HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0 ApplicationAr
GARFIELD COI'NTY
SUBDIVISION PROCEDURE
Prepare sketch
Plan
.02.03
SeeA 3
Preliminary PreI
Chairman
Prelininary
Sketch to
Board
Chairman
Preliminary
Chairman
Developer
Sketch to
. Staff
a
Sketch to Board
Chairman
Prepare
PreLimina Plan
Developer (4.02)
9ee page A 4
nary Preliml Preliminary Preliminary
Cha
Final Plat Final Plat
F e z gtla{rllfln
Prepare
Chairman
Flnal
with 3,10
Fees Rec"
DatE filed $seceipt * 7 f?'9'fu=
Received by
* of copies
Type of SubmissLon:
Request for ExemPtion
Preliminary PLan
Final PlatFtling
subdivision Name Kruas- &al
Location of subdivision rowNSHrP 7 5 ;tGE I ? h) sac z8 ' * aA- uul4
owner (s) Na.,^. - rHupoE:e &/u& REnry
-- ss iT-iJryEq-i4'u
Address
Subdivider (s) Name
Address
Designer Name
Address
Engineer Name Trel - Co tn&€prELtT-
/73o
FlannerF Inester file
cl-oEHOa 8t //'
Forms A 1 through A 11 must remEtn ln at aI1 tilqes.
fype of Subdivision Ilumber of
Dwelling Units
Area
(Acres)
b'2
*of
Total Area
(
(
(
(
(
(
)
)
)
)
)
)
Single Family
Apartments
Condominiums
Mobile Home
CommercialIndustriaL
N.A.
N .4.
Dedicated
Reserved
Dedicated
Reserved
Private open Areas
EasementsOther (Specify)
Street
Walkways
School Sites
SchooL Sites
Park Sites
Park Sites
TotaI
Estimated Water Requirement Gallons /day,
Proposed Water Source
Estimated Sewage Disposal Requirement Gallons/day.
Proposed Means of Sewage Disposal
Commission Recommendation Approval (Disapproval (
and/or conditions
ACTION:
PLanning
Remarks
Date
Board of Commissioners
Remarks and,/or Conditions
Approval (Disapproval
Signed
: '" 'Date Signed :i
" ITCH
Have the following items
planner t s satisfaction?
A3
PLAN ITEMIZED CHECK T
GARFIELD COUNTY
been adequately provided or satisfied to the
YE6 NO
'*;thtr-
7.5 minute
above at a
required i n-
forma ti on i ncl udi ng the fol I owi ng
a. Tract boundarY,block and Iot pattern with the area and
use of lots indicated bY note:
b. Street system with width.and grqd!9nt indicated by note;
the relatioirship of proposed to existing streets shall be
iIo*i,.i -*eii ai locitibn of legal acceis to the subdivision.
c. Existing development on the subject and adiacent property
shal I be shown
d. Topography, Iakes and streams shall be shown.
e. Soil types from the National Cooperative SoiI Su'rvey,USDA,
Soil ConsLi-vation Service and interpretations of soi'l types;
,egetiti on shal I be described and tree masses shown;
;radiation or other conditions on subiect
wfri ch coul d af f ect devel opment of
I be shown.
[TeTtEr-Fom the subdi vi der to the Board requesti ng Sketch
the amount of $ 1 5.00 andPlan review, accomPanied bY a fee in
i ncl udi ng the fol I owi ng i nforma ti on :
a. Name of proposed subdivision which shal'l be different
from any retorbed subdivision in Garfie'l d County.
b. Source of domestic. water and a description of th9 proposed
rnittoa of distriUution; evidence of existence of water rights
f or proposed water supp'ly may be requi red.
c. Manner of sewage disposal and a description of the pro-
posed method of coltection and treatment.
d. Evidence of the existence of legal access to the proPerty.
Ske.!ch Planmp-s may be'free-hand drawings bas.ed gn a USGS
1 :24,00-0 map or on a base map - proquced f rom the
scal6 of sufficient size to clearly depict the
\
\
\
\
f. Geologic, drainage
or adiacent ProPertYsubject propertY shal
Information 4.0r..02
Cop i es
All ofin two
4.01.03
the above maps, pl ans and i nformati on shal I be submi tted
cop i.e s
r.r I . I r
Ilave you had PreFsketcft pl,an consu].tatlon wlth sta'ff?
. P*-LIMINARY PLAN ITEMIZED CHO^KLIST
GART'IELD COUNTY A4
Have the folrowing items been adequatery provided or satisfied to the
lianner's satisfaction?
E.
\
NO:= Prrllmlnny Pl.n RGqulrlmtilt 4 rO2
+- Preliminary elan maps shall be draf ted in a 'preliminary fash-
ion , scalLd and dime|1;;;n.o_ io th9 nearest iootr construction
details requested-for rtr..i tr ut!lity improvements may be
shown schematically. U;i;;i-trec'ified',,tntrwise, maPs and
prins sh.ii-ut to icale as follows:
Subdivision Lot Area Scale
i-ffi f t.....T-;50- or less'feet
l0,0Ol sq. f-t.'2 acres"""l"=100 or less feet
more than 5 acres ' scal e shal'l be cons
claritY of dePicted
Finat -Ptag sheet s'i
t
I
iI
.-, ird
Prel imi nalY P t an
a rd:pro-po"t-. a''rot s u bd i y'i s i gl -: l:: I 1
Plan 4,02.01
istent with
i nforma ti on and
ze (24"x36" )
be shown on
being 42" in
information
TffinTiTe
one sheet
wi dth,and
as f ol I ows:
a . Prel i mi narY
Final Plat wil
I 36-2-2, Land
i?' il.:t;[;i;-tne ontY']i'-1irnl::ll,::
;;.ii';;h;;;'to irre rormat and i ncl ude
information sufficient to. indicate that the
1 meet requi ".r.;i; ;ittul i shed under cRS
SurveY PI at, a s amended I
b. North arrow, gFdphic scale and date;
c.Boundarylineswithbearings..ngail!anceS,plusaproperty
descri pti on of ine tract prop6seO for' subdi vi si on:
d. Departing property lings and owners of record of all par-
cels adioining the propo"i i'Uai'ision'' jntl'di1! parcels
separated th.l.iiom'L^iv-uv a FUbl i c right-of -waY;
e.}lithintheproposedsubdivis.ion,thestreet,blockandlotlayout and eli.stihq or proposgg eaie,ents for.drainage,irri-
qation,or other access or ;;iiiti.s shal I be shown drawn to
icale and dir.nrior,.d to tfre n....st foot.Standard lot set-
backs or easements may ue
'itoititto by note onl y;
f.Streetnamesandblockandlotnumberingsystemshallbe
shown.
2)
ga
pa
3)
ad
N ame and address of
if drYr and the
the prel imi narY
A5
the record owner or ol'rners ' and mort-
subdivider and the person or firm pre-
plat;gees
ring
Namjoin es and addresses of the owners of land immediately
ing the area to be Platted;
4) Total acreage of Iand to be subdivided and acreage in-
tended for eaifi-tVp. of usage in suf{icient detail to satis-
it .;quiremenii ,ib.r CRS t6O-2-37 (+) i and containing all
o? thd informiiion required on the Subdivision Summary
Form (Appendix G)
5) Proposed terms of reservations
si tes for parks,school s and other
associ ati ons , i
shal 1 be maPPed
or dedi cati ons of Publ i c
public buildings,streets,
ncluding a
and descri"Service;
\
\
faci 1 i ti es or uS€;
6) Bri ef descri pti on of proposed covenants
Vicinity Sketch Map 4.02.02.i,Ltly- drawn at a sca'le of one inch
.qruis r ,-ooo i;;i, .l !hgygh i f - such maps are not avai I -
;di;, - a uses maP, 1 : 24 ,006 scal e may . be accepted' Th9
Ii;iiiiv st<etcn'ihuii aepict tract iines and names of all
iUrttini subdiriiions, tire location of streets and h!Sh;
;;t; -wi Ini n an aiei oi approximately 9ne-hal f mi I e of the
;;;;.;;; suuaivision trattl the lo.?tion of al1 adiacent
irtititV systems within an ipprox'imate half-mile area min-
imum; ine-natural drainagg cburses for streams flowing
tnrough the piopor.d suUiivision with the I imits of
titUuIary arbas shown where this is reasonable.
P.h.ysical Information 4-02..03 t- -L-.-^-.^-i,ffii;\re6etition and wild'l ife characteristics
of the land prop6sed-for subdivision sha1l be jnvestigated
ina -iIorn on' u-pi;n -srpplemental to and at the same sca]e
ii tte'prel.imin'ary Plan, dccompan'ied by reports as necessary
io"-lorplete desciiption of existing conditions.
a. Geology - Bedrock Lithology qn9 thg stratigraphy-9f
or..iivi n! ,n.on;;iiaited ma[!ri al s shal I be se!9ral lv
described anai;; illustrated in sufficient detail to indi-
;;i; ;;t-pot.i',ti ai devel opment plggJt1n: resul ti ns f rom
ground waier, srUsi dencgr' i nstabi t'ity i n road excavati ons
and filts. expiniir..ioiis, drainage, structural bearing
ft.ength for building foundations, etc';
b. Soils - soil types and their bouldaries based on the
f'fitiona'l Coop.".iir. Soit Survey, USDA,.Soi'l Conservation
Service and a-tiUte of interpreiitionslfor included soil
types shall be mapped and descri bed;
\
c. Vegetation - Plant
of adipted materi al s ,
" i ng practi ces of' the
maises shal I be shown
Soi 1 Conservati on
on the plan.
descri pti on
bed fol I ow-
major tree
d. t'lildl'i fe -hlildlife species inhabitationr. ilcluding-,,tig' g;;; ,in9.r, -!htl I !. !?ppeg .nd-descri bed fol Iowi ns
a * i ra. - or"'+h-a,. Cal anr rln -Di v i < i on "of, hli I dl i f.e'-" r' .f 'r a... j p.i.iic.r.rf"tfr.,, Golorado Division.' of'-lll'ildl if"€'-." ., ' r'r ,'*
IEg NO
Gradinq ano Drainqaqe Plan 4'02'04
at the same scal e as tfte Pre-liminary P'lan shall depict the following:
'a. Generalized grading for all cut and fill slopes on
any'portion of the proposed subdivision where the un-
disturbed ground surface slopes 20% or more in any direc-
'tion showing existing and revised contours and any pro-
jposed retaining structures;
'b. Cross-sections to illustrate potentially difficul't
grade relationships between proposed roads and building.sites;
All existing water courses shall be shown; limits of tribu-d. Drainage Study - a drainage study shall be furnished.I
t
. tary areas where practical shal I be shown and computa -
. tions of expected tributary flows shall be made and theresults indicated. Design of drainage facilities shall be
such as to prevent major damage or flooding of residencesin a 100-year storm; areas sutject to innundation shall
be shown. Location and sizes of a I I proposed culverts,
\ bridges and di tches, channel s and easements sha'l I be
' shown. The dra i nage s tudy sha I'l be perf ormed a nd s i gned' by an engineer registered in the State of Colorado.
4.02.05
to and at the same scale as the Pre-
depi ct the fo1 I owi ng:
,l
1
\ets
-c.
Street Profile - centerline profiles of proposed stre
shal'l be plotted at a horizontal scale consistent with
the Preliminary Plan and an exaggerated vertical scale
either on the Qrading Drainage Plan or on a sheet supple
mentary thereto, with sufficient detail to insure that
proposid streets meet gradient limitations established
by this regulation and bear a logical relationship to
the grade of existing pub'l ic streets at points of inter-
section. Typi cal crois-secti ons of streets and general
paving specifications shail be shown;
-N uti I i t Plan
mental
shal l
a. lr{ater SuPPIY
]_ - tion system is
the sys tem s ha I
\
a) Evidenceof or use of
b) Historicrights..
- If a central water supply and distribu-to be provided, a generai description ofI be shown.
of ownership or right
exi sti ng and proposed
of"acquisition
use and estimated yie'l d
water righ.ts.
of claimed water
1 ) Source - evi dence that a water supply that i s
sufficient in terms of qualitY, quantity and depend-
ability will be available to ensure an adequate supply
of water for the type of subdivisjon proposed. Such evi-
dence may i nclude, but shal'l not be I imi ted to :
.r1
:
,:.rt
. +t{Pr.3ii
'+"'''f '.'
;t -.i ---t -'
I
I
I
a
an suppnary PlI
e
n
l:r'.ht
:.ES NO c) Amenability of existing rights to change in use.
d) Evidence that publ ic or private water owners can
ina will supply witer to the proPosqd subdivisiqnt -ititing the'am-ount of water available for usq.within
aha suSaivision and the feasibility of extending
service to that area.
concerning the potability of the proposed
for the subdivision.
which will own and
descri bed as wel I as
3) If connection is to be made to an existing !9t9riisi.*; ini;"riiion on the existing system shal I be
prov i ded
4) If it is intended that individual water systems
wit t be provided by lot oh,ners, a rqport indicating the
availabii ity of ambte potable grogn{ water at reason-
iUie dipths- throughout' the subdi v'is i on and the expect-
;a qr.iitv and tong-term yield of such wells shall be
p.oiiaea "t,v'l-re;litJr.a !ngineer or geologist qualified
to perform such work.
b. Sanitary Sewage DisPosal
sewage system is to be Provided'the ioI 1 6cti on sYstem andI be shown.
A7
the
r-
ons
oft
4 aftt
e) Evidence
water supplY
2) The nature of the legal en!itY
operate the water sYstem -shal I be
the proposed method of fi nanci ng.
lw
_$h_
-\\L
-\u
I ) If a central sani tarY
a general descriPtion of-
triatment f aci'l i ti es shal
a) Treatment - evidence that publiq of.private
i6r.ge treatment f aci I i t'ies can and wi I I provide
adeqiate sewage treatment. for the proposed sub-
airisi on i f sich serv i ce i s to be provi ded by an
existing district.
b) The nature of the legal e!!ity which will own and
op..ii. tf i r.r.r systefr -sha'l I bA descri bed, as wel I
ai the proposed method of financing.
c) If connection 1s to be made to an existing ?9v'|9riisi.r; irformation on the exi sti ng system shal I be
prov i ded .
\_2l If it iswill be acco
resul ts of s
wa ter I eve'l
Loca ti on. of
pI a t. The Pesigned by aian qua'l if ieof tests sha
.the CountY Hbf Piibl i c'He
i ntended that sani tary sewage di sposal
mp1 i shed by i ndi vi dual I ot owners ' the
oi t percoliti on tes ts and maximum ground
data where app'l icab'le shall be furnished
percolation tbsts sha'l.l be indicated on
iiot a ti on tests sha 1 I 'be performed and
registered engineer, geologist oI sanita
O-io- ao tfrl s work. f ne number and 'locati
1'l be as necessary to meet regui rements
ealth Officer and the Colorado Departmen
ii tt";"hla ter"Poll ut'i on' eontrool 0ommi'ssi on
YES NO
A8
c. Underground }{i r i ng - I f underground di s tri buti on of
el ectri ci 1 power or communi cati ons I i neS are proposed, a
description of the system or systems shal I be shown. The
subdivider shall present written evidence that the utility
Companies involved have been advised of the proposed System
and that an agreement on design has been reached.
fu.pie5 4 .02 .06
ATI of the above maps, plans and inforination shall be sub-
mi tted i n fi fteen copi es
AppL,icitl.on for Revl.ew of FLans has been completed' (Next Page)
Fee has been Paid.
r!
....-. ";
DE'AR. rNrs "$^Xflifllil,"3llillr*", - BUTLDTNG
APPLICATION FOR REVIEWo:
Project
Add,ress
State Sewage Disposal
-
,systems act, 1553
County Sewage Disposal
Systems Regulations
County Water SuppllrRegulations
County Subdivision. Regulations (3. 02. 02)
County Zoning Regula-tion
Other
YES NO
-
F.
Total # of units
CHECK THE APPROPRIATE SPACE FOR EACH.
-$ave cpPtei {- tli":g{ fl4 been completed, approved, and atrached?Have prans been propdrry submittea"to -ihe c6irnti -c5mm-iisiSiEi'j-IiraZ
or the Planning and Zoning Commission?Have plans received preliminary approval from the County Commissionersand/or the planning and Zoning coirilissiona *"br vv'rsrr&ee4\
H-ave -the applications for permit to construct been submitted andthe fees paid?
Have the special review fees been paid? ($5.00 per dwelling unit)or space?
Have the facilities been
Name of the person c firm
SE!fAGE
Application for permit
P1ans and specs for collectj-on
P1ans and specs for treatment
designed, by a professional engineer?
thg appropriate regulati '
tna99 to cgmpIy. Note: significant deviations or omission will re-
::1:-_*l ?Ili"i"r resuest ior "resubmission" i";i"ei;s repayment,
:I_I:11, f::" _for-,,re-review" . rh;;ei;;"-it r;-;;;;;3.1i'it.i"}r
prior to submission. rf we can be or anv """i-"-ti-"]g-, please contactus.
Signature.
DETAIL INFORMATION
*
T{ATER SUPPLY
Apptication for permit incLudingfuII raw water test resultsPlans and specs for source
ACCESS AND PARKTNG
Master plan*] Specifilations and. materials
easementsSpecifications
Plans and specs for disposal Plans and specs for treatment* Plans and specs for distribution..
DRAINAGE
Plans for collection, treatment,
and disposal
; Specifications and materials:' . r
.j
SOLID WASTECollection plan
=
Disposar method
...
:.. ..r te. .. . :'.-.:. ". ,r..r.. ..ri'
MANAGEMENT & CONSTRUCTION
BITITIES .
* Tt.t ha crrlrm.l 't..l^.r .-.: !r^ c: - - r -- r
A9
Have the following items
plannerr s satisfaction?
FINAL PLAN ITEMIZED CHECKLIST
GARSIELD COUNTY
been adequately provided or satisfied to the
YES NO Flnal Plil Eequircmcnls 4' 03
The FinaI PIat shall be drafted in a legible forry with bIack,
*.ierp"oof ink on a permanent reproducible material such as
mifir, or a sr,e.t or sheets measirring 2! b{ :9 il:lts with
;i;;"',ni"gin. *"isuring two inches on the Ieft hand side
ina-one-fritf i;;h on tIe remaining sides. The Ptat shal I
show the name of the subdivision, date, date of Survey'
north arrow and graphic scale and a vicinity map to appro-
o.iate scale. Wnit.'rrittpt. sheets are necessary to depict
[i,;'iitii-i;iiiig, ir,e-ri.inity ndp, lesal desryipti.on of
the tract bornaitly, i t ey map to itreet-'l ocati on and al1 cer-
tif icationr ur,d d;i'ications heed ipPqar only-on the'title
o" corer sh..tl Siite of the Finat'ptat shall be consistant
with that of the PreliminarY Plat.
FinaI P'lat 4.03.01
SfraTi-aOfrere to the format and include information as
follows:
a . Tract boundary I i nes and ri ght-of-way 1 i n9s or. street
iines-in sol i a-Ui acf I ines; eaiements oi othef rights-of-
;;t-iines-in auin.d I ines; and lot boundaries in solid
ii"nes shal l be shown wi th accurate dimensi ons to the nearest
0.0i-f;oa. geirir,gi oi deflection-an91e_s,-arc lengths,
tanoent di stances and central angl es of it t curves shal I be
;;;;;'.'E;;r,-iot shall be numberei and the dimensions and
area of each lot shall be if,onn. hlidths and'dimensions of
al I easements,-rigntr-of-wiV .na streets shal 1 be indi cated'
In addition tA reiuiierenti" Oeiiriued herei.n, !h: Iinll -plt!irr.ii-ri.I .ii r.,iui r"r.nti eiiaul i shed undei C. R S. 136'2'?
Land Survey Plat, dS amended;
b. Names of all streets or roads, block letters and lot
nrru."i-sn.ti';Ii-L;-i;dicatea f6r easy plat identification.
c. The location of all maior drain.glge. channels or areas
rno*ing if,i Uorna.ries . of- I ands subiect to i nundati on .
-
d. Al'l survevins data sha.ll. be Ii99-!o-Btiflll :::l::ld. AI-l surveylng oaEa snall De Lltru LU PI rilrq,rJ vv,re,\
p.i'.i;,-ih;-i ql;qli;;; .;;9. de;c"i Plll'-91 ll:::- ::l::':tii"iroi;;;i monuments on ih.'subdivision shall be indicated;
-L^- :- .li^ma*ani;; [;;[;.i; monuments at least four inches in diameter
with a suitaui'l';;;t;; poini shal'l be set to a depth.suffi-
cient-to insure a permanent accurate ba.se line- for"'the Pur-
I
I,,)
-9'
'i I'
0.- ''':,.:'
YES NO
410
pose of es,-ol ishing or re-establ ishir,e any point in thesubdivision. Such monument shal I be p'laced as necessary,in the opinion of the Plann'ing Commission or their designated
representative, to accomplish the above mentioned objec-tive. Iron monuments r"' in diameter and 18,' long shall bepl aced on a'l I poi nts on bounda ry I i nes where there i s a
change of direction and at all Iot corners, sufficient toinsure proper'l ocation of streets and utilities
e. A legal description of the property,
f. Name of subdivision, basis of bearings, north arrow,graphic scale and date.
g. Vicinity map at a scale of I inch eQuals 1,000 feetand incl uding section I ines; township and range I ines
where practi ca I .
h. Certifications and information as follows:
l) Name and address of owners of record, and mortgagee,if any.
2l Total acreage of the subdivi
and acreage within the subdjvis
sion, total number of lotsion devoted to each use
dl , commercia'l , streets,residentisuch as single familyor open space.
3) A reference to anybe filed with the p'l atfor which sites otheror reserved.
protecti ve covenan ts wh i ch shal 1
and an i ndi cati on of the purpose
than residential lots are dedicated
4) A Certi fi cate of
Appendix A).
5) Title Company or
6 ) Surveyor's Certishall be signed byof Col orado res ponsision pIat.
Dedi cati on and 0wnershi p ( see
Attorney's Certi fi cate (see Appendix B)
The certi fi catein the Statefina'l subdiv-
ficate (see Appendix C).a 'l and surveyor J i censed
i bl e for the survey and
7) An approval certifi cate(see Appendix D).
8) An approval certificate
the Planning Commission
the Board (see Appendix E)
(Thi s certifi cate need not
approval. )
for
for
9 ) The Recorder 's Certi fi ca te .be completed unti'l af ter f inal
Supplemental requi rements
be' bs fol I ows: I,03. 02
to be f i'led wi th Fi na l Pl a t shal l
1!.
a. A letter must be received from the subdivider statingthat all supplemental informatjon furnished with the Pre-
limi"n.afy Plat. is valid. for the Final f lat oF., if tfrig,ig
A l,I-
YES N9,
-
b. A fee shall be payable by th9 sYPdivider for the purpose
. of def rayi;;';-;;ni.i incrr-red by the countv. i n reviewi ns
the propoi.l subaivisiq!, lhe ambun! of which fee shaII be
aeierml hea upon the foI 1 owi ng schedul e:
each tot in the subdivision proposed for-;;ingle familY dwelling unit site'
2) $5.00 for each Iot
subdi vi si on ProPosed
dwel I i ng devel oPmen t.
not the casc ' revi sed
and format as required
furnished.
fee of $s0.00 wi 1 1
D rov i ded tha t the'snat I be credi ted
d. Engi neeri ng PI ans, . q9:9ri Pti 9T:ii...it, draiiage facilities' tlt!1
iit oth6r improvements proposed to
subdivider.
e. A subdivision agreement
divider and the CountY in
CopiesAII of
mitted
suppl emental da,,u of the same- scope-i6; ir,. Piel imi'narv PI at shaI l be
Iot in the subdivision proposed for any
than resi denti al .
l) $I0.00 for
devel opment as
3) $I0.00 for each
devel opment other
4) A mihimum
subdivi si on,
Secti on 3.01
hereunder.
(as defined under 1.02.08) in the
td-ue i ncl uded i n a mul ti -fami IY
-1
I
I
-I
"t
I
I
I
.1
I
be requtred for aly-
$t S.00 'fee requi red - i n .ioward the fee requi red
Anyadditionalplanrevieworinvestigationwhich,iirv-irre subdiiiider,s respqn:ibility under these
[ioni ana wrriirr is requestqq by tl'e subdivider to
bv the Countr, sfritt tie billed-, at cost, to the
ii,a -pii o pri-oi to Fi nal Pl at approval '
c. Three copies of atl the -protective covenants or restric-
tions pl aced ;; ing-9ruaivi s'ion, on9 99pv of whi ch shal l
be fi I ed for ie.ota i n tf,.'ofii;e of - the- Cl erk and Recorder
;i the-it*e of recordi ng the Fi nal P'lat '
i s nor-
regula-
be done
subdi vi der
and cost estimates for
i ty systems , bri dggs and
bL iirstalled bY the
4. 03. 03the above maPs,
in original and
to bc executed between the sub-
a.iordance with Section 3.10'
ol ats and i nformati on shal I be sub-'
Inree coPi es thereof.
,.: I+i -.1 .:
v1.
I
I
r i .r .i', h, .:r1 i,
TRI-CO Mar,agement, lnc.
Planning . Design . Surveying . Engineering . Construction
and Management of Land
KINGS ROW
Water
A complete description of the water origin and
distribution system for Kings Row Subdivision has been
submitted to the Planning Department. Here is a brief
review of the same:
I. Water Origin
A. Well - 325 Feet
1. t[eII completion and pyTp. instal]-ation
report by Mountain Orilling Company,
dated July 30, L974..2. Test pumped by Canaday Pump Company. aL 26 g.p.m. on June 22, L974.3. Geologic report by Lincoln Devore
Testing Laboratorlr dated November 8,
L974, states: "This well is capable of
producing far more than the proposed
26 g. p. m. rr
4. Report by Jerorne Gamba, P.E. and L.S.
No. 5933, dated November 19, L974,indicated adequate aquifer recharge(53,750 acre feet annually).5. Application for water rights inDistrict Court in and for WaterDistrict No. 5, State of Colorado,
Case No. W-2393.
B. $later Quality
1. Tested by Lincoln Devore Testing LaboratoryJuly 3, L974. Report states: "Thiswater meets state requirements for
chemical characteris{ics. "
Box 1730
AsPen
Colorado 81611
303.925.2688
A Subsidiary of Trico Corporation . Offices throughout the West
-2-
2. Report by Jerome Gamba, P-E- and L.S.
No. 5933, dated October 2, L974, indicated
that "individual sewage treatment systems
may be expected to perfolrn very satisfac-
torily on Kings Row Subdivision without
endangering the subsurface ground water
qualiiy, conditioned upon ttre following: "
Er. No effluent disposal within 200 feet
of well;
b. Adequate design;
c. Use of aerobic disPosal fields.
II. Water System
A. Storage - from report by Jerome Gamba,
P.E. and L.S. No. 5933, dated January 3, L9752
1. Eire Storage
2. Domestic3. Emergency4. Total
60 ,000
15 ,69 8
22,709w
B. Distribution - Through pumping and 5' UCP
sygtem as described in Plan submitted by
Tri-Co Management, Inc., to Garfield County
Planning Department.
III. There are 78 shares of the Missouri Heights Irrigation
Company which could supplement the well water source
for domestic irrigation.
TRI-CO Management, lnc.'
Planning . Design . Surveying . Engineering . Construction
and Management of Land
KINGS ROI^I
Soils and Foundations
I. Soils Inventory prepared by the U. S. Soil Conservation
Service, received July 8, L974 and submitted withpreliminary plan.
II. Mt. Sopris Soil Conservation District indicated
various Limitations for soil-s found at Kings Row.
(September 15, 1974)
III. Geologic report for Kings Row prepared by Lincoln
Devore Testing Laboratory, dated November 8, 19741
indicated soil and slope limitations but specifies
engineering solutions for all such conditions.
Box 1730
AsPen
Colorado 81611
303.925.2688
A Subsidiary of Trico Corporation . Offices throughout the West
TRI-CO Managernent, lnc..
Planning . Design . Surveying . Engineering . Construction
an_d Management of Land
Sewage Treatment s'azryzz
Individual sewage treatment systems are proposed
for Kings Row Subdivision. CompJ-ete descriptions and
reports have been submitted to the Planning Department.
Here is'a brief review of the salne.
I. Feasibility
Percol-ation tests by Gerard Pesman, P.8.3276,
dated June 24, 1974, ind,icate an average
percolation rate of 14.6 min. per inch. The
report statess "In my opinion, depending on
the number of sites and spacitg, the terrainis suitable for individual septic tank and
leech fieLds."
The ManuaL of Septic Tank Practice by the U. S.
Oepa Welfare
indicates that a percolation rate of 14.6 min.
per inch requires an absorbtion area of less
than 200 sq. ft. per bedroom. For a four
bedroom house this means 800 sq. ft. or less
than'0.68 of the average size lot at Kings Row.
The geologic report for Kings Row prepared by
the Lincoln Devore Testing Laboratorlr dated
November 8, L974, states, "The laboratory isof the opinion that individual sewage disposal
systems are feasible".
Report by Jerome Gamba, P.E. and t.S. No. 5933t
dated October 2t 1974, indicated that "indj.vidual
selrage treatment systems may be expected to
perform very satisfactorily on Kings Row Sub-division without endangering the subsurface
ground water quality conditioned upon the
following: "
1,. ,No effluent disposal- within 200 feet of
well;2. Adequate d,esign;3. Use of aerobic disposal fields.
'.7-22 e r" //z
/r'-'-'{r{77'a'<''J_,_---<
Box 1730
Aspen
Colorado 81611
303.92s.2688
-T-
*
./n - 1.s-,).d,D
4,/&7,,/'7t., "f.29
KINGS ROW
A.
B.
D.
A Subsidiary of Trico Gorporation . Offices throughout the West
II.
-2-
Type of System
A. The geologic report for Kings Row, prepared by
the iincoin Oev-ore Testing Laboratory, recommends
"forced aeriation-type tank with evapotranspira-
tion fields."
B. Forced aeriation-type tanks are described by
Leroy Reid in his article "Design of wastewater
oisp6sat Systems for Individual Dwellings"
(Jo-urnal of Water Pollution Control- Federation,
October, Lg7Ll. He states, nThe quality of
effluent is far superior to that of septic
tanks", and that "uaintenance of the sysfem
is minim?I", and that operational costs are
$14.80 to $A3-|l/Year.
c. Evapotranspiration as described by the Manual
of Septic iank Practice by the U. S. Oe@-ent
Welfare is a sYstem
of placing tile lines near the top of trench
wheie trees, shrubsl €tc.1 absorb and release
to the atmosphere quantities of moisture
through evapbtransfiration.
it:.
'.'I
RE-.iIERED in COLO.. NEW MEXlco and
SURVEY ENGINEERS. INC.
June 24 t L974 . i ,',:_ i
Alf PI{OIO$[ntEfSS[DI&, - rrtArmFED n.' "P.o.BOI2m, '--* 'il
:_\
'tt l ' '.q
ReplY ts -----
cu\D Jrrngflor, c{r.BAm 81501
PEoIE3B€13275. '. ,,,. a:
Er"[SBlrlDlIr' , .
P.O.B82E[
' a[orlE3e]gir5€ta ,; . =l
I00lT|VEN'EIDI.
G1f, IUWOODSP[Irr**Oq.BJlDO8lEOl
PHoIlE 3&l-915{llB
: I f,-.- , t,,,,,,r,,,,.,*,.
l4r. Gre88 Johnsoa .' :
fri-Co Minagenent ' '-.' ,P.0. Box L73O ' ,, '.-.,.
,,_. "-.: , _. .
,..,.., ,,Dear Gregg, - ,, '
The foLlouing percolation tests urere done by me.atd-u:rder uy r
""p""ri"i-on fn6 precedin6 week on property located- in Secti'oa
ZO-r-2f-A ZB TZs iAZw 5P,M.. Following-are the results. A11
hoLes were d.ug by a backhoe urith a 2 ft. bucket to the gepthP ',
;ilTn, ielour. -Hoies were saturated at least 8 trrs t previous to
tilI"i""il--'aff holes meet the criterion of rate betrlreen 5 uin.,/iJo...,-.
to 50 uin./1n. of percolation rate-
Hole No. 1 6 ft. long - 4.2 ft. d.eep - 14 ninutes/j-nch
soil-sand'Y si-1t ,
Hole No' 2 - . 3"i1:"H3$ Irt;'-tl;ru3:#"-rle,ilit:';:(liilc rock
Ho1e No. I+ - ? ft. lolA --r.0 ft.-deep - LZ ninutes/inch ' ,r ,,. j
Ho1eNo.,5,-7ft.}ong:-[.aft.deep-L5ninutes/i1chsoil-sandy silt - du6 dorn to nrhite basalti.c rock 'Hole No. 5 5 it. 1on! - 4.? ft.-deep - LZ ninutes,/iach
HoLe No. ) ras dug but n6 fiitea. ftrere vas no evideace of any"vater table in ani of the holes dug and terrain is high cotmtry ,,irigated land. in ny opinior5 depending on the nunber of sites aad
spacing, the terrain is suitable for j.ndJ-vidual septic tank aad "
leech iields.
J' 3!.,1
t!
-14
,.,4
;: :, i.
Colo. Reg. Prof. Engr. 2376
.:. i'l
s*,n#u*, * ;t.*g5gervio 'run; 5 lettr
John A. Tlurllon
0rortr 7!i0'6hmmd Spf*r Sotsrado
P. 0. Box 7Sg
ffinglr, Colorado
Et6flt :
Julo 1974
Phoni 32tl-6538
'.dr ." 'i
t, ' ',r
. {..*,1 t '.. '
.;i p,.' r $t'
,,'',
,, , fiol Flle No. Se-G3*?4 Exrrrrptton,
,' ( Flln l.b. SIF*Sil*?4 $trrGofi,fitfr) '''
KlrUn Rorv $r.rbdlvl tlcr
At thdr rpoclal rrmtlng on 2E May 1974, Urc BorC cl Cor^mty Oornrnhttomrs
apptomd yo.r roq,net fc Exorrptlon lrum thc CoLnty St^6dlvlrlon Regutatlone
on corldltlar th$ the Eaglc Cornty Plarrtlng Corrrnrlrslon "spprovcp and ratlflca"
both tht prltlmlnary anu'ftnd plrrr aa eJornltted:to urd ryro;rA by Garfleld
County. Becauac of tht Excmptton ryproval, m llrrther actlon on the rkotch
plwr wlll bc tal{on.
lf yor.r havc any ttrrtFrer qrnatlont, pleaer corrtrc.t thclr Seorctry, the Gormty
,.:"'
Fleq:retlhrll .: :
Ml+harl S. Blalr
Slructor
iMBBIi(t
cc: Board of County Commteelorrrsg
Trl-Co Mrrng?ffiant Serporatlon t
Board al Go,tnty Gommlulomra, {iarfteld Celaly ..2
,.:,,'
r': t.i.
,, it;+r)t ':
? r"* l: {
t ,'.' , ,!l ''.
,-,aqr...., ' i, &;'B":
"T.1lb;,!l*:t'.i i' i *:.' i
r;\'!
1.:
,f
:t
,,
l ri,,
'nr,i ..;
{t^
ir,
RF"g\\LOJ.-O..
z.tr)oA<-.
$\
\$
-1P
.1 ',v
:h/E
44
tfto
^l\-t d9;
tOT 35- aot2.llo AL. -l
,5.4eipex *vX.(o.oaAc.r)
@lg1o5Lt zq'l
- 4c.09
o.?A?^<-
)T- ?1\1t\
Auarrr,4elgT all+exra€.
(.t
S'r
\9
d5
$$3ZA
$*r
n$2
rx$
6.
\.1,\q
\s.
:tT.4
)?9 l
-C-r z,9)_-
\\r
\\
\\,D:L-_ 20).+to iY,.
t"
-.f@jO t-r-.:-sA
9)
roz.*, -{zS?Aq
-g=-=9j
fi17"
,,,.?L' EKA'NA.E i nz.t{>NttoN ^.fi^'*'rr'/.t'c.oz' OfeN -*AE-8.aOCo Ac.
7 iil, No..',))l
'/-u
" att.ol
9]
lloL N-
k,
W
a L-oI 35-': TIata,.
;l
:l
k
L.OT
aolo
\'-
'\',
\\\
r\t
\\i
il)
;Tl ?JbfxttNT
'A1'r'*
'-'oPEN *rtz(o'oA ac t .)' 40.o?
t o.?z2rtn,
S-Aqo 6Zt Zq't v\
rc.1--
'/ " 1a ,tu
_@T e7
).tA? A/-.
OT XD
b-
*a
Lor o 't\t
2.@G N-. 1\^
1,froo
^6\-,of,
-1-
Ac.
'66AsU€€170.@
}JtZu-)
Pn-rerl;:ltlU;Jfull
E
c
6
{t
)r%i7k
f o=t*,2672 otPftx;;:-'i'
\.
r.o@t:<l
cc.|sr
\96
$$3
1S
Ye I
il$3
ttr$
Ng
i
os
-\
u-1T". 90?.+r'' /1'
.,P \ ,\
- \
'\,,
:\'\
;,rAo \ - \.,t)ilift._\ u- I $i
, -Q-1. ; -1 1r\' "\s='t'- 'r\- Lo't' 39 \\''
i i'\l;' "''Q'r i ' \')t
-'y
I
I
t
I
George D. Morrls, P.E.1000 W. Flllmorc
Colorodo Springr, Colorcdo 80907
303-6323593
I
Soll Mechonics
Foundotion
I
Evoluotion
Motcrlo ls
I
rests
Concrele
! , u'' ""''n
As pho lr
I
Mix Deslsn
Gcologic
I
lnterP?ctolion
Groundwoler
t
HYdrolosY
by
I ?:h:ilt
Geol og i sts
I ao,o,oro sprtnss,
Colorodo
t Pucblo,
Colorodo
!
,o,." M.9ump
Rock Springs, -.
I
wvomrns
Glenwood Springs '
Avon. Colorodo
It#::..ffiil'
I 'JJ,:',".t
Lcc E. Sllerwolt
T
E
N
T
THE LINCOLN.DEVORE TESTING LABORATORY
MEMBER: A.S.T.M.
A.S.C.E.
cEc
ACt
November Ir L974
Tri-Co $anagement, Inc.
P O Box 1730
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: Kings Row Subdivlgiop
Yor.lr Proiect ,74148 ,
Gentlemen:
Transmitted herewith ia a re[Prt
concerning the general and engineering geology and soil
conditions of a Proposed subdivision known as the Kingg ROw
Subdivision. The proposed subdivision is located i,n Gapflgld
and Eagte Counties, approximately 14 miles southeast Of
Glenwood Springs, Colorado. This rePort is vtrritten in egmr
pliance with the provisions of Colorado Senate BiIl 35
(IO5-2-34 C.R.S. 1963 as amended) and the relevant GarfieLd
and Eagle Counties Subdivision Regulations'
GDM,/gam
LDTIJ ,fob No, L2429
GS IIB
Richard Morris, Geologitt
Respectf uJ-},y submitted t
WJtr'o(zry
THE LINCOLN.DEVORE TESTINE LABORATORYt
T
I
I
T
lr
lr
lr
lr
lr
l:
lr
l:
l:
MEMBER: A.S.T.M.
A.S.C.E.
cEc
ACI
George D. Morrls, P'E'
GENERAL & ENGIMERING GEOT.OGY & SOIIJS
KINGS ROW SUBDIVISION
GARFTELD & EAGLE COUNTTES' COT,oRADO
1000 W' Fillmorc
Colorodo Springa, Colorodo 80907
303'632.3593
Soil Mechonics
Foundotlon
Evo luot i on
Motcrio ls
Tastg
Concreie
Mlx Design
Aspho h
Mix Deslgn
Geologic
lnlerpretot I on
Groundwoter
Hydrology
by
Rcgl slered
Prolegs iono I
Engineers &
Geol ogi sts
Colorodo Sprlngs,
Colorodo
Pucblo,
Colorod o
Howord M. Drmp
Rock Springs,
. Wyomlng
Glcnwood Sp:ings '
Avon, Colorodo
Rondsll E. ConnollY
Eugenc F. Lohmon
Gunnison,
Colorodo
Lee E. Stierwolt
I
I
I
t
lr
lr
lr
lr
l:
l:
INTRODUCTION:
At your request, Personngl of this Laboratpry
have completed an investigation of the general and engineering geology
and soil conditions of a proposed subdivision known as the Kinge Rot"
Subdivision, This tract is located in the N2 fVlO4 of Section 28 and the
SZ SW4 and the SW4 Se4 of Section 2I, Township 7 South' Range 87 Weet
ofthe6thP.M.inGarfieldandEagleCounties,Colorado.Thesub-
division is approximately 5 miles east of carbondale ' !4 miles goutheast
of Glenwood springs, and 2 miles north of the Roaring Fork River' It
is located on the Garfield-Eagle County line with approximately g0?6 qf
the area being located in Garfield county and 2v/" Ln Eagle County' A
countyroadrunsalongthesouthandwestlinesoftheproperty.
Topographicatly, the site is an upland mesa
with low rolling hills and small steep slopes where underlying basalt
flows are exposed. The sawatch Range rises at a dietance in the east
andtheElkMountainsarefoundtothesouth.Noexactageofthe
basaltlavaflowshasbeenestablished;however,theyarebelievedto
be late Pleistocene to Miocene (I million to 25 million years old) '
These rocle outcrop near the tops of the small hiLls in the arep and
produce a number of steep talus slopes' NO flOwing streamq were found
onthepropertyThowever,asmallintermittentstreamcrogaeBthe
northeast corner of the property. several irrigation ditchee erosg
the property. The major ditch runs from the cehter of the north bound-
arytothegenterofthewestboundary.Inseveralareag,theee
ditches have eroded substantially into the overlying soil' ALI the
remaining draws aPpear to be dry, as were the irrigation ditches'
-1-
I
I
t
I
lr
lr
lr
lr
l:
l:
Several small areas of the property wetre
used as irrigated pasturerand; however, the majority of area is covered
with a dense growth of big sagebrush. Tree cover is limited to a
number of emall scrub oak stands, mainly along the major irrigation
ditch, and a few small pines on the rocky hilltops' cacti are numerous
in the sagebrush covered areas. The proposed deveropment on the site
is planned for both the flat lying areas and the hillsides' open
space has been provided along the county road and in a }arge area of
relativelyflatgroundnortheastofthecenterofthetract.
gENERAL GE9LOGY:
The entire subdivision is underlain by an
extensive series of basalt flows. A water weII drilled in the north-
central portion of the property encountered basalt from the surface
to 325 feet the maximum depth of the drilling. As Btated previousryt
the exact age of the flows has not been established; however' they
are believed to have occurred from the Miocene EpoCh to the Pleistocene
Epoch(orasoldas25millionyearstoasrecentastmillionlreara).
It is believed that these flows cover the Eagle VaIIey Evaporite and
possibly the Belden Formations. The Eagle VaIIey Evaporite conEists
of thin beds of gypsum and shale, and has been known to cause a number
of sinkhole depressions where it is at or near the surface' For
example, at a point 8 miles to the north of the property, the basaLt
flows dip into a topographic basin Possibly caused by the collapge
of a C?verhlq or caverns, in the underlying evaporite sequence. The
Berden Formation, on the other hand, consists primariry of shares and
-2-
I
I
I
tl
lr
lr
lr
lr
l:
t:
l:
Iimestone in this area. Both the Eagle Valley and the Belden Formations
are pennsylvanian in age (approximately 300 million years old) '
The only rock tyPe exposed in the area is
thebasalt.Itgenerallyouteropsnearthetopsofthehills'most
oftenonsoutherlyfacingslopes.SlopesbelowtheoutcroPsare
normally steep (uP to qo-as%), and are littered with boulders and
cobbles of basalt. Much of the basalt is highly vesicular' having the
apPearanceofasponge.Thebasaltflowisprobablyresponsiblefor
the formation of the many small hills in the area as it forms a very
resistant cap on each of the hilts. A layer of callche has been formed
in the soil just above the basalt' This layer of very high calcium
carbonate concentrations is several feet thick' and the lower portion
contains numerous boulders of basalt. ExPosures of this layer ehow
it to be a hard, white, well cemented soil layert strongly resembling
rock.
Most of the soils on the property aPPear
to be residual; that is, they are derived from the weathering of the
basalt beneath them. The soil is a very calcareous' pink' silty clayt
is very loose near the surface, and becomes increasingty more compaCt
and cemented with increasing depth. The steeper hilrsides are corlu-
vial soils composed of basalt boulders in the pink silt or clay' The
several irrigation ditches have eroded deep cuts into the eilt and
produced some nearly vertical slopes up to 25 feet high' These elopes
are,however'veryunstableandhaveslumpedinplacedalongthese
deep cuts.
-3-
I
I
t
lr
lr
lr
lr
l:
lr
Structurally, the Kings Row Subdivision
lies on the southeast flank of the white River uplift' This is a
great rock arch which began to rise at the time of the Laramide period
of deformation (approximately 60 million years ago) ' and which may
stilt be undergoing some deformation. The white River uplift is
characte xLzed by many faults, both reverse (thrust) and tension (normal) '
Most of the uplifting predates the formation of the basalt flowl
therefore, virtually no major faults apPear in the basalt' trre closest
major fault is the ned Tabre Mountain Fault, aPProximately 4 miles
east of the subdivision, which has the largest displacement of any
of the faults on the south flank of the white River uplift' It is a
Iarge thrust fault with an apparent displacement of several thousand
feet. The fault trends to the northeast from a point 6 miles east of
Carbondale to about 6 miles south of Gypsum, at which point' it trends
eastward for about 20 miles '
Fromthestandpointofgeomorphology'the
Iand forms that exist on the Kings Row property are mainLy the reeult
of erosion. The property is located on an upland mesa capped by the
extensive basart frows in this region. The basart was probabry intro-
duced to the area through rocar ventsr possibry those at Buek Point,
7 miles to the north, and at a small peak 3 miles west of Buek Point'
Many smarr, Iow buttes have been developed on the property through
erosionbywaterandgravitationalbreak-upofthisbasalteap.The
extensive joint system in the basalt causes it to break off at the
outcrop faces into large blocks. These blocks are found in heavy
concentrations below most outcrops and have been creeping down the
-4-
I
I
I
I
lr
lr
lr
lr
slopesbelowthebasaltexposures"xingsRowisinthesouthern
Rocky MOuntain geomorphic provinee' near its boundary with the colorado
PlateauProvince,andboththeclimateandthelandformsreflectin
part the characteristics of the two provinces '
The drainage pattern is a poorly developed
dendritietype.Thesmallgulliesshownoparticulartendencyto
follow structural trends. There are no continuously flowing streams
on the property, and only one intermittent stream is indicated on the
USGS 7.5' Leon Quadrangle map' This stream crosses the property in
theextremenortheastcornerofthesite.Ingeneral,thereisvery
little drainage development on the property' Local drainage is prob-
ably in the form of sheetflow or internal drainage through the soil'
significant stream flow apparently is restricted to periods of
torrential rains and (possibry) rapid snowmelts"
ENGINEERING GEOLOGY:
From the standpoint of engineering geologYr
there are few specific areas of concern' The engineering features of
the basalt, caliche and soil will be discussed in general terms' in
this report, since these materials wiII be encountered in developing
this area.
In general, the slopes in the area are
moderate and appear to be relatively stable in their !:ttislg' The
few steep slopes on the property are covered with blocks of basalt and
exhibitsignsofrockcreep"Theseslopesmust,therefore'becon-
sidered moderately unstable and would require further investigation
-5-
I
T
I
beforetheconstructionofanybuildinEonthem.Suchareasarein-
dicated on the Slope Map appended to this rePort'
The silty clays which cover the majority
oftheareagenerallyformthelowslopesandflatareasinthesub-
division.Theirrigationditcheshavecutdeeplyintothissoilwhere
thegradtentissteepened,suchasthoseplaceswheretheditches
follow natural stream courses' At one such cut' along the main clitch
justwestofthecenterofthearea(Block2,Lot8),thesoi}has
beenerodedintoacliffapproximately25feethigh.Thecliffis
, cut nearly vertical and, in places, is slightly overhangirlg. Bl.ocks
of the silty clay soil, generally Io to 15 feet across, have s,-umped
intothestreambedatnumerousplacesinthisarea.Inotherareas'
the soir has been eroded to g to 10 feet in depth, forming narrow rrvrr
strapedgullieswithslopesfromabout60otovertical.Theseslopes
exhibited no particurar signs of srope movement" Irazards to structures
maybeavoidedbyinsuringthattheyarebuiltbackfromtheedgesof
the unstable slopes' Considering the characteristics of the soil'
buildingsetbacksshouldbeslightlygreaterthanthedepthsofthe
gul.Iies-30feetofsetbackforthelargegutly,and15feetforthe
smaller ones '
other than those factors al-ready mentionedt
there wirr be no other significant stabirity probrerns on this site'
Thesiltyclaysoilsarenotsusceptibletoeitherconso}idation
(settlement)orexpansion(swelling).Laboratorytests,iDfact'
suggestthatthesoi]-isextremelystableina].mostallrespects,and
thatitwillcausefew'ifany'problemswithrespecttothe
I
I
I
I
t
t
Ir
ll
T development of this site. Much of their stability is no doubt due to
cementation by calcite (the "caliche"). This cementation' moreover'
doesnotaPPeartodiminishsubstantiallywhenwaterisaddedtothesoil.
Although the presence of the Eagle Valley
Evaporite Formation beneath the basalt flows has al-ready been noted'
the thickness of the basalt cover should be more than sufficient to
prevent the formation of sinkholes on this tract' The water well
drilled in the northern part of the proposed subdivision encountered
basalt throughout its depth of 325 feet, and the water taken from the
well showed nO evidence of having been in contaet with gypsum' This
indicates that a considerable thickness of fairly competent basalt
exists between the ground rever and the Eagle valrey Evaporite' whire
it is true that a large sinkholerOr sinkholes, has evidently caused a
collapse in an area 8 miles to the north, this event is believed to
have oecurred before the formation of the lava flows' For this reasont
no sinkholes or related phenomenon are expected in Kings Row' Further-
more, there are no nearby mines or other such human enterprises which
could induce a collaPse'
Adverse slopes exist only in a few local
areas.Asnotedabove,thesteepslopesaretypicallytalusand
colluviaI slOpes belOw basalt outcrops. These slopes should generally
be avoided. The remainder of the site has slopes ranging from about
4% to ZO%t with the bulk of these being around Lo%' These slopes will
generally be suited for development, although the need for careful
design of structures and sewage disposal systems will increase as the
20% level is approached, of the 49 lots proposed for this subdivision'
-7-
I
I
only three appear to be subject to serious slope problems' on Lots
II and L2 of Block 2, it may be difficult to find a building site with
slopes less than 2tr/"; on Lot 5 of Block 4, steep slopes will make access
to the tot difficult. rf these lots pre to be developed, all improv-
ments must be specially designed for the slope conditions' similarly'
there should be no serious excavation problems. The silty clay can be
excavated with relative ease while the caliche layers may present
difficulties for hand work (though not for power machinery). Blasting
will probably be required in the basalt. As there is generally at
least 4 feet of soil cover over the basalt, most excavation ean be
easily accomplished. Due to the possibility of encountering rock' how-
ever, basements should be discouraged near areas of rOck outcrOp and
where borings have encountered basalt at shallow depths' These areas
may be inferred from the appended Geologic Map'
Drainage problems will not generally be
serious. The site is located on a topographie high spot, and most of
the storm runoff passing through the property wilt originate within
the subdivision itself. There are, strictly speaking, no real flood-
plains, and all Of the drainage basins are very small- - well under 100
acres. The existence of irrigation ditches may complicate the situ-
ation somewhat, but flood hazards from such ditches have historically
tended to be trivial. The only provision for flood control which need
be taken in Xings Row would require the construction and maintenance
of suitable ditches and structures to properly drain storm runoff
from lots and streets. rt should be noted, though, that the soil on
the site is susceptible to erosion, as is evidenced by the condition
t
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
t
t
t
I
I
I
I -8-
I
T
T
t
I
I
I
I
T
t
I
I
t
t
I
I
I
T
I
of some of the existing ditches. These ditches should be protected
from further erosion by either lining them or, the far more economiea'I
expedient.of ,constructing certain erosion control structures at inter-
't'
vals to protect the bottom and sides. similar measures should be
incorporated into any ditches constructed in the proposed subdivision'
Care should also be taken to avoid stripping and teaving bare any sub-
stantial area of land, particularly on steeper slopes' In the event
that erosion begins, remedial measures should be taken as soon as
practical. Development of the tract will increase storm runoff and
will consequently increase the potential rate of erosion, but this
can be counteracted if the proper preventative and corrective measures
are taken"
It is not expected that groundwater will be
encountered at shallow depths on this property' None was found in any
of the test borings, and neither the elimate, topography or geology
are favorable to the accumulation of groundwater in the relatively thin
soil layer. There are, therefore, no particularly marshy areas in the
proposed subdivision. The formation of such marshy areas after develop-
ment has taken plaee is possible, but may be entirely prevented by the
use of properly designed and constructed sewage disposal systems, water
distribution systems and surface drainage improvements' In any eventt
the forrnation of marshy areas would require widespread neglect of those
factors throughout the subdivision over a long period of time' The
presence of caliche layers in the soil i-ndicates that groundwater
evaporation is rather heavy in this soil, and that the soil is seldom'
if ever, saturated. GrOundwater iS, of course, found on the site' but
only in deep sub-artesiam aquifers in the basalt'
-9-
I
t
I
I
I
t
I
t
t
I
I
I
t
t
t
I
I
I
I
The proposed Kings Row Subdivision lies in
an area of slight regional seismic activity. Earthquakes of low inten-
sity have been felt in the vicinity in historic times, although none of
these tremors is known to have had its epicenter in the immediate area
of Kings Row" fwo centers of seismic activity may be discerned' One
of these is in the white River uPlift between Glenwood springs and
Dotsero, where some very recent lava flows are found. Earthquakes of
MSK (modified Mercalli) intensity V have been noted here' The other is
the Aspen area, where shocks of MsK(modified Mercalli) intensity vI
have been felt. According to the literature, the site lies in a region
of seismicity in which earthquakes may occur at a rate of four per
decade per square degree of surface area, and in which shockg may
achieve a MSK intensity of VII' or a Richter magnitude of 5'0: This is
considered the threshold for significantly damaging quakes. It should
be emphasized that this risk is by no means limited to this site, but
is regional in nature. There is no reason to believe that any unusual
degree of risk is associated with this particular site' It is recom-
mended, though, that structures be designed to withstand low magnitude
earth accelerations.
There is no
ciated with the formations exposed in
known radiation hazard agso-
and near the proposed subdivision.
-r0-
T
T
T
I
l
il
lr
lr
lr
lr
lr
l:
l:
li
lr
l:
SOILS & FOUNDATION ENGIW
Thirteen test borings were drilled on the
site of the Kings Row subdivision as shown on the attached Boring Lo-
cation DiaEram. The borings were placed around the site to determine
the general soils profile over the site and to obtain samples for
testing to determine the foundation design. characteristics of, the
individual soils were noted for the purpose of designing foundations
for structures in the subdivision. The general profile of the site is
certainly not uniform, from either the soils or geologic points of view'
Sufficient consistency was noted that no further test borings were
deemed necessary. AIl borings were drilled with a Power-drivent con-
tinuous auger drilI. samples were taken with the standard split sPoon
sampler'withthinwalltubesandbybulkmethods.
The slopes on the site are relatively steep
so that it is almost a certainty that housing sites will be placed on
both cut and filled areas on the site. The bearing values for the
different soil types given in this report have been given as a low
average for the soil type at various depths. These maximum bearing
values are, therefore, the safest of the bearing values found in the
area. Higher bearing values may be found from point to point and these
differences can be estimated from the drive record shown on the logs'
Bearing values for each of the materials used in a compacted fill are
also given within the report, so that some estimate can be made for
bearing if a building is to be placed on a controlled fill'
Except for a very small amount of material
near the surfaee of the ground, all of the soils on the site are
-11-
I
I
I
I
I
T
rt
lr
lr
lr
lr
l:
residualty weathered materials. They are predominantly derived from
the basatt which underlies the site' For this reason' the soils are
all quite similar in physical characteristics and engineering reactions'
ThreesoiltypeshavebeenshownontheboringlogsandaredeEcribed
in this report. They are given as three distinct soir types because
the engineering characteristics of the soils do vary to a degree and
the Laboratory feers that these differences shourd be noted. A1I- of the
soirs are variations of sirty crays, however, so that the differences
between the soil characteristics are actually rather small' One majOr
feature of the site is the presence of numerous rock fragmqnts derived
from the underlying basalt. Wherever these rock fragments become very
numerous, the soil was found to be quite dense and the blow count record
indicates a high bearing value. This blow count record should not be
taken literally in this case, since these rock fragments are merely
pieceslyinginthematrixofclayorsiltyclay.Therockfragments
are not scattered uniformly through the mateliat and tend to be found
in groups. ft cannot be known for certain whether a foundation will
rest upon numerouE rock fragments or a clay withOut many fragments until
theexcavationisactuallyconstructed.Forthisreason,itwillbe
much safer to assume that the rock fragments are not present and to
design for the bearing values of the clay matrix' such a design will
be on the safe side. At the same time, the excavating eontractor can
be tord that numerous rock fragments may be found at any point, so that
he will be prepared to excavate them properly'
A second major variation from the norm of
thesoilonthesiteisthatoftheformationalbasaltitEelf.Several
-L2-
l!
lr
lr
lr
l:
Ir
Ir
lr
lrII
I
T
I
t
t
of the test l:orings show that this basalt is found quite close to the
surface of the ground and some exposures of the basalt were noted in
the previous section on geology. At points where the basalt is ex;rosed,
the building should be sited so that it can rest either completely on a
flat portion of the basalt or on the soil away from the outcrop. If
the building is placed directly on the basalt, the bearing value of
this material is extremely high, exceeding 30r000 psf in maximum bearing
value. This material, in the formational condition, also has no expan-
sive characteristics or settlement eharacteristics. In short, it is a
rock and not a soil. For this reason, many of the recommendations
given for foundation design on the site can be ignored if the foundation
is plaeed directly on the basalt. It must be noted, of courSe, that if
these foundations are placed directly on the rock, it may be necessary
to blast at points in the excavation in order to get a reaaonably smooth
surface on whieh to place the foundation" It should also be noted that
the foundation should be tied to the basalt in some manner. This can
be done, either by drilling reinforcing bars into the basalt or by
chipping a "footing" line around the building into which the concrete
foundation can be placed. If the basalt platform is relatively IeveI,
such a tie will not be absolutely required. If the basalt is found to
slope, however, the foundation must be tied to the basalt.
Considering only the soils bn the site, the
precise soil values vary considerably around the area. In general,
and bearing value of the soil gradually increases from thethe density
surface of
5 feet will
the ground downwardr so that the bearing value at a depth of
be somewhat lower than the bearing value at 10 feet.
-13 -
lt
t:
t:
lr
t:
JII
t
I
I
I
I
I
T
one exception to this was in the area of Test Boring No. 4 where a
soft, wet lens h,as found between T-L/2 and II feet and the soils in
this lens had quite a low bearing value. The three soil types found
on the site are reported herein as separate soils. None of the test
borings extended beneath 40 feet and most of the foundations on the site
will be placed in the upper Io to 15 feet of the profile. Several
test borings were extended to a depth of 40 feet in an effort to deter-
hn" the depth of the basalt at those points.
The first soil type reported is a silty clay
which contains some fine grained sands and usually contains large
amounts of rock fragments. This material was found at various eleva-
tions on the site, although it appears to be more common at greater
depth. The second soil type is a lean clay which contains a lagge
amount of silt and some sand and gravel sized material. These two soils
are quite similar and Soil Type No. 2 also has a tendency to contain
rock fragments scattered throughout. Engineering charaeteristi.es of
the soils are somewhat different, so the soils are reported as separate
types. The third soil type is a lean elay of finer grain size and of
higher plasticity. This material is a true clay and is found mostly
near the surface of the ground. This is a very highly weathered ma-
terial and very few rock fragments h,ere found within this cla1z. More
precise engineering data for these soil types is shown on the attached
summary sheets. The forrowing discussion is general in nature.
SoiI Type No. I is a silty clay of relatively
fine grain size. This material is of low plasticity, of low to medium
permeability and generally of medium density. rt has a very mird
- r&*
I
T
T
I
I
T
T
I
I
T
I
T
T
t
T
T
T
t
tendency to expand against light loads upon the addition of moisture.
The amount of this tendency is not sufficient to affect structural por-
tions of the buildings, but may affect floor slabs on grade or other
flatwork, if these are directly in contact with the soil. This soil has
some tendeney to long term consolidation, but this will be negligible
if the bearing values given in the report are net exceeded. The bearing
value of this material at a depth of 5 feet below the existing surface
of the ground was found to average 2400 psf maximum and 400 psf minimum.
At a depth of 10 feet, ttre bearing value h,as found to average 3OOO psf
maximum and about 400 psf minimum. In the compacted state, at a density
of 95% of the maximum Proctor density, ASTM D-698, the soil h,as found
to have a bearing value of 4OOO psf maximum and 500 psf minimum, pro-
vided a cover of at least 3 feet exists above footing level. This soil
was found to contain sulfates, but not in detrimental quantities.
Soil Type No. 2 Ls a silty clay which contains
some sand and gravel, mostly in the form of rock fragments. Thie ma-
terial is of low plasticity, generally of low permeability and of medium
density. This soil also has some tendency to expand upon the addition
of moisture. The amount of this tendency is not high and will not affect
structural portions of buildings unless they are extremely light. It
will affect floor slabs on grade and other flatwork, if they are di-
rectly in contact with the soil. This material has some tendeney to
long term consolidation, but under the proposed loadings, tlis will be
negligible. Its shearing value is reasonably high, so that stable
foundations can be designed for the site, even though they are on guite
steep slopes. The bearing value of this material in the native state,
!-I 5-
l:
h
h
h
h
h
Ir
!r
ItrI
T
I
t
T
T
at a depth of 5 feet, was found to be 3800 psf maximum and 500 psf
minimum. At a depth of l0 feet, the bearing value was found to be
4500 psf maximum and 600 psf minimum. In the compacted state, at a
density of 95% of the maximum Proctor density, ASTM D-698, the bearing
value of this material was found to be 6000 psf maximum and 700 psf
minimum. This soil contains sulfates, but not in detrimental amounts.
Soil Type No. 3 is a lean clay of much finer
grain size than either of the other two materials. This soil is plastic,
of low permeability and.generally of medium density. It has a tendency
to expand against medium loads upon the addition of moisture. The
amount of this expansion could affect lightly loaded members of the
structure and will certainly affect floor slabs on grade or other flat-
work, if they are placed on the soil. This soil also has a mild ten-
dency to long term consolidation, but this will be negligible if the
allowable bearing values given for this scil type are not exceeded. The
bearing value of this material at a depth of 5 feet, in the native Btate,
was found to be 3000 psf maximum and 800 psf minimum. At a depth of
10 feet below the surface, in the native state, the bearing value was
found to be 3300 psf maximum and 9OO psf minimum. In the reeompacted
state, dt 95% of the maximum Proctor density, ASTM D-698, the bearing
value was found to be 4500 psf maximum and IOOO psf minimum. This soil
contains some sulfates, but not in detrimental quantities.
the site was rather
high. Some areas of
that seepage may be
The moisture content of all the poils on
variable, but, for the most part, is not partieularly
seepage moisture were found on the site, indicating
expected near the various intermittent stream areas.
_t6_
T
T
T
T
T
I
t
I
T
T
T
T
I
T
T
I
I
I
t
One area in Test Boring No. 4 was particularly wet and near saturation.
This is either an area which is affected by the underflow of an inter-
mittent stream or it is a trapped water pocket. In either event, water
might be found in excavations in this vicinity. Over most of the rest
of the site, free water will probably not be a great problem in the
existing condition.
Since all of the soils on the site are sensi-
tive to the entry of water in one way or another, drainage control will
be quite important on the site. Future lawn irrigation could add water
to the subsurface soils, causing mild expansion, Ioss of shearing re-
sistance and, on very steep hillsides, could cause some soil flow. This
must be avoided after the subdivision is completed, so that the drainage
control will be quite important on the site. Recommendations are given
in this report concerning eonstruction of buildings to reduce the
effects of changes in moisture content and to recommend proper drainage
procedures around the proposed structures.
sorls & FouNpATroNS - coNC!-usroNs & RECoMMENpATTONS:
At the time of writing this report,
personnel of the Laboratory have not seen plans for the proposed build-
ings which will be plaeed. on the site. Indeed, the plans probably do
not yet exist. The Laboratory has been told that, except for sbme
commercial structures on one tract of the site, most of the buildings
will be residential units, either of the single family variety or of
the townhouse type. Sueh buildings will range from one to two stories
in height and will probably be eonstructed both with and without basemente.
-L7 -
I
I
t
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
T
I
t
I
I
Even though a multi-story building is proposed, most buildings which
are not over four stories are of medium weightr so that there will be
no major differences in foundation types on the site. In general, al-I
such building designs consist of fairly uniformly loaded, wall bearing
structures with some isolated center columns or bearing partitions.
1his is the type of building which witl be assqftred for this rePort.t
eonsidering medium weight structures of this
type and the soil profile over most of the site, the most common foun-
dation type wiII be that of spread footings of either continuous or
isolated design. Since most of the soils on the site are only mildly
expansive, spread footings can be designed to place Pressures on the
soil within the maximum and minimum bearing values given in the rePort'
In some cases, with very lightly loaded single story buildings, it may
be that a no footing, or grade beam on grade, type of design will be
used rather than the spread footing. The design of such a beam on grade
is essentially the same as that of a spread footing, so that the recom-
mendations would be fundamentally the same for each. If any of the
buildings are designed as post and beam tyPe structures, the isolated
pad foundation would probably be more economical. Here again, the
desrqn or an isolated pad system is essentially the same as that of a
spread footing system, so that aII of these foundations will be con-
sidered together.
Two other type of foundation systems are
possible in the area. The drilled pier and grade beam system could be
used on the site. It will be rather uneconomical, however, since the
top of the formational basalt is quite hard and caissons cannot be
-18-
I
I
I
I
I
T
T
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
extended into it. Sueh caissons would depend for support on the upper
weathered materials. These soils have fairly good lateral support,
but since the upper soils will basically support the buildings anlm,ay,
drilled piers are uneconomical when compared to spread footings. The
second foundation type which might be used on the site is that of a
controlled man-made fill. Such a fill may be required on parts of the
site, merely to level the ground sufficiently to place a building
thereon. On ground with slopes of less than L5%, there is no major
objection to such a fill used for leveling. On slopes above L5%,
special procedures would be required for such fiIls. In any event, a
controlled man-made fill could be made of any of the materials so long
as the appropriate bearing values are used. The design of the foundation
on such a fill would be essentially the same as that on the native
ground, except for the different bearing values. If it is properly
placed, the man-made fill has the advantage of increasing the bearing
value of the soil over the native state and of making this bearing value
more uniform over the building site. If such a man-made fill is used,
it must be properly constructed and carefully controlled. Precise
specifications for such a fill are not given in this report, but can
be supplied upon request.
In general, the soils are of low expansive
qualities and do not have ahy--major tendency to long term consolidation.
The minor expansion of most of the soils would require some splciaf
floor slab on grade design, but would not affect the structural portions
of the buildings to any great degree. If the buildings are plaeed on
spread footing or no footing type foundations, they must be designed
-19-
I
T
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
lr
lr
lr
lr
lr
l,
lr
for the bearing capacity of the soil upon which they rest. The bearing
values for each of these soil types are given within the previous section
of this report and on the summary sheets, and should not be exceeded by
the normal total load of the building. It should be noted that an
additional 5OO psf may be added to these bearing values given, to resist
loads which are temporary in nature and will last less than 72 hours.
This would include wind loadings and some snow loads. The total bearing
valuesr ds given on the summary sheets, plus this 500 psf should not be
exceeded at any time by the total load in the building. On those soils
which have a minimum dead load required, the dead load of the building
must exert this pressure on the soil to prevent the exPansion of the
soil beneath the foundation"
Due to rather considerable variations in the
soil eharacteristics over short distances, it must be recommended that
spread footings be relatively welI balanced around the structure. In
this manRer, the building will place essentially the same pressure on
the underlying soil at all points around the exterior walls. If a
spread footing or isolated footinglis used, these footings eould be
widened or narrowed rather easily to change the loads on the underlying
soil. If a no footing type of foundation is being used, voids could
be placed beneath lightly loaded stem walls so that the load could be
eoncentrated on smaller areas of the wall. Considering a single or
two-story structure with a basement, the criterion for balancing should
be the dead troad of the structure plus about one-third the live load.
If the building is a single story strueture without a basement, the
criterion for balancing would be the dead load only. Using whichever
-20-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
t
t
of these eriterion is applicable, the foundations should be balanced
within about 400 psf at aII points beneath the exterior walls. Iso-
Iated interior footings should be balanced for loads about 200 psf more
than those used on exterior walls. This will compensate for differences
in foundation shape and for the center expansion of the soil which wiII
be rather characteristic of this site. A balance of this type is not
always possible with some loadings, but a reasonable balance should be
maintained throughout all structures on the site.
Regardless of which foundation type is used
on the site, the concrete stem wall above the footings or pads should be
designed as a grade beam. This grade beam should be capable of BPanning
at least L2 feet, in the case of the continuous footingr or the distance
between isolated pads, with that type of foundation. This grade beam
must be continuously reinforced around the structure with no gaPs or
breaks unless they are specially designed. Reinforcing should be
at both top and bottom of the grade beam. In the case of basement
structures, the top of the grade beam can be considered the bottom
Line of the basement so long as a beam of at least 4 feet in depth
placed
window
mains beneath the window. On this particular site, the reinforcing
should be balanced between the top and bottom of the beam.
on the steeper hillsides, vertical rein-
foreing will probably be required, particularly in basement areas' This
is partially to resist the pressures of the surrounding soil and parti-
aIIy.to prevent lateral movement within the building. For the purposes
of designing this vertical reinforcing, the equivalent fluid Pressure
of Soil Type No. I and No" 2 ean be taken as 46 pcf, active state. The
-2L-
T
t
I
I
t
t
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
t
active state.
foreing unless
Square isolated
pads.
equivarent ftuid pressure of soir Type No. 3 can be taken as 54
Footings beneath the stem walls wiII not require
wall surface more than 8they extend out from the
column pads should, of course, be reinforeed as
In one h,ay or another, the uPPer soils on
the site are sensitive to the entry of water. Mostly, they are slightly
expansive. Ilowever, with the addition of large quantities of water
some of the soils might tend to shear or lose lateral strength to some
degree" Overa1I, the total movement should be relatively small, but
floor slabs on grade are very light and any movement may be sufficient
to crack the slab if it is not properly designed. Slabs on grade should
be separated from the structural portions of the buildings and aLlowed
to float freely. Special design will not be,E€guired beneath non-bearing
partitions, except on Soil Type No. 3. In this case, a void should be
placed within the non-bearing partition, so that the movement in the
floor slab would not be transmitted to the floor or roof above. The
best loeation for such a void would be at the bottom of the partltion,
but it may be placed at the top if some dry waIl damage can be tolerated.
Bearing nar$ltion" should not be placed on the floor slab on grade on
a thickened section, but should be placed on separately designed foun-
dations or pads.
Sand or gravel pads should generally not be
are of trovu permeability.
Pcf,
rein-
incheg.
two-way
used on this site,
If a pad iE used,
water trap beneath
since the underlying soils
it must be well drained so that it does 'not beeome a
the building. In the case of a basement floor slab,
-22-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
T
I
drainage might be quite difficult and it is generally recommended that
such a slab be placed directly on the native soil, rather than risk the
possibility of forming a water trap. since no true free water exists on
the site, a capillary break wilt not be required beneath structures. It
must, however, be recommended that a vapor barrier be used beneath any
floor slab on grade, particularly if it rests below the exterior grade'
To avoid the placement of exeessive amounts of water into the soilt
dry wells are not recommended on the site'
Surface drainage of this site will be ex-
tremely important due to the sensitivity of the soil. water must be
removed rapidly from the area of the structures and not allowed to
stand or pond around the buildings, particularly in backfilled areas'
Dralnage from one building should not be directed at another. ALl drain-
age shoutd be carefully designed so that water is removed frOm the area
of structures rapidly and is not allowed to infiltrate the ground in
excessive quantities. Roof drains should be carried across backfilled
areas and drained weII away from the building. The test borings in-
dicate that free water should not be found in any of the sites. If any
free water is found in an excavation, however, of if surface drainage
eannot be accomplished property, a perimeter drain wilL be reguired
around the foundations of the structures, Such a perimeter drain must
be properly constructed and should consist of a drain piPe, a gravel
collector and a sand filter. The drain Pipe must be connected to a
free outlet.
To aid in removing water rapidly and to give
some lateral stability to the structures, it is recommended that all
-23-
I
t
I
I
T
I
I
I
t
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
t
I
t
t
I
I
t
backfill around the buildings and in utility trenches leading to the
buildings be compacted to at least 90% of the maximum Proctor density,
ASTM D-698. The native soils on the site should be used for this back-
fill and should be placed in lifts of not more than I inches after com-
paction. Each lift should be compacted by.tnechanical means at approxi-
mately the optimum moisture content of the soil. No backfill on this
site should be ponded, puddled, soaked or jetted.
None of these soils were found to have ex-
cessive amounts of sulfates and there was no free water in the uPper
soils on the site. Due to,this, it ean be recommended that all concrete
in contact with the soil be made using Type I Cement.
One major variation exists on several of the
lots. A few lots contain slopes which are extremely steep and will
require special design for the foundations in order to avoid lateral
shear or slope instability. The design of these foundations will depend
entirely on the design of the upper structure. In general, however, it
is recommended that the foundations for buildings on these few lots be
designed with numerous cross ties so that the foundation will act as a
fairly rigid box. Under some circumstances, the floor slab eould be
incorporated with the surrounding walls to act as a diaphragm between
the waIls. In any event, structures on sites of this type should be
very rigidly constructed so that minor movements will not affect the
structure to any great degree. Special designs are possible on the sites,
but sites with slopes of greater than 20% should be indigidsblly in-
vestigated to insure than no specific lateral instability exists at
the present time and also to insure that the foundation design will act
-24-
;
I
I
I
in concert with the soils on a slope of this type' Bedding planes of
the soil, if BhYr the presence of rock on the steep s}ope, etc., would
all be faetors i.n the final design of the building' compaction' parti-
cularly on the downhill side of the building wilt be required to be much
more dense than on other sites of the tract'
Specific paving studies were not made on the
upper soils on the site. In general, these uPPer soils are rather Poor
sub base materials, however, with Hveem values of less than I0'
Assuming a traffic index of 4.5, which would be normal for subdivision
streets of this tyPe, a gravel base course of at least 11 inches in
thickness is indicated to properry support asphart paving and alrow the
street a long life. Lesser amounts of gravel may be uSed' of course'
but would shorten the tife of the asphalt accordingly' It must be
recommended that utility trenches beneath streets and the sub base and
base course beneath the streets all be compacted to 95% of the maximum
proctor density, ASTM D-I557. Here again, such compaction should be
done by mechanical means at approximately the optimum moisture content
of the soil used. No soil on this site should be compacted by jetting'
ponding or flooding.
t:
lr
lr
lr
lr
t:
-25
I
lrrl
t
of
I
T
T
I
I
I
I
I
T{AEER SUPPLY:
It is proposed that this subdivision be
supplied with water via a community system utilizing a werr and a
storage tank. The, werl itserf has been drirted in Block r, Lot 7,
This werl was drilred to a total depth of 325 feet, with water being
found at 3oo feet' Hydrostati-e pressure rifted the h,ater lever in
the well to a depth of 24o feet. rt has been reported to the.Labora-
tory that this welr was pumped for 24 hours at a rate of 26 ga110ns
per minute, and that the drawdown of the water table was 5 inches. A
sample was colrected from this welr by Tri-co Management, rnc., .and
was sent to the Laboratory for testing. Results were as follows:
Turbidity
Color_CobaIt ScaIe
Arsenic
Cadmium
ehromium
Fluoride
Lt*1y d.o{ Lead
Selenium
Barium
Rec. Lo,r do I CYanide
Total hardness
Calcium
Magnes ium
Total solids
Specific conductance
Copper
Zinc
Iron
Manganese
Chloride
Nitrate
Sulphate
On the basis of these tests, it
grood quality for domestic uses.
The source of
Vesiculan basalt
0 units
0 units @ pH 7.3
0.009 ppm to trace
0.009 ppm
0.0I ppm to trace0.75 ppm
0.05 ppm
0 to trace
0 to trace
0.01 ppm
22O.O ppm
130.0 ppm
90.0 ppm
316.0 ppm
5L2.5 Micro MHOS,/cm
0" 10 ppm
0.60 ppm
0.O2 ppm
0.02 ppm10,0 ppm1.3 ppm22.0 ppm
can be said that this water is
aquifer in the basalt.
this water is a
Iava flows tend
sub-artes ian
to be
-26-
H
lr
l:
lr
Ir
lr
Ir
T
t
excellent aquifers because of the innumerable fissures and cavities
which exist in them. If these openings in the rock interconnect, they
form virtual "pipelines" for giroundwater. When a system of openings
in basalt'happens to connect both a water source and a wel}, excallent
results can be expected. Some of the largest springs and most Pro-
ductive wells in the world are found in basalt flows of this tyPe. In
this particular we11, the sub-artesian hydrostatic pressure and the
almost insignificant drawdown measured in the pumping test both indi-
cate that this well is capable of producing far more than the proposgd
26 gaLlons per minute. For the same reasons and others, it is the
Laboratory's opinion that this source of water will be quite dependable,
E'rom the available information, it is impossible to calculate exactly
the long term effects of pumping this well upon the aquifer; it is
likewise impossible to determine the actual source of the water ind
the effect on the aquifer of further land development in the area. A
highly detailed hydrogeologic investigation of the entire region would
be required to determine this information, and such an investigatlon
is probably not necessary. There is little doubt that the aquifer can
meet the water needs of the proposed subdivision at the rather reetricted
pumping rate of. 26 gallons per minute without significant damage.
Furthermore, a study of published weII records indicates that few, if
anyr other wells tap this particular aquifer. In the event that more
wells are drilled into this aquifer and the aquifer is overpumped,
ample warning of approaching problems will be given in the form of, a
general lowering of the static water level in existing welle. Slrould
such a lowering occur, it would then be appropriate to conduct the
-27 -
t
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
t
T
I
I
I
I
I
t
T
T
T
extensive regional hydrogeologic stuciy to determine the ultimate water
supply capacity of this aquifer for planning purposes. until such time,
though, as the area experiences considerably more groundwater develop-
ment, Do such problems wilt occur. The well eonstructed in the Pro-
posed subdivision is not in itself of a magnitude to signifioantly
affeet this tYPe of aquifer"
The owners of the proposed Kings Row Sub-
divi,sion have filed a claim for 26 gallons per minute of water frqm
this well with the water court for water Division No. 5 as case number
W*2:1g3, with an aPPropriation date of Juty 30, 1973, The Laboratofy
has been informed that thie appropriation is uncontested, and that
the deadline for the filing of protests is past'
Due to the fact. that this right,
awarded, will be very junior in nature, it is quite likely
of the water will depend on certain provisions made by the
avoid damaging already existing whter rights. The owner of
also possesses 78 shares in the Missouri Heights Irrigation
This company, which has 2492 shares outstanding, Possesses
the following:
Priofitv No"
12A
(from Mountain
568
Quantity
(aIso, all of the unappropriated flow of cattle creek)
Total QuantitY z 4319 acre feet
2823 acre feet December 28,
Meadow Ditch - Priority No. 149CC, May 3l't
1496 acre feet SePtember 3t
h,hen
that uae
owner to
the proPerty
Company.
right to
1911
1902 )
t947
hformation from the office of the division
Water Resources Department indicates thatengineer of the Colorado
-28-
I
T
I
t
I
I
IT
lr
lr
lr
l:
l:
2G0o acre feet of water was actuarry pertrritted to enter the spring Park
ReservoiroftheMissouriHeightslrrigationCompanyinLgT3.The
LabOratory was unable to determine the amount of water actually asgigned
to a share in this company. Irowever, considering the number of shares and
the amount of water, it aPpears that the owner's 78 shares could consist
of as much as )!f, ."r" feet, and that tI:ey actually consisted of 8I acre
feet in Lg73. ffiu Laboratory would' thereforer recommend that the
,}x; use of the proposed subdivision be carculated, and
that an augmentation plan be prepared and submitted to the l{ater court'
in which a part of the ditch water would be used to make up the consump-
tive use of the deveropment, thus avciling any damage to existing'water"-
I
Iiqhts.r-ql
SE9IAGE DISPOSAL:
It is proposetl by the owner that individual
sewage disposal systems be used in this subdivision' Percolation tests
were made by Gerard P"t"'=*""' P' E' of Survey Engineers' Inc"
commentedonbyJeromeGambarP"E'ofEl'doradoEngineeringconrpany'
After reviewing this information, the Laboratory is of the opinion that
individuar sewage disposar systems are feasibre on this siteG-$is
conventional septlc tank and leachi ti-eLd/well eYstemg should
Ja o. ""rai:l ,* is recommended that forced aeration-type tanks be
used to obtain a treated effruent, and that ttrip effruent be diepgsed
of in evapotranspiration fields to prevent the effluent from Leaehing
intothesiltyclaysoils"Suchsystemsaresomewhatmoreexpeneive
than simple septic tank systems, and they must be specifical}y engin-
eeredforeachsite.Acommunitydisposalsystemisprobab}yalpo
feasiable as an alternative'
t
I
I
I
t
T
I
T
T
I
t
T
T
T
T
T
t
I
T
SUM}IARY:
I. The tract of land, to be known as "Kings Row", is located 14 miles
southeast of Glenwood Springs, Colorado, in Sections 2L and 28t
Township 7 South, Range 87 West of the 5th P.M. ' and straddles the
boundary between Garfield and Eagle Counties. Topographically, it is
located in rolling hill country north of the Frying Pan River, aFd liee
entirely within the drainage basin of that river. Geologically, it is
underlain by vesicular basalt lava flows of Miocene to Pleistocene ager
and by a reddish clay soil, which is derived from the basalt and
contains caliche laYers.
2. Slopes are generally stable, with the exception of talus slopqs
below basalt outcrops and of cutbanks a1ong gullies, ThF Eoils
are generally stable. A few lots display excessively steep slopes;
a few lots (generally, the same lots) wilf have basalt at or near the
ground surface. The proposed streets and lots should be properly
drained. Due to the possibility of small earthquakes in the generaL
region, structures should be designed to withstand l-ow magnitude #U*at, .,
accelerations. Few bther problems will occur.
3. The subsurface soils are silty clays and are generally mild1y ex-
pansive. This expansion will affect very Iight members sueh as floor
slabs and some protective action should be taken to ensure that move-
ment in these slabs is minimal. As long as the bearing values of the
soil are not exceeded and the minimum loading is observed, spread foot-
ings or no footings may be used on most of the site, with no major
special design. Drainage precautions must be taken to avoid infil-
tration into the soil.
-30-
I A few sites with very steep slopes will require special design
I to avoid hillside creep or slope movement. Other than this, relafively
I
standard foundation construction may be used.
t 4. A community water system is proposed. A well has been drilled,
t and will supply water of good quality at a rate of 26 gallons Per minute,
I This well penetrates a substantial sub-artesian aquifer in the ve8icular
I basalt lava flow, and is cqpable of supplying the needs of the subdivision
t without undergoing significant damage. Rights to the water have been
- claimed, with the recent appropriation date of JuIy 30, L973. To avoidIdamage to existing water rights, it is suggested that an augmentation
I plan be developed and approved utilizing some of the 78 shares which the
I
owner poasesses in the Missouri Heights Irrigation Company.
5. Individual sewage disposal systems are proposed. Such systeme
I are feasible, provided that forced aenation tanks and evapotranspiration
- disposal fields are used.I
I
It is believed that all pertinenE ppinte
have been covered in this report. If questions arise, pleage feel free
I to contact the Laboratory at any time.
T
T
T
T
I -31-
T\
I
t
t
T
T
I
T
T
T
T
I
I
T
1.
2.
BIBLIOGRAPIIY
Bass, N. W., and Northrop, S.Ai 1963; Geology of Glenwood
Springs Quadrangfle and vicinity, Northwestern Colorado:
U. S. Geol. Survey Bulletin LL42-Ji pp. J6I-if-65.
Davis, S. N. and DeWiest, R. J. M.i L966; Elzdrog€blogy,
463 pp.
3. Donnell, ,J. R. et al; 1960; Geological Road Logs of Colorado;
Rocky Mountain Association of,Geologists; pp 76-77.
4. Mallory,
Colorado
Bulletin
W. W.; L97L; The Eagle Valley Evaporite, Northwest
-- A Regional Synthesis: U. $. Geol. Survey
I311-E; 37 pp.
5.Simon, R. B.; L972; Seismicity: Rock Mountain Association
of Geologists Geologic Atlas of the Rocky Mountain Region;
pp 48-51.
6. Author unknown i L964; Records of Wells in Colorado: Colorado
Water Conservation Board Basic Data Release #!-7.
I
t
T
T
I
T
I
T
t
I
T
T
I
T
T
I
T
I
I
T
T
t
T
t
t
o
TxIra'
\r r:d.
t
t
t
\
I
tsra
rl
_ _-__/_)\\t .-_/
\ ' -\. Pr.ot . '
it:\-\ -_
'\\ b_..
\ \ zaf+\
o
T,n.rrt
t tI.,L
! ,' \'-...-/ '',! .'{. \.->l- _'::Lr'-\-,r-i)
I-'-- -l- - -6
Coor.rrv Zaso
---nJ
AIo Scar-e
EA6LE Co._;_
9ABF|6LD Co-
fEsT Boe,tNc" LocerroN D,Aag,a-r,..
Ktnt6S Row Sug; *Eeq"e/GAerueup Cos.
tlNC0[N-DeV0RE TESTING LAB0BAT0RY
COIONAOO SPBINGS, PUEBLO, COLORAOO-ROCK SPRINGS. WYOMING
I
I
I
I
I
t
T
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
T
T
SYMBOLS & NOTES
Standard Penetration drive
ers indicate 9 blows to
e the spoon L2" into ground.
-L/2" Shelby thin wall
1e
Nhtural ![rcisture Content
Weathered or DecomPosed SoiI
Free water table
Natural dry densitY
-Disturbed gulk SamPIe
Soil tyPe related to samPlesin report
Top of formation
Test aoring Location
Seismic or ResistivitY
Station
Standard Penetration Drives are
made by driving a standard 1.4"
split sPoon samPler into the
ground by droPPing a 140 Ib.
r,,reight 30" . ASTM test des. D-1586 '
Samples may be bulk, standard sPIi
spoon (both disturbed) or 2-L/2"
I.D. thin wall ("ondisturbed")
Shelby tube samPles. See log for
type
) ,,,,
I r.rumb
I ari.,
J
==-t'',1,"
l^"
to' I
:l
lv.lr.s.
lo
,"' -, IEa*'I
o
+
I
Conrlcinations of
often used and
as sP,/sM.
these slzmbol-s are
are labeled e.g.
GM
GC
SYMBOL
GW
GP
SW
SP
SM
SC
ML
CL
OL
MTI
CH
OH
PT
DESCRIPTION
WeIl graded gravel
Poorly graded gravel
Silty gravel
Clayey gravel
Well graded sand
Poor1y graded sand
Silty sand
Clayey sand
s ilt
Lean clay
Organic sitrt
Elastic silt
Fat cIaY
(nigfr Plastic )
Organic claY
Peat
Hard formation
(any type)
Geologic symbol given
e.g. KP = Pierre Shale
LINC0IN-DeVORE TESTING LAB0RAT0RY
COL()RAO(I SPRINGS, PUEBLO, C(ITORAD()-ROCK SPRINGS, WYOMINGNOTES & SYMBOLS
I
I
I
t
Tesf Holc No.
Top Elevotion
z 3 I .r
C1-,
SrLTy
,-lED,rJr,4
DtxsrT)/
F,NEqrzArN
Cu
$tt_ry
4eplupt
DFN',ry
f/tz Loaaa-toA2 o^ALA Lo@
PlAsrtq
Cc
F,N6
ate.,.rN
14EDtot-l
1Q1,. Daxsroy
a.-tt.t2 Lar6
@ a PtAstr<
9o<z
Cu
Frxg
6,2*t^l
Lo.o?6/n_ tao
Cu
LaosE
--c-
Frzr.4
lSAz F,r.lE
Ao-D,br@eAtN@ow
Meototl
DENSITT
3olz
W,'Ooa-lo,g) ,
G)
- Lo.^)
Cr_
Pglsrrc-FE,,
Ex?axs
|-TEDtuA
l4aowu
D6,NstT)/
Loto Oo
Cu
Z%. IttNrr
\=o.tz Qzarx
@ o xo,sr
n Plepruvt
Dl€Nsfiy
%lu Loro
ua;,rr);''
eo<-E
Hottr
l4/z Pr-arna
ao:tt't r,^"
@) Ge.*trt
l-o.o
EY?Ai{StoN
tleDwq
9€Nstiy
l4otst'
D€^{S.?y
Cz-
SoFTt?/tz- ,.)ETa*llsl rcog) DE^tsrD/
-c.Stury
Soer
F,N6
6ean*
14Llc.c
oe,^J'e8/z Loqz
so/4t
10 Ao-so,t2z^r*
@
cMo$r
,6,t"fO
t-L/ct
e-c,ea
FE&M,E,NTf'
IOX BIS;A,ut
p6lcPLy Ox
tcer.zra:.co
5f D.eNse
DENSE
t-L
Dgx:e
5rury
,*,N€
Qeetx
Lou)
E.DE 15T5EdtcrrrAL
1Z-ea,
ML-lcu
Heowx
D6Nttry
Zaey-
CL-
ST.|FF'
t-lEOtoq
peN5ffy
'7,8, Sxxoy
o L€N,€s
e.a.-a
(u"s,
Fg-aa
;2o
Pce3tra
t4olsT
Ft^re
Qeat't
t 1ED,u4
DE,.ISITY
(-.1-
Motsr
Flxe
Qz-at*
4/,.
'.*o?20F
MEDlvl4
,460t,rH
Ee.arNo€E
Dx Basatr
Fe.eTDEap
oE.N5fi7
-*trt-.Deuse
Pa<z
'!/t, Elul<t-06N58
25 :lS,s2a .o FaNE E,eFotr.t- oxg,aaa
(vas,aarr..r)
4lrz
25
30
6e.a1ry
Lou)
PAAifl<
14EDtupt
DeNsfil
U)ETLayEz
Eocy
6"q
SrLTy
D€N'6
Lo,1)
?r-astr<
Flxe
6aarr,g
Dexse
MotsT
Za-z
30
Fg,saert,xri
35
Vey
DEA56
CAcctg,soos is
.4r Basarr
DaE"L/ ,.d.x4,
Fcx-to3.D
ve?-y Lout
P.-Atrr<HL/et
P6^rsG
gE7ForAL o.t
9ocz-(uss.Bas;.)4A 40
DRILLING LOGS LINCOLN-DeVOR E TE STI NG LABORATORY
COLORADO SPRIN GS.-PU E BLO, COLORADO
Test Hole No.6 7 a I lo
op Elevoiion
Cu
Flrre
_6rAtN
Llt^lcu
D€Ns6
?oez
Cu
F-txe,
6garrt
Cr-
ZEo
laCO3 41115--.-
DENs6
lZhz t-oo 0attolo3l zoee
MLI1L
Lou) b)o
t.4EOtO.4
354. Dertslry
9*,c? =,u.(? Qer,r
Laa
Pr.rr:nc
Lout
c._
SlLry
VEZY
9e^{se,
3/tzSO/.,. ,.4eDav,/'
oo-l1,r2Denst't
A o peasrr<
Lot;, tDo
LoaDeYTulgN
Mt-/ct_
,4ED'UL,I,lB, D€Ns,tY
O Lo,o 4)o
c.a'lc.n-e.
*,r?'"8.
st/4"
5 Fe^6r.t5Ar5
La..f
PcAsrr<_
Dexse,
@*?iu^o
-!,,r? 5
Eerutr*L or.a
E<tc-c-
La,o
Ex?trts to ttLad
?L^tI:t<(vcs,Bat^t.
27/12 D51s6lox Eesarr 22iz
4s9,9
ac
ExPAN5
Eoe*
Ot,t*7;
O -'wr6arAtr
VEzYp6N'C
PeE?Ly dr
tFz'r;rose>
T8,1010*. wto"te.t
vezy LEN'T-J
Loto
7L4snc-
EtNa
D6Ni6 l.leotut-t
"::'t"-Ct-
ts,N€
Qe-etal
?uatn4"
l<eDll:.pt
_E r"r_
Mt-/<.t-
Loto
Pr*sn<-
v6e,
DENStE
Morct
Zoc-y-
Ee,eosaru oN
%cz
(ves. Besrr)z,EEvtALoN6G..1t^,', kc.L 1515Cr-
5rL'ry Blsegr
Ityl
o
14t_leu
F,N6 .
Qeux
Meowu' PEMs,ry
Lo,a
Pr..q,rfi(
TB,
a 20
25 F
sBl4n
q6,o
23hVc-u
30 30
35 35
40 40
DRILL!NG LOGS LINCOLN-DeVoRE TE STI NG LABORATORY
COLORADO SPRIN GS-PU EBLO, COLORADO
I
T
Tcsr Holc No.
Top Elevotion
u te l3
Cu
LoaS6
Cg
3 tttr.
F,N€
Qaerr.l
H,Eotuq
D6N5try
Loto
PLAsir(
Cc
Lo.O
W6
t reotuJ4
"alraotn''n
c.A!.os cx
Cq
vezysrLl.y
,o2 fixeo Geanx
?uastt<
'Vz
w"7
'5
pE,NSE 5
I Noqec-vs
?ooz
NT,M13
Zo<-c 4.ercrtE
LGfNStts
t4eoto*t
D6^r5try
Lou>
Ex?aNsaod
I l4osr
ro I ?,...sr,-
721r,,Fercx liB,
@-8.+Z E,lENs,€10t Hae-oLayaq or
6e.xveu l.%c-a-ft.x,
Frxge,
6eerr.t
E€'FosALo,{
Poez(Vas. gesarr)
3t/rz
d;tL,t2
@'
t-tLhu.
Pexss
MoET
5A,{gr/
a6,.ts6-5
La.O
P-asrrc-
Fr{6
4aarx
z/rz
15 f t4sotupt w'7 15
OFNstI,r'
o
tutt_leu
lutsotut 4
Dt/l{S.T/
Margf
Frxe
Qz.etx
uLlcL
lt
y1
1+r
TiB,
o thl 20NoMek,.E
PaaE-
FEA6r.{C{\os
PEr,tsEur/.,
25 25
.30 30
35 is
40 40
DRILLING LOGS LINCOLN-DeVoRE TE STING LABORATORY
COLORADO SPRINGS-PU EBLO, COLORADO
t
T
I
I
T
I
t
I
t
t
T
T
l'
t
I
I
T
t
I
SUMMARY SHEET
Soil Sompl e - ML/CL Tesr No' 12429 Gs I18
Locqtion Kinqs Row Subd.:Eag1e,/Garf ield Co' Dote-
Boring tu.-9-.D"Pth 5'
s;ilf" N" Test bY
Noturol Woter Content (w) -I1.' 7 %
Specific GrovitY (Gs) 2 ' 0S tn Ploce Density (ro) 97.8 Pcf
Plostic Limit P. L- 2L.4 o/o
Liouid Limit L. 1- 3C.2 06
Fldsticitv lndex P.l. 8' 8 o/o
Shrinkoje Linrir 24'3 o/o
Shrinkoge Rotio
Volrtneiti" Chonge %
Lineql Shrinkoge- %
MOISTURE DENSITY: ASTM METHOD
Ootimum Arbisture Content - w9--96
lvLximum &y Density -Td-Pcf
Colifornio B6oring R6tio (9v)=--%
Swell, 1 - Foys-L,a--:%
Swell Lpsf Wo goin-}!&o
BEARING:
l-busel Penetrometer (ov) 2890= ' +sf
Uncon f i ned Compression (qu)-25-3-Q-psf
Flot" B"oring: Psf
lnches Settlement-
Consolidotion4 . Lo/o
PERMEABILITY:
under 4000 psf
K (ot 20PC)
Void Rotio
Sulfotes 250+PPM.
SIEVE ANALYSIS:
Sieve lrlo.
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS:
Groin size (mm)
i2" 1qg.9i - e%1 -to ?q*9
LINCOLN-DeVOR E TESTI NG LABORATORY
coLoRADo sPRl NGS, coLoRADOSOtL ANALYSIS
l:
lr
lr
lrll
l,
IT
SUMT\AARY SHEET
Soit Somptu Ct (verY siItY)Test No. 12429 Gs 118
Locotio Co. Dote 1 o/^ q,/7 4
Boring No.----Jt-Depth 8 '(^-^Io ru^
-2
Test bv tlrw/nrtu
Noturol Woter Content (w) 18.4 o/o
Specific Grovity (Gs) 2.gr ln Ploce Density (r.)---98. a-pcf
SIEVE ANALYSIS:
Sieve }.lo.o/o Possing
II
3/4 95.3-
lh" gs.o
2W 62.6
HYDROMETER AN,ALYSIS:
Groin size (mm)
loo o
lo _ 8J,4)n 84. 0
plostic Limit p.y- 22.4 olo
Liquid Limit L. y- 33.4 o/o
Plosticity lndex P.l.
Shrinkoge I
FIow lndex
Limir 17. 5 %
Shrinkoge Rotio
Volumefric Chonge
Lineol Shrinkoge
MOISTURE DENSITY: ASTM METHOD
Optimum lr4oisture Content - w9--7o
N4oximum
Colifornio
Dry Density -td-pcf
Beori no Rotio (ovl----------9o
Swell:
Swell
BEARING:
l-buse I Penetrometer (ov)--4! I 9---+sf
Unconfined Compression (qu) 4310 psf
Plote Beoring:psf
lnches Settlement
Consolidotior? . 9o/o under 4000 Prf
PERMEABILITY:
K (ot 20e
Void Rotio
Sulfotes 500+pPm.
Beorins *?11t^G')rij
SOIL ANALYSIS LINCOLN-DeVORE TESTI NG LABORATORY
coLoRADO SPRINGS, COLORADO
I
T
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
T
T
T
I
T
T
I
t
I
T
SUMIvIARY SHEET
Soil Somple CL Test No.
Dole
t2429 GS 1IB
Locotion Co'tL/4/7 4
Boring No.-
Somple No.
Deoth I0'
3 Test by MTW/RNM
Noturol Wofer Content (w) 13. 5 o/o
Specific Grovity (Gs)2.59 ln Ploce Density (po) 103. 3 pcf
SIEVE ANALYSIS:
Sieve lrb.
I
I
I
ll
3/4::
r/zy
200
-
99,4
HYDROMffER ANALYSIS:
Groin size (mm) o/o
.0200
.0050
51. 6
33.7
plostic Limit p.y- 20.5 o/o
Liquid Limit L. Y- 34*9 ob
Plosticity
Shrinkoge
Flow lnde
lndex P.l. 14.3
Limir 15. I %
Shrinkoge Rotio
Volumetric Chonge . o6
Lineo! Shrinkoge
MOISTURE DENSITY: ASTM METHOD
Ootimum lr4oisture Contenf - wL-,.--3o
lvloximum Dry Density -rd-,ocf
Colifornio g6oring Rotio (oy)=------96Swell' r Dora-.L96
Swell ogoinst t-9!-psf Wo goin.L2r996
BEARING:
l-louse I Penetrometer (ov)--3399--+sf
Unconfined Compression (qu) 3370 psf
Plote Beoring:psf
lnches Settlement-t"i,"irl"iioff.i@r
PERMEABILITY:
K (ot 20o
Void Rotio
Sulfotes 500+PPM.
SOIL ANALYSIS Ll NCOLN-DeVOR E TESTI NG LABORATORY
. COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO
ROBERT OELANEY
KENNETH EALCOMB
JOHN A.THULSON
DEr-eNrv & Barcortn
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
DRAWER 79O
GloNwoon Srnrwos, Colonlno ereot
March 6, L975
EDWARD AIA COLORAOO AVENUE
TELEPHONE 946.6646
AREA CODE 3O3
ROBERT C
sCOT" M.
GARTI-EID- .cg PUNNER
!{r. Larry Schmueser
County PlannerGarfield County Planning Department
20L4 Blake Avenue
Glenwood Springs, CO 81G0I
Re: Kings Row Subdivision
Dear Larry:
Please be advised that prior to submission of thefinar prat upon the above subdiviiion, Thunder River Rearty
company will convey all of its right, title and interestin and to the Thunder River Realty company werl, the subjectof Ruling of Referee and Decree of the-waler court forDivision 5 in W-2393, to Colorado Country's Kings Row, alimited partnership. The limited partneiship wirr thenconvey its interest in the water welr to the HoroeownerrsAssociation upon its formation under Colorado 1aw.
I thank you for calling this to my attention.
Very truJ.y yours,
DELANEY & BALCOME
MAR - ? 1975
& BALCOMB
JAT:bd
Dnr-e.Nnv & Be.r-corun
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
DRAWER 79O
Gr,rr.rwooo SrntNos, Colonapo etoot
March 3, L975
ROBERf DELANEY
KENNETH BALCOMB
JOHN A.fHULSON
EOWARO MULHALL, JR.
FIOBERT C. CUTTER
SC6TT M. BALCOMB
AIC] COLORAOO AVENUE
TELEPHONE 945.0146
AREA CODE 3O3
l{r. Larry Schmueser
County Planner
20L4 Blake Avenue
Glenwood Springs, CO 816 01
Re: Kings Row Subdivision
Dear Larry:
Enctosed please find copy of revised paragraph 15t
together with copy of Ruling of Referee and Decree of Court
concerning the Thunder River Realty Company WelI. Please
contact me as soon as possib3-e concerning the acceptability
of the amendment. If you wish further amplification, we wiII
be happy to furnish the same to you, but we plan to estabLish
a water system within the homeowners association which will
operate much the same as the Oak Meadows Water Association.
Very truly yours,
DEI.,ANEY & BALCOMB
JAT: bd
Enc.
lPF
llu
GARF
f\..1 -l tr, iLn 1,"
AR - 5 19/5
IELD CO. PLAili.JIR
15. Colorado Countryts K]NG ROW Homeowners' Association:
A nonprofi ts
of the property owners at Colorado Countryrs rings Row to
assume tfre- responsibil-ity of architectural control upon d,elegation
of such authority by Otrner and to regulate, manage and maintain
the supply of domestic water in Colorado Countryr s KINGS ROW.
Owner shalt be required to obtain from the Corporation aLl
domestic water. No water from any other source shalL be allowed
without the written consent of the Board of Directors being
first obtained. The water shaLl be delivered to each Iot through
a water distribution system with the regulation of flow of water
obtained either by the sizing of lines to each Iot or the
metering of the water delivered, or a combination of both.
Charges-for such water shall be sufficient to pay the cost
of obtaining the water from the well head source, distributing
the same, miintaining the distribution system and providing a
capital reserve for reconstruction of the system as necessary.
th6 owners of all parcels shall be members and shall be required
to maintain memberstrip in such Association and shall be entitLed
to one (1) vote for elch parcel owned and shall be required to
pay assessments Levied by the Association which assessments shalI
be-prorated equally among ttre parcels. If the owner or owners of
any parcel faiL, after demand, to pay any assessment levied by
the nomeownerst Association, then the llomeownerst Association
or Colorado Countryts KINGS RO![, whichever incurred such costs,
shall have a }ien, from and after the time of notice of such
faiLure to pay is recorded in the office of the County C1erk
and Recorder of nagle and GarfieLd Counties, Colorado, against
the parcel of such owner or owners for the amount due and not
paidl plus interest from the date of demand for palment at the
iate of six per cent (6S) Per annum, plus all costs and expense
of colLecting the unpaid amount, including reasonable attorneyrs
fees.
ru
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
E. N. HAASE
CHIEF ENGINEER
T
STATE DEPARTMENT OF H
CHAS. E. SHUMATE ' EXECUTIVE
STATE OF COLORADO
IGHWAYS
DIRECTOR
DISTRICT 3
R. A. PROSENCE
DISTRICT ENGINEER
. (303) 242-2Ae2
eglflel4_gguntf,
traffic condltions become crltlcal
highway through this area.
as rtEl Jebeltt intersectlon)
so. 97H sT. . GRANO JUNCTION, COLO. At50l
February 21, 1975
Mr. Iarry Schmueser
County Planner
Garfield County Planning Dept.
2014 Blake Avenue
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Ibar Mr. Schmreser:
This letter w111 srerve as anpllftcatton of our dlseusston on Pebruary
L9, L975, concernLng the tlro proposed sub-divislons ln Garfleld County,
namely Klngs Bow and Panorama Ranches, and their impact on the transport-
'_%ation cori:iilo?ii-in the area.
Ile would Llke to emphasize that the conJectures offered ln thts cor-
respondence rrere soltcited and are advisory Ln nature only and ere aot
lntended as presumptlve interJectlon by the Stste of Colorado into Local
affaire.
In our oplnlon the affected county roads are adequate t,o handle the
present trafflc plus the added volume whlch will be lntroduced by the two
gub-divisl.ons ln questl.on. l{e are basing this asstrnption on an estimated
500 vehtcle trtps per day generated by the 113 proposed lots. The maJor
portion of these trips will uttllze three county roads, speclflcally County
Roads 100, 102, & 103. Comparlng the relationshlp of these roads wtth SII
82 we offer:
Co. Road L00 & SB 82 (Comonlv referred to as rr0atherine Store'r lntersectlon)
It le quite probable that by the tine
at this location we w111 have a four-lane
(Bstlmated ln four or five years.)
CO. Road 102 & SII 82 (Comonlv referred to
Fb.B 24 tm
PLANNEB'
Thls intersection lras recentl.y tmproved
atlon lanes and should be adequate to handle
expanded to a four lane faclLlty.
with acceleratlon and deceler-
the addltlonal traffic unttl
continued... . .
/
CO. Road 1.02 and SH 82
This intersection is on
left turn Lane ls provided on
they may have to be added ln
duced at thls point rrarrents
-2-
the four-lane portion of SH 82. An exclusive
SH 82. No aceet-decel Lanes are present and
future years lf the additlonal trafflc lntro-
the expendlture.
It ls also reagonable to assume that as greater demands are placed on
the county road system, ln thls erea, several factors will have to be
constdered end commltments made to inprove the servlceabillty of the system.
For example, additlonal pavtng will be requlred to provlde dust-proof sur-
faces, posstble restabllization and reconstruction of existlng roads Lf
deterlorat{on occurrs wlth the lncreased trafftc especialty heany constructlon
equlpment. All roads ehould be speed zoned and proper traffic control devlces
tnstalled to provide for an orderly and safe traffic flow on the system.
Widening proJects will almost be a certainty as the flow-density lncreases.
We hope the above connents prove useful ln your endeavor to provlde an
efficlent and safe road system and lf we can be of further assistance, please
1et us know.
Very truly yours,
R. A. PROSENCE
DISTRICT ENGINEER
,DAVID B.
DISTRICT SAFBIY & TNAFFIC E}TGINEBB
DBC:lnw
CC: Prosence-Leonard
Bovee
T. Arnold
Ilanson
f11e
il,
EAGLE COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF PI"ANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
Eagle County Annex
P. O. Box 789
Eagle, Colorado
8163 1
20 February 1975
Phone 328-6338
To: Garfield Cbunty Planning Commission
Thru: Director of Planning
2014 Blake Street
Glenwood Spgs, Colorado 81601
Re:Kings Row Subdivision, Preliminary Plans
The Eagle County Planning Commission is advised that you may reconsider the plan
and wishes to restate the requirements by Eagle County for the portion of the proposed
subdivision that lies within Eagle County, especially the requirement that lot lineswill conform to the County boundary. When the developer proposes to plat that
portion in Eagle County, the Eagle County Board of County Commissioners will require
the lot line conformancerso the entire design may as well reflect that now.
A copy of our letter to you of 19 September 1974, is attached.
ir ft,sspgglfully,
furil,*A -f.3,1*L
Michael S. Blair
Director
MSB/kt
cc: Board of County Commissioners
l )!i;'./ \
. '.-rl, . ..' 'lt-1 : I I
i ir f ;.i' ;'1, ,:l ll.u .\ liii
/.,'i r;. r. l! "\.. i
i).,, ,. -',,1 x ?iil
,i rr,1;lC, :.'ielclrado
(i 1 0-"i1
19 ,llepternber 1974
V" ,.i.,_lll.".f
,'liel:;: 3Al-.C338
ts).
Ivlark L. .Ile*r
Oarfiekl Countl !'}lanning Departr'ent
Glenl,;oo<l lirrings, Colorticio 816n1
il,e: i'ilngs iir:w Siul>dlvlslon i]e-62-74
Lloar Lrark:
,,,.tt thelr reguler meeting on,lientcmber 18, the tiagle Corntl, I'la:rnlng Llornrnlsslon
reviewecl thc proposcC prelirnina"::]' n].::n frr the centtonrcl :rrojr;et. Thls revlew
ls purausnt to an si;reemcnt bct'r'eer: Cn:'ficlcJ en;1 '.4'ilc'-'cr':.i,icri,Jntcd 2.il Ila3,'19?4.
The i'lalnlng Cornrnisslon has the follor,'.,ing corrntents on the plen, o:; nresentcd:
- all relctnnt lot lines n:ust conforr.r, to the county line b'lsoctin; the proJect.
,/ -" 6ii of the lanrj'(o4 carh llalue thorcof ) in iinglle County nnuEt Lre iedlcated
to the apnropriate sehr:ol L:istrlct.
- a road maintenauce sgree;rent must bodrawnbetween our tvro countles,
api:lieal,Ie to the short rorrJ spenino l:.4;;1e County
the drain&ijc report ls not ftdeituate because;
ct- - lt cloes not iCentify tlie draina.;e bnsins used in,,i: calculations
- elralnai;e is irropcsei! to be handlecJ by exir:ting i:,'ri;;ation ciitches
nnri nrinirrrsrl roarlriirle dralna.6;e. The u.se of lrrig:ntion rli",.ches to
handle storm runoff is not recornmendetl unless the ditches are
0,L re-designed to occcllr-,1]lorlnte ceicula.tecl runoff volurcs, w'ithout
Jeofrnrcllz.in4 dorvn-;,,1,"ennr rJitches. The 0.5;, grr.cje for nortlons of
thc roac! rvill rrot h,i.ndie drainafie v,{tlrout extenslve culvertlng a.ncl
e&sen:cnt to gc.t the rlrsinage away frorn tlie r.oacibcd
- thot the final pl*t ior the l,a;;le C:ounty nortlon be subJe ct to the
cntire finnl plrrt r'evierv procelis as shorvn in i-ogle Coultyts;:ub-
rlivir;ion iiogul ations .
These recornmcndatlons wlll be presentecl to the Board of County Cjommlssioners
ai thelr rneetlng on 26 Septomber 19?4, beglnnlng at 9:00 rt.hi., and any reeultlng
commdnts.rvlll be forwarded to your offlce for conslderatlon ln your review.
If you have nny questlons, pleaee contact thts offlco.
Slncerely,
Quontln irlltchelll Jl".
Plonnlng rt, sslstant
FEB 14 1975Dnlallpv & Ber-cor*tn
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
DRAWER 79O
GLrwwooo Senrros, Cor-one'oo aroot
February 13, L975
81601
EIE COLORADO AVENUE
TELEPHONE Q46'Q546
AREA COOE 3O3
PIANN6R
ROtsERT DELANEY
KENNETH BALCOMB
JOHN A.THULSON
EDWARO MULHALL,JR.
ROtsERT C. CUTTER
SCOTT M. BALCOMB
Mr. Larry R. Schmueser
Planning Director
Garfield County Planning Department
20L4 Blake Avenue
Glenwood Springs, CO
Re: Kings Row Subd,ivision
Dear Larry:
At the time I forwarded to you my letter of Eebruary
12th, L975, I was of the opinion that the public hearing to be
held on lr[arch 10, L975, would be ].imited to matters contained
in our petition for reconsideration. After having now discussed
this malter with you and Jerry Hartert at length, I now realize
that the public hearing will concern itself with any and all
matters which could have been brought up at the first public
hearing.
In my conversation with you this date, I was not
clear as to what your position will be with the Commission.
I assumed. that your letter of January J-7, L975, recommending
non-approval of Kings Row stated aLl of the reasons *ty you
recommended against approval. You indicated on the phone
that there might be additional reasons and I requested that
you furnish these to rne. P}eage consider this letter as being
a request by me on behalf of the subdivider that you set forth
all reasons why you feel the Kings Row Subdivision should
not be approved.
We would be happy to meet with you at your convenience
and discuss any and all problems and matters which you feel
are an impediment to your approval of the preliminary plan.
very truly yours,
DEI,ANEY & BAI,COMB
JAT: bd
GARFTELD trtrUNTY
PLANN!NG DEPARTMENT
GLENWOtrD SPRINGS, COLtrRAOtr Bl60l
PHONE 943-EJ212ztr14 BLAKEAVENUE
Februarg 77, 7975
ITEUO rc FILE
A petition fiot reconsicleration was heard on Februatg 70th and
a motion was made and unanimousTg carried that reconsidetation
wouTd be given anil a pubTic hearing to be heTd on March 70th,
797 5.
_.i
GARFIELD trtrUNTY
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
GLENWtrOD SPRINGS, EOLtrRAOtr Bl60l
PHONE 945-A21220I4 BLAKEAVENUE
februarg 70, 7975
TO: BOARD OY COUNTY COMMTSSIONER,S
FROM: GAR?IELD COUNTY PI,ANNING DEPARTMENT
RE: King's Rcrr,t Stsbdivision (status as of ?ebruarg L0, 7975)
Gentlenen:
ilhe King',s Rorrr Subd.ivision was refened to fhe PTanning Cottwrission
ulnn sketch pTan approvaT dtn Mag 20, 7974, bg the Boatd of countg
Cownissioners.
Prelintinarg Plan infornation was teceived bg the GarfieTd Countg
Planning Departu:rlnt, on Augrust 79, 7974. Pteliminarg pTan
infornation was subnitted to the Reyjerv Agencies on Septenhet 9,
7974.
As tlre information submitted. was not compTeted., nore infozntation was
requested bg the CoTorado GeoTogical Suttteg, Division of Watet
Resources, and aTso the Plartning Depattnent-
Otz Octobet 8, 7974 a Tetter was teceived. ftom Mr. John Wix trnst7nning
the preliminarg plat public hearing from October to Novenibet.
The plat Cownittee tnet on Deceniber 77, 7974 and an on-site teviest was
nade on Decedber 74, 7974, at that tine this cotwnittee recorarended that
the prognsed deveTopnent conte before the fu77 Planning Comnission on
Januarg 73, 7975
At the public hearing of Januarg 73, 7975 it was noved. that the L5 itag
review period be used, as aTTowed for in the Subdivision Regalations
anit this discussion be continued. Januatg 20, 7975 in the Mowttain Vi*t
BuiTding.
On Januarg 20th the attached reflp was submitted to the PTaruting Comnission
and these were Er.rtiaT gtounits ugnn which the King's Ror,t Subdivision was
dqtied.
A petition fot teconsideration of fJtis subdivision was received on Januatg
27, 7975. Anit tltis wi77 be djscussed bg the Planning Comnission tonight,
Februarg 70, 7975.
LRS/KAg
$ttachnent
Verg ttuTg gours'
Lattg R. Schmueser
PTaruting Director
PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION
TO: Garfield County Planning Commission
FROM: Thunder River Realty Co., General Partner
of Colorado Country's Kings Row, a Limited Partnership
RE: King's Row Subdivision, Garfield and Eagle Counties
For the reasons and upon the grounds as hereinafter
stated, it is respectfully requested that the Planning Commission
of Garfield County, Colorado, reconsider the decision to not
recommend for approval to the Board of County Commissioners of
Garfield County, Colorado, the above subdivision, which action
was taken by said Commission on January 20, L975. The reasons
and grounds for this request are as follows:
1. The motion to not recommend. approval of the sub-
division was based upon the recommendation to the Board by the
County Planner. The recommendatj-on of the County Planner was
based upon four items which were:
(a) Poor access. The County road upon which primary accessto the subdivision would be gained was described as attfarm to market roadtt.
(b) The manner in which the water distribution system wasto be governed did not meet the requirements of the sub-
division resolution.
(c) That all existing rights-of-way and easements were not
shown, particularly that of Holy Cross Electric Associat,ion.
(d) A water decree for the proposed water rights had notyet been obtained.
.
2. Section 3.07 of the Garfield County Subdivision
Regulations provides that the Planning Commission shall only
recommend for approval those p:reliminary plans which i.t finds
to be developed in accordance with the intent, standards andcriteria specified in these regulations. It further provides
that approval can be given conditioned upon the accomplishmentof any modifications necessary to meet the requirements of theregulations. The points relied upon by t,he County Planner,
except for primary access, can be met with little or no problem
whatsoever, thus bringing the subdivision within the intent
standards and. criterj-a specified in the regulations. These
objections can be remedied as follows:
(a) It is submitted that the provisions concerning
the lega1 entity to operate the water system has been
adequalely met as set forth in paragraph 15 of the
protective covenant,s for the subdivision, however,
whatever additional steps are deemed necessary in order
to establish the proper 1egal. entity will be met.
(b) A11 existing right-of-way and easements can
be set forth on the plat of the subdivision, however,
it is submitted that it is unnecessary for the reason that
Holy Cross El-ectric Association has advised the County
Planner that its power line will be removed and has platted
the new position of the Line.
(c) The Referee for Water Division No. 5 issued his
W-2393 that the water weIIruLing on December 11r. 1974 in
located in the subdivision be
The decree will be conditioned,put to a beneficial use within
Approval can and should be given to the subdivision with the
conaitions hereinabove set forth being noted uPon the plat
'as required by the subdivisions regulations.
3. The first item of objection by the county Planner,
pOOr access On a "farm to market rOadr " is an objection that
iras never heretofore been noted or made known to the subdivider.
At the time of sketch plan submittal nothing was said or communicated
to the subdivider thaC the primary road access r^Ias inadequate.
At informal sessions held between the ,developer or his agents
and the County Plannerr IIo objection was made that the primary
road access wls inadequate. At a meeting of the Plat Committee
of the planning Commiision of Garfield County held on December 11,
L974, and at which meeting the recommendations and statements
of the County Planner were sOlieited and taken, no mention
whatsoever wls made of inadequate primary road access to the
subdivision. At the public hearing held on January 13, L9751
no mention was made that the primaiy road access to the subdivision
was inadequate. At the fuII meeting of the Planning Commission
held on Jinuary 20, L975, the County Planner first revealed
to the developer that the prirnary road access was inadequate.
Additionally, the subdivider retained the services of the County
planner while he was not in the employ of Garfield County. While
in the emplov of the subdivider he advised the subdivider that
the subai-vision looked good and no mention whatsoeveli was made
about inadequate primary road access.
granted a conditionaL decree.
only upon the water being
a reasonable time.
-2-
4. That there are three primary access roads to
the property, a more particular description of which is set
forth in paiagraph I in letter addressed to this Commission
under date of January 13, L975 and signed by John Wix, President,
Thunder River Realty Co. (copy of which is attached hereto).
5. That of the three primary access roads to the
subdivision, the better of the three is the one generaLLy
known as the "Catherine Store Road".- This is the road understood
by the subdivj-der to be referred to by the County Planner
ai the "farm to market"road. It is submitted that this road
is as good a county road as exists in Garfield County. It
is submitted that the recommendations of the County Planner,
based upon this objection, is spurious.
6. The subdivision regulations of Garfield County
do not describe or define, in even the vaguest detail, what
is adequate or inad.equate primary access. The road is a dedicated
county road, is paved throughout most of its length, is adequateLy
graveled and drained, is utilized daily by the schooL buses
irom RE-} and otherwise meets every test of main arterial
off-highway county roads within the County. To now hoLd that
such a-county road is inadequate would be tantamount to holding
that no further subdivj.sions in Garfield County could be approved
that would gain their access on similar county roads. Such
a hoLding oi ruI-ing would be contrary to the subdj-vision regulations
and without foundation or bases in law or in fact.
7. Had lack of primary access been a real reason in
the mind of the County PLanner, it most certainly would have
surfaced before the ad3ourned public hearing on the preJ.iminary
p1an. Had this objection been raised at a timely date the
subdivider would not have expended most of the following sums
of money, all of which will be nonrecoverable if approval of
ttre subdivision is not allowed:
Water welL
Water pump
Percolation test
Engineering and drafting
Engineerj.ng and drafting(incurred but not paid)
LegaI
Total
$ 3,9r4.00
r r 301 .59
176.50(paid) L6,460.83
558.00
ggo.54flT,zrr.46
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully submitted that this
Commission reconsider its decision made on January 20, L975
-5-
and grant conditional approval of the subdivision and allow
the subdivider to meet the objections raised by the County
Planner and adopted by this Commission and over which the
subdivider has control.
Respectfully submitted this 24rtl day of January, L975.
DEI,ANEY & BALCOMB
By
Attorneys for Thunder River
Realty Co.
JAT: bd
"", Mr. Richard C. Martin r .Chairman, Planning Commission
Mr. Larry Schmueser, County Planner
Mr. Gerald Hartert, County Attorney
-4-
Ert n l\rErt rl'El.t4}.r-lrTr
c0t0RAD0 . 303/927-3942B0X I052 .
January
B A S A LT,
].:lr, 197,
John Martin, Chairman
. Larry Schnmeaer, Planner
20il1 gtake Avernre
Glenwood Sprlnge, CoLo. 81501
Re: Colorado CorntrYts Klngs Row
Gentlenen:
KindLy include the enclosed brief wlth the Klngs Row subdtvislon appllcatlon.
I neglected to present lt at Last nlghtfs publlc hearlng.
Whl1e technLcal expertlse ln studies and reports already submLtted properly
replies to the maJbrity of lay questions and obJeetions raLsed at the publlc
hearing, those aciusations prlsented by Attorney DeVillblss on behaLf of a
number-of landowners -- only one of whom is withln either sight or sound
of the proposed subdlvlslon -- are singularly biased, unsupportabLe, unfair
opinions tirat can on3-y be denled, with common sense the only supporting
argunent for deniaL. Values of land ownershJ.p are real, not ttil).usory.rr
"Flnanclngt' for homebullders ls avaiLabLe. Dlrect taxes and indLrect
beneflts of tUe productlvity of those who wilL rnake their homes in the
subr[ivision be]-le that it wiLl Ue an ltalbatrosst' on the neck of the
county or that it w111 neontribute nothLng.rt The suMivislon is belng developed
as a quallty f.iving area within the prlce reach of Roaring Fork area
resldents where only a very few of the tt20r000 other lots Like itrr
exLst.
Atternpts to represent Panorama Estates, in which I am a partner, aB an
unl-awi'ul subdivlsion bordered on the desptcable. The smallest parcel
conve3red there measures 20 acres. It ?ras eonveyed prior to Senate BiII
35. -Ott"r conv6yanees have been 60 acres, lr3 acres, 2lr acres and
61 ".""". The 2ir-acre parce1 was contracted for prior to Senate 8111
35 bV Robert D. Searrow in exchange for surveying serriees.
Thenk yor for your attention.
John Wix
EncIA
BASALT, COLORADO
BOX 1052 . 927-3942
ASPEN, COTORADO
BOX I83l . 925-2074
CARBONDALE, COLORADO
BOX G . 963-2877
GarfieLd County Plannlng Conmission
Thunder River was the Ute tndian name tor the Roating Fork
GAR?ITLD COI'NW PTANNTNG
Garf leld Cowrty Courthouse
Glenercrd Sptings, Co) orado
COilMTSSTON I,,EETING
order at 7:45 P.il. bg Chairtan,
Januarg 73, 7975
Dtck llg.rtln,?he reetjng was ca7Led to
Those in attendance uere.'
Dick Martin, Chalraan
bqae Green
Jack ltitcheTT
CarT Betnklau
Carter Jacksqt
llark Beamralcl
Jerrg Hartert
Iarrg Scfunteser
Bud lliTner
Ed FeTd
Brenda Ragnond
neeting were approved ars
preTiminarg pTat revi*t of
read. and tlre
Kingts Rou
Sore of the adjacent propertg.xrrers ware tepresented bC nt. DanlTblss
and ilt. DeviTbiss is to farnish the counisslon tith a stateatclrtt as
presented.
Aftet dlscussian it vas noved bg Devoe Gteen that a 75 daq tevi*t
period as aTToved in the subdjvisjut tegalatTon be used and it ras
scroncled bq l4r. Jack l{itchel7 and passed unanlnousTg.
The date estabijshd for thjs second neetinE was January 20th at 4:3O P.H.
in the llountain Vix aui).ding.
The next item for busjness was the presentation of the &rflel.d Corttty
Subdjrzjsion fnventorg and Evaluatiott as presented by Rabert nitkffikl
of the PTanning Department.
The minutes of the Decenlbet 9th
first item of business vas the
Subdivlsion.
A reprt to the Garfielcl
and the suggested cowtty
Schrnueser lyith djscussiryt
Countq PTanning Cormission on the status of Plr.n
-land use pTlcA for 7975 waa preaented by bttg
of the propnsed noratorium foTToulng.
-: .'
lii
',rt''
. r#ir i'lF"l
r. L .,,
.t
..;,
76
lrr. PhlT Schnrrck dJscussed the planned unlt deveTogrcnt
GarfieTd County arzd mirlrianted cr the .letter. ft uas llr.
that the flrst Letter was deflnttelg 7n error, atd tl:at
was received for revix.
resolutlon of
.sclrnuck's oplnlan
antlf.t lettar
tir. Rossi. of the CoTorado Land ttse Corlnnlssiqr revLsed Senate Bt77 35
Exemyttions ,vtd stated that t}ere seened to be ro problem ulth tha
vag that GarfieLd Countq was handllng these exemptions.
,i
tt lr.-. 'j
c, ,+:j.j
Eli','.
rJ
Page 2
lrr. Pat HaTligan , of the
on the annual budget and
Governrents for 1975.
Colorad<> Weat Are;t Council
staf f go.rls and obiectf Yes
of Governrnents rePorted
for Counci I of
The neeting was adjournecl
ttbuntain Vi* Bu i ldinq.
until Januarg 20, 1975 at 4:30 P.M. at the
Res;rectfu 7 7rl submitteq,
Acting .gecretarg
,. ;. ....:iJi?.i,...".
r'i ;';
.. . '1; tj''t j a l:,
rTI\TE]FT TTEA.I-TTr
B0X 1052 . BASALT, C0L0RAD0 . g0g/927-9942
January L3, L97,
,/
l:i&*ttlr-t-t
6ru"'' 'aJ1 ''..r.C*.-.JF
To: The
The
Garfield County Plannlng
Garfleld County Board of
Commission and
Commlssloners
ROtf, a subdlvislonSubJect: Colorado Corntryrs KfNGS
Road Access and possLble Lmpact on wildl-lfe
I. There
One ls are three prlnclpal aecess routes from Colorado Hlghway 82.
via the Crystal Sprlngs road. One is by the Cottonwood
Pass road, turnlng north at Cathertne. The thlrd ls north at EI
Jebel in Eagle county.
0f the three, it is anticipated that the Catherine turnOoff access
wtII be the one more.generally used. It ls both shorter and better
, than either of the other tuo routes. The distance from Highway 82
,ts four miles; all but one and one-half miles of lt ls aspha}t
surfaced. ft also ts the nearest route to Carbondale, which is the
area r.rhere most future restdents of the subdivlsion are expected
to work, shop anrl attend echool.
The EL Jebel- route ts appnoximatel-y one-half mile J.onger and ls
somewhat less comfcrtable to negotiate due to more curves and
both narrower and steeper secttons in the Fag1e county porti.on.
Honever, the section between El Jebel and Red Table Acres sub-
dtvlsion -- about tuo mlles -r !r&s olled in 197L which has
lmproved the access considerably.
The Crystal Springs route leaves Highway 82 Just east of the
gravel pit near the Stage Coach restaurant. ft ls approximately
two mlLes longer than the Catherlne route and ls not expected
to be generally used. However, it is an adequate aceess withottt
steep grades and provides both a seenic and good emergency route
to the subdlvlston.
ff. Remarks by the Colbrado Dlvlsion of Wtldllfe indicates the area
of the subdlviston as a deer corridor, I^Itth all due respect to
that publlc agency, it ls submltted that only a very occaslonal
deer uses the area as a pass-through route to better feeding
grorrnds tc the north. |,Irs. Bessie Fender, who hps resided
tmmediately adjaeent to Kings Row for more than forty yeiars,
evers that she rareLy sees a deer on the property nor on the
haylands north, south and west of the subdtvislon.
Thls wrlter has vislted the property at Least once e week since
December, L969, r^lhen it flrst was offered for sale. He has never
BASATT, COLORADO
BOX 1052 c 927-3942
ASPEN, COTORADO
Box t83l . 925-2074
CARBONDATE, COIORADO
BOX G . 963-2877fhuadcr Rlvcr w,t thc Uta ,ndira n,,mo lor tha Rorring Fort
Page 2 (fhgs Row access and wildllfe lmPact)
seen anythlng frorn the wildlife kingdom larger than a rabbit
on the property, and, indeed, has seen lLttle sign of deer on the
subJeet Iands.
A}though the land east of the El Jebel road and also i.mmediately
west of lt ls rmrch more heavily populated, tt Is evldent to even
a casual observer that the principal game corridor Iles between
t,lrere and Basalt !{ountain. Deer are commonly seen Ln that area
at all. hours and during all seasons.
Thls seems to substanttate what we who havd spent our entlre lives
1n uestern Colorado have observed, namel-y that the mere existence
of peopLe In an &rE& -- unless they are tmnters -- does not deplete
the'deir populatlon. By the sane token, feed for wildlife generally
is augmeniea Uy man-mad€ and nurtured slll:ubs, I-awns, gardens and
irrLgated pastures.
Respectfuly submttted,
OAzZ*
John inlix, Presldent
Ttnrnder River ReaItY Co.
TRI-CO Marlagement, lnc.'
Planning . Design' Surveying' Engineering' Construction
and Management of Land
January 6, L975
Larry Schmueser
Garfield County Planning
Department
20L4 Blake Avenue
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Box 1730
AsPen
Colorado 81611
303.925.2688
0Aflngio co, PI-ANNER,
Dear Mr. schmueser:
Enclosed please find the revised water storage calcula-
iiorrs for Kingrs Row Subdivision. I have also enclosed
a copy of our water distribution map with the new storage
figui6 indicated. We are sorry that-our previous figure
wa! inadequate. If further iniormation is needed on this
subject, please be in touch.
SincereLy yours,e@M
Gregg Johnson
WGf: rm
Enclosures
A Subsidiary of Trico Corporation . Offices throughout the West
TRI-CO Management, lnc.
Planning . Design . Surveying . Engineering . Construction
and Management of Land
January 6, L975
Larry SchmueserGarfield County Planning
Department
20L4 Blake Avenue
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Dear Mr. Schmueser:
Enclosed please find the revised water storage calcula-
tions for King's Row Subdivision. I have also enclosed
a copy of our water distribution map with the new storagefigure indicated. We are sorry that our previous figure
was inadequate. If further information is needed on this
subject, please be in touch.
SincereLy yours,
Box 1 730
Aspen
Colorado 81611
303.925.2688
JAN - 7 1975
e@M
Gregg Johnson
WGJ: rm
Enclosures
A Subsidiary of Trico Corporation . Offices throughout the West
KI NGS
DETERMI NATI ON
RON SUBDIVISION
0F ST0P./qGE REQUIREMENTS GARFIELD 00. PLANNER'
tle'll Capacity -- 26 gpm
Subdivision -- 49 lots
Estimated 3.5 persons/lot
Estimated total popu'lation -- 172
(A) tirt Storaoe
As per " Guide for Determi nati on"- of Requ i red Fi'ie Fl gry" , ( Insur-
ance Services Office, June 1972), the fire flow shall not be
less than 500 cpm. The suogested fire flow for a development '
of this nature is 500 gpm.
The "Gradinq Schedule for Municipal Fire Protection", (Insurance
Services 0ffice, 1973), calls for a reouired duration of fire
flow of 2 hours.
Assuming that the fire flow would be required at a time of
intemupted supp'ly, the storage should be:
(2)(60)(Soo1 = 60,000 gallons
(B) Donrestic Storage
Since fire storage should be maintained at all times, it shou'ld
not double as domestic storaqe. Domestic storage requirements
are computed as follows
Normal Demand:
(49 lots)(3.5 people/lot)(100 gpd/person) = .l7,150
Average"flow = 17,.l50/.l440 = ll.9 qpm
Peak Day Demand:
200% of normal = 34,300
verage flow = 34,300/'1440 = 23.8 c;pm
Instantaneous Demand Flor^r:
As per Table XXI, "Connnunity Water Systems", the in-
stantaneous demand that can hre expected in the develop-
nrent is 3.2 opm per residence br (3.?)(+g) = 156.8 gpm.
Practical experienc. i6rlicates that the instantaneous demand
flows can occur over a period of 2 hours per day, requiring
a flow of (156.S)(.l20) = .|8,8.I6 qallons. hlell production during
that same period 'is (26)(120) = 3.|20 qal'lons. Therefore" do-' mestic storage in the amount of 18,816 - 3120 = 15,698 Js re- ,
qu'ired.
JAN - 7 1975
(C) Fmergenc.v Storaqe
Emergency storage should a'lways be provided to, at least in
part, satisfy needs durinq power outages or excess demands
on the system. This is nornially computed at 30% of the total
of all other storaqe. Therefore,
Fi re
Domestic
Subtota I
Emersency (. 30) (75,698)=
60,000
I 5 ,698
75 ,699
22,709
Tota I Storage Requ'i red 98 ,407 ga 1 1 on s
For purposes of construction it is reconnrended that a'100,000 ga1]on
tank be specified to conform with standard dimensions of tank sup-
pl iers.
ffi,,*ffi
q.\'+l1o
where G =
..
-P=
Fj-re Protection -- King's Row Subdivision
calcurations for adequate fire flow and reserve storage arebased on sriteria established by the American rnsuranceAssociation. The total quantity of water used will be 1ow,but the demand rate is high. rhe demand rate is calculatedusi:rg the foJ.lowing equation:
G = 1020 fF- ( r - o.o1 \lF )
fire-demand rater gpm
population, thousands.
At Ki-ng's Row, the total subdivision will be 49 1ots, andfiguring 3.5 persons per dwerling, a total population of172 persons- For this population, the fire-demand rate is420 gpn- ror 3 population of less than 500 persons in thistype of value district, the American rnsuranLe Associationassumes a fire duration of two hours, which reguires areserve storage capacity of 50r400 ga1Ions. odmestic waterconsumption is 18 gpm, wel]. capacity is 26 gpmr thereforestorage is required for fire proteclion on:-y. A 52,000gral.lon storage tank is therefore adequate.
a)a r /scz t tl rc D / r//r/ zz
7//t5 tJ tlFo vEgt/O,|rEO 4/2P
lvur 4 ou ?dP7-/L
TRI-CO Management, lnc.
. Planning . Design . Surveying . Engineering . Construction
and Management of Land
December 17, 1974
I{r. Larry Schmueser
Garfield County Planning
Department
20L4 Blake Avenue
GLenwood Springs, Colorado 81601.
Dear IUr. Schmueser:
Enclosed is a description of how the
Kingrs Row was derived. If You feel
or question our figures, Please let
Sincerely,
water storage forthis is inadequate
us know.
Box 1730
Aspen
Colorado 81611
'925'2688
.?l,*r,Ai1g Vh*_Gregg Johnson
WGJ: rm
Enclosure
CC: John Wix
A Subsidiary of Trico Corporation .Offices throughout the West
TRI-CO Management, lnc.
Planning . Design . Surveying . Engineering . Construction
and Management of Land
December L6, L974
Larry Schmueser
Garfield County Planning
Department
20L4 B1are Avenue
GLenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Dear IvIr. Schmueser:
Enclosed is a statementground water for Kings
covered in the geologic
GARFIELD CO. PLANNEE
by Jerome Ganr"ba concerning theRow. I befieve this matter wasreport. However, you may want
Box 1730
Aspen
Colorado 81611
303.925.2688
1974"lI
this for your file.
Sincerely,
Gregg J
WGJ:rm
Enclosure
A Subsidiary of Trico Corporation . Offices throughout the West
ZtrI4 BLAKE AVENUE.
GARFIELD trtrUNTY
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
GLENWOtrO SPRINGS, trtrLtrRADtr Bl6Ot
Deceniber 77, 7974
PLAT COMTtITIEE REVIETI MEETING
PHtrNE 945-Et212
Re: King*s:.'Rcln
Those in attendance were:;
Dick lttattin, Chainnan
Jacl< MitcheTT
Degoe Gteen
Latrq Schrm:eser
Bud MiTner
Ed FeTd
JoIn Wix
Attotneg Thulson, attorneg fot
l4r. llix
ilhe Plat Cownitte Review 7ed discussion in xegatds to the sewet
ptobTetw whiclt was expTained bg Ed Fe7d, Deputg Sanitarian. Also
drainage studg was reviewed and it was decided bg the Plat
Conrnittee that said prognsed deveTopnent, wouTd be reviewed with an
on-site inspection of fJtis ptotrnsed deveTopment on Saturdag, Decedber
74,7974.
The ptopnsed deveTopfi,ent was tevieuted on Satutdag bg Dick Martin,
Chainan, Degoe Gteen, Jack LtitcheTT, Larrg Schrmseset, Mr. Johnson,
and JoIn Wix.
ilhe concTusion of the meeting was the PTat Review Conmittee would
tecormend this propnsed deveTopnent to cotne before the fu77
PTanning Corwnission on Jarutatg 73, 7975.
EAGLE COUNTY
DEPARTML , OF PLANNING AND DEVELOP,..JNT
COURTHOUSE
ANNEX Phone 328-6338
P. O. Box 789
Eagle, Colorado
81631
27 September 1974
Mark L. Bean
Garf ield County Planning Department
Glenwood Spgs, Colorado 81601
qnnl:Re: Kings Row Subdivision Preliminary Plan
Eagle County File No. Se-62-74
At their special meeting on 26 September 1974, the Eagle County Board of
Gounty Commissioners expressed disapproval of the Preliminary Plan, as
submitted. The reasons listed in the attached letter are the reasons for such
disapproval. Also, concern was expressed by the Colorado Geological Survey
as to the geologic study submitted.
lf you have any questions, please contact their Secretary, the County Clerk,
or this off ice.
Respectful ly ,ffi'Mt/
Quentin Mitchell, Jr.
Planning Assistant
QM,/Kt
cc: Board of County Commissioners
.cr; i. iJil.s *.5-' :____*
(C) Emergency Storaqe
Emeroency storage should always be provided to, at least in
part, satisfy needs during power outages or excess demands
on tfrg system. This is nornral'ly computed at 30% of the total
of all other storage. Therefore,
Fire 60,000Domestic 15,698Subtotal T5;69E=
Emergency (.S01(75,699)= 22,709
Total Storage Required 98,407 gallons
For purposes of construction it is reconmended that a .100,000 gal'lon
tank be specified to conform with standard d'imensions of tank sup-
pl iers.
'.t
,.,"
Fire Protection -- King's Row Subdivision
calculations for adequate fire fl-ow and reserve storage are"based on srj-teria established by the American rnsuranceAssociation. _The total quantity of water used wilr be 1ow,but the demand rate is high. rhe demand rate is calculatedusiag the following equation:
c = 1o2oVF (r-o.olfF)
where G
:
P
= fire-demand rater gpm
= population, thousands.
4! ri-g's Row, the total subdj-vision will be 49 1ots, and,figuri-ng 3.5 persons per dwelling, a total population of
1?? p"rcons- For this population, the rire-almand rate is420 'gpn- hr 3-populatioir of lesi than 500 persons in thistype of value district, the American rnsurance Associationassumes a fire duration of_tryo hours, which requires areserve storage capacity of 50r40o ga1Ions. Domestic waterconsumpti-on is 18 gpm, well capacit! is 26 gpmr theieforestorage is required for fire proteclion onry. A 52,000ga11on storage tank is theref6re adequite.
,uQ J ftcz, (/ tv D / z//r/ zz
7//tS /r t/Fo VEgt/06rEO 4/?r
/v"r 4 ou QdsT*lL
I
f.:
-- 1'
',.:
/ -'-,
.-.i:
.:.
.- :€. t',
.
CO Ma
Design . Surveying .
ement of Land
l TRI.
..Planning .
and Manag
nagement, lnc.
Engineering . Construction
Box 1730
Aspen
Colorado 81611
.925.2688
December 17, L974
I"Ir. Larry Schmueser
GarfieLd County Planning
Department
20L4 Blake Avenue
GLenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Dear Mr. Schmueser:
Enclosed is a description of how the water storage forKingrs Row was derived. If you feel this is inadequateor question our figures, please let us know.
Sincerely,
"f'L'A::d V(wGregg Johnson
V[Gf : rm
Enclosure
CC: John Wix
Effm
GARTTELD CO. PLANNER'
A Subsidiary of Trico Corporation . Offices throughout the West
TRI-CO Management, Inc.
Planning . Design . Surveying . Engineering . Construction
and Management of Land
December L6, L974
Larry Schmueser
Garfield. County Planning
Department
20L4 Blare Avenue
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Dear Mr. Schmueser:
Enclosed is a statementground water for Kingscovered in the geologic
by Jerome Gamba concerning thenow. f befieve this mattei wasreport. However, you may want
GARFIELD C{].
Box 1730
Aspen
Colorado 816'11
303.925.2688
PLANNEB
this for your fi1e.
Sincerely,
Enclosure
A Subsidiary of Trico Corporation . Offices throughout the West
GARFIELD trtrUNTY
PLANNINE DEPARTMENT
GLENWtrtrD SPRINGS, trOLORAOtr BI60I
2tr14 BLAKE AVENUE PHtlNE 945-EJ212
December 77, 7974
PLAT COMMTT?EE REVIEW TLEETING
Re: Kingts:.'Row
Those in attqtdance vtete:
Dick l4artin, Chainm.n Bud MiTner
Jack MitcheTT Ed FeTd
Degoe Green John Wix
Larrg Schmueser Attorheg. ThuTson, attotneg for
l[r. Wix
The PTat Conmitte Revielrtt 7ed discussion in tegards to the sewet
ptobTens which was expTained bg Ed Fe7d, Deputg Sanitarian. Also
drainage studg was reviewed and it was decided bg the Plat
Corwnittee that said proynsed deveTopment wouTd be reviq,red with an
on-site inspection of this proynsed deveTopment on Satutdag, Decembet
74,7974.
The protrnsed deveToprnent was reviewed on Saturdag bg Oick Martin,
Chaittran, Degoe Gteen, Jack ltitcheTT, Larrg Schmueser, Mr. Johnson,
and John \lix.
The conclusion of the treeting was the Plat Review Comnittee wouTd
reconmend this propnsed deveTopment to come befote the fu77
PTanning Conrnission on Januarg 73, 7975.
TRI-CO Management, Inc.
Planning . Design . Surveying . Engineering . Construction
and Management of Land
January 6, L975
Box 1730
Aspen
Colorado 81611
303.925.2688
60. PIANNER,
Larry SchmueserGarfield County Planning
Department
2OL4 Blake Avenue
Glenwood Springs, Colorado
was inadequate.subject, please
SincereLy yours,
81501
If further information is needed on thisbe in touch.
Dear Mr. Schmueser:
Enclosed please find the revised water storage calcula-tions for Kingrs Row subd.ivision. r have alio enclosed
1.copy of our water distribution map with the new storagefigure indicated. we are sorry thal our previous figure
@M
Gregg ,Iohnson
WCJ: rm
Enclosures
0Aflngu
A Subsidiary of Trico Corporation . Offices throughout the West
t --:
KINGS RON SUBDIVISI()IJ
DETERMINATION OF STOPSGE REQUIREMENTS SARFIELD OO.
tlell Capacity -- 26 gpm
Subdivision -- 49 lots
Estimated 3.5 persons/lot
Estimated total popu'lation -- 172
(A) Fire Storage
As per "Guide for Determination.of Required Fiie Flow", (Insur-
ance Services 0ffice, June 1972), the fire f]ow shall not be
less than 500 opm. The suogested fire flow for a developnrent
of this nature is 500 gom.
The "Grading Schedu'le for Municipal Fire Protection", (Insurance
Services 0ffice, .1973), calls for a required duration of fireflon of 2 hours.
Assuming that the fire f'low would be requ'ired at a time of
intemupted supply, the storage should be:
(2)(60)(5oo) = 6o,ooo sa1'lons
(B) Donrestic Storaqe
Since fire storage should be ma'intained at all tirnes, it should
not double as domestic storage. Domestic storage requirements
are computed as fol I ows:
Normal Demand:
(49 lots)(3.5 people/lot)(100 gpd/person) = 17,'150
Average'flow = 17,.l50/.l440 = 11.9 gpm
Peak Day Demand:
200% of normal = 34,300
Average flow = 34,300/1 440 = 23.8 qpm
I nstanta neot,s Demand Fl our:
As per Table XXI, "Cornmunity Water Systems", the in-.
stantaneous demand that can hre expected in the develop-
nrent is 3.2 opm per res'idence or (3.2)(+g) = '156.8 gpm.
Practica'l experience indicates that the instantaneous demandflows can occur gyer g period of 2 hours per day, requiringa flow of (.l56.S)('120) = .l8,8.l6 qallons. Well production iuringthat same period is (2A11 .l20) = 3120 gallons. Therefore, do- -',
' mestic storage in the amount of .18,816 - 3'120 = 15,698 Js re-',..
qui red
PLANNER'
!' .. i'
t:
EAGLE COUNTY
DEPARTME , OF PLANNING AND
COURTHOUSE
ANNEX
P. O. Box 789
Eagle, Colorado
8r631
27 September 1974
DEVELOP...JNT
Phone 328-6338
Mark L. Bean
Garf ield County Planning Department
Glenwood Spgs, Colorado 81601
A.*l:Re: Kings Row Subdivision Preliminary Plan
Eagle County File No. Se-62-74
At their special meeting on 26 September 1974, the Eagle County Board of
Gounty Commissioners expressed disapproval of the Preliminary Plan, as
submitted. The reasons listed in the attached letter are the reasons for such
disapproval. Also, concern was expressed by the Colorado Geological Survey
as to the geologic study submitted.
lf you have any questions, please contact their Secretary, the County Clerk,
or this off ice.
Respectful ly ,iZ'M/
Quentin Mitchell, Jr.
Planning Assistant
oM/kt
cc: Board of County Commissioners
I* 'o
rslA
DEPAR
EAGLE COUNTY
JNT OF PI.,ANNING AND DEVELL .v{ENT
COURTHOUSE
P.O. Box 789 Phone 328-6338
Eagle, Colorado
8 1631
19 September 1974
Mark L. Bean
Garfield County Planning Department
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Re: Kings Row Subdivision Se-62-74
Dear Mark:
At their regular meeting on September 18, the Eagle County Planning Commission
reviewed the proposed preliminary plan for the captioned project. This review
is pursuant to an agreement between Garfield and EagleCounties dated 28 May L974.
The Planning Commission has the following comments on the p1an, as presented:
- all relevant lot lines must conform to the county line bisecting the project.
- 6% of the land (or cash value thereof ) in Eagle County must be dedicated
to the appropriate school District.
- a road maintenance agreement mustbe diarvmbetween our two counties,
applicable to the short road spanin Eagle County
- the drainage report is not adequate because;
- it does not identify the drainage basins used in Q calculations
- drainage is proposed to be handled by existing irrigation ditches
and minimal roadside drainage. The use of imigation &tches to
handle storm runoff is not recommended unless the ditches. are
re-designed to accommodate calculated runoff volumes, without
jeopardizing down-stream ditches. The O.5% grade for portions of
the road will not handle drainage without extensive culverting and
easement to get the drainage away from the roadbed
- that the final plat for the Eagle County portion be subject to the
entire final plat review process as shown in Eagle Countyrs Sub-
division Regulations.
These recommendations will be presented to the Board of County Corrimissioners
at their meeting on 26 September 1974, beginning at g:00 A.M., and any resulting
comments will be forwarded to your office for consideration in your review.
ALr,' If you have any questions, please contact this office.
Sincerely,""Q,,),/offirfuU
Quentin Mitchell, Jr.
Planning Assistantcc: Board of Countv Commissioners
DrC 1 I 1974
GARFIELD CO. PITNNER,. Fire Protection -- King,s Row Subdivision
calculations for adequate fire flow and reserve storage arebased on criteria established by the American rnsuranceAssociation. _The total quantity of water used will be low,but the demand rate is high. rhe demand rate is calculatedusing the following eguation:
c = 1o2ofp'(r-o.o1fF)
= fire-demand rater gp[
= population, thousands.
At xingrs Row, the total subdivision will be 49 Iots, andfiguring 3.5 persons per dwe11ing, a total population of
17? p".rons. For this population, the rire-aemand rate is42o gpm- For a population of less than 500 persons in thistype of value district, the American rnsurance Associationassumes a fire duration of two hours, which reguires areserve storage capacity of 50r4oo ga11ons. odmestic waterconsumption is J-8 gpm, well capacity is 26 gpm, thereforestorage is requi-red for fire proteclion onty. A 52,ooog.a'llsn storage tank is therefLre adequate.
where G
P
....
---"\ .........
j
I
/
/"
l'
'
,... . .....,.. .. . " • " •••.•.••. ~·. i:.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT IN Am:> F ! L_ E D I N \V.\TE'.{ C~)~J~tT
FOR WATER DIVISION NO. 5< Uivbiou Nu. ~· ·
STATE OF COLORADO 0 l; (• 1 1 4 (\ 7 JI •• •J 1·.,1 I 't
~ _QF ';SPOFV\DO ~ ~~-P~-----·NA,, n c~~r~1~ .::.-·~.JV-Application No. W-2393
~'> ~ '
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION )
)
)
)
)
...........................................................................
f~Y OF~'t:1 T
FOR WATER RIGHTS OF .THUNDER RIVER REALTY
0 l.l
... . ... . .................... ~
IN THE ROARING FORK RIVEH OR ITS TRIBUTARIES RULING OF
REFEREE TRIBUTARY INVOLVED.: ,\JNNAJ".IED
IN EAGLE COUNTY '
The above entitled application was filed on August 14, _1974,
~ ~i1.''~·-~ -~»--, '
alld was referred to the undersigned as Water Referee for Water Division
No. 5, State of Colorado, by the Water Judge of said Court on the 22nd
day of August, 1974, in accordance with Article 21 of Chapter 148,
Colorado Revised Statutes 1963, as amended (Chapter 373 S.L. Colo. 1969),
'
known as The Water Rights Determination and Administration Act of 1969.
And the undersigned Referee having made such investigations as
are necessary to determine whether or not the statements in the application
are true and having become fully advised with respect to the subject
matter of the application does hereby make the following determ~nation
and ruling as the Referee in this matter, to-wit:
•• v
,;,:'
. ' l. The statements in the application are true.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
The name of the structure is Thunder River Realty Company Well.
The name of claimant and address is Thunder River Realty Company
ro Box 1052, Basalt, Colorado.
The source of the water is a well having a depth of 325 feet.
The well is located in the SW 1/4 SE 1/4 of Section 21,
Township 7 s., Range 87 West of the 6th PM, at a point whence
the Southwest Corner of said Section 2 bears South 66° 22'
49~ West 3054.6 feet.
«. The use of the water is domestic and municipal for 49 lot
subdivision.
The date of initiation of appropriation is July 30, 1973.
8. The amount of water claimed is 0.145 cubic foot of water per
second of time, condi tioual. ·
9. On October 10, 1974, Permit No. 18904-F was issued by the
, Qt~lc;:~ of t,he State Engineer with the following conditions of
~. '1,pproval:: ·. ·
I'•' ·7 .... ~ • .~ ' w c,.> 4 ,decree for this appropriation must be obtained from
' ;. · the'·District Court in and for Water Division No. 5,
State'of Colorado, prior to the use of the well. This
approval is subject to the terms of this decree •
; ~-:
.. , ' .. ,
., • " 1·. '.e
... 'I;.. ,.,.. ' .~ .. ·' "': \ ,-' . . .... -
. \'"•' ,_,,, ..
'·
,,Y • :t' ~ ,~, ,J' • '~ \ ""-'"I< • •.o••' •
:r
,,.
/
'ill
f~-i-.
I~ ~·
1;, bit
i~ Ii.
·::
1:,
l
;~
~ ~~-
" I~:
... ....
'> ,,
(b) Applicant shall install totalizing flow meter on well.
(c) Applicant" shall maintain and submit to the Division of
Water Resources records of annual extraction of ground
water.
(d) Total annual consumption limited to 41.932 acre feet.
10. The test well was completed and tested on June 23, 1974, showing
a sustained yield of 26 gallons per minute or 0.0572 cubic
£eet per second of time.
The Referee does therefore conclude that the above entitled
application should be granted and that 0.0572 cubic foot of water per
second of time with appropriation date of July 30, 1973, is hereby awarded
conditionally to the Thurider River Realty Company Well for domestic and
municipal purposes, provided always that said 0.0572 cubic foot of water
per second of time is on the condition that said quantity of water be applied
to a beneficial use within a reasonable time; subject, however, to all
earlier priority rights of others and to the integration and tabulation by
the Division Engineer of such priorities and changes of rights in accordance
with law, and further subject to the conditions of approval stated on the
drilling permit as outlined in paragraph 9 above.
· Application for a Quadrennial finding of reasonable diligence shall
be filed in December of 1978 and in December of every fourth calander year
thereafter so long as claimant desires to maintain this conditional
water right or until a determination has been made that this conditional
water right has become an absolute water right by reason of the completion
of the appropriation.
It is accordingly ORDERED that this ruling shall be filed with the
Water Clerk and shall become effective upon such filing, subject to judicial
review pursuant to Section 148-21-20 CRS 1963, as amended (1971).
It is further ORDERED tllii.t a oopy of tHis riiling sHall be filea
With tlie appr.opriate Di vision Engineer and the State Engineer.
Done at the City of Glenwood Springs, Colorado, this .1'1/:~
day of /)E~MQ<t< I 197 1+.
No protest wns filed in this~mattcr.
the foregoing ruling is confirmed
1/nnd approved, and is made the
Judgment and Decree of this court.
BY THE REFEREE:
a~u. Water ~er~ree
Water ·Division No. 5
State of Colorado
... ,~~:
.·,'
..
.:.;
JOHN D. VANDERHOOF
Governor
-~~~q\!,1~~$ . ~JC~?~ -~-<__ ~~
·~~
COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
254 COLUMBINE BUILDING -1845 SHERMAN STREET
DENVER. COLORADO 80203 PHONE 892-2611
December 11, 1974
Garfield County Planning Department
2014 Blake
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Gentlemen: RE:
r-c'-~ -,
KINGS ROW SUBDIVISION
·"-~---· --
GAREIWl CO .. Pl.MNEI'
We have reviewed the preliminary plan and supporting documents for the proposed
Kings Row Subdivision. The general and engineering geology soils report by the
Lincoln-D()ore.Testing Laboratory quite adequately describes the geologic con-
straints which would effect this propose subdivision. We believe that if the
developer adheres .to the recommendation presented in the report and in the
summary on pages 30 and 31, that this preliminary plan could be approved.
Specifically, lots 11 and 12 of block 2 have steep slopes which may not be
suitable for a building site. Lot 5 of block 4 has steep slope which will
make access difficult. Individual sewage disposal systems " •• are feasible,
provided that forced airation tanks and evapotranspiration disposal fields
are use".
In conclusion, we believe that this subdivision is feasible if the conditions
and recommendations in the Lincoln-D{)rore report are adhered to by the developer.
If we can be of further assistance, please contact our office.
DCS/je
cc: Land Use Commission
Lincoln-DE('Yore Testing Lab.
Sincerely,
/~1~/;J c ____ r ~ (:_
David c. Shelton
Associate Engineering Geologist
GEOLOGY
STORY OF THE PAST ••• KEY TO THE FUTURE
su£>Jt.C1 ~ ll~ it: oecentier 6 • '914
•
•
, EAGLE COUNTY
DEPARTl\r,_1\IT OF PLANNING AND DEVEL<... ,v1ENT
COURTHOUSE
Mark Bean
P. 0. Box 789
Eagle, Colorado
81631
26 November 197 4
Garfield County Planning Department
2014 Blake
Glenwood Spgs, Colorado 81601
Re: Se-62-74 Kings Row
Phone 328-6338
At their meeting on 26 November 1974, the Eagle County Board of County
Commissioners reviewed the latest input to the captioned project. Their comments
and requests are the same as those references in my letter of 27 September 1974,
with one exception -the abi I ity of the irrigation ditches for runoff control is the
subject of differing opinions. In one instance, the Eldorado report suggests that
the ditches can handle the runoff; on the other hand, Lincoln -Devore makes
reference to the already-eroded nature of the ditches.
The Board of County Commissioners feels that resolution of this and the other points
referenced will be necessary before thjs County can allow the project, as proposed,
to proceed.
~~~
Quentin Mi tche 11 , Jr.
Planning Assistant
QM/kt
cc: Board of County Commissioners
IN R.EPLY R.EFER. TO
United States Department of the Interior
l
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
Glenwood Springs Resource Area
P.O. Box 1009
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
1785.1
GARFIELD CO. PLANNER
November 25, 1974
Mark L. Bean., Planner
Garfield County Planning Department
2014 Blake
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Dear Mark:
We have reviewed the Kings :Row subdivision prelimin-
ary plan and have the following comments in addition
.to our comments on Septerol:;>er 18, 1974:
1. The proposed subdivision lies on the outer
perimeter of critical deer winter range.
2. some of the lots appear to be extremely
steep and could prohibit building on them.
3. The soils are limiting factors in many ways,
especially for sewage disposal. The geology
report does not appear to be favorable.
There appears to be a great many adverse conditions to
the development. Extreme care in review should determine
the feasibility of the project and thereby protecting
the potential residents.
sincerely yours,
~zi:,,[ t/:' ~,.,,
Stewart A. Wheeler,
Area Manager
Save Energy and You Serve America!
: ! :
--
'·'·:
<.:>
(j)
lD
Cl:?
ill
~
o;i
("")
0
("")
'
Cf) ..-a: 0
0 r.D
>-..-
UJ CX)
> a: 0 ::>
(/) 0
0 <i a: z 0
<i ...J
...J 0
0 u
UJ a: Cf) UJ
I-(.!J
Cf) z
(.!J a:
UJ a... a: Cf)
' 0
0
V) 0
a: s:
w z w w z _J
(.!J (.!J
z w '
(.!J (j) z c.o
I-c.o
...J x ::> 0 Cf)
z co
0 0 u
a..:
'-.._
'-.._
>-z UJ
<i ::J a... z 2 UJ
0 > u <i
(.!J () z 0
a: <i
UJ a:
UJ 0 z ...J
(.!J 0 ! '
z u .
w 00 ..-
0 CX)
0 // <i
a:
0
0
_J
w·
QAREIELD CO. PLANNER
Tri-Co Management, Inc.
P.O. Rox 1730
Aspen, Colorado 81611
ATTN: Mr. Jim Reser
Gentlemen:
pr-:: K.inns PcM s._~1di vi s·i on
}"Ct 7/\11.-2'
Pro-'
In compl·i3nce v:ib vcur 1 "''1\J':st l subr:iit rh(: fr:.-! ~O\iLq rlis~>2rtation
concerninn ::;-e 2c•Jifer pr,_.vi iin0 rn·r:ui1(i ~·1r ~'cl' ., • d w:estic v:.~1 I on th~
1-,rl • • -s•L_.1v1s1on.
GEOLOGY: The aquifer ;s cr;n:;irised of t1io•..:er1c> [)3s11t flov1s .rnd cinder
beds surerimposed nn urc!erl.'-'inq sed·ir,1ents rar,crlnn i:; age from Pennsy1-
vanian through low0r Cre+~ceous.
The area predominately ccv~rect iJY th·s<.:: t•rtsa 1t-s forms tl'\e southc~rn flank
of the \~hite Piver L:plFt cr:irmrisi"1? i1\J'.irC·Yi 1 1atE1y 14G square: milP.s.
The lavas, denosi":er! nrior i:o and dut in'.l t:H~ 1Jn·1 if+-C!xhihit a general
south to southwest dip. T1c urconforrnab1c co!'1tact br:>tv1'~0n sediments
and lava is highly irreqular ..:iue. 1·0 t'11e P"r~-~cva +.opt·iqraphy v1hic~1 reflects
sediment fol.:.inq control (i.e. c.nticlinal val!eys and synclin.:il ridges)
u.nd cavern ccll.1ns» in thP un·:\P.r~yi:'ri 0yosum br:~ris of tl1e naradox forma-
t" .. 1011.
f:ECH/\RGE: Lee Fnev 101d of t•1e Glern..Jcr;d '.)p,··i!H1-:; yf~1ce of the State nivi-
sion of \.Ji1ter P~~soiffces stc:.t0s tl:at: i:his a:~ea rece;;es precipitation in
t:1e amount of 8!"JCJ acri:: ff'.':21: i'.(''' scrrnre rTile P'~r ye(1r. It is ,cistimated
t:-:at at lecist r-.rr:, of •l1'? outcrup-suL0• .. •tc1op ;i.-->', of -,(10 ::.quare niles
will exhibit percolation 11tes suffici?ntlv hi~~ to ~cc0pt ~ ~inirnum
of 80% of the ;irecipi"tatinn -t~tn t.h·'. 0r('W''J ''lat-::-. P1P.ref0re~ on the
L•?sis of t;hr. ;;b0vr~, ;:~: ~;siir'atci r:i:;it,;=:1 r:c::·.:·rnc to the aquifer is c:al-
t:ulated as '°ollov1s:
·. '" ~.
. '. .···
,
j.
r-'
Ui ...
if
" I\
,..
TAJ-CO. Management, Inc.
Planning • Design • Surveying • Engineering • Construction
and ~anagement of Land_0.~~
~Box ·1730
·' :. Aspen
Colorado 81~11 · ··
303·925·2688. ~ •;'
~·i'i·_· •.. .
. '• . ..... .
~ ;-'I .. '
:;•:
November 15, 1974
. ..... ""<_·,
.,.~ ~-
;..;.
~ .\ .... -:t ~~·' '
~:
•. .w.r
.;:, .,· .. ~
•"'
,. ------~ ., .
~ _-:" --
·,.
~· ,..,, ;
~·
:f'
... '1'o whom it may concern: . ·
The geology report for the COLORADO COUNTRY'S KINGS
.. l'lOW SUBDIVISION prepared by the Lincoln Devore
~esting Laboratory makes a somewhat misleading .state-·
:ment which we would like to clarify. On page 17 of ·
said report under •soils and Foundations -Conclusions
and Jrecommendations• mention is made of "some comnercial ,.
structures• and "townhouse type" residential units •.
_Let it be clea;r that the only proposed use for.the -
subdivision is single family dwellings and customary
accessory uses as indicated by the Garfield County ·
Zoning Resolution.
We are sorry about the confusion and hope that this
.clarifies the situation •
. .Sincerely,
Gregg Johnson
·-;;
.~
.. ·
;
· .
~ ·'
-' . ~
~.. ·,,. \,_' '~
_,.
.-. ,
. ..r:·
-.. ...
::·
' ; __
~· -...
~'. -·" .r
;~
..
''~ >
<
... " ... --:
.,._ -,-._ '"'""(. ·~; ,,."; ..
. 4 •!,f .,., ' A Subsidiary of Trico Corporation • Offices throughout the West . ":"
r'•:"'•
-----------------------------------------------------'--'-r-------------
,
- - -------------·----------I --------------------------
I
----------------·-----------------------... -·-----· ---------·----------·----------------------------------I ----------~-------
---------------------j ~~-~~~==---~-~~-~ -~ -_-.·-•----_. -·--• •--•••---·-~--~~--~~-I ~---~~
------------------------------~---
i ·I
, : I
'!I
! I:
Ii
11
1:
I' I' :I ----~r------------------
--1:1-
~r----
-r;l-
1·
Ii ---11~--.... -
--!f--
111
! I
I -~----! ------
--------------1 ~ -------------
-----_--tr!-----------------
-ttL------1! i ---
1 i ,1 n·-
-~J __
i !
i'
t; to 0
•• 0 a· 0 a ••••• • ft ........................ ....
--j I . -------------. -------;,~ ~;yt;ip;/(11? ?J;.:Po -;i;--------····----:11 ______ -------
--·--·-·~,--·-·--------· ·· ------------·· --. . --···· ·--··-·--------····---· ------···--·-----···-·---·---------------··----··-· d-s;JJY/Jl'/'V~ rYI (?7tn f-/>Y.?7 (7) ,,
' '«_LS:/ ffeo __ -·-------·-· S:h!!i29/?P -7t:liXl1t7/l!d:X --Cb.::l~---rl-+
------·----·-~----------(jj21..~9 .. ::l ?rt1.UHl7-->71(;1;:.,--· >mc:Yctt---o..J-·-----_ .. __ -------
at~JTNI?>' ---q--.Jdilfl::l'?f/l'Yf#,,J-oii617 -.do _____ m J?i:/?t:Yna----. ----------·---·
-. ~ _______ ··-·-____ -. --rt ------··-----·-----------------&-----··-1 ----------·-·------··
---···--·------------------------- ---.:.::.. -.:zlbinrp.3(16'-- ---------i ----·-·--·-·------
----·------------·------------ --Jdt P~Ji.1!1 ~7~l!kYO' ____ Cft7 ___ -----: -----··------·-
-------------·-·---·---------------- --· ----·-· ----------~l:vt77r:J'I)----------------·-·· ·-
I ------------------------i:?0'21. . -~iilro..t.gg .JrY;t17;g;y~ ------------I ------------
-----------------------.. ---- - -:Il'VIYl/fr5ZZl'YIG'H -C16t;0' --03.:;ry----r~ ------i \-----.. -------
~~~ ~----!~~. ~ ····CJO orrn-~~ · ·····--=-·· -~-~4 11~-----~---~-
--·----···----·---·--··--~3'7:EJ!TIY f)Otzb';Jlf7.!!7(/ -~~--y.z;---------1 ·-----'----------··
-----------------:---~-;FfYt7-/ufyr;Qf) -1-1.um :h'/iilQ:lrw;J------------11-----...
----·--·-----------..:tC¥V --c:Q' S?Vn :.£07--J.n'61i?.:n.a~r cv-------Tr _______ -------·-···-
---------------·--··-----------·-.. -·----·--··--------· -----·---------.--~-' ----------------··
• 7\, V"'""'-711' I I . '
-'7VlrGif ---- -. --• hurl70()-• -;n~~T i r ~ ---------
. -·--·--· -·--·-· ---------· ----·-------------: 1----------------
__ . ---------------?fl.;t:/0730Ei(/ --ha --3~-~~------i \---------
--------·--------_?J.Er,:l:;IWQ'j? ~w b' :..tm:i'f77 -~ 1-----
---·-----------m --:u1:1n?:>.:;a&-.zcrr 0'31i79r77>lftnl . --}IL --------
--------------~Q,lg;;y· 77"iiV 70.ii'Jt7 .' ~----II~------7{/=m -_lj~np 7fnY~7. ~~~-?jl~~=---H
1---·--·--------.sal';YY.:t~I:/--(Yjgi?J::;:il--~---· -£-- --.-------------
1r ·-~·······
I: i i: I
-------------------------~---------------------------~-·------•-•*••~•~•aa•a•.A_A._A••••e.e•A•••••4•
i
i
----------------~
------------·--H-~------------·-------
o-------·-----
------------t+t----
! I ------!
-----------++-+-----------------~----------------·--
r------------+-+------------------------
---------------+--'--+-----------.~-;:--;---------
·-
-!
.! ----T 1---------------
11
&.
---· --------
tJf::_
---~~-----------------------------------·-----·-·-------------···-------------------.. _ ......... -····· 1-~ LE-.Z--~ -~··· ..... _ crz__ ____ _
-------________ J ______ 9)_ _____ tL}liUL" ~~--~---~------------------------
_________________ Jrl ____________ ... ~A-~_/~-----~~-___ _ _ _ I: ~< <:}f-'= ---------_-------
-~--~--~f-~~--Jt__r-¥ · b~~ u ----=-;Ef:i;-
~~i --------~E711i::tt-1':> ___ -------------------1· I _____ ££~ .. -UA-1~£ ~ ,.tr.;>A7 ~,(/~. - -
-----------------1 ! ----------U)/£/A.Jd¢ ____ ?Z) _EXt!C"ff61_/,!E! 8,f/ ________ -~-'-~~
- ---1 · -__£k£EMS€__ . Al€-. l(QMI!" ~. -. . ~~~(N..-,,.,--1
_________________ J "---------~~---BE'~u6€ __ OE __ (!.Uet_i/~~ ~ I i ~-:-------------
---------------___ , '-----------_a,.c -P~ ~.4$ 7' "9T ~ I i -----------------------------------------------+-------___ L!.,E'&;J ---~,,(,) -~;e/l/~Hr µ,(J![S__ __ 1µ _____________________ _
-----------~ L-_ ---E~ .. C/1$£#8./13-~Lf) ___ . ___ _
1·------------· _________ /f./65"L"J _/1£«Ql17~-E~HE»r'li/ ____________ _
inn ----------------------______ Gk"~ _O~ n ~Q~.Gl_. • U nn ______________________________ _
;_-_ -~-1 ------········-
! ____ --------------------\ ---------~-------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------r ---------------·--···-·----------------------------------------------- -------------------------
1 .
~---~~-------=][~~-----~-~-------------------------------------------
~---=~--~~ -. ·-=···---~-------. .•.. -~ •. _ .•. -~--~~~=-~ ~~---
--=~-~-=[ L-------------= ~ -=-----_ ~~----------=-~ -----------------
• I ! -------. --·--------·--·--------------------·
I
I ,
------------------+++---------------------------------
~----------+++---------------------------------------------
I . 1------------------
j.
i 1-----------+;--+---------------------------------------------~---
1-------------H+-------------------------------------------------------------------
-----•-+-"---------------------·------------------~--------·------------··--·-------· ------------------------------~-------·--------------- -------------
--------+---
1----------------+~L _______ --------~ I
:r--
: I
--,.-~r-----------------
I 1
............... ......___.,, ----... .J.....:. -----............. ---......... -------------.. -.a.....----------------.. -----------.. ...._ __ ..... -.. --... -................ ..........___ .................. .__ ............... __._ ..... _ .................. ..........___. ............. ~
~'1
.....
R.X~ER. R.E.ALTY"
BOX 1052 • BASALT, COLORADO • 303/927-3942
November 14, 1974
Xhe following amendments and corrections and deletions
are hereby incorporated and made a part of the Protective
Covenants for Colorado Country's KINGS ROW, a subdivision.
Paragraph l, Resideptial Ust --deletion. Delete second
sentence vbioh beginsi •Lota £our (4) acres, eto.,.•
Peraer-ph 2, Ag;im•ll 9gd Qommeroial Uat --oorreotion.
Tbe tirat ••ntenoe ot •aid paragraph i• hereby corrected to
reada •Xbe only liveatock permitted to be kept on the land
aball be on lot• measuring three (3) aorea or more. A max-
imum ot two (2) boraea may be kept on deaignated lota." Con-
tinue witb the sentence: "Barna or stables, etc.,.•
Paragraph 7, PJ::aigage Control --amendment. Xbe last
••ntence of tbi• paragraph shall be amended to reads •No
building aba11 be erected closer than thirty (30) feet from
any main irrigation ditch and no oloaer that titt••n (15)
feet ~rom any lateral ditob.•
P•.regrapb 11, l••otrio:t.tx Wirt• and Pszi•• --amendment.
Thi• paraaraph •hall be amended to read1 wowner •hall pro-
vtde •l•otrio •nd telephone tranami••ion lin•• to th• boundary
ot ••oh lot or paro•l. E1eotrio lin•• shall b• in aooordanoe
with d••ign and location criteria of Holy Croaa Eleotrio Aa-
aociation and installed underground or overhead. or in a com-
bination ot the two methods, in a manner oonduoive to both
aatbetio quality and inflation control.•
BASALT, COLORADO
BOX 1052 • 927-3942
ASPEN, COLORADO
BOX 1831 • 925-2074
Colorado Country's KINGS ROW,
a Limited Partnership by
Thunder River Realty Co.,
General ~ar~
By #~;V ~o4J Wix, President
~under .Ri\~r R••.lty Co.
B \ '\''\.•· ,,,, y \ ' "" ,,, '·-. ') .. --' ·~ ~ _\-,• ... , ~-
Jo ie Dunning, Seora~ry
Thu •. er Ri V•ztAini~ RADO
I .
Thunder River was the Ute Ind/an name for the Roarlns Forl< BOX G • 963-2877 i
------' -----·----·-~
';1
r. ..
~~f P,~;
iii,. ~·.~
':l.' I~· p 1i!
~
t;J\.LiL.t<...: C:UUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
GARFIELD CO. PLANNER
John Wix
Thunder River Realty
Box 1052
Basalt, Colorado 81621
Dear Sir:
EAGLE COUNTY ANNEX
P. 0. Box 789
Eagle, Colorado
81631
12 November 1974
Re: Kings Row, Se-62-74
Phone 328-6338
In receipt of a copy of your letter dated November 9 to the Superintendent of the
Eagle Valley School District, I would suggest that you misinterpreted my letter of
19 September to the Garfield County Planning Department. In it, I merely suggested
that the dedication of land on cash "to the appropriate school district" be based upon
the valuation of the land in the entire project, not just that in Garfield County. As
we are both aware that RElJ is the appropriate school district, the reference in my
letter has nothing to do with the Eagle Valley School District and is valid when inter-
preted correctly. As such the double assessment you made reference to is non-
existent.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact this office.
Sincerely,
~~.d{~
Quentin Mitchell, Jr.
Planning Assistant
QM/ac
cc: Superintendent, School District Re50J
Garfield County Planning Department
Garfield County Boord of County Commissioners
Eagle County Board of County Commissioners
Tri-Co Management· Company
f1
-·
~X>E:FI. .... Fl.X~E:Fl.
fa fJ y. /I " r 11 t /A fJ rt E/N / c o L o R A o o
Box 1052 -Basalt, Colo. 81621
• 303/925-1730
9, 1974
Superintendent.
Eagle Valley School District
Eagle, Colorado
Re: _Colorado Country's ·KINGS ROW, a subdivision, 49 lots ------Dear Sir:
The captioned subdivision is served by School District RE-1.
Approximately 160 acres of the land, plus all but approximately
1/4 mile of roads proposed to serve six lots on 40 acres lying
in Eagle County, are in Garfield County.
School. District RE-1 has notified the Garfield County Planning
Office, which has jurisdiction over the subdivision pursuant to
an agreement between the counties of Eagle and Garfield, that
it expects land or cash payment under the subdivision regulations
based upon the entire 49 lots of the proposed subdivision.
Similarly, the Eagle County Planning Office has notified the
Garfield County Planning Office that your school district
expects cash or land payment for the 40 acres of the subdivision
lying in Eagle County.
This appears to place the owners under double assessment, and,
as the area will be served by School District RE-1, we respectfully
request the Eagle Valley School District to forego its assessment.
We submit that.this is a reasonable request.
Thank you for your attention.
Sincerely,
John Wix, President
cc: vGarfield County Planning Office
Garfield County Board of County Commissioners
Eagle County Planning Office
Eagle County Board of County Commissioners
Tri-Co Management Company
BASALT, COLORADO John A. Thulson, Attorney
BOX 1052 • 927-3384
ASPEN, COLORADO
BOX 1831 • 925-1730 Thunder River was the Ute Indian name for the Roaring Fork
CARBONDALE, COLORADO
BOX G • 963-2877 8
TRI-CO . ' Management, Inc.
Box 1730
Aspen
Colorado 81611
303·925·2688 Planning • Surveying • Design • Engineering and Management of Land
Aspen
#'
•oftllber a, lt14
NOV ll: ~J
Jt049•r Saade•
1ARF1ELD co~ fWllliR
Colorado Department: of Bealth
4210 ·s .. t 11th Avenue
Denver, Colorado 80220
Dear Mr. 8JU.4ea1
'Phe prelilliaary plan for JU.n9a Row 8tib4lflaion will be up for
reviav aoon u4 the Garfield County Pluning office hu re-
fern4 • to your letter of Oct.ober 9. After talJtin9 with you
on the phone, % felt that there was no need for the aentioned
4etaile4 drawing• and apecif icationa at the preliminary plan
ata9e. If t:hia la atill your feeling• I would vary auoh apprec-
iate your COIUl'WlioatinCJ thia to the Carf iel4 County Plann1n9
Departaent. We are willin9 to comply with any reocmmen4ationa
or raquin•nta you may have when we reach the final plan or
conatruct:.ion ataqe. Ke feel i:h&t the water well development,
stora;e facilities, and distribution plana already submitted
clearly ahow the intent of the developer to install an adequate
and reliable water system which would conform to any reOOJmBenda-
tiona or requirement• you may have.
If, hoveveJ:", you f .. 1 additional infoxmation ia needed at thia
tiae pleaae be in contact with thi• otfioe.
Sincerely your•,
Greg9 .:Jobnaon
dob
CCI J;.u'ry -aer
John Wix ·
/ ///'
_,,-:·/
·;..// /·~·-···-·
-~~~·
Pueblo We.st Steamboat Springs
··1
'~ ..
~ .· . .\ · ..
"-~ ,;._,
-~ ;
. -~~ .. t~. r·; ..
· .... ',..;, ~-.
.:...!'-i
,,;
:ff) y:~ ... ~··.: ;:· ,,,. -~· .;~·;j ~}/·~~~··:"''_,f~··~l'--~
<.~·:')~:·('.'.·I' ~):.?(;:~r. .. ; : ·1
: (.:f, F·~·:;':.:·f """'''}:
~'f)t~. '. ·i ·~:~ ;:.. ·~-: t1't', ·;:~;:'.'..·~·· ~~;
__ ,_,,·
.,. ! i I. . ~· ,•,
;~
__ } .. ) ,
·~ ~ "'"'~; {? -'t ;.:!
.~
. -~
L I::
·Jii
·\ii . ~!'.!!.··
" .. ~.
. !.'
~' ··1 ;;: . :.,.:./.
~-.:: .
·...-~. !>'-~
.. •..
:~ ... ,
·~ ,., ......
;_.._ .. :... .. ,_,.;;.
, .......... i.,
;r ~':·:::, l : .. ::'": .. ~ ·.. . .. . ·. . ·-.
,;r.
..,.
,.. ... , .. ;, -. ,,..~ a Novenmer.1974·:· ·~> : kV"~··i>i1
~.
~:::-·
g.. ._ '~.J.!r: Qreg Jom'lson
-·· .:: ·~·Tr1-£.o Management. lnc .
. ' ;.· . ·: _' :'.i.~;i_~~·}~~
' · ... "Box• 1730 ~ ..
d . . J:', . .'~fi, :?:·1~~~~:'~ a, • A~eo~·>colDraoo 816H ' • ·_a: .-' ;
. 0 ~
-~--~
. W OCI . >. .:; !i -~o
'
~.~ .
~·
. ...,
·RE: J<ings Row Subdivision·'...:"." D.r•1n-:· · ,;•:. , ·~':· .
age S b.tdV Re Yi E!W _ .. : . 'c.. . ~ .. < .::_'...,• -~~...:.
:R.X~E:R. :R. E .A. L 'T "Y'
• 303 I 921-3942 BOX 1052 • BASALT, COLORADO
November 8, 1974
• Larry Schmueser
Garfield County Planner
Glenwood Springs, Colo. 81601
Re: Colorado Country's KINGS ROW, a subdivision
Dear Larry:
This letter is to request postponement of the hearing on the preliminary
plat for captioned subdivision from November 11th. until the next regular
or special meeting of the Commission and the Board.
I am sorry that summary reports from Lincoln-Devore on the geological
study performed and from Gerald Gamba on the drainage study performed
would not be adequate for the November hearing. However, I wish to
have the full reports and other matters in complete order before appearing
~theheu~.
Kindly advise me of the date and time of the next date when I may
present the subdivision for preliminary approval.
cc: John A. Thulson, Glenwood
Tri-Co Management, Aspen
i=~~;,3~~~~~(.\.·~~r'.,~:i; ~ .. ::.·,¥:~: .~~. K,,~~:~-,~~
<~:~;~_;.;!;t,~i·-;.~~·.:.... ':},,.
r:"" .. -t/"". '
~~~
John Wix, President
<..,,."'l'~d~,.1;r fF ?aitr"7~""'+in ·;. ''ritf. rs· ..... -;:
. ... ~ ., .......
. ' : -~-. ~}~;;,~~~; ~··.[-,.... • • <· ·i
~J "; -.. .·
··~~~·s: .. :. , .
· .. -2--·.r r·, ,,.;;,, . t. .~ .·.::;·:.:.., ~.:, :; ,.;, ~·=-~~~.
~ '~-'!I;. ... ' ·;">"! -.
.,-_ , ..
:·"'*<'
'-:-"[~ .:: -.-;_"--..;;;.~
-:~ :· ~ . ;( ·.~OUJj4iog ·the nmo-graphs pvbl i shed by .Jeppson .at _Utah. Sta.te'. ~iversi4'-;~ :,' ~',;{·.· ~:(_.·!
, :~,::,, · ~:Channel .-paciti~ \l(ere a.l~o chec~ed. Using .the pn>posect;dMfUlial~ ~ ~ ~ ,:~ · ·r ;·~'':.;>.
:v.:;.. -. ·I' ·-,, · .sl8'f@, the. channels are of adequate sue to bM1dle the compute,i . .st~ · <;;;. ::-~~; •• • .:-:•.> r ~. ,' ' -. -runoff from the on-site drainage; . . .. · ' ."~_.\· ~ :_·. ···~~-:: ./
.-·. :_~ ~ · .. ';. ·:~ :: 11' ~ry', the ru~;,; volumes c~uted are ~.easonably c~rrect and ·~~~\-~·::__i!.::..f:' ~~~:;
-:-.··_ · ·:· ...,,.eposed drainage channels with tile proposed grades will carry. the rWIO'ff<·-:-. t,_., ·~ .... :1< ,, ~· l-·:... ._,, ·• .
.-::.-,.._::-. .. at ~.section checked~ . lflowever, in· reviewing ttie data provideci..-tbe..,.. ~< i.: ~ .~ ~; ... }
--..... ~elocity; :in the pr.oposed channels is high· and velocity control or t:baftie'K~-·"-'···, c.;-.--:>-:
~
:':~·
1·
I I'"' I .
I
I' ! "
;/
.>-r--' •'
·'
r
.. -~
"·..-1~~~? :;
(:.~~·
$-•· ......
......
"1 ~'~:
.;._·!!--
... ,' ', .-. . -arul roadway embankment protection should .be incorporated for .protection ..againrt: ~:·.~·.~
· exce~ve el/VU"1·on · · · • · · · ·~ ·· · ·;r · . ' c. •· · :-A.... · .. ~!:t;f ·~ -.. > >; .-. ' : " "": ' ~.::.;,.• ;. ",r -~-#_,,.,Ill•"!•.~ ••. .:·~!;,
f .. •' ~ .... ~· . ~-·· ;o• • -~ ~---~ , .. ~'-. -• : -.-··, ~~~ /·~~~~:~·:· -·(:~ ·: l. ,;~ _..,..
"::.-' "..._ ··:' 1f we can be &f,.furtber assistance please"Fe~l free to l~t us ·'know.:.;·~-.·,···" ·.):,-. · ·
.:.. .... ,: :_,,..· -~.._"'!':°':. ~ "'.-;~ ·:\-<.'. -. , . _. ! ,. . "~,· -~ --·-..... _ ... -~ ,_. -·
.. .;
~ ·~ .
1 ~~. ·-
;:.
·:";
-~ ..
<
,,
. ""·
.....
,;.
....
..
.'i
...
~'* ...... -...
•:~ '
~_..:
' -... -~ -~-
.,.·, ·. ... ,, . •. <
. 't-
.-~· ' .. ~ 'JJ:'_ -·· ..,, . .;..-
'¥ .. ... -" .. ~-:-
.... ,. ~ ... ~.
.#·-
'.."'
.....
..
:-•·
..'
. '.
~'·
I'. '. .:
,,. . .
i,...
·!~ ~.. '.:. ~~~.~ <:
• t ~.. ,...:
·~ ''" ... '., .. _,, -,. .. .~
.•
·~
~ -·.
-""!'' ',._:..,, ·,
" ~ -__ . -~~
_'),.
~--~
;...-, .. i
,,-.... ,>-' ....
·.i:.' -·· . ... -..
~ .. ' ~
,,
··:. •.::. "". ~
~-'-' ~ ··'-;
--· ... ' -. .. .... .,,. ,,
..
-~~.' .-
_.__ :;_.,
:; -~
~ : •...
·".~-
~ ..:~
j· '• ..
--..,· '·.
;·/; ":::~:f :-.;~
..... ~'~~~:-:r:·· -•;o.
:..~ ... .JI' .. ,~·-_:--~··,:
; . ~ :n
' . "",-· ~' .. ~ -. "'. ·. '
.. . -~ ,.. ..
" :-~ ..... ' ' -,; -» ~ . ...,,
... : .... _.-,
~-··
.";,. ·~i~ ·~··"'.
~ -·,.. ··}~,~-..
... . ..;~ ~~--,~ ~: ' . ..~ .
t· ..
}:· ~~)\
'.i-
,. /~·:~ >;.' ~~,~~~~ . . i •. ,.> •
~ .......... -:.~~ ~ .: ~ .·
;~~ _f ~-;._~, ~.·-/ •
~ ...... ~·. '
... z· .
.p~~;. ........ ..f-
:".;. · '.t. ' -<~"' .. ' .. • ' :/:'~··:~;·,1~·:~~
;,.
. ·~ ! ~-
:.;; ..
-.;· -'·. .• ·.·. ' . .. . . . ;i;~~;.·1~
"l
GARFIELD COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH &
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
_Qp C!_--LLU €'f1,' //
2014 BLAKE AVENUE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601
October 27, 1975
KING REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC.
P. O. Box 1044
Basalt, Colorado 81621
Dear Sir:
PHONE 945-7255
In receiving your plans and specifications for water supply at King's Row,
we have noted that you are dangerously close to the maximum mandatory tolerance
for lead, arsenic, and cyanide; therefore, it is requested that we be allowed to
collect a sample from the well to be sent to the State laboratory for reanalysis
in these three areas in order to verify the actual amounts of these potentially
hazardous substances present.
Please notify us when you could accompany us to the well site to obtain such
a sample.
Sincerely,
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT
_,. (· --/" ,~ / /.
;_:., c~t:hi---,· ,t..--__ ~.c/~(,,,
Lamont L. Kinkade, R.P.S.
City, County & State Sanitarian
LLK/tlb
cc: Garfield County Planning Department ..,....,-
3Jf_Jl/I/
/Jf' 4;,tlwkJ+
~/t-tsn. ~
()\__
•:6e1r-JGd. . '~06
'
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
t.A::i I 71fi~UE • DENVER, COLORADO 80220 • PHONE 388-6111
-.-w-t -t::\~~ Edward G. Dreyfu., M.D., M.P'.H. Executive Director
Tri-County Management, Inc.
P. O. Box 1730
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Sirs:
October 9, 1974
RE: MS-1 Proposed
Kings Row Subdivision
,
This department is in receipt of the preliminary data for the
above referenced project.
The material has been received with the following comment be-
ing noted.
l. No detailed drawing and specifications
of the proposed water well development,
storage facilities, and distribution
system have been submitted for review.
Enclosed are "Request for Review Forms" that must be submitted
with the above material in order for them to be reviewed by this
Department.
RHS/vg
cc: Mark Bean,
Garfield Co. Planning
2014 Blake Avenue
Glenwood Springs, Colorado
cc: Lamont Kinkade
Very truly yours,
DIVISION OF ENGINEERING
AND SANITATION
c?~~ul/~..d~
Roger H. Smades, P.E.
District Engineer
Engineering Section
-~ ... Mount Sopris Soil Conservation District
P.O. Box 1302 -Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
OCT - 8 1974
October 5, 1974
~ .C 1~~D CO. PLANNER
Garfield County Planning and zoning Commission
Larry R. Schmueser
2014 Blake Ave.
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Dear Mr. Schmueser: Re: Kings Row Subdivision
Attached is a copy of the Mt. Sopris Soil Conservation District's letter
dated September 15, 1974.
In checking our records, it was noticed that the reply was sent to Eagle
County. There was confusion on part of the clerical secretary since the
land was located in Eagle County and she did not detect that the land was
to be included in subdivision regulations for Garfield County.
A copy of the letter dated September 15, 1974 was sent to Attorney
John Thulson.
We are sorry for any inconvenience we may have caused you.
Sincerely,
,,')
f'~(I ~
Flaven J. ~se
President
•-rcto.-1 uonanoct
•9'1 .cw .,..t •l'Ut ·-n1q'Hm94 ~n1 o:a •P •etiwapom •-.ids o~
~90£r( .,
_... 9"' W"i 111D'Alf'IGO tt---~ • 'Pitt e&tt• o:a MP •.:aw~ 'duUEeAP
•.&wp '""'" .., "°'""' ...... pw 9dot• .... ,~ o:a -· •eti•...-...... Pft .......
•ttff JO NI~·
pa9 ediOt• JO •• ......._. tlO IU'Jpadep UUM «\ ai•npam •..-.ua ~
..,
--:=::: . ·---;:.
•t9"119.10d aop.etto4 "'" pn ...
_ _. '91Jet• 10 •"""""• °' •P UMM °' 94•DPO'I •--.de ~
••at&J""• pB llilot• ;o ..... ...._. ~ 9l\P NN8tt o:a -~ 'da"fttMIJ'.
••--19"8 ... ~· JO ee...S..8 G:a •P anAM ·~ 1'aW .... .S
IMO'[tOJ ft U nDfrPl:a'Pl'Jt
•antx paw -®LX • aou •b.ndoad .,~ ao st'J'09 JO ~ ~ NW .-.111&
!JAGO:> 916wa SJ vnt »J G0T41t0Tidl WjSJli#I Li i,£f; "IA
. W-~ .... JMleoe.I nq pXW08 ~01•8lO ao-pu.neao:> t'JOS tllllillos ~--eq;r,
··w •st -...astdtls
I "9f')
'tt9t8
'l\G&iildotM90 paw 6a1mc• •""°°
•..
, .... ,_.
·,i:-
·'
" ,~. '•.
. -,
4--
·:f'·
;C
.. •
)_" ."\ -~ ' .
,'f'
' .....
. .. --
, >.;: • ,_,
. _, -~ .
:'
------------------------------~~
R ..
'" ; ~
,·, :f:
' <~ '
.;. .. ...
, .
.. •
i
' ~// ;
'
Cl)
a:
0 >-w > a:
::::> en
0 z
<C _,
0 w a: w ....
(/)
CJ w a:
'
(/)
a: w w z
tS z w
CJ z ;:: _,
::::>
Cl) z
0 u
'
>-z
<C a..
::E
0 u
. (.!) z
a: w w z
(.!) z w
0
0
<C a:
0
0
-' w
I
c::>
C> L.,
~ L.,
~
Ci> .
M
0
M
....... ...
0
<O -co
0
0 < 0:::
0 _,
0 u
(/)
(.!) z a: c..
(/)
0
0
0
3: z w _,
CJ
'
O'>
<O
<O
x
0 co .
0
c..
'
w
::::> z w > <
0
0
<C c::
0
-' 0 u
co -co
Tri-co Management Inc.
P.O. Box 1730
Aspen, Colorado 81611
W~@rn~
~-CT -4 1q74
GARflELD CO. PLANNER
Attn: Mr. Jim Reser and Mr. Gregg Johnson
2 October 197 4
RE: Kings Row Subdivision -Project
74148
Gentlemen: ... .:<<
In compliance with your request I have reviewed the data submitted
concerning applicability of soil infiltration disposal of effluent
from individual home sewage treatment systems on the King Row Subdivi-
sion in Eagle County.
By letter of 15 September 1974 the Mount Sopris Soil Conservation
District has recommended to the County Planning Corrmission "that a
central sewage system be installed, one that is not ground absorbed".·
· In addition to the information provided by the soil·conservation dis-
trict, I have received the following pertinent data:
1. Percolation test data from Gerard Pesman, P.E.
2. Water well log and pump installation report from Mountain
Drilling. · a .
3. Pumping test report from Canaday Pump Company.
4. Preliminary plat of Kings Row Subdivision.
5. Map of water distribution plan and perc. test locations.
'
From review of the above named d~ta, previous knowledge of1the geologi-·
cal character of the area, and recent technical literature the follow-
ing conclusions are drawn:
1. The percolation rates (range-12 min/inch to 19 min/inch) are
within acceptable limits for soil absorbtion disposal.of individual
sewage treatment system effluent.
2. The well encountered water at a depth of 300 feet with suf-·
ficient hdyrostatic Pl'.'essure to raise the water level in the ·
well to 240 feet below the surface. This indicates that an im-
pervious layer of rock exists extending from some undetermined
depth below the surf~ce to a depth of 300 feet. If this were not
the condition, the top of the water table would have been encoun-
tered at 240 feet instead of 300 feet.
111 Treatment and Disposal of Wastewater from Home by Soil Infiltration
and Evapo-Transpiration ... Dr. Alfred P. Bernhart, P.E., University of
Toronto Press. 1973.
~ , -2-
3. The well was pumped at a rate of 26 g.p.m. for 24 hours with
only a five inch drawdown indicating a saturated zone of high
porosity and permeability below the 300 foot level.
4. The well is located on the topographically highest portion
of the property with a potential of four individual sewage systems
within a 500 foot radius and nine individual sewage systems with-
in a 1000 foot radius of the well head.
5. If there was no loss of moisture from the soil to evaporation~.
transpiration, the nine individual systems, discharging 500 g.p.d.
each.into the 1000 foot radius, would increase the moisture content
of the body of soil and rock to a depth.or 250 feet approximately
5% by volume in 100 years. , .. · ·
6. Depending on the design of the individual systems, evapo-
transpiration can be expected to remove from 30 to lOOS of the
effluent water content from the soil.
Based upon the above conclusions it is my opinion that individual sewage
treatment systems may be expected to perform very satisfactorily on
the Kings Row Subdivision without endangering the subsurface ground
water quality conditioned upon the following: ·
1. No sewage system effluent diposal shall be allowed to take
place ~ithin ~00 feet of the ~ell head.
2. Each individual system .shall be designed by a qualified person
specifically for the dwelling unit it is to serve.
3. All designs should attempt to accomodate to a maximum evapo-
transpiration rate and therefore aerobic disposal fields should
be used in preference to anaerobic fields. "Dry wells" should
not be used at all.
Respectfully,
~~~G/ Jerome F. Gamba ·
P.E. & L.S. 5933
~
STATE OF COLORADO
John D. Vanderhoof, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WILDLIFE
Jack R. Grieb, Director
6060 Broadway
Denver, Colorado 80216 ( 825-1 1 92)
30 September 1974
GARFIELD COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Attention: Mark L. Bean
2014 Blake Avenue
Glenwood Springs, Colo. 81601
Re: KING'S ROW SUBDIVISICN
~~TIW
1 - 1 1~74
-·-.. ---·
GARFIELD CO. PLANNER
The tract of land described as being in the north t and northwest i of
section 28 and the south t southwest i southwest! southwesti of section
21 T7S R87W has been examined by the Division of Wildlife with the fol-
lowing results:
The land is situated on the crest of a knoll or ridge and the
plant cover is typical of an ecotone or boundary of the sagebrush-
grassland and oak-serviceberry habitat types. Because of this edge
effect it has an abundance of small mammal and bird species.
A pellet group census transect was taken and indicated 19 deer days
of use per acre. Evidence was found of use by coyote, badger, and
numerous small mammals inclmding grcund squirrels, rabbits, and shrews.
The bird species present included those ccmrnon to both sagebrush and
Oakbrush habi1at types. Additional animals that may be present are
blue and sage grouse, band-tailed pigeons , mourning doves, hawks and
owls, bear,and turkeys.
Impacts on the wildlife of a subdivision on this tract would be the
elimination of use of the area by the big game species mentioned and
a severe reduction in the habitat of the small mammals 1 song birds,
and game birds using the area. The tFact is a continuation of a large
oakbrush area that is used as intermediate (spring-fall) range by
deer and cocaasionally by elk on the way to and from the winter range
on the north wall of the Roaring Fork valley. This particular tract
extends out into the surrounding cleared fields and provides a corr-
idor for this migration.
The splitting of this area into two acre and larger lots with its
associated roads, driveways, houses and outbuildings will remove
most of the natural ve~etation. The allowing of one horse per acre
in paddocks will insure the removal of all growing ve7etation from
these areas. Apparently, there is no provision for irrigation to
restore these denuded areas, and if there were, the grade and rocki-
ness of the ternafun would cause a high pcssibility of erosion.
The proximity of human activity would cause some wildlife to abandon
adjacent areas of habi~at which includes some deer fawning sites.
Sincer~;'/)/A /} __
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, T. W. Ten Eyck, Executive D" l~.~N, Ford Strong, Chairman
R. Withers Cool, Vice Chairman • Charles A. Gebauer, Secretary • Dr. J. K. ildress, Member • Orest Gerbaz, Member• Dean Hull, Member
Dean Suttle, Member• Jean K. Tool, Member• Vernon C. Williams, Member
JOHN D. VANDERHOOF
Governor
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
Department of Natural Resources
300 Columbine Building
1845 Sherman Street
Denver, Colorado 80203
September 2 7, 197 4
Garfield County Planning Department
Attention: Mark L • Bean
2014 Blake Avenue
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Re: Kings Row
Dear Mr. Bean:
This is to acknowledge receipt of preliminary plan material for
the above referenced subdivision. As requested, I have reviewed this
information to determine whether an adequate water supply is available,
C. J. KUIPER
State Engineer
and at this time, I cannot provide you with a determination due to the lack
of sufficient information. More information is needed on the source of
ground water, the geology of the area, and available recharge to the aquifer.
Also, the developer does not have available a legally adequate water supply
until the application for a water right is approved by the Water Court (Case
No. w~2393).
If this information is provided, I would be most happy to review it
at your request.
JAD/HDS:mvg
cc: L. Enewold
G. McNeish
B. DeBrine
V/truly yours,
~a.!{/~
• Jeris A. Danielson
-11Pputy State Engineer
JOHN D. VANDERHOOF
Governor
Mr. Larry Schmueser
~ ~dd~-~1.!,IJ!!«t. §)9f~~ f~~~--·~J
COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
254 COLUMBINE BUILDING -1845 SHERMAN STREET
DENVER, COLORADO 80203 PHONE 892-2611
September 27, 1974
Garfield Planning Department
2014 Blake Avenue
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Dear Mr. Schmueser: RE: KINGS ROW
JOHN W. ROLD
Director
As our letter of September 20, 1974, stated we did not receive a geologic report
with the submittal of this subdivision. A copy of that letter was sent to Tri-Co
Management, Inc., and they responded to that by sending the enclosed "Geologic Report,"
bn the assumption that it had not been included in the original submittal. In fact,
the "Geologic Report" which they sent, had been included in the submittal, but we
do not consider this adequate as a geologic report. From our previous work together
and previous geologic report which have been submitted, you are well aware of the
reasons why this so-called "Geologic Report" is totally inadequate.
At this time, therefore, we reconnnend denial of this subdivision request until
reasonable geologic information becomes available, and we are given an opportunity
to review that geologic information.
If we can be of further assistance, please contact our off ice.
,,.
DCS/skl
cc: Land Use' Connnission
Tri-Co Management, Inc.
Enclosure
Sincerely,
Oa/l.rz-~~ C ,s_y&~
David C. Shelton
Associate Engineering Geologist
GEOLOGY
STORY OF THE PAST .•• KEY TO THE FUTURE
..
i;:tGLE Cl)UNTY
DEP/ l\1 .NT Cl·' :)L 'NNING 1'.ND D:.·:VEJ.. .. .lENT
ccur:T11ou :~r::
P.O. i3ox 789
Engle, Colorado
81631
l9 September 1974
Phone 328-6338
Mnrk L. Dean
Garfield County Planning Department
Glenwood Springs. Colorado 81601
Re: Kings Row Subdivision Se-62-74
Dear !·liark:
~ t their regular meeting on September 18, the Cagle County Planning Commission
reviewed the proposed preliminary plan for the captioned project. This review
ls pursuant to a.n agreement between Gnrfield and Fngle Counties dated 28 f\!ay 1974.
The Planning Commission has the following comments on the plan, n.s presented:
•'
-all relevant lot lines must conform to the county line bisecting the project.
-6% of the land (or cash value thereof) in Eagle County must be dedicated
to the appropriate school District.
-a road maintenance agreement most be drQ.!llMbetween our two counties,
a.pplicnble to the short road spe.n im Sngle County
-the drainage report ls not adequate because;
-it does not identify the drainage basins used in Q calculations
-drainage is proposed to be handled by existing irrigation ditches
and minimal roadside dralne.g-e. The use of irrigation ditches to
handle storm runoff is not recommended unless the ditches are
re-designed to accommodate calculated runoff volumes. without
jeopardizing down-stream ditches. The 0. 5% erade !or portions of
the road will not handle drainage v.itbout extensive culverting and
easement to get the drainage away from the roadbed
-that the final plat for the ~:agle County portion be subject to the
entire final plat review process as shown in Eagle County's Sub-
cll vision liegulations.
These reoommendnttons will be presented to the Board of County Commissioners
at their meeting on 26 September 1974, beginning at 9:00 /' .M •• and any resulting
comments will be forwarded to your office for consideration in your review.
If you have any questions, please contact this o!!tce.
Sincerely.
Quentin Mitchell, Jr.
Planning A salstant
,
I -TRI-CO Management, Inc.
Planning • Design • Surveying • Engineering • Construction
and Management of Land
September 24, 1974
Colorado Geological Survey
254 Columbine Building
1845Sherman Street
Denver, Colorado 80203
Attention: David c. Shelton
Dear Mr. Shelton:
Enclosed is a copy of the geologic report which should
have been included with the preliminary plan for Kings
Row Subdivision. We are very sorry if this was not
included in your package as indicated by your letter of
September 20, 1974.
Sincerely,
,,.-// l /,. ... , , ~t-~f l lfhut7J
u-egg .io!!PSon -'-
dob
cc: Garfield County Planning Department
Land Use Commission
A Subsidiary of Trico Corporation • Offices throughout the West
Box 1730
Aspen
Colorado 81611
303. 925. 2688
' t #
,
TRI-CO Management, Inc. · ....
Box 1730
Aspen
Colorado 81611
303. 925. 2688
Planning·· Design • Surveying • Engineering • Construction
and Management of Land
August 30, 1974
Geologic Report for Kings Row Subdivision, located in
Garfield and Eagle counties, Colorado.
r------1 The Kings Row region is one of apparently stable ignious
basalt rock as indicated by the well report and open out-
croppings in the· area. Colorado geologic maps are not
presently available and we therefore stand open to comment
from the USGS.
A Su!J';id1a1 11 nf Ir 11:0 CntrH •r .111011 • O!fH''.:!S tt11nwJh1;ut the West
-~:,
~. :-
..-1"'-
,. '
··--1 i'l'
(~' !
-,~ ..
T~·l-CQ~jMandgement, Inc.
Planning • Design • Surveying • Engineering • Construction
and Management of Land
September 18, 1974
Mr. John Wix
Colorado Country
Box 219
Basalt, Colorado 81621
Dear Mr. Wix:
SEP 2 0 1~:i74
GARFIELD CO. PLANNER
-
Box 1730
Aspen
Colorado 81611
303·925·2688
Enclos~d is the request for review of plans and specifications
for public water supply. If it meets with your approval could
you please sign and send on to
Mark Bean
Garfield County Planning Dept.
2014 Polake Avenue
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
I had mentioned to you earlier that there would be a technical
review this Friday. However, it has been canceled. Apparently
they feel everything is in order.
I have some information on that tank we talked about and if you
are still interested I'll send it down. The man who has these
tanks is currently planning to set some up here in Colorado.
You might save some money i r you L.i.l' .i 11 to his plans.
If you have any questions please call.
Sincerely, .
·\:.,i\ ~ &' A , .. ~u ·._J . /-"·~~---
Gregg Johnson -
dob
A Subsidiary of Trico Corporation • Offices throughout the West
~~
'j}
·,,:
,~
=., .....
•;.:;:--,
·~; :'-
LJl""\f"~~~~-w;F'-''~ I I ~Lela . D~cial
Mail in duplicate tr -NVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION t.Dal::e.~kesoLL·rcr·
2014 SLAKE AVE,
945-7255
GLENw~;~··;;;~ 1 N ~~~~ 816 a~ . .!D.,!.!:.A~TuE!..--------------
REQJEST FOR REVIEW OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
FOR
PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY
FROM: Colorado Country's Kings Row Home Owners Association
(Name or Municipality, District, Industry, or other Owner)
BUSINESS ADDRESS: Box 1052, Basalt, Colorado 81621 927-3942 __________ :__ ______ .:._ __________________ Phone No. ______ ~---------
TO: Colorado State Department of Public Health, Sanitation Division.
1. It is requested that the following plans, specifications, reports, and design inforaation be
reviewed hy your Department:
List of Documents: Colorado Division Water Resources Permit Application;
water Form B; Well Report. Colorado Division of
Water Resources~ Well completion and Pump Installation
Report; Test.Pump Report; Chemical Analysis W~ter
Sample
(Note: Design data on all treataent units aust be subaitted)
2. After you have reviewed these plans and documents it is requested that our Municipality, District,
etc., be advised as to the following:
A.
B.
c .
D.
What saiitary defects were found?
Do the facilities on the plans comply with Colorado State Department or Public Health design
stan1ards and it not, what are the recommendations tor modifications in design?
Do you reel our water system •111 produce a water complying with the minimum requirements or
. the Colorado State Department or Public Health when the facilities in Item 1 are completed?
What are the recommendations concerning the proposed project in general as outlined?
3. Below is a brier description or the improvements proposed: A central water distribution
system to serve all lots as described by includedplans.
4. The water is to be obtained rrom the following source (also describe source and subait any
laboratory or technical data available): well {see well report and related
information as listed above
5. Is water supply chlorinated? if necessary ~~--~~~------~~~~-
· ..
Page 2
6. The rollo•ing inrormation is supplied:.
A. Naae or Design Engineer Gordon Freudig -Trico Managment, Inc.
B. Is Design Engineer registered? yes In what state? Colorado PE 7126
c. Estimated cost or project unknown
D. Total money available ror project unknown
E. Method or rinancing unknown
F. Date expected to call ror construction bids unknown
G. Expected date or completion or construction unknown
H. Population to be served by planned racilities 3.5 persons/lot= 171.5 persons
. . .. 49
I. Number or· taps to be served------------------------------
1 I·£._, .. --,~ l Title.~
~'--2 ~--~ "-----~a--"------District O!rtcial or Owner
ES ENG 59 (Rev. 5-58-10)
':'·.•
--r-·---..-. -:'. J··
-_____ . ...__. --.-.....,..
,;;
·=:t'·,
~..;_~-!------~· .,
-.1: --·
!
I
l
·---··-·--~
!
i· """'"-""":-,......"'i+~------+--------------·--------·-----J ..<: ·.~~L
• . I •
----· ---·~--~-----------·---· --------.. -,,;. ---_""'"·"""-;._....,_._..,..3·-__ .... J;~-:-_-. ~-
' ·------------~-----------------------
' i
I
......----11 ~, • I .··. -----+--
'··
·, '·'
-:--r-------
-------~------------------------
. I .
--·--------------------··--------'------'---~--------
1 •
I
.:.! ----·-------·----------·----...!---~
1:----tt------+---------------. ----·---·---______________________ _;_ ____ _
I
!
------------· ----·---·--------------·--·----
I.
~----++---------.J _______ --------------------------------------!-,--·
i
r-.;;fft~~~--~-------------+.-1~_--~-·~_-:-:I
; = kaaf-~ ~~·
. ·I Jt-... ~~:rc::Sl~S-:.-..---·--~ ~ ~OOZ!
-~f-j-t.ft'.1'7fijc:;,-.~~~-=~----~/'1\eo/ rvra 091 (!)( . . . .
J:t:Fy'~ s·ii . <!!) -~;---J
--c;10 I ~-: -.. ,-·---:-ci -1
' i : --.t l ~~ .~". ; ,,_ __ __, _______________________ _ ------------
~
'
---------.C--------· - -
-----------------
...
'
JOHN D. VANDERHOOF
Governor
SEP 2 4 1q74
GARFIELD CO. PLANNER
-~-~-'l\t~ . ~~· ?~--·~ ~
COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
254 COLUMBINE BUILDING -1845 SHERMAN STREET
DENVER. COLORADO 80203 PHONE 892-2611
September 20, 1974
Garfield County Planning Department
2014 Blake Avenue
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Gentlemen: RE: KINGS ROW
JOHN W. ROLD
Director
We are unable to fully evaluate the preliminary plat and supporting documents
due to the fact that no geologic report was included. We recommend that the
developer be required as stated in Senate Bill 35 to submit a geologic report
which discusses the geologic factors which would effect the proposed land use.
When this additional information is available we will be able to more fully
evaluate the proposed subdivision.
If we can be of further assistance, please contact our office.
DCS/skl
cc: Land Use Commission
Tri-Co Management, Inc.
Sincerely,
¥-~e-~
David C. Shelton ~ ~ · ?.R ,
Associate Engineering Geologist
GEOLOGY
STORY OF THE PAST ••• KEY TO THE FUTURE
L8, Lg74
ve
1.
2.
3.
4.
United States Department of the Interior
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
Glenwood Springs Resource Areap.O. Box 1OO9
Glenwood Springs, Co1o[ado 8J.601
Septembe
Guttts
Mark L. Bean, planner
Garfield County planning Oepartmenlt
2014 Blake Avenue
Glenwood .Springs, Colorado 91601
Dear Mark:
We have reviewed, the Kings Row Subflivision and hathe following comrents:
IN REPLY REFER TO
L785.2
Provisions for
included in the
snow removal
protectirze
hould be
rrenants.
bea]-ting
septie tanks
incl in the
Porous soils seem tofactor for individual
and leach fields.
A leash law should beprotective covenants.
The sr:bdivision is in closeto a critical deer wintering range.
incerely yours,
art A. !{heeler,
Manager
sep re tl
COLOFIADO
STATE
U N lVERSITY
Colorado State Forest Service
1039 North 7th Street, Grand Junction, Colorado 81501
Telephone 3O3 - 242'7518
September 15, L974
t'Iarlc L. Bean, Planner
Garfield County Planning DePt.
2014 Blake Avenue
Glenwood Springs, Colo. 81601 ,
".
Dear Mark:
Reference preliminary pLans of Kings Roi'r
2l- and 28, T7S' R87[il.
I have reviewed the pLat and supporting informaEion submitted to me by your offlce
and detect no significant problems relative to fire safety and vegetative inpact
which couLd be considered higher than normal considering the nature of the deveLop-
ment.
Subdivision located in portions of sections
Sincerely,
L4 lts
LeRoy A. Scott
Senior District Forester
sEP 18 1914
Eq o[,
r'*
Ronnlxe Fonx ScHoou Dlsrnlcr RE-t
LUCIAN H. ALLEN. SUPERINTENDEE
NICHOLAS R. MASSARO. A33ISTAM SUPA.
P. O. lOX 420
GLENWOOD SPRINGS' COLOFAOO A!60I
Septernber L3, L974
Mr. Mark L. Bean
Garfteld County Plannlng Department
2014 BLake
Glenwood Sprlnge, Colorado 81601
RE: Kings Row Subdivisio'n
Dear Mr. Bean:
The Board of Educatton of Roarlng Fork School
Distrlct RE-l ie recoumendlng the donatlon of
one acte of Land for each fifty hmresites or
dollar value of sald donatl.on to be deposited
with the Garfleld County Cmissioners to be
used by the. school dtstrict for the purchase
of future schooL sltes.
Forty-nr.ne sites would represent forty-nine
rtftieths of an acre or doLlar value thereof.
mlw
y',",i7'"' Cr cv''v1
L
SL?
sl$t
Septeurber 11 , L97 4
lIark L. Bean, PLanner
Garfleld Cormty Planning DePt.
2014 Blake Ave.
G&,enwood Springs, C0 81601
RE: Klags Row SubdLvlslon
Dear I,Ir. Bean:
We take obJectlon to Paragraph 11, Page 3 of the Protectlve Covenaats for
Colorado Countryrs Kings Row-subdivislon. This paragraph states that the
ohmer shal-I provide electrlc 1lnes ln or over the roadway abuttlng each 1ot
and that aoy sKtenslons from said l-lne shaLL be underground and at the exPense
of the parcel holder.
Due to the curylng nature of the roads as platted tt wiLL be very dlfficuLt
to bulld overhead-poner llnes that naturally proceed ln straight 1lnes from
pole to poIe. The guys and anchors at each angLe point wtL1 probably fa1-L
outside of tte platied eaaement and require additlonal easenents'
The requirenent of tmderground lines from the roadway to the house could
require the potentlal 1ot otner to pay an lnordlnately high cost for this
service. Thls could conceivably run is high as two to flve thousand dollars
per lot.
We request that thls paragraph 11 be deleted from the Protectlve Covenants
and that the develop"i *oik out anesth6tl.cally and economically feaslble
el_ectrlc distributlon system with us. At that tine more aPproprlate covenant
restrictions can be drawn.
Sincerely,
S ELECTRIC
CIIK/ep
cc: John Wi:r, Presfdent, Thunder River Realty Co'
Tri Co l"traaagement Inc.
sys
2trI4 EILAKE AVENUE
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
EARFIELD trtrUNTY
ENVIRtrNMENTAL HEALTH
EiLENWtrtrD SpRtNGS, trtrLORADO El16tr1
MEMORANDUM
Mark L. Bean, Garfield County planning Dept.
Lamont L. Kinkade, R.p.S., Director
KrNGs Row suBDrvrsroN - preliminary plan comments
September 9, 1974
Water
No chlorinator provided
No application for State review submitted(See attaiched)
SeJ,ver
No application for State review submitted(See attached)
- AIl eLse appears to be in order -
EWIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPT.
f,ilqn ruffiADE
Lamont Lr. Kinkade, R.P.S.Director
PHONE 945-7255
1.
2.
ttK/@
encls.
r
{-/
r
l{ir
I B0X 1052 . BASA[T, C0t0RADO . 3Og/9Zt-9942
September Lt, L97L
1. ,-"r.;18r ! '
SIIB.TECT: Colorado Countryts KfNG.S R01f, a subdlvlsion eonslsting of lr9
single famlIy residentlaL 1ots on 2O2.L5 acres of land sttuataln the S!$l% and SVldEl, Section 21 and the N$IhI%, Sectlon 28,
Township J Sorth, Range 87 l,llest of the Sixth Princlpal Merldlan,
Garfteld and Eagle corntles, Coloredo.
Notice ts hereby given that at least f!.ve percent of those
lands above-descrlbed shaLl be reserved through deed restrictlons as
open area, the malntenance of nhich shall be insured by speciflc
obllgations in the deed of each lot and ln the Protecttve Covenantsof the subdird.sion.
Notice aLso is hereby given that the streets within the subdlvislon
shall be eonstructed in aecordance wlth the specifications of the respectlve
counties and dedlcated thereto upon approval and acceptance by said countles.
Thank you for your attentlon.,,W
John Wix, Presldent
Thunder Rlver Realty Co.,
General Partner for
Colorado Countryrs
KfNGS ROi\r.
;r r$-Tf PiS iE{l iffi. f \f l,E iR iR. :B re. I- 5P g
CARBONDATE, COLORADO
BOX G o 963-2877
I
I
\
t
EASAtT, COLORADO
Box 1052 . 927-3i42
ASPEN, COLORADO
Box l83l . 925-2074 Thundcr Rivar w., tho lJte lndian nrma tor thc Roatinl fork
:,
zfingz P" ^,
PRELI MI NARY PLAT REVI Et^l --:--Najlfng-*l-f-{
(-
Colorado Geological SurveY
D;r; sire] ton ( Dr. t^ti 1 I j anL Pat Rogers )
Assistant Enginebring Geologi st
!
89?-261L
892-2778
5-5665
Fish & Parksx\
or
Lee Enewold
Division Engineer
Garfield CountY Courthouse
P0 Box 396
Glenwood Springs, Colo
Division of t,lildlife Game,
Marv Smith
Area Supervisor
526 Pinb Street (Hotel Colorado)
Glenwood Springs, Colo
Bureau of Land Management
Stewart Wheelerii5 gttr iireet (Post 0ffice Building)
P0 Box 1009
Glenwood Springs, Colorado
F"^ [..ta
1845 Sherman Street
Denver, Colorado 80203
Land Use Commission
Rob Schubert
State CaPitol Annex
East 14th Avenue
Denver, Colorado 80203
Colorado PubIic Health Department
Greq Misbaifr (Grand Junction - 243-3395)
V \ wut6t P,ol'lution Control Engineer
'/ \ 4210 East lLth Avenue
Denver, Colorado 80220 388-6111
Western SIope Gas company (Pub\tL So-"'"c)
Don Brungardt
Right-of-l,laY Agent
550 15th Street
P0 Box 840
Denver, Colorado 80201 s34- 1261
@re $.qrnc
oD 0x ulo?
ili.$,,s'.to[o Stbso
reP S*' ,UCV /Ctt tcca
5-5478
I
-2-
Soil Conservation Service
Arttn KoesterAllen frlfit Koester
'r n\)'r.l Post Office Building
, \"J{ \ - Po Box 880t U t Glenwood SPrings, Colo
X\
Roaring Fork School District RE-1
Lucian H. Allen
\z-! Superintendentl\ Po Box B2o
Glenwood SPrings, Colorado
Admini stration Bui lding'-(a."ost from CitY Market)
Garfield Schoo'l District RE-2
L. tl. Green
Superi ntendent
9th Street & East Avenue
P0 Box 872
Ri f'le, Col orado 81650
Mountain Bell
Paul Patterson
Manager
1429 Grand Avenue
Glenwood SPrings, Colorado
or
Mountain BellJ. C. Kilrer
Right-of-l'laY Agent
P0 Box 2688
619 Main Street
Grand Junction, Colorado 81501
\ Co]or"ado State Forest Service
\ teroy R. Scott
Senior District Forester
1039
Grand Junction, Colorado 81501
HotY Cross Electric Association
Clen Kopf
Engi neeri ng DePartment
1301
Gnand Avenue
Glenwood SPrings, Colorado
Rocky Mountain Natural Gas
John Reed
Vice President
2423 l4eadowlark Lane
P0 iox 700
Glenwood SPrings, Colorado
5-5494
5- bser
525- 1595
5-5411
243-8011 or 243-2920
5-5491
\\
5-5473
-3-
Public Service ComPanY
Miland Dunivent
\r District Manager- 119 East 3rd Street
P0 Box 152Rifle, Colorado 81650 625-2210
Colorado l^lest Council of Governments
\ J. Pat Halligan\ Executive Director
229 West Avenue
P0 Box 351
Rifle, Colorado 81650 625-t723
Colorado Mountain Collegen West Campus
Richard D. TaYlor? Director
Rural Educational Development Proiect
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 5-7481
Town of New Castle
c/o Town Clerk ,r
156 North 5th
New Castle, Colorado 984-2311
XXX
\g^* bt-rit7 - fuauu& 0^^6s/6r')
S2oSw-tO qh//Str,r.os.r,2A in seeliatr 2/;
w24 5E24 'S Er.f S trz 2+
Seatia tt 2 K;
s c(bt'orr ? ?; 4 )) t t7
7 7 aze.s * or; the ( tT
SE!.*
Nlru
N t:zT.
5outh,
N /t/r, t h*nA in
llao7?e
/'h seotiott QO)
TtzP, Z
P' /u7.
and tc construet, operate and mairrtair, on the abave dbscribed, tand.s aia/or inor',Lpon all streets, road.s or high'u;ays abutti:rg said r,ar.as, a. erectric trars-mission or d-istribution line or systera, aao io cui ard trim rrees a5d shrnbberytc ihe extent necessary tr-, keep them ciear cf sald electric rine c, systen andio eiit d'ot'n from tine tn tine all d.ead., v/eak, learilng or d.an;erous trees thatarq t:,i1 enough to strike the i.,,iies in'fa11i,g, #-s*+eehed++ae]rrarnL
.. 5rne uadersi.gned ecveEanil ilEt he t'S tnp c\..Dier_ of ihe ab.\,e d.rls-tll'ibpd lar.ais ar.d' that th€ saii-lands-are lree ara cl,ear .f encur;:i.rar:ces a.,iriilens nf wha{5nsysr eharacter e:{cept those heid }y ihc f0licvinil:Unitr/ frer$(r'6 /*;St ir"r.nnoe ?ai Dcnwr,722p,
ItJ IITTNSSS 17t@3CF, there21_t.his )Z dar.
.iz r .t i:and _ana..),1 / .
5i1r:eo, sealed and. delivt_,redj n -t he lre sence 01- :
/t' N--* l':t.a<: --*__tLrr / r, >r,
Srate of Ccloradc I) ss.
)
-d.
a,-ii::.' r]. r. rlt:e.i l.!'t'.r ie,'. 19+_L. br' ._-'r-\
L-r Jlr.r
soa1.
/^)L*{/* 2 , )*Jnnn
l,lnt.u.y plrl,1 i c
tr^i\)
e )):rl / nf
PROTECT I\TE COVENANTS
Colorado Countryrs KINGS ROW
A SUI}DIVISION
Colorado Countryrs KINGS ROI{, & Colorado llmlted partner-
shlp, belng the holder of lands hirelnafter desorlbed, hBreby
sets f ort,h thsse proteetlve ooverrarrts for ttro benef I t of na td
lands and the ownor or owners thereof.
These oovenants attaeh to the followlng descrlbed real
property, To Wit:
Colorado Countryrt KINGS liow,of Lots No. 1 through No. &8,
and EagIe Countles, Colorado,of the County Clerks of Eagle
County, Colorado, on[n tsook
F1llng No. I, conslstlngsttuated ln Garfleldas recorded ln the offloes
County and Garfteld
ffiof Eaem
l.n Bookat Page of Garfleld County.
. Colorado Corrntryr s KINGS IIOW, through and by lts General['artner, Thunder lllvor Realty [o., l'. 0. llox lO5g, Basalt,
CoIorado, heroinaf ter cal led rrOwnef rrr hereby deolares tha t ttrefollowtng ooyenants, oondltlorts, restrlotions and reservatlonsshall attaoh to the said reaI property antl ov€ry lot thereofand shall const ttuto ooverrants running wt th tlre land :
I. Hesldetltlql Use : No lot strall be used f or any purposootherttra@ttrposos'ancluotlotnaybere-suboiv1rled.
No bulldlngs, lmprovements or structuros shall be oonstguoted onany lot snaller than two (2) acrea ln stze, other tnafrlslnglefantly dwelltng and such lmprovements or etructures afare ln-ctdental or appurtenant to a slngle fanlly dweIllng or to usosherelnafter defined. Lots four (rl) acr€s, or larger, ln slze
may contatn one single fanlly dweliing antl one guest house. NoIot shall be used at any tlme for buslness or commerctal act-lvlty. Notwlthstandlng the foregoing, any lot nay be used by
Ownerr ot lts nonlnee, tor a model home or sales offlce for the
purpose of se}llng }ots or homes.
2. Antpals and Commerelql Use: The only llvestock per-nltted to fe one hoise per acre. Rarn"or stables nuat be construoted for sald horses. The locatlon
and butldlng plans for eald harns or stables must be approvedby Ownerprlor to thetr constructlon. No poultry shall be kepton any paroel.
Itogi shaIl be permlt,ted only subJect to the strlcteet lnter-pre'tatlon of the following restrlotlono: No dog shall be per-nlttgtl to troepase beyond the boundarles of the lot or paro€l ofland owned by the person or porsons where the dog ls lroused un-Ieas aooonpanted \y " person ln full oontrol of the anlnalrsbohovlor. Owner, or a sucoeedlng Homeowners r\ssoolat1oir, shall
have the rlght and obllgatlon to assess and enforoe payment of aflne by the antmalrs owner of one-hundred dollars ($fOO.OO) for
each vlolatlon of thls restrlotlon. fn addltlon to the fore-golng ponalty, any dog oarrght chanlng, or moloatlng rleer or horses
()
may be ordered disposed of by Owner herein, or succeeding Home-
owners Assoclatlon. UhlIe these restrictions nay sesn severe,lt ts polnted out that uncarod for dogs have wreaked serlous
havoc in western Colorado to both domestlcated llvestock and wllddeer, a sltuatlon that wtII no longer be tolerated by livestock
owners and wlldllfe authorlties.
No place of buslness of any k'lnd shall be plaoed or permlttedto remaln on any of sald lots or parcels, nor shall any unslghtly
obJoot or nulsance be erected, placed or malntalned on any of saldparoels, nor shall any use or thlng be p€rmltted whloh may €n-
danger the health or unroasonaloly d lsturb the holder of any parce.l
in the property.
1. Oilr-qqs qqO-,!{lnqlal Devetopeqqt: One-haIf of alI o1I,
gaE and n wtth the remalnlng on6-half owned by Besele F. F'ender, Ownor shall guarantee ttrroughtltle tnsuranoe that any lot holdor, hls sucoessors or asetgns,shall be lndennlfted for any loss whlch nlght oocur fron theererclse of eald mlneral rlghts.
{. frrlgation Bights: A}1 holders of ditch rlghts and tr-r1gat1onffieyedbyea1ddttchessha}1ent1tlethento enter upon any parcel or parcels at reasonatrle tlmes for the
purpose of repalr, constructlon or malntenance of lrrlgatloncanals or dttohes located upon exlettng eaaoments. Owner ehallfurther be entltled to apply irrlgatlon water at reasonable tlmesto oonmon grcen belt easemente located upon any paroel or paroelsas ln lts dlsoretton lt may determlne n€oessary and deslrable.
I
5. Slgns: No sign and no advertlslng devlce of any natureshall be placed upon ihe property except a small slgn on a paroel,
no larger that 6tt x l8tt, i.n form and design approved by Owner,whtch shalI constltute the Archltectural ControL Authorlty, ehowlngthe ownerts'nam€ and/or property address of the paroel, and exeepta small slgn on a parcol, no larger that l8tr x 5(t,, , tn form and
deslgn approved try the Arohltectural Control Authorlty, to lndloatethe lot ls for sale and tho party, tho arldress and/or telephone
nunber to oontaot, for lnformatlon about nuoh salo, and Broapt suotrother type of slgn or slgns alt mfly bo approvorl I n wrl l;lng by ChoArohtteotural Uontrol Authorlty.
6. Seuerage DtsposaI,: AII sewage ttlsposal faclIltles,sanIf,aryffink,sewageIeaotr,perculating"y"i",,or drain fleld shaIl be lnstalled and oonstruoted aooordlng to ttrehealty and safety standards of the Countles of Eagle and Garf,leld
and Stat'e of Colorado. No septic tanks shall be lnstaIIed wlthtna radlus of 2OO feet from the deep well supplylng donestlc waterto the subdlvislon. Wtthln that radlus only state-approved aeratedsanltary dloposal systems may be lnstallod.
?. Drqlpg.gg- Cont,tq!: Lot owners strall provtdo oulverts where+drlveways oross road dltehes and lrrl.gatlon dttctres. The mlnlmum :slze culve rt shall be elghteon ( ttl) lnches l.n dlameter unless ap-proval ts glven by the Architectural Oontrol Auttrorlty for a smbl-ler slze. No butldtng nray be erected closer than L5 feet fromany main lrrtgatlon d1tch.
8. Temporary Structures: No tent or shack shall be placed
rrpon any paroel and no temporary brrlldlng, luprovement or gtruoturo
shall be plaoed upon any parcel, tncludlng any tratler, exoopt duri.ngsuch reasonable peflod as nay lre nocessary for the construotlonof approved lnprovement on such paroel. No such tenporary bulld-lng, lmprovement or structure and no garage or barn and no bulld-lng, lmprovement or stnrcture ln the course of conetructlon shallbe used , oven temporart Iy r a I a re s lderrce .
-1-
9. Zontng: No lands withinshall eveF-fficcupied or rrned byposo ln or tn any manner whlctr lszontng requtrements of Uagle andexcept as the sane may be alloweda non-oonformlng us€.
Colorado Countryrs KINGS ROWor for any struoture or pur-oontrsry to the appl lcnhloGarfleId Count,Ies, Colorado,
under sald rsgulatlons or ag
IO. Enolosure of Unstglrtly F'aollltles and Equlpment:Arl unBrghtry structures, faolllttes, equlpment and other ltems,lnoludlng but not llmlted to those speolfled below, shall beenolosed wltlrin a so1ld, covered structure or screened fromvlew. Any traller, boat, truck, traotor, snow removal or gardeneguipment, and any slmilar ltems shall be kept at all tlmes, exeeptwhen in aotual use, ln an onclosed structure. Any refuse or trashcontalner, utlltty meter or other uttltty faollltyr gBS, oil,or water tank, sorvlce area, storage pller or area for hanglngclothlng or other household fabrlcs shall be enolosed or ap-proprlately soreened from vtew by plantlng or fenclng apprbvedby Owner, and adcquate to conceal the same from neighbors, streetsand private roads and access drlves. No lumber, metars, burknaterials,serap, r€fuee or trash shall be kept, stored or arlowedto accuuulate on any parcel except truildlng materlals durlng thecourge of construction and only for such reasonable period oftine aa ls necessary prlor to collectlon of or dlsposal thereof.No unslghtry weeds shal} be permltted to grord or rematn on anyparce l.
11. Electrlclty Wlres and Poles_: Owner shall provldellnes In or ovei the roadwayelectric and
, a buttlng eaoh rot or paree l. An.y extenstons f rom sa ld l lnesshall tto ttndergrorrnd ancl shal l. he lnatnl le d at tho oxponB6 oftho lot or parool holdor.
12. Noxlous or Of ferrsivo Actlvltles: Noactlvlty
anythlngto other
shall be carried on upon biiy-paroefbe done or permltt,ed whloh mey bo orproperty or to the owners thereof.
noxlous or offenslveat any tlme'l0or shall
beoome a nulsanos
L3. Arohlteclural CoqlLqq! Authorlty: Colorado Countryre
KINGS ROW oonstltute the Archltecturalcontror Authorlty untlr suoh time as 1t asslgna or delegatesthe functton of Archltectural Control Authortty to the KINGS
&OW lloneownsrst Agsoclatlon by lnstruments reoorded tn the recordsof the County Clerk and lleoorder of Eagle and Garfleld Countles,
14. Easements Roserved: All easements of reoord and alIeasementsmpIatofCo}oradoCountrylsKINGSRow,
l? recorded, are hereby resirved by Colorado Countryrs KINGS &Ot{,tts successorg and asslgns.
L5. Colorado Countryts KINGS ROI{ Homeownerst Assoclatlon:A nonprof ;tsof the property owners at Colorado Countryts KINGS ROW to assumethe responslbtllty of archlteotural control upon delegatlon ofsuch authortty by owner and to regulate, manage and malntalnthe supply of doneetlc water ln Colorado Couniryts KINOS ROW.The ovtners of aII parcels shall be members and shall be r€qulredto malntaln menbershtp ln suoh Assoclatlon and shalI be en{ltledt.o ono (I) vote for eaoh parcel owned anrl etrall tle roqulred to
I)rly ffR;oscmcntn levled by l,lro AeRor:tat,lnn nhlotr ofisoermcnl,r nhalllto prorated equally anong ttre paroelo. If tha ownor or ownorg of l?!y Paroel fall, afiter demand, to pay any ss{ressmsnt lsvted bythe llomeownors I Assoolatlon, then ttre llomeowners I Assoolatton or 1
colorado countryts KrNGS llol{, whtohever lnourred suoh oosts,sharl have a llen, fron and after the tlne of notloe of suohfallure to _pgy ls reoorded tn the offloe of tho County Clerk andBecorder of Eagle and Garflerd counttes, cororado, agllnst theparoel of suoh owner or ownera for the amount due-and not pa1d,plus lntoreet from the date of denand for payment at the riteof_ilx,per cgnt (6f") per annun, prus arr o-osis and exponse ofoorreotlng thc unpald amount, lncludlng reasonabre attorneyre
-ll -
fees. The lten may be foreelosed ln the manner for foreclosure
of nortgagos ln the State of Colorado.
15. ADprovaI of Structures: No struoture shall be plaoed
or p n any Paroel, or al.tered in anyupon or pernltte , or al.tered in any
way shlch w111 ohange 1ts exterlor appoaranoo wlthoub tlre prlor
approval, ln wrltlng, of the Owner or lts asslgns.
L7. rf struoturerr Def lned: rtstiucturefr as userl hcrsln shall
Eaan any ffie or below the surfaoe of ttre ground
whtoh nlght affect the apposranoe of the property or the health
or safety of any person lnoludtng, by way of llluetratlon and
not ltnltatlonr oDy bulldlng, garage, poroh, shed, greenhouse'
bathhouse, ooop, oager pstlo, swlmmlng pool, tennls court, ewtm-
nlng or tennls oabana, stable, barn, fence, waII, slgn, barbeoue
plt, tank, playhouse, treehouse, gazebo, pool, pondr €xcavotion,
pfp", poler-wtre, cable, or any trees or other landscaptng features.
I8. Irrigatl,on and Malntenance o{ Commg{r. Srea.s: The holder
of any fo EIY cEarge of three
dollars whtch Owner shall cleposlt ln a spectal nalntenance accorrnt
for the purposo of defraylng costs of natntatntng the water
systen and for lrrlgatlng and malntalnlng all oommon areas.
I9. I'Prlmary Strueturesrr: ff Prlmary Structurefr shall mean
any enclo ooouples moro thq! elghty (eO)
square foet ln area or more than blx hundred (5OO) oublc feet
|n volume. The prlmary structures permltted on any stngle paroel
shall conslst of no more than I (I) slngle fanily dwelling house
rrith an lnterlor Itvlng f loor area' of at least oire thousand ( f ,OOO)
square feet exoluslve of accessory trulldlngs, garages, porohes
or pattos, together wlth no more than two (2) non-dwelllng unlt
unobnnected enolosed structures euoh as swlnmlng or tennts oabanas,
stables, garagos or greenhousss. No structure shall be erooted
or lnstatled sxcept conourrontly wtth or after construotlon of
sattl single fanlly dwelltng house. AII prlmary st,ruoturea ehall
oonf orm ln appoaranoo wl ttr sn ltl dwe I I lttg hottne.
20. Struoture Exterlor: 'l'lre erterlor port lons of aIl butld-
irtgsstralffia1nedwoorI,stuccoltrotura1rook,bf1ck,
rlr- such other naterlal as may be approvod by the Arohlteotural
t-l omm i t tee .
2I. Feqceq: Fences shall be sub,ieot to apProval by the
ArohltectffiT-eommittee as to locatton , aI-ze, d€slgn, EOterlaI
and side guard requlrenents, and proximlty to nelghborhood property
antl structures. No barbed wlre fences shall be permltted. Fences
shall be etther spllt ralI or pole. Smaller steol mesh enclosures
for dogs may be approved by the Archlteotural Control Commlttee.
22. Procedure for Approval of Structures: Colorado Oountryra
KINGS BOW wlth r€spect to ln-fornatlon to be furnlshed and t,he form and mannor of presentlng
the some ln order to obtaln approval for any structure, lnoludtng,but not ltnited to, all lanrlscaplng. For aII prtnary structures,exterlor deslgn and elevation plans shall be submtttetl to Owner
whlch shall show looatton of alI exlstlng and proposed structures
on the parcel; all parcellinesg shall lndlcate materlals and
colors to be used; and shal1 be accompanled by sanples of naterlals
and eolors to be used, upon request. Plans shall be subnltted tn
duplleate.
23. Crlterla lor ,lrchltectural Oontrol: Owner ehall haveoonplete ffrflfriiriffi6Fto approve or dlsapproventrrroturcs. Thle dleoretlon nhal I lrrr oxoroleerl wl th al, loast t,he
followlttg obJeotlves ln mlrrrl:
-1-
a. To dlrect the posltlonlng, elevation, Prof il-e and
surface treatment of all structures so as to minlmlze thelr
obstruotlon or dlmlnutlon of quallty of ttre prlncipal vlews
fron eaoh slro.
b. Pre5lerve or enlranoe exlst,lng featuros of natttral
beauty euoh tt trees, shrubs, topograPhy and undeflned opcnnoaa
or transltlon between aroa8.
o. Pronote the deslgn of "trrrotr""" so that thelr sltlng,
forn and surfaoe treatnent harmonlzes wlth the nat,ural settLng
and wlth other struotures on adJaoent property.
d. Pronote the use of new landsoape naterials that are
lndigenous to or exlstlng |n the area and whlch have low maln-
tenance effort requlrements so that natural and landscaped sreag
are not sharply oontrasted ard well-nalntained and poorly-maln-
tained areas are not sharply contrasted.
e. Pronote the use of structural materlals that have
mlnlnun malntenanoe r€qulrements so as to assure a better ap-
pearlng area under alI condltlons.
f. Pronote the deslgn and constructlon of lmprovements that
i.noorporate the best visual, funotlonal and matertal quallty
elenents posslble so that each parcel wlII serve lts ownor better
and enhanee the value of adjaoetrt property by tts presence.
g. Conslder the long-tern future effeot of dec!,slons on
the nature of lmprovements allowed ln the area.
24. Approval or Dlsapproval: Any struoture sha}l be deemed
---if1lTsaffis approval ts oxprsssly gtven andand eonsldere
1s evlrtenoed ln wrltlng exeeute d hy Owner. Notwl thstandlng the
foregotng, 1f Owner fa tls to approvo a s tr"uo 0ut'e atttl does nol
€rpressly lndtoate dtsapproval or afflrmatlvely lmpose addltlona.I
re(ulrements or request additlonal lnfornatlon be furnlshed, €lther
veiUally or ln wrlttng, wlthln fifteen (15) days after a wrttten
request for wrltten approval, tlre structuro shall he rleemed ap-
proved. In addltlon, 8s to any trona f tdo purchaser or eltoumbranoer
f or value aud wlthout not,loo r aDy s truotut'e whlott has lreen com-
plete or lnstallod for one hundred twenty (fZO) days'shall be
besred to have been approved unless Owner shall have reoorded an
lnstrunent 1u wrltlng tndtoattng dtsapproval ln the offloe of the
County C1erk and Reoorder of Garfleld County, Colorado, prlor to
the date on whloh such bona flde purchaser or encumbrancer be-
oane Suoh for value.
25. Pronpt Conplgtlo! of Structures: Constructlon or 1n-
staltatto O promptly and dlllgently
after approval by Owner. Unless the tlme ls extended by Owner
ln writiirg, fatlirrs to oonplete the struoture wtthln one (t)
yoar after the date of approval shall constltuto an automatlo
revooatlon of the approval of the approval and any partlally
eonpleted or lnstalled struoture shall not then be thereafterpernitted to renaln on the property for a perlod }onger than
three (l) nonths after the 0wner requests removal of the parttally
oonstructed or tnstalled struoture.
26. Blght of Inspeotton: Owner an<l tts duly appolnted.agentsor ompfoyeee uay-enIoF upon any property of any reasonahll tlmoor ttmes for lnspectlon of any struoturo.
27. Change of Grade: No grade, stream bed, grourtd level or
dralnage ffitein on-any paroel shall be altered or ohanged wlthout
obtalnlng the prtor approval, ln wrttlnS, of Owner.
-6-
28. Variances: Owner may allow variances from compllancewlth any 6fffi5-E6rms or provlslons of thoso proteotive covenants
when clrcumstances suoh as topography, natural obstructlons orhardshlp may requtre and, if such varlanoe 1s granted, no vlolatlonof the oovenants, restrlctlons and oondltions of these restrlotlonsshall be deened to have ocourred wlth respect to the matter forwhich the varlance was granted. Such varlance must be evldenced1n wrlttng. The grantlng of such variance shall not operate towalve any of the terms and provtstons of these restrlotlons forany purposo except as to the partlaular property and partlcularprovlslon hereof oovered by the varl.allco. In no event may avartanoe be granted whloh would permlt any buslness or oon-nerl.cal aotlvlty.
29. Enforoeqent Rlght_s: The covenants, restrlotlons andcondttlonffise protectlve ooyenants may be en-forced at any ttrne by the owner or owners of any property, bya group of owners of the property described hereln, by the Owner
Homeown€rsf Assoolatlon provlded for herel.n, or, notwlthstandlngthe fact that lt may no }onger hold tltle to any property herelndescrlbed, Colorado Countryts KINGS ROW.
50. Renedles,: The oovenants, restrlctions and condi.tlonscontatnea-Tfr-Tffi'e proteetlve oovenantc shall be enforoeablehy prooeedtng for prohlbitlve or mandatory tnJunctlon. DanagesshaII not be deemed an adequate remedy for breaoh or vlolatlonbut, in anepproprlate case, punltlve damagoe may be awarded. Inany aotloii to enforce any covenantr rostrictton or condltlon con-talned ln these restrtctlons, the party or partles brlnglng suohaotlon, tf suocossful ln the actlon, shall be awarded reasonableattorneyr s feeg.
5I. Addttlonal Remedy: In addltion to the remedlos statedabove,omnoe'uponvlolatlonorbrgaohofany
oovenantr rostrlotlon or condltlon c'bntalned tn these protootlveoovenant8, may enter upon any property where suoh vto16tlon orbreaolr exlsts and may abate or romove the thlng or condttlonoauslng the vlo1atlon or broaoh or may otherwlse oure the vlola-tton or hreooh. The ooets lnourred shaIl be bllled to urrrl paldby the owner or ownors of the propertl'. If the ownCIr or ownergof the property fall, after denand, to pay such oosts, then theOwnerr or its nonlnee, whlchever tncurred such oosts, shall havea rlen, from and after the tlme a notioe of such fatlure to payls recorded ln the offlce of the County Clerk and ltecorder of Gar-fleld county, colorador agalnst the property of suoh owner orowners for the anount due and not paid, prus lnterest from thedatc of denand for payment at the rate of slx per cent Gf,) perannunr PIus all ooets and expenses of collectlng t,he unpuid anount,lncluding reaeonable attorneyts fees. The llen may be foreclosedln the manner for foreclosure of mortgages in the State of Colorado.
32. Benedy of 9wuer: In addltlon to the remedy stated above,fiw1thrffiropertytherelsabreaoho?orfa1Iureto
eomply wtth any of the covenants, restrlctlons or condltlons con-talned ln these protectlve covenants, then Ownor, 1ts sucoessorsand aeslgns, shall have the rtght, immedlately or at any tlme dur-lng the contlnuatlsn of such breaoh or fatluro, to re-enter andtake possesston of the above-descrtbed property and, upon theexeroi.se of thls rlght of re-entry, trtre to eald propert,y shallthereupon vgst ln owner, lts suooessors or aselgne. The rlght ofre-entry and for revestlng of tltle provlded undor thls Soctlonshall be subJeot to ttre provlslons of Seotton jj of theso pro-teotlve oovenantB entltled Proteotlon of llnoumbranoer. Tha pro-vlstons of Sootlon I(, of these res trlotlons entl.tled Amentlmeirtand Termlnatton.
55. Proteotlon of Encumbranoer:. No vLolatton or breaoh of anyproteottverestrlot1on, oovonan't or oondltlon oontalned ln these
-7-
covenants and no actlon to enforce the same shall defeat, renderinvalid or lmpalr the lien of any mortgage or deed of trust takenin good falth for value or the title or lnterest of the holderthereof or the titte acquired by any purchaser upon foreclosureof any such mortgage or deed of trust. Any suoh purchaser shall,however, take tltle subJeot to those proteotlve covenants whlchoccurred prlor to suoh foreorosure whleh shalr not be deemedbreaches or vlolatton hereof.
,4. Severabl l l t,v :
c o nd t t i o nffiT:EETiE o* t n
dependent and separateaffeot the valldlty and
IN h'ITNESS WIIBIiEOF, 0olorado
i,he so Froteet tve Cove nants to tle
. 1q74.
Ilach of the oovonants, restrlotlons andthese restrlctlons shall be deemed ln-and the lnvalidatlon of any one shall notcontlnued effeot of any other.
35. Anendment and Teqm!qqtl_oq: Ttre restrtottons, oovenantsand condl covenants sharl oontlnue unttlJanuary l, 1985, and from year to y6ar thereafter until anendedor ternlnated by wrltten instrument executed by the Owner IlomeownersfAssoclatlon or by the owners of a maJorlty of itre paroels of theproperty deeorlbed hereln. Prlor to January r, r985, these pro-tectlve covcnante may be amonded or ternlnated by reoorded ln-strument exeouted by the reoord owners of a ma.Jorlty of theparcels of the property herein descrlbed or by the Owner HomeownersrAssoctatlon and wlth the wrltten consont of the Ownor.
16. Paragraph Headlngs: The paragraph headlngs ln thls1nstrunenffinceonIyandsira1lnotbeoon81deredln constntlng the restrlctlons, eovenants and condltlons hereinconta lned.
J7 . l{alver: Walver or falluro to onf orce any restrlctlon,covenant 6fri-iiAltton in these protoctlve covenants shal I notoperate os a walver of any otlrer l.sstrlctlon, covonant or con-dltlon.
Countryts KINGS IIOW has
execrr t,ed Rfl of the
caused
day of
Colorado Countryts KINGS ROW,a Llnlted Partnershlp byThunder lllver ttealty Co.,
General Partner
John l{lx, Prosldent
Thunder Rlver ReaIty Co.
Jonnle Dunntng, Seoretary
Thundor lllver ReaIty Co.
(sear)
jj'Ir\TE OF
County of Eagle
John wlx and*Jonnle Dunnlng, betng flrst dury sworn, deposentttl soy that they are the I'reslrlent ancl Seorotary 16Bpeoi,tveiy ofTltundor lltvor llealty Co., l,tro (lenoral lrnrtnor of Oololorto OorrnlrytKINGIi ltOWr a llmlterl part,nerutrtp, and t?rat they have axeoutstl thaforegolng Proteotlve Covenants for aud ln tetralf of and aB theofflclaI aot of sald 1lm1ted partnerehlp.
Subeorlbed and sworn to before me ttrls
1974. Wltnoss my hand and offtolal seaI.
day of
By
By
coL0nADo
1,".
My oommlsslon explreo:Notary PubIlc