Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0 ApplicationSUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR PEACH VALLEY VISTAS OWNER AND APPLICANT: Kelly and Michael Lyon Family, LLC P.O. Box 110 Silt, Colorado 81652 ENGINEER: Gamba & Associates, Inc. P.O. Box 1458 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602 (970) 945-2550 SURVEYOR: Michael Gamba P.E. & P.L.S. Gamba & Associates, Inc. P.O. Box 1458 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602 (970) 945-2550 April 6, 2005 APR 1 8 2005 BUILDING & PLANNNG SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR PEACH VALLEY VISTAS OWNER AND APPLICANT: Kelly and Michael Lyon Family, LLC P.O. Box 110 Silt, Colorado 81652 ENGINEER: Gamba & Associates, Inc. P.O. Box 1458 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602 (970) 945-2550 SURVEYOR: Michael Gamba P.E. & P.L.S. Gamba & Associates, Inc. P.O. Box 1458 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602 (970) 945-2550 March 25, 2005 • • • PEACH VALLEY VISTAS March 25, 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION: 1 4:00-4:10 PRELIMINARY PLAN 1 4:11 "CLUSTER OPTION" 1 4:12 TECHNICAL COMPLETION 4 4:20-4:22 PLANNING COMMISSION 4 4:30-4:34 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 4 4:40-4:41 PRELIMINARY PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS 5 4:42 PRELIMINARY PLAN MAP SCALE 5 4:50 PRELIMINARY PLAN MAP 6 4:60 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 8 4:70 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: GEOLOGY SOIL, VEGETATION & WILDLIFE8 4:80 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: DRAINAGE PLAN 9 4:90-4:91 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: UTILITY PLAN 9 4:92 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: UTILITY PLAN (sanitary sewage disposal) 11 4:93 PLANS MARKED "Not for Construction" 12 4:94 OFF-SITE ROAD IMPACTS 12 APPENDIX A- GARFIELD COUNTY APPLICATION FORMS APPENDIX B- ADJOINING PROPERTY AND MINERAL OWNERS APPENDIX C- DRAINAGE REPORT APPENDIX D- GEOLOGIC EVALUATION REPORT APPENDIX E- RADIATION SURVEY APPENDIX F- GEOTECHNICAL SUBGRADE INVESTIGATION AND PAVEMENT DESIGN REPORT APPENDIX G- NATIONAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION SERVICE (NRCS) SOIL INFORMATION APPENDIX H- UTILITY AGREEMENTS APPENDIX I- VEGETATION MAP APPENDIX J- WILDLIFE MAPS APPENDIX K- TITLE COMMITMENT APPENDIX L- ISDS OPERATION AND MAINAINENCE AND DATA APPENDIX M- WATER SUPPLY REPORT APPENDIX N- VICINITY MAP APPENDIX 0- OPEN SPACE DOCUMENTS APPENDIX P- WATER RIGHTS INFORMATION • • • PEACH VALLEY VISTAS March 25, 2005 INTRODUCTION: The following submittal information is presented in an order and style intended to correspond to Subdivision Regulations of Garfield County, Colorado of 1984. The proposed Peach Valley Vistas Subdivision is located east of the Town of Silt. The Davis Point Road borders the property on the west, County Road 214 borders the north, the Peach Valley Acres Subdivision borders the east and the Cactus Valley Ditch borders the south. The property is currently zoned Garfield County A/R/RD and is used for agricultural activities such as hay production. A vineyard is also located in the southern portion of the property. The Peach Valley Vistas Subdivision parcel contains approximately 54.878 acres. The proposed land use for the Peach Valley Vistas Subdivision is residential in nature and consists of twenty-five (25) single family lots. Lot 25 is to be approximately 18.51 -acres in size and will be the "conserved" area to comply with the County's Cluster Plan option. Lot 25 will be allowed to continue in an agricultural manor consistent with the present use including farming and the raising of livestock. Kelly and Michael Lyon Family, LLC own the Peach Valley Vistas parcel. A copy of a title commitment policy, including the legal description, is included with this submittal as Appendix K. 4:00-4:10 PRELIMINARY PLAN The Preliminary Plan shall be submitted to the Garfield County Planning Commission at least forty-nine (49) days prior to a regularly scheduled Commission meeting. The submitted material shall be sent to the Garfield County Planning Department, and shall include twenty (20) copies of the application form, map(s) and all supporting documentation, except only seven (7) copies of the drainage and utility plans are necessary. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining all governmental or agency permits required by Colorado state law and these Regulations. Evidence that such permits have been obtained or are in the process of being obtained shall be submitted as part of the Preliminary Plan.... 4:11 "CLUSTER OPTION" At this point in the application process the applicant may decide to chose a "Cluster Option" for development of a parcel in A/I, A/R/RD or R/L (Valley Floor) Zone Districts. Upon submission of a Clustering option, a `Yield Plan' which defines the number of parcels which would otherwise be allowed with a two (2) acre minimum lot size, and the balance or remainder of the parcel which may be undevelopable, will be based on the applicants configuration of lots as would otherwise be allowed under two -acre minimum lot size regulations. If choosing to undertake the Cluster Option, the applicant shall submit a second Cluster Option Plan showing lot configurations based on a minimum lot size of one (1) acre, with lots clustered so as to preserve greenbelt and common open space areas on otherwise developable land. This second Cluster Option Plan will be subject to the same review criteria, and must contain the same elements, with the following additions: The applicant has elected to choose a "Cluster Option" for the development of the project. The Sketch Plan previously submitted outlined a conventional lot layout and will be resubmitted during the Preliminary Plan phase as a "Yield Plan" as described in the Subdivision Regulations. The "Yield Plan" will demonstrate the potential to develop the property under the current A/R/RD regulations by defining lots with a H:\02372\01\Preliminary Plan Report(s)\SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAN 4-4-2005.doc 1 PEACH VALLEY VISTAS March 25, 2005 minimum area of two -acres, a road network, and delineated lands defined as un -developable. The number of lots available from the "Yield Plan" is twenty-four. A. A calculation of total developable land, based on land area contained in legal and allowable lots as defined, in a proposed Yield analysis. The total developable land, including road rights-of-way, is approximately 52.86 acres. B. A calculation of developable land reserved for greenbelt or common open space, as a percentage of total developable land. See Appendix O. Number of additional lots. 1.) For preserving otherwise developable lands, as determined in the Clustering Option as defined by Garfield County, placed in a Common Open Space or Greenbelt designation amounting to twenty-five percent (25%) or more of the otherwise developable tract or parcel of land being subdivided, development applicants shall be entitled to one additional developable lot, or one additional developable lot for every sixteen (16) or more otherwise developable lots, whichever is greater, or, if the next threshold is met: The applicant has proposed to implement this option as the development plan calls for 25 lots, which is one lot more than what is possible as demonstrated by the "Yield Plan." The actual lands preserved are greater than the 25%. 2.) For preserving otherwise developable lands, as determined in the Clustering Option as defined by Garfield County, placed in a Common Open Space or Greenbelt designation amounting to forty percent (40%) or more of the otherwise developable tract or parcel of land being subdivided, development applicants shall be entitled to one (1) additional developable lot, or one additional developable lot for every twelve (12) or more otherwise developable Tots, whichever is greater. The applicant has opted for the 25% percent preservation plan even though the development is possible while preserving the 40% of project lands because the development plan only requires one additional lot over that attainable with the "Yield Plan." Cluster Option Sketch Plan. The parcel is currently used for agricultural purposes, including hay fields and a small vineyard. The southern approximately one-quarter of the parcel is lightly wooded with deciduous trees and has some mild topography sloping to the Lower Cactus Valley Ditch. The southwesterly corner of the parcel is traversed by a rugged channel cut by a ditch return from the Ware and Hines ditch which returns water to the Colorado River. The development is proposed for the lower approximately one-half of the parcel. However no development is proposed south of the Lower Cactus Valley Ditch or in the southwesterly corner of the property. The portions of the parcel not proposed for development (including the northern hay field, the southwest corner and the area south of the Lower Cactus Valley Ditch) will be reserved as open space. Further discussion of the open space is included in Appendix O. A.) A description of the land to be included in common open space or greenbelt. The majority of the land to be included in the open space will be comprised of agricultural fields currently used for hay production. The H:\02372\01\Preliminary Plan Report(s)\SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAN 4-4-2005.doc 2 • • • PEACH VALLEY VISTAS March 25, 2005 majority of common open space or greenbelt land will be included within Lot 25. B.) Ownership and proposed management of the common open space or greenbelt. Ownership will be by the Homeowners Association except Lot 25 which will be private ownership. See Appendix O. C.) A weed control and erosion management strategy for the common open space or greenbelt. Gamba & Associates, Inc. have had discussions with Steve Anthony with Garfield County. Mr. Anthony provided us with a copy of the Garfield County Noxious Weed Management Plan forms, format, and a list of noxious weeds. Peach Valley Weed Management Plan As part of the Garfield County's Preliminary Plan submittal requirement, applicants are required to implement a weed management plan as outlined in Garfield County Noxious Weed Management Plan, adopted by the Board of County Commissioners May 1, 2000. On August 14, 2004 Gamba & Associates, Inc. conducted a site visit identifying Canada thistle, Cheatgrass and Russian knapweed as noxious weeds present at the Peach Valley location. Scattered Russian Olive and Tamarisk trees were present in the southern part of the parcel along the irrigation ditches. A vegetation map has been created depicting weed species, location and stand density in relation to irrigation ditches, roads, fences and buildings. Gamba & Associates, Inc. proposes the developer contract with one of the following companies to provide an appropriate schedule for maintenance of the weeds. Professional Weed Control Companies: Gallagher Agri -Services 7715 County Rd331 Silt, Co 81652 876-2864 Julius A G 248 E 2nd St Parachute, Co 81635 285-1518 The vegetation/weed map, as well as supporting information is included as Appendix 1. D.) Intended uses allowed in the common open space or greenbelt, and amenities and structures to be placed there, if any. Lot #25 comprises the majority of the open space and is located on the northern portion of the development. Lot #25 uses are proposed to be the same as the other lots in the subdivision with the addition that agricultural uses including farming and the raising of livestock will be permitted on the balance of the lot not developed as a residence. H:\02372\01\Preliminary Plan Report(s)\SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAN 4-4-2005.doc 3 PEACH VALLEY VISTAS March 25, 2005 4:12 TECHNICAL COMPLETION If the application is in technical compliance, the Planning Department will send copies of the application to review agencies for comment, which may include but are not limited to: A. The appropriate school district; B. Each county or municipality within two (2) miles of any part of the proposed subdivision, and any municipality within three (3) miles of the subdivision, if the municipality has adopted a major street plan, as provided by Colorado state law or as agreed upon in any city/county agreement; C. Any public utility, local improvement district, service district, or affected incorporated or unincorporated entity or persons owning or controlling water rights or water right structures, when applicable; D. The Colorado State Forest Service, when applicable; E. Other planning commissions with jurisdiction over the area; F. The Division of Wildlife, Colorado Department of Natural Resources, when applicable; G. The appropriate local soil conservation district board or boards; H. The district, regional or state department of health, when applicable; I. The Colorado State Engineer; J. The Colorado Geological Survey; K. The United States Forest Service or Bureau of Land Management, if applicable; and L. Any other agencies or persons who, in the opinion of the Planning Commission, may be affected by the proposed subdivision may able to assist in the review of the proposed subdivision.... 4.20-4:22 PLANNING COMMISSION 4:21 The Planning Commission shall hold an advertised public hearing on the proposed subdivision at a regularly scheduled meeting of the Commission. The applicant shall be solely responsible for the publication, posting and mailing of all notices and shall present proof of publication and mailing at or before the meeting. Notice for the meeting shall be given as follows' . The Developer will coordinate the publication, posting and mailing of all notices and shall present proof of publication and mailing at or before the Planning Commission meeting. 4:22 The Commission shall complete its review and make its recommendation to the Board at the public hearing on the Preliminary Plan or continue the hearing to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting for additional information or public input before making a decision.... 4:30-4:34 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 4:31 The Board shall hold an advertised public hearing on the proposed subdivision within sixty (60) days after completion of the Planning commission hearing. The applicant shall be solely responsible for the publication, posting and mailing of all notices and shall present proof of publication and mailing at or before the meeting. Notice for the meeting shall be given as follows:.... H:\02372\01\Preliminary Plan Report(s)\SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAN 4-4-2005.doc 4 • • • PEACH VALLEY VISTAS March 25, 2005 The Developer will coordinate the publication, posting and mailing of all notices and shall present proof of publication and mailing at or before the Planning Commission meeting. 4:32 The Board shall complete its review and make its decision on the Preliminary Plan within fifteen (15) days after the conclusion of the public hearing.... 4:33 The Board shall make its decision regarding the Preliminary Plan based on the recommendation of the Planning Commission and on the conformity or compatibility of the proposed subdivision with the following: A. Garfield County Subdivision Regulations;; B. Garfield County Zoning Resolutions; C. Garfield County Comprehensive Plan; D. Garfield County road standards and policies; E. Garfield County municipal comprehensive plans and municipal regulations, as applicable; F. Compatibility to existing land uses in the surrounding are; and; G. Other applicable local, state and federal regulations, resolutions plans and policies. 4:34 Preliminary Plan approval shall be valid for a period not to exceed one (1) year from the date of Board approval, or conditional approval, unless and extension of not more than one (1) year is granted by the Board prior to the expiration of the period of approval.... 4:40-4:41 PRELIMINARY PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS 4:41 The Preliminary Plan submittal shall contain an application form, map(s), and required additional and supplemental information. All documentation shall be of sufficient detail and clarity to answer basic engineering questions and to permit evaluation of the application. Detailed construction, engineering and design plans will be developed at the time of Final Plat submittal. This Preliminary Plan submittal contains an application form, maps, and required additional and supplemental information. The documentation is believed to be of sufficient detail and clarity to answer basic engineering questions and to permit evaluation of the application. Detailed construction, engineering and design plans will be developed at the time of Final Plat submittal. 4:42 PRELIMINARY PLAN MAP SCALE Unless otherwise specified, maps and plans shall be to scale as follows: Subdivision Lot Area Scale Less than 10,000 sq. ft. 1"+50' or less 10,001 sq. ft. — 2 acres 1"=100' or Tess 2.01 acres or more 1"=200' or less: The maps and plans have been generally prepared at a scale of 1" = 100'. H:\02372\01\Preliminary Plan Report(s)\SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAN 4-4-2005.doc 5 PEACH VALLEY VISTAS March 25, 2005 4:50 PRELIMINARY PLAN MAP Preliminary Plan maps showing the entire area proposed for subdivision at a size of 24" X 36" and including the following information are included with this submittal: A. The name of the proposed subdivision is Peach Valley Vistas and is different from that of any subdivision previously recorded in Garfield County. The name of the proposed subdivision is Peach Valley Vistas. B. Date of preparation of the map, graphic scale, basis of bearing and symbol designating North, certified by a Colorado registered professional surveyor: These items are on the Plans and Maps. C. Boundary lines with bearings and distances, survey ties and legal description of the proposed subdivision; These items are on the Preliminary Final Plat. D. Names, addresses and phone numbers of the owners/applicants, and engineer for the proposed subdivision; names and addresses of mineral owners and lessees of mineral owner of record of the proposed subdivision. See Appendix B for adjoining owners and mineral owners, the adjoining owners are also labeled on the Preliminary Final Plat: OWNER AND APPLICANT: Kelly and Michael Lyon Family, LLC P.O. Box 110 Silt, Colorado 81652 ENGINEER: Gamba & Associates, Inc. P.O. Box 1458 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602 (970) 945-2550 SURVEYOR: Michael Gamba P.E. & P.L.S. Gamba & Associates, Inc. P.O. Box 1458 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602 (970) 945-2550 E. Vicinity map from U.S.G.S quadrangle at a scale of 1"=2000' depicting the location of streets, highways and adjacent utility systems within a minimum one-half mile of the proposed subdivision; A Vicinity map is included in this submittal, see Appendix N. F. Departing property lines, names and addresses of owners of record of all parcels adjoining and within two hundred feet of the proposed subdivision, including those separated by a public right-of-way. The adjoining owners are listed on the Preliminary Plan maps as well as in Appendix B; G. Street, block and lot layout within the proposed subdivision, including the approximate area of each lot; H:\02372\01\Preliminary Plan Report(s)\SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAN 4-4-2005.doc 6 • • PEACH VALLEY VISTAS March 25, 2005 These items are on the Plans and Maps. H. Proposed easements for drainage, irrigation, access and These items are on the Preliminary Final Plat, Plans and Maps. I. Standard lot setbacks, which may be indicated by map note. Setbacks are as defined in the underlining A/R/RD zone district and are depicted on the Preliminary Plan maps; J. Land use breakdown showing: 1. Existing zoning 2. Total development area; 3. Total number of lots proposed; 4. Total number of dwelling units proposed; 5. Total area off non-residential floor space; 6. Total number of individual dwelling units proposed for each structure; 7. Total number of proposed off-street parking spaces; 8. Total gross density proposed, number of dwelling units as a ratio to the total development area. See the following table: Land Use Table Existing zoning A/R/RD Total development area: 54.878 Acres Total number of lots proposed: 25 Total number of dwelling units proposed: 25 Total area off non-residential floor space: 0 Total number of individual dwelling units proposed for each structure: 1 Total number of proposed off-street parking spaces: 50 Total gross density proposed, number of dwelling units as a ratio to the total development area. 2.2 Acres / Dwelling Unit K. Existing contours with the following minimum contour intervals: 1. Two foot contours are shown as the lots are less than 2 acres. The contour data was provided by Enartech Engineering and has been supplemented by surveys from Gamba & Associates, Inc. in the area of the large drainage channel located along the southwestern portion of the property. 2. See number 1 above. See number 1 above. L. Common open space not reserved or dedicated to the public: See Appendix 0. M. Sites to be preserved or dedicated for public parks, schools and other public building, facilities or use; and , or Greenbelt space. No sites are proposed to be dedicated for parks, schools or other public buildings or facilities. See Appendix 0. H:\02372\01\Preliminary Plan Report(s)\SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAN 4-4-2005.doc 7 PEACH VALLEY VISTAS March 25, 2005 N. Approximate street grades and road centerline radii of curvature data; and Street grades and road centerline radii are shown on the Preliminary Plan Road Plan and Profile drawing, included in this submittal. O. Any existing easement, along with the name(s) and address(es) of the entity having an easement and legal description of those easements: Existing easements are shown on the Preliminary Final Plat. 4:60 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The following information accompanies this submittal: A. Proposed terms of reservation or dedication of sites for public and/or common facilities or use, if any; greenbelt See Appendix 0. B. Description of the proposed phasing plan, if any; The applicant proposes to complete the development in one phase. C. Evidence that all lots and parcels created will have access to a public right-of-way, as required by Colorado state law; All lots and parcels created will have access to a public right-of-way (Davis Point Road), via an internal road system, as depicted on the Preliminary Plan Maps. D. Total number of proposed off-street parking spaces, excluding those provided for single- family residential use; The development provides only single-family residential dwellings and no public areas are proposed, thus no off-street parking spaces are required other than those provided for single-family residential use. E. Evidence in the form of various maps and reports included in this submittal (existing conditions, layout, geologic hazard, etc.) show that all areas of the proposed subdivision, which may involve soil or topographical conditions presenting hazards or requiring special precautions, have been identified, and the proposed uses of these areas are compatible with such conditions; See geology report included in Appendix D and Drainage report included in Appendix C. F. A radiation evaluation was performed for the development, See radiation survey included in Appendix E. G. A title commitment for the property to be developed; and The title commitment is included as Appendix K. H. If there is a subdivision of a section required, a copy of the final work sheet shall be provided for approval by the county Surveyor. No subdivision of a section was required for the Peach Valley Vistas Subdivision. 4:70 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: GEOLOGY SOIL, VEGETATION & WILDLIFE Information on the following characteristics of the area proposed for subdivision is included in this submittal and shown graphically and/or by reports, and includes: H:\02372\01\Preliminary Plan Report(s)\SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAN 4-4-2005.doc 8 PEACH VALLEY VISTAS March 25, 2005 A. Geology — • See geology report included in Appendix D. • B. Soils — A map and descriptions of soil types and their boundaries based on the National Cooperative Soil Survey, U.S.D.A. National Resource Conservation Service is included in Appendix G. C. Vegetation — A map and description of plant associations following practices of the National Resource Conservation Service and including a description of adapted materials and the location of major tree masses is included in Appendix l; and D. Wildlife — A description of wildlife habitation, including big game ranges based on the mapping practices of the Colorado Division of Wildlife are included in Appendix J. 4:80 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: DRAINAGE PLAN A drainage plan, at the same scale as the Preliminary Plan is included with this submittal and includes the following information: A. Existing water courses; Included in the Drainage Report, Appendix C. B. Limits of tributary areas, were practical; Included in the Drainage Report, Appendix C. C. Computations of expected tributary flows; and Included in the Drainage Report, Appendix C. D. Design of drainage facilities to prevent storm waters in excess of historic run-off from entering, damaging or being carried by existing drainage facilities, and to prevent major damage or flooding of residences in a one hundred year storm, showing: 1. Are subject to inundation: and The property is not in an area mapped by FEMA. The project is designed so that all 100 -year flood waters will be diverted to and through constructed or natural drainage structures and features. 2. Location and size of proposed culverts, bridges, ditches and channels. Included in the Drainage Report, Appendix C. 4:90-4:91 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: UTILITY PLAN A water supply plan, at the same scale as the Preliminary Plan, is included with this submittal and includes the following information: A Domestic Water Supply System Report has been prepared and is included as Appendix M. A. Evidence that a water supply, sufficient in terms of quality, quantity and dependability, shall be available to ensure an adequate supply of water for the proposed subdivision. 1. Evidence of ownership or right of acquisition or sue of existing and proposed water rights; See Appendix P. 2. Historic use and estimated yield of claimed water rights; H:\02372\01\Preliminary Plan Report(s)\SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAN 4-4-2005.doc 9 PEACH VALLEY VISTAS March 25, 2005 See Appendix P. 3. Amenability of existing right to change in use; See Appendix P. 4. Evidence that public or private water owners can and will supply water to the proposed subdivision, including the amount of water available for use within the subdivision by such providers, the feasibility of extending service to the are, proof of the legal dependability of the proposed ware supply and the representation that all necessary water rights have been obtained or will be obtained or adjudicated, prior to submission of the final plan; and See Appendix P. B. If a central water supply and distribution system is to be provided, a general description of the system, as designed by a Colorado registered engineer. In addition: The system will generally consist of two existing on-site wells as a water source; a treatment facility to remove contaminants and disinfect; a feed line to an 80, 000 -gallon water storage tank,; and a distribution network of PVC pipe. The storage tank is proposed for Lot 3 of the Kelly and Michael Lyon Family, LLC Exemption and the owner has the ability to connect to the proposed water system if a problem develops with their existing well. The domestic water system will not be used for irrigation as a separate system implementing shares from the Ware and Hines ditch will provide irrigation water. 1. The nature of the legal entity which will own and operate the water system; and The nature of the legal entity which will own and operate the water system is a Home Owners Association 2. Proposed method of financing the water system. All financing will be provided "out-of-pocket" by the owner. C. If connection is to be made to an existing water system, a letter from and authorized representative of said system stating that the proposed development will be served, and evidence from either the Colorado State Engineer's Office or Water Court, Water Division No. 5, that the existing water system presently possesses an adequate legal water supply to serve the proposed development; No connection to an existing water system is proposed. Water supply will be from two existing on-site wells. D. If individual water systems shall be provided by lot owners, a report indicating the availability of ample potable ground water at reasonable depths throughout the subdivision and the expected quality and Tong -term yield of such wells, with the written report by a registered professional engineer licensed by the State of Colorado, qualified to perform such work; and Individual water systems are not proposed. Water supply will be from two existing on-site wells serving the entire subdivision. E. If applicable, a Plan of Augmentation and a plan for subdivision water supplies, as required by law, with the supporting engineering work signed by a Colorado registered engineer, shall be submitted by the applicant, even if the applicant is not the actual supplier of water. See Appendix P. H:\02372\01\Preliminary Plan Report(s)\SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAN 4-4-2005.doc 10 PEACH VALLEY VISTAS March 25, 2005 4:92 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: UTILITY PLAN (sanitary sewage disposal) A sanitary sewage disposal plan, at the same scale as the Preliminary Plan, shall provide the following information in graphic and/or written form: A. If a public sewage disposal system is proposed evidence that provision has been made for an adequate sewage treatment works for the subdivision and, if other methods of sewage disposal are proposed, evidence that such systems will comply with state and local laws and regulations; A public sewage disposal system is not proposed. A drawing showing that Individual Sewage Disposal Systems (ISDS) are feasible which meet state and Garfield County ISDS regulations for each lot is included in Appendix L. B. If a sewage treatment works is proposed, a general description of the collection system and treatment facilities, as designed by a registered professional engineer licensed by the State of Colorado. In addition: No sewage treatment works are proposed. Sewage will be handled by ISDS. C. If public or private sewage treatment facilities are to be provided by an existing district or through connection to an existing sewer system, evidence that the treatment facility or system can and will provide adequate sewage treatment for the proposed subdivision. In addition: Private sewage treatment facilities will not require a connection to an existing sewer system. D. If no central sewage treatment works is proposed and individual sewage disposal systems will be utilized, a description of sewage, the disposal means, as well as evidence as the result of soil percolation tests and produce excavations to determine maximum seasonal ground water level and depth to bedrock shall be provided In additions: Individual sewage disposal systems (ISDS) will be utilized. The ISDS will be designed and installed at the time of building construction. The development is residential and only residential sewage is expected in the ISDS'. Disposal is anticipated to be typical infiltration beds or trench systems but will be determined at the time of building construction. Preliminary investigative soil percolation tests have been performed and the results are included in this report in Appendix L. Profile holes were also excavated. The soil generally consists of a shallow organic topsoil layer underlain by light brown silty clay. There was no evidence of high ground water or bedrock. 1. Indicate by location on the plat; The locations of the percolation tests and profile holes are indicated on the ISDS map in Appendix L. 2. Performed and signed by a registered professional engineer licensed by the State of Colorado; The percolation tests and the profile holes were observed under the supervision of a registered professional engineer. H:\02372\01\Preliminary Plan Report(s)\SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAN 4-4-2005.doc 11 PEACH VALLEY VISTAS March 25, 2005 3. The number of percolation tests and profile holes are deemed adequate in number to indicate the feasibility of installation of ISDS for every lot within the Peach Valley Vistas Subdivision. Several percolation test holes and profile holes were excavated in the representative soil types on the site. See Appendix L. E. If individual sewage disposal systems are to be utilized, a proposed management plan for the operation and maintenance of on-site systems shall be provided. A proposed management plan for the operation and maintenance of the ISDS' is included as Appendix L. 4:93 PLANS MARKED "Not for Construction" All utility and road plans will be marked "Not for Construction." 4:94 OFF-SITE ROAD IMPACTS Off-site road impacts shall be evaluated for subdivisions through completion of a traffic study identifying the volume of traffic generated from the development, based on Trip Generation Rate calculations utilizing the most current Institute of Traffic Engineers, Trip Generation manual, to establish an Average Daily Traffic (ADT). The road impact fee shall be established as a result of entering the applicable data identified in the Road Impact Fee calculation Work Sheet located in Appendix A.... Based on the Manual Trip Generation, 5th Edition, the anticipated Average Daily Traffic (ADT) for the development is 254.75 vehicle trips. 25 units X 10.19 trips per dwelling unit 254.75 vehicle trips per day, round up to 255 trips. A discussion with Fred Jarman on February 17, 2005 yields the following Road Impact Fees: 255 vehicle trips per day X $210.00 per Trip = $53, 550.00. Amount due at Final Plat = $53, 550.00 / 2 = $26, 775.00. Amount due per lot at time of issuance of Building Permit is remaining fee divided by number of lots = $26, 775.00 / 25 = $1, 071.00 (ITE land use code 210, single family detached housing on a Saturday) H:\02372\01\Preliminary Plan Report(s)\SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAN 4-4-2005.doc 12 • • ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS LIST DIEMOZ, OLIVER AND RONALD AND ALLESSANDRI MARJORIE E. 3445 COUNTY ROAD 214 SILT, CO 81652 2179-012-00-008 BLACK, MYRON W. 3050 HIGHWAY 13 RIFLE, CO 81650 2179-024-00-549 KAY, RICHARD D. & PATRICIA JANE 34651 HIGHWAY 6 SILT, CO 81652-9529 2179-111-00-547 SOVERN, BARRY M. & PATRICIA JANE 421 COUNTY ROAD 235 SILT, CO 81652 2179-013-00-009 BELLIO, H. JOHN & MARGARET J. LIVING TRUST DATED 4/10/2000 PO BOX 150 SILT, CO 81652 2179-021-00-337 BELLIO, H. JOHN & MARGARET J. LIVING TRUST DATED 4/10/2000 PO BOX 150 SILT, CO 81652 2179-024-00-022 DICE, DEBRA & JOE 3301 COUNTY ROAD 214 SILT, CO 81652 2179-012-00-208 KUHNS, KENNETH K. JR & GAIL J. 3465 COUNTY RD 214 SILT, CO 81652 2179-012-00-243 GROSS, MICHAEL ROBERT 3467 COUNTY RD 214 SILT, CO 81652 2179-012-00-242 SCHWAAB, LISA ECHELLE MARTIN 3495 COUNTY RD 214 SILT, CO 81652 2179-012-00-006 HERITAGE TRUST & ASSET MANAGEMENT, INC. CUSTODIAN FBO ARTHUR C. ARMIJO, IRA 359 MAIN STREET GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81501 2179-012-00-564 ARMIJO, ARTHUR C. & LAPPIEL M. 475 COUNTY RD 167 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 2179-012-00-565 YERIAN, DANA A. & DRAKE, JOAN M. 3550 COUNTY RD 214 SILT, CO 81652 2179-013-00-357 DAYBREAK ENTERPRISE LLC 3550 COUNTY ROAD 214 SILT, CO 81652 2179-013-00-297 VITTUM, DELORES C. 1605 NW 80TH. AVE., APT A MARGATE, FL 33063 2179-013-00-329 REW, SHEILA A., CASTLE, JEREMY REW, JOSHUA 35445 HIGHWAY 6 SILT, CO 81652 2179-013-00-012 MENU, BENNETT C. & DEBORAH M. 3704 PEACH VALLEY ROAD SILT, CO 81652 2179-013-04-001 COURIER, JOHN S. & LAURA BEATTIE 3706 COUNTY RD SILT, CO 81652 2179-013-04-002 KOPER, MONA R. & ROBERT J. 3708 COUNTY RD 214 SILT, CO 81652 2179-013-04-003 MCFARLIN, LLOYD H & IRIS C. PO BOX 4 SNOWMASS, CO 81654 2179-013-04-004 ELSE, KENNETH R. & DOROTHY M. 3712 COUNTY RD 214 SILT, CO 81652 2179-013-04-005 ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS LIST cont. JONES, HELEN & KOTTEN, RUTH 3714 COUNTY ROAD 214 SILT, CO 81652 2179-013-04-006 SELVAGE, CONSTANNCE BETHAL & GREGORY, ALLEN & FLANAGAN, VINCE MONTEL 3716 COUNTY RD 214 SILT, CO 81652 2179-013-04-007 WITT, KAREN L. & SZKLARZ, SCOTT A PO BOX 4748 EAGLE, CO 81631 2179-013-00-674 BARTEL, JOHN 602 DAVIS POINT ROAD SILT, CO 81652 2179-013-00-675 DUCKWORTH, DINA & PLEASANTS, DORMAN C/O KRABACHER & SANDERS, PC. 201 NORTH MILL STREET # 201 ASPEN, CO 81611 2179-013-00-676 LONG KEVIN J & GINA M REECE 4786 COUNTY 312 NEW CASTLE, CO 81647 2179-013-00-677 MINERAL OWNERS LIST Kelly & Michael Lyon Family, LLC PO Box 110 Silt, CO 81652 Apollo Energy, LLC 1557 Ogden Street, Suite 300 Denver, CO 80218 • • • • • • April 01, 2005 STEWART TITLE OF GLENWOOD SPRINGS, INC. 804 COLORADO AVENUE, 2ND FLOOR GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 (970) 945-5434 FAX NO. - (970) 945-7081 ORDER NO. 857 RE: KELLY & MICHAEL LYON FAMILY/TBD Thank you For using Stewart Titlel In connection with the above Order Number, please find attached the following: TITLE COMMITMENT X AMENDED COMMITMENT Please direct all CLOSING questions to: TITLE ONLY FILE Please direct all TITLE questions to: Buyer: Buyer's Agent: Seller: Seller's Atty : ENDORSEMENT PAM HOLMES Phone: 970-945-5434 e-mail: pam.holmes@stewart.com TO BE DETERMINED TO BE DETERMINED KELLY AND MICHAEL LYON SUBDIVISION MELODY MASSIH VIA E-MAIL MELODYMASSIH®HOTMAIL.COM & MAIL SCHEDULE B EXCEPTION DOCUMENTS HAVE SEEN SENT TO: MELODY PLEASE READ CAREFULLY 1. This is a Commitment to issue one or more policies of title insurance in our Standard Form when the requirements set forth in the Commitment have been satisfied. 2. Only the policies shown are committed to. If there are any changes in the transaction, order an endorsement from us. Stewart Title reserves the right to add and/or delete requirements and/or exceptions accordingly. 3. The date on this Commitment is important. NOTHING after that date has been considered by us. 4. This commitment is good for 6 months only. Extensions should be ordered from us if they are needed. r. STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY Privacy Policy Notice PURPOSE OF THIS NOTICE Title V of the Gramm -Leach -Bliley Act (GLBA) generally prohibits any financial institution, directly or through its affiliates, from sharing nonpublic personal information about you with a nonaffiliated third party unless the institution provides you with a notice of its privacy policies and practices, such as the type of information that it collects about you and the categories of persons or entities to whom it may be disclosed. In compliance with the GLBA, we are providing you with this document, which notifies you of the privacy policies and practices of Stewart Title Guaranty Company. We may collect nonpublic personal information about you from the following sources: -- Information we receive from you, such as on applications or other forms. Information about your transactions we secure from our files; or from our affiliates or others. - Information we receive from a consumer reporting agency, -- Information that we receive from others involved in your transaction, such as the real estate agent or lender. Unless it is specifically stated otherwise in an amended Privacy Policy Notice, no additional nonpublic personal information will be collected about you. We may disclose any of the above information that we collect about our customers or former customers to our affiliates or to nonaffiliated third parties as permitted by law. We also may disclose this information about our customers or former customers to the following types of nonaffiliated companies that perform marketing services on our behalf or with whom we have joint marketing agreements: -- Financial service providers such as companies engaged in banking, consumer finance, securities and insurance, -- Non-financial companies such as envelope stuffers and other fulfillment service providers. WE DO NOT DISCLOSE ANY NONPUBLIC PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU WITH ANYONE FOR ANY PURPOSE THAT IS NOT SPECIFICALLY PERMITTED BY LAW. We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those employees who need to know that information in order to provide products or services to you. We maintain physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards that comply with federal regulations to guard your nonpublic personal information. File No. 857 Stewart Title of Glenwood Springs, Inc Privacy Policy Notice (Pagel) American Land Title Association Commitment - 1982 TITLE INSURANCE COMMITMENT BY STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY AGREEMENT TO ISSUE POLICY We agree to issue policy to you according to the terms of the Commitment. When we show the policy amount and your name as the porposed insured in Schedule A, this Commitment becomes effective as of the Commitment Date shown in Schedule A, If the Requirements shown in this Commitment have not been met within six months after the Commit- ment Date, our obligations under this Commitment will end. Also, our obligation under this Commitment will end when the Policy is issued and then our obligation to you will be under the Policy. Our obligations under this Commitment is limited by the following: The Provisions in Schedule A. The Requirements in Schedule B -I. The Exceptions in Schedule B-11. The Conditions on Page 2. This Commitment is not valid without SCHEDULE A and Sections I and II of SCHEDULE B. This Commitment is not an abstract, examination, report or representation of fact or title and does not create and shall not be the basis of any claim for negligence, negligent misrepresentation or other tort claim or action. The sole liability of Company and its title insurance agent shall arise under and be governed by the Conditions of the Commitment. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Stewart Title Guaranty Company has caused its corporate name and seal to be hereunto affixed by its duly authorized officers on the date shown in Schedule A. STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY Chairman of the Boa Countersigned: Authorized Countersignature STEWART TITLE OF GLENWOOD SPRINGS. INC. P.O. Box 430 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 (970) 934-5434 Agent ID N06051A urcer NO. M.) SCHEDULE A Order Number: 857 1. Effective date: March 15, 2005 at 8:00 A.M. 2. Policy or Policies to be issued. Amount of Insurance (a) A.L.T.A. Owner's (Standard) $ TBD Proposed Insured: TO BE DETERMINED (b) A.L.T.A. Loan (Extended) $ Proposed Insured: TO BE DETERMINED, ITS SUCCESSORS AND/OR ASSIGNS (c) Leasehold $ Proposed Insured: 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 fee simple estate or interest in said land is at the effective date hereof vested in: KELLY & MICHAEL LYON FAMILY LTD. LIABILITY COMPANY 5. The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: SEE ATTACHED LEGAL DESCRIPTION Purported Address: SILT, CO 81652 STATEMENT OF CHARGES These charges are due and payable before a Policy can be issued. TO BE DETERMINED • • • • Continuation of Schedule B - Section 1 Order Number: 857 Book 1376 at Page 752 as Reception No. 6086C8. Disburser's Notice, filed in connection with the above Deed of Trust, recorded DECEMBER 11, 2002 in Book 1415 at Page 972 as Reception No. 616447. Modification of Deed of Trust recorded January 24, 2005 in Book 1657 at Page 786 as Reception No. 667469 7. Termination Statement for Financing Statement from KELLY AND MICHAEL LYON FAMILY LLC, debtor(s), to WESTSTAR BANK, secured party, recorded AUGUST 28, 2002, as Reception No. 609746, giving notice of a security interest pursuant to the Uniform Commercial Code. 8. Release by the Public Trustee of Garfield County of the Deed of Trust from KELLY AND MICHAEL LYON FAMILY LTD. LIABILITY for the use of WESTSTAR BANK to secure $125,000.00 dated SEPTEMBER 29, 2004 and recorded OCTOBER 13, 2005 in Book 1630 at Page 916 as Reception No. 661686. 9. Deed from vested owner, vesting fee simple title in purchaser(s). 10. Deed of Trust from the Borrower to the Public Trustee for the use of the proposed lender to secure the loan. • • NOTE: Effective September 1, 1997, CRS 30-1-406 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 inch. The Clerk and Recorder may refuse to record or file any document that does not conform. -2 - r.., Order Number: 857 SCHEDULE B Section 2 EXCEPTIONS r•� The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the sante are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. Rights or claims of parties in possession, not shown by the public records. 2. Basements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, and any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material 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 the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this commitment. 6. unpatented mining claims; reservations or exceptions in patents, or an act authorizing the issuance thereof; water rights, claims or title to water. 7. Any and all unpaid taxes and assessments and any unredeemed tax sales. 8. The effect of inclusions in any general or specific water conservancy, fire protection, soil conservation or other district or inclusion in any water service or street improvement area. 9. Right of the proprietor of a vein or lode to extract and remove his ore therefrom, should the same be found to penetrate or intersect the premises hereby granted, as reserved in United States Patent recorded April 17, 1923 in Book 73 at Page 162 as Reception No. 82536. 10. Right of way for ditches or canals constructed by the authority of the United States, as reserved in United States Patent recorded April 17, 1923 in Book 73 at Page 162 as Reception No. 82536. 11. Easement and Right of Way recorded August 16, 1910 in Book 62 at Page 454 as Reception No. 40089. 12. Mountain States Telephone and Telegraph Easements and Rights of Way recorded September 7, 193.1 in Book 50 at Page 427 as Reception No. 42570 and recorded June 7, 1963 in Book 191 at Page 314 as Reception No. 132267. 13. Reservation of one-quarter of all mineral rights as contained in Deed recorded April 21, 1958 in Book 308 at Page 123 as Reception No. 201322, and any and all assignments of record, or otherwise, thereof, or interests therein. 14. Cooperative Agreement for Permanent Damage Prevention Fencing recorded April 7, 1993 in Book 858 at Page 750 as Reception No. 445964 and Cooperative Agreement for Permanent Damage Prevention Fencing recorded April 7, 1993 in Book 858 at Page 865 as Reception No. 446021. Continued on next page • or Continuation of Schedule B - Section 2 Order Number: 857 • 15. Right of Way Easement recorded March 21, 1994 in Book 896 at Page 232 as Reception No. 460705, 16. Matters disclosed on the Plat of Kelly and Michael Lyon Family, LLC Exemption recorded December 19, 2001 as Reception No. 593910. 17. Resolution No. 2001-90 recorded December 6, 2001 in Book 1313 at Page 85 as Reception No. 593911. 18. Lyon Family Exemption on Davis Point Road Declaration of Colorado Common Interest Community recorded December 19, 2001 in Book 1313 at Page 92 as Reception No. 593913. 19. Affidavit Re: Boundary Line Adjustment recorded January 31, 2002 in Book 1325 at Page 843 as Reception No. 596695. • • DISCLOSURE Order No,: 857 To comply with the provisions of C.R.S. 10-11-123, the Company makes the Following disclosure: (a) That there is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased or otherwise conveyed from the surface estate and that there is a substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other minerals, or geothermal energy in the property; and (b) That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owner's permission, Note: File No. Bs1 Stewart Title of Glenwood Springs, Inc. Disclosure • DISCLOSURES Pursuant to C.R.S. 10-11-122, notice is hereby given that: (A) THE SUBJECT REAL PROPERTY MAY BE LOCATED IN A SPECIAL TAXING DISTRICT; (B) A CERTIFICATE OF TAXES DUE LISTING EACH TAXING JURISDICTION SHALL BE OBTAINED FROM THE COUNTY TREASURER OR THE COUNTY TREASURER'S AUTHORIZED AGENT; (C) 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. Note: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 3-5-1, Paragraph C of Article VII 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 Stewart Title of Glenwood Springs, Inc. 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 Lender's Title 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: • A. The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single family residence, which includes a condominium or townhouse unit. • B. No labor or materials have been furnished by mechanics or materialmen for purposes of construction on the land described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months. C. The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against unfiled mechanic's and materialmen's liens. D. The company must receive payment of the appropriate premium. E. If there has been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased, within six months prior to the Date of the 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 agreernerts satisfactory to the company; and, any additional requirements as may be necessary after an examination of the aforesaid information by the Company. No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured has contracted for or agreed to pay. NOTHING HEREIN CONTAINED WILL BE DEEMED TO OBLIGATE THE COMPANY TO PROVIDE ANY OF THE COVERAGES REFERRED TO HEREIN UNLESS THE ABOVE CONDITIONS ARE FULLY SATISFIED. Order No. 857 D'.sclosures (YSDD) Rev. 10(99 STEWART TITLE OF GLENWOOD SPRINGS, INC. Privacy Policy Notice PURPOSE OF THIS NOTICE Title V of the Gramm -Leach -Bliley Act (GLBA) generally prohibits any financial institution, directly or through its affiliates, from sharing nor.public personal information about you with a nonaffiliated third party unless the institution provides you with a notice of its privacy policies and practices, such as the type of inforrnation that it collects about you and the categories of persons or entities to whom it may be disclosed. In compliance with the GLBA, we are providing you with this document, which notifies you of the privacy policies and practices of Stewart Title of Glenwood Springs, Inc. We may collect nonpublic personal information about you from the following sources: -- Information we receive from you, such as on applications or other forms. -- Information about your transactions we secure from our files, or from our affiliates or others. -- Information we receive from a consumer reporting agency. -- Information that we receive from others involved in your transaction, such as the real estate agent or lender. Unless it is specifically stated otherwise in an amended Privacy Policy Notice, no additional nonpublic personal information will be collected about you. We may disclose any of the above information that we collect about our customers or former customers to our affiliates or to nonaffiliated third parties as permitted by law. We also may disclose this information about our customers or former customers to the following types of nonaffiliated companies that perform marketing services on our behalf or with whom we have joint marketing agreements: -- Financial service providers such as companies engaged in balking, consumer finance, securities and insurance. -- Non-financial companies such as envelope staffers and other fulfillment service providers. WE DO NOT DISCLOSE ANY NONPUBLIC PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU WITH ANYONE FOR ANY PURPOSE THAT IS NOT SPECIFICALLY PERMITTED BY LAW. We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those employees who need to know that inforrnation in order to provide products or services to you. We maintain physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards that comply with federal regulations to guard your nonpublic personal information. File No. 857 Stewart Title of Glenwood Springs, Inc. Privacy Policy Notice (Page 2) r•a Order Number. 8 57 • SCHEDULE B Section 2 EXCEPTIONS The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. Rights or claims of parties in possession, not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, and any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4, Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material 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 the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this commitment. 6. Unpatented mining claims; reservations or exceptions in patents, or an act authorizing the issuance thereof; water rights, claims or title to water. 7. Any and all unpaid taxes and assessments and any unredeemed tax sales. 8. The effect of inclusions in any general or specific water conservancy, fire protection, soil conservation or other district or inclusion in any water service or street improvement area. 11". Right of the proprietor of a vein or lode to extract and remove his ore therefrom, should the same be found to penetrate or intersect the premises hereby granted, as reserved in United States Patent recorded .April 17, 1923 in Book 73 at Page 162 as Reception No. 82536. 10. Right of way for ditches or canals constructed by the authority of the United States, as reserved in United States Patent recorded April 17, 1923 in Book 73 at Page 162 as Reception No. 82536. 11. Easement and Right of Way recorded August 16, 1910 in Book 62 at Page 454 as Reception No. 40089. 12. Mountain States Telephone and Telegraph Easements and Rights cf Way recorded September 7, 1911 in Book 50 at Page 427 as Reception No. 42570 and recorded June 7, 1963 in Book 191 at Page 314 as Reception No. 132267. 13. Reservation of one-quarter of all mineral rights as contained in Deed recorded April 21, 1958 in Book 308 at Page 123 as Reception No. 201322, and any and all assignments of record, or otherwise, thereof, or interests therein. 14. Cooperative Agreement for Permanent Damage Prevention Fencing recorded April 7, 1993 in Book 858 at Page 750 as Reception No. 445964 and Cooperative Agreement for Permanent Damage Prevention Fencing recorded April 7, 1993 in Book 858 at Page 865 as Reception No. 446021. Continued on next page • Continuation of Schedule B - Section 2 Order Number: 857 15. Right of Way Easement recorded March 21, 1994 in Book 896 at Page 232 am Reception M. 460705. 16. Matters disclosed on the Plat of Kelly and Michael Lyon Family, LLC Exemption recorded December 19, 2001 as Reception No, 593910. 17. Resolution No. 2001-90 recorded December 6, 2001 in Book 1313 at Page 85 as Reception No. 593911. 18. Lyon Family Exemption on Davis Point Road Declaration of Colorado Common Interest Community recorded December 19, 200: in Book 1313 at Page 92 as Reception No. 593913. 19. Affidavit Re: Boundary Line Adjustment recorded January 31, 2002 in Book 1325 at Page 843 as Reception No. 596695. • • • APPENDIXA - GARFIELD COUNTY APPLICATION FORMS • • GARFIELD COUNTY Building & Planning Department 108 8th Street, Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Telephone: 970.945.8212 Facsimile: 9 www.garfield-county.com RECEIVED APR 1 8 2005 Subdivision Application Form GENERAL INFORMATION (To be completed by the applicant.) ➢ Subdivision Name: Peach Valley Vistas ➢ Type of Subdivision (check one of the following types): Sketch Plan Preliminary Plan l '' 1 Final Plat ➢ Name of Property Owner (Applicant): Kelly and Michael Lyon Family, LLC ➢ Address: P.O. Box 110 ➢ City: Silt State: CO Telephone: 876-5944 Zip Code: 81652 FAX: 876-5943 ➢ Name of Owner's Representative, if any (Attorney, Planner, etc): ➢ Address: Telephone: ➢ City: State: Zip Code: FAX: ➢ Name of Engineer: ➢ Address: Gamba & Associates, Inc. ➢ City: Glenwood Springs State: CO ➢ Name of Surveyor: ➢ Address: Gamba & Associates, Inc. Telephone: 945-2550 Zip Code: 81601 FAX: 945-1410 ➢ City: Glenwood Springs State: CO Telephone: 945-2550 Zip Code: 81601 FAX: 945-1410 ➢ Name of Planner: ➢ Address: Telephone: ➢ City: State: Zip Code: FAX: GENERAL INFORMATION continued... ➢ Location of Property: Section 1 Township 6 South Range 92 West ➢ Practical Location / Address of Property: Southeast of the Intersection of County Roads 214 and 235. ➢ Current Size of Property to be Subdivided (in acres): 54.878 ➢ Number of Tracts / Lots Created within the Proposed Subdivision: 25 ➢ Property Current Land Use Designation: 1. Property's Current Zone District: A/R/RD 2. Comprehensive Plan Map Designation: Proposed Utility Service: ➢ Proposed Water Source: On-site wells ➢ Proposed Method of Sewage Disposal: I.S.D.S. ➢ Proposed Public Access VIA: County Road 235 ➢ Easements: Utility: On-site, see Plat Ditch: Ware & Hines, Lower Cactus Valley, see Plat Total Development Area (fill in the appropriate boxes below): ) Res dential'. Duplex 25 0 :e:(Acres 0.000 Parkinq Prov ded 50 0 :i -Family 0 0.000 0 Mobile Home 0 0.000 0 Total 25 0.000 0 floor Are :e (Acres) Parking :.Provided,' (2) Commercial 0 0.000 0 (3) Industrial 0 0.000 0 (4) Public./ -.Quasi -Public 0 0.000 0 (5) Open Space / Common Area Total 0 0.000 0 ➢ Base Fee: Sketch Plan - $325.00; Prelim Plan - $675.00; Final Plat - $200 paid on - Plat Review Fee (see attached fee schedule) 7 • I. THE SUBDIVISION PROCESS In order to subdivide land in Garfield County, an Applicant is required to complete the following land use processes in the following order: 1) Sketch Plan Review Process, 2) Preliminary Plan Review Process, and 3) Final Plat Review Process. This section will briefly describe the nature of each process and provide general direction including subdivision regulation citations to a potential applicant requesting subdivision approval in Garfield County. All of the Garfield County Zoning and Subdivision Regulations are located for purchase at the Planning Department and can also be found on the World Wide Web at the following address: http://www.garfield-county.com/building and planninq/index.htm A) The Sketch Plan Review (Section 3:00 of the Subdivision Regulations) 1. Purpose The purpose of the Sketch Plan process is to allow an individual an opportunity to propose a subdivision in a "sketch" format to the Planning Department and the Garfield County Planning Commission in order to obtain a cursory review for compliance with the County's land use review documents, regulations, and policies to identify any issues that would need to be addressed if the proposed subdivision were to be pursued. 2. Applicability Any individual proposing a subdivision in Garfield County is required to complete the Sketch Plan review process as the first step in Garfield County's Subdivision process. More specifically, Garfield County defines a subdivision (Section 2:20.48) as the division of a lot, tract or parcel of land into two (2) or more lots, tracts, parcels or separate interests, or the use of any parcel of land for condominiums, apartments or • other multiple -dwelling units, as further defined by Colorado state law. 3. Application / Submittal Requirements In order to apply for a Sketch Plan Review an Applicant is responsible for reviewing Section 3:00 of the Subdivision Regulations and providing enough information to the Planning Department in the application to conduct a thorough review and provide the resulting comments to the Planning Commission for their review and comments. Specifically, Section 3:30, 3:32, and 3:40 of the Subdivision Regulations contain the specific information required to be submitted to the Planning Department in order to satisfy the application requirements in addition to the information requested on this application form. 4. Process / Public Meeting The Sketch Plan review process is considered a 1 -step process because the application is reviewed only by the Planning Commission at a public meeting. In order to appear before the Planning Commission, an applicant will have submitted all required application submittal requirements mentioned above to the Planning Department Staff. Once submitted, Staff will have 15 working days to review the application to determine if all the required submittal information has been submitted as required. If Staff determines that all the required information has been submitted, a letter will be • sent to the applicant indicating the application has been deemed "technically complete." It is at this point Staff will also indicate when the application has been 3 scheduled to be reviewed before the Planning Commission and will request the applicant supply additional copies to provide the Commission for their review. If Staff determines that all the required information has not been submitted, a letter will be sent to the applicant indicating the application does not comply with the submittal requirements and therefore has determined the application to be "technically incomplete." The letter will also outline the applications deficiencies so that the applicant knows what additional information needs to be submitted. At this point, the applicant has 6 months (180 days) to provide the necessary information to the Planning Department to remedy the application so that it may be deemed technically complete. If the application has not been deemed technically complete within this time, the application will be terminated. Once the application has been deemed technically complete and a date has been established as to when the Planning Commission will review the application, Staff will conduct a land use review of the application using the County's land use regulatory documents including the Zoning Resolution, Subdivision Regulations, and the Comprehensive Plan of 2000. In addition, Staff will also consider referral comments provided from a variety of state and local agencies who may also review the application. As a result, Staff will write a Memorandum on the proposed subdivision to the Planning Commission containing the results on the land use analysis. This Memorandum will also be furnished in advance to the applicant. At the date and time set for the public meeting before the Planning Commission, Staff will present the findings in the Memorandum and the applicant will be required to present the proposed subdivision and respond to comments and questions provided by the Planning Commission. The comments provided to the Applicant by the Planning Department and the Planning Commission as a result of the Sketch Plan Process will be kept on file in the Planning Department for 1 -year from the meeting date before the Planning Commission. If an Applicant does not submit a Preliminary Plan application to the Planning Department within the 1 -year timeframe, the Sketch Plan file will be closed and the Applicant will need to reapply for a Sketch Plan review prior to a Preliminary Plan review. B) Preliminary Plan Review (Section 4:00 of the Subdivision Regulations) 1. Purpose The purpose of the Preliminary Plan review process is to conduct a thorough review of the many aspects that are associated with dividing land in Garfield County for the purposes of residential, commercial, and industrial development. This is the most intensive review step where the Building and Planning Staff, the Planning Commission, and the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) will conduct a thorough review of all the issues associated with the proposed subdivision against the County's regulatory requirements. Ultimately, the purpose of this process is to identify all the major issues in the proposed subdivision by using the County's Zoning Resolution, Subdivision Regulations, Comprehensive Plan of 2000, as well as other state and local referral agencies that will provide comments on any issues raised in their review. This is the process that will either approve or deny the application request. 4 • • 2. Applicability Any individual proposing a subdivision in Garfield County is required to complete the Preliminary Plan review process as the second and most intensive step in Garfield County's Subdivision process. More specifically, Garfield County defines a subdivision as the division of a lot, tract or parcel of land into two (2) or more lots, tracts, parcels or separate interests, or the use of any parcel of land for condominiums, apartments or other multiple -dwelling units, as further defined by Colorado state law. 3. Application / Submittal Requirements In order to apply for a Preliminary Plan Review, an Applicant must have already completed the Sketch Plan review process addressed in Section 3:00 of the Subdivision Regulations. An applicant requesting Preliminary Plan review will be required to submit this application form, all the required submittal information contained in Sections 4:40 to 4:94 of the Subdivision Regulations as well as address all of the applicable Design and Improvement Standards in Section 9:00 of the Subdivision Regulations. In addition to the substantive submittal information related to the proposed subdivision project itself, an applicant is required to complete all the public notice requirements so that legal public hearings can be held before the Planning Commission and the BOCC which is addressed in Sections 4:20 — 4:31 of the Subdivision Regulations. 4. Process / Public Hearings The Preliminary Plan review process is considered a 2 -step process because the application is ultimately reviewed by two County decision-making entities during public hearings: the Planning Commission who makes a recommendation to the BOCC. In order to obtain dates for the public hearings before the Planning Commission and the BOCC, an applicant will have submitted all required application submittal requirements mentioned above to the Planning Department Staff. Once submitted, Staff will have 30 working days to review the application to determine if all the required submittal information has been submitted as required. If Staff determines that all the required information has been submitted, a letter will be sent to the applicant indicating the application has been deemed "technically complete." It is at this point Staff will also indicate when the application has been scheduled to be reviewed before the Planning Commission / BOCC. Additionally, Staff will provide the applicant with the notice forms to be mailed, published, and posted. If Staff determines that all the required information has not been submitted, a letter will be sent to the applicant indicating the application does not comply with the submittal • requirements and therefore has determined the application to be "technically incomplete." The letter will also outline the applications deficiencies so that the applicant knows what additional information needs to be submitted. At this point, the applicant has 6 months (180 days) to provide the necessary information to the Planning Department to remedy the application so that it may be deemed technically complete. If the application has not been deemed technically complete within this time, the application will be terminated. Once the application has been deemed technically complete and a date has been established as to when the Planning Commission / BOCC will review the application, Staff will conduct a land use review of the application using the County's land use regulatory documents including the Zoning Resolution, Subdivision Regulations, and the Comprehensive Plan of 2000. In addition, Staff will also consider referral comments provided from a variety of state and local agencies who may also review the application. As a result, Staff will write a Memorandum on the proposed subdivision to the Planning Commission / BOCC containing the results on the land use analysis. This Memorandum will also be furnished in advance to the applicant prior to the public hearings. As mentioned above, Staff makes a recommendation to the Planning Commission and the BOCC regarding the issues raised in the analysis of the proposed subdivision. The Applicant will first propose the subdivision to the Planning Commission who is responsible for making a recommendation of approval, approval with conditions, or denial to the BOCC. Next, the application will be reviewed by the BOCC during a regular public hearing. The BOCC will consider the recommendations from the Planning Staff and the Planning Commission, the information presented by the applicant, and the public. As a result, the BOCC is the final decision-making entity regarding the proposed subdivision and will either approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application. If the BOCC approves the subdivision application at the public hearing, the approval shall be valid for a period not to exceed one (1) year from the date of Board approval, or conditional approval, unless an extension of not more than one (1) year is granted by the Board prior to the expiration of the period of approval. (See the specific information provided in Section 4:34 of the Subdivision Regulations.) Following the hearing, Staff will provide a resolution signed by the BOCC which memorializes the action taken by the Board with any / all conditions which will be recorded in the Clerk and Recorder's Office. Once an applicant has Preliminary Plan approval, they are required to complete the third and final step in the County's Subdivision Process: Final Plat Review. C) Final Plat Review (Section 5:00 of the Subdivision Regulations) 1. Purpose The purpose of the Final Plat review process is to provide the applicant with a mechanism to prove to the County that all the conditions of approval required during the Preliminary Plan review process have been met / addressed to the satisfaction of the Planning Staff and the BOCC. This being the case, the chairman of the BOCC will 6 • sign the Final Plat and have it recorded memorializing the subdivision approval granted by the BOCC. This is the last step in the County's subdivision process. 2. Applicability Any individual proposing a subdivision in Garfield County is required to complete the Final Plat review process as the third and last step in Garfield County's Subdivision process. More specifically, Garfield County defines a subdivision as the division of a lot, tract or parcel of land into two (2) or more lots, tracts, parcels or separate interests, or the use of any parcel of land for condominiums, apartments or other multiple -dwelling units, as further defined by Colorado state law. 3. Application / Submittal Requirements In order to apply for a Final Plat review, an Applicant must have already completed the Preliminary Plan review process addressed in Section 4:00 of the Subdivision Regulations. An applicant requesting Final Plat review will be required to submit this application form, all the required submittal information contained in Section 5:00 of the Subdivision Regulations and responses to all the conditions of approval required as part of the Preliminary Plan review process. 4. Process The Final Plat review process is considered a 1 -step process because the application is ultimately reviewed by the Building and Planning Staff and presented to the BOCC for their signature if the application satisfies all the required submittal information to the satisfaction of the Building and Planning Department. If Staff determines that all the required information has been submitted, a letter will be sent to the applicant indicating the application has been deemed "technically complete." It is at this point Staff will also indicate when the application has been scheduled to be presented to the BOCC for signature. (This is not a public hearing or meeting and therefore does not require public notice.) If Staff determines that all the required information has not been submitted, a letter will be sent to the applicant indicating the application does not comply with the submittal requirements and therefore has determined the application to be "technically incomplete." The letter will also outline the applications deficiencies so that the applicant knows what additional information needs to be submitted. Once the application has been deemed technically complete and a date has been established as to when the BOCC will review the Final Plat, Staff will review the application / Final Plat in terms of adequacy to determine if all the submittal information satisfies the Final plat requirements as well as the responses to the conditions of approval. During this review, Staff will forward the Final Plat the County Surveyor for review and a signature. In the event there are additional questions or clarification issues to be addressed, the County Surveyor will generally contact the applicant to have the plat adjusted as necessary. Once, Staff has completed the review and all required information has been submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Department 7 and the County Surveyor has signed the Final Plat in Mylar form, it will be scheduled at the next BOCC meeting to be placed on the consent agenda with a request to authorize the Chairman of the BOCC to sign the plat. Once the Final Plat is signed, it is then recorded by the County Clerk in the Clerk and Recorder's Office for a fee of $11 for the first sheet and $10 for each additional sheet thereafter. This fee shall be paid by the applicant. This act of recording the signed Final Plat represents the completion of the Garfield County Subdivision Process. Please refer to the specific language in the Final Plat portion (Section 5:00) of the Subdivision Regulations for specific timelines and additional responsibilities required of the applicant to complete the Final Plat process. Please Note: This information presented above is to be used as a general guide for an applicant considering a subdivision in Garfield County. It is highly recommended that an applicant either purchase the Garfield County Zoning Resolution and Subdivision Regulations or access them on-line at: http://www.garfield-countv.com/buiidinq and planningiindex.htm in order to ascertain all the necessary requirements for each of the three steps including Sketch Plan Review, Preliminary Plan Review, and Final Plat Review. I have read the statem is above and have provided the required attached information which is correct urate to t, ` best of my knowledge. - (Signat. re of app ►' : nt/ow Last Revised: 11/21/2002 8 • APPENDIX B - ADJOINING PROPERTY AND MINERAL OWNERS • 3 ti 3 H N61S • ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS LIST DIEMOZ, OLIVER AND RONALD AND ALLESSANDRI MARJORIE E. 3445 COUNTY ROAD 214 SILT, CO 81652 2179-012-00-008 BLACK, MYRON W. 3050 HIGHWAY 13 RIFLE, CO 81650 2179-024-00-549 KAY, RICHARD D. & PATRICIA JANE 34651 HIGHWAY 6 SILT, CO 81652-9529 2179-111-00-547 SOVERN, BARRY M. & PATRICIA JANE 421 COUNTY ROAD 235 SILT, CO 81652 2179-013-00-009 BELLIO, H. JOHN & MARGARET J. LIVING TRUST DATED 4/10/2000 PO BOX 150 SILT, CO 81652 2179-021-00-337 BELLIO, H. JOHN & MARGARET J. LIVING TRUST DATED 4/10/2000 PO BOX 150 SILT, CO 81652 2179-024-00-022 DICE, DEBRA & JOE 3301 COUNTY ROAD 214 SILT, CO 81652 2179-012-00-208 KUHNS, KENNETH K. JR & GAIL J. 3465 COUNTY RD 214 SILT, CO 81652 2179-012-00-243 GROSS, MICHAEL ROBERT 3467 COUNTY RD 214 SILT, CO 81652 2179-012-00-242 SCHWAAB, LISA ECHELLE MARTIN 3495 COUNTY RD 214 SILT, CO 81652 2179-012-00-006 • HERITAGE TRUST & ASSET MANAGEMENT, INC. CUSTODIAN FBO ARTHUR C. ARMIJO, IRA 359 MAIN STREET GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81501 2179-012-00-564 ARMIJO, ARTHUR C. & LAPPIEL M. 475 COUNTY RD 167 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 2179-012-00-565 YERIAN, DANA A. & DRAKE, JOAN M. 3550 COUNTY RD 214 SILT, CO 81652 2179-013-00-357 DAYBREAK ENTERPRISE LLC 3550 COUNTY ROAD 214 SILT, CO 81652 2179-013-00-297 VITTUM, DELORES C. 1605 NW 80TH. AVE., APT A MARGATE, FL 33063 2179-013-00-329 REW, SHEILA A., CASTLE, JEREMY REW, JOSHUA 35445 HIGHWAY 6 SILT, CO 81652 2179-013-00-012 MENU, BENNETT C. & DEBORAH M. 3704 PEACH VALLEY ROAD SILT, CO 81652 2179-013-04-001 COURIER, JOHN S. & LAURA BEATTIE 3706 COUNTY RD SILT, CO 81652 2179-013-04-002 KOPER, MONA R. & ROBERT J. 3708 COUNTY RD 214 SILT, CO 81652 2179-013-04-003 MCFARLIN, LLOYD H & IRIS C. PO BOX 4 SNOWMASS, CO 81654 2179-013-04-004 ELSE, KENNETH R. & DOROTHY M. 3712 COUNTY RD 214 SILT, CO 81652 2179-013-04-005 ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS LIST cont. JONES, HELEN & KOTTEN, RUTH 3714 COUNTY ROAD 214 SILT, CO 81652 2179-013-04-006 SELVAGE, CONSTANNCE BETHAL & GREGORY, ALLEN & FLANAGAN, VINCE MONTEL 3716 COUNTY RD 214 SILT, CO 81652 2179-013-04-007 WITT, KAREN L. & SZKLARZ, SCOTT A PO BOX 4748 EAGLE, CO 81631 2179-013-00-674 BARTEL, JOHN 602 DAVIS POINT ROAD SILT, CO 81652 2179-013-00-675 DUCKWORTH, DINA & PLEASANTS, DORMAN 0/0 KRABACHER & SANDERS, PC. 201 NORTH MILL STREET # 201 ASPEN, CO 81611 2179-013-00-676 LONG KEVIN J & GINA M REECE 4786 COUNTY 312 NEW CASTLE, CO 81647 2179-013-00-677 • • APPENDIX C - DRAINAGE REPORT • • • • • DRAINAGE REPORT PEACH VALLEY VISTAS SILT, COLORADO March 14, 2005 PREPARED FOR: Kelly and Michael Lyon Family. LLC Peach Valley Vistas PO Box 110 Silt Colorado 81652 (970) 876-5944 PREPARED BY: Gamba & Associates, Inc. Consulting Engineers and Land Surveyors 113 Ninth Street — Suite 214 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone: (970) 945-2550 Fax: (970) 945-1410 Martin J Rowe Nathan J. Bell P.E 33401 • • • Table of Contents INTRODUCTION AND LOCATION 3 PREVIOUS DRAINAGE STUDIES 3 HYDROLOGIC AREA 3 NORTHERN SECTION OF THE PROPERTY 4 SOUTHERN SECTION OF THE PROPERTY 6 HYDROLOGIC CRITERIA AND METHODOLOGY 6 PROPOSED DRAINAGE PATTERNS 7 CONCLUSIONS 8 Appendix A—Pre-development Data and Calculations 9 Drainage Study for Peach Valley Vistas, Silt, Colorado Oct 25, 2004 Page 2 of 29 • • INTRODUCTION AND LOCATION The proposed Peach Valley Vistas Subdivision is located east of the Town of Silt. The Davis Point Road borders the property on the west, County Road 214 borders the north, the Peach Valley Acres Subdivision borders the east and the Cactus Valley Ditch borders the south. The property is currently zoned Garfield County A/R/RD and is used for agricultural activities such as hay production. A vineyard is also located in the southern portion of the property. The Peach Valley Vistas Subdivision parcel contains approximately 54.878 acres. The proposed land use for the Peach Valley Vistas Subdivision is residential in nature and consists of twenty-five single-family lots. The Infrastructure will include some regrading, access roads together with associated drainage and buried utilities. Subsequent development of the Subdivision will include Single-family residences and associated driveways. PREVIOUS DRAINAGE STUDIES To the best of our knowledge, there are no existing drainage reports for this area. HYDROLOGIC AREA Pre Developed Conditions Large offsite tributary areas to the North of the property (Sub Basin 01 and 02) and to the West of the property (Sub Basins 03,05,0.5-1 and 09) have been considered. Between these basins and the property is the Ware and Hines irrigation ditch delivering flow in a westerly direction. The decreed flow in the ditch is believed to be 49 cfs (cubic feet per second), physical observation confirms flows of this order, despite the fact that the demands on the ditch are upstream of the site and a lower flow would be expected. To the southwest of the proposed developed area an existing ditch spillway structure exists which diverts a significant proportion of the irrigation flow from the ditch under the Davis Point Road via existing culvert number 16 and across the South West corner of the property. This excess flow then is routed under Interstate 70 to the Colorado River. The Tong -term effect of this overflow has been considerable erosion to the original surface terrain creating a significant local cut. Proposals for erosion protection are not considered in this report since it is not relevant to the storm drainage patterns, however separate recommendations are to be made as part of the project engineering. Drainage Study for Peach Valley Vistas, Silt, Colorado Oct 25, 2004 Page 3 of 29 NORTHERN SECTION OF THE PROPERTY The Northern section of the property is not proposed for development with the exception of lot 25, which is located in sub basin 05. The Northern section will remain as agricultural land The capacities of the culverts through which the irrigation ditch passes have been analyzed along the length of ditch which influences the development. All storm water flows were analyzed for a 100 year 24 hour precipitation event. • Storm water flows from Sub Basin 01, north of the property, calculated at 80 cfs, will inundate the ditch locally, most likely breach the ditch at Culvert number 5 and flows will migrate to the low Point on County road 214 and continue in a southerly direction but will not affect the subject development. • Storm Water flows from Sub basin 02, north of the property, calculated at 172 cfs, will inundate the ditch and will overflow south over the CR 214 at the position of culvert number 9 (squashed 56" x 36") which has a lower capacity than the upstream ditch. Alternatively the storm flow from Basin 02 will simply inundate CR 214 roadside ditches and enter the property at the northeast corner. In addition to the flow from sub basin 02, the smaller culvert 09 will constrict the higher than decreed flows in the irrigation ditch produced by general storm upstream inundation, therefore breaching an approximate net flow of 40 cfs at this point. Further storm flows have also been considered from sub basin 03,northwest of the property, at 32 cfs and have been added to the general position of culvert 09 in order to produce a worst-case condition. The above listed flows will inundate the north part of the field and will flow in a southeasterly direction. • The situation at existing culvert number 10 (36" diameter) was analyzed. The flow in the ditch immediately prior to the culvert is the ditch flow from the preceding culvert number 9 at 48cfs plus the storm flow from sub basin 03 (32cfs) since it is possible that this flow could divert south of county road 214. Calculations show that the culvert will carry a flow of 43cfs, and 37cfs will overspill from the side of the ditch and travel in a southeasterly direction. • The situation at existing culvert number 12 (36" diameter) was analyzed. The flow in the ditch immediately prior to the culvert is the ditch flow from the preceding culvert number 10 at 43cfs plus the storm flow from sub basin 05 (30cfs). Calculations show that the culvert will carry a flow of 49cfs, and the balance of 24cfs will overspill from the side of the ditch and travel in a southeasterly direction. • The situation at the proposed culvert number 20 under the access road to the subdivision was analyzed. The flow in the ditch immediately prior to the new culvert is the ditch flow from the preceding culvert number 12 at 49cfs plus the conservative case of a storm flow from sub basin 05-01 (12cfs). Calculations show that a 36" diameter CMP culvert will carry the decreed ditch flow of 49cfs, and the balance of 12cfs will overspill from the side of the ditch and travel in a easterly direction Drainage Study for Peach Valley Vistas, Silt, Colorado Oct 25, 2004 Page 4 of 29 • • • • • • In order to safeguard the development two drainage swales have been designed, an East- West swale, which is designed to protect the north area of the development and a North- South swale, which is designed to ensure that flows are directed to the existing deep swale/wetlands feature on the southern section of the eastern boundary. The East West swale has been dimensioned to intercept the worst-case storm condition flows from the following sources, which have been previously described above, plus the possible event of an irrigation ditch breach. The swale will directly protect lots 3,4 and 5. Sub basin 03 Sub basin 05 Sub basin 05-1 Sub basin 06 Ditch Breach from any position Total 32 cfs 30 cfs 12 cfs 12 cfs 49 cfs 135 cfs The North-South Swale orientated swale has been dimensioned to intercept the worst-case storm condition flows from the following sources, which have been previously described above, including the possible event of irrigation ditch breach. The swale will directly protect lots 6 and 7. Sub basin 02 172 cfs Sub basin 04 7 cfs E/W Ditch 135 cfs Total 314 cfs The North-South swale on the eastern boundary is to be continued a distance of approximately 360 feet south from the intersection with the East-West Swale, until it connects with the existing natural deep swale/wetlands feature. The North-South swale should extend a nominal distance of 450 feet north of the intersection in order to intercept storm flows, which may overflow from the inlet of culvert number 10, or a ditch breach. Beyond the distance of 450 feet the existing flood irrigation ditch should be enlarged in order to ensure flows will enter the main swale. The swales should be reinforced reinforced with Pyramat or equivalent erosion control matting in order to protect against scour and to encourage vegetation. The elevation of the proposed lot 25 is above the Ware and Hines irrigation ditch however the localized site specific grading of the property should take into account the risk of roadside ditches inundating the property during a 1:100 year storm. Drainage Study for Peach Valley Vistas, Silt, Colorado Oct 25, 2004 Page 5 of 29 SOUTHERN SECTION OF THE PROPERTY Post Developed Conditions With the exception of one isolated lot number 25 on Sub Basin 05, the southern half of the site is proposed to be developed and accordingly was divided into 3 post developed sub basins (07, 08 and 09). Control points A and B were designated for sub basins 07 and 08 respectively. The effect of development on sub basins 05 and 09 being considered negligible (refer to table 1). For each lot a standard impervious area of 3,200 square feet and 1,200 square feet was applied for the residence and driveway respectively. HYDROLOGIC CRITERIA AND METHODOLOGY Runoff flows for the different basins were calculated using the U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service Technical Release No. 55 Procedures for Determining Peak Flows in Colorado. The drainage basins, hydrologic curve numbers, times of concentrations, travel time, peak discharges, and the calculated hydrographs for the pre -development conditions are shown in Appendix A. Similar data and calculations for the post -developed conditions are provided in Appendix B. The rate of runoff for the 100 -year design frequency storm event was computed using the rainfall values from the NOAA Atlas 2, Precipitation Frequency Atlas of the Western United States, Volume III -Colorado 1973. The overland flows for the drainage basin were broken into three categories of flow types as follows: sheet flow, shallow concentrated flow, and channel flow. The individual calculations for the times of concentration based on the various flow types are provided for the basin in Appendix A and Appendix B. The T.R. 55 method calculates the times of concentration (Tc) of the basin and a subsequent travel time from the basin outfall to the composite watershed outfall point, which in this case is identical. Following the calculation of the times of concentration, the runoff curve numbers for pre and post development conditions are calculated. The basin is separated into areas having a common runoff curve number, and then a weighted curve number is calculated for the entire basin. Following the calculation of the times of concentration and the weighted curve numbers, pre and post development hydrographs are calculated. The peak rates of runoff for the pre and post development conditions is provided in Appendix A and B respectively. According to our calculations, the pre -development peak rate of runoff due to the 100 -year storm event and the corresponding post development peak rate of runoff are as follows; Drainage Study for Peach Valley Vistas, Silt, Colorado Oct 25, 2004 Page 6 of 29 • • • • • • TABLE 1 Basin Control Point Pre Developed Runoff (cfs) Unmitigated Post Developed Runoff (cfs) Pre Developed Area , (Acres) Post Developed Area (Acres) 07 A 22.65 23.42 19.48 16.06 08 B 7.56 14.49 6.50 9.75 05 29.86 30.02 17.52 17.52 09 32.51 32.67 19.07 19.07 PROPOSED DRAINAGE PATTERNS As noted above, the pre -developed flows for sub -basins 07 and 08 show an increase. The Targe increase for basin 08 is attributable to the larger catchment area combined with the impervious areas of the developed lots. For basin 07 the reduction in catchment area for the post -developed condition has offset the increase in impervious area. Road ditches on each side of the subdivision road collect water, which is directed, via culverts 21 and 22 to control points A and B. The increase in runoff for Basins 05 and 09 from development of lot 25 and part of the group of lots 15,16,17 and 18 respectively is very small and not considered significant. The detention volume required to mitigate the increase in runoff due to the proposed development for Basins 07 and 08 are 8,911 cubic feet and 6,812 cubic feet respectively. Basin Control Point Pre -Developed Run off (cfs) Post Developed Detention Basin Discharge 07 A 22.65 19.3 08 B 7.56 7.56 Drainage Study for Peach Valley Vistas, Silt, Colorado Oct 25, 2004 Page 7 of 29 CONCLUSIONS As noted above, the proposed improvements on the site will require two principal measures to protect the developed area from a 1 in100 year storm event. These include; • Construction of drainage swales along the Northern part of the developed area and partially to the east boundary. The specified swales should be reinforced with a geotextile fabric or other means of protection to prevent scour during a storm event and encourage early growth of vegetation. • Construction of two detention basins to the south of the site in order to mitigate the effects of increased flows from the developed areas and ensure that post developed flows do not exceed natural historic flows. Drainage Study for Peach Valley Vistas, Silt, Colorado Oct 25, 2004 Page 8 of 29 • • • • • • Appendix A—Pre-development Data and Calculations TR -55 Tabular Hydrograph Method Input Summary Description Basin 01 Rainfall Distribution Type II Ia/P Interpolation On Total Area 99.2600 ac Peak Time 726.0000 min Peak Flow 80.4852 cfs Given Input Data: Subarea D/S Subareas Area CN Tc Tt Rainfall Description (ac) (min) (min) (in) 01 99.2600 74 7.9654 0.0000 2.4000 Support Data: Subarea Name: 01, Row: 1 Sheet Flow Description sheet Manning's n 0.1500 Flow Length 50.0000 ft Two Yr, 24 hr Rainfall 2.0000 in Land Slope 0.1000 ft/ft Computed Sheet flow time > 3.7392 min Shallow Concentrated Flow Description Shallow Surface Unpaved Flow Length 468.0000 ft Watercourse Slope 0.0961 ft/ft Velocity 5.0017 fps Computed Shallow flow time > 1.5595 min Channel Flow Description Channel Flow Area 3.0000 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 5.6000 ft Drainage Study for Peach Valley Vistas, Silt, Colorado Oct 25, 2004 Page 9 of 29 Flow Length 3169.0000 ft Channel Slope 0.0690 ft/ft Manning's n 0.0130 Hydraulic radius 0.5357 ft Velocity 19.8056 fps Computed Channel flow time > 2.6667 min *************************** Total Time of Concentration > 7.9654 min **************************** TR -55 Tabular Hydrograph Method Input Summary Description Basin 02 Rainfall Distribution Type II Ia/P Interpolation On Total Area 283.7000 ac Peak Time 732.0000 min Peak Flow 171.7233 cfs Given Input Data: Subarea D/S Subareas Area CN Tc Tt Rainfall Description (ac) (min) (min) (in) 02 283.7000 74 11.9308 0.0000 2.4000 Support Data: Subarea Name: 02, Row: 1 Sheet Flow Description sheet Manning's n 0.1500 Flow Length 50.0000 ft Two Yr, 24 hr Rainfall 2.0000 in Land Slope 0.5000 ft/ft Computed Sheet flow time > 1.9642 min Shallow Concentrated Flow Description Shallow Surface Unpaved Flow Length 1196.0000 ft Watercourse Slope 0.2300 ft/ft Drainage Study for Peach Valley Vistas, Silt, Colorado Oct 25, 2004 Page 10 of 29 • • • • • Velocity 7.7378 fps Computed Shallow flow time > 2.5761 min Channel Flow Description Channel Flow Area 3.0000 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 5.6000 ft Flow Length 5090.0000 ft Channel Slope 0.0420 ft/ft Manning's n 0.0175 Hydraulic radius 0.5357 ft Velocity 11.4787 fps Computed Channel flow time > 7.3905 min *************************** Total Time of Concentration > 11.9308 min **************************** TR -55 Tabular Hydrograph Method Input Summary Description Basin 03 Pre developed Rainfall Distribution Type II Ia/P Interpolation On Total Area 18.5700 ac Peak Time 726.0000 min Peak Flow 31.6618 cfs Given Input Data: Subarea D/S Subareas Area CN Tc Tt Rainfall Description (ac) (min) (min) (in) Basin 03 pre 18.5700 85 4.8740 0.0000 2.4000 Support Data: Subarea Name: Basin 03 pre, Row: 1 Sheet Flow Description Manning's n 0.1300 Flow Length 50.0000 ft Two Yr, 24 hr Rainfall 2.0000 in Drainage Study for Peach Valley Vistas, Silt, Colorado Oct 25, 2004 Page 11 of 29 Land Slope 0.2000 ft/ft Computed Sheet flow time > 2.5273 min Messages: Info: Time of Concentration rounded to 6.0000 min in row <1>. Shallow Concentrated Flow Description Shallow con Surface Unpaved Flow Length 376.0000 ft Watercourse Slope 0.2660 ft/ft Velocity 8.3214 fps Computed Shallow flow time > 0.7531 min Messages: Info: Time of Concentration rounded to 6.0000 min in row <1>. Channel Flow Description Channel Flow Flow Area 3.0000 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 5.6000 ft Flow Length 1044.0000 ft Channel Slope 0.0380 ft/ft Manning's n 0.0175 Hydraulic radius 0.5357 ft Velocity 10.9185 fps Computed Channel flow time > 1.5936 min Messages: Info: Time of Concentration rounded to 6.0000 min in row <1>. *************************** Total Time of Concentration > 4.8740 min **************************** Messages: Info: Time of Concentration rounded to 6.0000 min in row <1>. Drainage Study for Peach Valley Vistas, Silt, Colorado Oct 25, 2004 Page 12 of 29 • • • • • TR -55 Tabular Hydrograph Method Input Summary Description Basin 04 Pre developed Rainfall Distribution Type II la/P Interpolation On Total Area 5.8100 ac Peak Time 726.0000 min Peak Flow 6.7560 cfs Given Input Data: Subarea D/S Subareas Area CN Tc Tt Rainfall Description (ac) (min) (min) (in) Basin 04 pre 5.8100 79 8.9595 0.0000 2.4000 Support Data: Subarea Name: Basin 04 pre, Row: 1 Sheet Flow Description Manning's n 0.1500 Flow Length 50.0000 ft Two Yr, 24 hr Rainfall 2.0000 in Land Slope 0.0200 ft/ft Computed Sheet flow time > 7.1182 min Shallow Concentrated Flow Description Shallow con Surface Unpaved Row Length 224.8200 ft Watercourse Slope 0.0266 ft/ft Velocity 2.6315 fps Computed Shallow flow time > 1.4239 min Channel Flow Description Channel Flow Flow Area 3.0000 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 5.6000 ft Flow Length 250.5100 ft Channel Slope 0.0319 ft/ft III Manning's n 0.0175 Drainage Study for Peach Valley Vistas, Silt, Colorado Oct 25, 2004 Page 13 of 29 Hydraulic radius 0.5357 ft Velocity 10.0038 fps Computed Channel flow time > 0.4174 min *************************** Total Time of Concentration > 8.9595 min **************************** TR -55 Tabular Hydrograph Method Input Summary Description Basin 05 Pre Developed Rainfall Distribution Type II la/P Interpolation On Total Area 17.5160 ac Peak Time 726.0000 min Peak Flow 29.8647 cfs Given Input Data: Subarea D/S Subareas Area CN Tc Tt Rainfall Description (ac) (min) (min) (in) 05 17.5160 85 4.3541 0.0000 2.4000 Support Data: Subarea Name: 05, Row: 1 Sheet Flow Description sheet Manning's n 0.1300 Flow Length 50.0000 ft Two Yr, 24 hr Rainfall 2.0000 in Land Slope 0.1000 ft/ft Computed Sheet flow time > 3.3348 min Shallow Concentrated Flow Description Shallow Surface Unpaved Flow Length 110.0000 ft Drainage Study for Peach Valley Vistas, Silt, Colorado Oct 25, 2004 Page 14 of 29 • • • • • • Watercourse Slope 0.4090 ft/ft Velocity 10.3185 fps Computed Shallow flow time > 0.1777 min Channel Flow Description Channel Flow Area 3.0000 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 5.6000 ft Flow Length 1000.0000 ft Channel Slope 0.1250 ft/ft Manning's n 0.0175 Hydraulic radius 0.5357 ft Velocity 19.8027 fps Computed Channel flow time > 0.8416 min *************************** Total Time of Concentration > 4.3541 min **************************** R-55 Tabular Hydrograph Method Input Summary Description Basin 05-1 Pre Developed Rainfall Distribution Type II Ia/P Interpolation On Total Area 6.9336 ac Peak Time 726.0000 min Peak Flow 11.8218 cfs Given Input Data: Subarea D/S Subareas Area CN Tc Tt Rainfall Description (ac) (min) (min) (in) 05-01 6.9336 85 4.2047 0.0000 2.4000 Support Data: Subarea Name: 05-01, Row: 1 Sheet Flow Description sheet Manning's n 0.1300 Drainage Study for Peach Valley Vistas, Silt, Colorado Oct 25, 2004 Page 15 of 29 Flow Length 50.0000 ft Two Yr, 24 hr Rainfall 2.0000 in Land Slope 0.1000 ft/ft Computed Sheet flow time > 3.3348 min Shallow Concentrated Flow Description Shallow Surface Unpaved Flow Length 421.0000 ft Watercourse Slope 0.6360 ft/ft Velocity 12.8672 fps Computed Shallow flow time > 0.5453 min Channel Flow Description Channel Flow Area 3.0000 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 5.6000 ft Flow Length 385.7000 ft Channel Slope 0.1250 ft/ft Manning's n 0.0175 Hydraulic radius 0.5357 ft Velocity 19.8027 fps Computed Channel flow time > 0.3246 min *************************** Total Time of Concentration > 4.2047 min **************************** Drainage Study for Peach Valley Vistas, Silt, Colorado Oct 25, 2004 Page 16 of 29 • • • • • • TR -55 Tabular Hydrograph Method Input Summary Description Basin 06 Pre developed Rainfall Distribution Type II Ia/P Interpolation On Total Area 10.5460 ac Peak Time 726.0000 min Peak Flow 12.2631 cfs Given Input Data: Subarea D/S Subareas Area CN Tc Tt Rainfall Description (ac) (min) (min) (in) Basin 06 pre 10.5460 79 6.6443 0.0000 2.4000 Support Data: Subarea Name: Basin 06 pre, Row: 1 Sheet Flow Description Manning's n 0.1500 Flow Length 50.0000 ft Two Yr, 24 hr Rainfall 2.0000 in Land Slope 0.0600 ft/ft Computed Sheet flow time > 4.5869 min Shallow Concentrated Flow Description Shallow con Surface Unpaved Flow Length 252.2600 ft Watercourse Slope 0.0516 ft/ft Velocity 3.6651 fps Computed Shallow flow time > 1.1471 min Channel Flow Description Channel Flow Flow Area 3.0000 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 5.6000 ft Flow Length 655.4100 ft Channel Slope 0.0459 ft/ft Drainage Study for Peach Valley Vistas, Silt, Colorado Oct 25, 2004 Page 17 of 29 Manning's n 0.0175 Hydraulic radius 0.5357 ft Velocity 11.9999 fps Computed Channel flow time > 0.9103 min *************************** Total Time of Concentration > 6.6443 min **************************** TR -55 Tabular Hydrograph Method Input Summary Description Basin 07 Pre developed Rainfall Distribution Type II Ia/P Interpolation On Total Area 19.4800 ac Peak Time 726.0000 min Peak Flow 22.6517 cfs Given Input Data: Subarea D/S Subareas Area CN Tc Tt Rainfall Description (ac) (min) (min) (in) Basin 07 pre 19.4800 79 8.0175 0.0000 2.4000 Support Data: Subarea Name: Basin 07 pre, Row: 1 Sheet Flow Description Manning's n 0.1500 Flow Length 50.0000 ft Two Yr, 24 hr Rainfall 2.0000 in Land Slope 0.0790 ft/ft Computed Sheet flow time > 4.1090 min Shallow Concentrated Flow Description Shallow con Surface Unpaved Flow Length 592.0000 ft Drainage Study for Peach Valley Vistas, Silt, Colorado Oct 25, 2004 Page 18 of 29 • • • Watercourse Slope 0.0790 ft/ft Velocity 4.5349 fps Computed Shallow flow time > 2.1757 min Channel Flow Description Channel Flow Flow Area 3.0000 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 5.6000 ft Flow Length 1069.0000 ft Channel Slope 0.0337 ft/ft Manning's n 0.0175 Hydraulic radius 0.5357 ft Velocity 10.2822 fps Computed Channel flow time > 1.7328 min *************************** Total Time of Concentration > 8.0175 min **************************** TR -55 Tabular Hydrograph Method Input Summary Description Basin 08 Pre developed Rainfall Distribution Type II Ia/P Interpolation On Total Area 6.5000 ac Peak Time 726.0000 min Peak Flow 7.5583 cfs Given Input Data: Subarea D/S Subareas Area CN Tc Tt Rainfall Description (ac) (min) (min) (in) Basin 08 pre 6.5000 79 6.4619 0.0000 2.4000 Support Data: Subarea Name: Basin 08 pre, Row: 1 Sheet Flow Description Manning's n 0.1500 Flow Length 50.0000 ft Drainage Study for Peach Valley Vistas, Silt, Colorado Oct 25, 2004 Page 19 of 29 Two Yr, 24 hr Rainfall 2.0000 in Land Slope 0.0800 ft/ft Computed Sheet flow time > 4.0883 min Shallow Concentrated Flow Description Shallow con Surface Unpaved Flow Length 466.0000 ft Watercourse Slope 0.0940 ft/ft Velocity 4.9467 fps Computed Shallow flow time > 1.5701 min Channel Flow Description Channel Flow Flow Area 3.0000 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 5.6000 ft Flow Length 639.0000 ft Channel Slope 0.0560 ft/ft Manning's n 0.0175 Hydraulic radius 0.5357 ft Velocity 13.2545 fps Computed Channel flow time > 0.8035 min *************************** Total Time of Concentration > 6.4619 min **************************** Drainage Study for Peach Valley Vistas, Silt, Colorado Oct 25, 2004 Page 20 of 29 • • • • TR -55 Tabular Hydrograph Method Input Summary Description Basin 09 pre Rainfall Distribution Type II la/P Interpolation On Total Area 19.0670 ac Peak Time 726.0000 min Peak Flow 32.5092 cfs • Given Input Data: Subarea ENS Subareas Area CN Tc Tt Rainfall Description (ac) (min) (min) (in) 09 19.0670 85 4.4601 0.0000 2.4000 Support Data: Subarea Name: 09, Row: 1 Sheet Flow Description sheet Manning's n 0.1300 Row Length 50.0000 ft Two Yr, 24 hr Rainfall 2.0000 in Land Slope 0.1000 ft/ft Computed Sheet flow time > 3.3348 min Shallow Concentrated Flow Description Shallow Surface Unpaved Flow Length 244.0000 ft Watercourse Slope 0.3500 ft/ft Velocity 9.5453 fps Computed Shallow flow time > 0.4260 min Channel Flow Description Channel Flow Area 3.0000 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 5.6000 ft Flow Length 1175.0000 ft Channel Slope 0.2500 ft/ft • Manning's n 0.0175 Drainage Study for Peach Valley Vistas, Silt, Colorado Oct 25, 2004 Page 21 of 29 Hydraulic radius 0.5357 ft Velocity 28.0053 fps Computed Channel flow time > 0.6993 min *************************** Total Time of Concentration > 4.4601 min **************************** Drainage Study for Peach Valley Vistas, Silt, Colorado Oct 25, 2004 Page 22 of 29 • • • Appendix A—Post-development Data and Calculations TR -55 Tabular Hydrograph Method Input Summary Description Basin 05 Post Rainfall Distribution Type II Ia/P Interpolation On Total Area 17.5162 ac Peak Time 726.0000 min Peak Flow 30.0209 cfs Given Input Data: Subarea D/S Subareas Area CN Tc Tt Rainfall Description (ac) (min) (min) (in) 05 17.5162 85 4.4601 0.0000 2.4000 Support Data: Subarea Name: 05, Row: 1 Sheet Flow Description sheet Manning's n 0.1300 Flow Length 50.0000 ft Two Yr, 24 hr Rainfall 2.0000 in Land Slope 0.1000 ft/ft Computed Sheet flow time > 3.3348 min Shallow Concentrated Flow Description Shallow Surface Unpaved Flow Length 244.0000 ft Watercourse Slope 0.3500 ft/ft Velocity 9.5453 fps Computed Shallow flow time > 0.4260 min Channel Flow Description Channel Drainage Study for Peach Valley Vistas, Silt, Colorado Oct 25, 2004 Page 23 of 29 Flow Area 3.0000 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 5.6000 ft Flow Length 1175.0000 ft Channel Slope 0.2500 ft/ft Manning's n 0.0175 Hydraulic radius 0.5357 ft Velocity 28.0053 fps Computed Channel flow time > 0.6993 min *************************** Total Time of Concentration > 4.4601 min **************************** TR -55 Tabular Hydrograph Method Input Summary Description Basin 07 Post developed Rainfall Distribution Type II la/P Interpolation On Total Area 16.0588 ac Peak Time 726.0000 min Peak Flow 23.4208 cfs Given Input Data: Subarea D/S Subareas Area CN Tc Tt Rainfall Description (ac) (min) (min) (in) Basin 07 post 16.0588 82 7.0118 0.0000 2.4000 Support Data: Subarea Name: Basin 07 pre, Row: 1 Sheet Flow Description Sheet Flow Manning's n 0.0110 Flow Length 23.1600 ft Two Yr, 24 hr Rainfall 2.0000 in Land Slope 0.0034 ft/ft Computed Sheet flow time > 0.9662 min Shallow Concentrated Flow Drainage Study for Peach Valley Vistas, Silt, Colorado Oct 25, 2004 Page 24 of 29 • • • • Description Shallow con Surface Paved Flow Length 143.1500 ft Watercourse Slope 0.0726 ft/ft Velocity 5.4773 fps Computed Shallow flow time > 0.4356 min Channel Flow Description Channel Flow Flow Area 8.0000 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 8.9440 ft Flow Length 2019.0000 ft Channel Slope 0.0388 ft/ft Manning's n 0.0375 Hydraulic radius 0.8945 ft Velocity 7.2462 fps Computed Channel flow time > 4.6438 min Sheet Flow Description Sheet Flow Manning's n 0.0110 Flow Length 23.1600 ft • Two Yr, 24 hr Rainfall 2.0000 in Land Slope 0.0034 ft/ft Computed Sheet flow time > 0.9662 min • * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Total Time of Concentration > 7.0118 min **************************** Composite Runoff Curve Number Calculator Description Area (ac) Curve Number lots 1.5537 98 roads 1.1181 98 turn circle 0.2596 98 undeveloped 13.1274 79 Total Area > 16.0588 82 < Weighted CN Drainage Study for Peach Valley Vistas, Silt, Colorado Oct 25, 2004 Page 25 of 29 TR -55 Tabular Hydrograph Method Input Summary Description Basin 08 post developed Rainfall Distribution Type II la/P Interpolation Off Total Area 9.7490 ac Peak Time 726.0000 min Peak Flow 14.4864 cfs Given Input Data: Subarea D/S bareas Area CN Tc Tt Rainfall Description (ac) (min) (min) (in) Basin 08 post 9.7490 82 3.9179 0.0000 2.4000 Support Data: Subarea Name: Basin 08 pre, Row: 1 Sheet Flow Description Manning's n 0.0110 Flow Length 37.0600 ft Two Yr, 24 hr Rainfall 2.0000 in Land Slope 0.0264 ft/ft Computed Sheet flow time > 0.6199 min Shallow Concentrated Flow Description Shallow con Surface Paved Flow Length 46.9900 ft Watercourse Slope 0.0547 ft/ft Velocity 4.7544 fps Computed Shallow flow time > 0.1647 min Channel Flow Description Channel Flow Flow Area 8.0000 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 8.9440 ft Flow Length 1547.9700 ft Channel Slope 0.0501 ft/ft Manning's n 0.0375 Drainage Study for Peach Valley Vistas, Silt, Colorado Oct 25, 2004 Page 26 of 29 • • • • • • Hydraulic radius 0.8945 ft Velocity 8.2340 fps Computed Channel flow time > 3.1333 min *************************** Total Time of Concentration > 3.9179 min **************************** Composite Runoff Curve Number Calculator Description Area (ac) Curve Number Lots 0.9279 98 Roads 0.7641 98 Turning Circle 0.0000 98 grass 8.0570 79 Total Area > 9.7490 82 < Weighted CN Drainage Study for Peach Valley Vistas, Silt, Colorado Oct 25, 2004 Page 27 of 29 TR -55 Tabular Hydrograph Method Input Summary Description Basin 09 Post Rainfall Distribution Type II Ia/P Interpolation On Total Area 19.0679 ac Peak Time 726.0000 min Peak Flow 32.6665 cfs Given Input Data: Subarea D/S Subareas Area CN Tc Tt Rainfall Description (ac) (min) (min) (in) 09 post 19.0679 85 4.4601 0.0000 2.4000 Support Data: Subarea Name: 09, Row: 1 Sheet Flow Description sheet Manning's n 0.1300 Flow Length 50.0000 ft Two Yr, 24 hr Rainfall 2.0000 in Land Slope 0.1000 ft/ft Computed Sheet flow time > 3.3348 min Shallow Concentrated Flow Description Shallow Surface Unpaved Flow Length 244.0000 ft Watercourse Slope 0.3500 ft/ft Velocity 9.5453 fps Computed Shallow flow time > 0.4260 min Channel Flow Description Channel Flow Area 3.0000 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 5.6000 ft Drainage Study for Peach Valley Vistas, Silt, Colorado Oct 25, 2004 Page 28 of 29 • • • Flow Length 1175.0000 ft • Channel Slope 0.2500 ft/ft Manning's n 0.0175 Hydraulic radius 0.5357 ft Velocity 28.0053 fps Computed Channel flow time > 0.6993 min • • *************************** Total Time of Concentration > 4.4601 min **************************** Composite Runoff Curve Number Calculator Description Area (ac) Curve Number lots 15 and 16 0.1079 99 Undeveloped 18.9600 85 Total Area > 19.0679 85 < Weighted CN Drainage Study for Peach Valley Vistas, Silt, Colorado Oct 25, 2004 Page 29 of 29 • APPENDIX D - GEOLOGIC EVALUATION AND PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION • s • • • GEOLOGIC EVALUATION AND PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PEACH VALLEY VISTAS GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO Prepared For: KELLY & MICHAEL LYON FAMILY, LLC c/o Gamba & Associates P.O. Box 1485 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 Attention: Mr. Nathan Bell, P.E. Job No. GS -3819-A February 20, 2003 CTL/THOMPSON, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 234 CENTER DRIVE ■ GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601 • (970) 945-2809 TABLE OF CONTENTS SCOPE SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS SITE DESCRIPTION PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT GEOLOGIC SETTING GEOLOGIC HAZARDS SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS GROUND WATER 1 2 3 3 4 4 5 6 SITE DEVELOPMENT 7 Overlot Grading and Road Grading 7 Utility Construction 9 PRELIMINARY BUILDING CONSIDERATIONS 9 Preliminary Foundation Considerations 9 Interior Floors and Exterior Slabs -On -Grade 10 Below Grade Walls and Basement Construction 10 CONCRETE 11 SURFACE DRAINAGE 11 INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS (ISDS) FEASIBILITY 12 LIMITATIONS 12 FIGURE 1 - GEOLOGIC MAP FIGURE 2 - GEOLOGIC HAZARDS MAP FIGURE 3 - APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURES 4 AND 5 - SUMMARY LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURES 6 THROUGH 9 - SWELL/CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS TABLE I - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS APPENDIX A - GUIDELINE SITE GRADING SPECIFICATIONS KELLY & MICHAEL LYON FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTL/T GS -3819-A • SCOPE • • This report presents the results of our Geologic Evaluation and Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for the Peach Valley Vistas in Garfield County, Colorado. The site is planned for a single family residential development. Our geologic evaluation was performed to identify geologic conditions at the site and judge their possible influence on the planned development and discuss preliminary mitigation concepts. Our geotechnical investigation involved performing subsurface exploration and engineering analysis to provide an overview of geotechnical considerations to assist in planning the development of the subdivision and developing preliminary foundation recommendations. After building footprints are finalized and building plans are known, design level geotechnical studies will be needed to provide design level recommendations and construction criteria for individual buildings. This report identifies issues believed to be common throughout the site and to most of the Tots and provides preliminary geologic and geotechnical discussion and recommendations regarding mitigation of geologic hazards, overlot grading, infrastructure installation, building site excavations and fills, foundation construction, lateral earth pressures and floor slabs. Our report includes a description of the subsoil conditions found in our exploratory borings and a discussion of site development as influenced by geotechnical considerations. This investigation was performed in accordance with our Proposal GS -02-251, dated November 22, 2002. This report is based on a review of published geologic maps and literature, an evaluation of aerial photographs, site observations, conditions disclosed by our exploratory boring drilling, results of laboratory tests, engineering analysis of field and laboratory data and our experience. The criteria presented in this report are intended for planning purposes only and not for design of specific structures. A summary of our conclusions is presented below. KELLY & MICHAEL LYON FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTL/T GS -3819-A 1 SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS 1. We did not observe any geologic conditions or geologic hazards that would preclude development of this site for the intended single family residential use. An area of potential rockfall hazard and potentially unstable slopes along ravine banks will need to be avoided or mitigation will be needed. The subsoil conditions are generally favorable for the proposed residential development. 2. Our exploratory borings penetrated a 1 to 2 feet thick layer of organic, sandy clay "topsoil" above silty to sandy clays. In our TH-1 the clays were underlain by claystone bedrock at a depth of 21 feet. In ourTH-3 the topsoil was underlain by sandstone to a depth of 20 feet. The sandstone may be bedrock or could be a large colluvial block from rockfall from Davis Point Mesa above the site to the west. Free ground water was found in our exploratory borings TH-1, TH-2 and TH- 4 at depths varying from 8 to 18 feet deep during our field investigation. 3. In general, we judge the native, silty to sandy clays to vary from a low expansion potential to a high compression potential. We judge the sandstone to be non-compressible and non -expansive. 4. We anticipate spread footings placed on native soils will be the recommended foundation type on lots where non -expansive clays and sandstone bedrock are exposed at foundation elevations. Where footings will be supported by moderately to highly compressible clays, it may be recommended to subexcavate below the bottom of footings and backfill the sub -excavation with densely compacted structural fill. Where expansive clays occur at foundation elevations, footings with a minimum deadload may be recommended. We recommend design level soils and foundation investigations on a lot by lot basis to determine the appropriate foundation type for individual buildings and to develop design level criteria. 5. Preliminary data indicates concrete slabs -on -grade floors placed on the sightly compressible clays will perform satisfactorily if the soils below slabs are not wetted. Where moderately to highly compressible clays occur at floor subgrade elevations we will likely recommend to remove and replace 1 to 2 feet of the clays below floor slabs with structural fill similar to that below footings. Where expansive clays occur below floor slabs, slabs can likely bear on 1 to 2 feet of structural fill or structurally supported floors with crawl spaces below may be recommended. KELLY & MICHAEL LYON FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTUT GS -3819-A 2 • 6. Control of surface drainage is important to the performance of foundations, interior and exterior slabs -on -grade and roadways and access drives. Surface drainage should be designed to provide rapid removal of surface runoff away from buildings and off of roads. Water should not be allowed to pond adjacent to buildings, roadways or access drives. • • SITE DESCRIPTION The site is an approximately 54.88 acre parcel located approximately 1 mile east of the Town of Silt, Colorado. Davis Point Road is along the west property boundary and County Road 214 (aka Peach Valley Road) is along the north property boundary. The existing Peach Valley Subdivision is to the east and agricultural land is to the south. David Point Mesa is above the site to the west. The Ware and Hines Ditch is along the north approximately one-half of the west part of the site. The Lower Cactus Valley Ditch is through the south part of the site. Ground surfaces slope down to the south and east from high points along Davis Point Road and County Road 214 at grades measured from topographic mapping at approximately 10 percent that flatten to approximately 4 percent to the southeast. The north and east parts of the site are irrigated pasture. A vineyard is in the central - west part of the site. A dry land area of ravine erosion with near vertical ravine banks up to 20 vertical feet tall is at the southwest part of the site. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT We understand the parcel is to be developed for single family residential usage. Plans are to construct roadways and utilities for approximately 24 residential lots of approximately 2 to 2.5 acres each. We anticipate each lot will be a "ranchete" with a single family residence, barn and out buildings. Water service will be centralized and sewage systems will be individual sewage disposal systems (ISDS). KELLY & MICHAEL LYON FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTL/T GS -3819-A 3 GEOLOGIC SETTING In our opinion, no geologic conditions or potential geologic hazards exist that will preclude development of the site for single family residential use. The property is underlain by bedrock consisting of the Tertiary aged Wasatch Formation. The bedrock at this site is likely covered by Quaternary aged alluvial terrace deposits. At the ground surface, over most of the site, to depths up to 30 feet are undifferentiated eolian (wind blown) and alluvial fan deposits. Undifferentiated eolian and alluvial deposits consist of silty to sandy clays (loess) with clayey sand and gravel layers (alluvial fan deposits). Colluvial blocks from rockfall from Davis Point are likely dispersed in the eolian and alluvial fan deposits and probably increase in number towards Davis Point to the west and south. Undifferentiated deposits of alluvium and colluvium are associated with the ravine erosion in the southwest part of the site. Undifferentiated alluvial and colluvial deposits consist of clays, sands and gravels produced by reworking eolian, alluvial fan and terrace alluvium deposits. Several areas of man placed fill are associated with irrigation ditches and an area of site grading in the east - central part of the site. A map of interpreted geologic units is shown on Figure 1. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS We identified rockfall from Davis Point Mesa and potentially unstable slopes related to the near vertical ravine banks as the only significant geologic hazards. Sandstone rock outcrop near the top of Davis Point Mesa provides a source for rockfall. Areas to be developed that are within rockfall hazard areas will require mitigation. The ravines eroded into the southwest part of the site and the Ware and Hines Ditch provide effective mitigation for rockfall. If the ravines are filled or the Ware Hines Irrigation Ditch is removed, rerouted or piped then the rockfall hazard boundaries will change. Mitigation of rockfall can consist of an impact barrier and/or catchment structure. If development will be in rockfall hazard areas then a more KELLY & MICHAEL LYON FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTL/T GS -3819-A 4 • • • detailed rockfall hazard evaluation will be needed to develop design level mitigation recommendations. Figure 2 shows the existing rockfall hazard boundary and the rockfall hazard boundary without the Ware and Hines Ditch. Slopes along the sides of ravines in the southwest parts of the site are steep to near vertical. Some areas along the ravine sides exhibit evidence of "recent" or "active" instability. In our opinion, the ravines should be backfilled or roadways and structures should be set back from the top of the ravines sides a horizontal distance equal to at least the vertical height of the sides. We performed a radiation screening of the site. Our screening involved traversing the site several times in a "zig zag" fashion and continuously looking from the line of travel to a radiation screening device. Measurements were taken with a Ludlum Instruments, Inc. Model No. 19 Micro -R -Meter. Measurements were taken from the various soils occurring at the site. Our measurements ranged from 13 to 20 microroentgens per hour. Our experience indicates these measurements are consistent with normal background radiation in the region and are not cause for concern. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Subsurface conditions were investigated by drilling four (4) exploratory borings for foundation analysis and five (5) subgrade borings for pavement design at the approximate locations shown on Figure 3. Our borings were drilled using an all terrain vehicle mounted drill rig and 4 -inch diameter, continuous flight auger. Subsurface exploration operations were directed by our field representative who logged the soils and obtained samples for laboratory testing. Graphic logs of the soils found in our borings and results of field penetration resistance tests are presented on Figures 4 and 5. Penetration resistance tests were performed in borings by driving a modified California sampler with a 140 pound weight falling 30 KELLY & MICHAEL LYON FAMILY. LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTLIT GS -3819-A 5 inches. Local experience indicates penetration resistance tests using a California sampler are similar to the results of a standard penetration test. The modified California sampler results in a 2 -inch diameter by 4 inch long sample suitable for many laboratory tests. Samples obtained from our borings were returned to our laboratory where they were visually classified and typical samples selected for testing. Laboratory test results are presented on Figures 6 through 9 and summarized on Table 1. Our exploratory borings penetrated a 1 to 2 feet thick layer of organic, sandy clay "topsoil" above soft to medium stiff, moist to wet, silty to sandy clays. In ourTH- 1 the clays were underlain by very hard claystone bedrock at a depth of 21 feet. In our TH-3 the topsoil was underlain by medium hard to very hard sandstone to a depth fo 20 feet. The sandstone may be bedrock or could be a Targe colluvial block from rockfall from Davis Point Mesa above the site to the west. Free ground water was found in our exploratory borings TH-1, TH-2 and TH-4 at depths of 8 to 18 feet deep during our field investigation. Up to 30 feet thick layers of silty to sandy clays were found. Clay samples subjected to one dimensional swell/consolidation testing to judge volume change potential exhibited varying characteristics from a low expansion potential to a high consolidation potential. GROUND WATER Ground water was encountered in our exploratory borings TH-1, TH-2 and TH-4 at 8 to 18 feet deep during our field investigation. Much of the site is currently used as irrigated pasture. We observed several areas of hydrophilic vegetation that indicate shallow ground water conditions. We believe ground water at this site is related to flood irrigation and irrigation ditches on and above the site. We do not anticipate that "natural" ground water conditions will adversely effect basement KELLY 8 MICHAEL LYON FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTL/T GS -3819-A 6 • • • construction. Mitigation of ground water can likely be accomplished by eliminating flood irrigation and lining of waterways with a synthetic liner and construction of subsurface foundation drainage systems. SITE DEVELOPMENT The following sections present recommendations and discusses overlot grading and road building and utility installation. Overlot Grading and Road Grading Grading plans were not prepared at this writing. Where overlot grading is required to provide a flat ground surface it appears maximum cuts and fills will generally be on the order of 10 feet or less. We believe excavations can be accomplished with large earthmoving equipment such as D-8 dozers with ripper blades and trackhoes. Where sandstone bedrock and/or blocks are encountered in excavations blasting will likely be needed. Disturbed areas with man placed fill are associated with the irrigation ditches and an area in the east - central part of the site. Existing fill will need to be removed and the ditches obliterated from below areas to be built on. Where ditches are to be filled the ditches should be excavated to provide a rectangular cross section of sufficient width such that large, heavy compaction equipment can "work" fill material to obtain uniform compaction. Surface grading will need to ensure that any abandoned or truncated ditches will not direct surface run-off towards buildings or cause infiltration of water above the buildings. Where irrigation ditches will be at elevations above buildings the ditches may need to be lined or piped to reduce water infiltrating the subsoils and resulting in wet or damp conditions below buildings and in basements. The possibility of ditch bankfailure and flooding should be taken into consideration where ditches will be above buildings. Where ravines KELLY & MICHAEL LYON FAMILY. LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTLT GS -3819-A 7 are to be filled, to allow road embankment construction we recommend placement of culverts or underdrain systems in the bottom of the ravine to prevent water ponding adjacent to the uphill side of the fill embankment. Subgrade for interior subdivision roads will generally be native clays. Pavement design recommendations are presented in our Pavement Design Report, CTL/Thompson, Inc. Job No. GS -3819-B. Areas to receive fill or be paved must be properly prepared. The area below the new fill and road alignments should be stripped to the natural soils free of existing fill, significant organics, debris or other deleterious materials. The exposed soils should be prepared for fill placement by scarifying the upper 6 inches, moisture treating and compacting. The resulting surface should be proof rolled with a heavy (18 kip/axle) pneumatic tire vehicle such as a loaded tandem. Soft areas should be reworked or otherwise stabilized prior to placing fill. The on-site soils free of organics or rock larger than 6 inches in diameter or other deleterious materials can be used as fill. Fill for overlot grading or road building should be placed in maximum 10 inch thick, loose lifts, moisture conditioned to between 2 percent below to 2 percent above optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor (ASTM D 698) maximum dry density. The native clay soils are silty and it will likely be difficult to obtain uniform moisture distribution for fill placement. Mixing water into the soils will likely require disking or other mechanical method to achieve uniform moisture conditioning. Fill placed on steeper cross slopes should be placed on flat benches. The benches should be 8 to 12 feet wide to allow for heavy compaction equipment. Maximum bench height should be equal to or Tess than bench width. Placement and compaction of fill should be observed and tested during construction. KELLY & MICHAEL LYON FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTL/T GS -3819•A 8 • • Utility Construction Utility trenches should be sloped or shored to meet local, State and Federal safety regulations. Based on our subsurface exploration, we believe the clays are Type B and sandstone is stable rock based on OSHA standards. OSHA recommends temporary construction slopes no steeper than 1 to 1 (horizontal to vertical) for Type B above the water table. Excavations into sandstone can be to near vertical. Excavation slopes specified by OSHA are dependent upon types of soils and groundwater conditions encountered. Seepage and groundwater conditions in excavations will down grade the OSHA soil type. Excavation slopes recommended above will slough to near 4 to 1 (horizontal to vertical) or flatter below the water table. Contractors should identify the soils encountered in excavations and refer to OSHA standards to determine appropriate slopes. Excavations deeper than 20 feet need to be designed by a professional engineer. PRELIMINARY BUILDING CONSIDERATIONS Preliminary Foundation Considerations Near surface soils are generally silty to sandy clays. The clays were judged to vary from a low expansion potential to highly compressible. Footing foundations can likely be used for buildings on lots were clays occur at foundation levels. Where the clays posses a significant consolidation potential it may be recommended to remove and replace the upper 3 to 4 feet of soil from below the bottom of footings with structural fill. The excavated soil is likely appropriate as structural fill soils. Where expansive clays occur at foundation elevations, footings with a minimum deadload may be recommended. KELLY 8 MICHAEL LYON FAMILY. LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTL/T GS -3819-A 9 Interior Floors and Exterior Slabs -On -Grade Excavations will generally expose silty to sandy clays at slab -on -grade subgrade elevations. Where slabs will be supported by compressible clays it may be recommended to remove the upper 1 to 2 feet of soil from below slabs and replace it with structural fill. Structural fill below floor slabs can be with the native on site clays. Where expansive clays occur at slab -on -grade subgrade elevations, floor slabs can likely be placed on 1 to 2 feet of structural fill or structural floors with crawl spaces below may be recommended. A gravel layer should not be placed below slabs -on -grade where the subgrade consists of clays. A gravel layer below floor slabs increases the possibility of a single water source wetting the entire area below slabs. To reduce the adverse effects of differential slab movement, floor slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and columns with slip joints. Control joints should be used in floor slabs to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. Below Grade Walls and Basement Construction Below -grade foundation walls will be subjected to lateral earth pressures. Foundation walls for buildings are restrained and cannot move, therefore, they should be designed for the "at rest" lateral earth pressure. An equivalent fluid density in the range of 40 to 60 pcf will likely be appropriate to design for the "at rest" case depending on the actual backfill soils. We recommend backfill behind the walls be compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor (ASTM D 698) maximum dry density. Preliminary lateral earth pressure values do not include allowances for sloping backfill, hydrostatic pressure or surcharge Toads. Water from surface run-off (precipitation, snow melt, irrigation) frequently flows through backfill placed adjacent to foundation walls and collects on the surface of the comparatively impermeable soils occurring at the bottom of KELLY & MICHAEL LYON FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTL/T GS -3819-A 10 • • • ig foundation excavations. This can cause damp or wet conditions in basement and crawl space areas of buildings. To reduce the accumulation of water we recommend that a foundation drain be placed adjacent to foundation walls. The foundation drain should lead to a positive gravity outfall. In addition, adequate crawl space ventilation should be provided. CONCRETE Soils tested for the presence of soluble sulfates exhibited concentrations varying from 0.006 percent to 0.008 percent. The concentrations are considered negligible for sulfate exposure to concrete. In our opinion, sulfate resistant concrete is not necessary for structures that come into contactwith the soils at this site. SURFACE DRAINAGE Surface drainage will need to control and channelize surface water down, around and away from buildings and off road surfaces. Seasonal surface flows through building footprints needs to be re-routed away from the buildings. Areas of potential ponding water should be eliminated. The performance of foundations and concrete flatwork is influenced by moisture conditions in the subsoils. Wetting of foundation soils can be reduced by grading the ground surface to cause rapid run-off of water away from the buildings. Wetting or drying of the open foundation excavations should be avoided. The ground surface surrounding the buildings should be sloped to drain away from the buildings in all directions. We recommend a slope of at least 12 inches in the first 10 feet. Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all KELLY & MICHAEL LYON FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTL/T GS -3819-A 11 backfill. We recommend against burying discharge lines since they increase the likelihood of wetting soils near the foundation. INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS (ISDS) FEASIBILITY Due to winter conditions percolation testing could not be performed. We reviewed the USDA Soil Conservation Service (SCS) data which indicates the soils at the site percolate slowly. We believe that Individual Sewage Disposal Systems (ISDS) will be appropriate at this site, however, percolation rates outside the range of 5 to 60 minutes per inch will require special "engineered" systems. We recommend performing percolation testing when actual percolation field locations and elevations are known. In addition, ISDS will be influenced by impermeable materials such as the sandstone encountered in our TH-3 and by ground water conditions discussed above under GROUND WATER. LIMITATIONS The criteria in this report is preliminary and not for construction of buildings. The criteria is intended for use in developing preliminary designs and construction of roadways and installation of utilities. Design level criteria can only be developed and published after review of grading and building plans for individual Tots. Individual site specific investigations will be needed. Our exploratory borings were spaced to obtain a reasonably accurate picture of the subsurface. Variations in these subsurface conditions not shown by our exploratory borings will occur. Our report was based on conditions disclosed by our exploratory borings, results of laboratory testing, engineering analysis and our experience. Criteria presented reflects anticipated construction as we understand it. KELLY & MICHAEL LYON FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTL/T GS -3819-A 12 • • This investigation was conducted in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by engineering geologists and geotechnical engineers currently practicing undersimilar conditions in the locality of this project. No other warranty, express or implied, is made. If we can be of further service or if you have questions regarding this report, please call. CTL/THOMPSON, INC. Wilson L. "Liv" Bowden, C.b4 Engineering Geologist Reviewed ?bj� Jahn Nlch(jA Branch Manager; LB:JM:cd '\..(5 copies sent) KELLY & MICHAEL LYON FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTL/T GS -3819-A 13 Y -618£ -SO '°N 9o(' 01001030 1 o • R, o f(0 0 0 O (.fl 0 0 (t) O 0_ a - j 0 — (a 0- O • N X- 0 V) n a 7 (D as 0 a 0 N 0 oa as 0 o C 0 0 rn m c C fl < Q-0 -0 0 a 3 --• o 0 -C7 O -,- 0 C v m 0 m o 3 0 (0 ( -• -i a Q m O (n a 3 0 N 0 0 (D 3 _1 O < (D f ca O 3 O 0 -+ a 0 0 O —�0 O 0- C- a a o (1) 0 0 0 O 0 O a c o < (0 C• -s 0 3 • 0 aa) (D 0 (D = • C < a E 3 �• 0 0 a r m m z 0 0 0 II W 0 0 • O -V D -n C7 r*i 0 < 0 O r Z N —1 0 D O (n 0 0 0 • • • Y-6 l8T-SO 'oN qot' 0 m 0 r- 0 0 n N v -v 1 O T > -t > -Z 0-0 O m n ° 0 Q Q 0 S (D N fD �. O 0 t0 C 0 n 0 -3 a, ° O X 0 0 S.(4),O 0 co -w ' —w N CO O 0 X 0 a� 0p 0 (0 r C) m Z 1 i00£ = .t 'Non 1 Y -618£—S9 '0N qor 0 -71 A801 dOldX3 co 0 z • 1•4•d RV; ;Hi .A0 r N -1 m • 1 • 1 — Z 0 o 5 o = n a n a o 6• 13....• 0-- o' ° o' ° J cD 3 CD -. -w o4CO o m -1 C n x cr 0 -3 0 0 < 0 0 "1 0 a as m 0 CD 0 n �- o j v- a. 5'0 0 N _ _. c0' 0 c0 y ,00£ = „I. elDOS • >D vD nr Or C Z —I V N 0 > O N r 0 D 0 V -6I2 —S9 oN qor • • • SONIe108 ) dOldd01dX3 JO SOO1 1 eivylw 1S Depth In Feet W O U1 0 Cn O O 111111111111 01 0 W \\••••••••••••••• •-•••••••• \»\\\»\\»\\\\\»»»>\\`�( 0 mmall `\»•I(� N 11 LJ W 0 W -,(r J O O \ \ \ N N II a °°°°°°°°°°° \L± 01 N 0 to N N N (n 0 lee J uy}dea V -61,22 --SO 'oN qof Xddwwns )dOlddO1dX3 • El II El El 7' N 0 '7 as ca 30 o Ea" ET. 7 a • E. 3 1 `Isiow °p.JDy ties 35 ofv5o o a �, o 0: p.,c < y 0 0 3 n (D a 0 -1� o3 m1n CD 3-0 7•w • .4, -o c 0 o � -33-13 7m °a30 •o sco NO -41 ; cD � 0 0. c 3 0.° Cr CD a • Q. 7 O ul O :Co c°3 am Oo cao ,j N 7 0 • m U1 n t0 m 0 W �\ S 0 N o -+ -1 O 0 7- 7 m • ? u1 E a) m (0 S';1<) x O • 17 O O 7 p N 0 O n O� O 7 • N Q-4- O 0 m7 a3 ; 0 0 o 7 m 7• U1 y (0 C -1 7 Cr • a "a"; 0 o -. o a0m 7 o m x a3 0v_ O 30 m - 0� C z o o n I 7 -0 33N3 O • C 0 3 0 0cn C N CD to 0. - - - -+ a0 3- a) -{4u,a 0 I 2. C 7 TIT- • m 3a o 7 r- 0 0 z O m N 0 Depth In Feet cn o 0000. 0 U1 0 }eeJ ul y}dea U.1 • • • COMPRESSION % EXPANSION 4 3 2 0 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -6 -7 -8 -9 -10 -11 EXPANSION UN6E.1:2 RESSURE..DUE.T.0 CONSTANT WETTING 0 0.1 Sample of CLAY, SANDY (CL) 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF From TH-1 AT 9 FEET JOB NO. GS -3819-A 100 NATURAL DRY UNIT WEIGHT= 113 PCF NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT= 14.8 % Swell Consolidation Test Results FIG. 6 COMPRESSION % EXPANSION -10 11 -12 -13 L ADDITIONAL COMPRESSION U 1DEP 0ONSTAN`f PRESSURE DUE TOW TTIN G 0.1 Sample of CLAY, SANDY (CL) 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF From TH-2 AT 4 FEET JOB NO. GS -3819-A NATURAL DRY UNIT WEIGHT= NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT= 100 103 PCF 19.0 Ok Swell Consolidation • Test Results FIG.7 • • • COMPRESSION 'Yu EXPANSION 7 6 5 4 3 2 0 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -6 -7 -8 0.1 EXPANSION UNDER -OCAS -TAW PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING 0 0 0 4 e 0 Sample of CLAY, SANDY (CL) 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF From TH-3 AT 4 FEET JOB NO. GS -3819-A 100 NATURAL DRY UNIT WEIGHT= 119 PCF NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT= 5.7 % Swell Consolidation Test Results FIG. 8 COMPRESSION % EXPANSION -10 -11 -12 -13 -14 -15 LI -4 Lfi DUE TO WETTING 0.1 Sample of CLAY, SANDY (CL) 1.0 10 APPLIED PRESSURE - KSF From TH-4 AT 9 FEET JOB NO. GS -3819-A 100 NATURAL DRY UNIT WEIGHT= 112 PCF NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT= 26.3 % Swell Consolidation Test Results FIG. 9 JOB NO. 3819-A w • • SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS SOIL CLASSIFICATION CLAY, SANDY (CL) CLAY, SANDY (CL) CLAY, SANDY (CL) ;CLAY, SANDY (CL) CLAY, SANDY (CL) 1CLAY, SANDY (CL) PASSING NO. 200 SIEVE (%) 0.008 0.006 SOLUBLE SULFATES (%) UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (PSF) ATTERBERG LIMITS PLASTICITY INDEX (%) Q IL _! W - U) N r Q t- O O O NATURAL DRY DENSITY (PCF) N r T C7 r r M 0 r O r r O N r N r r NATURAL MOISTURE (%) d O -'- CO 4 O O , I's 6 t0 M to N _ p d W W V.. o d' O) we et Q) Q) BORING r 7 h- N 1- C F- M f- sr 1- 0 0 w 0 `Note: Swell due to wetting at an applied load of 1,000 psf. APPENDIX A GUIDELINE SITE GRADING SPECIFICATIONS PEACH VALLEY VISTAS Garfield County, Colorado KELLY & MICHAEL LYON FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTL/T GS -3819-A GUIDELINE SITE GRADING SPECIFICATIONS PEACH VALLEY VISTAS GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO 1. DESCRIPTION This item shall consist of the excavation, transportation, placement and compaction of materials from locations indicated on the plans, orstaked by the Engineer, as necessary to achieve overlot elevations. These specifications shall also apply to compaction of excess cut materials that may be placed outside of the development boundaries. 2. GENERAL The Soils Engineer shall be the Owner's representative. The Soils Engineershall approve fill materials, method of placement, moisture contents and percent compaction, and shall give written approval of the completed fill. 3. CLEARING JOB SITE The Contractor shall remove all trees, brush and rubbish before excavation or fill placement is begun. The Contractor shall dispose of the cleared material to provide the Owner with a clean, neat appearing job site. Cleared material shall not be placed in areas to receive fill or where the material will support structures of any kind. 4. SCARIFYING AREA TO BE FILLED All topsoil and vegetable matter shall be removed from the ground surface upon which fill is to be placed. The surface shall then be plowed or scarified until the surface is free from ruts, hummocks or other uneven features, which would prevent uniform compaction by the equipment to be used. 5. COMPACTING AREA TO BE FILLED After the foundation for the fill has been cleared and scarified, it shall be disked or bladed until it is free from Targe clods' and rocks larger than 6 inches in diameter, brought to the proper moisture content (within 2 percent of optimum moisture content) and compacted to not Tess than 95 percent of maximum density as determined in accordance with ASTM D 698. KELLY & MICHAEL LYON FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTLJT GS -3819-A A-1 EQ3 6. FILL MATERIALS Fill soils shall be free from vegetative matter or other deleterious substances, and shall not contain rocks having a diameter greater than six (6) inches. Fill materials shall be obtained from cut areas shown on the plans or staked in the field by the Engineer or imported to the site. Concrete, asphalt, organic matter and other deleterious materials or debris shall not be used as fill. On-site materials classifying as CL, CH, SC, SM, SW, SP, GP, GC and GM are acceptable as defined by ASTM D 2487-83. 7. MOISTURE CONTENT Fill material shall be moisture treated to within limits of optimum moisture content specified in "Moisture Content and Density Criteria." Sufficient laboratory compaction tests shall be made to determine the optimum moisture content for the various soils encountered in borrow areas. The Contractor may be required to add moisture to the excavation materials in the borrow area if, in the opinion of the Soils Engineer, it is not possible to obtain uniform moisture content by adding water on the fill surface. The Contractor may be required to rake or disc the fill soils to provide uniform moisture content through the soils. The application of water to embankment materials shall be made with any type of watering equipment approved by the Soils Engineer, which will give the desired results. Water jets from the spreader shall not be directed at the embankment with such force that fill materials are washed out. Should too much water be added to any part of the fill, such that the material is too wet to permit the desired compaction from being obtained, rolling and all work on that section of the fill shall be delayed until the material has been allowed to dry to the required moisture content. The Contractor will be permitted to rework wet material in an approved manner to hasten its drying. 8. COMPACTION OF FILL AREAS Selected fill material shall be placed and mixed in evenly spread layers. After each fill layer has been placed, it shall be uniformly compacted to not less than the specified percentage of maximum density given in "Moisture Content and Density Criteria." Fill materials shall be placed such that the thickness of loose materials does not exceed 10 inches and the compacted lift thickness does not exceed 8 inches. KELLY & MICHAEL LYON FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTL/T GS -3819-A A-2 EQJ Compaction as specified above, shall be obtained by the use of sheepsfoot rollers, multiple -wheel pneumatic -tired rollers, or other equipment approved by the Engineer for soils classifying as CL, CH, or SC. Granular fill shall be compacted using vibratory equipment or other equipment approved by the Soils Engineer. Compaction shall be accomplished while the fill material is at the specified moisture content. Compaction of each layer shall be continuous over the entire area. Compaction equipmentshall make sufficienttrips to ensure thatthe required density is obtained. 9. MOISTURE CONTENT AND DENSITY CRITERIA Fill material shall be substantially compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum ASTM D 698 (AASHTO T 99) dry density within 2 percent of optimum moisture content. Additional criteria for acceptance are presented in DENSITY TESTS. 10. DENSITY TESTS Field density tests shall be made by the Soils Engineer at locations and depths of his choosing. Where sheepsfoot rollers are used, the soil may be disturbed to a depth of several inches. Density tests shall be taken in compacted material below the disturbed surface. When density tests indicate that the density or moisture content of any layer of fill or portion thereof is below that required, the particular layer or portion shall be reworked until the required density or moisture content has been achieved. 11. INSPECTION AND TESTING OF FILL Inspection by the Soils Engineer shall be full time during the placement of fill and compaction operations so that they can declare the fill was placed in general conformance with specifications. All inspections necessary to test the placement of fill and observe compaction operations will be at the expense of the owner. 12. SEASONAL LIMITS No fill material shall be placed, spread or rolled while it is frozen, thawing, or during unfavorable weather conditions. When work is interrupted by heavy precipitation, fill operations shall not be resumed until the Soils Engineer indicates that the moisture content and density of previously placed materials are as specified. KELLY & MICHAEL LYON FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTL/T GS -3819-A A-3 13. NOTICE REGARDING START OF GRADING The Contractor shall submit notification to the Soils Engineer and Owner advising them of the start of grading operations at least three (3) days in advance of the starting date. Notification shall also be submitted at least 3 days in advance of any resumption dates when grading operations have been stopped for any reason other than adverse weather conditions. 14. REPORTING OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS Density tests made by the Soils Engineer, as specified under"Density Tests" above, shall be submitted progressively to the Owner. Dry density, moisture content, and percentage compaction shall be reported for each test taken. 15. DECLARATION REGARDING COMPLETED FILL The Soils Engineer shall provide a written declaration stating that the site was filled with acceptable materials, and was placed in general accordance with the specifications. KELLY & MICHAEL LYON FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTL/T GS -3819-A A-4 • APPENDIX E - RADIATION SURVEY • • Gtech October 19, 2001 Kelly and Michael Lyon Family LLC Attn: Kelly Lyon P.O. Box 110 Silt, Colorado 81652 " „L' ilio OCT 4 2001 Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. 5020 County Road 154 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone: 970-945-7988 Fax: 970-945-8454 hpgeo@hpgeotech.com Job No. 101 677 Subject: Gamma Radiation Survey, Proposed Peach Valley Vista Subdivision, East of Davis Point Road, Garfield County, Colorado. Dear Mr. Lyon: As requested, a representative of Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. has performed a radiation survey of the subject site. The findings and conclusions of our work are presented in this report. The survey was conducted in accordance with our agreement for professional services to Kelly and Michael Lyon Family LLC, dated September 27, 2001. Proposed Development: A 23 lot residential subdivision is proposed on the property. The property covers about 51.6 acres with each lot varying in size between 2 and 2.49 acres. Single family residences will be constructed on each lot. The structures will likely be one and two story wood frame structures over crawlspaces or possible basement levels. Site Conditions: The area of the proposed development is located to the east of Davis Point Road and South of County Road 214 (Peach Valley Road) in Garfield County, Colorado. The terrain is variable in regard to location on the property. The northern portion is irrigated pasture. A fenced in orchard is located near the center of the property. Steep erosional ravines vegetated with sagebrush are located in the southern portion. An existing barn is located near the northwest corner of the property. Radiation Survey: A gamma radiation survey was conducted in the development area between October 2 and 10, 2001. Gamma radiation measurements were taken on about 100 foot spacings with a Ludlum Model 3 survey meter and Ludlum Model 44-9 detector. The readings were taken about 21 feet above the ground surface. The survey points and readings are summarized on Fig. 1. The 217 readings ranged from 0.02 to 0.04 millirems per hour with an average of 0.025 millirems per hour. Background readings taken off U.S. Highway 6 to the west of Davis Point Road were Kelly and Michael Lyon Family LLC October 19, 2001 Page 2 0.02 millirems per hour. Conclusions: The gamma radiation readings taken at the subject site appear to by typical of natural background levels in the area. No mitigation of the radiations should be required. If there are any questions or if we may be of further assistance, please let us know. Sincerely, HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOT - •t CAL, INC. Jordy Z. Adamson, Rev. by: DEH JZA/ksw attachment cc: Enartech - Attn: Peter Belau H -P GEOTECH PEACH .VALLEY ROAD APPROXIMATE SCALE = 300' LEGEND • RADIATION MEASUREMENT .025 MILLIREMS PER HOUR 0 0 _Z O Q_ .02 //22 .03 03 .025 .025 HA2 .025 .02` .03 .025 '.02 .025 .025 .02 .025 .03 .025 .025 .025 1.025 • .03 1 .025 `.03 8.025 1 .03 .03 .02 .03 " .035 .03 ' .035 ' .035 .04 .02 1.02 .025 1.03 .025 .03 .02 .025 • 025 .025 .02 .025 .025 .025 T.03 .025 1.025 • .02 .03 T.025 .025' .04 ?.035 x.03 02 02 .025 .025 .02 .03 .025 .025 -.025 1.025 .025 .02 .02 .02 .025 .02 .02 .02 .02 • .02 .025 .02 025 .02 1.02 .025 .02 .025 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 025 .03 .02 .02 .02 1.02 .025 025 .03 .03 .035 .03 .025 .025 .02 1 .025 .02 .02 .025 .02 .02 .02 .o2 `02 .02 .025 .025 .025 .02 .02 .025 .025 .02 .025 .02 1.025 .025 -02 .03 1.02 .02 .025 .025 1.02 .025 .025 .02 .02 1.02 .02 .025 .02 .02 • .02 .02 .025 .025 t • 101 677 ti HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. RADIATION SURVEY POINTS Fig. 1 035 .035 .03 .03 '.035 '.035 '.03 .035 T.03 '.03 • I.03 8.025 .025 .025 '.03 1.025 1 .03 8.025 1 I8.03 1'.025 .025 8.025 .025 .03 •.025 ' 1 .035 .03 .02 • .02 .025 • • .025 .03 • • .03 .025 .025 -.025 1.025 .025 .02 .02 .02 .025 .02 .02 .02 .02 • .02 .025 .02 025 .02 1.02 .025 .02 .025 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 025 .03 .02 .02 .02 1.02 .025 025 .03 .03 .035 .03 .025 .025 .02 1 .025 .02 .02 .025 .02 .02 .02 .o2 `02 .02 .025 .025 .025 .02 .02 .025 .025 .02 .025 .02 1.025 .025 -02 .03 1.02 .02 .025 .025 1.02 .025 .025 .02 .02 1.02 .02 .025 .02 .02 • .02 .02 .025 .025 t • 101 677 ti HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. RADIATION SURVEY POINTS Fig. 1 • APPENDIX F - SUBGRADE INVESTIGATION AND PAVEMENT DESIGN • • • • • SUBGRADE INVESTIGATION AND PAVEMENT DESIGN PEACH VALLEY VISTAS GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO Prepared For: KELLY & MICHAEL LYONS FAMILY, LLC c/o Gamba & Associates P.O. Box 1458 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 Attention: Mr. Nathan Bell, P.E. Job No. GS -3819-B February 20, 2003 CTL/THOMPSON, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 234 CENTER DRIVE • GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601 • (970) 945-2809 • TABLE OF CONTENTS SCOPE 1 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATION 1 EARTHWORK 2 Excavations 2 Trench Backfill 2 Subgrade Preparation 2 FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT DESIGN 3 PAVEMENT SELECTION 5 MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION 5 MAINTENANCE 6 LIMITATIONS 6 • FIGURE 1 - APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS FIGURES 2 AND 3 - SUMMARY LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS APPENDIX A - LABORATORY TEST RESULTS APPENDIX B - PAVEMENT DESIGN CALCULATIONS APPENDIX C - FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS APPENDIX D - FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE RECOMMENDATIONS • KELLY 8 MICHAEL LYONS FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTLIT JOB NO. GS -3819-B • • • SCOPE This report presents the results of our subgrade investigation and pavement design for the Peach Valley Vistas in Garfield County, Colorado. The purpose of this investigation was to determine the type and support characteristics of subgrade soils present below the proposed roads and provide design pavement alternatives and construction guidelines. The scope of our investigation was described in our Proposal No. GS -02-251. This report includes a description of the subgrade soils found in our exploratory borings, laboratory test results, recommended pavement sections, and construction and materials guidelines. The pavement alternatives presented were based upon laboratory test results and the AASHTO design methods. FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATION The total length of paved roads will be approximately 2,650 feet. Our field investigation consisted of five (5) subgrade borings (S-1 through S-5) and four (4) exploratory borings (TH-1 through TH-4) at the approximate locations shown on Figure 1. Soils found in our borings at anticipated subgrade elevations generally consisted ofsoftto medium stiff, moist to wet, silty to sandy clays. Free ground water was encountered in our exploratory borings at 8 to 18 feet beneath the existing ground surface. Figures 2 and 3 show logs of soils found in our borings. Classifications and engineering properties of samples of the soils encountered in our borings are summarized on Table A -I. The laboratory testing program was designed to provide index properties of the soils sampled and subgrade support values for those soil types which influence the pavement design. In general, one type of subgrade soil was present below roads at Peach Valley Vistas. A Hveem Stabilometer test was performed on a composite sample of the subgrade soil type (Group I) to determine a design support KELLY & MICHAEL LYONS FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTUT JOB NO. GS -3819-B 1 value ("R" value). Test results are presented in Appendix A. Group I soils were cohesive and testing indicated an "R" value of 13. The Effective Resilient Modulus (based on the CDOT modified design criteria) was calculated to be 3929 psi for Group I soils. EARTHWORK Excavations Grading plans were not provided to us. Based on conversations with the civil engineer (Gamba & Associates), we expect street subgrade elevations will generally be near existing ground surface elevations along the planned street alignments. We anticipate excavations to construct the streets and underground utilities can be accomplished with conventional excavation equipment. Trench Backfill Placement and compaction of trench backfill will have a significant effect on the life and serviceability of the pavement system. Backfill can consist of the on-site soils, provided they are free of organics, debris and rocks larger than 6 inches in diameter. We should be advised to allow comment on backfill soils to be imported to the site. Backfill should be placed in loose lifts of 10 inches or less, moisture treated to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95 percent of standard Proctor (ASTM D 698, AASHTO T 99) maximum dry density. A representative of our firm should observe placement and check compaction and moisture content of backfill soils during placement. Subgrade Preparation The ground surface along the planned street alignments should be stripped of vegetation, organics and other deleterious materials. The resulting subgrade KELLY & MICHAEL LYONS FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS Curr JOB NO. GS -3819-B 2 • • • EQI soils should be scarified to a depth of at least 6 inches, moisture treated and compacted. Fill placed to attain planned subgrade elevations for the streets can consist of the on-site soils free of organics, debris and rocks larger than 6 inches in diameter. The fill should be placed in loose lifts of 10 inches or less, moisture treated to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum standard Proctor (ASTM D 698, AASHTO T 99) dry density. The native clay soils are silty and it will likely be difficult to obtain uniform moisture distribution. Disking or other mechanical mixing will likely be needed to achieve uniform moisture conditioning. Subgrade soils should be proof -rolled with a heavy (18 kip/axle), pneumatic tire vehicle such as a loaded tandem prior to placement of aggregate base course or pavements. Soft areas, if found, should be reworked or stabilized. A geotextile fabric should be placed between clay subgrade soils and aggregate base course. Aggregate base course should be laid in thin, loose lifts, moisture treated to within 2% of optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 95% of maximum modified Proctor dry density (ASTM D 1557, AASHTO T 180). A representative of our firm should observe placement and check compaction and moisture content of fill and aggregate base course during construction. FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT DESIGN (modified AASHTO) The general subsoil profiles along the proposed street alignments do not reflect planned grading. The actual subgrade soils below streets will be the result of cuts and fills during grading operations and will not be known until utility construction and street grading operations are complete. Our field and laboratory data provide a general characterization of the subgrade soils that will support the proposed streets. Subsoils below the road alignments will likely be the silty to sandy clays. The actual soils at final subgrade elevations along street alignments should be checked by a representative of our firm to verify the soils are as anticipated and that our recommended pavement sections are appropriate. KELLY & MICHAEL LYONS FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTLIT JOB NO. GS -3819-B 3 A combined bulk sample of the silty to sandy clay subgrade soils had an R - value of 13. The anticipated subgrade soil type at this site possesses fair to good pavementsupport characteristics. Design calculations for the anticipated subgrade soil type at this site result in the recommended sections below. We recommend a geotextile fabric be placed between clay subgrade soils and aggregate base course. Roadways in Peach Valley Vistas will classify as local streets servicing single- family residences. Estimated traffic volumes were not known at this writing. We assumed an Equivalent Daily Load Application (EDLA) of 5 for our analysis. One loading represents an equivalent single -axle load of 18,000 pounds. If actual traffic volumes will be significantly different from those assumed, we should be informed to allow re-evaluation of our recommended pavement section alternatives. Our pavement design calculations are presented in Appendix B. Based on the assumed traffic volumes, our calculations indicate the pavement section alternatives presented in Table A below. TABLE A RECOMMENDED PAVEMENT SECTION ALTERNATIVES Location EDLA Full -Depth Asphalt Concrete Asphalt & Concrete Aggregate Base (AC) Course* Stoney Ridge Subdivision 5 6 inches 4 inches + 6 inches or 3 inches + 8 inches * Geotextile fabric should be placed between clay subgrade soils and aggregate base course. KELLY & MICHAEL LYONS FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTL/T JOB NO. GS -3819-B 4 • • • Egi PAVEMENT SELECTION The alternative involving asphalt concrete over aggregate base course retains a higher risk of distress as compared to the full -depth asphalt alternative due to the increased potential of moisture in the subgrade. The addition of moisture to subgrade soils can lead to softening of the subgrade and eventual failure of the pavement. Our experience indicates the pavement section alternatives provided above wilt perform adequately for the subject streets if positive drainage is provided. Independent from the type of pavement chosen, care must be taken to provide proper maintenance throughout the life of the pavementto ensure a 20 -year service life. MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION The performance of a pavement system is as much a function of the quality of the paving materials and construction practices as the support characteristics of the subgrade soil. The construction materials are assumed to possess sufficient quality as reflected by the strength coefficients used in the flexible pavement design calculations. Flexible pavement construction recommendations are included. as Appendix C. During construction, careful attention should be paid to the following details: • Placement and compaction of trench backfill. • Compaction at curblines and around manholes and water valves. • Excavation of completed pavements for utility construction and repair. • Moisture treating or stabilization of the subgrade. • Design slopes of pavement surfaces and the adjacent ground to rapidly remove water from the pavement surface. KELLY & MICHAEL LYONS FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTL/T JOB NO. GS -3819-B 5 MAINTENANCE We recommend a preventive maintenance program be developed and followed for all pavement systems to assure the design life can be realized. Routine maintenance, such as sealing and repair of cracks, is necessary. Choosing to defer maintenance usually results in accelerated deterioration leading to higher future maintenance costs. A recommended maintenance program is outlined in Appendix D. LIMITATIONS Our exploratory borings were spaced to obtain a reasonably accurate picture of subsurface conditions below the planned streets. Variations in the subsurface conditions not indicated by our borings will occur. The actual soils at final subgrade elevations along the street alignments should be checked by a representative of this office to verify the soils are as anticipated and that our recommended pavement sections are appropriate. If the anticipated traffic loads are considerably different from those assumed, we should be contacted to review our recommendations. We believe the geotechnical services for this project were performed in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in the locality of the project. No other warranty, express or implied, is made. If we can be of further service in discussing the contents of this report, or in the analyses of theroposed pavement systems from a geotechnical p. int of view, please call. CTL/THOMP , INC. Wilson L. "Liv" Bowden, C.P.G.`.Z Engineering Geologist LB:JM:cd (5 copies sent) KELLY & MICHAEL LYONS FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTL/T JOB NO. GS -3819-B -63 Reviewed John Msec Branch Mana 6 8-618£—SO •0N gor • 0 J1dOlVdO 1dX3 co 0 xf z 0 n1 co J • •(I • o 5 o 5 C") n. cIc1 o -• o o ° o' ° 7 (DP CD ti) tn - ,, O Vl O el) -ti c 'I x . O O 6- < 0 C -'s m a 0 ° 3 ao cp O 0 ~ 0 7 Cr cal O . N P 5 c3 p co • N_ (/1' r P1 m z 0 N 0 0 0 3 11 (/1 O 0 1 1 8-618£-S0 • • • )ddwwns 0 T1 kdOld601dX3 w 0 z to Depth In Feet 1111111111111111111111111IiiII1 !Ill' c(n 0 (Nn 0 O O 0 W lIlIlI I I II\' • \ •»>: : \ \ \ \ • v 0 Isa \ \ \ O \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ c \ \ \ \ mosok ',\\\\\\\\\\\\U \\ \ \ I\ \\\ \ D \\\\ J J J \ \ \ It\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ N N N Iia \\\\\'\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ -•\\\\\\\\\\ u \n\\\\\11\\\\\ V u► cn W iN N N C!O Cn O I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I I 1 I I I 1 i 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I 1 1 I J t8e� uI 4tdea N Cn O • • • El -61112 -SO •°N )dVwwns 0 AdO1V1Oldx3 CO 0 HNN\ FE T N 0- C-)2, C7 3 D o o z,o o. (-01 GO 7 -4. .7'' 7 35- 3 3`" o g m y.7 ow Cr + i 3 ao 08- '• C-O.m or _ ? a 0 i O�o c r 3 a Q ( O 9 -7 o °. 0 a * -. O S 7 0 •• + _ o -, o - a to a o 3 w 3 I la r m m z 0 Depth In Feet 11111111111 0 NNNNNN "\\\\\ NNNN \\\\\ `\"e\ NNNNN 9 z O m • N leej ul yldep • • • KELLY & MICHAEL LYONS FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTL1T JOB NO. GS -3819-B APPENDIX A LABORATORY TEST RESULTS VUU 800 700 600 500 400 300 0) a 200 w 0) w tZ 100 O H X LU 0 .. .... . ........ __.. L J •• - Group Number 1 AASHTO Classification A-6 Liquid Limit 28 Plasticity Index 12 . Design R -Value 13 L 0 10 "R" VALUE Job No. GS -3818-B 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Hveem Stabilometer Test Results 90 Fig. A-1 • • • APPENDIX B FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT DESIGN CALCULATIONS KELLY & MICHAEL LYONS FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTL/T JOB NO. GS -3819-B DESIGN CALCULATIONS DESIGN DATA Estimated Daily Load Applications (EDLA) = 5 per lane Equivalent Single Axle Load (ESAL) = 36,500 per lane Resilient Modulus (MR) = 3929 Structural Number (SN) = 2.3 (from Fig. B-2) DESIGN EQUATION SN = CID, + C2D2 = 0.40 - Strength Coefficient - Asphalt Concrete C2 = 0.12 - Strength Coefficient - Aggregate Base Course D1 - Depth of Asphalt Concrete (inches) D2 - Depth of Aggregate Base Course (inches) FULL -DEPTH ASPHALT SECTION: ▪ = 2.3/ 0.40 = 5.75 inches of Asphalt Concrete ASPHALT OVER 6 INCHES AGGREGATE BASE COURSE: D 1 = ((2.3) - (6.0)(0.12))/0.40 = 4 inches of Asphalt Concrete ASPHALT OVER 8 INCHES AGGREGATE BASE COURSE: D1 = ((2.3) - (8.0)(0.12))/0.40 = 3.3 inches of Asphalt Concrete RECOMMENDED PAVEMENT SECTIONS: 1. 6.0 inches of full -depth asphalt concrete, or 2. 3.0 inches of asphalt concrete over 8 inches aggregate base course, or 3. 4.0 inches of asphalt concrete over 6 inches aggregate base course. Note: Geotextile fabric should be placed between clay subgrade soils and aggregate base course. KELLY E. MICHAEL LYONS FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTL/T JOB NO. GS -3819-B B-1 O O Cr N II!! f HUI 1 1 1 I ( Isd ) W 'sninaoi 1 31-11538 -110S 03Bavo8 3Al1J•dd3 ( SNOI lIW ) B1M 'SNOLLVol1ddV CVO -1 3-1XV 3 1DNIS 1N3-1VAIn03 031Vw11S3 (i) a 'A1n1aVn3a O O 0 to h N 1,1 m z STRUCTURE DESIGN CHART FOR FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT Job No. GS -3819-B DESIGN SERVICEABILITY LOSS A PSI \ o ‘o O O _ o p N _ O O Cr N II!! f HUI 1 1 1 I ( Isd ) W 'sninaoi 1 31-11538 -110S 03Bavo8 3Al1J•dd3 ( SNOI lIW ) B1M 'SNOLLVol1ddV CVO -1 3-1XV 3 1DNIS 1N3-1VAIn03 031Vw11S3 (i) a 'A1n1aVn3a O O 0 to h N 1,1 m z STRUCTURE DESIGN CHART FOR FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT Job No. GS -3819-B JOB NO. GS3819-B TABLE A -I SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Description 'CLAY, SANDY (CL) 'CLAY, SANDY (CL) 'CLAY, SANDY (CL) CLAY, SANDY (CL) a) am a) i _75, o 5 c@1 n a) _ a — a�o_. ' Classification 17 N_I c 0 1 CL J 0 J 0 0 = we. i9 < (9 < (9 < (9 < a x O -0 0 c CO w CO to Atterbera Limits T ax) o CO o C ' E co f in N N r 'II E CJ 0N J co CO co N co N ' mOa) N > 59 7 Lam' c.) c`r, is 0 aa) eL Z o a) N P. N 7-. - C o CO O O Z 2 0 N d' C� op N in a 0 o Z 0 1- r- E.-ci-) 0 •- L9 L9 L9 L9 Sample No. ,- rn CO In Cn COMBINED'I S-1 THROUGH' S-5 • • • APPENDIX C FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS KELLY & MICHAEL LYONS FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTL/T JOB NO. GS -3819-B U' FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS Experience has shown that construction methods can have a significant effect on the life and serviceability of a pavement system. We recommend. the proposed pavement be constructed in the following manner: 1. The subgrade should be stripped of organic matter, scarified to a depth of at least 6 inches, moisture treated, and compacted. Soils should be moisture treated to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum standard Proctor dry density (ASTM D 698, AASHTO T 99). The above moisture treatment and compaction recommendations also apply where additional fill is necessary. 2. Utility trenches and all subsequently placed fill should be properly compacted and tested prior to paving. As a minimum, fill should be compacted to 95 percent of ASTM D 698. 3. After final subgrade elevation has been reached and the subgrade compacted, the area should be proof -rolled with a heavy pneumatic - tired vehicle (i.e. a loaded ten -wheel dump truck). Subgrade that is pumping or deforming excessively should be scarified, moisture conditioned and compacted. 4. If areas of soft or wet subgrade are encountered, the material should be subexcavated and replaced with properly compacted structural backfill. Where extensively soft, yielding subgrade is encountered, we recommend the excavation be inspected by a representative of our office. 5. A geotextile fabric should be placed between clay subgrade and aggregate base course. Aggregate base course should be laid in thin, loose lifts, moisture treated to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum modified Proctor dry density (ASTM D 1557, AASHTO T 180). 6. Asphaltic concrete should be hot plant -mixed material compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum Marshall density. The temperature at laydown time should be near235 degrees F. The maximum compacted lift should be 3.0 inches and joints should be staggered. 7. The subgrade preparation and the placement and compaction of all pavement material should be observed and tested. Compaction criteria should be met prior to the placement of the next paving lift. The additional requirements of the Garfield County should apply. KELLY & MICHAEL LYONS FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTL/T JOB NO. GS -3819-B • • • APPENDIX D FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE RECOMMENDATIONS KELLY & MICHAEL LYONS FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTL/T JOB NO. GS -3819•B EQ3 C -2 MAINTENANCE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FLEXIBLE PAVEMENTS The primary cause for deterioration of high traffic volume pavements is loss of integrity of the asphalt concrete and subgrade failure. High volumes also create pavement rutting and smooth, polished surfaces. Preventive maintenance treatments will typically preserve the original or existing pavement by providing a protective seal and improving skid resistance through a new wearing course. 1. Annual Preventive Maintenance a. Visual pavement evaluations shall be performed each spring or fall. b. Reports documenting the progress of distress shall be kept current to provide information on effective times to apply preventive maintenance treatments. c. Crack sealing shall be performed annually as new cracks appear. 2. 3 to 5 Year Preventive Maintenance a. The owner should budget for a preventive treatment at approximate intervals of 3 to 5 years to reduce oxidative embrittlement problems. b. Typical preventive maintenance treatments include chip seals, fog seals, slurry seals and crack sealing. 3. 5 to 10 Year Corrective Maintenance a. Corrective maintenance may be necessary, as dictated by the pavement condition, to correct rutting, cracking and structurally failed areas. b. Corrective maintenance may include full depth patching, milling and overlays. c. In order for the pavement to provide a 20 year service life, at least one major corrective overlay can be expected. KELLY 8 MICHAEL LYONS FAMILY, LLC PEACH VALLEY VISTAS CTL/T JOB NO. GS -3819-B D-1 • APPENDIX G - NATIONAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION SERVICE (NRCS) SOIL INFORMATION Previously SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE (SCS) INFORMATION • • • • • Peach Valley Vistas N.R.C.S. (S.C.S.) Soils Map SCALE: 111 = 200' SHEET: 1 of 1 DATE: FEBRUARY 17, 2005 PROJECT: 02372 [DRAWN BY: BK CHKD BY: AUG DRAWING: SoilsMap.dwg DIRECTORY: H:\02372\0I\Soils\ GAMBA ASSOCIATES 200 200 40C GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 1 INCH = 200 FEET Soil Type Description Acree loam, 3 to 6 percent slopes. Acree loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes. Dahlquist-Southace complex, 12 to 25 percent slopes. Dollard -Rock outcrop, shale complex, 12 to 25 percent slopes. Dollard -Rock outcrop, shale complex, 25 to 65 percent slopes. Empedrado loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes. Kelly and Michael Lyon Family, LLC Peach Valley Vistas PO Box 110 Silt, Colorado 81652 (970) 876-5944 GAMBA & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS 970/945-2550 WWW.GAMBAENGINEERING.COM 113 NINTH ST.. STE. 219 P.O. SOX 1958 GLENWOOD ■GRIHGS, CO 91002 SHEET NO. 1 • • • 16 Soil Survey loam. The soil is noncalcareous to a depth of 27 inches and calcareous below that depth. Included in this unit are small areas of Showalter, Morval, Cushool, and Evanston soils. Included areas make up about 10 percent of the total acreage. Permeability is slow in the Acree soil. Available water capacity is high. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate to severe on 'the steeper slopes. This unit is used mainly for irrigated pasture or as hayland. It also is used for homesite development or as rangeland. The potential plant community on this unit is mainly prairie junegrass, western wheatgrass, bluebunch wheatgrass, mountain big sagebrush, and Saskatoon serviceberry. Other plants that characterize this site are Indian ricegrass, mountainmahogany, and Douglas rabbitbrush. The average annual production of air-dry vegetation is about 900 pounds per acre. If the range condition deteriorates, mountain big sagebrush, rabbitbrush, and annual weeds increase in abundance. These plants are dominant when the range is in poor condition; therefore, livestock grazing should be managed so that the desired balance of the preferred species is maintained. Grazing should be delayed until the soil is firm and the more desirable forage plants have achieved sufficient growth to withstand grazing pressure. Loss of the surface layer severely reduces the ability of the unit to produce plants suitable for grazing. This unit is well suited to hay and pasture. A seedbed should be prepared on the contour or across the slope where practical. Proper stocking rates, pasture rotation, and restricted grazing during wet periods help to keep the pasture in good condition and protect the soil from erosion. Fertilizer is needed to ensure the optimum growth of grasses and legumes. If properly managed, the unit can produce 4 tons of irrigated grass hay per acre annually. This unit is poorly suited to homesite development. The main limitations are a high shrink -swell potential, low strength, and the slow permeability. Population growth has resulted in increased construction of homes in areas of this soil. This map unit is in capability subclass IVe, irrigated and nonirrigated. It is in the Loamy Slopes range site. 2—Acree very stony sandy loam, 12 to 25 percent slopes. This deep, well drained soil is on alluvial fans and valley side slopes. It formed in alluvium and residuum derived dominantly from redbed sandstone and shale. Elevation is 6,500 to 8,200 feet. The average annual precipitation is 16 to 18 inches, the average annual air temperature is 40 to 42 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 95 to 105 days. Typically, the upper part of the surface layer is dark grayish brown very stony sandy loam about 5 inches thick. The lower part is clay loam about 5 inches thick. The subsoil is clay about 13 inches thick. The substratum to a depth of 60 inches or more is clay loam. The soil is noncalcareous to a depth of 27 inches and calcareous below that depth. Included in this unit are small areas of Showalter, Morval, Cushool, and Evanston soils. Included areas make up about 10 percent of the total acreage. Permeability is slow in the Acree soil. Available water capacity is high. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate or severe on the steeper slopes. This unit is used mainly as rangeland. It also is used as wildlife habitat. The potential plant community on this unit is mainly prairie junegrass, western wheatgrass, bluebunch wheatgrass, mountain big sagebrush, and Saskatoon serviceberry. Other plants that characterize this site are Indian ricegrass, mountainmahogany, and Douglas rabbitbrush. The average annual production of air-dry vegetation is about 900 pounds per acre. If the range condition deteriorates, mountain big sagebrush, rabbitbrush, and annual weeds increase in abundance. These plants are dominant when the range is in poor condition; therefore, livestock grazing should be managed so that the desired balance of the preferred species is maintained. The suitability of this unit for range seeding is poor. The main limitation is the slope. Grazing should be delayed until the soil is firm and the more desirable forage plants have achieved sufficient growth to withstand grazing pressure. The slope limits access by livestock. The limited accessibility results in overgrazing of the less sloping areas. Livestock grazing should be managed to protect the unit from excessive erosion. This map unit is in capability subclass Vie, nonirrigated. It is in the Loamy Slopes range site. 3—Acree loam, 3 to 6 percent slopes. This deep, well drained soil is on alluvial fans and valley side slopes. It formed in alluvium and residuum derived dominantly from redbed sandstone and shale. Elevation is 6,500 to 8,200 feet. The average annual precipitation is 16 to 18 inches, the average annual air temperature is 38 to 42 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 95 to 105 days. Typically, the surface layer is dark grayish brown loam about 10 inches thick. The upper 4 inches of the subsoil is clay loam. The lower 13 inches is clay. The next layer is clay loam about 7 inches thick. The Aspen -Gypsum Area, Colorado 17 substratum to a depth of 60 inches or more is clay loam. The soil is noncalcareous to a depth of 27 inches and calcareous below that depth. Included in this unit are small areas of Showalter and Morval soils. Included areas make up about 10 percent of the total acreage. Permeability is slow in the Acree soil. Available water capacity is high. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. This unit is used mainly for irrigated crops or as hayland. It also is used for pasture or homesite development. The potential plant community on this unit is mainly Letterman needlegrass, Idaho fescue, western wheatgrass, mountain big sagebrush, and Saskatoon serviceberry. Other plants that characterize this site are slender wheatgrass, lanceleaf rabbitbrush, elk sedge, and scattered Gambel oak. The average annual production of air-dry vegetation is about 1,500 pounds per acre. If the range condition deteriorates, mountain big sagebrush, lanceleaf rabbitbrush, Kentucky bluegrass, and annual weeds increase in abundance. If the quality of range vegetation has seriously deteriorated, seeding is needed. The suitability of this unit for range seeding is good. This unit is well suited to irrigated crops. Corrugation irrigation is suited to this unit. If furrow or corrugation irrigation systems are used, runs should be on the contour or across the slope. Because of the slow permeability in the subsoil, the application of water should be regulated so that water does not stand on the surface and damage the crops. The content of organic matter can be maintained by using all crop residue, plowing under cover crops, and using a suitable rotation Crops respond to applications of nitrogen and losphcrus fertilizer. If properly managed, the unit can —uce 90 bushels of barley per acre annually. pis unit is well suited to hay and pasture. A seedbed should be prepared on the contour or across the slope where practical. Proper stocking rates, pasture rotation, and restricted grazing during wet periods help to keep the pasture in good condition and protect the soil from erosion. Fertilizer is needed to ensure the optimum growth of grasses and legumes. If properly managed, the unit can produce 4 tons of irrigated grass hay per acre annually. This unit is poorly suited to homesite development. The main limitations are a high shrink -swell potential, low strength, and the slow permeability. Structures, sanitary facilities, roads, and landscaping should be designed and planned to reflect these limitations. Population growth has resulted in increased construction of homes in areas of this soil. This map unit is in capability subclass IVe, irrigated and nonirrigated. It is in the Mountain Loam range site. 4—Acree loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes. This deep, well drained soil is on alluvial fans and valley side slopes. It formed in alluvium and residuum derived dominantly from redbed sandstone and shale. Elevation is 6,500 to 8,200 feet. The average annual precipitation is 16 to 18 inches, the average annual air temperature is 38 to 42 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 95 to 105 days. Typically, the surface layer is dark grayish brown loam about 10 inches thick. The upper 4 inches of the subsoil is clay loam. The lower 13 inches is clay. The next layer is clay loam about 7 inches thick. The substratum to a depth of 60 inches or more is clay loam. The soil is noncalcareous to a depth of 27 inches and calcareous below that depth. Included in this unit are small areas of Showalter and Morval soils. Included areas make up about 10 percent of the total acreage. Permeability is slow in the Acree soil. Available water capacity is high. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. This unit is used mainly for irrigated hay or pasture. It also is used as rangeland, for a limited number of irrigated crops, or for homesite development. The potential plant community on this unit is mainly Letterman needlegrass, Idaho fescue, western wheatgrass, mountain big sagebrush, and Saskatoon serviceberry. Other plants that characterize this site are slender wheatgrass, lanceleaf rabbitbrush, elk sedge, and scattered Gambel oak. The average annual production of air-dry vegetation is about 1,500 pounds per acre. If the range condition deteriorates, mountain big sagebrush, lanceleaf rabbitbrush, Kentucky bluegrass, and annual weeds increase in abundance. If the quality of range vegetation has seriously deteriorated, seeding is needed. The suitability of this unit for range seeding is good. This unit is well suited to hay and pasture. A seedbed should be prepared on the contour or across the slope where practical. All adapted pasture plants can be grown, but bunch -type species planted alone generally are not suitable because of the hazard of erosion. Proper stocking rates, pasture rotation, and restricted grazing during wet periods help to keep the pasture in good condition and protect the soil from erosion. Fertilizer is needed to ensure the optimum growth of grasses and legumes. If properly managed, the unit can produce 4 tons of irrigated grass hay per acre annually. This unit is suited to irrigated crops. It is limited 18 ainly by the slope. Corrugation irrigation is suited to this unit. If furrow or corrugation irrigation systems are used, runs should be on the contour or across the slope. Because of the slow permeability in the subsoil, the application of water should be regulated so that water does not stand on the surface and damage the crops. The content of organic matter can be maintained by using all crop residue, plowing under cover crops, and using a suitable rotation. Crops respond to applications of nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizer. If properly managed, the unit can produce 80 bushels of barley per acre annually. This unit is poorly suited to homesite development. The main limitations are the shrink -swell potential, low strength, and the slow permeability. Structures, sanitary facilities, roads, and landscaping should be designed and planned to reflect these limitations. Population growth has resulted in increased construction of homes on this soil. This map unit is in capability subclass IVe, irrigated and nonirrigated. It is in the Mountain Loam range site. 5—Acree loam, 12 to 25 percent slopes. This deep, well drained soil is on alluvial fans and valley side slopes. It formed in alluvium and residuum derived dominantly from redbed sandstone and shale. Elevation • is 6,500 to 8,200 feet. The average annual precipitation is 16 to 18 inches, the average annual air temperature is 38 to 42 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 95 -to 105 days. Typically, the surface layer is dark grayish brown loam about 10 inches thick. The upper 4 inches of the subsoil is clay loam. The lower 13 inches is clay. The next layer is clay loam about 7 inches thick. The substratum to a depth of 60 inches or more is clay loam. The soil is noncalcareous to a depth of 27 inches and calcareous below that depth. Included in this unit are small areas of Showalter and Morval soils. Also included are small areas of soils that are similar to the Acree soil but are coarser textured. Included areas make up about 15 percent of the total acreage. Permeability is slow in the Acree soil. Available water capacity is high. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. This unit is used mainly as rangeland. It also is used as wildlife habitat. The potential plant community on this unit is mainly Letterman needlegrass, Idaho fescue, western •wheatgrass, mountain big sagebrush, and Saskatoon serviceberry. Other plants that characterize this site are slender wheatgrass, lanceleaf rabbitbrush, elk sedge, Soil Survey and Gambel oak. The average annual production of air- dry vegetation is about 1,500 pounds per acre. If the range condition deteriorates, mountain big sagebrush, lanceleaf rabbitbrush, Kentucky bluegrass, and annual weeds increase in abundance. The suitability of this unit for range seeding is fair. The main limitation is the slope. This unit is poorly suited to homesite development. The main limitations are the slope and the shrink -swell potential. This map unit is in capability subclass Vle, nonirrigated. It is in the Mountain Loam range site. 6—Almy loam, 1 to 12 percent slopes. This deep, well drained soil is on fans and uplands. It formed in alluvium derived dominantly from calcareous redbed sandstone and shale. Elevation is 6,000 to 7,800 feet. The average annual precipitation is 12 to 14 inches, the average annual air temperature is 42 to 46 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 85 to 105 days. Typically, the surface layer is reddish brown loam about 8 inches thick. The upper 3 inches of the subsoil is fine sandy loam. The lower 15 inches is sandy clay loam. The substratum to a depth of 60 inches or more is fine sandy loam. The soil is noncalcareous to a depth of 11 inches and calcareous below that depth. Included in this unit are small areas of Empedrado soils. included areas make up about 20 percent of the total acreage. Permeability is moderate in the Almy soil. Available water capacity is high. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. This unit is used as rangeland or hayland. The potential plant community is mainly bluebunch wheatgrass, Indian ricegrass, bottlebrush squirreltail, Douglas rabbitbrush, and Wyoming big sagebrush. Prairie junegrass, needleandthread, and Sandberg bluegrass also are included. The average annual production of air-dry vegetation is about 950 pounds per acre. If the range condition deteriorates, Wyoming big sagebrush, Douglas rabbitbrush, cheatgrass, and annual weeds increase in abundance. The suitability of this unit for range seeding is good. Loss of the surface layer severely reduces the ability of the unit to produce plants suitable for grazing. This unit is well suited to hay and pasture. It has few limitations. Grasses and legumes grow well if adequate fertilizer is used. If properly managed, the unit can produce 5 tons of irrigated grass hay per acre annually. This unit is well suited to homesite development. This map unit is in capability subclass IVe, irrigated and nonirrigated. It is in the Rolling Loam range site. Aspen -Gypsum Area, Colorado 31 Included in this unit are small areas of Yamo and Forelle soils. Also included are small areas of sandstone Rock outcrop. Included areas make up about 10 percent of the total acreage. The Dahlquist soil is deep and well drained. It formed in alluvium derived from material of mixed mineralogy. Typically, the surface layer is brown cobbly sandy loam about 6 inches thick. The upper 7 inches of the subsoil is very cobbly sandy clay loam. The lower 10 inches is very cobbly sandy loam. The substratum to a depth of 60 inches is extremely cobbly sandy loam. The soil is noncalcareous to a depth of 13 inches and calcareous below that depth. Permeability is moderate in the Dahlquist soil. Available water capacity is low. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. The Southace soil is deep and well drained. It formed in alluvium derived dominantly from mixed mineralogy. Typically, the surface layer is brown very stony sandy loam about 3 inches thick. The upper 7 inches of the substratum is very stony sandy loam. The next 12 inches is extremely stony sandy loam. The lower part to a depth of 60 inches is extremely stony loamy coarse sand. Permeability is moderately rapid in the Southace soil. Available water capacity is low. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of water erosion is slight. This unit is used mainly as rangeland or for pasture. It also is used for limited homesite development or wildlife browse areas. Both of the major soils are local sources of gravel and crushed rock and are utilized as such in quarry operations. The potential plant community on the Dahlquist soil is mainly western wheatgrass, bluebunch wheatgrass, crairie junegrass, true mountainmahogany, and big sagebrush. Other plants that characterize this site are nteiope bitterbrush, Utah serviceberry, Indian ricegrass, and Douglas rabbitbrush. The average annual production of air-dry vegetation is about 900 pounds per acre. If the range condition deteriorates, big sagebrush, Douglas rabbitbrush, and cheatgrass increase in abundance. The potential plant community on the Southace soil is mainly bluebunch wheatgrass, western wheatgrass, Indian ricegrass, big sagebrush, and Utah serviceberry. Other plants that characterize this site are bottlebrush squirreltail, fringed sagebrush, scattered pinyon pine, and Utah juniper. The average annual production of air- dry vegetation is about 600 pounds per acre. If the range condition deteriorates, big sagebrush, fringed sagebrush, cheatgrass, and broom snakeweed increase in abundance. The suitability of this unit for range seeding is poor. • The main limitation is the stoniness. Suitable management practices include proper range use, deferred grazing, and rotation grazing. Aerial spraying is suitable for brush management. Because of the hazard of seepage, this unit is limited as a site for livestock watering ponds and other water impoundments. If this unit is used for hay and pasture, the main limitations are the low available water capacity and the stones on the surface. Frequent irrigation is needed. Applications of nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizer improve the growth of forage plants. Rotation grazing helps to maintain the quality of forage. Irrigation water can be applied by sprinkler and flooding methods. If this unit is used for homesite development, the main limitations are the high content of cobbles and stones and the slope in the steeper areas. Population growth has resulted in increased construction of homes in areas of this unit. The gravel and cobbles in disturbed areas should be removed if the site is landscaped, particularly in areas used for lawns. The effluent from septic tank absorption fields can surface in downslope areas and thus create a health hazard. If the density of housing is moderate or high, community sewage systems are needed to prevent the contamination of water supplies resulting from seepage. • This map unit is in capability subclass Vle, irrigated and nonirrigated. The Dahlquist soil is in the Loamy Slopes range site, and the Southace soil is in the Stony Foothills range site. 27—Dahlquist-Southace complex, 12 to 25 percent slopes. This map unit is on alluvial fans, terraces, and terrace side slopes. Elevation is 6,200 to 7,400 feet. The average annual precipitation is 12 to 16 inches, the average annual air temperature is 42 to 46 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 105 to 115 days. This unit is about 45 percent Dahlquist soil and 40 percent Southace soil. Included in this unit are small areas of Yamo and Forelle soils and Gypsiorthids. Also included are small areas of sandstone Rock outcrop. Included areas make up about 15 percent of the total acreage. The Dahlquist soil is deep and well drained. It formed in alluvium derived from material of mixed mineralogy. Typically, the surface layer is brown cobbly sandy loam about 6 inches thick. The upper 7 inches of the subsoil is very cobbiy sandy clay loam. The lower 10 inches is very cobbly sandy loam. The substratum to a depth of 60 inches is extremely cobbly sandy loam. The soil is noncalcareous to a depth of 13 inches and calcareous below that depth. Permeability is moderate in the Dahlquist soil. Available water capacity is low. The effective rooting • 32 Soil Survey • depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. The Southace soil is deep and well drained. It formed in alluvium derived dominantly from mixed mineralogy. Typically, the surface layer is brown very stony sandy loam about 3 inches thick. The upper 7 inches of the substratum is very stony sandy loam. The next 12 inches is extremely stony sandy loam. The lower part to a depth of 60 inches is extremely stony loamy coarse sand. The soil is calcareous throughout. Permeability is moderately rapid in the Southace soil. Available water capacity is low. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. This unit is used mainly as rangeland. It also is used as wildlife habitat. Both of the major soils are local sources of gravel and crushed rock and are utilized as such in quarry operations. The potential plant community on the Dahlquist soil is mainly western wheatgrass, bluebunch wheatgrass, prairie junegrass, true mountainmahogany, and big sagebrush. Other plants that characterize this site are antelope bitterbrush, Utah serviceberry, Indian ricegrass, and Douglas rabbitbrush. The average annual production of air-dry vegetation is about 900 • pounds per acre. If the range condition deteriorates, big sagebrush, Douglas rabbitbrush, and cheatgrass increase in abundance. The potential plant community on the Southace soil is mainly bluebunch wheatgrass, western wheatgrass, Indian ricegrass, big sagebrush, and Utah serviceberry. Other plants that characterize this site are bottlebrush squirreltail, fringed sagebrush, scattered pinyon pine, and Utah juniper. The average annual production of air- dry vegetation is about 600 pounds per acre. If the range condition deteriorates, big sagebrush, fringed sagebrush, cheatgrass, and broom snakeweed increase in abundance. The suitability of this unit for range seeding is poor. Mechanical treatment is not practical because of the stones on the surface and the slope. Suitable management practices include proper range use, deferred grazing, and rotation grazing. Aerial spraying is suitable for brush management. Because of the hazard of seepage, this unit is limited as a site for livestock watering ponds and other water impoundments. If this unit is used for homesite development, the main limitations are the slope and the large stones. The gravel and cobbles in disturbed areas should be removed if the site is landscaped, particularly in areas loused for lawns. The slope is a management concern if septic tank absorption fields are installed. Absorption lines should be installed on the contour. This map unit is in capability subclass Vle, nonirrigated. The Dahlquist soil is in the Loamy Slopes range site, and the Southace soil is in the Stony Foothills range site. 28—Dahlquist-Southace complex; 25 to 50 percent slopes. This map unit is on alluvial fans, terraces, and terrace side slopes. Elevation is 6,200 to 7,400 feet. The average annual precipitation is 12 to 16 inches, the average annual air temperature is 42 to 46 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 105 to 115 days. This unit is about 40 percent Dahlquist soil and 35 percent Southace soil. Included in this unit are small areas of Yamo soils and Gypsiorthids. Also included are small areas of sandstone Rock outcrop. Included areas make up about 25 percent of the total acreage. The Dahlquist soil is deep and well drained. It formed in alluvium derived from material of mixed mineralogy. Typically, the surface layer is brown cobbly sandy loam about 6 inches thick. The upper 7 inches of the subsoil is very cobbly sandy clay loam. The lower 10 inches is very cobbly sandy loam. The substratum to a depth of 60 inches is calcareous extremely cobbly sandy loam. The soil is noncalcareous to a depth of 24 inches and calcareous below that depth. Permeability is moderate in the Dahlquist soil. Available water capacity is low. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. The Southace soil is deep and well drained. It formed in alluvium. Typically, the surface layer is brown very stony sandy loam about 3 inches thick. The upper 7 inches of the substratum is very stony sandy loam. The next 12 inches is extremely stony sandy loam. The lower part to a depth of 60 inches is extremely stony loamy coarse sand. The soil is calcareous throughout. Permeability is moderately rapid in the Southace soil. Available water capacity is low. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate or severe on the steeper slopes. This unit is used mainly as rangeland. It also is used as wildlife habitat. Both of the major soils are local sources of gravel and crushed rock and are utilized as such in quarry operations. The potential plant community on the Dahlquist soil is mainly western wheatgrass, bluebunch wheatgrass, prairie junegrass, true mountainmahogany, and big sagebrush. Other plants that characterize this site are antelope bitterbrush, Utah serviceberry, Indian ricegrass, and Douglas rabbitbrush. The average annual production of air-dry vegetation is about 900 Aspen -Gypsum Area, Colorado 33 pounds per acre. If the range condition deteriorates, big sagebrush, Douglas rabbitbrush, and cheatgrass increase in abundance. The potential plant community on the Southace soil is mainly bluebunch wheatgrass, western wheatgrass, Indian ricegrass, big sagebrush, and Utah serviceberry. Other plants that characterize this site are bottlebrush squirreltail, fringed sagebrush, scattered pinyon pine, and Utah juniper. The 'average annual production of air- dry vegetation is about 600 pounds per acre. If the range condition deteriorates, big sagebrush, fringed sagebrush, cheatgrass, and broom snakeweed increase in abundance. The suitability of this unit for range seeding is poor. Mechanical treatment is not practical because of the stones on the surface and the slope. The slope limits access by livestock. The limited accessibility results in overgrazing of the Tess sloping areas. Suitable management practices include proper range use, deferred grazing, and rotation grazing. Aerial spraying is suitable for brush management. Because of the hazard of seepage, this unit is limited as a site for livestock watering ponds and other water impoundments. This unit is poorly suited to homesite development. The main limitation is the slope. This map unit is in capability subclass Vile, nonirrigated. The Dahlquist soil is in the Loamy Slopes range site, and the Southace soil is in the Stony Foothills range site. 29—Dollard-Rock outcrop, shale complex, 12 to 25 percent slopes. This map unit is on ridges and mountainsides. Elevation is 6,800 to 8,500 feet. The average annual precipitation is 15 to 18 inches, the average annual air temperature is 42 to 44 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 80 to 90 days. This unit is about 45 percent Dollard soil and 45 -Percent shale Rock outcrop. Included in this unit are small areas of Pinelli soils on the slightly concave parts of the landscape. Included areas make up about 10 percent of the total acreage. The Dollard soil is moderately deep and well drained. It formed in residuum derived dominantly from Mancos shale. Typically, the surface layer is grayish brown clay loam about 4 inches thick. The substratum is clay loam about 29 inches thick. It is underlain by weathered Mancos shale. The depth to weathered parent material ranges from 20 to 40 inches. The soil is calcareous throughout. Permeability is slow in the Dollard soil. Available water capacity is low. The effective rooting depth is 20 to 40 inches. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of water erosion is slight or moderate on the steeper slopes. The Rock outcrop consists of slightly weathered, consolidated exposures of Mancos shale. This unit is used as rangeland or as wildlife habitat. The potential plant community is mainly bluebunch wheatgrass, Indian ricegrass, western wheatgrass, Saskatoon serviceberry, and mountain big sagebrush. Other plants that characterize this site are big bluegrass, bottlebrush squirreltail, mountain snowberry, lanceleaf rabbitbrush, and scattered Gambel oak. The average annual production of air-dry vegetation is about 400 pounds per acre. If the range condition deteriorates, mountain big sagebrush, cheatgrass, mustard, and other annual weeds increase in abundance. The suitability of this unit for range seeding is poor. The main limitations are the bedrock exposures and the slope. This unit is severely limited as a site for all urban uses. Because of a high shrink -swell potential, the slow permeability, the depth to bedrock, the exposed bedrock, the hazard of erosion, and low strength, the unit should not be used for homesite development. The Dollard soil also is very highly susceptible to slumping and creeping as a result of an excessive load, overirrigation, or natural processes. This map unit is in capability subclass Vle, nonirrigated. It is in the Mountain Shale range site. 30—Dollard-Rock outcrop, shale complex, 25 to 65 percent slopes. This map unit is on ridges, mountainsides, and valley sides. Elevation is 6,800 to 8,500 feet. The average annual precipitation is 15 to 18 inches, the average annual air temperature is 42 to 44 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 80 to 90 days. This unit is about 45 percent Dollard soil and 45 percent shale Rock outcrop. Included in this unit are small areas of Pinelli soils on the slightly concave parts of the landscape. Included areas make up about 10 percent of the total acreage. The Dollard soil is moderately deep and well drained. It formed in residuum derived dominantly from Mancos shale. Typically, the surface layer is grayish brown clay loam about 4 inches thick. The substratum is clay loam about 29 inches thick. It is underlain by weathered Mancos shale. The depth to weathered parent material ranges from 20 to 40 inches. The soil is calcareous throughout. Permeability is slow in the Dollard soil. Available water capacity is low. The effective rooting depth is 20 to 40 inches. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of water erosion is severe. The Rock outcrop consists of slightly weathered, consolidated exposures of Mancos shale. This unit is used as rangeland or as wildlife habitat. 34 Soil Survey ,The potential plant community is mainly bluebunch wheatgrass, Indian ricegrass, western wheatgrass, Saskatoon serviceberry, and mountain big sagebrush. Other plants that characterize this site are big bluegrass, bottlebrush squirreltail, mountain snowberry, lanceleaf rabbitbrush, and scattered Gambel oak. The average annual production of air-dry vegetation is about 400 pounds per acre. If the range condition deteriorates, mountain big sagebrush, cheatgrass, mustard, and other annual weeds increase in abundance. The suitability of this unit for range seeding is poor. The main limitations are the bedrock exposures and the slope. This unit is severely limited as a site for all urban uses. Because of a high shrink -swell potential, the slow permeability, the depth to bedrock, the exposed bedrock, the hazard of erosion, and low strength, the unit should not be used for homesite development. The Dollard soil also is very highly susceptible to slumping and creeping as a result of an excessive load, overirrigation, or natural processes. This map unit is in capability subclass Vile, nonirrigated. It is in the Mountain Shale range site. 31—Dotsero gravelly sandy loam, 5 to 25 percent •slopes. This deep, well drained soil is on mountains, terraces, side slopes, and benches. It formed in pumice, tuff, and basalt. Elevation is 7,200 to 7,800 feet. The average annual precipitation is 11 to 16 inches, the average annual air temperature is 40 to 44 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 85 to 95 days. Typically, the upper part of the surface layer is very dark grayish brown gravelly sandy loam about 7 inches thick. The lower part is dark grayish brown gravelly sandy loam about 24 inches thick. The upper 10 inches of the substratum is gravelly sandy loam. The lower part to a depth of 60 inches is fine sandy loam. The depth to carbonates ranges from 20 to 40 inches. Included in this unit are small areas of Evanston and Forelle soils. Included areas make up about 10 percent of the total acreage. Permeability is moderately rapid in the Dotsero soil. Available water capacity is moderate. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. This unit is used for livestock grazing or as wildlife habitat. The potential plant community is mainly bluebunch wheatgrass, needleandthread, western wheatgrass, prairie junegrass, mountain big sagebrush, and Douglas rabbitbrush. Other plants that characterize this site are muttongrass, smooth horsebrush, and Saskatoon serviceberry. The average annual production of air-dry vegetation is about 1,500 pounds per acre. If the range condition deteriorates, mountain big sagebrush, Douglas rabbitbrush, cheatgrass, and annual weeds increase in abundance. Range seeding may be needed if the range is in poor condition. For successful seeding, a seedbed should be prepared and the seed drilled. Brush management improves deteriorated areas of range that are producing more woody shrubs than were present in the potential plant community. Suitable management practices include proper range use, deferred grazing, and rotation grazing. Aerial spraying is suitable for brush management. The slope limits access by livestock. The limited accessibility results in overgrazing of the less sloping areas. If this unit is used for homesite development, the main limitation is the slope. This map unit is in capability subclass Vle, nonirrigated. It is in the Deep Loam range site. 32—Dotsero sandy loam, 1 to 12 percent slopes. This deep, well drained soil is on terraces, side slopes, and benches. It formed in mixed alluvium derived dominantly from redbed sandstone and shale. The alluvium has a mantle of volcanic material. Elevation is 6,300 to 7,200 feet. The average annual precipitation is 11 to 16 inches, the average annual air temperature is 40 to 44 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 85 to 105 days. Typically, the upper part of the surface layer is very dark grayish brown sandy loam about 7 inches thick. The lower part is dark grayish brown gravelly sandy loam about 24 inches thick. The upper 10 inches of the substratum is gravelly sandy loam. The lower part to a depth of 60 inches is fine sandy loam. The soil is neutral and noncalcareous to a depth of 21 inches and moderately alkaline and calcareous below that depth. Included in this unit are small areas of Forelle and Evanston soils. Included areas make up about 15 percent of the total acreage. Permeability is moderately rapid in the Dotsero soil. Available water capacity is moderate. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. This unit is used mainly for irrigated crops or as hayland. It also is used for livestock grazing. The potential plant community on this unit is mainly bluebunch wheatgrass, needleandthread, western wheatgrass, prairie junegrass, mountain big sagebrush, and Douglas rabbitbrush. Other plants that characterize this site are muttongrass, smooth horsebrush, and Saskatoon serviceberry. The average annual production of air-dry vegetation is about 1,500 pounds per acre. If Aspen -Gypsum Area, Colorado 35 the range condition deteriorates, mountain big sagebrush, Douglas rabbitbrush, cheatgrass, and annual weeds increase in abundance. This unit responds well to applications of fertilizer, to range seeding, and to proper grazing use. Areas that are heavily infested with undesirable plants can be improved by chemical or mechanical treatment. This unit is well suited to hay and pasture. A seedbed should be prepared on the contour or across the slope where practical. For successful seeding, a seedbed should be prepared and the seed drilled. Applications of nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizer improve the growth of forage plants. Proper stocking rates, pasture rotation, and restricted grazing during wet periods help to keep the pasture in good condition and protect the soil from erosion. Furrow, border, corrugation, and sprinkler irrigation systems are suited to this soil. Pipe, ditch lining, or drop structures in irrigation ditches facilitate irrigation and reduce the hazard of ditch erosion. This unit is well suited to irrigated crops. If properly managed, it can produce 80 bushels of barley per acre annually. This unit is well suited to homesite development. This map unit is in capability subclass IVe, irrigated and nonirrigated. It is in the Deep Loam range site. 33—Earsman-Rock outcrop complex, 12 to 65 percent slopes. This map unit is on mountainsides and ridges. Elevation is 6,000 to 8,500 feet. The average annual precipitation is 14 to 16 inches, the average annual air temperature is 42 to 44 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 80 to 105 days. This unit is about 45 percent Earsman very stony sandy loam and 35 percent Rock outcrop. The Earsman soil is on the less steep slopes, and the areas of Rock outcrop are in the steeper convex areas throughout the unit. Included in this unit are small areas of Arle and Ansari soils and soils that are similar to the Earsman soil but are deeper over bedrock. Included areas make up about 20 percent of the total acreage. The Earsman soil is shallow and somewhat excessively drained. It formed in residuum and colluvium derived dominantly from calcareous redbed sandstone. About 5 to 10 percent of the surface is covered with flagstones, and 5 to 15 percent is covered with channery fragments. A thin layer of partially decomposed needles, twigs, and leaves is on the surface in many places. Typically, the surface layer is reddish brown very stony sandy loam about 5 inches thick. The substratum to a depth of 19 inches is very channery sandy loam. The depth to hard, calcareous sandstone ranges from 10 to 20 inches. Permeability is moderately rapid in the Earsman soil. Available water capacity is very low. The effective rooting depth is 10 to 20 inches. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of water erosion is slight to severe on the steeper slopes. This unit is used mainly as rangeland or as wildlife habitat. It also is used as a source of firewood and posts. The potential plant community on this unit is mainly pinyon pine, Utah juniper, bluebunch wheatgrass, bottlebrush squirreltail, Indian ricegrass, and western wheatgrass. The potential production of the native understory vegetation in normal years is about 500 pounds of air-dry vegetation per acre. The slope limits access by livestock. The limited accessibility results in overgrazing of the less sloping areas. If the plant cover is disturbed, protection from flooding is needed to control gullying, streambank cutting, and sheet erosion. This unit is suited to limited production of firewood. The average annual production is 5 cords per acre. The average stocking rate is 100 trees per acre. Special care is needed to minimize erosion when the stands are thinned and when other forest management practices are applied. This unit is severely limited as a site for homesite development. Limitations include the shallow depth to bedrock, the exposed bedrock, the slope, the rapid runoff rate, and the very high hazard of water erosion. This map unit is in capability subclass Vile, nonirrigated. It is in the Pinyon -Juniper woodland site. 34—Empedrado loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes. This deep, well drained soil is on fans and upland hills. It formed in alluvium and eolian material. Elevation is 6,500 to 9,000 feet. The average annual precipitation is 15 to 18 inches, the average annual air temperature is 40 to 44 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 75 to 95 days. Typically, the surface layer is brown loam about 5 inches thick. The subsoil is clay loam about 35 inches thick. The substratum to a depth of 60 inches or more is clay loam. The soil is noncalcareous to a depth of 38 inches and calcareous below that depth. Included in this unit are small areas of soils that are similar to the Empedrado soil but have a darker, thicker surface layer. Also included are small areas of soils that are similar to the Empedrado soil but are silt loam or silty clay loam. Included areas make up about 20 percent of the total acreage. Permeability is moderate in the Empedrado soil. Available water capacity is high. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of water erosion is slight. 36 Soil Survey QThis unit is used as hayland or for crops. It is well uited to hay and pasture. Grasses and legumes grow well if adequate fertilizer is used. If properly managed, the unit can produce 5 tons of irrigated grass hay per acre annually. The potential plant community on this unit is mainly western wheatgrass, needleandthread, prairie junegrass, mountain big sagebrush, and Douglas rabbitbrush. Other plants that characterize this site are muttongrass, Letterman needlegrass, common snowberry, Utah serviceberry, and antelope bitterbrush. The average annual production of air-dry vegetation is about 1,500 pounds per acre. If the range condition deteriorates, mountain big sagebrush, Kentucky bluegrass, Douglas rabbitbrush, and annual weeds increase in abundance. This unit is well suited to alfalfa and small grain crops. It has few limitations. Maintaining crop residue on or near the surface helps to control runoff and soil blowing and helps to maintain tilth and the content of organic matter. If properly managed, the unit can produce 90 bushels of barley per acre annually. This unit is suited to homesite development. The main limitations are the shrink -swell potential and the moderate permeability. The shrink -swell potential can Obe minimized by thoroughly prewetting foundation areas. The moderate permeability can be overcome by increasing the size of the absorption field. This map unit is in capability subclass IVe, irrigated and nonirrigated. It is in the Deep Loam range site. 35—Empedrado loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes. This deep, well drained soil is on fans and upland hills. It formed in alluvium and eolian material. Elevation is 6,500 to 9,000 feet. The average annual precipitation is about 15 to 18 inches, the average annual air temperature is 40 to 44 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 75 to 95 days. Typically, the surface layer is brown loam about 5 inches thick. The subsoil is clay loam about 35 inches thick. The substratum to a depth of 60 inches is clay loam. The soil is noncalcareous to a depth of 38 inches and calcareous below that depth. Included in this unit are small areas of soils that are similar to the Empedrado soil but have a darker, thicker surface layer. Also included are small areas of soils that are similar to the Empedrado soil but are silt loam or silty clay loam throughout. Included areas make up about 20 percent of the total acreage. Permeability is moderate in the Empedrado soil. Available water capacity is high. The effective rooting ipdepth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. This unit is used as hayland or for crops. It is well suited to hay and pasture. Grasses and legumes grow well if adequate fertilizer is used. If properly managed, the unit can produce 4 tons of irrigated grass hay per acre annually. This unit is well suited to alfalfa and small grain crops. It is limited mainly by the slope in some areas. Limiting tillage during seedbed preparation and controlling weeds help to control runoff and erosion. All tillage should be. on the contour or across the slope. If properly managed, the unit can produce 75 bushels of barley per acre annually. The potential plant community on this unit is mainly western wheatgrass, needleandthread, prairie junegrass, mountain big sagebrush, and Douglas rabbitbrush. Other plants that characterize this site are muttongrass, Letterman needlegrass, common snowberry, Utah serviceberry, and antelope bitterbrush. The average annual production of air-dry vegetation is about 1,500 pounds per acre. If the range condition deteriorates, mountain big sagebrush, Kentucky bluegrass, Douglas rabbitbrush, and annual weeds increase in abundance. These plants are dominant when the range is in poor condition; therefore, livestock grazing should be managed so that the desired balance of the preferred species is maintained. This unit is suited to homesite development. The main limitations are the shrink -swell potential and the slope. The shrink -swell potential can be minimized by prewetting foundation areas. The slope is a management concern if septic tank absorption fields are installed. Absorption lines should be installed on the contour. This map unit is in capability subclass IVe, irrigated and nonirrigated. It is in the Deep Loam range site. 36—Empedrado loam, 12 to 25 percent slopes. This deep, well drained soil is on fans and upland hills. It formed in alluvium and eolian material. Elevation is 6,500 to 9,000 feet. The average annual precipitation is 15 to 18 inches, the average annual air temperature is 40 to 44 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 75 to 95 days. Typically, the surface layer is brown loam about 5 inches thick. The subsoil is clay loam about 35 inches thick. The substratum to a depth of 60 inches or more is clay loam. The soil is noncalcareous to a depth of 38 inches and calcareous below that depth. Included in this unit are small areas of soils that are similar to the Empedrado soil but are silt loam or silty clay loam. Also included are small areas of soils that are similar to the Empedrado soil but have a darker, thicker surface layer. Included areas make up about 15 percent of the total acreage. Permeability is moderate in the Empedrado soil._ • APPENDIX H - UTILITY INTENT TO SERVE LETTERS • • • Qweat Communications 9750 East Costilln Eng1rwood, CO 80112 Workman,Amy L Tracking tt 3583 Will Serve Wednesday, October 13, 2004 1:10:26 PM SUBJECT Telephone facilities to planned / ptr.=fm,acd development. Attn: PEACH VALLEY VISTaA 5' iM1#04,,t07All ^c;t t"�'' 1l!'r•il' `f i�;i';;'' 'e', ii'' (KFi 1.Y I. M1CHALL LYON 1nl+ L' 1 4' '� .t PO BOX 110 1800 MEDICINE BOW C'1', SILT 81652 t*thOti3t;007,77.7t,ri,,oll""1.',..,7,!,!!',;!‘,.;iii!q; ,,,1:•1;4,,::,, 11.0 970 876 5944 •VK'. �4,�YS�1,4.(• nri\' P". I, k,\..;.ti^•:N�,�.�11 `�Pf�ie);;;��c:�+h;;i�1a)•nary,�t:�<Pir�M:�!�����t'�.c.,�`�'•.�.E t1r:j�,;;i�i� ,,P; :.,j,w�_. (Awes: will hrnvidc service to your planned / proposed development: 0 IPEACIi VALLEY VISTAS ' 1J.'�6%, :yi�(T'':"v'''K�v4I,7lp:b1i„,n;4d11if_"��1111=7 1 6S 92W 6TN• GARFIEI ,y) • freSf0 b!4q ,,ffA tip};17.#:0141W K;:i •• i.;.1.1 1'IT �11i� '''W,D ^ rya .,1 sjl yr 1.:i477:. Provisioning the servir,(: will be in accordance with tariffs on file at the Culur<,iln Public Utilities Commissi._w 1 will need a fin& plat with measurements, easernenis, sidchesscs; your phasing plan, and a trend, titan before 1 can have this engineered, If rhe.re arr :my further questions, or if I can provide auy assistance, please contact me. Workman,Amy L (303) 792-6338 (LDA Coordincnr) Sincerely • ** TOTAL PPGE.02 ** "0, Xcel Energy- , • PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY 2538BIichmannAvenue Grand Junction, Colorado 81505 October 25, 2004 Britt Kelly Gamba & Associates, Inc. P O Box 1458 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 Dear Mr. Kelly, The area of County Rd. 235 (Peach Valley Vistas Subdivision) in Silt is in Public Service Co of Colorado's service territory and will be served by Public Service Co in accordance with the Rules and Regulations on file with the Colorado Public Utilities • Commission at the time of application. I have enclosed an application for gas and electric service. If I can be of further assistance, please contact me at 970-244-2695 or 970-244-2661 FAX. Sincerely, T I on c c oo er Planner, Western Division • RECEW D QCT 2 6 2G]4 • Tillmon McSchooler 7-0 r�4ru� SERVICE > OM=ANY 9g COL.OP,RDC' A NEW CENTURY ENERGIES COMPANY • 2538 Blichmann Ave. Grand Junction, CO 81505 E -Mail address - tillmon.mcschooler@xcelenergy.com (970) 244-2695 / FAX (970) 244-2661 Rifle Fax (970) 625-6030 APPLICATION FOR NEW GAS / ELECTRIC SERVICE DATE OF APPLICATION I hereby request gas and / or electric service for the site listed below. I understand the following information is required to process my request: APPLICANT'S NAME (IF BUSINESS) PRIMARY CONTACT TITLE SERVICE ADDRESS SUBDIVISION BLOCK LOT CITY ZIP FILING MAILING ADDRESS CITY HOME PHONE # WORK PHONE # FAX # PLACE OF EMPLOYMENT ZIP SOCIAL SECURITY # OR TAX ID # SPOUSE INFORMATION: NAME EMPLOYER SOCIAL SECURITY # WORK PHONE # HAVE YOU HAD SERVICE WITH OUR COMPANY PREVIOUSLY? IF SO, WHERE? CONTACT INFORMATION: GENERAL CONTRACTOR PHONE # ELECTRICIAN PHONE # PLUMBER PHONE # WILL YOU BE NEEDING A TEMPORARY / CONSTRUCTION METER? (UNDERGROUND TEMPORARY POWER FEE - $172 / OVERHEAD FEE - $276) IF SO, WILL YOU BE BUILDING MORE THAN ONE HOME WITH THE METER? PERMANENT POWER: UNDERGROUND ( ) OVERHEAD ( ) SCHEDULE INFORMATION: FOUNDATION & BACKFILL ( DATE) DATE GRADED (+ OR — 6") ANTICIPATED DATE OF OCCUPANCY MODULAR HOME? ANTICIPATED DATE OF ARRIVAL • GENERAL INFORMATION: SQUARE FOOTAGE SINGLE FAMILY ( ) MULTI -FAMILY ( ) TOTAL NUMBER OF UNITS COMMERCIAL ( ) APPENDIX 1 - VEGETATION MAP with NOXIOUS WEEDS • • 200 200 400 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 1 INCH = 200 FEET LEGEND Agriclultural Sagebrush Steppe Marshland Canada Thistle +/- 2.37Acres Russian Knapweed and Cheatgrass +/- 1.23 Acres Russian Knapweed (Sporatic) +/- 0.16 Acres NOTE: Saltcedar and Russian Olive are not depicted on map, however they are present in sporatic locations on the property, most notably along ditches banks. Eventhough these species aren't shown on the map they should be included as part of the weed control process. Peach Valley Vistas Vegetation Map SCALE: SCALE SHEET: 1 of 1 DATE: FEBRUARY 17, 2005 PROJECT: 02372 DRAWING: Vegetation Mapdwg DIRECTORY: H:\02372\O1\Preliminary Plan Maps and Drawings\ DRAWN BY: BK CHKD BY: MJG GAMBA & ASSOCIATES Kelly and Michael Lyon Family, LLC Peach Valley Vistas PO Box 110 Silt, Colorado 81652 (970) 876-5944 GAMBA & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS 970/945-2550 WWW.GAMBAENGI N EERI NG.COM 113 NINTH ST., STE. 214 P.O. PDX 1458 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81002 SHEET NO. 1 • • • GARFIELD COUNTY NOXIOUS WEED MANAGEMENT PLAN Adopted by the Board of County Commissioners May 1, 2000 Revegetation Guidelines and Reclamation Standards Amended May 7, 2001 Resolution #2002-94 October 21, 2002 Prepared by Garfield County Vegetation Management and the Garfield County Weed Advisory Board GARFIELD COUNTY NOXIOUS WEED MANAGEMENT PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION I: Introduction 1.01 Mission Statement... 1 1.02 Purpose of the Plan 1 1.03 Enactment Authority 2 1.04 Garfield County Noxious Weed List 2 SECTION II: Weed Identification 2.01 Written Description of 21 Designated Noxious Weeds 5 2.02 How to Distinguish Varieties of Thistle, Knapweed or Toadflax 9 2.03 The Threat of Escaped Ornamentals 10 2.04 Integrated Weed Management — Treatment Methods...... 11 SECTION III: Jurisdictional Overview of areas of infestation 3.01 Overview 23 3.02 County Lands 73 3.03 State Lands 24 3.04 Federal Lands 24 3.05 Municipalities 24 3.06 Railroads 24 SECTION IV: Plan of Work 4.01 Objectives and Goals 75 4.02 Prevention and Detection 26 4.03 Garfield County Gravel Purchase Guidelines 27 4.04 Education and Awareness 27 4.05 Land Stewardship ...28 4.06 Revegetation and Rehabilitation . 28 4.07 Requirements (Soil Plan, Revegetation Plan & Security) .... 29 4.08 Reclamation Standards 30 4.09 Mapping and Inventory 32 SECTION V Enforcement 5.01 Compliance on Private Lands ..33 5.02 State Lands 35 5.03 County Rights -of -Way 36 • • • • • • SECTION VI Plan Evaluation 6.01 Plan Evaluation 36 SECTION VII: Resource Directory 7.01 Government Agencies 36 7.02 Internet Websites ..38 7.03 Books 38 SECTION VIII: Definitions 8.01 Definitions 39 SECTION I INTRODUCTION "A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of a biotic community. It is wrong when it tends to do otherwise." Aldo Leopold, A Sand County Almanac 1.01 Mission Statement: The health of our environment is a high priority for residents of Garfield County. The health and productivity of natural plant communities and agricultural lands is threatened by the introduction of numerous invasive alien plants. Without an effective integrated weed management plan these aggressive plants will continue to infest and degrade the lands we value so highly. Rapid expansion of noxious weeds is an obstacle to maintaining healthy ecosystems and restoring disturbed native plant communities and habitats. Because noxious weeds tend to be highly invasive and harmful to native vegetation, they can quickly dominate many sites and often cause permanent damage to plant communities. Estimates indicate that 70 million acres of private, state, and federal land are infested with noxious weeds in just eleven western states. This is occurring in both disturbed and relatively undisturbed areas. The intent of the Colorado Noxious Weed Act and the goal of the Garfield County Weed Advisory Board is to curb the degradation of our valued environment by implementing an Integrated Weed Management Plan to stop the spread of noxious weeds. Management of weeds may seem overwhelming, but through developing partnerships at all levels — local, regional, and national — we hope that the likelihood of reaching our weed management goals will be high. The challenge for all involved is to develop management systems, support and direction for preventing the spread of weeds before the situation becomes even more serious and economically unfeasible. 1.02 Purpose of the Plan: The purpose of the Plan is to provide guidelines for managing designated noxious weeds which represent a threat to the continued economic, environmental and agricultural value of lands in Garfield County. This plan provides for the implementation of the Colorado Noxious Weed Act by detailing integrated management options for designated noxious weeds. Options include education, preventive measures, good stewardship, and control techniques. The intent is to incorporate those options that are the least environmentally damaging and are practical, timely, and economically feasible. Further, it is the respon- sibility of all landowners to use integrated methods to manage noxious weeds, and the 1 • • responsibility of local governing bodies to assure that these plants are in fact managed on • public and private lands. • • 1.03 Enactment Authority: The Colorado Weed Management Act (C.R.S. 35-5.5-101, et. seq.) was signed into state law in 1990 and amended in 1996. Now known as the Colorado Noxious Weed Act, it states that noxious weeds pose a threat to the natural resources of Colorado. The Act also directs that the Board of County Commissioners of each county shall adopt a Noxious Weed Management Plan for all unincorporated land within the county. Municipalities shall adopt a weed management plan for all lands within their boundaries. The county and municipalities may cooperate, through an intergovernmental agreement, for the powers and authorities of the Act. The Act directs the Board of County Commissioners to appoint a local Weed Advisory Board, whose power and duties are as follows: 1. To develop a noxious weed list; 2. To develop a Weed Management Plan for managing designated noxious weeds; 3. To recommend to the Board of County Commissioners that identified landowners be required to submit an integrated weed management plan for managing designated noxious weeds on their properties. 1.04 Garfield County Noxious Weed List: The State of Colorado has three noxious weed lists designated by rule of the Colorado Department of Agriculture. The State has designated 68 plants as State Noxious Weeds. This list is available through the Garfield County Vegetation Management Department or the State of Colorado. These weeds comprise the "A" List. Ten of the sixty-eight plants have been prioritized by the State as being the most widespread and causing the greatest economic impact. These plants are the "B" list. The third or "C" list contains fifteen plants that are not widespread in Colorado; however local advisory boards are encouraged to contain and eradicate these species before they significantly impact the economic and environmental values of the State. An extensive survey of weed managers throughout Colorado determined the comprehensive "A" list. This list, created by administrative rule, allows each local governing board to specify which plants cause serious local impacts. The local governing board may create a designated noxious weed list, containing all or portions of the State's list depending upon the local situation and priorities. Most jurisdictions would not be able to dedicate the resources to manage all of the plants on the comprehensive list, so many local governing boards adopt a list of plants most threatening to their area. In addition to the list of weeds designated by the State of Colorado, the Garfield County Weed Advisory Board has specified certain plants as noxious weeds in our area. These are alien plants that present a threat to the well being of land within Garfield County. These noxious weeds are aggressive, fast spreading, and capable of displacing native plant species that provide habitat for wildlife and food for people and livestock. The Garfield County Designated Noxious Weed List includes the following: 1. Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) 2. Chicory (Cichorium intybus) 3. Common burdock (Arctium minus) 4. Dalmatian toadflax (Linaria dalmatica) 5. Diffuse knapweed (Centaurea diffusa) 6. Hoary cress (Cardaria draba) 7. Houndstongue (Cynoglossum offinale) 8. Jointed goatgrass (Aegilops cylindrica) 9. Leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) 10. Musk thistle (Carduus acanthoides) 11. Oxeye daisy (Chrysantheum leucanthemum) 12. Plumeless thistle (Carduus acanthoides) 13. Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) 14. Russian knapweed (Acroptilon repens) 15. Russian olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia) 16. Salt cedar (Tamarix ramosissima) 17. Salt cedar (Tamarix parviora) 18. Scotch thistle (Onopordum acanthium) 19. Spotted knapweed (Centaurea maculosa) 20. Yellow starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis) 21. Yellow toadflax (Linaria vulgaris) 3 • • • (This page intentionally left blank) • • • SECTION II WEED IDENTIFICATION GARFIELD COUNTY'S 21 NOXIOUS WEEDS Noxious weeds threaten many of the reasons we live, work, and recreate in Garfield County. The Garfield County Weed Advisory Board encourages you to become more knowledgeable about noxious weeds. Our natural resource and agricultural heritage depend on your involvement. 2.01 Description of Designated Noxious Weeds: Canada Thistle (Cirsium arvense) Canada thistle is a member of the Aster family and was introduced from Europe. It is a creeping perennial, which reproduces by seeds and fleshy, horizontal roots. The erect stem is hollow, smooth and slightly hairy, 1 to 5 feet tall, simple, and branched at the top. The flower color is primarily lavender, pink, or purple. Canada thistle emerges in May in most parts of Garfield County. It is one of the most widespread and economically damaging noxious weeds in Colorado. Infestations are found in cultivated fields, riparian areas, pastures, rangeland, forests, lawns and gardens, roadsides, and in waste areas. Because of its seeding habits, vigorous growth, and extensive underground root system, control and eradication are difficult. Chicory (Chicorium intybus) Chicory belongs to the Sunflower family. Chicory, a simple perennial, reproduces only by seed. The plant has a deep fleshy root and tufted basal leaves that resemble those of a dandelion. The stem is multi -branched and can reach over five feet tall. The flowers are bright blue, purple, or occasionally white, and occur along the stems of the plant. The plant is closely related to the cultivated endive and is grown in some areas for the succulent leaves and the fleshy roots. The roots are dried and used as a substitute for coffee. Other names for chicory are succory, blue daisy, blue sailors, and coffeeweed. Chicory is scattered throughout western Garfield County. Common Burdock (Arctium minus) Common burdock is a member of the Aster family. It is an introduced biennial, which reproduces by seeds. In the first year of growth the plant forms a rosette. The second year the plant grows erect. Burdock grows to 6 feet tall, has enormous leaves and a prickly bur. The flowers are purple and white in numerous heads. Burdock grows along roadsides, ditch banks, and neglected areas. This plant is a very serious threat to sheep as the burs can significantly damage the quality of their wool. Burdock will cause eye infections in cattle. 5 • • • • • Dalmatian Toadflax (Linaria genistifolia) Dalmatian toadflax is a member of the Figwort family. It was introduced as an ornamental from Europe, and is common in Glenwood Springs. It is a creeping perennial with stems from 2 to 4 feet tall. The flowers are snapdragon -shaped, bright yellow, with orange centers; the leaves are waxy and heart -shaped. Dalmatian toadflax is especially well adapted to arid sites and can spread rapidly once established. Because of its deep, extensive root system and heavy seed production, this plant is difficult to manage. Diffuse Knapweed (Centaurea di fusa) Diffuse knapweed is a member of the Aster family. Diffuse knapweed was introduced from Europe and is a biennial or short-lived perennial forb, which reproduces only by seed. The plant usually produces a single main multi -branched stem that is 1 1/2 to 2 feet tall. The flower is white or pink with bracts. The largest infestation of diffuse knapweed in Garfield County is south of Glenwood Springs at the Glenwood Airport and old rodeo grounds. Hoary Cress (Cardaria draba) Hoary cress, also known as whitetop, is a member of the Mustard family, and was probably introduced from Europe in alfalfa seed. It is a creeping perennial, which reproduces by seed and creeping roots. The extensive root system spreads horizontally and vertically with frequent shoots arising from the rootstock. It grows erect from 10 to 18 inches high and has a gray -white colored leaf. The flowers are white and numerous in compact flat-topped clusters which give the plant its name. Hoary cress is one of the earliest perennial weeds to emerge in the spring, producing flowers in May or June. It grows in waste places, cultivated fields, and pastures, and is capable of vigorous growth. It is found throughout Garfield County. Houndstongue (Cynoglossum officinale) Houndstongue is a member of the Borage family. It is a biennial that was introduced from Europe. It reproduces by seed and appears as a leafy rosette in its first year. The plant grows 1 '/2 to 3 feet high with reddish -purple flowers. Houndstongue is commonly known as the "Velcro weed" because of its small nutlets that are rapidly spread by people, domestic animals, wildlife and vehicles. Houndstongue grows on ranges, pastures, trails and roadsides and is toxic to horses and cattle, as it contains alkaloids that may cause liver cells to stop reproducing. It is common throughout Garfield County. Jointed Goatgrass (Aegilops cylindrica) Jointed goatgrass is a member of the Grass family, Barley tribe. It is a non-native grass introduced from Turkey in the late 1800s. It is a winter annual, reproducing by seed and grows 15 to 30 inches tall in erect stems which branch at the base to give the plant a tufted appearance. Seeds of jointed goatgrass are attached to their rachis segment and shed in June and July, during and prior to wheat harvest. The seeds are very similar in size and shape to wheat seed and therefore are difficult to screen out. Jointed goatgrass is found in the Harvey Gap area and in west Mamm Creek. 6 Leafy Spurge (Euphorbia esula) Leafy spurge, a member of the Spurge family, was introduced from Europe. It is a creeping perennial that reproduces by seed and extensive creeping roots. The roots can extend as deep as 30 feet from a plant that grows 1 to 3 feet tall, with pale green shoots and small yellow -green flowers. The plant, including the root, has milky latex that is damaging to eyes and sensitive skin. Leafy spurge is an extremely difficult plant to control because of its extensive sprouting root. It is adapted to a wide variety of Colorado habitats and is very competitive with other plant species. If it becomes established in rangeland, pasture, and riparian sites, it may exclude all other vegetation due to its competitive nature. There is plant is found scattered in the Wallace Creek area and there are a few plants found on the I-70 right-of-way west of Glenwood Springs. Musk Thistle (Carduus nutans) Musk thistle is a member of the Aster family. Introduced from Eurasia, it is a winter annual or biennial which reproduces by seed. The first year's growth is a large, compact rosette from a large, fleshy, corky taproot. The second year stem is erect, spiny, 2 to 6 feet tall and branched at the top. The waxy leaves are dark green with a light green midrib and mostly white margins; flowers are purple or occasionally white. Musk thistle is also known as "nodding thistle" and is commonly found in pastures, roadsides, and waste places. It prefers moist bottomland soil, but also can be found on drier uplands. It is found throughout Garfield County. Oxeye Daisy (Chrysanthemum leucanthemum) Oxeye daisy, a member of the Aster family, is a native of Eurasia. It is an erect perennial plant with white ray and yellow disk flowers, which bloom from June through August. Oxeye daisy is commonly sold in wildflower seed mixes or transplanted as an ornamental despite its tendency to crowd out more desirable vegetation. It is scattered throughout Garfield County. Plumeless Thistle (Carduus acanthoides) Plumeless thistle is a member of the Aster family. Introduced from Eurasia, it is a winter annual or biennial which reproduces by seed. This plant can be distinguished from musk thistle by its smaller flowers from '/2 to 1 inch in diameter. The leaves of plumeless thistle lack the prominent white margin present on musk thistle leaves. The plant may grow to a height of 5 feet or more. Flowers are reddish -purple and are either solitary or clustered. Taproots are large and fleshy. Plumeless thistle is an extremely prolific seed producer. It is found in pastures, river valleys, and along roadsides. It is found throughout southern Garfield County and is becoming a problem south of Battlement Mesa. Purple Loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) Purple loosestrife is a member of the Loosestrife family. It is a perennial introduced from Europe. The erect, square stem can reach 1 1/2 to 8 feet tall with magenta -colored flowers. Purple loosestrife is a highly aggressive invader species that can be found in most wetland sites throughout the state. If left unchecked, a wetland will eventually 7 • • • • • become a monoculture of loosestrife, posing a severe threat to waterfowl habitat and impeding water flow in irrigation ditches. There are no confirmed locations in Garfield County. Russian Knapweed (Acroptilon repens) Russian knapweed is a member of the Aster family introduced from Europe. It is a creeping perennial that reproduces by seed and creeping, horizontal roots. The ridged stems are stiff and 1 to 3 feet high, with thistle -like flowers that are lavender to white. It is very difficult to control or eradicate once it becomes established. It grows in cultivated fields, along ditch banks, fence rows, roadsides, and in waste places. Russian knapweed is toxic to horses. It is most common in the Dry Hollow, Silt Mesa, and Missouri Heights areas. Russian Olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia) Russian Olive is a member of the Oleaster family. A hardy, fast-growing tree from Europe, Russian Olive has been promoted for windrow and ornamental plantings. This tree may reach heights from 10 to 25 feet. The trunks and branches are armed with 1 to 2 inch woody thorns. The leaves are covered with small scales which give the foliage a distinctive silvery appearance. The fruit is berry -like, and is silvery when first formed but turns brown at maturity. Very common in western Garfield County especially along the Colorado River between Silt and Rifle. Salt Cedar (Tamarix ramosissima, Tamarix parviflora) Salt cedar is a member of the Tamarisk family. It is a deciduous or evergreen shrub or small tree, 5 to 25 feet tall. Tamarisk may live 50 to 100 years. It has a wide range of tolerance to saline and alkaline soil and water. It copes with high concentrations of dissolved solids by absorbing them through its roots and excreting salts through glands in its stem and leaves. The excreted salts eventually form a saline crust on the soil. A single plant of saltcedar will use about 200 gallons of water per day while it is actively growing. The bark on the saplings and stems is reddish -brown. Leaves are small and scale -like, on highly branched slender stems. Ramosissima is 5 -petaled and pink to white. Parviflora is 4 -petaled. Introduced from Eurasia, tamarisk is widespread in Gar- field County, along the Colorado River from Glenwood Canyon to the Mesa County Line. Scotch Thistle (Onopordum acanthium) Scotch thistle is a member of the Aster family. It is a biennial that was introduced from Europe or eastern Asia and can reach a height of 8 feet. The rosette forms the first year and can have leaves up to 2 feet long and 1 foot wide. The second year the plant produces flowers that are reddish -purple to violet. It is found primarily along roadsides and railroads, but can become an impassable obstacle to livestock on rangeland and pastures. Common between Glenwood Springs and New Castle. Spotted Knapweed (Centaurea maculosa) Spotted knapweed is a member of the Aster family. Native to Central Europe, it is a simple perennial that reproduces from seed and forms a new shoot each year from a taproot. The plant can have one or more shoots up to 4 feet tall. Flower color is usually lavender to purple. Spotted knapweed occupies dry meadows, pastures, stony hills, roadsides, and the sandy or gravel flood plains of streams and rivers, where soils are light textured, well -drained, and receive summer precipitation. Spotted knapweed tolerates dry conditions, similar to diffuse knapweed, but will survive in higher moisture areas as well. There is a small infestation south of Battlement Mesa and scattered, isolated patches are increasing in Garfield County. Yellow Starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis) Yellow starthistle is a member of the Aster family. It is an annual, 2 to 3 feet tall, that was introduced from Europe. Flowers are yellow, located singly on ends of branches, and armed with sharp straw-colored thorns up to 3/4 inch long. "Chewing disease" results when horses are forced to eat yellow starthistle. Currently, there are no confirmed reports of starthistle in the Garfield County, however single plants have been reported in the past. There are known infestations in neighboring counties. Yellow Toadflax (Linaria vulgaris) Yellow toadflax is a member of the Figwort family and is sometimes called common toadflax or "butter and eggs." It was introduced from Europe as an ornamental and has now become a serious problem to rangelands and mountain meadows. It is a perennial reproducing from seed, as well as from underground rootstalk. The flowers are bright yellow with deep orange centers that resemble the snapdragon. Yellow toadflax does well in all types of soils. Its displacement of desirable grasses not only reduces ecological diversity, but also reduces rangeland value and can lead to erosion problems. Because of its early vigorous growth, extensive underground root system, and effective seed dispersal methods, yellow toadflax is difficult to control. Yellow toadflax infests thousands of acres in the Flat Tops Wilderness. 2.02 How To Distinguish Varieties Of Thistle, Knapweed Or Toadflax: THISTLES Four types of thistles are on the Garfield County Noxious Weed List. Canada thistle is a perennial; it has an extensive root system. Plumeless, Scotch, and musk thistles are biennials; they are relatively shallow rooted and reproduce by seed only. Canada and plumeless thistle are often mistaken for each other, however it is very simple to tell them apart. Canada has a smooth stem; plumeless has spiny stem leaves. The bracts under the flower of Canada are spineless; the bracts under the flower of plumeless appear as sharp spines. The flowers of musk thistle are about three times larger than those of Canada or plumeless. Musk thistle seedlings have a very prominent white midrib. Scotch thistle leaves are larger than those of the other thistles. They grow up to 2 feet in length and 1 foot wide. The leaves are covered with dense hairs, which give them a gray appearance. All of the biennial thistles may grow to heights of greater than six feet. Canada thistle may grow from 1 to 4 feet tall. 9 • • • • • • Colorado has several species of thistle which are native and do not cause the problems of the noxious species. Native thistles have mostly white, sometimes very pale lavender flowers and are more succulent than the noxious species. The flowers may have a hairy or fuzzy appearance and stems of some species are reddish. KNAPWEEDS Russian knapweed is a perennial with an extensive underground root system. Spotted knapweed is a biennial, or occasionally a short-lived perennial with a short taproot. Generally, the flowers of spotted and Russian knapweed are pinkish -purple, diffuse flowers are white, however there are exceptions. The best way to distinguish between the knapweeds is by the bracts. The bracts of Russian knapweed are white and papery -thin. Diffuse knapweed has sharp -toothed bracts. Spotted knapweed bracts are more like a fringe (not as spiny) with a black spot on each bract. TOADFLAX The best way to distinguish the different toadflaxes is to look at the shape of the leaves. Yellow toadflax has narrow leaves that are pointed at both ends; the leaves of Dalmatian toadflax are heart -shaped, clasp the stem, and are waxy with a blue green color. Yellow toadflax tends to be a smaller plant than Dalmatian toadflax. 2.03 The Threat Of Escaped Ornamentals: Most plants used for landscaping purposes cannot proliferate outside the cultivated environment of the home garden. But certain exotic plants and seeds were imported to the United States for their aggressive growth habits, xeriscape potential, or re -seeding capabilities. Such plants, known as escaped ornamentals or invasive ornamentals, include oxeye daisy, purple loosestrife, dalmatian toadflax, chicory, Russian olive, and yellow toadflax. The very traits that make these plants desirable for a garden or landscape may also enable them to thrive outside cultivated areas and become fierce competitors with our native vegetation. Because they exist here without the presence of any natural predators, these plants have the ability to spread extensively and pose a severe threat to the delicate balance of our native ecosystems. Since various invasive ornamental plants are attractive and establish themselves quickly, they are popular with landscapers and gardeners and may be purchased through certain nurseries in Garfield County. It is imperative that we educate landscape architects, gardeners, and nursery growers about the need to eliminate such plants from their landscape plans. Otherwise these plants will inevitably escape from the cultivated garden and jeopardize the natural wildflower and plant communities that we cherish. Native wildflowers such as Colorado Blue Columbine, our state flower, cannot compete with invasive ornamental plants for nutrients, sunlight, and water. As a result, our biologically diverse mountain meadows, grasslands, wetlands, and agricultural lands are in danger of being overrun by non-native invasive ornamental plants. 10 2.04 Integrated Weed Management — Treatment Methods: Management techniques include cultural, mechanical, biological and chemical strategies. The optimum method or methods for weed management will vary depending on a number of site specific variables. Factors to be considered should include soil type and stability, grade, associated vegetation, existing and proposed land use, proximity to water, availability of irrigation water, weed type and stage of growth, and severity of infestation. The management method selected should be the least environmentally damaging, yet practical and reasonable in achieving the desired results. When considering weed management on a property, work on the areas that may transport weed seeds. These areas include ditches, streams, roadsides, driveways, trails, livestock concentrated areas, and equipment storage sites. The following recommendations are intended to be a reference for weed management in Garfield County. The information is not intended to be a complete guide to weed management. Before using any chemical, you should thoroughly read the label. Any use of a herbicide inconsistent with the label is neither legal nor recommended. Changes in herbicide registrations occur constantly. The herbicide label is the legal document on herbicide use. Read and follow all directions carefully. The use of a pesticide in a manner not consistent with the label can lead to injury of crops, humans, animals, and the environment. Specific chemical recommendations are available • from the Garfield County Vegetation Management Department and/or licensed applicators and are not listed in the Plan. CANADA THISTLE Description: Perennial. Reproduces from vegetative buds in root system and from seed. Comments: Canada thistle is best managed through an integrated management system that emphasizes competitive, desirable plants. Biological control: Three insects currently available. It is best to release a complex of insects (different insects that will stress different parts of the plant.) Ceutorhyncus litura — a weevil that stresses the crown of the plant. Urophora carduii — a stem and shoot gall fly. Cassidia rubiginosa — leaf beetle. Chemical control: Contact Garfield County Vegetation Management or a licensed applicator for specific recommendations. Cultural control: Maintain soil fertility and moisture at optimum levels to favor grass growth. Mechanical control: Research indicates that mowing of Canada thistle may be effective when done repeatedly at two week intervals over a period of 11 • • • several years. Pulling and digging up Canada thistle is ineffective • as the plant has such an extensive root system. • • CHICORY Description: Simple perennial. Comments: Chicory is well established in western Garfield County (Parachute) and is spreading rapidly in other parts of the County. Biological control: Close grazing by sheep will control the chicory in pastures. Chemical control: Contact Garfield County Vegetation Management or a licensed applicator for specific recommendations. Cultural control: Re -seed disturbed areas adjacent to chicory infestations with appropriate perennial grasses. Mechanical control: None available. COMMON BURDOCK Description: Biennial. Prolific seed producer. Comments: Burs may become entangled in the hair of livestock, wildlife, or pets allowing seed to be distributed to new areas. Biological control: None currently available. Chemical control: Contact Garfield County Vegetation Management or a licensed applicator for specific recommendations. Cultural control: Minimize soil disturbances, encourage desirable plant growth. Mechanical control: Top growth removal through mowing or cutting is effective as is pulling or digging out the plant at flowering or early seed formation. DALMATIAN TOADFLAX Description: Aggressive perennial, escaped ornamental. Comments: Widespread in Glenwood Springs. Biological control: The defoliating moth, Calophasia lunula, has been released on Dalmatian and yellow toadflax. It may defoliate up to 20% of the leaves of the plant. Chemical control: Cultural control: Mechanical control: Education: Contact Garfield County Vegetation Management or a licensed applicator for specific recommendations. Re -seed disturbed areas adjacent to toadflax infestations with appropriate perennial grasses. Repeated mowing 2-3 times per year will slow spread and reduce seed production. The key to Dalmatian toadflax management is to create an awareness among homeowners, nurseries, landscapers, and landscape architects that Dalmatian toadflax is a noxious weed and therefore should not be specified in plantings, sold in nurseries or planted in home gardens or large-scale landscape projects. DIFFUSE KNAPWEED Description: Comments: Biological control: Chemical control: Cultural control: Mechanical control: HOARY CRESS Description: Comments: Biological control: Chemical control: Cultural control: Biennial, reproduces by seed. Increasingly common in Garfield County. The largest infestation is at the Glenwood Springs Airport. Two seed head flies, Urophora affinis and U quadrifasciata, are available. They reduce seed production. A root -boring moth, Agapeta zoegana, causes considerable damage to roots. Contact Garfield County Vegetation Management or a licensed applicator for specific recommendations. Reseeding of disturbed sites with fast growing grasses helps prevent diffuse knapweed establishment. Handpulling has been effective, if done persistently over time. A very competitive, deep-rooted perennial that reproduces by root segments and by seed. Common in Garfield County. None currently available. Contact Garfield County Vegetation Management or a licensed applicator for specific recommendations. Mowing or cultivation effectiveness will be increased if other plants like perennial native grasses or alfalfa are seeded in the hoary cress stand as competitors. Maintain range and pasture in 13 • • • good condition. Promote healthy grass growth through proper • irrigation and fertilization. Do not overgraze. • • Mechanical control: Removal of top growth is somewhat effective. Repeated treatments may reduce seed production and spread. HOUNDSTONGUE Description: ' Biennial. Prolific seed producer. Seed nutlets break apart at maturity and cling to clothing or animals. Comments: Widespread throughout Garfield County. Biological control: None currently available. Chemical control: Contact Garfield County Vegetation Management or a licensed applicator for specific recommendations. Cultural control: Re -seed disturbed sites with fast growing native grasses. Maintain range and pasture in good condition. Promote healthy grass growth through proper irrigation and fertilization. Do not overgraze. Mechanical control: Houndstongue is a prolific seed producer, and the seeds are readily spread by their ability to stick to wildlife and domestic animals. Physical removal of the plant at flowering or in early seed formation, by pulling or digging, will break the cycle of the plant. LEAFY SPURGE Description: A perennial up to three feet tall that reproduces by vigorous root stalks and seed. Comments: Leafy spurge is primarily found in Wallace Creek in western Garfield County. An extremely difficult -to -control perennial weed that will require re -treatments to achieve adequate control. Development of a management plan is helpful to manage large areas of leafy spurge. Biological control: Sheep or goats will graze leafy spurge. If livestock graze leafy spurge after seed formation, hold animals in a corral for at least seven days before moving them to an uninfested area to avoid seed spread. Several flea beetles (Apthona spp). are available from the Colorado Department of Agriculture Insectary in Palisade. These insects are available upon request at no charge to the public. The larvae bore into leafy spurge roots and the adults feed on the leaves. Also available from the Insectary are Oherea erythrocephala, a stem 14 Chemical control: Cultural control: Mechanical control: MUSK THISTLE Description: Comments: Biological control: Chemical control: Cultural control: and root crown mining long -horned beetle, and Spurgia esulae, a shoot tip gall midge. Contact Garfield County Vegetation Management or a licensed applicator for specific recommendations. Any activity that encourages vigorous grass growth is very important. Overgrazing stresses grasses and makes them less competitive to leafy spurge. Mowing leafy spurge at 14 to 21 day intervals may cause higher susceptibility to fall applied herbicides. Musk thistle is a biennial and the key to its successful management is to prevent seed formation. Scattered throughout the County, heaviest in the Crystal River Valley. The musk thistle seed head weevil, Rhinocyllus conicus, is wide- spread in Colorado. Larvae of this insect destroy developing seeds but are not 100 percent effective by themselves. The weevil normally impacts seed production by about 50 percent. Herbicides can be combined with weevils if the insects are allowed to complete their life cycles. Another weevil, Trichosirocalus horridus, attacks the crown area of musk thistle rosettes and weakens the plant before it bolts. This weevil has reduced stand density in areas where it has become well established. A leaf feeding beetle, Cassidia rubiiginosa, causes considerable damage by skeletonizing leaves. It is recommended to release more than one type of insect on a weed since each type may work on different parts of the plant. Contact Garfield County Vegetation Management or a licensed applicator for specific recommendations. Musk thistle, like other biennial thistles, thrives on disturbance. The best management is to minimize disturbance. If it does occur be certain to revegetate with competitive perennial grasses. Mechanical control: The most effective type of mechanical control is to hand pull this plant prior to flowering. This can be unrealistic on large acreage or when the ground is very dry. Another option is to use a shovel to cut the root below the surface of the soil, taking care not to disturb the soil more than necessary. If this is done prior to flowering the plant can be left in place after it is cut. If it has 15 • • • • • • OXEYE DAISY Description: Comments: Biological control: Chemical control: Cultural control: already flowered the plant should be removed and placed in a bag and disposed of. Mowing is not effective on this species unless repeated numerous times throughout the growing season since musk thistle will flower and produce seed even after one or two mowings. A rhizomatous perennial, escaped ornamental. A rapidly spreading weed in Garfield County. None currently available. Contact Garfield County Vegetation Management or a licensed applicator for specific recommendations. None available. Mechanical control: No information available. Education: The key to oxeye daisy management is to create an awareness among homeowners, nurseries, landscapers, and landscape architects that oxeye is a noxious weed and therefore should not be specified in plantings, sold in nurseries or planted in home gardens or large-scale landscape projects. PLUMELESS THISTLE Description: Comments: Biological control: Chemical control: Cultural control: Mechanical control: A biennial, prolific seed producer. Common in southern Garfield County, rapidly spreading south of Battlement Mesa. The same seed head weevil, Rhinocyllus conicus, that attacks musk thistle also feeds on plumeless thistle seeds. Another musk thistle weevil, Trichosirocalus horridus, has been released on plumeless thistle in Garfield County. This weevil appears to be ineffective on plumeless. Contact Garfield County Vegetation Management or a licensed applicator for specific recommendations. Plumeless thistle, like other biennial thistles, thrives on disturbance. The best management is to mimimize disturbance and revegetate with competitive perennial species Mowing is generally not effective on plumeless due to the plant's capacity for rapid re -growth. Hand cutting is not effective unless 16 there are repeated follow-up treatments. Hand cutting should only be conducted if there is a commitment to follow-up efforts. Plumeless tends to branch out where it is cut and then it re -flowers. Pulling plumeless can be very effective, especially if done after a light rain. Hand pulling, with a good set of gloves, is preferable to shoveling. Shoveling disturbs the ground thus creating a potential seedbed for future infestations. PURPLE LOOSESTRIFE Description: An introduced perennial. This escaped ornamental is also a prolific seed producer, able to produce over 10,000 seeds per square yard. Comments: The US Fish and Wildlife Service and the Colorado Division of Wildlife are extremely alarmed about the proliferation of purple loosestrife in wetland and riparian habitats. Biological control: Biological control may eventually bring weed populations under control, but it will not eliminate or prevent the spread of noxious weeds. A survey of loosestrife populations in Europe has resulted in the selection of five insects which may have potential as biocontrols. Three of these species have completed initial screening tests conducted by the International Institute of Biological Control, in Switzerland and one, Hylobius transverovittatus, a root mining weevil which attacks the vascular tissue of the plant, was subsequently released in New York in 1991. Chemical control: Contact Garfield County Vegetation Management or a licensed applicator for specific recommendations. Cultural control: Not available. Mechanical control: Mechanical methods include hand pulling, mowing, and flooding. Hand pulling is effective when infestations are detected early. The root system must be completely removed, since the root sections can sprout and form new plants. For this reason hand pulling is only effective on small plants. Education: The key to purple loosestrife management and other escaped ornamentals is to create an awareness among homeowners, nurseries, landscapers, and landscape architects that purple loosestrife is a noxious weed and therefore should not be specified in plantings, sold in nurseries or planted in home gardens or large- scale landscape projects. 17 • • • • • RUSSIAN KNAPWEED Description: Comments: Biological control: Chemical control: Cultural control: Mechanical controls: RUSSIAN OLIVE Description: Comments: Biological control: Chemical control: A perennial with an extensive underground root system. This weed is very common in Garfield County. Like other creeping perennials, the key to Russian knapweed control is to stress the weed and cause it to expend nutrient stores in its root system. An integrated management plan should be developed that places continual stress on the weed. Currently, the best management plan includes cultural control combined with mechanical and/or chemical control techniques. A single control strategy, such as mowing or a herbicide, usually is not sufficient. The plant is toxic to horses, however they must consume it over a period of time before poisoning will occur. Once poisoning occurs horses are unable to chew and advance food to the back of their mouths, swallowing is impaired and horses can drink only if they immerse their head in water far enough to get water to the back of their mouths. Poisoning is irreversible and death by starvation will occur. None currently available. Contact Garfield County Vegetation Management or a licensed applicator for specific recommendations. Russian knapweed tends to form monocultures by eliminating other plants. Therefore, sowing desirable plant species is necessary after the weed is controlled. Research indicates that the native grasses, streambank wheatgrass and thickspike wheatgrass will establish in an area after Russian knapweed is suppressed with herbicides. If the Russian knapweed stand is not too old and grasses are still present, stimulating grass growth by irrigation (where possible) should increase grass competition with knapweed and keep it under continual stress. Repeated mowing combined with herbicide applications will gradually stress the plant. A tree that may reach heights from 10 to 25 feet. Very common along the Colorado River and other drainages in western Garfield County. None available. Contact Garfield County Vegetation Management or a licensed applicator for specific recommendations. 18 Cultural control: Mechanical control: . SALT CEDAR Description: Comments: Biological control: Chemical control: Cultural control: Plant native trees or less aggressive introduced trees. In riparian areas establish native riparian vegetation. Small trees may be controlled mechanically by using an appropriate tool or shovel. Shrub or small tree. Widespread throughout Garfield County. There are experimental projects being conducted in a few areas in the West involving the release of mealybugs and leafbeetles. These are not cleared for general release. The recent listing of the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher (a native species that nests in saltcedar) under the Endangered Species Act has challenged efforts to move forward with release of insects for biocontrol. Contact Garfield County Vegetation Management or a licensed applicator for specific recommendations. Establish native riparian vegetation. Mechanical control: Historical saltcedar management projects have included root plowing and raking, dozing, mowing, and prescribed burning. These methods provide only short-term benefits and are labor intensive. SCOTCH THISTLE Description: A biennial. Comments: Common in Garfield County, the worst infestations are located between Glenwood Springs and New Castle. Biological control: None currently available. Chemical control: Contact Garfield County Vegetation Management or a licensed applicator for specific recommendations. Cultural control: Reseed disturbed sites with appropriate perennial grasses. Mechanical control: Digging the plant at the rosette stage is effective. 19 • • • • • • SPOTTED KNAPWEED Description: Comments: Biological control: Chemical control: Cultural control: Mechanical control: A short-lived, non -creeping perennial that reproduces from seed and forms a new shoot each year from a taproot. One of the most invasive, aggressive weeds to plague the western United States. Small infestation located in the Battlements. The seedhead flies, Urophora affinis and Urophora quadrifasciata, have been released in many Front Range counties. These insects cause plants to produce fewer viable seeds and abort terminal or lateral flowers. Root feeding insects may have more of a detrimental effect on knapweed populations than seed feeding insects. Larvae of the yellow winged knapweed moth feed in the roots of both knapweed species. Contact Garfield County Vegetation Management or a licensed applicator for specific recommendations. If desirable grass competition is evident in spotted knapweed stands, judicious herbicide application that does not injure grasses may release them to compete effectively with the weeds. Irrigation may help stimulate grass competition in these cases. Seeding suitable perennial grasses is necessary to prevent weed re -invasion. None available. YELLOW STARTHISTLE Description: Comments: Biological control: Chemical control: Cultural control: Mechanical control: Annual, prolific seed producer. In California alone, this plant has infested more than 20 million acres. There are no known infestations in Garfield County; however there have been reports in the past of single -plant infestations. A seed -feeding beetle, Bangasterus orientalis, has been released in California and Idaho. Seed weevils and seed flies have also been released. In Garfield County, we hope to detect and eradicate any infestations of starthistle before biocontrols are necessary. Contact Garfield County Vegetation Management or a licensed applicator for specific recommendations. Vigorous competitive grass is essential to maintain a plant community's resistance to starthistle invasion. Mowing or cutting starthistle is rarely effective. 20 YELLOW TOADFLAX Description: Comment: Biological control: Chemical control: Cultural control: Education: Mechanical control: An escaped ornamental perennial reproducing by seed and rootstalk. Prevalent in the Flattops. One insect species Calophasia lunula a defoliating moth has been released on yellow toadflax. It may defoliate up to 20 percent of the leaves. Contact Garfield County Vegetation Management or a licensed applicator for specific recommendations. Attempt to maintain competitive communities of desirable species. Re -seed any open ground with perennial grasses to prevent invasion by other weed species. The key to management of yellow toadflax and other escaped ornamentals is to create an awareness among homeowners, nurseries, landscapers, and landscape architects that yellow toadflax is a noxious weed and therefore should not be specified in plantings, sold in nurseries or planted in home gardens or large- scale landscape projects. Digging and pulling where feasible, can provide effective control of toadflax if conducted annually for 10 to 15 years. 21 • • • • • 22 (This page intentionally left blank) SECTION III 23 • • • • • JURISDICTIONAL OVERVIEW OF AREAS OF INFESTATION IN GARFIELD COUNTY 3.01 Overview: The County has adopted an "early detection, early treatment" philosophy. Early detection is identifying and documenting recently introduced weed species into an area. Early treatment is the follow-up that could possibly eradicate new infestations. 3.02 County Land: County property is categorized as Roads, Airport, and the Landfill. Roads: Garfield County has over 900 miles of county roads. Roadsides shall be managed regarding the 21 weeds on Garfield County's noxious weed list. A Priority List will be established each growing season based upon input from the Road and Bridge District Foremen, the public, and past observations by staff. The roadsides will be selectively spot treated for noxious weeds. There will be no general herbicide applications to non - listed weeds unless specifically requested by the Road and Bridge Foremen, or the County Commissioners, to treat a roadside for safety and sight reasons. Roadside treatment will start in the warmer, western end of the county in mid-April and move to the east and south as the growing season progresses. Each road on the Priority List will be treated at least once. If time and workload allows some of the heavily infested roadsides will be treated a second time. Airport: The Airport will be treated on an as -needed basis for noxious weeds. There are scattered infestations of Russian knapweed and musk thistle on Airport property. Landfill: The Anvil Points Landfill will be treated on an as -needed basis for noxious weeds. There are isolated musk thistle plants at the Landfill. It is the goal of Garfield County to develop and implement a comprehensive noxious weed management program on all County -owned property. 3.03 State Lands: Colorado Department of Transportation: Garfield County has an Intergovernmental Agreement with CDOT to treat noxious weeds on Interstate 70, State Highways 13, 133, 82, 325 and US 6&24. This agreement is on an annual basis and is for the treatment of designated noxious weeds. Colorado Division of Wildlife: The Colorado Division of Wildlife has a weed management program in place for the Garfield Creek State. Wildlife Area. Garfield County has worked with the DOW at the Rifle Falls Fish Hatchery to monitor and treat isolated patches of yellow toadflax. Colorado State Parks: Rifle Gap, Rifle Falls, and Harvey Gap have weed management programs for their properties. Garfield County is available to provide technical assistance and weed identification upon request. 3.04 Federal Land: Bureau of Land Management: Garfield County has Intergovernmental Agreements with the Grand Junction Field Office and Glenwood Springs Field Office to treat noxious weeds on BLM land. These agreements are reviewed and modified on an annual basis. White River National Forest: The WRNF (within Garfield County) manages its noxious weeds through their Ranger Districts in Rifle and Carbondale, and through the Supervisor's Office in Glenwood Springs. Garfield County and the Rifle Ranger District have tentative plans for a cooperative agreement in 2000. 3.05 Municipalities: Carbondale, Glenwood Springs, New Castle, Parachute, Rifle, and Silt are the six incorporated communities in Garfield County. Once Garfield County adopts this plan it will be presented to the municipalities for their consideration. Municipalities have specific responsibilities as described in the Colorado Noxious Weed Act. (See Section 1.03 of the Plan.) 3.06 Railroads: There are two rail lines within Garfield County. The Roaring Fork Railroad Holding Authority (RFRHA) is a consortium of local governments that owns the rail line between Glenwood Springs and Carbondale. RFRHA has a Weed Management Plan in place. Union Pacific owns the rail line that generally runs parallel to I-70. Garfield County has requested a Weed Management Plan from UP. 25 • • • SECTION IV PLAN OF WORK 4.01 Objectives and Goals: Goals and Objectives of the Garfield County Weed Management Plan A. Develop and implement a comprehensive •noxious weed management program on all County -owned property. B. Educate the public concerning week management issues. C. Foster a spirit of cooperation among federal, state and local government agencies and private landowners. D. Work with other government agencies and departments to institute "Best Management Practices" and/or policies that stress prevention as a weed management tool. E. Promote and use integrated management techniques. F. Establish and maintain healthy plant communities with native or beneficial • vegetation. G. Restore and maintain desirable plant communities, healthy ecosystems, and productive agricultural lands in Garfield County. • H. Stop the spread of noxious weeds to uninfested lands. L Contain heavily weed -infested areas. J. Implement "Title 35 Article 5.5, The Colorado Weed Management Act." Management Goals for Weed Species Management goals will vary from species to species, by location, and over time. For some species, such as yellow starthistle, complete eradication of existing infestations and total suppression of newly identified infestations is feasible and appropriate. Containment of existing intentional plantings, exclusion of seed from new wildland or open space mixes, and elimination of targeted escaped infestations are three different management goals for certain ornamentals such as oxeye daisy. Russian knapweed, saltcedar, and Russian olive infestations are so widespread that they must be managed, in many cases, merely for containment and reduction in the rate of spread. Eradication of these stands may only be viewed as impossible in some instances, or as a long range objective. 26 In all cases, revegetation, either from the existing seed bank or through supplemental planting, must be included as a management goal. Without revegetation, disturbed or denuded soils invite adventitious weed infestation. 4.02 Prevention and Detection: Prevention is the highest priority weed management technique on non -infested lands. Among government officials, land managers, farmers, ranchers, and the general public there is growing recognition that protecting weed -free plant communities is the most economical and efficient land management practice. The benefits are obvious. Weed -free plant communities: • Provide essential wildlife habitat and forage. • Save ranchers and farmers many billions of dollars in labor costs and lost production. • Ensure aesthetic and recreational qualities of an area. • Prevent soil erosion and improve water quality. The spread of noxious weeds is most likely to occur where soil has been disturbed either by human activities (road and trail cuts, construction sites, the spread of gravel, road fill and topsoil contaminated with noxious weed seed, or overgrazing) or by natural events (fire, avalanches, mudslides, flooding). Disturbed land provides opportunity for noxious weeds. Exotic plants and seeds such as oxeye daisy, purple loosestrife, chicory, toadflax, and Russian olive escape from our yards and gardens. Since they are attractive and establish themselves quickly, they are popular with landscapers and gardeners for ornamental planting and may be purchased through nurseries. They have the same ability to dominate and spread, however, as other better known noxious weeds. Still other known methods of weed introduction include: • Contaminated seed, feed grain, hay, straw, and mulch. • Movement of contaminated equipment, cars, bikes, etc. across uncontaminated lands. • Animal fur, fleece, human clothing. • Dried flower arrangements. Prevention is best accomplished by ensuring that new weed species seed or vegetative reproductive plant parts of weeds are not introduced into new areas, and by early detection of any new weed species before they become widespread. STRATEGIES to prevent the introduction or establishment of noxious weeds in areas not already infested include: • Identification and eradication of small. new infestations. • Continuous monitoring and evaluation to prevent recurrence. • Identification of existing conditions, disturbances, and activities that represent a potential threat to native habitat. • Identification of recently introduced weed species that represent a future threat. 27 • • • • Timely revegetation and reclamation of disturbed sites using appropriate native plant species. • The use of weed free seeds and mulch. • Countywide promotion of the Colorado Weed Free Hay and Forage program. • Prioritization of weed management along areas of entry and dispersal. • Discouraging the sale of weedy ornamental plants and seed packets that contain weeds. PREVENTION WILL ALWAYS BE THE MOST EFFECTIVE NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL AVAILABLE. 4.03 Garfield County Gravel Purchase Guidelines The County shall require the following before agreeing to purchase any gravel for County projects: A. The gravel pit shall be inventoried and mapped by the pit operator for all plant species on Garfield County's noxious weed list on an annual basis. B The gravel pit operator shall provide the County with a weed management plan. Noxious weeds shall be treated prior to seed formation. • C. The gravel pit operator must supply the County with a detailed treatment record. • D. The County will inspect the pit, the inventory, and the application records two weeks prior to the purchase of gravel or other aggregates. 4.04 Education and Awareness: Education must play a major role in implementing this weed management plan. Groups targeted for public education include the following: farmers and ranchers, homeowners associations, private citizens, developers, gardeners, landscapers, nurseries, public and private land management agencies, recreational users, youth groups, schools, oil and gas companies, pipelines, and other utilities. A partnership of the public and private sectors, along with awareness of what noxious weeds are and the problems they cause, is essential to maintain or create plant communities that are free of noxious weeds. Knowledge about how to identify weeds, how and where weeds are spread, and what it takes to manage weeds is needed. Continuation and expansion of current educational programs as well as the development of new programs is a priority of the Garfield County Noxious Weed Management Plan. The Garfield County Vegetation Management Department and/or other governmental agencies will provide this instruction. Workshops will be held throughout the year to enhance public awareness. Opportunities for education include: • Widespread distribution of informative printed material. 28 • Offering weed tours and talks to the public. • Private applicator certification, applicator safety, and laws/regulations. • Proper calibration of spraying equipment. • Contacting area nurseries, landscapers, and landscape architects, to emphasize the problems created by escaped ornamentals. • Cooperation with local media to disseminate weed information. • Custom weed management recommendations for individual landowners. WEED MANAGEMENT BEGINS WITH EDUCATION. 4.05 Land Stewardship: The Colorado Noxious Weed Act requires that all property owners use integrated methods to manage noxious weeds. Weed management must be ongoing, requiring an integrated approach in which proper land stewardship practices are utilized. Most weed species, if detected early, can be managed. STRATEGIES: • Identify your plants. • Understand the target weed. Does it reproduce by seed or roots or both? • Maintain inventory maps. • Develop a noxious weed database. • Develop site specific weed management plans in cooperation with other individual landowners and public agencies. • Develop a decision-making process that uses site-specific information to make decisions about treatment choices. • Develop a long-term strategy including regular monitoring of treatment areas. • Alleviate the situation, or practices, that allowed the weeds to spread. • Take the necessary action. MAINTAINING LAND THAT IS FREE OF WEEDS IS GOOD STEWARDSHIP. LANDOWNERS WHO DO NOT MANAGE THEIR WEEDS PLACE THEIR NEIGHBORS' LANDS AT RISK. 4.06 Revegetation and Rehabilitation: A crucial part of any weed management plan is the reintroduction of site appropriate vegetation. Establishing a desirable plant community after noxious weeds have been removed from a highly infested area requires timely cultivation and reseeding. Since the seeds from noxious weeds may lay dormant for many years, removing all visible signs of the noxious weeds does not ensure against their return. Revegetation can help prevent the germination of weed seeds. It is important to inspect the land regularly to identify and treat small, new 29 • • • • • • infestations. For proper reclamation, managed irrigation of dry areas, fertilization, and reseeding are essential to establish desirable plant communities. Native plants are most appropriate when the goal is restoration (trying to restore native habitat). Weed -free seeds of native Colorado grasses, wildflowers or plant species appropriate to the site may be purchased, but the best source for seeds is from native species that grow in the immediate vicinity of the infestation. They will be best adapted to local conditions and will help maintain local integrity and genetic viability. Using native plants or seeds to reclaim disturbed land reduces degradation of native ecosystems, reduces the need for herbicides and conserves water resources. Native plants will provide a broad biological diversity and help keep Colorado looking like Colorado with a unique regional landscape that sets us apart from other areas of the country. When the goal is reclamation (reseeding for quick ground cover establishment or erosion control), it may be appropriate to use introduced, non-aggressive grasses and forbs. Contact the Natural Resources Conservation Service or Colorado State University Cooperative Extension for seeding recommendations. The Native Plant Revegetation Guide for Colorado, published by the Colorado State Parks Natural Areas Program, is an excellent guide for native plant reseeding. Contact the Garfield County Vegetation Management office for further information on this material. STRATEGIES: • Study all vegetation in the area and surrounding areas. • Preserve plant species native to Colorado. • Test the soil for pH balance. Try to retain and utilize as much on-site topsoil as possible. • Select a predominant species that is appropriate to the site. Then choose a few complimentary species to provide a balanced plant community. • Choose plants that are healthy, vigorous and pest free. • Use weed -free seeds. Use non -hybrid seeds. Avoid commercial seedpackets containing exotic plant species. • Choose plants that are horticulturally appropriate, i.e. plant species that are adaptable to climate, soil and topographical conditions of the designated area. • Consider the use of water, its availability and the vegetative requirements. • To landscape for wildlife, choose native plants that provide cover, forage, browse, seeds for birds and rodents, and shade. • Be site-specific; revegetation strategies may vary for small lots, farms, ranches or construction sites. • Establish a vegetative cover that is diverse, effective and long lasting, capable of self - regeneration. • Stabilize the surface. 4.07 Requirements (Soil Plan, Revegetation Plan & Security Adopted May 7, 2001): • At the discretion of the Board of County Commissioners, as part of the Planning and Zoning approval process, for land disturbances outside the building envelope, the County may require, at preliminary plan and prior to Final Plat, the following items: A Soil Plan to include: • Provisions for salvaging on-site topsoil. • A timetable for eliminating topsoil and/or aggregate piles. • A plan that provides for soil cover if any disturbances or stockpiles will sit exposed for a period of 90 days or more. A Revegetation Plan to include: • Plant material list (be specific, scientific and common names required). • Planting schedule (to include timing, methods, and provisions for watering, if applicable). • A map of the area impacted at preliminary plan (where the soil will be disturbed). • A revegetation bond. (Agricultural practices are exempt from revegetation requirements unless they are in association with a subdivision or land use proposal). A revegetation security may be required if, in the determination of the Board of County Commissioners, the proposed project has: • A potential to facilitate the spread of noxious weeds. • A potential to impact watershed areas. • A potential for visual impacts from public viewing corridors • Steep slopes (15% or greater) or unstable areas. • Disturbs large areas (Half an acre or greater). The revegetation security will be in an amount to be determined by the Board of County Commissioners that will be site-specific and based on the amount of disturbance. The security shall be held by Garfield County until vegetation has been successfully reestablished according to the following Reclamation Standards. The Board of County Commissioners will designate a member of their staff to evaluate the reclamation prior to the release of the security. 4.08 Reclamation Standards (Adopted Mav 7, 2001) 1. Site stability A. The reclaimed area shall be stable and exhibit none of the following characteristics: 1. Large rills or gullies. 31 • • • • 2. Perceptible soil movement or head cutting in drainages. 3. Slope instability on or adjacent to the reclaimed area. • B. Slopes shall be stabilized using appropriate reshaping and earthwork measures, including proper placement of soils and other materials. 2. Soil Management Topsoil management shall be salvaged from areas to be disturbed and managed for later use in reclamation. 3. Erosion Prevention The surface area disturbed at any one time during the development of a project shall be kept to the minimum necessary and the disturbed areas reclaimed within ninety days to prevent unnecessary or undue degradation resulting from erosion. A. The soil surface must be stable and have adequate surface roughness to reduce run- off, capture rainfall and snow melt, and allow for revegetation. B. Application of certified noxious weed free mulch or erosion netting may be necessary to reduce soil movement, retain soil moisture, and promote revegetation. C. Soil conservation measures, including surface manipulation, reduction in slope angle, revegetation, and water management techniques, shall be used. D. Sediment retention structures or devices shall be located as close to the source of the sediment generating activities as possible to increase their effectiveness and reduce environmental impacts. 4. Revegetation When the final landform is achieved, the surface shall be stabilized by vegetation or other means to reduce further soil erosion from wind or water, provide forage and cover, and reduce visual impacts. Specific criteria for evaluating revegetation success must be site- specific and included as a part of the reclamation plan. A. Vegetation production, species diversity, and cover, shall support the post - disturbance land use. Areas where the post -disturbance land use does not include lawns, gardens, and flower beds; shall approximate the surrounding undisturbed area or be revegetated to a desired plant community with a composition of species and plant cover typical to that site. B. The vegetation shall stabilize the site and support the planned post -disturbance land use, provide natural plant community succession and development, and be capable of renewing itself. This shall be demonstrated by: 1. Using certified noxious weed free seed. 2. Successful onsite establishment of the species included in the planting mixture and/or other desirable species. 3. Evidence of vegetation reproduction, either spreading by rhizomatous species or seed reproduction. 4. Evidence of overall site stability and sustainability. C. The revegetation plan shall provide for the greatest probability of success in plant establishment and vegetation development by considering environmental factors such as seasonal patterns of precipitation, temperature and wind; soil texture and fertility; slope stability; and direction of slope faces. D. To insure the establishment of a diverse and long-lasting vegetative cover, the permittee shall employ appropriate techniques of site preparation and protection. species diversity should be selected for long-term land uses and to provide for a reduction in visual contrast. E. Where revegetation is to be used, a diversity of vegetation species shall be used to establish a resilient, self-perpetuating ecosystem capable of supporting the post - disturbance land use. Species planted shall include those that will provide for quick soil stabilization, provide litter and nutrients for soil building and are self - renewing. F. Integrated Weed Management (IWM) methods shall be employed for all noxious weed species on the Garfield County List. Weed management methods shall be used whenever the inhabitation of the reclaimed area by noxious weeds threaten nearby areas. G. Where revegetation is impractical or inconsistent with the surrounding undisturbed areas, other forms of surface stabilization shall be used. Contact Steve Anthony, Garfield County Vegetation Manager, at 970-625-3969 for information on weed management and reclamation. Contact Dennis Davidson, Natural Resources Conservation Service, at 970-945-5494, ext. 101, for reclamation and seeding recommendations. 4.09 Mapping and Inventory: Mapping is a valuable tool in integrated weed management. As such, the Vegetation Manager will establish and maintain visual maps of past and present infestations of noxious weeds on county land. This will provide a graphic representation of weed management progress and needs. The primary goal of mapping will be to record the noxious weed 33 • • • species present, areas infested, density of infestations, and other site factors pertinent to • successfully managing the infestation. • • SECTION V ENFORCEMENT 5.01 Compliance: Private Lands: A. Inspection. (1) Garfield County, through its delegates, agents, and employees, shall have the right to enter upon any premises, lands, or places, whether public or private, during reasonable business hours for the purpose of inspecting for the existence of noxious weed infestations, when at least one of the following . has occurred: (a) The landowner has requested an inspection; (b) A neighboring landowner or occupant has reported a suspected noxious weed infestation and requested an inspection; or (c) An authorized agent of the local government has made a visual observation from a public right-of-way or area and has reason to believe that a noxious weed infestation exists. (2) (a) No entry upon any premises, lands, or places shall be permitted until the landowner or occupant has been notified by certified mail that such inspection is pending. Where possible, inspections shall be scheduled and conducted with the concurrence of the landowner or occupant. (b) If, after receiving notice that an inspection is pending the landowner or occupant denies access to the inspector of the local governing body, the inspector may seek an inspection warrant issued by a municipal, county, or district court having jurisdiction over the land. The court shall issue an inspection warrant upon presentation by the local governing body, through its agent or employee, of an affidavit stating: i) the information which gives the inspector reasonable cause to believe that any provision of this article is being or has been violated; ii) that the occupant or landowner has denied access to the inspector; and iii) a general description of the location of the affected land. No landowner or occupant shall deny access to such land when presented with an inspection warrant. B. Management. (1) If following inspection pursuant to section 5.01(A), land is found to contain designated undesirable plants, the landowner shall be given written notice, personally or by certified mail. The notice shall name the undesirable plants, identify the location of the plants, advise the landowner to control the undesirable plants, and specify the best available control methods of integrated management. The notice shall include an offer to consult with the landowner in the development 34 of a management plan for the control of undesirable plants on the land. The notice also shall state that the landowner shall, within a reasonable time not to exceed 10 days, either (I) comply with the terms of the notification; (II) acknowledge the terms of the notification and submit an acceptable plan and schedule for the completion of the plan for compliance; or (III) request an arbitration panel to determine the final management plan. (2) If the landowner chooses action option I, the Garfield County Vegetation Management Department, or its representative, will re -inspect the land to confirm compliance. (3) If the landowner chooses action option II, the Garfield County Vegetation Management Department, or its representative will review the proposed weed management plan and determine its efficacy. If the plan is acceptable, no further action will be taken except to monitor compliance, including re -inspection. (4) If the landowner chooses action option III, an arbitration panel will be selected by the Board of County Commissioners, in accordance with CRS 35-5.5-109(4)(b). The state statute currently anticipates that the arbitration panel shall be comprised of a weed management specialist or weed scientist, a landowner of similar land in the same county, and a third panel member chosen by agreement of the first two panel members. The landowner or occupant shall be entitled to challenge any one member of the panel, and the local governing body shall name a new panel member from the same category. The decision of the arbitration panel shall be final. A hearing shall be set for a time and date as soon as practical after the panel is complete. The Garfield County Vegetation Management Department, or its representative, shall give written notice, personally or by mail, of the hearing to any complainant. The landowner is entitled to appear before the panel, individually and/or by representative, as is any complainant. The arbitration panel will be required to determine the final management plan not more than two calendar weeks after the hearing is completed. In the event of non-compliance with any management plan, in addition to remedies set forth in paragraph 5.0 1 C. The arbitration panel shall have the ability to award cost of the arbitration to the prevailing party including arbitration panel fees and expenses. These fees and expenses may include, but are not limited to, salary, wages, travel, and per deim expenses. C. Failure to Comply. 1. Public Nuisance. If the landowner fails to comply with the notice to control the designated undesirable plants, fails to submit an acceptable management plan, fails to comply with an accepted management plan, or fails to comply with a management plan as determined by the arbitration panel, the Board of County Commissioners, at a public hearing at least 10 days after notice thereof to the property owner, may declare the infested property a public nuisance for which the remedies for abatement of a public nuisance shall be available as provided in C.R.S. 35-5.5-113. Once declared, such 35 • • • • • • nuisances are subject to all laws and remedies relating to the prevention and abatement of nuisances. 2. Other remedies. In addition to, or as an alternative to the nuisance remedy Garfield County may compel management of the weeds in the following manner: the Garfield County Vegetation Management Department, or its representative, shall give written notice of a hearing before the Board of County Commissioners to the landowner by personal delivery or by certified mail which will include the date and time of the hearing, 10 days prior to the hearing date. The notice will include (i) description of the land, (ii) name of the undesirable plants and their location(s) on the land, (iii) date the Garfield County Vegetation Management Department, or its representative, will perform weed control on the land, (iv) method of control to be applied, (v) a statement that the land will be assessed the entire cost of the weed control plus 20% surcharge for the cost of inspection and other incidental costs, which total will be a lien on the land (or the tract of which it is a part) until paid, and (vi) a statement should the landowner refuse admission to the land for application of the weed control, the County will seek civil and/or criminal penalties and court -enforced abatement of a public nuisance. Such an assessment under this section shall have priority over all other liens except general taxes and prior special assessments may be certified by Garfield County Vegetation Management to the County Treasurer and collected and paid over in the same manner as provided for collection of taxes. Costs of providing for and compelling weed management shall not be assessed until the level of management called for in the notice or as developed by the arbitration panel has been successfully achieved. 3. Other Occupants. Whenever the land is known to the Garfield County Vegetation Management Department, or its representative, to be occupied by someone other than the record owner, written notices also shall be given to the occupant, and the occupant shall be informed that C.R.S. 35-5.5-109 and this regulation imposes on occupants the same responsibilities for undesirable plant control as it imposes on landowners. 4. Notice. Whenever notice is given by mail, it shall be deemed given when deposited in a regular depositary of the United States Postal Service, postage prepaid. Notice to landowners shall be mailed to the last known address as shown in the County's Assessment Roll unless the landowner has provided the Garfield County Vegetation Management Department a different address for notice. Notice to occupants shall be mailed to the land's physical address unless the occupant has provided the Garfield County Vegetation Management Department with a different address for notice. 5. Condition Precedent. No private land management shall be compelled without first applying the same or greater management measures to county land or rights-of-way that are adjacent to the private property. 5.02 State Public Lands: C.R.S. 35-5.5-110 and the Governor's Executive Order for Noxious Weed Management Programs govern compliance on lands owned by the state of Colorado or its agencies. 5.03 County Rights -of -Way: It shall be the duty of Garfield County to confirm that all county roads, highways, rights-of- way, and any easements appurtenant thereto, are in compliance with the Colorado Noxious Weed Act and this management plan, and any violations of this article by the county shall be the financial responsibility of the county. SECTION VI 6.01 PLAN EVALUATION The goals and plan of work in the Garfield County Noxious Weed Management Plan will be reviewed and evaluated annually at the February Garfield County Weed Advisory Board meeting. Any proposed additions or changes shall be recommended by the Garfield County Weed Advisory Board and approved by ordinance by the Board of County Commissioners before becoming final. The Garfield County Noxious Weed Management Plan shall be reviewed by the Weed Advisory Board at least every three years, per CRS 35-5.5-107(4)(a); and the management plan and any recommended amendments to the plan shall be transmitted to the Board of County Commissioners for approval, modification, or rejection. SECTION VII RESOURCE DIRECTORY AND SOURCES OF INFORMATION 7.01 Government & Other Organizations Bureau of Land Management Glenwood Springs Field Office PO Box 1009 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 37 (970) 947-2800 Colorado Department of Agriculture Eric Lane, State Weed Coordinator 700 Kipling St., Suite 4000 • • • • • • Lakewood, CO 80215-5894 (303) 239-4182 Colorado Department of Ag. Insectary P.O. Box 400 .Palisade, CO 81526 (970) 464-7916 Colorado Division of Wildlife 50633 US Hwy 6 & 24 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 945-7228 Colorado Department of Transportation 226 S. 6th St., Room 317 Grand Junction, CO 81501 (970) 248-7361 Colorado State University Extension Weed Science Specialist 116 Weed Research Ft. Collins CO 80523 (970) 491-7568 Colorado State University Cooperative Extension PO Box 1112 Rifle, CO 81650 (970) 625-3969 Colorado Weed Management Association P.O. Box 1910 Granby, CO 80446-1910 (970) 887-1228 Eagle County Weed Department PO Box 239 Eagle, CO 81631 (970) 328-8778 Garfield County Vegetation Management PO Box 1112 Rifle, Co 81650 (970) 625-3969 Natural Resources Conservation Service Bookcliff Soil Conservation District Mount Sopris Soil Conservation District Southside Soil Conservation District PO Box 1302 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 945-5494 Pitkin County Land Management 76 Service Center Road Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 920-5214 Roaring Fork Railroad Holding Authority PO Box 1270 Carbondale, CO 81623 (970) 704-9282 White River National Forest 900 Grand Ave. Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 945-2521 7.02 Internet Websites Colorado Weed Management Association http://www.fortnet.org/CWMA Native Plant Conservation Initiative http://www.nature.nps.gov/npci/ Bureau of Land Management http://vvww.blm.govleducation.html National Wildlife Federation http://www.nwf.org Pesticide Information http://164.159.187.239?NWRSFi1es/Inte met resources/Pesticide.html 7.03 BOOKS Weeds of the West University of Wyoming Bulletin Room (307) 766-2115 Colorado Flora, Western Slope William Weber and Ronald Wittman Available in most bookstores Native Plant Revegetation Guide for Colorado Colorado Natural Areas Program (303) 866-3437 Noxious Weeds, Exotic and Invasive Plant Management Resources http:// 164.15 9.187.23 9/NWRSFi1es/Inter netResources/Weeds.html Weed Science Society of America http://piked2.agn.uic.edu/wssa/ Colorado Natural Heritage Program http://colostate.edu/Orgs/CNHP Colorado Natural Areas Program http://elbert.state.co.us/cnap Chemical Label Information http://greenbook.net Trees and Shrubs of Colorado By: Jack Carter Available in most bookstores Troublesome Weeds of the Rocky Mountain West Colorado Weed Management Assoc. Available through Garfield County (970) 625-3969 Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland Weeds University of Arizona Press 1230 N. Park Ave. Suite 102 Tuscon, AZ 86719 1-800-426-3797 39 • • • • • • SECTION VIII 8.01 DEFINITIONS 1. Act — The Colorado Noxious Weed Act, Title 35 C.R.S., Article 5.5 as amended. 2. Adjacent — Having a common boundary that meets or touches at some point. 3. Aggressive — Fast growing, tending to spread quickly. 4. Agriculture — Uses involving the cultivation of land, production of crops, and/or the keeping of livestock and the preparation of these products for man's use and disposal. 5. Alien Plant — A plant species that is not indigenous to the State of Colorado. 6. Annual — A plant that lasts one growing season, completing its life cycle from seed to seed in one year. 7. Biennial — A plant that lives in two calendar years. The first year is usually a vegetative form, such as a rosette of leaves. The second year the plant grows a flowering shoot, sets seeds and dies. 8. Biological Management — The use of organisms to disrupt the growth of noxious weeds. 9. Bolt — To flower or produce seeds prematurely or develop a flowering stem from a rosette. 10. Bract — A reduced or modified leaf often surrounding the base of a flower. 11. Browse - Tender shoots, twigs, and leaves of trees and shrubs fit for food for wildlife. 12. Chemical Management — The use of agents or plant growth regulators to disrupt or inhibit the growth of noxious weeds. 13. Commissioners — The Garfield County Board of Commissioners. 14. County — The unincorporated areas of Garfield County. 15. Cultural Management — Methods or management practices which favor the growth of desirable plants over noxious weeds, including maintaining optimum fertility and plant moisture status in an area, planting at optimum density and spatial arrangement in an area, and planting species most suited to a particular area. 40 16. Designated Noxious Weed — A non-native, invasive plant or plant parts that is identified as a threat to native plant communities and included on the Garfield County Noxious Weed list. 17. Desirable Plants — Plants considered to be advantageous and beneficial to the environmental viability of the county. 18. Escaped Ornamental -A plant originally intended for horticultural or landscape situations that has escaped its intended boundaries. 19. Exotic Plant — A plant that is not a regular member of the native or natural community in which it is found. 20. Forb - A broad -leafed, non -woody plant other than grass that dies back to the ground after each growing season. 21. Forage - Food for animals, especially when taken by browsing or grazing. 22. Garfield County Weed Advisory Board — A group of individuals appointed by the Board of County Commissioners of .Garfield County to advise on matters of management of noxious weeds. 23. Herbaceous - Applies to plants of soft texture whose stems die back to the ground after each growing season; green and leaf like, not woody. 24. Infestation — Growth of an undesirable plant which has become harmful or bothersome. • Heavy Infestation — Dense, 25-100 percent canopy cover. • Moderate Infestation — Widely scattered plants, 5-25 percent canopy cover. • Light Infestation — Occasional plant per acre, less than 5 percent canopy cover. 25. Integrated Management — The planning and implementation of a coordinated program utilizing a variety of methods for managing noxious weeds, the purpose of which is to achieve desirable plant communities. Such methods may include but are not limited to education, preventive measures, good stewardship and biological, cultural, herbicide and mechanical management. 26. Invasive — Aggressive, capable of invading a plant community and creating a monoculture. 27. Invasive Ornamental -A plant originally intended for horticultural or landscape situations that has escaped its intended boundaries and is capable of invading a plant community and creating a monoculture. 28. Landowner — Any owner of record of state, municipal or private property including an owner of any easement, right-of-way, or estate within the county. 41 • • • • • 29. Lobe - A division or segment of a leaf or other plant part, especially a rounded one. 30. Local Noxious Weed — Any plant of local importance which has been declared an invasive or undesirable plant by the Garfield County Weed Advisory Board. 31. Management — Any activity that prevents a plant from establishing, reproducing, or dispersing itself. 32. Management Plan — A plan developed by the local Weed Advisory Board and implemented by the Board of County Commissioners in order to control the spread of noxious weeds. 33. Mechanical Management — Methods or management practices that physically disrupt plant growth including tilling, mowing, burning, flooding, mulching, hand -pulling, shoveling, hoeing and chopping. 34. Monoculture — A single homogeneous crop without diversity. 35. Native Plant — A plant species that is indigenous to a particular locale. 36. Neighboring — Any property located within a one-half mile radius of the boundary of a subject property. 37. Noxious Weed — An alien plant or parts of an alien plant that has been designated as being invasive and undesirable and has been declared a noxious weed by the County Weed Advisory Board and meets one or more of the following criteria: a) aggressively invades or is physically destructive to economic crops or native plant communities; b) is detrimental directly or indirectly to the environmentally sound management of natural or agricultural ecosystems; c) is poisonous to livestock; d) is a carrier of detrimental insects, diseases or parasites. 38. Noxious Weed Management — The planning and implementation of an integrated program to manage undesirable or problematic plant species. 39. Ornamental - A decorative, aggressive, non-native plant often sold through nurseries or spread through seed collection; a threat to native plant species because it has no natural predators and thus competes against the plants of the natural ecosystem. 40. Perennial - A plant that grows for three years or more. Usually flowering and producing fruit each year. The above ground part of the plant may die, but new growth comes from the roots or the crown each spring. 41. Petiole - A slender stem that supports the blade of a foliage leaf. 42 42. Rhizome - An elongated subterranean plant stem that produces shoots above and roots below, and is distinguished from a true root by possessing buds, nodes and scalelike leaves. 43. Rosette - A cluster of closely crowded leaves in a compact circle, usually at ground level. 44. State Noxious Weed — Any weed identified by the commissioner of the State of Colorado Department of Agriculture after surveying the Local Weed Advisory Boards and prioritizing the top ten problematic plants. Said survey is to be conducted every three years. 45. Subject Lands - All public and private lands within unincorporated Garfield County with the exception of: a) any municipal property owned or leased to an incorporated municipality; b) any land managed or administered by a federal agency. 46. Surfactant - A compound that improves the emulsifying, dispersing, spreading, wetting, or other surface modifying properties of liquids. 47. Weed Inspector — The agent or employee appointed to conduct the duties and functions as defined under this plan. 48. Weed Office — The office of the Weed Inspector, or Vegetation Management Director, out of which all noxious weed administration and enforcement activities are conducted. 49. Wildflower — The flower of a wild or uncultivated plant or the plant bearing it. 50. Xeriscape — Landscaping with water conservation as a major objective. 43 • • • APPENDIX J - WILDLIFE • • MULE DEER RANGE LEGEND Resident population Severe winter range Note: The source of the Information shown on this map is the Colorado Division of Wildlife's Natural Diversity Information Source Web Page www.ndis.nrel.colostate.edu. 200 200 400 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 1 INCH= 200 FEET SCALE: 1" = 200' Peach Valley Vistas Deer Range DATE: FEBRUARY 16, 2005 SHEET: 1of2 J PROJECT: 02372 DRAWING: Wildlife map.dwg DIRECTORY: H:\02372\01\Preliminary Plan Maps and Drawings\WIIdHNe\ DRAWN BY: BK CHKD BY: AUG GAMBA & ASSOCIATES Kelly and Michael Lyon Family, LLC Peach Valley Vistas PO Box 110 Silt, Colorado 81652 (970) 876-5944 GAMBA & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS 970/945-2550 WWW.GAMBAENGINEERING.COM 113 NINTH BT., STE.214 P.O. Box 1958 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81802 SHEET NO. 1 • ELK RANGE LEGEND Winter range Winter concentration areas. Note: The source of the information shown on this map is the Colorado Division of Wildlife's Natural Diversity Information Source Web Page www.ndis.nrel.colostate.edu. 200 200 • 400 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 1 INCH= 200 FEET Peach Valley Vistas Elk Range SCALE: 1" = 200' SHEET: 2 of 2 DATE: FEBRUARY 16,20051 [ iOJECT: 02372 DRAWING: Wildlife map.dwg DIRECTORY H:\02372\01\Preliminary Plan Maps and Drawings \Wildlife\ DRAWN BY: BK CHKD BY: MJG GAMBA Kelly and Michael Lyon Family, LLC Peach Valley Vistas PO Box 110 Silt, Colorado 81652 (970)876-5944 GAMBA & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS 970/948-2880 WWW.GAMBAENGINEERING.COM 113 NINTH BT., UTE. E14 P.O. BOX 1458 OLENWOOD SPRINGS. CO 8180E SHEET NO. • APPENDIX K - TITLE COMMITMENT • • • APPENDIX L - ISDS OPERATION AND MAINAINENCE AND DATA • s INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM SEPTIC TANK AND LEACH FIELD -^^ PREPARED FOR: PEACH VALLEY VISTAS SILT, COLORADO "OktPorg5r7- ' , 4CritIN Of 01 aoiclitent grerr 'TANI CROFPO SW,170,4 tar0,4 0131147: GAMBA & ASSOCIATES CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS ,:atata 1,41a. «0404Ort ,WAS 4010k1k VA,44,k,ilk..0.4,10 -Mx,. 941% Calgt, j PLNJG pyrta. "SlAktAti4 ,itittfhA,^44 4,114 • INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE The following tips and suggestions are intended to increase the useful life of your engineered sewage disposal system and to prevent disposal system failure due to neglect and abuse. The design of this system is designed for a minimum number of persons occupying the stated structures. A larger occupancy rate than the design rate may result in an overload of the septic system and cause immediate system failure or a reduction of the life span of the leaching area. MINIMIZE THE LIQUIDS Wastewater that enters the system can be minimized by practicing water conservation practices within your home. The Tess wastewater you produce, the less wastewater there will be to treat and dispose. 1. Repair leaky fixtures. Check the toilet(s), by dropping food -coloring dye in the tank(s) and see if it shows up in the bowl prior to flushing. 2. Wash clothes only when you have a full load. 3. Take short showers instead of baths. Don't turn on the shower all the way and turn it off while lathering. 4. Install and use water saving fixtures and devices in your bathrooms, laundry rooms and kitchens. 5. Do not let the water run while washing, shaving, brushing teeth, rinsing vegetables, dishes, etc. Use a stoppered basin where possible. 6. Provide adequate drainage around the engineered system area to divert surface runoff from higher ground during storms or winter snowmelt. MINIMIZE THE SOLIDS Septic systems are "anaerobic" treatment systems. Digestion of solid materials is very slow and requires air or "aerobic" conditions to "disappear". The less material you put into the system, the less often it will require pumping. A good rule to follow is: "Don't use your septic system for anything that can be disposed of in some other way" 1. Avoid using a garbage disposal. Throw out scraps and other garbage with the trash. 2. Collect grease in a container rather than pouring it down the sink. 3. Minimize the disposal of paper products into the system. Non -degradable items such as disposable diapers, sanitary napkins, tissues, cigarette butts and paper towels are especially harmful to the system. ISDS 0 & M Manual Page 1 of 3 4. Only three things should go into the septic tank: Human Wastes; Toilet Paper; and Water. 5. Ordinary household chemicals (bleaches, detergents & soaps) will not hurt the bacteria in your system when not used in excessive amounts. 6. DO NOT DISPOSE OILS, PAINTS, THINNERS OR OTHER TOXIC LIQUIDS INTO YOUR SYSTEM. SEPTIC TANK ADDITIVES Advertised chemical additives, bacteria, enzymes, etc. do not help solids breakdown in the septic tank and should not be used to reduce the need for pumping the septic tank. REGULAR INSPECTIONS Septic Tank: To inspect the septic tank, remove the manhole cover at the inlet end of the tank. Use a shovel to push the scum layer away from the side of the tank and estimate its thickness. If the scum layer is 12" thick or more, arrange to have the septic tank pumped immediately. Replace the cover and wash off the shovel and your hands. For an average 3 or 4 bedroom residence, the pumping interval for the septic tank is usually between 2 and 4 years. Annual inspection of the septic tank should become part of your overall home maintenance routine. Effluent Filter: The effluent filter should be fitted with an alarm to warn when it is becoming plugged, regardless if an alarm is present or not, the filter should be inspected and cleaned following the manufacturers recommendations, or at least once per year. Dosing Tank or Pump Station: To inspect the dosing tank, follow the same instructions for the septic tank. However, there should not be a scum layer or sediments inside the tank. Check to see if the water level markings are consistent on the side of the tank. Variability indicates that the siphon or effluent pump is not operating properly. If the water level is near the top of the markings, wait for the siphon or pump to operate and watch for problems. The siphon has an overflow pipe in which the effluent will flow out of the tank by gravity. Should this be occurring, have the tank pumped and check the siphon openings to see if they are plugged. ISDS 0 & M Manual Page 2of3 • • • • • Filter Mound or Trench: Check the observation tubes regularly. Standing water near the same elevation as the natural soil surface (or higher) may be an indication of trouble. Look for seepage or excessive wetness near the base of the filter mound or trench area. SUMMARY A general inspection of the septic tank, dosing tank (or pump station), filter mound or trench area should be made each year. These inspections are best made during the wet season of the year. If these items are not routinely inspected, solids can carry over into the disposal areas from the septic tank and clog the system resulting in system failure and health hazard risks. In areas with potentially high ground water, the septic tank should be pumped during low water months such as September, October, and November. Pumping during high water months may cause the septic tank to float out of the ground. H:\04467102 ISDS managment\O&M-Story.doc ISDS 0 & M Manual Page 3 of 3 PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS FORM Peach Valley Vistas Preliminary Plan Pere Tests; 02372-01 DROP in WATER PERCOLATI LEVEL ON RATE L (inches) 1 (min/in) 240.00 o 0 N 120.00 240.00 Hole Percolation Rate:I 240.00 0 0 N 0 0 N 240.00 240.00 0 0 N 0 0 00 0 0 - CN 0.188 1 160.00 Hole Percolation Rate:I 160.00 Average Percolation Rate of 3 Holes:I 213.33 Notes: Percolation Tests #992, #993, & #996 were performed on 10-8-04. k!1 N 7--4 0 V) N ,--- 0 O kr) N 0 k!) N --I 0 V') N —+ O to N ,--i O 0.125 N N O Hole Percolation Rate:I 3/8 0.375 o0 oo * o M r-+ en 0 DEPTH TO WATER LEVEL (FROM TOP OF DROP in STAKE) WATER LEVEL (inches) 1 (inches) 1 3/4 1 1/8 00 '' 2 1/4 1 1/8 00 00 00 - 00 - � 00 0\0 ---I 0\0 N 00 O 0\0 _ O d\ O 10 3/8 N - M oo l n' .--1 -,-- 0:30 30.0 1 4 3/8 I .-� O� TME INTERVAL 30.0 o o 1 30.0 O OM O O O O O O o o 0 0 O 0 TME INTERVAL O O o O I 0:30 I 0:30 0:30 0:30 1 0:30 0:30 10:27:00 1 0:30 10:57:00 1 0:30 O M o s. eo 0 O 0 O 4fi. --i 0 o O - 0 o. vi .-a '-i O 0 Vi ,--a - 9:45:00 O O 4(i O -,- o O do O o O U'1 -' _- O o, kP) • , - .--1 (6 0 o C� -I .---' 0 O N .--�' --- TEST HOLE - below existing HOLE No. N # CY # CY #$ • • • Garfield, after PP perc. tests County Health Deportment ISDS Design Calculations Gravel less Infiltration System Individual Sewage Disposal/Treatment System Type: Owner's Name and Address: Septic Tank Project Number: 02372-01 House Size (sq. ft.): 0 N/A gallons/person/day Number of Bedrooms in Main House Number of Offices, Libraries, Studies, Similar -sized Rooms in Main House Number of Bedrooms in Detached Caretaker unit Number of Offices, Studies, Similar -sized Rooms in Caretaker Unit (If the caretaker unit is ATTACHED, treat as if part of main house.) Average Daily Waste Flow : aft fer eI9 c r e. spjeol B Average Percolation Rate (t) = 240.0 minutes/inch Design Flow (Q) = Average Daily Waste Flow X 1.5 Design Flow, Q = 900 gallons/day Yes 4 0 0 0 Garbage Disposal? (Y/N) Minimum of 2 bedroom Total Bedrooms and Potential Bedrooms: 4 equivalents. Additional flow in gallons/person/day due to two, (2) bathrooms, assume water closet, lavatory, and shower: persons using additional bathrooms. 0 0 600 dm gallons/day Absorption Area = A = - ,x'XI T 5 A= A (Trench) = A (Bed) = 2788.55 sq. ft. of absorption area required 1394.27 sq. ft.. Trench System: 1951.98 sq. ft.. Bed System: Percolation rate is an average. 2,789.00 sq.ft. (Rounded Area) 50 % Reduction 30 % Reduction A maximum ft t e a Ppc.sToa1 m Palfrq:11 aTrT i s rBM dTTra rBM dl 11 a uB2 b r Pd cj . 2 wEnTrd3a a system only if the lot size and soil conditions are optimal . If a reduction is being proposed, describe why lot INFILTRATORS for Garfield County Number of Infiltrator Units (BED) Rounded Number of Units: 125.93 Standard 126 bed system, Unit Length: Unit Width: 30.33 units wide, and feet wide X 6.00 Row Separation: 3.42 3.00 Actual number of Infiltrators for "square" field/trench = 14.00 units long. 84.00 feet long 2,548.00 sq. ft. of trenches 126.00 units Infiltrator Cost (ea.) = $ 28.00 Cost of Infiltrators = $3,528.00 Page 1 H:02372011SDS1SDS Calculations.xls • APPENDIX M - WATER SUPPLY PLAN REPORT • s DOMESTIC WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM REPORT PEACH VALLEY VISTAS SILT, COLORADO April 6, 2005 PREPARED FOR: Kelly and Michael Lyon Family. LLC Peach Valley Vistas PO Box 110 Silt Colorado 81652 (970) 876-5944 PREPARED BY: Gamba & Associates, Inc. Consulting Engineers and Land Surveyors 113 Ninth Street — Suite 214 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone: (970) 945-2550 Fax: (970) 945-1410 Chris Furman P.E 35179 • • • Table of Contents Introduction 1 Water Source 1 Water Demand 1 Water Quality 2 Water Treatment 2 Water Availability 3 Water Supply, Treatment, and Distribution 3 Alternative Treatment Systems Reviewed 3 Fire Flow 4 APPENDIX A APPENDIX B APPENDIX C APPENDIX D APPENDIX E — — Well Permits — Water Quality Test Data, Well #1 — Water Model Output — Fire District Tank Approval Letter Well Pump Test Data • Introduction The proposed Peach Valley Vistas Subdivision is located east of the Town of Silt. The Davis Point Road borders the property on the west, County Road 214 borders the north, the Peach Valley Acres Subdivision borders the east and the Cactus Valley Ditch borders the south. The property is currently zoned Garfield County A/R/RD and is used for agricultural activities such as hay production. A vineyard is also located in the southern portion of the property. The Peach Valley Vistas Subdivision parcel contains approximately 54.878 acres. The proposed land use for the Peach Valley Vistas Subdivision is residential in nature and consists of twenty-five single-family lots. Access is provided by a loop road and a cul-de-sac which accesses Davis Point Road directly. In general, we anticipate that the Peach Valley Vistas water supply system will actually consist of two separate systems. One system for potable domestic water and another for irrigation water. The systems will not be interconnected. The potable water system, as proposed, will consist of two wells, a treatment plant, a storage tank, and a distribution pipe network. The various components of the system are discussed in more detail below. A design drawing depicting the proposed layout for the system is included in the submittal for subdivision preliminary plan. The following is a brief description of the proposed layout for the water system. Well #1 is located in the southerly portion of the project and near the easterly property line. Well #2 is also in the southerly portion of the property and near the Cactus Valley Ditch. The wells will pump through a PVC pipe to the treatment plant which is proposed to be in the generally area of the project entrance. A 4 -inch PVC supply pipeline is constructed from the project parcel to the easement parcel where the storage tank will be constructed. Parallel to the existing 4 -inch PVC supply pipeline is an 8 -inch PVC distribution main pipeline. The 8 -inch main will serve the developments distribution network which basically consists of a looped PVC main and a PVC main dead end line serving the lots adjacent to the cul-de-sac. Water Source cN The water source for the Peach Valley Vistas potable water supply system will consist of two existing and permitted wells (well #1 and well #2). Copies of the well permits are included in the r) appendix of this report. Well #1 is decreed for 14 gpm, well #2 is decreed for 27.25 gpm and /XC wells #1 and #2 combined are permitted to pump up to 13.665 acre feet per year. The wells have had 24 hour pump tests performed and well #1 has had a significant amount of water �N l quality testing done. Quality test results are included in the appendix of this report. v\, Irrigation c� Irrigation demands will be met through a separate irrigation water supply system. Irrigation ` \ water will come from the Ware and Hines ditch, shares of which are owned by the property (� owner and will be deeded to the Peach Valley Homeowners Association. Storage for the irrigation system is proposed to be either a small pond located within Lot 25 or individual tanks with booster pumps at each lot. Water Demand Potable water demands have been conservatively estimated as follows: Domestic use: 100 gallons/person/day X 3.5 persons/residence X 25 residences = 10,000 gallons per day. Peach Valley Vistas Water Supply System April 6, 2005 Page 1 = 8,750 acre feet / year Water Quality Water quality test data for well #1 indicate that the well water will require more treatment than is typical for underground water sources, although the water quality seems consistent with the Silt area, with a couple of exceptions. The majority of contaminants tested for were either not detected or detected at levels below maximum acceptable levels. The contaminates found in the testing which are of the most concern are radon and toluene. Radon is a naturally occurring gaseous radioactive element resulting from the radioactive decay of uranium. The principal concern regarding radon comes from the off -gassing of radon from the ground water while showering or during similar activities. Radon has the potential to cause lung cancer. Currently there is no federally enforced drinking water standard for radon. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed to regulate radon in drinking water from community water suppliers such as the Peach Valley Vistas. The Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) proposed by the EPA is 300 pCi/L. The measured levels of radon for well #1 are 810 picoCurie/Liter (pCi/L). . Recommended treatment methods to remove radon from drinking water are Aeration and/or Granulated Activated Carbon (GAC) filtration. Toluene is an organic hydrocarbon liquid. The largest chemical use for toluene is to make benzene and urethane. The discovery of toluene in the well #1 sample data is unexpected. The EPA has set a MCL for toluene of 1 part per million (ppm). The measured levels of toluene for well #1 are 1.5 ppm. The EPA has approved the following treatment methods for removing toluene: GAC in combination with Packed Tower Aeration. Several other contaminants were found in the testing of well #1 at levels which are higher than the EPA's Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels (SMCL) or EPA guidance levels. These contaminants, the reported level, and the SMCL are as follows: Test Contaminant Results units Level Total Solids 1680 mg/L 500 mg/L SMCL Sulfate 369 mg/L 250 mg/L SMCL Sodium 630 mg/L 20 mg/L EPA Guidance Level The ground water is described as "hard water" due to the levels of solids dissolved within it. Total solids at the tested levels will leave residue wherever water has evaporated from a surface and are expected to cause significant increases in the maintenance and replacement schedule for all potable water system components, both in the treatment plant and in the individual homes of the development. Sulfate concentrations at the level tested may cause a poor taste. Sodium concentrations at the level tested may present a health risk to individuals requiring a low sodium diet and will cause a salty taste to the water. Additional water quality testing for each well is to be conducted prior to a final design for the treatment system Water Treatment We propose to treat the water to reduce the levels of radon and toluene to below the MCL for toluene and the proposed MCL for radon with a packed tower aeration unit and a GAC unit. We Peach Valley Vistas Water Supply System April 6, 2005 Page 2 • • further recommend that at a minimum each house be equipped with a water softener for the entire house and a Reverse Osmosis (RO) system for drinking water. Water Availability Wells #1 and #2 have been decreed as discussed above in the Water Source section of this report. Repeating for convenience, Well #1 is decreed for 14 gpm, well #2 is decreed for 27.25 gpm and wells #1 and #2 combined are permitted to pump up to 13.665 acre feet per year. Wells #1 and #2 were subjected to pump tests. Well #1 was pump tested for 24 hours at a constant pumping rate of 14 gallons per minute (gpm). Well #2 was pump tested for 24 hours at a constant pumping rate of approximately 27.25 gpm. Water Supply, Treatment, and Distribution Water supply system for the Peach Valley Vistas development is proposed to generally consist of the following components, listed in the order of flow of water: • Pumps in wells #1 and #2. • Packed tower Aeration unit. • Wet well. • Supply pump. • Granulated Activated Carbon (GAC) unit. • Disinfection by the injection of a mixed oxidant solution as prepared by a MIOX disinfection system. • • Chlorine contact in the PVC pipeline supplying the 80,000 gallon water storage tank. The supply and distribution pipelines are separate to preclude the possibility of "shortcutting" the system and distributing water before the full chlorine contact time has occurred. • 80,000 above ground steel water storage tank or alternate on an adjoining easement parcel. (Note: The above ground tank has been designed.) • PVC distribution pipe network, as depicted on the drawing included with the Preliminary Plan submittal. • Inline water valves at minimum 1000 foot spacing and at pipe intersections. • Fire hydrants and accessories, as directed by the Fire District. Alternative Treatment Systems Reviewed Due to the contaminant load of the well water we have investigated several water treatment processes not typically required for well water supplying a small community water system. Processes investigated include: Various filtration methods including Reverse Osmosis (RO), and nanofiltration membranes. These micro -filtration technologies have the capability of producing extremely clean water. In fact, typically, less -treated water is re -injected to the stream after the RO process to reintroduce minerals to the final drinking water. Reverse Osmosis is an attractive alternative in that it produces the most aesthetically pleasing water. However, the process is not particularly efficient in that it creates a "waste" stream of water which is slightly enriched in contaminants which must be disposed of. The typical disposal S method is in shallow infiltration fields (similar to an ISDS leach field). Other disposal means may include deep injection wells or conveyance to a surface water. We are continuing our Peach Valley Vistas Water Supply System April 6, 2005 Page 3 investigation of these processes but foresee cost issues and potential difficulties in the disposal of the waste stream which may preclude their use. Alternative disinfection methods include: chlorine gas, sodium hypochlorite, Ultra Violet (UV) and mixed oxidents. At this time we are proposing the MIOX mixed oxidant process. The MIOX process produces a mixed oxidant solution from a brine solution created from sodium chloride (table salt). The salt is stored in the unit and on site and presents very little risk to human health or the equipment. Chlorine gas injection, while relative simple and fundamentally cost effective, presents very significant risk to human health. Chlorine gas is toxic and special handling and security is required for its safe use. We anticipate that in the future even more stringent handling requirements will be implemented, increasing operating costs significantly. Chlorine gas injection can also leave a sufficiently high residual so as to cause objectionable taste and odor. Sodium Hypochlorite: On-site generation of sodium hypochlorite remains a potentially viable alternative to on-site generation of mixed oxidants. The mixed oxidant solution provides the potential for greater flexibility in treating for quality issues other than just providing disinfection. Fire Flow Fire fighting water will be provided from the proposed 80,000 gallon water storage tank and distributed via the potable water pipe network. Fire hydrants are proposed at various locations along the access road at maximum intervals of 500 feet and as directed by the Fire District, see the accompanying drawing. A comprehensive water model has been developed for the project using Haestad Methods, Inc. WaterCAD v3.5 software. The results from this model are included in an appendix of this report. The parameters of the water model are: • Water storage tank base elevation: 5,637 feet • Water storage tank height: 24 feet • Minimum available fire flow from a hydrant: 1,500 gpm • Minimum residual pressure: 20 psi • Maximum line pressure: • Pipe type: PVC C900 The design meets the Uniform Fire Code, 1997 requirements. Peach Valley Vistas Water Supply System April 6, 2005 Page 4 • • • • • • Peach Valley Vistas Open Space "The 6.55 acres identified as OS 2 on the plat will be common open space for the use of the homeowners in Peach Valley Vistas. This parcel shall be deeded to the Homeowner's Association for Peach Valley Vistas, and the Homeowner's Association will be responsible for repair and maintenance of this parcel. The 18.51 acres identified as Lot 25 is also considered to be open space. Lot 25 will be used for agricultural purposes, including but not limited to raising, harvesting and selling crops, or by the feeding, breeding, management and sale of, or the products of, livestock, poultry, fur -bearing animals, or honey bees, or for dairying and the sale of dairy products, or for any other agricultural or horticultural use of animal husbandry or any combination thereof. Lot 25 may also be used for residential purposes, and a house, barn or other outbuildings associated with the agricultural or residential uses may be constructed on this lot. Lot 25 will be privately owned and maintained, is not to be used by the public, the Homeowner's Association, or any of the other lot owners in Peach Valley Vistas, and cannot be resubdivided but can be sold like any other lot in Peach Valley Vistas." • DOMESTIC WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM REPORT APPENDIX A Well Permits • • Form No. GWS -25 OPLICANT OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 818 Centennial Bldg., 1313 Sherman St., Denver, Colorado 80203 (303) 866-3581 EXST WELL PERMIT NUMBER 61982 -F DIV. 5 WD 39 DES. BASIN MD KELLY & MICHAEL LYON FAMILY LLC PO BOX 110 SILT, CO 81652- (970) 876-5944 CHANGE/EXPANSION OF USE OF AN EXISTING WELL APPROVED WELL LOCATION GARFIELD COUNTY SW 1/4 SW 1/4 Section 1 Township 6 S,. Range 92 W Sixth P.M. DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES 1004 Ft. from South Section Line 1227 Ft. from West Section Line UTM COORDINATES (NAD83) Easting: Northing: ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1, This well shall be used in such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of this permit does not assure the applicant that no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civil court action. 2) The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water Well Construction Rules 2 CCR 402-2, unless approval of a variance has been granted by the State Board of Examiners of Water Well Construction and Pump Installation Contractors in accordance with Rule 18. 3) Approved pursuant to CRS 37-90-137(2) for the use of an existing well appropriating ground water tributary to the Colorado River, as an alternate point of diversion to the Avalanche Canal and Siphon, on the condition that the wet shall be operated only when the West Divide Water Conservancy District's substitute water supply plan, approved by the State Engineer, is in effect, and when a water allotment contract between the well owner and the West Divide Water Conservancy District for the release of replacement water from Ruedi Reservoir is in effect, 0 or under an approved plan for augmentation. WDWCD contract #020530PW(a) (Amended). Approved for an expansion of use of an existing well constructed September 24, 2002 to a depth of 162 feet, under permit no. 243224 (canceled) and later permitted for use under permit no. 58719-F (canceled). 5) The use of ground water from this well in combination with Lyon Well No. 1 (permit no. 61981-F) is limited to fire protection, ordinary household purposes inside 25 single family dwellings, the irrigation of not more than 3,000 square feet of home gardens and lawns per residential site, and the watering of 25 head of non-commercial domestic animals. Total irrigation shall not exceed 1.72 acres (75,000 square feet) of home gardens and lawns. All use of this well will be curtailed unless the water allotment contract or a plan for augmentation is in effect. This well is known as Lyon Well No. 2. 6) The maximum pumping rate of this well shall not exceed 27.25 GPM. 7) The combined average annual amount of ground water to be appropriated from this well and Lyon Well No. 1 (permit no. 61981-F) shall not exceed 13.665 acre-feet. ,) 1 -re return flow from the use of this well must be through an individual waste water disposal systems of the non -evaporative type where the water is returned to the same stream system in which the well is located. The owner shall mark the well in a conspicuous place with well permit number(s), name of the aquifer, and court case number(s) as appropriate. The owner shall take necessary means and precautions to preserve these markings. 10) A totalizing flow meter must be installed on this well and maintained in good working order. Permanent records of all diversions must be maintained by the well owner (recorded at least annually) and submitted to the Division Engineer upon request. 11) This well shall be located not more than 200 feet from the location specified on this permit and at least 600 feet from any existing well, completed in the same aquifer, that is not owned by the applicant. NOTE: Canceled permit nos. 243224 and 58719-F was previously issued for this well. �� APPROVED DMW Receipt No. 9502065B State Engineer DATE ISSUED 11-15-2004 By EXPIRATION DATE 11-15-2005 Form No. GWS -25 APPLICANT OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 818 Centennial Bldg., 1313 Sherman St., Denver, Colorado 80203 (303) 866-3581 EXST WELL PERMIT NUMBER 61981 -F DIV. 5 WD 39 DES. BASIN MD KELLY & MICHAEL LYON FAMILY LLC PO BOX 110 SILT, CO 81652- (970) 876-5944 CHANGE/EXPANSION OF USE OF AN EXISTING WELL APPROVED WELL LOCATION GARFIELD COUNTY SW 1/4 SW 1/4 Section 1 Township 6 S Range 92 W Sixth P.M. DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES 215 Ft. from South Section Line 773 Ft. from West Section Line UTM COORDINATES (NAD83) Easting: Northing: ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1) This well shall be used in such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of this permit does not assure the applicant that no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civil court action. 2) The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water Well Construction Rules 2 CCR 402-2, unless approval of a variance has been granted by the State Board of Examiners of Water Well Construction and Pump Installation Contractors in accordance with Rule 18. 3) Approved pursuant to CRS 37-90-137(2) for the use of an existing well appropriating ground water tributary to the Colorado River, as an alternate point of diversion to the Avalanche Canal and Siphon, on the condition that the well shall be operated only when the West Divide Water Conservancy District's substitute water supply plan, approved by the State Engineer, is in effect, and when a water allotment contract between the well owner and the West Divide Water Conservancy District for the release of replacement water from Ruedi Reservoir is in effect, or under an approved plan for augmentation. WDWCD contract #020530PW(a) (Amended). 4) Approved for an expansion of use of an existing well constructed May 1, 2002 to a depth of 123 feet, under permit no. 239419 (canceled) and later permitted for use under permit no. 58718-F (expired). 5} The use of ground water from this well in combination with Lyon Well No. 2 (permit no. 61982-F) is limited to fire protection, ordinary household purposes inside 25 single family dwellings, the irrigation of not more than 3,000 square feet of home gardens and lawns per residential site, and the watering of 25 head of non-commercial domestic animals. Total irrigation shall not exceed 1.72 acres (75,000 square feet) of home gardens and lawns. All use of this well will be curtailed unless the water allotment contract or a plan for augmentation is in effect. This well is known as Lyon Well No. 1. 6) The maximum pumping rate of this well shall not exceed 14 GPM. 7) The combined average annual amount of ground water to be appropriated from this well and Lyon Well No. 2 (permit no. 61982-F) shall not exceed 13.665 acre-feet. 8) The retum flow from the use of this well must be through an individual waste water disposal systems of the non -evaporative type where the water is returned to the same stream system in which the well is located. 9) The owner shall mark the well in a conspicuous place with well permit number(s), name of the aquifer, and court case number(s) as appropriate. The owner shall take necessary means and precautions to preserve these markings. 10) A totalizing flow meter must be instated on this well and maintained in good working order. Permanent records of all diversions must be maintained by the well owner (recorded at least annually) and submitted to the Division Engineer upon request. 11) This well shall be located not more than 200 feet from the location specified on this permit and at least 600 feet from any existing wet, completed in the same aquifer, that is not owned by the applicant. NOTE: Canceled permit no. 239419 and expired permit no. 58718-F were previously issued for this well. APPROVED DMW Receipt No. 9502065A ?Kr -2 State Engineer By DATE ISSUED 11-15-2004 EXPIRATION DATE 11-15-2005 • DOMESTIC WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM REPORT APPENDIX B Water Quality Test Data, Well # • • HAZEN Evergreen Analytical, Inc. Carl Smits 4036 Youngfield Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Hazen Research, Inc. 4601 Indiana Street Golden, CO 80403 USA Tel: (303) 279-4501 Fax: (303) 278-1528 REPORT OF ANALYSIS DATE July 5, 2002 HRI PROJECT 009-93 HRI SERIES NO. F067/02 DATE RECD 06/06/2002 CUST. P.O.# 020.740 SAMPLE NO. F067/02-1 SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION: 02-3166-010, P, Q, R - Well# 239419 - sampled on 06/04/2002 DETECTION PARAMETER RESULT LIMIT METHOD ANALYSIS DATE ANALYST Gross Alpha (+-Precision*), pCi/I (T) 10(+-12) 9 EPA 900.0 06/17/2002 RPO @ 0712 Gross Alpha (+-Precision*), pCi/I (T)*** 3(.+-12) 9 EPA 900.0 06/17/2002 RPO @ 0712 Gross Beta (+-Precision*), pa/1(T) 0(+-13) 13 EPA 900.0 06/17/2002 RPO @ 0712 Radium -226 (+-Precision*), pCi/I (T) 0.3(+-0.2) 0.1 SM 7500 -Ra B 06/19/2002 RPO @ 0849 Radium -228 (+-Precision*), pCi/I (T) 0.6(+-0.7) 0.6 EPA Ra -05 06/18/2002 LH/SMS @ 1638 *don (+-Precision*), pCi/I (T) 810(+-30) 14 SM 7500 -Rn B 06/06/2002 SMS @ 1527 Total Solids, mg/I 1680 10 EPA 160.3 06/10/2002 DM Uranium, pCi/l (T)** 7 1 ASTM D2907-91 06/10/2002 BY @ 1409 Uranium, ug/I (T) 10 2 ASTM D2907-91 06/10/2002 BY © 1409 *Variability of the radioactive decay process (counting error) at the 95% confidence level, 1.96 sigma. Certification ID's: CO/EPA - 0000008; CT - PH -0152; KY - 90076; KS - E-10265; NH - 232801-A; NY ELAP - 11417; PA DEP 68551; WI - 998376610 **Uranium results reported assuming the activity of natural U = 6.77 x 10-7 Ci/gm. ***Less Radon and Uranium. /71 CODES: By- ^' (T) = Total (D) = Dissolved Robert Rostad C. •(S) = Suspended (R) = TotalRecoverable Leboratory Manager (PD) = Potentially Dissolved < = Less Than Sarnple collection time assumed to be 1200 for radon calculation. An Employee -Owned Company Evergreen Analytical, Inc. / \ 4036 Yaungfield St. Wheat Ridge, CO 80033-3882 PH (303) 425-6021 FAX (303) 425-6854 "Quality Data On Time" FAX TO: COMPANY: �v c /6 FAX* DATE: 06125/02 MESSAGE -Please deliver to the recipient immediately: # PAGES: FROM: Z 340(, The information and accompanying materials to this facsimile message are confidential information intended only for the individual er entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the Intended recipient, or the employer or agent reopenstele to Cellver It to the Intended recipient. you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication or accompanying materials Is strictly prohibiied. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us by telephone, and return the original message and accompanying materials to us at the above address via the U.S. Postal service. We will reimburse any reasonable casts you incur in notifying us and returning the message and accompanying materials to US. Thank you. • • i n d u s t r i a l Industrial Laboratortas to your iodopondent, Third party analytical to:Mug laboratory To: Ever>areen Analytical 4036 Younefield - Wheat Ridge CO 50033-3862 Attn: Carl Smits PO Number: 020739 JUN 14 2002 EYI601 Date Received: 6/5/2002 Date Reported: 6/6/2002 Note: Sample test procedures conform to EPA 40Cr'1(141 requirements. Test Analysis Lab No. Sample Descrintion Method Result Units MDL DateBv 020605028-01A 02-3166-01N Total Coliform Absent TH SM 9223 6/512002 Irl MDL = Method Detection Limit ND =Not Detected at the Method Detection Limit Pale: 1 of 1 Mike Gross, Laboratory Director 1450 cast 62nd Avenue • Denver, Colorldo 80216 • (303) 287-9691 • (303) 287-0964 Fax www-industriattaos.net Receipt 01 an4lyiirvices angnowthtlges the own:: apo conditions on tno reverse eitjt Lino acknowledges that tney arc part of int' or0or. This report is not to oe reproduced in whole or in Dart for advertising] purposes without nntaintno prior written nr.thorixation_ Client Sample ID : We11#239419 Lab Sample ID : 02-3166-01I Date Collected : 06/04/2002 Date Received : 06/05/2002 4UJO 1 °unguent 3 ., VV neat lunge, LV auuw., (303) 425-6021 Client Project ID : Enartech Lab Work Order : 02-3166 Sample Matrix : Drinking Watcr Method: E300 ANIONS BY IC Date Prepared ; 06/06/2002 Date Analyzed ; 06/06/2002 Lab File ID : 544741 Method Blank : MELANK Effective Dilution : 2 Compound Name CAS Number Concentration RL Units Nitrate -N u 0.112 mg/L Date Prepared : 06/06/2002 Lab File ID : 544742 Date Analyzed : 06/06/2002 Method Blank : MBLANK Effective Dilution : 10 Compound Name Nitrite -N CAS Number Concentration RL Units Nitrite + Nitrate -N Sulfate 14808-79-8 369 U 0.76 mg/L u 0.76 mg/L 5 mg/L QualalArs: U • Not Detected az the Reporting Limit (RL) - Analyte detected below Practical Quantization Limit (PQL) E - Extrapolated value. See rerun at dilution. S - Spike Reoovery outside accepted recovery limits B • Analyze detected in the associated Method Blank. This valno was not Subtracted from the sample result. • • Value exceeds maximum contamination limit (MCL) R - Dilution Tat RPD >1O% indicates possible interference • Approved 6/1314002 6:35 PM Client Sample 1.D. Lab Sample Number Date Sampled Date Received Ana Ivsis Total Dissolved Solids pH Total Alkalinity Fluoride Total Cyanide Langelier index EVERGREEN ANALYTICAL, Inc. 4036 Youngfield St. Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 (303) 425-6021 Weil #239419 02-3166-01 06/04/02 06/05/02 MPthnd Standard Method 2540 C EPA 150.1 Standard Method 2320 8 Standard Method 4500-F C Standard Method 4500 -CN E Standard Method 23308 naiyst Analysis Report Client : Enartech Lab Project Number : 02-3166 Matrix : Water Date Date prenarP,ft Analyzed 06/10/02 06/11/02 06/05/02 06/05/02 06/13/02 06/13/02 06/06/02 06/06/02 06/17/02 06/17/02 06/13/02 06/13/02 Result Unit 1680 mg/L 7.72 247 mgCaCO3/L 3.2 mg/L <0.010 mg/L +0.22 Approved Client Sample ID Lab Sample ID Date Collected Date Received : We114239419 : 02-3166-01L : 06/042002 : 06/052002 4036 Youngfield St., Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 (303) 425-6021 Client Project ID : Enartcch Lab Work Order : 02-3166 Sample Matrix : Drinldng Water Method: E200.8 ICP -MS, 200.8, TOTAL RECOVERABLE Date Prepared : 06/10/2002 Date Analyzed : 06/1I12002 Lab File ID : 020611A.B\093SMPL.D\ Effective Dilution : 1 Method Blank : MB -11896 Compound Name CAS Number Concentration RL Units Arsenic Barium 7440-38-2 Beryllium Calcium 7440-39-3 7440-41-7 Cadmium 0.0031 0.002 mg/L 0.031 0.025 mg/L 7440-70-2 Chromium Copper Nickel U 45 7440-43-9 Lead Antimony Selenium Thallium 7440-47-3 7440-50--8 7440-02-0 7439-92-1 7440-36-0 7782-49-2 7440-28-0 0.001 0.4 U 0.001 mg/L mg/L mg/L U 0.005 U 0.025 U 0.05 U 0.01 U mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L 0.005 mg/L U 0.005 mg/L U 0.001 mg/L Date Prepared : 06/10/2002 Date Analyzed : 06/14/2002 Lab File 1!D : 02D614A.B\018SMPL.D\ Effective Dilution : 20 Method Blank : MB -11896A Compound Name CAS Number Concentration RL Units Sodium 7440-23-5 630 3.2 mg/L Method: E245.1 MERCURY,DRINKING WATER,245.1 Date Prepared : 06/10/2002 Date Analyzed : 06/10/2002 Lab File ID : 02061003 Method Blank : MB -11893 Effective Dilution : 1 Compound Name CAS Number Concentration RL Units Mercury 7439-97-6 U 0.0001 mg/L Qualifiers: U - Not Detected at the Rcponing Limit (RL) 1 - Analyte detected bola. Pntcuicul Quantitation Limit (PQL) E - Extrapolated value. See rerun ur dilution. S - Spike Recovery outside accepted recovery limits c_ Analyst 13 . Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank. 'rhis value was not subtracted from the smnplc result. - - value exceeds maximum contamination limit (MCL) R - Dilution Test RPD >10% indicates possible iluu (=nee. Approved 6/25/:00.3:45 PM r Client Sample ID : Well#239419 Lab Sample ID ; 02-3166-01B Date Collected : 06/04/2002 Date Received : 06/05/2002 Date Prepared : 06/13/2002 • Date Analyzed : 06/14/2002 Method: E525.2 (303) 425-6021 Client Project ID : Lab Work Order : Sample Matrix : Lab Fie D3 Method Blank . Prep Factor Effective Dilution : Drinking Water SOCs Enartech 02-3166 Drinlang Warr 1GCMS2061312301024.D MB -11928 0.001 1 Units; PO - Analyte Benzo(a)pyrene B Is(2-ethyl h exyl )adipate Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate CAS # 50-32-8 103-23-1 117-81-7 Concentration U U RL Surrogate Recovery Perytene-d12 107% 0.2 0.5 1 QC Limits 70 - 130 POL 0.2 0.5 1 Qualltiers: U - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit (RL) S - Space Recovery outside acmptcd recovery limit 3 - Analyte demoted below Pranicul Quuotitar;an limit (PQL) • - Compound detailed above regulatory linut E - Larnpolared value. Sec rerun az &i ntioa X - Not Applicable. B - Analyin detected- the associated Method Blank / iFieSK Analyst Approved 6/1412002 3:41 PM Client Sample ID : We11#239419 Lab Sample ID : 02-3166-01E Date Collected : 06/04/2002 Date Received : 06/05/2002 4036 Yonngfield St., Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 (303) 425-6021 Client Project ID : Enartech Lab Work Order : 02-3166 Sample Matrix : Drinking Water Method: E531.1 CARBAMATE PESTICIDES - 531.1 Date Prepared : 06/120002 Lab File ID : 544735 Date Analyzed : 06/13/2002 Method Blank : MBLANK Effective Dilution : 1 Compound Name CAS Number Concentration RL , Units Aldicarb Sutfoxide 1646-87-3 Methiocarb 2032-65-7 lJ 2 U 4 Aldicarb Sulfone 1646-88-4 Oxamyl 23135-22-0 U U 2 2 3-Hydroxycarbofuran Aldicarb Carbaryl 16655-82-6 116-06-3 63=25-2 U U U 2 1 2 Carbofuran Methomyi 1563-66-2 16752-77-5 Propoxur 114-26-1 1.5 U 1 Qualifiers: U - Not Detected at the Reporting Litten (RL) J - Analyte detected below practice! Quantitation Limit (PQL) E - Extrapolated value. Sec rerun at dilution. S - Spike Recovery outside accepted recovery limits Analyst pg/L pg/L pg/L IIB/L i g/L 14/L pg/L Ng/L iiglL B - Anatyte detected in the associated Method Blank. ?iris value was not subtracted from the sample result. • • Value exceeds maximum contamination limit (MCL) R • Dilution Test RPD >10% indict= possible interference. 41c - Approved 613/2002 1:S3 PM Client Sample ID : We11#239419 Lab Sample ID : 02-3166-01H Date Collected : 06/04/2002 Date Received : 06/05/2002 4036 Youngfield St., Wbeat Ridge, CO 80033 (303) 425-6021 Client Project ID : Enartech Lab Work Order : 02-3166 Sample Matrix : Drinking Warer Method: E549 - DIQUAT 549 Date prepared : 06/102002 Date Analyzed : 06/14/2002 Method Blank : M LANK Lab File ID : 544740 Effective Dilution : 1 Compound Name CAS Number Concentration RL Units Diquat 85-00-7 U 1 pg/L Qualifiers: U - Not Detected at the Reporting Limit (RL) J - Attatytc detected bctow Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) E • Extrapolated value_ S c rerun at dilution. S • Spiko Recovery ouyjdo accepted recovery limits C - Anaiyre deed in the associated Method Blank. This valve was not subtracted from the camplc result - Value exceeds maximum contamination Limit (MC:-) R - Dilution Ten RID > 10% indicates possible interference. Analyst Approved 6/14/2002 3:26 Plif 4036 Youngt-icld St.., Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 (303) 425-6021 Client Sample ID : We11#239419 Lab Sample ID : 02-3166-01F Date Collected : 06/04/2002 Date Received : 06/05/2002 Date Prepared : 06/12/2002 Date Analyzed : 06/13/2002 Client Project ID : Enanech Lab Work Order : 02-3166 Sample Matrix : Drinking Water Lab Fac ID : ECD406131015F0101.D Method Blank : MB -11920 Effective Dilution : 1 Method: E504 EDBJDBCP 504 Units: N911 - Analyte 1,2-Dibromoethane 1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane CAS # 106-93-4 96-12-8 Concentration U U RL 0.05 0.05 PQL 0.05 0.05 Qu: X - Not Appiicnbin. TJ = Analyzed for, but not detectdd. B = Also found in the blank. E = Extrapolated value. Value emcee& calibration range. S - Spixe recovery amide accepted recovery limiu. Analyst Definitions: RL= Reporting Limit. PQL _ Practical Quantitation Limit. Approved 6/11/2r/02 1 D: 44 ah1 • Client Sample ID : Well#239419 Lab Sample ID : 02-3166-010 Date Collected ; 06/04/2002 Date Received : 06/05/2002 Date Prepared : 05/06/2002 Date Analyzed : 06/07/2002 4036 Yonngfield St., Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 (303) 42S-6021 Client Project ID : Enartech Lab Work Order : 02-3166 Sample Matrix : Drinking Water Lab File ID ; 1GCMS20606\3101031.D Method Blank ; M33-11880 Prep Factor : 0.1 Effective Dilution : 1 Method: E548.1 Endothail by GCMS Units: pgtl. Analyte Endothall CAS # 145-73-3 Concentration U RL PQL 40 40 Qualifiers: U - Not Detected at the R:poning Limit mit (RL) J - Analyte demoted below Practical Qaarea anion Limit (?QL) E - EYtrzpolned value. Sec ream at dilution. B - Analyte dtnetuti isassociated Mailed Blank 5 - Spike Recovery outside accepted recovery limits • . Compound detectact anove regulatory limit X- No: Applicablo- Approved 6/10/2002 1:50 PM Client Sample ID : Well#239419 Lab Sample 11) : 02-3166-01D Date Collected : 06/04/2002 Date Received : 06/05/2002 Date prepared : 06/12/2002 Date Analyzed : 06/15/2002 4036 Youngfield St., Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 (303) 4254021 Client Project ID : Enartech Lab Work Order : 02-3166 Sample Matrix : Drinking Water Lab File ID : ECD506141013B1301.D Method Blank : MB -11922 Effective Dilution : 1 Method: E515.1 Herbicides 515.1 Units: pg/L Analyte Dalapon Dicamba Pentachlorophenol 2,4-D 2,4,5 -TP (Silvex) Dinoseb Picioram CAS # 75-99-0 1918-00-9 87-86-5 94-75-7 93-72-1 Concentration U U U U U RL PQL 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.32 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.36 0.25 0.26 Surrogate Recovery DCAA QuaBtien: 88-85-7 1918-02-1 U u 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 115% QC Limits 70 - 130 X - Not Applicable. U — Analyzed far, but not detected B Also found in thn blank. .1= Artslyre found, but below the PQL. E — Extrapolated value Value ids calibration, range. S = Spike recovery outsido accepted recovery iynire Definitions: RL _ Reporting 7 iTMr PQL = Practical Quataitation Limit. 611812 002 10:57 AM' • Analyst Approved Client Sample ID : We11#239419 Lab Sample 11D : 02-3166-01C Date Collected : 06/04/2002 Date Received : 06/05/2002 Date Prepared : 06/06/2002 • Date Analyzed : 06/12/2002 Method: E507 y./.2U 1. uuu};•awu ....— (303) 425-6021 Client Project ID : Enartech Lab Work Order : 02-3166 Sample Matrix . Drinking Water Lab File ID : NPD06111023F0101.D Method Blank : MB -11874 Rffcctive Dilution : 1 507 Std List Units: P! Analyte Alachlor Atrazine Sutachlor Metolachlor Metribuzin CAS # Concentration 15972-60-8 1912-24-9 23184-66-9 51218-45-2 21087-64-9 u v u u RL 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 PQL 0.36 0.34 0.53 0.38 0.38 Propachlor Simazine 1918-16-7 122-34-9 u u 0.25 0.25 1.1 0.35 Surrogate Recovery 1, 3 -Dimethyl 2 -nitrobenzene 8796 QC Limits 70 - 130 Qualifiers: X - Not Applicable. U = Analyzed for, but not detected B — Also found in the blanc. R = iztrapolatad value. Value exceeds calibr. tion range. S = Spike recovery outside cuceptad recovery limits Analyst DcliNdons: RL =Reporting -Limit PQL = Practical Quatrdiition Limit 6.(13/20G2 10rs6AM 4036 Young cl l St., wheat Bulge, CO NO034 (303) 425-6021 Client Sample ID : Well#239419 Lab Sample ID : 02-3166-01C Date Collected : 06/04/2002 Date Received : 06/05/2002 Date Prepared : 06/06/2002 Date Analyzed : 06/08/2002 Client Project ID : Enartech Lab Work Order : 02-3166 Sample Matrix : Drinking Water Lab File ID : ECD106071040F0101.D Method Blank : MB -11874 Effective Dilution : 1 Method: E508 508 Std List Units: pgJL Analyte Aldrin a -BHC b -BHC d -BHC g -BHC a -Chlordane g -Chlordane 4,4' -CDD 4,4' -DDE 4,4' -DDT CAS # Concentration RL PQL 309-00-2 U 0.01 0.015 319-84-8 U 0.01 0.011 319-85-7 U 0.01 0.01 319-86-8 U 0.01 0.012 58-89-9 U 0.01 0.011 Dieldrin Endosulfan 1 Endosulfan 11 Endosulfan sulfate Endrin 5103-71-9 U 0.01 0.01 5103-74-2 U 0.01 0.01 72-54-8 U 0.01 0.01 72-55-9 U 0.01 0.01 50-29-3 U 0.01 0.01 Endrin aldehyde HCCPD Heptachlor Heptachlor epoxide Hexachlorobenzene 60-57-1 U 0.01 0.01 959-98-8 U 0.01 0.01 33213-65-9 U 0.01 0.01 1031-07-8 U 0_01 0.011 72-20-8 U 0.01 0.01 Methoxychlor Toxaphene Aroclor 1016 Aroclor 1221 Aroclor 1232 Aroclor 1242 Aroclor 1248 Aroclor 1254 Aroclor 1260 Surrogate Recovery TCMX DCB Qnuiifera: 7421-93-4 U 0.01 0.011 77-47-4 U 0.025 0.14 76-44-8 U 0.01 0.013 1024-57-3 U 0.01 0.01 118-74-1 U 0.01 0.01 72-43-5 U 0.01 0.03 8001-35-2 U 0.6 1.2 12574-11-2 U 0.25 0.42 11104-28-2 U 0.25 0.42 11141-16-5 U 0,25 0.42 53469-21-9 U 0.25 0.42 12672-29-6 U 0.25 0.63 11097-69-1 U 0.25 0.63 11096-82-5 U 0.25 0.63 QC Limits 65% S 70 - 130 84% 70 - 130 X - Not Applicable. U - An..drad for, but not detected. = Also found in the blank. J = Anslytc found, but below the PQL. E - Extrtpelxied value. Value exceeds calibration range. 5 = Spike recovery outside accepted recov-, jimi Dclinitions: RL = Reporting Limir- PQL = Practical QuattatianLjmit. Approved 6/10/2002 12'?6P,u • MrrJu luuugssciu as., TVla<ial UVVJJ (303) 425-6021 Client Sample ID : Wc11#239419 Client Project ID : Enartech Lab Sample ID : 02-3166-01A Lab Work Order : 02-3166 Date Collected : 06/04/2002 Sample Matrix : Drinking Water Date Received : 06/05/2002 Lab File I1) : 1VOA4060711401014.1) Date Prepared : 06/07/2002 Method Blank : R13060702 411/ Date Analyzed : 06/07/2002 Pren Factnr : 1 Effective Dilution : 1 • Method: E624.,2 Drinking Water VOCs Units: 1.19/1- Analyte 9/L Analyte CAS # Concentration Benzene 71-43-2 Bromobenzene 108-86-1 Bromochloromethane 74-97-5 Bromodichloromethane • 75-27-4 Bromoform 75-25-2 Bromomethane 74-83-9 n-Butylbenzene 104-51-8 sec-Butylbenzene 135.98-8 t-Burylbenzene 98-06-6 Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 Chlorobenzene Chloroethane Chloroform Chloromethane 2-Chlorotolu ene 108-90-7 75-00-3 67-66-3 74-87-3 95-49-8 4-Chlorotoluene 106-43-4 Dibromochioromethane 124-48-1 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 96-12-8 1,2-Dibrornoethane 106-93-4 Dibromomethane 74-95-3 RL PQL U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 1,2 -Dichlorobenzene 95-50-1 1,3 -Dichlorobenzene 541-73-1 1,4 -Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 Dichlorodrfiuoromethane 75-71-8 1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 1,2-Dichloro ethane 107-06-2 1,1-Dichloroethene 75-35-4 cis-1.2-Dichloroethene 156.59-2 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-60-5 1,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 1,3-Dichloropropane 142-28-9 2,2-Dichloropropane 590-20-7 1,1-Dichloro propene 563-58-6 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 10061-01-5 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 10061-02-6 Ethylbenzen a 100-41-4 Hexachloro-1, 3 -butadiene 87-68-3 Isopropylbenzene 98-82-8 p-Isopropyltoluene 99-87-6 Methylene chloride 75-09-2 U 0,5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 u 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 Naphthalene 91-20-3 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 1 1 u 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 U 0.5 0.5 Quwii Lem: U - Not Demoted at the Reporting Limit (12L) J - Analyte detected below Practical Quantitation Limit (PQL) E - Extrepolatul value See renin at dilution. 13 - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank Analyst S - Spike Recovery omraide accepted recovery lirnita • - Compound detected above regulatory limit X - Not Applicubk. pproved 6112120)210:47 AM 4036 Youngficld Client Sample ID : Well#239419 Lab Sample ID : 02-3166-01A Date Collected : 06/04/2002 Date Received : 06/05/2002 Date Prepared : 06/07/2002 Date Analyzed : 06/07/2002 Method: E524.2 Analyte n-Propylbenzene Styrene Tetrachforoethene 1,1, 1, 2-Tetrachto roethan e CAS # St., Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 (303) 425-6021 Client Project ID : Enartcch Lab Work Order : 02-3166 Sample Matrix : Drinking Water Lab File ID : 1V0A4060711401014.D Method Blank : RB060702 Pren Factor : 1 Effective Dilution : 1 Drinking Water VOCs Units: pgit Concentration RL 103-65-1 100-42-5 127-18-4 630-20-6 • 1,1,2.2 -Tetrachloroethane Toluene 1.2,3-Trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-Trichlorabenzene 1,1,1 -Trichloroethane 79-34-5 108-88-3 87-61-6 120-82-1 71-55-6 u u U u u 1.5 u u u 1,1,2 -Trichloroethane Trichloroethene Trichlorofluoromethane 1,2,3-Trichtoropropane 1,2, 4-Trimethylbenzene 79-00-5 79-01.5 75-69-4 96-18-4 95-63-6 1, 3, 5-Trimethylbenzene Vinyl chloride m,p-Xylene o -Xylene Surrogate Recovery 1,2 -Dichlorobenzene -d4 (SS -1) 4-Brornofluorobenzene (SS -2) 108-67-8 75-01-4 1330-20-7 95-47-6 U u u U u u u u u 99% 100% 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 PQL 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 QC Limits 70 - 130 70 - 130 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Qualifiers: U- Not Detected at the Repotting Limit (RL) J - Analyte detected below Practical Quantiution Limit (PQL) E • L• m-apolstrd value. Soo rerun ut dilution. B - Analyte detoeted in the associated Method Bionic Analyst S - Spike Recovery otttsike accepted rcc ovcry limit - Compound detected above regulatory limit, X - Not Applicable. Apprvvcd 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 6/1212003 10:47 AM • • DOMESTIC WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM REPORT APPENDIX C Water Model Output • • • Scenario Summary Scenario Summary Report Increase WP -10 & WP -5 to 12" Physical Alternative Demand Alternative Initial Settings Alternative Operational Alternative Age Alternative Constituent Alternative Trace Alternative Fire Flow Alternative Cost Altemative User Data Altemative Increase WP -10 & WP -5 to 12" Base -Average Daily Remove 4" Tank Line Base -Operational Base -Age Alternative Base -Constituent Base -Trace Alternative Increase Tank System to 20 psi Base -Cost Base -User Data Hydraulic Analysis Summary Analysis Steady State Friction Method Hazen -Williams Formula Accuracy 0.001000 Trials 40 Quality Analysis Summary Analysis Quality Time Step Constituent Maximum Pipe Segments N/A hr Minimum Pipe Travel Time 100 2.78e-5 hr Calibration •Demand Operation Demand <None> 0.00 Roughness Operation Roughness <None> 0.00 Created: 03/02/05 10:56:27 AM • Project Engineer: Micheal Gamba Title: Peach Valley Fire System WaterCAD v4.5 [4.5015c] h:\...\acad2000-layout for water model.wcd Jerome Gamba & Associates Inc 03/02/05 11:00:04 AM © Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Scenario: Increase WP -10 & WP -5 to 12" Fire Flow Analysis Junction Report Label Elevation E (ft) WJ-2 WJ-3 WJ-4 WJ-5 WJ-6 WJ-7 WJ-8 WJ-9 WJ-10 WJ-11 WJ-12 WJ-13 WJ-14 WJ-15 WJ-16 WJ-17 WJ-18 WJ-19 WJ-20 WJ-21 5,598.43 5,593.99 5,574.07 5,560.52 5,598.43 5,593.99 5,574.07 5,560.52 5,556.58 5,553.74 5,531.95 5,524.61 5,510.88 5,496.43 5,494.66 5,490.36 5,493.34 5,498.52 5,509.80 5,522.75 xisting Zone false false false false false false false false false false false false false false false false false false false false None None Tank 1 Tank 1 None None None Tank 1 Tank 1 Tank 1 Tank 1 Tank 1 Tank 1 Tank 1 Tank 1 Tank 1 Tank 1 Tank 1 Tank 1 Tank 1 Type Demand Demand Demand Demand Demand Demand Demand Demand Demand Demand Demand Demand Demand Demand Demand Demand Demand Demand Demand Demand Demand (gpm) Pattern 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 6.00 5.00 0.00 9.00 0.00 0.00 Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Fixed Demand Calculated Calculatedblydraulic Grad (gpm) (ft) 0.00 5,634.53 0.00 5,634.53 0.00 5,634.53 1.00 5,634.52 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.00 5,634.52 0.00 5,634.52 0.00 5,634.52 0.00 5,634.52 2.00 5,634.51 2.00 5,634.51 0.00 5,634.51 6.00 5,634.51 5.00 5,634.51 0.00 5,634.51 9.00 5,634.51 0.00 5,634.51 0.00 5,634.51 Pressure e (psi) 15.62 17.54 26.16 32.02 N/A N/A N/A 32.02 33.72 34.95 44.38 47.55 53.49 59.74 60.51 62.37 61.08 58.84 53.96 48.35 Title: Peach Valley Fire System Project Engineer: Micheal Gamba h:\...\acad2000-layout for water model.wcd Jerome Gamba & Associates Inc WaterCAD v4.5 [4.5015c] 03/02/05 10:59:20 AM © Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 • DOMESTIC WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM REPORT APPENDIX D Fire District Tank Approval Letter • • BURNING MOUNTAINS FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT Brit C. McLin Chief 611 Main St. Phone: (970) 876-5738 P.Q. Box 2 Fax: (970) 876-2774 Silt, CO. 81652 E -Mail: chief800@rof.net January 12, 2005 Garfield. County Re: Peach Valley Vistas on County Road 214 and. Davis Point Road two miles east of Silt, Colorado, a 25 lot subdivision for single family homes owned by Kelly and Michael Lyon Family, LLC I have reviewed the sketch plan and the location of the 80,000 gallon storage tank. I understand that there will be a Homeowner's Association to maintain the water system. Considering that the storage tank requires 25,000 gallons for domestic use, the balance (55,000 gallons) will be sufficient for .fire fighting. There is an existing 10,000 gallon tank dedicated for fire fighting with a hydrant on Davis Point Road now. For a backup, the existing well that feeds the storage tank pumps over 25 GPM. It is not a requirement, but since the Homeowners will own water rights out of the Ware and Hinds Ditch on Davis Point .Road, we would like to have permission from the home owners to pump water from the ditch for other structures in that area. The roads in the subdivision should be a minimum of 24 feet wide with a hard surface, the cul-de-sac needs to have a right of way of 75 feet in diameter. Hydrants should be placed approximately every 500 feet with 3 feet of space all of the way aroundand with easy vehicle access from the primary road. Hydrants at stations 1000, 1500, 2000 and 2500 will suffice for a total of 4 hydrants. Bri . McLin Fire Chief Burning Mountain Fire District • • DOMESTIC WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM REPORT APPENDIX E Well Pump Test Data • • WELL CONSTRUCTION AND TEST REPORT STATE OF COLORADO, , OFFICE OF THE STATE .ENGINEER FOR OFFICE USE ONLY A Ca Is. ,L/p, L APPROVAL N GWS31-91-03 1. WELL PERMIT NUMBER 243224 Alw lip Owner Name(s): Kelly & Michael Lyon Family LLC Mailing Address: P.O. Box 110 City, State, Zip : Silt, Co. 81652 Phone # : 970-876-5944 3 WELL LOCATION AS DRILLED SW 1/4 SW 1/4 Sec: 1 Twp: 6 S Range: 92 W DISTANCES FROM SEC. LINES ft. from South Sec. line and ft. from West Sec. line OR Northing: Easting: SUBDIVISION: LOT: BLOCK: FILING (UNIT): STREET ADDRESS AT LOCATION • GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION ft. DRILLING METHOD Air Rotary DATE COMPLETED: 9/24/2002 TOTAL DEPTH: 162 DEPTH COMPLETION: 162 5. GEOLOGIC LOG 6. HOLE D1 AME I tit (in) FROM (ft) TO (ft) Depth Type of Material (Size, Color, and Type) 9.0 0 71 000-060 Clays, Silts 6.5 71 162 064)-066 Gravels Oro -162 Wasatch Formation 7. PLAIN CASING OD (in) Kind Wall Six From (It) To (R) 7.0 Steel 0240 -1 60 7.0 Steel 0.240 66 70 5.5 PVC 0.250 66 1 162 PERF. CASING : Screen Siot Size 7.0 Steel 0.240 60 66 • Water Located: 50 + Remarks : 8. Filter Pack Material : Size : Interval : 9. Packer Placement Type : Formation Depth : 72 10. GROUTING RECORD Material Amount Dcnsity l Interval Placcnxan ' Cement 3 sks 6 gaUsk 10-25 poured D.'SINFECTION : Type : HTH Arno Used : 4 oz. WELL TEST DATA : () Chole Box If Test Data Is Submitted On Supplemental TESTING METHOD : Air Compressor Static Level : 21 ft. Date/Time Measured 9/24/2002 Production Rate 30 gpm Pumping Level : Total ft. Date/Time Measured 9/24/2002 Test Length : 2 hours Test Remarks : 13. tbanerrad the sratements made hereto and know the contents thereof. and that they arc tmc to my knowledge. (Prsuant ro Scctr r 2a -t-1.4 (13)(a) CRS, the malang of false name= onustitates perpuy In the samrd deux and is pumshablc as a doss t misdrme mor.) CONTRACTOR : Shelton Dniting Corp. Phone : (970) 927-4182 Mailing Address : P.O. Box 1059 Basalt, Co. 81621 Lic. No. 1095 Name / Title (P1 se Type or Print) Wayne Shelton / President Signature Date 10/2/2002 WELL TEST REPORT ;T7 Name ISQI (j Irk 0. Address 0 r r 3 n 3 7 y J i Date 4:s'� Telephone Well Log Depth Water Level ( 7' (( Casing Size 5<7 Draw Down Pump Setting Production Teal Pump • DRAWDOWN RECOVERY TIME MIN. LEVEL GPM TIME MIN. LEVEL 0 : 3 o IV' 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 8 a 10 10 12 12 15 15 20 20 30 30 40 40 50 60 60 60 90 120 180 • Name Address WjLL TEST REPORT h I l'Ya r? `>; r - C( •)(ls% eine 4._13 ' 1. Telephone Well Log Depth Casing Size Pump Setting Test Pump 130r 1.1.0 ' /!./r,, 2c c7 -j/ Water Level //I r 1 Draw Down To- 4'7 - Production fr, • DRAWDOWN RECOVERY&.- f'-cs2 TIME MIN. LEVEL GPM TIME MIN. LEVEL Z(;a0 r 0 1 /i_e-- 5 1 1 2 (v • Y , / 76 /-? 2 �7, � om 1-1 ¢�.�' 3a 7% 3 / 4 2 fa 4 5 // -.2 to 5 6 .3C),6 t1 • c.`g7" e 3 Y 8 474., 5 ya. 10 ve, 10 f!. 12 3 la. 12 3 r- ii, 15 16 Z 20 L/ ell 20 3 ; /2 30 4/V r S 30 '�i 40 Z71 '5 40 `y 5+ '/ " 50Z ja 6Y R, ' ,1 50 -, 60 so ;�(�"'t 90 • 120 57.6)io leo 6) j= (?j72 I`It G/'01 1 1 75.5" r'/Mrril u 7 . 40 �, . ivr,f VE, �ni (1� 41- ( _4( >,Pm 1 �Q Ism .; -x ,'V � AO: _1 LY3' 46 10)A • • Name • Address 0 H 0 aamuelson rump 7 7 Date 6 3 �� WELL TEST REPORT rtrz..11- Thr C//P1s 'Iu,,� Telephone 9I4.t; . 15/ '7 Well Log Depth 130 ) Water Level ‘:// Casing Stze :ir(% Draw Down l / r" 9 Ptih"t" /rVrnr4% Pump Setting 0-0 -C) Production r� Test Pump J bir. -S' 'it , DRAWDOWN RECOVERY TIME MIN. LEVEL GPM TIME MIN. LEVEL `1 1I•)1 0 y7—-44, 0 2 )5 2 3 )6..( / . 3 4 )c(3'' 4 5 12914-i" 5 6 7) 1 ' 3/)'' 6 8 3 /0" 8 10 36•:` '' '3 10 ' 12 A4:. e'/?. r 12 15 (> 1 " 7 j ,y •/ 15L ' 20 ty,7• 20 7 t 30 .' 30 7 3 ' 40 f�'r 7s�c+%i 60 / Si ' ' 50 60 3,'l'% 60 r3 / 120y,' 9', 180 -3v,-.., ..'37j � 1 t 1lq,1.' A. 4a...'11.;)(:.;LlJ 7. o.� ham✓ Tir (71/ifj • STATE OF COLORADO, OFFICE OF TBE STATE ENGINEER APPROVAL% Gws31-91-03 1. WELL PERMIT NUMBER 239419 iii Owner Name(s): Kelly & MiDhael Lyon Family LLC Mailing Address: P.O. Box 110 City, State, Zip : Stlt, Co. 81652 Phone # : 970-876-5944 i - WELL LOCATION AS TRILLED3 SW 1/4 . SW 1/4 Sec: l Twp: 6 S Range: 92 W DISTANCES FROM SEC. LINES 215 ft. from South Sec. line and 773 It. from West Sec. line OR Northing. Easting. SUBDIVISION: LOT: BLOCK: FILING (UNIT): STREET ADDRESS AT LOCATION GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION ft. DRILLING METHOD Air Rotary 4 DATE COMPLETED: 5/1/2002 TOTAL DEPTH: 123 DEI'III COMPLETION: 123 5. GEOLOGIC LOG 6. HOLE DIAMETER (i,) FROM (S) TO (ft) DDpth Type of Material (Size, Color, and Type) . 9.0 0 44 000-005 Toasoil, Gravels 6.5 44 123 005-031 Clays, Silts 031-039 Sand, Gravels 7. PLAIN CASINO 038-123 Gays, Shales On (in) Kmd Wall Sae From (It) To (R) 7.0 Steel 0240 -1 34 7.0 Stul 0.240 39 44 5.5 PVC 0.250 38 123 PERI. CASINO : Screen Mot Size r 7.0 Steel 0.240 34 39 _ _ III • Water Located: 4. 31-38 Remarks : • 8. Filter Pack Material : Size : Interval : 9. Packer Placement Type : Formation Depth : 50 10. GROUTING RECORD Itizznal Amount I Density Interval Placement Cement 3 sks 6 gal/sic 10-25 poised 11. DISINFECTION : Type : I-1TH Amt, Used : 4 oz :2 WELL TEST DATA : () Cheek Boot If Test Data Is Submitted On Supplemental TESTING METHOD : Air Compressor Static Level : 10 ft. Date/Time Measured 5(1/2002 Production Rate 2.5+ bpm Pumping Level : Total $ Dat (Time Measured 5/1/2002 Test Length : 2 hours Teat Remarks : err my km*Wedpr. (Purslbrt so S 24-4-I.I (DDX") (RS, Ib =long of false sues Welt, w 13. now rad abs aaFae.aak) vat a OF mg= sd e+e 1hry ao fr fs .are aaaaiam seated de a a•d P a a CON'P Al T'OR : 5 eettan Drilling Corp. Phone : (970) 927-4182 Mailing Address : P.Q. Box 1059 Ba.Qli, •.:1621 Lie. No. 1095 Name / Title (Please Type or Print) Wayne Shelton / President Loh S ..• : .. / ✓ ��i Date 5/15/2002 Jame lddreee Pate *0/ Well Log Depth Casing Size Pump Setting Test Pump TIME 2-7D WELL TEST REPORT Lye" (,vim. 9�1p Telephone /6 DRAWDOWN MIN. LEVEL GPM 1 2 ...._--. it j e c_ 3 .?�` 477jit': CpRIs lVQL.� FAX 943 - Water Level Draw Down 26 , 30 Production zi 7• Mitts is ' RECOVERY TIME l MIN. LEVEL ;17 zs act 5 -3 .10 1d5� ate V. iv 1110 ►' 30 •t' s 8 Y, .?d 10 12 a1t,2Y.3:2 2x,3`1 30 4y. Y.3 40 y, y 60 .� Sr . Y '7 g0 •r 1 33 5- 3 2 37 4/0 Y y-- 5-5- Os- 15" --SS"O15" I; 2 0 D 1 331, �4 3 44 2 3 4 5 8 e 10 12 15 20 30 40 50 60 •tl5 '2.77 22 37 2Q Lot -qict 441 onto a ..ca 1 115 tS., lay a 253 9 p. 17 Al 51 d25.7q alb �T �1,h1P t v,r. �-ca+v7til- � �-FJU r • • APPENDIX N VICINITY MAP • • 8 3 a 3 z 2000 2000 4000 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 1 INCH = 2000FEET CONTOUR INTERVAL 40FEET Peach Valley Vistas Vicinity Map SCALE: 1" =2000' DATE: MARCH 15,2004 DRAWN BY: OK SHEET: 1 413 PROJECT: 02372 CHKD BY: MIG DRAWING: Vicinity Map.dwg DIRECTORY: H:\02372\01\Preliminary Plan Maps and Drawings\ GAMBA A ASSOCIATES Kelly and Michael Lyon Family, LLC GAMBA & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS 970/945-2550 WWW.GAMBAENGINEERING.COM 113 N1NTN ST., STE. 214 P.O. SOA 14ES GLENWOOD SPRINGS, Co 51602 • APPENDIX 0 - OPEN SPACE DOCUMENTS • • • APPENDIX P WATER RIGHTS • • s Melody D. Massih, P.C. P.O. Box 916 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602 Telephone: (970) 945-8113 Facsimile: (970) 945-6933 FAX TRANSMISSION- COVER SHEET DATE: 3/24/05 TO: Nathan Bell FAX #: 945-1410 FROM: Melody D. Massih DOCUMENT: West Divide Contract for Peach Valley Vistas NUMBER OF PAGES (including cover page): 6 • COMMENTS: Nate- attached is the West Divide Contract for your inclusion in the preliminary plan application. Please let me know if you need anything else with regard to the legal water supply for Peach Valley Vistas. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This transmission may contain privileged or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure or use of the information is unauthorized and prohibited. If you have received this message ui error, please immediately contact the sender and destroy this message. Thank you • 09/23/2004 10:16 9708765943 LYON CONSTRUCTION :erne Jemmy 20D1 4ITLICA11ON 11Ot4Af5 D WATER LEASE FROM WEST DIVIDE WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT 109 Wet Fourth Street, P. 0. Hoar. 1478, Rifle, Colorado 81650 L APPLICANT INFORMATION Peach Valley Vistas Norte: Kelly and Mkhsel Lyon Finny LLC Nhi1bS addce m r.Q Boor 110. Silt CO 11652 Tehmham: f9701 176-5944 Authorised agent: MVleladv D. Mesita. Att<anry *r Keliv and MISAISILISIXIMatlatC (9201945.4467 2. COURT CASE 4's;. Decree Case No. Augmentation Pian Cue No. 3rUSE OF WATER O RESMENITAL (1.ck arppleable beats) ❑ Orditniy household use Number of dwellings: IR Subdiivision: No. contracted units: Q No. Tadao lots: 25 PO Hoare gardmAawn irrigation of 3.4O sat. F. per loot Method of irrigation: O flood O sprinkler D drip 0 other IE Non-commercial striatal watering of25 animals Fine Promotion Irrigation oral be piped to each lot frau the Ware and limas ditch Wei! SAS A, jrwwortforwattiple maser welts mast be submitted O COM MNERCIAL (cheekspplic bk boxers) Number awaits: Total sq. R. of commercial units: Description alum 0 INDUSTRIAL Description of use: E.aperatiie*C Max lanai water surface to bo exposed: Description of any use, War disc evaporation. and method of diversion% rate of aversion, end IMO" amount of &version of any trate withdrawn from the peed: 0 MUNICIPAL Desa:riptien of use: 4. SOURCE OF WATER SRm-ture Wells and 10 OQQ.ei[on storNielynk Structure Ham Lyre Wells #1 and Soon= amber Menge ISOroand water Carnet Permit it 58718-F said 51C119 -P 0 Dime Pimping: TttbunteY Location.: PAGE 02 Contract #020530PVV(a) Map #436 Date Activated 6/27/02 Date Amended 9/16/04 S LOCATIONOFS7RUCTURE(Weill) Oarl old Casty 4w ��, flW /. County Quarter/Wena Quarter Section 1 T6S R92Vj Sixth P.M. Section Township Range Principal Meridian 215 Pt ecru Sexatb 7» Pt. from West Dislatce of. well from *action liras (ConyRoad 235) Well location address: TBD Davis Point Road (Location of Well 62 Lt attached) 6. LAND ON WI ICH WATER WILL HR USED y (Lad ` arc �T SK may be provided "�d of an anaclo era See attached heal desaiptke for Lot 5.19s1lur and Maid ,L12 FAppily LLC EgmFEM Number ofacres in tract: 541879 Jadttilen bVa the District, at Applitnwt's Lwow. may be remora 7. TYPE OF SEWAGE SYSTEM 00 SeptilrA * option leach field :Central system °Other Districtnanre: 11. VOLUME OF LEASED WATER NEEDED IN ACRE PEST: .26 sac fact (minimum of 1 sae foot) Provide engin:m a K dam to support volume of *voter rcgredad Commertiol, anarrricipasl, and industrial users sorra provide diversion and co tssassmi a data on a mon,* leak A totalizing flow meer wide rewrote readmit iv regairredto be iautofkkd and usage mooned to West Divide. Apphomt apex+ ocknenoledgas 11 kw keel the opportaudtyto review the Dormers form Water Allotment Contract taxed agrees this a4aplichtatis i ismade 'organist and subject to the tensa sou( conditions cootabsed therein. DATE APPROVED: 9 - 0 `i WEST DIVIDE WATER CONSERVANCY f)1STWCT • . 64/'tj!'1F7194 LIR lb 9/08/bb94:4 • • LYON CONSTRUCTION PAGE 0:3, LOCATION OF STRUCTURE (WcP #2) gag atd t'.amtY SW' SW /" Quarter Booboo 1 7 S County � Sixth P,x, Suedes Tawntibip Range Prirtcipr Maridied 1004 FL Gram Soot 1727 Ft-fmll West Distance of well Brom section lines (County Road 235) Weil location iddrez: TBJ) Davis Pont Road X ve 29vd 17•d o O inWgd r tt M 1 ijk z u, 0 S' L`. -EU iEi —5 i; c 1* _so ii0 S 0 o M g� 66666666006606 r"''"gA2 a;: off pqw : a Q GiCCOGOC4p0 p pj 0 00.- pQ P7 2sc00000aa4gl- 666660660660o O O O r 1 A h. m m., O OJ 66666006006640; OW M C. p0OO.-1p Cb OBD N .-0 666600466060 rOO.^Grr.0r•C2 0 0 o d c 0 o 0 0 6 D O ri h,pimbhi�Dtitiui C. O C 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 co oc td C 6666666 nj 2322p* 0 mo 6066666 PJ 0000000000 0 0 4 8 C O O p 0 0 C7 p CiOOGCCOGOOG p t0to VNNP1NNC 44° C4P.. ��+py 000c7 6 G0 C76 p 66666666666 2t tgCC> 2 0WUOW►O- -7W. dI'�,'SQcnOz00 hn T r :-ins i inn Nri 1 ki Iligi jJqjj 4t Z, cc -cc. +�--0-N G chcnninnir 1 nom•.,. �,...� .••••• E669Si760L6 3d `HISSbW 'Q 41Q013W Wd6:6 £002 v2 NUN • • • v, r..••+ rso•AY JIUUYYJ,MJ Form No. GWS -25 APPLICANT L YUN UUNb I h'U I 1 UN OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER Ca�OLp RiaO DI SIGN fOF IN t t2cRESOURCES (003) eeea5s1 PAGE 05 1095 f WELL PERMIT NUMSER 58718 DIV. 5 W039 DES. BASIN MD 5 Block: RMa: 6ubdir KELLY & 1.1104A5L LYON FAMLY U.0 EXEMPTION APPROVED WELL LOCATION GARFIELD COUNTY SW 1/4 SW 114 Section 1 Township B S Range 92 W Sldh P.M. QISTANCES FROM SECTIIN LJNES 215 Ft from South Section Line 773 Ft from West Section Lite ().Q ts-k CTS PO BOX 110 . SILT. CO 81662- LIJ e t1 4.1 AM COORDINATES (970) 876-5944 Notting: Eating;F',�'RMWTTO U$ AN MISTING WE4X ISSUANCE OF 1'H1$ PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT, CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1) This well shell be used in such a way ss to cause no material injury to atdaarg water rights. The Issuance of this permit does not assure tha'eppIcant that no matey will occur to anther vested water right or preclude another owner of a vested water right frore eeakkng retie, M a civil court action. The of a variance ehhaen approval been granted by the State Bo E1010111101E10101111015 of Water Ws Construction and Pump Installation Contractors In accordance wilt Rule 18. 3) Approved pursuant to CRS 3740-137(2) for the use of an existing wet constructed under permit no. 239419, appropriatttg ground water tributary to Me Colorado River as an alternate point 01 diversion to he Avalanche Canal and *than, on the oondmon tttatlbe well shell be operated only when the West OMds Wady Conservancy Maitre substitute water supply plan. approved by the State Engineer, Is In effect, and when a water allotment contract between the well owner end the West Divide Water Coneetvenoy Olsbld for the release of replacement water from Ramat Reservoir is in effect. , or under an approved plan for augmentation. WDWCD witted 1f020530P W (a). 4) The hew** of this permit hereby cancels permit no. 239419. 5) The use of ground water from arta well in combination with Wail No. 2 (permit 58719-F) le limited to ordinary houe.boid purposes Inside 21 single 1omly duwdings. the ktigation of n0- more than 83,000 square het (1.43 acres) of home gardens and lawns. and the watering of 42 head of stock Ali use of this well will be curtoited unless the roster allotment contract ora plan for augmentation Is in affect. This well Is.knttwn es Wag No. 5) The rrdobrwm pumping rata of this wee shall not armed 14 GPM. 7) The corrtbined average annual Imo -Int d ground waier to be apprcindatad from this well and Well P4.2 (permit 58719-9 shall not exceed 5 acre-feet. a) The return low front the use of this will tntRt bo through an Individual rrasb i water disposal systems r1 the non-avapond)ve type wArere the water Is retuned to the same stream system in which the wall Is located. 9) The owner sha8 mark the Well kr e oorapicwus piece with well permit nrhiber(s), name of the aquifer, and mud one malamute) as appropriate. The (twaer aha$ take necessary means end precautions to praaerve.these martdngs- 10) At/taking flow meter mewl let Metaled on this well and maintained In good waking order. Permanent records of all diversions meat be matrttabned by the well owner (recorded at least ennuely) and submitted tad to the Division Engineer upon reqs 11) This welt Shall be located at least 800 teat iron any eodating well, completed at the same aquifer, that is not vaned by the applicant. 12) This area shalt be located not more than 200 fed from the location specified on this pehmtt. APPROVED CJE Mole ®npa»ar .ftegtot No. 9501313A r DATE ISSUED 110V-2 72002 EXPIRATION DATE NOV 27 Fom1 No. GWS,25 APPLIPAUT LYON L.11f4IRUCTIdN PAGE 06 OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER oL R&DO DI I/ SIGN OF IATE RESOURCES 0103) 8663661 1�ta en 8k, Denver, eb WELL PERMIT NUMBER 58719 F DIV. 6 WD 39 DES. BASIN MD Lot 6 Bock: Pikes Suldty; KELLY & IacHAEL LYON FAMILY LLC FxEUPTlON 1095 ���1t �1 c��a -��, L I C PO BOX 110 SILT, CO 81B52- (970)876.5944 IT TO II3EAN1Ol TING 110314 rlk 44. APPPRQVIED_1NELL LOCATION GARFIELD COUNTY SW 1l4 SW 1l4 Section 1 Trip 6 5 Range 92 W Sixth P.M. DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES 1004 Ft from South Section Lone 1227 Ft. hon Wast Section Lha UTM CQOF HN TES Nortldrw ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONOITt9NS OF APPROVAL f) Thin %mil shall ba used in such a way as to causer no material injury to existtnn water rights, The issuance of this permit does not amuse the applicant that no Injury oaf occur to anomer vested water right or preclude enoNter meter of e vested water right from seer 1f relief In a cb ft court action. 2) The construction of this wall shell be In oomp6ance with the Wet r Wait Construction Rums 2 CCR 402..2, unless approval of a variance has bean granted by the Stabs Board of Exemilnera of Water Well Construction end Pump Installation Contreatorb kr accordance with Rub 19, 3) APptdved pursuant lo CRS 37-90-137(2) for the use 61 en mating well constructed Wader permit no. 243224 and correetton of wail baton, appropriating ground water trl,utery 10 the Cato redo River, as an altercate poke of diversion b the Avalanche Canal and Siphon, on be condition that the wail shell be operated only when the West Divide Water Conservancy Debtors subattut water $upply per, approved by the Staab Engineer, Is In affect and when a water allotment contract between its well owner and ane Wast Divide Water Coneorvprncy District for the release of replacement water from Rued RasemmirisIneffect orunder enapproved peon for eugtrrentaton. WDWCDcontract #t020630PW(s). 4) The Isausj CO of this permit hereby cancels Item* rho.'243224. 5) The use of ground water from Wes well in combination with Well No, 1 (permit 51718-F) Is limited to ordinary household purposes Inside 21 simple fafnl r dwelinps, the krigatidn a not mote than 4000 equere Net (1.45 acres) of home gardens and lawns, and the waearltg of 42 heed of stack. Ail use of tins well will be curta1ed unless tine water allotment aonlr*Ct eta plan For augment On Ie in effect This well Is known es Well No. 2. 6) The mordnmm pumping tate of this well shell not exceed 2725 GPM. 7) The combined average annual ernount of Bryne water to be appropriated from this well and Well No. 1 (pewit 59718.F) shall not exceed 5 eae-/s et. 6) The maim flow from flue nae of Pk well mutt be through en individual %mete water disposal systems of the non'ewPorailve type where the water is rationed to ate same stream system in which the well le located. 0) The owner Shell marks be well in a conspicuous [Moo with well pent* flwnber(s), name of the omelet, and court case number(:) as e0propriete. The owner shall take necessary means and precautions b preserve these markings. 10) A totsiLdng flow meter must beinstalled on this well end maintained in good whxidrlg order. Permanent 'scores of al diversions must be maintained by the well owner (recorded et least annually) and submitted b this Division Engineer upon request 11) This wee shall be tom et least 600 feet from any existing well, completed in the same aquifer, that Is not owned by the appliant. t2) This well shat be located not more than 200 feet nom the boca0on specified on ante permit. CJE APPROVED , Stade E Rootlet t NO.9501313B • DATE ISSUED EXPIRATION DATE NOV 2 7 243 • • APPENDIX Q- PROPOSED METHOD OF FINANCING THE WATER SYSTEM • • 5EP-13-2005 14:09 From:0E.M,PC 9709456933 To:9703843470 P.1'17 FAX TRANSMISSION OLSZEWSKI & MASSIH, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 214 8`" STREET. S uu t 210 P.O. 130x 916 GLLNWOOD SPIUN('iti, COI DRADO R 1602 To: Fred Jarman Fax #: 384-3470 From: Melody 0. Massih, Esq. Subject: Letter to Craig Lis I'ri,Gri IONL: 970,'928 9104 rAc SImii.k: 970.928,9600 SEP 1 3 2005 0IAg` IELD COUNTY BUILDING & PLF+'NNING Date: Scptcml Ij 13, 2005 Pages: 17. incluing this cover sheet. Fred- attached is the letter faxed to Craig Lis this afternoon. Please contact me with questions. THIS FACSIMILE'fRANSMIssION IS STRICTLY CONFinENTIAL AND 1S ` NTENDED ONLY FOR THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY NAMED ABOVE. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVE[) THIS FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY THIS OFFICE IMMEDIATECY AND RETURN THE TRANSMISSION TO US AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS. THANK YOU. SEP -13-2005 14:09 From:DaM,PC 9709455933 Edward 1.3. 01S7Cwskr Melody 0. Massib To:9703543470 P.2'17 OLSZEWSKI & MASSiH, P.C- ATTORNEYS AT LAW Craig M. Lis, P.L. Division of Water Resources 1313 Sherman Street, Room 818 Denver CO 80203 214 8 I STRFFT, SI IiTF 210 P.O. 130x 916 Cii1,PNWOOn'PPIN(S, C0101000 0 81602 TFI.P,PHoN N.: 970.928.9100 FAcslri .r: 970.928.9600 September 13, 2005 VIA FACSIMILE ONLY TO (303) 8116-3589 Re: Peach Valley Vistas Subdivision Preliminary Plan Section 1, T6S, R92W, 6" PM W. Division 5, W. District 39 Dear Craig: This letter is in response to your email dated September 9, 2005, wherein you requested certain information regarding the irrigation within the above -referenced subellision. Enclosed are the Ibllowing documents: 1, Map prepared by Gamba & Associates, Inc., showing approxiruate amount and location of historic irrigated area; 2. Table prepared by Gamba & Associates, Inc., showing the caleuh tion for current amounts to be dedicated for irrigation of Lot 25; 3. Deed showing Kelly and Michael Lyon Family. LLC's ("developer") ownership of the 34.5 shares of Ware and Hines Ditch water: and 4, Decrees for the Ware and Hines Ditch. The developer is proposing to subdivide 58.88 acres into 25 lots, and 24 of those lots (l .ots 1- 24) will he approximately 1 acre each in size. Lot 25 will contain 18.5 acres. A portion of this property including platted Lot 25 is currently used for agricultural purposes, and Lot 25 will continue to be owned by the developer and used for agricultural purposes. As is (stated in your June 30, 2005 lel ter to Fred 'Jarman, the developer has received Well Permit Nos. 61f.)81 -F and 61982-F, and the wells in combination arc permitted to withdraw and average of 13.665 ere -feet annually to be used in part for ordinary household uses inside 25 single family dwellings ankl'irrig,ation of not more than OM •.C./LY0)CPt CH VALLEY VIFTn4l IF1.TF SEP -13-2005 14:09 From:OaM.PC OI S%F,WSKI & MASSIH, P.C. Page 2 September 13, 2005 9709456933 To:9703843470 P.3'17 3000 square feet of home gardens and lawns per residential site (with tical irrigation not to exceed 1.72 acres of home gardens and lawns). The developer owns 34.5 shares in the Ware and I Iines Ditch. In ially, the developer planned to deed a portion of these shares to the Peach Valley Vistas I Iomeowners Association for additional irrigation on Lots 1-24. However, as stated above, Lots 1-24 already hav (sufficient irrigation. Thus, the developer is withdrawing his plan to provide any additional irrigation)I f or these lots and at this time he will not be deeding any of the Ware and Hines Ditch shares for addi[ sinal irrigation uses on Lots 1-24. 1111 The developer does plan to dedicate shares of the Ware and ines ditch to continue the agricultural irrigation on Lot 25. As you can see from the cnclos rdl map, there are currently approximately 30.853 acres being irrigated with the Ware and Ilines Ditch shares. However, Lot 25 will consist of 18.5 acres. and only this portion ol'the 58.88 acre propertI will continue to be irrigated with the ditch shares. As is set forth in the table showing the calculation r irrigation of Lot 25, 9.388 shares of the ditch will be necessary to irrigate Lot 25. The developer gill dedicate the 9.381? shares of Ware and Hines ditch water to Lot 25 to ensure that the agricultural irrigation on this lot continues. Our public hearing regarding this development is betore the GI rfield County Planning, and Zoning commission tomorrow, September 14, 2005 at 6:30 p.m. We w u1d very much appreciate it if you could review the enclosed documents and write a response to tiied Jarman at the Garfield County Building and Planning Department regarding the sufficiency of irrigation water for this development before our hearing tomorrow night. Please let mc know if you have any questions regarding these documents. 'Thank you for your tirnc and consideration. cc: Kelly Lyon Michael_ Gamba 1 -'red Jarman .MtPt.A. *('11 vnl, I,1:.'vtti'1' n JLI, Very truly yours, OLSZEWSKI & M S Melody rt, I\ assih SEP -13-2005 14:10 From:D&M,PC 9709456933 To:9703843470 P.4'17 1.1 1 1 L 014 01011 1 tl`,I�7/M11�I/Qyy�l„I+ ¢a1�il F ,rl; i4r” t 0j'T A76Ri#y.+ t0P-441 tl4�t1 r +> ara�tn NasNlkiw,i'4 NrylNRuuIA ,Hy,xw iti! t 1 94! Bik$./l C & , f�iA tt't ream, yJ I1h�Kh�tM n �1 r? h!(iyyib}y� . f1 � ll! ;ltd I , ,I fi,l0 µ�Ii.iaronttxv�dR�f+lmhsa�l►A�CC sal�ttay AW}� 11' iiti ,i rntAt �eyt" d$i .. r 40I a tII( TfKAirrifyMb M :47:7i:: os I ., `L� kb w t ry r +Itxl I'�) t MdCtk 'Kiat til�ua 1I tai f�' � ttag4thtyiE '� it 1 tAl Aphir+k+@u 1 * rv1x„au.VI% PM . st t 111ia1t1 $1r.iR kt�l 9 M/�Iiki r iGt k K a; f ..09.4. �ra0!1*.1 w k*.f aw l lu , h t4P i y N r �( At /THtJ t Itt'�: A .011411.4ll . /1" i'kbltl1l. Peach Volley Vistas Approximate Historic Irrigated Area SCALE. r - - DATE SeONwae• 1.1,1110S SPIEET, I di KKCSe:C'.I OMT2A1 MIAVANC . MwRN In NkwAt 1•11pIW1 CdrMVlleeaie, LOU (TOW N O22T31011k11Se14wAlta Aee SerplyC•4de7eel fSMWN W. C;NK17 flY GAMUA & ASSOCIATES, INC. G A M B A CONDUIiTING CNGINIMRR A LAND SURVEYORS 810/047.0 DSO WWW.GAMRARNGINEERING.COM 0 Ass001A1[e •••ws•• •f •rle.n snr ire. 111A•1•004 •1.1•10•••• •1v sr•.+. r._ SEP -13-2005 14:11 From:08MEPC 9709455933 To:9703843470 P.5'17 Required Irrigation to Flood Irrigate Lot 25 Irrigatable Area of Lot 25 .707.5.06.56; sq. ft. (frdrh Autocad) 16.242 acres 11 Ii _ Required Irrigation (Assuming 50% Efficiency)' 3.68 acre-ft/adre Total Required Irrigation 59.74 acre-ftJJ Gallons per minute per share 8 gattmin ll I, Hours Per Day 24 hrs/day 1 Minutes Per Hour 60 min/hr III; Minutes Per Day 1440 min/day 'I I Cubic Feet per Acre -Feet 43560 cu ftleer-fit Gallons per Cubic Feel 7.481 gal/cu ft I I' Inches Per Foot 12 in III' Irrigation Season 180 days H i! Acre -ft per share 6.364 acre-ft/share Required Shares assuming 50% efficiency, 180 days for irrigation season, and constant daily supply of shares 9.388 shares I, Notes: 1) 3.68 acre-ft/acre is based upon 50% efficiency to irrigate alfa/hay in Garfield Irrigation requirements for alfa/hay is 22.07 acre -inches per year of net irrigatio by Colorado Department of Agriculture website. Couf ty. provided SEP -13-2005 14:11 From:O&M, PC 89/]2/2085 12:57 9700705943 IIIIAIIIII 114111 IIIIII 111 ilia 111I11111111111II Illi 1 of 2 R 0.D DD101EeIGARFIELDD Cd0�ut/TY R6sooaf 9709456933 To:9703843470 LYOH CONSTRUCTION PAGE R1/R7 QUIT CLAIM DMEJ) TIDE DERn,Mats shle 30 WS deyof MerOA alai WtR$JRT A. MOON AND CAROLYN A. 11EL80N . rtpmr, aid of the old Carey of Ons AYUIXLD end StOf COLORADO t KELLY' & MICHAEL LEOR Mau LTD. LIABILIT' COMPANY whose lust address it P .0. BOX 110 Ilitir, CO ,if1652 ddye Yui County of Guinn° end Nast at' COLORADO • meow witless, 11,.1 IM gamer, kw sea et peat teraiat of ‘he tem u( TOAND NoDodi. 11receipt.d sialide.my of l atdl k larch/ ecendwledied, hep remised, rallied_ cold, coo eyed. sod QUIT CLAIMED. end by them Prneda, do rename. $et1 ed1, eos.ver ad �htt County of ()ye CHIm auto tilt jrentee, ha T1elAtan , tua0rc and ouijli, tertvee, ell the rijht, tide. %%Merest, chip, and b lee fir las n . with lelpro,ersehte fr lay. tbwta, Ira" Ind hint In MaaA . IM hi Illi Icel propsn1!IELo WWI SOK th7 sorbet of Coterie. dacr:bs4 at toOmor. ALI. DITCH AND MATER RIGN7'9 IIIiLONOINC TO, USED UPON OR IN CONNLCIION CII { THS pROPERIT Dp,NC.M D IN ATTACHED LEGAL DCECR.IPTION, INCLuDING 34.5 SHARE [OY WARE AND HINDS DITCH WATIR. TOCETHER WITH DOMESTIC WELL WATER 7REVIOSSI:e IW ITSE, ALL EXISTING PUM S AND PJPIAC, ALL MINERAL RIGHT'S, OIL AND GAS, AND ALL FEDERAL:t;RptImG RIGHTS GRANTOR HAS R1GMT, TITLE OR INTEREST IM. By hro«1 by sneer and number es. ill COIDST7 ROAD 235 DAVIS VOICE'' RD, ETLT. CO 111`53 TO HAVE AND TO HOLD Ur Hat. t)Co l& wllh ill Ind fitsikdar the own Noma nld in 'eller. usaewleo IBrm^AipII er in .ay and all Me aloft, afj►r. tele. BOHM and claim.bnsou• Ir, of the yattar, olid( M j!'s ar MAW. la TM plural wi# rherourltil , ba)Ctlned• i ta+1Y prowl r use, baMl It fed be:maf of the jtanlK � h17 Fell end real jAt Nsrcvd. The Wavier NOOK, %ball Iflehfd0 Hit phu+ , and die am jylar, .,d the use of any Hetldet shall be sndicsble N all jendere. IN WT T MESS WHl lEDY, IM l'oo'p,. has emoted Hits deed on Hhe dare mel fol* above Suitor COLMAADO ) i e. County 01 GARFIELD The Ibrttomj Mnrurasnl woo letoowle4 cad boron me ibis 30th dey of by ESRSEW! U NELltou ADD CAROLYW R, NELSON Worm my h ,yand offal My emnnAuue expires ta.l•. MILliCOLI fug tn3e4105 mf runu,r.,v.,,.wpw c►I 2001 march w. Na WM s..h%U Ola/ a.., p1►] +o. PoLi - 0 �l �k Q!t(c.S _ Notary Public P.6/17 SEP -13-2005 14:11 From:D&M,PC 0'3/12/2005 12:53 9708765943 9rder Number: 01000224 9709456933 To:9703843470 LYON CONSTRUCTION , EXHIBIT A P.7'17 PAGE 02/02 (1111! 1l11l1 1! ! 11) ION 1MMil !l111111 Ilii in �1!!! 578724 04/85/2081 11�a1242 P924 K RLSDORF 2 of 2 R 29.88 D 0.04 GARFIELD COUNTY CO LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE W1/2EN1/4 Or 8XCTZON 1, TOW1JSHID 6 E00?R, RANGE 92 NEST or TRE 6TH P.N. EXCEPT THAT PORTION HERETOFORE CQNVRYED OUT 8X DOCUMENT NO. 197873 AND RECORDED IN 800E 300 AT PAGE 587 OA TA OYPICE OF THE CL RE & RECORDER OF GARFIBLD COMM, COLORADO1, COMPRISING75.49 ACRES. MORE 4R LESS. COUNTY OF AARFtELD STATE OP COLORADO 5EP-13-2005 14:11 From:08.M.PC 'asp r 'ua onz. 'V SVP OH.L 9709456933 r r+ M � b r .► r. - o—m3f-•-mm.- •.m mo,wm.m Term O 7*46 r.,..moy—,am rr Y•+.d''T ..Aa,m4 :'WPgN61. <v g�0ww0 d0°° m p'W p[q 7rC`i P 2. 3,ro�r� oo d..VII ir _.5121" apyOo t q.,..,.v.,�. .�'... app yi.., Uy �mr C� mg ;rW C- 6+'ry� a'r.g3 '1 ar V...�.-rf3,m0 0`� .NmO,W.O.gd ..i.my .''.O ... dW (1.164 f� '10,_ 46 m C .g. rbm — ,e +$ AAp'.,:gab =do moo.. oom�9a1. 0. T eeAcp�'ra�%5�r~.AL° „*".W"1,..- 2 �i -i »o;�'y' x "+., oo n ffmm0 7m,7vO,p OV9A m60��ds; 0=�0, n� 0. A ,®. .+peggAal: S "gyp 7dro N m�,roOnv�.. .. C6 Orp�m'ore. mbW�00�poop w >�a o`r. ZO 4, 1.+Yge�ap,Wk Co 0. ,Oa od,...s.12. 90rypIDOrep9 ptl2.r a n .-Apo mmma„Do•nn aoKCv.~7X'00,0et. m N G 0A 9 ,�' apq6W.P 0002:121. ,r• , Q. or ti �m --cr ;ter '+a, F cl QapayP•y '� Q'm o•1 mOm yf m IT „ 0.0,1S."22:_3„, 'ov o--iVp EL: mro 4�mva01 000m0Oe02�0 o �;� ywonovi�e0we'2 PWO ., V G.70 �+ 0:7.— yy. .0 mtme.mdor M m°.'Ziog~r °0 a d.. 0. a s. ,o rDgm 0 Ao. y 0,..7 Ani .. o. O.m m mg vi„P boa....... q.. a,• . ,r,. 44g"410"�000 - a ,. m oo a0.o aarm a00apA P O Ory0r� a 'erwr 00.rrmP 0 IC O ad5/000wpD0,700m r«. QO n(9. 6 yAW.9Y-2ar /spit) Ie1a.taaa To:9703843470 P.8'17 40. v aV A ,,,00.0%,-1,00^,00,c7, .T P W .0. ". .4.;,..„.,g. poo d m g m m I* fn P D.�p ,.. P n "� 0 w �'. '4 P, r.1 .D "'�+ ems. 5 r °' N a a m m m y Z vomaO'.' m ,.._rm� H."a.a 99ynmom ..m w rp t,.rm 7o S• p m ¢...p d0 pdtxp m _ vK*w3w 0T, -,...1 V17 oti o 7'.i7e'. AO PR.- Cr t7-Urm Q' AO rmo. it s v. -.� aaoc,ZZ.4.o0 rQ.rrc�b.paga erro�vl1 �, ru i '� h] g A C n r° P r° P w '� .O m G u . a '? ARG f� J ,. v" O A g 004 o C � 72-0G'-'2.-13.'=:60,, v C m •- 0 o. -•Rep �, oo5m cve5.a gclomr. W ANCP 7k>'a 0a.a Oc`°P@z•-; O CA E,mA 4' C' 7 r-''�'. C,:: 'm 0 m 4.0,4..." m•.-.� Pap M, abb e tl� S 7 A .� G. CY _. O' OD ,... " d 09 �bI p,W r'r W ^tV rm..D 6. p'n 1(r7'' ry G o 661 o, .a .. 47 ,7 -R. w. 0 rr o d 4 CY • C.. 9 2' e - C O ro 0! g a v A i7 P• ry p� G f'r r, P C fD Y 19 m O. m �"' y O eD O IS ~ �� a�o°am°o�po°a -' m;"aaQ,OC 0 t n 5 ��jaD 0. —„,-,.z wm „' adg,°>.apm CI •0 ID r' ......1°, R p w O 0' W Cz' A O. m l0 aWelm n G O'7W r7a ,Pfi" m7W 0 W m f1W 6, ' T 7-0;16"'Q. . p�dpp -1 C d, FA cc i p. q .� n �-. D� G�'� PAGC m'^� n A .O -.v W G.+O1 P':r w y p �. O u m a, cro a .. to g E w 0,,,,n. .., g c, o a .+ .c J n ¢ o m C Kr o w o m R'. A ee +'n" �Q C �' �aP C.YW� 7m4'pOv m 0 6 A ate..,rA `cps Imo a�7.0" cc m g .o Wry: ,ti msN o?gia5�. m.c.a o_ Ei .1.-...:-: 1 SEP -13-2005 14:12 From:OaM,PC 9709456933 To:9703943470 P.9'17 STATE Oi' COr,ORA 00. CO'VNTY OI` CARP'1T i.D, 5 In the IJ In the matter of the petition 4r I tltriet Court, and application of Bernard Roan f 1 t re -hearing of the priority or ri ght to the 1,1 and water for lrrfga ion I./Perot/it Order. from Flit Creak, through the W are and Hinds Ditch, In WaterIA s- Lrlet No. :i9. I i Now on this 14th day of A) i�il, A. 0. 1890, this matter enining 011 to 1,2 heard open the pelltI 1 of the petitioner herein, and it appearing to the Cours. ILat fluty notice had hucu served puruonally upon each and every person int4i'nrted, and the until petitioner *p- penring 111 r'usuon sr; wu11 as b) ,Tohn T. Shumate, Eaq,, his att.or- ue,v. and the varlone yurtien int' rested appearing in person as well as by N. T, Sale, Esti., their utt r11oy, and the court having heard the ovidcnce end tcu(imony on behalf of mad petitioner au well las that 011 the part of all those DO-iions interested we aforesaid; and the Court beim now fully advise:111i the premises, (loth find: That the said petitioner, D rnard Ruan, heti the right to use water from Elk Creek through l aid ditch for purposes of Irriga- tion; tb..t: ,,,a sari iiiht was iii rated upon the First Enlargement of said %'ere and Hinds Ditch 13 Murch 1st, 71;8G, priorities) of ditch heretofore odiudtcateu t:ein 'Neu_ 15, G7 and 1;t6; that he has abort 95 acres of land tinder sal j!ditch, And is entitled to the use of 1.9 cubic feet of wnt,r Dor ad .o+ld of time of the water of said Elk Creek lo flow through uutd df.tult to irrigate said laud. It Is therefore Ordered, Adjdaced and Decreed. that Phe said Bernard Rutin be entitled to 1.9IVUblo feet of caster per second of limo of the waterN of said Elk Creek, with priority right. thereto tinting from the Drat enlurremela11 of the costa Were and Hinds Ditch, 00 Murch 1st, A. D. 1888, Aisd that there be allowed to ftnw Into said ditch from said creek t�r, the use and benefit of the said Bernard Rutin, tinder and by virIue of the appropriation by loiret Enlargement of said ditch—P1'IorityINn. I7—.I.6 etthiC feet of water per second of time. and that said 'amount of water he decreed to said ditch In addition to the 5.r ',cubic feet of water huretofore decreed to said priority No. 57. aIw in addition to the whole amonnt of 16 eeb!c feet of water Del' ECctjnd of time heretofore decreed to said ditch, s 1 judged and Decreed that the dr d, on the 1101 day or May, A. 1) ltcatlon of the priority of right. 1 i'iVater District No. 39" bc, and and emended au as to customs I ,djudged that the said p(ttitIonet• 1'iOMAS A. Ri1C?KER, Judge. 1 And it is further Ordered, Ad Gree of this Court made and ontarr 1889, "In the matter of the naju to the Urie of water for IrN"'atio,l fi+ the same is hereby uhanged, alter with this decree. end it 11, nether Ordered and pay all cents of thin proceeding. SEP -13-2005 14:12 From:DaM,PC 9709456933 1 To:9703843470 s 4..-,. a ^ N�_�'11.OFI vmmg138 02p. W Kpt r�OD a'oa U)mv)w I r, "� 0A 04111 U a �tl 2. Q �m'y I 0,... 0'tD O. mnmm y+m��YAaba••••y, b:' i 0,4 rowjf0m121 0� " me.1 ynaa�a o ^pv " • Sr) vup9 0.p o-.tywaa rt �i Am GCC...Q0.vunem P� GYp Ra�et ...0.G W n ,11?) '+ 0._,51;_.--7 es r r' ,t 4_ A el 7 ID S G, � N. m �p^O 'romm oeta sms''g��*��Keoy Qer+mac_ >aAo^ <d no y peIDpm ..7.,-7, ;m0�,p ..,„ 40. ^�g�~p•,w �'�w wA'o. _,,,v, pA��b wp.�RUi �{e p�"rRxir i ua•IDCAVAC.O„O� D W 0, g'gg b'•^o paA ;y'A'r O. �se ;S �i NOS oIDB...0.'"92/o. n0. eticro ,m-,0-5-3 mo -� n'< co yaf),;)w,f . .-go" po.j y, O CfG tiJ ).. ,x r,, :v C7 (g -mf mw 0;1/0'0 ",b o w 3707 ig-4.4'f .3.,m.�0,g F.�'�b0• .N7 r I n 1 o mr�m' O'n-.O.1..... 0 m mAA m gmoc� LV co%0o P." oW A BGG a ��Op mA��rS�A. .ma..0 �• 4��� W1:9.4,740-.1'0771r1?�d~~',-' mm0 �mP a�°ic ata• a 9 �rnm ^�>m�° j o ''.p,S "Czhp=mI,+�Pm��° z �0 I m°v. m�a�cao mtiID C7 "I m ,gro- 8 G 9n, d'GA Qek'W`°� !i 0'A 5 .: ►i1 `� lcfAylmymW pa. '" mo.'°" ,'.Fy pi ;I.' 0�'aP, Z l 06.1: ^wcy8p d P4' ,0 0,6 ao�G,p^m rA0P' p,, f�,, rn tea• 'O0.o°y�om .]o �m ^_ a rit • VI `) R ,» .., m mm y m .'i. m..0. 0. 'f G. 11;; fir° u 8 v. 0�mw rola as���p- �" n Pg am g�mmm mizq' Z W� i DA d �R�A v,� 700 P. X 00 PSN � A p op fp n fp m w ( . .Y� P. Cw� ap�•,S,Ay,� m CN O -Py �i'pp' .fp'mOr,pp A J V +ca ,C70m 10 �¢ •pf ,D, p^m10>p.,7�m W N.4a OyNW C c^ `aab m »� op�jAafet Peg. woad d Zmodi A N O O ,.f 40,b2:4. „e r]cg' .1.—e ,,,,,-0,.,g,_.3 Ga L " a P+OY'rA2arym°11.1 0 IG _ m rom ao•mfmr�cPm°r,paRtm �_ 1•. ^ a w, m m y ;1 E, ,I-,'" ^Pro 0 b' ci p Y C' d 1 � wi .o r'p'1 p 0 .f m o F"A ti Ti"• �q0p �Am�Gam� �°.d o mac -' a4.7'p "p"mwP n'4C Uim "3 .*. (500. ,m-. D p ^. b W .n a m .o-. p. `0• Fefy0.m,%Y"f O- '2' GLY IZ, m Vi"""e2 PP61•0p, mr ...G co '+ A mimes p par ," p7 " .'z c* 4S ^ea•p' As' Y m m 4P.."f�d ,a p10iaa..m,p 44 y ; .-. 0 m N tit 4� Q. I mRo[.].A, ... r~o m __'+ t7 'Oi y� .i a .. C. P O tD M N ,r.. r � w. O m n ��pp ED' r no nm . mey = UtaE•-o1/ oF�90 m; Z" gwpN� `301' P P q,TE r 0. P m d 0. 1..400 nm m _W g. n' �+�' r'p m A m `M^" Ire 'vO CC tid ?"4:% iA I I A a SpA m' A ^'aa _'Rwy �m �ID P o1 ," m ti m7 D-)dp O^f 4^44 ... G m :,a P> .fpr. FF V .P. w k 0 e. 0. o 0• 0• t=i re Yt00 adD00 d0 Ya - eo a e. 04, a 9)p.. aG1° w o' -' a � PO 1. 440'((9D'0 �moap A !"45' n;Arj�.p.�ry�U ...b +.. qyA g CY;72 , O 7 ,.. o. aAllm_ m" a k=R �mr> w- m E m...0. P m D A d C W 0.0 " g a g v °; .0•0. off c am p,m0. .""1p° N Soc om mgp..p, p eoK O,m• � r' o0 A m CID A rood Fo mm a P? w .e O 0 0.m 4 O Q LC, H3.LIf1 UOls73)x3 3H1» N %L%IS g3a�4fN P.10'17 roN0 'UG i� O P m O °„ U" pati pro ID < p,0. e m^roti• ^70.0'0 >7 m �C`7 p,0 ti I .pR mm %QC tuC"p. upo m, h H ei g a,p'P r•'C,�a. A 0 • 44 Z A O'mm0 °,ori p'4g e - O 5,i; (4 "4 01 p : 1- g;;. °b'n oc�y-o2 C ~ a C m p Rm O.j n OG ^A �A' z" pp`p�'�Genn ge O p0.4p'�..0A 14mm a A1,,"0=.-mg A •I Cp r0 n .. 0 . •• A G r' G my .` G A S p; W E m 2 Rc4 m 5 - AOA St .1: m 0 a- ��g.a Irln Z.,3 V.= • 0 g 'A - , 11,.„g0. -,I . P..= „ B PP p c.7 - ..r!,.... p m 0 *1'347A W y w Gm'..?m�mK n1.1 u')mw^D� 0gpooO A', G A n R 4) m g. C! O l7 `� r. p m gat0.. „,, cv C..., v g th g.,awos a _ . o s m m G, DA me— 'D 'C 4. r F ° ° 9Q n l. m C m _ r a.; ^ID°. z O. 0 o ° • Ma 1., o. Or o.r� Vf 1 L n 0 #. 1 m p C R 0 ...N 4 v. SEP -13-2665 14:13 From:OaM,PC 9769455933 To:9763843470 P 11%17 73 the thatlthes further petitioner Oherein puyludged and the cOuts of thiseed p proceeding. C°ore. dl g, Done in open Court, Ry the Court., JOHN T. SHUMATD, Judge. IITATE OP COLORADO, COUNTY OP GARFIELD. c. In the District Court. Tho Colorado Fue1 Ai Iron Company, a corporation, Kirk U. Morley, Bessie Morley, Hans S. 1Iehdrick- son, Angus Hutchinson, Henrietta M. Hutchinson, Evan D. Jonas, Haury C. Carter, Mary h1. Stronse, John R. Obcrto, Peter 7auganella, Dernurd Ruunc, lieu S. Hinds, 9. L. Meadows. Ida 1.'. Dow, Henry M. Davidson, Plaintiffs, vs. Daniel Slaughter, Aiox K. Drown, Aiice A, Ware, Ulrich Lutz and John H. Nelson, Defendants. i Now on this 70th day o1' April. A. 0. 189k, the name being one nS f.he iegiilar judicial daya of the November. A. D. I1197 term of said Court, the, above entitled matter coming on regularly for trial before the Court, and the plaintiffs appearing in person end by Edward T. Taylor, Esti., their attorney, and the defendants Daniel Slaor:hter and Alexander fi. Drown appearing in person, and it aD- nearing to the Court by the return of the officer that. each of the de- fendants herein haves been regnlarty and duly nerved with Sulnhtonn and a ropy at the complaint on the -day of March, 1898, and that the exhl defendants, Slaughter, Lutz and Ware havo filed their answer herein and /edged to be made plainttfra Sn 0115 proceeding, and the defendants, Drown and Nelson, Lave neither filed any answer, mutton or demurrer herein, and the trial of sald cause is proceeded with, before tt.e C`nurt, a jury having been expressly waived; and the ('hurt having prard the testimony herein, and being now folly advised in the premises, doth find: 1 trst: 'shat the plaintiffs and defendants herein are the own- ers of the Ware and Hinds Ditch and water rights, thereunto be• ion..,Seg, which ditch Is Nn. lb in the decree of this Court made and entered on the lith day of May, A. 1). 1889, in and for Water District. No. 99; that Raid ditch is u private, unincorporated ditch um] that the owners thereof are tenants in emntnon and each of the parties hereto own the lend therennder in aald water diatrlet, County and State, and aub1eel to irrigation Crow Said dash, and that the owhere thereof In the order from the headi"ate down are as folluwe, tuwlt: The Colorado Fuel and Iran Company, Ben S. Hinds, Mary E. Struuue. Alice A. Ware, Bessie Morley, Evan D. Jones, 3. L. Meadows, t.lrfek Lutz, K1rk (,. Morley, Alex IC, Brown, Order and Decree, nn 5EP-13-2005 14:13 From:O&M,PC 9709455933 To:9703943470 P.12/17 ..nWOmq�pO =oc 0_,,_ aAa yfi8y ^i� d . -fi'w p '' 0 0 0aap''r' am m^mp1r7.>n1r2mcmo�II:. ARd m n m yAoPgymb AW0,.I80 WM g0„,Po;m 7 m G y0d�G 0 d .. '( •7wy ° O y6gRi,-ovawn sati.3mfam°4�oo^ aLCea'_.y,,.wAImm Cmcpa'--i-Dp0 OWP" N°Gm 1.1Aa4R0Awv ` mA CpceM'"a-myw aojCWom^ ,✓ -poor q Wmn°n�UO+m m A' D'm..ompmsm09mP Ad OwWAt7r19T�aa7C rWm4ag .zWa..Om.. ••1 0OKmmmApCm m-0.. 0,.Dt420/0,m O"+wO.,P.0 0,., 00W �O'7'Pg am`!ammmWUaPati7..9tl.^aA 7b P n'... �S%^Y r.. -'m a l dORnm W m�07 OQA=Qr mm"pm bA2Orn0Ro ^YA07tiyry�,°ap° w� OpT?mp�Irry?pea0mn pio in:imm'i:poEy_iW,^Pam,-u'j "'„r a^m: Ta+ 07mQmO°rov ,V.?.aGt2gB»pa.rORW m yg'.�. Gma0B^mt.2m0',-', �,pmPm�W-pr77'PWF0mw nW0P>G AmmCOYm;Om ��: O gOry"..�G.(^.n'A0,00 •4 07 q v1 1,„m'0 GwmaOy�ry pw��0aA�o'FY y?G.dKaG,Orn mea rWOO0�m� W�y�PaRm•Lm ,E/ -'1F 7,dye�� 'OOaprr=; ymP7P P10c°w,tr Om0.• 7"� �;;pry7A0+P m_Cp.a sop .ad.3ap`0,.iP mmmNamFr-ODqmm AOG2'n4O 000. 9traY AOOm %-R'cga -siA - 'n. O. »..A.~W C0C7 70"mr 7..00m4 „1,...,0-,10t, $0w,c7,77..- m A..miii t, 'aWm 'ac iamams.gPa5'3-,pO m m p ° dsimo ,.. a Cr'”.ki, wi,mtO.ah0==5pS.��..z-gaOaaiA.54;:Opa m w. , Z g wm yOGepmyO ,yOaAnAMdOW-adSA."gg 0nCOmgENOopA'P,7'^°mOymO"^`s 1 0.,o?..^9 QmM F.1,A❑gzoW_40. .01;Om?'R'170 a~A�5QA"' n-OgOOff.Arnar,-;."- -!!.=•-.-6 0m .oeO0 fi,,a CwaAmaO 0.',4';..g�.arevg}A- a o op=..4-;-..m7'.45-4-("4a-'.°co]tln�_mr iad! gao.w.,,ig,°' "14t.��a.�.-o o,�0.onm p7 y8O ,mamnn� ..,7,agnpAw.y�VOrymm0A;i1g ,7°apgi:g m "'aA� P10. W°�AZm.7~wgmposme-G ,.>ue In$� D'bm�d'rpa»mX9p0iyeyn• aaP.c1..'Q+a^�,y7mc9-mm mO og . rm06 mAryw.MO„ngw°em'-mr.A.p n,�q ryay.0,m,mOV.1"m`msm, ~rO680OO.. O. irrp0n°Pg3gGPa o'OO'- P.°°%B Pad a„.. ti OmPm p?ro .aeag yA A..G wm„...a0.g.. WO i -^ba "RW amYC_;m^wonnOW c,mw apGm •70��mtl,�»5Y?gp0WCmJCOV CHa3.A^ p g�PpA�ao . dm 6VAbp m zP4EaaA:!mwav .i1 amw' .1o?5mWC 07pC00.0aAo g=1w 4°5 D ';A'n'InkianA9Crou1-A xy wmi?^ wm a w I, ..-.8 G 7 d mm . 8 g awn ; �t 'a y vi cr r m v a. oo m �' -" m y a .- p ....,p ,.. g .. (p N a d (} 4 .7 0.µw, !j!� m 04 P O O O 0 r m m .. v 0 C b°'-' C>' �' ❑� R 0 tr' fJ C a' CY n p m O h d w 0 '� C1' P w A A r d p. +1 m n ... V, rf ,4 A pp A a 7- cp 07 P Cr 2 0 l9 O y r a B p.,2 0. m ty M 0 9 'G O -+ m a' • cr O tY -� ti A '''-'61..". O Aa. rs k 5 ryUo^ a agMW e° QmmyD=Ay501° �D^g-. 'a �Q?( o. V ',�Ze wa, �-1 .... m alpttpm Q,Ggpagftsm R;a'®am MpptiA �Tr F'7mm�W� O mW9.-5,0nmm oltionp tYp m m n0 .m _ a N-' m mP PW »°a". wead.. 01- g 1./ . o", `-i-.A.%mI;F,4 CwypwyC� a ti%.7;Vg y m m aW m o y- W m » Y m m `t F y_ ,.. O 0' " O'? 0 P .-. -'�. p' r. m 't n -+ .p.. O e' a p R ti y P Pm�' • m.7,85mA"O'~Oanw _tp�:..m.in°m mO�0=p-- .:°m io" co 8 A m J.5 gr�mmOma_. P8by R..g.p`tlMg°'g 0$0.':01';-11,tle pyJagmmonw . W o.'r aQ4t •- A o e w w o' �7-0,11;,m -t g°_ g m T awe �p„17„o.m{!m ` ° 8a... Cg a� 1 woccy a..d . 2 ,,, , ,~4, ,..67'.. • OCrY w;c~dawo,,Olvpa, A/ mC7 AnP0 0oge,da= e.m OtlmS . _,-...m._ D ?' A q r 74 d b' ::.im 0 A, p, m n 9' m p, A 09 y gn ° ?+ a'pi 71 A C b 10 P .. m amo 0r`gmcm MOO �o'n' °m Oa '' 0.0 '''� 8,yga �-m+WOq Om, r0 ° �Q �i�;�o�dA'e d oft, Poa'0.dg° ° m c mi° mc" a a�oG0 `�y OmeP.. e'er° n�1 A anpQ.m P'gg W m.e.eap F+'Q� l vc' 1"OP anrpi g.?:`mA'-I °"".°0°6'..x'`4- .00 mm.m a�GYmm Fa� wO. �0t="O y0 ompaq 'il;'p�0pc. Gid?4..'.0 G%��%�aw~.. a. O 0 A n m^ $7 10, O � u 0 .y ° Qp G P ^r adp '. ,e tip .. mgga^ ^ ooh A 3. mAp m cY> oA A m r m pp �n 0 p G 0. m m C A. p o O b k c 7 Q0 al y b N ^` C p C R a em,„,.. ,gMA.g .F15�y0,o..a,;.g,y a d0 0F=7mi�miOn�Mg � .'�'n�ea�m°9�aiai® p9 P ° 5(11°="6. ... C ., 0 y m pn G PLd d d m u u �' Ito ® w m� w ". O m O a c„ A r '. m Ow p,; 3 m g p9 C= 7 O G y r tl� .. r O p p O m m m ti� ,�.. H Xy tl� � .q g a..40121451," •i .e01.. G 7s N Fs�mo�. g�gG,,,,, aHe dgwmw 8�A P° �y mdl^byG �gon;; g7wP.°io"� m _m.r.v. i'_ m_ dO .. •A _.m p mma9b'^P.A OOARa,=.1.4.P. w,O 't l- w g `� ,..tf m04,0-......06,,pa _ `Cn .y - O A 0 0 0 ~ a m W-.0, „0,,,,g..,, mA C 7 47 y;� a p - Th O4 A a' a ma C O 91 "p0°=.40%;�pgAoO'pmd�1°'1do R°.ag.7g�ro7aa�,8?" °.aoaop at7g�nO. gi0tlrm+09 em P -p e p h.. a a0n ry on' �.r..iA ��CO'y�»n .1-lidp P ny-.n..A g�0 Oa �„OppAp m.�n'/ A. v,�NCf IY `em ',mn r.pp rn .1 -leggy; ti A Q O pp p 0 7 P 4 0 0 m d p n a m a. e- r o .a ; m a a• ° A O m O A r d d w S' 0 M ma m0 ,tia arl► .i tl tl 17N ..gym [Yr.mn,y ,4$a o870" °m 6"12 mnmP °' W8,:o.'"pom"A7pppp9"04" m a A-"tia8 m'+, PCwp9 O' ti^a0m G.myn O mP C0 pA? °y» .n rO ~'Opm 1'^OsAPs=Awl"yo; Q:prpP D A"�.e 'pDA p9�lq g0'rt Sb"m Op d�-, Sp Pamafm's ,Opelm pp' MCPm mm re g m r'4.00t1 ... vomm,Rs m a w -„ O •t 0 • V P1 El 0 w n r O P Y Y� "" b `i '_ -1 47 ,. n 7 0.0V4 m 3o va8 ''EJ "°' KrB °rmr :LYrGEOap otiw9 17 °0brYQ°cn ��'aA ° ~GAam If' ,1°TaaNC Ai° m4w Pc g~ �C�.+m�=Op n09 q%C.'Or C '7 °°pip p�'"o wW 0P C1k D'� Cm pac'a ppgm WmO d'p g 4° "-i-g" r0-ggmO. a n 7 w a h l A w •-1 O. O 6 0 v N 4 n a a. l0 A.. °. w r* m SEP -13-2005 14:14 From:D&M,PC 9709456933 To:9703B43470 P.17,/17 16 gating season Pitch shalt v II headgates and measuring those which eacoter from mhi shaltett thinuut nat head- hcr own expense, under the •!rection and eupervietott of send in hie r much amounts us the wild W$tcr Camu,unq It IR hereby wade the duty of itWater Commitsaiouersslunershall od9uplrert;crviee the distribution of the water trgtii said ditch during gating Rcawun and before said I•vidcrs are lacedinteeafdeditch,eetit es well am thoreafter, as herein afore ordered: a as be permitted to take any water Edam and l n owner shall frrlgating season, excepting tii,ruu h ea ditch during btheox present Water Cummla:+ioner shall dlreu+E 'and approve smearing Dur as the hereto par tAnd It Is further Ordered ��iy' the Court that ail of rhe parties Jesup therefor `opts of this /stili leding equally, and thxi. executIott i raOMAB A. RUCRiele, .Judge. 1111 PRIORI I y NO. 1 B CIiAN(; I7 OF POINT 011' DI VElty ON OF A PORTION OF PRIORITY N0. 16 FROM L'XCXELSi, 1J DITCH TO EXCELSIOR N0, 2 DITCH Flora A. Maxl old, Petitioner Now on this 96th day of Ma eh, A. D. 1909, r.hle cause coming on to be heard upon the petition Yflod herein and the matted, and It appearing to the Court and the Court ao Gnding, that a tranefor of water right ae prayed for lu Bald petition, would be of very great advantage to 0 said Drovino hereinafter contained as 1 'itdtf ing petitioner, awn wtith the crag, throughout, Ruch transfer wit root lu urlonsly9aff affect the vented de- rtghta of others In and to the win j y Rrurt rvent- ing to the Court and the Court • of water, andaft further appear- ing has been given and ser' �Iln wonling, that duo notice of this tram Rifle Creek, and It further ted upon all persons taking water Court ao a Creek, that appearing to the Court, ab it thq the townmitu of Rifle ltciert dnCoun're of lots of land /situate within and others owning land lying under and subject to lrtgatfon fr 16 In the decree of this n the wild Excelsior Ditch No. theft attorneys, J. W. Dolt aunt FBtqr' iJtOw present In oven Court by ae between them an amicable land N, A. Wall, Esq., and that whereby and under the uiullcratanding has been reached heroin as follows, and which le accordingly herrebyee tray DI. catered Upon a consideration of tate said pro entered, cunt, h lug been Bled thereto by any tortionl! endlen. no protest or y Offer do fn Rupuon thereof t On! anti the tFsttmnny offered in It 16 hereby Ordered, Adiudg1 J that the petitioner, Flora A. Ph1JItps „and Jy Decreed by the Court and she h hereby allowed to trap formerly er A. Maxfield, be, Excelsior Ditch w 1 Gin the decrees of thlter from the headfate of the Eo the h which le numberetB Court, eadgate of the F:aexeleior o. 2 Ditch, described in the ditch statement appended to the Raid netitin., and thereof, rind `"!:12 uu rnade n. part fe hereby numbered A 16 in the docreett of lhle Court, four -tenths of a cubic foot of water Per aecund of limn, for the Irrigation of the lands betongln 4> the under and suhjeet to irrigation th efrtm, outlofPand lying there- under the SEP -13-2005 14:15 From:DaM,PC 9709456933 To:9703843470 P.14'17 ,70.▪ 11)1- 3. ,00:1000,4,-,M0 ,O 00Z 0'$,C0'=! ' ' 1 go m G, O m m A Y m m. O 0 0 - w n J 0, A ,a- O PTI :� w A C, ti 45 CV• 70.0 m7'e s'm. CLi ,4 x mp�, am 1 —waacm=9p .1 X hl tr;to 75 .7, mc.P=a.. ,m.r'p- _g'A^ O 42 t1 C im" Somn• IApma Ef07T+CypY'1:, i 4 d..A Z0.,.a 0 (�•O O '1; C O p m u" =,�m a. 1 0.'0 o vP• F. g ti LR .y '7 n,� • �m m C D�• ,v W G r ' 0 W a. c 0 me 'PAC oe S teer2 m-v"Ic" O W „,' C r pp m CY O tm t p ' N•-hpponC Qa..�.„m ammama�_•, o:.od00 sm.1mi ..m7.= s_0.mHwiaCA o " OxP^p0fDvgnm.t., mapmad,oz CP• ',m m_IC .wA?. ,7aa_.G .4 ca0g. ` ,a %• 517i6»s; ....,-.�p=Aa w pn±KAxr,b pm'.w7'<m°'0. a .gt 10.r 074m� " a;H^ib"�'e go_d. .i' vg...,, mmo '44.r, ^ v' o? :mm1pp^Gr^ p Cg .•3''py� 04oB._rgi00.g, ., O.p Ei 1+ m k o pi p m e.o.Bu,O,Ax~ n.".rbg0 0o a dr -Nm-.- 03cr 00 ZWpn•,wb •.,mi 0m vis.. R.- -) t.m0QDc.ppom ipo 171 C N 4�0.. ooc "0.0°'00 00 t�QQ]] , A;4,60 -r°5, p mGy p^•!or; mm-,br0q pt;l"n sP eo epi, .....O C". ,p ...sio-0 ., pin,,, ,0 m.;m'miir r o.d : a -i ° m 4 Poa P .j 0 0 ..3� xg O • 0 N mc. ▪ y 2n ►4 x tt d. a9 p► ixP• ao.� Cal D,—C..( c°)..-0..� Bppmmt� O 7 00 A o" o m p .•. G ..j _ • --l'a o wma.?,a ro 2,7. • -15;i6.$7 -as. OV al 'OC 0,00E p 4Mm Z''4a a Q a 0 a o. y G A" S o N.. A°~ b' d• ",d 5 am A.. o m �3 o A a .8...v�-A"� ,▪ ,,To x aa' El ,I7 z= N z 'oi;mDp[1 "Fi. t$. W Q g ti 4 ~ ~ ~ 2:11 0 N oz "4 a'O 0-. 0' 4 n 0 .�, A O L w, py p yr0Y1�;,'9 I ( = otv-lo� @ (7 • ': 3 i -"g R 0 I f11 o x ,m+o,„ °,aN ii��OA tv rr"2 0.• r4 0-'.m _• -m a 0 ]1 •Aiafe A m 00 Amb -,0„1-1; eom50)y0c�0. oe am E:: o G 0 o rv,D •� wFp m a ~ m O• mp .. t vs to • iy a g Opp_n,,,,„•tl • -mp 'maFmV� µB m B a a LI m '.1-0.6, a• m m F1 m A kkOs� m G0 0. G n w '+ •• a m a. i n C! / rp A l7' .Q, p n pa .01 Q W d F°'n'*^m°':�., oe:O. n S ti" S o$ m 0O TIIIiiil �. m 5c7=* o°ap,0' .AW n '.M D,0 41"V 0 sten a A0. w" .• ro., p.. _ -. o -6, =�-> m0 e• v :.sa., m Cr -,10.a. 0..,°0/.-- ... oi m : 41 "+� G0.AbD.. o V 441 2 ,,,., a f 'O 2.e g=m , m "e°t7a ,.„,,,,a,-, b 1O m0.p (AA 1 V0.... x E" -,r .” C Iy m tl p' C 00 . ti p ,~. d .q A m Pn Ai m A, p n , --.,-,0. A O t m w A1..w ^ A l h a. o m m.. :1:.' 0.- 00."1 mi, ,� 0.0.a•Rpd1m�'$r°i. dA Wp y, .. ...p ,i O 0 S. .p0. go c; ° mnpo....40 g o 00 Al,lNb 0.P�C3,m 0.0.0 ^m SOOag,m" b•A F rpr A P O'er. ,+ 6CB�f" p �p 0.-+ �y ,-.O. 46m Ia VI."6'tppp,A ��Amel' Era 2.F:7.4:1112.6.1;490.:!!!!1! tia p:atAca�SoSalm°C�;p� o0 r ,.•. AO•bm �„i• m _.0 ill''a. '-1 P; A;.. a ic a: wmmm t7 40,,e,- �"-,..4ip i'%p mar,..,`! , 0 p.mSRV+ V E.A 0a ao5 �Aaa �O,•^e;-'o0 G500 xapCEJ a pp mm n �6G n V GC AA V�^O rS.-. 4'. Sr• m1,�mot7.,a o6c0'�tip 8 G p^"-tmc'.."9.11Rmyr�mg 1 fpm -w22 -- . r. • p 7 g v I P' ,q 7 0 "O•• 4 0 3 m m' l tO V • m gap pq A O A O, A e) A R ,S tb h p O. O 4 o° .,� "c Gc m .0w,0g 7. w`� P v. mei-, I' ....< P. C. r. II Atd 5EP-13-2005 14:15 From:08,M,PC 9709456933 To:9703843470 r a ro 4I N O m e a_ 0. OMAM •C rJn c... O ..• =0,0,.. n 7 r+ 'I O n y . w O W m 7 A " C a 0,, Qe? G^ fOXr e- uC+7, nmx' '44"`40'a m # e +,q E0'e T.'9 O•] N 7 yyp m d 0? 0,0 A,Ortm''.C►7,nim . .'�5rL.%[1:V .',q�RR,...• A-n+0O Gr cp Ky 2',= r. � 4 �• i� A � qa d+ P+ � m �° ttggw, d Wim_ 4 w ��O �• w g-00-0.. xp.�p•m•(~�L�YC .m ��m �wFt ��yI 'O �n!py p' A O '="-g4=„'. . r 0 A A Q f. A .� ¢ D ''� ^ O .7. ti d pa N O rt O m L+ m c ti ° �m'.�a-a..20,y.°.ayA<Gpm.1d p�4pomi,,.,. „a. C�g,�.'�Lo�°+S°°Q-3x7i' 1e��°° d=am 60 4A w00 f."" la' 1° 2. oo••.? �'4°f� � CD ''_csd°°.map o'p _ E w —7 ,T" io e 8 gyp . -N 0 - 7 p.- .4 m, n w n A n r. V O' O m m: V. ro A N I� A C m rn. e+? .• o Cw 5 A n A m P .a .m N O So to n• p,, •`�•� Hco r"... ...A,Ei,a0. oAWdmphepS'.- p'�Ae�CmO>.OiyN .O.Xaa' oa a L.. "W 4 14Y da' m �' d 21. 0 0.p.A CJ,� 'x .-00 p.�o c a m''mt7 p T nal °cem a °NC Oom Ce, Ct'pmd M�.4 m07wmeo: L.'•o A te' °�x�xp'Do p'A d� yam. .. e y a^n A v7 W G o cr O o� a d4 ., c'� o'�•^C°PI wwo: uo tri A Z o. .._-°) -. a P y� `4'" a t 307460-0,1=,-0, ' g A o- p' ...tip me.co A'�p tln • M7 .. ,Cy W•"Z. 'p'0 yco ACi]c dm c -,0--„,-...,....g' a•ao° DIM Aa2p,�aa'B 000.a co 0,- 0 9 �' r te" 2. 0 :z w ro °,°,0 w�0m y� m0.0zoi ° m Ox'rlC BSS • !�C y =1 'r1'. ro �' a o A r R 7 ro A t p y t7 V 2 �- oo =4 A p =1.1. c M r• •'i' BOC 0 'ra=^?-14gg ; f:no.. m3aag'dmro2o a cr7 vmAa-�c n amm. ri>aCmwcomQ 0.; n ro m C p ro A P % • m Orc W P. C p i3 gmA A r,. :o,0.c 0-4:1-.....-01.0-1,,,(7100,n5.14 o°we ,.a1"00pi.4."ym ..•.,.p=. m.tiroWn't 7,p d N••O-A0Amm1'a0.7•..i�-p 3Nm.A n nCoNm Co ,,• 1 " • h� 8O` �i' ra,,,c„°01°Wr0 o0 A•W _CAti N� =e. . Wn°a- -'....trow.WWw o..wth P O�El' 7am-pAQi ' mw Qm F.t.O ctAtrtc "7ny.- ,p,py. m"'gocmv° oato-mgoc=. vm.0%1-.40,, oao�K O %0_,,,,m0...0.1,3-GGA�pi.m0atiANma ca o 2-14.9, mp ig A ea G•• 7ti,tP0 C7CJwm o. p'itx w:�m acp ,8w O.. oA gyp, a x p A ggnN aFrwd" -- C D v fiip »p, _.r .y ti f`r <",i' a y. `" g ii ca o`� 2 t, . ,:f.. X . x .., �o W 'O as •-, z- ;64 C 7+rp �m0�mp,�3Ar t O ,.y C?- .� d"7 •A .'f o a m • pow v p+O c oa ^ N ro:: w OG 7.. ^ "'. C d 9 e. A m 7• "' .q' Q O d O m y . W �-vn°' m W m'° -t m �' 71g; ? *'? m 7''S= Q' `" = x.•n. ps10L4r Q4 .cwnpp' U r. n aN pp..i a en •GI Cm o - CbOPnp�.VZn•aAF-W - Ci2/`" • oop7waa,y. 1.7 <C2 ,°°5 PP 9D A ..' CAC t1 0 "yc^g aaaocmad 'uosleJ 'R 13110f (3.143}13O13Y'IN3 NOS'ION) aauo1313ad ��=�14 rErg111!.h1 x:�s1a SaN1H INV 311V CINSI13J2iY'1M3 3S33D4) SST 'OH A11110I1E1 HaL1Q SaN11{ QALY 321Y.S 2 FE OIE(1 t'I"gbd .c''v SI r.. b °. w m1 p yn i9 vc'O'4•5g Drom f+3 ~'d ° .•,A tiro p 9-,4a4 ' C [2-. 60 0 p' %/0 0 F.9 O,..co m A '44Qf9goN ct oP .�wp�AenASo`nm gCA m-14'�wipa 51..'11 ypo Q.4o'Op•p'••1 • ...W1•O a l y 6r rt rm* mW 54!1;!445! fpm m mImGmlmmF°:1^UOXe8arT''-aBA-- •"AOamt ti aqA ' - ° 0�m m mi m m o C A n a 7. _C gro9aPe ° 1'/ n 00 7a'm v <_ag w .P.'a a G p�A'ap�� 013op.06m- 5P ma t'. CLQ O OCM A A m rr .-0 r. omo?oam 1.z. I nOD g('e N '. .a `.. lm M p m 7 00 ou^epp Re: {o. • G• G•1 , b O • -,n �,Ay a•"my , ••Tp,o C o 'Y �* ,: .,, O y y h i M 4 rt m .` C Imo, ° G• 1. m^ o m N O. S [J A P' H m •s N C Q u°'oo .'P•8'o ro,wa2- 0-N O P c.. -P- m C p cO 1A' D. n p na m n a a '' � p;W �. � i3 gip'^0 W'• -p- _cc F-• � .4ro o 0 m p 7• v. ..... •7r0 Gr: Ar.-. .� tO .m+ r ��, cnD� R.5�.p Q . d f4. o. m m p d N O 0.0.0, 0—m aoCm� e ,IVO-tw :y ro „o w r, m a : Fj p_ mr.7 .�� ;S. m rt I.,y O,'' o `C ° 4 O �i .7 A . 7 (� 3; d O O ,....--.-c A N. l$:Y 28 r�i a77. '113)1311U 'v SYIh10iu P.15/17 1 SEP -13-2 OP 14:15 From:02.M,PC 9709456933 To:9703843470 P.16'17 107 cubic Leet of additional water Is to be turned back into said Ezst Pork of Elk Creak through the Intervening space of about 160 feet. It Is further Ordered Adjudged and Decreed by the Court, that Bala the Plereun and Harris Diti;h be, Sufi hereby Is uu,nbertitl 90 A, in the decrees of this Court for Water District No. 39, and that because of the original conatrnrtinn of said ditch and the aPDltcatton of water therethrough roe a beneficial use there be awarded to Said ditch for the use and benefit of tbo partial law- fully entitled thereto 2 G-10 cubic Poet of water per Parond of time from the Fast Pork of Elk. Creek for Irrigation and domestic purposes, Priority No. 16G A, 1n Bald decrees relating back to and dating from September 27th, 1898, anti that tor the purpose of elevating a portion of the water aforesaid so as to utilize the same there be allowed to flow into said ditch from the East Fork of Elk Crock 24 cubic Leet of water per serond of time In addition for a distance of about 1000 fent to a point for the puryuse of power 1u ruuulug the turbine wheel and thereafter to at once be returned to said creek without material dlminuatlon through Ulu intervening distance of 160 feet. It ie further Ordered. Adjudged and Decreed by the Court, that there he allowed to flow into said ditch from the East Pork of link Creek tar Irrigation purposes mid for the bencht or the par- ties lawtuhy entitled thereto 2 S-10 cubic feet of water per sec- ond of time and that for the first 1000 feet from the headgate of Bald ditch there bo allowed to flow thereto and therethrough for power purposes, to elevate a portion of said water to be tided for Irrigation purposes 24 Cubic feet of water per second of time In addition and after such use at once returned to the stream with- out material dlminuation through the Intervening dlslauce of 160 feet. It to further Ordered, Adjudged and Decreed by the Court, that this decree shall be subject to the general enndltlo,S and provisions to the decree of this Court an lar as applicable, entered May 11, 1889, entitled "to the matter of the adjudication to the priority ut rights to the use of water for irrigation in Water District No. 39." It le further Ordered Adjudged and Decreed by the Court; that the petitioners pay the coats of this proeneritng_ Done In open Court, By the Court. .JOHN T. SHUMA'PE, Judge. PRIORITY NO. 157 WARE AND HINDS DITCI3 (13, 1), 0 and D 1,NLARG1 MENT) Henry Bosco, Mike Dodo, .1. T. Crawford, 8ewurd Dow. .Peitioners Now on thia ,18th day of December. A. D. T9uo, the same befog oar of the regular judicial days of the November, A. D. 1900. term of said Court, the above cutllled matter coming tn, to tea heard by the C'nnrt, the petttiutters, appearing in ',emir' and by 1 1 01 SEP -13-2005 14:16 From:D&M,PC 9709456933 To:97E13843470 P.17'17 168 Edward T. 'Taylor, Esq., their attorney., and tlanial Slaugntetr, ap- pearing to andb that all PartIl ntitledhis to tnotice ofrrthis appearing too the the C rt. proceeding hap been duly notified, and he written acknowledgement, Of nodes and perrnleeion to said p.titJonora, both to make the said enlargement and to Court. the thusr owners i f.rta saidhereunder enl enlargement. thleast d was tiled in the by the following owners to theacknowledgement Bald W re having been altowd AW. y C. Carter, B. S. Hinds, the said Wore and Hinds Ditch, V. 'Ire, Mary K. btroneo, }lens A. K. Itrowd, John Dreue3, Alice V. Ware, S. Hendrlck8otr, Bernard I10ttano, K. Z. M s l 3'. Mca M. Hutchinson, lda Dow, H. N. Davidson, W. H. Nllliy, Halley.Mc d the Colorado D. Oborto, E. D. .tones, Batiste Morley,arn ltb testimony 1''uej & Iron Company and the Courtl having and nrgument.e of counsel, and gl now fully advised in the premises. doth find: i That the said Risco had 6t) Berea !the said Crawford ow IR Wee Of practicablyOacres, the said lDodoand yl acres, and sohjed ht to e said Driigation from the said Ware and Binble land lying p� and Hinds Ditch; that all of timid tltlonprs have completed the work of conatructlon of their resPertJtvo enlargement interests and rights hi said ditch and the priorttier.lot each nod all thereof aro entitled to date from the 8th day ',fj October, A. D. 'IRAR: and OW thta Said H. D. C. & D. Enlargum rt and Extension of tho said Warn and Hinds Ditch int entitied to PrIerity No. 157, with an appru- priatlon of 3.8 noble feet of water in, second of Uwe, of which amount the maid Bosco is ontltied 10 .2 cubic feot; the said Craw- ford 1.2 cubit feet: the said Dodo—.8jt. one crrbtc foot, and the said Dow— 4 of one subfc toot of water p�' second Of time; Wherefore, It is Ordered, Adjudged and Decreed by the Court. that there be allowed to Row into thO''aaid Ware and Hinds Ditch for irrigation purposes for the use ay�71 d W noI t of the n'd thdtr Henry y Bosco, Mike Dodo, J. TbyCrwford, anvirtue of he appropriation by the said and apC.& under and by D D. C. & D. Enlargement of said f itch, Priority No. 157, with R.G cubic feet of water per second of tine, that then la further Ordered, Adjudge and Decreed, findings and this decree shall bo sulbject to the mama provisions and all the oonditlons of the decree Cqril thie Court, made and eutor- ed on the llth day of May, 1889, "Ih'Ithe metier of the adjudica- tion of the priority of rights to Of' luso of water for Irrigation In Water pistriet No. 39", and also subject to all the conditions a,nd panto provtaiuue as ore contatne lin the docroe of this Court mode and entored on the 20th day ofl.prll, A. D. 1398, In relation to the said Warn and Hinds Ditch In •WW,,ator District No. $0. And It is further Ordered that !potlttoncrs 'herein pay all the costa of this proceeding. THOMAS A. RU(%KEIL Judio. LOYAL E. LEAVENWORTH SANDER N. KARP DAVID H. McCONAUGHY JAMES S. NEU SUSAN W. LAATSCH NICOLE D. GARRIMONE ANNA S. ITENBERG MICHAEL J. SAWYER CASSIA R. FURMAN LEAVENWORTH & KARP, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 201 14T" STREET, SUITE 200 P. O. DRAWER 2030 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602 Telephone: (970) 945-2261 Facsimile: (970) 945-7336 jsn@lklawfirm.com September 2, 2005 Fred Jarman, Senior Planner Garfield County Building & Planning Department 108 8th Street, Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 DENVER OFFICE:* 700 WASHINGTON ST. STE 702 DENVER, COLORADO 80203 Telephone: (303) 825-3995 Facsimile: (303) 825-3997 *(Please direct all correspondence to our Glenwood Springs Office) C 1E' S LVED Gq FP 0 6 2005 8°j401VGs p VNI NY ��'NIVING Re: City of Rifle Pump and Pipeline — Garfield County Location and Extent Review Dear Fred: The City of Rifle has obtained possession of property owned by Rocks -R -Us, LLC, which property is located north of the Colorado River and east of the main I-70 interchange providing access to the City of Rifle. The legal description of the property and a copy of the Order for Immediate Possession issued by the District Court, Case No. 2005CV192, are enclosed herein for your reference. The property is located in unincorporated Garfield County and is zoned A/I ("agricultural/industrial"). The City of Rifle plans to construct a new municipal water intake structure and pipeline on the property that will be used to pump water to the City's water treatment plant. Under Garfield County's Zoning Regulations, pumping facilities and pipelines are special uses in the A/I zone district. In lieu of submitting an application for a special use permit, the City is submitting its plans for the intake pump station and pipeline to the Planning Commission for "location and extent" review, pursuant to C.R.S. § 30-28-110(1). According to state statute, whenever a county planning commission has adopted a master plan of the county, no public structure or utility shall be constructed in the unincorporated territory of that county unless the proposed location and extent thereof has been submitted to and approved by the county planning commission. C.R.S. § 30-28-110(1)(a). However, should the planning commission disapprove the submission, that disapproval may be overruled by the vote of a majority of the applicant's governing body. C.R.S. § 30-28-110(1)(c). On behalf of the City of Rifle, we are submitting for the County Planning Commission's location and extent review the engineering plans for the City's pump station and raw water pipeline. The plans, which were prepared by Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc., are enclosed herein. Please schedule this matter for review by the Planning Commission at its next public meeting. I. 2U05\Cl ients\Ri lle2-557,Letvrs,Jarm an-LocationEstent. wpd LEAVENWORTH & KARP, P.C. Fred Jarman, Senior Planner Page 2 September 2, 2005 Please contact me if you have any questions regarding this submittal or need additional information. Very truly yours, LEAVENWORTH & KARP, P.C. JSN:ndg Enclosures cc (w/o encs.):John Hier, City Manager Bill Sappington, Public Works Director Jeff Simonson, P.E. h2005 \Clients \ [title \ 2-557 \Leiters Vartuao-LocationExiciii.wpd EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION A tract of land situate in Lots 1 and 2 of Section 15, and the SE1/4 of Section 10 all in Township 6 South, Range 93 West of the 6th P.M. being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast Corner of said Section 15, thence South 00°0529" West 716.76 feet to the South line of said Lots 1 and 2;thence South 77°00'00" West 1386.00 feet along said South line; thence South 75°00'00" West 262.91 feet along said South line to the Easterly line of a tract of land described in Book 490 at Page 716 of the records of the Clerk and Recorded of Garfield County Colorado; thence along said Easterly line of the following 2 courses: 1) North 63°13'39" West 392.47 feet; thence 2) North 24°28'39" West 220.00 feet to the South right of way line of the of the Denver and Rio Grand Western Railroad; thence North 63°35'34" East 2285.62 feet along said right of way line to the East line of said Section 10; thence South 00°00'00" East 296.95 feet along said East line of Section 10 to THE POINT OF BEGINNING. AND A tract of land situate in the NE1/4 of Section 15, Township 6 South, Range 93 West of the 6th P.M., being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast Corner of Lot 1 of said Section 15 whence the Northeast Corner of Section 15 bears North 00°05'29" East 716.76 feet; thence South 00°05'29" West 232.73 feet along the East line of said Section 15 to the Northeast Corner of a tract of land described as Parcel No. 2 recorded in Book 666 at Page 296; thence along the North line described in Parcel 2, Book 666 at Page 296 the following 2 courses: (1) South 72°07'26" West 1385.10 feet; (2) thence South 87°18'26" West 114.55 feet to the Easterly line of a tract of land described in Book 490 at Page 716; thence North 25°43'39" West 288.87 feet along said Easterly line; thence North 63°13'39" West 51.53 feet along said Easterly line to the South line of Lots 1 and 2 of said Section 15; thence North 75°00'00" East 262.91 feet along said South line; thence North 77°00'00" East 1386.00 feet along said South line to the POINT OF BEGINNING. DISTRICT COURT, GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO 109 - 8th Street Suite 104 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 EFILED Document CO Garfield County District Court 9th .TT. Filing Date: Aug 4 2005 8:57AM MDT Filing ID: 6414243 Review Clerk: Dilia Blackard FOR COURT USE ONLY l Petitioner: CITY OF RIFLE, a Colorado home -rule municipality Respondents: ROCKS -R -US, LLC; a Colorado limited liability company; COLORADO RIVERS EDGE, LLC; a Colorado limited liability company; DENVER AND RIO GRANDE RAILROAD; OLIVIA A. FAWCETT; ALBINO DONNA; EDNA M. DONNA; B&L RESOURCES, LLC; CENTRAL AGGREGATES, INC., a Colorado corporation; GEORGIA CHAMBERLAIN, as Treasurer and Public Trustee of Garfield County. Case Number: 2005 CV 192 Division: ORDER FOR IMMEDIATE POSSESSION THIS MATTER comes before the Court upon the Stipulation for Immediate Possession entered into between Petitioner, the City of Rifle, (the "City") and the Respondents Rocks -R -Us, LLC, Colorado Rivers Edge, LLC and B&L Resources, LLC ("Respondents"). The Court being fully advised in this matter hereby: FINDS that: 1) immediate possession of the property described in the attached Exhibit A (the "Subject Property"), which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is necessary for the project described in the Petition in Condemnation filed in this action; 2) there has been a failure of negotiations between the parties with regard to the compensation sought to be paid for the Property; 3) any disturbance of the possessory rights of the Respondents is necessary; 4) the taking by the City is for a public use and in the public interest; 5) the City has the statutory authority to condemn the Subject Property; and 6) the sum of $575,000.00, is a sufficient amount for the City to pay into the Registry of this Court as a deposit for the benefit of the Respondents and all other parties with a claimed interest in the Subject Property, until compensation is finally ascertained for the taking in a subsequent valuation hearing. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the City shall be granted possession of the Subject Property as follows: a) Upon execution of the Stipulation entered into by the parties, the City (and its employees, agents, attorneys, contractors, potential contractors and bidders) shall have the right to enter onto the Subject Property for the purposes of inspecting the Subject Property, obtaining photographs, soil samples, measurements and other data related to the City's proposed use of the Subject Property; b) On or after September 1, 2005, the City may deposit the sum of $575,000.00 into the Registry of the Court and that the Clerk of the Court is directed to accept such funds and place them into an interest bearing account pending further orders of the Court; c) Upon such deposit, the City shall obtain immediate possession of the entire Subject Property upon the City's deposit into the Court Registry of the City's appraised value of the Subject Property ($575,000.00); and d) The terms of the City's initial entry onto the Subject Property (pursuant to paragraph (a)) and its taking of full possession (paragraph (c)) shall be governed by the Stipulation for Immediate Possession which is hereby referenced and incorporated herein. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that upon deposit of such funds, the City shall have possession of the Subject Property described in Exhibit A which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, and the City and its contractors, agents, servants, and employees may take and retain possession of said Property, and make cuts, fills, or in any other manner change the shape or configuration of said land; and to take and use therefrom any and all earth, stone, gravel, timber and other materials for construction and maintenance purposes, and to build, construct, or otherwise improve said property for the purposes set forth in the Petition in Condemnation during the pendancy of this proceeding, without interference from the Respondents, or any other Respondent, or their successors, assigns, heirs, devisees, personal representatives, guests or invitees, or any other person or persons claiming by, through, or under said Respondents. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all terms and conditions of the Stipulation for Possession are incorporated into and made a part of this Order. DONE this 7 day of CERTIFICATE OF MAILING I certifywast mailed toto all of Foregoing ,ord ounsel of ' 6 This day of ` 2— • g1 . (JC� , 2005. 2 rrrrrrrrrr m a<mmmUUO 0 .1rrf1-r tez <a 0 <z 0 o JJJJJJ O p ii �aaaa«aa¢ n 4 am 0m p rvOry 18E1 imtl mJ < Vi( � 2 0000000000 <=qp W 0000 HFFFhh <00 O 00 00Y8 . w wi,tgZa 88-FEER a i qin oFFgpmoa� .................... ca<aaaaaac ¢wW wZ ���oo�oouu awam Nmmm0Nmmmm lin4 WWWWWWWWJJJJJJJJLLLLLLLL LLLLLLLL ¢¢¢2C0000aaaaaaaa6att0U�� eeafz ZZZaze www2270 U ZZZZZZZZZZmmm¢¢¢OU WWY,W 500000 55,090„WWWWWWWWWL aaaaaaaaaa WWWWWWWWWWUUUC��Tjj jj j== JZZZZZZZ22WWW JJJJJJJJJmNmmmm00000000mm ¢ ¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢NmmwwwxxxSxSxSJJ xw w 00OO< aaaaaaaa<( s �'w�kk�k'�k'k'�'�000«aZZZZZZZZ�� h ppca(a<c¢¢¢ r- 707100» ob3333333333opp�b�aaaaaaaapp -:M2'Wwuii?.00 WWWWWWwWWW ZZZZZZZZZZ 000000000 OOOO000OOO a b PROJECT ENGINEER: Lk ti '1 SILL SIPPIGTON, PE .32 O 1-70 RIFLE SHEETS 17 & 18 7C11 LINE STA. 706.20 !I ----u... • 51 ,_....., ,5 tr !H- .1: II • II ; !pvii '-"--.. ....1: -"---._ cnn A cnn LAT r tfln t9rf cnn -17A-rs- cnn 1 MATCH LINE S4 1,.A -Oa .-71Tra- -Trar- -1Yrri= Vat ea, ... '!1 urns. -r3 apex; da/ • 'POP 'A. SP . 4roti sw, PaY0I, NW ass. Am 010 VITY•SIN Y. WW.IT 0itY 'MOW MY WT. 1.1. . P.M'..101,01 : V. mox 'NI •••••••. onr:44 n am, Mownn-metrteetel.n. onol lonleMa.mtl• i$ kis 011ityktkEt cL 7\ OVOrl7IN1l Old/,add NQINI l 11 a Il ' i s\9 r fZ 3 9 .(MH ti s S yC El cow. oc �+90L Y S 3N/) HJ1YiY ALIGNMENT "B CC _D to PRELIMINARY I 7 t 1—" i s — — 1 it I P` I --L --• 1 le P II� I 'j f_Fl P , y I II It f it,_P G = Ili A 1: P '1 I_" `„ haw 1 ih W -� .$ .RSA dgt 40 < k \,Z'- 4.4 mmimmusiousionmod f 0 --' U ili a 6 Y MA [INF A. 272+00 1 MATCH LIN( A. ! • dB ,— . I t .1: 01'6' - k 5 a 66IK 1 .,7... N - s ray aia,. 4 g 0 ....., 't ,1.266 ,— . or, - k 5 a rsim 1 .,7... N - crtzrs E 0 — ,,,.. 1...T -....1 'C t'ars 6 ars A, sliAATCIL,1176;0 tri 4 aSSaaa SS, aaSaaaaaIQ .SSSSaia5aaI, ISSSSSaaaaR ti ti 1 7 / C K h e O ro Pi rs rs N o ro K lK e A I� o rains IM aaaaaaaa; aaaaaaaa;;, aaaaaaaaaR aaaaaaaaa;R 41 iK rs h e � 1 n n rs aaaaaaaaati N e C) ns M aaaaaaaaa 4 7 4 o p s a a .s .s s a 4 f1 rs aS ., , a ¢ z a 8 N + 5 a a a / / .Ns Mr '4- h + e w 4N / / 1Nr 1N0 1rf N e / / / / / 1 A -TNT m vrr h e / 1' ro wr lrrr s.Ir 1010 N e+ INV h10 -n /Or / / I'u ihrr 0000 w 1000 ! a RR RR;Raaf R§RRa;R RaaRa R RRRR;RI RI R / / $+ r / r0, / tt 0s / / / / 1Nr 1010 e* vswr 1010 WIT 1010 x 1r h eN r n h e 1 m a0 1010 B R„ R« 8 a R K 1r e+ Ar: ri IV rc Y 0 1 e 0 •� � / cM K r0 z 0 0 \ !74'4 |!§;;! ff 0 \ / \ VAS rriS ;;| 4|§;;| ,\ PITT / ! Z , N '4'4'4 || \ Z tits }, / / 3 CROSS SECTIONS § k • V) 2 ©® (� 1 0 ° • Lai O l _ ZJ _ z LLai F -741 / its JZL61F O. 0 U i ti V Sia F@b Rai cimMtral kg Pi Pei J ^ 4® 1 — ry .44 pool 4® 101 zt tdt Zs e,q5tt 6eLr,a • r I l ti k W tr 0 a c77) a 51 .0149 mat go 'a memo. ••••••• me Pr ID .11 ••••.•1•••••••61.••1rnist10.• i' It 11 a I I 1 i 1 11 of 11 i lit a iiii.„ 1,i 111 9 i li 11111 Pi li Itt it: -it 1 11 ill! li li pi li i it 111 ii!!Piti ill lit 1;1 1111 iii :11 1! i Ii111 911 ii 11 I! II i" • 1 : III 1 '5''11.111 1111 tt II Pi ig ,ii , 1 li .1 1 .1:t1 4,, il it I1 11%! li I11 11 11 I i 1:41 1,1 11'11 11 ti.ilil Pr lil ii i i fit 1111 VIA I 1` 1/ 'Itt't II 1 t if1 if 1 /011 i 1 1!11 i1;! 11! 1111411)11 iii ii 1* bi. 04 Itiattp; ,ili I Iii II! Ali Ilit ht1111! hillt Itti 0 1 z 1 :‘- :, , 11 OEEE___,t: ._::. Li , zr,, ,, .51 • ./ CM ,04-. • -a • V/ 1 1 Zs.) 1 1 z t; CING PLAN CLI 11 8 tl A 1 Pih.4 PICAL WALL CORNER DETAIL a nal II (o! 11 Ft { t f + ti tiI �� {i d i f 1 11 11 /i 1 Ft} t ! 1 t{ lit s :! ,f $ 6 f 1.=f:; 1 e 1 �i 5� 1 I ;Ili` £ , 1 1 i' ii 113- iiilt 1 111 liii 1i III 1 iii!li 1 II 0, - ,l Iiiiiii I i if I,Si i k is f s "1 f ii:z f {{ t j' 1� hti'#� jt {j 111. i`ft�tf }±�;ti I S 1 .1f{� I�RA 'i II i;! it{ In i }, #}I !II! !1. 1#I 1}t �_��W # i >! rif# !Ail viii lilt tr' i' �#! ii. F99` YF " a MMIN .43 @! 11174 tv als '!•E NfJ 4D '7c 1 CID GENERAL NOTELEOR ALL LLECTRICAL SHEETS au41' ge F 1 U Z a 3 z W z F 1 o m In. o y: 0141-15f- O layaIvan. ns 0 . 6 an. 4f »N.3s"i:: c Ss: 1 .� mi ion ldl „ "RNvd 111111111k ME BE °ME ' i'v i ' 53e '51 ' ii ; a 11:`� 11111111111111111 II1 ABBREVIATIONS e'[6� c:�`e 3 1) " eGe5 4 g $ L e B g� -� 166406, a; s?c� BE E EE9 o©o® Zit 11 TE: E W '64 Lowy a 36 S ce La 7.1 w6 0 RR 5 'p EQg S ee Cr— oz za a D- Ce a 0 O 0- L. - l® ; U N z x 0 s Val !it ie € E t. 6�pp ip - at B" E 1i el fi e8 E; ,3 If tg 3 2 2 S U 0. a 124 0 , 44 CC n W s 063 z 040 H8onn Pig ^"mo mg a u1 % n° e Dosage i; o0 N=amigo. teNpI z o Z rn J . O 1 z I 0 z 1) a 4 tx Tor or Ito-% In TIC Ottror URN(' I 50 a 0 STATIONARY LOUVER SCHEDULE 55 'MARS ATM Orunr5 ti! alg 25 54 Eg V 1 ) } i A a 1 a IJ ec UT7UTY COMPANY CO NO; Itii Bah l'gf, ,744 kg 71: •�tia b^- ;4: =ew TABLE OF BEARING AREAS IN SO. FT. 1) P. CONCRETE RE4CT70N BLOCK DETA V/ 5 1 vitb Ifi X25 t i t.itg 44 14 61 g 8 ig Htt: �Pi tit R�Fta Ca_ �c 11 1RH r F r ti CH DETAIL Ng" AIR & VACUUM RELEASE MANHOLE a 1 a 8 LOYAL E. LEAVENWORTH SANDER N. KARP DAVID H. McCONAUGHY JAMES S. NEU LEAVENWORTH & KARP, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 201 14TH STREET, SUITE 200 P. O. DRAWER 2030 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602 Telephone: (970) 945-2261 Facsimile: (970) 945-7336 jsn@lklawfirm.com SUSAN W. LAATSCH NICOLE D. GARRIMONE RF C ANNA S. ITENBERG ` MICHAEL J. SAWYER CASSIA R. FURMAN *ember 7, 2005 SEP 1 2 2005 CAR -:EL t COON ry BUILDING &i �iv;rtiIG Fred Jarman, Senior Planner Garfield County Building & Planning Department 108 8th Street, Suite 201 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 DENVER OFFICE:* 700 WASHINGTON ST. STE 702 DENVER, COLORADO 80203 Telephone: (303) 825-3995 Facsimile: (303) 825-3997 *(Please direct all correspondence to our Glenwood Springs Office) By Facsimile and U.S. Mail Re: City of Rifle Pump and Pipeline — Garfield County Location and Extent Review Dear Fred: You requested information regarding the City of Rifle's pending water rights application that will be used to supply water for the City's new water intake pump station and pipeline, for which the Garfield County Planning Commission is undertaking a location and extent review. Accordingly, this letter supplements the City's submission for a location and extent review of its pump station and pipeline. By way of background, the City's new pump station and pipeline will pump water from the Rifle Pond Well (because the source of the water in the exhausted gravel pit formally owned by Rocks R Us, LLC is ground water, it is technically considered a well), which structure will serve as the new municipal water intake for the City. The City's existing municipal intake structure is located downstream on the Colorado River, and the City owns several water rights decreed for diversion at that location. The primary purpose for the City's pending water rights application is to decree an alternate point of diversion for the City's existing water rights at the new municipal water intake, the Rifle Pond Well. A copy of the City's pending Application for Underground Water Right, Change of Water Rights, Amendment to Plan for Augmentation, and Approval of Plan for Augmentation, Case No. 04CW193, (the "Application") is enclosed herein for your reference. By the Application, the City requests an underground water right for the Rifle Pond Well. Open mining activities at the Rifle Pond Well were commenced prior to January 1, 1981 and continued for some time after that date; however, it does not appear that Rocks R Us ever augmented evaporative losses from the Well. In accordance with Colorado statute, C.R.S. § 37-90-137(11)(b), the City's Application seeks to augment evaporative losses from the Well caused by open mining activities performed on or after January 1, 1981 (which work was estimated to create 7.9 acres of exposed surface area). As discussed above, the Application also requests to decree the Rifle Pond Well — which will I:\2005\Clients\Ride\2-557V-ettersVarman-LocationExtent-W ater.wpd LEAVENWORTH & KARP, P.C. Fred Jarman, Senior Planner Page 2 September 7, 2005 become the new municipal water intake for the City of Rifle — as an alternate point of diversion for the City's existing water rights. Based on that change of water rights, the Application also amends the City's plan for augmentation decreed in Case No. 83CW 110 to include the new, alternate point of diversion at the Rifle Pond Well. Rocks R Us LLC and Colorado Rivers Edge LLC jointly filed the only Statement of Opposition against the City's Application. We are working with their attorney in attempt to resolve their concerns in the case. I hope this information is helpful to you. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions or need additional information regarding this matter. Very truly yours, LEAVENWORTH & KARP, P.C. ames S. Neu JSN:ndg Enclosure cc (w/o enc.): John Hier, City Manager Bill Sappington, Public Works Director Jeff Simonson, P.E. 1:\2005\Clients\Rifle\2-557\LettersVarmand.ocationExtent-W ada.wpd r DISTRICT COURT, WATER DIV. 5, COLORADO Court Address: Garfield County Courthouse 109 8th Street, Suite 104 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 947-3861 (970) 945-8756 fax NOV 3 0 2004 A COURT USE ONLY A CONCERNING THE APPLICATION OF: CITY OF RIFLE, COLORADO in Garfield County, Colorado Case Number: 04CW /93 Attorneys for Applicant: Name: Edward B. Olszewski, # 24723 Nicole D. Garrimone, # 32088 Leavenworth & Karp, P.C. Address: 201 14th Street, Suite 200 P.O. Drawer 2030 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 Phone #: (970) 945-2261 Fax #: (970) 945-7336 E-mail: eboalklawfirm.com Div.: Ctrm.: APPLICATION FOR UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHT, CHANGE OF WATER RIGHTS, AMENDMENT TO PLAN FOR AUGMENTATION, AND APPROVAL OF PLAN FOR AUGMENTATION 1. Name and address of Applicant: City of Rifle, Colorado c/o Bill Sappington, Public Works Director P.O. Box 1908 Rifle, CO 81650 Please direct all pleadings and correspondence concerning this Application to Applicant's attorneys. I: \2004\Clients\Rifle\2-557\Pleadings \Rifle Pond -App. wpd District Court, Water Div. 5, Colorado Case No. 04CW Water Rights Application of the City of Rifle Page 2 of 12 FIRST CLAIM APPLICATION FOR UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHT 2. Name of structure: Rifle Pond Well A. Point of Diversion: The Rifle Pond Well point of diversion is described at the proposed pump station, which will be located in the NE1/4 of the NE1/4 of Section 15, Township 6 South, Range 93 West of the 6th P.M., at a point approximately 500 feet from the North Section line and 1,050 feet from the East Section line of said Section 15. B. Source: Alluvial formation tributary to the Colorado River C. i. Date of Appropriation: December 18, 2002 ii. How Appropriation was Initiated: The Rifle Pond Well appropriation was initiated by field investigation and formation of intent to appropriate water. D. Diversion Rate: 15.6 c.f.s., conditional E. Uses: Municipal, commercial, domestic, irrigation, industrial, fire protection, recreation and piscatorial purposes, for use within the City of Rifle as it now exists and as it may be expanded and for use in those areas located outside of the City, but capable of receiving water service from the City. F. Name and address of owner of land on which structure is located: Rocks R Us, LLC, 27346 Hwy 6 & 24, P.O. Box 1556, Rifle, CO 81650. G. Remarks: The Rifle Pond Well is an existing gravel pit pond located adjacent to the Colorado River in the NE1/4 NE1/4 of Section 15, Township 6 South, Range 93 West of the 6th P.M. Upon issuance of a decree, the Applicant will obtain a well permit for the Rifle Pond Well. The gravel pit pond is located within 100 feet of the Colorado River and pumping from the pond will have no delayed depletion to the Colorado River. 1:120041CIients\Rifle \2-557\Pleadings\Rifle Pond -App pd District Court, Water Div. 5, Colorado Case No. 04CW Water Rights Application of the City of Rifle Page 3 of 12 SECOND CLAIM APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF WATER RIGHTS 3. Name of structure: Excelsior Ditch A. From Previous Decrees: i. On May 11, 1889, in Civil Action No. 103, the Garfield County District Court awarded to the Excelsior Ditch, Structure No. 16, Priority No. 16, an absolute water right for 2.0 c.f.s. to be used for irrigation, with an appropriation date of November 5, 1883. The headgate of the Excelsior ditch was decreed on the east bank of Rifle Creek, about one and one-fourth miles above the mouth in Section 9, Township 6 South, Range 93 West in Garfield County. On March 26, 1904, in Civil Action No. 1071, 0.40 c.f.s. of the 2.0 c.f.s. previously awarded to the Excelsior Ditch was transferred to the Excelsior No. 2 Ditch. On June 11, 1927, in Case No. 2601, the Garfield County District Court decreed that the point of diversion of the 1.6 c.f.s. remaining in the Excelsior Ditch be changed to the point of diversion of the Rifle Creek Canon Ditch, which is located on the east bank of Rifle Creek at a point whence the West Quarter Corner of Section 18, Township 5 South, Range 93 West of the 6th P.M. bears N. 22°10' E. a distance of 1,925 feet. On January 15, 1934, as supplemented or corrected by decree dated April 3, 1934 in CA 3011, it was decreed by the Garfield County District Court that the use of the 1.6 c.f.s. previously awarded to the Excelsior Ditch under Priority No. 16, and which is owned by the Town of Rifle, be changed from irrigation use to domestic and municipal use, such that said 1.6 c.f.s. may be utilized for domestic, street sprinkling, fire protection, irrigation of trees and lawns, flushing of streets and sewers and such domestic and municipal or beneficial or convenient purposes as may be necessary, beneficial or convenient to the Town or its inhabitants or the use of water for its water works system. l:\2004\Clients\Rifle\2-557\Pleadings\Rifle Pond-App.wpd District Court, Water Div. 5, Colorado Case No. 04CW Water Rights Application of the City of Rifle Page 4 of 12 On July 13, 1979, in Case No. W-3389, in the District Court in and for Water Division No. 5, an alternate point of diversion for the 1.6 c.f.s. previously awarded to the Excelsior Ditch was decreed, which alternate point is the same as the point of diversion of the Town of Rifle Pump and Pipeline, located on the North bank of the Colorado River at a point S. 48°48'52" W. 2,132.13 feet from the Southeast Corner of Section 10, Township 6 South, Range 93 West of the 6th P.M. ii. Source: Rifle Creek, tributary to the Colorado River B. Proposed Change: Applicant requests two alternate points of diversion for the 1.6 c.f.s. previously awarded to the Excelsior Ditch, Priority No. 16, at the following points of diversion: i. Rifle Pond River Intake, described as follows: a) Name of Structure: Rifle Pond River Intake b) Point of Diversion: The Rifle Pond River Intake will be located in the NE1/4 of the NE1/4 of Section 15, Township 6 South, Range 93 West of the 6th P.M., at a point approximately 1,050 feet from the North Section line and 100 feet from the East Section line of said Section 15. ii. Rifle Pond Well, described in paragraph 2.A, above. 4. Name of structure: Town of Rifle Pipeline (Structure No. 109) A. From Previous Decrees: i. On August 15, 1940, in Civil Action No. 3344, and by Supplemental Decree filed on July 10, 1942 in the same Civil Action, the Garfield County District Court awarded to the Town of Rifle Pipeline, Structure No. 109, Domestic Priority No. 15, an absolute water right for 1.0 c.f.s. for the beneficial purposes and uses of the Town of Rifle and the inhabitants thereof, for street sprinkling, fire protection and domestic purposes, with an appropriation date of October 1, 1939. I:\2004\Clients\Rifle\2-557\Pleadings\Rifle Pond -App. wpd District Court, Water Div. 5, Colorado Case No. 04CW Water Rights Application of the City of Rifle Page 5 of 12 The point of diversion of the Town of Rifle Pipeline, Structure 109, was located on the South bank of the Colorado River at a point whence the Southwest Corner of Section 17, Township 6 South, Range 93 West of the 6th P.M. bears S. 79°33' W. 3,807.6 feet. On January 3, 1978, in Case No. W-3388, the point of diversion for the Town of Rifle Pipeline, Structure No. 109, was changed to a new point of diversion located on the North bank of the Colorado River at a point whence the Northeast Corner of Section 15, Township 6 South, Range 93 West of the 6th P.M. bears N. 48°48'52" E. 2,132.13 feet. ii. Source: Colorado River B. Proposed Change: Applicant requests two alternate points of diversion for the 1.0 c.f.s. previously awarded to the Town of Rifle Pipeline, Structure No. 109, at the following points of diversion: i. Rifle Pond River Intake, described in paragraph 3.B.i, above. ii. Rifle Pond Well, described in paragraph 2.A, above. 5. Name of structure: Rifle Pipeline (Structure No. 163) A. From Previous Decrees: i. On September 5, 1952, in Civil Action No. 4004, the Garfield County District Court awarded to the Rifle Pipeline, Structure No. 163, Priority No. 258, an absolute water right for 7.5 c.f.s. and a conditional water right for 7.5 c.f.s. to be used for domestic purposes, fire protection and general municipal purposes, with an appropriation date of February 5, 1949. The point of diversion of the Rifle Pipeline, Structure No. 163, Priority No. 258, as decreed, is located on the North bank of the Colorado River at a point whence the Northwest Corner of the Northeast 1/4 Northwest 1/4 of Section 15, Township 6 South, Range 93 West of the 6th P.M. bears N. 04°15' E. 1,553.2 feet. 1:\2004\Clients \ Rifle \2-557\Pleadings \Rifle Pond -App. wpd District Court, Water Div. 5, Colorado Case No. 04CW Water Rights Application of the City of Rifle Page 6 of 12 On January 3, 1978, in Case No. W-3388, the point of diversion of the Rifle Pipeline, Structure No. 163, Priority No. 258, was changed to a new point of diversion located on the North bank of the Colorado River at a point whence the Northeast Corner of Section 15, Township 6 South, Range 93 West of the 6th P.M. bears N. 48°48'52" E. 2,132.13 feet. ii. Source: Colorado River B. Proposed Change: Applicant requests two alternate points of diversion for the 15.0 c.f.s. previously awarded to the Rifle Pipeline, Structure No. 163, at the following points of diversion: i. Rifle Pond River Intake, described in paragraph 3.B.i, above. ii. Rifle Pond Well, described in paragraph 2.A, above. 6. Name of structure: Starke Ditch, First Enlargement A. From Previous Decrees: i. On July 9, 1965, in Civil Action No. 4954, the Garfield County District Court awarded to Starke Ditch, First Enlargement, Structure No. 15, Priority No. 241, an absolute water right for 1.0 c.f.s. to be used for domestic and general municipal purposes, with an appropriation date of June 1, 1936. The point of diversion of the Starke Ditch, First Enlargement, as decreed, is located in the Northwest 1/4 Southeast 1/4 of Section 36, Township 6 South, Range 94 West of the 6th P.M. at a point whence the Southeast Corner of said Section 36 bears S. 49°28' E. 2,209 feet. On July 12, 1982, in Case No. 81CW173, an alternate point of diversion was decreed for the 1.0 c.f.s. absolute water right to the Starke Ditch, First Enlargement, Structure No. 15, Priority No. 241, to a point located on the Northerly bank of the Colorado River at a point whence the Northeast Corner of Section 15, Township 6 South, Range 93 West of the 6th P.M. bears N. 48°48'52" E. 2,132.13 feet. I:\2004\Clients\Rifle\2-557\Pleadings1Rifle Pond-App.wpd District Court, Water Div. 5, Colorado Case No. 04CW Water Rights Application of the City of Rifle Page 7 of 12 ii. Source: Beaver Creek, tributary to the Colorado River, or the Colorado River B. Proposed Change: Applicant requests two alternate points of diversion for the 1.0 c.f.s. previously awarded to the Starke Ditch, First Enlargement at the following points of diversion: i. Rifle Pond River Intake, described in paragraph 3.B.i, above. ii. Rifle Pond Well, described in paragraph 2.A, above. 7. Name of structure: City of Rifle Colorado River Intake First Enlargement A. From Previous Decree: i. On June 7, 1982, in Case No. 81CW437, the District Court in and for Water Division No. 5 awarded the City of Rifle Colorado River Intake Enlargement a conditional water right in the amount of 23.1 c.f.s. with an appropriation date of December 16, 1981, for all municipal uses, including irrigation, domestic, manufacturing, commercial, industrial, mechanical, fire protection, power generation, fish and wildlife propagation, recreation and storage for system balance purposes. The point of diversion is located on the North bank of the Colorado River at a point whence the Northeast Corner of Section 15, Township 6 South, Range 93 West of the 6th P.M. bears N. 48°48"52' E. 2,132.13 feet. ii. Source: Colorado River B. Proposed Change: Applicant requests two alternate points of diversion for the 23.1 c.f.s. previously awarded conditionally to the City of Rifle Colorado River Intake Enlargement to the following points of diversion: i. Rifle Pond River Intake, described in paragraph 3.B.i, above. ii. Rifle Pond Well, described in paragraph 2.A, above. I:\2004\Clients\Rifle\2-557\Pleadings\Rifle Pond-App.wpd District Court, Water Div. 5, Colorado Case No. 04CW Water Rights Application of the City of Rifle Page 8 of 12 THIRD CLAIM AMENDMENT TO PLAN FOR AUGMENTATION 8. Amendment to Plan for Augmentation Decreed in Case No. 83CW110 A. Previous Decrees: On June 30, 1986, the District Court in and for Water Division No. 5, State of Colorado, entered a Decree in Case No. 83CW110 that, inter alfa, approved a change of water rights and plan for augmentation to provide a reliable water supply for the City of Rifle. The Decree was subsequently amended by a decree dated October 19, 1994 in Case No. 93CW332. B. Proposed Amendment: The Applicant requests to amend the plan for augmentation decreed in Case No. 83CW110 to provide that the water rights augmented thereunder, and described on the following chart, will have alternate points of diversion at the new locations described in paragraphs 3-7 of the Second Claim, above. The water diversion requirements, consumptive use and depletions for the augmented water rights will not be changed by this application. WATER RIGHTS: CASE NO. 83CW110 STRUCTURE CASE NO. ADJ. DATE APP. DATE SOURCE AMOUNT Starke Ditch No. 18 CA 89, CA 1205, CA 3050, 79CW91 05/05/1888 03/30/1883 Beaver Creek 1.0 c.f.s., abs. Excelsior Ditch CA 103, CA 1071, CA 2601, W 3389 05/11/1889 11/05/1883 Colorado River or Rifle Creek 1.6 c.f.s., abs. Town of Rifle Pipeline CA 3322, CA 3344, W 3388 08/15/1940 10/01/1939 Colorado River 1.0 c.f.s., abs. Rifle Pipeline CA 4004, W 3388 09/05/1952 02/05/1949 Colorado River 7.5 c.f.s., abs. 7.5 c.f.s., cond. Starke Ditch 1st Enlargement CA 4954, 81CW173 07/09/1965 06/01/1936 Colorado River or Beaver Creek 1.0 c.f.s., abs. Colorado River Intake 151 Enlargement 81CW437 12/31/1981 12/16/1981 Colorado River 23.1 c.f.s., cond. I:\2004\Clients\Rifle\2-557\Pleadings\Rifle Pond -App pd District Court, Water Div. 5, Colorado Case No. 04CW Water Rights Application of the City of Rifle Page 9 of 12 FOURTH CLAIM APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF PLAN FOR AUGMENTATION 9. Name of Structure to be Augmented: Rifle Pond Well, described in paragraph 2, above. 10. Water Rights to be Used for Augmentation: Ruedi Reservoir A. Ruedi Reservoir. The Applicant holds Water Allotment Contract No. 009D6C0042 from the United States Bureau of Reclamation for 350 acre-feet of annual supply from Ruedi Reservoir for municipal and industrial purposes through augmentation. Ruedi Reservoir was decreed in the Garfield County District Court in Civil Action No. 4613 for domestic, municipal, irrigation, industrial, generation of electrical energy, stock watering and piscatorial uses, with an appropriation date of July 29, 1957. By subsequent order of the Water Court entered in Case No. W-789-76, the decreed amount of this reservoir has been fixed at 102,369 acre feet. Ruedi Reservoir is located in Sections 7, 8, 9, 11 and 14 through 18, T. 8 S., R. 84 W., 6th P.M., in Eagle and Pitkin Counties, and derives its water supply from the Fryingpan River. By decree of the Water Court in Case No. 81CW34, Ruedi Reservoir was decreed a refill right in the amount of 101,280 acre-feet, conditional. In Water Court Case No. 95CW95, 44,509 acre-feet was made absolute. 11. Statement of plan for augmentation: A. General Description of Water Supply Operations and Plan for Augmentation. The City of Rifle is in the process of acquiring the Rifle Pond Well to use as a municipal water intake and flood protection structure on the Colorado River. The Rifle Pond Well is an existing gravel pit well that was created by open mining operations commenced prior to January 1, 1981. Because the current owner and creator of the gravel pit pond began exposing ground water to the atmosphere through open mining prior to January 1, 1981, no well permit was obtained for the gravel pit, and no plan for augmentation was decreed to replace depletions caused by evaporation from the structure. See C.R.S. § 37-90-137(11)(b). By this Plan for Augmentation, the Applicant seeks only to augment out -of -priority evaporative losses from exposed groundwater in the Rifle Pond Well caused by l: \2004\Clients \ Rifle \2-557\Pleadings \Rifle Pond -App. wpd District Court, Water Div. 5, Colorado Case No. 04CW Water Rights Application of the City of Rifle Page 10 of 12 open mining activities that occurred after December 31, 1980. Except as amended in the Third Claim above, the City's decreed augmentation plan in Case No. 83CW 110 shall remain in full force and effect and is merely supplemented by the current Plan for Augmentation. A water rights location map depicting the structures is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference. B. Estimated Consumptive Uses and Augmentation Requirements. The current surface area of the Rifle Pond Well is 19.2 acres. Based on aerial photographs of the pond site, it is estimated that the pond had a surface area of 11.3 acres prior to January 1, 1981. Therefore, the surface area of the gravel pit pond created after December 31, 1980 is estimated to be 7.9 acres. Using the State Engineer's method for calculating pond and lake evaporation (Senate Bill 120) at elevations less than 6,500 feet msl, the Applicant's engineer has determined the net annual evaporation rate to be 3.32 acre-feet per acre of surface area. The estimated surface area of the Rifle Pond Well created after December 31, 1980 - and for which the augmentation of evaporative losses is required - is 7.9 acres. Using the calculated evaporation rate, the total annual evaporation for 7.9 acres of surface area is 26.3 acre-feet. Based on recent drought conditions, a downstream call on the Colorado River may be expected to occur for a week each during the months of April, May, June and October and during the entire months of July, August and September, for total potential out -of -priority depletions of 13.6 acre-feet annually. The schedule of monthly evaporation and out -of -priority depletions is shown on Table 1, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. C. Augmentation Water Supply. Augmentation water will be provided from Ruedi Reservoir as necessary to augment out -of -priority depletions caused to the Colorado River by evaporation from 7.9 acres of exposed surface area in the Rifle Pond Well and to provide for transit losses associated with the delivery of augmentation water from Ruedi Reservoir. Reservoir releases will include five percent (5 %) for transit loss. D. Operation of Plan for Augmentation. The Applicant will provide augmentation water according to the schedule contained in Table 2, attached hereto and I:\2004\Clients\Rifle\2-557\Pleadings\Rifle Pond-App.wpd District Court, Water Div. 5, Colorado Case No. 04CW_ Water Rights Application of the City of Rifle Page 11 of 12 incorporated herein by reference, to replace out -of -priority depletions to the Colorado River, in time and amount, caused by evaporation from 7.9 acres of exposed surface area in the Rifle Pond Well. The Applicant will provide accounting and supply calculations regarding the timing of depletions as required by the Division Engineer for the operation of this Plan for Augmentation. 12. Names and addresses of owners of land on which structures is or will be located, upon which water is or will be stored, or upon which water is or will be placed to beneficial use. A. Rifle Pond Well and Rifle Pond River Intake: Rocks R Us, LLC, 27346 Hwy 6 & 24, P.O. Box 1556, Rifle, CO 81650. B Ruedi Reservoir: U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, E. Colorado Projects Office, 11056 W.C.R. 18E, Loveland, CO 80537, operates Ruedi Reservoir on lands owned by U.S. Forest Service, White River National Forest, P.O. Box 948, Glenwood Springs, CO 81602. 13. List of Documents Attached to and Incorporated into this Application: A. Exhibit A: Water Rights Location Map B. Table 1: City of Rifle Pond Evaporation Worksheet C. Table 2: Augmentation Schedule WHEREFORE, Applicant requests that the Court enter a decree: (1) confirming the conditional underground water right as described herein; (2) approving the change of water rights requested herein; (3) amending the plan for augmentation decreed in Case No. 83CW110 as described herein; (4) approving the plan for augmentation as described herein; and (5) granting such additional relief as the Court deems appropriate. Respectfully submitted this 1:\2004\Clients \Rifle\2-557\PIeadings\Rifle Pond -App pd day of November 2004. Nicole D. Garrimone District Court, Water Div. 5, Colorado Case No. 04CW_ Water Rights Application of the City of Rifle Page 12 of 12 VERIFICATION STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. COUNTY OF GARFIELD ) I, Michael J. Erion, P.E., engineer for the City of Rifle, state under oath that I have read this Application for Surface Water Right, Underground Water Right, Change of Water Rights, Amendment to Plan for Augmentation, and Approval of Plan for Augmentation and verify its contents to the best of my knowledge and belief. P.E. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 3 0 day of November, 2004 by Michael J. Erion, WITNESS my hand and official seal. My Commission expires: 0 6/ 2 8/ 2 0 0 8 C:\Documents and Settings \mmorris\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK1001Rifle Pond-App.wpd c Nov -26-2004 05:31pm From - T -629 P.00/O7 F-112 Nov -29-2004 05:31mm From- T-829 P.005/007 F-112 OE clog t 1 11 46 a a O atemegateggg r �07CJ��G{c� Qti'�S P eaeaeeaeaeaeaeaeaeaeae IL? ooRc000 c.7 P'7 ICJ CO N cl 0 ilii Out-of-Priority Evapoartion (acre-feet) pppp B8QppQ eQ�p+rq��ypp�� SSSS OC d O LO c! C TE b5 66Pc4vivice�fcs3Po n rgg2XitS24175. o N g b J 2gh.Q1-0 11 %0000000000 p P /� �- @ �p O 0� CO L Ititg.c20 co eli § 8g3,F287E;Rg2$ d O P P O P P P P O O o do©c0000 �p g. v.ggg... opp ,,,,„, .. N r3 Fc 0 0 c4 tr -§• -000000000000 To.3c§b,o25g000000 2 .�000000000000 1 .i23;; thin 6 W W 25 li � c_ a ; o a E z3 0 .16 ill El seENtEEEC Nov -29-2D04 05:31pm From - TABLE 2 CITY OF RIFLE EVAPORATION REPLACEMENT SCHEDULE OF RELEASES MONTH EVAPORATION JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER (acre feet) 0.552 0.751 1.300 2.374 3.331 4.246 4.270 3.741 2.648 1.659 0.854 0.519 OUT -OF -PRIORITY EVAPORATION (acre feet) RUEDI RESERVOIR RELEASES (acre feet) T-629 P.006/OD7 F-112 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.593 0.833 1.061 4.270 3.741 2.648 0.415 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.62 0.87 1.11 4.48 3.93 2.78 0.44 0.00 0.00 TOTAL NOTES: 26.245 13.562 14.24 Evaporation from Table 1. Out -of -Priority evaporation assumes River CaII one week in April, May, June & October and all of July through September. Ruedl Reservoir release includes 5 % transit loss. E;\Clients1341 City of Rifle\ RESOURCE PondEvaporation ENGINEERING, INC. 11/29/2004