Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0 ApplicationExhibit "E" IMPROVEMENTS COST ESTIMATE The following cost estimates are based on information gathered in September, 1982based on the owner being the contractor and installing all improvements except electrical services. Costs include on site materials to be used. These cost estimates are not to be used for bid items and may fluctuate depending upon time elements, economics and on site materials. Refer to page 15 for Construction Phase Items. PHASE I 1. Water System 2. Road System Creek Side Drive 3. Electrical System 4:. Construction. Surveys and Engineering $52,000.00 11,000.00 7,500.00 1,000.00 PHASE I ESTIMATED COST $71,500.00 PHASE II 1. Water System 2. Road Systems Blue Sage Drive Cedar Ridge Drive Highway Entrance lanes Gulch crossing on Cedar Ridge Drive. No. Detention Pond. (with Detention Pond structures. add $3,000.00) $20,500.00., 45,000.00 12,500.00 7,000.00 $34,500.00 TOTAL ROAD SYSTEM 85,000.00 3. Electrical System 35,000.00 4. Construction Surveys and Engineering 4,000.00 PHASE II ESTIMATED COST 'PHASE 'I & II TOTAL ESTIMATED COST - (Average cost per lot for construction cost $14,375.00) $158,500.00 $230,000.00 ADDENDUM "ENGINEERS IMPROVEMENTS ESTIMATED CASTS" This addendum pertains to the most extreme estimated costs possible to meet the water quality requirements for the Rifle Creek Ranch Subdivision water system, in regards to the Colorado Department of Health test findings of radioactive particles in the water. 1. Relocate and redrill the two wells with a cable -tool -drilling sig, install casing and perforated casing. Pump,well for a 24 hour period and send water samples to the state for water quality tests. (Well depth approximately 75 feet) 2. Install a filter system designed for this water system and approved by the state to remove radioactive particles. Filtration is based on two Katadyn Filters Type MF -7R. Additional Estimated Costs $ 11,000.00 Total Phase I Estimated Cost Total Phase II Estimated Cost $ 82,500.00 158,500.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED IMPROVEMENTS COST $241, 000.00 (Average cost per lot for construction $15,000.00) Project Project ENINEER'S ESSTTIIMATE Name ,e/Ar--- Number r ITEM 1(--)74/45 .Z �1aT�.P_ c57-37-6"/:-/ < /,(/ -A Add 6'' ��/e /4/2 8'' &,17---e--A,/j50)( 7--77;Aci -s ,477-2/0. /4(7uJM' / Exhibit "E" Page / of % 1QUANTITY UNIT 1 UNIT PRICE l TOTAL I />ieo .P/rd G pie ,ar /A/A.7.5 -// 7-71 .6/7_0Ai.l /d T�4 �! �� cc_ � �, �4 Ci/Z- D/A/ DG i O1d,IIC /7g7- arti1--a7-/rx Is= T9NK 366/675 86,0 ffo 6 4 2 L� Lam" 2 L5 L5 Prepared by: Date: 9/2/2 7,-0 ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE- Project STIMATE•Pro ect Name Project Number /e'5/5f9z ITEM_ QUANTITY UNIT Ji.I��E Z T T,��: (%U - /01:1,4 E. .1 7, TE (A. -Ai 65) 4/0 6'/ C-„dre W/4/ __-1r__Ti�C1U /J)/2 4vr: ao. 1 z7Go Exhibit "E" Page -o UNIT PRICE 1 TOTAL CAt (kX1/(16-GST/o tl (//,/ 4-4e �� 1 vC. Prepared by: C1.---410, Date: 16%2, oav ,3 4, s av ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE Project Name //,1= -C - E5 QdeAt Project Number ITEM IQUANTITY UNIT -7-)4/45&-- Ald.SE IL! Te; gPD /IV At /y.9SE 411,9,1/a n/ 4-7 is1asT .X FA'EE01 P055/5./1/1/ D>?/ LI 714" n/Etc' 14-;cL4 s /AI sr94< A;6 d' 77csry /t - Sys {.r� //) K / /n �� n ,rf/A._ M F -7/I' 7s /'N,47 SE "Pg4 St S.t 7-‘177,-/:S%/ r�ls�r Tom/' eo fr Tvr�� w"7-iT Syp --/ Pe, 5% Prepared Date: Exhibit "E" Page 3 3 UNIT PRICE 1 TOTAL sc, sow ,S"v oa v 1 (3, oo v y,3vo ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE Project Name ,/,-e..&" deCE/� Project Number : /e5/-56 ITEM BL-ock . 2 Exhibit "E" - Page / of �7 (QUANTITY UNIT 1 UNIT PRICE I' TOTAL %r %44 A ,07---.<04:16 ille & oJ/L/. 5�4 rf 4/) 491f4fdrc7) ro 95j% ,O Toe) 3�Jo /P3 4450 )/e b ,Vz eo rxb 75 -7 -AL /fo • Cll?--: ,G,c1r2cfiodr2 ` i/ fre,r[i.IVZ 7/e3xl M/'4d -/o _4S/dad, /r feu c/ (9''/-1,4 (au D' Clic,. I Gr dre,�id L� L11L'L of /L/) /, oo 1 yD5 30 LF Tod Prepared by: �.i Project .ENGIINEER'S ESTIMATE Name f' /l='G Olee75 Project Number •ITEM -4,ve d QUANTITY UNIT / 24 BL oc k 1) ,4t7 a7 " e-eft1 ('? 1/ Exhibit "E Page e of 6 - UNIT PRICE'1TOTAL 0,1 //0SSi 2 7280 Prepared: by: - Ci S, 72.5— J ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE Project Name :Project Number ITEM /8/56Z /.S" 2i 1QUANTITY UNIT V,4Z cD,2, cJL fur 4Ii 9//i4 -fie A,4f E (34 d M,j. = Geo . ar 2 Ta 9� Aoa77). -75 6 Z27 /7o r )/e Ab r— Exhibit "E" Page 5 of 6 UNIT PRICE 1 TOTAL Prepared by: �� ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE Project Name /I,'LE Project Number ITEM QUANTITY Cii 0.a7)• ICOc.rT UNIT CST (9#/wv /1,11G cx/c 5 // a /1i ,l zvz)19,,4 c_ c — a/c./n,eErE �Q j-).6ai) 1o; 6,O 7j-. D out /oT,� Zrs$ d3, A0a. oo enc cle /4 /43/4 3/4 Coir siuo/'iut fa �✓d�»tn��rdSs� ,s- /1/0 cidey 7b?) Prepared by: Date: Exhibit "E" Page of 5 UNIT PRICE 1 TOTAL Ye, 3-a° zao / p a /'o dad ,3z 00 /b; 8°° /1GaO ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE Project Name ,j,eGL e�GE,� .' , ,ue Project Number /?/-'S Page Exhibit "E" 5 of ITEM �,��1^NTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE I TOTAL , ('-g4° 'f,����er�a 1-444sE 65(17",e,d,clg. t • 1. 4..tet Z. ,C/,43s - 77. -7-0T-,Q Prepared—b Date: /0 c;, ate: /0d 19 6, do 94/107 Exhibit "E" public Service Compri P.O. Box 152 Rifle, Co 816,E July 29 , 1982 ... Kay Robinson 115 Co. Rd. 251 Rifle,., Co 81650 © t©l oaand®. Dear Kay .. As you requested, we have prepared -an estimate to install 120/240 volt, single phase, -underground electric facilities to•serve Lots 1 through 11, Block,1' and Lots 1 through 5, Block 2 in• Rifle' Creek 'Ranch . Subdivision. Your cost to haye,these facilities installed is.$42,438.00 payable in ad- vance of construction. .This.refundable construction_depos't..is subject to refund in accordance with Company Tariffs on file. In addition to your deposit,'there will be a charge to the builders for -,..e underground service laterals from our secondary pedestals to the meter loca- tions. This cost will be billed in accordance with.the schedule of prices in•.effect at the time of installation„and is not subject to refund. Installation of service is contingent upon the following: 1. Extra charge if•customer builds house more. than 250 ft from P.SCo. facility. . 2 All necessary easements and right of way must be granted. 3. Construction ahead of paving and concrete. work. 4. Property pins must be installed. 5.- Site must be to grade (plus or minus six inches) 6. Water and sewer must be installed and past our easement: 7. Route oftrenching must be•clearof obstructions: Execution and return of the enclosed contracts will release the job for construction. Payment of'the above mentioned construction charge is deferred until we notify you 10. days before, our, crews are scheduled to start actual construction. Please notify me as soon as possible if you plan to continue with.the project. This estimate is valid until September 27, 1982. If I can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact.me. Sincerely ud Graham. Consumer Service Representative BG:lb 77' 4 a z MEMO TO: Paul Mannino, County Planner ca*FROM: City of Rifle Planning Department DATE: June 21, 1982 RE: Rifle Creek Ranch, Preliminary Plat Ju/V22198e 44/140 As per the Rifle Creek Ranch preliminary plat request, the City of Rifle has the following comments: 1. All recommendations made in the soils report should be strictly adhered to, particularly those related to cuts and fill, and appropriate erosion control measures for roads and building sites. 2. Staff still has some concern with regard to individual septic systems which are located within soils with high water tables and low permeability rates (i.e. along Rifle Creek). The installation of absorption and evapotrans- piration fields within these areas should be required as a condition of approval for the project. 3. All recommendations made in the drainage study should be closely followed particularly those related to minimum building pad elevations along Rifle Creek, and the development of adequate subsurface drainage systems. 4. Staff questions the proposed Protective Covenants requiring the Homeowners Association to maintain facilities within the common areas (i.e. the new dam, wells, water system, roads). Staff feels that some sort of performance guarantee should be required for these facilities (i.e. to be applied for a 4-5 year period following completion of construction). 5. Staff feels that Restritive Covenants #1 and #2 should be modified. As written, these covenants would prohibit any future subdivision of the lots as platted. If the City of Rifle were to annex into this area, division of some of these lots (particularly within Block 2) may be necessary. We would suggest that the covenants restricting future lot subdivision become void should annexation of this area occur. 6. Staff has some concern that the proposed booster pumps will not provide sufficient pressure to fire hydrants #'s 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. The minimum level for adequate fire flow pressure is approximately 40 psi. 7. The preliminary plat submittal contains no correspondence or information from the Division of Wildlife. Staff has noted evidence of deer, eagles and pheasants on the subject property. The applicants should contact the Division of Wildlife so that the property can be assessed for the presence of critical wildlife habitats. Should you have any questions regarding the above comments, please do not hesitate to call. 337 East Avenue P.O. Box 1908 Phone 625 - 5223 Rifle, Colorado 81650 oM—T—S7—=il 0ME OF "OIL SHALE" U.S.A. • RICHARD D. LAMM Governor OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 1313 Sherman Street -Room 818 Denver, Colorado 80203 (303) 866-3581 July 7, 1982 Mr. Paul Mannino Garfield County Planning Department 2014 Blake Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Dear Mr. Mannino: JERIS A. DANIELSON State Engineer 1�IL 1982 Re: Rifle Creek Ranch Subdivision We have received the above referenced proposal for a 16 -lot subdivision. Water would be supplied by two wells which are augmented under a plan for aug- mentation in Water Court Case No. 81CW56. The plan for augmentation allows for 30 residential units with lawn and garden irrigation, limited to 1000 square feet, through the domestic water system. Covenants also restrict lawn and garden irrigation to 1000 square feet per lot. A separate irrigation system may supply some of the lots, although details of this system are not presented and have not been reviewed. The water system is to be supplied by two wells which were originally constructed as exempt domestic wells (permit nos. 109310 and 112781). Pump tests for the wells are included in the information submitted. The pump test for the east well is inconclusive since the drawdown did not stabilize. The east well supplied somewhat over 10 gpm for 12 hours until sand problems occurred. It would appear the sand problem may be related to the construction of the well. The west well produced around 13 gpm during a stable period towards the end of the well test. From the material presented, it appears the wells are in an alluvial material. Since a plan for augmentation exists, replacement wells or additional wells as alternate points of diversion should be available if required. If a problem exists with the wells at this point in time, it may be necessary to identify who will be responsible for their replacement or rehabilitation within a pre -determined period. Ownership of the water system is unclear from the information submitted. Also, operation and maintenance responsibilities are somewhat unclear although they may be covered by paragraph 2(c) in the covenants. We believe some clari- fication of these issues may be appropriate. • • Mr. Paul Mannino Page 2 July 7, 1982 The soils investigation submitted with the proposal indicates certain areas have slow percolation and high ground water and suggests evapotranspira- tion beds may be used. We would like to point out that evapotranspiration beds could not be used as they are not authorized by the augmentation plan. Unless alternative methods (non -evapotranspiration) of treating sewage are available for the problem lots consistent with county regulations, we could not recommend platting of these lots. The drainage report indicates the site is two miles below the Rifle Gap Reservoir, a Bureau of Reclamation project. The building of a subdivision below this dam will not alter the hazard rating of the dam. The drainage report is developed on the basis of a 9,400 cfs discharge from the dam during flood stage. We do not know what the 9,400 cfs figure represents, but we suspect that it may be a 100 -year flood. Our records indicate the spillway capacity of this dam to be 32,500 cfs, and we believe this figure represents the probable maximum flood. Based on the above information, we would have no objection to this proposal provided evapotranspiration systems are prohibited. Also, we would ask the applicants to amend their well permits so that our records will show their current use. Please let us know if you have any questions. Sincerely, Id u . A4 40Aw- Hal D. Simpson, P.E. Assistant State Engineer HDS/KCK:mvf cc: Lee Enewold, Div. Eng. Reiner Haubold Stephen Spann 410 GARFIELD COUNTY 111 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601 2014 BLAKE AVENUE TO: Dennis Stranger Garfield County Planning Department FROM: Terry L. Howard rZ ( ./(J( Garfield County Environmental Health Departmen i. 8 1982 DATE: July 8, 1982 PHONE 945-2339 SUBJECT: Rifle Creek Ranch Subdivision In reviewing the preliminary plat for Rifle Creek Ranch Subdivision, I noted the following considerations: 1. Lots proposed on the valley floor tend to have very high ground water tables. 2. Most lots to the west of the highway have substantial slopes. 3. Percolation rates are variable and in places exceed one inch in sixty minutes. 4. There is a proposal at the sketch plan stage for a sanitation district within approximately one-half mile of Rifle Creek Ranch Subdivision. v ER From the standpoint of this Department, it is almost always preferable to see a development linked to a nearby sanitation district, especially when there are conditions at the site which make the construction of individual sewage disposal systems difficult. This Department would like to see Rifle Creek Ranch and Cedar Hills arrive at an amicable and mutually beneficial arrangement for central collection and treat- ment of sewage from both subdivisions, but these developments are at different stages of planning and practical considerations may preclude such an arrangement. This Department recommends approval of individual sewage disposal systems for the subdivision with the provision that the systems be designed by a registered professional engineer to accommodate the physical constraints of the site. toulto RICHARD D. LAMM GOVERNOR COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 715 STATE CENTENNIAL BUILDING - 1313 SHERMAN STREET DENVER, COLORADO 80203 PHONE (303) 866-2611 July 13, 1982 Garfield County Planning Department 2014 Blake Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Dear Planners: Re: Rifle Creek Ranch Subdivision JOHN W. ROLD DIRECTOR r JUL LS1982..J J CO. ilidiNER From a geologic standpoint there are several areas of concern which have been pointed out in the Engineering Geologic Report prepared by Lincoln Devore. However, we are unable to complete our review at this time because the geologic map is missing from the report. We cannot recommend approval of this subdivision until our review is completed. Once the geologic map becomes available, we will be happy to complete our review and forward any recommendations to your staff. If you have any questions, please call our office. Sincerely, c.v 0 Bruce K. Stover Engineering Geologist BKS/bn cc: Land Use Commission GEOLOGY STORY OF THE PAST ... KEY TO THE FUTURE RICHARD D. LAMM GOVERNOR ,a�'''CA(r) 1 ��' ""`�,\]�;(t�. COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURIY 1 7- 715 STATE CENTENNIAL BUILDING - 1313 SHERMANStREET DENVER, COLORADO 80203 PHONE (303) 866-2111' JUL 2 9 1982 July 26, 1982 Co.WILLA HAMER Garfield County Planning Department 2014 Blake Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Dear Planners: RE: RIFLE CREEK RANCH JOHN W. ROLD DIRECTOR We have finally received a copy of the geologic map prepared for this sub- division from the developer. There are several geologic concerns which will affect the development of this property including potentially unstable slopes, erosion, low density fill material, high water table, and areas of weak wet clayey soils. These factors are adequately described and detailed in the Engineering Geologic Report pre- pared by Lincoln DeVore. We would like to emphasize the following recommendations: 1) No conventional septic systems should be constructed in the North Eastern portion of the property due to clayey soils and a seasonably high water table. Evapotranspiration or other alternative systems should be used. 2) Basement construction should be avoided in the North Eastern portion of the project. 3) Special attention to slope stability, road cuts, and erosion must be used to prevent excessive erosion or slope failures. 4) Areas of disturbed low density fill must be recompacted and engineered properly to prevent settlement or hydrocompaction problems. In summary, this area contains geologic factors which could adversely affect development if they are not properly addressed. It is very important that the above recommendations and all those contained in the Engineering Geologic report are closely followed in order to prevent unsafe or undesirable conditions from developing in this subdivision. Sincerely, Bruce K. Stover Engineering Geologist CC: LUC GEOLOGY STORY OF THE PAST .. KEY TO THE FUTURE RICHARD D. LAMM Governor • \g�6 OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 1313 Sherman Street -Room 818 Denver, Colorado 80203 (303) 866-3581 July 22, 1982 Mr. Dennis Stranger Garfield County Planning Department 2014 Blake Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 JERIS A. DANIELSON State Engineer JUL 2 6 1982 tit,,d d VV• d Re: Rifle Creek Ranch Dear Mr. Stranger: Pursuant to your request, this letter is to clarify our statement in our letter of July 7, 1982 concerning the flood plain below the Rifle Gap Reservoir. The drainage report for the proposed Rifle Creek Ranch subdivision has been developed on the basis of a 9,400 cfs discharge during flood stage. We do not know what the 9,400 cfs figure represents, but we suspect that it may be a 100 year flood. Our records indicate the spillway capacity of this dam to be 32,500 cfs, and we believe this figure represents the probable maximum flood. This office does not recommend residential construction within the floodplain defined by the spillway design flood (the 32,500 cfs). While we do not recommend residential construction within the spillway design discharge flood plain, we have no specific authority to approve or deny such pro- posals. Definition of standards and criteria and acceptance or denial of proposals is largely a matter of county responsibility. We hope this clarification is helpful. Please let us know if you have any additional questions. Sincerely, -111D Hal D. Simpson, P.E. Assistant State Engineer HDS/KCK:mvf cc: Lee Enewold, Div. Eng. Alan Pearson RICHARD D. LAMM Governor JERIS A. DANIELSON State Engineer OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 1313 Sherman Street -Room 818 Denver, Colorado 80203 (303) 866-3581 September 24, 1982 Mr. Dennis Stranger Garfield County Planning Department 2014 Blake Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Dear Mr. Stranger: Re: Rifle Creek Ranch We have reviewed our information concerning the Rifle Gap Reservoir at the request of Christine Lytle of Solar Country. It appears our previous concerns regarding the proposed Rifle Creek Ranch subdivision and the flood- plain below the spillway of Rifle Gap Reservoir were the result of an error in our dam roster. We, therefore, withdraw our previously stated concern. We recommend approval of this proposal consistent with the water supply recommendation stated in our letter of July 7, 1982. Sincerely, Hal D. Simp§on, P.E. Assistant State Engineer HDS/KCK:ma cc: Lee Enewold, Div. Eng. Reiner Haubold Steve Spann Christine Lytle, Solar Country `8o1ar County r EJ. f:oa 163 (303) 076 222? !+44.4•• SAP, Qwrb. 611i&2 August 27, 1982 Office of the State Engineer Division of Water Resources 1313 Sherman Street Room 818 Denver, CO 80203 ATTN: Keith Kepler RE: Rifle• Creek Ranch Subdivision, First Filing Solar Country Project No.: 181582 Dear Keith, (T -?,77-777. AUG3 0 1982 MELLO IA In our platting of the above-named subdivision, we have encountered a significant discrepancy between the flow rate we used in analyzing the floodplain of Rifle Creek adjacent to the site and the flow rate your office terms "the probable maximum flood". Rifle Creek Tanch Subdivision, First Filing, is bordered along its eastern limits by Rifle Creek. Approximately two miles upstream (north) of the site is the Rifle Gap Dam and Reservoir which was designed and built by the Bureau of Reclamation. A copy of the design plans were obtained from Boyd Holt of the Grand Junction office of the Bureau of Reclamation. From these plans, a copy of which is enclosed, the following information is found. Maximum River Outlet Rate 325 c.f.s. Flow Line of Spillway 5960.0 Inflow Design Flood Peak Flow Rate Three -Day Inflow Volume Maximum Water Surface Spillway Discharge Storage (above 5960.0) 9400 c.f.s. 9000 Ac -ft 5971.8 3645 c.f.s. 4625 Ac -ft Crest of Dam 5978.0 Projected values with water surface at crest) Spillway Discharge 6000 c.f.s. Storage (above 5960.0) 6400 Ac -ft Converstion with Lonnie Lewis with the Engineering Services department of the Denver office of the Bureau of Reclamation indicated that the -2 - Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP) Inflow Storm Peak Rate is 9400 c.f.s. Therefore the Design Inlow used by the Bureau of Reclamation in the design of Rifle Gap Dam is the PMP Storm and the Design Outflow of 3645 c.f.s. is the Probable Maximum Flood of Rifle Creek immediately downstream of Rifle Gap Dam. Enclosed are calculations determining the floodplains for the 100 -year Storm with 325 c.f.R. discharge from Rifle Gap (Total Flow = 5540 c.f.s.), for the PMP Storm with no detention in Rifle Gap Reservoir (Flow = 9400 c.f.s.), and for a flow of 32,500 c.f.s. (the quantity your office calls the probable maximum flood). Also enclosed are cross-sections of Rifle Creek adjacent to the site and a plan view showing the floodplains of the three flow rates analyzed. Hal Simpson of your office stated that it is the policy of the Division of Water Resources to recommend against development in the floodplain created by the maximum discharge of an upstream reservoir. The floodplain labelled "100 -year (Q=5540) Floodplain" fulfills this recommendation as it exceeds the floodplain that would be generated by a flow of 3645 c.f.s., the Probable Maximum Discharge of Rifle Gap Dam. Furthermore, the floodplain for a flow rate of 9400 c.f.s. exceeds that which would result during maximum discharge from Rifle Gap with a 100 -year Storm coincidentally occuring on the area downstream of the dam (Total Flow= 3645 + 5215 = 8860 c.f.s.). This is the flow rate used in the preliminary Drainage Report for Rifle Creek Subdivision. In conclusion, we request that your office review your previous recommendations concerning our Drainage Report for Rifle Creek Subdivision, First Filing, in consideration of the additional information and exhibits herewith enclosed. Thank you for your attention to this project. Should you have any questions or require more information, please contact the undersigned. Cordially, Christine M. Lytle, P.E Solar Country Enc. cc: Dennis Stranger, Garfield County Planning Department Kay Robinson //A/4,(;61// orf C /,I0. �u410P-P-ps P (/,,�) ,,v /1 c' r-5 /0167'1E,0raL Z1 , ,4°,113 (44) (d4C / 4e) o.el 0,e -eft. 8G02 3 a .0, `-)"/ / 31 .6o 6.o9 •/ ni O,`2' 0,76 /6'2 o.7 ''j o Q7 " - 4D/3 o- �a to/ 7B7 /,0---t) 0.7-, ,1 /046 0.7 A 06 e/ /Decci2/4/6,4/ ad p i2/.4 / AhdOP: SIS/CLGi.G norms/A /Ale-6o 2e.1,8),1u ,2A.1,4L��G /=Loar�PL,4i,<� �o� Q = 5 40 Ger--5 �CE /°� /¢/� �o,� �- "�0�� �.S�c-LTi 041 S r,L1 , --)F LoA -s /1/ Ai th,t1e-I 5 ,' - (T) LC�%r /Clr L -P -r /ci,clr O 2: / Z,. / o. o a-0 0.040 4: / /.' / o.o.o 0.0 9 /6 - / ,Z3, / 0.045 c),04-5 / : / l : / o, D&O ci.a .o c-7 m- �D 7->/c)rxv-dic2o 7c3./ GP' on/ 7 /fl/ o/ rc �o 7 / �/ 7 / S� 00� �� - / /-770 _7_/ G _,/O' o ©% k)(C) r'/i9 r S/ /127 /L L 77'/ p (7o(2-7_-_;" sem' (7.(7 7 (-7rY/ c'y�`-mac �a'� a/Yr7 -7/"YO /yo/y'7/7,/(21-) X77077' )'Q/ o?'0 / clYo'7/7V r(;' 712.` cv7)02P o/Q = �/07c nirp . . I . . _ . . ---1 1 , 1 i . • • ' , I 1 1, _ i.. ] 1 ! - - • , - 1 • • . ...... ..... ' • - . .. . /1 -- + — ' i -i- , • • - - -- - /-• 1 . .... . , ' (.9 4 ./;-_-.--., • ... . .... . • . . ...... • . ..... - - -- _I . , -7:" 0 ' ( _ 3 E--.5 - _ _ . _ _ ---- .0 , _ _ _Im lir, , , . , ...... . . . . ._ . . . . : : : . i ...... l' ; 1 ' ' ' , 1 \ :\• , _. , . • ' ' ._ _1 . _ . . I _,_,- 1- t 1 ' ' ' -f ._ . .0 , . i -.1 _ . . . — + riMilrill" 1 1 , T , NILE! ..... Din .1. .0 . to • ri q ___ . . -7- _ __ _:_4-•1•-• - , , -7-—4-- I IIN ( • NMI MINE ONE 111.011111111111111111 Nummum ommomm EINEM •••••1••••••mml• mummom • MR • MINffillINIIIIIIN Nommsom mosommini mom .1.0 _ .._.. • - cr:-4-i) i 1 vial 1 Ermorm 1 Illmailmmi i ••••••••• •••••••••• _ ,- wil Mg . . .i_ 7\ ________ ,__ . , 1• m MEMMEMEMMINIMM mmommemisimim immissomm ••••••••1 •••••sr Ern= II • mmil m mem m m 0.00 1 • luso Imo Eel 11•111•1101111 •mom MI MIMI ism BM um _. M mm Irmo KUL isom 1 ors — • nom __. ii• • I_ AMINE , (-) ----- NM 11111 11/1111./1 MIIIMEMEMS ...0....• in FIN a .... Arm HI- - - -1 II no is L _ 1 1 •_r , mis __i , 1 1 I- --1-1- ' MN OEM MI • II - II ME 1 • 111 III 111111 MI i _ . .111 , -+ ' • 1111111111111111111111M ......... ., , ' ,_ 6 , , , + . - - -., f-,•,-) !hoz , . . MEMMEMEM• nom mom um ••• + • ummommissmimm' , 11 --:-- -----, ••••rws... • , • •••• mow •• mums • inn __ , MOEN own P . is • - •- -, 4- _.. - -4--' - ----r __ _ ___f -4- --,_ IIIIII --'- - ' • 11•111, =pi ' 0 • -/ I '1 i ' i ' . I 1 t 6 ) A-//,(1 . 4 0 /, • •• , , M 4 t_ 1 1 11 mom mom - ' I NM . , _1 i 1 / Ell fi, III: , i • + • - • • . - • , 1 , , , M . ' , 1- . . - , 11111 1 1 , . —T-11 ,- ,- -r.--- 1 + . 1 _. III. . II • 111111Mil IIIM 1 I ' 1 ' ..... . ........... . . . _ . „ . . . ... . . .. . . . .--i . ._. -1 -• 1 • t -L- - 11111111111 , . , • . . ... • • . ._ . ' - '' • • ! I, 1._ +- 1- M 1111 M M MI IIIIIIII 111•11 II • IN 111 14 • - • - - - + • - I 1 1 I , ' ' , . ' , ..... I,- 1 , 1 44Q (.egii:)) (9vr ,8.1uii4/4 z.(?,AJAP< //1/4/ 0,-4:1,0i, Voo /44,41 0,,d� L.E,C?' ki _1Vr 414�i L8-,cT ,�ie,,‘1> 4i/ C it /, , L'7 67.3 6,q,5 7.3 _ 46.8 6o, 3 , 3 2..Z4 X99.0 820 33.0 _5q161 940 89.0 6610 76,Z,/ X 78. / 4 28.4 6 e .S 2q .4 zi5.6 41.9 e8, 4 //qo C Q e, /0.6 /.. /, 3 i, 8 Z 2 e/ 23.5 6.4 &. 3 /7,411 004 DL4 a.e4 •OQ D.a 4.0¢ 0.4 O.oa 0o4 g , /7o_ 5047 d4 34� _ 7 / 22 2a.3 1923 & X092 2 d4,0 29,9 i9297 //, 5 79 //.c a/ 70. _ a -7-1,74? _ q4A0 q470 2Z60 ,</, U,/ jjejr,e CL ita7 A/ C. o. �Ec rioAi 62 Flo Voo 32, 0 06-p>}1 i/y /3.` i9i -58 67.3 6,q,5 7.3 46.8 6o, 3 , 3 • V -r, ) r f -- 1 on ■■■■ ■N ■■n mlli !IuI 1.■•V■• MEM OM ■■ EE_ ■ mum NINE■■ -Es smog ' 11 1 Es 1 ..■■1-{ __OM: iii fEMUOMM.II iii E fi, } -r A/4 • - • H - ii N I_ 1 1_:• - t 4 • 1.0 1 II t tcAn0- 16911 MIN 1 1 • -:_: n r! Li I -;_>, I i I \i5 �orlrl O/J E.4 ��1 R N t"- ioo' LO(' 5 ,C,1/e Cive.15 rYa4ch S�6d, vrs/*on F; ///`21) %,C15 2 FT/odd? to/r, PRELIMINARY PLAT RIFLE CREEK RANCH SUBDIVISION First Filing GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO • • RIFLE CREEK RANCH SUBDIVISION, First Filing PRELIMINARY PLAT INFORMATION Table of Contents Owner -Developer Letter of Submittal 1 2 Mortagee Dedication 3 Adjacent Landowners Mineral Rights Owners 4 Subdivision Summary Form 5 Rifle Creek Ranch Subdivision Location - General Information 6 Land Uses 7 Water System Data 8 - 23 Plan of Augmentation 24 - 28 Road System - 29 Lot Standards 30 Sewer System 30 Wildlife Area 30 Utility,Company 30 Covenants 31 - 40 Highway Access Approval Letter 41 Attached booklets Geology -Soils Report Drainage Report OWNER -DEVELOPER: MORTGAGEE: NAME OF SUBDIVISION: SURVEYORS - ENGINEERS: GEOLOGY - SOILS: Ann Catherine (Kay) Robinson 0015 - 251 Road Rifle, Colorado 81650 ph. 625-3663 Rhoda Miller Brewer RIFLE CREEK RANCH SUBDIVISION First Filing Solar Country P.O. Box 163 Silt, Colorado 81652 ph. 876-2222 Lincoln DeVore 2510 Glen Avenue - P.O. Box 1427 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 -2 - Garfield County Commissioners Garfield County Courthouse Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Re: Rifle Creek Ranch Subdivision First Filing Gentlemen: Ann C. Robinson 0115 Co. Road 251 Rifle, CO 81650 June 2, 1982 Submitted herewith for the above named subdivision are the preliminary plat and accompanying materials for Rifle Creek Ranch Subdivision First Filing. Each of the lots in the proposed subdivision contains two acres or more in area; this is in keeping with the minimum requirement in the agricul- tural rural residential zone in which this subdivision lies. As stated. in the Declaration of Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions which accompanies this submittal, only single family residential usage shall be permitted within this subdivision. Included within the soil and geologicalreport are the conclusions and recommendations of the testing laboratory regarding the percolation tests performed on the site. The individual homeowners shall be responsible for obtaining further tests to be used in the design of the sanitary sewage disposal system for each of the lots. I request that this plan be considered as expeditiously as possible by the Board of County Commissioners and the Garfield County Planning Commission. Thank you for your consideration of this plan. Very truly yours, (7.C; --AL v Ann C. Robinson -3- • RATIFICATION AND DEDICATION WHEREAS, prior to the date hereof, ANN C. ROBINSON caused to be filed in the Clerk and Recorder's Office of Garfield County, Colorado, a plat designated as Rifle Creek Ranch Subdivision, which plat was recorded as Document No. ; and WI-IEREA.S, the undersigned is the beneficiary of a deed of trust encumbering the real property being the subject of said plat, which deed of trust is recorded in Book 4r3 at Page 2/2. , Garfield County Records; and WHEREAS, the undersigned desires to join in the platting of said real property; NOW TIIEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the undersigned does hereby ratify in all respects said plat and the statements contained therein and does hereby grant to the County of Garfield, Colorado, for public use the streets shown thereon including avenues, streets and access r4.ghts of way, the public lands for their use and the drainage and utility easements for drainage and utility purposes. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereby affix my signature. Rhoda Miller Brewer STATE OF NEBRASKA ) COUNTY OF..' 6k. ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged to before me this Q. day of April, 1981, by RHODA MILLER BREWEa. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires Nota Publ -4 - ADJACENT LANDOWNERS Dorothy E. and Thomas L. Emmer 1471 State Highway 325 Rifle, CO 81650 Carroll Wilson Pierce Mangurian 1980 State Highway 325 Rifle, CO 81650 4 Mile Road Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 MINERAL RIGHTS Mineral Search as to Lots 3 & 4, Section 19, Township 5 South, Range 92 West of the 6th P.M. for Ann C. Robinson . Ray G. Sykes. and Mary Sykes: l F'L -S/9)"'C An undivided '/z interest in and to the mineral rights as reserved in instrument recorded February 11, 1954 in Book 275 -at Page 34, Reception No. 134334. Cecil Vernon: Undivided y, interest in all oil, gas and other minerals, with the right to mine, drill for and otherwise remove the same as reserved in instrument recorded February 27, 1961 in Book 332 at Page 598, Reception No. 213021. W. F. Scarrow and Myrtle E. Scarrow: An undivided 1/8 interest in and to all oil, gas and other minerals with the right to mine, drill for and remove the same as reserved in Book 400 at Page 163, Reception No. 242886. Ann C. Robinson: An undivided 1/8 interest in and to oil, gas and other minerals conveyed to her in instrument recorded December 24, 1973 in Book 453 at Page 210, Reception No. 261147. G. ' Garfield Date June 1, 1982 -5- SUBDIVISION SUMMARY FORM County Type Subdivision Name: RIFLE CREEK RANCH SUBDIVISION - First Filing Location of Subdivision TOWNSHIP 5S Owner(s) NAME ADDRESS Subdivider(s) NAME ADDRESS Designer NAME ADDRESS of Subdivision Request for Exemption Preliminary Plan Final Plat Filing 1 RANGE 92W SEC. 19 1/4 t.ntc 3&4 Ann Catherine (Kay) Robinson 0115 251 Road, Rifle, CO 81650 (same) ph. 625-3663 Solar Country P.O. Box 163, Silt, CO 81652 ph. 876-2222 Type of Subdivision Number of Dwelling Units Area % of (Acres) Total Area ( ) Single Family ( ) Apartments ( ) Condominiums ( ) Mobile Home ( ) Commercial ( ) Industrial 16 N.A. N.A. Dedicated Reserved Dedicated Reserved Private Open Areas Easements (Water System) Other (specify) (Colorado State Street Walkways School Sites School Sites Park Sites Park Sites Highway 325) 36.608 75.92 5_676 4.473 0.296 1.169 11 77 9 28 n Fit 7_119 Total 48.222 1nn_ nn Estimated Water Requirements 8,000 Gallons/day.(domestic use only) Proposed Water Source wells Estimated Sewage Disposal Requirement A nnn Gallons/day. Proposed Means of Sewage Disposal Individual septic. fatly cyGrama ACTION: Planning Commission Recommendation Approval ( ) Remarks Disapproval ( ) ,Date , 19 Board of County Commissioners Approval ( ) Remarks Disapproval Date , 19 RIFLE CREEK RANCH SUBDIVISION First Filing LOCATION: The Rifle Creek Ranch Subdivision is located in Lots 3 and 4 (ASA) of Section 19, Township 5 South, Range 92 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Garfield County, Colorado, approximately two miles Northerly of the City of Rifle, and less than one mile Southerly of the Rifle Creek Golf Course, along Rifle Creek. GENERAL INFORMATION: The Rifle Creek Ranch Subdivision, First Filing, has been designed for the existing Garfield County Zone District A/R/RD with 16 lots, 2 acres or larger, for, a single family development. The development will have its own central water system, with individual septic tank sewage systems. The road systems are residential and mountain road classifications. Electrical and telephone services are within the development. This development abuts the BLM lands and access has been provided for the homeowners and public. This development is adjacent to the Rifle Creek Estates Subdivision. Colorado State Highway No. 325 runs Northerly along and through the development. LAND USES: The Rifle Creek Ranch Subdivision, First Filing is designed for 2.0 acres or larger lots. The smallest lot being 2.00 acres, the largest being 3.25 acres, average lot size being 2.29 acres. Common areas are designated in both Block 1 and 2 for the homeowners and will be maintained by the homeowners thereafter. Block 1 has a common area providing access to the adjacent BLM lands. Block 2 has a common area adjacent to Colorado State Highway No. 325. This area has two springs which will provide irrigation water to lot owners East of the highway. Bureau of Land Management access is off Cedar Ridge Drive for public use as this road has been in place for several years. Access also is provided for the homeowners through the Block 1 common area. A utility easement is provided for public utility companies and homeowners along the Southerly line of Block 2 for service of wells, pumps and water system facilities. A bridal path easement exists within the 125 foot Bureau of Reclamation (West Area) electrical transmission line through Lot 6, Block 1 and along the lot line between Lots 5 and 6, Block 1 to Blue Sage Drive. Also a bridal path easement exists within the 20 foot utility easement through Lot 11, Block 1. The bridal path will be within Blue Sage Drive and Cedar Ridge Drive leading to the common area in Block 1 for access to the BLM land. WATER SYSTEM: The Rifle Creek Ranch Subdivision, First Filing will be supplied by a central water system using two existing water wills drilled 9/22/80 (#1) and 1/18/82 (#2). A Plan of Augmentation has been filed and approved by the District Court Water Division No. 5, Case No. 81CW56. The well permits, drilling report and test data, along with a copy of the Plan of Augmentation are enclosed. Two wells have pump tested; data and charts are attached hereinafter. Well No. may require additional pumping to clean the sand out, or be relocated. A 26,000 gallon steel water storage tank will be buried at the elevation of 5,815 feet in Lot 2, Block 1, with additional hook up lines for a 20 to 26,000 gallon tank for future development. The system Water main Cover over the pipe. is designed for lines will be 6 the water mains a 30 unit development by adding the future tank. and 8 inch PVC SDR -21, 160 PSI, ASIM 2241 pipe. shall have a minimum of 52 inches over the top of No water facilities within a structure shall be constructed above the elevation 5,805 feet. A1'l water facilities with less than 30 PSI or above the elevation of 5,745 feet shall install an inline booster pump on their service line to boost the PSI to a minimum of 40 PSI. All service lines requiring a booster pump shall be one inch in size to the pump then reduced to a 3/4 inch line. All service lines from the main line to inside the structure shall be Type "K" copper pipe. All service lines without a booster pump shall be 3/4 inch size. Only homes within Block 1 shall be permitted to have an outside hose bib for sprinkling and irrigation. All other homes will have separate irrigation water available for sprinkling and irrigation. Seven fire hydrants are planned for this development and they will comform to the Rifle Fire District specifications. The fire hydrants and main water line system is designed for a pumper truck hook up for hydrants less than 60 PSI. The PSI pressure for the proposed building sights and fire hydrants, as shown on the utility plan map, are as follows: (see data on following sheets) 1 Approximate Drop in Building Site Elevation from Static Head Elevation Tank (5815) PSI Block 1 Lots 1 5760 55 23.8 2 5810 5 2.2 3 5790 25 10.8 4 5785 30 13.0 5 5770 45 19.5 6 5710 105 45.5 7 5715 100 43.3 8 5720 95 41.1 9 5725 90 39.0 10 5735 80 34.6 11 5745 70 30.3 Block 2 Lots 1 5675 140 60.6 2 5670 145 62.8 3 5670 145 62.8 4 5670 145 62.8 5 5680 135 58.4 Lowest point of I Development in 5630 185 80.0 I Future Approximate Drop in Fire Hydrant Elevation from Static Head Elevation Tank (5815) PSI Fire Hydrant Number 1 5790 25 10.8 2 5735 80 34.6 3 5730 85 36.8 4 5745 69 29.9 5 5730 85 36.8 6 5675 140 60.6 7 5670 145 62.8 w AAI C� Application must he complete where applicable. Type or print in BLACK INK. No overstrikes or erasures unless initialed. —10- 81•ntennial Biog., 1313 Sherman St., Denver, CcOdo 80203 PERMIT APPLICATION FORM (X.) A PERMIT TO USE GROUND WATER A PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A WELL FOR: 'I A PERMIT TO INSTALL A PUMP (s ) REPLACEMENT FOR NO IOTHER WATER COURT CASE NO t'(kULiVLi) JUL 2 5 t979 t ti .R:,tutrcts L• 1t ENUit ER CULL/ (1) APPLICANT • mailing address NAME 9J1/1f1.2 __A,c,11.1„vJ12_,() STREET _0_2/ %L/) o/ Sf CI TY J I'L C, (, Qj , S (Stale) r TELEPHONE (2) LOCATION OF PROPOSED WELL County Ll -[L,/ I—/- L- Z�/ Section /�. of the t- n 7” 3 / /C? y_1� ..__—% �� tr1/ '/, , Rng. _� I1../ (3) WATER USE AND WELL_DATA I'ro(,rrrP1 ncl4nnr1111purllpinq r:rtC (repro) ..._ "'/ Y•�_. 1' i r.111r• .nuiu,tl .Inluun1 of giound miler j__ toirlt .Ipprnprt,r)Cd (acre feet):— — -_1- -._..— tJunlhcl ul ,IP rr•, 1(1 het irrIq,t(rd I'Irr(ro•.rvl lol.rl •II (,111 (fent):._. rlrlurirr rpuun•I . 1I c1 i; to het Uht:rinr.tl horn. t „ 1 Ownet's well Resignation GROUND WATER TO BE USED 7011: ( ) HOUSEHOLD USE ONLY. no irrigation (0) (yam) DOMESTIC (1) ( I INDUSTRIAL (5) ( I I IVCSTOCK (7) (Ra) IRRIGATION (G) ( 1 COMMERCIAL (4) ( I MUNICIPAL (8) ( I OTHER (9) DETAIL THE USE ON BACK IN (11) (4) DRILLER N:rinc _1(2 111 - "fir nit /1 I, IStatc) (2 TIirphunc Nu. � t� .i Z _ Lic. No. FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: DO NOT WRITE IN THIS CO1 t)Mr) Receipt No/6 Basin Dist. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL This well shall be used in such a way as to Causer no material injury to existing water rights The ISSu,rnCC of the; permit cl(W; 1101 ;r'riurr Ihr2 :Iplrlir.n 1 Mat no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civil court action. APPROV} PURSUANT TO CRS 1973, 37-92-602 (3) (D) (II) AS THE ONLY WELI, 0'I A TRACT OF 35 ACRS OR MORE DESIGNATED AS ACRES IN ,' I , — r4 � r-) - A P`120VED FJD DOMESTIC USP;, INCLUDING TtT IRRIGATION OF NOT OVER OLE ACR OF IME GARDENS AND LAWNS. APPLICATION APPROVED 1 PERMIT NUMBER 1 tJ 93 l 0 DATE ISSUED _ AUG 0 1 1979 EXPIRA 11wDATL __AU_G 07 19.31 -11jrl"'x (STATE ENGINEER) BY v( I.D. -- j _ iLLYt�L'�-'-- COUNTY- _._ _ PHONE • m5 -/mi � To: L. -llSTATEMENT SToCtIEMAN DRILLt1G - ErieEouipment 1550 Co. Road 293 Rifle, CO 81650 J WATER WELLS TEST HOLES OF ALL KINDS Date /X SIZE DEPTH CASING I.D. SIZE v.0 FEET PERF. SIZE PERF. WATER LEVEL ESTIMATED c^,^"., PER FT. PRICE ' • ' . r_- cifr- _____ ----__' -' ,--,1-- 36 .cf--7*‹ 1 --ir-'-- ----- | ~� -,- . ~.c.= ' -__- ----___-__-___= / � | , | ' / / i | _.� 4r.m�' � -- t / r _ { ' . --- —i� -------- | | ' �� / ' � ''—' �| ' '| r ' '—' •• .'— .� . ^ � | ! . ! /. !| . •| 11/2% Hterest per month after 30 days. THIS FORM.MUST BE SUBMITTED WITHIN 60 DAYS OF COMPLETION OF THE WORK DESCRIBED HERE. ON. TYPE OR PRINT IN BLACK INK. WELL OWNE ADDRES DATE COMPLETED —12— ,ORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESirCES 1313 Sherman Street - Room 818 Denver, Colorado 80203 WELL COMPLETION AND PUMP INSTALLATION REPORT PERMIT NUMBER /4.; 2/1) r• /D- 2 Z WELL LOG i / f ' of the `-' GvEL� 6"/ 1/. of Sec. / T. R. (9,2 \4// !�1 19 2 HOLE DIAMETER From To Type and Color of Material Water Loc. XOL/-/ G' TOTAL DEPTH _ Use additional pages necessary to complete log. in from to —2...ft. in from to ft in from -to ft DRILLING METHOD /c CASING RECORD: Size ?/ & kind Size & kind PM Plain Casing from Q to ft. from to ft Size & kind from to ft 16',/�� Perforated Casing g'IY� & kind from to ft Size & kind from to ft Size & kind from to ft GROUTING RECORD//,. Material Intervals 4/(4 7' (''Z 4 1i_de'�1C77`. Placement Method GRAVEL PACK: Size Interval TEST DATA Date Tested , 19 _ Static Water Level Prior to Test / ft. Type of Test Pump t; Length of Test r` Sustained Yield (Metered) Final Pumping Water Level PUMP INSTALLATION REPORT -13- mp Make --t--/----7-2---1/C11111/., 1 ype. 'owered by HP Jump Serial No. Rotor Serial No. )ate Installeo 'urnp Intake Depth temarks TELL TEST DATA WITH PERMANENT PUMP late Tested tatic Water Level Prior to Test ength of Test Hours ustained yield (Metered) GPM urnping Water Level ,emarks -J F -a 0 1- W 0 z a W 0 1t:' 3J _WATER L) TABLE `,.W a- J V) CONTRACTORS STATEMENT The undersigned, being duly sworn upon oath, deposes and says that he is the contractor of the well or pump installation described hereon; that he has read the statement made hereon; knows the content thereof, and that the same is true of his own knowledge. C. Signature .1e* -h '. State of Colorado, County of Subscribed and sworn to betore me this /,day of My Commission expires: 9--/7 . • Notary Public�� / '' / :��1C.J ,19 License No SS r 19 CONE OF (DEPRESSION FORM TO BE MADE OUT IN QUADRUPLICATE: WHITE FORM must be an original copy on both sides and signed. WHITE AND GREEN copies must be filed with the State Engineer. PINK COPY is for the Owner and YELLOW COPY is for the Driller. • WELL. Aqua Tec Well Test Udte Owner —14— /7) �r \Cl 1\C;t Win-( Pump (0 H.P. US Well depth <-1Z Pumping Surface casing diameter Type Lino!. casing Location • Permit No. ECS-. usek \n c'e Voltage 4 0 / Pipe depth 7 1( S. er casing to 1 Zft. tt tYpe. Comments FL to Rate Temp/(F 1 1 Ii1 V .. 0 Min u V ♦. . , - . .. . . . � 11-2�� ( . • 1/2 //$ .:.- 1 //, 5- 2 .-_F)-O //,5 //, :M° 3 c30-1 an — 3 4 -a4 /A 5 i2. 6 ,,2t)-6 ?v - Pi /L 7 cQ U - 70 /Z 8 6-I( /Z 9 - /( /Z 10C. ,0 - /(i / v 15 (3p - i(-� /7 20 �30-,` /2 25 Or)-// /; 40 lC'�LL- .. 50 c� - - ? /D, ,S /. /L.0 .x. 60 -70- t e -_S- 1 - 15 (-20 — /( 1 - 30 1 - 45 ,7(ri-5--- : P?-- ¢ /0,0 2 - 0 Z 2 - 30 -/- 3- 30 a 7-/ '4 - 0 ,,=;..)- 0 /2,5 5 - 0 ,,,.3-/ 6 - 0 3-1-g- )7 ) - 0 ,_,3.-� /2.5- 2.S l® - 0 .� '12 3 '•il 18 - U 40 20 - 0 4/ z'-4 /,3_ 24 - 0 3d -g4 2,O , ,. 21Az,-,),,, ss/ _ d A1J,L cije_EZ. Vz-klqe kseAtcutI RPS cuig_ pn NL2- U)e ,ort5f4 el Air' Ine I'SI Meter kale 1 PIfl ) f rf1It1efl- wELL 41r -15- 1/2 - -jam 2 3 _ '' 4 / 5` —7 c 6 7 . 1— . 9 10 ,2._S� �4-j/,-7 15 D -v? - %- 20 25 (?Q — C--- --30 30 0 40 ! 7 - /O 50 /7— 60 l /— 1 - 15 1 - 30 1 - 45 2 - 0 . 2 - 30 3 - 0 3 - 30 4 - 0 5 - 0 6 - 0 7 - 0 _ '8 - 0 9 - 0 12 - 0 15 - 0 18 - 21 - 0 24 - 0 wELL 41r -15- 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 0 S 1 9 8 ^�r 7 lJ� 6 5 4 3 z 0 2 -9T- OW. IIIIIIIIl1I11!llp IUIII :� e e ��il11�1l�!!s�l�°-� 'P3�9���lllllgl�� IIU u.limil llllI aE I�$ei�lli� e ! ll �B sl 71111111. ri i f 11! 1 ii ' t I Ir 1.. i t :$ 91== 11 i l . in _ _ __ OM Ltd !!i hi. um 111 11,11:110111111111111 viii iii• ! ' iiia■ i=iiiiii1 eee■e :NMI I �■i ■e ee■■■■e■■■■■IU■■■■■p■■e1 11 11I11111111111lllllli..ai..ii li - ..u..e....i........._. 11:: :SCC CI' _ 1 _ 11111l :dire 111 111111113.11111111)41a riiin1llil®ll!!!lll0la1 %hit I ipli UM 111•111111111fflIllIHNIIIHIHIIOHIIH 111101 11111011111111101111010 Ill l O • r+ D 3V 0 .Jb AF'c�'L.G►=: ! :C%r`a 'CbL t DO DIVISION OF WATER R SOU 300 CultinMIR Bldg., 1045 Sb.'rrnan St., Deaver. Color weZL Application must be complete where applicable. Type or print in BLACK INK. No overstrikes or erasures unless initialed. rf 2 PERMIT APPLICATION FORM (A ) A PERMIT TO USE GROUND WATER (:;) A PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A WELL FOR: (;:) A PERMIT TO INSTALL A PUMP 1313 SHERMAN 31. - RM. u,,, - r r- is j0i\10�ER, COLORADO 00203 ( ) REPLACEMENT FOR NO ( ) OTHER WATER COURT CASE N0. RECEIVED Nov 1 5 1979 - NTER RE RC STATE ENGINES (1') APPLICANT - mailing address NAME �' ,•,.•1 n• • r , . r STREET n CITY •t 1 r TELEPHONE NO (State) (Zip) (2) LOCATION OF PROPOSED WELL County Ti '1/ of the %, Section r , IN,SI (E.W) 19 6 th (3) WATER USE AND V'JELL DATA Proposed maximum pumping rate Wpm)71 Average annual amount of ground water to be appropriated (acre-feet): Number of acres to be irrigated: Proposed total depth (feet): 1 r Aquifer ground water is to be obtained from: • •' L:• 1 Owner's well designation GROUND WATER TO BE USED FOR: ( • 1 HOUSEHOLD USE ONLY • no irrigation (0) (•") DOMESTIC (1) ( ) INDUSTRIAL (5) 1 LIVESTOCK (2) (X) IRRIGATION (6) ( ) COMMERCIAL (4) ( ) MUNICIPAL (8) OTHER (9) DETAIL THE,USE ON BACK IN (11) (4) DHILLER Name • Street JJ V r, i11 V 1 � ^ n ••• J '4I.^ City (State) .11 Telephone No Lie.. Nu. (Zip) FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: DO NOT WRIITE-IN THIS COLUMN U/ Receipt No) ) Basin Dist. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL This well shall be used in such a way as to cause no material injury to existing ,••a:^r ri.;hts. The issuance of the permit does not assure the applicant that no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civil court action. APPROVED PURSUANT TO CRS 1973, 37-92-602 (3)(b)(II) AS TIIE ONLY_WELL ON A TRACT OF 35 ACRES OR MORE DESIGNATE) AS 3 5 - ACRES ACRES IN tan S t.i kf Sec. /g T i. R.•y2- t'/ Pryi f APPROVED FOR DOMESTIC USE, INCLUDING THE IRRIGATION OF NOT OVER ONE ACRE OF HODLE GARDENS AND LAWNS. Li i. °1 j -�3-• r APPLICATION APP;IOVED AD - x'5'11 Iia?81 .FEB 07 J1980 EXPIRAT_1QN DATE _ E 198Z- PERMIT 98Z PERMIT NUMBER DATE ISSUED BY . I.D. _ y?,1 INE l Crf � -) COUNTY__.. PHONE 625-1421 r L To: • -18- STATEMENT • STONEMAN DRILLING /21,r -P0 Bucyrus Erie Equipment 1550 Co. Road 293 Rifle, CO 81650 WATER WELLS TEST HOLES OF ALL KINDS Date,/ SIZE DEPTH CASING SIZE 0.D. FEET PERF. SIZE PERF. WATER LEVEL ESTIMATED CAPACITY PER FT. PRICE rj"l1..., ec-r, - 1A.C.,----Iri._ _ LU'R_ tt121- N-11' t• ii`tlk.4-il, ./t., &I/L _.• - d' '.11. W., CL, ---t7 '10--k:1*--__:_VArt —1r-- -,.. 6 r m &j ti.P,1 • 1 ive-XX- 1HIS FORM MUST BE SUBMITTED WITHIN 60 DAYS OF COMPLETION OF THE WORK DESCRIBED HERE- ON. TYPE OR PRINT IN BLACK INK. WELL OWNE ADDRES DATE COMPLETED 19 COIDRADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOIS 1313 Sherman Street - Room 818 Denver, Colorado 80203 WELL COMPLETION AND PUTP If Tp} ION REPORT PERMIT NUMBER .7 =--1 - WELL LOG 2 .j From To Type and Color of Material ( v6\7/Pv /1/141 '/• of the 1i`/ 'h of Sec T ��. , R.Vc, 191,1 HO DIAMETER in from n to 1 .- ft. Water in. from / to � ft Loc. XOLL/ i r Use a tJ TOTAL DEPTH /.'l , / dditional pages necessary to complete log. -z PM in from��!�j ft DRILLING METHOD / cJ- 7 CASING RECORD: Plain Casing V Size /7_ & kincitom to ft. Size & kind �. ' �'- from -- to ft Size & kind from to ft Perforated Casing Size & to ft. Size & kind from to ft Size & kind from to ft GROUTING RECORD/ Material 7" Intervals Placement Method • GRAVEL PACK: Size Interval TEST DATA Date Tested /G -/'i Static Water Level Prior to Test Type of Test Pump Length of Test/14/_,,1 Sustained Yield (Metered) C-�//'' ,) ^ r;',/ L/Z'/ ft Final Pumping Water Level -20- I *OW INS."ALLAU ION REPOS* Pump Make Type Powered by HP Pump Serial No. Motor Serial No. Date I nstal lea Pump Intake Depth Remarks WELL TEST DATA WITH PERMANENT PUMP Date Tested Static Water Level Prior to Test Length of Test Hours Sustained yield (Metered) GPM Pumping Water Level Remarks 1 TOTAL DEPTH 1 • • • • 3 J WATER v \ TABLE W W J aJ al Ww 31- n. z D CONE OF DEPRESSION CONTRACTORS STATEMENT The undersigned, being duly sworn upon oath, deposes and says that he is the contractor of the well or pump installation described hereon; that he has read the statement made hereon; knows the content thereof, and that the same is true of his own knowledge. Signature License No. State of ColorSdo, County of '.%` 4 �! _ SS Subscribed and sworn to betore me this /t'r day of k1 j, ' f , 19 . My Commission expires 1-74— / 7 , 19 J J Notary Public FORM TO BE MADE OUT IN OUADRUPLICATE: WHITE FORM must be an original copy on both sides and signed. WHITE AND GREEN copies must be filed with the State Engineer. PINK COPY is for the Owner and YELLOW COPY is for the Orifler. 75 a 21 3a 36i 4z,. 45 90 Aqua Tec We I 1 Owner lest Odle -21- Pump /0 H.P. Well • Permit No. Location (A4 r. Voltage P-` V / Pipe / depth Pumping depth ''(o Surface casing diameter Type Liner casing 7 << S. casing to r ft to ft. ft type. Rate Temp/(F) Comments 1 I IIID n 0 Min U i. ,-$ I_ ,.- . '.. r ff ( -6-<( /5 - 1/2 1 7 �-/o / 2 42-/o LY -I 4 • 4- /(I 5 4 /0 �.e. - 2) 7 - 4i7 9 10 _'- 15 0- 2 0 S-0 - G, 25 5L2 9 30 5 1 -) 40 $1 -4Y 50 / - Y b0 5i.- J' 1 - 15 'Z_z 1 - 30 5-2-5" •1 - 45 SZ -74 - - ,2 - 0 Z —/0 30 5 )3 - 0 3 - % )3 - 30 �3�-Z-' r4 - 0 5-3- ,5 - 0 S3- 7- 6 / - 1 --. )8- 0 S4-. __-- )9 - 0 c-4 - 12 - 0 5 - O /5- / 3 3. )¢ �F�21 , l i 15 - U s---.3 .--/O )18 - 0 _ ; 2-7 - 0 6Z--/�= 24 - 0 5-0 -7i/g- water t PvE'1 1 [1[' 1 U L L i licl .. i 1-11 iI / \' 1 U Min ,`-73i, 4 — - 1/1 _ _ - 3 72/-/ .7C —5 1z - 4 5 6 7 27.3 84 9' 2 - -, 10 : 15 -- 25 - S-4 30 2 )-g 40 Z / 50 2 •- Z. 60 a7-// 1 - 15 1 - 30. 1 - 45 2 - 0 2 - 30 3 - U 3 - 30 - ----- ---- — 4 - 0 .- 5 - 0 6 - 0 8 - 0 9 - 0 12 - 0 15 - 0 18 - 0 21 - 0 24 - 0 Zad---- 41/0/ —22— • cn -A N c N 0CA ' IP IIIi■IhP■I ■■ ■ii■ia4 I■..um mom 1111 ROOM 111111111111 ia��G u■i�'■ '■u_II If t1II 11111114061111 � GG1 ■G1.!!I!!■�!■.■ i -H--; :: � .61"41111 111 wwmimo .�l2po:PElag4-4_ 1 MEM =ihill 11 _ - 1111'sGGG Oki mil Aim h. in.. 1 ■■■■ wwww iiiiiiiiiiiiii WIC: wwww www= wwwww ilia a 11111 N -23- } 1 1i I 11 Iii v 1 8 6 z S f N xN mm _� urs a= 25 2n rn 0 0 O 7 L IAF. 8 6 t 1::47.1V am L I 8 6 01 IN Ili' DISUZICT COUT IN AND FOR DIVISION N. 5 STATF: ;)Z COLORADO C'SL: NO. 8/gAi..5-4 TL 2 Referee and the Division Engineer, "ater Div;Nd. 5, mot in conference on the (LA 0C to discuss the :bove eutitied Applic-tion for..=MGWir-104°ForeVAz- 0 /61' A4A/ 40e, IVarA/T7g7) e24/. a rsult OL TL conLerence, the :teferee a:1(1 Lhu Division 1]n:!,ineer concur in the opinion that he statements in the application are true, the: Lxtt he iternrrik LhiS applic.tion for --'--r;' L. /evil cze 4a6 r+44P; have no adverse effect on t/ and ehe 4.14,0//e/97/04) etra/rd, • BY TILE REFI -::REE: ater Referee '4ater Division No. 5 State of Colorado - !'h. dNove and Foregoing was (delivered) (1iL,(1) to the DivLion :1-wineer in Yater Division No. .5 , this (.2., dav 0[ _-_-7An , 19k: • Yater Clerk -25 - IN THE DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR WATER DIVISION NO. 5 STATE OF COLORADO Application No. 81CW56 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION ) FOR WATER RIGHTS OF ) ANN CATHERINE ROBINSON ) IN THE COLORADO RIVER ) OR ITS TRIBUTARIES ) TRIBUTARY INVOLVED: RIFLE CREEK ) IN GARFIELD COUNTY ) FILED IN DISMCT COURT WATER G :':;iO l 5, COLORADO JAN G 199? MARIE TALAMtS, CLERK RULING OF REFEREE The above entitled application was filed on February 26, 1981, and 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 llth day of March, 1981, in accordance with Article 92 of Chapter 37, Colorado Revised Statutes 1973, known as The Water Right 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 mage the following determination and ruling as the Referee in th.i.s matter, to -wit: 1. The statements in the application are true. 2. The application is for approval of a Plan for Augmentation involving Kay's Korner Well No. 1, Kay's Korner Well No 2, and the Rifle Creek Canyon Ditch. 3. The name of the claimant and address is: Ann Catherine Robinson; 0115 County Road 251; Rifle, Colorado. 4. The source of the water for all of the structures is Rifle Creek, tributary to the Colorado River. 5.(a)Kay's Korner Well No. 1 is located in the NWSW; of Section 19,T. 5 S., R. 92 W. of the 6th P.M. at a point 2000 feet North of -the South line and 1000 feet East of the West line of said Section 19. (b)Kay's Korner Well No. 2 is located in the NW1/4SW1/4 of Section 19, T. 5 S., R. 92 W. of the 6th P.M. at a point 1,950 feet North of the South line and 400 feet East of the West line of said Section 19. (c)The headgate of the Rifle Creek Canyon Ditch, as decreed, is located on the East bank of Rifle Creek, about seven miles above the mouth thereof. -26- 81CW56 6.(a)Kay's Korner Well No. 1 was issued Permit No. 109310 by the Office of the State Engineer on August 7, 1979. (b)Kay's Korner Well No. 2 was issued Permit No. 112781 by the Office of the State Engineer on February 7, 1980. (c)On May 11, 1889, in Civil Action No. 103, the Garfield County District Court awarded to the Rifle Creek Canyon Ditch, Structure No. 5, Priority No. 5, an absolute water right for 4.0 cubic feet of water per second of time to be used for irrigation, with appropriation date of March 10, 1883. The applicant herein is the owner of 0.25 cubic foot of water per second of time of said Priority No. 5. 7. This is an application for approval of a Plan for Augmentation in which the applicant seeks to provide a dependable supply of water for domestic, irrigation and livestock w.:•ater for a 30 lot subdivision located onga0 acres of land, by the use of Kay's Korner Well No. 1 and Kay's Korner Well No. 2. 8. On April 28, 1981, a Statement of Opposition was filed by the City of Rifle. Neqot/4iat.3 between the parties produced the following Stipulation resulting in the withdrawal of the Statement of opposition: m,,„ n,,,,i ,,.an+ by and thrc-uah her consulting engineer, -27- 81 CW 5 6 and lawn and garden irrigation for the subdivision. c. The out -of -priority consumptive uses contemplated for water withdrawn through these two wells will be approximately 3.93 acre feet annually. This consumptive use total is computed based upon 350 gallons per day per household with a 15% consumptive use; 30 gallons per day per head of livestock; and 1.16 acre feet annual consumptive use for irrigation of .69 acres of lawn and gardens within the entire subdivision. d. The consumptive use of the proposed uses of water from these two wells will cause no material injury to vested water rights when the 7.00 acres of historically irrigated ground are removed from irrigation. As a conservative margin of safety in making the calculations of the 7.00 acres, the factor of three times the normal dryup requirements were used. 10. The Plan for Augmentation as set forth herein is one contemplated by law, and if implemented and administered in accordance with this Decree, will not injuriously affect vested water rights or decreed conditional water rights, and the application should be granted in accordance with C.R.S. 1973, 37-92-305(3). The Referee does therefore conclude that the above entitled application for approval of Plan for Augmentation should be granted insofar as it is consistent with the terms and conditions of the Stipulation as set forth in paragraph 8 above, and in accorc:ance with the Plan for Augmentation as set forth in paragraph 9 above. Provision will be made in Engineer or his of water of the 7N --mentation . a manner satisfactory to the Division representative, for the by-pass of the required amount Rifle Creek Canyon Ditch to implement the Plan for It is accordingly ORDERED that this ruling shall be filed with Water Clerk and shall become effective upon such filing, subject Judicial review pursuant to Section 37-92-304 CRS 1973. It is further ORDERED that a copy of this ruling shall be ad with the appropriate Division Engineer and the State Engineer. Done at the City of Glenwood Springs, Colorado, this _ day of hi,4L2 , 19A1. BY THE REFEREE: Wr .Referee • er Division No. 5 State of Colorado No protest was filed in this matter, and accordingly the going ruling is confirmed and approved, and is made the ement and Decree of this court; provided however, that the 81CW56 approval of this Plan for Augmentation shall be subject to re- consideration by the Water Judge on the question of injury to )he vested rights of others during any hearing commencing in the --i„ calendar years succeeding the year in which this decision is rendered. DATED f�lr�u /o,//PC - -29 - ROAD SYSTEMS: There are two main access approaches off Colorado State Highway No. 325, being Cedar Ridge Drive and Creek Side Drive. Approaches were inspected by the Highway Department and applications were submitted in March, 1982. At this time we have not received the permits. We would like approval from the commissioners to use the existing access off the highway for Lot 10, Block 1, subject to the highway approval. A (+) 10 percent grade calculated on a vertical curve with the opposite side being a (-) 8 percent grade was used to minimize the amount of side hill cut on Cedar Ridge Drive after the access approach from the highway. The first 50 feet of this vertical curve averages a (+) 9.2 percent grade, the second 50 feet drops to a (+) 6.8 percent and continues dropping throughout this vertical curve. All other road sections do not exceed an 8 percent grade. All rights-of-way are 60 feet. Offset centerlines were established. on. Cedar Ridge Drive and Blue Sage Drive to keep a majority of slope cuts within the rights-of-way. No access road to building sites will exceed 15 percent. All access roads could be constructed at a 12 percent or less grade. The sub -base materials for the road construction exists within Block 1, where the old gravel pit for the Rifle Gap Dam and Road materials were supplied. The roads will be asphalt chip and seal mat. All roads will be constructed per Garfield County Specifications and inspected by the County Road Superinten- dent as construction is performed. The road bed shall be 26 feet wide with a four foot shoulder. No on -street parking is proposed. All lots shall provide their own off-street parking. The side slopes of cuts and fills shall not exceed a slope of 12:1 except as approved by the County Road Superintendent. All cul-de-sacs have a minimum radius of 45 feet. The shortest centerline curve radius is 100 feet. All road intersections intersect at 90 degrees from centerlines. 410 -30- • LOT STANDARDS: Lots 1,2,3,4,10 and 11, Block 1 have approximately 3/4 acres of buildable area when applying 20 percent side slopes. Using 30 percent side slopes the area increases to about one acre or more. We feel there is sufficient area to construct a residential home with a septic tank and leach field on these lots. Various types of systems could be used. Domestic water will be provided for each lot by a pipe line, central water system. Envelope Blocks for these lots and Lots 2,3,4 and 5, Block 2 are shown on the Drainage Plan. Refer to the flood study for other standards. SEWER SYSTEMS: Individual septic tank and leach field are proposed for this development, however, due to the high water table in Block 2, additional designs will be required. We recommend that upon application of building permits the type and location of the septic system be shown and described on a plot plan which is acceptable by the County Building and Health Department, for their approval or recommenda- tions. WILDLIFE AREA: The common areas herein were located for wildlife habitat. Various small animals and birds are within this development. There are no big game ranges on this development, however, deer use the drainage area which the common area in Block 1 is designed for. Rifle Creek also has a 30 foot drainage easement on each side of the highwater line for wildlife habitat. UTILITY COMPANIES: Public Service will be supplying the electrical services, Telephone and Telegraph Company will be supplying utilities are on and crossing this project. Both with a preliminary utility plat for their review. shall be submitted prior to public hearings. and Mountain Bell the phone companies A letter services. Both have been provided from both companies • -31- • DECLARATION OF CONDITIONS, COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS By this declaration made this 20th day of April, 1982, Ann C. Robinson, hereinafter called the "Declarant", who is the owner of the herein described property, more fully described on Exhibit A, subject to those lots numbered 1 through 30 with said real property, hereinafter called "the Lots", to the conditions, covenants, and restrictions as set forth hereinafter for the benefit of the property and its purchasers. 1. Limitation on Use. No lots within Rifle Creek Ranch Subdivision shall ever be occupied or used for any purpose other than single family dwellings and accessory uses, public and common uses related to single family dwellings. 2. Prohibition of Resubdivision. No lot described on the recorded plat of Rifle Creek Ranch Subdivision shall ever be resubdivided into smaller tracts or lots nor conveyed or encumbered in any less than the full original dimensions as shown on said recorded plats; provided that conveyances or dedications of easements for utilities may be made for less than all of one lot. 3. -Amendment and Termination of Covenants. The covenants contained in this instrument shall be amended or terminated only upon the written consent of all owners of the Lots and the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado. 4. Waiver. Failure to enforce any provisions of these covenants shall not constitute a continuing waiver of the right to enforce any provision. 5. Severability. Should any part or parts of these -1- • -32- • covenants be declared invalid or unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not effect the validity of the remaining covenants. 6. The conditions hereof and those attached hereto as Exhibit B constitute this declaration of conditions, covenants and restrictions. Ann C. Robinson, Declarant STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF GARFIELD ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged to before me this day of , 1982, by Ann C. Robinson, Declarant. My commission expires: Notary Public Address • -33- • EXHIBIT B PROTECTIVE COVENANTS FOR RIFLE CREEK RANCH SUBDIVISION LOCATED IN GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO 1. Land Use. The property in said Subdivision is intended to be developed for single family residential purposes only in a rural setting and motif and with all structures designed to blend into and compliment the natural surroundings. Lots 1 though 16, inclusive, RIFLE CREEK RANCH SUBDIVISION, shall be used for residential purposes with only one (1) habitable dwelling per lot. Only two (2) outbuildings shall be at least 400 square feet each on the ground level and consistent with the architecture of the main dwelling. No elevated tanks, towers or structures are allowed. No building or structure intended for or adapted to business, commercial or manufacturing purposes, nor any multiple family dwelling, shall be erected, placed, maintained or permitted upon such property. Subject to the other provisions in these covenants, use of any lot for pasture of horses or the raising of crops when a dwelling shall first have been constructed thereon shall not be construed as being incompatible with residential purposes. 2. Homeowners Association. (a) A non-profit corporation will be organized under the laws of the State of Colorado, the name of which will be RIFLE CREEK RANCH SUBDIVISION HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION" (Association). The Association will own and be responsible for repair, replacement, maintenance, alterations, and upkeep of: any private community roads or easements; all common utilities with the subdivision, including the domestic and irrigation water systems; and land and recreation facilities on "Open Space". The Association will also be responsible for the enforcement of these Protective Covenants, and shall have such other duties as are prescribed by its Articles of Incorporation and corporate bylaws. (b) Each individual or entity or combination of owners upon acquiring title to a lot in the Subdivision shall automatically become a member of the Association and shall be entitled to one (1) vote in the Association on all matters. There shall be one (1) vote for each lot regardless of the number of individuals or entities owning any lot. (c) The board of directors of the Association may assess each member a fee at all appropriate times to cover the costs of maintenance and improvements to the property and facilities owned by the Association or for which the Association is responsible, and for such other special purposes as determined by a majority of the voting members. Each assessment so levied shall become a lien on the land and improvements of each owner in said Subdivision to the extent of the assessment levied. The Board of Directors shall be entitled to maintain an action in the -1- • -34- • District Court of Garfield County, Colorado, for the purpose of recovering any unpaid assessments and for the purpose of foreclosing the lien against the lands and improvements of the defaulting lot owner. Damages may include costs of said action plus reasonable attorney's fees. (d) The water supply for Subdivision in-house domestic purposes will come from a central system. Water from such system shall be limited to one hundred (100) gallons per person per day per lot for in-house domestic purposes. No irrigation shallbe permitted from the domestic system but shall be from a separate system. Water for irrigation purposes shall be limited to that amount reasonably necessary to irrigate 0.25 acres of irrigated area on each lot, if applicable. The Homeowners Association shall have all powers reasonably necessary to compel the lot owners to limit water use so as to comply with this paragraph and to otherwise prevent all waste of water. 3. Water Augmentation Plan. (a) The Association and each lot owner shall comply with all of the terms and requirements of the Plan of Augmentation, decreed in Case No. 81CW56 on February 10, 1982, by the Water Court, Division No. 5, sitting at Glenwood Springs, Colorado. Said Plan of Augmentation covers the out -of -priority consumptive uses of water drawn from the wells serving this subdivision. (b) In addition to the accounting required to be made to the appropriate officials of the Division of Natural Resources, State of Colorado, the Association shall have the duty of enforcing the specific water use limitations found in said decree, to wit: in-house domestic uses, irrigation of no more than 1,000 square feet of lawns and gardens per lot, and stockwatering of one head of livestock per lot. (c) Pursuant to the provisions of said decree and a stipulation reached in said case, this section of the protective covenants is specifically made for the benefit of the City of Rifle as well as in favor of other lot owners in this subdivision. The City of Rifle hereby is granted the right to take enforcement action against any individual lot owner/owners whose water use exeeds the limitations in the decree. 4. Architectural Control Committee. (a) The board of directors of the Association will appoint an ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL COMMITTEE (ACC) consisting of at least three (3) members, any of whom may be a member of the board. No building or fencing shall be erected, placed, or altered on any lot until the construction plans and specifications and a plan showing the location of the structure of fence have been approved in writing by the ACC. No grading or landscaping shall be undertaken without the prior approval in writing of the ACC. No natural vegetation on the west 11 sites, being Lots No. 1 - 11 shall be disturbed without approval from ACC. -2- • • -35-- (b) The ACC shall exercise its best judgment to see that all improvements, construction, landscaping and alterations on the lands within the Subdivision conform and harmonize with the natural surroundings and with existing structures as to external design, materials, color, setting, height, topography, grade, and finished ground elevation. The ACC shall protect the seclusion of each home site from other home sites insofar as possible. Approval shall not be unreasonably withheld and shall be deemed automatically granted if no action is taken within thirty (30) days from the -date a request is made by a lot owner for the approval of a proposal. Any lot owner whose application has been denied or whose activity has been proscribed may appeal to the board of directors or ultimately to a majority vote of the voting members of the Association. No member of the ACC shall receive any compensation for services performed pursuant to this covenant. (c) The ACC may grant a reasonable variance or adjustment of these conditions and restrictions in order to overcome practical difficulties and prevent unnecessary hardships arising by reason of the application of the restrictions contained herein. Such variances or adjustment shall be granted only in case the granting thereof shall not be materially detrimental or injurious to other property or improvements of the neighborhood and shall not defeat the general intent and purpose of these restrictions. (d) The ACC shall not be liable in damages to any person or association submitting any architectural plans for approval, or to any owner or owners of lands by reason of any action, failure to act, approval, disapproval, or failure to approve or disapprove, with regard to such architectural plans. Robinson, (e) The initial members of the ACC shall be Ann C. A majority of the ACC may designate a representative to act for it. At any time the then record owners of the majority of lots in the Subdivision shall have the power through any duly recorded instrument to change the membership of said ACC. In the event of the death, resignation or inability to act of any member of the ACC, the remaining members shall have full authority to designate a successor. 5. Resubdivision. No residential lot in RIFLE CREEK RANCH SUBDIVISION shall ever be resubdivided. 6. General Restrictions on Residential Lots. (a) The site of all structures of all kinds on each lot shall be approved by the ACC using the criteria described in these covenants, unless varied by the provisions of paragraph 3 (c). (b) No structures of any sort on any lot shall be -3- • -36- • constructed closer than twenty-five feet (25') from any lot line. (c) No fences shall be constructed or maintained on any lot in the subdivision higher than four and one-half feet (41/2'), but this restriction shall not apply to patio fences in connection with dwellings. All fences must be of 1" x 6" x 8' brown -stained boards. Materials other than wood may be utilized if previous permission therefor is given by the ACC. (d) Wire fencing shall not be allowed on any lot boundaries bordering on community roads, whether public or private. (e) No structure of a temporary character, trailer, mobile home, basement, tent, shack, garage, barn or other outbuilding shall be placed on said land by means other than new construction; and no building shall be used as a residence, even though new construction, which has been completely prefabricated and built elsewhere, it being the intention of these covenants to prohibit the use of mobile homes as a residence on said property. This covenant, however, shall not prohibit precut homes which are partially constructed on the property, nor the temporary use for no more than a six (6) month period of trailers during construction for storage of tools and materials or for construction office. (f) Each residential lot, as described in 1 hereof may have only one (1) habitable dwelling constructed thereon. This dwelling shall have at least 1500 square feet of finished living area measured by outside dimensions, excluding carports, garages, attics, unfinished basements, utility and storage areas, open porches and entrances. At least 1500 square feet of this area shall constitute rooms with two (2) sides or more above ground. (g) Each residence shall contain at least one (1) fully equipped bathroom and all sewage shall be disposed of by means of an individual mechanical sewage treatment facility or septic tank and leach field as shall be approved by the Colorado State Health Department and local health agencies having jurisdiction thereof. Owners shall install and maintain such treatment facilities in good operating condition and shall cause the same to be inspected by qualified persons at least once each twenty-four (24) months. Copies of the results of each inspection shall be furnished to the ACC and the Garfield County Health Department. If inspections are not so made, the ACC shall cause the same to be made and the cost thereof shall be assessed to the owner. No lot shall be used in any manner or for any purpose that would tend to pollute nearby streams or other sources of water. (h) No building shall be placed upon the property herein by means of other than new construction; it being the purpose of this covenant to insure that old buildings will not be moved from previous locations and place upon property in said -4- -37- Subdivision. (i) Exterior lighting must be approved by the ACC. No structures shall be permitted on any lot which exceed thirty feet (30') in height from the highest natural finished grade line immediately adjoining the foundation or structure. No radio, short wave or television antenna over five feet (5') above the highest roof line shall be permitted unless approved by the ACC. (k) Clothes lines, equipment, garbage cans, service yards, wood piles or storage areas shall be adequately screened by planting or construction to conceal the same from view of neighboring lots and streets. (1) No gas lines, light and power lines, telephone lines or television cables shall be permitted unless said lines are buried underground and at the owner's expense. The ACC may, however, allow overhead light, power, telephone and television lines if the same would not detract from the view of other property owners and the cost of placing the same underground would be prohibitive. (m) The owner of any lot in said Subdivision shall complete construction of any structure thereon within one (1) year after commencement. (n) Every dwelling shall provide off-street parking, excluding garages or carports, for the regular use of at least four (4) vehicles. (o) No structures shall be placed or located on any lot in such a manner that will obstruct, divert or otherwise alter the natural water drainage courses and patterns. Likewise, no landscaping or changes to the existing terrain shall be made which shall obstruct, divert or otherwise alter such drainage. No lot shall be graded such that natural water or irrigation water overflow is diverted from existing drainage or along other than existing topography. (p) The roof and exterior finish of all dwellings and outbuildings shall be of a natural color (earth tones only, no white) consistent with the surrounding area. Doors and trim may be excluded from the effect of this subparagraph if approved by the ACC. 7. -Use Restrictions. There shall not be permitted or maintained upon any lot or any part thereof, any trade, business or industry, except that owners may rent or lease for residential purposes when not required for the owner's use. No oil, natural gas, mining, quarrying, or other similar development operations of any kind shall be permitted upon or in the Subdivision, nor shall -5- • -38- • derricks, tanks, or other structures pertinent to these operations be permitted in the Subdivision. 8. Community Recreation Facilities. The acres of land designated "Open Space" shall be available for the private use of all Rifle Creek Ranch Subdivision homeowners, including any future residents on the lands adjacent to the Subdivision that may be developed by Ann C. Robinson or her successors, as part of Rifle Creek Ranch Subdivision. Riding trails, corrals, picnic tables and shelters, and other recreational facilities may be constructed on this land upon approval of a majority of the residents, as defined above, prior to the time of construction. 9. Animals. Owners and lessees of residential dwellings may have a reasonable number of ordinary household pets, not kept or bred for commercial purposes, so long as such pets do not constitute any annoyance to other owners. Owners and lessees may keep one (1) horse per lot of ground owned or leased in the Subdivision. Additional horses may be kept on their property for short periods if such horses have permanent pasture elsewhere. FFA or Four-H project livestock shall be allowed. The ACC may, however, require any owner to remove any animals if, in the opinion of the ACC, lands are overgrazed or the animals constitute an annoyance to the owners of neighboring tracts. Family pets, other than dogs and cats, must be kept within an enclosed area which must be kept clean, sanitary and reasonably free from refuse, insects and waste at all times. All animals must be so maintained that they do not become a nuisance to the neighborhood and do not run at large or endanger or harass other animals, including wildlife upon neighboring lands, and public domain. 10. Nuisances. No noxious or offensive conduct or activity shall be carried on upon any lot or in any structure thereon which may constitute a health hazard, nuisance or annoyance to the neighborhood. 11. Vehicle Registration. Motorcycles and snowmobiles may be utilized for transportation in and out of the subdivision. 12. Signs. No billboards, signs, or other advertising devices of any nature shall be erected, placed, maintained or permitted upon the property in said Subdivision, provided that this restriction shall not be construed to prevent appropriate name and address signs and signs that advertise the property for sale or lease insofar as it is necessary to promote the sale and development of such property. 13. Private Roads. Individual lot owners are responsible for the construction and maintenance of private roads on their lots. Where such roads cross drainage areas no smaller than eighteen (18") culverts shall be installed by the lot owners. 14. Outside Burning. The outside burning of any trash, -6- -39- .4 rubbish or other materials shall be absolutely prohibited. Standard and approved barbeques and fireplaces shall be allowed for the preparation of foodstuffs only. 15. Maintenance of Residential Lot. No lot shall be used or maintained as a dumping ground for rubbish or storage area for junk or unused vehicles. All business-related materials, equipment and supplies shall at all times be kept in an enclosed area. The owner of any lot shall keep the structures thereon in good repair, doing such maintenance as may be required for this purpose. Each dwelling shall be equipped with a garbage disposal unit. Garbage cans must be contained in a covered area at all times. 16. Recreational Equipment and Vehicles. All trailers, detached campers, commerical vehicles or automobiles in disrepair shall not be parked or maintained on any lot or on any street unless the same is within a covered garage or otherwise screened from view of other lots. Temporary parking of recreational vehicles will be allowed in regular course of use. 17. Wildlife. No hunting, shooting, trapping or otherwise killing or harming of wildlife, except coyotes, skunks, and porcupines, shall be permitted in the Subdivision, it being the intent hereof to conserve and protect all wildlife to the fullest extent possible. ACC shall set forth reasonable rules governing skunks, porcupines and coyotes. 18. Easements and Rights -of -Way. Easements and rights-of-way in perpetuity are hereby reserved for the erection, construction, maintenance and operation of wires, cables, pipe, conduits and apparatus for the transmission of electrical current, telephone, television and radio lines and for the furnishing of water, gas, sewer service, or for the furnishing of other utility purposes, together with the right to enter for the purpose of installing, maintaining and improving said utilities along, across, upon and through the strip of land twenty feet (20') in width along all interior lot lines of all lots ten feet (10') in width along outside boundary lines of the Subdivision. Individual lot owners are responsible for the installation and maintenance of all lines from the respective tap points to the points of use. 19. Duration of Covenants. These covenants are to run with the land and shall be binding upon all parties and all persons claiming under them until June 1, 2005, at which time said covenants shall be automatically extended for successive periods of twenty-five (25) years, unless by vote reflected by signed documents duly recorded by the majority of the then owners it is agreed to change said covenants in whole or in part. 20. Enforcement. If any lot owner or persons acting by, through or under him should violate or attempt to violate any of the covenants herein stated, it shall be lawful for the ACC, -7- -40 - the Association or any other person or persons owning lots in said Subdivision, to prosecute any suit in law or in equity to restrain and enjoin the violation of such covenants and to recover damages for such violations and to recover all costs and attorney fees necessary to enforce the provisions of these covenants. 21. Severability. The invalidation of any one of these covenants by judgment or court order shall in no way affect any of the other provisions which shall remain in full force and effect. These covenants shall be in addition to, and not in substitution for, all applicable building, zoning and other governmental laws, ordinances, resolutions, rules and regulations which shall be strictly followed and adhered to in all respects. STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. COUNTY OF GARFIELD ) this Declarant. Ann C. Robinson, Declarant The foregoing instrument was acknowledged to before me day of , 1982, by Ann C. Robinson, My commission expires: Notary Public Address • STATE OF COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS Grand Junction, Colorado 81502 (303) 242-2882 260 Ranney Street Craig, Colorado 81625 June 2, 1982 (303) 824-5104 Ann Catherine Robinson 0115 Road 251 Rifle, Colorado 81650 Dear Ms. Robinson: This letter is in regard to your application for two accesses onto State Highway 325. One on the east side at 1056' south of Milepost # 2, and one on the west side 10' south of Milepost # 2. These are entrances to a residential development. Permits will be issued for these in a short while. They will have to be studied as to how much improvement will need to be made at each location, and the exact location for each. If there is any further information needed or any questions to be answered, feel free to contact me. JAK:wt Very truly yours, , • JohA. Kier Hi hway Maintenance Superintendent • • RIFLE CREEK RANCH SUBDIVISION First Filing PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT by: SOLAR COUNTRY • • RIFLE CREEK RANCH SUBDIVISION, First Filing FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT Table of Contents Introduction 1 Existing Drainage Conditions 1 Proposed Conditions 1 Methods Used Hydrology 2 Hydraulics 2 Conclusion 3 Calculations Appendix Bibliography Maps RIFLE CREEK RANCH SUBDIVISION, FIRST FILING FINAL DRAINAGE REPORT INTRODUCTION: This report is an analysis of drainage conditions and design of drainage structures for the proposed RIFLE CREEK RANCH SUBDIVISION, First Filing, Rifle, Colorado. RIFLE CREEK RANCH SUBDIVISION (see Map Number 1) is located in the Southwest Quarter of Section 19, Township 5 South, Range 92 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Garfield County, Colorado, and contains 47 acres. The site is about 2.5 miles North of the City of Rifle and is bordered by State Highway 325 and Rifle Creek on the East, Rifle Creek Estates on the South and West, public (BLM) land on the West, and private property on the North. EXISTING DRAINAGE CONDITIONS: As mentioned above, Rifle Creek borders the Easternmost edge of the site. Two miles North of the site is the Rifle Gap Reservoir. This structure limits normal creek flow to.325 cfs and has a maximum design discharge at flood stage of 9,400 cfs. The only other significant drainageway on the site is a normally -dry creek which enters the property on the West, passes through an existing pond, crosses State Highway 325 by means of a 72 inch CMC, and enters Rifle Creek near the Southeast corner of the site. Incidental drainage includes four small areas which all flow in an Easterly direction. PROPOSED CONDITIONS: RIFLE CREEK RANCH SUBDIVISION will be developed as a single-family residential area with sixteen lots of two acres or more. As stated in the Protective Covenants for this subdivision, each lot will be limited to no more than 1,000 square feet of irrigated area and the native vegetation will be maintained beyond those irrigated areas. Three roads will be constructed within the subdivision. The total length of these roads is less than one mile. The surface material will be an asphalt chip and seal mat. 2 The existing pond on the site contains a large amount of sediment. The existing embankment at the pond will be removed along with the sediment and vegetation within the pond itself. A new dam will be constructed such that the maximum high water depth at flood stage will be less than 10 feet. Due to the size of the lots along with the limitations on development of the lots and the relatively small amount of road to be built, runoff characteristics of the site will be essentially unchanged by development. METHODS USED: HYDROLOGY: Two methods of hydrologic analysis were used. The first, and simpler, of the two is the Rational Method. The Rational Method assumes that conditions throughout the drainage area are uniform. For that reason, it is most appropriately used for small drainage areas with one drainage way and little variation in soil types or ground cover. This study used the Rational Method to analyze Drainage Areas Number 1A, 1B, 2, 3 and 4. As can be seen on Map Number 2 as well as within the calculations, all of these drainage areas are less than one square mile. The Soil Conservation Service Method of Hydrograph Generation was applied to the analysis of the largest drainage basin, Drainage Area Number 5. -This basin is not only larger than the recommended upper limit for the Rational Method but is also a more complex basin and warrents a more detailed method of analysis. HYDRAULICS: Once the design flows has been determined, culverts were sized for the crossings by the proposed roads using the nomographs of the Bureau of Public Roads. These nomographs were also used to analyze the existing 72 inch culvert under State Highway 325 and to design the discharge structure for the pond reconstruc— tion. Copies of the nomographs are included in the appendix. The channel relocation was designed using the Manning's Equation. The flood— plain along Rifle Creek was determined using this method also. Routing of the low hazard runoff flood through the proposed pond was done using the Puls Method as published in "Handbook of Applied Hydrology" by Ven Te Chow. 3 CONCLUSION: As labeled on the accompanying Drainage Plan, all cross -road culverts are designed as 18" CMC. The only exception is the outlet structure for the pond in the Common Area of Block 1. This system will utilize 4 - 36" CMC with headwalls. In designing the outlet system for the pond, the primary consideration was the conveyance of the total design runoff without exceeding a depth of ten feet. At the same time it is desirable to maintain a normal pool depth of four to five feet. Therefore the actual headwater depth to discharge the design flow rate is further limited to five or six feet. These restrictions led to selection of a series of small culverts as the discharge structure. The flood plain along Rifle Creek does not extend very far beyond the high banks of the creek. The limits are shown on the Drainage Plan. It is re- commended that construction on those lots adjacent to Rifle Creek be at an elevation equal to or above the flood water surface. This recommendation extends also to those lots adjacent to the major drainage way through Block 1. The following table indicates the recommended minimum building pad elevations. BLOCK LOTS RECOMMENDED MIN. BLDG. PAD ELEVATION 1 2 1, 2 10, 11 2 3 4 5704.1 5678.0 5664.0 5667.0 5670.0 The drainage way flowing Easterly along the South line of Block 2 will be rerouted to follow the road. This will allow for more buildable area on Lot 2 of Block 2, as well as provide more control of the drainage through that lot and decrease the area flooded by Rifle Creek and the drainageway itself. BIBLIOGRAPHY Handbook of Applied Hydrology, Ven Te Chow, McGraw-Hill, 1964 Design of Small Dams, U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, 1974. Hydraulic Design of Improved Inlets for Culverts, U.S. Department of Transporta- tion, Federal Highway Administration, 1972. ( = = „d,eciet Alo / - /A1,21( 1,-4 /t/o _IA oc°A _16-2 i2s ii rz-ze,c21 eo .2) --/="5 ),117-4/Al2 1/ 0/12, JLJLC • L a ---- _56 /4 = Z•7 // ,Ds 7 52 7 5 QoQ b/ IJ -7) n7,//7L SK/- x1 s O. 6-6 Z=7"- ,5 iJJL L71 6„ 0.50 41 / • Leocvedzi z Jc/./ ScP,zE 0 AZ --?nte /2.17, /142 r_ _ . 72././4)._ 2-/),,_/,,2ii,._ 4/A-_----:-4„0,1 /-Ly'-' • I <4-./. -F/.-7- --:/.,i.2..zi (L'--7,7-:.)- //i_Z-_42'' (,, . /„-L-1)/1:1 • (k i 1 •AJ) 6-, _A ----)\i '5-703, ,0 /C123 5.`"Yoln / 6? 5 -)0-3,5- 5 7 al:, o 0 o ' o Z„_Z 2) , 1 ,, , (,, .(•.,,,, ,,, 5 --',.? _/ 41gle. . 1 0,0/5 4_4 /7,0 / , e3 Q,3 ),/ (., 5 4a f; (.a --- f,,q,-_ • 0,-7y /4. /7 ,(S _%:..3 ( 2 ,.-..:--):.2c: _ 7,5 - - _ z.z._-4 _L2.-1:: - -, .- c --D, -01.7`..)' 65. 9 /7 I5,- -:"z-1.3 3 /,r)o _c=i _...., 1 623 -ed,2.4. ,:-..3- o,00 le.s Z. / c,-• 6,9226.,L5 .03.,9 / oq (5 :•__4_3 6,84- '85 Lq0.7 . / . 0,`;_ sic).7 /-7,0_,Z 1,61--;',(i -72/ 011_, ::"5- • • - 6 / -----e_•\/ 2z2.A/ i:',e-15 (, ) r---5-) (//`.75 0 •.s 0 '5-703, ,0 /C123 5.`"Yoln / 6? 5 -)0-3,5- 1,() 5 7 al:, o '5 -Jo?. 0 • 4z. e0-0 -- •c)z _ 7•5 _"704, •--7o .--);0 -Z-7 - E.---- V /2--.e.d 6/6)4 (7 C, L , (2C-1=7) /(_77, (4 ci ---- rci,--.) • -.c7- - --n; zC- 7 .'-'.... • ( --) -r-------_, . r) 0 ri-if ,ki ) (0 1-----)) • re 1 ---;)Ca 0 (__ :i t---•:,) , c'D g2,27 0 /7 7,.q7 te,/..zro zo6.84 0 o 7p i1.• • 6.-15 1/'. 0 i, Ii (-,5 0.5 7 0.,3.),,? 0. L -ii . c.... c)..--7/ . A/0 /, '6). "• 0,d 1 / 6 41. 4o 0- .40 f.. -?o /-5 •• • • gZ 6 42:3 - lo`if. 0 0, -77 . 715' i 0 Z.7 0_2,_ /5_70.5',C) a,q 1 . 5-7o 5;6 / 0_0 ii 1/ 0- 4,S 6. 5- (4, . . /c2/4o . ,5_03.._ .3 ,s _ ""io., 0 /� 1,/ P A 53(4.6 ' . r -- Z\7— 12,i 0 W71 JLItZ (J A -`1-77,4105D /1 4:10 L )6'7)/ ) —111-1 -_ =-(_•_____ Alt" -?_-.0i4 T.L.-/--.r-2_ 02-r/-- oki ,__:-___>. - 7- () 7z../0 0 ri-if ,ki ) (0 1-----)) • re 1 ---;)Ca r-----_,') (__ :i t---•:,) 0 c'D g2,27 0 /7 7,.q7 te,/..zro zo6.84 76.67 ..E30 -?5 zo".0.6(11 0 5.75 41/5 /5:0 22./-5 2Vp.0 qL.V0 /4.5. 7c/ 7L. 70..1. /0_ 5.70S. ei6 •-/I/P)(9/ i•IAV /7 6 d /6 1- 3G_ auto 5(/.7/.00 A.7iL IC/1 A -L;LP7711 /0 -, - --- • -- () -- - 7----/ - if-- --7/' • . _____ea,•• z(a..70 - _ -7--7 U,, • • • : 0 ,24t5„ / 7 o '53 L / 6'0 .e__5' fle, Z. 7 * 2.3______ai.1• 07, a 7„75 --(__,_,C) ____e_4.1 1 / 235 -5-7o 2.2c _f0e, 20 --, Z/441 Lie, 7o I /Z. -p) __65,Z/ 76.0 c=i). 7 7 e _ • 510/0_4_ (--ye73 0.860 03.0_7_...._____________ / 0.7 . - _2,i5 Z. 7-T_ ___Mi ' 5_6 f 07 /7,Z f • /,3 7. 5 7 io 0 4 51_004_7.5._ •-/I/P)(9/ i•IAV /7 6 d /6 1- 3G_ auto 5(/.7/.00 A.7iL IC/1 A -L;LP7711 /0 • I '0 OS 1 ,111 ai■■■ r -.� ■ 2-- 1 :111 ■IR Li Ellima Li 11 11,11 1111 w A il• 11 r A r . iir■,uii • T IIUIIPiIlIImu Emma= a - r ■..■ iuu.■.....■■.■.■. '� . ■■. ■....... uu■m....■ ■.. ► I ilniln 1,11��11 11111 II i 1 ni 111 Ilil� -4- /`'4 1 ■ grafi n /■..■/uuN■.■■■■/II.rI■.II 1 Iu1IIIII1IItIuhRuIlmIIIoIIIII1hmI: l► .■...■u..■....■..u�■..u■..■■..■■■■■■.......■■..■.... .■■■�.■u►�■■.■■■■■■■..► ... MIIMMEMIIM ■u.■■■■■■■■■■■.■..■■■■■..u■.■ �a 1U• iiIMMIi� ■■i ii in11111i 1111 1111111111=11 111111111111 II liq ■u■.■.■■...■■.■�. ..• N® M1111111111111:10m=111... ' :y::i�.•"•'Pria...■=111ii■■■iin1•N1■■.■ =mmuminasz � rlizar . 11.1.1■■■■ HhIUpIIHhIIIII!IIIIHHUUIIIIH.■u..■/�ia.■ ,•UIIHIHJ` IIIIIIIIIIIIIIi� 11111111111111111 ..■■..■■i......•. ■uu ......■...■...■■■.11 •..� .■...■u■.■.■..■.. ■..■. ■• •.C11:I11.u•u.. II . ..■u■ ■.■.1..1.u■ u■u■ ■■■■... ■u. ...■1111 I11111111111� MEMO 1= u..■■■■■■.. ■.■■�,1� .■■u1.■■ ■.■■■■.■ ■■■.1..■■■..■..■. ■■.u■.■■..■■■■.■■ .■u1..■■■■.■■.■. 111111111111111 16. • . "11 Isiglirem 1AO1'ui WEE de - I - ■.■ . ■.I ''P III -•i=••Iii - ••. 11111111- __ . — I • 0 ■..■..■■..■. ■■■::::.i:::: iiiP' . «_ - ff .■..■■. . ■■.� ___ . f - onipplipill 11111111 11 11111 11111111 iiia=l '1:1111111 MEM 1 � ..■u ■ ■■.■■... u■ ..■uuso ■1■ .■p 1"' 11 I I 1 u • it o _ ------ /a_ .,/•L,21.__,6 ic-2/;')e, A = - /.94A1//) i 8/l_4 o, -T- ----- /S 1.1 - o. 8 4-- / -2-7.5 ,J/41,4c.7 ,4,e -,d /Jo 4' Cyj 6.�o . . - /. fd,G�.1,LT- , q / (0. -)6Y/ -c -2-a)6 a0/ Yr 172. q// /i,./z....er:-=T__-0ol7'>e',) (//J /4.0r -r 1Die4J,Jk 416e-4 k/o ?4 /o/(.1 ) i © _p_r- .7z/in.-J./At,�.D idn e,tiNJ, E (/A h.i.e4t%1C_ 4iiii l / /R I) ozz2ok- 0r8 -0C.8 a� •6,1./%/) /-,Q4,(117l17_E j c>i .1L'4 `) - a. 6.7 7 /./5- 7a2 /G/• G, 7 7 o,57 0.27 0./g••. ___1 2 5 ¢. , 4 3n 7/ ,?3,e3 /0-o ___' . �o ,L _LA/0 . • . 4- q j1-r ,w// <D mfr/ _._4()_/1 /tL-- /6 k-/-77 So/;..S z.° /-1 ± / -3.-5/i . • • „O •----- /5-6 0 F-7-- (5, (o, 6 Oe egs. 1.1 6-_-_ 77 .(..t6 zi; - iLiti,o_i /±166ktz, _NI , 67R 1 ) ,efi,u (;,(1) .L8e7- .0 (JI-1 ( , ha) Aik) (a 0 P -,g -',-1:77-Z, .c,z 7 0. Ce_'5 LL42 ooz) o.o 047 7 o.....-3 7 . 2 o 4'. 0.77 5I/ 0. 5-(e_ 6o, /-1 ± / -3.-5/i . • • „O •----- /5-6 0 F-7-- (5, (o, 6 Oe egs. 1.1 6-_-_ 77 .(..t6 zi; 14-1-44-1-2;;Clop-F 4 elk.] - 5'4 2s s -rzzo.A-1 z2;'r4-1 (1) r: Lie._ tha ?_ ., /Alam -.-4__ (J4) ,I.1 D264 - (Li ie) ..,5,..boAi s Z-1 _ rA1,0f) (() .‘7 / ; / / ccoao 0:,..D..1.0 6. 0 o.04o o o_.__ Z g / 29 c), 1 . . 437 (1O - o , o 9_. q /• 0 / J. /./37 f.,1 /j- o.,__LS , Z_Z_de3 o• 7'5 - 14-1-44-1-2;;Clop-F 4 elk.] - 5'4 2s s -rzzo.A-1 z2;'r4-1 (1) r: (2,41.4,0 /Li .." - ----_--- .---- X.%(,,, L: 7- L eit----r .‘7 / ; / / ccoao 0:,..D..1.0 6. 0 o.04o 0 Z g / /6:,/ C%Oa-13- ._1 (2,41.4,0 /Li "IP um p .1.1 lisiNTIPM1 ■■: : 7- = 07 c CED 5 5 — 5 .5(e 7o . te, Zel, A /i ad/JA 1 L -,-- -- Zi._. -5 ,11/27, ,DDic,i5 - n ,41Ja- / 1 -- / c , -382 - C..5 . o . A f Z7 ... CED 5 5 — 5 .5(e 7o . te, Zel, II I I I I I f I I I i i i I I 1 1 I I i_I. I IIi1J III l l I_. I. 1 l_�yi_.I _I.. . N ■.:u■C::� u••u .■.�:.i..::■__-_ ■�■■ .■ :::.::CC'„1C..::.::I:: C::.E:. r !11.EM-::C:■.■ X11::::1`1::::: 4e-2 betr,d r26y,/ -Typ 42/$ . oU _ - , f4 /),e0,e54.62, ikpv. 42/.4//-=--, 2tL e451) 0.(1 /. Q p5 -a • 5-.6/2.45 d/41 --r-c) x c9/c/ aoAi,/c).(1 ,er-Jo 94,Y6..g5— /y,/ 50 • • �r A. 1 el frip e • I 411 IN4 D61%Nir ti;:kr. orada t L b-‘1, tittoc:4 _imp- ,46--1111 41,„twaerAtoop valorer *WO Piterompi ,ii 'ALIO' p A Vail fie lita t4IIPNE A t r l d .1 I OtibmA w: INA a. Ife"),M1gaimm �, .1Iv44091 pr. INI s is --400* risMets* 't Ni t4 fallIt* ',/ ii Am mopillefAMINAMONS1: Nitiviorib----4"0"m6161411L At% n e nr DESIGN OF SMALL DAM ar N IP ar.,.. .nr •0 .n w u� Ir figure 17. Probable maximum 6 -hour point values in inches for general -type storms west of the 105' meridian. 288—D--2756, 288—D-275: '99aa-98Z 'S9a-a-88Z 'V61,11 -0-88Z 'uo!puaw 0501 ;o 41$M o•IO Jo; ogoid Wnwprow uoy$ ssal poou u6lsap mop! 6u!!ndwo) .ioj o14o3!lddo poiu!oJ od/4.1o4ouo8 JA04-9 8u!u!wJalap Jo; o!4od •C •'8!d 0901 .uagwnu pa400ipu! Aq sanion wuo;s adA4. iouaua6 wnwixow algogoJd ap!n!a :a4oN 00ZI kik / ar It i Ifit Popo sag* mi P lattimma la , arAit hP ilit Initril A iarAttrit. SSW Inte 4/tripit intra PIWW4P/ 1po41 LC.* tiV AI 44. legitValli iltablarilmillitrit Aill 44," itOMITITIR 401 j 6 "fit 1"911111...i........r anktinAll it, A Plow* 111011JMYWO ifi I k- iirAVAN LNIIIMINakali Pa willa arow eksfAesar 41111111ffirev °A1Potisl otwaiviev,t ,,,s,4i 1/4 lg# firNmi1rls4lt0i �i'��l, `����'it �ls wW ieilist•f �o�' iIIi0?ak Ighlikis 181111g4"411* s f o�E SZ oe 1 triettlAttA oZ eillk.4, 0501 0011 • • '1921—a-8ei '09a-a—gu 'UDIpIJOW eS01 )O Isom DOJO JO) (104)11 Y( 10110A IUIOd) 110)UI0J Jnoy•, WJOISJapUA4I WAW;XOW avioga4 'pt unbii .•1 .011 16. IIM i•r- *WI r u. w , uu• < n.a 0111"It togili'�iNIk't NOZ .•r imiE ilitagliblq111 ILL ' Istraimouram --"",:t. lifitabuillmillite6\ ire ianerNAIII 0 liklplideta. mom Aim it 4. ' NI 6rd ja I 1 I al I lairl / lirelUIl! �,`_-�4ir111r1tA,ri �./�, aaieki �tios heiwlalwk• - . R. l II 3NOZMW. illrodiAlfd ier 4w, *i egiorpowsuiebutAtm *me? 4'4e 14111040 it wetagmr-;4 Illaduriorp viermooklid tm IV* fitybkiref --vig YMI1mil 1tf1Iktijp. .•� ve'. '3 p 9 .01 .1, .10' 01 A11 .wi At i .1. saipn)S poo)J 58 /if• 1 tO 115. • 7 DESIGN OF SMALL D ltf• NOTE. DIVIDE PROBABLE MAXIMUM THUNDERSTOR VALUES BY INDICATED NUMBER figure 24. Ratio for determining 1 -hour thunderstorm rainfall applicable for computing inflow design flood less than maximum probob for area west of 105° meridian. 288—D-2767, 288—D-2768. RATIOAREA RAINFALL / POINT RAINFALL ZONE C 100 260 300 400 500 600 AREA IN SQUARE MILES Figure 19. General storm: conversion ratio from 6 -hour point rainfall to 6 -hour area rainfall for area west of 105' meridian. 288—D-2759. 54 1.00 .ss .52 .s DESIGN OF SMALL DAMS J .72 a.64 N 0 Z .s2 .I \\N AREA LIMIT - ZONE II ZONE: ,a l AREA LIMIT ZONE I 0 50 100 :50 200 250 300 AREA N SQUARE MILES 350 .00 450 500, Figure 21. Thunderstorm: conversion ratio from 1 -hour point rainfall to 1 -hour area rainfall for area west of 105° meridian. 288—D-2762. 52 DESIGN OF SMALL DAMS TABLE 1. -Constants for extending 6 -hour general -type TABLE 2. Probable maximum thunderstorm point rain - design storm values west of 105° meridian to longer fall in inches for various durations based on percent - duration periods 1 age of 1 -hour rainfall values from figure 20 Duration (hours)= Constants Zone A Zone B Zone C 8 1.20 1.18 1.14 10 1.39 1.36 1.26 12 .. 1.58 1.53 1.36 14 1.76 1.66 1.43 16 1.93 1.77 1.50 18 2.10 1.87 1.57 20 2.26 1.95 1.64 22 2.42 2.03 1.71 24 2.57 2.10 1.78 30 2.95 2.28 1.97 36 3.26 2.38 2.15 42 3.55 2.40 2.25 48 3.79 2.41 2.28 60 4.14 ... ... 72 4.34 ... ... 1 Multiply 6 -hour point rainfall from figure 17 by indicated constant. r For durations shorter than 6 hours, the time distribution of storm values can be obtained from the appropriate curve presented on figure 18. TABLE A-8. Derign thunderstorm precipitation time- sequence in 15 -minute intervals Time, hour Order of magnitude Zones I and III Zone II 0.0 .. . 0.25 .50 .75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00 0 4 3 2 1 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 '12 0 3 2 '4 Duration limit of sone rainfall. Duration (minutes) Zones I and III (percent of 1 -hour value) Zone II ' (percent of 1 -hour value) 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165 180 48 71 88 100 110 117 122 126 129 . 131.5 133 134 48 71 88 100 1 Zones are outlined on figure 20. 544 DESIGN OF SMALL, DAMs TABLE A-9.—Design thunderstorm precipitation direct TABLE A-10.—Minimum 15 -minute retention lost rates runt curve number Thunderstorm cover index CN for sono and type flood Cover type Tree, including understory Cover density at ground surface, percent More than 50 50 or less Zone I Zone II Type of flood Type of flood IDF A B IDFA B Hydrologic Zone III A Type of flood IDFA B 70 78 85 75 89 91 70 78 85 75 82 88 70 78 85 75 83 91 Brush, sage, grass or combinations More than 50 50 or less 75 82 88 80 86 91 80 86 91 85 90 94 70 79 88 75 85 94 1 IDF—inflow design flood, probable maximum thunderstorm rainfall + A thunderstorm—Flood_for assumption A. B thunderstorm—Flood for assumption B. ' Undentory an be defined es a layer of foliage, in a forest. below the level of the main canopy; or the trees forming such a layer. Minimum loss rate, 13 inch per 15 minutes . I. 9,8B t w■■• •- •••111N• .A �^� j/ Yw• w■•N�INw■w■ ainfall (P w NwN: IMAM= =i:::■:�ase:Sise■■:e:wRunoff (Q) eNN••mame�rsN�:■■••■ i _ SWIM __ e %/�/e 7SMOWIMMOOM tyi ••■N■■■w w■ ■�•�Y■■wrr■r_ -Rate- ,/P 4;-•■...Y■••■•wN■N■ ....•••••■ Y■ rNw•7•ww0•wwwY•.=Y•■Y%uu.raw■% •w•.w•Ie••Nr.■YN■LI•w•uwl.■ • •r.Nw Infiltration Curve •a .... O ... wrM•awlriaa.ar HMI ►+w ■aw••a• N ■••Nw• t/ •• I r.•■■■■NN JIaNN•• ". T; \'' EMIRS ■ M ••w■N. ./ �B . •rL7s4• JNU N•■w• -�-T G / N■ ■ ■o■■mouommie.s �O ■J■••r MOW rmr■wON■ .w••.aiw■NNIIa N•N■-o■N■■••NN■N•■ • r.N■Y••i■N■■/■■_AS—o/ wt-/A••■�WWWWY�•I■•pMNmd•�/IN••■� •WN• • ••L•Na r. .4. 7o•■I 4 Initialy-..� ... 111=1111010•1161111=1=111 `a Anew r.N•NA• M••N.I .•swv mNw.ew .n : otostroct ion 1, ■: TO,. ■ ■au: •0 •sem w••■ i• raA•:�.w•N�•ilii■ i�■•�ii•�w■wiv V _ ■ ■ ors. Q ■• •• Yw•.NNe7aaw /Nwe,t /.am■arame 1.N■■■aeN' u — •......■sac.. Y■ :u 000•NN•�■■■5 55•• ailing maw •utire,:i■N•■�r4� u�LMU::Y+I'�i: 41111•1111•••••••• ... v �:e�ini�j.msiiiii�i�■1�ii��l� ► j { elI1111 aili 1w i� 10' 1��f��111111ia1�J�usomer.ommram■-" ,r.��•ww••w•.•w•r_►� lr , ww ■•Era:�•NIi- liPird Adil iwuIMO .I,UlrUiMIIMME'i IIII4 J II5il1�e117�11r. 1MlUa Illil�IHt rflln111t �:w N n ■ Nv. uwr■NN • •v.s .Ywn.e JwaN•.N•s•v7•:NN7wwwr.Y■ INI IV' d .51101, !II . ' UUIlOi1IUIIP!UUI ■• •wNeW.N•Y4....' i.R .•q•l■ J.N•. aw.•. tP w.O7•■w'.oN■•NC7• w Ner•_■ N7N.'m..s sw■Aa■ aa•Na Or I. NON•�.N•o•nC.m•wN.wr N■w..i ■ r7■ 4..0 JowVV w /YYr.■•■■�r .iwN•v.uxamo•/.m■N•••`.• ■NrJ■ 7.7mruNr. AOOI■•■■■w J••aw•.=J■■N■oaY•a•oNr..N ••rfi:•�.i::, •_ r�.y■•I Y■ ... �RR., ; /- wNYYI.wo••••rmw •V. iwY•w••EP:e�w ■•.■w•I.• / /'. �•■ •'/■ ■ I7eNOJ -� b. .•ws a■N■:N••ww n•• ■ GPIl�.a, • I ■-4=u d sir' _g i�i �'�i=:.- 1,,.. ; :.: ,+. s t91NUNNr/I s N MOM 11� ■9 ia■pJi•■t./4•e. ��.wwwr.�•■wwrl •w .N NOM= -�__. - • -�-Ja - - _ ��p IN MN 4N•iaIQ NN•w•:N■N■w■�•■• /• ■•oNY. --1i- • iT I a� .—... NRRK•.:w:._sa NNI:�mNa r •Gus . ■N:■ - r w:iiu�w• 1 ■ - T� .�■•V� Nrrwww/S ��� �•••YaNNN.w OMMOISOMO yF�•'��•� llOOMOOMUM �.10 ■■•• NrY�is ' • ■ N • gg r _:.wews� •J.-�a New�R•r.' Y 'k.rN■ww s.w••T .�al riow,, � 3i. a 9gOef_ .■' Ni■,�s� w•ww■�m�=i■•::wNNSNr p�N 4tio-_-- �!4 niwu 2 3 4 S 6 7 RAINFALL (P) IN INCHES N z s . Q+ (P -lo r Z P -10+S r. v r'• With P210; S 21a+G1 4 Lr and G • P-10-0. y b • Curves on this C T sheet are for the coast - I D -"1a• 0.2S, so that - c o. 3 " Q•(P-0.25)2 v P+0.8S ::::::: r 2 L T. ri--i-iT !1:E: 'C � �.'! rH, Nn 8 9 10 11 ■ 12 P•0 to 12 inches el • O fn R Ineh.a Sure A-4. F' Solution of runoff equation, O- P .2S (Sheol 1 of 2.) (U.S. Soil Conservation Service.) 288—D-2549. P'{-0.85 Chart 12 DIAMETER OF CULVERT (0) IN INCHES 180 168 158 144 132 120 108 96 84 72 60 54 48 42 36 33 30 U 27 a -r o -n 24 21 18 15 • 12 STRUCTURAL PLATE C. M. 10,000 8,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 800 EXAMPLE 0634 Inches (3.0 feel) Q/N • 66 cis la H' f 0 (feet) (1) i.e 5.4 (2) 2.1 6.3 (3) 2.2 6.6 ID In feet 600 500 400 O 1. 300 / w-1.5 0 / ? ? 200 Q�,i,� N / /*/ 1- cr w a W ww 100 /m 80 a - x- _ 60 /N 50 a 0 40 w 0 30 Hf SCALE ENTRANCE w 0 TYPE 1— .4 20(1) Headwall 0 (2) Mitered to conform a w to slope Z 10 (3) Projecting 8 6 5 To use scale (2) or (3) project 4 horisontolly to scale (1),then use straight Inclined Tins through 3 D and 0 scales, or reverse as illustrated. 2 1.0 FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION MAY 1973 13-76 — 4. — 3. — .7 — .6 — .7 — .6 HEADWATER DEPTH FOR C. M. PIPE CULVERTS WITH INLET CONTROL 2000 1000 800 600 —120 500 —108 400 — 96 300 — 84 200 —T2 — 66 N —60 DISCHARGE (Q/N) —54 100 N _ —48 80 c> Z —42 60 50 0 — 36 40 0.35-33 1— — — w-30 30 2 /21 a �T 20 Ib 8 6 5 4 3 2 —24 —21 —18 —15 —12 EUREAU OF PUBLIC ROADS JAN. 1963 • • NW 1 '\` MI M.DIMM Slope So --4, Chart 3 SUBMERGED OUTLET CULVERT FLOWING FULL HW° = H + h0 + El. Outlet Invert 0 ti 1- 09 `00 G'j. W 1• . w J �Z.1, O F _ ��20 / • / 00 �� 0 ‘...,..,::;-,-;5,w w EXAMPLE 13-67 —.4 —.5 —.6 —.8 - 1.0 —2 — 3 —4 —5 —6 - 8 -10 - 20 HEAD FOR STANDARD C. M. PIPE CULVERTS FLOWING FULL n = 0.024 yl r N 19 2 PP / 45 IM 6337 •v � "• L1 13 Qt la/ A CORRAL r • 9136 J 1 ]9 2+,--1 Goodri + 1-7-f +ark } 2s rS29 ParkI .00 g� 'O°\\45 "o\ 16 .IM 593 fall 14 k, 17 1e cssiValje(r ^nom Reservoir •r 4 — r i n1 Ro▪ do � I awtrt:/ NCD 20 22 * 23 36 1 A% lAubbard J{, 2 Jmmaa —•Murphy + Rest 4-•r l Dev Is . Park— --wk._•••} L T• `,'slide -e` L. 35 /33 win s I LNebster «. 1a aq�rsenr Scot Mesa J10 12 —Frayed Res/ Prefont Irl. APP 4111. • — 4 '31'14 p• Pk' c_� •��{' t22's ./23i� '• 4 777. \_\ I✓/ I e *; P4.ORY ,, o N '•-0 \616 — 35 }� r% 36 ;Park t 21 N. Webster 25 j 13c •.66+41 / r 29 MAP NU. V � CI t4 Ma' .J I . 11 '- I' • I\ `--' - . \ ' ) 5084 — ....ft.. • Gravel Pit *". at se am An. = %Se, 0 0 IL 25 gine Creek Community u /--- „ rc Nic.) D'Rk, A.C. ta.E_AS .58C II 29 Lincoln DeVore GENERAL AND ENGINEERING GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE SOILS INVESTIGATION. RIFLE CREEK RANCHES GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO Lincoln DeVore 1000 West Fillmore St. Colorado Springs, Colorado 80907 (303) 632-3593 Home Office Kay Robinsoh c/o Solar Country P.O. Box 163 Silt, Colorado 81652 April 22, 1982 Re: GENERAL AND ENGINEERING GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE SOILS INVESTIGATION RIFLE CREEK RANCHES GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO Dear Ms. Robinson: Transmitted herewith is a report giving the results of a geologic. and subsurface soils investigation on Rifle Creek Ranches in the Rifle area of Garfield County, Colorado. This investigation was performed to determine the general and engineering geology and subsurface soil conditions of this site in accordance with the provisions of Colorado Senate Bill 35. Respectfully submitted, LINCOLN-DeVORE TESTING LAB., INC. By: nik, P.E. Reviewed by:• 1111111 44, , 9i ga 0, orris, :. By: Mic ael T. Weaver Reviewed B Professional Geologist MTW/GK/llm LD Job No. 43069 -GS cc: LDTL - Glenwood Springs LDTL - Grand Junction Colorado Springs, Colorado Pueblo, Colorado Grand Junction, Colorodo mmel eic•, Jr. fes ional Geo og'st Glenwood Springs, Colorado Evanston, Wvominc 410 INTRODUCTION: The contents of this report are a general and engineering geology and soils engineering investiga- tion for the proposed Rifle Creek Ranch Subdivision. It is pro- posed to develop 16 -two acre lots on 47 acres. The subdivision is located in the Southwest quarter of Section 19, Township 5 South, Range 92 West, of the 6th Principal Meridian, Garfield County, Colorado (see Geologic Map). The site lies on a series of old alluvial ter- races about 2.5 miles north of the town of Rifle, Colorado, and is bounded partially on the east by State Highway 325 and Rifle Creek, and by Rifle Creek Estates Subdivision, Filing 2 on the West. Part of this site was the previous location of an old gra- vel pit and quarry operation, from which a considerable amount of the on-site sand and gravel resource was removed. The topography of the site is dominated by there gently sloping terrace levels separated by moderately steep slopes, resulting in step-like topography. Surface drainage is fair on the west side, but both surface and subsurface drainage in the northeast portion is poor. Vegetation consists of sagebrush and bunch grasses with some cedar and pinyon trees along the steeper slopes. The climate is semi -arid and some irrigated farming has taken place on the lower terrace level. • • GENERAL GEOLOGY: The bedrock in this area consists entirely of the Wasatch Foramtion (Tw) of Tertiary Age. Ths for- mation consists of a very thick (4,000-5,000 feet) sequence of purple, red, brown and green thick bedded claystone and shales with lenticular, thick to thin, tan to buff, moderately cemented, highly fractured sandstone layers. These layers dip toward the southwest at low to moderate angles. Colluvial soils (Qc) cover the bedrock over much of the site. The increasing dip of the bedrock in the area is due to the sites proximity to the Grand Hogback, a large structural monocline associated with the White River Uplift. The -White River Uplift began synchronous with the Larimide Orogeny (a mountain building episode which started in Colorado before the close of the Cretaceous Period) and resulted locally in lower Paleozoic rocks being uplifted to the high structural relief today known as the Flat Tops. Thisprocess tilted the sandstone layers of the Mesa Verde Formation on the end, later to be exposed by erosion of the softer clays of the Wasatch and Mancos Formations. This erosion created the Grand Hogback with extends some 40 miles to the south and 30 miles to the north. The dips of the sandstones along the hogback are very steep to vertical and in places overturned. The dip of the beds decreases abruptly as one comes away from the Grand Hogback measuring from 25• on the north to 15• on the south end of the site, which is only one mile south of the hogback. Quaternary (approximately one million years and younger) stream erosion, which exposed the • • Grand Hogback and created Rifle Gap, also truncated the claysto- nes and sandstone beds of the Wasatch Formation under site. A considerable thickness of well-rounded sand and gravel in the form of terrace deposits (Qt) was then deposited on the Wastach Formation. Following the deposition of the terrace gravels, torrential sheetwash and eolian (wind blown) activity covered the gravels and Wasatch Formation with a variable thickness of fine silty clay (Qal). This clay is mainly the product of weathering and erosion of the Wasatch and Mesa Verde Formations. ENGINEERING GEOLOGY: From the standpoint of engineering geology, there are a few specific areas of concern. Since the soils underlying the portion of the subdivision in which develop- ment is planned consist almost exclusively of alluvial and terrace deposits, the engineering features of these materials will be discussed in general terms. The materials on the site are quite variable consisting of everything from colloidal clays to gravel and cobbles and the terrace deposits are often cemented to varying degrees by a secondary calcarious material known as caliche. Caliche deposits are a few inches to several. feet thick, derived locally from the evaporation of moisture in the soil resulting in the deposition of calcium carbonate through a leaching process. Slope stability is of concern in the immediate vicinity of the steeper slopes and gullies. Slopes on -3- the western portion • the property, are suscepible to erosion; and in fact, are so easily eroded that soil development is impeded, resulting in sparce vegetation in the form of isolated Cedar and Pinyon Pine trees and sagebrush. The slopes on the site appear to be stable at present. However, care should be taken to maintain this stability by avoiding detrimental construction practices such as removal of vegetation which would expose the slopes to further erosion. Also, cuts in the toes of these slopes should be avoided wherever possible. There appears to be very few other mass wasting hazards present on the site. That is, there is no evidence of landslide, mudflow, debris flow or soil creep. Further recommendations regarding slope stability will becovered later in the soil engineering section of this report. Terrace deposit on the western side of the site were found to be quite dense (except for the areas mapped as fill) and therefore, will not be susceptible to con- solidation or hydrocompaction. Clays encountered in the northeast portion have a swell potential and all soils will con- tain corrosive minerals in significant amounts. The areas mapped as fill in the vicinity of the proposed water tank consist of a mound of terrace materials piled up puring extraction of the gra- vel. In the other borrow areas, fill exists as disturbed material on the flat areas and as a wedge of fill along the east slopes. Also, a berm for a small pond and an old coal load -out facility are considered man-made fill. All of this material must be con- sidered in a low density state and as such will be unsuitable for foundations or other construction, without first being removed and recompacted by mechanical means. -4- • Cuts and tills mllObe necessary in the vicinity of the old gravel quarry in order to achieve a suitable building site. All fill placed beneath footings or floor slabs should be compacted as discussed in the soils section of this report. No hazard appears to exist from sub- sidence, because no sciuble rocks outcrop south of the Grand Hogback, and the nearest underground mining activity took place more than a mile to the north of the property. A small load -out facility for a small mining operation is located on Lot 1, Block 1, but has been inactive for many years. The possibility of the mining activity extending under the site is highly unlikely. Perched water was noted at shallow depths in the northeast portion of the site, and several springs, seeps, and bogs were also found. The seasonally wet (SW) areas have been so mapped on Figure 1. It should be noted that the areas mapped as Alluvium (Qal) are also commonly characterized by poor surface and/or subsurface drainage conditions (see Test Hole No. 7). Surface and subsurface drainage should be improved in this area and construction of basements should be avoided. The flood plain for Rifle Creek has not been established in the area of the subdivision; however, the construction of Rifle Creek Resevoir and regulated release of water into Rifle Creek should minimize the hazard from flooding; however, the potential for flooding should he evaluated by con- ducting a drainage study. All drainage structures for the site should be sized in accordance with anticipated flows. The general location of the Rifle Creek Ranch is such that the potential seismic risk must be con- sidered. Rifle lies in an area (as does much of west central • • Colorado) where earthquakes of Modified Mercalli intensity VII or richter mangitude 5.0 may be encountered, and where significant shocks may be expected at the rate of four per decade, per square degree of surface area. The Modified Mercalli (or MSK) intensity and richter mangitude given here are generally considered to be the threshold values at which earthquakes become potentially damaging. The City of Glenwood Springs itself experienced a shock of MSK intensity V in 1839. In the year 1967, when research was done on the problem, some 20 shocks of Richter magni- tude 2.0 to 4.0 were epicentered in the vicinity of Baxter Mountain (5 miles north of the Glenwood Springs area), and another such shock was epcicentered at the Harvey Gap Reservoir (6 miles east of the site). This last shock was believed to have been artificially induced by the presence of the reservoir. Other tremors have been recorded in the Aspen vicinity. While the data does not, by any means, support the conclusion that this part of Colorado is an area of serious earthquake danger, a certain risk does exist in the area which must be taken into consideration in the design of structures, embankments and cuts. Generally speaking, a slight degree of "overdesigning" is called for, together with the avoidance of certain types of structural systems which are inherently unstable in the face of horizontal accelerations. As noted above, this entire section of Colorado is subject to very much the same type of seismic risk, and there is no reason to believe that Rifle Creek Ranch occupies an area of exceptional risk. • • The possibility of a slight radiation hazard does exist on the site within the gravels and cobbles in the terrace deposits. These deposits are derived upstream from the site, where Rifle Creek has cut through and exposed the Chinle, Entrade, Navajo, and Morrison formations in which are found concentrations of Vanadium and Uranium Ore. In these formations, Vanadium Ore was discovered in 1909 and mined on and off until 1954, during which 750,000 tons of ore, con- taining about 25 million pounds of V205 and several hundredths percent U3O8. The Vanadium -Uranium Ore would be the only source of radioactive minerals on the proposed subdivison and would have had to been eroded out and deposited on the site by alluvial action. This mixing of the ore -bearing rocks with other rocks in the terrace gravels would effectively reduce the concentration of radioactive minerals to less than several hundred -thousandths of a percent. A gamma radiation survey was con- ducted on a neighboring site which included scanning the auger samples from all the borings, gravel pit exposures, and recent road cuts. No significant readings higher than background radiation were recorded. There is therefore, no reason to believe that any unusual degree of risk from radiation hazard exists on this site. While there will be a heavy demand for aggregate in the Upper Colorado Valley through the remainder of this century, it is not believed that withdrawal of the remainder of the deposit will significantly affect the regional aggregate • • supply. Furthermore, given the existing housing shortage in the Rifle area, it is believed that the value of the Rifle Creek Ranch, as a residential district, far outweighs its potential value as an aggregate resource, and that its development will tend to decrease development pressures on other, higher grade deposits in the bottom of the Colorado River Valley. Some of this sand and gravel may be useful as a low-grade material within the development itself, being employed as an embankment and base - course material. It is our understanding that water rights and supply is being investigated by another engineering firm. Individual sewage disposal systems have been proposed for this subdivison. Four percolation tests have been performed on the site. The two tests performed in the terrace sand and gravel deposits resulted in satisfacotry per- colation rates, 30 and 40 minutes per inch. Tests conducted in the alluvial clays in the northeast part of the site ranged from 60 to 120 minutes per inch. Details of the test results are not included in this report as they are not intended for design use. The Laboratory feels that for the most part, acceptable per- colation rates can be expected wherever terrace gravels are encountered; however, because of the presence of a significant amount of fines in the deposits, the rates will tend to lie in the slow range. On the east side of the subdivision where stiff clays are present, percolation rates will probably be slow to very slow. • • In the northeast part of the site, both slow prcolation rates and possible high ground water will be limiting factors. In these areas a combination of absorption and/or evapotranspiration fields could possibly be used. Evapotranspiration beds and combination beds will need to be overdesigned to provide storage during colder months and snow cover periods to make up for the reduced evapotranspiration capa- bility. All leaching and absorption fields should contain at least a six inch sand filter which contains sufficient fines to filter and retain the bacterial and viral portions of the effluent. In conclusion, the Rifle Creek Ranch should be a good site for a housing development. The engineering problems to be found on the site are not extensive and can all be overcome through sound design and construction. BORINGS, LABORATORY TESTS AND RESULTS: Seven test borings were placed on the site, at locations indicated on the enclosed Geologic Map. These test borings were placed in such a manner as to obtain a reaso- nably good profile of the proposed construction site subsurface soils. Some variations were noted in the soil profile, but in general, the profile was found to be fairly uniform, so that further test borings were not deemed necessary at this time. All test borings were advanced with a power -driven, continuous auger drill and samples were taken with the standard split -spoon sampler and by bulk methods. The precise gradational and plasti- city characteristics associated with the soils encountered during drilling can be found on the attached summary sheets. The repre- sentative number for each soil group is indicated in a small circle immediately below the sampling point on the Drilling Logs. The following discussion of the soil groups will be general in nature. The soil profile varied somewhat across this site. In the south part of the site, the profile consisted of a 2 to 3 foot deep surficial cover varying from gra- vel debris fill to topsoil and soft clay. Below this surface layer, foundation soils consist of dense river terrace sands and gravels, cobbly in some areas. In the north and northeast areas, the soils were finer (clayey sands, silts and silty clays), of much lower density and higher natural water contents. Bedrock (mudstone) of the Wasatch Formation was encountered at a depth of 23 feet in Test Hole No. 4. Soil Type No. 1 classified as a silty sand and gravel (SM) of fine to very coarse grain size. Soil Type No. 1 is non -plastic and of high to very high density. In themselves, these soils will have virtually no tendency to expand upon the addition of moisture nor to long-term con- solidation under applied foundation stresses. Granular materials, such as these, do have a tendency to settle rapidly • • under the initial application of static foundation pressures. However, these settlements are characteristically fairly rapid in nature and should be virtually complete by the end of construc- tion. In any event, if the allowable bearing values given in this report are not exceeded, and if recommendations pertaining to inspection, reinforcing, balancing and drainage are followed, it is felt that differential movement can be held to a tolerable magnitude. At shallow foundation depths across the site, these soils were found to have an average allowable bearing capacity on the order of 5000 psf. Soil Type No. silty sand and gravel (SM), like Soil Type described. However, this soil group often high quantities of cobbles, but its matrix 2 also classified No. 1 previously contains moderate as to is composed of more sand than the type No. 1 soils. The expansion and settlement characteristics of this soil group will be nearly identical to those previously described for Soil Type No. 1. Allowable bearing values on the order of 5000 would be associated with this soil group. Soil Type No. 3 classified as a clayey sand and silt (SC) of generally fine grain size. Small quantities of coarser sands and gravels also occur in these soils, together with pieces of shale and sandstone. This material is of moderate density near the ground surface but below the 5 foot depth level its density decreases rapidly, becoming quite low at 15 feet. Natural moisture contents are low to moderate and the expansion potential is very slight. Mixed granular -cohesive soils of low density, such as these, will • • experience significant settlement over the short and inter- mediate time periods, but tend to exhibit little long-term con- solidation settlement. A maximum allowable bearing pressure of 2000 psf would be appropriate for shallow, lightweight building foundations located above the 5 foot depth level. Much lower allowable bearing pressures would apply for deeper footings, that must be developed from site specific soils information. Soil Type No. 4 classified as silty sandy clay (CL) of fine to medium grain size. Soil Type No. 4 is typical of the formational mudstone which underlies the site and serves as bedrock in the area. Soil Type No. 4 is plastic, of very low permeability and of high to very high density. The mud - stones are mildly expansive in nature with swell pressures on the order of 460 psf being measured. Should drilled piers be used for the building, the expansive nature of the fine grained bedrock must be given consideration. Owing to its initial high density condition, these soils would have virtually no tendency to long-term consolidate. At a penetration of 5 feet into the formational mudstone layer, tip bearing capacities on the order of 10,000psf could be achieved. Soil Type No. 4 was found to contain sulfates in detrimental quantities. Soil Type No. 5 classified as a silty clay (CL) of very fine grain size. Soils of this group are often of moderate density and moisture content in the surficial 3 foot depth zone. Below the 3 foot depth, Soil Type No. 5 is typically wet and of low density. These soils have a distinct tendency to expand upon the addition of moisture with swell pressures on the order of 1940 psf being considered typical. • • While this magnitude of expansion should not be sufficient to affect the heavy structural members of the building, it can cause some movement beneath light structural members and floor slabs on grade. These soils will have a distinct tendency to long-term consolidation under applied foundation pressures. However, if the allowable bearing values given are not exceeded, we feel that differential movement would be tolerable. Foundations located in the 3 to 5 foot zone of depth below existing grade could be designed for a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 2000 psf over most of the site. Maximum allowable bearing will be governed by the lower density of underlying materials, with no minimum pressure required where the bearing soils are wet. On drier bearing surface, required minimum pressures could range from 500 to 1400 psf depending on site specific conditions. For footings located deeper than 5 feet, the maximum allowable pressure will have to be reduced, depending also on the specific conditions at each site. Free water was found at a depth of 27 inches in Test Boring No. 7 on this site. Also, the high moisture levels in the soils in Test Borings No. 5 and 6 suggest relatively high static water levels at the 6 to 8 foot depth level during wetter seasons in the northeast portion of the site. Such water levels would be related to nearby Rifle Creek which is very close to the east edge of the site and to springs and seeps in the extreme northern portion of the site. This northeast por- tion of the property lies much lower than the rest of Rifle Creek Ranch. Free water at the rest of the site should be relatively deep and should not affect shallow construction. • • In some areas (particularly in the north half where the finer grained soils occur), the nature of the foundation soils in the area is such that the formation of areas of perched water is quite possible. If these wet areas are encountered during foundation excavation, some pumping is possible. This is a temporary, quick condition caused by vibra- tion of the equipment on the site. If this should occur, it can be stopped by removal of the equipment and greater care taken in the excavation process. If this does not stop the pumping, pro- perly placed coarse rock should be worked into the soil or pro- perly designed geotechnical fabric could be applied to the earth face. The foundations could also be redesigned based upon lower bearing values if large amounts of seepage are encountered. It is emphasized that minor pumping is a temporary, quick condition and should not affect the structure after it is completed. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Since the exact magnitude and nature of the foundation loads are not precisely known at the present time, the following recommendations must be somewhat general in nature. Any special loads or unusual design conditions should be reported to Lincoln-DeVore so that changes in these recommen- dations may be made, if necessary. However, based upon our ana- lysis of the_soil conditions and project characteristics pre- viously outlined, the following recommendations are made. • • In general, the soils found across the subdivision will form a reasonably good base for the proposed residential structures. Dense sands and gravels and medium dense clayey sands were encountered at or near the present ground sur- face in the region of the terrace deposits. For these non - expansive (or low expansive) areas, spread footings of various widths, in conjunction with a reinforced concrete grade beam stem wall, will probably be the most suitable foundation type, if the higher expansive clays are not located within 3 feet of the bot- tom of the foundations. For those areas of the subdivision where the clays are encountered, foundations must be designed with the expansive and/or consolidation potential of the subsur- face soils in mind. The design must take into consideration the relative stiffness of the soil at each building site. The foun- dation configuration which can be used on the expansive clays will depend upon the magnitude of foundation loads exerted by the residential units as well as the exact degree of expansion anti- cipated from the soils. Several foundation types are acceptable for use on these clays. These foundation configurations would include, but are not limited to: 1) The first option would consist of the engineered no footing design, with the stem wall resting directly on the ground surface. The judicious use of voids would be employed to balance the structure and to increase the contact stresses beneath any very light walls. For most moderately loaded foundation systems, this voided stem wall design would probably prove satisfactory considering the magnitude of expansion- pressures encountered across the subdivision, and the anticipated foundation loads for these single family dwelling units. We would anticipate that the majority of the foundation systems used on the clays across the subdivision will fall into this category. 2) The second foundation configuration would essentially be a combination of one of the preceding alternatives in conjunction with an overexcavated, compacted, granular pad. The depth of over -excavation would be related to the expansion potential of the clays as well as the nature of the residential units. Typical depths of overexcavation should range from about 3 to 6 feet. After overexcavation, a compacted granular pad using non -expansive, non -free draining soils could be constructed, maintaining a minimum of 90%, but not exceeding a maximum of 95% of the soil's modified maxi- mum Proctor dry density, ASTM D-1557. The purpose of this compacted pad is not to entirely overcome the expansive potential of the clays, but rather to provide anbuffer" zone between the clays and the foundations. A designed foundation system, similar to one of the preceding alternatives, would then be constructed on top of the granular pad. Frequent density tests would be required during pad construction to ensure that an adequate density level is being maintained. This option would also be used if any areas of uncontrolled fill are encountered during the excavation process. At the present time, it is difficult to establish the exact maximum and minimum allowable design para- meters for each residential lot across the subdivision. As noted earlier, the foundation soils are somewhat variable in terms of their classification and engineering characteristics. The engi- neering properties given in this report were based upon those soil materials encountered in our subsurface exploration program. While it is unlikely that drastically different soil types will be encountered during excavation for foundations, the possibility exists that intermediate variations between several of the soil types outlined here could be encountered. It must, therefore, be recommended that the open foundation excavation be inspected prior to the placing of forms to establish the appropriate design parameters for each individual building lot. Further exploration on a lot to lot basis is warranted. At the time of inspection or other further investigation, the maximum and minimum bearing values can • • be established and recommendations made as to the suitable foun- dation type for that particular lot. Also, this inspection will show that no debris, soft spots, or areas of unusually low den- sity are located within the foundation region. Any necessary changes in the recommendations included in this report can easily be made at the time of such inspection. If it is necessary to provide preli- minary, or presumptive, foundation designs, we would recommend using a maximum allowable pressure of 2500 psf with a minimum contact pressure of 500 psf maintained under all footings as an overall site average. Then, where site specific soil conditions are not suitable for these pressures, foundations could either be reproportioned for approximate design pressures or placed to bear on an appropriate controlled fill as described in option (2) above. Applicable design pressures and the extent of controlled fill, if any, must be determined from an examination of soil con- ditions exposed in open building excavations at each specific site. Regardless of the foundation type used, it is recommended that the foundation components be balanced to lower the possibility of differential movement. This balancing will help the buildings move more or less as single units, rather than in a differential manner. The foundation system should be proportioned such that the pressure on the soil is approximately the same throughout the building. The judicious use of voids beneath very light walls will help balance the structure, as well as to develop the minimum design pressures dictated by the expansive clays. The appropriate criterion for • • balancing will depend somewhat upon the nature of the structure. Single -story, slab on grade structures may be balanced on the basis of dead load only. Multi -story structures should be balanced on the basis of dead load plus approximately one-half the live load. Using the appropriate criterion, the contact pressures should be balanced to within +300 psf beneath all load bearing walls throughout the residential units. For the sandier soils, isolated interior column pads should be designed for pressures of slightly less than the average selected for the bearing walls. On the clays, isolated pads should be designed for pressures of slightly more than the exterior wall average. Using whichever criterion is applicable, we would recommend balancing these internal pads on pressures of approximately 150 psf more or less than the average of the exterior walls. To help ensure that the structure moves more or less as a single unit rather than in a differential manner, we would recommend that all stem walls be supported by a grade beam capable of spanning at least 12 feet. This grade beam would apply to both interior and exterior load bearing walls. Such a grade beam should be horizontally reinforced continuously around the structure with no gaps or breaks in reinforcing steel unless they are specially designed. Beams should be reinforced at both the top and the bottom with the major reinforcement being either at the bottom, on granular soils, or at the top when the bearing soils are the expansive clays. All interior bearing walls should rest on a grade beam and foundation system of their own and should not be allowed to rest on a thickened slab section or "shovel" footing. • • Where the stem walls are relatively shallow, vertical reinforcing will probably not be necessary. However, where the walls retain soil in excess of about 5 feet in height, vertical reinforcing may be necessary to resist the active pressure of the soils along the wall exterior. To aid in designing such vertical reinforcing, the following equivalent fluid pressures can be utilized: 35 pcf for fill similar to soil Type Nos. 1 and 2. 40 pcf for fill similar to Soil Type No. 3 45 pcf for fill similar to Soil Type No.5 It should be noted that the above values should be modified to take into account any surcharge loads applied at the top of the walls as a result of stored goods, live loads on the floor, machinery, or any other exter- nally applied forces. The above equivalent fluid pressures should also be modified for the effects of any free water table. The bottom of all foundation com- ponents should rest a minimum of 3 feet below finished grade or as required by the local building codes. Foundation components must not be placed on frozen soils. Where floor slabs are used, they may be placed directly on grade or over a compacted gravel blanket of 4 to 6 inches in thickness. Under no circumstances should this gravel pad be allowed to act as a water trap beneath the floor slab. A vapor barrier is recommended beneath any and all floor slabs on grade which will lie below the finished exterior ground surface. In areas of high water, a gravel capillary break con- nected to the drain system is recommended. All fill placed beneath the interior floor slabs must be compacted to at least 90% of its maximum modified Proctor dry density, ASTM -D-1557. -19- • • Prior to constructing floor slabs on grade, any unsuitable materials including topsoil, organics and unacceptable miscellaneous fills should be removed from the underslab areas. The resulting surface should be scarified and recompacted prior to placing the new fill. Where slabs will be located on or near the more expansive clays, all floor slabs on grade must be constructed to act independently of the other structural portions of the building. These floor slabs should contain deep construc- tion or contraction joints to facilitate even breakage and to help minimize any unsightly cracking which could result from dif- ferential movement. Floor slabs on grade should be placed in sections no greater than 25 feet on a side. Any interior, non - load bearing partitions which will be constructed to rest on the floor slab should be constructed with a minimum space of 11 inches at either the top or bottom of the wall. The bottom of the wall would be the preferred location for this space. This space will allow for any future potential expansion of the subgrade soils and will prevent damage to the wall and/or roof section above, which could be caused by this movement. Adequate drainage must be provided in the foundation area both during and after construction to pre- vent the ponding of water. The ground surface around the building should be graded so that surface water will be carried quickly away from the structure. The minimum gradient within 10 feet of the building will depend upon surface landscaping. Bare or paved areas should maintain a minimum gradient of 2%, while • • landscaped areas should maintain a minimum gradient of 6%. Roof drains must be carried across all backfilled areas and discharged well away from the structure. The existing drainage in the area must either be maintained or improved. Water should be drained away from the structures as rapidly as possible and should not be allowed to stand or pond in the area of the buildings. The sur- face drainage across the entire property must be carefully controlled to prevent infiltration and saturation of the foun- dation soils. All backfill around the buildings should be com- pacted to a minimum of 90% of its maximum Proctor dry density, ASTM D-1557. Roof drains must be carried across all backfilled regions and discharged well away from the structures. In any areas of the subdivision where foundations may rest on expansive soils, a subsurface peripheral drain is recommended around the exterior of the struc- ture near foundation level. Such a drain would also be recom- mended in any area where living spaces extend below the final exterior grade. This drain should consist of a perforated drain pipe, gravel collector and sand filter. The drain will help intercept any potentially harmful seepage water at the foundation level and quickly remove it from the building vicinity. The discharge pipe should be given gravity access to the ground sur- face. If a gravity discharge is not available, then a sealed sump and pump should be used. Dry wells should not be used anywhere across this subdivision. In the north and northeast areas where low density soils occur to significant depths (Test Holes • • No. 4, 5, 6 and 7) the amount olf structural fill transported to the site during construction, either for purposes of site grading or to raise the interior floor slabs to their desired design ele- vation, should be kept to a minimum. The surcharge applied by the structural fill could consolidate the soft, fine grained soils previously described. Obviously, if the underlying soils consolidate as a result of this applied surcharge, some struc- tural movement would follow. Due to the soft, wet condition of the soil materials encountered at the north part of the subdi- vison, construction of basements may be difficult and dewatering techniques may be necessary during construction. Additionally, problems with basement foundations may be encountered during periods of strong seepage due to uplift against the foundation and the possibility of seepage into the basement. While we would not entirely recommend against the construction of basements on this site, it is strongly recommended that basement or half base- ment foundations be well sealed and that they be provided with the peripheral drains and underslab drainage layers described in this report. It is extremely important that the subsurface drains be properly installed and in good working order. Surface slopes on the site vary from 2:1 to 10:1 (horizontal:vertical). While the slopes appear to be stable at this time, there is considerable potential for erosion and, in steeper areas, some potential for minor, localized slope failures. Provided that general construction is controlled to avoid major alternations to existing vegetative covers and slope geometry, no major problems are expected. Where cuts over 8 feet deep are required ilareas steeper than 5:1, strongly recom- mend that the planned cuts be evaluated for the specific soil conditions at the cut location to determine the required extent, if any, of side sloping, retaining wall construction or other provisions. In general, regardless of location, any cut over 6 feet deep should be examined by appropriate personnel from a construction safety stand point to determine if a caving hazard may exist that would require sloping or bracing of the sides of the excavation. Excavation into the denser coarse- grained terrace deposits may present a moderate level of diffi- culty, particularly where nested cobbles and occasional boulders are encountered, but should require only extra effort in normal excavation procedures. Special procedures such as ripping or blasting should not be needed at this site. In the areas of low density, fine grained soils, no major excavating difficulties are anticipated so long as the stability of the slope and cut is con- sidered. The presence of poor surface and subsurface drainage in the northeast portion of the site along with soft/wet soil conditions will complicate road construction in this area. Although no Hveem-Carmany testing was conducted on the soils from this area, the laboratory classification of the soils and our experience in the region indicates that the fine grained, silty clays will tend to have low to very low R values. It is assumed that the proposed roads in the subdivision will be gravel in nature. On roadways in areas where these conditions are found (soft/wet clay soils), it is recommended -23- • • that something on the order of 12 to 14 inches of large river rock material be worked into the soils and, assuming that a reasonable stabilization has occurred, that approximately 10 to 12 inches of a road base course material be used to bring the road to finished grade. In wet area such as this, we have also recommended and had considerable success, with a filter fabric material similar to the Mirafi 500X. Basically, this material when rolled out on the in situ ground surface, allows for the elimination of the river rock layer as mentioned above. Should the Mirafi 500X option be selected, we would recommend simply rolling the fabric out onto the present ground surface after stripping existing vegetation. Sharp rocks, tree stumps or any other obstructions which might perforate the fabric should be removed. Again, approximately 10 to 12 inches of road base course should be placed on the filter fabric. Although these recommendations should not be considered as design sections, they would probably provide sufficient support for low volume traffic and should not require a great amount of additional maintenance in the future other than surface grading. It is recommended that a cost analy- sis be run on both alternates and compared before selection. In both alternates, proper surface durainge (culverts, etc.) must be maintained so as to not pond water behind or near the roadways. The soils on this site were found to contain sulfates in detrimental quantities. Therefore, a Type II Cement would be recommended in all concrete in contact with the soil. Under no circumstances should calcium chloride ever be • • added to a Type II Cement. In the event that Type II Cement is difficult to obtain, a Type I Cement may be used, but only if it is protected from the soils by an impermeable membrane. The open foundation excavation must be inspected prior to the placing of forms and pouring of concrete to establish that adequate design bearing materials have been reached -and that no debris, soft spots or areas of unusually low density are located within the foundation region. All fill placed pm the site must be fully controlled and tested to ensure that adequate densification has occurred. It is extremely important due to the nature of data obtained by the random sampling of such a hetero- geneous material as soil that we be informed of any changes in the subsurface conditions observed during construction from those outlined in the body of this report. Construction personnel should be made familiar with the contents of this report and instructed to relate any differences immediately if encountered. It is believed that all pertinent points concerning the geology and subsurface soils on this site have been covered in this report. If soil types and conditions other than those outlined herein are noted during construction on the site, these should be reported to Lincoln-DeVore so that changes in recommendations can be made, if necessary. If questions arise or further information is required, please feel free to contact Lincoln-DeVore at any time. SOILS DESCRIPTIONS: SYMBOL USCS OESCR/PTION •OCK DESCRIPTIONS: SYMBOL pESCR/PT/ON SOLS a NOTES: SYMBOL DESCR/PTION Free !water 9/I2 Standard penetration drive Numbers indicate 9 blows to drive the spoon 12" into ground. 1 ST 2- I/2" Shelby thin wall sample W0 Natural Moisture Content Wx Weathered Material Free water table ;o.;p•pa SEDIMENTARY ROCKS. x, Topsoil :�9'. 'tea. o: a_• CONGLOMERATE SANDSTONE p 'N Man-made Fill - - " - , - --- ==_- SILTSTONE SHALE •o•0:0:0, o:o.°o•.o. o:o'oa GW Well -graded Gravel- 0000 °o °o o0 0000101 GP Poorly -graded Gravel x x x x x x CLAYSTONE COAL d 0 C ° o GM Silty Gravel %oo o "o/ O, GC Clayey Gravel SW Well -graded Sand 1 I LIMESTONE 15' Wx Yo Natural dry density T.B.- Disturbed Bulk Sample 0 Soil type related to samples in report Top of formation 1 1 1 SP Poorly -graded Sand `i�` DOLOMITE / I �I l 1 SM Silty Sand .1— 1 MARLSTONE /�� ,, �' SC Clayey Sand GYPSUM Other Sedimentary Rocks ML Low -plasticity Silt ROCKS CL Low -plasticity Clay /mus li /\ \\ / V----- /—�+++ GRANITIC ROCKS Form. )--•--Lk---1 Standard by driving sampler 140lb. des. Samples spoon thin samples. The boring at the warranted of subsurface and times. Test Boring Location ®Test Pit Location Seismic or Resistivity Station. Lineation indicates approx. length a orientation of spread (S= Seismic , R= Resistivity ) Penetration Drives are made a standard 1.4" split spoon into the ground by dropping a weight 30'.ASTM test D-1586. may be bulk, standard split (both disturbed) or2-1/2"I.D. wall ("undisturbed") Shelby tube See log for type. logs show subsurface conditions dates and locations shown ,and it is • that the are representative conditions at other locations + + + + +++ DIORITIC ROCKS 1 OL Low -plasticity Organic Silt and Clay 11 %ii. u. • �/ GABBRO 5 MH High -plasticity SiltC•— RHYOLITE / CH High plasticity Clay rr ANDESITE -/- - OH High- plasticity Organic Clay Pt Peat BASALT ...*:.:•"'A • .+.•:~:•' TUFF a ASH FLOWS °oo.a�` o ° GW/GM Well- graded Gravel, Silty 1 ' • I.:, , •:.. o' ��`� BRECCIA a Other Volcanics ° ° 0 0 ° GW/GC Well -graded Gravel, ° Clayey c r I- ^ Other Igneous Rocks 00° 00 0 GP/GM Poorly -graded Gravel, 0 Silty �� /‘i MHIC ETAMORPROCKS ° 00 0 00 °°° 0 GP/GC Poorly -graded Gravel,_ ° Clayey GNEISS %f�� '" SCHIST r6 °p o GM/GC Silty Gravel, Clayey �r� PHYLLITE onot GC/GM Silty Gravel, Silty ��� SLATE SW/SM Well - graded Sand, Silty ter: �.�•: METAQUARTZITE .•�f r`'" SW/SC Well- graded Sand, Clayey ,; I i i 1i1, i i;' I ! I SP/SM Poorly -graded Sand, I Silty SP/SC Poorly -graded Sand, Clayey .00 .0 MARBLE oqo ✓ 4y�V HORNFELS 19 SERPENTINE SM/SC Silty Sand, Clayey Other Metamorphic Rocks ,. . • SC/SM Clayey Sand, Silty L7 LINCOLN E TESTING LABORATORY COLORADO. Colorodo Springs, Pueblo, Glenwood Springs, Montrose, Gunnison, Grand Junction.— WYO.— Rock Springs EXPLANATION OF BOREHOLE LOGS AND LOCATION DIAGRAMS CL/ML Silty Clay / I TEST HOLE No. TOP ELEVATION •I0 —15 •20 •25 —30 E - -w w —35 •40 w 6.[4 vE,c. - OFB•dt .SM, Sit 7V 4•vO C YE[.Lw., - vE kY D,f Al 16 -5 A.4 --4-`i Sow( 4-0654.Cs, 1,e5. 5N4 c'1 soNosro�E RA—FL/SAL /Z' o„v Qou[-O .7 r z 4.0.4vg4- ad®t/s "from 04 .0 SSM, S/L 7Y .% d G.egv`L, 47. ew, t o6.4- Se -I- I i 5,44,6/47y SA.vp,j_ aGRA&4-G, w co 443e.b'S, v. gtOci/SAL ® /7 "- DAV ce,33c�.S DRILLING LOGS t 1 4' -(0/3 LINCOLN LDeVORE ENGINEERS• GEOLOGISTS 3 /Of'S O/4- 5,L7Y CL.AY, LT,,e,'-q-- 5A-1, s/L7 , sA.' L 6.,z.4 L ,SND 40.645 5, 3 lN, ✓, DEA/S: — -S AMti ,,,zEFtiSgc62)/3 ow ea/54144c S t 4. 1 t T ( 15-1 0 5- 30-- 35- 40— COLORADO: COLORADO SPRINGS,— PUEBLO , GLENWOOD SPRINGS , GF'AND JUNCTION , MONTROS E , W`VOMINCi: ROCK SPRINGS -- TEST HOLE No. 4 I TOP ELEVATION 5 6 I-10 I =15 -20 I-25 SC CLAYEY SAA,/D AA' A r/Gr, ter. /g,,, v ST/FF 5.4A4 if 3as-r —sAHF -SAME WASA 7 cM M Mu CLI s.exioy GLPSY) 4- 5,t7Y),DEN s //i tbily S/t 3%/i I., x 4.5/ 3 chz y,=I4.L/ 1-30 ,(/ore: 5". ceee+ Zbw.v.✓oc6 1— ACG 7EsT— W (00 , 4 iN//NC.V — _ W 7LR.Q7 -«• 35 1- -40 7 1 CL, S/L1Y CLAY 7•�C %4A,L , L'T. 8RN/ F/ed`9 —SAM (,5,•,c7" -Sari' ,t/ord : Si�FEi - Pe:cc 'sr - 0 F.4LL ju//e.../ 7- S 4741447EZ ,S47r/AC47EZ T t 11- i ht. ZS3 3/z w ••28.2/ 3/I z z4.8/ -r 1 1- -r -r ToPao/L- GL-, Su -7•y cGAy, 772,4c6 i SAND, L•T. $,2'ou.mi, F/2 fl /9/,i, 1.3 3�2 c4, =/6aX I-5Amc 4.4, =23.1X 0-, S'M .S/try 111:1 6I4-'0 AND 0,e.4vE-+L, ,26,0 1324(A)n1, meo. DENSE. 02 2 30- 35- 40 - DRILLING LOGS DLINCOLN DeVORE ENGINEERS• T-- GEOLOGISTS COLORADO: COLORADO SPRINGS , PUEBLO , GLENW00D SPRINGS , GF'AND JUNCTION , MONTROSE WYOMING ROCK SPRINGS TEST HOLE No. 7 TOP ELEVATION • 111 10 15 20 25 30 1- w w L. 35 40 1— a. w ToPSoi�- x FL661.44re ¢ T cam S/Lryeuy.� 77UoG6' of SAAvo, / LT. 8/24u)NJ / 112. VEe-yl SOFT 4=22.8% - 5,4me SAmE SOFT 2 tZ Wa '29.17. 8/4 14.):23.6%, DRILLING LOGS r LINCOLN 11)DeVORE ENGINEERS• GEOLOGISTS -r 5- 10— 20� 25.--1 30- 35—+ 40— COLORADO: COLORADO SPRINGS,— PUEBLO , 6LENWOOD SPRINGS , GRAND JUNCTION , MONTROSE , WYOMING: ROCK SPRINGS e Soil Sample SM - s/,-TYS4ND t a.ERv(G Project A.e,4•i - A&A -L.4 :1 Sample Location 7/--2 ( 5 100 90 C7 80 y, 70 a 60 50 40 a 30 20 10 GRAVEL SAND Coarse Fine Co. Test NO. 43069 6 S Date 4-B-82 Test by Tb,/ SILT TO CLAY Medium Fine Nonplastic to Plastic 0' 100 I 0 I 1 blame .er- (+J1 I 11/2" 14" 1' " .dl *4 40 #20 4440 #100 4200 - Sieve No. .001 Sample No. 2 Specific Gravity Moisture Content 5 -Lo Effective Size 0.0/Z ,,,.„ Cu ^-2z5 Cc �• Fineness Modulus L.L. P.I.�I/P % BEARING S000 t psf GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS Sieve Size % Passing 1 1/2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" 4 / 0a o . o Bo. 6B•O 10 20 40 100 200 58.4 .5_/. 3 44 3'i• 9 Z4.S .0200 /2.5 _ oo So 6.3 Sulfates plan LINCOLN-DeVORE TESTING LABORATORY COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO Soil Sample SNI- s7z.ry s mio d G eAVEL Pro j ect &A/cu ,cd' - Sample Location 774/-/p 5' 100 GRAVEL SAND Coarse Fine Co. Test No. 43069 65 Date 4-601.-8Z Test by 7Z»1 SILT TO CLAY Medium Fine Nonplastic to Plastic 60 z 50 40 30 20 10 0 100 I ! 0I Dlame( ) 1 .01 �.er- 112" /4"72"M" ##4 #10 #20 #40 #100 #200 - Sieve No, .001 Sample No. / Specific Gravity Moisture Content 8.9 Effective Size 0.0/4 ',min Cu -.250 Cc -r.20/ Fineness Modulus L.L. P.I. // ? BEARING psf Sieve Size % Passing 1 1/2" 1" 93.7 3/4" e.9 1/2" 3 8 4 7G.7 �4. 10 f. s 2 0 4s. 9 40 39. 100 30.0 200 23. 7 .0200 1/.2 .o050 3 Sulfates ppm GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS LINCOLN-DeVORE TESTING LABORATORY COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO Soil Sample SC- CcAYEY „S,v,f) ANO S/LT Test No. 43069 GS Project,C/, zg4r, .e4we,v IB.- .0/F Cad o. Date 4-8 gz Sample Location Test by 7py 100 90 80 4 70 • 60 w 50 40 a 30 • 20 10 GRAVEL Coa rse 1 Fi ne SAND Co. J Medium 1 Fine SILT TO CLAY ■ Nonplastic to Plastic N 0 100 1 1 if.0 i1/2 " DiameJ.er- (48.11 #4 #10 #20 #40 #100 #200 - Sieve No. .01 .001 Sample No. -3 Specific Gravity Moisture Content Effective Size Cu Cc Fineness Modulus L.L. 2/. 7 % P.I. 74 - BEARING psf Sieve Size % Passing 1 1/2" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" 4 /O .b 974 9� .q 10 20 40 100 200 94.5 9z.7 89.4 ‘7-5 .0200 463 / 9.7 coSo _ /44,3 Sulfates GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS PPm LINCOLN-DeVORE TESTING LABORATORY COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO Soil Sample CL, SR,yoY CLAY 5.47Y SUMMARY SHEET Test No. 43o(o9 GS Location OA%c a.e.r.ce iQA/4r,' -cuer- ei0‘.-44.; Co40. Date4 -& Az Boring No. Depth Test by_7Z)V Sample No. ¢ Natural Water Content (w) % In Place Density (To) pcf Specific Gravity (Gs) SIEVE ANALYSIS: Sieve No. % Passing 1 1/2" Plastic Limit P L. X4.7 % Liquid Limit L. L. z./ % Plasticity Index P.I. 74 ok 1" Shrinkage Limit 3, 4 �� Flow index 1/2" /o'.o Shrinkage Ratio % 4 91.4 Volumetric Change % 10 q6.6 Lineal Shrinkage % 20 9z.s" MOISTURE DENSITY: ASTM METHOD Optimum Moisture Content - w° Jo 40 V-9 100 73.3 200 56.y HYDROMETER ANALYSIS:Swell Grain size (mm) % Maximum Dry Density -rd pcf California Bearing Ratio (av) ok Swell. ok _Days against mac' psf Wo gain 7. / °o BEARING: House! Penetrometer (av).__ psf 0•oZ 3e-4. 0 ooS i6.2 Unconfined Compression (qu) psf Plate Bearing• psf Inches Settlement Consolidation % under psf PERMEABILITY: K (at 20°C) Void Ratio Sulfates ppm. SOIL ANALYSIS LINCOLN-DeVORE TESTING LABORATORY COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO 7.4 '14.2 Soil Sample CL - 6/47,, ct,4v SUMMARY SHEET pest No. 43069 GS Location .Pif,cc C K_wc�f er - ,e,.Cc.e-, C'o44,. Cite„ 4'5-82 Boring No. Depth Test by %aR Sample No. Natural Water Content (w) % In Place Density ('ro) pcf Specific Gravity (Gs) SIEVE ANALYSIS: Sieve No. % Passing 1 1/2" Plastic Limit P L. 21-3 % Liquid Limit L. L. 38.8 % Plasticity Index P.I. i 7-,S" cyo 1" Shrinkage Limit % 3/4" Flow Index. 1/2" Shrinkage Ratio ok 4 Volumetric Change % 10 ioo•o Lineal Shrinkage % 20 9g.» MOISTURE DENSITY: ASTM METHOD Optimum Moisture Content - w2.......___% Maximum Dry Density -rte pcf 40 9q, 7 100 1s• e 200 96.4 HYDROMETER ANALYSIS: Grain size (mm) % California Bearing Ratio (av) Swe I I • Days % Swell against/9¢a pcf Wo gain qz % BEARING: Penetrometer (av)._. o o z69.0House( G•ooS 4./.q psf Unconfined Compression (du) psf Plate Bearing• psf Inches Settlement Consolidation % under psf PERMEABILITY: K (at 20°C) Void Ratio Sulfates ppm. SOIL ANALYSIS LINCOLN-DeVORE TESTING LABORATORY COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO ,Z. 7 s Division of Highways DOH Form 101 Rev. August, 1981 • Stlighway No/MP }NY 325 iiT 2. + 1 :)- Local Jurisdiction `IT:F.1 ,1 ri F'n1T'tf�' MTCE Section/Patrol DOH Permit No 6R711?6 Required Permit Fee' ' •(J`. STATE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS PERMIT FOR ACCESS PAID Tt) The property owner, T T %n ;T '-'"`'?'9:'N (herein called permittee) is granted permission to construct an access approach on the T'^ side of State Highway , a distance of 1' feet F(7.9 -.1 from milepost '� also known as , for the purpose of obtaining access to 5 0T' 'T" r, -TTS' T' The access approach shall be constructed, maintained and used in accordance with the State Highway Access Code, the terms and conditions of this permit, site requirements noted below, and listed attachments. This permit may be revoked by the issuing authority if at any time the permitted access approach and its use violate any of the terms and conditions of this permit or the State Highway Access Code. The use of advance warning and construction signs, flashers, barricades and flagmen are required at all times during access approach construction within State right-of-way in conformance with the MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES, Part VI. The Department of Highways and its duly appointed agents and employees shall be held harmless against any action or damage sustained by reason of the exercise of this permit. SITE REQUIREMENTS 7. ^ ' -r+ •' i j`t "' r . C`' OF C• 7 rc t ,i k -i . _ = �SST��I C:1.�T'_:I) �0 ��� '_ LL _ ��` :."'!'_ ,� ,C : 1. �_ i. , % �. _ � � U:; ��, . 3..., `Ci. `_(:,C,.:;: , Ii)�. 5 Fi rr.y arc, TO 24:' ATM 7'11F,T "' ;,':TJL: UP SO � :pis IS A IA I ti n? go -i-, ON`J.""L•, FeCi ,1s';O '1 IE Ili i "Psi 'IVIS :'! 1�;i c; �t 'm i .i L1 TC.77, IiI( :1 t.Y AT 7'..' 'j. 21" OF �T? 17." OF CTC'n 6" 1 TTS A T.'T3" Cl? - - �Il;' LAST TILL l� �.._ ��_.� I_, (�' C.,, -'2.57E :�SF,...�'D???, �.. tf.TYHALT TO P-'Prr0717.//.77 Lt.7.7,. 1F NO DSII' 1'I,;!' I`' Pik`..: `7, TT :'T_r?, "?LT?, T _= i`. C'>�T (7.7-)215.; rL:' c �! 1 T 11:I '.pili L&9T (;" 3/4" 4 1T"'T11 PTITO. '_'`-IS A:I:_, '��'' 1;;; Cr' TA,!5.7.11) 'i'0 ��/ �_.. ') S'2.4.`1ARD 0-1,13 O ) LTT''� iL!� 11:,v'YtIPir, ST7, C; C TL'T, YLL :)I PIJC:I�D L T;�; 17:d..:.:'•••• r- Tr T „ z . ; r' Tr n r- r r. r _?Z!'. f ` rT ,- a:�l-7'G`I. � �_:, , .�.:... rd ,�j� r?r�.,, _ err- c'C'�T�i,:i _'rI 1 sz ':,, r.� . __�....,.:�?s -.�� A _.��.rV~ :S ', r /F T 1< 171'-T r f. f � Tr'1' ` T ,, 11 rT -`'. �� T-•�; _-�, Tr i..� `'T �:',T) I -.I 1;� � i4:[Z.,L f}V Z � . ��. `T''_�T'� IC C � �. ;� .. 7'::'trT•C^Sr�y� 1 I T _ :.,.� i•_�,Y BE C MET ;POSTS r ! .� ST'=~ ?, �, 3C',I P^^P'..:''V ',-,) T""''CC's .C"_v,1.1. �). IF C11+17T.57 :Q 1.17 T IS•T•'ITL Bi; RTrS.'C:•::::D>ILL'Y GF I E F_. •Z1711: ,, LF T.. J� rC 17,-..)'.1 ri aS r T/� �T 11 *..!..3-t7 T. 'L�t Cti .„1 7 � ES 1.77 s T �'',A„��ji) � CAUSE A L1t1!�]i�'� [11 tI i �_,J_ � , ri�.l., .'���:.�CT: � . - _ �F�.-• 1' �7 2.r-: m �.! "'c�1.3 ?t � , �A 'ti 1 L INTI A T' 'Jr r, or,. " " ; �,.1.t-1- AT .'� � Pte: STs ._:.� :�k :. , � . (� . 1 � T �I'iP , r✓� . ,r. -� __ _ . 1.7.751.7.-=__ �r .._ _ Il, 1�� CM71-173P• _T, m G` i; =ON, A COPY OF THIS P_rciT TO BT' Where the appropriate local authority retains issuing authority, local approval is required prior to approval by the State Department of Highways. MUNICIPALITY or COUNTY By(X) Date Title THE STATE DEP AR T R• NT C' HIGHWAYS STATE OF COLORADO, DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS E.N. HAASE, CHIEF ENGINEER Division of F:ig;;vr2ys —Stats of Colorado 260 Ranney St. ! �', Craig, Colorado 81625 �7 By(X) ,+ J',1i1 L+ /41-;(- k'_ At Date Title %•-� 9 -< ;--.7-- () Upon the signingof this permit thepermittee agrees to the terms and conditions and referenced attachments contained i theconstruction site. All construction shall be completed in an herein. A copy of this permit must be available at P expeditious and safe manner and shall be finished within 45 days from initiation. The permitted access approach shall be completed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the permit prior to being used. The permittee shall notify with the Colorado Department of Highways in at , at least 48 hours prior to commencing construction within the State Highway right-of-way. The person signing as the permittee must be the owner or legal representative of the property served by the permitted access. , , -1 /2 / 7 / Permittee(X) t/!�� ,'f �-- ���'' -'.' ,�^2 .'?1 Date 2 ,-) /e. / THIS PERMIT IS NOT VALID UNTIL STAMPED AND NUMBERED BY A DULY AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS. COPY DISTRIBUTION White, MTCE Section White, Applicant Canary, Local Jurisdiction Pink, MTCE Patrol File Canary, Inspector Pink, Traffic Eng. Goldenrod, Staff MTCE Division of Highways DOH Form 101 Rev. August, 1981 • • StWiighway No/MP • . ^w "' i 1 Local Jurisdiction - ,'i l -'td f'rt;rlt‘r MTCE Section/Patrol DOH Permit No Required Permit Fee: STATE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS PERMIT FOR ACCESS The property owner, 'illi t '. ," 1'1 'I' (herein called permittee) is granted permission to construct an access approach on the . side of State Highway , a distance of 1 1 feet from milepost 1 ) also known as i , :. ' for the purpose of obtaining access to 1' , ' . - - -'' „ The access approach shall be constructed, maintained and used in accordance with the State Highway Access Code, the terms and conditions of this permit, site requirements noted below, and listed attachments. This permit may be revoked by the issuing authority if at any time the permitted access approach and its use violate any of the terms and conditions of this permit or the State Highway Access Code. The use of advance warning and construction signs, flashers, barricades and flagmen are required at all times during access approach construction within State right-of-way in conformance with the MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES, Part VI. The Department of Highways and its duly appointed agents and employees shall be held harmless against any action or damage sustained by reason of the exercise of this permit. SITE REQUIREMENTS ',.717t _ r 110 2.11 7 • 1 • • t L T' c,1 r • .. r I Y ' Where the appropriate local authority retains issuing authority, local approval is required prior to approval by the State Department of Highways. MUNICIPALITY or COUNTY By(X) Date Title STATE OF COLORADO, DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS E.N. HAASE, CHIEF ENGINEER By(X) Date Title Upon the signing of this permit the permittee agrees to the terms and conditions and referenced attachments contained herein. A copy of this permit must be available at the construction site. All construction shall be completed in an expeditious and safe manner and shall be finished within 45 days from initiation. The permitted access approach shall be completed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the permit prior to being used. The permittee shall notify �I �''_ with the Colorado Department of Highways in at _ , at least 48 hours prior to commencing construction within the State Highway right-of-way. The person signing as the permittee must be the owner or legal representative of the property served by the permitted access. Permittee(X) - /-- Date THIS PERMIT IS NOT VALID UNTIL STAMPED AND NUMBERED BY A DULY AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS. COPY DISTRIBUTION Pink, MTCE Patrol File White, MTCE Section Canary, Inspector White, Applicant Pink, Traffic Eng. Canary, Local Jurisdiction Goldenrod, Staff MTCE