 " W 39°26'56"N 39°26'56"N 39°27'4"N 39°27'4"N 39°27'12"N 39°27'12"N 39°27'20"N 39°27'20"N 39°27'28"N 39°27'28"N 39°27'36"N 39°27'36"N 39°27'44"N 39°27'44"N 39°27'52"N 39°27'52"N 39°28'0"N 39°28'0"N 39°28'8"N 39°28'8"N 39°26'48"N 2023 NAIP 3.75 Quarter Quadrangle Garfield County Mosaic Harvest Roaring ForkHarvest Roaring Fork COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE LLC Basemap Sources: Date Prepared: 19-NOV-2024 Map 6. CPW Mapped Elk Habitat Legend: Coordinate System: NAD83 State Plane Colorado Central Project No. 24323 o Subject Property Garfield County, CO Wildlife Impact Report 0 500 1,000250 Feet 0100 Elk Run Dr, Ste 128, Basalt, CO 81621 970.618.4740 www.coloradowildlifescience.com ^ ^ CattleCre ek R o a r i n g F o r k R i v e r Cattle Creek Top of Slope (Approximate) CPW Mapped Habitat Subject Parcels Summer Range Winter Concentration Area Winter Range Severe Winter Range Highway Crossing Area RFC Conservation Easement 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 2 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 2 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 3 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 3 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 4 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 4 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 5 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 5 ' 5 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 1 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 1 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 2 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 2 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 3 0 " W 10 7 ° 1 6 ' 3 0 " W 39°26'56"N 39°26'56"N 39°27'4"N 39°27'4"N 39°27'12"N 39°27'12"N 39°27'20"N 39°27'20"N 39°27'28"N 39°27'28"N 39°27'36"N 39°27'36"N 39°27'44"N 39°27'44"N 39°27'52"N 39°27'52"N 39°28'0"N 39°28'0"N 39°28'8"N 39°28'8"N 39°26'48"N 2023 NAIP 3.75 Quarter Quadrangle Garfield County Mosaic Harvest Roaring ForkHarvest Roaring Fork COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE LLC Basemap Sources: Date Prepared: 19-NOV-2024 Map 7. CPW Mapped Black Bear Habitat Legend: Coordinate System: NAD83 State Plane Colorado Central Project No. 24323 o Subject Property Garfield County, CO Wildlife Impact Report 0 500 1,000250 Feet 0100 Elk Run Dr, Ste 128, Basalt, CO 81621 970.618.4740 www.coloradowildlifescience.com ^ ^ CattleCre ek R o a r i n g F o r k R i v e r Cattle Creek Top of Slope (Approximate) CPW Mapped HabitatSubject Parcels Human-Bear Conflict Area Fall Concentration AreaRFC Conservation Easement Migration Corridors The ability to migrate is essential for native ungulates to travel to, and access, important seasonal habitats. Throughout their range, bighorn sheep, elk, and mule deer migrate in the fall and spring as animals travel between winter and summer ranges. Migration allows mule deer to avoid deep snow and other harsh conditions during winter and take advantage of high-quality forage during summer. Because migration corridors serve as the critical link between summer and winter ranges, they must be unimpeded by physical barriers (e.g., game-proof fences, roads, etc.) and protected from various forms of development and human disturbance (e.g., housing and energy development). We differentiate between “migration corridors” and “transition range” since migration corridors are areas typically constrained by some feature – either natural (e.g., topography) or anthropogenic (e.g., residential development) – whereas transition range is simply the habitat that these animals live in as they move between seasonal habitats (e.g., winter range and production areas). Impact Analysis. The property does not intersect with any mapped or otherwise known migration corridors and is more than 2.6 miles from the nearest mapped and/or field verified migration corridor. Accordingly, the proposed development will have NO EFFECT on elk or mule deer migration corridors. BLACK BEARS The property lies within a mapped black bear (Ursus americanus) fall concentration area (Folk et al. 1976, Nelson et al. 1983, Rogers and Durst 1987, Hellgren 1998) and is adjacent to a human conflict area (CPW 2023). Black bear fall concentration areas in the Roaring Fork Valley are most often located in Gambel oak and mixed montane shrublands where most of the shrubs produce sufficient forage for the hyperphagic and fall transition stages of a bear’s annual cycle (Folk et al. 1976, Nelson et al. 1983). The specific fall concentration area encompassing the property is a broad region that encompasses nearly 600,000 acres. The property is situated near the westernmost boundary which ends at the bluffs on the west side of the valley floor (Map 6). Defined by CPW as “…those parts of the overall range that are occupied from August 15 until September 30 for the purpose of ingesting large quantities of mast and berries to establish fat reserves for the winter hibernation period (Colorado Parks & Wildlife (CPW) 2024c),” the Project Area does not provide the resources sought by bears during the autumn hyperphagic period. In contrast, the vegetation within the Roaring Fork River riparian area and west-facing slopes of the conservation easement provide the resources such as abundant berries (e.g., serviceberries, currants) and mast (e.g., acorns) that black bears require during this period. Additionally, the property is adjacent to areas mapped as human bear conflict areas. These are areas where bears have learned to associate humans with food which results in conflicts. These conflicts include bears foraging in residential trash, raiding bird feeders, and breaking into homes. Such conflicts are almost always due to human negligence and increase in frequency when natural food sources are limited due to weather conditions such as drought or late frosts that kill the flowers of fruit bearing shrubs. Simple measures can be implemented to greatly reduce conflicts between people and bears (See Section 8). Bears also use the Roaring Fork River corridor as a daily, seasonal, and periodic movement route. The naturally dense cover provided by the mix of multi-aged cottonwoods, willows, and other riparian shrubs provide ample security and thermal cover for bears throughout the non-winter months. CWS has observed bears ambling up- and down-river throughout this river reach. Impact Analysis. The proposed PUD is unlikely to have significant impacts on bear populations or result in the direct loss of bear habitat. The only effective bear habitat on the property is within the conservation easement; the Project Area is essentially devoid of any resources attractive to black bears. Consequently, the proposed PUD will have NO EFFECT on individual bears or black bear populations. That said, it is likely that bears will be common visitors within the PUD once it is complete and occupied. But, as described above, implementation of mitigation measures can help avoid substantial conflicts. GREAT BLUE HERON An active great blue heron (Ardea herodias) colony or “heronry” occurs within the conservation easement portion of the property (Photo 24). Great blue herons breed across the entire North American continent (Palmer 1962). The largest heron species in North America is common and widespread with a distribution that covers most of the North American continent (Butler 1992). This highly adaptable species thrives in a wide variety of habitats. Early in the 20th century, great blue herons suffered from unrestricted hunting, but today, with legal protection and greater awareness about conservation, they are among the most abundant wading birds in North America (Audubon Society 2007). Great blue heron populations are stable or increasing throughout most of its entire range and are ranked globally secure and uncommon in Colorado (G5/S3B) by NatureServe and the Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP) (NatureServe 2019). The World Conservation Union (IUCN) red list category for the great blue heron is “LC” (Least Concern) and the Audubon Watchlist Status is “Green”2 (Audubon Society 2007). As with all migratory birds, the great blue heron is protected under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918. Great blue heron nesting in Colorado has been documented since the late 19th century (Bailey and Niedrach 1965) and heron populations are generally stable or increasing throughout most of its range (Rocky Mountain Bird Observatory 2005). The earliest extensive surveys, which were conducted in 1965 and 1973, noted 23 and 18 colonies respectively, mostly in the northeast quarter of the state (Ryder et al. 1979). In 2002, Levad and Leukering reported 127 active great blue heron colonies in Colorado. According to Bird Conservancy of the Rockies (formerly Rocky Mountain Bird Observatory), statewide bird monitoring program data were submitted for 174 sites, including many inactive sites which are monitored because of this species' habit of reestablishing sites after many years of inactivity. One hundred twenty four sites were active from 1999 through 2004 (Rocky Mountain Bird Observatory 2005). As with most bird species, nesting areas represent an integral component of breeding, and the lack of acceptable sites may limit population numbers. Habitat characteristics that influence the location of heronries vary considerably depending on physiographic factors. Human activity within or near active heronries has been associated with reduced productivity and site abandonment (Bjorkland 1975, Wershkul et al. 1976). As with other wading birds, response to disturbance is influenced by a variety of factors including breeding stage and distance (Vos et al. 1985). Human disturbance is a major factor influencing nesting and foraging activities of the great blue heron. Though herons may become habituated to some human activities (Grubb 1979, Kelsall and Simpson 1980, Vennesland 2000), human recreation can cause herons to temporarily abandon their breeding attempts, allowing predators to take eggs (Moul 1990), or permanently abandon a colony (Markham and Brechtel 1979). Colonies are typically located in areas with abundant natural buffers (forest and wetland) and low road density (Watts and Bradshaw 1994, Gibbs and Kinkel 1997). Major threats to great blue herons include housing and industrial development, water recreation, road construction, and any other activities that result in habitat degradation (Simpson et al. 1987, Popotnik and Giuliano 2000). High levels of human activity near breeding colonies have also been linked with increased disturbance from bald eagles (Vennesland 2000). According to the Heron Working Group5, “As a rule, general day-to-day activity by humans that reside near colonies does not interfere with heron nesting activities. It is novel sounds that frighten herons from nests and lead to abandonment. Sudden blasts of horns or dynamite and starting of chain saws are known to frighten herons from nests. Colonies will sometimes abandon if these activities persist.” Distance & Timing Vennesland (2000) was among the first to experimentally show that herons habituate to non- threatening presence of people near colonies. He measured the response of herons to his approach (on foot) through the nesting season. He found that colonies in rural areas that seldom experienced people departed their nests sooner than colonies in urban areas. He also established recommendations for the nesting season (February to August) in British Columbia. His study revealed that heron breeding productivity was significantly and negatively predicted by the frequency of pedestrian traffic within 250m of colonies. The low productivity documented at colonies with high levels of pedestrian activity, however, was more directly due to bald eagle disturbance. Hence, there may be an interaction between human and eagle disturbances at heron colonies. Vennesland concluded that “(t)otal human activity (including pedestrians, cars, planes and land clearing equipment) had no relationship to heron breeding” (Vennesland 2000). 5 A consortium of individuals from university, government and conservation organizations interested in the conservation of the Pacific Great Blue Heron (Ardea herodias fannini). Photo 19. A portion of the active heronry on the property Klein (1993) reported that great blue heron responses to humans in vehicles and afoot varied from no response to flying away, and that they reacted more to humans on foot than in vehicles. Rodgers and Smith (1995) reported that great blue herons flushed at a mean distance of 32.0 ± 12.3 m in response to persons approaching on foot. Skagen et al. (2001) found a reduction in the number of great blue heron nests when they were exposed to humans on foot. Vennesland (2000) found that herons at isolated colonies in southwestern British Columbia reacted more strongly to human disturbance than at colonies in urban settings, and that response varied as the season advanced. Herons at two colonies reacted strongly to the approach of researchers at 100 m and 90 m, respectively, whereas urban colonies at Beacon Hill Park, Victoria, and Stanley Park, Vancouver, never responded, indicating a relatively strong degree of habituation. Great blue heron colonies are most sensitive to human disturbance during the early stages of nest selection, nest building, pair formation and egg-laying (Quinney 1982, Vos et al. 1985, Butler 1992). Once eggs are laid, adults flush reluctantly, and once chicks are in the nest few adults will flush. As the chicks grow, there appears to be a growing commitment by the adult herons, and they are much less likely to abandon a nest when disturbed. Vos et al. (1985) determined that the distance in which herons responded to experimental human intrusion averaged around 150 m early in the breeding season, dropping to 60 m late in the breeding period. Vos et al. (1985) studied a heronry at Fossil Creek Reservoir in Larimer County, Colorado. They found that heron response to human activity changed as the breeding season progressed each year. Herons were most responsive to human intrusions early in the breeding season (March), flushing from the nest at the slightest disturbance and not returning until the cause was no longer present. During egg laying and incubation (mid-April), herons were less willing to abandon nests and returned more readily. Attachment further strengthened in late-May to early-June when young were present. At nine colonies in southwestern British Columbia, Vennesland found that the average distance at which herons responded to the first approach of a colony in the season was 49 m, whereas response distance to the last approach averaged 15 m, suggesting that herons habituate to observers over the season. Habituation In a 2001 Wildlife Working Report, Gebauer & Moul (2001) reported several studies have provided evidence that some heron colonies can become habituated to non-threatening human disturbance (Anderson 1978, Webb and Forbes 1982, Vos et al. 1985, Butler 1992, Gebauer 1995, Gebauer and Moul 2001). In fact, many heronries have been established or continue to persist within 300 m (984 ft) of human disturbance. In British Columbia, a colony at Stanley Park is located in a highly disturbed area (Otter 1991) but has reproduced successfully in most years (i.e., 1977-1997), and another colony was established in a cedar hedge between a busy parking lot and an access road to Vancouver International Airport between 1981 and 1992 (Webb & Forbes 1982). Butler (1991) described established colony sites in highly disturbed areas at an industrial site near Parksville, and in residential areas of Victoria and Vancouver. If dense vegetation obscures human activity, herons appear less likely to react. At the Canadian Forces Base colony, Gebauer (1995) speculated that a natural 50 m buffer of cottonwoods on one side and a 5 m wide dugout waterway between the colony and dike on the other side, may have contributed to a colony’s lack of response to activities. A 100 m cottonwood buffer may have sheltered a colony near a major highway bypass in Port Coquitlam, B.C., Bowman and Siderius (1984) and Vos et al. (1985) also suggested that a dense buffer of trees or shrubs might reduce the impact of potential disturbances. Mitigation Carlson and McLean (1996) showed that barriers that reduced human occurrence below heronries had a stronger effect on the number of herons fledged than buffer zones around colonies. Barriers such as fences, ditches, other watercourses, and dense forests may be effective in reducing human intrusion. Summers (1996), cited in Gebauer & Moul (2001), recommended that vegetation screening be required between heronries and all development activities occurring within 100 m or less from a heronry. Screening vegetation should be at least two meters high at a distance of 100 m from the edge of the colony. At distances closer than 100 m, the vegetation height will depend on its distance from the colony and the height of the nests at the nearest edge of the colony. Summers (1996) also makes specific recommendations for spacing and species composition of vegetation utilized in screening. Rodgers & Smith (1995) advised that mitigation may be possible to shorten buffer distances when physical barriers prevent direct visual contact. Ikutaa and Blumstein (2003) concluded that “…by reducing the number of humans and providing areas of refuge within highly visited habitats, protective barriers allow birds to behave as they would in an undisturbed environment.” Von Duyke (2009) used metal flashing to prevent mammalian predators from climbing the nest trees. Carlson and McLean (1996) showed that barriers that reduced human occurrence below colonies had a stronger effect on the number of herons fledged than buffer zones around colonies. Barriers such as fences, ditches, other watercourses, and dense forests may be effective in reducing human intrusion. Impact Analysis. The active heronry is situated entirely within the portion of the property encumbered by the conservation easement. The conservation easement goes to great lengths to mitigate the potential effects of development within the Project Area on herons and the heronry, including a “Heron Protection Area” within a defined “Rookery Zone” (also referred to as the “Heron Protection Area” within Exhibit B of the conservation easement. The easement requires, among other mitigation measures, that, “…all property and/or potential lots abutting the Rookery Zone and located within 200 meters of the heron rookery, which property is located primarily to the south-east of and above the Rookery Zone, to be bermed and visually screened from the heron rookery through the planting of trees and other adequate vegetation, which screening shall be as dense as possible while still allowing for tree growth. Lots located south-east of and above the Rookery Zone, abutting the Rookery Zone and outside 200 meters of the heron rookery, shall be visually screened from the heron rookery by the planting of trees strategically located so as to screen human activity from the rookery, but which screening shall not be as dense as the screening on the lots within 200 meters of the rookery. All plans and materials for said screening and berming activities shall be reviewed and reasonably approved by Grantee prior to such installation. Said screening components shall also be shown and included on any future landscaping plan for the Sanders Ranch property submitted to Garfield County in connection with any development process.” Going forward, the developer has expressed their intent to continue to partner with RFC to improve the habitat where the heron are currently nesting. With adherence to these requirements, and any protections required by the conservation easement, the proposed PUD will have NO EFFECT on individual great blue herons, the Cattle Creek heronry, or populations of great blue herons. OTHER SPECIES Other species of note detected or otherwise known to occur on the property include American badgers (Taxidea taxus), American mink (Neovison vison), bobcats (Lynx rufus), coyotes (Canis latrans), long-tailed weasels (Mustela frenata), mountain lions (Puma concolor), red fox (Vulpes vulpes), striped skunks (Mephitis mephitis), and osprey (Pandion haliaetus). CWS observed a number of badger holes and mounds (Photo 20). Badgers dig these holes while hunting prey such as Wyoming ground squirrels (Urocitellus elegans). No sign of the other predators was observed, but bobcats, coyotes, long-tailed weasels, mink, mountain lions, and skunks are known to occur in the Roaring Fork River corridor in the area. Ospreys occur on the property and use the tall cottonwoods and ponderosa pines for perching throughout the year. Those trees also provide suitable osprey nesting habitat. In fact, a pair of ospreys successfully nested in a nest originally built by great blue herons at the property until the tree it was in blew down in a wind storm seven to eight years ago. That pair subsequently built a new nest across the river and upstream a bit from the property. 6.0 ADJACENT LAND USE - §4-203.G(1) The property is embedded in what could be referred to as a mixed residential-commercial/industrial- rural landscape where historic agricultural land has been increasingly converted to other uses. The property is surrounded on all sides by residential subdivisions. A geospatial buffer model was created in ArcGIS 10.5 (ESRI 2017) to approximate indirect 6 impacts and loss of habitat effectiveness associated with the implementation of the proposed residential development. This is based on the premise that human activities, noise, fugitive light, and road noise would diminish the habitat effectiveness on the ranch. Clustering residential development allows for more opportunities to conserve large patches of wildlife habitats; land containing a few large patches is less fragmented than land containing smaller patches within the same area. The buffer distances used for this analysis are based on available scientific and land management literature (Odell and Knight 2001, Odell et al. 2003, Fraterrigo and Wiens 2005, Glennon and Kretser 2005, Hansen et al. 2005, Lenth et al. 2006, Merenlender et al. 2009). Specifically, Odell and Knight (2001) found that houses and areas of frequent human activity in Pitkin County have a zone of influence that extends approximately 180 m in all directions into adjacent habitat. Their study showed that human-sensitive species were less common up to 180 m from human disturbance. Bird and medium sized mammal population densities were affected by the arrangement and density of exurban housing developments, with both species groups avoiding seemingly intact habitat up to 180 m from residential development (Odell and Knight 2001). Smith et al. (1989) suggest that mule deer habitat use is influenced up to 82.3 m from houses during the winter but Vogel (1989) reported that mule deer use declined significantly within 400 m of existing residential development. The property is clustered with existing residential, commercial, and industrial development. The zones of influence from existing development extend onto the property. As a result, the proposed development will not result in the indirect loss of effective habitat on adjacent parcels. In addition, all development would be clustered on the previously disturbed bench above the river to avoid direct and indirect effects on wildlife habitat. The important habitat represented by the Cattle Creek and Roaring Fork riparian areas is already perpetually protected within the conservation easement area; the proposed vegetational buffers and habitat augmentation will further insulate those habitat areas from human disturbance. 6 Indirect Impacts: those effects of the proposed development which are reasonably certain, but would occur later in time or are spatially separated from the project. Examples of indirect impacts (effects) would include increased traffic, noise and activities from residents, fugitive lighting, etc. Direct Impacts: would include the impacts (and effects) associated with implementation of the proposed project. Direct impacts would include direct conversion or manipulation of habitats (including beneficial or detrimental changes) or direct impacts to a species, (including road and home building, occupancy of developed areas, reclamation of open space areas, use of soft path trails). 7.0 DISCUSSION Residential development has the potential to cause animals to abandon traditional home ranges (Peek et al. 1982). Two factors, however, may alleviate the necessity to abandon established ranges. First, animals may not abandon home ranges if they are able to exploit undeveloped areas of their home range (Hershey and Leege 1976). Second, forest and shrubland cover mitigates some of the effects development and human activity have on animal behavior (Edge et al. 1985) because animals are able to retreat to safe environments. Therefore, it is of value to wildlife, and specifically elk, to minimize both the direct and indirect effects of development on adjacent habitat. The proposed development succeeds in this effort by clustering development with existing areas of human activity on a disturbed site with little wildlife habitat adjacent to a state highway and protecting those areas of the property that continue to provide effective habitat in a perpetual conservation easement that will be further insulated from human disturbance. In addition, the proposed PUD is situated within an area with substantial residential, commercial, and industrial development. As such, implementation of the proposal and the associated human activity is unlikely to result in the direct or indirect loss of wildlife habitat or otherwise disrupt wildlife behavior, activity, or movement. In addition, the proposed PUD recognizes the value of the conservation easement and the wildlife habitat that it protects. The ecological communities within the easement area, however, are vulnerable to disruption resulting from increased human activity in adjacent areas. In order to minimize those effects, the PUD incorporates a number of elements to both improve the ecological function and integrity of the protected area by improving the habitat within and around it (e.g., expanding the native vegetation paralleling Cattle Creek) and creating buffers that both insulate the wildlife habitat of the easement areas from the developed areas and create additional habitat and movement corridors. 8.0 MEASURES TO REDUCE WILDLIFE & ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS The following measures and conditions will further protect the wildlife and ecological resources of the property and surrounding area and reduce potential negative effects of development on adjacent habitat: A. DESIGNATED OPEN SPACE The PUD plan avoids direct impacts to more than 27% of the property by setting aside additional land in close proximity and adjacent to the Nature Area Neighborhood and other habitat areas. This includes the existing 55± acre RFC conservation easement, the “Heron Rookery Zone” (collectively as OS-1), and new areas specifically designated and located to create more space between the wildlife habitat and residential homes. This is intended to improve the effectiveness of existing habitat within the conservation easement by creating buffers between human activity and habitat areas. A 50-foot buffer area (with landscaping and streets/trails) will be established along the east side of the conservation easement (OS-4) extending east from the top of the slopes above the river. In addition, the Rio Grande Trail will be buffered by a 50-foot area of native vegetation on the west side and a 20- foot area on the east side providing approximately 10 acres of moderate value habitat for birds and small mammals as well as limited cover for movement of larger animals. Additionally, the plan is to be restored the Cattle Creek riparian area including additional natural areas (OS-2 and OS-3). 1. The conservation easement and Cattle Creek buffer areas must be planted with a mix of native deciduous and evergreen trees, native shrubs, and native grasses and forbs. 2. All plantings in these areas should emulate relatively undisturbed upland and riparian reference sites in proximity to the property. 3. Structurally, the buffers and riparian restoration areas should be multi-canopied with as much structural complexity across the horizontal and vertical planes as possible. 4. Wherever possible, riparian vegetation (e.g., willows, red-osier dogwood, thinleaf alder) should be planted along the Glenwood Ditch to simulate riparian habitat for birds and small mammals. 5. These planting plans must be submitted to and approved by the Roaring Fork Conservancy and/or the county Land Manager prior to installation. a. The plans must include a minimum 5-year irrigation plan to provide the plants with the greatest opportunity to become successfully established. B. LIGHTING Artificial light can disorient nocturnal animals, affect their feeding and breeding patterns, disrupt night pollinators, and interfere with their natural instincts. Outdoor lighting specifically designed to minimize skyward facing light with shielding, directing the light downward will be required within 100 feet of the conservation easement, wildlife movement corridors, or designated wildlife habitat areas. C. FENCING Fencing that is incompatible with wildlife movements can result in direct wildlife mortality, restricted or blocked movement, and reduction of habitat effectiveness. Fencing will be restricted so as not to limit terrestrial wildlife movements and should meet the wildlife friendly fencing standards described in CPW’ s Fencing With Wildlife in Mind 7. D. TRAILS 1. No recreational trails will be constructed within 50 feet of slopes of the Roaring Fork River portion conservation easement or within the Cattle Creek riparian section. a. Trails will be allowed that cross the Cattle Creek section in a perpendicular or near perpendicular manner. 2. Hiking and biking trails will adhere to the best management practices in the publication Planning Trails with Wildlife in Mind 8. 3. To minimize impacts to wintering elk and deer, trails within or adjacent to the slopes on the west side of the property will be closed from December 1 through March 30. E. RFC CONSERVATION EASEMENT & GREAT BLUE HERONS All restrictions regarding access and/or activities within conserved areas described by the conservation easement will be clearly signed in multiple locations at the easement boundary and provided in writing to all residents and will be strictly enforced. 7 Available at https://cpw.state.co.us/Documents/LandWater/PrivateLandPrograms/FencingWithWildlifeInMind.pdf 8 Available at https://cpw.widen.net/s/hpbjvgzbhf/planning_trails_with_wildlife_in_mind_full_plan 1. A 30-foot minimum width vegetational buffer will be created paralleling the top of the slope along the eastern conservation easement boundary above the Roaring Fork River as well as along the boundaries of the “Heron Rookery Zone” where it extends beyond the top of the slope to reduce edge effects, visually screen areas of human activity from the conserved area, and create additional wildlife habitat. 2. The eastern side of the conservation easement where it narrowly follows Cattle Creek will be buffered with a habitat area/park with a mix of upland and riparian vegetation to improve the habitat effectiveness along the creek. a. This buffer will encompass the entire riparian area of Cattle Creek plus an additional area of the uplands and will total approximately 12± acres. 3. Plant materials used for these purposes should be a minimum of 10 feet in height and include a mix of deciduous and coniferous trees and shrubs to ensure that the screening effect is immediate and effective year round. 4. In addition to the top of slope vegetation buffer, a berm and visual vegetation screen will be created at the boundary of the “Heron Protection Area” in accordance with the conservation easement. Plans and materials for the screen and berm must be reviewed and reasonably approved by RFC prior to installation. 5. Roads, bridges, and/or trails are prohibited within this portion of the “Rookery Zone.” No access by the public will be allowed within this area unless specifically allowed by the conservation easement. 6. Additional vegetational screening will be installed between any trails adjacent to the conservation easement area. Such trail screening must be reviewed and approved by Garfield County prior to installation in accordance with the conservation easement. 7. Construction and/or installation of utilities allowed within the Roaring Fork riparian area and/or the “Rookery Zone” by the conservation easement (e.g., water intake structure) will be prohibited during the great blue heron nesting period. F. BLACK BEARS The property is within a black bear fall concentration area, adjacent to human bear conflict areas and areas that provide excellent black bear habitat. The following precautions will likely reduce human- bear conflicts: 1. Residential Waste a. Residential waste brought outdoors for pickup must be secured in Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee (IGBC) certified bear-resistant containers, if possible, or stored in a structure that prevents black bear access. b. No waste should be placed outside in an unsecured manner, such as in bags or standard canisters. c. Any approved container containing such materials may be placed next to the street no earlier than 6:00 a.m. on the designated morning of garbage collection and must be returned to its enclosed structure that same day. d. Composting should be restricted to yard waste (e.g., leaves and grass clippings). Food waste composting will be prohibited. e. Barbeque grills must be maintained in a clean state to prevent attracting bears. f. Pets should not be fed outside during the non-winter months. 2. Wherever possible, lever style door handles should be avoided on the exterior of structures. 3. Bird feeders should be avoided from April 1st through November 30th. G. DOMESTIC ANIMAL CONTROLS 9 Dogs running at large pose a significant threat to wildlife. Although dogs are rarely successful in catching the many animals they chase, they do occasionally kill wildlife. More often, they injure the wildlife enough to cause their eventual death. Packs of dogs are much more efficient hunters, and have been known to kill adult mule deer and elk. When dogs are unsuccessful in catching the object of their chase, the potential prey has had to expend significant energy in order to evade the dog. This expenditure of energy, particularly in winter when food is scarce, threatens the survival of that animal (or group of animals). In particular, pregnant wildlife and newborn animals do not have the reserves to repeatedly expend in avoiding dogs. 1. Residents must comply with Garfield County’s Animal Control Regulations. 2. Dogs must be leashed at all times unless within a residential fenced enclosure or a designated dog park that is surrounded by a physical dog-proof barrier. 3. Contractors and their employees should be prohibited from bringing their dogs on site during construction even if kept within their vehicles. 4. Per the conservation easement, dogs will not be allowed at any residences adjacent to the “Rookery Zone.” 5. Each residential unit will be limited to a maximum of one dog in accordance with the conservation easement. 6. Domestic cats must be kept inside or on a leash at all times. H. WEED MANAGEMENT 1. A revegetation plan will be prepared for each phase of construction and submitted to the County Vegetation Manager. Implementation of each revegetation plan should be completed within one growing season of completion of a given phase of construction and must meet Garfield County Revegetation Guidelines 10 standards. 2. A weed management plan will be developed that addresses all County-listed noxious weeds found on site. This weed management plan will be submitted to the County Vegetation Manager for approval. I. PHASE 0 RECLAMATION The 2015 development plan for the property included a reclamation requirement for the entire property prior to development. This was “…necessary to repair the damage to the Project Site resulting from actions taken by Bair Chase in association with the Sanders Ranch PUD which partially regraded the Project Site…and stripped and stockpiled the topsoil.” Since that time, as described 9 In this case, the term domestic animal includes dogs, cats, birds and other small mammals and reptiles, but not fowl, herd animals, goats or horses. 10 Available at https://www.garfield-county.com/vegetation-management/filesgcco/sites/29/2019/03/2019_Revegetation_Update.pdf above, the site has recovered somewhat with native trees and shrubs such as rabbitbrush, sagebrush, and narrowleaf cottonwoods becoming established across the property. Although the site remains degraded with areas of bare, stony or gravelly soils (due to topsoil removal) and substantial noxious weed problems (especially cheatgrass) elk, mule deer, American badgers, and other wildlife continue to use the site. While weed control is a significant need, reclamation/grading of the entire site would be counter-productive by further disrupting the remaining habitat, and essentially repeating the site’s disturbance only to be re-graded yet again each time an individual phase is developed. J. UTILITIES 1. All utility poles must be made raptor-friendly, raptor proof, or underground. LITERATURE CITED Altmann, M. 1963. Naturalistic studies of maternal care in moose and elk. Pages 233-253 in H. L. Rheingolded, editor. Maternal Behavior in Mammals. John Wiley, New York. 849pp. Anderson, J. M. 1978. Protection and management of wading birds. Pages 99-104 in A. Sprunt IV, J. C. Ogden, and S. Winkler, editors. Wading birds. National Audubon Society Research Report No. 7, New York, NY. Andrews, R., and R. Righter. 1992. Colorado birds : a reference to their distribution and habitat. 1st edition. Denver Museum of Natural History, Denver, Colo. Audubon Society. 2007. Great Blue Heron. Waterbird Conservation Website. Available http://web1.audubon.org/waterbirds/species.php?speciesCode=greblu1. National Audubon Society, New York, N.Y. Bailey, A. M., and R. J. Niedrach. 1965. Birds of Colorado. Denver Museum of Natural History, Denver, CO. Bailey, R. G. 1976. Ecoregions of the United States. USDA Forest Service, Washington, D.C. Bailey, R. G. 1995. Description of the ecoregions of the United States. 2nd edition. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service, Washington, DC. Bailey, R. G., United States Geological Survey, and United States Forest Service. 1998. Ecoregions of North America. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service, Washington, D.C. Barbknecht, A. E., W. S. Fairbanks, J. D. Rogerson, E. J. Maichak, B. M. Scurlock, and L. L. Meadows. 2011. Elk parturition site selection at local and landscape scales. The Journal of Wildlife Management 75:646-654. Bjorkland, R. G. 1975. On the death of a midwestern heronry. Wilson Bulletin 87:284-287. Bowman, I., and J. Siderius. 1984. Management guidelines for the protection of heronries in Ontario Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Boyce, M. S., and J. R. Sauer. 1978. Elk Distribution and Behavior in Calving Areas. University of Wyoming National Park Service Research Center Annual Report. Available at: http://repository.uwyo.edu/uwnpsrc_reports/vol2/iss1/4 2:15-18. Boyle, S. 2006. North American River Otter (Lontra canadensis): a technical conservation assessment. Available online at http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/northamericanriverotter.pdf. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. . Bradley, P. V. 1986. Ecology of river otters in Nevada. M.S. Thesis. University of Nevada, Reno, NV. Burcham, M., W. D. Edge, and C. L. Marcum. 1999. Elk use of private land refuges. Wildlife Society Bulletin 27:833- 839. Butler, R. W. 1991. A review of the biology and conservation of the great blue heron (Ardea herodias) in British Columbia. Canadian Wildlife Service, Pacific and Yukon Region, British Columbia, Canada. Butler, R. W. 1992. Great Blue Heron.in A. Poole, P. Stettenheim, and F. Gill, editors. The Birds of North America, No. 25. The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, PA and The American Ornithological Union, Washington, DC. Carlson, B. A., and E. B. McLean. 1996. Buffer Zones and Disturbance Types as Predictors of Fledging Success in Great Blue Herons, Ardea herodias. Colonial Waterbirds 19:124-127. Ciucci, P., and L. D. Mech. 1992. Selection of Wolf Dens in Relation to Winter Territories in Northeastern Minnesota. Journal of Mammalogy 73:899-905. CNHP. 2016. Survey of Critical Biological Resources: a resurvey and update of Potential Conservation Areas in Garfield County, Colorado. Colorado Natural Heritage Program, Fort Collins, CO. Cole, E. K., M. D. Pope, and R. G. Anthony. 1997. Effects of road management on movement and survival of Roosevelt elk. Journal of Wildlife Management 61:1115-1126. Colorado Parks & Wildlife (CPW). 2003. State Of Colorado River Otter Recovery Plan, Revision of 1980, 1984, and 1988 Draft Plans. Colorado Parks & Wildlife, Denver, CO. 51 pp. Colorado Parks & Wildlife (CPW). 2023. CPW All Species Activity Mapping Data. Available online at http://www.arcgis.com/home/group.html?owner=rsacco&title=Colorado%20Parks%20and%20Wildlife%20- %20Species%20Activity%20Data. Colorado Parks & Wildlife, Fort Collins, CO. Colorado Parks & Wildlife (CPW). 2024a. Collared Gray Wolf Activity September 24, 2024 - October 22, 2024. October 23, 2024. Colorado Parks & Wildlife (CPW). 2024b. Colorado River Otter Observations by Water Body: Roaring Fork River January 1, 2018 - October 31, 2024. Colorado Parks & Wildlife (CPW). 2024c. CPW All Species Activity Mapping Data. Available online at http://www.arcgis.com/home/group.html?owner=rsacco&title=Colorado%20Parks%20and%20Wildlife%20- %20Species%20Activity%20Data. Natural Diversity Information Source, . Colorado Parks & Wildlife, Fort Collins, CO. Conner, M. M., G. C. White, and D. J. Freddy. 2001. Elk movement in response to early-season hunting in northwest colorado. Journal of Wildlife Management 65:926-940. deRoode, J. C. 2015. Monarchs as herbivores, prey, and hosts. Pages 43-46 in K. S. Oberhauser, K. R. Nail, and S. Altizer, editors. Monarchs in a Changing World: Biology and Conservation of an Iconic Butterfly. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY. Dexter, C. 1998. River survey of west-central Colorado, for yellow-billed cuckoo and riparian weeds. Report prepared for the Bureau of Land Management. Bureau of Land Management, Grand Junction, CO. 26 pp. Durkin, P. 2009. Spiranthes diluvialis (Ute Ladies’-tresses orchid) 2008 Survey Report, Glenwood South Bridge Environmental Assessment. State of Colorado Department of Transportation, Grand Junction, Colorado. Edge, W. D., and C. L. Marcum. 1985. Movements of Elk in Relation to Logging Disturbances. Journal of Wildlife Management 49:926-930. Edge, W. D., C. L. Marcum, and S. L. Olson-Edge. 1988. Summer forage and feeding site selection by elk. Journal of Wildlife Management 52:573-577. Edge, W. D., C. L. Marcum, and S. L. Olson. 1985. Effects of logging activities on home-range fidelity of elk. Journal of Wildlife Management 49:741-744. ESRI. 2017. ArcGIS version 10.5. Environmental Systems Research Institute, Redlands, California, USA. Fertig, W., R. Black, and P. Wolken. 2005. Rangewide status review of Ute ladies’-tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis). Prepared for the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and Central Utah Water Conservancy District. 101 pp. Folk, G. E., A. Larson, and M. A. Folk. 1976. Physiology of hibernating bears. Ursus 3:373-380. Fraterrigo, J. M., and J. A. Wiens. 2005. Bird communities of the Colorado Rocky Mountains along a gradient of exurban development. Landscape and Urban Planning 71:263–275. Gebauer, M. B. 1995. Status and productivity of Great Blue Heron (Ardea herodias) colonies in the lower Fraser River valley in 1992, 1993 and 1994. B.C. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Surrey, B.C. Gebauer, M. B., and I. E. Moul. 2001. The Status of the Great Blue Heron in British Columbia. Wildlife Working Report No. WR-102. B.C. Ministry of the Environment, Lands and Parks, Wildlife Branch, Victoria, BC. 66 pp. Gibbs, J. P., and L. K. Kinkel. 1997. Determinants of the size and location of Great Blue Heron colonies. Colonial Waterbirds 20:1-7. Gillihan, S., and B. Byers. 2001. Evening Grosbeak (Coccothraustes vespertinus).in A. F. Poole and F. B. Gill, editors. The Birds of North America Online. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY. Glennon, M., and H. E. Kretser. 2005. Impacts to wildlife from low density, exurban development: information and considerations for the Adirondack Park. Technical paper no. 3. Wildlife Conservation Society Adirondack Communities and Conservation Program, Saranac Lake, New York. Grubb, M. M. 1979. Effects of increased noise levels on nesting herons and egrets. Proceedings of 1978 Conference of Colonial Waterbird Group:49-54. Halterman, M. D., M. J. Johnson, J. A. Holmes, and S. A. Laymon. 2016. A Natural History Summary and Survey Protocol for the Western Distinct Population Segment of the Yellow-billed Cuckoo. U.S. Fish and Wildlife, Colorado Plateau Research Station, Flagstaff, AZ. Hansen, A. J., R. L. Knight, J. M. Marzluff, S. Powell, K. Brown, P. H. Gude, and A. Jones. 2005. Effects of exurban development on biodiversity: patterns, mechanisms, and research needs. Ecological Applications 15:1893– 1905. Hellgren, E. C. 1998. Physiology of Hibernation in Bears. Ursus 10:467-477. Hershey, T. L., and T. A. Leege. 1976. Influences of logging on elk on summer range in north-central Idaho. Pages 73–80 in Proceedings of the Elk-Logging-Roads Symposium, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID. Ikutaa, L. A., and D. T. Blumstein. 2003. Do fences protect birds from human disturbance? Biological Conservation 112:447-452. Kelsall, J. P., and W. Prescott. 1971. Moose and deer behaviour in snow in Fundy National Park, New Brunswick. Canandian Wildlife Service Report 15. Kelsall, J. P., and K. Simpson. 1980. A three year study of the great blue heron in southwestern British Columbia. Proceedings of 1979 Conference of Colonial Waterbird Group 3:69-74. Kingery, H. E. 1998. Colorado breeding bird atlas. Colorado Bird Atlas Partnership : Colorado Division of Wildlife, Denver, Colo. Klein, M. L. 1993. Waterbird Behavioral Responses to Human Disturbances. Wildlife Society Bulletin (1973-2006) 21:31-39. Lenth, B., R. L. Knight, and W. C. Gilgert. 2006. Conservation Value of Clustered Housing Developments. Conservation Biology 20:12. Levad, R., and T. Leukering. 2002. Inventories Of Colorado’s Great Blue Herons: 1999-2001. Journal of the Colorado Field Ornithologists 36. Loveless, C. M. 1967. Ecological characteristics of Mule Deer winter range. Technical Publication 20. Colorado Department of Game, Fish and Parks. Mack, C. M. 1985. River otter restoration in Grand County, Colorado. M.S. Thesis, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO. Mao, J., J. Groves, K. Wright, D. Cacho, and P. Will. 2013. Avalanche Creek Elk Herd E-15 Data Analysis Unit Plan -- Game Management Units 43 and 471. Colorado Parks and Wildlife, Glenwood Springs, CO. Mao, J., J. Groves, K. Wright, T. Trant, and P. Will. 2011. D - 13 (Maroon Bells Deer) DAU Plan -- Game Management Units 43, 47, and 471. Colorado Parks and Wildlife, Glenwood Springs, CO. Markham, B. J., and S. H. Brechtel. 1979. Status and management of three colonial waterbird species in Alberta. Proceedings of 1978 Conference of Colonial Waterbird Group 2:55-64. McKelvey, K. S., K. B. Aubry, and Y. K. Ortega. 2000. History and distribution of lynx in the contiguous United States. Pages 207-264 in L. F. Ruggiero, K. B. Aubry, S. W. Buskirk, G. M. Koehler, C. J. Krebs, K. S. McKelvey, and J. R. Squires, editors. Ecology and conservation of lynx in the United States. University Press of Colorado, Denver, CO. Mech, L. D. 1989. Wolf Population Survival in an Area of High Road Density. The American Midland Naturalist 121:387-389. Mech, L. D., S. H. Fritts, G. L. Radde, and W. J. Paul. 1988. Wolf Distribution and Road Density in Minnesota. Wildlife Society Bulletin (1973-2006) 16:85-87. Melquist, W. E., and M. G. Hornocker. 1983. Ecology of river otters in west central Idaho. Wildlife Monographs 83. Melquist, W. E., J. P.J. Polechla, and D. Toweill. 2003. River otter (Lontra canadensis). Pages 708-734 in G. A. Feldhamer, B. C. Thompson, and J. A. chapman, editors. Wild mammals of North America: biology, management, and conservation. Second edition, Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD. 1216 pp. Merenlender, A. M., S. E. Reed, and K. L. Heise. 2009. Exurban development influences woodland bird composition. Landscape and Urban Planning 17:9. Mladenoff, D. J., R. G. Haight, T. A. Sickley, and A. P. Wydeven. 1997. Causes and Implications of Species Restoration in Altered Ecosystems. BioScience 47:21-31. Morrison, J. R., W. J. d. Vergie, A. W. Alldredge, A. E. Byrne, and W. W. Andree. 1995. The effects of ski area expansion on elk. Wildlife Society Bulletin 23:481-489. Moul, I. E. 1990. Environmental contaminants and breeding failure at a Great Blue Heron colony on Vancouver Island. M.S. University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C. NatureServe. 2019. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe Web Service, Arlington, Virginia. Available online at http://www.natureserve.org/explorer. NatureServe. 2020. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. . NatureServe Web Service, Arlington, Virginia. Available online at http://www.natureserve.org/explorer. NatureServe. 2023. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. . NatureServe Web Service, Arlington, Virginia. Available online at https://explorer.natureserve.org/. Nelson, R. A., J. G. Edgar Folk, E. W. Pfeiffer, J. J. Craighead, C. J. Jonkel, and D. L. Steiger. 1983. Behavior, biochemistry, and hibernation in black, grizzly, and polar bears. Ursus 5:284-290. Odell, E. A., and R. L. Knight. 2001. Songbird and medium-sized mammal communities associated with exurban development in Pitkin County, Colorado. Conservation Biology 15:0-0. Odell, E. A., D. M. Theobald, and R. L. Knight. 2003. Incorporating ecology into land use planning: the songbird’s case for clustered development Journal of the American Planning Association 69:72-82. Otter, K. 1991. Herons. Discovery 20:135-137. Palmer, R. S., editor. 1962. Handbook of North American birds. Vol. 1. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT. Parker, K. L., C. T. Robbins, and T. A. Hanley. 1984. Energy expenditures for locomotion by mule deer and elk. Journal of Wildlife Management 48:474-488. Peek, J., M. Scott, L. Nelson, J. Pierce, and L. Irwin. 1982. Role of cover in habitat management for big game in northwestern United States. Pages 363-373 Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resource Conference. Phillips, G. E., and A. W. Alldredge. 2000. Reproductive success of elk following disturbance by humans during calving season. Journal of Wildlife Management 64:521-530. Phillips, T. A. 1974. Characteristics of elk calving habitat on the Sawtooth National Forest, Idaho. USDA Forest Service Range Improvement Notes 19:1-5. Popotnik, G. J., and W. M. Giuliano. 2000. Response of birds to grazing of riparian zones Journal of Wildlife Management 64:976-982. Quinney, T. E. 1982. Growth, diet, and mortality of nestling Great Blue Herons. Wilson Bulletin 94:571-577. Rearden, S. N., R. G. Anthony, and B. K. Johnson. 2011. Birth-site selection and predation risk of Rocky Mountain elk. Journal of Mammalogy 92:1118-1126. Righter, R. 2004. Birds of western Colorado Plateau and Mesa Country. Grand Valley Audubon Society, Grand Junction, Colo. Rinkevich, S. E., J. L. Ganey, J. L. W. Jr., G. C. White, D. L. Urban, A. B. Franklin, W. M. Block, and E. Clemente. 1995. General biology and ecological relationships of the Mexican Spotted Owl,. Pages 19-35 in K. J. Cook, editor. Recovery plan for the Mexican Spotted Owl. Vol. I. USDI Fish and Wildl. Serv., Albuquerque, NM. Rocky Mountain Bird Observatory. 2005. Monitoring Colorado's Birds: Great Blue Herons in Colorado. Available http://mercury.ornl.gov/metadata/nbii/html/cloakn/akn.ornith.cornell.edu_Metadata_RMBO_GBHE_MD_sep 05.html. Rocky Mountain Bird Observatory, Brighton, CO. Rodgers, J. A., and H. T. Smith. 1995. Set-back distances to protect nesting bird colonies from human disturbance in Florida. Conservation Biology 9:89-99. Rogers, L. L., and S. C. Durst. 1987. Evidence That Black Bears Reduce Peripheral Blood Flow During Hibernation. Journal of Mammalogy 68:876-878. Ryder, R. A., W.D. Graul, and G. C. Miller. 1979. Status, Distribution, and Movements of Ciconiiforms in Colorado. Pages 49-58 in Proc. Colonial Waterbird Group. Seidel, J. W. 1977. Elk calving behavior in west central Colorado. Pages 38-40 in Colorado Division of Wildlife, editor. Proceedings of the Western States Elk Workshop. Colorado Division of Wildlife, Denver. Simpson, K. J., J. N. M. Smith, and J. P. Kelsall. 1987. Correlates and consequences of coloniality in great blue herons. Journal of Zoology 65:572-577. Skagen, S. K., C. P. Melcher, and E. Muths. 2001. The interplay of habitat change, human disturbance and species interactions in a waterbird colony. The American Midland Naturalist 145:18-29. Smith, D. O., M. Conner, and E. R. Loft. 1989. The distribution of winter mule deer use around home sites. Transactions of the Western States Section of the Wildlife Society 25:77-80. Summers, K. 1996. Management guidelines for Great Blue Heron colonies in British Columbia. Thiel, R. P. 1985. Relationship between Road Densities and Wolf Habitat Suitability in Wisconsin. The American Midland Naturalist 113:404-407. Toweill, D. E., J. W. Thomas, and D. P. Metz. 2002. North American elk: ecology and management. 1st edition. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington [D.C.]. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2022. IPaC - Information for Planning and Consultation: A project planning tool to help streamline the USFWS environmental review process. Available: https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/. United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service, Atlanta, GA. Ungulate Winter Range Technical Advisory Team. 2005. Desired conditions for Mule Deer, Elk, and Moose winter range in the Southern Interior of British Columbia. B.C. Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection, Biodiversity Branch. Victoria, BC. Wildl. Bull. No. B-120. 18pp. USFWS. 1982. Habitat Suitability Index Models: Mule Deer. Draft. USFWS. 1995. Ute Ladies'-tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis) recovery plan. Available https://ecos.fws.gov/docs/recovery_plan/950921.pdf. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Denver, Colorado. USFWS. 2010. Ute ladies'-tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis) Species Profile. Environmental Conservation Online System. USFWS. 2023. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 5-Year Status Review for Ute Ladies'-Tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis). USFWS Mountain-Prairie Region, Region 6; Utah Ecological Services Field Office, Denver, Colorado. Vennesland, R. G. 2000. The effects of disturbance from humans and predators on the breeding decisions and productivity of the Great Blue Heron in south-coastal British Columbia. M.S. Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C. Vogel, W. O. 1989. Response of deer to density and distribution of housing in Montana. Wildlife Society Bulletin 17:406-413. Von Duyke, A. 2009. Conservation and Restoration of a Great Blue Heron Breeding Colony in East Central Minnesota. University of Minnesota. Vos, D. K., R. A. Ryder, and W. D. Graul. 1985. Response of breeding great blue herons (Ardea herodias) to human disturbance in north central Colorado. Colonial Waterbirds 8:13-22. Wait, S., and H. McNally. 2004. Selection of habitats by wintering elk in a rapidly subdividing area of La Plata County, Colorado. Pages 200–209 in W. W. Shaw, L. K. Harris, and L. VanDruff, editors. Fourth international symposium on urban wildlife conservation, Tucson, AZ. Watts, B. D., and D. S. Bradshaw. 1994. The influence of human disturbance on the location of great blue heron colonies in the lower Chesapeake Bay. Colonial Waterbirds 17:184-186. Webb, R. S., and L. S. Forbes. 1982. Colony establishment in an urban site by great blue herons. Murrelet 63:91-92. Webb, S. L., M. R. Dzialak, S. M. Harju, L. D. Hayden-Wing, and J. B. Winstead. 2011. Influence of land development on home range use dynamics of female elk. Wildlife Research 38:163-167. Wershkul, D. F., E. McMahon, and M. Lieitschuh. 1976. Some effects of human activities on the great blue heron in Oregon. Wilson Bulletin 88:660-662. Wickersham, L. 2007. Colorado Breeding Bird Atlas II. San Juan Institute of Natural and Cultural Resources. Durango, Colorado. Found online at http://www.cobreedingbirdatlasii.org. APPENDIX A. PROPOSED SITE PLAN HARVEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT CODE PAGE 4 A. The Harvest Neighborhoods Overview NORTH FRONTAGE Figure A.1 Regulating Plan VILLAGE CENTER CREEKSIDE SOPRIS THE FARM VILLAGE NEIGHBORHOOD NORTH CENTRAL NORTH RIVERFRONT SOUTH RIVERFRONT NATURE AREA TABLE I.A1 - NEIGHBORHOOD STANDARDS NO R T H FR O N T A G E NO R T H CE N T R A L TH E F A R M VI L L A G E NE I G H B O R - HO O D VI L L A G E CE N T E R NO R T H RI V E R F R O N T CR E E K S I D E SO U T H RI V E R F R O N T SO P R I S NA T U R E AR E A TO T A L ESTIMATED AREA, AC 31.8 44.5 12.5 18.0 10.6 16.8 43.2 22.9 14.0 67.9 282.4 PERCENT OF TOTAL AREA 11.3% 15.8% 4.4% 6.4% 3.8% 6.0% 7.8% 15.6% 4.9% 24.0% 100.0% MAX COMMERCIAL, SF 5,000 0 0 5,000 35,000 0 0 0 5,000 0 50,000 MIN OPEN SPACE/ NEIGHBORHOOD 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% NA MAX RESIDENTIAL DENSITY DU/AC 15 12 9 15 6 8 9 7 8 0 MAXIMUM RESIDENTIAL UNITS 1,500 APPENDIX B. PHOTOS Photo 1. The disturbed bench portion of the property, the Project Area Photo 2. The Roaring Fork River, its riparian area, and the westerly facing slopes between the upland bench and the riparian system Photo 3. Big sagebrush Photo 4. Yellow rabbitbrush growing amidst the cheatgrass and other non-native grasses Photo 5. One of the non-native Siberian elms growing within the Project Area Photo 7. Crested wheatgrass is one of the introduced hay grasses growing on the site Photo 8. Native needle and thread is one of the native grasses that has re-occupied the site Photo 9. Indian ricegrass is another native found in a few patches on the property Photo 10. A few patches of native sedges (Carex spp.) were observed in swales on the north side of the Rio Grande Trail Photo 11. A variety of trees and shrubs dominate the slopes down to the river including ponderosa pine, pinyon pine, Rocky Mountain juniper, Gambel oak, and big sagebrush Photo 12. The riparian area of the Roaring Fork River within the conservation easement supports a mosaic of riparian plant communities (adjacent to upland communities like the big sagebrush shrubland in the foreground) Photo 13. The lower sections of Cattle Creek on the bench are in reasonable condition with the exception of the prevalence of the non-native reed canarygrass Photo 14. Other sections of Cattle Creek are in poor condition, absent of a riparian plant community other than a near monoculture of reed canarygrass Photo 15. The upper segment of Cattle Creek is paralleled by isolated patches of upland shrubs including Gambel oak, and riparian shrubs such as coyote willow, which provide limited wildlife habitat Photo 16. The invasive cheatgrass dominating most of the Project Area provides little to no wildlife value Photo 17. Relatively recent elk sign observed within the project area during the November site assessment Photo 18. An elk day bed encountered in the Project Area in November Photo 20. A number of badger excavations were observed at the northeast end of the Project Area APPENDIX C. CPW SAM DEFINITIONS FOR SELECTED SPECIES AMERICAN BLACK BEAR FALL CONCENTRATION: That portion of the overall range occupied from August 15 until September 30 for the purpose of ingesting large quantities of mast and berries to establish fat reserves for the winter hibernation period. HUMAN CONFLICT: That portion of the overall range where two or more confirmed black bear complaints per season were received which resulted in CDOW investigation, damage to persons or property (cabins, tents, vehicles, etc), and/or the removal of the problem bear(s). This does not include damage caused by bears to livestock. OVERALL RANGE: The area which encompasses all known seasonal activity areas within the observed range of a population of black bear. SUMMER CONCENTRATION: That portion of the overall range of the species where activity is greater than the surrounding overall range during that period from June 15 to August 15. BALD EAGLE FALL CONCENTRATION AREA: Areas frequented by wintering bald eagles between November 15 and March 15. These may be large areas radiating from preferred roosting sites. WINTER RANGE: areas where bald eagles have been observed between November 15 and April 1. GREAT BLUE HERON FORAGING AREAS: Areas where Great Blue Herons are known to feed. Appropriate habitat includes shallow water areas associated with reservoirs, lakes, ponds, and streams. NESTING AREAS: Individual trees or groups of trees containing nest platforms, and a buffer zone extending 500 meters around a known active or inactive nest site. Nest platforms are usually located in dominant trees associated with riparian habitats. HISTORIC NESTING AREAS: Formerly active nesting area that has been destroyed or in which no courtship, breeding or brooding activity has been observed at any time in the last five years MULE DEER CONCENTRATION AREA: That part of the overall range where higher quality habitat supports significantly higher densities than surrounding areas. These areas are typically occupied year round and are not necessarily associated with a specific season. Includes rough break country, riparian areas, small drainages, and large areas of irrigated cropland. HIGHWAY CROSSING: Those areas where mule deer movements traditionally cross roads, presenting potential conflicts between mule deer and motorists. MIGRATION CORRIDORS: A specific Mappable site through which large numbers of animals migrate and loss of which would change migration routes. RESIDENT POPULATION: An area that provides year-round range for a population of mule deer. The resident mule deer use all of the area all year; it cannot be subdivided into seasonal ranges although it may be included within the overall range of the larger population. SEVERE WINTER: That part of the overall range where 90% of the individuals are located when the annual snowpack is at its maximum and/or temperatures are at a minimum in the two worst winters out of ten. SUMMER RANGE: That part of the overall range where 90% of the individuals are located between spring green-up and the first heavy snowfall. Summer range is not necessarily exclusive of winter range; in some areas winter range and summer range may overlap. WINTER CONCENTRATION: That part of the winter range where densities are at least 200% greater than the surrounding winter range density during the same period used to define winter range in the average five winters out of ten. WINTER RANGE: That part of the overall range where 90 percent of the individuals are located during the average five winters out of ten from the first heavy snowfall to spring green-up, or during a site specific period of winter as defined for each DAU. NORTH AMERICAN RIVER OTTER CONCENTRATION AREA: Areas where river otters are known to concentrate; otter sightings and signs of otter activity are more frequent in these areas than in their overall range. OVERALL RANGE: Those areas encompassing all mapped seasonal activity areas within the observed range of a population of river otters. WINTER RANGE: Areas used by otters when ice cover is present. This will normally, but not necessarily, be smaller than the overall range. ROCKY MOUNTAIN ELK HIGHWAY CROSSING: Those areas where elk movements traditionally cross roads, presenting potential conflicts between elk and motorists. MIGRATION CORRIDORS: A specific Mappable site through which large numbers of animals migrate and loss of which would change migration routes. PRODUCTION AREA: That part of the overall range of elk occupied by the females from May 15 to June 15 for calving. (Only known areas are mapped and this does not include all production areas for the DAU). RESIDENT POPULATION: An area used year-round by a population of elk. Individuals could be found in any part of the area at any time of the year; the area cannot be subdivided into seasonal ranges. It is most likely included within the overall range of the larger population. SEVERE WINTER: That part of the range of a species where 90 percent of the individuals are located when the annual snowpack is at its maximum and/or temperatures are at a minimum in the two worst winters out of ten. The winter of 1983-84 is a good example of a severe winter. SUMMER CONCENTRATION: Those areas where elk concentrate from mid-June through mid-August. High quality forage, security, and lack of disturbance are characteristics of these areas to meet the high energy demands of lactation, calf rearing, antler growth, and general preparation for the rigors of fall and winter. SUMMER RANGE: That part of the range of a species where 90% of the individuals are located between spring green-up and the first heavy snowfall, or during a site specific period of summer as defined for each DAU. Summer range is not necessarily exclusive of winter range; in some areas winter range and summer range may overlap. WINTER CONCENTRATION: That part of the winter range of a species where densities are at least 200% greater than the surrounding winter range density during the same period used to define winter range in the average five winters out of ten. WINTER RANGE: That part of the overall range of a species where 90 percent of the individuals are located during the average five winters out of ten from the first heavy snowfall to spring green-up, or during a site specific period of winter as defined for each DAU. APPENDIX D. U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE CONSULTATION LETTER 10/28/2024 22:41:19 UTC United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Western Colorado Ecological Services Field Office 445 West Gunnison Avenue, Suite 240 Grand Junction, CO 81501-5711 Phone: (970) 628-7180 Fax: (970) 245-6933 In Reply Refer To: Project Code: 2025-0012200 Project Name: Harvest Roaring Fork PUD Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project location or may be affected by your proposed project To Whom It May Concern: The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as well as proposed and final designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. The species list fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be completed by visiting the IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested through the IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list. The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangered species and/or designated critical habitat. A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2) (c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a biological Project code: 2025-0012200 10/28/2024 22:41:19 UTC 2 of 14 Ƒ evaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to determine whether the project may affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 CFR 402.12. If a Federal agency determines, based on the Biological Assessment or biological evaluation, that listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected by the proposed project, the agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR 402. In addition, the Service recommends that candidate species, proposed species and proposed critical habitat be addressed within the consultation. More information on the regulations and procedures for section 7 consultation, including the role of permit or license applicants, can be found in the "Endangered Species Consultation Handbook" at: https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/documents/ endangered-species-consultation-handbook.pdf Migratory Birds: In addition to responsibilities to protect threatened and endangered species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), there are additional responsibilities under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) to protect native birds from project-related impacts. Any activity, intentional or unintentional, resulting in take of migratory birds, including eagles, is prohibited unless otherwise permitted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)). For more information regarding these Acts, see https://www.fws.gov/program/migratory-bird-permit/what- we-do. The MBTA has no provision for allowing take of migratory birds that may be unintentionally killed or injured by otherwise lawful activities. It is the responsibility of the project proponent to comply with these Acts by identifying potential impacts to migratory birds and eagles within applicable NEPA documents (when there is a federal nexus) or a Bird/Eagle Conservation Plan (when there is no federal nexus). Proponents should implement conservation measures to avoid or minimize the production of project-related stressors or minimize the exposure of birds and their resources to the project-related stressors. For more information on avian stressors and recommended conservation measures, see https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/threats-birds. In addition to MBTA and BGEPA, Executive Order 13186: Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds, obligates all Federal agencies that engage in or authorize activities that might affect migratory birds, to minimize those effects and encourage conservation measures that will improve bird populations. Executive Order 13186 provides for the protection of both migratory birds and migratory bird habitat. For information regarding the implementation of Executive Order 13186, please visit https://www.fws.gov/partner/council-conservation- migratory-birds. We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Code in the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project that you submit to our office. Attachment(s): Official Species List Project code: 2025-0012200 10/28/2024 22:41:19 UTC 3 of 14 Ƒ Ƒ Ƒ Ƒ USFWS National Wildlife Refuges and Fish Hatcheries Bald & Golden Eagles Migratory Birds Wetlands OFFICIAL SPECIES LIST This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed action". This species list is provided by: Western Colorado Ecological Services Field Office 445 West Gunnison Avenue, Suite 240 Grand Junction, CO 81501-5711 (970) 628-7180 Project code: 2025-0012200 10/28/2024 22:41:19 UTC 4 of 14 PROJECT SUMMARY Project Code: 2025-0012200 Project Name: Harvest Roaring Fork PUD Project Type: Residential Construction Project Description: Harvest Roaring Fork PUD Project Location: The approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:// www.google.com/maps/@39.45805395,-107.2674285117229,14z Counties: Garfield County, Colorado Project code: 2025-0012200 10/28/2024 22:41:19 UTC 5 of 14 1. ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT SPECIES There is a total of 11 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list. Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species list because a project could affect downstream species. Note that 4 of these species should be considered only under certain conditions. IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA Fisheries , as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the Department of Commerce. See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office if you have questions. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce. 1 Project code: 2025-0012200 10/28/2024 22:41:19 UTC 6 of 14 Ƒ Ƒ MAMMALS NAME STATUS Canada Lynx Lynx canadensis Population: Wherever Found in Contiguous U.S. There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3652 Threatened Gray Wolf Canis lupus Population: CO No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4488 Experimental Population, Non- Essential BIRDS NAME STATUS Mexican Spotted Owl Strix occidentalis lucida There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8196 Threatened Yellow-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus americanus Population: Western U.S. DPS There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3911 Threatened FISHES NAME STATUS Bonytail Gila elegans There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat. This species only needs to be considered under the following conditions: Water depletions in the upper Colorado River basin adversely affect this species and its critical habitat. Effects of water depletions must be considered even outside of occupied range. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1377 Endangered Colorado Pikeminnow Ptychocheilus lucius Population: Wherever found, except where listed as an experimental population There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat. This species only needs to be considered under the following conditions: Water depletions in the upper Colorado River basin adversely affect this species and its critical habitat. Effects of water depletions must be considered even outside of occupied range. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3531 Endangered Humpback Chub Gila cypha There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat. This species only needs to be considered under the following conditions: Threatened Project code: 2025-0012200 10/28/2024 22:41:19 UTC 7 of 14 Ƒ Ƒ NAME STATUS Water depletions in the upper Colorado River basin adversely affect this species and its critical habitat. Effects of water depletions must be considered even outside of occupied range. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3930 Razorback Sucker Xyrauchen texanus There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat. This species only needs to be considered under the following conditions: Water depletions in the upper Colorado River basin adversely affect this species and its critical habitat. Effects of water depletions must be considered even outside of occupied range. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/530 Endangered INSECTS NAME STATUS Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743 Candidate Silverspot Speyeria nokomis nokomis No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2813 Threatened FLOWERING PLANTS NAME STATUS Ute Ladies'-tresses Spiranthes diluvialis No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2159 Threatened CRITICAL HABITATS THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S JURISDICTION. YOU ARE STILL REQUIRED TO DETERMINE IF YOUR PROJECT(S) MAY HAVE EFFECTS ON ALL ABOVE LISTED SPECIES. USFWS NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE LANDS AND FISH HATCHERIES Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a 'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to discuss any questions or concerns. THERE ARE NO REFUGE LANDS OR FISH HATCHERIES WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA. Project code: 2025-0012200 10/28/2024 22:41:19 UTC 8 of 14 1. 2. 3. BALD & GOLDEN EAGLES Bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act . Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to bald or golden eagles, or their habitats , should follow appropriate regulations and consider implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described in the links below. Specifically, please review the "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles". The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a) There are likely bald eagles present in your project area. For additional information on bald eagles, refer to Bald Eagle Nesting and Sensitivity to Human Activity For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, see the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY below to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your project area. NAME BREEDING SEASON Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626 Breeds Dec 1 to Aug 31 Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1680 Breeds Dec 1 to Aug 31 PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specifically the FAQ section titled "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret this report. Probability of Presence () 1 2 3 Project code: 2025-0012200 10/28/2024 22:41:19 UTC 9 of 14 Ƒ Ƒ Ƒ Ƒ no data survey effort breeding season probability of presence Green bars; the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project overlaps during that week of the year. Breeding Season () Yellow bars; liberal estimate of the timeframe inside which the bird breeds across its entire range. Survey Effort () Vertical black lines; the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. No Data () A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week. SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Bald Eagle Non-BCC Vulnerable Golden Eagle Non-BCC Vulnerable Additional information can be found using the following links: Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds https://www.fws.gov/library/ collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-migratory-birds Nationwide conservation measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/ documents/nationwide-standard-conservation-measures.pdf Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/ media/supplemental-information-migratory-birds-and-bald-and-golden-eagles-may-occur- project-action MIGRATORY BIRDS Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act . Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider 1 2 3 Project code: 2025-0012200 10/28/2024 22:41:19 UTC 10 of 14 1. 2. 3. implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described in the links below. Specifically, please review the "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles". The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a) For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, see the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY below to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your project area. NAME BREEDING SEASON Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626 Breeds Dec 1 to Aug 31 Black Swift Cypseloides niger This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8878 Breeds Jun 15 to Sep 10 Broad-tailed Hummingbird Selasphorus platycercus This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/11935 Breeds May 25 to Aug 21 Cassin's Finch Haemorhous cassinii This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9462 Breeds May 15 to Jul 15 Clark's Nutcracker Nucifraga columbiana This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9421 Breeds Jan 15 to Jul 15 Evening Grosbeak Coccothraustes vespertinus This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9465 Breeds May 15 to Aug 10 Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1680 Breeds Dec 1 to Aug 31 Project code: 2025-0012200 10/28/2024 22:41:19 UTC 11 of 14 NAME BREEDING SEASON Lewis's Woodpecker Melanerpes lewis This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9408 Breeds Apr 20 to Sep 30 Olive-sided Flycatcher Contopus cooperi This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3914 Breeds May 20 to Aug 31 Pinyon Jay Gymnorhinus cyanocephalus This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9420 Breeds Feb 15 to Jul 15 Virginia's Warbler Leiothlypis virginiae This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9441 Breeds May 1 to Jul 31 Western Grebe aechmophorus occidentalis This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6743 Breeds Jun 1 to Aug 31 PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specifically the FAQ section titled "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret this report. Probability of Presence () Green bars; the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project overlaps during that week of the year. Breeding Season () Yellow bars; liberal estimate of the timeframe inside which the bird breeds across its entire range. Survey Effort () Vertical black lines; the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. No Data () A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week. Project code: 2025-0012200 10/28/2024 22:41:19 UTC 12 of 14 Ƒ no data survey effort breeding season probability of presence SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Bald Eagle Non-BCC Vulnerable Black Swift BCC Rangewide (CON) Broad-tailed Hummingbird BCC Rangewide (CON) Cassin's Finch BCC Rangewide (CON) Clark's Nutcracker BCC - BCR Evening Grosbeak BCC Rangewide (CON) Golden Eagle Non-BCC Vulnerable Lewis's Woodpecker BCC Rangewide (CON) Olive-sided Flycatcher BCC Rangewide (CON) Pinyon Jay BCC Rangewide (CON) Virginia's Warbler BCC Rangewide (CON) Western Grebe BCC Rangewide (CON) Additional information can be found using the following links: Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management Project code: 2025-0012200 10/28/2024 22:41:19 UTC 13 of 14 Ƒ Ƒ Ƒ Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds https://www.fws.gov/library/ collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-migratory-birds Nationwide conservation measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/ documents/nationwide-standard-conservation-measures.pdf Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/ media/supplemental-information-migratory-birds-and-bald-and-golden-eagles-may-occur- project-action WETLANDS Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes. For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of Engineers District. Please note that the NWI data being shown may be out of date. We are currently working to update our NWI data set. We recommend you verify these results with a site visit to determine the actual extent of wetlands on site. WETLAND INFORMATION WAS NOT AVAILABLE WHEN THIS SPECIES LIST WAS GENERATED. PLEASE VISIT HTTPS://WWW.FWS.GOV/WETLANDS/DATA/MAPPER.HTML OR CONTACT THE FIELD OFFICE FOR FURTHER INFORMATION. Project code: 2025-0012200 10/28/2024 22:41:19 UTC 14 of 14 IPAC USER CONTACT INFORMATION Agency: Colorado Wildlife Science, LLC Name: Jonathan Lowsky Address: Colorado Wildlife Science, LLC Address Line 2: 0100 Elk Run Drive STE 128 City: Basalt State: CO Zip: 81621 Email jonathan@coloradowildlifescience.com Phone: 9706184740 BACKGROUND & QUALIFICATIONS Colorado Wildlife Science, LLC (CWS) is a small wildlife and ecological consulting firm based in Basalt, Colorado, specializing in wildlife research, management, and monitoring, ecological assessments, wildfire hazard assessments, baseline inventories, ecological planning, habitat management, and ecological restoration. CWS applies a scientifically sound approach to biological resource studies and management. Our work combines professional integrity and strong academic training with extensive experience working for government, private, and non-profit clients. With an extensive network of professional collaborators that includes plant ecologists, foresters, hydrologists, and soil scientists, CWS leverages the collective knowledge of experienced professionals working toward practical, effective and cost saving solutions. CWS provides expert services to a diverse array of clients. Since we are a small company, personal attention is ensured. We combine full in-house GIS (ArcGIS) with real-time, sub-meter GPS to provide state-of-the-art spatial data, analyses, maps, and presentations. Owner and Wildlife Biologist Jonathan Lowsky, M.S. Wildlife Biology, Colorado State University, has a broad range of knowledge. With more than 26 years of professional experience with federal (US Forest Service), state (Colorado Division of Wildlife), and county agencies as well as two major universities (Colorado State University and University of Washington), Jonathan’s career has focused on a diverse array of wildlife. Mr. Lowsky’s experience includes biological assessments and evaluations for NEPA compliance, conservation planning, GIS mapping and modeling, wildlife research, and ecological monitoring design and implementation, as well as wetland and riparian delineations, evaluations, and restoration. He has authored management plans and conservation easement baseline inventory reports and published scientific papers. Jonathan has been directly involved in fire mitigation since 1995 when he directed ponderosa pine fuel reduction, thinning, and habitat improvement efforts on the North Kaibab Ranger District of the Kaibab National Forest. Over the course of 26 years as a professional ecologist he has gained intimate knowledge of ecosystem processes in western Colorado that lead to increased fuel loads, over- mature forest and shrublands, and measures that can be taken to reduce the threat and intensity of wildfires. In addition, I am experienced in mechanical treatments of forest, woodland, and shrubland for the purpose of wildfire mitigation and habitat improvement. Mr. Lowsky strongly believes that these two resource goals are mutually beneficial and measures that prioritize either wildfire mitigation or habitat improvement should consider both goals in the design and implementation of those actions. In addition, Mr. Lowsky is a certified wildland fire mitigation expert and has completed two wildland fire mitigation certification courses: (1) Wildland Fire Assessment Program and (2) National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) FIREWISE - Conducting an Assessment in the Wildland/Urban Interface. A detailed description of Mr. Lowsky’s professional experience and references are available. For additional information, please visit our website at www.coloradowildlifescience.com. Exhibit I Kimley Horn Harvest Roaring Fork Traffic Assessment Traffic Impact Study Harvest Roaring Fork Garfield County, Colorado Prepared for: Harvest Roaring Fork, LLC TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY Harvest Roaring Fork Garfield County, Colorado Prepared for Harvest Roaring Fork, LLC 909 Lake Carolyn Parkway Suite 150 Irving, Texas 75309 Prepared by Curtis D. Rowe, P.E., PTOE Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 6200 South Syracuse Way Suite 300 Greenwood Village, Colorado 80111 (303) 228-2300 April 2025 This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, 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 liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 04/18/2025 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork 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 ....................................................................................................... 4 3.0 EXISTING AND FUTURE CONDITIONS .................................................................. 7 3.1 Existing Study Area ...........................................................................................................7 3.2 Existing Roadway Network ................................................................................................8 3.3 Existing Traffic Volumes ..................................................................................................11 3.4 Unspecified Development Traffic Growth .........................................................................11 4.0 PROJECT TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS ............................................................. 16 4.1 Trip Generation................................................................................................................16 4.2 Trip Distribution ...............................................................................................................19 4.3 Traffic Assignment ...........................................................................................................19 4.4 Total (Background Plus Project) Traffic............................................................................19 5.0 TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS ...................................................................... 24 5.1 Analysis Methodology ......................................................................................................24 5.2 Key Intersection Operational Analysis .............................................................................25 5.3 CDOT Turn Bay Length Analysis .....................................................................................29 5.4 Vehicle Queuing Analysis ................................................................................................31 5.5 Improvement Summary ...................................................................................................32 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................... 34 APPENDICES Appendix A – Intersection Count Sheets Appendix B – Future Traffic Projections Appendix C – Trip Generation Worksheets Appendix D – Intersection Analysis Worksheets Appendix E – Signal Timings Appendix F – Queue Analysis Worksheets Appendix G – SH-82 Access Improvement Exhibits 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork Page ii LIST OF TABLES Table 1 – Harvest Roaring Fork Adjacent Street Peak Hour Traffic Generation ........................17 Table 2 – Harvest Roaring Fork Peak Hour of the Generator Traffic Generation .......................18 Table 3 – Level of Service Definitions .......................................................................................24 Table 4 – Spring Valley Road & SH-82 (#1) LOS Results .........................................................25 Table 5 – Cattle Creek Road (CR-113) & SH-82 (#2) LOS Results ...........................................26 Table 6 – RCUT and Project Access Level of Service Results ..................................................28 Table 7 – Turn Lane Queuing Analysis Results.........................................................................31 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 – Vicinity Map ................................................................................................................6 Figure 2 – Existing Geometry and Control .................................................................................10 Figure 3 – 2024 Existing Traffic Volumes ..................................................................................12 Figure 4 – 2024 Existing Adjusted Traffic Volumes ...................................................................13 Figure 5 – 2035 Background Traffic Volumes............................................................................14 Figure 6 – 2055 Background Traffic Volumes............................................................................15 Figure 7 – Project Trip Distribution ............................................................................................20 Figure 8 – Project Traffic Assignment .......................................................................................21 Figure 9 – 2035 Total Traffic Volumes ......................................................................................22 Figure 10 – 2055 Total Traffic Volumes.....................................................................................23 Figure 11 – Recommended Geometry and Control ...................................................................33 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork Page 1 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report has been prepared to document the results of a Traffic Impact Study for the Harvest Roaring Fork development proposed to be located along the west side of State Highway 82 (SH- 82) across from the Cattle Creek Road (CR-113) intersection in Garfield County, Colorado. Harvest Roaring Fork is proposed as an affordable workforce housing development including 450 single-family detached housing dwelling units, 200 single-family attached housing dwelling units, 625 multifamily housing dwelling units, 225 affordable/deed-restricted housing dwelling units, approximately 40,000 square feet of neighborhood amenity retail, 10,000 square feet of office, and a 90-room hotel. It is expected that Harvest Roaring Fork will be completed by 2035; therefore, analysis was conducted for the 2035 short -term buildout horizon as well as the 2055 long-term thirty-year planning horizon. The purpose of this traffic study is to identify project traffic generation characteristics to determine potential project traffic related impacts on the local street system and to develop the necessary mitigation measures required for the identified traff ic impacts. The following intersections were incorporated into this traffic study based on the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) requested scope: • Spring Valley Road (CR-114) and SH-82 (#1) • Cattle Creek Road (CR-113) and SH-82 (#2) CDOT identified that two accesses would be allowed for this property along SH-82, due to the project size and that no other access is available from adjacent streets. CDOT identified those accesses to be one three-quarter movement access and one right-in/right-out movement access. It is proposed that the North SH-82 Access (#3) be restricted to three quarter turning movements (left out restricted) while the South SH-82 Access (#4) will be restricted to right-in/right-out movements only. To facilitate left turns, two Restricted Crossing U-Turn (RCUT) signalized intersections will be constructed along SH-82. The northern RCUT U-Turn will be located at the North SH-82 Access (#3) intersection, while the southern RCUT U-Turn would occur approximately 1900 feet south of Cattle Creek Road. Both U -Turn intersections would be signalized with simple two-phase operations, only stopping the one direction of SH -82 during the left turn/U-Turn Phase. The North SH-82 Access /RCUT (#3), South SH-82 RIRO Access (#4), and the South SH-82 RCUT (#5) intersections were also evaluated in this study. 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork Page 2 Regional access to Harvest Roaring Fork will be provided by Interstate 70 (I -70) and SH-82. Primary access will be provided by SH-82. Proposed direct access will be provided by a northern three-quarter access on the west side of SH-82 (#3) and a southern right-in/right-out access on the west side of SH-82 (#4). Accounting for internal capture, Harvest Roaring Fork is expected to generate approximately 11,936 weekday daily trips, with 7 94 of these trips occurring during the morning peak hour and 1,041 of these trips occurring during the afternoon peak hour. However, as requested by CDOT, the peak hour of the generator rates for the residential uses was used instead of the peak hour of the adjacent street traffic. Although this is not the correct procedure to evaluate the true impact of a project, this then provides a conservative analysis. With the peak hour of generator rates, the site is expected to generate 875 morning peak of the generator trips and 1,118 afternoon peak hour of the generator trips with internal capture. Based on the analysis presented in this report, Kimley -Horn believes Harvest Roaring Fork will be successfully incorporated into the existing and future roadway network. Analysis of the peak season traffic volumes, the proposed project development, and expected future traffic volumes resulted in the following recommendations: • The westbound left turn at the High-T Cattle Creek Road (CR-113) and SH-82 (#2) intersection is projected to operate with long delays and poor level of service prior to the addition of Harvest Roaring Fork project traffic . Therefore, CDOT has proposed SH-82 corridor improvements within the study area to include RCUT intersections to the north and south of this intersection. As such , the Cattle Creek Road (CR-113) and SH-82 (#2) intersection would be restricted to right -in/right-out movements only. A northern signalized RCUT intersection (#3) is proposed 2,480 feet north of this Cattle Creek Road (CR-113) intersection. This is the location of the proposed three -quarter movement access for Harvest Roaring Fork. This signalized RCUT intersection (#3) will provide the U-turn movement for exiting drivers destined to southbound SH-82 from Cattle Creek Road. Likewise, a southern signalized RCUT (#5) is proposed approximately 1,900 feet to the south of Cattle Creek Road (CR-113). This signalized RCUT intersection (#5) will provide the U-turn movement for entering drivers along southbound SH-82 destined to Cattle Creek Road. 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork Page 3 • The proposed North Three-Quarter Access (#3) at the northern RCUT is recommended to operate with signalization. The traffic signal phasing should operate with no eastbound right turns on red while the northbound to southbound U -turn phase operates. Based on CDOT standards and the future 55 mph posted speed limit, it is recommended that a 600-foot with 222-foot taper southbound right turn deceleration lane and a 960-foot with 222-foot taper southbound acceleration lane from the eastbound right turn be constructed along southbound SH-82 at this intersection. The southbound right turn lane length should be considered when locating the northern access (#3) for appropriate spacing from the Calaway Court right -in/right- out intersection to the north. A continuous acceleration to deceleration auxiliary lane can be created between Calaway Court and the North Three -Quarter Access (#3). Additionally, 875- foot with 222-foot taper dual northbound left turn lanes are recommended at this RCUT intersection (#3). • The proposed southern right-in/right-out access along SH-82 (#4) is recommended to operate with stop or yield control with either a R1-1 “STOP” sign or R1-2 “YIELD” sign on the eastbound right turn approach , respectively. Additionally, based on CDOT standards and the future SH-82 55 mph posted speed limit, a southbound right turn deceleration lane of 600 feet with 222-foot taper and a southbound acceleration from the eastbound right turn with a length of 960 feet with 222-foot taper be constructed at this access intersection. A continuous auxiliary lane could be constructed between the north and south accesses along SH -82 based on the proposed access spacing and the required acceleration and deceleration length s. • The proposed Southern RCUT (#5) intersection is recommended to operate with signalization. A 925-foot with 222 -foot taper southbound left turn lane is recommended at this RCUT intersection. The east edge of SH-82 will need to be widened to accept the U-turn movement from the largest possible design vehicle. • Any onsite or offsite improvements should be incorporated into the Civil Drawings and conform to standards of Garfield County and CDOT as appropriate, as well as the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) – 11th Edition, 2023. 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork Page 4 2.0 INTRODUCTION Kimley-Horn has prepared this report to document the results of a Traffic Impact Study for the Harvest Roaring Fork development proposed to be located along the west side of State Highway 82 (SH-82) across from the Cattle Creek Road (CR-113) intersection in Garfield County, Colorado. A vicinity map illustrating the Harvest Roaring Fork development location is shown in Figure 1. Harvest Roaring Fork is proposed as an affordable workforce housing development including 450 single-family detached housing dwelling units, 200 single-family attached housing dwelling units, 625 multifamily housing dwelling units, 225 affordable/deed -restricted housing dwelling units, approximately 40,000 square feet of neighborhood amenity retail, 10,000 square feet of office, and a 90-room hotel. It is expected that Harvest Roaring Fork will be completed by 2035; therefore, analysis was conducted for the 2035 short-term buildout horizon as well as the 2055 long-term thirty-year planning horizon. The purpose of this traffic study is to identify project traffic generation characteristics to determine potential project traffic related impacts on the local street system and to develop the necessary mitigation measures required for the identified traff ic impacts. The following intersections were incorporated into this traffic study based on the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) requested scope: • Spring Valley Road (CR-114) and SH-82 (#1) • Cattle Creek Road (CR-113) and SH-82 (#2) CDOT identified that two accesses would be allowed for this property along SH -82, due to the project size and that no other access is available from adjacent streets. CDOT identified those accesses to be one three-quarter movement access and one right-in/right-out movement access. It is proposed that the North SH-82 Access (#3) be restricted to three quarter turning movements (left out restricted) while the South SH-82 Access (#4) will be restricted to right-in/right-out movements only. To facilitate left turns, two Restricted Crossing U-Turn (RCUT) signalized intersections will be constructed along SH-82. The northern RCUT U-Turn will be located at the North SH-82 Access (#3) intersection, while the southern RCUT U-Turn would occur approximately 1900 feet south of Cattle Creek Road. Both U -Turn intersections would be signalized with simple two-phase operations, only stopping the one direction of SH -82 during the 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork Page 5 left turn/U-Turn Phase. The North SH-82 Access /RCUT (#3), South SH-82 RIRO Access (#4), and the South SH-82 RCUT (#5) intersections were also evaluated in this study. Regional access to Harvest Roaring Fork will be provided by Interstate 70 (I -70) and SH-82. Primary access will be provided by SH-82. Proposed direct access will be provided by a northern three-quarter access on the west side of SH-82 (#3) and a southern right -in/right-out access on the west side of SH-82 (#4). 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork Page 7 3.0 EXISTING AND FUTURE CONDITIONS 3.1 Existing Study Area The existing site is primarily comprised of vacant land. A previous restaurant that’s been abandoned exists within the very northern portion of the site. T he Roaring Fork River is to the west of the proposed development. To the north of the project site are single family homes, retail uses, and industrial uses. To the south of the project site is vacant land and industrial land. East of the project site, across SH-82, are commercial and industrial uses. The area to the west of the project site, across the river, consists of single-family homes and a golf course. A site aerial is shown below (north is up). Site Aerial 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork Page 8 3.2 Existing Roadway Network SH-82 extends north/south (although CDOT defined east/west) in the area fronting the project site with two through lanes in each direction, separated by an approximate 30-foot width grass median. The posted speed limit of SH-82 adjacent to the site is 65 miles per hour. CDOT classifies SH-82 as an E-X: Expressway, Major Bypass. Spring Valley Road (CR-114) extends in the east/west direction as a two-lane roadway. It has a posted speed limit of 35 miles per hour west of SH-82 and 25 miles per hour east of SH-82. Cattle Creek Road extends in the east/west direction with one through lane in each direction. It has a posted speed limit of 35 miles per hour. The signalized intersection of Spring Valley Road (CR-114) and SH-82 (#1) operates with protected-only left turn phasing on the north-south SH-82 approaches and split phasing on the Spring Valley Road (CR-114) east-west approaches. The northbound and southbound approaches provide one left turn lane, two through lanes, and a right turn lane . The eastbound and westbound approaches consist of shared left turn/through lane s and separate right turn lanes. An aerial photo of the existing intersection configurati on is below (north is up - typical). Spring Valley Road (CR-114) and SH-82 (#1) 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork Page 9 The unsignalized ‘T’-intersection of Cattle Creek Road (CR-113) and SH-82 (#2) operates with stop control on the westbound Cattle Creek Road (CR-133) approach. The northbound approach provides two through lanes and one right turn lane . The southbound approach consists of one left turn lane and two through lanes. The westbound approach provides a shared left/right turn lane. An aerial photo of the existing intersection configuration is below. Cattle Creek Road (CR-113) and SH-82 (#2) The intersection lane configuration and control for the study area intersections are shown in Figure 2. 40 0 ' 25 0 ' 75 ' 15 0 ' 25' 100' 77 5 ' 25 0 ' ACCEL150' ACCEL200' ACCEL250' AC C E L 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork Page 11 3.3 Existing Traffic Volumes Existing turning movement counts were conducted at the study intersections on Tuesday, March 19, 2024 during the weekday morning and afternoon peak hours while area schools and colleges were in session. The counts were conducted 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 on this count date. The existing intersection traffic volumes are shown in Figure 3 with count sheets provided in Appendix A. As requested by CDOT, a weekly seasonal adjustment factor of 1.11 was applied to the existing traffic volume counts collected during the third week of March to obtain 2024 adjusted peak season peak hour volumes as obtained from the CDOT Online Transportation Information System (OTIS) website. As noted from this traffic information, a weekly volume of 184,635 vehicles along SH-82 were observed ending March 23, 2024 compared to 206,014 weekly peak SH-82 volume ending July 27, 2024 for Count Station 214. The 2024 existing adjusted peak season traffic volumes are shown in Figure 4. 3.4 Unspecified Development Traffic Growth According to information provided on the website for the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT), the 20-year growth factor along SH-82 in the vicinity of the site is 1.19. The 20-year growth factor equates to annual g rowth rate of 0.87 percent. Traffic information from the CDOT OTIS website is included in Appendix B. This annual growth rate was used to estimate near- term 2035 and long -term 2055 traffic volume projections at the key intersection s. Background traffic volumes for 2035 and 2055 are shown in Figures 5 and 6, respectively. 90(45) 44(32) 124(190) 205(70) 32(32) 19(56) 13 3 ( 1 0 6 ) 15 8 6 ( 7 1 1 ) 57 ( 2 1 ) 33 ( 5 8 ) 53 0 ( 1 6 0 1 ) 62 ( 1 1 4 ) 1 93(39) 47(45) 87 ( 3 7 ) 18 0 6 ( 8 0 1 ) 37 ( 7 6 ) 60 2 ( 1 7 9 9 ) 2 100(50) 49(36) 138(211) 228(78) 36(36) 21(62) 14 8 ( 1 1 8 ) 17 6 0 ( 7 8 9 ) 63 ( 2 3 ) 37 ( 6 4 ) 58 8 ( 1 7 7 7 ) 69 ( 1 2 7 ) 1 103(43) 52(50) 97 ( 4 1 ) 20 0 5 ( 8 8 9 ) 41 ( 8 4 ) 66 8 ( 1 9 9 7 ) 2 110(55) 54(40) 152(232) 251(86) 40(40) 23(68) 16 3 ( 1 3 0 ) 19 3 6 ( 8 6 8 ) 69 ( 2 5 ) 41 ( 7 0 ) 64 7 ( 1 9 5 5 ) 76 ( 1 4 0 ) 1 113(47) 57(55) 10 7 ( 4 5 ) 22 0 5 ( 9 7 8 ) 45 ( 9 2 ) 73 5 ( 2 1 9 7 ) 2 131(65) 64(47) 181(276) 298(102) 47(47) 27(81) 19 4 ( 1 5 4 ) 23 0 2 ( 1 0 3 2 ) 82 ( 3 0 ) 48 ( 8 4 ) 76 9 ( 2 3 2 4 ) 90 ( 1 6 6 ) 1 135(56) 68(65) 12 7 ( 5 4 ) 26 2 3 ( 1 1 6 3 ) 54 ( 1 1 0 ) 87 4 ( 2 6 1 2 ) 2 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork Page 16 4.0 PROJECT TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS 4.1 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 Manual1 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 average rates that apply to Single Family Detached Housing (ITE Land Use Code 210), Single Family Attached Housing (ITE 215), Multifamily Low-Rise Housing (ITE 220), Affordable Housing (ITE 223), Hotel (ITE 310), Small Office Building (ITE 712), and Strip Retail Plaza (ITE Land Use Code 822) for traffic associated with the development. Since full buildout of Harvest Roaring Fork is proposed to contain commercial community amenities within the residential development, internal capture trips are expected to occur on site as well. These internal capture trips are shared trips from vehicles already within the internal street network. Since the commercial uses will primarily serve the overall residential development area and it is proposed to be located internal to the development area , a 90% internal capture was applied to the retail trips as discussed with CDOT. Access to the retail portion is indirect and out of the way for a typical street -front retail location attracting areawide traffic. Accounting for internal capture, Harvest Roaring Fork is expected to generate approximately 11,936 weekday daily trips, with 794 of these trips occurring during the morning peak hour and 1,041 of these trips occurring during the afternoon peak hour. Calculations were based on the procedure and information provided in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition – Volume 1: User’s Guide and Handbook, 2021. Table 1 summarizes the estimated trip generation for Harvest Roaring Fork. The trip generation worksheets are included in Appendix C. 1 Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Manual, Eleventh Edition, Washington DC, 2021. 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork Page 17 Table 1 – Harvest Roaring Fork Adjacent Street Peak Hour Traffic Generation Land Use and Size Weekday Vehicle Trips Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total Single Family Detached Housing (ITE 210) – 450 Dwelling Units 4,244 82 233 315 266 157 423 Single Family Attached Housing (ITE 215) – 200 Dwelling Units 1,440 30 66 96 65 49 114 Multifamily Low-Rise Housing (ITE 220) – 625 Dwelling Units 4,214 60 190 250 201 118 319 Affordable Housing (ITE 223) – 225 Dwelling Units 1,084 23 58 81 61 43 104 Hotel (ITE 310) – 90 Rooms 720 23 18 41 27 26 53 Small Office Building (ITE 712) – 10,000 Square Feet 144 14 3 17 7 15 22 Strip Retail Plaza (ITE 822) – 40,000 Square Feet 2,178 56 38 94 132 132 264 Total Project Trips 14,024 288 606 894 759 540 1,299 Total External Project Trips (with Internal Capture) 11,936 225 569 794 634 408 1,041 However, as requested by CDOT, the peak hour of the generator rates for the residential uses were used instead of the peak hour of the adjacent street traffic. Although this is not the correct procedure to evaluate the true impact of a project (different uses have different hours of maximum traffic volume causing the summation to be inaccurate and mixing the higher use trip generation during a time period when the adjacent street traffic volumes are less), this then provides a conservative analysis. With the peak hour of generator rates, the site is expected to generate 875 morning peak of the generator trips and 1,118 afternoon peak hour of the generator trips with internal capture. Table 2 summarizes the peak hour of generator trip generation. 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork Page 18 Table 2 – Harvest Roaring Fork Peak Hour of the Generator Traffic Generation Land Use and Size Weekday Vehicle Trips Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total Single Family Detached Housing (ITE 210) – 450 Dwelling Units 4,244 88 250 338 285 161 446 Single Family Attached Housing (ITE 215) – 200 Dwelling Units 1,440 28 82 110 76 46 122 Multifamily Low-Rise Housing (ITE 220) – 625 Dwelling Units 4,214 71 223 294 221 135 356 Affordable Housing (ITE 223) – 225 Dwelling Units 1,084 21 60 81 66 47 113 Hotel (ITE 310) – 90 Rooms 720 23 18 41 27 26 53 Small Office Building (ITE 712) – 10,000 Square Feet 144 14 3 17 7 15 22 Strip Retail Plaza (ITE 822) – 40,000 Square Feet 2,178 56 38 94 132 132 264 Total Project Trips 14,024 301 674 975 814 562 1,376 Total External Project Trips (with Internal Capture) 11,936 238 637 875 689 430 1,118 One item worthy of note is the possible change in vehicle miles traveled with development of this project. This proposed affordable housing project will be located to the south of the City of Glenwood Springs. It is believed that many of the residents that will reside within this development will work within the communities to the south of the project (Carbondale, Basalt, Aspen, Snowmass Village, and Pitkin County). As residents of this housing development would otherwise still need to live somewhere if this project were not constructed, many of these residents would instead likely live further north and/or along the I -70 corridor to the east or west. This project will provide housing closer to employment and will thereby reduce the amount of vehicle miles traveled for these residents by eliminating travel through the City of Glenwood Springs. Likewise, any residents living in this Harvest Roaring Fork community who work in Glenwood Springs would redistribute this existing traffic to northbound flow in the morning and southbound flow in the afternoon, out of direction for the heaviest movements along SH -82. It is believed that the traffic volume reduction, vehicle mile travel benefit, and redistribution of existing traffic movements will be recognized in the City of Glenwood Springs. 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork Page 19 4.2 Trip Distribution Distribution of site traffic on the street system was based on the area street system characteristics, existing traffic patterns, existing and anticipated surrounding employment, school, and attraction information, 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. The project trip distribution for the proposed development is illustrated in Figure 7. 4.3 Traffic Assignment Harvest Roaring Fork traffic assignment was obtained by applying the project trip distribution to the estimated traffic generation of the development shown in Table 2. Traffic assignment is shown in Figure 8. 4.4 Total (Background Plus Project) Traffic Site traffic volumes were added to the background volumes to represent estimated traffic conditions for the short-term 2035 buildout horizon and long -term 2055 thirty-year planning horizon. These total traffic volumes for the study area are illustrated for the 2035 and 2055 horizon years in Figures 9 and 10, respectively. 30 % [3 0 % ] 1 [20%] 10 % 20 % [3 0 % ] 70 % 3 [1 0 0 % ] 70 % [ 3 0 % ] 2 [80%] [2 0 % ] 10 % 70 % [ 3 0 % ] 4 [3 0 % ] [7 0 % ] 70 % 5 71 ( 2 0 7 ) 19 1 ( 1 2 9 ) 1 127(86) 24 ( 6 9 ) 48 ( 1 3 8 ) 19 1 ( 1 2 9 ) 16 7 ( 4 8 2 ) 3 63 7 ( 4 3 0 ) 35 8 ( 6 1 1 ) 2 510(344) 12 7 ( 8 6 ) 24 ( 6 9 ) 35 8 ( 6 1 1 ) 4 19 1 ( 1 2 9 ) 44 6 ( 3 0 1 ) 16 7 ( 4 8 2 ) 5 110(55) 54(40) 152(232) 251(86) 40(40) 23(68) 16 3 ( 1 3 0 ) 20 0 7 ( 1 0 7 5 ) 69 ( 2 5 ) 41 ( 7 0 ) 83 8 ( 2 0 8 4 ) 76 ( 1 4 0 ) 1 127(86) 23 2 1 ( 1 0 7 8 ) 48 ( 1 3 8 ) 95 5 ( 2 2 9 4 ) 16 7 ( 4 8 2 ) 11 3 ( 4 7 ) 3 170(102) 30 6 2 ( 1 5 0 0 ) 15 2 ( 1 3 7 ) 10 9 3 ( 2 8 0 8 ) 2 510(344) 25 5 2 ( 1 1 5 6 ) 24 ( 6 9 ) 12 4 5 ( 2 9 4 5 ) 4 29 8 ( 1 7 4 ) 27 6 4 ( 1 3 2 6 ) 10 5 4 ( 2 8 1 6 ) 5 131(65) 64(47) 181(276) 298(102) 47(47) 27(81) 19 4 ( 1 5 4 ) 23 7 3 ( 1 2 3 9 ) 82 ( 3 0 ) 48 ( 8 4 ) 96 0 ( 2 4 5 3 ) 90 ( 1 6 6 ) 1 127(86) 27 5 5 ( 1 2 6 8 ) 48 ( 1 3 8 ) 10 9 8 ( 2 7 0 3 ) 16 7 ( 4 8 2 ) 13 5 ( 5 6 ) 3 203(121) 35 2 2 ( 1 7 0 3 ) 18 1 ( 1 6 4 ) 12 3 2 ( 3 2 2 3 ) 2 510(344) 30 1 2 ( 1 3 5 9 ) 24 ( 6 9 ) 14 1 3 ( 3 3 8 7 ) 4 31 8 ( 1 8 3 ) 32 0 4 ( 1 5 2 0 ) 12 2 2 ( 3 2 5 8 ) 5 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork Page 24 5.0 TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS Kimley-Horn’s analysis of traffic operations in the site vicinity was conducted to determine potential capacity deficiencies in the 2035 and 2055 development horizons at the identified key intersections. The acknowledged source for determining overall capacity is the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM)2. 5.1 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, standard traffic engineering practice recommends overall intersection LOS D and movement/approach LOS E as the minimum desirable thresholds for acceptable operations. Table 3 shows the definition of level of service for signalized and unsignalized intersections . Table 3 – 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, Sixth Edition, Transportation Research Board, 2016. Study area intersections were analyzed based on average total delay analysis for signalized and unsignalized intersections. Under the unsignalized analysis, the LOS for a two -way stop- controlled intersection is determined by the computed or measured control delay and is defined for each minor movement. LOS for a two -way stop-controlled intersection is not defined for the whole intersection. LOS for signalized, roundabout, and all-way stop controlled intersections are defined for each approach and for the overall intersection. 2 Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual, Sixth Edition, Washington DC, 2016. 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork Page 25 5.2 Key Intersection Operational Analysis Calculations for the operational level of service at the key intersection s for the study area are provided in Appendix D. The existing year analysis is based on the lane geometry and intersection control shown in Figure 2. Existing peak hour factors were utilized in the existing , 2035, and 2055 horizon analysis years. The signalized intersection analysis utilizes the signal timings provided by CDOT. Signal timing worksheets are attached in Appendix E. Synchro traffic analysis software was used to analyze the signalized and unsignalized key intersections for HCM level of service. Spring Valley Road (CR-114) and SH-82 (#1) The signalized intersection of Spring Valley Road (CR-114) and SH-82 (#1) operates with protected-only left turn phasing on the north-south SH-82 approaches and split phasing on the Spring Valley Road (CR-114) east-west approaches. The intersection is operating with longer delays and unacceptable level of service during the morning and afternoon peak hours at LOS E under peak season existing conditions. In order for the intersection to operate acceptably, the eastbound and westbound approaches are recommended to have the split phase removed and be converted to permissive -only phasing. The approaches should be reconstructed and designated to provide separate left turn, through, and right turn lanes. With this configuration, the split timings can remain the same with 40 seconds given to the east/west approaches and 135 seconds still given to the north/south approaches. Under the recommended intersection operation and configuration, the intersection is anticipated to operate at LOS C with project traffic in 2035 with buildout of the development. By 2055, the overall intersection may operate with LOS D during the afternoon peak hour. Table 4 provides the results of the LOS analysis conducted at this intersection. Table 4 – Spring Valley Road & SH-82 (#1) LOS Results Scenario AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay (sec/veh) LOS Delay (sec/veh) LOS 2024 Existing 71.1 E 69.3 E 2035 Background 82.3 F 81.5 F 2035 Background Plus Project # 30.7 C 31.3 C 2055 Background 120.5 F 126.4 F 2055 Background Plus Project # 45.2 D 28.9 C # = Remove E/W Split Phasing, Reconfigure E/W Approaches to Separate Left, Through, and Right Turn Lanes 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork Page 26 Cattle Creek Road (CR-113) and SH-82 (#2) The unsignalized ‘T’-intersection of Cattle Creek Road (CR-113) and SH-82 (#2) operates with stop control on the westbound Cattle Creek Road approach. Since this intersection is a High-T, the westbound left movements only conflict with the northbound through movements. Therefore, in the analysis to correctly demonstrate the High-T configuration, the southbound through volumes were coded as zero. The intersection movements operate acceptably at LOS C or better during the morning peak hour but LOS F for the westbound movement during the afternoon peak hour under existing peak season conditions. Prior to the addition of project traffic in 2035, the westbound approach may continue to operate poorly during the afternoon peak hour . Therefore, CDOT has proposed SH-82 corridor improvements within the study area to include RCUT intersections to the north and south of this intersection. As such, this intersection would be restricted to right-in/right -out movements only. A northern signalized RCUT intersection is proposed 2,480 feet north of this intersection. This is the location of the proposed three -quarter movement access for Harvest Roaring Fork. The signalized RCUT intersection will provide the U- turn movement for exiting drivers destined to southbound SH -82 from Cattle Creek Road. Likewise, a southern signalized RCUT is proposed approximately 1,900 feet to the south of Cattle Creek Road. This signalized RCUT intersection will provide the U-turn movement for entering drivers along southbound SH-82 destined to Cattle Creek Road. With free right turn movements due to the presence of an acceleration lane, the westbound right tur n will operate without delay and LOS A. Table 5 provides the results of the LOS analysis conducted at this intersection. Table 5 – Cattle Creek Road (CR-113) & SH-82 (#2) LOS Results Scenario AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay (sec/veh) LOS Delay (sec/veh) LOS 2024 Existing Westbound Approach Southbound Left 17.3 9.8 C A 86.8 21.6 F C 2035 Background Westbound Approach Southbound Left 19.6 10.3 C B 152.0 26.4 F D 2035 Background Plus Project # Westbound Right 0.0 A 0.0 A 2055 Background Westbound Approach Southbound Left 27.0 11.4 D B 484.5 44.9 F E 2055 Background Plus Project # Westbound Right 0.0 A 0.0 A # = Restricted to Right-In/Right-Out Movements Only 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork Page 27 RCUT Intersections and Access With completion of the Harvest Roaring Fork project, access will be provided by a proposed northern three -quarter access on the west side of SH-82 (#3) and a southern right-in/right-out access proposed on the west side of SH-82 (#4). The proposed North Three-Quarter Access (#3) at the northern RCUT is recommended to operate with signalization. The traffic signal phasing should operate with no eastbound right turns on red while the northbound to southbound U -turn phase operates. A southbound right turn deceleration lane, northbound left turn deceleration lane, and southbound acceleration lane from the eastbound right turn/northbound to southbound U - turn are all proposed. The proposed southern right-in/right-out access along SH-82 (#4) is recommended to operate with either stop or yield control with a R1-1 “STOP” sign or R1-2 “YIELD” sign on the eastbound right turn approach, respectively. A southbound right turn deceleration lane and southbound acceleration lane from the eastbound right turn are proposed. A continuous auxiliary lane could be constructed between the north and south accesses along SH -82 based on the proposed access spacing and the required acceleration and deceleration lengths. The proposed Southern RCUT (#5) intersection is recommended to operate with signalization. A southbound left turn deceleration lane is proposed. The east edge of SH-82 will need to be widened to accept the U-turn movement from the largest possible design vehicle. An acceleration lane along northbound SH-82 may be desired for this RCUT intersection as well. The access improvements along SH-82 are shown in exhibit concepts provided in Appendix G. With this lane geometry and control at all three intersections, the movements are anticipated to operate acceptably throughout 2035, at LOS C or better. By 2055, the intersections and movements all are anticipated to operate acceptably with exception of the SH -82 South RCUT (#5) intersection, which may operate at LOS E during the afternoon peak hour. Therefore, consideration of three through lanes in the 2055 horizon may be needed. However, with this horizon being so far into the future, continuous monitoring of traffic conditions is recommended. If the advent of autonomous self -driving cars is predominantly realized, vehicle time headways are expected to significantly decrease from the current two seconds between vehicles to one second or even a half second which would double or quadruple roadway capacities, respectively. Table 6 provides the results of the level of service for the project accesses. 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork Page 28 Table 6 – RCUT and Project Access Level of Service Results Intersection 2035 Total 2055 Total AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay (sec/ veh) LOS Delay (sec/ veh) LOS Delay (sec/ veh) LOS Delay (sec/ veh) LOS SH-82 North Access/RCUT (#3) 13.5 B 20.6 C 23.3 C 18.7 B SH-82 South RIRO Access (#4) Eastbound Right 0.0 A 0.0 A 0.0 A 0.0 A SH-82 South RCUT (#5) 11.1 B 29.8 C 21.4 C 69.6 E 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork Page 29 5.3 CDOT Turn Bay Length Analysis Based on the two accesses along SH-82 being new accesses, access permits are anticipated to be needed at both intersections as development occurs. Auxiliary turn lanes along CDOT controlled highways are to be implemented based on volume threshold requirements set forth in the State Highway Access Code. Further, turn lane lengths should be designed based on the State Highway Access Code. SH-82 is categorized as an Expressway, Major Bypass (E-X) and has a posted speed limit of 65 miles per hour adjacent to the site. However, it is understood that CDOT plans to reduce the speed limit along this section of SH -82 to 55 mph in the near future. According to the State Highway Access Code for category Expressway, Major Bypass (E-X) roadways, the turn lane warrants are as follows: • A left turn deceleration lane is required for any access with a projected average daily left turn ingress volume greater than 10 vehicles per day (vpd). The transition taper length will be included within the required deceleration length. If the projected peak hour left ingress turning volume is greater than 10 vehicles per hour (vph), a left turn lane with deceleration, storage, and transition taper lengths is required for any access. • A right turn lane with deceleration and taper lengths is required for any access with a projected peak hour right turn ingress turning volume greater than 10 vph. • A right turn lane with acceleration and taper lengths is required for any access with a projected peak hour right turning volume greater than 10 vph. Based on the 2035 traffic volume projections, turn lane requirements at the project access intersections along SH-82 are as follows: SH-82 North Three-Quarter Access /RCUT (#3) • A northbound left turn lane is warranted based on projected 2035 background plus project traffic volumes being 529 northbound left turns during the peak hour and the threshold being 10 vpd. Based on the future 55 mile per hour speed limit, the deceleration length is 600 feet, plus a 222-foot taper. The storage requirement is 540 feet in 2035; however, based on the operational traffic analysis, it is recommended that dual northbound left turn lanes be designated at this access reducing the storage requirement to 2 75 feet in each lane. Therefore, it is recommended that the dual northbound left turn lanes be constructed and designed to 875 feet plus a 222-foot taper in 2035. 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork Page 30 • A southbound right turn lane is warranted based on projected 2035 background plus project traffic volumes being 138 southbound right turns during the peak hour and the threshold being 10 vph. Based on the future 55 mile per hour speed limit, the deceleration length is recommended to provide 600 feet, plus a 222-foot taper. Therefore, it is recommended that the southbound right turn lane be constructed and designed to 600 feet plus a 222-foot taper in 2035. The southbound right turn lane length should be considered when locating the northern access for appropriate spacing from the Calaway Court right-in/right-out intersection to the north. • A southbound acceleration lane along SH-82 from the north access eastbound right turn is warranted based on projected 2035 background plus project traffic volumes being 127 eastbound right turns during the peak hour and the threshold being 10 vph. Based on the future 55 mile per hour speed limit, the acceleration lane length is recommended to provide 960 feet, plus a 222-foot taper. SH-82 South Right-In/Right-Out Access (#4) • A southbound right turn lane is warranted based on projected 2035 background plus project traffic volumes being 69 southbound right turns during the peak hour and the threshold being 10 vph. Based on the future 55 mile per hour speed limit, the deceleration length is recommended to provide 600 feet, plus a 222-foot taper. Therefore, it is recommended that the southbound right turn lane be constructed and designed to 600 feet plus a 222-foot taper in 2035. • A southbound acceleration lane along SH-82 from the north access eastbound right turn is warranted based on projected 2035 background plus project traffic volumes being 510 eastbound right turns during the peak hour and the threshold being 10 vph. Based on the future 55 mile per hour speed limit, the acceleration lane length is recommended to provide 960 feet, plus a 222-foot taper. SH-82 South RCUT (#5) • A southbound left turn lane is warranted based on projected 2035 background plus project traffic volumes being 298 northbound left turns during the peak hour and the threshold being 10 vpd. Based on the future 55 mile per hour speed limit, the deceleration length is 600 feet, plus a 222-foot taper. The storage requirement is 300 feet in 2035 and 325 feet 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork Page 31 in 2055; therefore, it is recommended that the southbound left turn lane be constructed and designed to 925 feet plus a 222-foot taper for the 2055 horizon. 5.4 Vehicle Queuing Analysis A vehicle queuing analysis was conducted for the study area intersections. The queuing analysis was performed using Synchro presenting the results of the 95th percentile queue lengths. Results are shown in the following Table 7 with calculations provided within the level of service operational sheets of Appendix D for unsignalized intersections and Appendix F for signalized intersections. Table 7 – Turn Lane Queuing Analysis Results Intersection Turn Lane Existing Turn Lane Length (feet) 2035 Calculated Queue (feet) 2035 Recommended Length (feet) 2055 Calculated Queue (feet) 2055 Recommended Length (feet) Spring Valley Rd & SH-82 (#1) Eastbound Left Westbound Left Northbound Left Northbound Right Southbound Left Southbound Right C C 400’ 250’ 75’ 150’ 170’ 232’ 245’ 25’ 281’ 25’ C C 400’ 250’ 400’ 150’ 214’ 336’ 244’ 25’ 372’ 25’ C C 400’ 250’ 400’ 150’ Cattle Creek Rd & SH-82 (#2) Northbound Right Southbound Left 250’ 775’ 25’ R 250’ R 25’ R 250’ R SH-82 North 3/4 Access/ RCUT (#3) Northbound Left Southbound Right DNE DNE 254’ 117’ 875’+222’T 600’+222’T 294’ 200’ 875’+222’T 600’+222’T SH-82 South RIRO Access (#4) Eastbound Right Southbound Right DNE DNE 25’ 25’ C 600’+222’T 25’ 25’ C 600’+222’T SH-82 South RCUT (#5) Southbound Left DNE 459’ 925’+222’T 444’ 925’+222’T DNE = Does Not Exist; C = Continuous; R = Removed Lane and Movement; Red Text = Storage Deficiency; Blue Text = Recommendation All queues are anticipated to remain within the existing or recommended newly constructed turn lane lengths through 20 55. It is recommended that the southbound left turn lane at the Spring Valley Road and SH-82 (#1) intersection be extended from 75 feet to 400 feet of length. Of note, project traffic does not contribute to th is movement. 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork Page 32 5.5 Improvement Summary Based on the results of the intersection operational and vehicle queuing analysis, the key intersection recommended improvements and control are shown in Figure 11. 40 0 ' 100' 150' ACCEL960'+ 22 2 ' T 222'T960'+ 60 0 ' + ACCEL 222'T960'+ ACCEL 22 2 ' T 87 5 ' + 22 2 ' T 60 0 ' + 222'T960'+ 100' 150' 222'T 40 0 ' 25 0 ' 15 0 ' 25 0 ' ACCEL ACCEL250' 22 2 ' T 92 5 ' + 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork Page 34 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the analysis presented in this report, Kimley -Horn believes Harvest Roaring Fork will be successfully incorporated into the existing and future roadway network. Analysis of the peak season traffic volumes, the proposed project development, and expected future traffic volumes resulted in the following recommendations: • The westbound left turn at the High -T Cattle Creek Road (CR-113) and SH-82 (#2) intersection is projected to operate with long delays and poor level of service prior to the addition of Harvest Roaring Fork project traffic. Therefore, CDOT has proposed SH -82 corridor improvements within the study area to include RCUT intersections to the north and south of this intersection. As such, the Cattle Creek Road (CR -113) and SH-82 (#2) intersection would be restricted to right -in/right-out movements only. A northern signalized RCUT intersection (#3) is proposed 2,480 feet north of this Cattle Creek Road (CR -113) intersection. This is the location of the proposed three -quarter movement access for Harvest Roaring Fork. This signalized RCUT intersection (#3) will pro vide the U-turn movement for exiting drivers destined to southbound SH-82 from Cattle Creek Road. Likewise, a southern signalized RCUT (#5) is proposed approximately 1,900 feet to the south of Cattle Creek Road (CR-113). This signalized RCUT intersection (#5) will provide the U-turn movement for entering drivers along southbound SH-82 destined to Cattle Creek Road. • The proposed North Three-Quarter Access (#3) at the northern RCUT is recommended to operate with signalization. The traffic signal phasing should operate with no eastbound right turns on red while the northbound to southbound U -turn phase operates. Based on CDOT standards and the future 55 mph posted speed limit, it is recommended that a 600 -foot with 222-foot taper southbound right turn deceleration lane and a 960 -foot with 222-foot taper southbound acceleration lane from the eastbound right turn be constructed along southbound SH-82 at this intersection. The southbound right turn lane length should be considered when locating the northern access (#3) for appropriate spacing from the Calaway Court right -in/right- out intersection to the north. A continuous acceleration to deceleration auxiliary lane can be created between Calaway Court and the North Three -Quarter Access (#3). Additionally, 875- foot with 222-foot taper dual northbound left turn lanes are recommended at this RCUT intersection (#3). 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork Page 35 • The proposed southern right-in/right-out access along SH-82 (#4) is recommended to operate with stop or yield control with either a R1 -1 “STOP” sign or R1-2 “YIELD” sign on the eastbound right turn approach, respectively. Additionally, based on CDOT standa rds and the future SH-82 55 mph posted speed limit, a southbound right turn deceleration lane of 600 feet with 222-foot taper and a southbound acceleration from the eastbound right turn with a length of 960 feet with 222-foot taper be constructed at this a ccess intersection. A continuous auxiliary lane could be constructed between the north and south accesses along SH -82 based on the proposed access spacing and the required acceleration and deceleration lengths. • The proposed Southern RCUT (#5) intersection is recommended to operate with signalization. A 925-foot with 222 -foot taper southbound left turn lane is recommended at this RCUT intersection. The east edge of SH-82 will need to be widened to accept the U-turn movement from the largest possible design vehicle. • Any onsite or offsite improvements should be incorporated into the Civil Drawings and conform to standards of Garfield County and CDOT as appropriate, as well as the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) – 11th Edition, 2023. 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork APPENDICES 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork APPENDIX A Intersection Count Sheets COLORADO 82 COLORADO 82SPRING VALLEY ROAD SPRING VALLEY ROAD (303) 216-2439 www.alltrafficdata.net Location:1 COLORADO 82 & SPRING VALLEY ROAD AM Tuesday, March 19, 2024Date: Peak Hour - Motorized Vehicles Peak Hour - Bicycles Peak Hour - Pedestrians Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour:07:15 AM - 08:15 AM Peak 15-Minutes:07:30 AM - 07:45 AM 1,776 674 258 197 6251,885 256 159 0.93 N S EW 0.91 0.91 0.84 0.89 (1,315)(3,382) (444) (402) (302) (445) (1,266)(3,518) 57 1 13 2 124 44 90 205 32 19 0 0 1, 5 8 6 58 53 0 334 SPRING VALLEY ROAD SPRING VALLEY ROAD COLORADO 82 COLORADO 82 1 1 4 6 N S EW 1 0 22 1 0 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 1 N S EW 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrian Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 7:00 AM 0 13 69 0 35 3870512 0237 638 10012,9124716717 7:15 AM 1 5 94 0 26 4550311 02512 732 41112,9154922524 7:30 AM 0 19 126 0 41 434065 02012 782 20102,88161331114 7:45 AM 1 22 186 0 30 376042 01912 760 00102,7834840119 8:00 AM 2 12 124 1 35 3210614 0268 641 00102,6254729610 8:15 AM 2 17 169 0 32 369034 01911 698 10203717108 8:30 AM 0 14 154 0 42 3590411 0139 684 00013421914 8:45 AM 1 10 151 2 24 304044 01410 602 000024261513 Count Total 10974204347 5,5373,00526531,0731127811590633503681 Peak Hour 01932 09044 4 58530 11321,586 2,9152051243357 6 1 4 1 COLORADO 82 COLORADO 82CATTLE CREEK RD CATTLE CREEK RD (303) 216-2439 www.alltrafficdata.net Location:2 COLORADO 82 & CATTLE CREEK RD AM Tuesday, March 19, 2024Date: Peak Hour - Motorized Vehicles Peak Hour - Bicycles Peak Hour - Pedestrians Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour:07:15 AM - 08:15 AM Peak 15-Minutes:07:30 AM - 07:45 AM 1,893 649 140 124 6391,899 0 0 0.92 N S EW 0.91 0.91 0.94 0.00 (1,288)(3,521) (264) (228) () () (1,277)(3,546) 0 087 47 0 93 0 0 0 0 0 1, 8 0 6 0 60 2 370 CATTLE CREEK RD CATTLE CREEK RD COLORADO 82 COLORADO 82 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrian Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 7:00 AM 0 0 83 0 20 451000 0290 597 00002,65804100 7:15 AM 0 0 99 0 18 518000 0290 679 00002,6720870 7:30 AM 0 0 161 0 26 498000 0190 730 00002,61101412 0 7:45 AM 0 0 186 0 23 396000 0200 652 00002,523019 8 0 8:00 AM 0 0 156 0 20 394000 0250 611 00002,40406100 8:15 AM 0 0 180 0 25 374000 0210 618 000008100 8:30 AM 0 0 171 0 12 414000 0250 642 0000013 7 0 8:45 AM 0 0 173 1 16 315000 0180 533 00000640 Count Total 0687805,0623,36016011,20900018600000000 Peak Hour 000 0930 0 0602 0871,806 2,672047 37 00000 COLORADO 82 COLORADO 82SPRING VALLEY ROAD SPRING VALLEY ROAD (303) 216-2439 www.alltrafficdata.net Location:1 COLORADO 82 & SPRING VALLEY ROAD PM Tuesday, March 19, 2024Date: Peak Hour - Motorized Vehicles Peak Hour - Bicycles Peak Hour - Pedestrians Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour:05:00 PM - 06:00 PM Peak 15-Minutes:05:30 PM - 05:45 PM 838 1,847 267 196 1,773833 158 160 0.94 N S EW 0.91 0.89 0.93 0.82 (3,349)(1,675) (513) (370) (298) (281) (3,241)(1,693) 21 0 10 6 190 32 45 70 32 56 0 0 71 1 10 7 1, 6 0 1 587 SPRING VALLEY ROAD SPRING VALLEY ROAD COLORADO 82 COLORADO 82 1 1 11 3 N S EW 1 0 29 0 1 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 9 N S EW 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 6 0 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrian Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 4:00 PM 4 24 270 0 34 2060710 0185 646 12122,6741732118 4:15 PM 4 20 328 0 24 162067 0158 639 30302,7521036163 4:30 PM 3 23 362 1 19 177087 0117 702 20002,877175287 4:45 PM 5 26 352 0 15 1790611 0155 687 00122,9831742122 5:00 PM 1 14 359 0 27 205011 6 012 7 724 004 03,0361747135 5:15 PM 3 24 396 0 33 16202310 016 9 764 012 01552174 5:30 PM 1 38 425 0 23 210010 5 0 8 5 808 201 11846136 5:45 PM 2 31 421 0 23 13401211 0 911 740 104 02045156 Count Total 41105352131 5,7101,43519812,913200235710406783051693 Peak Hour 05632 04532 71071,601 0106711 3,036701905821 3 1 11 1 COLORADO 82 COLORADO 82CATTLE CREEK RD CATTLE CREEK RD (303) 216-2439 www.alltrafficdata.net Location:2 COLORADO 82 & CATTLE CREEK RD PM Tuesday, March 19, 2024Date: Peak Hour - Motorized Vehicles Peak Hour - Bicycles Peak Hour - Pedestrians Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour:05:00 PM - 06:00 PM Peak 15-Minutes:05:45 PM - 06:00 PM 838 1,846 84 111 1,876841 0 0 0.99 N S EW 0.85 0.96 0.93 0.00 (3,306)(1,672) (199) (199) () () (3,317)(1,683) 0 235 45 0 39 0 0 0 0 0 80 1 0 1, 7 9 9 761 CATTLE CREEK RD CATTLE CREEK RD COLORADO 82 COLORADO 82 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrian Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 4:00 PM 0 0 278 0 6 243000 0110 567 00002,39001910 0 4:15 PM 0 0 357 0 7 185000 0100 593 00002,53001915 0 4:30 PM 0 0 375 0 11 180000 090 609 00002,63001816 0 4:45 PM 0 0 373 0 6 196000 080 621 00002,71002117 0 5:00 PM 0 0 412 0 12 237000 070 707 00002,79801425 0 5:15 PM 0 0 453 1 4 197000 0120 693 000001214 0 5:30 PM 1 0 450 0 8 190000 0110 689 000001019 0 5:45 PM 0 0 484 1 11 177000 090 709 000009180 Count Total 013412205,1881,6056523,1820107700000000 Peak Hour 000 0390 1 01,799 235801 2,798045 76 00000 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork APPENDIX B Future Traffic Projections CDOT Tra ff ic Proj e c t ions: River Edge ROUTE REF PT ENDREF PT LENGTH AADT AADTYR YR20FACT OR GR OW TH RATE DHV LOCATION 082A 7.824 11.699 3.879 26000 2022 1.19 0.87%12.5 ON SH 82 W/O SH 133 CARBONDALE 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork APPENDIX C Trip Generation Worksheets Project Trip generation for Designed by Date Job No. Checked by Date Sheet No.of TRIP GENERATION MANUAL TECHNIQUES ITE Trip Generation 10th Edition, Average Rate Equations Land Use Code -Single-Family Detached Housing Land Use Sub Category Setting/Location Independent Variable - Number of Units (X) -450 T = Trip Ends Peak Hour:Weekday, Generator Dwelling Unit(s)Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Peak Hour:Weekday, Generator Dwelling Unit(s)Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Dwelling Unit(s)Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Non-Pass-By Trip Percentage Non-Pass-By Trip Volumes AM Peak Entering Exiting PM Peak Entering Exiting Note: Rounding may occur in calculations Average Rate Average Rate 26% 285 Directional Distribution: 74% 161 88 250 Directional Distribution: 64%36% PM Peak Hour of Generator T = (X) * 0.99 446 Daily Weekday 338 Trip Ends Trip Ends Per Trip Ends Average Rate T = (X) * 0.75 Harvest Roaring Fork (Peak Hour of Generator) Single-Family Detached Housing Dwelling Unit(s) General Urban/Suburban January 06, 2025 210 MAG 196960000 AM Peak Hour of Generator Trip Ends Per Directional Distribution: 285 161PM Peak100% 88 250100%AM Peak T = (X) * 9.43 Trip Ends Per 4244 2122 2122Trip Ends 50%50% Project Trip generation for Designed by Date Job No. Checked by Date Sheet No.of TRIP GENERATION MANUAL TECHNIQUES ITE Trip Generation 10th Edition, Average Rate Equations Land Use Code -Single-Family Detached Housing Land Use Sub Category Setting/Location Independent Variable - Number of Units (X) -450 T = Trip Ends Peak Hour:Weekday, Adjacent Street Traffic Dwelling Unit(s)Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Peak Hour:Weekday, Adjacent Street Traffic Dwelling Unit(s)Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Dwelling Unit(s)Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Non-Pass-By Trip Percentage Non-Pass-By Trip Volumes AM Peak Entering Exiting PM Peak Entering Exiting Note: Rounding may occur in calculations Average Rate Average Rate 26% 266 Directional Distribution: 74% 157 82 233 Directional Distribution: 63%37% One Hour Between 4 and 6 PM T = (X) * 0.94 423 Daily Weekday 315 Trip Ends Trip Ends Per Trip Ends Average Rate T = (X) * 0.7 Harvest Roaring Fork Single-Family Detached Housing Dwelling Unit(s) General Urban/Suburban January 06, 2025 210 MAG 196960000 One Hour Between 7 and 9 AM Trip Ends Per Directional Distribution: 266 157PM Peak100% 82 233100%AM Peak T = (X) * 9.43 Trip Ends Per 4244 2122 2122Trip Ends 50%50% Project Trip generation for Designed by Date Job No. Checked by Date Sheet No.of TRIP GENERATION MANUAL TECHNIQUES ITE Trip Generation 10th Edition, Average Rate Equations Land Use Code -Single-Family Attached Housing Land Use Sub Category Setting/Location Independent Variable - Number of Units (X) -200 T = Trip Ends Peak Hour:Weekday, Generator Dwelling Unit(s)Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Peak Hour:Weekday, Generator Dwelling Unit(s)Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Dwelling Unit(s)Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Non-Pass-By Trip Percentage Non-Pass-By Trip Volumes AM Peak Entering Exiting PM Peak Entering Exiting Note: Rounding may occur in calculations Average Rate Average Rate 25% 76 Directional Distribution: 75% 46 28 82 Directional Distribution: 62%38% PM Peak Hour of Generator T = (X) * 0.61 122 Daily Weekday 110 Trip Ends Trip Ends Per Trip Ends Average Rate T = (X) * 0.55 Harvest Roaring Fork (Peak Hour of Generator) Single-Family Attached Housing Dwelling Unit(s) General Urban/Suburban January 06, 2025 215 MAG 196960000 AM Peak Hour of Generator Trip Ends Per Directional Distribution: 76 46PM Peak100% 28 82100%AM Peak T = (X) * 7.2 Trip Ends Per 1440 720 720Trip Ends 50%50% Project Trip generation for Designed by Date Job No. Checked by Date Sheet No.of TRIP GENERATION MANUAL TECHNIQUES ITE Trip Generation 10th Edition, Average Rate Equations Land Use Code -Single-Family Attached Housing Land Use Sub Category Setting/Location Independent Variable - Number of Units (X) -200 T = Trip Ends Peak Hour:Weekday, Adjacent Street Traffic Dwelling Unit(s)Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Peak Hour:Weekday, Adjacent Street Traffic Dwelling Unit(s)Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Dwelling Unit(s)Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Non-Pass-By Trip Percentage Non-Pass-By Trip Volumes AM Peak Entering Exiting PM Peak Entering Exiting Note: Rounding may occur in calculations Average Rate Average Rate 31% 65 Directional Distribution: 69% 49 30 66 Directional Distribution: 57%43% One Hour Between 4 and 6 PM T = (X) * 0.57 114 Daily Weekday 96 Trip Ends Trip Ends Per Trip Ends Average Rate T = (X) * 0.48 Harvest Roaring Fork Single-Family Attached Housing Dwelling Unit(s) General Urban/Suburban January 06, 2025 215 MAG 196960000 One Hour Between 7 and 9 AM Trip Ends Per Directional Distribution: 65 49PM Peak100% 30 66100%AM Peak T = (X) * 7.2 Trip Ends Per 1440 720 720Trip Ends 50%50% Project Trip generation for Designed by Date Job No. Checked by Date Sheet No.of TRIP GENERATION MANUAL TECHNIQUES ITE Trip Generation 10th Edition, Average Rate Equations Land Use Code -Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) Land Use Sub Category Setting/Location Independent Variable - Number of Units (X) -625 T = Trip Ends Peak Hour:Weekday, Generator Dwelling Unit(s)Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Peak Hour:Weekday, Generator Dwelling Unit(s)Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Dwelling Unit(s)Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Non-Pass-By Trip Percentage Non-Pass-By Trip Volumes AM Peak Entering Exiting PM Peak Entering Exiting Note: Rounding may occur in calculations Average Rate Average Rate 24% 221 Directional Distribution: 76% 135 71 223 Directional Distribution: 62%38% PM Peak Hour of Generator T = (X) * 0.57 356 Daily Weekday 294 Trip Ends Trip Ends Per Trip Ends Average Rate T = (X) * 0.47 Harvest Roaring Fork (Peak Hour of Generator) Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise), Not Close to Rail Transit Not Close to Rail Transit Dwelling Unit(s) General Urban/Suburban January 06, 2025 220 MAG 196960000 AM Peak Hour of Generator Trip Ends Per Directional Distribution: 221 135PM Peak100% 71 223100%AM Peak T = (X) * 6.74 Trip Ends Per 4214 2107 2107Trip Ends 50%50% Project Trip generation for Designed by Date Job No. Checked by Date Sheet No.of TRIP GENERATION MANUAL TECHNIQUES ITE Trip Generation 10th Edition, Average Rate Equations Land Use Code -Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) Land Use Sub Category Setting/Location Independent Variable - Number of Units (X) -625 T = Trip Ends Peak Hour:Weekday, Adjacent Street Traffic Dwelling Unit(s)Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Peak Hour:Weekday, Adjacent Street Traffic Dwelling Unit(s)Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Dwelling Unit(s)Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Non-Pass-By Trip Percentage Non-Pass-By Trip Volumes AM Peak Entering Exiting PM Peak Entering Exiting Note: Rounding may occur in calculations Average Rate Average Rate 24% 201 Directional Distribution: 76% 118 60 190 Directional Distribution: 63%37% One Hour Between 4 and 6 PM T = (X) * 0.51 319 Daily Weekday 250 Trip Ends Trip Ends Per Trip Ends Average Rate T = (X) * 0.4 Harvest Roaring Fork Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise), Not Close to Rail Transit Not Close to Rail Transit Dwelling Unit(s) General Urban/Suburban January 06, 2025 220 MAG 196960000 One Hour Between 7 and 9 AM Trip Ends Per Directional Distribution: 201 118PM Peak100% 60 190100%AM Peak T = (X) * 6.74 Trip Ends Per 4214 2107 2107Trip Ends 50%50% Project Trip generation for Designed by Date Job No. Checked by Date Sheet No.of TRIP GENERATION MANUAL TECHNIQUES ITE Trip Generation 10th Edition, Average Rate Equations Land Use Code -Affordable Housing Land Use Sub Category Setting/Location Independent Variable - Number of Units (X) -225 T = Trip Ends Peak Hour:Weekday, Generator Dwelling Unit(s)Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Peak Hour:Weekday, Generator Dwelling Unit(s)Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Dwelling Unit(s)Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Non-Pass-By Trip Percentage Non-Pass-By Trip Volumes AM Peak Entering Exiting PM Peak Entering Exiting Note: Rounding may occur in calculations Average Rate Average Rate 26% 66 Directional Distribution: 74% 47 21 60 Directional Distribution: 58%0% PM Peak Hour of Generator T = (X) * 0.5 113 Daily Weekday 81 Trip Ends Trip Ends Per Trip Ends Average Rate T = (X) * 0.36 Harvest Roaring Fork (Peak Hour of Generator) Affordable Housing, Income Limits Income Limits Dwelling Unit(s) General Urban/Suburban January 06, 2025 223 MAG 196960000 AM Peak Hour of Generator Trip Ends Per Directional Distribution: 66 47PM Peak100% 21 60100%AM Peak T = (X) * 4.81 Trip Ends Per 1084 542 542Trip Ends 50%50% Project Trip generation for Designed by Date Job No. Checked by Date Sheet No.of TRIP GENERATION MANUAL TECHNIQUES ITE Trip Generation 10th Edition, Average Rate Equations Land Use Code -Affordable Housing Land Use Sub Category Setting/Location Independent Variable - Number of Units (X) -225 T = Trip Ends Peak Hour:Weekday, Adjacent Street Traffic Dwelling Unit(s)Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Peak Hour:Weekday, Adjacent Street Traffic Dwelling Unit(s)Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Dwelling Unit(s)Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Non-Pass-By Trip Percentage Non-Pass-By Trip Volumes AM Peak Entering Exiting PM Peak Entering Exiting Note: Rounding may occur in calculations Average Rate Average Rate 29% 61 Directional Distribution: 71% 43 23 58 Directional Distribution: 59%41% One Hour Between 4 and 6 PM T = (X) * 0.46 104 Daily Weekday 81 Trip Ends Trip Ends Per Trip Ends Average Rate T = (X) * 0.36 Harvest Roaring Fork Affordable Housing, Income Limits Income Limits Dwelling Unit(s) General Urban/Suburban January 06, 2025 223 MAG 196960000 One Hour Between 7 and 9 AM Trip Ends Per Directional Distribution: 61 43PM Peak100% 23 58100%AM Peak T = (X) * 4.81 Trip Ends Per 1084 542 542Trip Ends 50%50% Project Trip generation for Designed by Date Job No. Checked by Date Sheet No.of TRIP GENERATION MANUAL TECHNIQUES ITE Trip Generation 10th Edition, Average Rate Equations Land Use Code -Hotel Land Use Sub Category Setting/Location Independent Variable - Number of Units (X) -90 T = Trip Ends Peak Hour:Weekday, Adjacent Street Traffic Room(s)Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Peak Hour:Weekday, Adjacent Street Traffic Room(s)Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Room(s)Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Non-Pass-By Trip Percentage Non-Pass-By Trip Volumes AM Peak Entering Exiting PM Peak Entering Exiting Note: Rounding may occur in calculations Average Rate Average Rate 56% 27 Directional Distribution: 44% 26 23 18 Directional Distribution: 51%49% One Hour Between 4 and 6 PM T = (X) * 0.59 53 Daily Weekday 41 Trip Ends Trip Ends Per Trip Ends Average Rate T = (X) * 0.46 Harvest Roaring Fork Hotel Room(s) General Urban/Suburban January 06, 2025 310 MAG 196960000 One Hour Between 7 and 9 AM Trip Ends Per Directional Distribution: 27 26PM Peak100% 23 18100%AM Peak T = (X) * 7.99 Trip Ends Per 720 360 360Trip Ends 50%50% Project Trip generation for Designed by Date Job No. Checked by Date Sheet No.of TRIP GENERATION MANUAL TECHNIQUES ITE Trip Generation 10th Edition, Average Rate Equations Land Use Code -Small Office Building Land Use Sub Category Setting/Location Independent Variable - Number of Units (X) -10 T = Trip Ends Peak Hour:Weekday, Adjacent Street Traffic 1,000 Sq Ft Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Peak Hour:Weekday, Adjacent Street Traffic 1,000 Sq Ft Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting 1,000 Sq Ft Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Non-Pass-By Trip Percentage Non-Pass-By Trip Volumes AM Peak Entering Exiting PM Peak Entering Exiting Note: Rounding may occur in calculations Average Rate Average Rate 82% 7 Directional Distribution: 18% 15 14 3 Directional Distribution: 34%66% One Hour Between 4 and 6 PM T = (X) * 2.16 22 Daily Weekday 17 Trip Ends Trip Ends Per Trip Ends Average Rate T = (X) * 1.67 Harvest Roaring Fork Small Office Building 1,000 Sq Ft General Urban/Suburban January 06, 2025 712 MAG 196960000 One Hour Between 7 and 9 AM Trip Ends Per Directional Distribution: 7 15PM Peak100% 14 3100%AM Peak T = (X) * 14.39 Trip Ends Per 144 72 72Trip Ends 50%50% Project Trip generation for Designed by Date Job No. Checked by Date Sheet No.of TRIP GENERATION MANUAL TECHNIQUES ITE Trip Generation 10th Edition, Average Rate Equations Land Use Code -Strip Retail Plaza (<40k) Land Use Sub Category Setting/Location Independent Variable - Number of Units (X) -40 T = Trip Ends Peak Hour:Weekday, Adjacent Street Traffic 1,000 Sq Ft GLA Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Peak Hour:Weekday, Adjacent Street Traffic 1,000 Sq Ft GLA Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting 1,000 Sq Ft GLA Entering Exiting T =Entering Exiting Non-Pass-By Trip Percentage Non-Pass-By Trip Volumes AM Peak Entering Exiting PM Peak Entering Exiting Note: Rounding may occur in calculations Average Rate Average Rate 60% 132 Directional Distribution: 40% 132 56 38 Directional Distribution: 50%50% One Hour Between 4 and 6 PM T = (X) * 6.59 264 Daily Weekday 94 Trip Ends Trip Ends Per Trip Ends Average Rate T = (X) * 2.36 Harvest Roaring Fork Strip Retail Plaza (<40k) 1,000 Sq Ft GLA General Urban/Suburban January 06, 2025 822 MAG 196960000 One Hour Between 7 and 9 AM Trip Ends Per Directional Distribution: 132 132PM Peak100% 56 38100%AM Peak T = (X) * 54.45 Trip Ends Per 2178 1089 1089Trip Ends 50%50% 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork APPENDIX D Intersection Analysis Worksheets Timings 2024 Existing Adjusted AM 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114)04/02/2024 Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Lane Group EBT EBR WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)36 228 49 138 69 588 37 148 1760 63 Future Volume (vph) 36 228 49 138 69 588 37 148 1760 63 Turn Type NA Free NA Free Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Free Free 2 6 Detector Phase 4 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)7.0 7.0 5.0 20.0 20.0 5.0 20.0 20.0 Minimum Split (s)20.0 20.0 13.5 28.0 28.0 13.5 28.0 28.0 Total Split (s)20.0 20.0 15.0 120.0 120.0 15.0 120.0 120.0 Total Split (%)11.4% 11.4% 8.6% 68.6% 68.6% 8.6% 68.6% 68.6% Yellow Time (s)3.5 3.5 5.5 6.0 6.0 5.5 6.0 6.0 All-Red Time (s)3.0 3.5 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)6.5 7.0 8.5 8.0 8.0 8.5 8.0 8.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-Max Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 175 Actuated Cycle Length: 175 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 125 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Splits and Phases: 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114) HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2024 Existing Adjusted AM 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114)04/02/2024 Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 21 36 228 100 49 138 69 588 37 148 1760 63 Future Volume (veh/h) 21 36 228 100 49 138 69 588 37 148 1760 63 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 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 23 39 0 108 53 0 74 632 40 159 1892 68 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, %2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 29 50 90 44 66 2395 1068 66 2395 1068 Arrive On Green 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.04 0.67 0.67 0.04 0.67 0.67 Sat Flow, veh/h 681 1155 1585 1214 596 1585 1781 3554 1585 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 62 0 0 161 0 0 74 632 40 159 1892 68 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1836 015851810 01585178117771585178117771585 Q Serve(g_s), s 5.9 0.0 0.0 13.0 0.0 0.0 6.5 12.3 1.5 6.5 65.0 2.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.9 0.0 0.0 13.0 0.0 0.0 6.5 12.3 1.5 6.5 65.0 2.6 Prop In Lane 0.37 1.00 0.67 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 79 0 134 0 66 2395 1068 66 2395 1068 V/C Ratio(X)0.78 0.00 1.20 0.00 1.12 0.26 0.04 2.40 0.79 0.06 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 142 0 134 0 66 2395 1068 66 2395 1068 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 82.9 0.0 0.0 81.0 0.0 0.0 84.3 11.3 9.5 84.3 19.9 9.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 17.9 0.0 0.0 140.3 0.0 0.0 146.7 0.3 0.1 675.0 2.7 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 BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 3.2 0.0 0.0 11.4 0.0 0.0 5.7 5.1 0.6 15.4 27.1 1.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh 15.00 10.00 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 100.8 0.0 15.0 221.3 0.0 10.0 230.9 11.6 9.6 759.3 22.6 9.8 LnGrp LOS F A B F A A F B A F C A Approach Vol, veh/h 183 234 746 2119 Approach Delay, s/veh 44.1 155.4 33.2 77.5 Approach LOS D F C E Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 15.0 125.9 14.1 15.0 125.9 20.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 8.5 8.0 6.5 8.5 8.0 7.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 6.5 112.0 13.5 6.5 112.0 13.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.5 14.3 7.9 8.5 67.0 15.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 15.3 0.1 0.0 41.4 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 71.1 HCM 6th LOS E Notes Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is included in calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. Timings 2024 Existing Adjusted PM 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114)04/02/2024 Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Lane Group EBT EBR WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)36 78 36 211 127 1777 64 118 789 23 Future Volume (vph) 36 78 36 211 127 1777 64 118 789 23 Turn Type NA Free NA Free Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Free Free 2 6 Detector Phase 4 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)7.0 7.0 5.0 20.0 20.0 5.0 20.0 20.0 Minimum Split (s)20.0 20.0 13.5 28.0 28.0 13.5 28.0 28.0 Total Split (s)20.0 20.0 15.0 120.0 120.0 15.0 120.0 120.0 Total Split (%)11.4% 11.4% 8.6% 68.6% 68.6% 8.6% 68.6% 68.6% Yellow Time (s)3.5 3.5 5.5 6.0 6.0 5.5 6.0 6.0 All-Red Time (s)3.0 3.5 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)6.5 7.0 8.5 8.0 8.0 8.5 8.0 8.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-Max Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 175 Actuated Cycle Length: 175 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 145 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Splits and Phases: 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114) HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2024 Existing Adjusted PM 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114)04/02/2024 Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 62 36 78 50 36 211 127 1777 64 118 789 23 Future Volume (veh/h) 62 36 78 50 36 211 127 1777 64 118 789 23 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 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 67 39 0 54 39 0 138 1932 70 128 858 25 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, %2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 79 46 65 47 66 2347 1047 66 2347 1047 Arrive On Green 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.04 0.66 0.66 0.04 0.66 0.66 Sat Flow, veh/h 1146 667 1585 1055 762 1585 1781 3554 1585 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 106 0 0 93 0 0 138 1932 70 128 858 25 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1813 015851818 01585178117771585178117771585 Q Serve(g_s), s 10.1 0.0 0.0 8.9 0.0 0.0 6.5 70.8 2.7 6.5 18.9 1.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 10.1 0.0 0.0 8.9 0.0 0.0 6.5 70.8 2.7 6.5 18.9 1.0 Prop In Lane 0.63 1.00 0.58 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 125 0 112 0 66 2347 1047 66 2347 1047 V/C Ratio(X)0.85 0.00 0.83 0.00 2.09 0.82 0.07 1.93 0.37 0.02 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 140 0 135 0 66 2347 1047 66 2347 1047 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 80.5 0.0 0.0 81.2 0.0 0.0 84.3 22.1 10.6 84.3 13.3 10.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 33.8 0.0 0.0 30.0 0.0 0.0 536.2 3.4 0.1 470.9 0.4 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 BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 5.9 0.0 0.0 5.1 0.0 0.0 12.9 30.0 1.0 11.7 7.9 0.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh 15.00 10.00 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 114.4 0.0 15.0 111.2 0.0 10.0 620.5 25.5 10.7 555.1 13.7 10.3 LnGrp LOS F A B F A A F C B F B B Approach Vol, veh/h 148 208 2140 1011 Approach Delay, s/veh 86.2 55.3 63.4 82.2 Approach LOS F E E F Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 15.0 123.6 18.6 15.0 123.6 17.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 8.5 8.0 6.5 8.5 8.0 7.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 6.5 112.0 13.5 6.5 112.0 13.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.5 72.8 12.1 8.5 20.9 10.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 36.7 0.1 0.0 23.7 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 69.3 HCM 6th LOS E Notes Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is included in calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. Timings 2035 Background AM 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114)04/02/2024 Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Lane Group EBT EBR WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)40 251 54 152 76 647 41 163 1936 69 Future Volume (vph) 40 251 54 152 76 647 41 163 1936 69 Turn Type NA Free NA Free Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Free Free 2 6 Detector Phase 4 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)7.0 7.0 5.0 20.0 20.0 5.0 20.0 20.0 Minimum Split (s)20.0 20.0 13.5 28.0 28.0 13.5 28.0 28.0 Total Split (s)20.0 20.0 15.0 120.0 120.0 15.0 120.0 120.0 Total Split (%)11.4% 11.4% 8.6% 68.6% 68.6% 8.6% 68.6% 68.6% Yellow Time (s)3.5 3.5 5.5 6.0 6.0 5.5 6.0 6.0 All-Red Time (s)3.0 3.5 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)6.5 7.0 8.5 8.0 8.0 8.5 8.0 8.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-Max Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 175 Actuated Cycle Length: 175 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 145 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Splits and Phases: 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114) HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2035 Background AM 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114)04/02/2024 Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 23 40 251 110 54 152 76 647 41 163 1936 69 Future Volume (veh/h) 23 40 251 110 54 152 76 647 41 163 1936 69 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 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 25 43 0 118 58 0 82 696 44 175 2082 74 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, %2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 32 54 90 44 66 2382 1062 66 2382 1062 Arrive On Green 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.04 0.67 0.67 0.04 0.67 0.67 Sat Flow, veh/h 675 1161 1585 1213 596 1585 1781 3554 1585 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 68 0 0 176 0 0 82 696 44 175 2082 74 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1837 015851810 01585178117771585178117771585 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.4 0.0 0.0 13.0 0.0 0.0 6.5 14.1 1.6 6.5 81.6 2.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.4 0.0 0.0 13.0 0.0 0.0 6.5 14.1 1.6 6.5 81.6 2.8 Prop In Lane 0.37 1.00 0.67 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 86 0 134 0 66 2382 1062 66 2382 1062 V/C Ratio(X)0.79 0.00 1.31 0.00 1.24 0.29 0.04 2.65 0.87 0.07 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 142 0 134 0 66 2382 1062 66 2382 1062 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 82.5 0.0 0.0 81.0 0.0 0.0 84.3 11.8 9.8 84.3 23.0 10.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 17.3 0.0 0.0 182.4 0.0 0.0 188.3 0.3 0.1 781.7 4.8 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 BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 3.5 0.0 0.0 12.9 0.0 0.0 6.5 5.8 0.6 17.4 34.7 1.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh 15.00 10.00 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 99.8 0.0 15.0 263.4 0.0 10.0 272.5 12.1 9.9 865.9 27.8 10.1 LnGrp LOS F A B F A A F B A F C B Approach Vol, veh/h 204 258 822 2331 Approach Delay, s/veh 43.3 182.9 38.0 90.2 Approach LOS D F D F Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 15.0 125.3 14.7 15.0 125.3 20.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 8.5 8.0 6.5 8.5 8.0 7.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 6.5 112.0 13.5 6.5 112.0 13.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.5 16.1 8.4 8.5 83.6 15.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 17.6 0.1 0.0 27.5 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 82.3 HCM 6th LOS F Notes Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is included in calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. Timings 2035 Background PM 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114)04/02/2024 Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Lane Group EBT EBR WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)40 86 40 232 140 1955 70 130 868 25 Future Volume (vph) 40 86 40 232 140 1955 70 130 868 25 Turn Type NA Free NA Free Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Free Free 2 6 Detector Phase 4 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)7.0 7.0 5.0 20.0 20.0 5.0 20.0 20.0 Minimum Split (s)20.0 20.0 13.5 28.0 28.0 13.5 28.0 28.0 Total Split (s)20.0 20.0 15.0 120.0 120.0 15.0 120.0 120.0 Total Split (%)11.4% 11.4% 8.6% 68.6% 68.6% 8.6% 68.6% 68.6% Yellow Time (s)3.5 3.5 5.5 6.0 6.0 5.5 6.0 6.0 All-Red Time (s)3.0 3.5 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)6.5 7.0 8.5 8.0 8.0 8.5 8.0 8.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-Max Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 175 Actuated Cycle Length: 175 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 145 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Splits and Phases: 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114) HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2035 Background PM 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114)04/02/2024 Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 68 40 86 55 40 232 140 1955 70 130 868 25 Future Volume (veh/h) 68 40 86 55 40 232 140 1955 70 130 868 25 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 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 74 43 0 60 43 0 152 2125 76 141 943 27 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, %2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 86 50 71 51 66 2306 1029 66 2306 1029 Arrive On Green 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.04 0.65 0.65 0.04 0.65 0.65 Sat Flow, veh/h 1147 666 1585 1059 759 1585 1781 3554 1585 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 117 0 0 103 0 0 152 2125 76 141 943 27 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1813 015851817 01585178117771585178117771585 Q Serve(g_s), s 11.2 0.0 0.0 9.8 0.0 0.0 6.5 91.4 3.1 6.5 22.2 1.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 11.2 0.0 0.0 9.8 0.0 0.0 6.5 91.4 3.1 6.5 22.2 1.1 Prop In Lane 0.63 1.00 0.58 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 136 0 122 0 66 2306 1029 66 2306 1029 V/C Ratio(X)0.86 0.00 0.84 0.00 2.30 0.92 0.07 2.13 0.41 0.03 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 140 0 135 0 66 2306 1029 66 2306 1029 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 80.0 0.0 0.0 80.7 0.0 0.0 84.3 26.8 11.3 84.3 14.7 11.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 38.2 0.0 0.0 34.3 0.0 0.0 628.6 7.5 0.1 555.9 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 BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 6.7 0.0 0.0 5.8 0.0 0.0 14.6 39.9 1.2 13.2 9.3 0.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh 15.00 10.00 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 118.2 0.0 15.0 115.0 0.0 10.0 712.8 34.3 11.5 640.2 15.2 11.0 LnGrp LOS F A B F A A F C B F B B Approach Vol, veh/h 167 230 2353 1111 Approach Delay, s/veh 87.3 57.0 77.4 94.4 Approach LOS F E E F Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 15.0 121.6 19.6 15.0 121.6 18.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 8.5 8.0 6.5 8.5 8.0 7.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 6.5 112.0 13.5 6.5 112.0 13.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.5 93.4 13.2 8.5 24.2 11.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 18.3 0.0 0.0 27.5 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 81.5 HCM 6th LOS F Notes Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is included in calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. Timings 2035 Total AM 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114)03/27/2025 2035 Total AM 8:41 am 01/25/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)23 40 251 110 54 152 76 838 41 163 2007 69 Future Volume (vph)23 40 251 110 54 152 76 838 41 163 2007 69 Turn Type Perm NA Free Perm NA Free Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 Free 8 Free 2 6 Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 5.0 20.0 20.0 5.0 20.0 20.0 Minimum Split (s)20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 13.5 28.0 28.0 13.5 28.0 28.0 Total Split (s)28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 21.0 110.4 110.4 36.6 126.0 126.0 Total Split (%)16.0% 16.0% 16.0% 16.0% 12.0% 63.1% 63.1% 20.9% 72.0% 72.0% Yellow Time (s)3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 5.5 6.0 6.0 5.5 6.0 6.0 All-Red Time (s)3.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)6.5 6.5 7.0 7.0 8.5 8.0 8.0 8.5 8.0 8.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-Max Act Effct Green (s)19.4 19.4 175.0 18.9 18.9 175.0 11.3 110.8 110.8 21.8 121.3 121.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.11 1.00 0.11 0.11 1.00 0.06 0.63 0.63 0.12 0.69 0.69 v/c Ratio 0.17 0.21 0.17 0.81 0.29 0.10 0.72 0.40 0.04 0.80 0.88 0.07 Control Delay (s/veh)72.0 72.3 0.2 111.7 74.8 0.1 112.9 13.1 0.1 98.8 27.4 1.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)72.0 72.3 0.2 111.7 74.8 0.1 112.9 13.1 0.1 98.8 27.4 1.7 LOS E E A F E A F B A F C A Approach Delay (s/veh)14.7 51.7 20.5 31.8 Approach LOS B D C C Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 175 Actuated Cycle Length: 175 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 100 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.88 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 29.2 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 92.0%ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114) HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary 2035 Total AM 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114)03/27/2025 2035 Total AM 8:41 am 01/25/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)23 40 251 110 54 152 76 838 41 163 2007 69 Future Volume (veh/h)23 40 251 110 54 152 76 838 41 163 2007 69 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 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 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 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 25 43 0 118 58 0 82 901 44 175 2158 74 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, %2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 162 220 174 220 100 2268 1011 195 2458 1096 Arrive On Green 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.06 0.64 0.64 0.11 0.69 0.69 Sat Flow, veh/h 1345 1870 1585 1364 1870 1585 1781 3554 1585 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 25 43 0 118 58 0 82 901 44 175 2158 74 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1345 1870 1585 1364 1870 1585 1781 1777 1585 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.0 3.6 0.0 15.0 4.9 0.0 8.0 21.5 1.8 17.0 83.4 2.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 8.0 3.6 0.0 18.6 4.9 0.0 8.0 21.5 1.8 17.0 83.4 2.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 162 220 174 220 100 2268 1011 195 2458 1096 V/C Ratio(X)0.15 0.20 0.68 0.26 0.82 0.40 0.04 0.90 0.88 0.07 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 168 230 176 224 127 2268 1011 286 2458 1096 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 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 73.9 69.7 0.0 78.1 70.3 0.0 81.7 15.3 11.8 76.9 21.2 8.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.5 0.5 0.0 10.5 0.8 0.0 25.4 0.5 0.1 19.5 4.8 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 BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.1 1.8 0.0 5.8 2.4 0.0 4.4 9.0 0.7 8.9 34.9 1.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh 15.00 10.00 LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 74.4 70.2 15.0 88.6 71.0 10.0 107.1 15.9 11.9 96.4 26.0 8.8 LnGrp LOS E E B F E A F B B F C A Approach Vol, veh/h 204 258 1027 2407 Approach Delay, s/veh 33.9 59.6 23.0 30.6 Approach LOS C E C C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 27.7 119.7 27.6 18.3 129.1 27.6 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 8.5 8.0 * 7 8.5 8.0 7.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 28.1 102.4 * 22 12.5 118.0 21.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 19.0 23.5 10.0 10.0 85.4 20.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 25.3 0.2 0.0 31.7 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 30.7 HCM 7th LOS C Notes * HCM 7th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is included in calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. Timings 2035 Total PM 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114)03/27/2025 2035 Total PM 3:49 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)68 40 86 55 40 232 140 2084 70 130 1075 25 Future Volume (vph)68 40 86 55 40 232 140 2084 70 130 1075 25 Turn Type Perm NA Free Perm NA Free Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 Free 8 Free 2 6 Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 5.0 20.0 20.0 5.0 20.0 20.0 Minimum Split (s)20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 13.5 28.0 28.0 13.5 28.0 28.0 Total Split (s)20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 33.0 128.0 128.0 27.0 122.0 122.0 Total Split (%)11.4% 11.4% 11.4% 11.4% 18.9% 73.1% 73.1% 15.4% 69.7% 69.7% Yellow Time (s)3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 5.5 6.0 6.0 5.5 6.0 6.0 All-Red Time (s)3.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)6.5 6.5 7.0 7.0 8.5 8.0 8.0 8.5 8.0 8.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-Max Act Effct Green (s)12.7 12.7 175.0 12.2 12.2 175.0 19.3 122.4 122.4 16.9 120.0 120.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.07 0.07 1.00 0.07 0.07 1.00 0.11 0.70 0.70 0.10 0.69 0.69 v/c Ratio 0.76 0.32 0.06 0.64 0.33 0.16 0.78 0.92 0.07 0.82 0.48 0.02 Control Delay (s/veh)120.0 83.2 0.1 107.9 84.3 0.2 90.1 29.4 2.4 111.5 14.3 0.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)120.0 83.2 0.1 107.9 84.3 0.2 90.1 29.4 2.4 111.5 14.3 0.0 LOS F F A F F A F C A F B A Approach Delay (s/veh)59.3 28.6 32.3 24.2 Approach LOS E C C C Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 175 Actuated Cycle Length: 175 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 130 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.92 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 30.8 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 94.4%ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114) HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary 2035 Total PM 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114)03/27/2025 2035 Total PM 3:49 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)68 40 86 55 40 232 140 2084 70 130 1075 25 Future Volume (veh/h)68 40 86 55 40 232 140 2084 70 130 1075 25 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 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 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 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 74 43 0 60 43 0 152 2265 76 141 1168 27 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, %2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 117 144 117 144 172 2483 1107 160 2459 1097 Arrive On Green 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.10 0.70 0.70 0.09 0.69 0.69 Sat Flow, veh/h 1364 1870 1585 1364 1870 1585 1781 3554 1585 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 74 43 0 60 43 0 152 2265 76 141 1168 27 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1364 1870 1585 1364 1870 1585 1781 1777 1585 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 9.5 3.8 0.0 7.6 3.8 0.0 14.7 92.7 2.7 13.7 26.4 0.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 13.3 3.8 0.0 11.4 3.8 0.0 14.7 92.7 2.7 13.7 26.4 0.9 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 117 144 117 144 172 2483 1107 160 2459 1097 V/C Ratio(X)0.63 0.30 0.51 0.30 0.88 0.91 0.07 0.88 0.47 0.02 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 117 144 117 144 249 2483 1107 188 2459 1097 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 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 82.5 76.3 0.0 81.7 76.3 0.0 78.1 21.9 8.3 78.7 12.4 8.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 11.5 1.4 0.0 4.5 1.4 0.0 19.8 6.5 0.1 30.5 0.7 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 BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 3.7 1.9 0.0 2.8 1.9 0.0 7.8 39.0 1.0 7.7 10.8 0.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh 15.00 10.00 LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 94.0 77.6 15.0 86.2 77.6 10.0 97.9 28.4 8.5 109.2 13.0 8.5 LnGrp LOS F E B F E A F C A F B A Approach Vol, veh/h 74 273 2493 1336 Approach Delay, s/veh 130.4 37.4 32.0 23.1 Approach LOS F D C C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 24.2 130.3 20.5 25.4 129.1 20.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 8.5 8.0 * 7 8.5 8.0 7.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.5 120.0 * 14 24.5 114.0 13.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 15.7 94.7 15.3 16.7 28.4 13.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 24.9 0.0 0.2 38.9 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 31.3 HCM 7th LOS C Notes * HCM 7th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is included in calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. Timings 2055 Background AM 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114)09/19/2024 Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Lane Group EBT EBR WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)47 298 64 181 90 769 48 194 2302 82 Future Volume (vph)47 298 64 181 90 769 48 194 2302 82 Turn Type NA Free NA Free Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Free Free 2 6 Detector Phase 4 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)7.0 7.0 5.0 20.0 20.0 5.0 20.0 20.0 Minimum Split (s)20.0 20.0 13.5 28.0 28.0 13.5 28.0 28.0 Total Split (s)20.0 20.0 15.0 120.0 120.0 15.0 120.0 120.0 Total Split (%)11.4% 11.4% 8.6% 68.6% 68.6% 8.6% 68.6% 68.6% Yellow Time (s)3.5 3.5 5.5 6.0 6.0 5.5 6.0 6.0 All-Red Time (s)3.0 3.5 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)6.5 7.0 8.5 8.0 8.0 8.5 8.0 8.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-Max Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 175 Actuated Cycle Length: 175 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 145 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Splits and Phases: 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114) HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2055 Background AM 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114)09/19/2024 Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)27 47 298 131 64 181 90 769 48 194 2302 82 Future Volume (veh/h)27 47 298 131 64 181 90 769 48 194 2302 82 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 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 29 51 0 141 69 0 97 827 52 209 2475 88 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, %2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 36 63 90 44 66 2357 1051 66 2357 1051 Arrive On Green 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.04 0.66 0.66 0.04 0.66 0.66 Sat Flow, veh/h 666 1171 1585 1215 595 1585 1781 3554 1585 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 80 0 0 210 0 0 97 827 52 209 2475 88 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1837 0 1585 1810 0 1585 1781 1777 1585 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 7.5 0.0 0.0 13.0 0.0 0.0 6.5 17.9 2.0 6.5 116.1 3.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 7.5 0.0 0.0 13.0 0.0 0.0 6.5 17.9 2.0 6.5 116.1 3.5 Prop In Lane 0.36 1.00 0.67 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 99 0 134 0 66 2357 1051 66 2357 1051 V/C Ratio(X)0.81 0.00 1.56 0.00 1.47 0.35 0.05 3.16 1.05 0.08 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 142 0 134 0 66 2357 1051 66 2357 1051 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 81.9 0.0 0.0 81.0 0.0 0.0 84.3 12.9 10.3 84.3 29.5 10.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 21.6 0.0 0.0 285.9 0.0 0.0 275.0 0.4 0.1 1009.8 33.4 0.2 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 BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 4.2 0.0 0.0 16.8 0.0 0.0 8.1 7.4 0.8 21.6 58.1 1.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh 15.00 10.00 LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 103.5 0.0 15.0 366.9 0.0 10.0 359.3 13.4 10.4 1094.0 62.9 10.7 LnGrp LOS F B F A F B B F F B Approach Vol, veh/h 255 319 976 2772 Approach Delay, s/veh 42.8 245.0 47.6 139.0 Approach LOS D F D F Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 15.0 124.1 15.9 15.0 124.1 20.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 8.5 8.0 6.5 8.5 8.0 7.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 6.5 112.0 13.5 6.5 112.0 13.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.5 19.9 9.5 8.5 118.1 15.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 23.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 120.5 HCM 6th LOS F Notes Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is included in calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. Timings 2055 Background PM 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114)09/19/2024 Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Lane Group EBT EBR WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)47 102 47 276 166 2324 84 154 1032 30 Future Volume (vph)47 102 47 276 166 2324 84 154 1032 30 Turn Type NA Free NA Free Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Free Free 2 6 Detector Phase 4 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)7.0 7.0 5.0 20.0 20.0 5.0 20.0 20.0 Minimum Split (s)20.0 20.0 13.5 28.0 28.0 13.5 28.0 28.0 Total Split (s)20.0 20.0 15.0 120.0 120.0 15.0 120.0 120.0 Total Split (%)11.4% 11.4% 8.6% 68.6% 68.6% 8.6% 68.6% 68.6% Yellow Time (s)3.5 3.5 5.5 6.0 6.0 5.5 6.0 6.0 All-Red Time (s)3.0 3.5 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)6.5 7.0 8.5 8.0 8.0 8.5 8.0 8.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-Max Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 175 Actuated Cycle Length: 175 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 145 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Splits and Phases: 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114) HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2055 Background PM 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114)09/19/2024 Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)81 47 102 65 47 276 166 2324 84 154 1032 30 Future Volume (veh/h)81 47 102 65 47 276 166 2324 84 154 1032 30 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 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 88 51 0 71 51 0 180 2526 91 167 1122 33 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, %2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 89 51 79 56 66 2274 1014 66 2274 1014 Arrive On Green 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.04 0.64 0.64 0.04 0.64 0.64 Sat Flow, veh/h 1148 665 1585 1058 760 1585 1781 3554 1585 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 139 0 0 122 0 0 180 2526 91 167 1122 33 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1813 0 1585 1817 0 1585 1781 1777 1585 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 13.4 0.0 0.0 11.7 0.0 0.0 6.5 112.0 3.8 6.5 29.1 1.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 13.4 0.0 0.0 11.7 0.0 0.0 6.5 112.0 3.8 6.5 29.1 1.3 Prop In Lane 0.63 1.00 0.58 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 140 0 135 0 66 2274 1014 66 2274 1014 V/C Ratio(X)0.99 0.00 0.90 0.00 2.72 1.11 0.09 2.52 0.49 0.03 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 140 0 135 0 66 2274 1014 66 2274 1014 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 80.7 0.0 0.0 80.4 0.0 0.0 84.3 31.5 12.0 84.3 16.6 11.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 74.2 0.0 0.0 49.9 0.0 0.0 815.1 56.8 0.2 728.3 0.8 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 BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 9.2 0.0 0.0 7.4 0.0 0.0 18.0 64.1 1.5 16.4 12.2 0.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh 15.00 10.00 LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 154.9 0.0 15.0 130.2 0.0 10.0 899.4 88.3 12.2 812.5 17.3 11.6 LnGrp LOS F B F A F F B F B B Approach Vol, veh/h 196 286 2797 1322 Approach Delay, s/veh 114.2 61.3 138.0 117.6 Approach LOS F E F F Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 15.0 120.0 20.0 15.0 120.0 20.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 8.5 8.0 6.5 8.5 8.0 7.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 6.5 112.0 13.5 6.5 112.0 13.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.5 114.0 15.4 8.5 31.1 13.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 35.8 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 126.4 HCM 6th LOS F Notes Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is included in calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. Timings 2055 Total AM 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114)03/27/2025 2055 Total AM 3:49 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)27 47 298 131 64 181 90 960 48 194 2373 82 Future Volume (vph)27 47 298 131 64 181 90 960 48 194 2373 82 Turn Type Perm NA Free Perm NA Free Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 Free 8 Free 2 6 Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 5.0 20.0 20.0 5.0 20.0 20.0 Minimum Split (s)20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 13.5 28.0 28.0 13.5 28.0 28.0 Total Split (s)24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 18.6 110.5 110.5 40.5 132.4 132.4 Total Split (%)13.7% 13.7% 13.7% 13.7% 10.6% 63.1% 63.1% 23.1% 75.7% 75.7% Yellow Time (s)3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 5.5 6.0 6.0 5.5 6.0 6.0 All-Red Time (s)3.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)6.5 6.5 7.0 7.0 8.5 8.0 8.0 8.5 8.0 8.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-Max Act Effct Green (s)17.5 17.5 175.0 17.0 17.0 175.0 10.1 109.4 109.4 25.1 124.4 124.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.10 1.00 0.10 0.10 1.00 0.06 0.63 0.63 0.14 0.71 0.71 v/c Ratio 0.22 0.27 0.20 1.08 0.38 0.12 0.95 0.47 0.05 0.83 1.01 0.08 Control Delay (s/veh)77.1 77.1 0.3 170.2 80.8 0.2 149.5 19.0 0.1 97.6 46.8 2.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)77.1 77.1 0.3 170.2 80.8 0.2 149.5 19.0 0.1 97.6 46.8 2.0 LOS E E A F F A F B A F D A Approach Delay (s/veh)15.7 73.1 28.9 49.1 Approach LOS B E C D Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 175 Actuated Cycle Length: 175 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 130 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.08 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 43.4 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 104.1%ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114) HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary 2055 Total AM 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114)03/27/2025 2055 Total AM 3:49 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)27 47 298 131 64 181 90 960 48 194 2373 82 Future Volume (veh/h)27 47 298 131 64 181 90 960 48 194 2373 82 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 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 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 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 29 51 0 141 69 0 97 1032 52 209 2552 88 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, %2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 124 182 138 182 103 2273 1014 230 2526 1127 Arrive On Green 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.06 0.64 0.64 0.13 0.71 0.71 Sat Flow, veh/h 1332 1870 1585 1354 1870 1585 1781 3554 1585 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 29 51 0 141 69 0 97 1032 52 209 2552 88 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1332 1870 1585 1354 1870 1585 1781 1777 1585 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.7 4.4 0.0 12.6 6.1 0.0 9.5 25.8 2.1 20.3 124.4 3.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.7 4.4 0.0 17.0 6.1 0.0 9.5 25.8 2.1 20.3 124.4 3.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 124 182 138 182 103 2273 1014 230 2526 1127 V/C Ratio(X)0.23 0.28 1.02 0.38 0.94 0.45 0.05 0.91 1.01 0.08 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 128 187 138 182 103 2273 1014 326 2526 1127 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 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 78.6 73.3 0.0 83.1 74.1 0.0 82.2 16.0 11.7 75.2 25.3 7.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.1 1.0 0.0 81.6 1.6 0.0 70.3 0.7 0.1 20.9 20.4 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 BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.3 2.2 0.0 9.5 3.0 0.0 6.4 10.8 0.8 10.7 56.0 1.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh 15.00 10.00 LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 79.7 74.3 15.0 164.7 75.6 10.0 152.5 16.7 11.8 96.1 45.7 7.9 LnGrp LOS E E B F E A F B B F F A Approach Vol, veh/h 266 324 1181 2849 Approach Delay, s/veh 33.4 91.3 27.6 48.3 Approach LOS C F C D Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 31.1 119.9 24.0 18.6 132.4 24.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 8.5 8.0 * 7 8.5 8.0 7.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 32.0 102.5 * 18 10.1 124.4 17.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 22.3 27.8 11.7 11.5 126.4 19.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.3 31.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 45.2 HCM 7th LOS D Notes * HCM 7th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is included in calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. Timings 2055 Total PM 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114)03/27/2025 2055 Total PM 3:52 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)81 47 102 65 47 276 166 2453 84 154 1239 30 Future Volume (vph)81 47 102 65 47 276 166 2453 84 154 1239 30 Turn Type Perm NA Free Perm NA Free Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 Free 8 Free 2 6 Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 5.0 20.0 20.0 5.0 20.0 20.0 Minimum Split (s)20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 13.5 28.0 28.0 13.5 28.0 28.0 Total Split (s)20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 37.1 130.6 130.6 24.4 117.9 117.9 Total Split (%)11.4% 11.4% 11.4% 11.4% 21.2% 74.6% 74.6% 13.9% 67.4% 67.4% Yellow Time (s)3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 5.5 6.0 6.0 5.5 6.0 6.0 All-Red Time (s)3.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)6.5 6.5 7.0 7.0 8.5 8.0 8.0 8.5 8.0 8.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max C-Max Act Effct Green (s)13.2 13.2 175.0 12.7 12.7 175.0 22.3 122.6 122.6 16.2 116.5 116.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.08 1.00 0.07 0.07 1.00 0.13 0.70 0.70 0.09 0.67 0.67 v/c Ratio 0.86 0.36 0.07 0.72 0.38 0.19 0.80 1.08 0.08 1.02 0.57 0.03 Control Delay (s/veh)135.7 84.5 0.1 116.0 85.7 0.3 82.0 73.4 3.5 151.4 17.6 0.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)135.7 84.5 0.1 116.0 85.7 0.3 82.0 73.4 3.5 151.4 17.6 0.1 LOS F F A F F A F E A F B A Approach Delay (s/veh)65.0 30.1 71.7 31.6 Approach LOS E C E C Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 175 Actuated Cycle Length: 175 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 150 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.08 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 56.0 Intersection LOS: E Intersection Capacity Utilization 106.7%ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114) HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary 2055 Total PM 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114)03/27/2025 2055 Total PM 3:52 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)81 47 102 65 47 276 166 2453 84 154 1239 30 Future Volume (veh/h)81 47 102 65 47 276 166 2453 84 154 1239 30 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 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 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 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 88 51 0 71 51 0 180 2666 91 167 1347 33 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, %2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 111 144 111 144 200 2825 1260 162 2748 1226 Arrive On Green 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.11 0.79 0.79 0.09 0.77 0.77 Sat Flow, veh/h 1354 1870 1585 1354 1870 1585 1781 3554 1585 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 88 51 0 71 51 0 180 2666 91 167 1347 33 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1354 1870 1585 1354 1870 1585 1781 1777 1585 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 9.0 4.5 0.0 9.0 4.5 0.0 17.5 107.8 2.2 15.9 24.2 0.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 13.5 4.5 0.0 13.5 4.5 0.0 17.5 107.8 2.2 15.9 24.2 0.8 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 111 144 111 144 200 2825 1260 162 2748 1226 V/C Ratio(X)0.80 0.35 0.64 0.35 0.90 0.94 0.07 1.03 0.49 0.03 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 111 144 111 144 291 2825 1260 162 2748 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 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 84.0 76.6 0.0 83.1 76.6 0.0 76.7 14.7 3.9 79.5 7.2 4.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 32.7 1.8 0.0 12.8 1.8 0.0 19.8 8.1 0.1 79.4 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 BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 5.0 2.3 0.0 3.6 2.3 0.0 9.2 40.9 0.7 10.9 9.1 0.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh 15.00 10.00 LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 116.7 78.4 15.0 95.9 78.4 10.0 96.5 22.8 4.0 158.9 7.9 4.6 LnGrp LOS F E B F E A F C A F A A Approach Vol, veh/h 114 340 2937 1547 Approach Delay, s/veh 121.8 38.2 26.8 24.1 Approach LOS F D C C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 24.4 147.6 20.5 28.2 143.8 20.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 8.5 8.0 * 7 8.5 8.0 7.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.9 122.6 * 14 28.6 109.9 13.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 17.9 109.8 15.5 19.5 26.2 15.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 12.8 0.0 0.2 48.4 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 28.9 HCM 7th LOS C Notes * HCM 7th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is included in calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th TWSC 2024 Existing Adjusted AM 2: SH-82 & Cattle Creek Rd (CR-113)04/02/2024 Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 103 52 668 41 97 0 Future Vol, veh/h 103 52 668 41 97 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized -Free -None -None Storage Length 0 0 -250775 - Veh in Median Storage, # 2 - 0 - - 0 Grade, %0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94 Heavy Vehicles, %2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 110 55 711 44 103 0 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 917 - 0 0755 0 Stage 1 711 - - - - - Stage 2 206 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.84 - --4.14 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 - --2.22 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 271 0 --851 - Stage 1 448 0 - - - - Stage 2 808 0 - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 238 - --851 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 401 - - - - - Stage 1 448 - - - - - Stage 2 710 - - - - - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 17.3 0 9.8 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h)--401 -851 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio --0.273 -0.121 - HCM Control Delay (s)--17.3 09.8 - HCM Lane LOS - - C A A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)--1.1 -0.4 - HCM 6th TWSC 2024 Existing Adjusted PM 2: SH-82 & Cattle Creek Rd (CR-113)04/02/2024 Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.1 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 43 50 1997 84 41 0 Future Vol, veh/h 43 50 1997 84 41 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized -Free -None -None Storage Length 0 0 -250775 - Veh in Median Storage, # 2 - 0 - - 0 Grade, %0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 99 99 99 99 99 99 Heavy Vehicles, %2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 43 51 2017 85 41 0 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 2099 - 0 02102 0 Stage 1 2017 - - - - - Stage 2 82 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.84 - --4.14 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 - --2.22 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 45 0 --258 - Stage 1 89 0 - - - - Stage 2 932 0 - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 38 - --258 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 84 - - - - - Stage 1 89 - - - - - Stage 2 784 - - - - - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 86.8 0 21.6 HCM LOS F Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h)--84 -258 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio --0.517 -0.161 - HCM Control Delay (s)--86.8 021.6 - HCM Lane LOS - - F A C - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)--2.2 -0.6 - Notes ~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon HCM 6th TWSC 2035 Background AM 2: SH-82 & Cattle Creek Rd (CR-113)04/02/2024 Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.3 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 113 57 735 45 107 0 Future Vol, veh/h 113 57 735 45 107 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized -Free -None -None Storage Length 0 0 -250775 - Veh in Median Storage, # 2 - 0 - - 0 Grade, %0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94 Heavy Vehicles, %2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 120 61 782 48 114 0 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1010 - 0 0830 0 Stage 1 782 - - - - - Stage 2 228 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.84 - --4.14 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 - --2.22 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 236 0 --798 - Stage 1 411 0 - - - - Stage 2 788 0 - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 202 - --798 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 366 - - - - - Stage 1 411 - - - - - Stage 2 675 - - - - - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 19.6 0 10.3 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h)--366 -798 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio --0.328 -0.143 - HCM Control Delay (s)--19.6 010.3 - HCM Lane LOS - - C A B - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)--1.4 -0.5 - HCM 6th TWSC 2035 Background PM 2: SH-82 & Cattle Creek Rd (CR-113)04/02/2024 Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.5 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 47 55 2197 92 45 0 Future Vol, veh/h 47 55 2197 92 45 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized -Free -None -None Storage Length 0 0 -250775 - Veh in Median Storage, # 2 - 0 - - 0 Grade, %0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 99 99 99 99 99 99 Heavy Vehicles, %2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 47 56 2219 93 45 0 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 2309 - 0 02312 0 Stage 1 2219 - - - - - Stage 2 90 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.84 - --4.14 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 - --2.22 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 32 0 --213 - Stage 1 68 0 - - - - Stage 2 923 0 - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 25 - --213 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 64 - - - - - Stage 1 68 - - - - - Stage 2 728 - - - - - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 152 0 26.4 HCM LOS F Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h)--64 -213 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio --0.742 -0.213 - HCM Control Delay (s)--152 026.4 - HCM Lane LOS - - F A D - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)--3.3 -0.8 - Notes ~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon HCM 7th TWSC 2035 Total AM 2: SH-82 & Cattle Creek Rd (CR-113)03/27/2025 2035 Total AM 8:41 am 01/25/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 170 1093 152 0 3062 Future Vol, veh/h 0 170 1093 152 0 3062 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized -Free -None -None Storage Length - 0 -250 - - Veh in Median Storage, #2 - 0 - - 0 Grade, %0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94 Heavy Vehicles, %2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 181 1163 162 0 3257 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All - - 0 0 - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - - - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 - - 0 - Stage 1 0 0 - - 0 - Stage 2 0 0 - - 0 - Platoon blocked, %- - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - - - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 0 0 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBT Capacity (veh/h)- - - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - - HCM Control Delay (s/veh)- - 0 - HCM Lane LOS - - A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)- - - - HCM 7th TWSC 2035 Total PM 2: SH-82 & Cattle Creek Rd (CR-113)03/27/2025 2035 Total PM 3:49 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 102 2808 137 0 1500 Future Vol, veh/h 0 102 2808 137 0 1500 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized -Free -None -None Storage Length - 0 -250 - - Veh in Median Storage, #2 - 0 - - 0 Grade, %0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 99 99 99 99 99 99 Heavy Vehicles, %2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 103 2836 138 0 1515 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All - - 0 0 - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - - - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 - - 0 - Stage 1 0 0 - - 0 - Stage 2 0 0 - - 0 - Platoon blocked, %- - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - - - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 0 0 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBT Capacity (veh/h)- - - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - - HCM Control Delay (s/veh)- - 0 - HCM Lane LOS - - A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)- - - - HCM 6th TWSC 2055 Background AM 2: SH-82 & Cattle Creek Rd (CR-113)09/19/2024 Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.3 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 135 68 874 54 127 0 Future Vol, veh/h 135 68 874 54 127 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized -Free -None -None Storage Length 0 0 -250 775 - Veh in Median Storage, #2 - 0 - - 0 Grade, %0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94 Heavy Vehicles, %2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 144 72 930 57 135 0 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1200 - 0 0 987 0 Stage 1 930 - - - - - Stage 2 270 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.84 - - -4.14 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 - - -2.22 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 178 0 - -696 - Stage 1 344 0 - - - - Stage 2 751 0 - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 143 - - -696 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 304 - - - - - Stage 1 344 - - - - - Stage 2 605 - - - - - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 27 0 11.4 HCM LOS D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h)- -304 -696 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - -0.472 -0.194 - HCM Control Delay (s/veh)- -27 0 11.4 - HCM Lane LOS - - D A B - HCM 95th %tile Q (veh)- -2.4 -0.7 - Notes ~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon HCM 6th TWSC 2055 Background PM 2: SH-82 & Cattle Creek Rd (CR-113)09/19/2024 Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 10.4 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 56 65 2612 110 54 0 Future Vol, veh/h 56 65 2612 110 54 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized -Free -None -None Storage Length 0 0 -250 775 - Veh in Median Storage, #2 - 0 - - 0 Grade, %0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 99 99 99 99 99 99 Heavy Vehicles, %2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 57 66 2638 111 55 0 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 2748 - 0 0 2749 0 Stage 1 2638 - - - - - Stage 2 110 - - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.84 - - -4.14 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 - - -2.22 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 16 0 - -143 - Stage 1 ~ 40 0 - - - - Stage 2 902 0 - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 10 - - -143 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ~ 38 - - - - - Stage 1 ~ 40 - - - - - Stage 2 555 - - - - - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v$ 484.5 0 44.9 HCM LOS F Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h)- -38 -143 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - -1.489 -0.381 - HCM Control Delay (s/veh)- -$ 484.5 0 44.9 - HCM Lane LOS - - F A E - HCM 95th %tile Q (veh)- -5.9 -1.6 - Notes ~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon HCM 7th TWSC 2055 Total AM 2: SH-82 & Cattle Creek Rd (CR-113)03/27/2025 2055 Total AM 3:49 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 203 1232 181 0 3522 Future Vol, veh/h 0 203 1232 181 0 3522 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized -Free -None -None Storage Length - 0 -250 - - Veh in Median Storage, #2 - 0 - - 0 Grade, %0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94 Heavy Vehicles, %2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 216 1311 193 0 3747 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All - - 0 0 - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - - - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 - - 0 - Stage 1 0 0 - - 0 - Stage 2 0 0 - - 0 - Platoon blocked, %- - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - - - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 0 0 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBT Capacity (veh/h)- - - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - - HCM Control Delay (s/veh)- - 0 - HCM Lane LOS - - A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)- - - - HCM 7th TWSC 2055 Total PM 2: SH-82 & Cattle Creek Rd (CR-113)03/27/2025 2055 Total PM 3:52 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 121 3223 164 0 1703 Future Vol, veh/h 0 121 3223 164 0 1703 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized -Free -None -None Storage Length - 0 -250 - - Veh in Median Storage, #2 - 0 - - 0 Grade, %0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 99 99 99 99 99 99 Heavy Vehicles, %2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 122 3256 166 0 1720 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All - - 0 0 - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - - - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 - - 0 - Stage 1 0 0 - - 0 - Stage 2 0 0 - - 0 - Platoon blocked, %- - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - - - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 0 0 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBT Capacity (veh/h)- - - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - - HCM Control Delay (s/veh)- - 0 - HCM Lane LOS - - A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)- - - - Timings 2035 Total AM 3: SH-82 & North Access 03/27/2025 2035 Total AM 8:41 am 01/25/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)127 280 955 2321 48 Future Volume (vph)127 280 955 2321 48 Turn Type Perm Prot NA NA Perm Protected Phases 5 5 6 6 Permitted Phases 6 6 Detector Phase 6 5 5 6 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s)22.5 9.5 22.5 22.5 Total Split (s)148.0 27.0 148.0 148.0 Total Split (%)84.6% 15.4% 84.6% 84.6% Yellow Time (s)3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode C-Max None C-Max C-Max Act Effct Green (s)143.9 22.1 175.0 143.9 143.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.82 0.13 1.00 0.82 0.82 v/c Ratio 0.09 0.70 0.29 0.87 0.04 Control Delay (s/veh)0.1 83.8 0.2 12.4 1.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)0.1 83.8 0.2 12.4 1.5 LOS A F A B A Approach Delay (s/veh)19.1 12.2 Approach LOS B B Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 175 Actuated Cycle Length: 175 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2: and 6:NBSB, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 80 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.87 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 14.1 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 91.3%ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 3: SH-82 & North Access HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Total AM 3: SH-82 & North Access 03/27/2025 2035 Total AM 8:41 am 01/25/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)0 127 280 955 2321 48 Future Volume (vph)0 127 280 955 2321 48 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s)4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.97 0.95 0.95 1.00 Frt 0.87 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)1611 3433 3539 3539 1583 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)1611 3433 3539 3539 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph)0 138 304 1038 2523 52 RTOR Reduction (vph)0 25 0 0 0 8 Lane Group Flow (vph)0 113 304 1038 2523 44 Turn Type Perm Prot NA NA Perm Protected Phases 5 5 6 6 Permitted Phases 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s)143.9 22.1 175.0 143.9 143.9 Effective Green, g (s)143.9 22.1 175.0 143.9 143.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.82 0.13 1.00 0.82 0.82 Clearance Time (s)4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s)3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph)1324 433 3539 2910 1301 v/s Ratio Prot c0.09 0.29 c0.71 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.09 0.70 0.29 0.87 0.03 Uniform Delay, d1 3.0 73.3 0.0 9.6 2.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.02 1.00 0.99 1.68 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 4.9 0.0 2.3 0.0 Delay (s)3.1 79.6 0.0 11.8 4.8 Level of Service A E A B A Approach Delay (s/veh)3.1 18.1 11.6 Approach LOS A B B Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh)13.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.84 Actuated Cycle Length (s)175.0 Sum of lost time (s)9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 91.3%ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min)15 c Critical Lane Group Timings 2035 Total PM 3: SH-82 & North Access 03/27/2025 2035 Total PM 3:49 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)86 529 2294 1078 138 Future Volume (vph)86 529 2294 1078 138 Turn Type Perm Prot NA NA Perm Protected Phases 5 5 6 6 Permitted Phases 6 6 Detector Phase 6 5 5 6 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s)22.5 9.5 22.5 22.5 Total Split (s)87.0 88.0 87.0 87.0 Total Split (%)49.7% 50.3% 49.7% 49.7% Yellow Time (s)3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode C-Max None C-Max C-Max Act Effct Green (s)82.5 83.5 175.0 82.5 82.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.47 0.48 1.00 0.47 0.47 v/c Ratio 0.07 0.35 0.70 0.70 0.18 Control Delay (s/veh)0.1 35.7 0.5 50.4 17.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)0.1 35.7 0.5 50.4 17.6 LOS A D A D B Approach Delay (s/veh)7.1 46.6 Approach LOS A D Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 175 Actuated Cycle Length: 175 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2: and 6:NBSB, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 40 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.70 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 18.6 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.2%ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 3: SH-82 & North Access HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2035 Total PM 3: SH-82 & North Access 03/27/2025 2035 Total PM 3:49 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)0 86 529 2294 1078 138 Future Volume (vph)0 86 529 2294 1078 138 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s)4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.97 0.95 0.95 1.00 Frt 0.87 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)1611 3433 3539 3539 1583 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)1611 3433 3539 3539 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph)0 93 575 2493 1172 150 RTOR Reduction (vph)0 49 0 0 0 65 Lane Group Flow (vph)0 44 575 2493 1172 85 Turn Type Perm Prot NA NA Perm Protected Phases 5 5 6 6 Permitted Phases 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s)82.5 83.5 175.0 82.5 82.5 Effective Green, g (s)82.5 83.5 175.0 82.5 82.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.47 0.48 1.00 0.47 0.47 Clearance Time (s)4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s)3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph)759 1638 3539 1668 746 v/s Ratio Prot 0.17 c0.70 0.33 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 0.05 v/c Ratio 0.06 0.35 0.70 0.70 0.11 Uniform Delay, d1 25.1 28.7 0.0 36.6 25.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.23 1.00 1.30 2.75 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 0.1 0.3 2.3 0.3 Delay (s)25.3 35.3 0.3 49.9 71.4 Level of Service C D A D E Approach Delay (s/veh)25.3 6.8 52.3 Approach LOS C A D Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh)20.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.74 Actuated Cycle Length (s)175.0 Sum of lost time (s)9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.2%ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min)15 c Critical Lane Group Timings 2055 Total AM 3: SH-82 & North Access 03/27/2025 2055 Total AM 3:49 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)127 302 1098 2755 48 Future Volume (vph)127 302 1098 2755 48 Turn Type Perm Prot NA NA Perm Protected Phases 5 5 6 6 Permitted Phases 6 6 Detector Phase 6 5 5 6 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s)22.5 9.5 22.5 22.5 Total Split (s)152.8 22.2 152.8 152.8 Total Split (%)87.3% 12.7% 87.3% 87.3% Yellow Time (s)3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode C-Max None C-Max C-Max Act Effct Green (s)148.3 17.7 175.0 148.3 148.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.85 0.10 1.00 0.85 0.85 v/c Ratio 0.09 0.95 0.34 1.00 0.04 Control Delay (s/veh)0.1 114.8 0.2 23.8 2.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)0.1 114.8 0.2 23.8 2.2 LOS A F A C A Approach Delay (s/veh)24.9 23.5 Approach LOS C C Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 175 Actuated Cycle Length: 175 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2: and 6:NBSB, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 150 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.00 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 23.3 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 103.9%ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 3: SH-82 & North Access HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2055 Total AM 3: SH-82 & North Access 03/27/2025 2055 Total AM 3:49 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)0 127 302 1098 2755 48 Future Volume (vph)0 127 302 1098 2755 48 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s)4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.97 0.95 0.95 1.00 Frt 0.87 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)1611 3433 3539 3539 1583 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)1611 3433 3539 3539 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph)0 138 328 1193 2995 52 RTOR Reduction (vph)0 21 0 0 0 2 Lane Group Flow (vph)0 117 328 1193 2995 50 Turn Type Perm Prot NA NA Perm Protected Phases 5 5 6 6 Permitted Phases 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s)148.3 17.7 175.0 148.3 148.3 Effective Green, g (s)148.3 17.7 175.0 148.3 148.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.85 0.10 1.00 0.85 0.85 Clearance Time (s)4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s)3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph)1365 347 3539 2999 1341 v/s Ratio Prot c0.10 0.34 c0.85 v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.09 0.95 0.34 1.00 0.04 Uniform Delay, d1 2.2 78.2 0.0 13.3 2.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.06 1.38 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 32.6 0.1 9.8 0.0 Delay (s)2.3 114.4 0.1 23.9 2.9 Level of Service A F A C A Approach Delay (s/veh)2.3 24.7 23.5 Approach LOS A C C Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh)23.3 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.99 Actuated Cycle Length (s)175.0 Sum of lost time (s)9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 103.9%ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min)15 c Critical Lane Group Timings 2055 Total PM 3: SH-82 & North Access 03/27/2025 2055 Total PM 3:52 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)86 538 2703 1268 138 Future Volume (vph)86 538 2703 1268 138 Turn Type Perm Split NA NA custom Protected Phases 5!5 5 6! Permitted Phases 6 6 Detector Phase 6 5 5 5 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s)22.5 9.5 9.5 22.5 Total Split (s)23.0 152.0 152.0 23.0 Total Split (%)13.1% 86.9% 86.9% 13.1% Yellow Time (s)3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode C-Max None None C-Max Act Effct Green (s)18.5 147.5 147.5 175.0 18.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.84 0.84 1.00 0.11 v/c Ratio 0.28 0.20 0.99 0.39 0.68 Control Delay (s/veh)2.1 3.2 24.5 0.3 62.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)2.1 3.2 24.5 0.3 62.9 LOS A A C A E Approach Delay (s/veh)21.0 6.4 Approach LOS C A Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 175 Actuated Cycle Length: 175 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 6:SBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 150 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.99 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 16.3 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.5%ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 ! Phase conflict between lane groups. Splits and Phases: 3: SH-82 & North Access HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2055 Total PM 3: SH-82 & North Access 03/27/2025 2055 Total PM 3:52 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 2 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)0 86 538 2703 1268 138 Future Volume (vph)0 86 538 2703 1268 138 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s)4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.97 0.95 0.95 1.00 Frt 0.87 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)1611 3433 3539 3539 1583 Flt Permitted 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)1611 3433 3539 3539 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph)0 93 585 2938 1378 150 RTOR Reduction (vph)0 83 0 0 0 55 Lane Group Flow (vph)0 10 585 2938 1378 95 Turn Type Perm Split NA NA custom Protected Phases 5!5 5 6! Permitted Phases 6 6 Actuated Green, G (s)18.5 147.5 147.5 175.0 18.5 Effective Green, g (s)18.5 147.5 147.5 175.0 18.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.84 0.84 1.00 0.11 Clearance Time (s)4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s)3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph)170 2893 2982 3539 167 v/s Ratio Prot 0.17 c0.83 0.39 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 c0.06 v/c Ratio 0.06 0.20 0.99 0.39 0.57 Uniform Delay, d1 70.4 2.6 12.7 0.0 74.4 Progression Factor 1.00 1.20 1.76 1.00 1.12 Incremental Delay, d2 0.6 0.0 2.5 0.1 11.3 Delay (s)71.1 3.1 25.0 0.1 94.6 Level of Service E A C A F Approach Delay (s/veh)71.1 21.4 9.3 Approach LOS E C A Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh)18.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.94 Actuated Cycle Length (s)175.0 Sum of lost time (s)9.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.5%ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min)15 ! Phase conflict between lane groups. c Critical Lane Group HCM 7th TWSC 2035 Total AM 4: SH-82 & South RIRO Access 03/27/2025 2035 Total AM 8:41 am 01/25/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 510 0 1245 2552 24 Future Vol, veh/h 0 510 0 1245 2552 24 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized -Free -None -None Storage Length - 0 - - - 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 0 554 0 1353 2774 26 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All - - - 0 - 0 Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - - - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 0 - - - Stage 1 0 0 0 - - - Stage 2 0 0 0 - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - - - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 0 0 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTEBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)- - - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - - HCM Control Delay (s/veh)- 0 - - HCM Lane LOS - A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)- - - - HCM 7th TWSC 2035 Total PM 4: SH-82 & South RIRO Access 03/27/2025 2035 Total PM 3:49 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 344 0 2945 1156 69 Future Vol, veh/h 0 344 0 2945 1156 69 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized -Free -None -None Storage Length - 0 - - - 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 0 374 0 3201 1257 75 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All - - - 0 - 0 Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - - - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 0 - - - Stage 1 0 0 0 - - - Stage 2 0 0 0 - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - - - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 0 0 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTEBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)- - - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - - HCM Control Delay (s/veh)- 0 - - HCM Lane LOS - A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)- - - - HCM 7th TWSC 2055 Total AM 4: SH-82 03/27/2025 2055 Total AM 3:49 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 510 0 1413 3012 24 Future Vol, veh/h 0 510 0 1413 3012 24 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized -Free -None -None Storage Length - 0 - - - 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 0 554 0 1536 3274 26 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All - - - 0 - 0 Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - - - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 0 - - - Stage 1 0 0 0 - - - Stage 2 0 0 0 - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - - - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 0 0 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTEBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)- - - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - - HCM Control Delay (s/veh)- 0 - - HCM Lane LOS - A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)- - - - HCM 7th TWSC 2055 Total PM 4: SH-82 03/27/2025 2055 Total PM 3:52 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 344 0 3387 1359 69 Future Vol, veh/h 0 344 0 3387 1359 69 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized -Free -None -None Storage Length - 0 - - - 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 0 374 0 3682 1477 75 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All - - - 0 - 0 Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy - - - - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 0 - - - Stage 1 0 0 0 - - - Stage 2 0 0 0 - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - - - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - - Stage 1 - - - - - - Stage 2 - - - - - - Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 0 0 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBTEBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)- - - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - - HCM Control Delay (s/veh)- 0 - - HCM Lane LOS - A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)- - - - Timings 2035 Total AM 5: SH-82 & South U-Turn 03/27/2025 2035 Total AM 8:41 am 01/25/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group NBT SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)1054 298 2764 Future Volume (vph)1054 298 2764 Turn Type NA Prot NA Protected Phases 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Detector Phase 2 1 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s)22.5 9.5 22.5 Total Split (s)124.4 50.6 175.0 Total Split (%)71.1% 28.9% 100.0% Yellow Time (s)3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)4.5 4.5 4.5 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Recall Mode C-Max None C-Max Act Effct Green (s)128.9 37.1 175.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.74 0.21 1.00 v/c Ratio 0.44 0.87 0.85 Control Delay (s/veh)10.2 88.4 2.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)10.2 88.4 2.7 LOS B F A Approach Delay (s/veh)10.2 11.1 Approach LOS B B Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 175 Actuated Cycle Length: 175 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 45 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.87 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 10.9 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 80.2%ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 5: SH-82 & South U-Turn HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary 2035 Total AM 5: SH-82 & South U-Turn 03/27/2025 2035 Total AM 8:41 am 01/25/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 2 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)0 0 1054 0 298 2764 Future Volume (veh/h)0 0 1054 0 298 2764 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 1146 0 324 3004 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, %2 0 2 2 Cap, veh/h 2678 0 347 3462 Arrive On Green 0.75 0.00 0.20 0.97 Sat Flow, veh/h 3741 0 1781 3647 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 1146 0 324 3004 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1777 0 1781 1777 Q Serve(g_s), s 20.5 0.0 31.3 24.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 20.5 0.0 31.3 24.6 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 2678 0 347 3462 V/C Ratio(X)0.43 0.00 0.93 0.87 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 2678 0 469 3462 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 7.8 0.0 69.3 0.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.5 0.0 21.6 3.2 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 7.9 0.0 16.4 1.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 8.3 0.0 90.9 3.6 LnGrp LOS A F A Approach Vol, veh/h 1146 3328 Approach Delay, s/veh 8.3 12.1 Approach LOS A B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 38.6 136.4 175.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 46.1 119.9 170.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 33.3 22.5 26.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.8 12.1 118.3 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 11.1 HCM 7th LOS B Timings 2035 Total PM 5: SH-82 & South U-Turn 03/27/2025 2035 Total PM 3:49 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group NBT SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)2816 174 1326 Future Volume (vph)2816 174 1326 Turn Type NA Prot NA Protected Phases 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Detector Phase 2 1 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s)22.5 9.5 22.5 Total Split (s)151.7 23.3 175.0 Total Split (%)86.7% 13.3% 100.0% Yellow Time (s)3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)4.5 4.5 4.5 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Recall Mode C-Max None C-Max Act Effct Green (s)147.2 18.8 175.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.84 0.11 1.00 v/c Ratio 1.03 0.99 0.41 Control Delay (s/veh)39.0 149.2 0.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)39.0 149.2 0.3 LOS D F A Approach Delay (s/veh)39.0 17.6 Approach LOS D B Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 175 Actuated Cycle Length: 175 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 140 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.03 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 31.6 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 95.0%ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 5: SH-82 & South U-Turn HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary 2035 Total PM 5: SH-82 & South U-Turn 03/27/2025 2035 Total PM 3:49 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 2 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)0 0 2816 0 174 1326 Future Volume (veh/h)0 0 2816 0 174 1326 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 3061 0 189 1441 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, %2 0 2 2 Cap, veh/h 2989 0 191 3462 Arrive On Green 0.84 0.00 0.11 0.97 Sat Flow, veh/h 3741 0 1781 3647 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 3061 0 189 1441 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1777 0 1781 1777 Q Serve(g_s), s 147.2 0.0 18.5 3.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 147.2 0.0 18.5 3.1 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 2989 0 191 3462 V/C Ratio(X)1.02 0.00 0.99 0.42 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 2989 0 191 3462 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 13.9 0.0 78.0 0.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 22.9 0.0 61.3 0.4 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 55.2 0.0 11.8 0.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 36.8 0.0 139.3 0.5 LnGrp LOS F F A Approach Vol, veh/h 3061 1630 Approach Delay, s/veh 36.8 16.6 Approach LOS D B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 23.3 151.7 175.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.8 147.2 170.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 20.5 149.2 5.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 18.9 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 29.8 HCM 7th LOS C Timings 2055 Total AM 5: SH-82 & South U-Turn 03/27/2025 2055 Total AM 3:49 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group NBT SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)1222 318 3204 Future Volume (vph)1222 318 3204 Turn Type NA Prot NA Protected Phases 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Detector Phase 2 1 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s)22.5 9.5 22.5 Total Split (s)121.9 53.1 175.0 Total Split (%)69.7% 30.3% 100.0% Yellow Time (s)3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)4.5 4.5 4.5 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Recall Mode C-Max None C-Max Act Effct Green (s)126.7 39.3 175.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.72 0.22 1.00 v/c Ratio 0.52 0.87 0.98 Control Delay (s/veh)12.3 81.0 14.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)12.3 81.0 14.1 LOS B F B Approach Delay (s/veh)12.3 20.1 Approach LOS B C Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 175 Actuated Cycle Length: 175 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 60 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.98 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 18.1 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 92.3%ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 5: SH-82 & South U-Turn HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary 2055 Total AM 5: SH-82 & South U-Turn 03/27/2025 2055 Total AM 3:49 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 2 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)0 0 1222 0 318 3204 Future Volume (veh/h)0 0 1222 0 318 3204 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 1328 0 346 3483 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, %2 0 2 2 Cap, veh/h 2633 0 370 3462 Arrive On Green 0.74 0.00 0.21 0.97 Sat Flow, veh/h 3741 0 1781 3647 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 1328 0 346 3483 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1777 0 1781 1777 Q Serve(g_s), s 27.0 0.0 33.4 170.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 27.0 0.0 33.4 170.5 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 2633 0 370 3462 V/C Ratio(X)0.50 0.00 0.94 1.01 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 2633 0 495 3462 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 9.4 0.0 68.2 2.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.7 0.0 21.5 16.7 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 10.5 0.0 17.5 8.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 10.1 0.0 89.7 19.0 LnGrp LOS B F F Approach Vol, veh/h 1328 3829 Approach Delay, s/veh 10.1 25.4 Approach LOS B C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 40.8 134.2 175.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 48.6 117.4 170.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 35.4 29.0 172.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.9 15.8 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 21.4 HCM 7th LOS C Timings 2055 Total PM 5: SH-82 & South U-Turn 03/27/2025 2055 Total PM 3:52 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group NBT SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)3258 183 1520 Future Volume (vph)3258 183 1520 Turn Type NA Prot NA Protected Phases 2 1 6 Permitted Phases Detector Phase 2 1 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s)22.5 9.5 22.5 Total Split (s)153.0 22.0 175.0 Total Split (%)87.4% 12.6% 100.0% Yellow Time (s)3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)4.5 4.5 4.5 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Recall Mode C-Max None C-Max Act Effct Green (s)148.5 17.5 175.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.85 0.10 1.00 v/c Ratio 1.18 1.12 0.47 Control Delay (s/veh)101.6 169.1 0.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)101.6 169.1 0.4 LOS F F A Approach Delay (s/veh)101.6 18.6 Approach LOS F B Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 175 Actuated Cycle Length: 175 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 150 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.18 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 73.1 Intersection LOS: E Intersection Capacity Utilization 107.7%ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 5: SH-82 & South U-Turn HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary 2055 Total PM 5: SH-82 & South U-Turn 03/27/2025 2055 Total PM 3:52 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 2 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)0 0 3258 0 183 1520 Future Volume (veh/h)0 0 3258 0 183 1520 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 3541 0 199 1652 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, %2 0 2 2 Cap, veh/h 3016 0 178 3462 Arrive On Green 0.85 0.00 0.10 0.97 Sat Flow, veh/h 3741 0 1781 3647 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 3541 0 199 1652 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1777 0 1781 1777 Q Serve(g_s), s 148.5 0.0 17.5 3.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 148.5 0.0 17.5 3.9 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 3016 0 178 3462 V/C Ratio(X)1.17 0.00 1.12 0.48 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 3016 0 178 3462 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 13.2 0.0 78.7 0.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 82.2 0.0 102.4 0.5 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 79.0 0.0 13.1 0.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 95.5 0.0 181.1 0.6 LnGrp LOS F F A Approach Vol, veh/h 3541 1851 Approach Delay, s/veh 95.5 20.0 Approach LOS F B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 22.0 153.0 175.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 17.5 148.5 170.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 19.5 150.5 5.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 26.0 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 69.6 HCM 7th LOS E 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork APPENDIX E Signal Warrant Analysis Worksheets CDOT MaxTime Timing Shee 082A_006.66@CMC_Rd Administration Unit Information Controller ID 16 Main St. SH82 Side St. CMC Rd Adapter IP Address Subnet Mask Default Gateway ARP DHCP 1 Disable 2 Disable Serial Ports: Port Description Function Address Baud Bits Stop Parity FlowCTSRTS 1Port 2/C21S None 1 9600 8 1 NoneNone 0 0 2Aux_P3/C22S None 1 9600 8 1 NoneNone 0 0 3SDLC Port 1 None 1 9600 8 1 NoneNone 0 0 4Com A/C50S None 1 9600 8 1 NoneNone 0 0 5FIO None 1 9600 8 1 NoneNone 0 0 6DISPLAY/C60M None 1 9600 8 1 NoneNone 0 0 7SP7 None 1 9600 8 1 NoneNone 0 0 8SP8/Com B None 1 9600 8 1 NoneNone 0 0 Unit Parameters Startup Flash 0 Auto Ped Clr Enable Red Revert 2.0 Backup Time 600 Ext Mode All Red Exit 6 Grn Flash Freq. 60 Yel Flash Freq. 60 MCE Enable Enable Free Seq. 1 MCE Seq. 1 Start Yellow 0.0 Start Red 0.0 Start Clear Hold6 Phase Parameters Phases 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Walk Time 0 7 0 7 0 7 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 Clear Time 0 20 0 26 0 12 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 Don't Walk 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min Green 5 20 0 7 5 20 0 7 0 0 1 1 1 1 Min Green 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Passage 2.5 6.0 0.0 3.5 2.5 6.0 0.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Max-1 15 120 0 20 15 120 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 Max-2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Max-3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yel Change 5.5 6.0 0.0 3.5 5.5 6.0 0.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Red Clear 3.0 2.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 0.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Add Red Clear 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Red Revert 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Added Initial 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 Max Initial 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Time B4 Reduce 0 50 0 0 0 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cars B4 Reduce 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Time To Reduce 0 50 0 0 0 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduce By 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Min Gap 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Dyn Max Limit 30 0 0 30 30 0 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 Dyn Max Step 2.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 1.5 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Advance Walk 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Delay Ped 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Alt Walk 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Alt Ped Clr Pre Green 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pre Clearance 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 Phase Options Phases 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Enable XX XXX X Auto Flash Ent.XX Auto Flash Exit Cross Black_White.jpg XX Non Actuated I Non Actuated II Non Lock Mem XXXXXXXX Min Veh Recall XX Max Veh Recall Ped Recall Soft Veh Recall Dual Entry XX Sim Gap Dis Guaranteed Pass Act Rest Walk Cond Service Add Initial Additional Phase Options Phases 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Ped Clr During Yel Ped Clr During Red Cond Reservice Yel Min Override No Startup Call Adv. Warn Flasher No Ped Str Up Call Ped Clr OVTG Flash Exit Call Flash Exit Ped Call MinGreen2 MaxGreen2 MaxGreen3 Ped2 Ped Clear Pre Clear Ped NA+ Mode Red Rest Serve Evy Oth Even Serve Evy Oth Odd Phase Configuration Ph. Startup Ring Concurrent No Served PhasesStartup Min Description 1Phase Not On 1 5,6 0 WBLT 2Green No Walk 1 5,6 0 EBT 3Phase Not On 0 0 NBLT 4Phase Not On 1 8 0 SBT 5Phase Not On 2 1,2 0 EBLT 6Green No Walk 2 1,2 0 WBT 7Phase Not On 0 0 SBLT 8Phase Not On 2 4 0 NBT 9None 0 0 10 None 0 0 11 None 0 0 12 None 0 0 13 None 0 0 14 None 0 0 Sequence Configuration Sequence 1 Sequence 2 Sequence 3 Sequence 4 Ring Phases Ring Phases Ring Phases Ring Phases 11,2,a,4,b 12,1,a,3,4,b 11,2,a,4,3,b 12,1,a,4,3,b 25,6,a,8,b 25,6,a,7,8,b 25,6,a,7,8,b 25,6,a,7,8,b 3333 4444 5555 6666 7777 8888 9999 10 10 10 10 11 11 11 11 12 12 12 12 13 13 13 13 14 14 14 14 Vehicle Detection Parameters Call Call Additional Switch Queue No Max Erratic Failed Det. Phs Ovl Call Phase Phase Delay Extend Limit Activity Presence Counts Time Description 110 04.00.000 0 00 220 00.00.000 0 00 320 00.00.000 0 00 420 00.00.000 0 00 520 00.00.000 0 00 620 00.00.000 0 00 730 00.00.000 0 00 840 04.00.000 0 00 940 04.00.000 0 00 10 4 0 0 4.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 11 4 0 0 4.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 12 4 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 13 1 0 0 4.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 14 3 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 15 5 0 0 4.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 16 6 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 17 6 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 18 6 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 19 6 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 20 6 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 21 7 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 22 8 0 0 4.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 23 8 0 0 4.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 24 8 0 0 4.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 25 8 0 0 4.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 26 8 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 27 5 0 0 4.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 28 7 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 Vehicle Detection Options Detector 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Volume Detector Occupancy Yellow Lock Call Red Lock call Passage Queue Call Terminate Detector 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Volume Detector Occupancy Yellow Lock Call Red Lock call Passage Queue Call Terminate Pedestrian Detectors Call Call No Max Det Phase Ovlp Act Presence Erratic Count 10 000 0 22 000 0 30 000 0 44 000 0 50 000 0 66 000 0 70 000 0 88 000 0 90 000 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 Overlaps Trail Trail Trail Walk Ped Walk Ped OLP Type Included Phases Modifier PhasesGRN YEL RED 1 Clr 12Clr 2DelayFlashDescriptions 1Off 00.00.000000.0Off 2Off 00.00.000000.0Off 3Off 00.00.000000.0Off 4Off 00.00.000000.0Off 5Off 00.00.000000.0Off 6Off 00.00.000000.0Off 7Off 00.00.000000.0Off 8Off 00.00.000000.0Off 9Off 00.00.000000.0Off 10 Off 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 Off Coordination Parameters Operational Mode Correction Mode Maximum Mode Force Mode Automatic Shortway (Auto) Per Pattern Per Pattern Patterns Phs Det Ped Patt. Cycle Offset 1 Offset 2 Offset 2 Split Sequence Ref. Color Max Mode Pln Pln Pln 10 0 0 0 0 0 Yel Inh 111 20 0 0 0 0 0 Yel Inh 111 30 0 0 0 0 0 Yel Inh 111 40 0 0 0 0 0 Yel Inh 111 50 0 0 0 0 0 Yel Inh 111 60 0 0 0 0 0 Yel Inh 111 70 0 0 0 0 0 Yel Inh 111 80 0 0 0 0 0 Yel Inh 111 90 0 0 0 0 0 Yel Inh 111 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yel Inh 1 1 1 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yel Inh 1 1 1 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yel Inh 1 1 1 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yel Inh 1 1 1 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yel Inh 1 1 1 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yel Inh 1 1 1 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yel Inh 1 1 1 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yel Inh 1 1 1 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yel Inh 1 1 1 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yel Inh 1 1 1 20 0 0 0 0 20 1 Yel Max1 1 1 1 Split Parameters Split 1 Coord Ref Split 2 Coord Ref PH. Time PH PH Mode PH. Time PH PH Mode 10 None 10 None 20 XX Min Rcl 20 XX Min Rcl 30 None 30 None 40 None 40 None 50 None 50 None 60 XX Min Rcl 60 XX Min Rcl 70 None 70 None 80 None 80 None 90 None 90 None 10 0 None 10 0 None 11 0 None 11 0 None 12 0 None 12 0 None 13 0 None 13 0 None 14 0 None 14 0 None Split 3 Coord Ref Split 4 Coord Ref PH. Time PH PH Mode PH. Time PH PH Mode 10 None 10 None 20 XX Min Rcl 20 XX Min Rcl 30 None 30 None 40 None 40 None 50 None 50 None 60 XX Min Rcl 60 XX Min Rcl 70 None 70 None 80 None 80 None 90 None 90 None 10 0 None 10 0 None 11 0 None 11 0 None 12 0 None 12 0 None 13 0 None 13 0 None 14 0 None 14 0 None Split 5 Coord Ref Split 6 Coord Ref PH. Time PH PH Mode PH. Time PH PH Mode 10 None 10 None 20 None 20 None 30 None 30 None 40 None 40 None 50 None 50 None 60 None 60 None 70 None 70 None 80 None 80 None 90 None 90 None 10 0 None 10 0 None 11 0 None 11 0 None 12 0 None 12 0 None 13 0 None 13 0 None 14 0 None 14 0 None Ring 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Offset Day Plan 1 Month of Year Days of Week Days of Month JFMAMJSMTWTFS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 XXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X JASOND 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 XXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Day Plan 2 Month of Year Days of Week Days of Month JFMAMJSMTWTFS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 XXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X JASOND 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 XXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Day Plan 3 Month of Year Days of Week Days of Month JFMAMJSMTWTFS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 JASOND 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Day Plan 4 Month of Year Days of Week Days of Month JFMAMJSMTWTFS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 JASOND 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Day Plan 1 Day Plan 2 Day Plan 3 Day Plan 4 Event Hour Min. Act Event Hour Min. Act Event Hour Min. Act Event Hour Min. Act 10 020 10 0 10 0 10 0 20 0 20 0 20 0 20 0 30 0 30 0 30 0 30 0 40 0 40 0 40 0 40 0 50 0 50 0 50 0 50 0 60 0 60 0 60 0 60 0 70 0 70 0 70 0 70 0 80 0 80 0 80 0 80 0 90 0 90 0 90 0 90 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 Actions Aux. Special Functions Actions Aux. Special Functions Act Pattern 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Act Pattern 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1Pattern 1 11Pattern 11 2Pattern 2 12Pattern 12 3Pattern 3 13Pattern 13 4Pattern 4 14Pattern 14 5Pattern 5 15Pattern 15 6Pattern 6 16Pattern 16 7Pattern 7 17Pattern 17 8Pattern 8 18Pattern 18 9Pattern 9 19Pattern 19 10 Pattern 10 20 Pattern 20 Preemption Parameters Preemption Parameters Preempt 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Preempt 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Link 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Track Yellow 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.525.5 Delay 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Track Red Clear25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.525.525.5 Min Duration 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Exit Red 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.525.525.5 Min Green 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Exit Ped Clear 255 255 255 255 255 255 255255 Min Walk 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Exit Yellow 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 Ent. Ped Clear 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 Exit Red 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 Track Green 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Preempt 12345678 Dwell Green 0 0 15 15 15 0 0 0 Non Lock Mem Max Presence 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Not Overide Flash Enter Yellow 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 NotOverideNextPre Ent. Red Clear 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 Flash Dwell Preemption Configuration Preempt 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Track phase Dwell Phase 2,5 4 1,6 8 Dwell Ped Exit Phase Track Overlap Dwell overlap Cycling phase Cycling Ped Cycling Overlap IO Modules Channel Configuration IO Mod TYPE Chan Ctrl Type Source Chan Ctrl Type Source 1Caltrans 332 1 Phs Veh 1 11 None 3 2None 2 Phs Veh 2 12 None 4 3None 3 None 3 13 Phs Ped 2 4None 4 Phs Veh 4 14 Phs Ped 4 5None 5 Phs Veh 5 15 Phs Ped 6 6None 6 Phs Veh 6 16 Phs Ped 8 7None 7 None 7 17 None 5 8None 8 Phs Veh 8 18 None 6 9None 9 None 1 19 None 0 10 None 10 None 2 20 None 0 Channel Options Channel 1234567891011121314 Flash Yellow XX Flash Red XXXXXX Alt Flash XX Startup Clearance Hold Type 1=off, 2=On, 3=Flash and 4= Alt Flash Channel 1 234567891011121314 Red Yellow Green Phase Intervals Pedestrian Intervals Interval Description Red Yel Grn Type Interval Description DWK CLR Wlk Type 1notActiveOn Off Off Red 1notActiveOn Off Off Dont Walk 2dltGrnOn Off Off Red 2dltPedOn Off Off Dont Walk 3PreGrnOff Off On Green 3walkOff Off On Walk 4minGrnOff Off On Green 4walkDwellOff Off On Walk 5grnExtOff Off On Green 5flashDtWlkFlash Off Off Ped Clear 6grnDwellOff Off On Green 6dWalkOn Off Off Dont Walk 7preClearOff Off On Green 7 8yelChangeOff On Off Yellow 8 9redClearOn Off Off Red 10 redDwell On Off Off Red 11 Barrier On Off Off Red Countdown Display Display Addr PhaseTime Display Addr PhaseTime 19 210 311 412 513 614 715 816 Manual Control Phase Groups Grp 1 Grp 2 Grp 3 Grp 4 Grp 5 Grp 6 Grp 7 Grp 8 Ring Ph Ring Ph Ring Ph Ring Ph Ring Ph Ring Ph Ring Ph Ring Ph 1010101010101010 2020202020202020 3030303030303030 4040404040404040 5050505050505050 6060606060606060 7070707070707070 8080808080808080 9090909090909090 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 11 0 11 0 11 0 11 0 11 0 11 0 11 0 11 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 12 0 13 0 13 0 13 0 13 0 13 0 13 0 13 0 13 0 14 0 14 0 14 0 14 0 14 0 14 0 14 0 14 0 15 0 15 0 15 0 15 0 15 0 15 0 15 0 15 0 16 0 16 0 16 0 16 0 16 0 16 0 16 0 16 0 Prioritor Settings Prioritor Priority Ph Output Dly Enabled Lock Out Time 10No0 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Loopback Functions Func Result Function Type IndexSource Function TypeIndex Func Result Function Type IndexSource Function TypeIndex 1 10 2 11 3 12 4 13 5 14 6 15 7 16 8 17 9 18 10 19 11 20 Section Configuration Section Control Poll Req # Fail Time Algorithm Period Description 1None60 1 300 240 2None60 1 300 240 3None60 1 300 240 4None60 1 300 240 5None60 1 300 240 6None60 1 300 240 7None60 1 300 240 8None60 1 300 240 9None60 1 300 240 10 None 60 1 300 240 11 None 60 1 300 240 12 None 60 1 300 240 13 None 60 1 300 240 14 None 60 1 300 240 15 None 60 1 300 240 16 None 60 1 300 240 User Program Info Pgrm Description 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork APPENDIX F Queue Analysis Worksheets Queues 2035 Total AM 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114)03/27/2025 2035 Total AM 8:41 am 01/25/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 25 43 270 118 58 163 82 901 44 175 2158 74 v/c Ratio 0.17 0.21 0.17 0.81 0.29 0.10 0.72 0.40 0.04 0.80 0.88 0.07 Control Delay (s/veh)72.0 72.3 0.2 111.7 74.8 0.1 112.9 13.1 0.1 98.8 27.4 1.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)72.0 72.3 0.2 111.7 74.8 0.1 112.9 13.1 0.1 98.8 27.4 1.7 Queue Length 50th (ft)26 45 0 133 62 0 95 194 0 198 1031 0 Queue Length 95th (ft)60 89 0 #232 113 0 #172 252 0 281 1159 17 Internal Link Dist (ft)494 493 616 1020 Turn Bay Length (ft)100 25 400 250 75 150 Base Capacity (vph)164 228 1583 162 223 1583 126 2239 1049 284 2452 1120 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.15 0.19 0.17 0.73 0.26 0.10 0.65 0.40 0.04 0.62 0.88 0.07 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Queues 2035 Total PM 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114)03/27/2025 2035 Total PM 3:49 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 74 43 93 60 43 252 152 2265 76 141 1168 27 v/c Ratio 0.76 0.32 0.06 0.64 0.33 0.16 0.78 0.92 0.07 0.82 0.48 0.02 Control Delay (s/veh)120.0 83.2 0.1 107.9 84.3 0.2 90.1 29.4 2.4 111.5 14.3 0.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)120.0 83.2 0.1 107.9 84.3 0.2 90.1 29.4 2.4 111.5 14.3 0.0 Queue Length 50th (ft)85 48 0 68 48 0 171 1013 2 160 321 0 Queue Length 95th (ft)#170 94 0 #132 94 0 m245 1170 m14 #270 404 0 Internal Link Dist (ft)494 493 616 1020 Turn Bay Length (ft)100 25 400 250 75 150 Base Capacity (vph)104 143 1583 100 138 1583 247 2475 1131 187 2425 1109 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.71 0.30 0.06 0.60 0.31 0.16 0.62 0.92 0.07 0.75 0.48 0.02 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. Queues 2055 Total AM 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114)03/27/2025 2055 Total AM 3:49 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 29 51 320 141 69 195 97 1032 52 209 2552 88 v/c Ratio 0.22 0.27 0.20 1.08 0.38 0.12 0.95 0.47 0.05 0.83 1.01 0.08 Control Delay (s/veh)77.1 77.1 0.3 170.2 80.8 0.2 145.9 17.3 0.1 97.6 46.8 2.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)77.1 77.1 0.3 170.2 80.8 0.2 145.9 17.3 0.1 97.6 46.8 2.0 Queue Length 50th (ft)31 55 0 ~179 76 0 113 264 0 236 ~1617 3 Queue Length 95th (ft)68 104 0 #336 133 0 #244 303 0 323 #1723 21 Internal Link Dist (ft)494 493 616 1020 Turn Bay Length (ft)100 25 400 250 75 150 Base Capacity (vph)132 186 1583 131 180 1583 102 2212 1038 323 2515 1147 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.22 0.27 0.20 1.08 0.38 0.12 0.95 0.47 0.05 0.65 1.01 0.08 Intersection Summary ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Queues 2055 Total PM 1: SH-82 & Spring Valley Rd (CR-114)03/27/2025 2055 Total PM 3:52 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 88 51 111 71 51 300 180 2666 91 167 1347 33 v/c Ratio 0.86 0.36 0.07 0.72 0.38 0.19 0.80 1.08 0.08 1.02 0.57 0.03 Control Delay (s/veh)135.7 84.5 0.1 116.0 85.7 0.3 82.0 73.4 3.5 151.4 17.6 0.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)135.7 84.5 0.1 116.0 85.7 0.3 82.0 73.4 3.5 151.4 17.6 0.1 Queue Length 50th (ft)102 57 0 81 57 0 200 ~1778 11 ~206 422 0 Queue Length 95th (ft)#214 107 0 #168 107 0 m194 m#1832 m10 #372 536 0 Internal Link Dist (ft)494 493 616 1020 Turn Bay Length (ft)100 25 400 250 75 150 Base Capacity (vph)104 143 1583 100 138 1583 289 2479 1132 163 2356 1097 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.85 0.36 0.07 0.71 0.37 0.19 0.62 1.08 0.08 1.02 0.57 0.03 Intersection Summary ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. Queues 2035 Total AM 3: SH-82 & North Access 03/27/2025 2035 Total AM 8:41 am 01/25/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 138 304 1038 2523 52 v/c Ratio 0.09 0.70 0.29 0.87 0.04 Control Delay (s/veh)0.1 83.8 0.2 12.4 1.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)0.1 83.8 0.2 12.4 1.5 Queue Length 50th (ft)0 146 0 444 1 Queue Length 95th (ft)0 209 0 502 m7 Internal Link Dist (ft)2506 2340 Turn Bay Length (ft)300 300 Base Capacity (vph)1518 441 3530 2910 1310 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.09 0.69 0.29 0.87 0.04 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. Queues 2035 Total PM 3: SH-82 & North Access 03/27/2025 2035 Total PM 3:49 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 93 575 2493 1172 150 v/c Ratio 0.07 0.35 0.70 0.70 0.18 Control Delay (s/veh)0.1 35.7 0.5 50.4 17.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)0.1 35.7 0.5 50.4 17.6 Queue Length 50th (ft)0 255 0 547 34 Queue Length 95th (ft)0 m254 m0 683 117 Internal Link Dist (ft)2506 2340 Turn Bay Length (ft)300 300 Base Capacity (vph)1336 1638 3539 1668 811 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.07 0.35 0.70 0.70 0.18 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. Queues 2055 Total AM 3: SH-82 & North Access 03/27/2025 2055 Total AM 3:49 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 138 329 1193 2995 52 v/c Ratio 0.10 0.95 0.34 1.00 0.04 Control Delay (s/veh)0.3 115.3 0.2 23.8 1.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)0.3 115.3 0.2 23.8 1.0 Queue Length 50th (ft)0 182 0 622 2 Queue Length 95th (ft)6 #294 0 m596 m3 Internal Link Dist (ft)2506 2340 Turn Bay Length (ft)300 300 Base Capacity (vph)1389 347 3539 2999 1349 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.10 0.95 0.34 1.00 0.04 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. Queues 2055 Total PM 3: SH-82 & North Access 03/27/2025 2055 Total PM 3:52 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 93 585 2938 1378 150 v/c Ratio 0.28 0.20 0.99 0.39 0.68 Control Delay (s/veh)2.1 3.2 24.5 0.3 62.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)2.1 3.2 24.5 0.3 62.9 Queue Length 50th (ft)0 64 1687 0 121 Queue Length 95th (ft)0 m56 m1407 0 m200 Internal Link Dist (ft)2506 2340 Turn Bay Length (ft)300 300 Base Capacity (vph)330 2893 2982 3539 222 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.28 0.20 0.99 0.39 0.68 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. Queues 2035 Total AM 5: SH-82 & South U-Turn 03/27/2025 2035 Total AM 8:41 am 01/25/2024 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group NBT SBL SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 1146 324 3004 v/c Ratio 0.44 0.87 0.85 Control Delay (s/veh)10.2 88.4 2.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)10.2 88.4 2.7 Queue Length 50th (ft)250 363 0 Queue Length 95th (ft)351 459 0 Internal Link Dist (ft) 904 3537 Turn Bay Length (ft)300 Base Capacity (vph)2607 466 3539 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.44 0.70 0.85 Intersection Summary Queues 2035 Total PM 5: SH-82 & South U-Turn 03/27/2025 2035 Total PM 3:49 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group NBT SBL SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 3061 189 1441 v/c Ratio 1.03 0.99 0.41 Control Delay (s/veh)39.0 149.2 0.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)39.0 149.2 0.3 Queue Length 50th (ft)~1966 204 0 Queue Length 95th (ft)#2048 #393 0 Internal Link Dist (ft) 904 3537 Turn Bay Length (ft)300 Base Capacity (vph)2976 190 3539 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 1.03 0.99 0.41 Intersection Summary ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Queues 2055 Total AM 5: SH-82 & South U-Turn 03/27/2025 2055 Total AM 3:49 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group NBT SBL SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 1328 346 3483 v/c Ratio 0.52 0.87 0.98 Control Delay (s/veh)12.3 84.5 15.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)12.3 84.5 15.0 Queue Length 50th (ft)330 400 1503 Queue Length 95th (ft)458 m395 m2147 Internal Link Dist (ft) 904 3537 Turn Bay Length (ft)300 Base Capacity (vph)2562 491 3539 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.52 0.70 0.98 Intersection Summary m Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal. Queues 2055 Total PM 5: SH-82 & South U-Turn 03/27/2025 2055 Total PM 3:52 pm 03/26/2025 Baseline Synchro 12 Report Page 1 Lane Group NBT SBL SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 3541 199 1652 v/c Ratio 1.18 1.12 0.47 Control Delay (s/veh)101.6 169.1 0.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)101.6 169.1 0.4 Queue Length 50th (ft)~2550 ~266 0 Queue Length 95th (ft)#2607 #444 0 Internal Link Dist (ft) 904 3537 Turn Bay Length (ft)300 Base Capacity (vph)3003 177 3539 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 1.18 1.12 0.47 Intersection Summary ~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. 196960000 Harvest Roaring Fork APPENDIX G SH-82 Access Improvement Exhibits ³³³ ! ! ! D D D ELIMINATE THREE SH82 ACCESS POINTS AT FORMER SOPRIS RESTAURANT PROPERTY SOPRIS RESTAURANT³³³ ! ! ! ³³³ ! ! ! ³³³ ! ! ! NORTH ENTRY UP VALLEY EB SH82 - TWO THROUGH LANES - RIGHT IN / RIGHT OUT - NO LEFT OUT PERMITTED DOWN VALLEY WB SH82 - TWO THROUGH LANES - SIGNALIZED LEFT IN & U-TURN P R O P E R T Y BO U N D A R Y C A R B O N D A L E P R O P E R T Y B O U N D A R Y G L E N W O O D G L E N W O O D C A R B O N D A L E SOUTH ENTRY CATTLE CREEK RD UP VALLEY EB SH82 - TWO THROUGH LANES - RIGHT IN / RIGHT OUT P R O P E R T Y B O U N D A R Y C A R B O N D A L E G L E N W O O D C A T T L E C R E E K R D DOWN VALLEY WB SH82 - TWO THROUGH LANES - RIGHT IN / RIGHT OUT TO CATTLE CREEK RD SOUTH U-TURN UP VALLEY EB SH82 - TWO THROUGH LANES - SIGNALIZED U-TURN TO ACCESS CATTLE CREEK & WEST BOUND SH82 C A R B O N D A L E G L E N W O O D DOWN VALLEY WB SH82 - TWO THROUGH LANES - U-TURN RETURN TO ACCESS CATTLE CREEK & WEST BOUND SH82 ³³³ ! ! ! ³³³ ! ! ! HARVEST - STATE HIGHWAY 82 PROPOSED INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS 34010_82Intersections250527 PARCELS : GARFIELD COUNTY GIS 2025 Q1 AERIAL : 2023 NAIP 1 METER RESOLUTION. USDA THIS MAP IS CONCEPTUAL AND IS INTENDED FOR GENERAL PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. 0 500 1,000250 FEET 1 INCH = 250 FEET ´map : jbl SOPRIS ENGINEERING LLC. - CIVIL CONSULTANTS 502 MAIN STREET, SUITE A3 CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 970.704.0311 1 IN = 80 FT 1 IN = 80 FT 1 IN = 80 FT 1 IN = 80 FT PROPOSED INTERNAL ROADS C A T T L E C R E E K R D 82 C A R B O N D A L E G L E N W O O D D D D GL 6 LOT 9 G L 1 GL 25 G L 6 GL 6 GL 1 GL 2 GL 6 LOT 9 G L 1 GL 25 G L 6 GL 6 GL 1 GL 2 PROPERTY LINE PRELIMINARY FORCE MAIN ALIGNMENT ACROSS RIVER ROARING FORK RIVER EXISTING CALAWAY CT. INTERSECTION CENTERLINE @ SH-82 MILE MARKER 6.96 EXISTING CR-154/CR-114 (THUNDER RIVER MARKET) INTERSECTIONCENTERLINE @ SH-82 MILE MARKER 6.68 EXISTING CR-113 (CATTLE CREEK ROAD)INTERSECTION CENTERLINE @ SH-82MILE MARKER 7.85TO BE REVISED TORIIGHT IN RIGHT OUT SH-82 MILE MARKER 7 SH-82 MILE MARKER 8 PROP E R T Y L I N E PRO P E R T Y L I N E PR O P E R T Y L I N E PROPOSED 34 MOVEMENT (LEFT IN AND RIGHT-IN/RIGHT-OUT INTERSECTION CENTERLINE @ SH-82MILE MARKER 7.38 PROPOSED RIGHT-IN/RIGHT-OUT INTERSECTIONCENTERLINE @ SH-82 MILE MARKER 7.76 PROPOSED SOUTH U TURN INTERSECTION CENTERLINE @ SH-82 MILE MARKER 8.21 3 4 M O V E M E N T T O R I R O = 2 0 0 4 ' ( 9 6 0 ' A C C E L + 22 2 ' T A P E R + 6 0 0 ' D E C E L + 2 2 2 ' T A P E R ) CALA W A Y C T T O 3 4 MO V E M E N T M I N L E N G T H = 2 0 0 4 ' ( 9 6 0 ' A C C E L + 222 ' T A P E R + 6 0 0 ' D E C E L + 2 2 2 ' T A P E R ) ( * A C T U A L 2 2 2 0 ' ) EXI S T I N G C A T T L E C R E E K T O 3 4 M O V E M E N T M I N L E N G T H = 2 3 6 0 ' (96 0 ' A C C E L + 6 0 0 ' D E C E L + 8 0 0 ' M E R G I N G ) ( * A C T U A L 2 5 0 0 ' ) RI R O T O P R O P O S E D U - T U R N M I N L E N G T H = 2 3 6 0 ' ( 9 6 0 ' A C C E L + 60 0 ' D E C E L + 8 0 0 ' M E R G I N G ) ( * A C T U A L 2 3 6 0 ' ) PROPOSED RFTA CROSSING,DEVELOPMENT ACCESS ROAD GOES UNDER RFTA TRAIL PROPOSED RFTA CROSSING, DEVELOPMENT ACCESS ROADCROSSES RFTA @ GRADE DATE REVISION XXX C-1.0 DRAWING NO. TITLE REG I O N A L STA M P G: \ 2 0 2 4 \ 3 4 0 1 0 - R E A L T Y C A P I T O L R I V E R E D G E \ C I V I L \ C I V I L D W G S \ P L O T \ 3 4 0 1 0 - C 0 . 0 - C D O T . D W G - M a r 1 7 , 2 0 2 5 - 3 : 2 4 p m NORTH 00/00/00 HARVEST INTERSECTIONS OVERALL HA R V E S T GA R F I E L D C O U N T Y , C O L O R A D O EX H I B I T MEMBER UTILITIESFOR THE MARKING OF UNDERGROUNDBEFORE YOU DIG, GRADE, OR EXCAVATECALL 2-BUSINESS DAYS IN ADVANCE Know what's below.before you dig.Call R 34010JOB NO. DATE:03/17/2025 DESIGNED BY DRAWN BY CHECKED BY XXX 00/00/00 XXX 00/00/00 XXX 00/00/00 SO P R I S E N G I N E E R I N G L L C 50 2 M A I N S T R E E T S U I T E A 3 C A R B O N D A L E C O 8 1 6 2 3 (9 7 0 ) 7 0 4 0 3 1 1 s o p r i s e n g i n e e r i n g . c o m 1 inch = ft. ( IN FEET ) GRAPHIC SCALE 0250 250 500 250 1000125 Exhibit J Impact Analysis HARVEST ROARING FORK IMPACT ANALYSIS GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO OWNER / APPLICANT: HARVEST ROARING FORK, LLC 909 LAKE CAROLYN PKWY IRVING, TX 75309 April 14, 2025 Table of Contents Section 1: Adjacent Land Use ....................................................................................................... 3 Section 2: Site Features ................................................................................................................ 3 Rivers, Creeks, and Flooding.................................................................................................. 3 Groundwater ........................................................................................................................ 4 Topography ........................................................................................................................... 4 Vegetative Cover ................................................................................................................... 4 Climate ................................................................................................................................ 4 Section 3: Soil Characteristics ...................................................................................................... 5 Section 4: Geology and Hazard ..................................................................................................... 5 Post-Glacial Alluvial Terraces ................................................................................................ 5 Pinedale Glacial Outwash Terraces ........................................................................................ 5 Coalescing Alluvial Fans........................................................................................................ 5 Section 5: Floodplains and Groundwater ...................................................................................... 6 Section 6: Environmental Impacts ................................................................................................ 6 Waters of the US ................................................................................................................... 6 Section 7: Nuisance ..................................................................................................................... 6 Section 8: Hours of Operation ....................................................................................................... 7 Appendix ..................................................................................................................................... 8 [Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank] Section 1: Adjacent Land Use Harvest Roaring Fork is generally located midway between Carbondale and Glenwood Springs on the West side of State Highway 82 at Cattle Creek. Exhibit A in the Appendix of this Impact Analysis lists the physical addresses, owners, account numbers, and mailing addresses of all properties within a 1,500-foot radius of the property. Exhibit B in the Appendix of this Impact Analysis illustrates the zoning classiflcations of the properties within the same 1,500-foot radius. The list below summarizes the nearby uses in each cardinal direction: • Northbound: Commercial/Limited, Commercial/General, Residential/Suburban, and Planned Unit Developments. • Southbound: Planned Unit Developments, Rural, and Public Lands. • Eastbound: Commercial/General, Commercial/Limited, Planned Unit Developments, Public Lands, and Rural. • Westbound: Ironbridge PUD and Teller Springs. Section 2: Site Features The current status of the site and its features are discussed in this section but are further described in the Engineer Report (Exhibit E of the PUD Application) and the Wildlife Study (Exhibit H of the PUD Application). In general, Harvest Roaring Fork will refer to the standard practices described in the Land Use and Development Code (LUDC) to mitigate impacts related to the site’s characteristics and other potential impacts related to the other sections contemplated in this Impact Analysis. Rivers, Creeks, and Flooding The Roaring Fork River fiows from the South to North just west of the Project Site through the RFC Conservation Easement. The Roaring Fork River is a large perennial river with a very large drainage basin to the south. The 283-acre Project Site is located mostly on nearly level river terraces that stand between about 50 to 80 feet above the Roaring Fork River. Cattle Creek crosses through the Project Site from east to west and roughly divides the property in half. Cattle Creek is a moderate sized perennial stream with a large drainage basin to the east. Cattle Creek joins the Roaring Fork River about mid-way along the western edge of the Project Site. Small alluvial fans are present on the terrace surfaces in the eastern part of Project Site. The upper parts of all these fans have been removed by grading for Highway 82 and development to the east of the highway. The fans developed at the mouths of small drainage basins on the eastern valley side of the Roaring Fork River. These basins support ephemeral steams that only fiow after heavy rainfall and snow melt. The fioodplains associated with both the Roaring Fork River and Cattle Creek generally do not extend onto the Project Site except along small portions of the eastern bank of the Roaring Fork River and along Cattle Creek. Lakes and Wetlands Wetlands exist along both Cattle Creek and the Roaring Fork River. Wetlands do not generally extend off the RFC Conservation Easement onto the Project Site except in very small pockets at the southern end of the site and along portions of Cattle Creek. No wetlands are present on the upper or mid-level terraces within the Project Site. Lakes or ponds were excavated on the Project Site as golf features as part of the proposed Sanders Ranch PUD but never completed. Groundwater Shallow groundwater can be expected closer to the Roaring Fork River and Cattle Creek. These shallow groundwater areas are generally located outside the Project Site. Topography The proposed development area is located mostly on nearly level river terraces that stand between about 50 to 80 feet above the Roaring Fork River. The terraces have an average down-valley slope of less than one percent. Steep escarpments separate the original terrace levels. These escarpments typically have slopes of up to 60 percent. The escarpments between some terrace levels were obliterated during previous grading. The current topography is signiflcantly modifled due to past grading, and nearly 80 years of agricultural activities even before the most recent development activities. Major grade changes and steeper slopes will occur in areas along the edges of the proposed development area behind lots and between residential pods in open spaces and common areas. Vegetative Cover While the area within the RFC Conservation Easement along the Roaring Fork River is still dominated by native woody species, much of the upland portion of the Project Site was cleared of native vegetation around 100 years ago to plant non–native hay grasses and/ or provide for livestock and farming activities. The riparian vegetation along Cattle Creek itself is highly altered. The impacts from past year-round grazing practices are also still apparent as very little woody vegetation occurs along much of Cattle Creek on the upper benches. Any remaining pockets of native sagebrush shrublands also show little species diversity. The introduction of the noxious weed species along the Roaring Fork River’ s riparian corridor probably occurred during the agricultural operation of the area as well. Further information can be found in Exhibit H of the PUD Application and in the Noxious Weed Compliance Letter (Exhibit P of the PUD Application). Climate The Project Site displays a semi-arid climate, almost transitioning into an arid type (Western Regional Climate Center, 2010). Winters are cold and dry, with a January high and low of 36.9 °F and 11.8 °F, respectively; because of its location west of the Rockies, the site does not receive much infiuence from Chinook winds as the areas east of the Rockies, but it receives protection from Arctic air masses that can settle to the east of the Rockies. Snowfall is often only moderate, with a 105-year average of 67.5 inches, though the median is 52 inches, and moreover, snow cover remains very short. Snow is greatest in December and January. Spring warming is gradual but quickens when nearing May. Summer is warm and dry, with average July highs reaching 88.6 ° F and lows reaching 50.6 °F. Autumn cooling is rapid, with freezes usually beginning in mid- to late September. Precipitation records exist for Glenwood Springs dating back to 1893 and give perspective on what the expectations are for receipt of natural rainfall on the Project Site. The average annual precipitation per year for Glenwood Springs is 16.43 inches which supports a relatively xeric environment. Locally, a typical spring or fall month is wetter than the mid- summer months, but in general only by fractions of an inch. Generally, precipitation ranges from 1.2-1.5 inches a month. These rates are typically not adequate for revegetation efforts. Section 3: Soil Characteristics In general, the soil conditions of the site consist of clay, silt, sand, gravels and cobbles up to 49 feet deep. The analyses of the site’s soils have not identifled any speciflc or critical soil-related issues that would indicate a problem for development of the site. Further details regarding the site’s soil characteristics, potential impacts from development, and Harvest’s approach to mitigating these potential impacts are outlined in Exhibits E and H of the PUD Application. Section 4: Geology and Hazard The site’s geologic characteristics generally differ between three main landforms, including (i) post- glacial alluvial terraces along the Roaring Fork River and Cattle Creek, (ii) Pinedale Glacial Outwash Terraces along the Roaring Fork River and related alluvial terraces along Cattle Creek, and (iii) coalescing alluvial fans. Harvest’s form-based code permits fiexibility in both design and mitigation practices should any development occur around these features. Post-Glacial Alluvial Terraces There are two post-glacial terraces, with the lower terrace standing about 5 feet above the river and the higher terrace standing about 13 feet above the river. The alluvium is described as a clast- supported deposit of silty sand with occasional bouldery, pebble and cobble gravel interbedded and often overlain by sandy silt and silty sand. Shallow groundwater is expected to be prese nt in these areas. Pinedale Glacial Outwash Terraces The Pinedale outwash terraces along the Roaring Fork River and the associated Cattle Creek terraces occur in several levels that formed at different periods. Grading in 2005 removed all the mid-level terraces. The alluvium under the Pinedale terraces associated with the Roaring Fork River and Cattle Creek are a clast- supported deposit of rounded gravel, cobbles and boulders in a silty sand matrix. Pedogenetic soil proflles are well developed in the Pinedale terraces. This indicates these surfaces have been stable with respect to erosion and deposition for over approximately 5,000 years. Coalescing Alluvial Fans The site’s fan deposits are sandy, low plasticity clay with low collapse potential and are moderately compressible under increased loading after wetting. These fans are geologically young landforms and are still potential sites of debris fiow and fiood deposition. Section 5: Floodplains and Groundwater Floodplains are located on the site speciflcally along the eastern banks of the Roaring Fork River and along Cattle Creek. The Land Survey (Exhibit C in the Appendix of this Impact Analysis) and Exhibit E of the PUD Application show and describe the areas of fioodplain in relation to the site, though the development of Harvest is not anticipated to have any perpetual impacts on fioodplain, as outlined in Exhibit E of the PUD Application. Local perched groundwater may develop when the site experiences heavy rainfall or runoff. However, Harvest’s drainage systems will be designed to accommodate these events and prevent any below-grade construction from excess moisture and hydrostatic pressure buildup. Section 6: Environmental Impacts Harvest Roaring Fork is not anticipated to have any long-term or short-term impacts on fiora and fauna or critical wildlife habitats. The project considers the recommendations outlined in Exhibit D of the PUD Application to protect against domestic animal impacts. Potential radiation hazards have not been identifled and should not be expected to impact the project or the surrounding areas. Waters of the US Development impacts to Waters of the US on the site are anticipated to be minor, and temporary in nature. Trenching for utility lines will require stockpiling of wetland topsoil and river bottom material, which will be returned to the top of the trench and properly stabilized as appropriate. Timber mats will be used in Waters of the US to minimize impacts from heavy equipment and erosion control measures will be implemented during construction per the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) construction stormwater permit. Potential bridge or culvert crossings across Cattle Creek may have minimal impacts but are expected to qualify for Nationwide Permit 58 NWP authorization, which requires that no more than ½-acre of Waters of the US are lost. Refer to Exhibit E in the PUD application for more details. Section 7: Nuisance The Project is anticipated to result in temporary construction - related nuisances such as noise and dust. Although the Project will comply with C.R.S. 25-12-103 and applicable State and Federal air quality standards for dust control, Rio Grande Trail users are likely to notice noise and dust particularly when construction activates are being conducted adjacent to the Rio Grande Trail. Neighboring residential and commercial properties are located at some distance from the Project Site, and while they may experience minimal additional ambient noise and dust during construction, the expected level of disturbance will be far below the standards prescribed by C.R.S. 25-12-103 and applicable State and Federal air quality standards for dust control. The potential nuisance effects associated with the Project are considered insigniflcant during both construction and completion to surrounding properties and trail users. When construction activities must be conducted immediately adjacent to the Rio Grande Trail, potential nuisance effects are likely to be noticed by trail users. Regardless, the activities will be conducted in accordance with applicable standards. The potential impacts to trail users are temporary and unavoidable and are considered insigniflcant. Section 8: Hours of Operation The commercial components of Harvest Roaring Fork are restricted to those allowable / permitted uses within the Local Commercial (CL) zoning category in the LUDC. Hours of operation for the potential commercial uses are not currently specifled under the PUD, which allows the LUDC to govern the open and close times of the future businesses. [Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank] Appendix [Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank] HARVEST ROARING FORK IMPACT ANALYSIS: EXHIBIT A: NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES WITHIN 1,500 FOOT RADIUS Adjacent Property Physical Address Owner Account #Mailing Address 6968 82 HWY GLENWOOD SPRINGS JOCHUM, GARY P & BROADHURST, RICK R111268 594 COUNTY ROAD 110 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 7014-007028 82 HWY GLENWOOD SPRINGS 7014 DSD LLC R011358 1254 COUNTY ROAD 127 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 7062 82 HWY GLENWOOD SPRINGS 7062 DSD LLC R110245 1254 COUNTY ROAD 127 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 105 MARAND RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS MANSFIELD, LINDA L R111257 2081 COUNTY ROAD 112 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 771 MARAND RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS REYNOLDS EXCHANGE LLC R111273 1320 PEARL STREET STE 300 BOULDER, CO 80302 33 MARAND RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS 0033 DSD LLC R111256 1254 COUNTY ROAD 127 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 7094-007104 82 HWY GLENWOOD SPRINGS A&G GWS LLC R011571 969 COUNTY ROAD 113 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 7150 82 HWY GLENWOOD SPRINGS GLENWOOD REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT, LLC R111278 PO BOX 2607 GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81502 Not available GLENWOOD SPRINGS ELK SPRINGS, LLC R082845 PO BOX 527 MOUNT PROSPECT, IL 60056 7300 82 HWY GLENWOOD SPRINGS GARFIELD COUNTY R111424 108 8TH STREET, SUITE 213 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601-3363 7264 82 HWY GLENWOOD SPRINGS CHOICE VENTURES, LLC R111270 8626 COUNTY ROAD 301 PARACHUTE, CO 81635 7258 82 HWY GLENWOOD SPRINGS PERAU, RONALD G REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST U/A/D 10-01-2024 R011561 200 DEER RUN TRAIL RIFLE, CO 81650 161 MARAND RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS REINKE, HENRY S R111258 1400 SHELDON DRIVE ELGIN, IL 60120 133 MARAND RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS M&M ENTERPRISES, LLC R111281 2407 PALMER AVENUE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601-4341 Not available CARBONDALE VAN RAND PARK ASSOCIATION R011551 PO BOX 248 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602-0248 Not available CARBONDALE VAN RAND PARK ASSOCIATION R011550 PO BOX 248 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602-0248 405 PINYON MESA DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS HODGINS, DAVID & CICERYOVA, VANDA TRUST DTD 08/01/2017 R083829 405 PINYON MESA DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 408 PINYON MESA DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS DALEY, LUKE EVERETT & STACY, SARAH NICOLE R083830 408 PINYON MESA DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 390 PINYON MESA DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS LACOSSE FAMILY TRUST 06/15/2022 R083831 390 PINYON MESA DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 380 PINYON MESA DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS HOLMES, BRIAN R & BECK, MONICA E R083832 380 PINYON MESA DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 374 PINYON MESA DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS LANGENFELD, CAMILLA R083833 374 PINYON MESA GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 356 PINYON MESA DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS EISELE, DAVID & MCMAHON, KARA R083834 356 PINYON MESA DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 340 PINYON MESA DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS CHAVARRIA DE SANTIAGO, CARMEN ROCIO R083835 4280 CULVER CIRCLE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 322 PINYON MESA DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS BOGART, MORGAN & PHILLIP R083836 322 PINYON MESA DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 Not available GLENWOOD SPRINGS PINYON MESA HOA INC R083837 PO DRAWER 2030 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602 7215 82 HWY GLENWOOD SPRINGS HARVEST ROARING FORK LLC R111280 909 LAKE CAROLYN PKWAY, SUITE 150 IRVING, TX 75039 Not available GLENWOOD SPRINGS HARVEST ROARING FORK LLC R082856 909 LAKE CAROLYN PKWAY, SUITE 150 IRVING, TX 75039 53 CALAWAY CT GLENWOOD SPRINGS HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF THE ROARING FORK VALLEY INC R084063 53 CALAWAY COURT GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 Not available GLENWOOD SPRINGS HARVEST ROARING FORK LLC R082857 909 LAKE CAROLYN PKWAY, SUITE 150 IRVING, TX 75039 Not available GLENWOOD SPRINGS HARVEST ROARING FORK LLC R082858 909 LAKE CAROLYN PKWAY, SUITE 150 IRVING, TX 75039 7910 82 HWY GLENWOOD SPRINGS STEELE VALLEY FAMILY LLC R011354 PO BOX 716 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602 236 110 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS CONGER, SHELLEY & MATTHEW R011024 4453 YATES STREET DENVER, CO 80212 50 110 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS MACKEY, GREGG R111262 PO BOX 398 BASALT, CO 81621 Not available CARBONDALE GARFIELD COUNTY R111436 108 8TH STREET, SUITE 213 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601-3363 552 110 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS HOWE, JOHN J & HEATHER D R011233 552 COUNTY ROAD 110 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 596 110 COUNTY RD CARBONDALE BEVER, JUSTIN MICHAEL & CASSANDRA DAYE R011232 596 COUNTY ROAD 110 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 65 110 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS 0065 CR 110 LLC R011618 65 COUNTY ROAD 110 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 7916 82 HWY GLENWOOD SPRINGS WAECHTLER, DONALD G & BONNIE F R011619 7916 HIGHWAY 82 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601-9307 43 110 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS D D INVESTMENTS LLC R111253 415 ELK CIRCLE BASALT, CO 81621 554 110 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS KENEALY, MICHAEL E & PENNY L R111776 554 COUNTY ROAD 110 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 7780-7840 82 HWY GLENWOOD SPRINGS BAYMAR HOTELS & PROPERTIES INC R111822 1111 KANE CONCORSE #211 BAY HARBOR ISLANDS, FL 33154 82 HWY GLENWOOD SPRINGS AMERIGAS PROPANE LP R111824 460 NORTH GULPH ROAD KING OF PRUSSIA, PA 19406 314 110 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS GREMEL HOLDINGS, LLC R111983 314 COUNTY ROAD 110 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 448 110 COUNTY RD CARBONDALE TUCKER, LLOYD R111984 448 COUNTY ROAD 110 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 82 113 COUNTY RD CARBONDALE ASPEN EQUITY GROUP LLC R111932 PO BOX 1439 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 Not available CARBONDALE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT R043958 2300 RIVER FRONTAGE ROAD SILT, CO 81652 1108 110 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS LLOYD, MICHAEL R111925 1108 COUNTY ROAD 110 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 1110 110 COUNTY RD CARBONDALE REINARZ, BERNADETTE F TRUST R111997 1110 COUNTY ROAD 110 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 62 113 COUNTY RD CARBONDALE CCC-B LLLP R111933 0132 PARK AVENUE BASALT, CO 81621 HARVEST ROARING FORK IMPACT ANALYSIS: EXHIBIT A: NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES WITHIN 1,500 FOOT RADIUS (CONT.) RAILROAD R.O.W. GLENWOOD SPRINGS ROARING FORK TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY R112102 1340 MAIN STREET CARBONDALE, CO 81623 6951 82 HWY GLENWOOD SPRINGS TEAMJLC COMMERCIAL LLC R011141 34 MANOR LAKE ESTATES SPRING, TX 77379 5439 154 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS CAVERN SPRINGS MHC LLC R011419 2151 PRIEST BRIDGE DRIVE, SUITE 7 CROFTON, MD 21114 5451 154 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS K & L LLC R111266 108 CROWN MOUNTAIN DRIVE BASALT, CO 81621 327 CORYELL RIDGE RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS CASTILLO, HUGO A R011470 PO BOX 1477 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 329 CORYELL RIDGE RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS OSTERMILLER, ROBERT D JR & LAURIE M R011495 275 MEADOW WOOD ROAD GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 5449 154 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS CARBONDALE RURAL FIRE PROTECTION DIST R111816 300 MEADOWOOD DRIVE CARBONDALE, CO 81623-9212 5387 154 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS CAVERN SPRINGS MHC LLC R111817 2151 PRIEST BRIDGE DRIVE, SUITE 7 CROFTON, MD 21114 Not available GLENWOOD SPRINGS HARVEST ROARING FORK LLC R082859 909 LAKE CAROLYN PKWAY, SUITE 150 IRVING, TX 75039 7025 82 HWY GLENWOOD SPRINGS YDD LLC R083558 132 PARK AVENUE BASALT, CO 81621 Not available GLENWOOD SPRINGS YDD LLC R083559 132 PARK AVENUE BASALT, CO 81621 5398 154 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS CCC-B LLLP R112020 0132 PARK AVENUE BASALT, CO 81621 5392 154 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS RUDD LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY R112021 132 PARK AVENUE BASALT, CO 81621 5396 154 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS RUDD LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY R112022 132 PARK AVE BASALT, CO 81621 5394 154 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS RUDD LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY R112023 132 PARK AVE BASALT, CO 81621 Not available GLENWOOD SPRINGS RUDD LIMITED LIABILITY CO R112024 132 PARK AVENUE BASALT, CO 81621 62 113 COUNTY RD CARBONDALE RUDD LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY R111934 0132 PARK AVENUE BASALT, CO 81621 483 167 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS 12TH AND AKRON APARTMENTS LLC R011407 497 COUNTY ROAD 167 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 485 167 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS GOLUBA, NICHOLAS W JR R011226 PO BOX 931 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602 348 167 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS WENTLING, JILL R R111472 PO BOX 1903 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602-1903 Not available GLENWOOD SPRINGS IRONBRIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC R041526 PO BOX 1315 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 406 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS MARIENTHAL, DEBORAH LIVING TRUST & MARIENTHAL, MICHAEL LIVING TRUST DTD R041406 406 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 382 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS BIRKELO, BRADLEY A & RUTH ROSLYN R041407 22212 CHIPPEWA LN GOLDEN, CO 80401 368 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS KORN, KURTIS W & MARLA M R041408 14503 N CREOSOTE COUT FOUNTAIN HILLS, AZ 85268-4140 342 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS BENNETT, TRACY R & ROBERT J R041409 342 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 322 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS BARNES, CYNTHIA & HIGGINS, MAXWELL R041410 24607 SOUTH 213TH WAY QUEEN CREEK, AZ 85142 304 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS KELLEY, JEFF SCOTT & FITZPATRICK HOLLENBACK, CAILEN R041411 304 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 284 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS KULWIEC, KENNETH J & ELIZABETH LYNDA R041412 284 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601-2729 403 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS MEUZELAAR, TOM & MELISSA L R041413 403 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 379 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS ROBBINS, JOSHUA JAMES & ROBBINS, KATHRYN LEE ACUFF R041414 12 MULE DEER TRAIL LITTLETON, CO 80127 365 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS PRATTE, DOUGLAS JAMES & JULIE JANELLE R041415 365 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 325 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS OLSON FAMILY TRUST DTD 10/05/2016 R041416 325 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 59 WILD ROSE CT GLENWOOD SPRINGS CHAVEZ, MARGARITO & MARIA EUGENIA R041417 59 WILD ROSE COURT GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 45 WILD ROSE CT GLENWOOD SPRINGS HEIN, JAMES E R041418 2014 CHIMNEY ROCK ROAD HOUSTON, TX 77056 29 WILD ROSE CT GLENWOOD SPRINGS THOMPSON, JONATHAN E & SCHAIRER, CHRISTINA R041419 31 UTE EL JEBEL, CO 81623 15 WILD ROSE CIR GLENWOOD SPRINGS THKW, LLC R041420 15 WILD ROSE COURT GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 270 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS KIDD, JANIE K LIVING TRUST R041422 270RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 214 WILD ROSE DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS KLEAGER, LYNN & COURTNEY R041423 0214 WILD ROSE DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 192 WILD ROSE DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS BOUDREAU, JOHN & BRENDA R041424 PO BOX 3838 VAIL, CO 81658 172 WILD ROSE DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS MATHESON, DAVID & PAULA R041425 172 WILD ROSE DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 158 WILD ROSE DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS GARLAND, MOLLY K TRUST R041426 158 WILD ROSE DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 144 WILD ROSE DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS GARLAND, MOLLY K TRUST R041427 158 WILD ROSE DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 126 WILD ROSE DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS HUMMEL, JEFFREY R041428 126 WILD ROSE DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 106 WILD ROSE DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS HICKEL, ANNA & DAVID R041429 106 WILD ROSE DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 295 SILVER MOUNTAIN DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS WESTFELDT, PATRICK B & MEGAN O R041430 158 WILD ROSE DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 281 SILVER MOUNTAIN DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS PROCK, JACK LLOYD & JEANETTE MARIE R041431 281 SILVER MOUNTAIN DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 117 WILD ROSE DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS PETTIT, JONATHAN M & ELIZABETH H R041471 117 WILD ROSE DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 149 WILD ROSE DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS ZERBA, GARRETT & EMILY R041472 149 WILD ROSE DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 179 WILD ROSE DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS MURRAY, CAMERON & ABBE R041473 179 WILD ROSE DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 211 WILD ROSE DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS BATE, STEFAN W & AMBER LEE R041474 211 WILD ROSE DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 235 WILD ROSE DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS ASPLUND, CRYSTAL JO R041475 235 WILD ROSE DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 HARVEST ROARING FORK IMPACT ANALYSIS: EXHIBIT A: NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES WITHIN 1,500 FOOT RADIUS (CONT.) Not available GLENWOOD SPRINGS BLUE HERON PROPERTIES LLC R041515 430 IRONBRIDGE DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 Not available GLENWOOD SPRINGS BLUE HERON PROPERTIES LLC R041516 430 IRONBRIDGE DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 Not available GLENWOOD SPRINGS IRONBRIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOC INC R041520 PO BOX 1315 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 Not available GLENWOOD SPRINGS IRONBRIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOC INC R041521 PO BOX 1315 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 Not available GLENWOOD SPRINGS IRONBRIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOC INC R041524 PO BOX 1315 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 Not available GLENWOOD SPRINGS IRONBRIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOC INC R041525 PO BOX 1315 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 296 RIVER BANK LN GLENWOOD SPRINGS MEINE FAMILY TRUST R043340 11964 S COPPER CREEK CIRCLE PARKER, CO 80134 272 RIVER BANK LN GLENWOOD SPRINGS DE WETTER, ROBERT & REGINA R043341 272 RIVER BANK LANE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 248 RIVER BANK LN GLENWOOD SPRINGS CHAPMAN, ERICA R043342 2844 E COALINGA DRIVE BREA, CA 92821 224 RIVER BANK LN GLENWOOD SPRINGS PRATT, RYAN D R043343 20 MAROON PL CARBONDALE, CO 81623 2550 109 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS SHERICK, GEORGE W & JERI L R010028 2550 COUNTY ROAD 109 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 650 LARIAT LN GLENWOOD SPRINGS CLAASSEN, TERRENCE C & LARA R010007 650 LARIAT LANE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 1750 109 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS JWK INVESTMENTS LTD R100179 1750 COUNTY ROAD 109 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 652 LARIAT LN GLENWOOD SPRINGS BUTLER, CHRISTOPHER & CAMPOS, STACEY Y R100082 652 LARIAT LANE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 263 SILVER MOUNTAIN DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS FENSKE, SCOTT A R041432 PO BOX 1323 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 241 SILVER MOUNTAIN DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS E & L REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT LLC R041433 691 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 Not available CARBONDALE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT R043957 2300 RIVER FRONTAGE ROAD SILT, CO 81652 Not available CARBONDALE ROARING FORK WATER & SANITATION DISTRICT R045083 PO BOX 326 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602 Not available CARBONDALE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AT ASPEN GLEN R830179 0080 BALD EAGLE WAY CARBONDALE, CO 81623 Not available CARBONDALE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AT ASPEN GLEN R830180 0080 BALD EAGLE WAY CARBONDALE, CO 81623 109 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS GLEASON, WALTER M ESTATE OF R820002 2273 RIVER ROAD GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81505 Not available CARBONDALE ASPEN GLEN GOLF COMPANY R830181 PO BOX 21307 HILTON HEAD ISLAND, SC 29925 9175 82 HWY GLENWOOD SPRINGS JERONIMUS, MICHALEEN & MICHAEL R111302 PO BOX 1318 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 9173 82 HWY CARBONDALE JERONIMUS, MICHALEEN & MICHAEL R111301 PO BOX 1318 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 9171 82 HWY CARBONDALE GARDNER DYNASTY TRUST, DATED 7/29/2021 R084552 PO BOX 1943 EAGLE, CO 81631 1752 109 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS CARLSON FAMILY TRUST R100066 1752 COUNTY ROAD 109 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 1800 109 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS MERRIAM, JOSEPH G & SHELLY L R100067 1800 COUNTY ROAD 109 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 Not available GLENWOOD SPRINGS TELLER SPRINGS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION R100083 720 E DURANT AVE ASPEN, CO 81611-2071 Not available CARBONDALE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AT ASPEN GLEN R830178 0080 BALD EAGLE WAY CARBONDALE, CO 81623 227 SILVER MOUNTAIN DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS COWHEY FAMILY TRUST DATED 4/14/16 R041434 571 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 203 SILVER MOUNTAIN DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS COMER, WILLIAM TONY & MARY KATHLEEN R041435 203 SILVER MOUNTAIN DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 191 SILVER MOUNTAIN DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS GIBSON, ALAN F TRUSTEE OF THE ALAN F GIBSON FAMILY TRUST DATED MARCH 5, 2008 R041436 191 SILVER MOUNTAIN DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 177 SILVER MOUNTAIN DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS HODGSON, ANNE R041437 177 SILVER MTN DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601-8655 252 SILVER MOUNTAIN DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS GIBBONS, ROBERT J R041443 252 SILVER MOUNTAIN DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 Not available GLENWOOD SPRINGS IRONBRIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOC INC R041522 PO BOX 1315 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 Not available CARBONDALE ASPEN GLEN WATER & SANITATION DISTRICT R830187 9929 HIGHWAY 82 CARBONDALE, CO 81623-9682 6931 82 HWY GLENWOOD SPRINGS TEAMJLC COMMERCIAL LLC R011142 34 MANOR LAKE ESTATES SPRING, TX 77379 228 CORYELL RIDGE RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS CUC, GUILLERMO OTONIEL R011026 PO BOX 512 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 244 CORYELL RIDGE RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS M R MAINTENANCE & REPAIR LLC R011270 1480 BARBER DRIVE CARBONDALE, CO 81623 266 CORYELL RIDGE RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS STOWE, M KAREN R011042 PO BOX 1637 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602 314 CORYELL RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS VAN GINKEL, KEENAN R011139 0314 CORYELL RIDGE ROAD GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 344 CORYELL RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS WILLISON, HENRY THOMAS TRUST U/D/T 10/23/2007 & WILLISON, LINDA LEE TRUST U/D/T 10/23/2007 R011567 344 CORYELL RIDGE ROAD GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 383 167 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS SCEATS, DONALD JAMES JR R011385 383 COUNTY ROAD 167 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 403 167 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS VARGAS, ROBERTO R011210 405 COUNTY ROAD 167 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 405 167 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS VARGAS, ROBERTO R011209 405 COUNTY ROAD 167 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 427 167 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS BERNS, HELEN WORTHEN REVOCABLE TRUST R011229 501 SYCAMORE STREET PEABODY, KS 66866 515 167 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS R011473 Contact Assessor 497 167 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS SCHLUNDT, HAYES KARAL R011318 497 COUNTY ROAD 167 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601-9335 Not available GLENWOOD SPRINGS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS GARFIELD COUNTY R011143 108 8TH STREET, SUITE 213 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601-3363 5387 154 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS CAVERN SPRINGS MHC LLC R111291 2151 PRIEST BRIDGE DRIVE, SUITE 7 CROFTON, MD 21114 330 CORYELL RIDGE RD CARBONDALE SERRANOS MARBLE AND GRANITE INC R111470 PO BOX 731 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 HARVEST ROARING FORK IMPACT ANALYSIS: EXHIBIT A: NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES WITHIN 1,500 FOOT RADIUS (CONT.) 324 CORYELL RIDGE RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS SERRANOS MARBLE AND GRANITE INC R111471 PO BOX 731 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 5445 154 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS CAVERN SPRINGS MHC LLC R111490 2151 PRIEST BRIDGE DRIVE, SUITE 7 CROFTON, MD 21114 495 167 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS FENSKE, SCOTT A R007554 PO BOX 1323 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 475 167 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS R007555 Contact Assessor 195 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS KNIGHT, DANIEL J & LINDSAY B R041421 195 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 290 SILVER MOUNTAIN DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS OLENICK, PETER R R041444 290 SILVER MOUNTAIN DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 302 SILVER MOUNTAIN DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS LOPEZ, VICTOR & RUTH CLASSEN R041445 302 SILVER MOUNTAIN DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 54 WILD ROSE DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS BLANKENSHIP, FAMILY TRUST R041447 54 WILD ROSE DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 28 WILD ROSE DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS SCHAUMBURG, JOHN S R041448 28 WILD ROSE DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 10 WILD ROSE DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS LOOMIS, JOHN BROLAN & GUDMUNDSEN, SANDRA M R041449 10 WILD ROSE DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 43 WILD ROSE DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS SANDRETTO, JAMES ALLEN & HILL, HEATHER ANNE R041468 43 WILD ROSE DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 65 WILD ROSE DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS FULLER, BRIAN LEE & VALERIE FULLER R041469 65 WILD ROSE DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 73 WILD ROSE DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS LOOMIS, CHARLES & VIRGINIA, & BRIGHT, KIMBERLY & BRUCE S R041470 73 WILD ROSE DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 170 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS COPELAND, ROB & JENNIFER R041476 170 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 150 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS PIENAAR, ETIENNE & FRANCIS PIENAAR, SHANNON M R041477 150 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 124 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS TC MIDWEST LLC R041478 17760 PRESTON ROAD STE 100 DALLAS, TX 75252-5696 171 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS HENSCHEL, PAUL M R041487 171 RIVER BEND WAY GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 320 RIVER BANK LN GLENWOOD SPRINGS CHAPMAN-OLINGER JOINT REVOCABLE TRUST R043339 320 RIVER BANK LANE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 1854 109 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS GRANGE, TODD H & SALLY K A R100068 1854 COUNTY ROAD 109 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 1856 109 COUNTY RD GLENWOOD SPRINGS KUHL, STEVEN D & LAURA S R100069 P O BOX 387 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 167 SILVER MOUNTAIN DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS HOWARD, JILL MARIE & WHITTAKER, JOSHUA R041438 167 SILVER MOUNTAIN DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 157 SILVER MOUNTAIN DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS OTERO, FELIX & GONZALES, YOLANDA R041439 157 SILVER MOUNTAIN GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 133 SILVER MOUNTAIN DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS DORFFI FAMILY TRUST R041440 3970 CRYSTAL BRIDGE DRIVE CARBONDALE, CO 81623 136 SILVER MOUNTAIN DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS DAVIS, KRISTIN F & JOSEPH S R041441 136 SILVER MOUNTAIN DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 196 SILVER MOUNTAIN DR GLENWOOD SPRINGS DOOLEY, RICHARD & JAMIE R041442 196 SILVER MOUNTAIN DRIVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 Not available GLENWOOD SPRINGS IRONBRIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOC INC R041523 PO BOX 1315 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 Not available null 280 LARIAT LN GLENWOOD SPRINGS MCCARTY FAMILY TRUST R100081 280 LARIAT LANE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 Not available GLENWOOD SPRINGS ROYAL MINI STORAGE, LLC R111886 PO BOX 2526 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602-2526 6916 82 HWY GLENWOOD SPRINGS SERRANOS MARBLE AND GRANITE INC R111885 PO BOX 731 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 HARVEST ROARING FORK IMPACT ANALYSIS: EXHIBIT B: EXISTING USES OF ADJACENT PROPERTY A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHEASTERLY 1/4 OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 89 WEST, AND IN SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 7, SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED BELOW COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO VICINITY MAP SCALE: 1" = 5000' ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW, YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THE CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS: PARCEL A (EAST PARCEL): A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHEASTERLY QUARTER OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 89 WEST, AND IN SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 7, SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF COLORADO STATE HIGHWAY 82, WHENCE A 2 1/2" BRASS CAP, FOUND IN PLACE, AND CORRECTLY MARKED AS THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 7, BEARS S 63°31'48" E A DISTANCE OF 2312.55 FEET; THENCE, ALONG THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF COLORADO STATE HIGHWAY 82 N 06°01'00" W A DISTANCE OF 1467.90 FEET; THENCE, N 08°53'00" W A DISTANCE OF 200.30 FEET; N 00°18'30" W A DISTANCE OF 201.00 FEET; N 06°01'00" W A DISTANCE OF 700.90 FEET; N 08°52'00" W A DISTANCE OF 313.00 FEET; THENCE, 346.52 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 1820.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10°54'32' AND SUBTENDING A CHORD BEARING OF N 15°58'00" W A DISTANCE OF 346.00 FEET; THENCE, N 11°08'00" W A DISTANCE OF 97.90 FEET; THENCE, 250.29 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1840.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 7°47'38" AND SUBTENDING A CHORD BEARING OF N 28°19'00" W A DISTANCE OF 250.10 FEET; THENCE, N 35°14'00" W A DISTANCE OF 122.52 FEET; THENCE, N 89°17'09" W A DISTANCE 7.98 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF A PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN RECEPTION NO. 575283; THENCE ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE S 35°22'19" E A DISTANCE OF 1.46 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL, N 89°17'09" W A DISTANCE OF 224.24 FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL; THENCE, N 00°00'00" W A DISTANCE OF 0.68 FEET; THENCE, N 89°30'08" E A DISTANCE OF 0.71 FEET; THENCE, N 00°20'09" E A DISTANCE OF 0.49 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF A PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN RECEPTION NO. 603760; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL THE FOLLOWING THREE COURSES: 1) N 89°44'57" W A DISTANCE OF 0.99 FEET; 2) N 30°31'43" W A DISTANCE OF 65.06 FEET; 3) N 86°47'11" W A DISTANCE OF 65.63 FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL; THENCE, N 86°47'11" W A DISTANCE OF 52.73 FEET; THENCE, N 89°36'12" W A DISTANCE OF 292.61 FEET; THENCE, N 89°43'30" W A DISTANCE OF 100.90 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF THE ROARING FORK TRANSIT AUTHORITY TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR EASEMENT; THENCE, ALONG SAID EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE S 19°38'52" E A DISTANCE OF 3829.47 FEET; THENCE, 79.82 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 2915.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 1°34'08" AND SUBTENDING A CHORD BEARING OF S 18°51'48" E A DISTANCE OF 79.82 FEET; THENCE, DEPARTING SAID EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE N 89°59'59" E A DISTANCE OF 73.94 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF COLORADO STATE HIGHWAY 82, ALSO BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL B (SOPRIS PARCEL): PARCEL 1 (AS DESCRIBED IN DEED RECORDED MAY 19, 1998 IN BOOK 1068 AT PAGE 543 AT RECEPTION NO. 525444.): A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN LOT 2 OF SECTION 7, T. 7 S., R. 88 W. OF THE 6TH P.M. LYING NORTHEASTERLY OF THE WEST AND SOUTH LINES OF SAID LOT 2 AND SOUTHWESTERLY OF THE SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE HIGHWAY NO. 82 AS RECONSTRUCTED IN 1967, SAID TRACT DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 2 BEING MARKED WITH AN IRON PIN; WHENCE AN IRON POST WITH A BRASS CAP FOUND IN PLACE AND PROPERLY MARKED FOR THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SEC. 1 IN T. 7 S., R. 89 W. OF THE 6TH P.M. BEARS S. 35°31'00" W. 770.44 FEET; THENCE N. 324.69 FEET ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 2 TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID HIGHWAY; THENCE S. 34°45'30" E. 229.17 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID HIGHWAY; THENCE S. 35°14'00" E. 167 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID HIGHWAY TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 2; THENCE WEST 227.00 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 2 TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 2, THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 2 (AS DESCRIBED AS PARCEL 1 IN QUIT CLAIM DEED RECORDED MAY 20, 2002 IN BOOK 1356 AT PAGE 384 AS RECEPTION NO. 603760 AND AS DESCRIBED AS EXHIBIT A-1 QUIT CLAIM DEED RECORDED JANUARY 24, 2001 IN BOOK 1228 AT PAGE 600 AS RECEPTION NO. 575283): A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN SECTION 7, T. 7 S., R. 88 W. OF THE 6TH P.M., COUNTY OF GARFIELD STATE OF COLORADO. SAID TRACT OF LAND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SE CORNER OF SECTION 1, T. 7 S., R. 89 W. OF THE 6TH P.M., (WITH ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN BEING RELATIVE TO A BEARING OF N. 00°10'09" E. BETWEEN THE SE CORNER AND THE E 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 1); THENCE N. 35°30'10" E. 769.47 FEET TO A FOUND REBAR (SOUTHWEST CORNER LOT 2 PER BOOK 687 AT PAGE 650) THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN SAID BOOK 687 AT PAGE 650 128.34 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY LINE N. 88°59'16" W. ALONG THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY LINE AND SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY LINE EXTENDED OF THE RECORDED AMENDED FYRWALD EXEMPTION PLAT 103.03 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY LINE AND SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY LINE EXTENDED S. 02°48'16" E. 70.52 FEET, TO A POINT IN AN EXISTING FENCE LINE; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY EXTENDED ALONG AN EXISTING FENCE LINE THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) COURSES: 1) S. 86°47'11" E. 65.63 FEET; 2) S. 30°31'43" E. 65.06 FEET; 3) S. 89°17'09" E. 0.99 FEET, TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 3: (AS DESCRIBED AS PARCEL 2 IN QUIT CLAIM DEED RECORDED MAY 20, 2002 IN BOOK 1356 AT PAGE 384 AS RECEPTION NO. 603760 AND AS DESCRIBED AS EXHIBIT A-3 IN QUIT CLAIM DEED RECORDED JANUARY 24, 2001 IN BOOK 1228 AT PAGE 600 AS RECEPTION NO. 575283): A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN SECTION 7, T. 7 S., R. 88 W. OF THE 6TH P.M., COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO. SAID TRACT OF LAND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SE CORNER OF SECTION 1, T. 7 S., R. 89 W. OF THE 6TH P.M. (WITH ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN BEING RELATIVE TO A BEARING OF N. 00°10'09" E. BETWEEN THE SE CORNER AND THE E 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 1); THENCE N. 35°30'10" E. 769.47 FEET TO A FOUND REBAR (SOUTHWEST CORNER LOT 2 PER BOOK 687 AT PAGE 650); THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN SAID BOOK 687 AT PAGE 650 128.34 FEET, THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE NORTH 187.87 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF STATE HIGHWAY NO. 82; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY LINE ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY THE FOLLOWING TWO (2) COURSES: 1) N. 34°53'49" W. 9.76 FEET; 2) N. 37°33'19" W. 6.55 FEET; THENCE S. 01°05'14" W. ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF THE RECORDED AMENDED FYRWALD EXEMPTION PLAT 200.87 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY LINE S. 88° 59'16" E. 13.39 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING EXCLUDING, HOWEVER, ANY PORTION OF PARCEL 2 AND/OR PARCEL 3 LOCATED IN OR ENCROACHING UPON: LOTS 3 AND/OR 4, AMENDED FYRWALD EXEMPTION PLAT, AS RECORDED INTEREST GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO UNDER RECEPTION NO. 547543. PARCEL 4 (AS DESCRIBED AS EXHIBIT A-2 IN QUIT CLAIM DEED RECORDED JANUARY 24, 2001 IN BOOK 1228 AT PAGE 600 AS RECEPTION NO. 575283): A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN SECTION 7, T. 7 S., R. 88 W. OF THE 6TH P.M., SAID TRACT OF LAND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SE CORNER OF SECTION 1, T. 7 S., R. 89 W. OF THE 6TH P.M., (WITH ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN BEING RELATIVE TO A BEARING OF N. 00°10'09" E. BETWEEN THE SE CORNER AND THE E 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 1); THENCE N. 35°30'10" E. 769.47 FEET TO A FOUND REBAR (SOUTHWEST CORNER LOT 2 PER BOOK 687 AT PAGE 650) THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN SAID BOOK 687 AT PAGE 650 0.68 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY LINE EAST ALONG THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID PROPERTY 221.76 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF STATE HIGHWAY NO. 82; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY LINE S. 35°22'19" E. ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY 4.26 FEET, TO A POINT IN AN EXISTING FENCE LINE; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY N. 89°17'09" W. ALONG SAID EXISTING FENCE LINE 224.24 FEET, TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, EXCEPTING FROM INSURANCE AND CONVEYANCE THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTING PARCELS 5, EXCEPTING PARCEL 6 AND EXCEPTING PARCEL 7 EXCEPTING PARCEL 5 (AS DESCRIBED EXHIBIT A IN QUIT CLAIM DEED RECORDED MAY 20, 2002 IN BOOK 1356 AT PAGE 390 AS RECEPTION NO. 603762) A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN SECTION 7, T. 7 S., R. 88 W. OF THE 6TH P.M.. SAID TRACT OF LAND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SE CORNER OF SECTION 1, T. 7 S., R. 89 W. OF THE 6TH P.M. (WITH ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN BEING RELATIVE TO A BEARING OF N. 00°10'09" E. BETWEEN THE SE CORNER AND THE E 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 1); THENCE N. 00°10'09" E. ALONG SAID SECTION LINE 691.13 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF THAT PROPERTY SURVEY RECORDED AS RECEPTION NO. 205 IN THE GARFIELD COUNTY INDEX FOR INFORMATIONAL LAND SURVEY PLATS, THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SECTION LINE N. 00°10'09" E. 2.36 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF THE RECORDED AMENDED FYRWALD EXEMPTION PLAT; THENCE LEAVING SAID SECTION LINE N. 89°13'44" E. ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY 344.69 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY LINE S. 02°48'16" E. 12.00 FEET TO A POINT IN AN EXISTING FENCE LINE; THENCE N. 86°47'11" W. ALONG SAID FENCE LINE 52.73 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID FENCE LINE N. 89°36'14" W. 292.62 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS CONTINUED: EXCEPTING PARCEL 6 (AS DESCRIBED AS EXHIBIT A IN QUIT CLAIM DEED RECORDED JANUARY 29, 2001 IN BOOK 1229 ACCORDING TO 263 AT RECEPTION NO. 575490): A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN SECTION 7, T. 7 S., R. 88 W. OF THE 6TH P.M., SAID TRACT OF LAND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; COMMENCING AT THE SE CORNER OF SECTION 1, T. 7 S., R. 89 W. OF THE 6TH P.M., (WITH ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN BEING RELATIVE TO A BEARING OF N. 00°10'09" E. BETWEEN THE SE CORNER AND THE E 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 1); THENCE N. 00°10'09" E. ALONG SAID SECTION LINE 627.10 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF THAT PROPERTY SURVEY RECORDED AT RECEPTION NO. 305 IN THE GARFIELD COUNTY INDEX FOR INFORMATIONAL LAND SURVEY PLATS, THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SECTION LINE N. 00°10'09" E. 64.03 FEET, TO A POINT IN AN EXISTING FENCE LINE; THENCE LEAVING SAID SECTION LINE S. 89°36'14" E. ALONG AN EXISTING FENCE LINE 292.62 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG AN EXISTING FENCE LINE S. 86°47'11' E. 118.36 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID FENCE LINE S. 30°31'43" E. 64.28 FEET, TO A POINT ON SAID NORTHERLY BOUNDARY; THENCE LEAVING SAID EXISTING FENCE LINE N. 90°00'00" W. ALONG SAID NORTHERLY BOUNDARY 443.63 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING PARCEL 7 (AS DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A IN RULE AND ORDER, CIVIL ACTION NO. 5952, DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF GARFIELD AND STATE OF COLORADO RECORDED DECEMBER 15, 1967 IN BOOK 391 AT PAGE 14 AS AT RECEPTION NO. 239725): A TRACT OR PARCEL OF LAND NO. 1 REV. 2 OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS, STATE OF COLORADO, PROJECT NO. S 0130(10), IN LOTS 2 AND 11 OF SECTION 7, T. 7 S., R. 88 WEST, OF THE 6TH P.M., IN GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO, SAID TRACT OF PARCEL BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF LOT 2, SECTION 7, T. 7 S., R. 88 W., FROM WHICH THESE CORNER OF SEC 1. T. 7 S., R. 89 W. BEARS S. 19°29'30" W., A DISTANCE OF 1330.0. FEET; 1. THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF LOT 2, SECTION 7, A DISTANCE OF 304.5 FEET; 2. THENCE S. 34°45'30" E., A DISTANCE OF 231.0 FEET; 3. THENCE S. 35°14' E., A DISTANCE OF 92.2 FEET TO A SOUTH LINE OF THE PROPERTY; 4. THENCE ALONG A SOUTH LINE OF THE PROPERTY, N. 89°12' E., A DISTANCE OF 118.5 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF LOT 2, SEC. 7; 5. THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF LOT 2, SEC. 7, SOUTH A DISTANCE OF 63.8 FEET TO THE SW. CORNER OF LOT 11, SEC. 7; 6. THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 11, SEC. 7, N. 89°47'E., A DISTANCE OF 208.0 FEET; 7. THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 2,050.0 FEET A DISTANCE OF 14.4 FEET (THE CHORD OF THIS ARC BEARS N. 32°43' W., A DISTANCE OF 14.4 FEET); 8. THENCE N. 34°03' W., A DISTANCE OF 311.4 FEET; 9. THENCE N. 42°28'30" W. A DISTANCE OF 487.6 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. FURTHER EXCEPTING THERE FROM ANY PORTION OF THE LAND WITHIN STATE HIGHWAY NO. 82 COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO. PARCEL C (WEST PARCEL): A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 1 AND THE WEST HALF OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 89 WEST, AND IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 7 AND THE NORTH HALF OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF THE ROARING FORK TRANSIT AUTHORITY TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR EASEMENT, WHENCE A 2 1/2" BRASS CAP, FOUND IN PLACE AND CORRECTLY MARKED AS THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 7, BEARS S 41°30'24"E, A DISTANCE OF 4758.08 FEET; THENCE, DEPARTING SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE N 19°38'52" W A DISTANCE OF 1221.19 FEET; THENCE, N 89°43'30' W A DISTANCE OF 683.95 FEET; THENCE, S 02°00'23" W A DISTANCE OF 590.77 FEET; THENCE, S 02°15'08" W A DISTANCE OF 557.94 FEET; THENCE, N 86°35'38" W A DISTANCE OF 84.72 FEET; THENCE, S 43°10'35" E A DISTANCE OF 251.44 FEET; THENCE, S 00°24'17" E A DISTANCE OF 1250.60 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF THE ROARING FORK CONSERVANCY EASEMENT; THENCE, ALONG THE SAID EASEMENT LINE S 03°09'52" W A DISTANCE OF 741.05 FEET; THENCE, S 00°21'30" E A DISTANCE OF 553.42 FEET; THENCE, S 00°04'33" E A DISTANCE OF 323.33 FEET; THENCE, S 24°10'18" E A DISTANCE OF 142.52 FEET; THENCE, S 29°13'16" E A DISTANCE OF 615.00 FEET; THENCE, S 19°31'50" E A DISTANCE OF 246.38 FEET; THENCE, S 23°25'35" E A DISTANCE OF 153.19 FEET; THENCE, S 17°46'37" E A DISTANCE OF 173.22 FEET; THENCE, S 30°48'54" E A DISTANCE OF 163.28 FEET; THENCE, S 51°46'41" E A DISTANCE OF 662.76 FEET; THENCE, S 44°39'33" E A DISTANCE OF 175.65 FEET; THENCE, S 13°37'07" E A DISTANCE OF 255.65 FEET; THENCE, S 34°06'17" E A DISTANCE OF 318.15 FEET; THENCE, S 35°45'21" E A DISTANCE OF 225.15 FEET; THENCE, S 55°41'54" E A DISTANCE OF 196.47 FEET; THENCE, S 63°52'39" E A DISTANCE OF 388.20 FEET; THENCE, S 57°54'58" E A DISTANCE OF 449.02 FEET; THENCE, S 47°15'14" E A DISTANCE OF 122.26 FEET; THENCE, S 89°53'16" E A DISTANCE OF 189.76 FEET; THENCE, N 40°23'30" W A DISTANCE OF 69.38 FEET; THENCE, S 87°28'29" W A DISTANCE OF 36.35 FEET; THENCE, S 83°52'12" W A DISTANCE OF 10.80 FEET; THENCE, N 58°27'19" W A DISTANCE OF 41.45 FEET; THENCE, N 29°51'31" W A DISTANCE OF 8.28 FEET; THENCE, N 24°16'24" W A DISTANCE OF 25.22 FEET; THENCE, N 69°00'53" W A DISTANCE OF 9.87 FEET; THENCE, S 87°31'44" W A DISTANCE OF 22.60 FEET; THENCE, N 57°25'01" W A DISTANCE OF 17.28 FEET; THENCE, N 50°09'49" W A DISTANCE OF 26.07 FEET; THENCE, N 46°21'12" W A DISTANCE OF 9.99 FEET; THENCE, N 44°28'05" W A DISTANCE OF 21.45 FEET; THENCE, N 55°50'08" W A DISTANCE OF 49.05 FEET; THENCE, N 56°25'40" W A DISTANCE OF 49.94 FEET; THENCE, N 68°12'23" W A DISTANCE OF 36.45 FEET; THENCE, N 46°54'04" W A DISTANCE OF 55.18 FEET; THENCE, N 68°49'21" W A DISTANCE OF 25.14 FEET; THENCE, N 47°41'50" W A DISTANCE OF 78.78 FEET; THENCE, N 30°26'40" W A DISTANCE OF 24.58 FEET; THENCE, N 25°47'01" W A DISTANCE OF 30.08 FEET; THENCE, N 18°11'39" W A DISTANCE OF 34.61 FEET; THENCE, N 30°58'21" W A DISTANCE OF 29.32 FEET; THENCE, N 21°59'14" W A DISTANCE OF 27.50 FEET; THENCE, N 30°16'07" W A DISTANCE OF 22.97 FEET; THENCE, N 25°41'38" W A DISTANCE OF 169.44 FEET; THENCE, N 41°17'39" E A DISTANCE OF 82.61 FEET; THENCE, N 38°34'52" E A DISTANCE OF 15.89 FEET; THENCE, N 34°26'44" W A DISTANCE OF 262.40 FEET; THENCE, N 57°58'09" W A DISTANCE OF 102.47 FEET; THENCE, N 53°43'31" W A DISTANCE OF 105.38 FEET; THENCE, N 55°58'11" W A DISTANCE OF 126.13 FEET; THENCE, N 56°14'57" W A DISTANCE OF 118.42 FEET; THENCE, N 49°16'04" W A DISTANCE OF 136.33 FEET; THENCE, N 44°30'51" W A DISTANCE OF 150.05 FEET; THENCE, N 32°49'55" W A DISTANCE OF 102.14 FEET; THENCE, N 37°44'19" W A DISTANCE OF 552.12 FEET; THENCE, N 18°10'02" W A DISTANCE OF 47.26 FEET; THENCE, N 27°58'19" W A DISTANCE OF 109.20 FEET; THENCE, N 35°01'36" W A DISTANCE OF 71.09 FEET; THENCE, N 41°32'47" W A DISTANCE OF 152.23 FEET; THENCE, N 40°22'24" W A DISTANCE OF 339.82 FEET; THENCE, N 64°20'53" W A DISTANCE OF 34.06 FEET; THENCE, N 45°00'36" W A DISTANCE OF 52.42 FEET; THENCE, N 44°53'41" W A DISTANCE OF 154.66 FEET; THENCE, N 32°35'48" W A DISTANCE OF 86.59 FEET; THENCE, N 57°01'32" W A DISTANCE OF 44.89 FEET; THENCE, N 30°33'12" W A DISTANCE OF 85.72 FEET; THENCE, N 37°39'02" W A DISTANCE OF 79.09 FEET; THENCE, N 37°32'30" W A DISTANCE OF 63.32 FEET; THENCE, N 20°02'15" W A DISTANCE OF 33.98 FEET; THENCE, N 39°52'25" W A DISTANCE OF 42.02 FEET; THENCE, N 25°36'04" W A DISTANCE OF 107.17 FEET; THENCE, N 30°34'08" W A DISTANCE OF 164.72 FEET; THENCE, N 11°39'01" W A DISTANCE OF 107.90 FEET; THENCE, N 24°56'06" E A DISTANCE OF 163.60 FEET; THENCE, N 63°39'33" E A DISTANCE OF 177.81 FEET; THENCE, N 83°14'43" E A DISTANCE OF 393.54 FEET; THENCE, N 07°15'26" W A DISTANCE OF 21.79 FEET; THENCE, N 80°51'11" E A DISTANCE OF 50.00 FEET; THENCE, N 89°15'06" E A DISTANCE OF 65.56 FEET; THENCE, N 57°50'04" E A DISTANCE OF 50.12 FEET; THENCE, S 84°51'15" E A DISTANCE OF 33.08 FEET; THENCE, S 81°39'50" E A DISTANCE OF 89.61 FEET; THENCE, N 56°07'00" E A DISTANCE OF 26.86 FEET; THENCE, N 07°38'31" E A DISTANCE OF 27.93 FEET; THENCE, N 37°41'57" W A DISTANCE OF 28.06 FEET; THENCE, N 50°00'15" E A DISTANCE OF 22.23 FEET; THENCE, N 82°02'30" E A DISTANCE OF 36.49 FEET; THENCE, S 63°34'38" E A DISTANCE OF 54.05 FEET; THENCE, S 45°59'58" E A DISTANCE OF 20.95 FEET; THENCE, S 14°44'20" E A DISTANCE OF 29.18 FEET; THENCE, S 11°11'17" W A DISTANCE OF 26.42 FEET; THENCE, S 14°58'41" E A DISTANCE OF 30.14 FEET; THENCE, S 43°42'10" E A DISTANCE OF 69.77 FEET; THENCE, S 31°36'59" E A DISTANCE OF 56.76 FEET; THENCE, S 49°38'46" E A DISTANCE OF 40.12 FEET; THENCE, S 45°30'55" E A DISTANCE OF 40.88 FEET; THENCE, S 60°16'38" E A DISTANCE OF 43.39 FEET; THENCE, S 73°16'24" E A DISTANCE OF 67.60 FEET; THENCE, S 53°05'15' E A DISTANCE OF 15.86 FEET; THENCE, S 63°37'30" E A DISTANCE OF 52.31 FEET; THENCE, S 83°28'21" E A DISTANCE OF 46.95 FEET; THENCE, N 86°20'27" E A DISTANCE OF 61.04 FEET; THENCE, N 31°59'09" E A DISTANCE OF 47.07 FEET; THENCE, N 06°58'38" E A DISTANCE OF 32.16 FEET; THENCE, N 72°08'07" E A DISTANCE OF 7.98 FEET; THENCE, S 24°51'03" E A DISTANCE OF 72.35 FEET; THENCE, S 41°52'47' E A DISTANCE OF 50.71 FEET; THENCE, S 54°44'21" E A DISTANCE OF 38.31 FEET; THENCE, S 83°39'39" E A DISTANCE OF 87.15 FEET; THENCE, S 57°11'12" E A DISTANCE OF 77.06 FEET; THENCE, S 41°51'16" E A DISTANCE OF 88.65 FEET; THENCE, S 57° 39'13" E A DISTANCE OF 65.60 FEET; THENCE, S 49°55'38" E A DISTANCE OF 74.96 FEET; THENCE, S 61°04'52" E A DISTANCE OF 43.44 FEET; THENCE, S 71°46'03" E A DISTANCE OF 55.45 FEET; THENCE, N 09°35'09" W A DISTANCE OF 59.88 FEET; THENCE, N 65°36'14" W A DISTANCE OF 60.45 FEET; THENCE, N 49°54'10" W A DISTANCE OF 64.72 FEET; THENCE, N 49°54'10" W A DISTANCE OF 86.97 FEET; THENCE, N 48°11'10" W A DISTANCE OF 54.30 FEET; THENCE, N 56°47'27" W A DISTANCE OF 123.97 FEET; THENCE, N 83°47'24" W A DISTANCE OF 93.00 FEET; THENCE, N 29°35'31" W A DISTANCE OF 119.58 FEET; THENCE, N 78°00'43" W A DISTANCE OF 33.84 FEET; THENCE, S 79°41'48" W A DISTANCE OF 37.80 FEET; THENCE, S 22°57'52" W A DISTANCE OF 56.05 FEET; THENCE, S 59°31'57" W A DISTANCE OF 45.48 FEET; THENCE, N 82°32'35" W A DISTANCE OF 28.23 FEET; THENCE, N 59°07'03" W A DISTANCE OF 95.71 FEET; THENCE, N 71°20'44" W A DISTANCE OF 85.73 FEET; THENCE, N 36°43'10" W A DISTANCE OF 93.22 FEET; THENCE, N 25°39'22" W A DISTANCE OF 181.92 FEET; THENCE, N 65°10'24" W A DISTANCE OF 98.43 FEET; THENCE, S 85°02'33" W A DISTANCE OF 52.20 FEET; THENCE, S 56°33'52' W A DISTANCE OF 39.34 FEET; THENCE, S 20°49'33" W A DISTANCE OF 42.96 FEET; THENCE, S 37°27'43" E A DISTANCE OF 21.60 FEET; THENCE, N 77°02'57" W A DISTANCE OF 89.66 FEET; THENCE, S 70°24'18" W A DISTANCE OF 70.95 FEET; THENCE, N 88°59'39" W A DISTANCE OF 55.55 FEET; THENCE, S 84°28'58" W A DISTANCE OF 49.93 FEET; THENCE, N 14°22'48 E A DISTANCE OF 68.20 FEET; THENCE, N 05°11'46" W A DISTANCE OF 77.59 FEET; THENCE, N 18°20'05" E A DISTANCE OF 10.82 FEET; THENCE, N 22°53'40" E A DISTANCE OF 44.14 FEET; THENCE, N 10°34'58" E A DISTANCE OF 35.11 FEET; THENCE, N 08°59'51" E A DISTANCE OF 47.16 FEET; THENCE, N 03°48'08" E A DISTANCE OF 36.48 FEET; THENCE, N 04°40'52" E A DISTANCE OF 71.03 FEET; THENCE, N 07°37'51" E A DISTANCE OF 54.66 FEET; THENCE, N 29°28'14" W A LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS CONTINUED: DISTANCE OF 63.68 FEET; THENCE, N 32°00'44" W A DISTANCE OF 61.05 FEET; THENCE, N 26°17'29" W A DISTANCE OF 55.52 FEET; THENCE, N 38°14'36" W A DISTANCE OF 44.36 FEET; THENCE, N 53°11'32" W A DISTANCE OF 37.73 FEET; THENCE, N 59°54'48" W A DISTANCE OF 54.16 FEET; THENCE, N 87°51'35' W A DISTANCE OF 36.97 FEET; THENCE, N 57°33'47"W A DISTANCE OF 65.70 FEET; THENCE, N 81°56'22" W A DISTANCE OF 85.02 FEET; THENCE, N 04°11'29" W A DISTANCE OF 158.65 FEET; THENCE, N 35°50'41" W A DISTANCE OF 41.30 FEET; THENCE, N 54°46'03" W A DISTANCE OF 24.70 FEET; THENCE, N 28°51'45" W A DISTANCE OF 209.99 FEET; THENCE, N 11°58'37" W A DISTANCE OF 33.82 FEET; THENCE, N 41°03'46" E A DISTANCE OF 78.19 FEET; THENCE, N 06°29'01" W A DISTANCE OF 117.20 FEET; THENCE, N 20°05'27" W A DISTANCE OF 94.24 FEET; THENCE, N 11°32'03" W A DISTANCE OF 63.83 FEET; THENCE, N 07°57'46" W A DISTANCE OF 141.45 FEET; THENCE, N 09°56'14" E A DISTANCE OF 50.76 FEET; THENCE, N 19°17'44" W A DISTANCE OF 91.04 FEET; THENCE, N 44°41'59" W A DISTANCE OF 134.55 FEET; THENCE, N 19°23'49" W A DISTANCE OF 74.18 FEET; THENCE, N 19°33'06" W A DISTANCE OF 43.27 FEET; THENCE, N 21°30'01" W A DISTANCE OF 72.23 FEET; THENCE, DEPARTING SAID EASEMENT LINE N 00°16'30" E A DISTANCE OF 217.77 FEET; THENCE, N 00°16'30" E A DISTANCE OF 312.94 FEET; THENCE, S 89°43'30" E A DISTANCE OF 1005.44 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF THE ROARING FORK TRANSIT AUTHORITY TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR EASEMENT, ALSO BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING. COUNTY OF GARFIELD STATE OF COLORADO PARCEL D (SOUTH PARCEL): A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE EAST HALF OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 89 WEST, AND IN THE WEST HALF OF SECTION 7 AND IN THE NORTH HALF OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF COLORADO STATE HIGHWAY 82, WHENCE A 2 1/2" BRASS CAP, FOUND IN PLACE AND CORRECTLY MARKED AS THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 7, BEARS S 78°49'20" E A DISTANCE OF 2150.14 FEET; THENCE, ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE S 09°35'09" E A DISTANCE OF 401.79 FEET; THENCE, S 09°35'09" E A DISTANCE OF 1545.87 FEET; THENCE, 626.05 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 1482.50 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 24°11'44" AND SUBTENDING A CHORD BEARING OF S 21°41'02" E A DISTANCE OF 621.41 FEET; THENCE, S 33°46'54" E A DISTANCE OF 387.28 FEET; THENCE, 294.32 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2815.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 5°59'26" AND SUBTENDING A CHORD BEARING OF S 30°47'11" E A DISTANCE OF 294.19 FEET; THENCE, DEPARTING SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE N 89°53'16" W A DISTANCE OF 218.07 FEET; THENCE, N 40°23'30" W A DISTANCE OF 69.38 FEET; THENCE, S 87°28'29" W A DISTANCE OF 36.35 FEET; THENCE, S 83°52'12" W A DISTANCE OF 10.80 FEET; THENCE, N 58°27'19" W A DISTANCE OF 41.45 FEET; THENCE, N 29°51'31" W A DISTANCE OF 8.28 FEET; THENCE, N 24°16'24" W A DISTANCE OF 25.22 FEET; THENCE, N 69°00'53" W A DISTANCE OF 9.87 FEET; THENCE, S 87°31'44" W A DISTANCE OF 22.60 FEET; THENCE, N 57°25'01" W A DISTANCE OF 17.28 FEET; THENCE, N 50°09'49" W A DISTANCE OF 26.07 FEET; THENCE, N 46°21'12" W A DISTANCE OF 9.99 FEET; THENCE, N 44°28'05" W A DISTANCE OF 21.45 FEET; THENCE, N 55°50'08" W A DISTANCE OF 49.05 FEET; THENCE, N 56°25'40" W A DISTANCE OF 49.94 FEET; THENCE, N 68°12'23" W A DISTANCE OF 36.45 FEET; THENCE, N 46°54'04" W A DISTANCE OF 55.18 FEET; THENCE, N 68°49'21" W A DISTANCE OF 25.14 FEET; THENCE, N 47°41'50" W A DISTANCE OF 78.78 FEET; THENCE, N 30°26'40" W A DISTANCE OF 24.58 FEET; THENCE, N 25°47'01" W A DISTANCE OF 30.08 FEET; THENCE, N 18°11'39" W A DISTANCE OF 34.61 FEET; THENCE, N 30°58'21" W A DISTANCE OF 29.32 FEET; THENCE, N 21°59'14" W A DISTANCE OF 27.50 FEET; THENCE, N 30°16'07" W A DISTANCE OF 22.97 FEET; THENCE, N 25°41'38" W A DISTANCE OF 169.44 FEET; THENCE, N 41°17'39" E A DISTANCE OF 82.61 FEET; THENCE, N 38°34'52" E A DISTANCE OF 15.89 FEET; THENCE, N 34°26'44" W A DISTANCE OF 262.40 FEET; THENCE, N 57°58'09" W A DISTANCE OF 102.47 FEET; THENCE, N 53°43'31' W A DISTANCE OF 105.38 FEET; THENCE, N 55°58'11" W A DISTANCE OF 126.13 FEET; THENCE, N 56°14'57" W A DISTANCE OF 118.42 FEET; THENCE, N 49°16'04' W A DISTANCE OF 136.33 FEET; THENCE, N 44°30'51" W A DISTANCE OF 150.05 FEET; THENCE, N 32°49'55" W A DISTANCE OF 102.14 FEET; THENCE, N 37°44'19" W A DISTANCE OF 552.12 FEET; THENCE, N 18°10'02" W A DISTANCE OF 47.26 FEET; THENCE, N 27°58'19" W A DISTANCE OF 109.20 FEET; THENCE, N 35°01'36" W A DISTANCE OF 71.09 FEET; THENCE, N 41°32'47" W A DISTANCE OF 152.23 FEET; THENCE, N 40°22'24" W A DISTANCE OF 339.82 FEET; THENCE, N 64°20'53" W A DISTANCE OF 34.06 FEET; THENCE, N 45°00'36" W A DISTANCE OF 52.42 FEET; THENCE, N 44°53'41" W A DISTANCE OF 154.66 FEET; THENCE, N 32°35'48" W A DISTANCE OF 86.59 FEET; THENCE, N 57°01'32" W A DISTANCE OF 44.89 FEET; THENCE, N 30°33'12" W A DISTANCE OF 85.72 FEET; THENCE, N 37°39'02" W A DISTANCE OF 79.09 FEET; THENCE, N 37°32'30" W A DISTANCE OF 63.32 FEET; THENCE, N 20°02'15" W A DISTANCE OF 33.98 FEET; THENCE, N 39°52'25" W A DISTANCE OF 42.02 FEET; THENCE, N 25°36'04" W A DISTANCE OF 107.17 FEET; THENCE, N 30°34'08" W A DISTANCE OF 164.72 FEET; THENCE, N 11°39'01" W A DISTANCE OF 107.90 FEET; THENCE, N 24°56'06" E A DISTANCE OF 163.60 FEET; THENCE, N 63°39'33" E A DISTANCE OF 177.81 FEET; THENCE, N 83°14'43" E A DISTANCE OF 393.54 FEET; THENCE, N 07°15'26" W A DISTANCE OF 21.79 FEET; THENCE, N 80°51'11" E A DISTANCE OF 50.00 FEET; THENCE, N 89°15'06' E A DISTANCE OF 65.56 FEET; THENCE, N 57°50'04" E A DISTANCE OF 50.12 FEET; THENCE, S 84°51'15" E A DISTANCE OF 33.08 FEET; THENCE, S 81°39'50" E A DISTANCE OF 89.61 FEET; THENCE, N 56°07'00" E A DISTANCE OF 26.86 FEET; THENCE, N 07°38'31" E A DISTANCE OF 27.93 FEET; THENCE, N 37°41'57" W A DISTANCE OF 28.06 FEET; THENCE, N 50°00'15" E A DISTANCE OF 22.23 FEET; THENCE, N 82°02'30" E A DISTANCE OF 36.49 FEET; THENCE, S 63°34'38" E A DISTANCE OF 54.05 FEET; THENCE, S 45°59'58" E A DISTANCE OF 20.95 FEET; THENCE, S 14°44'20" E A DISTANCE OF 29.18 FEET; THENCE, S 11°11'17" W A DISTANCE OF 26.42 FEET; THENCE, S 14°58'41" E A DISTANCE OF 30.14 FEET; THENCE, S 43°42'10" E A DISTANCE OF 69.77 FEET; THENCE, S 31°36'59" E A DISTANCE OF 56.76 FEET; THENCE, S 49°38'46" E A DISTANCE OF 40.12 FEET; THENCE, S 45°30'55" E A DISTANCE OF 40.88 FEET; THENCE, S 60°16'38" E A DISTANCE OF 43.39 FEET; THENCE, S 73°16'24" E A DISTANCE OF 67.60 FEET; THENCE, S 53°05'15" E A DISTANCE OF 15.86 FEET; THENCE, S 63°37'30" E A DISTANCE OF 52.31 FEET; THENCE, S 83°28'21" E A DISTANCE OF 46.95 FEET; THENCE, N 86°20'27" E A DISTANCE OF 61.04 FEET; THENCE, N 31°59'09" E A DISTANCE OF 47.07 FEET; THENCE, N 06°58'38" E A DISTANCE OF 32.16 FEET; THENCE, N 72°08'07" E A DISTANCE OF 7.98 FEET; THENCE, S 24°51'03" E A DISTANCE OF 72.35 FEET; THENCE, S 41°52'47" E A DISTANCE OF 50.71 FEET; THENCE, S 54°44'21" E A DISTANCE OF 38.31 FEET; THENCE, S 83°39'39" E A DISTANCE OF 87.15 FEET; THENCE, S 57°11'12" E A DISTANCE OF 77.06 FEET; THENCE, S 41°51'16" E A DISTANCE OF 88.65 FEET; THENCE, S 57°39'13" E A DISTANCE OF 65.60 FEET; THENCE, S 49°55'38" E A DISTANCE OF 74.96 FEET; THENCE, S 61°04'52" E A DISTANCE OF 43.44 FEET; THENCE, S 71°46'03" E A DISTANCE OF 55.45 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO. PARCEL E (NORTH PARCEL) A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE EAST HALF OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 89 WEST, AND IN THE WEST HALF OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING GARFIELD COUNTY SURVEYOR'S 2 1/2" BRASS, FOUND IN PLACE, AND CORRECTLY MARKED AS THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 7, THENCE S49°22'15' E A DISTANCE OF 5479.54 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE, S 89°43'30" E A DISTANCE OF 1005.44 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF THE ROARING FORK TRANSIT AUTHORITY TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR EASEMENT; THENCE, ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID EASEMENT S 19°38'52" E A DISTANCE OF 2644.53 FEET; THENCE, 494.34 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2815.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10°03'42" AND SUBTENDING A CHORD BEARING OF S 14°37'01" E A DISTANCE OF 493.70 FEET; THENCE, S 09°35'09" E A DISTANCE OF 120.78 FEET; THENCE, DEPARTING THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID EASEMENT N 65°36'14" W A DISTANCE OF 60.45 FEET; THENCE, N 49°54'10" W A DISTANCE OF 64.72 FEET; THENCE, N 49°54'10" W A DISTANCE OF 86.97 FEET; THENCE, N 48°11'10" W A DISTANCE OF 54.30 FEET; THENCE, N 56°47'27' W A DISTANCE OF 123.97 FEET; THENCE, N 83°47'24" W A DISTANCE OF 93.00 FEET; THENCE, N 29°35'31" W A DISTANCE OF 119.58 FEET; THENCE, N 78°00'43" W A DISTANCE OF 33.84 FEET; THENCE, S 79°41'48" W A DISTANCE OF 37.80 FEET; THENCE, S 22°57'52" W A DISTANCE OF 56.05 FEET; THENCE, S 59°31'57" W A DISTANCE OF 45.48 FEET; THENCE, N 82°32'35" W A DISTANCE OF 28.23 FEET; THENCE, N 59°07'03" W A DISTANCE OF 95.71 FEET; THENCE, N 71°20'44" W A DISTANCE OF 85.73 FEET; THENCE, N 36°43'10" W A DISTANCE OF 93.22 FEET; THENCE, N 25°39'22" W A DISTANCE OF 181.92 FEET; THENCE, N 65°10'24" W A DISTANCE OF 98.43 FEET; THENCE, S 85°02'33" W A DISTANCE OF 52.20 FEET; THENCE, S 56°33'52" W A DISTANCE OF 39.34 FEET; THENCE, S 20°49'33" W A DISTANCE OF 42.96 FEET; THENCE, S 37°27'43" E A DISTANCE OF 21.60 FEET; THENCE, N 77°02'57" W A DISTANCE OF 89.66 FEET; THENCE, S 70°24'18" W A DISTANCE OF 70.95 FEET; THENCE, N 88°59'39" W A DISTANCE OF 55.55 FEET; THENCE, S 84°28'58" W A DISTANCE OF 49.93 FEET; LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS CONTINUED: THENCE, N 14°22'48" E A DISTANCE OF 68.20 FEET; THENCE, N 05°11'46" W A DISTANCE OF 77.59 FEET; THENCE, N 18°20'05" E A DISTANCE OF 10.82 FEET; THENCE, N 22°53'40" E A DISTANCE OF 44.14 FEET; THENCE, N 10°34'58" E A DISTANCE OF 35.11 FEET; THENCE, N 08°59'51" E A DISTANCE OF 47.16 FEET; THENCE, N 03°48'08" E A DISTANCE OF 36.48 FEET; THENCE, N 04°40'52" E A DISTANCE OF 71.03 FEET; THENCE, N 07°37'51" E A DISTANCE OF 54.66 FEET; THENCE, N 29°28'14" W A DISTANCE OF 63.68 FEET; THENCE, N 32°00'44" W A DISTANCE OF 61.05 FEET; THENCE, N 26°17'29" W A DISTANCE OF 55.52 FEET; THENCE, N 38°14'26" W A DISTANCE OF 44.36 FEET; THENCE, N 53°11'32" W A DISTANCE OF 37.73 FEET; THENCE, N 59°54'48" W A DISTANCE OF 54.16 FEET; THENCE, N 87°51'35" W A DISTANCE OF 36.97 FEET; THENCE, N 57°33'47" W A DISTANCE OF 65.70 FEET; THENCE, N 81°56'22" W A DISTANCE OF 85.02 FEET; THENCE, N 04°11'29" W A DISTANCE OF 158.65 FEET; THENCE, N 35°50'41" W A DISTANCE OF 41.30 FEET; THENCE, N 54°46'03' W A DISTANCE OF 24.70 FEET; THENCE, N 28°51'45" W A DISTANCE OF 209.99 FEET; THENCE, N 11°58'37" W A DISTANCE OF 33.82 FEET; THENCE, N 41°03'46" E A DISTANCE OF 78.19 FEET; THENCE, N 06°29'01" W A DISTANCE OF 117.20 FEET; THENCE, N 20°05'27" W A DISTANCE OF 94.24 FEET; THENCE, N 11°32'03" W A DISTANCE OF 63.83 FEET; THENCE, N 07°57'46" W A DISTANCE OF 141.45 FEET; THENCE, N 09°56'14" E A DISTANCE OF 50.76 FEET; THENCE, N 19°17'44" W A DISTANCE OF 91.04 FEET; THENCE, N 44°41'59" W A DISTANCE OF 134.55 FEET; THENCE, N 19°23'49" W A DISTANCE OF 74.18 FEET; THENCE, N 19°33'06" W A DISTANCE OF 43.27 FEET; THENCE, N 21°30'01" W A DISTANCE OF 72.23 FEET; THENCE, N 00°16'30" E A DISTANCE OF 217.77 FEET; THENCE, N 00°16'30" E A DISTANCE OF 312.94 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL F: A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF COLORADO STATE HIGHWAY 82, WHENCE A 2 1/2" BRASS CAP, FOUND IN PLACE AND PROPERLY MARKED AS THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 7, BEARS S 78°01'43' E A DISTANCE OF 2054.18 FEET; THENCE, ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF N 09°35'10" W A DISTANCE OF 188.14; THENCE, 282.60 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 2915.00 FEET A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 5°33'17" AND SUBTENDING A CHORD BEARING OF N 12°21'49" W A DISTANCE OF 282.49 FEET; THENCE, DEPARTING SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE S 90°00'00" E A DISTANCE OF 49.74 FEET; THENCE, S 06°01'00" E A DISTANCE OF 202.70 FEET; THENCE, S 04°34'58" E A DISTANCE OF 260.70 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. COUNTY OF GARFIELD STATE OF COLORADO SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE: TO: LIFESTYLE ASSET MANAGEMENT LLC AN ARIZONA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, AND LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY, AND THEIR RESPECTIVE SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THIS MAP OR PLAT AND THE SURVEY ON WHICH IT IS BASED WERE MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 2021 MINIMUM STANDARD DETAIL REQUIREMENTS FOR ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEYS, JOINTLY ESTABLISHED AND ADOPTED BY ALTA AND NSPS, AND INCLUDES ITEMS 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 11 (OBSERVED), 12 AND 16 OF TABLE A THEREOF. THE FIELDWORK WAS COMPLETED ON JULY 23, 2021. JEFFREY ALLEN TUTTLE L.S. 33638 DATE OF PLAT OR MAP: 01/10/2022 LINE TABLE LINE # AL1 AL2 AL3 AL4 AL5 AL6 AL7 AL8 AL9 AL10 AL11 AL12 AL13 AL14 AL15 AL16 AL17 AL18 AL19 LENGTH 200.30' 201.00' 700.90' 313.00' 97.90' 122.52' 7.98' 1.46' 224.24' 0.68' 0.71' 0.49' 0.99' 65.06' 65.63' 52.73' 292.61' 100.90' 73.94' DIRECTION N08° 53' 00"W N00° 18' 30"W N06° 01' 00"W N08° 52' 00"W N11° 08' 00"W N35° 14' 00"W N89° 17' 09"W S35° 22' 19"E N89° 17' 09"W N00° 00' 00"E N89° 30' 08"E N00° 20' 09"E N89° 44' 57"W N30° 31' 43"W N86° 47' 11"W N86° 47' 11"W N89° 36' 12"W N89° 43' 30"W N89° 59' 59"E CURVE TABLE CURVE # C1 C2 C3 LENGTH 346.52' 250.29' 79.82' RADIUS 1820.00' 1840.00' 2915.00' DELTA 10°54'32" 7°47'38" 1°34'08" CHORD DIRECTION N15° 58' 00"W N28° 19' 00"W N18° 51' 48"W CHORD LENGTH 346.00' 250.10' 79.82' PARCEL A BOUNDARY PARCEL A BOUNDARY LINE TABLE LINE # CL24 CL25 CL26 CL27 CL28 CL29 CL30 CL31 CL32 CL33 CL34 CL35 CL36 CL37 CL38 CL39 CL40 CL41 CL42 CL43 LENGTH 84.72' 251.44' 142.52' 246.38' 153.19' 173.22' 163.28' 662.76' 175.65' 255.65' 318.15' 225.15' 196.47' 388.20' 122.26' 189.76' 69.38' 36.35' 10.80' 41.45' DIRECTION N86° 35' 38"W S43° 10' 35"E S24° 10' 18"E N19° 31' 50"W N23° 25' 35"W N17° 46' 37"W N30° 48' 54"W N51° 46' 41"W N44° 39' 33"W S13° 37' 07"E S34° 06' 17"E S35° 45' 21"E S55° 41' 54"E S63° 52' 39"E S47° 15' 14"E S89° 53' 16"E N40° 23' 30"W S87° 28' 29"W S83° 52' 12"W N58° 27' 19"W LINE TABLE LINE # CL44 CL45 CL46 CL47 CL48 CL49 CL50 CL51 CL52 CL53 CL54 CL55 CL56 CL57 CL58 CL59 CL60 CL61 CL62 CL63 LENGTH 8.28' 25.22' 9.87' 22.60' 17.28' 26.07' 9.99' 21.45' 49.05' 49.94' 36.45' 55.18' 25.14' 78.78' 24.58' 30.08' 34.61' 29.32' 27.50' 22.97' DIRECTION N29° 51' 31"W N24° 16' 24"W N69° 00' 53"W S87° 31' 44"W N57° 25' 01"W N50° 09' 49"W N46° 21' 12"W N44° 28' 05"W N55° 50' 08"W N56° 25' 40"W N68° 12' 23"W N46° 54' 04"W N68° 49' 21"W N47° 41' 50"W N30° 26' 40"W N25° 47' 01"W N18° 11' 39"W N30° 58' 21"W N21° 59' 14"W N30° 16' 07"W LINE TABLE LINE # CL64 CL65 CL66 CL67 CL68 CL69 CL70 CL71 CL72 CL73 CL74 CL75 CL76 CL77 CL78 CL79 CL80 CL81 CL82 CL83 LENGTH 169.44' 82.61' 15.89' 262.40' 102.47' 105.38' 126.13' 118.42' 136.33' 150.05' 102.14' 47.26' 109.20' 71.09' 152.23' 339.82' 34.06' 52.42' 154.66' 86.59' DIRECTION N25° 41' 38"W N41° 17' 39"E N38° 34' 52"E N34° 26' 44"W N57° 58' 09"W N53° 43' 31"W N55° 58' 11"W N56° 14' 57"W N49° 16' 04"W N44° 30' 51"W N32° 49' 55"W N18° 10' 02"W N27° 58' 19"W N35° 01' 36"W N41° 32' 47"W N40° 22' 24"W N64° 20' 53"W N45° 00' 36"W N44° 53' 41"W N32° 35' 48"W LINE TABLE LINE # CL84 CL85 CL86 CL87 CL88 CL89 CL90 CL91 CL92 CL93 CL94 CL95 CL96 CL97 CL98 CL99 CL100 CL101 CL102 CL103 LENGTH 44.89' 85.72' 79.09' 63.32' 33.98' 42.02' 107.17' 164.72' 107.90' 163.60' 177.81' 393.54' 21.79' 50.00' 65.56' 50.12' 33.08' 89.61' 26.86' 27.93' DIRECTION N57° 01' 32"W N30° 33' 12"W N37° 39' 02"W N37° 32' 30"W N20° 02' 15"W N39° 52' 25"W N25° 36' 04"W N30° 34' 08"W N11° 39' 01"W N24° 56' 06"E N63° 39' 33"E N83° 14' 43"E N07° 15' 26"W N80° 51' 11"E N89° 15' 06"E N57° 50' 04"E S84° 51' 15"E S81° 39' 50"E N56° 07' 00"E N07° 38' 31"E LINE TABLE LINE # CL104 CL105 CL106 CL107 CL108 CL109 CL110 CL111 CL112 CL113 CL114 CL115 CL116 CL117 CL118 CL119 CL120 CL121 CL122 CL123 LENGTH 28.06' 22.23' 36.49' 54.05' 20.95' 29.18' 26.42' 30.14' 69.77' 56.76' 40.12' 40.88' 43.39' 67.60' 15.86' 52.31' 46.95' 61.04' 47.07' 32.16' DIRECTION N37° 41' 57"W N50° 00' 15"E N82° 02' 30"E S63° 34' 38"E S45° 59' 58"E S14° 44' 20"E S11° 11' 17"W S14° 58' 41"E S43° 42' 10"E S31° 36' 59"E S49° 38' 46"E S45° 30' 55"E S60° 16' 38"E S73° 16' 24"E S53° 05' 15"E S63° 37' 30"E S83° 28' 21"E N86° 20' 27"E N31° 59' 09"E N06° 58' 38"E PARCEL C BOUNDARY PARCEL C BOUNDARY PARCEL C BOUNDARY PARCEL C BOUNDARY PARCEL C BOUNDARY LINE TABLE LINE # CL124 CL125 CL126 CL127 CL128 CL129 CL130 CL131 CL132 CL133 CL134 CL135 CL136 CL137 CL138 CL139 CL140 CL141 CL142 CL143 LENGTH 7.98' 72.35' 50.71' 38.31' 87.15' 77.06' 88.65' 65.60' 74.96' 43.44' 55.45' 59.88' 60.45' 64.72' 86.97' 54.30' 123.97' 93.00' 119.58' 33.84' DIRECTION N72° 08' 07"E S24° 51' 03"E S41° 52' 47"E S54° 44' 21"E S83° 39' 39"E S57° 11' 12"E S41° 51' 16"E S57° 39' 13"E S49° 55' 38"E S61° 04' 52"E S71° 46' 03"E N09° 35' 09"W N65° 36' 14"W N49° 54' 10"W N49° 54' 10"W N48° 11' 10"W N56° 47' 27"W N83° 47' 24"W N29° 35' 31"W N78° 00' 43"W LINE TABLE LINE # CL144 CL145 CL146 CL147 CL148 CL149 CL150 CL151 CL152 CL153 CL154 CL155 CL156 CL157 CL158 CL159 CL160 CL161 CL162 CL163 LENGTH 37.80' 56.05' 45.48' 28.23' 95.71' 85.73' 93.22' 181.92' 98.43' 52.20' 39.34' 42.96' 21.60' 89.66' 70.95' 55.55' 49.93' 68.20' 77.59' 10.82' DIRECTION S79° 41' 48"W S22° 57' 52"W S59° 31' 57"W N82° 32' 35"W N59° 07' 03"W N71° 20' 44"W N36° 43' 10"W N25° 39' 22"W N65° 10' 24"W S85° 02' 33"W S56° 33' 52"W S20° 49' 33"W S37° 27' 43"E N77° 02' 57"W S70° 24' 18"W N88° 59' 39"W S84° 28' 58"W N14° 22' 48"E N05° 11' 46"W N18° 20' 05"E LINE TABLE LINE # CL164 CL165 CL166 CL167 CL168 CL169 CL170 CL171 CL172 CL173 CL174 CL175 CL176 CL177 CL178 CL179 CL180 CL181 CL182 CL183 LENGTH 44.14' 35.11' 47.16' 36.48' 71.03' 54.66' 63.68' 61.05' 55.52' 44.36' 37.73' 54.16' 36.97' 65.70' 85.02' 158.65' 41.30' 24.70' 209.99' 33.82' DIRECTION N22° 53' 40"E N10° 34' 58"E N08° 59' 51"E N03° 48' 08"E N04° 40' 52"E N07° 37' 51"E N29° 28' 14"W N32° 00' 44"W N26° 17' 29"W N38° 14' 36"W N53° 11' 32"W N59° 54' 48"W N87° 51' 35"W N57° 33' 47"W N81° 56' 22"W N04° 11' 29"W N35° 50' 41"W N54° 46' 03"W N28° 51' 45"W N11° 58' 37"W LINE TABLE LINE # CL184 CL185 CL186 CL187 CL188 CL189 CL190 CL191 CL192 CL193 CL194 CL195 CL196 LENGTH 78.19' 117.20' 94.24' 63.83' 141.45' 50.76' 91.04' 134.55' 74.18' 43.27' 72.23' 217.77' 312.94' DIRECTION N41° 03' 46"E N06° 29' 01"W N20° 05' 27"W N11° 32' 03"W N07° 57' 46"W N09° 56' 14"E N19° 17' 44"W N44° 41' 59"W N19° 23' 49"W N19° 33' 06"W N21° 30' 01"W N00° 16' 30"E N00° 16' 30"E PARCEL C BOUNDARY PARCEL C BOUNDARY PARCEL C BOUNDARY PARCEL C BOUNDARY LINE TABLE LINE # CL40 CL41 CL42 CL43 CL44 CL45 CL46 CL47 CL48 CL49 CL50 CL51 CL52 CL53 CL54 CL55 CL56 CL57 CL58 CL59 LENGTH 69.38' 36.35' 10.80' 41.45' 8.28' 25.22' 9.87' 22.60' 17.28' 26.07' 9.99' 21.45' 49.05' 49.94' 36.45' 55.18' 25.14' 78.78' 24.58' 30.08' DIRECTION N40° 23' 30"W S87° 28' 29"W S83° 52' 12"W N58° 27' 19"W N29° 51' 31"W N24° 16' 24"W N69° 00' 53"W S87° 31' 44"W N57° 25' 01"W N50° 09' 49"W N46° 21' 12"W N44° 28' 05"W N55° 50' 08"W N56° 25' 40"W N68° 12' 23"W N46° 54' 04"W N68° 49' 21"W N47° 41' 50"W N30° 26' 40"W N25° 47' 01"W LINE TABLE LINE # CL60 CL61 CL62 CL63 CL64 CL65 CL66 CL67 CL68 CL69 CL70 CL71 CL72 CL73 CL74 CL75 CL76 CL77 CL78 CL79 LENGTH 34.61' 29.32' 27.50' 22.97' 169.44' 82.61' 15.89' 262.40' 102.47' 105.38' 126.13' 118.42' 136.33' 150.05' 102.14' 47.26' 109.20' 71.09' 152.23' 339.82' DIRECTION N18° 11' 39"W N30° 58' 21"W N21° 59' 14"W N30° 16' 07"W N25° 41' 38"W N41° 17' 39"E N38° 34' 52"E N34° 26' 44"W N57° 58' 09"W N53° 43' 31"W N55° 58' 11"W N56° 14' 57"W N49° 16' 04"W N44° 30' 51"W N32° 49' 55"W N18° 10' 02"W N27° 58' 19"W N35° 01' 36"W N41° 32' 47"W N40° 22' 24"W LINE TABLE LINE # CL80 CL81 CL82 CL83 CL84 CL85 CL86 CL87 CL88 CL89 CL90 CL91 CL92 CL93 CL94 CL95 CL96 CL97 CL98 CL99 LENGTH 34.06' 52.42' 154.66' 86.59' 44.89' 85.72' 79.09' 63.32' 33.98' 42.02' 107.17' 164.72' 107.90' 163.60' 177.81' 393.54' 21.79' 50.00' 65.56' 50.12' DIRECTION N64° 20' 53"W N45° 00' 36"W N44° 53' 41"W N32° 35' 48"W N57° 01' 32"W N30° 33' 12"W N37° 39' 02"W N37° 32' 30"W N20° 02' 15"W N39° 52' 25"W N25° 36' 04"W N30° 34' 08"W N11° 39' 01"W N24° 56' 06"E N63° 39' 33"E N83° 14' 43"E N07° 15' 26"W N80° 51' 11"E N89° 15' 06"E N57° 50' 04"E PARCEL D BOUNDARY PARCEL D BOUNDARY PARCEL D BOUNDARY LINE TABLE LINE # CL100 CL101 CL102 CL103 CL104 CL105 CL106 CL107 CL108 CL109 CL110 CL111 CL112 CL113 CL114 CL115 CL116 CL117 CL118 CL119 LENGTH 33.08' 89.61' 26.86' 27.93' 28.06' 22.23' 36.49' 54.05' 20.95' 29.18' 26.42' 30.14' 69.77' 56.76' 40.12' 40.88' 43.39' 67.60' 15.86' 52.31' DIRECTION S84° 51' 15"E S81° 39' 50"E N56° 07' 00"E N07° 38' 31"E N37° 41' 57"W N50° 00' 15"E N82° 02' 30"E S63° 34' 38"E S45° 59' 58"E S14° 44' 20"E S11° 11' 17"W S14° 58' 41"E S43° 42' 10"E S31° 36' 59"E S49° 38' 46"E S45° 30' 55"E S60° 16' 38"E S73° 16' 24"E S53° 05' 15"E S63° 37' 30"E LINE TABLE LINE # CL120 CL121 CL122 CL123 CL124 CL125 CL126 CL127 CL128 CL129 CL130 CL131 CL132 CL133 CL134 LENGTH 46.95' 61.04' 47.07' 32.16' 7.98' 72.35' 50.71' 38.31' 87.15' 77.06' 88.65' 65.60' 74.96' 43.44' 55.45' DIRECTION S83° 28' 21"E N86° 20' 27"E N31° 59' 09"E N06° 58' 38"E N72° 08' 07"E S24° 51' 03"E S41° 52' 47"E S54° 44' 21"E S83° 39' 39"E S57° 11' 12"E S41° 51' 16"E S57° 39' 13"E S49° 55' 38"E S61° 04' 52"E S71° 46' 03"E PARCEL D BOUNDARY PARCEL D BOUNDARY CURVE TABLE CURVE # C5 C6 LENGTH 626.05' 294.32' RADIUS 1482.50' 2815.00' DELTA 24°11'44" 5°59'26" CHORD DIRECTION S21° 41' 02"E N30° 47' 11"W CHORD LENGTH 621.41' 294.19' PARCEL D BOUNDARY A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHEASTERLY 1/4 OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 89 WEST, AND IN SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 7, SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED ON PAGE 1 COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO LEGEND AND NOTES: - INDICATES MONUMENT FOUND AS DESCRIBED - INDICATES MONUMENT SET AS DESCRIBED - DATE OF SURVEY: JULY 23, 2021 - UNIT OF MEASUREMENT: US SURVEY FOOT - ZONING IS BASED ON GARFIELD COUNTY PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT AND SHOULD BE VERIFIED ALONG WITH SETBACKS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION OR CRITICAL DESIGN. PARCEL A ZONING: RESIDENTIAL/SUBURBAN PARCEL B ZONING: RESIDENTIAL/SUBURBAN PARCEL C ZONING: RESIDENTIAL/SUBURBAN PARCEL D ZONING: PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT PARCEL E ZONING: PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT PARCEL F ZONING: RESIDENTIAL/SUBURBAN - BEARINGS ARE BASED UPON A 5/8" REBAR WITH A 1 1/2" ALUMINUM CAP L.S. #20133 BEING A 15 FOOT WITNESS CORNER TO A WESTERLY ANGLE POINT OF THE SUBJECT PARCEL, ALSO BEING ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOT 10 (AT THE GLENWOOD DITCH) AND A 5/8" REBAR WITH A 1 1/4" YELLOW PLASTIC CAP L.S. #22580 FOUND AT A WESTERLY ANGLE POINT OF THE SUBJECT PARCEL ALSO BEING ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 10. BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE RELATIVE TO THE RECORD BEARINGS SHOWN ON THE DEED RECORDED JUNE 22, 2011 AT RECEPTION NO. 804202 AND THE BEARINGS SHOWN ON AN ALTA SURVEY PERFORMED IN 2006 BY SGM (PROVIDED BY OWNER). - THIS IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT IS BASED UPON INFORMATION PROVIDED BY LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY IN ORDER NUMBER ABC63018126 DATED NOVEMBER 29, 2021. SAID PROPERTY IS DESCRIBED ON PAGE 1 OF THIS ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY. - THIS PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTIONS PER SAID TITLE ORDER NUMBER ABC63018126: 8. EXISTING LEASES AND TENANCIES. 9. RIGHT OF PROPRIETOR OF A VEIN OR LODE TO EXTRACT AND REMOVE HIS ORE THEREFROM SHOULD THE SAME BE FOUND TO PENETRATE OR INTERSECT THE PREMISES AS RESERVED IN UNITED STATES PATENTS RECORDED: JUNE 24, 1893 IN BOOK 12 AT PAGE 235, NOVEMBER 19, 1893 IN BOOK 12 AT PAGE 255, DECEMBER 4, 1894 IN BOOK 12 AT PAGE 339, JANUARY 15, 1896 IN BOOK 12 AT PAGE 394, MAY 17, 1897 IN BOOK 12 AT PAGE 460, JANUARY 24, 1906 IN BOOK 56 AT PAGE 534. NOTHING TO PLOT. 10. RIGHT OF WAY FOR DITCHES OR CANALS CONSTRUCTED BY THE AUTHORITY OF THE UNITED STATES AS RESERVED IN UNITED STATES PATENTS RECORDED: JUNE 24, 1893 IN BOOK 12 AT PAGE 235, NOVEMBER 17, 1893 IN BOOK 12 AT PAGE 255, DECEMBER 4, 1894 IN BOOK 12 AT PAGE 339, JANUARY 15, 1896 IN BOOK 12 AT PAGE 394, MAY 17, 1997 IN BOOK 12 AT PAGE 460, JANUARY 24, 1906 IN BOOK 56 AT PAGE 534, FEBRUARY 20, 1911 IN BOOK 71 AT PAGE 523. NOTHING TO PLOT. 11. RIGHT OF WAY FOR AN IRRIGATION DITCH GRANTED BY CHAS. TRAUTMAN ET AL TO THE GLENWOOD IRRIGATION COMPANY RECORDED JUNE 17, 1901 IN BOOK 44 AT PAGE 457 AND INSTRUMENT RECORDED AUGUST 27, 1945 IN BOOK 217 AT PAGE 150. PLOTTED HEREON. 12. RIGHT OF WAY GRANTED FROM C.C. CHASE TO THE MOUNTAIN STATES TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH COMPANY OVER AND ACROSS LOTS 6 AND 9, SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN RECORDED JULY 31, 1931 IN BOOK 164 AT PAGE 153 AND IN BOOK 164 AT PAGE 154. NOTHING TO PLOT. 13. AN UNDIVIDED ONE-FIFTIETH OF ALL OIL AND GAS LYING IN AND UNDER THE LANDS HEREIN DESCRIBED AS RESERVED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED JUNE 12, 1951 IN BOOK 258 AT PAGE 594, AND ANY AND ALL ASSIGNMENTS THEREOF OR INTERESTS THEREIN. NOTHING TO PLOT. 14. RESERVATION OF A SIX AND ONE-FOURTH PERCENT ROYALTY, IN PERPETUITY, FREE OF ALL COSTS OF PRODUCTION, FROM AND OUT OF ALL THE OIL, GAS AND OTHER MINERALS PRODUCED FROM SUBJECT PROPERTY AS CONVEYED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED DECEMBER 17, 1964 IN BOOK 362 AT PAGE 445, AND ANY AND ALL ASSIGNMENTS THEREOF OR INTERESTS THEREIN. NOTHING TO PLOT. 15. A LIFE ESTATE IN AND TO ONE-HALF OF ALL THE NET ROYALTY PAYMENTS RECEIVED FROM THE PRODUCTION OF MINERALS FROM SAID LAND AS RESERVED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED SEPTEMBER 28, 1965 IN BOOK 370 AT PAGE 69. NOTHING TO PLOT. 16. RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENT GRANTED TO HOLY CROSS ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION, INC. RECORDED NOVEMBER 22, 1966 IN BOOK 380 AT PAGE 234. PLOTTED HEREON. 17. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF RULE AND ORDER RECORDED DECEMBER 15, 1967 IN BOOK 391 AT PAGE 14. NOTHING TO PLOT. 18. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS AND OBLIGATIONS OF PRIVATE WAY LICENSE GRANTED BY DENVER & RIO GRANDE WESTERN RAILROAD TO UNION OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA RECORDED JANUARY 7, 1980 IN BOOK 541 AT PAGE 996. 19. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF AGREEMENT RECORDED AUGUST 19, 1994 IN BOOK 912 AT PAGE 970. 20. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY AS RESERVED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED AUGUST 11, 1998 IN BOOK 1082 AT PAGE 903. 21. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, RESTRICTIONS, EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY AS CONTAINED IN EASEMENT GRANT RECORDED AUGUST 2, 1999 IN BOOK 1142 AT PAGE 963 AND AMENDED EASEMENT RECORDED NOVEMBER 15, 2000 IN BOOK 1217 AT PAGE 588. PLOTTED HEREON. 22. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, RESTRICTIONS, EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY AS CONTAINED IN LICENSE GRANTS RECORDED AUGUST 2, 1999 IN BOOK 1142 AT PAGE 979 AND AT PAGE 993 AND AMENDMENTS RECORDED NOVEMBER 15, 2000 IN BOOK 1217 AT PAGE 596 AND IN BOOK 1217 AT PAGE 601. PLOTTED HEREON. 23. TERMS, CONDITIONS,RESTRICTIONS, EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY AS CONTAINED IN EASEMENT RECORDED AUGUST 2, 1999 IN BOOK 1143 AT PAGE 1 AND AMENDED EASEMENT RECORDED NOVEMBER 15, 2000 IN BOOK 1217 AT PAGE 593. PLOTTED HEREON. 24. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF AGREEMENT RECORDED DECEMBER 15, 1999 IN BOOK 1164 AT PAGE 818. PLOTTED HEREON. 25. EASEMENTS, RIGHTS OF WAY, TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT RECORDED FEBRUARY 07, 2000 IN BOOK 1171 AT PAGE 929 AND MAP RECORDED DECEMBER 24, 2008 AT RECEPTION NO. 760571 AND CORRECTED MAP RECORDED JANUARY 22, 2011 AT RECEPTION NO. 804200. PLOTTED HEREON. 26. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF EASEMENT RECORDED NOVEMBER 15, 2000 IN BOOK 1217 AT PAGE 610. NOTHING TO PLOT. 27. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF AGREEMENT RECORDED APRIL 20, 2001 IN BOOK 1247 AT PAGE 61. PLOTTED HEREON. 28. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF DITCH RELOCATION AGREEMENT RECORDED OCTOBER 03, 2001 IN BOOK 1292 AT PAGE 61 AND FIRST AMENDMENT RECORDED JANUARY 26, 2011 AT RECEPTION NO. 798017 AND RELATED QUIT CLAIM DEED RECORDED JANUARY 26, 2011 AT RECEPTION NO. 798018. PLOTTED HEREON. 29. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF AGREEMENT RECORDED MAY 20, 2002 IN BOOK 1356 AT PAGE 375. NOTHING TO PLOT. 30. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF RESOLUTION NO. 2007-115 RECORDED NOVEMBER 19, 2007 AT RECEPTION NO. 737576. NOTHING TO PLOT. 31. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF PRE INCLUSION AGREEMENT RECORDED DECEMBER 11, 2007 AT RECEPTION NO. 738957. NOTHING TO PLOT. 32. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF EASEMENT AGREEMENT RECORDED MAY 05, 2008 AT RECEPTION NO. 747899. NOTHING TO PLOT. 33. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT RECORDED MAY 05, 2008 AT RECEPTION NO. 747899. NOTHING TO PLOT. 34. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF RESOLUTION NO. 2008-112 RECORDED OCTOBER 07, 2008 AT RECEPTION NO. 756914. NOTHING TO PLOT. 35. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF PRE INCLUSION AGREEMENT RECORDED OCTOBER 09, 2008 AT RECEPTION NO. 757074. NOTHING TO PLOT. 36. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF GRANT OF EASEMENT AGREEMENT RECORDED DECEMBER 22, 2008 AT RECEPTION NO. 760451. NOTHING TO PLOT. ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW, YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THE CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. TITLE COMMITMENT EXCEPTIONS CONTINUED: 37. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, BURDENS, OBLIGATIONS AND EASEMENTS AS SET FORTH AND GRANTED IN UTILITY EASEMENT AGREEMENT RECORDED DECEMBER 17, 2010 UNDER RECEPTION 795965. NOTHING TO PLOT. 38. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, BURDENS, OBLIGATIONS AND EASEMENTS AS SET FORTH AND GRANTED IN EASEMENT RECORDED JANUARY 26, 2011 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 798016. PLOTTED HEREON. 39. RESERVATION OF ALL OIL, GAS AND MINERAL RIGHTS; AND ALL WATER RIGHTS AS CONTAINED IN DEED RECORDED APRIL 21, 2011 AT RECEPTION NO. 801638 AND CORRECTION DEED RECORDED JUNE 22, 2011 AT RECEPTION NO. 804202, ANY AND ALL ASSIGNMENTS THEREOF OR INTERESTS THEREIN. ACCESS EASEMENT NOT SPECIFICALLY DEFINED, THEREFORE NOTHING TO PLOT. (AFFECTS PARCELS A-C). 40. NON-EXCLUSIVE ACCESS EASEMENTS AND RIGHT OF WAY AS RESERVED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED APRIL 21, 2011 AT RECEPTION NO. 801638 AND CORRECTION DEED RECORDED JUNE 22, 2011 AT RECEPTION NO. 804202. ACCESS EASEMENT NOT SPECIFICALLY DEFINED, THEREFORE NOTHING TO PLOT. (AFFECTS PARCELS A-C). 41. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, BURDENS AND OBLIGATIONS AS SET FORTH IN RESOLUTION NO. 2011-84 AND 2011-85 APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN RECORDED DECEMBER 22, 2011 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 812356 AND 812357. AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT RECORDED NOVEMBER 22, 2016 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 885552. EXISTING EASEMENTS PLOTTED HEREON, PROPOSED EASEMENTS NOT PLOTTED. (AFFECTS PARCELS D-F). 42. EASEMENTS, CONDITIONS, COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATIONS AND NOTES ON THE MAPS OF RIVER EDGE COLORADO RECORDED JANUARY 05, 2012 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 812801 AND 812802. EXISTING EASEMENTS PLOTTED HEREON. PROPOSED EASEMENTS NOT PLOTTED. (AFFECTS PARCELS D-F). 43. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, BURDENS AND OBLIGATIONS AS SET FORTH IN PRE-INCLUSION AGREEMENT RECORDED JULY 25, 2012 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 821791. NOTHING TO PLOT. NOTHING TO PLOT. 44. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF RESOLUTION NO. PC 2012-04 RECORDED JULY 26, 2012 AT RECEPTION NO. 821852 AND RE-RECORDED AUGUST 14, 2012 AT RECEPTION NO. 822730. NOTHING TO PLOT. (AFFECTS PARCELS D-F). 45. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, BURDENS AND OBLIGATIONS AS SET FORTH IN MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING RECORDED OCTOBER 02, 2012 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 824971. NOTHING TO PLOT. 46. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF RESOLUTION NO. 2016-33 RECORDED MAY 02, 2016 AT RECEPTION NO. 876658. NOTHING TO PLOT. 47. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF RESOLUTION NO. 2016-32 RECORDED JUNE 02, 2016 AT RECEPTION NO. 876661. NOTHING TO PLOT. (AFFECTS PARCELS D-F). 48. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF MEMORANDUM OF WATER ALLOTMENT CONTRACT RECORDED JUNE 06, 2016 AT RECEPTION NO. 878102. NOTHING TO PLOT. 49. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF RESOLUTION NO. 2016-65 RECORDED NOVEMBER 22, 2016 AT RECEPTION NO. 885549. NOTHING TO PLOT. (AFFECTS D-F). 50. ANY QUESTION, DISPUTE OR ADVERSE CLAIMS AS TO ANY LOSS OR GAIN OF LAND AS A RESULT OF ANY CHANGE IN THE RIVER BED LOCATION BY NATURAL OR OTHER THAN NATURAL CAUSES, OR ALTERATION THROUGH ANY CAUSE, NATURAL OR UNNATURAL, OF THE CENTER THREAD, BANK, CHANNEL OR FLOW OF WATERS IN THE ROARING FORK RIVER LYING WITHIN SUBJECT LAND; AND ANY QUESTION AS TO THE LOCATION OF SUCH CENTER THREAD, BED, BANK OR CHANNEL AS A LEGAL DESCRIPTION MONUMENT OR MARKER FOR PURPOSES OF DESCRIBING OR LOCATING SUBJECT LANDS. NOTHING TO PLOT. 51. ANY RIGHTS OR INTERESTS OF THIRD PARTIES WHICH EXIST OR ARE CLAIMED TO EXIST IN AND OVER THE PRESENT AND PAST BED, BANKS OR WATERS OF CATTLE CREEK AND GLENWOOD DITCH. NOTHING TO PLOT. SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE: TO: LIFESTYLE ASSET MANAGEMENT LLC AN ARIZONA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, AND LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY, AND THEIR RESPECTIVE SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THIS MAP OR PLAT AND THE SURVEY ON WHICH IT IS BASED WERE MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 2021 MINIMUM STANDARD DETAIL REQUIREMENTS FOR ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEYS, JOINTLY ESTABLISHED AND ADOPTED BY ALTA AND NSPS, AND INCLUDES ITEMS 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 11 (OBSERVED), 12 AND 16 OF TABLE A THEREOF. THE FIELDWORK WAS COMPLETED ON JULY 23, 2021. JEFFREY ALLEN TUTTLE L.S. 33638 DATE OF PLAT OR MAP: 01/10/2022 LOT 18 LOT 7 LOT 2 LOT 6 LOT 31 LOT 10 LOT 1 LOT 8 LOT 3 LOT 4 LOT 7 LOT 6 LOT 11 LOT 5 LOT 4 LOT 9 0 LOT 3 LOT 1 LOT 9 LOT 9 LOT 25 LOT 17 FLOODWAY WETLANDS CONSERVATION EASEMENT100 YR FLOOD PLAIN APPROXIMATE POSITION OF PIPED PORTION OF THE GLENWOOD DITCH ACROSS THESE PARCELS FND REBAR & CAP LS 22580 FND 34" REBAR WITH 2.5" ALUMINUM CAP LS 22580 "LOT 71/LOT 1 1992" FND 58" REBAR WITH YELLOW PLASTIC CAP, PLS 19598 FND 58" REBAR WITH 1 14" PLASTIC CAP LS 22580 NOTE: BK 1142 AT PG 963DESCRIBES THERAILROAD CORRIDOR 50' OPEN SPACE EASEMENT BOOK 1143 AT PAGE 1 AMENDED BY BOOK 1217 PAGE 593 CATTLE CREEK/ UPPER ROARING FORK RIPARIAN ZONE 200 METER HERONPROTECTION AREA CONSERVATION EASEMENT BOOK 1171 PAGE 929 CATTLE CREEK/LOWERROARING FORK ZONE EASEMENT BOOK 1142 PAGE 963 AND AMENDMENT BOOK 1217 PAGE 588 (MAY BE RELOCATED) GLENWOOD DITCH-CENTER OF 25' AND DITCH RELOCATION AGREEMENT BOOK 1292 PAGE 61 & REC. # 798016. OPEN SPACE EASEMENTBOOK 1143 PAGE 1AMENDED BY BK 1217PG 593 S8 9 ° 2 9 ' 4 7 " E GARFIELD COUNTY SURVEYOR BRASS CAP FOR SE CORNER SECTION 7 CATTLE CREEK/ LOWERROARING FORK ZONE FND REBAR & PLASTIC CAP, ILLEGIBLE 3" ALUMINUM CAP GARFIELD COUNTY SURVEYOR SECTION 18 LICENSE GRANT AT MP 368+343 BOOK 1142 PAGE 979 AMENDMENT TO LICENSE GRANT BK 1217 PG 596 (MAY BE RELOCATED) PARCEL E 73.003 AC.+- CATT L E C R E E K GLEN W O O D D I T C H IRRIGA T I O N DITCH DI T C H FIBER OPTIC LINE 0.234 AC.±PARCEL F 20 4 3 . 8 4 ' ROARIN G F O R K T R A N S I T A U T H O R I T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O R R I D O R ROARIN G F O R K R I V E R COLORADO STATE HIG H W A Y N O 8 2 HERON ROOKERY ZONE HERON NESTING AREA 15' WITNESS CORNER PARCEL B DESCRIBED IN BOOK 511, PAGE 103 PERMANENT EASEMENT E-3 AS SHOWN ON DEPT. OF HIGHWAYS RIGHT 0F WAY MAPS WILDLIFE FENCE 7.5' EASEMENT , 1.5' EASTERLY OF AND 6' WESTERLY OF DESCRIBED CENTERLINE BK 380 PG 234 WILDLIFE FENCE 20' OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION EASEMENT BOOK 1143 AT PAGE 1 AMENDED BY BK 1217 PG 593 PERMANENT EASEMENT E-3-A AS SHOWN ON DEPT. OF HIGHWAYS RIGHT 0F WAY MAPS PERMANENT EASEMENT E-3-B AS SHOWN ON DEPT. OF HIGHWAYS RIGHT 0F WAY MAPS AGREEMENT IN BK 1164 AT PG 818 GRANTS SANDERS RANCH RIGHT TO CROSS FIBER OPTIC EASEMENT THAT LIES WITHIN RAILROAD CORRIDOR 50' OPEN SPACE EASEMENT BOOK 1143 AT PAGE 1 AMENDED BY BOOK 1217 PAGE 593 GARFIELD COUNTY SURVEYOR WITNESS CORNER HAS BEEN DESTROYED HATCHED AREA IS APPROXIMATE CONSERVATION EASEMENT BOOK 1171 AT PAGE 929 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN DIGITIZED PER FEMA FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP 1585 OF 2075 STAMPED PRELIMINARY - FOR ADDITIONAL FEMA AND FLOODINFORMATION, PLEASE VISIT THE FOLLOWING WEBSITES: https://www.garfield-county.com/community-development/fema-floodplain-mapping/ https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home GLENWOOD DITCH PIPELINE EASEMENT BOOK 217 PAGE 150 PARCEL D 85.924 AC.± C D O T R O W C D O T R O W P.O.B. PARCEL E P.O.B.PARCEL F P.O.B. PARCEL D LEGEND - DRAINAGE MANHOLE WATER VALVE WELL GATE VALVE TELEPHONE PEDESTAL UTILITY POLE INDICATES FOUND 3" COLORADO STATE HIGHWAY DEPT. R-O-W MONUMENT INDICATES FOUND NO. 5 REBAR AND CAP L.S. 20133 INDICATES FOUND NO. 5 REBAR AND CAP L.S. 22580 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED EXISTING FENCE LINE SIGN 0E OVERHEAD ELECTRIC LINE UE UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC LINE UT UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE LINE INDICATES SET NO. 5 REBAR AND CAP L.S. 33638 S25 ° 2 9 ' 3 3 " W 221 4 . 8 5 PARCEL A SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED BK 1247 PG 57 BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT BK 1247 PG 58 RAILRO A D C O R R I D O R B E T W E E N SANDER S R A N C H N O R T H P R O P E R T Y LINE (M P 3 6 7 . 3 ) A N D S A N D E R S R A N C H SOUTH P R O P E R T Y L I N E ( M P 3 6 8 . 7 7 ) I S SUBJEC T T O L I C E N S E G R A N T P E R B K 1142 PG 9 9 3 A N D A M E N D M E N T THERET O B K 1 2 1 7 P G 6 0 1 CONSERVATION EASEMENT BOOK 1171 PAGE 929 MICHAEL & MICHALEEN JERONIMUS9173 HWY. 82CARBONDALE, CO. 81623 JAMES & ALLYSON GARDNER9173 HWY. 82CARBONDALE, CO. 81623 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY53 CALAWAY CT.GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO. 81601 K & L LLC5451 COUNTY ROAD 154GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO. 81601 CAVERN SPRINGS MHC LLC5387 COUNTY ROAD 154GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO. 81601 CAVERN SPRINGS MHC LLC5387 COUNTY ROAD 154GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO. 81601 HU G O C A S T I L L O 32 7 C O R Y E L L R I D G E R O A D GL E N W O O D S P R I N G S , C O . 8 1 6 0 1 NICHOLAS GOLUBA485 COUNTY ROAD 167GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO. 81601 GRE G O R Y & S T E P H A N I E B O V E E 329 C O R Y E L L R I D G E R O A D GLE N W O O D S P R I N G S , C O . 8 1 6 0 1 PARCEL C 79.207 AC.± P.O.B. PARCEL C P.O.B. PARCEL A FND 58" REBARPLASTIC CAPILLEGIBLE P.O.B. PARCEL B FND 58" REBAR PLASTIC CAP L.S. 20133 FND 3.25" CDOTBRASS CAP FND 025" CDOTALUMINUM CAPL.S. 27272 FND 3.25" CDOT WITH ALUMINUM CAP LS 27272 FND 58" REBAR WITH 1 14" PLASTIC CAP, ILLEGIBLE FND 3.25" RFTAALUMINUM CAPL.S.16401 FND 5/8" REBAR ORANGEPLASTIC CAP L.S. 20133 FND 5/8" REBARPLASTIC CAPILLEGIBLE FND 3.25" CDOTBRASS CAP FND 3.25" CDOTBRASS CAP FND 3.25" RFTAALUMINUM CAPL.S.16401 FND 5/8" REBARPLASTIC CAPILLEGIBLE FND ALUMINUMROD FND 58" REBAR PLASTICCAP L.S. 20133 FND 3.25" CDOT ROWNO. 127 L.S. 27272 FND 3.25" CDOT BRASS CAP FND 2" ALUMINUM CAP 130' WITNESS CORNER L.S. 20133 FND 5/8" REBAR YELLOW PLASTIC CAP L.S. 19598 FND 3.25" RFTA CAP L.S. 16401 FND 3.25" RFTA ALUMINUM CAP L.S. 16401FND 3.25" RFTA ALUMINUM CAP L.S. 16401 PARCEL B 1.035 AC.± FND 3.25" RFTA ALUMINUMCAP L.S.16401 N8 9 ° 4 3 ' 3 0 " W 6 8 3 . 9 5 ' SET 58" REBAR WITH 1 14" RED PLASTIC CAP PLS 33638 SEE SHEET 5 SEE SHEET 6 SEE SHEET 7 SEE SHEET 9 SEE SHEET 4 42.499 AC±(SEE SHEET 2 FORBOUNDARY DETAILS) AL14 AL15 AL16 AL17 AL18 AL19 65.06' 65.63' 52.73' 292.61' 100.90' 73.94' N30° 31' 43"W N86° 47' 11"W N86° 47' 11"W N89° 36' 12"W N89° 43' 30"W N89° 59' 59"E CURVE TABLE CURVE # C1 C2 C3 LENGTH 346.52' 250.29' 79.82' RADIUS 1820.00' 1840.00' 2915.00' DELTA 10°54'32" 7°47'38" 1°34'08" CHORD DIRECTION N15° 58' 00"W N28° 19' 00"W N18° 51' 48"W CHORD LENGTH 346.00' 250.10' 79.82' PARCEL A BOUNDARY LINE TABLE LINE # CL136 CL137 CL138 CL139 CL140 CL141 CL142 CL143 CL144 CL145 CL146 CL147 CL148 CL149 CL150 CL151 CL152 CL153 CL154 CL155 LENGTH 60.45' 64.72' 86.97' 54.30' 123.97' 93.00' 119.58' 33.84' 37.80' 56.05' 45.48' 28.23' 95.71' 85.73' 93.22' 181.92' 98.43' 52.20' 39.34' 42.96' DIRECTION N65° 36' 14"W N49° 54' 10"W N49° 54' 10"W N48° 11' 10"W N56° 47' 27"W N83° 47' 24"W N29° 35' 31"W N78° 00' 43"W S79° 41' 48"W S22° 57' 52"W S59° 31' 57"W N82° 32' 35"W N59° 07' 03"W N71° 20' 44"W N36° 43' 10"W N25° 39' 22"W N65° 10' 24"W S85° 02' 33"W S56° 33' 52"W S20° 49' 33"W LINE TABLE LINE # CL156 CL157 CL158 CL159 CL160 CL161 CL162 CL163 CL164 CL165 CL166 CL167 CL168 CL169 CL170 CL171 CL172 CL173 CL174 CL175 LENGTH 21.60' 89.66' 70.95' 55.55' 49.93' 68.20' 77.59' 10.82' 44.14' 35.11' 47.16' 36.48' 71.03' 54.66' 63.68' 61.05' 55.52' 44.36' 37.73' 54.16' DIRECTION S37° 27' 43"E N77° 02' 57"W S70° 24' 18"W N88° 59' 39"W S84° 28' 58"W N14° 22' 48"E N05° 11' 46"W N18° 20' 05"E N22° 53' 40"E N10° 34' 58"E N08° 59' 51"E N03° 48' 08"E N04° 40' 52"E N07° 37' 51"E N29° 28' 14"W N32° 00' 44"W N26° 17' 29"W N38° 14' 36"W N53° 11' 32"W N59° 54' 48"W LINE TABLE LINE # CL176 CL177 CL178 CL179 CL180 CL181 CL182 CL183 CL184 CL185 CL186 CL187 CL188 CL189 CL190 CL191 CL192 CL193 CL194 CL195 LENGTH 36.97' 65.70' 85.02' 158.65' 41.30' 24.70' 209.99' 33.82' 78.19' 117.20' 94.24' 63.83' 141.45' 50.76' 91.04' 134.55' 74.18' 43.27' 72.23' 217.77' DIRECTION N87° 51' 35"W N57° 33' 47"W N81° 56' 22"W N04° 11' 29"W N35° 50' 41"W N54° 46' 03"W N28° 51' 45"W N11° 58' 37"W N41° 03' 46"E N06° 29' 01"W N20° 05' 27"W N11° 32' 03"W N07° 57' 46"W N09° 56' 14"E N19° 17' 44"W N44° 41' 59"W N19° 23' 49"W N19° 33' 06"W N21° 30' 01"W N00° 16' 30"E LINE TABLE LINE # CL196 CL199 LENGTH 312.94' 120.78' DIRECTION N00° 16' 30"E S09° 35' 09"E PARCEL E BOUNDARY PARCEL E BOUNDARY PARCEL E BOUNDARY PARCEL E BOUNDARY CURVE TABLE CURVE # C7 LENGTH 494.34' RADIUS 2815.00' DELTA 10°03'42" CHORD DIRECTION N14° 37' 01"W CHORD LENGTH 493.70' PARCEL E BOUNDARY LINE TABLE LINE # CL20 CL21 CL22 CL23 LENGTH 188.14' 49.74' 202.70' 260.70' DIRECTION N09° 35' 10"W S90° 00' 00"E S06° 01' 00"E S04° 34' 58"E PARCEL F BOUNDARY CURVE TABLE CURVE # C4 LENGTH 282.60' RADIUS 2915.00' DELTA 5°33'17" CHORD DIRECTION N12° 21' 49"W CHORD LENGTH 282.49' PARCEL F BOUNDARY NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW, YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THE CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHEASTERLY 1/4 OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 89 WEST, AND IN SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 7, SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED ON PAGE 1 COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE: TO: LIFESTYLE ASSET MANAGEMENT LLC AN ARIZONA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, AND LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY, AND THEIR RESPECTIVE SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THIS MAP OR PLAT AND THE SURVEY ON WHICH IT IS BASED WERE MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 2021 MINIMUM STANDARD DETAIL REQUIREMENTS FOR ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEYS, JOINTLY ESTABLISHED AND ADOPTED BY ALTA AND NSPS, AND INCLUDES ITEMS 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 11 (OBSERVED), 12 AND 16 OF TABLE A THEREOF. THE FIELDWORK WAS COMPLETED ON JULY 23, 2021. JEFFREY ALLEN TUTTLE L.S. 33638 DATE OF PLAT OR MAP: 01/10/2022 H I G H W A Y 8 2 YARD HYDRANT GUY WIRESWOOD FENCE WOOD FENCE ELECTRIC METER E D G E O F P A V E M E N T POWER POLE (TYP.) WIRE FE N C E SEPTICLIDSPARCEL 5 (EXCEPTION) PARCEL 6 PARCEL 7 PARCEL 2 PA R C E L 3 PARCEL 1 (EXCEPTION) (EXCEPTION) FENCE WAL K DE C K 6.42' 5.36' 61 . 4 ' 21.2' 10 7 . 7 ' 100.5' 21 . 5 ' 54.2' 35 . 6 4 ' N0 0 ° 0 0 ' 0 0 " E 32 4 . 6 9 ' N00°00'00"E 7.98' S 3 4 ° 4 5 ' 3 0 " E 2 2 9 . 1 7 ' S 3 4 ° 4 5 ' 3 0 " E 2 2 4 . 3 4 ' 4.55' N89°12'00"E5.54' N90°00'00"W 227.00' EDGE OF PARKING N89°17'09"W 224.24'S 3 5 ° 2 2 ' 1 9 " E 4. 2 6 ' N90°00'00"W5.95' N00°00'00"E 0.68' N88°59'16"W 103.03' S 0 2 ° 4 8 ' 1 6 " E 7 0 . 5 2 ' S86°47'11"E 65.63' S 3 0 ° 3 1 ' 4 3 " E 6 5 . 0 6 ' N0 0 ° 0 0 ' 0 0 " E 12 8 . 3 4 ' S88°59'16"E 13.39' S0 1 ° 0 5 ' 1 4 " W 20 0 . 8 7 ' EDGE OF PARKING EDGE OF PARKING 18 7 . 8 7 ' 0.19 ACRES +/- 0.84 ACRES +/--0.03 ACRES +/- PARCEL 7 EXCEPTION = 0.81 ACRES +/- DRIVE DRIVE S 3 5 ° 1 4 ' 0 0 " E 9 2 . 2 0 ' S 3 5 ° 1 4 ' 0 0 " E 6 9 . 9 8 ' S89°17'09"E 0.99' WO O D F E N C E WELL OVERHEAD UTILITY LINE FND 5/8" REBARCAP L.S. 19598 N34°53'49"W9.76' N37°33'19"W6.55' FND 5/8" REBARCAP L.S. 22580 FND 5/8" REBAR CAP L.S. 19598 FND 5/8" REBAR CAP L.S. 19598 FND 5/8" REBAR CAP L.S. 20133 P.O.B FOR PARCEL B PARCEL 2 FND 5/8" REBAR CAP L.S. 20133 SINGLE STORY WOOD BUILDING DECK DRIVE PARCEL 4 0.01 ACRES +/-(TYP.) DRIVE NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW, YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THE CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHEASTERLY 1/4 OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 89 WEST, AND IN SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 7, SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED ON PAGE 1 COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 5 MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 5 SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE: TO: LIFESTYLE ASSET MANAGEMENT LLC AN ARIZONA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, AND LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY, AND THEIR RESPECTIVE SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THIS MAP OR PLAT AND THE SURVEY ON WHICH IT IS BASED WERE MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 2021 MINIMUM STANDARD DETAIL REQUIREMENTS FOR ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEYS, JOINTLY ESTABLISHED AND ADOPTED BY ALTA AND NSPS, AND INCLUDES ITEMS 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 11 (OBSERVED), 12 AND 16 OF TABLE A THEREOF. THE FIELDWORK WAS COMPLETED ON JULY 23, 2021. JEFFREY ALLEN TUTTLE L.S. 33638 DATE OF PLAT OR MAP: 01/10/2022 LO T 9 N89°43'30"W 683.95' SET 58" REBAR WITH 1 14" RED PLASTIC CAP PLS 33638 LOT 31 PARCEL C 79.207 AC.± SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED BK 1247 PG 57 BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT BK 1247 PG 58 FND REBAR & PLASTIC CAP, ILLEGIBLE P.O.B. PARCEL E G L E N W O O D D I T C H LOT 1 PERMANENT EASEMENT E-3 AS SHOWN ON DEPT. OF HIGHWAYS RIGHT 0F WAY MAPS WILDLIFE FENCE FND 025" CDOTALUMINUM CAPL.S. 27272 I R R I G A T I O N D I T C H FND 58" REBAR WITH 1 14" PLASTICCAP LS 22580 7.5' EASEMENT , 1.5'EASTERLY OF AND 6'WESTERLY OF DESCRIBEDCENTERLINE BK 380 PG 234 FND 3.25" CDOTBRASS CAP LOT 6 LOT 7 PARCEL A 42.499 AC.± FND 3.25" CDOTWITH ALUMINUMCAP LS 27272 P.O.B. PARCEL B FND 58" REBAR PLASTIC CAP L.S. 20133 DITCH N89°43'30"W 683.95' FND 3.25" RFTA ALUMINUM CAP L.S.16401 FND 34" REBAR WITH 2.5" ALUMINUM CAP LS 22580 "LOT 71/LOT 1 1992" FND REBAR& CAP LS22580 FND 3.25" RFTAALUMINUM CAPL.S.16401 P.O.B. PARCEL C NOTE: BK 1142 AT PG 963DESCRIBES THERAILROAD CORRIDOR 50' OPEN SPACE EASEMENT BOOK 1143 AT PAGE 1 AMENDED BY BOOK 1217 PAGE 593 POWER POLES (TYP.) HUGO CASTILLO327 CORYELL RIDGE ROADGLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO. 81601 R O A R I N G F O R K T R A N S I T A U T H O R I T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O R R I D O R C O L O R A D O S T A T E H I G H W A Y N O 8 2 FND 5/8" REBARPLASTIC CAPILLEGIBLE 15' WITNESS CORNER PARCEL B DESCRIBED IN BOOK 511, PAGE 103 GLENWOOD DITCH-CENTER OF 25' AND DITCH RELOCATION AGREEMENT BOOK 1292 PAGE 61 & REC. # 798016. GRAVEL ROADS DITCH STORMMANHOLE(TYP.) R O A R I N G F O R K R I V E R GRAVEL ROAD TELECOMPEDESTAL(TYP.) EASEMENT BOOK 1142 PAGE 963 AND AMENDMENT BOOK 1217 PAGE 588 (MAY BE RELOCATED) DITCH STORMCULVERT(TYP.) DITCH DITCH NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW, YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THE CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHEASTERLY 1/4 OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 89 WEST, AND IN SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 7, SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED ON PAGE 1 COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 6 MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 6 MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 4 SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE: TO: LIFESTYLE ASSET MANAGEMENT LLC AN ARIZONA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, AND LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY, AND THEIR RESPECTIVE SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THIS MAP OR PLAT AND THE SURVEY ON WHICH IT IS BASED WERE MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 2021 MINIMUM STANDARD DETAIL REQUIREMENTS FOR ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEYS, JOINTLY ESTABLISHED AND ADOPTED BY ALTA AND NSPS, AND INCLUDES ITEMS 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 11 (OBSERVED), 12 AND 16 OF TABLE A THEREOF. THE FIELDWORK WAS COMPLETED ON JULY 23, 2021. JEFFREY ALLEN TUTTLE L.S. 33638 DATE OF PLAT OR MAP: 01/10/2022 GLENWOOD DITCH-CENTER OF 25' AND DITCH RELOCATION AGREEMENT BOOK 1292 PAGE 61 & REC. # 798016 R O A R I N G F O R K T R A N S I T A U T H O R I T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O R R I D O R FND 5/8" REBARPLASTIC CAPILLEGIBLE FND 3.25" CDOTBRASS CAP LOT 9 RAILROAD CORRIDOR BETWEEN SANDERS RANCH NORTH PROPERTY LINE (MP 367.3) AND SANDERS RANCH SOUTH PROPERTY LINE (MP 368.77) IS SUBJECT TO LICENSE GRANT PER BK 1142 PG 993 AND AMENDMENT THERETO BK 1217 PG 601 LOT 10 LOT 11 200 METER HERONPROTECTION AREA CA T T L E C R E E K / L O W E R RO A R I N G F O R K Z O N E G R A V E L R O A D C A T T L E C R E E K LOT 17 HERON ROOKERY ZONE PARCEL E 73.003 AC.± LOT 8 APPROXIMATE POSITION OF PIPED PORTION OF THE GLENWOOD DITCH ACROSS THESE PARCELS WILDLIFEFENCE 20' OPEN SPACECONSERVATIONEASEMENT BOOK 1143AT PAGE 1 AMENDEDBY BK 1217 PG 593 PERMANENT EASEMENT E-3-A ASSHOWN ON DEPT. OF HIGHWAYSRIGHT 0F WAY MAPS PERMANENT EASEMENT E-3-B AS SHOWN ON DEPT. OF HIGHWAYS RIGHT 0F WAY MAPS P.O.B. PARCEL A FND 58" REBARPLASTIC CAPILLEGIBLE FND 3.25" RFTAALUMINUM CAPL.S.16401 FND 5/8" REBARPLASTIC CAPILLEGIBLE FND ALUMINUMROD LOT 4 FND 3.25" CDOTBRASS CAP DITCH STORMCULVERT(TYP.) STORMMANHOLE(TYP.) WATERVALVE(TYP.) R O A R I N G F O R K R I V E R RO A R I N G F O R K R I V E R HE R O N N E S T I N G A R E A U N P A V E D R O A D C O L O R A D O S T A T E H I G H W A Y N O 8 2 NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW, YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THE CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHEASTERLY 1/4 OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 89 WEST, AND IN SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 7, SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED ON PAGE 1 COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 7 MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 7 MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 5 MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 5 SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE: TO: LIFESTYLE ASSET MANAGEMENT LLC AN ARIZONA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, AND LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY, AND THEIR RESPECTIVE SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THIS MAP OR PLAT AND THE SURVEY ON WHICH IT IS BASED WERE MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 2021 MINIMUM STANDARD DETAIL REQUIREMENTS FOR ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEYS, JOINTLY ESTABLISHED AND ADOPTED BY ALTA AND NSPS, AND INCLUDES ITEMS 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 11 (OBSERVED), 12 AND 16 OF TABLE A THEREOF. THE FIELDWORK WAS COMPLETED ON JULY 23, 2021. JEFFREY ALLEN TUTTLE L.S. 33638 DATE OF PLAT OR MAP: 01/10/2022 LO T 6 LO T 1 3 1 . 8 57.7 GLENWOOD DITCH-CENTER OF 25' AND DITCH RELOCATION AGREEMENT BOOK 1292 PAGE 61 LOT 3 LOT 3 LOT 2 LOT 18 LICENSE GRANT AT MP 368+343BOOK 1142 PAGE 979AMENDMENT TO LICENSEGRANT BK 1217 PG 596(MAY BE RELOCATED) L.S.16401 CONSERVATION EASEMENT BOOK 1171 PAGE 929 CATTLE CREEK/LOWERROARING FORK ZONE P.O.B. PARCEL D UNPAVED ROAD UNPAVED R O A D STORMCULVERT(TYP.) CATTLE CREEK/ UPPER ROARING FORK RIPARIAN ZONE GARFIELD COUNTY SURVEYOR WITNESS CORNER HAS BEEN DESTROYED OPEN SPACE EASEMENTBOOK 1143 PAGE 1AMENDED BY BK 1217PG 593 TELECOMPEDESTAL(TYP.) RETAINING WALLS P.O.B. PARCEL D FND 3.25" CDOT BRASS CAP FND 58" REBAR PLASTICCAP L.S. 20133 STO R M C U L V E R T STORMCULVERT(TYP.) LOT 1 D I T C H STORMMANHOLE(TYP.) R O A R I N G F O R K R I V E R AGREEMENT IN BK 1164 AT PG 818GRANTS SANDERS RANCH RIGHT TOCROSS FIBER OPTIC EASEMENT THATLIES WITHIN RAILROAD CORRIDOR CDOT ROW LOT 5 UNPAVED RO A D S89°29'47"E 2043.84' 200 METER HERONPROTECTION AREA C O L O R A D O S T A T E H I G H W A Y N O 8 2 S25° 2 9 ' 3 3 " W 2214 . 8 5 NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW, YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THE CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHEASTERLY 1/4 OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 89 WEST, AND IN SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 7, SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED ON PAGE 1 COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 8 MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 8 MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 6 MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 6 SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE: TO: LIFESTYLE ASSET MANAGEMENT LLC AN ARIZONA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, AND LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY, AND THEIR RESPECTIVE SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THIS MAP OR PLAT AND THE SURVEY ON WHICH IT IS BASED WERE MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 2021 MINIMUM STANDARD DETAIL REQUIREMENTS FOR ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEYS, JOINTLY ESTABLISHED AND ADOPTED BY ALTA AND NSPS, AND INCLUDES ITEMS 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 11 (OBSERVED), 12 AND 16 OF TABLE A THEREOF. THE FIELDWORK WAS COMPLETED ON JULY 23, 2021. JEFFREY ALLEN TUTTLE L.S. 33638 DATE OF PLAT OR MAP: 01/10/2022 LO T 6 GLENWOOD DITCH-CENTER OF 25' AND DITCH RELOCATION AGREEMENT BOOK 1292 PAGE 61 LOT 6 LOT 7 LOT 4 PARCEL D 85.924 AC.± HATCHED AREA IS APPROXIMATE CONSERVATION EASEMENT BOOK 1171 AT PAGE 929 CONTROLBOX ABOVE GROUNDIRRIGATION PIPIE WATER VALVE(TYP.) FND 2" ALUMINUM CAP130'WITNESS CORNERL.S. 20133 FND 5/8" REBAR WITH 1 14"YELLOW PLASTIC CAP,L.S. 19598 3" ALUMINUM CAP GARFIELD COUNTY SURVEYOR SECTION 18 N89°51'49"W 406.53' FND 3.25" RFTA ALUMINUM CAP L.S. 16401 FND 3.25" RFTA ALUMINUM CAP L.S. 16401 MARKER BOARD ROAD SIGN (TYP.) GLENWOOD DITCH PIPELINE EASEMENT BOOK 217 PAGE 150 AGREEMENT IN BK 1164 AT PG 818 GRANTS SANDERS RANCH RIGHT TO CROSS FIBER OPTIC EASEMENT THAT LIES WITHIN RAILROAD CORRIDOR STO R M C U L V E R T STORMMANHOLE(TYP.) STORMMANHOLE(TYP.) 50' OPEN SPACE EASEMENT BOOK 1143 AT PAGE 1 AMENDED BY BOOK 1217 PAGE 593 U N P A V E D R O A D U N P A V E D R O A D LOT 9 R O A R I N G F O R K R I V E R RO A R I N G F O R K R I V E R FND 3.25" RFTA CAP L.S. 16401 C O L O R A D O S T A T E H I G H W A Y N O 8 2 NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW, YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THE CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHEASTERLY 1/4 OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 89 WEST, AND IN SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 7, SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED ON PAGE 1 COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEYMATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 7 SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE: TO: LIFESTYLE ASSET MANAGEMENT LLC AN ARIZONA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, AND LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY, AND THEIR RESPECTIVE SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THIS MAP OR PLAT AND THE SURVEY ON WHICH IT IS BASED WERE MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 2021 MINIMUM STANDARD DETAIL REQUIREMENTS FOR ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEYS, JOINTLY ESTABLISHED AND ADOPTED BY ALTA AND NSPS, AND INCLUDES ITEMS 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 11 (OBSERVED), 12 AND 16 OF TABLE A THEREOF. THE FIELDWORK WAS COMPLETED ON JULY 23, 2021. JEFFREY ALLEN TUTTLE L.S. 33638 DATE OF PLAT OR MAP: 01/10/2022 Exhibit K Waterlaw Water Supply Letter November 6, 2024 Realty Capital Management Richard Myers rmyers@realtycapital.com Sarah Brown sbrown@realtycapital.com Tim Coltart tcoltart@realtycapital.com Via Email RE: Water Supply for Harvest Roaring Fork Development (our file # 1854A) Dear Richard, Sarah, and Tim: We provide this letter in support of the land use application to be submitted to Garfield County for the development of the Harvest Roaring Fork property. Harvest Roaring Fork, LLC (“Developer”) owns the former Sanders Ranch property – Garfield County Parcel Nos. 239307300033; 239501400161; 239307300032; 239307200031; and 239307200001 (the “Property”) and is in the process of developing the Property to include single-family homes, multi-family units, and commercial space. Specifically, this letter describes the water that can and will legally and physically supply the Property in sufficient quantity for domestic, commercial, and irrigation uses, as well as a series of ponds. Domestic and Commercial Water Supply Developer owns numerous water rights that will be assigned and dedicated to Roaring Fork Water and Sanitation District (“RFWSD”) as part of inclusion into RFWSD. After inclusion into the District and assignment of the below water rights, RFWSD will provide all domestic and commercial water supply to the Property. Developer is currently working on an amended Pre-Inclusion Agreement with RFWSD. The water rights to be dedicated to RFWSD include: • Case No. 01CW187 o Aspen Glen Well Nos. 1-7; o Coryell Ranch Well Nos. 1-4; o Coryell Ranch Roaring Fork Diversion o These water rights are all decreed as alternate points of diversion to the Basalt Water Conservancy District’s (“BWCD”) Basalt Conduit water right. • Case No. 07CW164 o Coryell Ranch Roaring Fork Diversion River Edge Enlargement; Decreed as alternate point of diversion to the Case No. 01CW187 water rights, the Roberson Ditch, and Posy Pump and Pipeline. o REC Well Field; o REC Roaring Fork Diversion • Case No. 08CW198 o Added Case No. 07CW164 water rights as alternate points of diversion to the Basalt Conduit water right. o This decree further contemplates the above-described process where Developer may assign the Case No. 01CW187 and 07CW164 water rights to RFWSD to receive District service In total, these decreed water rights allow Developer to serve 1,200 EQRs on the Property. These EQRs may either be domestic or commercial. Developer currently holds BWCD Contract No. 381c to augment depletions from the above water rights as part of the central water system. The contract will similarly be assigned to RFWSD. Applicant is in the process of obtaining an additional BWCD Allotment Contract that will augment the fully proposed 1,500 domestic EQRs and 30 commercial EQRs. The second BWCD contract will be an “Area A” contract that allows use of any of the above water rights to serve the Development, with augmentation supplies coming directly from the BWCD. Thus, Developer’s water rights, through dedication and inclusion within RFWSD, provide sufficient legal and physical water supply to serve the planned 1,500 domestic EQRs and 30 commercial EQRs. Irrigation Water Supply Developer owns irrigation water rights in the Glenwood and Staton Ditches. Developer directly owns rights in the Staton Ditch, while the Glenwood Ditch rights are owned through ownership of shares in the Thompson Glen Ditch Company (“TGDC”). Thompson Glen Ditch Company Developer owns 457 TGDC shares, equivalent to approximately 24.47 percent of the ditch company’s total water rights. TGDC owns 50 c.f.s. in the Glenwood Ditch, comprised of 32 c.f.s. in Priority No. 213BBBA and 18 c.f.s. in Priority No. 339. Thus, Developer’s 457 shares are equivalent to roughly 12.24 c.f.s. The majority of this water is diverted at the Glenwood Ditch headgate on the Roaring Fork River above the Property, while 2 c.f.s. may be diverted at the Cattle Creek headgate located on the Property. Staton Ditch Developer owns 0.87 c.f.s. in Staton Ditch, Priority Nos. 53 and 79, and 2.62 c.f.s. in Priority No. 299. This 4.36 c.f.s. is the entire amount currently decreed to the Staton Ditch as various amounts of each priority were changed to dry-up credits in several plans for augmentation. Developer’s Staton Ditch rights were changed to be decreed from Cattle Creek on the Property in Case No. 13CW19. However, that change resulted in a reduction in allowable diversion rates due to historical seepage calculation. Thus, Developer may divert 0.80 c.f.s. from Priority Nos. 53 and 79, and 2.42 c.f.s. from Priority No. 299 at the headgate on the Property. However, Developer may elect to divert the remaining 0.35 c.f.s. at the upper headgate on Cattle Creek for delivery to the Property. Case Nos. 01CW188 and 01CW189, discussed below, confirmed that the two ditches were historically commingled to irrigate 240 acres on the Property. Developer will continue to use these ditches as part of a raw water irrigation system for the Property. Additionally, the domestic water rights described above, and the associated BWCD contract, allow for 7 acres of irrigation from those water rights through the domestic water system. The domestic water system will be used to irrigate parks, open spaces, and landscaping. Ponds Developer owns five pond water rights, decreed in Case Nos. 01CW188 and 01CW189 as the Bair Chase Lake Nos. 1-5. Each lake is decreed for 25 acre-feet, conditional, for recreation, aesthetic, wildlife habitat for birds and fish, water quality enhancement, and piscatorial purposes. The surface area of each lake is limited to 5 acres. Evaporative depletions from the lakes are augmented through the plan for augmentation decreed in Case No. 01CW188 which includes a combination of historic consumptive use credits from the Glenwood and Staton Ditches (of varying amounts depending on total pond sizes) and the above-described BWCD contract. Developer plans to build a total of 5 surface areas of lakes, through a to-be-determined combination of the Bair Chase Lake Nos. 1-5 water rights. Developer owns sufficient water rights to provide a physical and legal water supply, with augmentation, for the proposed ponds. We hope that this information is helpful. Please contact me or John Sittler if you have any questions or wish to discuss this letter in more detail. Very truly yours, Patrick | Miller | Noto A Professional Corporation By:_______________________ Scott C. Miller miller@waterlaw.com SCM/jms cc: Chad Lee, Esq. džŚŝďŝƚD Z&dƌŽƐƐŝŶŐƐ WZ K W Z d z > / E ZK Z / E ' & K Z < Z / s Z y / ^ d / E ' > t z d ͘ / E d Z ^ d / K E E d Z > / E Λ ^ , Ͳ ϴ Ϯ D / > D Z < Z ϲ ͘ ϵ ϲ y / ^ d / E ' Z Ͳ ϭ ϱ ϰ ͬ Z Ͳ ϭ ϭ ϰ ; d , h E Z Z/ s Z D Z < d Ϳ / E d Z ^ d / K E E d Z > / E Λ ^ , Ͳ ϴ Ϯ D / > D Z < Z ϲ ͘ ϲ ϴ y / ^ d / E ' Z Ͳ ϭ ϭ ϯ ; d d > Z < Z K Ϳ /E d Z ^ d / K E E d Z > / E Λ ^ , Ͳ ϴ Ϯ D/ > D Z < Z ϳ ͘ ϴ ϱ dK Z s / ^ d K Z/ / ' , d / E Z / ' , d K h d ^, Ͳ ϴ Ϯ D / > D Z < Z ϳ ^, Ͳ ϴ Ϯ D / > D Z < Z ϴ WZK W Z d z > / E WZ K W Z d z > / E WZK W Z d z > / E WZ K W K ^ ϯϰD K s D E d ;> & d / E E Z/ ' , d Ͳ / E ͬ Z / ' , d Ͳ K h d /E d Z ^ d / K E E d Z > / E Λ ^ , Ͳ ϴ Ϯ D/ > D Z < Z ϳ ͘ ϯ ϴ WZ K W K ^ Z/ ' , d Ͳ / E ͬ Z / ' , d Ͳ K h d /E d Z ^ d / K E E d Z > / E Λ ^ , Ͳ ϴ Ϯ D/ > D Z < Z ϳ ͘ ϳ ϲ WZ K W K ^ ^ K h d , h d h Z E /E d Z ^ d / K E E d Z > / E Λ ^, Ͳ ϴ Ϯ D / > D Z < Z ϴ ͘ Ϯ ϭ ϯϰDK s D E d d K Z / Z K с Ϯ Ϭ Ϭ ϰ Ζ ; ϵ ϲ Ϭ Ζ > н ϮϮϮΖ d W Z н ϲ Ϭ Ϭ Ζ > н Ϯ Ϯ Ϯ Ζ d W Z Ϳ > t z d d K ϯϰD K s D E d D / E > E ' d , с Ϯ Ϭ Ϭ ϰ Ζ ; ϵ ϲ Ϭ Ζ > нϮ Ϯ Ϯ Ζ d W Z н ϲ Ϭ Ϭ Ζ > н Ϯ Ϯ Ϯ Ζ d W Z Ϳ ; Ύ d h > Ϯ Ϯ Ϯ Ϭ Ζ Ϳ y/^ d / E ' d d > Z < d K ϯ ϰDK s D E d D / E > E ' d , с Ϯ ϯ ϲ Ϭ Ζ ;ϵϲϬ Ζ > н ϴ ϳ ϱ > н ^ d K Z ' Ϳ D / E ; Ύ d h > Ϯ ϱ Ϭ Ϭ Ζ Ϳ Z/ZK d K W Z K W K ^ h Ͳ d h Z E D / E > E ' d , с Ϯϯϲ Ϭ Ζ ; ϵ ϲ Ϭ Ζ > н ϵ ϳ ϱ Ζ > н ^ d K Z ' Ϳ D / E WZ K W K ^ Z & d Z K ^ ^ / E ' ͕ s > K W D E d ^ ^ Z K 'K ^ h E Z Z & d d Z / > WZ K W K ^ Z & d Z K ^ ^ / E ' ͕ s > K W D E d ^ ^ Z K Z K ^ ^ ^ Z & d Λ ' Z y / ^ d / E ' Z / K ' Z E d Z / > d K W ^ ^ > K t ' Z EK Z d , E d Z > EK Z d , Z/ s Z & Z K E d s/ > > ' E / ' , K Z , K K EK Z d , &Z K E d ' d, & Z D s/ > > ' E d Z ^K h d , Z/ s Z & Z K E d Z < ^ / ^K W Z / ^ E d h Z > Z d Z s / ^ / K E yy y Ͳ ϭ ͘ Ϭ Z t / E ' E K ͘ d/ d > Z '/KE> ^dDW '͗ͰϮϬϮϰͰϯϰϬϭϬͲZ >dzW/dK>Z/s Z ' Ͱ/s/>Ͱ/s/>t'^ͰW>KdͰϯϰϬϭϬͲϬ͘ϬͲKd͘t'ͲƉƌϭϰ͕ϮϬϮϱͲϭϬ͗ϱϰĂŵ EK Z d , ϬϬ ͬ Ϭ Ϭ ͬ Ϭ Ϭ , Z s ^ d /E d Z ^ d / K E ^ Ks Z > > ,Zs ^d 'Z&/ >KhEdz͕K>KZK y,//d D D Z h d / > / d / ^ &K Z d , D Z < / E ' K & h E Z ' Z K h E & K Z z K h / ' ͕ ' Z ͕ K Z y s d > > Ϯ Ͳ h ^ / E ^ ^ z ^ / E s E .Q R Z Z K D W V R ϯϰ Ϭ ϭ Ϭ :K E K ͘ d ͗ Ϭϰ ͬ ϭ ϰ ͬ Ϯ Ϭ Ϯ ϱ ^ / ' E z Z t E z , < z yy y ϬϬ ͬ Ϭ Ϭ ͬ Ϭ Ϭ yy y ϬϬ ͬ Ϭ Ϭ ͬ Ϭ Ϭ yy y ϬϬ ͬ Ϭ Ϭ ͬ Ϭ Ϭ 6235,6(1*,1((5,1*//& 0$,1675((768,7($&$5%21'$/(&2 VRSULVHQJLQHHULQJFRP ϭ ŝ Ŷ Đ Ś с Ĩ ƚ ͘ ; / E & d Ϳ 'Z W , / ^ > Ϭ Ϯϱ Ϭ Ϯ ϱ Ϭ ϱ Ϭ Ϭ Ϯϱ Ϭ ϭϬ Ϭ Ϭ ϭϮ ϱ Exhibit N Safe Routes to Schools Map Roaring Fork School District Impact Harvest should have approximately 320 school-aged children when the community is completed and is expected to generate $4,800,000 in tax revenue annually to the Roaring Fork School District. Discussions with the school district indicate that the capacity to serve the development is not a concern and that additional land is likely not of interest. Should this be, Harvest Roaring Fork will pay any applicable school impact fees or other mechanisms agreed upon with the district and as required by Garfield County. See the next page of this exhibit for the safe routes to school map, which illustrates which schools Harvest’s school-aged children would attend and their approximate distances. Exhibit O Conservation and Sustainability Conservation and Sustainability A Conservation Community Harvest Roaring Fork is designed as a conservation community, integrating environmental stewardship with sustainable development. Our approach prioritizes wildlife and riparian area conservation, responsible land use, and sustainable building practices to ensure long -term ecological and community resilience. Through strategic planning, collaboration with conservation experts, and innovative building methods, we are committed to protecting natural resources while addressing the Roaring Fork Valley’s housing needs. Partnership with the Roaring Fork Conservancy (RFC) The Roaring Fork Conservancy (RFC) holds a 54-acre conservation easement within Harvest Roaring Fork, ensuring permanent protection of sensitive habitats along the Roaring Fork River and Cattle Creek. We are committed to continuing to work closely with the RFC to align our development plan with conservation values and support long-term ecological management both within the conservation easement and the greater Harvest community. Ongoing Coordination and Compliance Monitoring • Regular Meetings and Site Walks: We will actively engage with RFC to review development plans, ensure easement compliance, and implement best practices for ecological preservation. • Wildlife and Habitat Considerations: The Harvest Roaring Fork team, along with our wildlife expert, Jonathan Lowsky with Colorado Wildlife Science, have met with the RFC to discuss buffers, setbacks, single-loaded streets, and potential viewing access points that minimize habitat disruption. • Harvest Property Owners’ Association (POA) Role: We are working with the RFC to define how the POA can support long-term stewardship of the conservation easement through funding and education. Annual and As-Needed Monitoring • RFC conducts an annual monitoring assessment to ensure compliance with the easement’s conservation objectives. • Additional site visits will be conducted as needed to address concerns and preserve ecological integrity. Commitment to Conservation Harvest Roaring Fork is committed to a long-term partnership with the RFC to ensure that conservation remains a core pillar of our community. Our development approach reflects responsible land use and the goal to promote RFC’s mission to protect and enhance the watershed, riparian habitats, and biodiversity of the Roaring Fork Valley. Sustainability in Land Use and Development Beyond traditional conservation efforts, Harvest Roaring Fork embraces sustainable land use and building practices that reduce environmental impact and promote resilient community design. Sustainable Housing and Materials • Efficient Home Designs: Compact footprints reduce material use while maintaining functionality and livability. • Environmentally Conscious Construction: We emphasize low-waste building techniques, energy-efficient materials, and sustainable construction methods that align with conservation goals. • Water-Saving Design: Landscaping regulations encourage native plants, limit turf areas, and promote high-efficiency irrigation systems to reduce water demand. • Building Performance Standards: Homes will meet or exceed energy efficiency benchmarks through enhanced insulation, LED lighting, and Energy Star-rated appliances. • Carbon offsetting though the revitalization of the property increasing plant life both within the developed community and the conservation easement and the buffer areas. Preservation and Reclamation of Disturbed Land • The 54-acre conservation easement represents almost 20% of Harvest Roaring Fork. The remaining property was stripped of its topsoil in 2005, destroying almost all the vegetation that was there. Harvest Roaring Fork will increase the amount of dedicated open space and plans to reclaim and revegetate a significant portion of these denuded areas as each neighborhood is developed. • The conservation easement, linear parks, and wildlife corridors will enhance biodiversity and habitat connectivity on the property. Renewable Energy and Smart Growth • While large-scale solar or wind power generation is not feasible, individual buildings will incorporate energy-saving features to reduce overall consumption. • The project supports smart growth principles by locating housing near existing infrastructure and minimizing vehicular dependence by creating a village neighborhood within Harvest. Conclusion Harvest Roaring Fork is more than a housing development, it is a conservation-first community that integrates habitat preservation, sustainable building practices, and responsible land management. By collaborating with RFC and implementing eco-conscious development strategies, and prioritizing sustainable building practices and living, we are ensuring that this community will benefit both residents and the environment for generations to come. Exhibit P Noxious Weed Compliance 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.40.05 Miles Cattle Creek / Heron Point Noxious Weeds August 2021 Maxar Map Created by Hannah Judge Bulbous Bluegrass Bull Thistle Canada Thistle Cheatgrass Common Burdock Common Mullein Common Tansy Field Bindweed Houndstongue Musk Thistle Oxeye Daisy Perennial Sowthistle Plumeless Thistle Redstem Filaree Russian Olive Scotch Thistle Type Bull Thistle Canada Thistle Cheatgrass Common Mullein Common Tansy Houndstongue Musk Thistle Plumeless Thistle Scotch Thistle Garfield County Parcels 0 0.06 0.12 0.18 0.240.03 Miles Cattle Creek / Heron Point Noxious Weeds August 2021 Maxar, Microsoft, Maxar Map Created by Hannah Judge Bulbous Bluegrass Bull Thistle Canada Thistle Cheatgrass Common Burdock Common Mullein Common Tansy Field Bindweed Houndstongue Musk Thistle Oxeye Daisy Perennial Sowthistle Plumeless Thistle Redstem Filaree Russian Olive Scotch Thistle Type Bull Thistle Canada Thistle Cheatgrass Common Mullein Common Tansy Houndstongue Musk Thistle Plumeless Thistle Scotch Thistle Garfield County Parcels 0 0.09 0.18 0.27 0.360.04 Miles Cattle Creek / Heron Point Noxious Weeds August 2021 Earthstar Geographics, Map Created by Hannah Judge Bulbous Bluegrass Bull Thistle Canada Thistle Cheatgrass Common Burdock Common Mullein Common Tansy Field Bindweed Houndstongue Musk Thistle Oxeye Daisy Perennial Sowthistle Plumeless Thistle Redstem Filaree Russian Olive Scotch Thistle Type Bull Thistle Canada Thistle Cheatgrass Common Mullein Common Tansy Houndstongue Musk Thistle Plumeless Thistle Scotch Thistle Garfield County Parcels Bulbous Bluegrass Bull Thistle Canada Thistle Cheatgrass Common Burdock Common Mullein Common Tansy Field Bindweed Houndstongue Musk Thistle Oxeye Daisy Perennial Sowthistle Plumeless Thistle Redstem Filaree Russian Olive Scotch Thistle Type Bull Thistle Canada Thistle Cheatgrass Common Mullein Common Tansy Houndstongue Musk Thistle Plumeless Thistle Scotch Thistle Garfield County Parcels 0 0.06 0.11 0.17 0.220.03 Miles Cattle Creek / Heron Point Noxious Weeds August 2021 Maxar, Microsoft, Maxar Map Created by Hannah Judge ecorightsolutions@yahoo.com Harron Point/Cattle Ck Noxious Weed Mgt Plan Management Plan Goals The goal of the Cattle Ck./Harron Point Noxious Weed Management Plan is to manage and/or eradicate noxious weeds on the property in compliance with The Colorado Noxious Weed Act. Which aims to control the spread of invasive, non-native plants that threaten agriculture, ecosystems, and wildlife habitat. Inventoried Noxious Vegetation on the Property. Plumeless Thistle Common Mullin Cheat grass (not be treated at this time) Musk Thistle Common Burdock Bull Thistle Scotch Thistle Common Tansy Oxide daisy Canada thistle Control Methods The most effective plan for managing noxious weeds combines several control methods in a consistent, integrated management program. The plan must take into account the needs of the desirable native plants, the nature of the plant pests, safety to livestock and wildlife, and the needs of the property owner and land users. An integrated weed management program consists of a variety of combinations of the following methods: • Mechanical Management –Hand Pulling and chopping along the Rio-Grand Trail corridor. • Chemical Management – Herbicides (Milestone 4 oz/acre, Telar 1 oz./acre) have been used for the past two seasons at label rates and timing. For the past two years a total of four applications were made on the property which eliminated State list noxious vegetation from producing seeds in turn eliminating further spread of noxious weeds. The current weed populations currently germinating are a result of seed stocks in the soil. With the current progress being made on the property, seed stocks are being exhausted and noxious weed populations will decrease rapidly within the next year or two. 167 Redstone Blvd Redstone, CO 81623 (970) 963-7357 Exhibit Q Title Commitments Customer Distribution Prevent fraud - Please call a member of our closing team for wire transfer instructions or to initiate a wire transfer. Note that our wiring instructions will never change. Order Number: RND63021533 Date: 11/01/2024 Property Address: 7999 HIGHWAY 82, CARBONDALE, CO 81623 For Closing Assistance For Title Assistance George Rietsch 5975 GREENWOOD PLAZA BLVD GREENWOOD VILLAGE, CO 80111 (303) 850-4151 (Work) grietsch@ltgc.com Seller/Owner HARVEST ROARING FORK, LLC, A TEXAS LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY Attention: RICHARD MYERS/SARAH BROWN/TIM COLTART rmyers@rcpinvestments.com sbrown@realtycapital.com timcoltart@realtycapital.com Delivered via: Electronic Mail Estimate of Title Fees Order Number: RND63021533 Date: 11/01/2024 Property Address: 7999 HIGHWAY 82, CARBONDALE, CO 81623 Seller(s): HARVEST ROARING FORK, LLC, A TEXAS LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY Buyer(s): A BUYER TO BE DETERMINED Thank you for putting your trust in Land Title. Below is the estimate of title fees for the transaction. The final fees will be collected at closing. Visit ltgc.com to learn more about Land Title. Estimate of Title Insurance Fees "TBD" Commitment $279.00 TOTAL $279.00 Note: The documents linked in this commitment should be reviewed carefully. These documents, such as covenants conditions and restrictions, may affect the title, ownership and use of the property. You may wish to engage legal assistance in order to fully understand and be aware of the implications of the documents on your property. Chain of Title Documents: Garfield county recorded 03/12/2024 under reception no. 994230 Garfield county recorded 03/12/2024 under reception no. 994231 Property Address: 7999 HIGHWAY 82, CARBONDALE, CO 81623 1. Effective Date: 10/08/2024 at 5:00 P.M. 2. Policy to be Issued and Proposed Insured: "TBD" Commitment Proposed Insured: A BUYER TO BE DETERMINED $0.00 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is: FEE SIMPLE 4. Title to the estate or interest covered herein is at the effective date hereof vested in: HARVEST ROARING FORK, LLC, A TEXAS LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY 5. The Land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: PARCEL A (EAST PARCEL): A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHEASTERLY QUARTER OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 89 WEST, AND IN SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 7, SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF COLORADO STATE HIGHWAY 82, WHENCE A 2 1/2" BRASS CAP, FOUND IN PLACE, AND CORRECTLY MARKED AS THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 7, BEARS S 63°31'48" E A DISTANCE OF 2312.55 FEET; THENCE, ALONG THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF COLORADO STATE HIGHWAY 82 N 06°01'00" W A DISTANCE OF 1467.90 FEET; THENCE, N 08°53'00" W A DISTANCE OF 200.30 FEET; N 00°18'30" W A DISTANCE OF 201.00 FEET; N 06°01'00" W A DISTANCE OF 700.90 FEET; N 08°52'00" W A DISTANCE OF 313.00 FEET; THENCE, 346.52 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 1820.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10°54'32" AND SUBTENDING A CHORD BEARING OF N 15°58'00" W A DISTANCE OF 346.00 FEET; THENCE, N 11°08'00" W A DISTANCE OF 97.90 FEET; THENCE, 250.29 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1840.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 7°47'38" AND SUBTENDING A CHORD BEARING OF N 28°19'00" W A DISTANCE OF 250.10 FEET; THENCE, N 35°14'00" W A DISTANCE OF 122.52 FEET; THENCE, N 89°17'09" W A DISTANCE 7.98 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF A PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED JANUARY 24, 2001 AT RECEPTION NO. 575283; THENCE ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE S 35°22'19" E A DISTANCE OF 1.46 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL, N 89°17'09" W A DISTANCE OF 224.24 FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL; THENCE, N 00°00'00" W A DISTANCE OF 0.68 FEET; THENCE, N 89°30'08" E A DISTANCE OF 0.71 FEET; THENCE, N 00°20'09" E A DISTANCE OF 0.49 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF A PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED MAY 20, 2002 AT RECEPTION NO. 603760; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL THE FOLLOWING THREE COURSES: ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule A Order Number:RND63021533 1) N 89°44'57" W A DISTANCE OF 0.99 FEET; 2) N 30°31'43" W A DISTANCE OF 65.06 FEET; 3) N 86°47'11" W A DISTANCE OF 65.63 FEET TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL; THENCE, N 86°47'11" W A DISTANCE OF 52.73 FEET; THENCE, N 89°36'12" W A DISTANCE OF 292.61 FEET; THENCE, N 89°43'30" W A DISTANCE OF 100.90 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF THE ROARING FORK TRANSIT AUTHORITY TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR EASEMENT; THENCE, ALONG SAID EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE S 19°38'52" E A DISTANCE OF 3829.47 FEET; THENCE, 79.82 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 2915.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 1°34'08" AND SUBTENDING A CHORD BEARING OF S 18°51'48" E A DISTANCE OF 79.82 FEET; THENCE, DEPARTING SAID EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE N 89°59'59" E A DISTANCE OF 73.94 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF COLORADO STATE HIGHWAY 82, ALSO BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL B (SOPRIS PARCEL): PARCEL 1 (AS DESCRIBED IN DEED RECORDED MAY 19, 1998 IN BOOK 1068 AT PAGE 543 AT RECEPTION NO. 525444): A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN LOT 2 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M. COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO LYING NORTHEASTERLY OF THE WEST AND SOUTH LINES OF SAID LOT 2 AND SOUTHWESTERLY OF THE SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE HIGHWAY NO. 82 AS RECONSTRUCTED IN 1967, SAID TRACT DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 2 BEING MARKED WITH AN IRON PIN; WHENCE AN IRON POST WITH A BRASS CAP FOUND IN PLACE AND PROPERLY MARKED FOR THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 89 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M. BEARS S. 35°31'00" W. 770.44 FEET; THENCE N. 324.69 FEET ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 2 TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID HIGHWAY; THENCE S. 34°45'30" E. 229.17 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID HIGHWAY; THENCE S. 35°14'00" E. 167 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID HIGHWAY TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 2; THENCE WEST 227.00 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 2 TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 2, THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 2 (AS DESCRIBED AS PARCEL 1 IN QUIT CLAIM DEED RECORDED MAY 20, 2002 IN BOOK 1356 AT PAGE 384 AS RECEPTION NO. 603760 AND AS DESCRIBED AS EXHIBIT A-1 QUIT CLAIM DEED RECORDED JANUARY 24, 2001 IN BOOK 1228 AT PAGE 600 AS RECEPTION NO. 575283): A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO. SAID TRACT OF LAND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SE CORNER OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 89 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., (WITH ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN BEING RELATIVE TO A BEARING OF N. 00°10'09" E. BETWEEN THE SE CORNER AND THE E 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 1); THENCE N. 35°30'10" E. 769.47 FEET TO A FOUND REBAR (SOUTHWEST CORNER LOT 2 PER INSTRUMENT RECORDED APRIL 30, 1986 IN BOOK 687 AT PAGE 650) THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN SAID BOOK 687 AT PAGE 650 128.34 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY LINE N. 88°59'16" W. ALONG THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY LINE AND ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule A Order Number:RND63021533 SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY LINE EXTENDED OF THE RECORDED AMENDED FYRWALD EXEMPTION PLAT 103.03 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY LINE AND SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY LINE EXTENDED S. 02°48'16" E. 70.52 FEET, TO A POINT IN AN EXISTING FENCE LINE; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY EXTENDED ALONG AN EXISTING FENCE LINE THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) COURSES: 1) S. 86°47'11" E. 65.63 FEET; 2) S. 30°31'43" E. 65.06 FEET; 3) S. 89°17'09" E. 0.99 FEET, TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 3: (AS DESCRIBED AS PARCEL 2 IN QUIT CLAIM DEED RECORDED MAY 20, 2002 IN BOOK 1356 AT PAGE 384 AS RECEPTION NO. 603760 AND AS DESCRIBED AS EXHIBIT A-3 IN QUIT CLAIM DEED RECORDED JANUARY 24, 2001 IN BOOK 1228 AT PAGE 600 AS RECEPTION NO. 575283): A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO. SAID TRACT OF LAND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SE CORNER OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 89 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M. (WITH ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN BEING RELATIVE TO A BEARING OF N. 00°10'09" E. BETWEEN THE SE CORNER AND THE E 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 1); THENCE N. 35°30'10" E. 769.47 FEET TO A FOUND REBAR (SOUTHWEST CORNER LOT 2 PER BOOK 687 AT PAGE 650); THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN SAID BOOK 687 AT PAGE 650 128.34 FEET, THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE NORTH 187.87 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF STATE HIGHWAY NO. 82; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY LINE ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY THE FOLLOWING TWO (2) COURSES: 1) N. 34°53'49" W. 9.76 FEET; 2) N. 37°33'19" W. 6.55 FEET; THENCE S. 01°05'14" W. ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF THE RECORDED AMENDED FYRWALD EXEMPTION PLAT 200.87 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY LINE S. 88° 59'16" E. 13.39 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING EXCLUDING, HOWEVER, ANY PORTION OF PARCEL 2 AND/OR PARCEL 3 LOCATED IN OR ENCROACHING UPON: LOTS 3 AND/OR 4, AMENDED FYRWALD EXEMPTION PLAT, AS RECORDED IN GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO UNDER RECEPTION NO. 547543. PARCEL 4 (AS DESCRIBED AS EXHIBIT A-2 IN QUIT CLAIM DEED RECORDED JANUARY 24, 2001 IN BOOK 1228 AT PAGE 600 AS RECEPTION NO. 575283): A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO, SAID TRACT OF LAND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SE CORNER OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 89 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., (WITH ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN BEING RELATIVE TO A BEARING OF N. 00°10'09" E. BETWEEN THE SE CORNER AND THE E 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 1); THENCE N. 35°30'10" E. 769.47 FEET TO A FOUND REBAR (SOUTHWEST CORNER LOT 2 PER BOOK 687 AT PAGE 650) THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN SAID BOOK 687 AT PAGE 650 0.68 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY LINE EAST ALONG THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID PROPERTY 221.76 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF STATE HIGHWAY NO. 82; ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule A Order Number:RND63021533 THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY LINE S. 35°22'19" E. ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY 4.26 FEET, TO A POINT IN AN EXISTING FENCE LINE; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY N. 89°17'09" W. ALONG SAID EXISTING FENCE LINE 224.24 FEET, TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, EXCEPTING FROM INSURANCE AND CONVEYANCE THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTING PARCELS 5, EXCEPTING PARCEL 6 AND EXCEPTING PARCEL 7 EXCEPTING PARCEL 5 (AS DESCRIBED EXHIBIT A IN QUIT CLAIM DEED RECORDED MAY 20, 2002 IN BOOK 1356 AT PAGE 390 AS RECEPTION NO. 603762) A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M.. COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO, SAID TRACT OF LAND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SE CORNER OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 89 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M. (WITH ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN BEING RELATIVE TO A BEARING OF N. 00°10'09" E. BETWEEN THE SE CORNER AND THE E 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 1); THENCE N. 00°10'09" E. ALONG SAID SECTION LINE 691.13 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF THAT PROPERTY SURVEY RECORDED AS RECEPTION NO. 205 IN THE GARFIELD COUNTY INDEX FOR INFORMATIONAL LAND SURVEY PLATS, THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SECTION LINE N. 00°10'09" E. 2.36 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF THE RECORDED AMENDED FYRWALD EXEMPTION PLAT; THENCE LEAVING SAID SECTION LINE N. 89°13'44" E. ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY 344.69 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY LINE S. 02°48'16" E. 12.00 FEET TO A POINT IN AN EXISTING FENCE LINE; THENCE N. 86°47'11" W. ALONG SAID FENCE LINE 52.73 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID FENCE LINE N. 89°36'14" W. 292.62 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; EXCEPTING PARCEL 6 (AS DESCRIBED AS EXHIBIT A IN QUIT CLAIM DEED RECORDED JANUARY 29, 2001 IN BOOK 1229 AT PAGE 263 AS RECEPTION NO. 575490): A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO, SAID TRACT OF LAND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SE CORNER OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 89 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., (WITH ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN BEING RELATIVE TO A BEARING OF N. 00°10'09" E. BETWEEN THE SE CORNER AND THE E 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 1); THENCE N. 00°10'09" E. ALONG SAID SECTION LINE 627.10 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF THAT PROPERTY SURVEY RECORDED AT RECEPTION NO. 305 IN THE GARFIELD COUNTY INDEX FOR INFORMATIONAL LAND SURVEY PLATS, THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SECTION LINE N. 00°10'09" E. 64.03 FEET, TO A POINT IN AN EXISTING FENCE LINE; THENCE LEAVING SAID SECTION LINE S. 89°36'14" E. ALONG AN EXISTING FENCE LINE 292.62 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG AN EXISTING FENCE LINE S. 86°47'11" E. 118.36 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID FENCE LINE S. 30°31'43" E. 64.28 FEET, TO A POINT ON SAID NORTHERLY BOUNDARY; THENCE LEAVING SAID EXISTING FENCE LINE N. 90°00'00" W. ALONG SAID NORTHERLY BOUNDARY 443.63 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING PARCEL 7 (AS DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A IN RULE AND ORDER, CIVIL ACTION NO. 5952, DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF GARFIELD AND STATE OF COLORADO RECORDED DECEMBER 15, 1967 IN BOOK 391 AT PAGE 14 AS RECEPTION NO. 239725): ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule A Order Number:RND63021533 A TRACT OR PARCEL OF LAND NO. 1 REV. 2 OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS, STATE OF COLORADO, PROJECT NO. S 0130(10), IN LOTS 2 AND 11 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST, OF THE 6TH P.M., IN GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO, SAID TRACT OR PARCEL BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF LOT 2, SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST, FROM WHICH THE SE CORNER OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 89 WEST BEARS S. 19°29'30" W., A DISTANCE OF 1330.0. FEET; 1. THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF LOT 2, SECTION 7, A DISTANCE OF 304.5 FEET; 2. THENCE S. 34°45'30" E., A DISTANCE OF 231.0 FEET; 3. THENCE S. 35°14' E., A DISTANCE OF 92.2 FEET TO A SOUTH LINE OF THE PROPERTY; 4. THENCE ALONG A SOUTH LINE OF THE PROPERTY, N. 89°12' E., A DISTANCE OF 118.5 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF LOT 2, SECTION 7; 5. THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF LOT 2, SECTION 7, SOUTH A DISTANCE OF 63.8 FEET TO THE SW. CORNER OF LOT 11, SECTION 7; 6. THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 11, SECTION 7, N. 89°47' E., A DISTANCE OF 208.0 FEET; 7. THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 2,050.0 FEET A DISTANCE OF 14.4 FEET (THE CHORD OF THIS ARC BEARS N. 32°43' W., A DISTANCE OF 14.4 FEET); 8. THENCE N. 34°03' W., A DISTANCE OF 311.4 FEET; 9. THENCE N. 42°28'30" W. A DISTANCE OF 487.6 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. FURTHER EXCEPTING THEREFROM ANY PORTION OF THE LAND WITHIN STATE HIGHWAY NO. 82 COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO. PARCEL C (WEST PARCEL): A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 1 AND THE WEST HALF OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 89 WEST, AND IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 7 AND THE NORTH HALF OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF THE ROARING FORK TRANSIT AUTHORITY TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR EASEMENT, WHENCE A 2 1/2" BRASS CAP, FOUND IN PLACE AND CORRECTLY MARKED AS THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 7, BEARS S 41°30'24"E, A DISTANCE OF 4758.08 FEET; THENCE, DEPARTING SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE N 19°38'52" W A DISTANCE OF 1221.19 FEET; THENCE, N 89°43'30" W A DISTANCE OF 683.95 FEET; THENCE, S 02°00'23" W A DISTANCE OF 590.77 FEET; THENCE, S 02°15'08" W A DISTANCE OF 557.94 FEET; THENCE, N 86°35'38" W A DISTANCE OF 84.72 FEET; THENCE, S 43°10'35" E A DISTANCE OF 251.44 FEET; THENCE, S 00°24'17" E A DISTANCE OF 1250.60 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF THE ROARING FORK CONSERVANCY EASEMENT; THENCE, ALONG THE SAID EASEMENT LINE S 03°09'52" W A DISTANCE OF 741.05 FEET; THENCE, S 00°21'30" E A DISTANCE OF 553.42 FEET; THENCE, S 00°04'33" E A DISTANCE OF 323.33 FEET; THENCE, S 24°10'18" E A DISTANCE OF 142.52 FEET; THENCE, S 29°13'16" E A DISTANCE OF 615.00 FEET; THENCE, S 19°31'50" E A DISTANCE OF 246.38 FEET; THENCE, S 23°25'35" E A DISTANCE OF 153.19 FEET; THENCE, S 17°46'37" E A DISTANCE OF 173.22 FEET; THENCE, S 30°48'54" E A DISTANCE OF 163.28 FEET; THENCE, S 51°46'41" E A DISTANCE OF 662.76 FEET; ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule A Order Number:RND63021533 THENCE, S 44°39'33" E A DISTANCE OF 175.65 FEET; THENCE, S 13°37'07" E A DISTANCE OF 255.65 FEET; THENCE, S 34°06'17" E A DISTANCE OF 318.15 FEET; THENCE, S 35°45'21" E A DISTANCE OF 225.15 FEET; THENCE, S 55°41'54" E A DISTANCE OF 196.47 FEET; THENCE, S 63°52'39" E A DISTANCE OF 388.20 FEET; THENCE, S 57°54'58" E A DISTANCE OF 449.02 FEET; THENCE, S 47°15'14" E A DISTANCE OF 122.26 FEET; THENCE, S 89°53'16" E A DISTANCE OF 189.76 FEET; THENCE, N 40°23'30" W A DISTANCE OF 69.38 FEET; THENCE, S 87°28'29" W A DISTANCE OF 36.35 FEET; THENCE, S 83°52'12" W A DISTANCE OF 10.80 FEET; THENCE, N 58°27'19" W A DISTANCE OF 41.45 FEET; THENCE, N 29°51'31" W A DISTANCE OF 8.28 FEET; THENCE, N 24°16'24" W A DISTANCE OF 25.22 FEET; THENCE, N 69°00'53" W A DISTANCE OF 9.87 FEET; THENCE, S 87°31'44" W A DISTANCE OF 22.60 FEET; THENCE, N 57°25'01" W A DISTANCE OF 17.28 FEET; THENCE, N 50°09'49" W A DISTANCE OF 26.07 FEET; THENCE, N 46°21'12" W A DISTANCE OF 9.99 FEET; THENCE, N 44°28'05" W A DISTANCE OF 21.45 FEET; THENCE, N 55°50'08" W A DISTANCE OF 49.05 FEET; THENCE, N 56°25'40" W A DISTANCE OF 49.94 FEET; THENCE, N 68°12'23" W A DISTANCE OF 36.45 FEET; THENCE, N 46°54'04" W A DISTANCE OF 55.18 FEET; THENCE, N 68°49'21" W A DISTANCE OF 25.14 FEET; THENCE, N 47°41'50" W A DISTANCE OF 78.78 FEET; THENCE, N 30°26'40" W A DISTANCE OF 24.58 FEET; THENCE, N 25°47'01" W A DISTANCE OF 30.08 FEET; THENCE, N 18°11'39" W A DISTANCE OF 34.61 FEET; THENCE, N 30°58'21" W A DISTANCE OF 29.32 FEET; THENCE, N 21°59'14" W A DISTANCE OF 27.50 FEET; THENCE, N 30°16'07" W A DISTANCE OF 22.97 FEET; THENCE, N 25°41'38" W A DISTANCE OF 169.44 FEET; THENCE, N 41°17'39" E A DISTANCE OF 82.61 FEET; THENCE, N 38°34'52" E A DISTANCE OF 15.89 FEET; THENCE, N 34°26'44" W A DISTANCE OF 262.40 FEET; THENCE, N 57°58'09" W A DISTANCE OF 102.47 FEET; THENCE, N 53°43'31" W A DISTANCE OF 105.38 FEET; THENCE, N 55°58'11" W A DISTANCE OF 126.13 FEET; THENCE, N 56°14'57" W A DISTANCE OF 118.42 FEET; THENCE, N 49°16'04" W A DISTANCE OF 136.33 FEET; THENCE, N 44°30'51" W A DISTANCE OF 150.05 FEET; THENCE, N 32°49'55" W A DISTANCE OF 102.14 FEET; THENCE, N 37°44'19" W A DISTANCE OF 552.12 FEET; THENCE, N 18°10'02" W A DISTANCE OF 47.26 FEET; THENCE, N 27°58'19" W A DISTANCE OF 109.20 FEET; THENCE, N 35°01'36" W A DISTANCE OF 71.09 FEET; THENCE, N 41°32'47" W A DISTANCE OF 152.23 FEET; THENCE, N 40°22'24" W A DISTANCE OF 339.82 FEET; THENCE, N 64°20'53" W A DISTANCE OF 34.06 FEET; THENCE, N 45°00'36" W A DISTANCE OF 52.42 FEET; THENCE, N 44°53'41" W A DISTANCE OF 154.66 FEET; THENCE, N 32°35'48" W A DISTANCE OF 86.59 FEET; THENCE, N 57°01'32" W A DISTANCE OF 44.89 FEET; ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule A Order Number:RND63021533 THENCE, N 30°33'12" W A DISTANCE OF 85.72 FEET; THENCE, N 37°39'02" W A DISTANCE OF 79.09 FEET; THENCE, N 37°32'30" W A DISTANCE OF 63.32 FEET; THENCE, N 20°02'15" W A DISTANCE OF 33.98 FEET; THENCE, N 39°52'25" W A DISTANCE OF 42.02 FEET; THENCE, N 25°36'04" W A DISTANCE OF 107.17 FEET; THENCE, N 30°34'08" W A DISTANCE OF 164.72 FEET; THENCE, N 11°39'01" W A DISTANCE OF 107.90 FEET; THENCE, N 24°56'06" E A DISTANCE OF 163.60 FEET; THENCE, N 63°39'33" E A DISTANCE OF 177.81 FEET; THENCE, N 83°14'43" E A DISTANCE OF 393.54 FEET; THENCE, N 07°15'26" W A DISTANCE OF 21.79 FEET; THENCE, N 80°51'11" E A DISTANCE OF 50.00 FEET; THENCE, N 89°15'06" E A DISTANCE OF 65.56 FEET; THENCE, N 57°50'04" E A DISTANCE OF 50.12 FEET; THENCE, S 84°51'15" E A DISTANCE OF 33.08 FEET; THENCE, S 81°39'50" E A DISTANCE OF 89.61 FEET; THENCE, N 56°07'00" E A DISTANCE OF 26.86 FEET; THENCE, N 07°38'31" E A DISTANCE OF 27.93 FEET; THENCE, N 37°41'57" W A DISTANCE OF 28.06 FEET; THENCE, N 50°00'15" E A DISTANCE OF 22.23 FEET; THENCE, N 82°02'30" E A DISTANCE OF 36.49 FEET; THENCE, S 63°34'38" E A DISTANCE OF 54.05 FEET; THENCE, S 45°59'58" E A DISTANCE OF 20.95 FEET; THENCE, S 14°44'20" E A DISTANCE OF 29.18 FEET; THENCE, S 11°11'17" W A DISTANCE OF 26.42 FEET; THENCE, S 14°58'41" E A DISTANCE OF 30.14 FEET; THENCE, S 43°42'10" E A DISTANCE OF 69.77 FEET; THENCE, S 31°36'59" E A DISTANCE OF 56.76 FEET; THENCE, S 49°38'46" E A DISTANCE OF 40.12 FEET; THENCE, S 45°30'55" E A DISTANCE OF 40.88 FEET; THENCE, S 60°16'38" E A DISTANCE OF 43.39 FEET; THENCE, S 73°16'24" E A DISTANCE OF 67.60 FEET; THENCE, S 53°05'15" E A DISTANCE OF 15.86 FEET; THENCE, S 63°37'30" E A DISTANCE OF 52.31 FEET; THENCE, S 83°28'21" E A DISTANCE OF 46.95 FEET; THENCE, N 86°20'27" E A DISTANCE OF 61.04 FEET; THENCE, N 31°59'09" E A DISTANCE OF 47.07 FEET; THENCE, N 06°58'38" E A DISTANCE OF 32.16 FEET; THENCE, N 72°08'07" E A DISTANCE OF 7.98 FEET; THENCE, S 24°51'03" E A DISTANCE OF 72.35 FEET; THENCE, S 41°52'47" E A DISTANCE OF 50.71 FEET; THENCE, S 54°44'21" E A DISTANCE OF 38.31 FEET; THENCE, S 83°39'39" E A DISTANCE OF 87.15 FEET; THENCE, S 57°11'12" E A DISTANCE OF 77.06 FEET; THENCE, S 41°51'16" E A DISTANCE OF 88.65 FEET; THENCE, S 57°39'13" E A DISTANCE OF 65.60 FEET; THENCE, S 49°55'38" E A DISTANCE OF 74.96 FEET; THENCE, S 61°04'52" E A DISTANCE OF 43.44 FEET; THENCE, S 71°46'03" E A DISTANCE OF 55.45 FEET; THENCE, N 09°35'09" W A DISTANCE OF 59.88 FEET; THENCE, N 65°36'14" W A DISTANCE OF 60.45 FEET; THENCE, N 49°54'10" W A DISTANCE OF 64.72 FEET; THENCE, N 49°54'10" W A DISTANCE OF 86.97 FEET; THENCE, N 48°11'10" W A DISTANCE OF 54.30 FEET; ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule A Order Number:RND63021533 THENCE, N 56°47'27" W A DISTANCE OF 123.97 FEET; THENCE, N 83°47'24" W A DISTANCE OF 93.00 FEET; THENCE, N 29°35'31" W A DISTANCE OF 119.58 FEET; THENCE, N 78°00'43" W A DISTANCE OF 33.84 FEET; THENCE, S 79°41'48" W A DISTANCE OF 37.80 FEET; THENCE, S 22°57'52" W A DISTANCE OF 56.05 FEET; THENCE, S 59°31'57" W A DISTANCE OF 45.48 FEET; THENCE, N 82°32'35" W A DISTANCE OF 28.23 FEET; THENCE, N 59°07'03" W A DISTANCE OF 95.71 FEET; THENCE, N 71°20'44" W A DISTANCE OF 85.73 FEET; THENCE, N 36°43'10" W A DISTANCE OF 93.22 FEET; THENCE, N 25°39'22" W A DISTANCE OF 181.92 FEET; THENCE, N 65°10'24" W A DISTANCE OF 98.43 FEET; THENCE, S 85°02'33" W A DISTANCE OF 52.20 FEET; THENCE, S 56°33'52" W A DISTANCE OF 39.34 FEET; THENCE, S 20°49'33" W A DISTANCE OF 42.96 FEET; THENCE, S 37°27'43" E A DISTANCE OF 21.60 FEET; THENCE, N 77°02'57" W A DISTANCE OF 89.66 FEET; THENCE, S 70°24'18" W A DISTANCE OF 70.95 FEET; THENCE, N 88°59'39" W A DISTANCE OF 55.55 FEET; THENCE, S 84°28'58" W A DISTANCE OF 49.93 FEET; THENCE, N 14°22'48" E A DISTANCE OF 68.20 FEET; THENCE, N 05°11'46" W A DISTANCE OF 77.59 FEET; THENCE, N 18°20'05" E A DISTANCE OF 10.82 FEET; THENCE, N 22°53'40" E A DISTANCE OF 44.14 FEET; THENCE, N 10°34'58" E A DISTANCE OF 35.11 FEET; THENCE, N 08°59'51" E A DISTANCE OF 47.16 FEET; THENCE, N 03°48'08" E A DISTANCE OF 36.48 FEET; THENCE, N 04°40'52" E A DISTANCE OF 71.03 FEET; THENCE, N 07°37'51" E A DISTANCE OF 54.66 FEET; THENCE, N 29°28'14" W A DISTANCE OF 63.68 FEET; THENCE, N 32°00'44" W A DISTANCE OF 61.05 FEET; THENCE, N 26°17'29" W A DISTANCE OF 55.52 FEET; THENCE, N 38°14'36" W A DISTANCE OF 44.36 FEET; THENCE, N 53°11'32" W A DISTANCE OF 37.73 FEET; THENCE, N 59°54'48" W A DISTANCE OF 54.16 FEET; THENCE, N 87°51'35" W A DISTANCE OF 36.97 FEET; THENCE, N 57°33'47"W A DISTANCE OF 65.70 FEET; THENCE, N 81°56'22" W A DISTANCE OF 85.02 FEET; THENCE, N 04°11'29" W A DISTANCE OF 158.65 FEET; THENCE, N 35°50'41" W A DISTANCE OF 41.30 FEET; THENCE, N 54°46'03" W A DISTANCE OF 24.70 FEET; THENCE, N 28°51'45" W A DISTANCE OF 209.99 FEET; THENCE, N 11°58'37" W A DISTANCE OF 33.82 FEET; THENCE, N 41°03'46" E A DISTANCE OF 78.19 FEET; THENCE, N 06°29'01" W A DISTANCE OF 117.20 FEET; THENCE, N 20°05'27" W A DISTANCE OF 94.24 FEET; THENCE, N 11°32'03" W A DISTANCE OF 63.83 FEET; THENCE, N 07°57'46" W A DISTANCE OF 141.45 FEET; THENCE, N 09°56'14" E A DISTANCE OF 50.76 FEET; THENCE, N 19°17'44" W A DISTANCE OF 91.04 FEET; THENCE, N 44°41'59" W A DISTANCE OF 134.55 FEET; THENCE, N 19°23'49" W A DISTANCE OF 74.18 FEET; THENCE, N 19°33'06" W A DISTANCE OF 43.27 FEET; THENCE, N 21°30'01" W A DISTANCE OF 72.23 FEET; ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule A Order Number:RND63021533 THENCE, DEPARTING SAID EASEMENT LINE N 00°16'30" E A DISTANCE OF 217.77 FEET; THENCE, N 00°16'30" E A DISTANCE OF 312.94 FEET; THENCE, S 89°43'30" E A DISTANCE OF 1005.44 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF THE ROARING FORK TRANSIT AUTHORITY TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR EASEMENT, ALSO BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING. COUNTY OF GARFIELD STATE OF COLORADO PARCEL D (SOUTH PARCEL): A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE EAST HALF OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 89 WEST, AND IN THE WEST HALF OF SECTION 7 AND IN THE NORTH HALF OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF COLORADO STATE HIGHWAY 82, WHENCE A 2 1/2" BRASS CAP, FOUND IN PLACE AND CORRECTLY MARKED AS THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 7, BEARS S 78°49'20" E A DISTANCE OF 2150.14 FEET; THENCE, ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE S 09°35'09" E A DISTANCE OF 401.79 FEET; THENCE, S 09°35'09" E A DISTANCE OF 1545.87 FEET; THENCE, 626.05 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 1482.50 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 24°11'44" AND SUBTENDING A CHORD BEARING OF S 21°41'02" E A DISTANCE OF 621.41 FEET; THENCE, S 33°46'54" E A DISTANCE OF 387.28 FEET; THENCE, 294.32 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2815.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 5°59'26" AND SUBTENDING A CHORD BEARING OF S 30°47'11" E A DISTANCE OF 294.19 FEET; THENCE, DEPARTING SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE N 89°53'16" W A DISTANCE OF 218.07 FEET; THENCE, N 40°23'30" W A DISTANCE OF 69.38 FEET; THENCE, S 87°28'29" W A DISTANCE OF 36.35 FEET; THENCE, S 83°52'12" W A DISTANCE OF 10.80 FEET; THENCE, N 58°27'19" W A DISTANCE OF 41.45 FEET; THENCE, N 29°51'31" W A DISTANCE OF 8.28 FEET; THENCE, N 24°16'24" W A DISTANCE OF 25.22 FEET; THENCE, N 69°00'53" W A DISTANCE OF 9.87 FEET; THENCE, S 87°31'44" W A DISTANCE OF 22.60 FEET; THENCE, N 57°25'01" W A DISTANCE OF 17.28 FEET; THENCE, N 50°09'49" W A DISTANCE OF 26.07 FEET; THENCE, N 46°21'12" W A DISTANCE OF 9.99 FEET; THENCE, N 44°28'05" W A DISTANCE OF 21.45 FEET; THENCE, N 55°50'08" W A DISTANCE OF 49.05 FEET; THENCE, N 56°25'40" W A DISTANCE OF 49.94 FEET; THENCE, N 68°12'23" W A DISTANCE OF 36.45 FEET; THENCE, N 46°54'04" W A DISTANCE OF 55.18 FEET; THENCE, N 68°49'21" W A DISTANCE OF 25.14 FEET; THENCE, N 47°41'50" W A DISTANCE OF 78.78 FEET; THENCE, N 30°26'40" W A DISTANCE OF 24.58 FEET; THENCE, N 25°47'01" W A DISTANCE OF 30.08 FEET; THENCE, N 18°11'39" W A DISTANCE OF 34.61 FEET; THENCE, N 30°58'21" W A DISTANCE OF 29.32 FEET; THENCE, N 21°59'14" W A DISTANCE OF 27.50 FEET; THENCE, N 30°16'07" W A DISTANCE OF 22.97 FEET; THENCE, N 25°41'38" W A DISTANCE OF 169.44 FEET; ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule A Order Number:RND63021533 THENCE, N 41°17'39" E A DISTANCE OF 82.61 FEET; THENCE, N 38°34'52" E A DISTANCE OF 15.89 FEET; THENCE, N 34°26'44" W A DISTANCE OF 262.40 FEET; THENCE, N 57°58'09" W A DISTANCE OF 102.47 FEET; THENCE, N 53°43'31" W A DISTANCE OF 105.38 FEET; THENCE, N 55°58'11" W A DISTANCE OF 126.13 FEET; THENCE, N 56°14'57" W A DISTANCE OF 118.42 FEET; THENCE, N 49°16'04" W A DISTANCE OF 136.33 FEET; THENCE, N 44°30'51" W A DISTANCE OF 150.05 FEET; THENCE, N 32°49'55" W A DISTANCE OF 102.14 FEET; THENCE, N 37°44'19" W A DISTANCE OF 552.12 FEET; THENCE, N 18°10'02" W A DISTANCE OF 47.26 FEET; THENCE, N 27°58'19" W A DISTANCE OF 109.20 FEET; THENCE, N 35°01'36" W A DISTANCE OF 71.09 FEET; THENCE, N 41°32'47" W A DISTANCE OF 152.23 FEET; THENCE, N 40°22'24" W A DISTANCE OF 339.82 FEET; THENCE, N 64°20'53" W A DISTANCE OF 34.06 FEET; THENCE, N 45°00'36" W A DISTANCE OF 52.42 FEET; THENCE, N 44°53'41" W A DISTANCE OF 154.66 FEET; THENCE, N 32°35'48" W A DISTANCE OF 86.59 FEET; THENCE, N 57°01'32" W A DISTANCE OF 44.89 FEET; THENCE, N 30°33'12" W A DISTANCE OF 85.72 FEET; THENCE, N 37°39'02" W A DISTANCE OF 79.09 FEET; THENCE, N 37°32'30" W A DISTANCE OF 63.32 FEET; THENCE, N 20°02'15" W A DISTANCE OF 33.98 FEET; THENCE, N 39°52'25" W A DISTANCE OF 42.02 FEET; THENCE, N 25°36'04" W A DISTANCE OF 107.17 FEET; THENCE, N 30°34'08" W A DISTANCE OF 164.72 FEET; THENCE, N 11°39'01" W A DISTANCE OF 107.90 FEET; THENCE, N 24°56'06" E A DISTANCE OF 163.60 FEET; THENCE, N 63°39'33" E A DISTANCE OF 177.81 FEET; THENCE, N 83°14'43" E A DISTANCE OF 393.54 FEET; THENCE, N 07°15'26" W A DISTANCE OF 21.79 FEET; THENCE, N 80°51'11" E A DISTANCE OF 50.00 FEET; THENCE, N 89°15'06" E A DISTANCE OF 65.56 FEET; THENCE, N 57°50'04" E A DISTANCE OF 50.12 FEET; THENCE, S 84°51'15" E A DISTANCE OF 33.08 FEET; THENCE, S 81°39'50" E A DISTANCE OF 89.61 FEET; THENCE, N 56°07'00" E A DISTANCE OF 26.86 FEET; THENCE, N 07°38'31" E A DISTANCE OF 27.93 FEET; THENCE, N 37°41'57" W A DISTANCE OF 28.06 FEET; THENCE, N 50°00'15" E A DISTANCE OF 22.23 FEET; THENCE, N 82°02'30" E A DISTANCE OF 36.49 FEET; THENCE, S 63°34'38" E A DISTANCE OF 54.05 FEET; THENCE, S 45°59'58" E A DISTANCE OF 20.95 FEET; THENCE, S 14°44'20" E A DISTANCE OF 29.18 FEET; THENCE, S 11°11'17" W A DISTANCE OF 26.42 FEET; THENCE, S 14°58'41" E A DISTANCE OF 30.14 FEET; THENCE, S 43°42'10" E A DISTANCE OF 69.77 FEET; THENCE, S 31°36'59" E A DISTANCE OF 56.76 FEET; THENCE, S 49°38'46" E A DISTANCE OF 40.12 FEET; THENCE, S 45°30'55" E A DISTANCE OF 40.88 FEET; THENCE, S 60°16'38" E A DISTANCE OF 43.39 FEET; THENCE, S 73°16'24" E A DISTANCE OF 67.60 FEET; THENCE, S 53°05'15" E A DISTANCE OF 15.86 FEET; ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule A Order Number:RND63021533 THENCE, S 63°37'30" E A DISTANCE OF 52.31 FEET; THENCE, S 83°28'21" E A DISTANCE OF 46.95 FEET; THENCE, N 86°20'27" E A DISTANCE OF 61.04 FEET; THENCE, N 31°59'09" E A DISTANCE OF 47.07 FEET; THENCE, N 06°58'38" E A DISTANCE OF 32.16 FEET; THENCE, N 72°08'07" E A DISTANCE OF 7.98 FEET; THENCE, S 24°51'03" E A DISTANCE OF 72.35 FEET; THENCE, S 41°52'47" E A DISTANCE OF 50.71 FEET; THENCE, S 54°44'21" E A DISTANCE OF 38.31 FEET; THENCE, S 83°39'39" E A DISTANCE OF 87.15 FEET; THENCE, S 57°11'12" E A DISTANCE OF 77.06 FEET; THENCE, S 41°51'16" E A DISTANCE OF 88.65 FEET; THENCE, S 57°39'13" E A DISTANCE OF 65.60 FEET; THENCE, S 49°55'38" E A DISTANCE OF 74.96 FEET; THENCE, S 61°04'52" E A DISTANCE OF 43.44 FEET; THENCE, S 71°46'03" E A DISTANCE OF 55.45 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO. PARCEL E (NORTH PARCEL) A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE EAST HALF OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 89 WEST, AND IN THE WEST HALF OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT WHENCE THE GARFIELD COUNTY SURVEYOR'S 2 1/2" BRASS CAP, FOUND IN PLACE AND CORRECTLY MARKED AS THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 7 BEARS S49°22'15' E A DISTANCE OF 5479.54 FEET; THENCE, S 89°43'30" E A DISTANCE OF 1005.44 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF THE ROARING FORK TRANSIT AUTHORITY TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR EASEMENT; THENCE, ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID EASEMENT S 19°38'52" E A DISTANCE OF 2644.53 FEET; THENCE, 494.34 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2815.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10°03'42" AND SUBTENDING A CHORD BEARING OF S 14°37'01" E A DISTANCE OF 493.70 FEET; THENCE, S 09°35'09" E A DISTANCE OF 120.78 FEET; THENCE, DEPARTING THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID EASEMENT N 65°36'14" W A DISTANCE OF 60.45 FEET; THENCE, N 49°54'10" W A DISTANCE OF 64.72 FEET; THENCE, N 49°54'10" W A DISTANCE OF 86.97 FEET; THENCE, N 48°11'10" W A DISTANCE OF 54.30 FEET; THENCE, N 56°47'27" W A DISTANCE OF 123.97 FEET; THENCE, N 83°47'24" W A DISTANCE OF 93.00 FEET; THENCE, N 29°35'31" W A DISTANCE OF 119.58 FEET; THENCE, N 78°00'43" W A DISTANCE OF 33.84 FEET; THENCE, S 79°41'48" W A DISTANCE OF 37.80 FEET; THENCE, S 22°57'52" W A DISTANCE OF 56.05 FEET; THENCE, S 59°31'57" W A DISTANCE OF 45.48 FEET; THENCE, N 82°32'35" W A DISTANCE OF 28.23 FEET; THENCE, N 59°07'03" W A DISTANCE OF 95.71 FEET; THENCE, N 71°20'44" W A DISTANCE OF 85.73 FEET; THENCE, N 36°43'10" W A DISTANCE OF 93.22 FEET; ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule A Order Number:RND63021533 THENCE, N 25°39'22" W A DISTANCE OF 181.92 FEET; THENCE, N 65°10'24" W A DISTANCE OF 98.43 FEET; THENCE, S 85°02'33" W A DISTANCE OF 52.20 FEET; THENCE, S 56°33'52" W A DISTANCE OF 39.34 FEET; THENCE, S 20°49'33" W A DISTANCE OF 42.96 FEET; THENCE, S 37°27'43" E A DISTANCE OF 21.60 FEET; THENCE, N 77°02'57" W A DISTANCE OF 89.66 FEET; THENCE, S 70°24'18" W A DISTANCE OF 70.95 FEET; THENCE, N 88°59'39" W A DISTANCE OF 55.55 FEET; THENCE, S 84°28'58" W A DISTANCE OF 49.93 FEET; THENCE, N 14°22'48" E A DISTANCE OF 68.20 FEET; THENCE, N 05°11'46" W A DISTANCE OF 77.59 FEET; THENCE, N 18°20'05" E A DISTANCE OF 10.82 FEET; THENCE, N 22°53'40" E A DISTANCE OF 44.14 FEET; THENCE, N 10°34'58" E A DISTANCE OF 35.11 FEET; THENCE, N 08°59'51" E A DISTANCE OF 47.16 FEET; THENCE, N 03°48'08" E A DISTANCE OF 36.48 FEET; THENCE, N 04°40'52" E A DISTANCE OF 71.03 FEET; THENCE, N 07°37'51" E A DISTANCE OF 54.66 FEET; THENCE, N 29°28'14" W A DISTANCE OF 63.68 FEET; THENCE, N 32°00'44" W A DISTANCE OF 61.05 FEET; THENCE, N 26°17'29" W A DISTANCE OF 55.52 FEET; THENCE, N 38°14'26" W A DISTANCE OF 44.36 FEET; THENCE, N 53°11'32" W A DISTANCE OF 37.73 FEET; THENCE, N 59°54'48" W A DISTANCE OF 54.16 FEET; THENCE, N 87°51'35" W A DISTANCE OF 36.97 FEET; THENCE, N 57°33'47" W A DISTANCE OF 65.70 FEET; THENCE, N 81°56'22" W A DISTANCE OF 85.02 FEET; THENCE, N 04°11'29" W A DISTANCE OF 158.65 FEET; THENCE, N 35°50'41" W A DISTANCE OF 41.30 FEET; THENCE, N 54°46'03" W A DISTANCE OF 24.70 FEET; THENCE, N 28°51'45" W A DISTANCE OF 209.99 FEET; THENCE, N 11°58'37" W A DISTANCE OF 33.82 FEET; THENCE, N 41°03'46" E A DISTANCE OF 78.19 FEET; THENCE, N 06°29'01" W A DISTANCE OF 117.20 FEET; THENCE, N 20°05'27" W A DISTANCE OF 94.24 FEET; THENCE, N 11°32'03" W A DISTANCE OF 63.83 FEET; THENCE, N 07°57'46" W A DISTANCE OF 141.45 FEET; THENCE, N 09°56'14" E A DISTANCE OF 50.76 FEET; THENCE, N 19°17'44" W A DISTANCE OF 91.04 FEET; THENCE, N 44°41'59" W A DISTANCE OF 134.55 FEET; THENCE, N 19°23'49" W A DISTANCE OF 74.18 FEET; THENCE, N 19°33'06" W A DISTANCE OF 43.27 FEET; THENCE, N 21°30'01" W A DISTANCE OF 72.23 FEET; THENCE, N 00°16'30" E A DISTANCE OF 217.77 FEET; THENCE, N 00°16'30" E A DISTANCE OF 312.94 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL F: A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF COLORADO STATE HIGHWAY 82, ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule A Order Number:RND63021533 Copyright 2006-2024 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. WHENCE A 2 1/2" BRASS CAP, FOUND IN PLACE AND PROPERLY MARKED AS THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 7, BEARS S 78°01'43" E A DISTANCE OF 2054.18 FEET; THENCE, ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF N 09°35'10" W A DISTANCE OF 188.14; THENCE, 282.60 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 2915.00 FEET A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 5°33'17" AND SUBTENDING A CHORD BEARING OF N 12°21'49" W A DISTANCE OF 282.49 FEET; THENCE, DEPARTING SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE S 90°00'00" E A DISTANCE OF 49.74 FEET; THENCE, S 06°01'00" E A DISTANCE OF 202.70 FEET; THENCE, S 04°34'58" E A DISTANCE OF 260.70 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. COUNTY OF GARFIELD STATE OF COLORADO ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule A Order Number:RND63021533 ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part I (Requirements) Order Number: RND63021533 All of the following Requirements must be met: This proposed Insured must notify the Company in writing of the name of any party not referred to in this Commitment who will obtain an interest in the Land or who will make a loan on the Land. The Company may then make additional Requirements or Exceptions. Pay the agreed amount for the estate or interest to be insured. Pay the premiums, fees, and charges for the Policy to the Company. Documents satisfactory to the Company that convey the Title or create the Mortgage to be insured, or both, must be properly authorized, executed, delivered, and recorded in the Public Records. THIS COMMITMENT IS FOR INFORMATION ONLY, AND NO POLICY WILL BE ISSUED PURSUANT HERETO. This commitment does not republish any covenants, condition, restriction, or limitation contained in any document referred to in this commitment to the extent that the specific covenant, conditions, restriction, or limitation violates state or federal law based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, handicap, familial status, or national origin. 1. Any facts, rights, interests, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records but that could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or that may be asserted by persons in possession of the Land. 2. Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records. 3. Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and not shown by the Public Records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the Public Records. 5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date of the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 6. (a) Taxes or assessments that are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records; (b) proceedings by a public agency that may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the Public Records. 7. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water. 8. EXISTING LEASES AND TENANCIES. 9. RIGHT OF PROPRIETOR OF A VEIN OR LODE TO EXTRACT AND REMOVE HIS ORE THEREFROM SHOULD THE SAME BE FOUND TO PENETRATE OR INTERSECT THE PREMISES AS RESERVED IN UNITED STATES PATENTS RECORDED: JUNE 24, 1893 IN BOOK 12 AT PAGE 235, NOVEMBER 19, 1893 IN BOOK 12 AT PAGE 255, JANUARY 24, 1906 IN BOOK 56 AT PAGE 534. 10. RIGHT OF WAY FOR DITCHES OR CANALS CONSTRUCTED BY THE AUTHORITY OF THE UNITED STATES AS RESERVED IN UNITED STATES PATENTS RECORDED: JUNE 24, 1893 IN BOOK 12 AT PAGE 235, NOVEMBER 17, 1893 IN BOOK 12 AT PAGE 255, JANUARY 24, 1906 IN BOOK 56 AT PAGE 534. 11. RIGHT OF WAY FOR AN IRRIGATION DITCH GRANTED BY CHAS. TRAUTMAN ET AL TO THE GLENWOOD IRRIGATION COMPANY RECORDED JUNE 17, 1901 IN BOOK 44 AT PAGE 457 AND INSTRUMENT RECORDED AUGUST 27, 1945 IN BOOK 217 AT PAGE 150. 12. RIGHT OF WAY GRANTED FROM C.C. CHASE TO THE MOUNTAIN STATES TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH COMPANY OVER AND ACROSS LOTS 6 AND 9, SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 88 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN RECORDED JULY 13, 1931 IN BOOK 164 AT PAGE 153 AND IN BOOK 164 AT PAGE 154. ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part II (Exceptions) Order Number: RND63021533 13. AN UNDIVIDED ONE-FIFTIETH OF ALL OIL AND GAS LYING IN AND UNDER THE LANDS HEREIN DESCRIBED AS RESERVED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED JUNE 12, 1951 IN BOOK 258 AT PAGE 594, AND ANY AND ALL ASSIGNMENTS THEREOF OR INTERESTS THEREIN. 14. RESERVATION OF A SIX AND ONE-FOURTH PERCENT ROYALTY, IN PERPETUITY, FREE OF ALL COSTS OF PRODUCTION, FROM AND OUT OF ALL THE OIL, GAS AND OTHER MINERALS PRODUCED FROM SUBJECT PROPERTY AS CONVEYED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED DECEMBER 17, 1964 IN BOOK 362 AT PAGE 445, AND ANY AND ALL ASSIGNMENTS THEREOF OR INTERESTS THEREIN. 15. RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENT GRANTED TO HOLY CROSS ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION, INC. RECORDED NOVEMBER 22, 1966 IN BOOK 380 AT PAGE 234. 16. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF AGREEMENT RECORDED AUGUST 19, 1994 IN BOOK 912 AT PAGE 970. 17. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY AS RESERVED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED AUGUST 11, 1998 IN BOOK 1082 AT PAGE 903 18. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, RESTRICTIONS, EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY AS CONTAINED IN EASEMENT GRANT RECORDED AUGUST 2, 1999 IN BOOK 1142 AT PAGE 963 AND AMENDED EASEMENT RECORDED NOVEMBER 15, 2000 IN BOOK 1217 AT PAGE 588. 19. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, RESTRICTIONS, EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY AS CONTAINED IN LICENSE GRANTS RECORDED AUGUST 2, 1999 IN BOOK 1142 AT PAGE 979 AND AT PAGE 993 AND AMENDMENTS RECORDED NOVEMBER 15, 2000 IN BOOK 1217 AT PAGE 596 AND IN BOOK 1217 AT PAGE 601. 20. TERMS, CONDITIONS,RESTRICTIONS, EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY AS CONTAINED IN EASEMENT RECORDED AUGUST 2, 1999 IN BOOK 1143 AT PAGE 1 AND AMENDED EASEMENT RECORDED NOVEMBER 15, 2000 IN BOOK 1217 AT PAGE 593. 21. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF AGREEMENT RECORDED DECEMBER 15, 1999 IN BOOK 1164 AT PAGE 818. 22. EASEMENTS, RIGHTS OF WAY, TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT RECORDED FEBRUARY 07, 2000 IN BOOK 1171 AT PAGE 929 AND MAP RECORDED DECEMBER 24, 2008 AT RECEPTION NO. 760571 AND CORRECTED MAP RECORDED JANUARY 22, 2011 AT RECEPTION NO. 804200. 23. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF DITCH RELOCATION AGREEMENT RECORDED OCTOBER 03, 2001 IN BOOK 1292 AT PAGE 61 AND FIRST AMENDMENT RECORDED JANUARY 26, 2011 AT RECEPTION NO. 798017 AND RELATED QUIT CLAIM DEED RECORDED JANUARY 26, 2011 AT RECEPTION NO. 798018. 24. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF AGREEMENT RECORDED MAY 20, 2002 IN BOOK 1356 AT PAGE 375. 25. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF RESOLUTION NO. 2007-115 RECORDED NOVEMBER 19, 2007 AT RECEPTION NO. 737576. 26. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF PRE INCLUSION AGREEMENT RECORDED DECEMBER 11, 2007 AT RECEPTION NO. 738957. 27. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF RESOLUTION NO. 2008-112 RECORDED OCTOBER 07, 2008 AT RECEPTION NO. 756914. ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part II (Exceptions) Order Number: RND63021533 28. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF GRANT OF EASEMENT AGREEMENT RECORDED DECEMBER 22, 2008 AT RECEPTION NO. 760451. 29. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, BURDENS, OBLIGATIONS AND EASEMENTS AS SET FORTH AND GRANTED IN UTILITY EASEMENT AGREEMENT RECORDED DECEMBER 17, 2010 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 795965. 30. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, BURDENS, OBLIGATIONS AND EASEMENTS AS SET FORTH AND GRANTED IN EASEMENT RECORDED JANUARY 26, 2011 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 798016. 31. RESERVATION OF ALL OIL, GAS AND MINERAL RIGHTS; AND ALL WATER RIGHTS AS CONTAINED IN DEED RECORDED APRIL 21, 2011 AT RECEPTION NO. 801638 AND CORRECTION DEED RECORDED JUNE 22, 2011 AT RECEPTION NO. 804202, ANY AND ALL ASSIGNMENTS THEREOF OR INTERESTS THEREIN. (AFFECTS PARCELS A-C) 32. NON-EXCLUSIVE ACCESS EASEMENTS AND RIGHT OF WAY AS RESERVED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED APRIL 21, 2011 AT RECEPTION NO. 801638 AND CORRECTION DEED RECORDED JUNE 22, 2011 AT RECEPTION NO. 804202. (AFFECTS PARCELS A-C) 33. TERMS, RESERVATIONS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, BURDENS, OBLIGATIONS AND EASEMENTS AS SET FORTH AND GRANTED IN SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED RECORDED APRIL 22, 2011 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 801662, AS AMENDED BY SPECIAL WARRANTY CORRECTION DEED RECORDED JUNE 22, 2011 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 804201. (AFFECTS PARCELS D-F) 34. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, BURDENS AND OBLIGATIONS AS SET FORTH IN RESOLUTION NO. 2011-84 AND 2011-85 APPROVAL OF PREMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN RECORDED DECEMBER 22, 2011 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 812356 AND 812357. AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT RECORDED NOVEMBER 22, 2016 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 885552. NOTE: UPON EVIDENCE SATISFACTORY TO LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY THAT THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN REFERENCED HEREIN HAS BEEN TERMINATED, THE ABOVE EXCEPTION WILL BE DELETED. (AFFECTS PARCELS D-F) 35. EASEMENTS, CONDITIONS, COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATIONS AND NOTES ON THE MAPS OF RIVER EDGE COLORADO RECORDED JANUARY 05, 2012 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 812801 AND UNDER RECEPTION NO. 812802. (AFFECTS PARCELS D-F) 36. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, BURDENS AND OBLIGATIONS AS SET FORTH IN PRE-INCLUSION AGREEMENT RECORDED JULY 25, 2012 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 821791. 37. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF RESOLUTION NO. PC 2012-04 RECORDED JULY 26, 2012 AT RECEPTION NO. 821852 AND RE-RECORDED AUGUST 14, 2012 AT RECEPTION NO. 822730. (AFFECTS PARCELS D-F) ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part II (Exceptions) Order Number: RND63021533 38. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, BURDENS AND OBLIGATIONS AS SET FORTH IN MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING RECORDED OCTOBER 02, 2012 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 824971. 39. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF RESOLUTION NO. 2016-33 RECORDED MAY 02, 2016 AT RECEPTION NO. 876658. 40. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF RESOLUTION NO. 2016-32 RECORDED JUNE 02, 2016 AT RECEPTION NO. 876661. (AFFECTS PARCELS D-F) 41. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF MEMORANDUM OF WATER ALLOTMENT CONTRACT RECORDED JUNE 06, 2016 AT RECEPTION NO. 878102. 42. ANY QUESTION, DISPUTE OR ADVERSE CLAIMS AS TO ANY LOSS OR GAIN OF LAND AS A RESULT OF ANY CHANGE IN THE RIVER BED LOCATION BY NATURAL OR OTHER THAN NATURAL CAUSES, OR ALTERATION THROUGH ANY CAUSE, NATURAL OR UNNATURAL, OF THE CENTER THREAD, BANK, CHANNEL OR FLOW OF WATERS IN THE ROARING FORK RIVER LYING WITHIN SUBJECT LAND; AND ANY QUESTION AS TO THE LOCATION OF SUCH CENTER THREAD, BED, BANK OR CHANNEL AS A LEGAL DESCRIPTION MONUMENT OR MARKER FOR PURPOSES OF DESCRIBING OR LOCATING SUBJECT LANDS, AS DISCLOSED ON ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY CERTIFIED DECEMBER 22, 2023, PREPARED BY TUTTLE SURVEYING SERVICES. 43. ANY RIGHTS OR INTERESTS OF THIRD PARTIES WHICH EXIST OR ARE CLAIMED TO EXIST IN AND OVER THE PRESENT AND PAST BED, BANKS OR WATERS OF CATTLE CREEK AND GLENWOOD DITCH, AS DISCLOSED ON ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY CERTIFIED DECEMBER 22, 2023, PREPARED BY TUTTLE SURVEYING SERVICES 44. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF SHARE ASSIGNMENT AND STOCK POWER RECORDED MARCH 12, 2024 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 994233. 45. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF MEMORANDUM OF WATER ALLOTMENT CONTRACT RECORDED MARCH 12, 2024 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 994234. 46. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION OF ADVANCE AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT RECORDED MARCH 12, 2024 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 994235. ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part II (Exceptions) Order Number: RND63021533 Land Title Guarantee Company Disclosure Statements Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-122, notice is hereby given that: Note: Effective September 1, 1997, CRS 30-10-406 requires that all documents received for recording or filing in the clerk and recorder's office shall contain a top margin of at least one inch and a left, right and bottom margin of at least one half of an inch. The clerk and recorder may refuse to record or file any document that does not conform, except that, the requirement for the top margin shall not apply to documents using forms on which space is provided for recording or filing information at the top margin of the document. Note: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-2 requires that "Every title entity shall be responsible for all matters which appear of record prior to the time of recording whenever the title entity conducts the closing and is responsible for recording or filing of legal documents resulting from the transaction which was closed". Provided that Land Title Guarantee Company conducts the closing of the insured transaction and is responsible for recording the legal documents from the transaction, exception number 5 will not appear on the Owner's Title Policy and the Lenders Policy when issued. Note: Affirmative mechanic's lien protection for the Owner may be available (typically by deletion of Exception no. 4 of Schedule B, Section 2 of the Commitment from the Owner's Policy to be issued) upon compliance with the following conditions: No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured has contracted for or agreed to pay. Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-123, notice is hereby given: The Subject real property may be located in a special taxing district.(A) A certificate of taxes due listing each taxing jurisdiction will be obtained from the county treasurer of the county in which the real property is located or that county treasurer's authorized agent unless the proposed insured provides written instructions to the contrary. (for an Owner's Policy of Title Insurance pertaining to a sale of residential real property). (B) The information regarding special districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained from the Board of County Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County Assessor. (C) The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single family residence which includes a condominium or townhouse unit. (A) No labor or materials have been furnished by mechanics or material-men for purposes of construction on the land described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months. (B) The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against un-filed mechanic's and material-men's liens. (C) The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium.(D) If there has been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased within six months prior to the Date of Commitment, the requirements to obtain coverage for unrecorded liens will include: disclosure of certain construction information; financial information as to the seller, the builder and or the contractor; payment of the appropriate premium fully executed Indemnity Agreements satisfactory to the company, and, any additional requirements as may be necessary after an examination of the aforesaid information by the Company. (E) This notice applies to owner's policy commitments disclosing that a mineral estate has been severed from the surface estate, in Schedule B-2. Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-1-128(6)(a), It is unlawful to knowingly provide false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to an insurance company for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the company. Penalties may include imprisonment, fines, denial of insurance, and civil damages. Any insurance company or agent of an insurance company who knowingly provides false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to a policyholder or claimant for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the policyholder or claimant with regard to a settlement or award payable from insurance proceeds shall be reported to the Colorado Division of Insurance within the Department of Regulatory Agencies. Note: Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-3, notice is hereby given of the availability of a closing protection letter for the lender, purchaser, lessee or seller in connection with this transaction. Note: Pursuant to CRS 24-21-514.5, Colorado notaries may remotely notarize real estate deeds and other documents using real-time audio-video communication technology. You may choose not to use remote notarization for any document. That there is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased, or otherwise conveyed from the surface estate and that there is substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other minerals, or geothermal energy in the property; and (A) That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owner's permission. (B) Joint Notice of Privacy Policy of Land Title Guarantee Company Land Title Insurance Corporation and Old Republic National Title Insurancy Company This Statement is provided to you as a customer of Land Title Guarantee Company as agent for Land Title Insurance Corporation and Old Republic National Title Insurance Company. We want you to know that we recognize and respect your privacy expectations and the requirements of federal and state privacy laws. Information security is one of our highest priorities. We recognize that maintaining your trust and confidence is the bedrock of our business. We maintain and regularly review internal and external safeguards against unauthorized access to your non-public personal information ("Personal Information"). In the course of our business, we may collect Personal Information about you from: applications or other forms we receive from you, including communications sent through TMX, our web-based transaction management system; your transactions with, or from the services being performed by us, our affiliates, or others; a consumer reporting agency, if such information is provided to us in connection with your transaction; and The public records maintained by governmental entities that we obtain either directly from those entities, or from our affiliates and non-affiliates. Our policies regarding the protection of the confidentiality and security of your Personal Information are as follows: We restrict access to all Personal Information about you to those employees who need to know that information in order to provide products and services to you. We may share your Personal Information with affiliated contractors or service providers who provide services in the course of our business, but only to the extent necessary for these providers to perform their services and to provide these services to you as may be required by your transaction. We maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards that comply with federal standards to protect your Personal Information from unauthorized access or intrusion. Employees who violate our strict policies and procedures regarding privacy are subject to disciplinary action. We regularly assess security standards and procedures to protect against unauthorized access to Personal Information. WE DO NOT DISCLOSE ANY PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU WITH ANYONE FOR ANY PURPOSE THAT IS NOT STATED ABOVE OR PERMITTED BY LAW. Consistent with applicable privacy laws, there are some situations in which Personal Information may be disclosed. We may disclose your Personal Information when you direct or give us permission; when we are required by law to do so, for example, if we are served a subpoena; or when we suspect fraudulent or criminal activities. We also may disclose your Personal Information when otherwise permitted by applicable privacy laws such as, for example, when disclosure is needed to enforce our rights arising out of any agreement, transaction or relationship with you. Our policy regarding dispute resolution is as follows: Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to our privacy policy, or the breach thereof, shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association, and judgment upon the award rendered by the arbitrator(s) may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. Commitment For Title Insurance Issued by Old Republic National Title Insurance Company NOTICE IMPORTANT—READ CAREFULLY: THIS COMMITMENT IS AN OFFER TO ISSUE ONE OR MORE TITLE INSURANCE POLICIES. ALL CLAIMS OR REMEDIES SOUGHT AGAINST THE COMPANY INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT OR THE POLICY MUST BE BASED SOLELY IN CONTRACT. THIS COMMITMENT IS NOT AN ABSTRACT OF TITLE, REPORT OF THE CONDITION OF TITLE, LEGAL OPINION, OPINION OF TITLE, OR OTHER REPRESENTATION OF THE STATUS OF TITLE. THE PROCEDURES USED BY THE COMPANY TO DETERMINE INSURABILITY OF THE TITLE, INCLUDING ANY SEARCH AND EXAMINATION, ARE PROPRIETARY TO THE COMPANY, WERE PERFORMED SOLELY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMPANY, AND CREATE NO EXTRACONTRACTUAL LIABILITY TO ANY PERSON, INCLUDING A PROPOSED INSURED. THE COMPANY’S OBLIGATION UNDER THIS COMMITMENT IS TO ISSUE A POLICY TO A PROPOSED INSURED IDENTIFIED IN SCHEDULE A IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS OF THIS COMMITMENT. THE COMPANY HAS NO LIABILITY OR OBLIGATION INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT TO ANY OTHER PERSON. . COMMITMENT TO ISSUE POLICY Subject to the Notice; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and the Commitment Conditions, Old Republic National Title Insurance Company, a Minnesota corporation (the “Company”), commits to issue the Policy according to the terms and provisions of this Commitment. This Commitment is effective as of the Commitment Date shown in Schedule A for each Policy described in Schedule A, only when the Company has entered in Schedule A both the specified dollar amount as the Proposed Policy Amount and the name of the Proposed Insured. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met within 6 months after the Commitment Date, this Commitment terminates and the Company’s liability and obligation end. COMMITMENT CONDITIONS 1. DEFINITIONS 2. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met within the time period specified in the Commitment to Issue Policy, Commitment terminates and the Company’s liability and obligation end. 3. The Company’s liability and obligation is limited by and this Commitment is not valid without: 4. COMPANY’S RIGHT TO AMEND The Company may amend this Commitment at any time. If the Company amends this Commitment to add a defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim, or other matter recorded in the Public Records prior to the Commitment Date, any liability of the Company is limited by Commitment Condition 5. The Company shall not be liable for any other amendment to this Commitment. 5. LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY i. comply with the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; ii. eliminate, with the Company’s written consent, any Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; or iii. acquire the Title or create the Mortgage covered by this Commitment. 6. LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY MUST BE BASED ON THIS COMMITMENT “Knowledge” or “Known”: Actual or imputed knowledge, but not constructive notice imparted by the Public Records.(a) “Land”: The land described in Schedule A and affixed improvements that by law constitute real property. The term “Land” does not include any property beyond the lines of the area described in Schedule A, nor any right, title, interest, estate, or easement in abutting streets, roads, avenues, alleys, lanes, ways, or waterways, but this does not modify or limit the extent that a right of access to and from the Land is to be insured by the Policy. (b) “Mortgage”: A mortgage, deed of trust, or other security instrument, including one evidenced by electronic means authorized by law.(c) “Policy”: Each contract of title insurance, in a form adopted by the American Land Title Association, issued or to be issued by the Company pursuant to this Commitment. (d) “Proposed Insured”: Each person identified in Schedule A as the Proposed Insured of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment.(e) “Proposed Policy Amount”: Each dollar amount specified in Schedule A as the Proposed Policy Amount of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment. (f) “Public Records”: Records established under state statutes at the Commitment Date for the purpose of imparting constructive notice of matters relating to real property to purchasers for value and without Knowledge. (g) “Title”: The estate or interest described in Schedule A.(h) the Notice;(a) the Commitment to Issue Policy;(b) the Commitment Conditions;(c) Schedule A;(d) Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; and(e) Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and(f) a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form.(g) The Company’s liability under Commitment Condition 4 is limited to the Proposed Insured’s actual expense incurred in the interval between the Company’s delivery to the Proposed Insured of the Commitment and the delivery of the amended Commitment, resulting from the Proposed Insured’s good faith reliance to: (a) The Company shall not be liable under Commitment Condition 5(a) if the Proposed Insured requested the amendment or had Knowledge of the matter and did not notify the Company about it in writing. (b) The Company will only have liability under Commitment Condition 4 if the Proposed Insured would not have incurred the expense had the Commitment included the added matter when the Commitment was first delivered to the Proposed Insured. (c) The Company’s liability shall not exceed the lesser of the Proposed Insured’s actual expense incurred in good faith and described in Commitment Conditions 5(a)(i) through 5(a)(iii) or the Proposed Policy Amount. (d) The Company shall not be liable for the content of the Transaction Identification Data, if any.(e) In no event shall the Company be obligated to issue the Policy referred to in this Commitment unless all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have been met to the satisfaction of the Company. (f) In any event, the Company’s liability is limited by the terms and provisions of the Policy.(g) Only a Proposed Insured identified in Schedule A, and no other person, may make a claim under this Commitment.(a) Any claim must be based in contract and must be restricted solely to the terms and provisions of this Commitment.(b) Until the Policy is issued, this Commitment, as last revised, is the exclusive and entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Commitment and supersedes all prior commitment negotiations, representations, and proposals of any kind, whether written or oral, express or implied, relating to the subject matter of this Commitment. (c) 7. IF THIS COMMITMENT HAS BEEN ISSUED BY AN ISSUING AGENT The issuing agent is the Company’s agent only for the limited purpose of issuing title insurance commitments and policies. The issuing agent is not the Company’s agent for the purpose of providing closing or settlement services. 8. PRO-FORMA POLICY The Company may provide, at the request of a Proposed Insured, a pro-forma policy illustrating the coverage that the Company may provide. A pro-forma policy neither reflects the status of Title at the time that the pro-forma policy is delivered to a Proposed Insured, nor is it a commitment to insure. 9. ARBITRATION The Policy contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Proposed Policy Amount is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Proposed Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. A Proposed Insured may review a copy of the arbitration rules at http://www.alta.org/arbitration. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Land Title Insurance Corporation has caused its corporate name and seal to be affixed by its duly authorized officers on the date shown in Schedule A to be valid when countersigned by a validating officer or other authorized signatory. Issued by: Land Title Guarantee Company 3033 East First Avenue Suite 600 Denver, Colorado 80206 303-321-1880 Craig B. Rants, Senior Vice President This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by Old Republic National Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; and Schedule B, Part II —Exceptions; and a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. The deletion or modification of any Schedule B, Part II—Exception does not constitute an agreement or obligation to provide coverage beyond the terms and provisions of this Commitment or the Policy. (d) Any amendment or endorsement to this Commitment must be in writing and authenticated by a person authorized by the Company.(e) When the Policy is issued, all liability and obligation under this Commitment will end and the Company’s only liability will be under the Policy.(f) Exhibit R Affordable Housing Plan Harvest Roaring Fork – Conceptual Housing Mitigation Plan 1 Purpose The purpose of this narrative is to explain Harvest’s affordable and deed-restricted housing plan and how it is expected to beneflt Garfleld County. Current Housing Situation Rapidly increasing housing values, limited inventory, high competition, and a growing gap between incomes and housing costs makes Garfleld County the most difficult county to buy a home in the United States, per NBC News’ Home Buyer Index, with a difficulty score of 89.3 out of 100. Average home prices have soared at an unprecedented rate, more than doubling in less than flve years from around $400,000 in 2019 to approximately $925,000 today (according to Realtor.com). Teachers, flreflghters, nurses, police officers, and other essential working-class households that earn 130% or less of the Area Median Income (AMI) are being outpriced and outcompeted when seeking homeownership by those pursuing investment properties or their 2nd or 3rd homes. Since these investment properties / non-primary residences are frequently vacant, they do little to support the surrounding economy and community. As contemplated in Garfleld County’s Comprehensive Plan 2030, this results in increased commute times, traffic congestion (primarily through Glenwood Springs), public safety concerns, and an overall lower quality of life for the residents of Garfleld County. Although some measures have been taken to mitigate these issues, there are few indications that Garfleld County will not continue to suffer from the duality of increas ing housing demand and insufficient housing supply. It is important to highlight that the scarcity of affordable housing in the Roaring Fork Valley has resulted in an increase in housing costs in the towns along the lower Colorado River Basin, including Silt, Parachute, Rifie, and Newcastle. This lack of housing availability across different locations adversely affects many residents of Garfleld County, diminishing their quality of life by increasing traffic and commute times as residents are forced to live further away from their jobs in order to afford a home. The Harvest Roaring Fork Impact Harvest presents a rare opportunity for Garfleld County to provide more balance to its housing market. As proposed, Harvest may contain up to 1,500 housing units, 10% of which must satisfy the requirements of being “Mitigation Units”, as deflned in Article 8 of the LUDC. Harvest will comply with the requirements and standards outlined in Article 8. Harvest will go substantially above and beyond these requirements by offering an additional 20% (up to 300) deed-restricted residences designed to ensure more housing is available for the workforce. These full-time employment deed restrictions are described in detail later in this narrative. Finally, Harvest intends to offer a wide variety of housing types, with an emphasis on smaller building footprints and maximizing construction efficiency to bring down the cost of the home. Complying with Article 8 standards, imposing additional deed restrictions, utilizing economies of scale, and reducing the sizes of homes will help Harvest become a true workforce housing community that can make a meaningful impact on the County’s current housing crisis. Harvest Roaring Fork – Conceptual Housing Mitigation Plan 2 Conceptual Housing Mitigation Plan A. Key Assumptions In order for Harvest to tailor its housing types to the workforce, a better understanding of the prices that home buyers and renters deem affordable is necessary. This can be determined by referencing Garfleld County Housing Authority’s (GCHA) average median income (AMI) limits table and Article 8 of the LUDC. Combining these sources of information, Tables 1 and 2 below illustrate the maximum rental rates and purchase prices for each combination of household size and AMI limit. For 2025, the AMI for a 1-person household was $74,000 per year, per GCHA’s annual publishing. Table 1 Table 1 above calculates the maximum monthly housing expense that each household can afford by utilizing the annual GCHA’s 2025 AMI Limits table and key assumptions in Article 8 of the LUDC. Per Article 8, Table 1 assumes that no more than 33% (1/3rd) of gross monthly household income is dedicated to monthly housing expenses. It is important to note that the GCHA and §8-302.B.1 of the LUDC have differing percentages of income that is attributable to housing costs, which causes Tables 1 and 2 of this narrative to slightly differ from the 2025 calculations from the GCHA. The flgures shown in Table 1 represent the maximum monthly principal, interest, mortgage insurance, taxes, HOA dues, and other related home ownership costs each household can afford, as well as the maximum rental rates that Harvest may charge for its Mitigation Units, including any additional fees or services. These amounts are subject to GCHA’s annual update of AMI limits and to Article 8 standards regarding AMI categories. Table 2 below applies Article 8’s assumptions regarding principal and interest (P&I) payments and mortgage terms to derive the maximum purchase prices each household can afford. Article 8 assumes 80% of a household’s monthly housing expense is dedicated to P&I payments over a 30- year mortgage, based on a 7.25% interest rate (set by the GCHA), while the remaining 20% of a household's monthly housing expense is dedicated to mortgage insurance, taxes, homeowner’s insurance, and HOA dues. 2025 Max Housing Payments (Also Max Monthly Rent) Number of Residents AMI 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 80%$1,644 $1,878 $2,113 $2,347 $2,536 $2,722 $2,911 $3,098 Cat 1 100%$2,056 $2,347 $2,642 $2,933 $3,169 $3,403 $3,639 $3,872 Cat 2 110%$2,261 $2,582 $2,906 $3,227 $3,486 $3,743 $4,003 $4,259 120%$2,467 $2,817 $3,170 $3,520 $3,803 $4,083 $4,367 $4,647 140%$2,878 $3,286 $3,698 $4,107 $4,437 $4,764 $5,094 $5,421 180%$3,700 $4,225 $4,755 $5,280 $5,705 $6,125 $6,550 $6,970 Cat 3 Harvest Roaring Fork – Conceptual Housing Mitigation Plan 3 Table 2 Per the assumptions in Article 8 of the LUDC, the 2025 GCHA AMI limits table, and a 7.25% interest rate, the home prices shown in Table 2 are what each household can afford. This estimates the maximum initial sale price that Harvest can charge for its Mitigation Units. B. Deed Restricted Residences Due to the large size of the community, Harvest is better positioned to help address Garfleld County’s workforce housing crisis. Harvest proposes to double the number of required Mitigation Units (10%) with deed restricted residences (another 20%). These deed restricted residences may be detached or non-detached residences as permitted within the Planned Unit Development Guide (Exhibit D) of this application, however the intent is to provide many smaller homes for sale to promote homeownership. The proposed deed restriction would be perpetual and would speciflcally require a full-time job to be held by the owner (who is also an occupant) at the time of any sale taking place, including during the initial sale and any re-sales. To be eligible to purchase one of Harvest’s deed restricted residences, satisfactory evidence of full time employment must be provided to GCHA, including (i) evidence of working no less than 30 hours per week, and (ii) having a job either in Garfleld County, Pitkin County, or Eagle County, or the owner (who is also an occupant) must provide evidence of working full-time from home. Examples of evidence could include paychecks, tax returns, or other information that GCHA may reasonably require. Table 3 below shows the breakdown of Harvest’s proposed housing mix , assuming 1,500 total residences. Table 3 C. Proposed Housing Plan Location Maximum Purchase Prices Number of Residents AMI 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 80%181,456 207,203 233,195 258,943 279,785 300,383 321,226 341,824 Cat 1 100%226,820 259,004 291,494 323,678 349,732 375,479 401,533 427,280 Cat 2 110%249,502 284,904 320,644 356,046 384,705 413,027 441,686 470,008 120%272,184 310,805 349,793 388,414 419,678 450,575 481,839 512,736 140%317,548 362,605 408,092 453,149 489,625 525,670 562,146 598,192 180%408,276 466,207 524,690 582,621 629,517 675,862 722,759 769,103 Cat 3 Harvest Housing Mix Mitigation Residences 150 Deed Restricted Residences 300 Remaining Units 1,050 Harvest Roaring Fork – Conceptual Housing Mitigation Plan 4 Mitigation and deed-restricted residences in Harvest will be spread throughout the community. Mitigation Units may include a mix of multi-family residences, townhomes, and detached single- family homes; each of which will be located with respect to their surrounding uses, with higher- density units congregating around common amenities and open spaces, and lower density housing mostly located towards the western side of the community. Harvest’s deed-restricted residences will follow this same theme. Mitigation Unit Count The number of Mitigation Units provided will be 10% of the maximum number of housing units allowed in the PUD Guide. If the actual number of housing units is less than 1,500, then the number of Mitigation Units and deed-restricted residences will be reduced. In the event Harvest builds out to its full proposed capability of 1,500 residences, per §8-301, 260 bedrooms are required to be spread across a minimum of 150 Mitigation Units. Harvest’s Mitigation Units will likely be a blend of for-sale and for-rent residences. Partnering with a non-proflt organization is also an option. Mitigation Unit Mix and Breakdown by Category The exact unit mix of Harvest’s Mitigation Units is not yet determined, however the number of bedrooms (maximum of 260, based on 1,500 units and 150 Mitigation Units) and the unit sizes must comply with §8-301.C, as shown below: For Harvest’s deed-restricted residences, there should be an expansive selection of housing types, fioorplans, and exteriors; with the intent to provide homeownership to as many household types as possible within the underserved workforce housing market. Construction Schedule and Proposed Method of Construction Guarantee No building permits shall be issued for any residential units in any future phase of Harvest until a certiflcate of occupancy has been issued for the required number of Mitigation Units in the previous phase. To avoid confusion, the Mitigation Units required to be constructed in a phase shall not restrict the other residential units in the same phase from obtaining a certiflcate of occupancy. As an example, if a phase of Harvest includes 100 residential units, then the 10 required Mitigation Units must obtain a certiflcate of occupancy before any residential building can be constructed in the next phase. For any phase, the cumulative surplus number of Mitigation Units with a certiflcate of occupancy (if any) from previous phases may be deducted from the otherwise required number of Mitigation Units in the current phase. This proposed standard shall supersede §8-301.D and shall be considered as an alternative method of securing the construction of the Mitigation Units in §8 - 201.A.8.c. This alternate method ensures the Mitigation Units are built and receive a certiflcate of occupancy, and accelerates Harvest’s fundamental goal of making a positive impact on the current housing shortage. Harvest Roaring Fork – Conceptual Housing Mitigation Plan 5 Proposed Calculations for HOA Dues The HOA dues assessed for Harvest’s Mitigation Units will not exceed 75% of the amount assessed to market rate residences. Harvest will comply with §8-302.5. Proposed Form of Deed Restrictions Deed restrictions on Harvest’s Mitigation Units will follow the requirements set forth in §8-303, while the deed restricted residences shall have a perpetual full-time job deed restriction as outlined in Subsection B of this narrative. Rental Housing Additional Guidelines Harvest proposes to increase the AMI limits for rental housing to 80% and 100% for category I and category II households, respectively. To ensure any for-rent Mitigation Units remain affordable, the pricing of these units will always refiect the latest annual publishing of GCHA’s AMI Limits Table. For example, if Harvest currently had one hundred one-bedroom apartments available, ten one- bedroom apartments would need to be designated as Mitigation Units. Of those ten units, two of them would have a maximum monthly rent of $1,878, three others would be priced at a maximum of $2,347 per month, and the remaining flve would be available for rent at a maximum of $2,582 per month. Similarly, if GCHA flnds that a two-person household earning 100% of AMI increases from $84,500 (2025’s value) to $87,000 when the 2026 AMI Limits Table is published, the maximum monthly rent apartments would be adjusted as follows: • Category 1 Households: Two one-bedroom units priced no more than $1,933.33 per month • Category 2 Households: Three one-bedroom units priced no more than $2,416.67 per month • Category 3 Households: Five one-bedroom units priced no more than $2,658.33 per month. Justification for Off-Site Mitigation Units This is not applicable as Harvest will locate all Mitigation Units on-site. Compliance with Article 8, Division 4, and Article 8, Attachment A Harvest plans to comply with Article 8, Attachment A, and to coordinate with GCHA on the administration of Mitigation Units. The available and applicable incentives pursuant to Division 4 will be pursued at the time of Preliminary Plan. Exhibit S Funding of the Common Use Areas The Funding for Common Use Areas in Harvest Roaring Fork The long-term maintenance and management of common use areas and community improvements within Harvest Roaring Fork will be funded through a combination of revenue sources. These include assessments from the Cattle Creek Metropolitan District and a Property Owners Association (POA). Additionally, a transfer tax is under consideration as a potential funding source. This approach ensures financial sustainability while maintaining high-quality amenities and infrastructure. Cattle Creek Metropolitan District Assessments The Cattle Creek Metropolitan District will oversee major infrastructure and public service responsibilities, imposing assessments on properties within Harvest Roaring Fork to fund. These assessments will contribute to: • Maintenance of roads, trails, and public spaces. • Stormwater management and drainage infrastructure. • Street lighting, pedestrian pathways, and public safety features. The District was established in 2012 and remains an active entity. It is currently governing vacant land with no infrastructure in place. A map outlining the District boundary has been included for reference. See Exhibit A. Property Owners Association Assessments The POA will be responsible for maintaining community amenities and enforcing neighborhood standards. POA assessments will cover: • Day-to-day maintenance of shared amenities and private common areas. • Snow removal, landscaping, and seasonal upkeep. • Community management services, including enforcement of guidelines and architectural standards. Transfer Taxes on Property Sales A transfer tax is under consideration as an additional funding source for long-term community maintenance and enhancements. If implemented, the tax would be collected at the time of property resale and managed by Harvest Roaring Fork’s POA, with oversight and reporting requirements in place to ensure transparency and accountability. Revenue from the tax could be allocated toward: • Open space preservation and landscaping. • Parks, playgrounds, and recreational facilities. • Stewardship of conservation easement areas in coordination with the Roaring Fork Conservancy. Importantly, transfer tax funds would be restricted for use only within the community and would not be used for off-site improvements or unrelated infrastructure, ensuring all proceeds directly benefit the Harvest Roaring Fork community. Summary The Cattle Creek Metropolitan District will oversee major infrastructure and public service responsibilities. The POA will manage neighborhood-level maintenance, common area upkeep, and resident services. Harvest Roaring Fork’s funding structure is designed to ensure the financial sustainability of common use areas while keeping assessments attainable for residents. By utilizing a combination of Metro District assessments, POA dues, and potentially a transfer tax, we are aligning our approach with best practices for financial sustainability. Exhibit A Exhibit T Carbondale & Rural Fire District Letter Carbondale & Rural Fire Protection District As part of ongoing coordination with the Carbondale & Rural Fire Protection District (CRFPD), the Harvest Roaring Fork team has engaged in early discussions about the potential inclusion of a future fire station within the development. This concept remains under evaluation and will be further reviewed in collaboration with CRFPD and Harvest Roaring Fork as planning advances. If it is determined that a new fire station is not necessary, Harvest Roaring Fork anticipates contributing to fire protection services through ordinance required impact fees or other mechanisms as required and agreed upon Harvest Roaring Fork and CRFPD. Additionally, as each phase is constructed, Harvest Roaring Fork will ensure all necessary utilities, including water and sewer, are stubbed to neighboring property lines to facilitate future connections and expansion of water/sewer services. March 26, 2025 Glenn Hartmann and John Leybourne Garfield County 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Subject: Fire Protection for Harvest Roaring Fork Project Dear Glenn and John, Over the last several months, the Carbondale & Rural Fire Protection District (CRFPD) has been engaged in discussions with the Harvest Roaring Fork team regarding fire protection, impact fees, and fire/safety considerations for the proposed development. CRFPD operates a fire station directly north of the proposed Harvest Roaring Fork project located at 5449 Co Rd 154, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601. That fire station does not currently have a central water system to service the nearby neighborhoods. As part of its infrastructure planning, Harvest has indicated that as they build out their community, they will extend a water line connection to their northern property line. This water line should provide a reliable water service from the Roaring Fork Water and Sanitation District. CRFPD has discussed with Harvest Roaring Fork the diverse range of building types, proposed street cross sections, and Highway 82 access points proposed for the community. The fire department has also discussed with Harvest Roaring Fork the combination of impact fees/and or land dedication per the county ordinances and any future developer agreement with Garfield County. Should the zoning application for Harvest Roaring Fork be approved by Garfield County, Harvest Roaring Fork will be required to obtain CRFPD’s approval for all proposed development plans, including street layouts, access, and fire protection and life safety systems during the Preliminary Plan stage. All proposed infrastructure must comply with fire protection and access requirements prior to receiving construction permits. CRFPD and Harvest Roaring Fork have had initial discussions about the potential for a future fire station within the development. Further evaluation is needed to determine whether an additional fire station is necessary at Harvest, and we look forward to continuing these conversations with Harvest Roaring Fork and Garfield County as planning progresses. Please feel free to contact our office if you require any further information or clarification. Sincerely, Karl Oliver Prevention Division Chief Fire Marshall Carbondale & Rural Fire Protection District Office - (970) 963-2491 Cell - (970) 379-8991 Exhibit U Viewpoints Viewpoint 1 Viewpoint 2 Viewpoint 3 Viewpoint 4 Viewpoint 5 Viewpoint 6 Viewpoint 7 Viewpoint 8 Viewpoint 9 Viewpoint 10 Viewpoint 11 Viewpoint 12 Viewpoint 13 Viewpoint 14 Viewpoint 15 Viewpoint 16 Viewpoint 17 Viewpoint 18 Viewpoint 19 Viewpoint 20 Viewpoint 21 Viewpoint 22 Viewpoint 24 Viewpoint 23 Viewpoint 25 Viewpoint 26 Viewpoint 27 Viewpoint 28 Viewpoint 29 Viewpoint 30 Viewpoint 31 Viewpoint 32 Viewpoint 33 Viewpoint 34 Viewpoint 35 Viewpoint 36 Viewpoint 37 Viewpoint 38