The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About03.09 Binder 2 - Appendix J• Water Distribution System Hydraulic Analysis • • • • • SPRING VALLEY RANCH PUD — PHASE 1 GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO Water Distribution System Hydraulic Analysis Report October 15, 2007 PREPARED FOR: Spring Valley Holding, LLC 4000 County Road 115 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602 PREPARED BY: Gamba & Associates, Inc. Consulting Engineers and Land Surveyors 113 Ninth Street — Suite 214 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone: (970) 945-2550 Fax: (970) 945-1410 Michael J. Gamba P.E & P.L.S. 28036 T. Carter page P.E. 35161 Water Distribution System Hydraulic Analysis Report October 15, 2007 Page 1 of 4 1.0 Scope of Analysis The purpose of this hydraulic study is to verify that the design of the Spring Valley Ranch PUD — Phase 1 water distribution system adequately delivers the domestic use and the fire flow demands throughout the phase. This study was done by evaluating Phase 1 of the Spring Valley Ranch PUD at full build out conditions. Since the Phase 1 water distribution system consists of a fairly simple linear system, a relatively simple hydraulic analysis software was utilized. In this case, Flowmaster software from Haestad Methods was used to perform the hydraulic analysis. The Flowmaster software is only able to analyze one pipe segment at a time. For example, one pipe segment extends from the water storage tank to the first PRV (pressure reducing valve). The second pipe segment extends from the first PRV to the split in the loop, etc. To perform the analysis, the maximum flow conditions were required. The maximum flow conditions are comprised of 1) the peak day domestic (in-house) demand and 2) the maximum fire hydrant fire suppression flow. These two flow conditions represent typical industry design standards and attempt to evaluate the system on a "worse -case -scenario" basis. 1.1 MODELED DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM The system modeled by Flowmaster includes the 1.0 million gallon water storage tank, and the water pipeline network consisting of pipes, gate valves, bends, fittings, fire hydrants, and pressure -reducing valves. As mentioned above, this distribution system does contain one loop in the piping network, which would otherwise render the use of Flowmaster inefficient. However, this system also contains PRV's on each leg of the loop, which prevents any reverse flow conditions. Under these conditions, each leg of the loop can be analyzed separately, as if the other leg of the loop was not in service. 2.0 Methodology of Analysis The primary goal of a hydraulic study of this nature is to be able to determine if the water distribution system is capable of delivering the "worst -case -scenario" flows, while maintaining adequate minimum pressures within the system. The system is designed to provide working pressures of between 45 psi. and 135 psi. The Class - 52 ductile iron pipe proposed for the main pipelines in this system has a minimum pressure rating of 350 psi. The Landis Creek Metropolitan District No. 1, which will operate the water system for the Spring Valley Ranch PUD, requires that all water service lines are to be equipped with individual pressure reducing valves. Therefore, the individual residences should never be subject to working pressures above those deemed acceptable for the plumbing fixtures installed in the residence. The maximum flow conditions were analyzed to verify that the system pressures never fell below 20 psi, which is the minimum allowable system pressure during a fire flow according to the International Fire Code. Water Distribution System Hydraulic Analysis Report October 15, 2007 Page 2 of 4 • • • The Water System was designed with the following constraints: 1. A fire flow of 1750 gallons per minute for structures with floor areas up to 18,000 sq.ft. of Type V -B construction equipped with internal fire protection sprinkler systems. This fire flow is in accordance with Table B105.1 in the 2006 International Fire Code. 2. A residual pressure of 20 psi throughout the system. 3. A Hazen -Williams "C" friction factor of 130 for Ductile Iron Pipe. 4. The system was modeled with empty water storage tanks, so that the required fire flow will continue through the last gallon of water in the storage tank. 2.1 CALCULATING TOTAL WATER SYSTEM FLOW RATES The Flowmaster program uses demand units of Gallons per Minute (GPM). The system will be analyzed for the worst-case situation, so peak day demands (represented in GPM) will be used. The total peak domestic (non fire flow) demand was calculated using as flows: Average Day Demand (in-house) = 100 gal/day/person (assume 3.5 people per tap) = 350 GPD/tap Average Day Demand (irrigation) = 400 GPD/tap Total Average Day Demand = 350 GPD + 400 GPD = 750 GPD/tap • Maximum Day Demand = 4 x Avg. Day Demand = 4 x 750 GPD = 3000 GPD/tap Total System Demand (non -fire flow) = 56 services x 3000 GPD/tap = 168,000 GPD, assume flow over 12 -hour period = 14,000 gallons per hour = 233.33 GPM, assume 200% Factor of Safety = 466.67 GPM • As noted above, according to the 2006 International Fire Code, the minimum required fire flow is 1750 gallons per minute for structures with floor areas up to 18,000 sq.ft. of Type V -B construction, and which are equipped with internal fire protection sprinkler systems. Therefore, the Total Water System Flow Rates for the analysis of the Spring Valley Ranch - Phase 1 water distribution system is a calculated as follows: Peak Domestic Water Flow Rate + Peak Fire Hydrant Flow Rate = 466.67 GPM + 1750 GPM = 2217 GPM, which was conservatively used in the hydraulic analysis of all portions of the water distribution system. 3.0 Summary of Results The conditions outlined in the previous sections of this study were analyzed and the resulting output is included in the appendices attached to this report. Following is a Table summarizing the results of the analysis and demonstrating that the residual pressures (lower end pressures are in excess of 20 psi): Water Distribution System Hydraulic Analysis Report October 15, 2007 Page 3 of 4 Description of System Segment Effective Length [feet] Pipe Diameter [inches] Upper End Elevation Upper End pre sure [psi] ] Lower End Elevation Lower d Pressure si [psi] 1.0 MG Tank to PRV-1 3569 12 8027.53 0.00 A 7778.00 93.68 PRV-1 to Junction -1 3319 12 7778.00 45.00 8 7699.00 65.98 Junction -1 East to PRV-23 6982 12 7699.00 65.98 7568.00 94.85 PRV-23 to Junction 2 5485 12 7568.00 55.00 c 7495.00 64.71 Junction -1 West to PRV-26 5140 12 7699.00 65.98 7611.00 83.58 PRV-26 to Junction -2 1428.00 12 7572.00 55.00 c 7495.00 82.67 Junction -2 to PRV-34 4452.00 12 7495.00 64.71 7394.00 90.69 PRV335o 4823 12 7394.00 25.00 ° 7161.00 106.73 PRV-35 to End Hydrant at Metro District Building 3175.00 12 7161.00 60.00E 7070.00 86.76 A - Assumes water storage tank is empty, therefore pressure inside storage tank is equal to 0.00. a - Upper End pressure based on the downstream pressure setting at PRV-1 of 45.00 psi. c - Upper End pressure based on the downstream pressure setting at PRV-23 and PRV-26 of 55.00 psi. Upper End pressure based on the downstream pressure setting at PRV-34 of 25.00 psi. E - Upper End pressure based on the downstream pressure setting at PRV-35 of 60.00 psi. 4.0 Conclusion Our analysis for the Spring Valley Ranch, Phase 1 Water Distribution System has determined that the Phase 1 development is more than adequately served by the water distribution system as designed. H:\01269\17\Submittal Files\Appendix J\Water Distribution System Hydraulic Analysis.doc Water Distribution System Hydraulic Analysis Report October 15, 2007 Page 4 of 4 • • • Tank to PRV1 Worksheet for Pressure Pipe • Project Description Project File h:101269\17\utilit-1 \waterlwells\hydrau-1.fm2 Worksheet Tank to PRV1 Flow Element Pressure Pipe Method Hazen -Williams Formula Solve For Pressure at 2 Input Data Pressure at 1 0.00 psi Elevation at 1 8,027.00 ft Elevation at 2 7,778.00 ft Length 3,569.00 ft C Coefficient 130.0 Diameter 12.46 in Discharge 2,217.0 gal/min Results Pressure at 2 93.68 psi Headloss 32.92 ft Energy Grade at 1 8,027.53 ft • Energy Grade at 2 7,994.61 ft Hydraulic Grade at 1 8,027.00 ft Hydraulic Grade at 2 7,994.08 ft Flow Area 0.85 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 3.26 ft Velocity 5.83 ft/s Velocity Head 0.53 ft Friction Slope 0.009224 ft/ft 10/18/07 0701:08 PM FlowMaster v5.15 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 - ,v1 opT 4- 02.-+, • - • • • • • • Zone 1 - to PRV1 Fitting Count Le/Fitting Equivalent Length 90 bend (Vt.) 1 25 25 11 bend 7 5 35 22 bend 13 9 117 Gate Valve 4 6 22 Length of pipe 2,955 1 2,955 Tee 1 65 65 PRV 1 350 350 Total: 3,569 G A M B A & ASSOCIATES CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS WWW O•.ea LrOtntC•,..O. COM PHONE: 970/945-2550 FAX: 970/945-1410 113 NINTH STREET, SUITE 214 P.O. BOX 1458 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602-1458 PROJECT WORK ITEM 1a6? 1 SHEET OF / I BY (f ce DATEDi'f"' 0 - • j: hTh--- V ZZ - E.2 1/0,1/, 0//4f — Ocie_ -To o Pev 11.0.9 • PRV1 to Junction Worksheet for Pressure Pipe • • • Project Description Project File Worksheet Flow Element Method Solve For h:\01269117\utilit--1 \water\wells\hydrau-1.fm2 PRV1 to Junction 1 Pressure Pipe Hazen -Williams Formula Pressure at 2 Input Data Pressure at 1 Elevation at 1 Elevation at 2 Length C Coefficient Diameter Discharge 45.00 psi 7,778.00 ft 7,699.00 ft 3,319.00 ft 130.0 12.46 in 2,217.0 gal/min Results Pressure at 2 Headloss Energy Grade at 1 Energy Grade at 2 Hydraulic Grade at 1 Hydraulic Grade at 2 Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Velocity Velocity Head Friction Slope 65.98 psi 30.62 ft 7,882.32 ft 7,851.71 ft 7,881.80 ft 7,851.18 ft 0.85 ft2 3.26 ft 5.83 ft/s 0.53 ft 0.009224 ft/ft 10/18/07 05:41-18 PM FlowMaster v5.15 Haestad Methods, Inc 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 • • • Zone 1 - PRV1 to Junction Fitting Count Le/Fitting Equivalent Length 90 bend (Vt.) 0 25 0 11 bend 1 5 5 22 bend 4 9 36 Gate Valve 3 6 17 Length of pipe 2,155 1 2,155 Tee 1 65 65 PRV 0 100 0 Total: 2,278 GAMBA ASSOCIATES CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS WWW 4•.ve41e.10.vee•r44 COM PHONE: 970/945-2550 FAX: 970/945-1410 113 NINTH STREET, SUITE 214 P.O. Box 1458 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602-1458 CO DV 9 . . i The. zz to y Ttit PROJECT sve WORK ITEM SHEET Z OFDATE (V /C !J /o� BY fry • • Junction East to PRV23 Worksheet for Pressure Pipe Project Description Project File Worksheet Flow Element Method Solve For h:101269\17\utilit-1 \water\wells\hydrau-1.fm2 Junction East to PRV23 Pressure Pipe Hazen -Williams Formula Pressure at 2 Input Data Pressure at 1 Elevation at 1 Elevation at 2 Length C Coefficient Diameter Discharge 65.98 psi 7,699.00 ft 7,568.00 ft 6,982.00 ft 130.0 12.46 in 2,217.0 gal/min Results Pressure at 2 Headloss Energy Grade at 1 Energy Grade at 2 Hydraulic Grade at 1 Hydraulic Grade at 2 Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Velocity Velocity Head Friction Slope 94.85 psi 64.40 ft 7,851.72 ft 7,787.31 ft 7,851.19 ft 7,786.78 ft 0.85 ft2 3.26 ft 5.83 ft/s 0.53 ft 0.009224 ft/ft 10/22/07 04:50:14 AM FlowMaster v5 15 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 • • • Junction East to PRV23 Cou 9 Le/Fitting Equivalent 90 bend (Vt.) 0 25 0 11 bend 6 5 30 22 bend 5 9 45 45 bend 6 15 90 Gate Valve 9 6 50 Length of pipe 5.702 1 5,702 Tee 1 65 65 Hydrant Tee 10 65 650 PRV 1 350 350 Total: 6,982 G A M B A & ASSOCIATES CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS w w.. GAY841 NO,Net9INO CON PHONE: 970/945-2550 FAX: 970/945-1410 113 NINTH STREET, SUITE 214 P.O. Box 1458 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602-1458 ,oti 001, 3 f PROJECT SUS WORK ITEM I24'—/±- SHEET OF j q DATE( c/{ t DT BY r�P TiLoi 4 T7 -1- r ? ! ik_._ Pc_ ( C_I 0 V N-14-4 1 I ( C P (6) )� ZZ� ( ( 14111 (.G)Alt Vit- ( 1 1 (- rkt Fi'l (Ialt ( (e) • PRV 23 to Junction 2 Worksheet for Pressure Pipe • Project Description Project File h:101269 171utilit-1 \water\wellslhydrau-1.fm2 Worksheet PRV 23 to Junction 2 Flow Element Pressure Pipe Method Hazen -Williams Formula Solve For Pressure at 2 Input Data Pressure at 1 55.00 psi Elevation at 1 7,568.00 ft Elevation at 2 7,495.00 ft Length 5,485.00 ft C Coefficient 130.0 Diameter 12.46 in Discharge 2.217.0 gal/min Results Pressure at 2 64.71 psi Headloss 50.60 ft Energy Grade at 1 7,695.39 ft • Energy Grade at 2 7,644.79 ft Hydraulic Grade at 1 7,694.86 ft Hydraulic Grade at 2 7,644.27 ft Flow Area 0.85 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 3.26 ft Velocity 5.83 ft/s Velocity Head 0.53 ft Friction Slope 0.009224 ft/ft • 10/21/07 02.55:42 PM FlowMaster v5 15 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 • 03-C PRVIPS 23 @ 7,572' N 1 • PR to 2 Junction Cotinng Le/Fitting Eq engthnt 90 bend 0 25 0 11 bend 2 5 10 22 bend 1 9 9 45 bend 2 15 30 Gate Valve 6 6 33 Length of pipe 4,753 1 4,753 Tee 1 65 65 Hydrant Tee 9 65 585 PRV 0 350 0 Total: 5,485 • • G A M B A & ASSOCIATES CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS WWW Oaw On CNGiNCeNinO COY PHONE: 970/945-2550 FAX: 970/945-1410 113 NINTH STREET, SUITE 214 P.O. BOX 1458 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602-1458 :75/}11 -a prz_i) 7v u,poit! z 0 -go Tac, UJ U z z° pe/ PROJECT WORK ITEM 01W-19- SHEET 1 --19- SHEET OF BY T.� 9 DATE/u/ -4 ( • koafi-9433--i- �.. • • Junction West to PRV 26 Worksheet for Pressure Pipe Project Description Project File Worksheet Flow Element Method Solve For h:\01269\17\uti l it -1 \wate rlwel is\hydrau-1. fm2 Junction West to PRV 26 Pressure Pipe Hazen -Williams Formula Pressure at 2 Input Data Pressure at 1 Elevation at 1 Elevation at 2 Length C Coefficient Diameter Discharge 65.98 psi 7,699.00 ft 7,611.00 ft 5,140.00 ft 130.0 12.46 in 2,217.0 gal/min Results Pressure at 2 Headloss Energy Grade at 1 Energy Grade at 2 Hydraulic Grade at 1 Hydraulic Grade at 2 Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Velocity Velocity Head Friction Slope 83.58 psi 47.41 ft 7,851.72 ft 7,804.30 ft 7,851.19 ft 7,803.77 ft 0.85 3.26 5.83 ft/s 0.53 ft 0.009224 ft/ft ft2 ft 10/22/07 04 55:30 AM FlowMaster v5 15 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Junction 1 - West to PRV 26 Fitting Count Le/Fitting Equivalent Length 90 bend 2 25 50 11 bend 1 5 5 22 bend 1 9 9 45 bend 1 15 15 Gate Valve 5 6 28 Length of pipe 4,293 1 4,293 Tee 0 65 0 Hydrant Tee 6 65 390 PRV 1 350 350 Total: 5,140 • • GAMBA & ASSOCIATES CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS www- INCEIINO.CO• PHONE: 970/945-2550 FAX: 970/945-1410 113 NINTH STREET, SUITE 214 P.O. Box 1458 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602-1458 ---a9kt,e 7_ _Joicoos -7-61W3 pAy ?4 % P( 114- ( 1 !l 'C®r M lig) 7 2- tf c° Pau A-1 qo° i( PROJECT ode WORK ITEM SHEET V OF1 DATE BY 777 (0/(1/Ori- • e'r111-1.,P • • Junction 2 to PRV 34 Worksheet for Pressure Pipe • Project Description Project File h:\01269\17\utilit-1 \water\wells\hydrau'l .fm2 Worksheet Junction 2 to PRV 34 Flow Element Pressure Pipe Method Hazen -Williams Formula Solve For Pressure at 2 Input Data Pressure at 1 64.71 psi Elevation at 1 7,495.00 ft Elevation at 2 7,394.00 ft Length 4,452.00 ft C Coefficient 130.0 Diameter 12.46 in Discharge 2,217.0 gal/min 1-1) 09 (r.2.'' /,96(-44 (reW r '-.or.) Results Pressure at 2 90.69 psi Headloss 41.07 ft Energy Grade at 1 7,644.79 ft • Energy Grade at 2 7,603.72 ft Hydraulic Grade at 1 7,644.26 ft Hydraulic Grade at 2 7,603.19 ft Flow Area 0.85 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 3.26 ft Velocity 5.83 ft/s Velocity Head 0.53 ft Friction Slope 0.009224 ft/ft • 10/21/07 03:25:08 PM FlowMaster v5 15 Haestad Methcds, Inc 37 Brookside Road Waterbury CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Junction 2 PRV 34 to Cou Fitting Le/Fitting Eq engthnt 90 bend 0 25 0 11 bend 6 5 30 22 bend 10 9 90 45 bend 5 15 75 Gate Valve 4 6 22 Length of pipe 3.495 1 3,495 Tee 2 65 130 Hydrant Tee 4 65 260 PRV 1 350 350 Total: 4,452 • • G A M B A & ASSOCIATES CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS WWW aAhopie.o...CC.e..a CO. PHONE: 970/945-2550 FAX: 970/945-1410 113 NINTH STREET, SUITE 214 P.O. Box 1458 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602-1458 :---'- --J-01070/1 3 7-3 79-- 1 0 -( L i - ctT -s P, 12 D� 220 s� i (,fzs/ fmMi!7" Qt' 3(c - PROJECT - /; r WORK ITEM o)uaq- 17 -- SHEET OF • DATE I l,/ 2- /F/ BY 9 c+! • ..ttyryt - PoLuetntie. i • • PRV 34 to PRV 35 Worksheet for Pressure Pipe Project Description Project File h:\01269\17\utilit-1\water\wells\hydrau-1.fm2 Worksheet PRV 34 to PRV 35 Flow Element Pressure Pipe Method Hazen -Williams Formula Solve For Pressure at 2 Input Data Pressure at 1 25.00 psi Elevation at 1 7,394.00 ft Elevation at 2 7,161.00 ft Length 4,823.00 ft C Coefficient 130.0 Diameter 12.46 in Discharge 2,217.0 gal/min Results Pressure at 2 106.73 psi Headloss 44.49 ft Energy Grade at 1 7,452.19 ft III Energy Grade at 2 7,407.70 ft Hydraulic Grade at 1 7,451.66 ft Hydraulic Grade at 2 7,407.18 ft Flow Area 0.85 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 3.26 ft Velocity 5.83 ft/s Velocity Head 0.53 ft Friction Slope 0.009224 ft/ft • 10/21/07 0344:17 PM FlowMaster v5 15 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 PRV 335o PRV nt FittinCount Le/Fitting Equivalent 90 bend 2 25 50 11 bend 2 5 10 22 bend 4 9 36 45 bend 6 15 90 Gate Valve 6 6 33 Length of pipe 3,864 1 3,864 Tee 1 65 65 Hydrant Tee 5 65 325 PRV 1 350 350 Total: 4,823 • • GAMBA & ASSOCIATES CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS www c AnnAACOY 9 - PHONE: 970/945-2550 FAX: 970/945-1410 113 NINTH STREET, SUITE 214 P.O. Box 1458 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602-1458 PROJECT S�1 e - WORK ITEM O( /b (. 19 - SHEET OF 9 DA 40/ /10 I I 1 pA OaW Q FrM 100 , t2 O • PRV 35 to End Hydrant Worksheet for Pressure Pipe • Project Description • • Project File Worksheet Flow Element Method Solve For h:101269\17\utilit-1 \water\wells\hydrau-1.fm2 PRV 35 to End Hydrant Pressure Pipe Hazen -Williams Formula Pressure at 2 Input Data Pressure at 1 Elevation at 1 Elevation at 2 Length C Coefficient Diameter Discharge 60.00 psi 7,161.00 ft 7,070.00 ft 3,175.00 ft 130.0 12.46 in 2,217.0 gal/min Results Pressure at 2 Headloss Energy Grade at 1 Energy Grade at 2 Hydraulic Grade at 1 Hydraulic Grade at 2 Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Velocity Velocity Head Friction Slope 86.76 psi 29.29 ft 7,299.92 ft 7,270.64 ft 7,299.39 ft 7,270.11 ft 0.85 ft2 3.26 ft 5.83 ft/s 0.53 ft 0.009224 ft/ft 10/21/07 04 00 00 PM FlowMaster v5 15 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 c9) Last F.Hyd @ 7,070' PRV/PS 3 @ 7,161' ss • PRV 35 Hydrant End Fitting Le/Fitting Eqt uivalent 90 bend 1 25 25 11 bend 4 5 20 22 bend 2 9 18 45 bend 3 15 45 Gate Valve 3 6 17 Length of pipe 2,375 1 2,375 Tee 1 65 65 Hydrant Tee 4 65 260 PRV 1 350 350 Total: 3.175 • • G A M B A & ASSOCIATES CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS WWW OAMOACYO!MCCOIMO COM PHONE: 970/945-2550 FAX: 970/945-1410 113 NINTH STREET, SUITE 214 P.O. Box 1458 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602-1458 P4) os --Th(e)/ n U oThor Pr Pt er 2�0 Co fikiV ho.afe 4.V. - I' v 1 PROJECT see WORK ITEM 012_61- 13 -- SHEET BYT-CP OF DATE 10/20/ ( • ' • • PRV1 to Junction MAX fire flow Worksheet for Pressure Pipe • Project Description Project File Worksheet Flow Element Method Solve For h:\01269\17\utilit-1 \waterlwells\hydra u-1.fm2 PRV1 to Junction 1 MAX Fire Flow Pressure Pipe Hazen -Williams Formula Discharge Input Data Pressure at 1 Pressure at 2 Elevation at 1 Elevation at 2 Length C Coefficient Diameter 45.00 psi 20.00 psi 7,778.00 ft 7,699.00 ft 3,319.00 ft 130.0 12.46 in Results Discharge Headloss Energy Grade at 1 Energy Grade at 2 Hydraulic Grade at 1 Hydraulic Grade at 2 Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Velocity Velocity Head Friction Slope 4,972.9 gal/min 136.66 ft 7,882.32 ft 7,745.66 ft 7,881.80 ft 7,745.13 ft 0.85 ft2 3.26 ft 13.08 ft/s 2.66 ft 0.041176 ft/ft 10/21/07 04 44 04 PM FlowMaster v5 15 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury. CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 • Water Supply and Distribution System Design Report • • • • • SPRING VALLEY RANCH PUD — PHASE 1 GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO Water Supply and Distribution System Design Report October 15, 2007 PREPARED FOR: Spring Valley Holding, LLC 4000 County Road 115 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602 PREPARED BY: Gamba & Associates, Inc. Consulting Engineers and Land Surveyors 113 Ninth Street — Suite 214 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone: (970) 945-2550 Fax: (970) 945-1410 10 -ZZ. '''1111111'1`` Michael J. Gamba P.E & P.L.S. 28036 T. Carter page P.E. 35161 Water Supply and Distribution System Design Report October 15, 2007 Page 1 of 7 INTRODUCTION AND LOCATION This report was prepared to provide an outline of the design and the supporting calculations for the overall water supply and distribution system included in the Final Plat design for the Phase 1, Spring Valley Ranch PUD. GENERAL SYSTEM DESCRIPTION The water supply for the system consists of two potable water wells. Both wells have been pump tested and can physically provide flows up to 100 GPM for extended periods. The well pumps to be installed in each well have been designed to convey up to 100 GPM from each individual well to the top of the 1.0 MG water storage tank, which provides the water storage for the water system. A hydrological analysis of each well site has been performed to evaluate the potential for damage from the 100 -year flood. The water quality from the two wells has been tested and found to be of very high quality, meeting all regulated and recommended limits established by the CDPHE for drinking water supplies. According to CDPHE disinfection of the water supply is required. For this system, the design includes a MIOX, mixed oxidant disinfection system for each well. The operation of the well pumps is controlled via a radio -telemetry system between an altitude valve with a pressure -transducer located at the storage tank and the wells. POTABLE WATER WELLS As previously stated, there are two potable water wells within Phase 1 that shall serve all of the domestic potable water and fire protection needs established for this phase of the Spring Valley Ranch P.U.D. The two wells are located on the middle bench of the site, north and west of the proposed golf lots, as shown on the water system plans. For identification purposes, the wells were originally labeled Gamba 3 and Gamba 4. Subsequently, the owners chose to re -name the wells as ASR 13 and ASR 14 respectively. Details on the wells locations (latitude and longitude), permit numbers and dates, depth to water, and elevations are shown on the water system details sheet included in Exhibit 2 of Binder 4. Copies of the well permits and decrees for each included in Appendix A of Binder 2. WELL LOCATIONS AND PERMITS Well ASR 13 is located at 39°31' 2.86" North latitude, and 107°13' 13.70" West longitude, or approximately 2,240 -feet from the south section line of Section 21, and approximately 574 -feet from the east section line of the same Section 21, in Township 6 South, Range 88 West, 6th Principal Meridian. This location is within 156 -feet of the permitted location. The well has a final permit number of 66298-F. Please refer to the documents provided in Appendix A of Binder 2 of the Final Plat application. Water Supply and Distribution System Design Report October 15, 2007 Page 2 of 7 • • • Well ASR 14 is located at 39°30' 51.84" North latitude, and 107°12' 57.86" West • longitude, or approximately 1,138 -feet from the south section line of Section 22, and approximately 677 -feet from the west section line of the same Section 22, in Township 6 South, Range 88 West, 6th Principal Meridian. This location is within 14 -feet of the permitted location. The well has a final permit number of 66299-F. Please refer to the documents provided in Appendix A of Binder 2 of the Final Plat application. TOTAL DYNAMIC HEAD & PUMP SELECTION Each well will be pumping to the same storage tank, the 1 -million gallon tank located as shown on the water system plans. The design floor of the tank is at elevation 8,027.13 -ft. and the water level is set 39.5 -feet higher at 8,066.63 -ft. Well ASR 13 has a collar elevation at 7,767 -ft. and the static water level is at 7,627 -ft. Static head is therefore approximately 439.63 -ft. To this is added 17 -ft. of friction head, to account for the pipes, elbows, valves and water meter in the MIOX® treatment building, and the total is rounded up to 457 -ft. of Total Dynamic Head (TDH) for well ASR 13. The Gould Pump Selection program was used to select the pumps for Spring Valley Ranch, Phase 1. A copy of the Pump Data Sheet for this well shows that the Pump chosen is a 20 - horsepower 12 -stage Gould Model 5CLC, which has sufficient capacity to produce 100 - gallons per minute at up to a TDH of 600 -ft. Well ASR 14 has a collar elevation at 7,710 -ft. and the static water level is at 7,576 -ft. • Static head is therefore approximately 490.63 -ft. To this is added 11 -ft. of friction head, to account for the pipes, elbows, valves and water meter in the MIOX® treatment building, and the total is rounded up to 502 -ft. of Total Dynamic Head (TDH) for well ASR 14. The smaller friction head selected for this well is due to the larger pipe sizes over much of the run from Well ASR 14 to the water storage tank. The Gould Pump Selection program was used to select the pumps for Spring Valley Ranch, Phase 1. A copy of the Pump Data Sheet for this well shows that the Pump chosen is a 20 - horsepower 12 -stage Gould Model 5CLC, which has sufficient capacity to produce 100 - gallons per minute at up to a TDH of 600 -ft. This is the identical motor and pump combination proposed for well ASR 13, which will enable the operators to keep a spare pump and motor on -hand to respond quickly to breakdowns. Both wells will use the same motor and pump combination, which have more than adequate capacity to serve the site, and provide for the ability to have a single spare of the motor and the pump to serve both wells. • POTABLE WATER TREATMENT SYSTEM As previously noted, the design includes a MIOX, mixed oxidant disinfection system for each well to be used in the Phase 1, Spring Valley Ranch PUD water supply and distribution system. Water Supply and Distribution System Design Report October 15, 2007 Page 3 of 7 RAW WATER QUALITY The original water quality tests performed on these wells did not fully meet the requirements of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment for new wells. The tests performed on Well ASR 13 (Gamba 3) included tests for Nitrite, Antimony, Beryllium, Cyanide, Nickel, and Thallium, as well as Gross Alpha and Gross Beta. All results were well within the limits for Public Water Supplies. Copies of the December 19, 1998 test results are attached to the Application for Construction Approval to the CDPHE for a New Public Water System, which is also contained in Appendix J of Binder 2 of the Final Plat application for Phase 1 of Spring Valley Ranch PUD. Additional samples, which will meet the full testing requirements of the CDPHE for new wells are being taken, and results will be provided as soon as they are available. The tests performed on Well ASR 14 (Gamba 4) included tests for heavy metals, such as Arsenic, Barium, Cadmium, etc. as well as pH, Conductivity, Sodium, hardness etc. All test results, except for Hardness as CaCO3 were well within the limits for Public Water Supplies. Well ASR 14 was also tested for Total Coliform, with a result of 0 colonies per 100 mg/L. In addition, the same batteries of tests as stated above for Well ASR 13 were also performed, and the results were well within the limits for Public Water Supplies. Copies of the December 19, 1998 test results are attached to the Application for Construction Approval to the CDPHE for a New Public Water System, which is also contained in Appendix J of Binder 2 of the Final Plat application for Phase 1 of Spring Valley Ranch PUD. Additional samples, which will meet the full testing requirements of the CDPHE for new wells are being taken, and results will be provided as soon as they are available. Because of the depth of the wells, and the aquifer in which they are situated, it is anticipated that there will be no issues with the final water quality from either well, once the final water test results are received. WATER TREATMENT In light of the anticipated water quality, and in order to provide for disinfection of the well water, the treatment method of choice for these wells will be a mixed oxidant system at each well, with an oxidant contact chamber between the treatment units and the storage/distribution system. The oxidant contact chamber has been sized to provide a minimum of 30 -minutes of contact time at peak pumping capacity. In order to minimize the handling of toxic and/or hazardous materials, and to achieve the most capability to deal with unanticipated water quality issues, the decision has been made to use the MIOX® treatment system, specifically the SAL -40 units for each well site. The MIOX® units will be mounted in their own treatment buildings sited close to the wells, as shown on the water system plans. The MIOX® units proposed for Spring Valley Ranch P.U.D. Phase 1, have received an NSF -61 certification. Water Supply and Distribution System Design Report October 15, 2007 Page 4 of 7 • • • The MIOX® system employs essentially a water softener to create a brine solution that is then broken down by direct current to a chlorine disinfectant. The resulting solution is comprised of a mixed group of oxidants, each with various degrees of disinfecting capabilities. The mixed oxidants are stored in an "Oxidant Tank" until needed, at which time they are pumped into the raw water system downstream of the water meter. Each MIOX® system uses an electrolytic cell to break down a brine solution into a mixed -oxidant disinfection solution, which is then pumped into the raw water supply system. The power supply to the MIOX® system is typically either 240VAC or 480VAC. The well pumps will be 240VAC, and for simplicity, the MIOX® system will use the same voltage. Within the power supply, a rectifier changes the AC power to high amperage, direct current to be used by the electrolytic cell. The MIOX® controls monitor the water flow from each well using a 4 to 20 milliamp signal from an in-line water meter in the same building as the MIOX® unit. The controls can be adjusted to accommodate different water conditions, and different flow rates. The Sal -40 MIOX® units specified for both wells at Spring Valley Ranch P.U.D. Phase 1, have the capacity to supply up to 4 #/day of Free Available Chlorine, which will provide for 48,000 -gallons of treated water (at 1 mg/L of free chlorine). The anticipated demand on each well is on the order of 16,000-gpd. The intended free chlorine residual is to be 2 mg/L at the extreme end of the distribution system. The MIOX® control system allows the feed rate of the treatment solution to be adjusted to meet the specific requirements of the water system. A system schematic is included in Exhibit 2 of Binder 4. It is anticipated, based on the known water quality of the wells ASR 13 and ASR 14, that approximately 1.5 -#/day of free available chlorine will be necessary to provide the minimum EPA amount of 0.2-mg/L residual in the system. The SAL -40 MIOX® will have 2.6 times more capacity than is anticipated to be needed, therefore, should the water quality or conditions not meet the expectations, each SAL -40 MIOX® will be capable of increasing (or decreasing) its output to compensate for water conditions. The Sal -40 MIOX® treatment systems will be able to supply more than enough free available chlorine for the wells proposed for Phase 1. The use of common water softener salt eliminates the storage and handling of toxic and dangerous chemicals. The MIOX® systems can be individually adjusted to accomplish the desired residual in the water distribution system, and can easily accommodate the changes which will occur over time as the lots are developed and the water demand increases. Water Supply and Distribution System Design Report October 15, 2007 Page 5 of 7 WATER SYSTEM CONTROLS As previously noted, a radio -telemetry system will be installed to provide the controls for the water system for Phase 1 of Spring Valley Ranch PUD. TELEMETRY AND CONTROLS The 1 -million gallon water storage tank, located as shown on the water system plans, will be equipped with an altitude valve and a pressure transducer, located just outside the tank, in a manhole, which will communicate via radio -telemetry to each of the two well houses. The tank will be maintained in a full condition as much as possible. The pressure transducer will sense the pressure of the water at the discharge line from the tank and will be calibrated to the depth of the tank in the full condition. When the pressure transducer has sensed that the water level in the tank has dropped 1 - foot, which will represent the use of 3,431.6-ft3 or 25,668.4 -gallons, then the telemetry system will send a signal via radio to the well control system. The well control will evaluate which pump was turned on most recently, and select the other pump. The pumps will alternate their running and idle times in order to provide for the longest life of the motors and liquid ends. Each pump has a permitted pumping capacity of 100 -gallons per minute (GPM), or 6,000 -gallons per hour (GPH). Depending on water system demands, it should take a minimum of 4.3 -hours to re -fill the tank (with no system demands). If the tank has not filled within 5 -hours, the well controls will start the second well pump. In addition, if the pressure transducer senses that the water level has dropped by 2 -feet from the full mark, at any time, the telemetry system will signal the well control system, and the second pump will turn on. The water system sensors and controls will be selected in coordination with a qualified SCADA (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) firm, in order that all of the components will be compatible with a planned development -wide central control and monitoring system. It is intended that the eventual control system will allow the system operators to monitor all aspects of the water (and sewer and irrigation) systems remotely, from any phone line or any wireless communication site, through a dedicated and password -controlled system. Primary and backup system maintenance operators will be trained by the SCADA system supplier in all aspects of the operation and maintenance of the SCADA system. WATER DISINFECTION CONTROLS The well water for Phase 1 is of excellent quality, based on tests received to date. It is anticipated that the MIOX® treatment system proposed for each well site will be more than adequate to provide treatment to the water at the source. Each well and treatment site is equipped with a MIOX® SAL -40 Mixed Oxidant generator system, brine tank, oxidant tank and controls. In addition, on the well discharge line, which will pass through the treatment building (see water treatment details provided in Exhibit 2 of Binder 4), there is a Sensus water meter, which has the necessary control wiring to signal Water Supply and Distribution System Design Report October 15, 2007 Page 6 of 7 • • the Oxidant pump to inject the Mixed Oxidants into the well discharge line. The flow of • Mixed Oxidant is proportional to the well discharge as determined by the water meter. Flow control valves may also be used to adjust the flows from the wells, if necessary, to keep output within the permitted capacity. The water system controls are simple, and will provide reliable control and monitoring of the wells and disinfection systems. • • CONCLUSION The overall design of the water supply, treatment, storage and distribution system for Phase 1 of Spring Valley Ranch PUD is in compliance with the applicable requirements of the Colorado Division of Water Resources, the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, and the American Water Works Association. H:\01269\17\Submittal Files\Appendix J\Water Distribution System Hydraulic Analysis.doc Water Supply and Distribution System Design Report October 15, 2007 Page 7 of 7 • • • APPLICATION FOR CONSTRUCTION APPROVAL TO THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT FOR A NEW PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM PWSID # • (For Department Use) • • APPLICATION FOR CONSTRUCTION APPROVAL • System Type (e.g. sole proprietorship, partnership, corporation, mutual, government agency): Government Agency System Address: Post Office Box 1146 4000 County Road 115 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602 System Phone Number: (970) 945-6478 ■ Legal Owner's Name: Landis Creek Metropolitan District No. 1 Owner's Address: Landis Creek Metropolitan District No. 1 c/o Miller, Gruber & Rosenbluth; 700 17th Street, Suite 2200; Denver, Colorado 80202-3505 Owner's Phone Number: (303) 285-5320 • Administrative Contact Name: Diane Miller Phone Number: (303) 285-5320 • Consulting Engineering Company: Gamba & Associates, Inc. Project Engineer's Name: Michael .7. Gamba, P.E. & P.L.S. CO License # 28036 Company Address: 113 9th Street, P.O. Box 1458, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Engineer's Phone Number: (970) 945-2550 Estimated total project cost: $4,875,000 Estimated bid opening date: March 1, 2008 Estimated completion date: December 31, 2009 Estimated Size (MGD: 0.04375 -MGD Estimated population served: 175 residents # of Taps: 50 Residential Lots — 2 EQR/Lot = 100 EQR @ 350-gpd/EQR = 35,000-gpd. Clubhouse — 15 EQR @ 350-gpd/EQR = 5,250-gpd. Sales Office — 2 EQR ® 350-gpd/EQR = 700-gpd. Fire Station — 3 EQR @ 350-gpd/EQR = 1,050-gpd. Metro District Office — 5 EOR (a7 350-gpd/EOR =1.750-gpd. Totals: 125 EQR = 43,750-gpd. Last Revised 6/04 • • • Source Water Information (Provide the following information for all sources): Identify All Domestic and Industrial Water Discharges Five Miles Upstream (Surface Water) or within a 2.5 mile radius of the source (Ground Water). Attach a 7.5 minute USGS topographic map showing water source(s), discharges, and potential contamination sources. Potable Water Well ASR 13, Permit 66298-F If a Well, What Is the Total Well Depth?: 186 -ft. First Draw Depth at Perforated Casing?: 150 -ft. Source Water Location: Latitude: 39° 31' 2" North Longitude: 107° 13' 13" West Location of Water Treatment Facility: Within 40 -ft. of Well Site Potable Water Well ASR 14, Permit 66299-F If a Well, What Is the Total Well Depth?: 200 -ft. First Draw Depth at Perforated Casing?: 140 -ft. Source Water Location: Latitude: 39° 30' 51" North Longitude: 107° 12' 57" West Location of Water Treatment Facility: Within 40 -ft. of Well Site Distance from Nearest Incorporated Town or City: 6 -Miles +/- Direction of Nearest Incorporated Town or City: North West ❑ Approval by County Health Department: Signature Title Date ❑ Approval by Local Health and Environment Department: Signature Title Date ❑ System Legal Representative: Signature Title Date ❑ Owner's Signature _Date Last Revised 6/04 • DOCUMENTS ATTACHED: Note: The Division Cannot Make A Final Decision Until All Documents Have Been Submitted Construction Approval Application (Yes/No) YES Plans and Specifications (Yes/No) YES (Yes/No) YES Project Summary Design Calculations (Yes/No) YES Well Construction Derails (Yes/No/NA") YES Flood Plain Certificate (Yes/No) YES Inventory Form (Yes/No) YES Chemical Analysis Yes/No) NO County and Local Health Approval (Yes/No) NO Water Rights Certification (Yes/No) YES Well Permit .'es/No/NA'') YES Managerial Plan (Yes/No) YES Financial Plan Yes/No) YES • *NA = Not Applicable 1-E\01269\17\U 1 ies\Water\Submittal Package to CDPE E\Application for Construction Appmvalrtf • 11/23/2007 12/23/2007 • PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS Please refer to: W Sheets in Binder 4, Exhibit 2 • • • PROJECT SUMMARY Please refer to: Water Supply and Distribution System Design Report in Binder 2, Appendix J • • • DESIGN CALCULATIONS Please refer to: Water Distribution System Hydraulic Analysis Report in Binder 2, Appendix J • • • • • PWSID # (For Department Use) 100 -YEAR FLOOD PLAIN CERTIFICATION This Statement must accompany all Applications for Approval to Construct New Waterworks submitted to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. PROJECT TITLE Spring Valley Ranch P.U.D. County Garfield CONSULTANT Gamba & Associates, Inc. 113 9th Street, Glenwood Springs,C0 81601 STATEMENT I hereby certify that a Professional Engineering judgment has been made after evaluating all available flood plain data from the Colorado Water Conservation Board, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Housing and Urban Development, County Government, local flood districts, etc, regarding a potential 100 -year flood threat to the Domestic Potable Water Well Ase i3 Permit No. Well or treatment plant for Landis Creek Metropolitan District Name of entity or district, etc. In my opinion, these waterworks, as located and designed, are not subject to flood damage by a 100 -year event, based on the information enclosed from the Signature .V h4 . •uu , • _. - Title Professional Engineer Date October 5, 2007 A Professional Engineers' Stamp must be inctifldad,f9ha1I Community Water System's. Affix stamp below.oQQpO REGi/7i 1. Date 70/t) -7— :.. i 35161m•4.El • ,: . See Arrncioi ‘117;-;:g%t Last Revised 6/04 GAMBA • ASSOCIAT[S Spring Valley Ranch P.U.D. Phase 1 GAMBA & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 9 LAND SURVEYORS 970/945-2550 WWW.GAMBAENGINEER ING.COM 113 NINTH ST., 333.114 p.0.1301 14S4 GLIZNWOOa SPRINGS. CO 1111101 • • fo MIOX freatment f3uildrnq 2" NPfCauttt Pat _ `I Concrete Well Seal 4" MAA55 Pitless Adapter ( Madel J1014-40, OAP) Van Stare Style Plat e ( fwo-Piece, 4" Pipt) 6" Cl 52 12,1P, C MJ x MJ) 6" MEWL-ANGE Restrained Flaw Adapter / 6' x 4" Reducer WELL # A IIR 13 (aanba 5) A51;' 14 (Gamba 4) PEP.M1f # 66298-P 66299-P PERMIf 122E 09/25/ 07 09/25/07 PINI91 aeAa 7,767' 7,710' ANNILAR 5 Al.. 7673' 7,664' 5fAf1C WAJER 7,627' 7,576' PUMP 5Ef11NG 7,620' 7,580' 5LOf1EP CA51NG 7,617' 7,570' CA51NG510P 7,581' 7550' 130f1OM 7,567' 7530' PUMP: MOGEL G01LI2 GOLLP 51g SCLC SCLC If 20 20 Sanrtar� Wel Sea' l' (min,) o / Finish Grade 0_ 7,5' ( min.) COW ..r ..r Anular Seal Gold 5ubnersible Pump s5tatic Water Pump 5ettinq 5otted Casa! Cas;nq Stop 6ottan Well Details SCALE: Not to Scale SHEET: 1 of 1 DATE: October 5, 2007 DRAWN BY: tcp PROJECT: 01269-17 CHKD BY: X19 DRAWING: PumpStat.dwg DIRECTORY. Hr,01269\171Utilitter \ Water \wellsi PLAN VIEW - WELL I IED CONCRETE PAD DETAILS do3 6u!so3 IIaM o n c c -. a* to 0 0 cn — N C� 0 v°, 0 o 0- a 0_Cr. ID -i CO . 1 O A o 1J1 --0 N ^ 0 3 3P D C-) 0 7 0 1 c a 0 3 Spring Valley Ranch Typical Well Head Details SCALE: Hot to kale SHEET: 1 of 2 DATE: October 5, 2007 DRAWN 3Y. tcp PROJECT: 01269-17 CHKD 3Y: mjg DRAWING: Well Head Detail.dwg DIRECTORY. H \.0126911P,Utillties\Water\wells\ GAMBA • A»OCIATM. Spring Valley Ranch P.U.D. Garfield County Colorado GAMBA & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS 970/945-2550 WWW.GAMBAENGINEERINO.COM tO MINTPI rt.. rt[. 114 P.O. BOX !IY auNWOOa •PIIIMCP. CO 111001 EEEEW of Well Casing (min.) 2" (typ.) I■,■■Iil■■■ ■EWA ■r■ ■■■r jai■■ EEMENIEE ■■■■1t1■■■ ME ill lin t t o n c c -. a* to 0 0 cn — N C� 0 v°, 0 o 0- a 0_Cr. ID -i CO . 1 O A o 1J1 --0 N ^ 0 3 3P D C-) 0 7 0 1 c a 0 3 Spring Valley Ranch Typical Well Head Details SCALE: Hot to kale SHEET: 1 of 2 DATE: October 5, 2007 DRAWN 3Y. tcp PROJECT: 01269-17 CHKD 3Y: mjg DRAWING: Well Head Detail.dwg DIRECTORY. H \.0126911P,Utillties\Water\wells\ GAMBA • A»OCIATM. Spring Valley Ranch P.U.D. Garfield County Colorado GAMBA & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS 970/945-2550 WWW.GAMBAENGINEERINO.COM tO MINTPI rt.. rt[. 114 P.O. BOX !IY auNWOOa •PIIIMCP. CO 111001 a• SECTION VIEW - WELL HEAD CONCRETI a U) N Z 0 3 ooO c I _ Isom I r) n ' 0 0 7 7 vJnfl �0 CD o fp m 0 N (1) ; 0 a N o y+ a O (D CD 0 O� -,,17 0 'o N. 0. O 3 0 n (003 op N 5'; O 0 O N 0 703 0. - O c 3 7 (D N 7 0 0 o I CD m 0 7 C 3o.a_ > 7 5 W 3ac c 3 casco A a o �0 0 0 • 1 o��Y ' co z 0 3 mc 3 c) 0 0 - =o O O CD o 0 o „a),a0 O 7 punoJO 6uI}sp(3 (0 0 co -rz- 0 o 3 D 0 =3 n 5' o• N to = ^3 c -0 7 Q an (nm C n 0- 7 rn cD 7 rt N t0 to 0 7 3 0) c a 0 0 0 to 7 N 0 0 n' o n O n 0 a *107.1n3—'1 0 N O�. O 3 N n _ S -- m c = a 0 co co 3 N • • O O<5.o LO -0 R 0- 0 0 - 0 a0 I 0 0 0• O -o < 3(D3 0 do3 6u!so3 IIaM • Spring Valley Ranch Typical Well Head Details SCALE: Not to Scale DATE: October 5, 2007 DRAWN BY: hp SHEET: Spring Valley Rand, P.U.D. PROJECT: 01269-17 CHKD BY: 519 DRAWING: Well Head Detail.dwg DIRECTORY: H:\0126911T.Utilities\Water\wells\ GAMBA • ASSOCIATES Spring Valley Ranch P.U.D. Garfield County Colorado GAMBA & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS A LAND SURVEYORS 970/945-2550 WWW.GAMBAENGINEERING.COM 113 MIST'S rt.. Rt. 11A P.C. •03 145* OIZMWOOD SPRINGS. CO 111110* • • • SPRING VALLEY RANCH PROJECT GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO 100 -yr. Flood Plain at Wells October 15, 2007 PREPARED FOR: Spring Valley Holding, LLC. 4000 County Road 115 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 PREPARED BY: Gamba & Associates, Inc. Consulting Engineers and Land Surveyors 113 Ninth Street — Suite 214 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone: (970) 945-2550 Fax: (970) 945-1410 ,%%r .. '1/ � • w T. Carter'fra ' ,, ." 5161 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION AND LOCATION 3 •WELL LOCATIONS AND PERMITS 3 TRIBUTARY DRAINAGE AREAS 3 100 -YEAR FLOOD DEPTHS 4 CONCLUSION 4 • • Spring Valley Ranch PUD — 100 -Yr. Rood at Wells ASR 13 and ASR 14 October 15, 2007 Page 2of4 INTRODUCTION AND LOCATION This report was prepared to meet the requirements of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution, the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations, and the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan, and the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Water Quality Control Division in regards to the potential for damage from the 100 -year Flood at either of the two Potable Water Wells (ASR 13 & ASR 14) for the Spring Valley Ranch P.U.D., Phase 1. WELL LOCATIONS AND PERMITS The existing wells ASR 13 and ASR 14, are located on the middle bench of the property, at the base of a slope east of the hayfields, as shown on the water system plans. Well ASR 13 is located at 39°31' 2.86" North latitude, and 107°13' 13.70" West longitude, or approximately 2,240 -feet from the south section line of Section 21, and approximately 574 -feet from the east section line of the same Section 21, in Township 6 South, Range 88 West, sixth Principal Meridian. This location is within 156 -feet of the permitted location. The well has a final permit number of 66298-F. Please refer to the documents in Appendix A, attached. Well ASR 14 is located at 39°30' 51.84" North latitude, and 107°12' 57.86" West longitude, or approximately 1,138 -feet from the south section line of Section 22, and approximately 677 -feet from the west section line of the same Section 22, in Township 6 •South, Range 88 West, sixth Principal Meridian. This location is within 14 -feet of the permitted location. The well has a final permit number of 66299-F. Please refer to the documents in Appendix A, attached. TRIBUTARY DRAINAGE AREAS The attached sheet 1 of 2, in Appendix B, shows the area tributary to Well ASR 13, in the pre -developed condition. Once construction proceeds beyond Phase 1, there will be a paved road and ditches up-slope from the Well ASR 13 site. The road and ditches will intercept much of the flow from the northeast, and redirect it away from the well site. The final design of the drainage for this subsequent phase is not yet done, however, the design parameters and controls dictate that no culvert or other diversion structure will direct a greater flow towards the ASR 13 well site than exists in the pre -development condition. Therefore, our analysis, based on the pre -developed condition is the worst- case condition for overland flows tributary to the ASR 13 well site. The area tributary to Well ASR 13, as shown on sheet 1 of 2, (Appendix B) totals 31.12 - Acres, more or Tess. This area is within the larger pre -developed area identified in the drainage report as drainage area "A". The overall drainage area in "A" is 1,623.013 - Acres, plus or minus, and the 100 -year flood event for the entire drainage is 165.32 - cubic feet per second. There is nothing topographically to suggest that the area tributary to ASR 13 receives anything extraordinary in terms of flow, relative to the overall • Spring Valley Ranch PUD - 100 -Yr. Flood at Wells ASR 13 and ASR 14 October 15, 2007 Page 3 of 4 drainage area "A". Therefore, we have used a proportional area to estimate the total flow tributary to well, as follows: . Area tributary to Well ASR 13 (Total 100 -year Flood' = 31.12 -Ac. (165.32-cfs) = 3.17-cfs. Total Drainage Basin "A" 1623 -Ac. • • The area tributary to Well ASR 14, as shown on sheet 2 of 2, (Appendix B) totals 17.44 - Acres, more or less. Well ASR 14 is also within the larger pre -developed basin "A" as Well ASR 13, therefore the same area -to -flow ratio is used to evaluate the likely 100 -yr. flood, as follows: Area tributary to Well ASR 14 (Total 100 -year Floodl = 17.44 -Ac. (165.32-cfsl = 1.77-cfs. Total Drainage Basin "A" 1623 -Ac. 100 -YEAR FLOOD DEPTHS In order to be extra cautious in our evaluation of the risk of flood impact to the Well ASR 13, we have magnified the potential maximum flood by a factor of approximately ten, to 30-cfs. We evaluated the site of Well ASR 13 for natural ground slope, and the potential width of the flow, based on apparent topographic features. Using FlowMaster software, and solving for Channel Depth, we input values for a trapezoidal channel having an approximate channel width of 22 -feet, and fairly flat side slopes, 3:1 (Hz.:Vt.). The natural ground slope at the site is approximately 12.5% or 0.125 ft./ft. The value derived from this exercise (using nearly ten times the calculated flow for the tributary area) is a channel depth of 0.27 -ft. or 31/4 -inches. Since the construction requirements for potable water wells require a minimum of 1 -foot of well casing above natural ground, we can state with confidence that the risk of flood damage to the Well ASR 13 is virtually non- existent. As with our evaluation of Well ASR 13, we have magnified the potential maximum flood by a factor of approximately ten, to 20-cfs. We evaluated the site of Well ASR 14 for natural ground slope, and the potential width of the flow, based on apparent topographic features. Again using FlowMaster software, and solving for Channel Depth, we input values for a trapezoidal channel having an approximate channel width of 22 - feet, and fairly flat side slopes, 3:1 (Hz.:Vt.). The natural ground slope at the site is approximately 16.53% or 0.1653 ft./ft. The value derived from this exercise (using nearly ten times the calculated flow for the tributary area) is a channel depth of 0.20 -ft. or a little over 2 -3/8 -inches. Since the construction requirements for potable water wells require a minimum of 1 -foot of well casing above natural ground, we can state with confidence that the risk of flood damage to the Well ASR 14 is virtually non-existent. CONCLUSION There is virtually no risk of either Well ASR 13 or Well ASR 14 being impacted by the 100 -year event at this site. Spring Valley Ranch PUD — 100 -Yr. Flood at Wells ASR 13 and ASR 14 October 15, 2007 Page 4 of 4 T .a, oo GRAPHIC SCALE IN PET \ • NCH • 0.) FEET utary to Well\ ASR 13: 31.12 Acres Slope: 1,2.5%± •\.Q-100 = 3.23-cfs ]l: (GAMBA 3) ASR 13 Well ASR 13 Tributary Area LE: As Shown DATE: October 5, 2007 DRAWN BY: TCP SHEET: 1 of 2 PROJECT 01269.17 CHKD BY. AUG DRAWING: AUWEUS BASEMAP with Lob 20060427 and proposed wells 20070831.dwg DIRECTORY: H:101269U71UtiIifeslWator1we lsl GAMBA • ASSOCIATES Spring Valley Ranch P.U.D. 100 -year Flood GAMBA & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS A LAND SURVEYORS 970/94S-2SSO WWW.GAMDAENGINEERING.COM 111 NINTH /T.. RE. Pt4 P.O. 505 1.441e OLENW000 PP*I NOP. CO 51002 Storwater Flow Past Well-ASR1 3 Worksheet for Trapezoidal Channel Project Description Project File Worksheet Flow Element Method Solve For h:101269 \ 17 \u ti l i t-1 \water\we I I s\p roj e ct3 . fm 2 channel past Well ASR13 Trapezoidal Channel Manning's Formula Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coefficient Channel Slope Left Side Slope Right Side Slope Bottom Width Discharge 0.045 0.125000 ft/ft 3.000000 H : V 3.000000 H : V 22.00 ft 30.00 cfs Results Depth Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Top Width • Critical Depth Critical Slope Velocity Velocity Head Specific Energy Froude Number Flow is supercritical. • 0.27 ft 6.25 ft2 23.73 ft 23.64 ft 0.38 ft 0.041681 ft/ft 4.80 ft/s 0.36 ft 0.63 ft 1.64 10/16/07 03:46:53 PM FlowMaster v5.15 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 7 • • • PWSID (For Department Use) 100 -YEAR FLOOD PLAIN CERTIFICATION This Statement must accompany all Applications for Approval to Construct New Waterworks submitted to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. PROJECT TITLE Spring Valley Ranch P.U.D. County Garfield CONSULTANT Gamba & Associates, Inc. 113 9th Street. Glenwood Springs,CO 81601 STATEMENT I hereby certify that a Professional Engineering judgment has been made after evaluating all available flood plain data from the Colorado Water Conservation Board, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Housing and Urban Development, County Government, local flood districts, etc, regarding a potential 100 -year flood threat to the Domestic Potable Water Well 9.S4/ Permit No. Well or treatment plant for Landis Creek Metropolitan District Name of entity or district, etc. In my opinion, these waterworks, as located and designed, are not subject to flood damage by a 100 -year event, based on the information enclosed from the FEMA FTRM Map Co ieity Pa If]l (1071-1443( & attarhPrl 1etrpr G� Signature !l Title Professional Engineer A Professional Engineers' Stamp must be included jot' 1'i eity Water System's. Affix stamp below. ,;�tiO0v. 0 -TER Date October 5, 2007 Date '*i 35161 a 1-- ,`:' \'',11 %II.' Last Revised 6/04 r • • 10 MIOX lreatment 13uildUry 2" NPf Caldutt Port Cacrete Well Seal 4" MAA55 Pitless Adapter ( Madel JI014-40, OAP) Van 5tcne Style Range C fwo-Piece, 4" P,pt) 6" Cl 52 PIP. (MJ x MJ)Thk 6" MPGAPLAIV Restrained Flaw Adapter / 6' x 4" Reducer VIeLL # A5P 13 (aamba 3) A5R 14 (Gamba 4) PMI # 66298-P 66299-P PPRM111PAr 09/ 25/ 07 09/ 25/ 07 PINTS 1& APP 7,767' 7710' ANNLLAR 5eAl 7673' 7,664' 51A11C WArrR 7,627' 7,576' PUMP 5c1f1Na 7,620' 7,580' 51-0(1PIP CASING 7617' 7,570' CA51NG510P 7,55' 7,550' 130110M 7567' 7530' PUMP; MOM GOLLP GOILPP 51a SCLC SCLC 112 20 20 • 5aiitay Well5eal 1' (min,) 7,5' C min,) C0va) •/ ':nlsh (;r -:de Anrvlar Seal Gould Submersible Pump s5tatic Water Pump Setting Slotted Casing Casi g Stop Gotta^ • Well Details ALE. Not to Scale DATE: October 5, 2007 DRAWN BY: tcp SHEET: 1 of 1 PROJECT: 01269.17 CHKD B": nig DRAWING PumpSto2.dwg DIRECTORY: H:\01269\1 71UtilitieslWeterlwellsl GAMBA • ASSOCIATIS Spring Valley Ranch P.U.D. Phase 1 GAMBA & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS 970/945-2530 WWW.GAMBAENGINEERING.COM 113 NINTH 6T., STS. 214 P.O. SOX 1460 OLSNWOOD SPRINGS. CO 131802 z PLAN VIEW - WELL I IEAD CONCRETE I'AD DETAILS u). d03 6u!s03 IIaM 3 N -p 5. O Spring Valley Ranch Typical Well Head Details Not to Solo SHEET: 1 of 2 DATE: October 5, 2007 DRAWN BY: tOp PROJECT: 01269-17 GHQ 5": 019 JRAWING: Well Head Deloil.dwg ")16.ECTORY: H:91269 11 71UtIlitleslWo erlwells1 GAMBA • A3AOCIATo. Spring Valley Ranch P.U.D. Garfield County Colorado GAMBA & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 8 LAND SURVEYORS 970/945-2550 WWW.GAMBAENGINEERING.COM 13 MIMTPI R.. RI. RIP P.O. PDX SPAM OLIMW000 APRIMOe, CO •100• ERNIE ■\\►\Iii■I/■ �� awns r(-) �� E 0 N E ((A ,0° -i' 5. ._- tt�Qttttt I ARE O ..ailMEEEE ME■ Ell ■DE ■■ra■111■ III ■ i t N Spring Valley Ranch Typical Well Head Details Not to Solo SHEET: 1 of 2 DATE: October 5, 2007 DRAWN BY: tOp PROJECT: 01269-17 GHQ 5": 019 JRAWING: Well Head Deloil.dwg ")16.ECTORY: H:91269 11 71UtIlitleslWo erlwells1 GAMBA • A3AOCIATo. Spring Valley Ranch P.U.D. Garfield County Colorado GAMBA & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 8 LAND SURVEYORS 970/945-2550 WWW.GAMBAENGINEERING.COM 13 MIMTPI R.. RI. RIP P.O. PDX SPAM OLIMW000 APRIMOe, CO •100• SECTION VIEW - WELL HEAD CONCRETE PAD DETAILS U) N Z o3co0 0 1 - 3. ori rTi o o 3 (D (D O O 0 3 �+S n cD -1 N (D !n S (D cn0 3 0 O 0 r O=(D a O' O CSI o a 000 o f 0 -TJ o o 0. 3 0 - C7 � X03 (D n O) 3 co 0 00 °'O J3 0 o'o • (D cn 0 0 C-:4- „' I < (D0 O 7c 3 0. a _3' 3 Sac C 3(nm ,q a 0 0 0 v • - I co F" Cr_ m • � 0 j. 0 3 0) x Cr) CD(D mm -• 0. CDc> 3 CD 0 N •-•.- C « c 3 Q Fn. cpE" (0: CD f) a Jr: 0 co 10 0 3 o rt c 3 a 0 0 3 -Q =0 • 3 puno.J9 6ui1s!x3 0 (0 1) o' N ? O - 0 O IO N ^ _ 3 o 3 0 N 3 - D 3 N O (0 07 0 0 3' 10 3•ri cn (D 0 v 0 o 0 O 3 O 0. Q. C. (0 - I j• 0 g 03 -,T 0 0 0 3 0 5 0 c = o iDa�3a . o 5.9 ° < o 1n pova CD 0 - 000- I o -0 O0 ' O '< -8 - 0 0 3"3 o do3 bu!so3 IIaM Spring Valley Ranch • Typical Well Head Details SCALE: Not to Scale DATE: October 5, 2007 DRAWN 8Y: hp SHEET Spring Volley Ranch P.U.O. PROJECT: 01269.17 CHKO 9Y. mig DRAWING: Well Head Oetail.dwg DIRECTORY: H:1011691171UHIities\WateAwellsl GAMBA • ABSOCIATI Spring Valley Ranch P.U.D. Garfield County Colorado GAMBA & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS 970/945-2350 WWW.GAMBAENGINEERING.COM 113 NINTH 111... DR. 114 P.O. BOX 1414 * INWOOD 111RINO/. C011401 • • • SPRING VALLEY RANCH PROJECT GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO 100 -yr. Flood Plain at Wells October 15, 2007 PREPARED FOR: Spring Valley Holding, LLC. 4000 County Road 115 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 PREPARED BY: Gamba & Associates, Inc. Consulting Engineers and Land Surveyors 113 Ninth Street — Suite 214 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Phone: (970) 945-2550 Fax: (970) 945-1410 ,,,,„1,,,;,, •`° 07-'1 1y f • • T. Carter a iep iE'. 35161 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION AND LOCATION 3 • WELL LOCATIONS AND PERMITS 3 TRIBUTARY DRAINAGE AREAS 3 100 -YEAR FLOOD DEPTHS 4 CONCLUSION 4 • • Spring Valley Ranch PUD — 100 -Yr. Flood at Wells ASR 13 and ASR 14 October 15, 2007 Page 2of4 • INTRODUCTION AND LOCATION This report was prepared to meet the requirements of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution, the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations, and the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan, and the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Water Quality Control Division in regards to the potential for damage from the 100 -year Flood at either of the two Potable Water Wells (ASR 13 & ASR 14) for the Spring Valley Ranch P.U.D., Phase 1. WELL LOCATIONS AND PERMITS The existing wells ASR 13 and ASR 14, are located on the middle bench of the property, at the base of a slope east of the hayfields, as shown on the water system plans. Well ASR 13 is located at 39°31' 2.86" North latitude, and 107°13' 13.70" West longitude, or approximately 2,240 -feet from the south section line of Section 21, and approximately 574 -feet from the east section line of the same Section 21, in Township 6 South, Range 88 West, sixth Principal Meridian. This location is within 156 -feet of the permitted location. The well has a final permit number of 66298-F. Please refer to the documents in Appendix A, attached. Well ASR 14 is located at 39°30' 51.84" North latitude, and 107°12' 57.86" West longitude, or approximately 1,138 -feet from the south section line of Section 22, and approximately 677 -feet from the west section line of the same Section 22, in Township 6 •South, Range 88 West, sixth Principal Meridian. This location is within 14 -feet of the permitted location. The well has a final permit number of 66299-F. Please refer to the documents in Appendix A, attached. TRIBUTARY DRAINAGE AREAS The attached sheet 1 of 2, in Appendix B, shows the area tributary to Well ASR 13, in the pre -developed condition. Once construction proceeds beyond Phase 1, there will be a paved road and ditches up-slope from the Well ASR 13 site. The road and ditches will intercept much of the flow from the northeast, and redirect it away from the well site. The final design of the drainage for this subsequent phase is not yet done, however, the design parameters and controls dictate that no culvert or other diversion structure will direct a greater flow towards the ASR 13 well site than exists in the pre -development condition. Therefore, our analysis, based on the pre -developed condition is the worst- case condition for overland flows tributary to the ASR 13 well site. The area tributary to Well ASR 13, as shown on sheet 1 of 2, (Appendix B) totals 31.12 - Acres, more or less. This area is within the larger pre -developed area identified in the drainage report as drainage area "A". The overall drainage area in "A" is 1,623.013 - Acres, plus or minus, and the 100 -year flood event for the entire drainage is 165.32 - cubic feet per second. There is nothing topographically to suggest that the area tributary to ASR 13 receives anything extraordinary in terms of flow, relative to the overall Spring Valley Ranch PUD — 100 -Yr. Flood at Wells ASR 13 and ASR 14 October 15, 2007 Page 3of4 drainage area "A". Therefore, we have used a proportional area to estimate the total flow tributary to well, as follows: lb Area tributary to Well ASR 13 (Total 100 -year Flood) = 31.12 -Ac. (165.32-cfs) = 3.17-cfs. Total Drainage Basin "A" 1623 -Ac. • The area tributary to Well ASR 14, as shown on sheet 2 of 2, (Appendix B) totals 17.44 - Acres, more or less. Well ASR 14 is also within the larger pre -developed basin "A" as Well ASR 13, therefore the same area -to -flow ratio is used to evaluate the likely 100 -yr. flood, as follows: Area tributary to Well ASR 14 (Total 100 -year Flood) = 17.44 -Ac. (165.32-cfs) = 1.77-cfs. Total Drainage Basin "A" 1623 -Ac. 100 -YEAR FLOOD DEPTHS In order to be extra cautious in our evaluation of the risk of flood impact to the Well ASR 13, we have magnified the potential maximum flood by a factor of approximately ten, to 30-cfs. We evaluated the site of Well ASR 13 for natural ground slope, and the potential width of the flow, based on apparent topographic features. Using FlowMaster software, and solving for Channel Depth, we input values for a trapezoidal channel having an approximate channel width of 22 -feet, and fairly flat side slopes, 3:1 (Hz.:Vt.). The natural ground slope at the site is approximately 12.5% or 0.125 ft./ft. The value derived from this exercise (using nearly ten times the calculated flow for the tributary area) is a channel depth of 0.27 -ft. or 31/4 -inches. Since the construction requirements for potable water wells require a minimum of 1 -foot of well casing above natural ground, we can state with confidence that the risk of flood damage to the Well ASR 13 is virtually non- existent. As with our evaluation of Well ASR 13, we have magnified the potential maximum flood by a factor of approximately ten, to 20-cfs. We evaluated the site of Well ASR 14 for natural ground slope, and the potential width of the flow, based on apparent topographic features. Again using FlowMaster software, and solving for Channel Depth, we input values for a trapezoidal channel having an approximate channel width of 22 - feet, and fairly flat side slopes, 3:1 (Hz.:Vt.). The natural ground slope at the site is approximately 16.53% or 0.1653 ft./ft. The value derived from this exercise (using nearly ten times the calculated flow for the tributary area) is a channel depth of 0.20 -ft. or a little over 2 -3/8 -inches. Since the construction requirements for potable water wells require a minimum of 1 -foot of well casing above natural ground, we can state with confidence that the risk of flood damage to the Well ASR 14 is virtually non-existent. CONCLUSION There is virtually no risk of either Well ASR 13 or Well ASR 14 being impacted by the 100 -year event at this site. • Spring Valley Ranch PUD — 100 -Yr. Flood at Wells ASR 13 and ASR 14 October 15, 2007 Page 4 of 4 • •00 400 600 r GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 1 :NCH • 400 FEET (GAMIA 4 ASR 14 Area Tributary to Well ASR 14: 17.44 Acres Slope.. 16.5%± Q-100 = 1.81—cfs •LE: As Shown Well ASR 14 Tributary Area DATE: October 5, 2007 DRAWN BY: TCP SHEET: 2 of 2 PROJECT: 01269-17 CHKO 3Y: AUG DRAWING: ALLWELLS BASEMAP with Lots 20060427 and proposed wells 20070331.dwg DIRECTORY: HA012691171Ufilities\Wa erlwelisl GAMBA S ASSOCIATES Spring Valley Ranch P.U.D. 100 -year Flood GAMBA & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS 97O/94S-23SO WWW.GAMBAENGINEERING.COM 113 NINTH AT.. STE. 314 I.O, 102 14EE GLENWOOD E►RINOS. CO 11110E Storwater Flow Past Well-ASR14 Worksheet for Trapezoidal Channel Project Description Project File Worksheet Flow Element Method Solve For h:\01269\17\utilit-1 \water\wells\project3.fm2 channel past Well ASR14 Trapezoidal Channel Manning's Formula Channel Depth Input Data Mannings Coefficient Channel Slope Left Side Slope Right Side Slope Bottom Width Discharge 0.045 0.165300 ft/ft 3.000000 H : V 3.000000 H : V 22.00 ft 20.00 cfs Results Depth Flow Area Wetted Perimeter Top Width 111 Critical Depth Critical Slope Velocity Velocity Head Specific Energy Froude Number Flow is supercritical. • 0.20 ft 4.47 ft' 23.25 ft 23.19 ft 0.29 ft 0.045324 ft/ft 4.47 ft/s 0.31 ft 0.51 ft 1.80 10/16/07 03:47:10 PM FlowMaster v5.15 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Colorado Defxart hent or Public Health and En imnmmnt Water Quality Control Division Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) Inventory Form This form is used to collect the information necessary to maintain an accurate database, and to ensure that the monitoring schedules for the public water system are established correctly. PWSID Number (For new systems, the PWSID will be assigned by the WQCD/CADM Unit): COO Reason for Inventory Update Request (select one) Igf Proposed System or ❑ Existing System not in Inventory or ❑ Changes to System Information For Existing Systems: All items on pages one (1) and two (2) must be completed or form will be returned. If updating information on an existing system, complete only those fields that have changed. For Proposed Systems, please provide all available information. Existing System: Changes Include (please check all appropriate boxes): /✓GT 4 ' /Cf}BL' O System Name ❑ System Mailing Address ❑ System Physical Address ❑ System Phone/Fax 0 Admin Contact Info D Owner Contact Info. ❑ System Population ❑ Sources ❑ Treatment ❑ Sampling Point ❑ Activation ❑ Inactivation ❑ Other Reason for Chanqe(s): //Or /4M-le,4253-I System Name: 4-YD/5 / EG/a/r/i4/ /.57-/c7 County: System Mailing Address: 7? 9 362, //sCity: 4'LZ4tO C,,c State: CO Zip: ?We -7/4 (P.O. Box a mailStop) System Physical Address: 1000 67. , lac City:1 6- State: CO Zip: cfW/ to) 7241-0-W E-mail (if applicable): DO I1/@ sc/ /5. A/gr • 4 ystem Phone)%C65'6 Fax: Administrative Contact Name: PaltiL /1/4'4 y /� e• (Administrative Contact: The administrative contact receives mail at the PWS location ansd the prima c n ct person for drinking water program communications.) Admin Contact Mailing Address: "700 /T $//g City: PCU -pe State: CO Zip: 2-0Z —3'5725 - Admin Contact Phone:*)Z?, -3z1) Fax:(13)Z E-mail (if applicable): •DMI @ 1, rt•c.0,U 0 Owner Contact Name•M qgt/46.6e 4 4sl4v5Lc'7 (Legal Owner: The legal owner is an individual, corporation, partnership, Owner Mailing Address: 700 /--7 S (P.O. Box a Mail Sto association, state political subdivision thereof, municipality, or other legal entity.) • �t i Pilr�f State: co Zip: 202 —3 Owner Phone(33)z 'C3ZP Fax303 E-mail:34/.0 /(46-&AC� 4 ea' • System Population Types & Operating Periods - Please identify if the population is current or proposed & if proposed, please include the effective date. Population Maximum Number of Persons Served Types (See Page 3) Resident per Day Are these year-round populations? If No, please include months of service Non - Resident L C�4)6/t sE / -Visitofs L IGS 1 �• G —SEPI" 1 YES Number of service connections (i.e., buildings) used by each population type S � 3 2 • Wheiesafe.,L,(472 O 5 L WQCD SDWIS Inventory Change Form - V3, Jan 2006 - 1 - L 2 • For Dept. Use Only: Entered By: Date: System Source(s) Details Please include system flow diagram, detailing all sources, treatment and storage facilities and distribution system with this form. If system has more than four sources. please attach additional sheets. IPState Assigned Source ID Code For Dept. Use Only Source Name (As used by system) Water GW' GUI SW Seasonality Ground Water Sources Only Purchased (Yes or No) Seller's PWSID or Name (If applicable) Source Latitude Source Longitude P - Year Rnd S - Seasonal O - Other E - Emer. I - Interim A uifer q Name Well Depth (In Ft.) First Draw (In Ft.) TB4-r ,P 5 (/)ELL i-sg 13 Gini P r&Arg PS IS6 ISD No N71i- ,31°31Z" 013'13 wit -t- �' Se I(1- quJ P zoo 1 /1I0 AO- , 1°3051 I GT°1-Z 5 GW - Ground Water; GUI - Ground Water Under Influence of Surface Water; SW - Surface Water System Treatment Details State Assigned Treatment Plant ID For Department Use Only fikStorage Details Please include plant schematic with this form. If system has more than two treatment plants lease attach additional sheets. • Treatment Plant Name (As used by system) l9Lwv LiJ L tot5t° ((F oCRAgr- Contributing Sources (List all sources feeding each treatment plant) boa u, A -se 13 WeLL Rated Capacity (MGD) Q,OZ2. 9.0 ZZ Treatment Process Codes (List all that Apply - see Page 3) Ur® IMMEI f3 WORM d7P MEM 0 442-3 If system has more than two storage facilities, please attach additional sheets. CD C R J 317 31 3q° 30' " c c2 'a t1 c 0 —J 10 i3' State Assigned ID For Department Use Onl Storage Facility Name Contributing Sources (List all sources and/or plants that feed each storage facility) Storage Location (EP or DS) Volume of Storage Facility (in gallons) Storage Latitude Storage Longitude EP — Entry Point; DS — Distribution System Sampling Point Details If system has more than four sampling points, please attach additional sheets. Sample Point ID (As used by system) Sample Type (Raw, Treated, EP, CFE. IFE, DS) Contaminant(s) (List all parameters measured at this sampling point) Sample Location (please indicate sampling point location on system flow diagram and include Longitude and Latitude if possible) ,4-5473 -'Z E i COO 6io��r k 31 ° 3/1/.°A/; /D7 ° /3' /3 'vy /4,5-,e / -- �? 'C,4 &LOO- /Csl-G 3y° 30' --01/A/ j /97° lZ f 5-2-''W JT/I'c7 �/ Z TB4-r ,P 5 d c, 0 6/eXa tc4 -(eh. 37° Z7' 59 "N 1 to?'° /Of 35-4'W Sysl- l /11fi r&Arg PS ii/caa/ 4-/ (74 39° Z 912-61N ; /ice / / zew EP — Entry Point; CFE — Combined DS — Distribution system Person Completing Form: Please return pages 1 & 2 to: Filter Effluent; IFE — Individual Filter Effluent; ‘'ptrR�Ey%,'`, p Sl' Nss • Fy lJtwe •SPF C ER ,o'•' Colorado Dept. of Public Health & Environmirit, _ WQCD-CADM-B2 Drirking Water Data na:y=• ' . g 4300 Cherry Creek Drive South For C e Only: Denver, CO 80246-1530 Fax: 303-758-1398 . .... •ehy °/: Date: o ''„r'rrro. ti Date: !0/ WQCD SDWIS Inventory Change Form — V3, Jan 2006 - 2 - D7- • fo MIOX freatment Adding 2" NPf Ccndutt Pat Cci rete Well Seal 4" MAA55 Pitless Adapter ( Model JI014-40, 0AP) Van 5tcne 5tgle Plage ( fwo-Piece, 4" Pipt) 6" 0 52 0,1.P. (MJ x MJ) —k 6" MECA,9 AN tRestrained Flame Plame Adapter / 6' x 4" keducer Vat # A., 13 (Gamba 3) ASP 14 (Gamba 4) P.6PM1f # 66298-F 66299-P PPIf 17A1P 09/25/07 09/25/07 FINISH ave 7,767' 7,710' ANNLLARSAL 7,673' 7,664' SfAfIC WAV 7,627' 7,576' PUIMPSCffWG 7,620' 7,580' SLOrr P CASING 7,617' 7,570' CA5ING 5f0P 7,581' 7550' 130flVM 7,567' 7,550' PUMP: MOM 01L10 GO1LP 51ZP SCLC SCLC MP 20 20 5anitay Well Seal 1' (min.) . •::•. i Finish Grade 7.5' (min,) cove? �� I WI Anular Seal add Submersible Pump s5tatic Water Pump 5ettinq Slotted Casing Casing Stop l3ottcm OE: Not to Scale Well Details DATE: October 5, 2007 DRAWN BY: $cp Ioi1 PROJECT: 01269.17 CHKD BY: mlg .D.RAWING: PumpSto2.dwg DIRECTORY: 14:101269\17PAdlities\Vloter\wells\ GAMBA • ASSOCIPTCS Spring Valley Ranch P.U.D. Phase 1 GAMBA & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS at LAND SURVEYORS 970/945-2550 WWW.GAMBAENGI NEERING.COM 113 NINTX ST.. GM. Ma P.O. SO% 1a5S OL%NW000 SPRINGS, CO Y1a02 Google Earth - Edit Placemark Name: Well ASR 13 (Gamba #3) • Latitude: 39°31'2.86"N Longitude: 107'13'13.70'W Description Style, Color View Altitude Description: MONITORING Permit # MH -35174 FINAL Permit Division 5, WD 38, Number 66298 - F (09025107) Collar at 7,767' Elevation Plain Casing: 7" Steel from 7,766' to 7,637' Elevation (-1-ft. to 94 -ft.) 5.5" Steel from 7,685' to 7,617' Elevation (82 -ft. to 150 -ft.) 5.5" Steel from 7,531' to 7,567' Elevation (186 -ft. to 200 -ft.) Screened Casing 5.5" Perforated from 7,617' to 7,581' Elevation (150 -ft. to 186 -ft.) OK Cancel • • z • PLAN VIEW - WELL I-IEAD CONCRETE PAD DETAILS rn �.x � • g N -. a o - n N 3 (D CD LO 0 o C c5' rl 0. a• * on NCD r =• 1J fD n 127 3v 0 n n a D o = �'p Qc LO -3 -< CD r. c) 0 I N 5' Ifl do3 6wso3 IIaM -3 N 7' �■11 N I 0 ,■ ■I I■■I■ ME III■/I■ SWIM ■■r rM ■■ ENOTANIMI ■■I■11N■h -=‘' CD C) (1) r c 0 3 c° Spring Valley Ranch • Typical Well Head Details SCALE: Not to kale DATE: October 5, 2007 DRAWN 3Y: tcp SHEET: 1 of 2 PROJECT: 01269-17 CHKD BY: mfg DRAWING: Well Head Detatl.dw9 DIRECTORY: H:101269\17\Utilities\Wa •dwells\ GAMBA • ASSOCIATES Spring Valley Ranch P.U.D. Garfield County Colorado GAMBA & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS 970/945-2550 WWW.GAMBAENGINEERING.COM IIS MATE ST.. MTS. 214 P.O. SOX IAM •LEMW0012 SPMIM02. CO 21.02 SECTION VIEW - WELL I -LEAD CONCRETE PAD DETAILS 10 NN) Z oo 3 co 0 o I n 0 0 8 f'1 0 N C) () S re. CD O fD (D 0 • p 7 • O p - CD .0 tS In O o- 0 0 0 0 m = a• CL ( • pa CD 0 CD - o� 0 0 .- � 0 T. O_ 3 0 (-1;- g N C) 0 5• O O O g 03 o_ - 0 O Q 3 fD 0 O 0 p co O 7 c 3 0. 5' 5 N. 3 ac c 3 cn rn ,y 0 0 0 ▪ CO a c o �• C 3 3 D (A — 0 0. 0 n 0 O • 0- • c. ()3 — 000.03. In " -3 s 0 c = cD 03 NJ to • -00_a O 0 - OT o O 1 0 O In op <. 0 o_ 0 0 3 ° doo 6U!SDD IIaM Spring Valley Ranch Typical Well Head Details DATE: October 5, 2007 :CAI_. Not to Sale >HEET: Spring Volley Rands P.U.D. DRAWING: Well Head DetaiLdwg DIRECTORY: H:1012691171UHIities\Waterlwells1 DRAWN EY: kp PROJEC : 01269.17 CHKD 0? mIg GAMBA • wesociAT[1 Spring Valley Ranch P.U.D. Garfield County Colorado GAMBA & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS 970/945-2550 WWW.GAMBAENGIN2ERING.COM 111 NINTH ST., R1. 114 P.O. SOY 1.414 OLINl•000 SPRINGS, CO PI OOP Company: Spring Valley Ranch Name: Well ASR 13 (Gamba 3) Date: 10/12/2007 Pum . Data Sheet — GOULDS Well Permit # 66298 (09/25/07) 39 -deg. 31' 2" North Latitude 107 -deg. 13' 13" West Longitude Size: 5CLC Type: SUB Speed: 3450 rpm Synch speed: 3600 rpm Line: 12 Stages, 20 HP Curve: Goulds 5CLC Impeller: Specific Speeds: Ns: — Nss: — Dimensions: Suction: — Discharge: 4 in Pump Limits: Temperature: 110 °F Pressure: 450 psi g Sphere size: — — Data Point — Flow: 100 US gpm Head: 597 ft Eff: 72% Power. 20.5 hp NPSHr: — Design Curve — Shutoff head: Shutoff dP: Min flow: 740 ft 320 psi 50 US gpm 74% @ 114 US gpm r 22.5 hp © 163 US gpm — Max Curve — Max power: 31.8 hp @ 163 US gpm • Power: 33 hp Eye area: — 1000 800 600 400 17 Stages, 30 HP 12 Stages, 20 HP Search Criteria: Flow: 100 US gpm '�`� Powered By VL 1PUMP-FLO� Head: 457 ft Fluid: Water Temperature: 60 °F SG: 1 Vapor pressure: 0.2563 psi a Viscosity 1.105 cP Atm pressure: 14.16 psi a NPSHa: — Motor: Consult GOULDS to select a motor for this pump. 74 200 3 Stages, 5 HP 0 1.5 1 V) 0.5 a z 0 40 G. 20 0 0 a 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 US gpm Open suction pump. Performance Evaluation: Flow Speed Head Efficiency Power NPSHr US gpm rpm ft % hp ft 120 3450 549 74 22.3 — 100 3450 597 72 20.5 — 80 3450 634 70 18.1 — 60 3450 659 62 16.1 — 40 3450 — — — 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 %- Efficiency Selected from catalog: goulds g1.60 Vers: 2 For^n No J t4a!,i mm-Loio U:`! or 'water ds5.uraS OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER GWS -25 COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 81a Centennial Bldg., 1313 Sharman Jt., Cenver, Cc,cr3cc 30203 (303) gee -33a1 • APPLICANT T-837 P 0:4/0:- EXST • WELL PERMIT NUMBER 66298 - F DIV. 5 WD 38 DES. BASIN MD SPRING VALLEY HOLDINGS LLC 1 CALIFONIA STREET 22ND FLOOR SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111- (415) 588-9500 oCcenrr Tr % I ICF aN FYISTINr; WFI 1 APPROVED WELL LOCATION GARFIELD COUNTY NE 1/4 SE 1/4 Section 21 Township 6 S Range 88 W Sixth P.M. DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES 2105 Ft. from Scuth Section Line 500 Ft. from East Section Line UTM COORDINATES (Meters.Zone:13.NAD831 Easting: Northing: i ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1) This well shall be used In such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of this permit does not ensure that no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civil court action. 2) The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water Well Construction Rules 2 CCR 402-2, unless approval of a variance has been granted by the State Board of Examiners o1 Water Well Construction and Pump Installation Contractors in accordance with Rule 18. 3) Approved pursuant to CRS 37-9C-137(2) and Case no. 96CW258 on the condition that this well is operated in accordance with the Augmentation Plan approved by the Division 5 Water Court in case no. 98CW254 and pursuant to Case no. 98CW255 as an alternate point of diversion to the Basalt Conduit . If this well is not operated in accordance with the terms of said decrees, it will be subject to administration including orders to cease diverting water. The use of ground water from this well is limited to domestic including inside single family dwellings, commercial, irrigaiton of lawns and garden, shrubs, trees and goif course and open space and fire protection associated with the Spring Valley Ranch water supply system. A detailed description of the uses intended for the water withdrawn from the subject wells is described in detail in the decree in Case no. 98CW254. The well is to be known as A'SR>13. 5) The pumping rate of this well shall not exceed 1C0 GPM. 6) The average annual amount of ground water to be appropriated shall not exceed 50 acre-feet. The total annual diversions for this well and ali other structures listed in paragraph 5 of Cass no. 98CW254 are limited such that the total estimated annual consumptive use resulting from the diversions from said structures must not exceed 974 acre-feet. 7) The owner shall mark the well in a conspicuous place with well permit number(s), name of the aquifer, and court case number(s) es appropriate. The owner shall take necessary means and precautions to preserve these markings. 8) A totalizing flew meter must be installed on this well and maintained in good working order. Permanent records of all diversions must be maintained by the well owner (raccrded at least annually) and submitted to the Division Engineer upon request. 9) This well shall be constructed at least 600 feet from any existing well, completed in the same aquifer, that is rot owned by the applicant. 10) This well shall be ccnstructed nct more than 2C0 feet from the location specified cn this permit. 11) This well was crigina!ty instailed as a monitoring hcleAvell with a :gall permit number MH -35174 Page 1 of 2 10 4) r-"/9/e� �7 10 I 1� e•-• For Sta!a�:c.�'. _er Receipt No. 9502537B DATE ISSUED APPROVED By XPIRATION DATE 09-25-2006 ,mm v•r w, 11a:7. fl74UUi L7J 7;J40c01c1y I—d,ir P 0C:/CUT F -Ed Receipt No 95025378 WELL PERMIT NUMBER 66298 -F Page 2 • ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL NOTE: Unless a completed Weil Completion Report (G',VS-31) and Pump 'ns:alla:ion aha Test Report (GWS -32; is received by the Division of Water Resources before the expiratior ,iate shown below, this permit will expire cn the expiration date An exter s;on of the expiration. date may be availab e. Contact DWR for additional information or refer :o the extens;on request form (GWS -E4) available a:: httpa;.w,tiv.v,iter.shite.cc.usipubsiformsig:vs-64.pdf. NOT CE: This permit is not issued for industrial. municipal, construction, livestock, recreation, aesthetic, fish and wildlife uses as these uses were not augmented ane/or rot described ;n water court cases in the above paragraphs. You are hereby notified that you have the -ight to appeal :he issuance of this permit, by 5iirg a written request wit; this office within sixty (60) days of the Cate of issuance. pursuant to the State Adrtir,istrat:ve Procedures Act. (See Section 24-4-104 through 106,�/�1/r,,,7 3 WELL CONSTRUCTION AND TEST REPORT STATE OF COLORADO. OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER WELL PERMIT NUMBER MH -35174 Owner Name(s) : Aspen Spnngs Ranch Mailing Address : % Gamba & Assoc. P.O. Box 1458 City, St. Zip . Glenwood Springs, Co 81602 Phone (970) 945-2550 FCR OFFICE U(Gb ONLY , 3) - 13 APPROVAL $ GWS31-91.03 'ELL LOCATION AS DRILLED: NE 1/4 SE 1/4 Sec21 Twp. 06S Range 88W DISTANCES FROM SEC. LINES: 0 ft. from Sec. lire. and ft. from lac Sec. line. OR SUBDIVISION : LOT BLOCK FILING(UNIT) STREET ADDRESS AT WELL LOCATION : 4 GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION DATE COMPLETED 12/14/98 ft. DRILLING METHOD Air Rotary TOTAL DEPTH 200 ft. DEPTH COMPLETED 200 ft. GEOLOGIC LOG : 6. HOLE DIAM. (in) FROM (R) TO (Rl Depth Type of Material (Size, Color, and Type) 9.0 0 95 000-090 Clays, Voicanics 090-186 Volcanics 6.5 95 200 186-200 Red Clays 7. PLAIN CASING OD (in) 7.0 55 Kind Wall Size 5.5 Steel 0.24 Steel Steel 10.188 0.188 From (R) -1 82 To (R) 94 150 186 200 0 PERF. CASING . Screen Slot Size 5.5 Steel .188 150 186 WATER LOCATED : 150 + REMARKS 8. Filter Pack Material . Size Interval • 9 Packer Placement Type : Depth . 10. GROUTING RECORD : Matavtal Amount Derarty interval Placement cement 3 sks 16 gal 10-30 poured 11. DISINFECTION : Type : HTH Amt. Used 2 oz. 12. WELL TEST DATA ( ] Check Box If Test Data is Submitted On Supplemental Form TESTING METHOD : Air Compressor Static Level 140 ft. Date/Time Measured 12/14/1998 Production Rate Pumping Level : Remarks : 13. Total ft. Date/Time Measured 12/14/1998 Test Lergth . 90 gpm 2 hrs. I tint read gam SYatwretts made 'erten ena Know the consents Toted, and Tat they are ave to my ..mowledge IPt scent to Seceon 24-4-144 413)(e) CRS. the + along d hits* statrrrrts comae -eel pelf! .r aocoed degree and n pix lvde as a cue, t msadameanor.; CONTRACTOR Shelton Drilling Corp. Phone (970 927-4182 bAstling Address P O Box 1059 Butt f'0 8/691 t ,r No 106,5 Name / Title (Please Type or Print) •Wayne Shelton / President Signature Date 12/21/98 • Received from: Customer No. GRA JOHN C. KEPHART & CO. JIACTI 435 NORTH AVENUE N [A] AT • PHONE 242-7618 IES • GRAND JUNCTION, COLORADO 81501 ANALYTICAL REPORT Jerome Gamba °< Assoc. Glenwood Springs, CO 91602 Chris Furman .44 9375 water Laboratory '4o Sample 12/18/99 2/19/99 Date Received Date Reported Lab number 9375 Drinking Limits Sample ID Spring Valley, Raw Well Water for Public Water ASR #3, SVR# 98711-5 Supplies Garfield Cty Nitrite(N) 0.00 mg/1 1 mg/1 Antimony (Sb) 0.000 mg/1 0.006 mg/1 Beryllium(Be) 0.000 mg/1 0.004 mg/1 Cyanide(CN) 0.000 mg/1 0.2 mg/1 •ckel (Ni) 0.000 mg/1 0.1 mg/1 Thallium(T1) 0.000 mg/1 0.00 mg/1 Gross Alpha Gross Beta 2.6 oCi/liter 15 pCi/liter (approximately)* 2.1 pCi/liter 50 pCi/liter *Limit for Adjusted Alpha is 15. Adjusted Alpha is Gross Alpha minus Radon minus Uranium. • Lab Dir.: Brian S. Bauer SPRING VALLEY RANCH PUD WATER RIGHTS AND WATER RESOURCES • • • I. Executive Summary This report summarizes the water supply plan for the Spring Valley Ranch PUD. The water supply will be obtained from existing and proposed wells and springs located on the SVR property, and from surface water under senior decreed irrigation water rights in Landis Creek. This report addresses both legal and physical water supply. Extensive engineering investigations confirm that surface and groundwater resources are physically available for the development, and that well diversions will not have a long term negative impact on the water balance of the Spring Valley aquifer. The water supply for the development is authorized by Water Court decrees approving water rights, changes of water rights and two plans for augmentation. These existing decrees provide a legally adequate water supply for the entire residential development, commercial uses, golf course, and related potable and agricultural open space irrigation, as shown in the project plans. Augmentation water necessary to offset any out -of -priority depletions under the augmentation plans will be provided pursuant to contracts with the Basalt Water Conservancy District. Irrigation of the golf course and agricultural open space will occur under senior water rights, and will be supplemented by groundwater as necessary. II. Physical Water Supply The Spring Valley Ranch PUD will obtain its physical water supply from the following sources: ■ Available surface water supplies will be used to their fullest extent to provide the irrigation supply to the golf course, open space and common areas in order to minimize groundwater withdrawals. The project will divert surface flow from Landis Creek under the project's senior irrigation water rights. Almost all Landis Creek flows have historically been diverted and used on the Spring Valley Ranch property. Wright Water Engineers has documented an average water availability of 600 acre-feet/year from Landis Creek. Exhibit B, p. 4. In dry years and at times of the year when the surface supply is insufficient for full irrigation of the project, wells and springs on the property will be used. • Wells located in lower Spring Valley will withdraw water from the Spring Valley aquifer. There are three high capacity wells that have been completed, that are expected to yield over 250 g.p.m. each. As needed, additional wells described in the project augmentation plans can be drilled and utilized. Exhibit C. • Wells will also be developed in the middle bench area of the project to withdraw water from the Spring Valley aquifer. Several wells above elevation 8000 ft. have been drilled and tested. Pumping tests from these wells indicate a long term cumulative yield of greater than 100 g.p.m. Exhibit D. 2 Engineers have extensively analyzed the adequacy of the physically available water supply to support the development on a long term basis. These analyses have included evaluations of the long term yield of the Spring Valley aquifer, pumping tests of • wells drilled into the aquifer, and the existing and projected demands of the Spring Valley Ranch PUD and other adjacent and nearby properties for water from the aquifer. These investigations conclude that there is more than an adequate supply of water available from both ground and surface water sources to supply the development on a long-term sustainable basis, without adversely affecting the anticipated water requirements of neighboring properties. In March 2000, Jerome Gamba and Associates prepared a hydrogeologic analysis of the Spring Valley aquifer system. Exhibit E. The conclusions in the report are based on analysis of the geologic conditions of the area, calculations of precipitation infiltration, and an estimate of the specific yield of the Spring Valley aquifer. The report concludes that the average annual recharge to the Spring Valley aquifer is approximately 10,000 acre-feet of water per year. The report concludes that water withdrawals from the aquifer will have "little or no effect on the small domestic wells in the supper sediments or the surface discharge down Red Canyon." The Jerome Gamba report was peer reviewed by HRS Water Consultants, Inc. Exhibit F. The peer review report made several conclusions. • An average year annual infiltration of approximately 4,700 acre-feet/year to the aquifers beneath the Spring Valley Ranch PUD is supported by a water budget analysis that includes precipitation, evapotranspiration, soil moisture and the • surface and subsurface materials. • The wet year estimate of precipitation recharge is approximately 7,100 acre- feet/year and the dry year estimate is approximately 1,900 acre-feet/year. • The vertical permeability of the soils and the aquifer materials on the Spring Valley Ranch PUD are sufficiently high to support an annual infiltration rate in excess of 7,100 acre-feet/year. • The volume of groundwater available in storage in the Spring Valley Aquifer for withdrawal by project wells is approximately 82,000 acre-feet. Wright Water Engineers performed investigations in 1984, 1998, and 1999-2000 to determine whether the Spring Valley aquifer underlying the property can satisfy the water requirements of the development on a sustainable basis, without adversely affecting the water available to neighboring properties. This work included projections of future withdrawals of water from the Spring Valley aquifer by other planned development in the area. The work of Wright Water Engineers also included extensive pump testing of the Spring Valley wells and monitoring of neighboring wells. Based on this work, Wright Water Engineers developed a water balance analysis for the Spring Valley aquifer. This analysis concludes that under the existing level of development of the Spring Valley • aquifer, approximately 4,300 acre-feet of water per year flows out of the aquifer to the Roaring Fork River. In comparison, Wright Water Engineers determined that the depletion to the aquifer by the Spring Valley PUD at full build -out, plus future • development by other properties, would be only 800 acre-feet per year. Exhibit B, Table 8. • The Wright Water Engineers water balance analysis was peer reviewed by HRS Water Consultants, Inc. This peer review determined the total future depletions of the Spring Valley aquifer by the Spring Valley Ranch and future anticipated development to be 800 acre-feet per year. The report found that this amount was "far less than the estimated average annual aquifer recharge rate of 5,000 acre-feet/year. This verifies the long-term sustainability of the project's groundwater supply." Exhibit G. Wright Water Engineers has developed a report that updates the water supply analysis with regard to the present plan. This report concludes that "[s]ince the 2007 plan requires less water because the golf course plans were halved, it can be concluded, based on the previous studies, that there is adequate physical water for the 2007 plan." Exhibit H, p. 7. • The following points summarize the physical water supply available to serve the Spring Valley Ranch PUD. ■ An average of 600 acre-feet/year is available from surface flows in Landis Creek to serve golf course, open space and common area irrigation. Available surface water supplies will be used to their fullest extent to provide the irrigation supply to these areas in order to minimize groundwater withdrawals. The Hopkins Reservoir will be available as an emergency surface supply. At times when this supply is inadequate, groundwater from the Spring Valley aquifer will be available. • Physical pumping tests have documented the adequacy of both lower and upper wells to serve the ultimate water demands of the development. • Based on the most conservative hydrogeologic and water balance analysis, engineers have determined that the water available from Landis Creek and the Spring Valley Aquifer is more than adequate to provide for the water demands of the Spring Valley Ranch PUD, and anticipated future developments using the Spring Valley aquifer, on a long-term sustainable basis. III. Groundwater Monitoring Plan Prior to final plat, the Spring Valley PUD will develop a groundwater monitoring plan to monitor future groundwater levels in the Spring Valley Ranch Wells in compliance of conditions 12.0 and 12.01 of Garfield County Commissioner's Resolution 2005-83. The monitoring plan will include water level measurements in the production wells and other wells at the PUD that can be used as monitoring holes. There will be an 4 • • • additional monitoring well developed or identified that is at least 2000 feet from the production wells. The monitoring plan will include measurements made with enough frequency to observe seasonal groundwater fluctuations and long-term groundwater trends. Results of the monitoring program will be made available to the public through the County. IV. Water Quality In 2000, Wright Water Engineers conducted extensive water quality tests on the groundwater pumped from the Spring Valley Aquifer through Spring Valley Well No. 6. The report concludes that the "water from Spring Valley Well No. 6 is excellent and meets the potable water quality standards established by the Colorado Department of Health and Environment for public water supply systems." Exhibit I. V. Legal Water Supply A. Ownership of Water Rights Spring Valley Holdings owns senior water rights for irrigation, and numerous other water rights that will be used to supply both the potable and non -potable water requirements of the project. A copy of the deed by which Spring Valley Holdings acquired these water rights is included in the application materials. Additionally, Spring Valley Holdings holds contract rights with the Basalt Water Conservancy District under two water allotment contracts. These contracts allot a total of 6.0 c.f.s. of direct flow water rights under the Basalt Conduit water right, and a total of 420 acre-feet of storage water in Ruedi and Green Mountain Reservoirs. Copies of these contracts and the assignments of the contracts to Spring Valley Holdings are attached as Exhibit J. A list of the water rights available for water service to the project is shown on Exhibit A. B. Senior Irrigation Rights Spring Valley Holdings owns all of the senior ditch rights on Landis Creek. These rights have historically been used for irrigation on the Spring Valley Ranch, and have diverted all of the available physical supply of water from Landis Creek. These rights include the Kendall and Stricklette Ditch, Forker and Gibson Ditch, Landis Ditch Nos. 1 and 2, O.K. Ditch and Frank Chapman Ditch. Each of these water rights was transferred to a consolidated point of diversion at the Landis Creek Ditch in Case No. 81CW193, Water Division No. 5. Exhibit K. These ditch rights are decreed for a total of 12.0 c.f.s. with priority dates between 1882 and 1885, for the irrigation of 300 acres. 5 • • C. Wells and Springs In addition to the senior water rights to be used for irrigation, Spring Valley Holdings is the owner of some 35 water rights for wells and springs that will be used to provide the water supply for the Spring Valley Ranch PUD. These wells and springs include the following: Hopkins Spring No. 1 Hopkins Spring No. 2 Spring Valley Well No. 1 Spring Valley Ranch Well No. 2-3 SVH Well Nos. 5-10 ASR Well Nos. 13-16 Up to 20 Additional Wells In the decree in Case No. 98CW256, the project was decreed water rights to the wells described above for use in the PUD. Exhibit L. D. Wells and Springs are Alternate Points of Diversion for Basalt Conduit The wells and springs that will serve as the source of water supply for the residential and commercial development of the Spring Valley Ranch have been decreed as alternate points of diversion for the Basalt Conduit water right, under the allotment contracts with the Basalt Water Conservancy District. In Case No. 84CW212, Water Division No. 5, eleven wells and springs were decreed as alternate points of diversion for the Basalt Conduit water right. Exhibit N. In Case No. 98CW255, Water Division No. 5, the Court amended the decree in Case No. 84CW212 to include additional wells as alternate points of diversion for the Basalt Conduit water right. Exhibit 0. These wells are the ASR Well No. 13-16, together with up to 20 Additional Wells that could be developed on the Spring Valley Ranch PUD. These decrees provide that the wells and springs will operate under their own priorities as decreed; under the 1957 priority associated with the Basalt Conduit; and when neither of such priorities are in priority, under the augmentation plans decreed in Case No. 87CW155 and 98CW254, described below. There are no other water rights in the Spring Valley Aquifer with priorities senior to the 1957 priority date of the Basalt Conduit water right. Therefore, with this 1957 priority, the wells and springs serving the development are junior only to water rights located on the Roaring Fork and Colorado Rivers. 6 • • • E. Reservoirs The largest water storage reservoir on the Spring Valley PUD will be the Hopkins Reservoir, located at the upper end of the property. This reservoir has historically been used for irrigation. The Hopkins Dam must be rehabilitated for the reservoir to be fully operational. Once the dam is rehabilitated, the reservoir will be used primarily for aesthetic, wildlife and recreation purposes. It will be used for irrigation only as immediately necessary on an emergency basis. In Case No. 98CW257, Water Division No. 5, the Water Court decreed water storage rights to the ASR Reservoirs 1-3. Exhibit P. These reservoirs will be located to allow for irrigation of the golf course and open space, and as golf course features. Up to 29 acres of surface evaporation from these reservoirs is covered under the augmentation plans described below. F. Augmentation Plans The water rights to serve the Spring Valley Ranch PUD have been decreed to operate under two separate augmentation plans. These decrees will operate to ensure that the water supply for the project can be provided without causing injury to any other water rights. Both augmentation plan decrees contemplate that water will be released from Ruedi Reservoir and/or Green Mountain Reservoir in an amount equal to the out of priority depletion to the Roaring Fork and Colorado Rivers by the in-house, pond evaporation and irrigation requirements of the project. The first augmentation plan was decreed in Case No. 87CW155, Water Division No. 5. Exhibit Q. This augmentation plan contemplates water service for up to 2,642 residential units and 150 acres of irrigation, for a total annual water requirement of 1371 acre-feet and a total annual consumptive use of 453.6 acre-feet. See, Exhibit Q, Table II - 3. This augmentation plan contemplates water service to the Spring Valley Ranch from the following water rights: Hopkins Spring No. 1 Hopkins Spring No. 2 Spring Valley Well No. 1 Spring Valley Ranch Well Nos. 2-3 SVH Well Nos. 5-10 The second augmentation plan was decreed in Case No. 98CW254, Water Division No. 5. Exhibit R. This augmentation plan is decreed as being supplemental to the decree in 87CW155. This supplemental decree was entered to allow for additional irrigation, and also to add new sources of supply for the project. The water rights added to the water supply were ASR Well Nos. 13-16 and up to 20 Additional Wells, the ASR Ditch No. 1, and treated effluent from the Spring Valley Sanitation District. This augmentation plan contemplates water service for up to 577 residential units (91 of which 7 • would be on ISDS systems, and the remainder of which would be treated through the Spring Valley Sanitation District central system), and 420 acres of irrigation. The total annual water requirement covered under this augmentation plan is 1,457 acre-feet, with a total annual consumptive use of 974 acre-feet. A significant portion of the annual consumptive use will occur at times when there is no water rights call on the Roaring Fork River system. The overall augmentation requirement for the Spring Valley Ranch PUD is set in the augmentation plan at 420 acre-feet in a dry year, which is the total of the two Basalt District allotment contracts. The decree in Case No. 98CW254 provides that the numbers of EQRs and amounts of irrigated acreage described in the plan are subject to modification so long as the estimated consumptive use resulting from diversions from the water rights serving the development does not exceed 974 acre-feet annually. Therefore, the PUD plan may be modified and provided with a legally adequate water supply without amending the existing water rights decrees, so long as the total consumptive use does not exceed this amount. Finally, the decree in 98CW254 provides that it can allow for water service not only to the Spring Valley Ranch PUD, but also to "any related development at or near the same location." See, Exhibit R, Para. 10.a, p. 7. This provision will allow properties such as the owners of the BR Hopkins Spring and contiguous properties served by domestic wells to be served from the development's water supply as necessary. G. Potential Service to Offsite Properties As part of the decree in Case No. 98CW256, the Spring Valley Ranch development entered into an agreement with the other owners of the water rights to the BR Hopkins Spring (Spring Valley Holdings owns a 10% interest in the BR Hopkins Spring). Exhibit M. The other owners of the BR Hopkins Spring are or were Peter and Jackie Cabrinha, Louis and Donnalyne LaGiglia, Marvin L. Claridge, Troy and Becky Lange, Carol Rothrock, and Stanislaw and Gretchen Wroblewski. The agreement obligates Spring Valley Holdings to protect the spring flow to which the other owners are entitled from diminution by development activity. In addition, the other spring owners are entitled to connect to the central water supply system for the development, upon specified terms, for a potential total of 15 EQRs of additional service from the central water supply system for the development. Additionally, Condition 20 of Garfield County Commissioner's Resolution 2005- 84 provides terms and conditions under which the PUD would provide water service from the central water supply system to the owners of permitted domestic wells in use for single-family residences as of October 29, 2001, that are located on the properties contiguous to the boundaries of the PUD. Wright Water Engineers has identified 26 such properties. Exhibit H. As discussed above, the augmentation plan decree in 98CW254 provides that it can allow for water service not only to the Spring Valley Ranch PUD, but also to "any 8 • related development at or near the same location." See. Exhibit R, Para. 10.a, p. 7. This provision will allow the owners of the BR Hopkins Spring and of adjoining properties to be served from the development's water supply as necessary in accordance with the terms of the agreement in Case No. 98CW256 and Resolution 2005-84. H. Treated Effluent Municipal wastewater treated at the regional wastewater treatment facility of the Spring Valley Sanitation District that will serve Spring Valley Ranch (not including lots served by ISDS) may be used for golf course and open space irrigation. This regional wastewater treatment facility also serves Lake Springs Ranch, Colorado Mountain College, Los Amigos Ranch, the Pinion Pines Apartments, the Auburn Ridge Apartments, and other development, existing and future, in the vicinity. All of the treated effluent from water usage at these areas will be available for irrigation use. Pursuant to contract with the SVSD and other developments, Spring Valley Ranch PUD has available to it the use of treated effluent in an amount at least equal to the effluent generated by the development. As noted above, the augmentation plan decree in Case No. 98CW254 provides for the use of treated effluent on the development. The pumping and transportation facilities necessary to convey this tertiary treated effluent from the SVSD plant to the Spring Valley PUD will be constructed by SVSD at such time as there are sufficient quantities of treated effluent to make irrigation practical. The use of treated effluent will provide an additional source of physical supply for the irrigation of the development at full development, so that withdrawals from the Spring Valley aquifer can be correspondingly reduced. In addition, the irrigation use of effluent will recharge the aquifer with the same water that was originally withdrawn from it, providing a partially closed and self-sustaining system. Use of municipal effluent for irrigation is supported by the various landowners in the Spring Valley area as a means of further ensuring the sustainability and longevity of the aquifer as a water resource. The Spring Valley Ranch PUD cannot legally commit to the use of treated effluent at present since the effluent will not be produced in sufficient quantities for many years, and it is presently unknown what regulatory requirements will be in place at the time that reuse of effluent is economically reasonable. However, Spring Valley PUD intends to utilize treated effluent for irrigation on the development to the extent feasible in the future. I. Adequacy of the Legal Water Supply to Provide for the Spring Valley Ranch PUD As described in the Wright Water Engineers' report, Exhibit H, a comparison of the allowable diversions and depletions under the existing water rights decrees for the Spring Valley Ranch PUD demonstrates that the water requirements and consumptive use for the project are less than was approved in the 2002 plan and are within the allowable amounts in the decreed plans for augmentation for the project. 9 • • • VII. Conclusion On behalf of Garfield County, in 2000 Colorado River Engineering, Inc. reviewed the water supply for the Spring Valley Ranch. Exhibit S. This report concludes that "[o]ur review of available data and reports has indicated that the proposed water supply plan can provide a reliable water supply given the PUD water demand levels, available water rights, and physical supplies available from surface and groundwater sources." Also in 2000, the Colorado State Engineer reviewed the physical and legal water supply for the project and concluded that "the proposed water supply can be provided without causing material injury to decreed water rights and is adequate so long as: (1) the claimed water rights are dedicated to the project, and (2) the plan for augmentation is operated according to its decreed terms and conditions." Exhibit T. The water requirements for the Spring Valley Ranch PUD are less than the water requirements of the PUD as currently approved and as reviewed by the County and the State in 2000. The projected consumptive use associated with the current development plan for the Spring Valley Ranch PUD (not including agricultural irrigation in the Lower Meadow) is 545 acre-feet per year, as compared with 974 acre-feet per year under the currently approved plan that was analyzed in 2000. With the elimination of a golf course, the development is able to support continued irrigation of the valley floor. This irrigation component allows a "buffer" of water supply that can be used, or reduced, depending on climatic conditions and project water demand, to assure the continued sustainability of the aquifer, and a dependable water supply for the development. Therefore, a physically sufficient water supply, sustainable over the foreseeable future, exists to support the proposed residential and commercial development of the Spring Valley Ranch PUD. This conclusion is supported by extensive geological and hydrological investigation. In addition, all of the required water rights are owned by Spring Valley Holdings, and augmentation plans have been approved and decreed by the Water Court. These augmentation plans provide for a full legal water supply to the development while assuring that no injury is caused to any other water rights. 10 fo MIOX freatment 13uddrnq 2" NPfCau#iit Port Concrete Well Seal — 4101/ 4" MAA55 Pitiless Adapter ( Madel J1014-40, OAP) Van Stare Style Flange (fwo-Piece, 4" Pipt) 6" CI 52 t7/,P, (MJ x MJ) 6" MPGAPLANGP ' Restrained Flange Adapter / 6' x 4" Reducer WPLL # AS' 13 (Ga nba 3) ASP 14 (Garnba 4) PPX'Mlf # 66298-F 66299-P PP!?MIf 17Aii 09/25/ 07 09/25/ 07 PINI H, PAt22 7,767' 7,710' ANNLLAR SEAL 7,673' 7,664' SfAnC l^/AV 7,627' 7,576' PUMP 5e1 -11N6. 7,620' 7,500' 9...0i1PPCA51NG 7,617' 7570' CASING STOP 7,581' 7 550' 60r1OM 7,%7' 7,550' PUMP: MOM GOILP G011t7 size SCLC 50LC if 20 20 5aaitaru Well Seal 1' (min.) 7,5' (min,) covvp • 1f Finish Grade 0_ Anular Seal Gould Submersible Pump s5tatic Water Pump Setting Slotted Casing Casing Stop l3ottan • oCALE: Not to Scale Well Details DATE: October 5,2007 DRAWN 9'• tip SHEET: 1oll PROJECT: 01269.17 CNKD d'+. mjg DRAWII.G: Pump5102.dw9 DIRECTORY: H:;01269',1 PAtilittes\Watet\wellsl GAMBA ASSOCIATES Spring Valley Ranch P.U.D. Phase 1 GAMBA & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS 970/945-2550 WWW.GAMBAENGINEERING.COM 113 NINTH ST.. STA. 214 P.O. sox lase OLANW000 SPNINOs, CO e1M2 Google Earth - Edit Ptacemark Name: 'JVell ASR 14 (Gamba #4) Latitude: Longitude: 39°30'51.84"N 1079 2'57.86'W Description , Style, Color 11 View q Altitude Description: MONITORING Well Permit # MH -35175 FINAL Permit Division 5, WD 38, Number 66299 - F (09125107) Collar at 7,710' Elevation Plain Casing: 7" Steel from 7,709' to 7,764' Elevation (-1-ft. to 46') 5.5" Steel from 7,668' to 7,570' Elevation (42 -ft. to 140 -ft.) 5.5" Steel from 7,550' to 7,530' Elevation (160 -ft. to 180 -ft.) Screened Casing 5.5" Perforated from 7,570' to 7,550' Elevation (140 -ft. to 160 -ft.) l Cancel • z GC :ICI CIVd 1E12IJNOJ CIS luawaDJojwaj 0 0 In d03 6ulso3 IIaM 3 •N D 3 0 0 O C c — 0 — n 0 0 CO 3 o t0 N 0 • = r C) O u • O 3 3 o Spring Valley Ranch Typical Well Head Details .ALE: Hot to kale SHEET: 1 of 2 DATE: October 5,2007 DRAWN BY: tcp PROJECT: 01269.17 CH<D BY: rajg DRAWING: Well Head Detail.dwg DIRECTORY: H:101269\17\Utilities\Woter\wells\ GAMBA e ASSOCIATES Spring Valley Ranch P.U.D. Garfield County Colorado GAMBA & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS tY LAND SURVEYORS 970/945-2530 WWW.GAMBAENGINEERING.COM it, wurr>, ST., STS. au P.O. SOS ISY GLSNw000 SPRINGS. CO •1.011 • IC1 CIVd L I IONOJ C1VF:I1I T1 1M MAIA NOI.LJ;IS (n )Z o 3 Cop • p I —4 1 n o O 0 c71' n n CDD O • O n N li at, O- C - CD n - N O S 0 • o n o = o- 0. �o5 O ▪ W C. CD O tD rt0 O p0 O C`) N. 0. 3 p C7 n g 3 CD n m N_ n 7 c, 0 Lc) N O O • 03 o__ - z 3 • tD N 0 0 - I cD c 3 (3. a Sac • o- 3 cn rn ,y - N o O riPT a.4 0' u) 3 • j' m 3 doo 6uiso3 IIaM • E. Not to Scale Spring Valley Ranch Typical Well Head Details DA'E: October S, 2007 SHEET: Spring Valley Ranch P.U.D. PROJECT: 01269-17 CHIC mlg DRAWING: Well Head Dete7.dwg DIRECTORY: H:\01269\171UUlities\Woter\wells\ GAMBA • ASJOCIAT2! Spring Valley Ranch P.U.D. Garfield County Colorado GAMBA & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 8 LAND SURVEYORS 97O/945-2530 WWW.GAMBAENGI NEERING.COM 112 NINTH IST.. WM.214 202 rA22 aLINN'000 1.1.2I1.102. Co •1802 Company: Spring Valley Ranch Name: Well ASR 14 (Gamba 4) Date: 10/12/2007 po - Data Sheet - GOULDS Well Permit # 66299 (09/25/07) 39 -deg. 30'51" North Latitude 107 -deg. 12' 57" West Longitude Size: 5CLC Type: SUB Speed: 3450 rpm Synch speed: 3600 rpm Line: 12 Stages, 20 HP Curve: Goulds 5CLC Impeller: Specific Speeds: Ns: — Nss: — Dimensions: Suction: — Discharge: 4 in Pump limits: Temperature: 110 'F Pressure: 450 psi g Sphere size: — — Data Point — Flow: 100 US gpm Head: 597 ft Eff: 72% Power: 20.5 hp NPSHr: — — Design Curve — Shutoff head: 740 ft Shutoff dP: 320 psi Min flow: 50 US gpm 74%@114 US gpm r: 22.5 hp @ 163 US gpm — Max Curve — Max power: 31.8 hp@163USgpm • Power: 33 hp Eye area: — 1000 800 600 400 17 Stages, 30 HP Search Criteria: Flow: 100 US gpm QiPITATFLa Head: 502 ft Fluid Water Temperature: 60 'F SG: 1 Vapor pressure: 0.2563 psi a Viscosity. 1.105 cP Atm pressure: 14.16 psi a NPSHa: — Motor: Consult GOULDS to select a motor for this pump. 12 Stages, 20 HP 200 3 Stages, 5 HP 0 1.5 � 1 2 rA 0.5 0 z • d 0 0 a 0 40 20 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 US gpm Open suction purnp. Performance Evaluation: Flow Speed Head Efficiency Power NPSHr US gpm rpm ft % hp ft 120 3450 549 74 22.3 100 3450 597 72 20.5 80 3450 634 70 18.1 — 60 3450 659 62 16.1 — 40 3450 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 % - Efficiency Selected from catalog: goulds 81.60 Vers: 2 WELL CONSTRUCTION AND TEST REPORT FOR OFFICE USE ONLY STATE OF COLORADO, OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER CGo..(0.b c.t t-( WELL PERMIT NUMBER MH -35175 c ' r2. Owner Name(s) . Aspen Springs Ranch Mailing Address . %Gamba & Assoc. P 0 Box 1458 City, St. Zip . Glenwood Springs, Co. 81602 Phone (970) 945-2559 J _ 1 APPROVAL s GW531-91-03 3. WELL LOCATION AS DRILLED* SW 1/4 SW 1/4 Sec. 22 Twp. 06S Range 88W DISTANCES FROM SEC. LINES. 0 ft from Sec. line. and ft. from Sec. line. OR SUBDIVISION LOT BLOCK FILING(UNIT) STREET ADDRESS AT WELL LOCATION 4 GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION ft. DRILLING METHOD Air Rotary DATE COMPLETED 12/16/98 TOTAL DEPTH 180 ft. DEPTH COMPLETED 180 ft. 5. GEOLOGIC LOG : 6. HOLE DIAM. (in) FROM (ft) TO (ft) Depth Type of Material (Size, Color, and Type) 9.0 0 46 000-154 1 Volcanics 6.5 46 180 154-180 Maroon Formation L 7. PLAIN CASING 00 (on) Kind Wail Size From (ft) To (ft) 7.0 Steel p.24 -1 46 5.5 Steel p.188 42 140 5.5 Steel 0.188 160 180 0 PERF. CASING . Screen Slot Size . 5.5 Steel 188 140 160 i WATER LOCATED : 140 - 154 8 Filter Pack Material Size : Interval: 9 Packer Placement Type Depth : REMARKS 10. GROUTING RECORD : Matenal ARtourrt Qerty interval Plaoernent cement 3 sks 16 gal 10-30 poured 11. DISINFECTION : Type HTH Amt. Used 2 oz. l 112. WELL TEST DATA . [ ] Check Box if Test Data is Submitted On Supplemental Form TESTING METHOD : Air Compressor Static Level : 134 ft. Date/Time Measured : 12/16/1998 Production Rate • g0 gpm. Pumping Level • Total ft. Date/Time Measured : 12/16/1998 Test Length . 2 hrs Remarks : 13. 1 new toad a smart+ moos nan,n dna know the carter 3 rtmraof. and mat ney an true to toy :ro.+sdgs Pt. -warn b Section 244 ICA ( 13)(4) CRS. no manna of "also arnsrnarto cotorataos perry o, ,4cond dspna and n pun*)' as a craaa t mgdomsaror ) CONTRACTOR : Shelton Dulling Corp. Phone (970) 927-4182 Mailing Address P 0 Box 1059 Ratt C0 81621 Lic No 109,5 Name / Tale (Please Type or Pnnt) Wayne Shelton / President Signature Date 12/21/98 Fort No. GWS -25 4111tPLICANT !,4: 4,1ta rt..t- C U,v Cr 'Naze' tf3s.:7.'cas -�J�377373: OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 818 Centennial Bldg.. 1313 Sherman St., Denver, Colorado 30203 (303) see -3581 T-3337 P 056/90T F-547 EXST WELL PERMIT NUMBER 66299 -F DIV. 5 WD 38 DES. BASIN MD SPRING VALLEY HOLDINGS LLC 1 CALIFONIA STREET 22ND FLOOR SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111- (415) 568-9500 PERMIT TO USF AN EXISTING WELL APPROVED WELL LOCATION GARFIELD COUNTY SW 1/4 SW 1/4 Sedan 22 Township 6 S Range 88 W Sixth P.M. DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES 1150 Ft. from South 670 Ft. from West Section Line Section Line UTM COORDINATES (Meters.Zone:13,NAD83) Easting: Northing: ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1) This well shall be used in such a way as to cause no material injury to exlsJng water rights. The issuance of this permit does not ensure that no injury will occur to another vested water riciht or preclude another owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civil court action. The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water Well Construction Rules 2 CCR 402-2, unless approval of a variance has been granted by the State Board of Examiners or Water Weil Construction and Pump Installation Contractors in accordance with Rule 18. 3) Approved pursuant to CRS 37-90-137(2) and Case no. 98CW256 on the condition that this well is operated in accordance with the Augmentation Plan approved by the Division 5 Water Ccurt in case no. 98CW254 and pursuant to Case no. 98CVV255 as an alternate point of diversion to the Basalt Conduit . If this well is not operated in accordance with the terms of said decrees, it will be subject to administration including orders to cease diverting water. The use cf ground water from this well is limited to domestic Including inside single family dwellings, commercial, irrigaiton of lawns and garden, shrubs, trees and golf course and open space and fire protection associated with the Spring Valley Ranch water supply system. A detailed description of the uses intended for the water withdrawn from the subject wells is described in detail in the decree in Case no. 98CVV254. The well is to be known as /1,-$R14: 5) The pumping rate of this well shall not exceed 100 GPM. 8) The average annual amount of ground water to be appropriated shall not exceed 50 acre-feet. The total annual diversions for this well and all other stn:ctures listed in paragraph 5 of Case no. 98CW254 are limited such that the total estimated annual consumptive use resulting from the diversions from said structures must not exceed 974 acre-feet. 7) The owner shall mark the well in a conspicuous place with well permit number(s), name of the aquifer, and court case number(s) as appropriate. The owner shall take necessary means and precautions to preserve these markings. 8) A totalling fiiow meter must be installed cn this well and maintained in gocd working order. Permanent records of all diversions must be maintained by the well owner (recorded at (east annually) and submitted to the Division Engineer upon request. Tills well shall be constructed at least 300 feet from any existing well, completed in the same aquifer, that is nct owned by the applicant. 10) This well shall be constructed not more than 200 feet from the locztion specified on this permit. 11) This well was originally installed as a monitoring hole/Viet! with a wail permit number MH-35175Z�' yts-/.1.,,7 Page 1 of 2 APPROVED ceict No. 9502537C Far State Engineer e DATE ISSUED 09-25-2007 EXPIRATION DATE 09-25-2008 u7 -4^+ -JI J. I' M mm-t,C.0 Viv u Aa t9( K9SourC95 i-337 P :J /u0? F-51- Receipt Ne. 95C2537C WELL PERMIT NUMBER 60299 - F rays 2 • • ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL NOTE: unless a completed Well Con;pleticr Report (GWS -31) and Pump Installation and Test Report (GWS -32) is rec&vac oy the Division of Water Resources before the expiration date shown be'cw, this permit will expire or. the expiratior. date. An extens;cn of the expiration date may be available. Contact CWR for additional information or refer to the extension request form (GWS -64) avaita le at: httpviviww.water.state.co.us/pubs/forris/gws-64.pdf. .us/pubs/forms/gws-64.pdf. NOT'CE: This permit is not issued for industrial, municipal, corsm.ctien, livestock, recreation, aesthetic, fish and wildlife uses as these uses were not augmented and/or not described in water court cases in the above paragraphs. You are hereby notified that you have the right to appeal the issuance of this permit, by filing a written request with this office withir: sixty (60) days of the date of issuance, pursuant to the State Administrative Procedures Act. (See Section 24-4-104 throng 106. C.R.S.). ---/.J,/ fbs/ 7 • Received from: JOHN C. KEPHART & CO. GflAND J.\CU 435 NORTH AVENUE N LAATIftS • PHONE 242-7618 • GRAND JUNCTION, COLORADO 81501 ANALYTICAL REPORT Jerome Gamba °< Assoc. Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 Chris Furman 9408 water Customer No. Laboratory No Sample 12/23/98 2/19/99 Date Reported Date Received Lab number 9408 Drinking Limits Sample ID Spring Valley, 12/22 2PM for Public Water ASR Well #4, SVR #98711-5 Supplies Garfield Cty Arsenic(As) 0. 000 mg/1 0. 05 mg/1 Barium (6a) 0.02 mg/1 1.0 mg/1 Cadmium(Cd) 0.0000 mg/1 0.01 my/1 Chromium(Cr) 0,000 mg/1 0.05 mg/1 Fluoride(F) 0.00 mg/1 4 mg/1 Lead (Pb) 0. 004 mg/1 0.015 mg/1 Mercury (Hg) 0.00000 mg/1 0. 111:x.^_ mgi 1 Nitrate(N)c:1.67 mg/1 10.0 mg/1 Oelenium(Se) 0.000 mg/1 0.01 mg/1 Silver(Ag) 0.0000 mg/1 0.05 rng/1 Color(Co/F't unit) 0 no official limit pH 7.50 no official limit Conductivity@25 deg. C 475 umhos/cm no official limit Sodium (Na) 4.2 mg/1 20 .ng/1 Calcium(Ca) 57 mg/1 no official limit Magnesium(Mg) 22 mg/.1 125 mg/1 Potassium(K) 1..= mg/1 no official limit Chloride (C1) 4 mg/1 250 mg/1 Sulfate(SO4) 2 mg/1 250 mg/1 Phenol. Alkalinity(CaCO3) 0 mg/1 no official limit Total Alk:alinity(CaCO3) 220 mg/ 1 no official limit Si carbonate(HCO•3) 266 mg/1 no official limit Carbonate(C07) 0 mg/1 no official limit Dissolved Solids 295 mg/1 500 mg/1 Hardness (CaCO.3) 232 mg/1 200 mg/1 Turbidity(Nru) 0.3s 1 Boron(3) 0.00 mg/ 1 no official limit Copper(Cu) 0.000 mg/1 1.0 mg/1 Iron .F) 0.07 mg/1 0.3 mg/1 Manganese(Mn) 0.002 mg/1 0.05 mg/1 Moiyboenum(Mo) 0.001 mg/1 no official limit Ammonia(N) 0.:x0 mg/1 no official limit P'_.cspha.t:'(F) 0.02 rng/1 no official limit nc (i.n / c_1. (_1:17 rc /l 5.0 mg/1 Lab Dir.: Brian S. Bauer • Received from: Customer No. JOHN C KEPHART & CO. GAND JUNCUON LAO 435 NORTH AVENUE Ni0 • PHONE 242-7618 iEs • GRAND JUNCTION. COLORADO 81501 ANALYTICAL REPORT Jerome Gamba Z Assoc. Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 Chris Furman 9408 water Laboratory No Sample Date Received 12/2.3/98 2/19/99 Date Reported Lab number 9408 Drinking Limits Sample ID Spring Valley, 12/22 2PM for Public Water ASF Well #4, SVR #98711-5 Supplies Garfield Cty Total Coliform Bacteria 0 colonies/100m1 must be less than 1 Nitrite(N) 0.00 mo/1 1 mg/1 Antimony(Sb) 0.000 mg/1 0.006 mg/1 Beryllium(Be) 0.000 mg/1 0. 004 mg/1 41Plyanide (C,N) 0. 000 mg/1 0.2 mg/1 Nickel (Ni) 0.000 mg/1 0. 1 mg/1 Thallium(T1) 0.000 mg/1 0.002 mg/1 Gross Alpha Gross Beta 4.6 pCi/liter 15 pCi/liter (approximately) 2.3 pCi/liter 50 pCi/liter NOTE: Some bacteria was present, not known to be harmful. Chlorination treatment is suggested. *Limit for lidicasted Alpha is 15. Adjusted Alpha is Gross Alpha minus "'don minus Uranium. Lab Dir.: Brian S. Bauer • SPRING VALLEY RANCH PUD WATER RIGHTS AND WATER RESOURCES • • • I. Executive Summary This report summarizes the water supply plan for the Spring Valley Ranch PUD. The water supply will be obtained from existing and proposed wells and springs located on the SVR property, and from surface water under senior decreed irrigation water rights in Landis Creek. This report addresses both legal and physical water supply. Extensive engineering investigations confirm that surface and groundwater resources are physically available for the development, and that well diversions will not have a long term negative impact on the water balance of the Spring Valley aquifer. The water supply for the development is authorized by Water Court decrees approving water rights, changes of water rights and two plans for augmentation. These existing decrees provide a legally adequate water supply for the entire residential development, commercial uses, golf course, and related potable and agricultural open space irrigation, as shown in the project plans. Augmentation water necessary to offset any out -of -priority depletions under the augmentation plans will be provided pursuant to contracts with the Basalt Water Conservancy District. Irrigation of the golf course and agricultural open space will occur under senior water rights, and will be supplemented by groundwater as necessary. II. Physical Water Supply The Spring Valley Ranch PUD will obtain its physical water supply from the following sources: ■ Available surface water supplies will be used to their fullest extent to provide the irrigation supply to the golf course, open space and common areas in order to minimize groundwater withdrawals. The project will divert surface flow from Landis Creek under the project's senior irrigation water rights. Almost all Landis Creek flows have historically been diverted and used on the Spring Valley Ranch property. Wright Water Engineers has documented an average water availability of 600 acre-feet/year from Landis Creek. Exhibit B, p. 4. In dry years and at times of the year when the surface supply is insufficient for full irrigation of the project, wells and springs on the property will be used. • Wells located in lower Spring Valley will withdraw water from the Spring Valley aquifer. There are three high capacity wells that have been completed, that are expected to yield over 250 g.p.m. each. As needed, additional wells described in the project augmentation plans can be drilled and utilized. Exhibit C. • Wells will also be developed in the middle bench area of the project to withdraw water from the Spring Valley aquifer. Several wells above elevation 8000 ft. have been drilled and tested. Pumping tests from these wells indicate a long term cumulative yield of greater than 100 g.p.m. Exhibit D. 2 • Engineers have extensively analyzed the adequacy of the physically available water supply to support the development on a long term basis. These analyses have included evaluations of the long term yield of the Spring Valley aquifer, pumping tests of wells drilled into the aquifer, and the existing and projected demands of the Spring Valley Ranch PUD and other adjacent and nearby properties for water from the aquifer. These investigations conclude that there is more than an adequate supply of water available from both ground and surface water sources to supply the development on a long-term sustainable basis, without adversely affecting the anticipated water requirements of neighboring properties. In March 2000, Jerome Gamba and Associates prepared a hydrogeologic analysis of the Spring Valley aquifer system. Exhibit E. The conclusions in the report are based on analysis of the geologic conditions of the area, calculations of precipitation infiltration, and an estimate of the specific yield of the Spring Valley aquifer. The report concludes that the average annual recharge to the Spring Valley aquifer is approximately 10,000 acre-feet of water per year. The report concludes that water withdrawals from the aquifer will have "little or no effect on the small domestic wells in the supper sediments or the surface discharge down Red Canyon." The Jerome Gamba report was peer reviewed by HRS Water Consultants, Inc. Exhibit F. The peer review report made several conclusions. • An average year annual infiltration of approximately 4,700 acre-feet/year to the aquifers beneath the Spring Valley Ranch PUD is supported by a water budget analysis that includes precipitation, evapotranspiration, soil moisture and the surface and subsurface materials. • The wet year estimate of precipitation recharge is approximately 7,100 acre- feet/year and the dry year estimate is approximately 1,900 acre-feet/year. • The vertical permeability of the soils and the aquifer materials on the Spring Valley Ranch PUD are sufficiently high to support an annual infiltration rate in excess of 7,100 acre-feet/year. • The volume of groundwater available in storage in the Spring Valley Aquifer for withdrawal by project wells is approximately 82,000 acre-feet. Wright Water Engineers performed investigations in 1984, 1998, and 1999-2000 to determine whether the Spring Valley aquifer underlying the property can satisfy the water requirements of the development on a sustainable basis, without adversely affecting the water available to neighboring properties. This work included projections of future withdrawals of water from the Spring Valley aquifer by other planned development in the area. The work of Wright Water Engineers also included extensive pump testing of the Spring Valley wells and monitoring of neighboring wells. Based on this work, Wright Water Engineers developed a water balance analysis for the Spring Valley aquifer. This analysis concludes that under the existing level of development of the Spring Valley 3 aquifer, approximately 4,300 acre-feet of water per year flows out of the aquifer to the Roaring Fork River. In comparison, Wright Water Engineers determined that the depletion to the aquifer by the Spring Valley PUD at full build -out, plus future 110 development by other properties, would be only 800 acre-feet per year. Exhibit B, Table 8. • • The Wright Water Engineers water balance analysis was peer reviewed by HRS Water Consultants, Inc. This peer review determined the total future depletions of the Spring Valley aquifer by the Spring Valley Ranch and future anticipated development to be 800 acre-feet per year. The report found that this amount was "far less than the estimated average annual aquifer recharge rate of 5,000 acre-feet/year. This verifies the long-term sustainability of the project's groundwater supply." Exhibit G. Wright Water Engineers has developed a report that updates the water supply analysis with regard to the present plan. This report concludes that "[s]ince the 2007 plan requires less water because the golf course plans were halved, it can be concluded, based on the previous studies, that there is adequate physical water for the 2007 plan." Exhibit H, p. 7. The following points summarize the physical water supply available to serve the Spring Valley Ranch PUD. ■ An average of 600 acre-feet/year is available from surface flows in Landis Creek to serve golf course, open space and common area irrigation. Available surface water supplies will be used to their fullest extent to provide the irrigation supply to these areas in order to minimize groundwater withdrawals. The Hopkins Reservoir will be available as an emergency surface supply. At times when this supply is inadequate, groundwater from the Spring Valley aquifer will be available. • Physical pumping tests have documented the adequacy of both lower and upper wells to serve the ultimate water demands of the development. • Based on the most conservative hydrogeologic and water balance analysis, engineers have determined that the water available from Landis Creek and the Spring Valley Aquifer is more than adequate to provide for the water demands of the Spring Valley Ranch PUD, and anticipated future developments using the Spring Valley aquifer, on a long-term sustainable basis. III. Groundwater Monitoring Plan Prior to final plat, the Spring Valley PUD will develop a groundwater monitoring plan to monitor future groundwater levels in the Spring Valley Ranch Wells in compliance of conditions 12.0 and 12.01 of Garfield County Commissioner's Resolution 2005-83. The monitoring plan will include water level measurements in the production wells and other wells at the PUD that can be used as monitoring holes. There will be an 4 • • • additional monitoring well developed or identified that is at least 2000 feet from the production wells. The monitoring plan will include measurements made with enough frequency to observe seasonal groundwater fluctuations and long-term groundwater trends. Results of the monitoring program will be made available to the public through the County. IV. Water Quality In 2000, Wright Water Engineers conducted extensive water quality tests on the groundwater pumped from the Spring Valley Aquifer through Spring Valley Well No. 6. The report concludes that the "water from Spring Valley Well No. 6 is excellent and meets the potable water quality standards established by the Colorado Department of Health and Environment for public water supply systems." Exhibit I. V. Legal Water Supply A. Ownership of Water Rights Spring Valley Holdings owns senior water rights for irrigation, and numerous other water rights that will be used to supply both the potable and non -potable water requirements of the project. A copy of the deed by which Spring Valley Holdings acquired these water rights is included in the application materials. Additionally, Spring Valley Holdings holds contract rights with the Basalt Water Conservancy District under two water allotment contracts. These contracts allot a total of 6.0 c.f.s. of direct flow water rights under the Basalt Conduit water right, and a total of 420 acre-feet of storage water in Ruedi and Green Mountain Reservoirs. Copies of these contracts and the assignments of the contracts to Spring Valley Holdings are attached as Exhibit J. A list of the water rights available for water service to the project is shown on Exhibit A. B. Senior Irrigation Rights Spring Valley Holdings owns all of the senior ditch rights on Landis Creek. These rights have historically been used for irrigation on the Spring Valley Ranch, and have diverted all of the available physical supply of water from Landis Creek. These rights include the Kendall and Stricklette Ditch, Forker and Gibson Ditch, Landis Ditch Nos. 1 and 2, O.K. Ditch and Frank Chapman Ditch. Each of these water rights was transferred to a consolidated point of diversion at the Landis Creek Ditch in Case No. 81CW193, Water Division No. 5. Exhibit K. These ditch rights are decreed for a total of 12.0 c.f.s. with priority dates between 1882 and 1885, for the irrigation of 300 acres. 5 C. Wells and Springs In addition to the senior water rights to be used for irrigation, Spring Valley Holdings is the owner of some 35 water rights for wells and springs that will be used to provide the water supply for the Spring Valley Ranch PUD. These wells and springs include the following: Hopkins Spring No. 1 Hopkins Spring No. 2 Spring Valley Well No. 1 Spring Valley Ranch Well No. 2-3 SVH Well Nos. 5-10 ASR Well Nos. 13-16 Up to 20 Additional Wells In the decree in Case No. 98CW256, the project was decreed water rights to the wells described above for use in the PUD. Exhibit L. D. "ells and Springs are Alternate Points of Diversion for Basalt Conduit The wells and springs that will serve as the source of water supply for the residential and commercial development of the Spring Valley Ranch have been decreed as alternate points of diversion for the Basalt Conduit water right, under the allotment contracts with the Basalt Water Conservancy District. • In Case No. 84CW212, Water Division No. 5, eleven wells and springs were decreed as alternate points of diversion for the Basalt Conduit water right. Exhibit N. In Case No. 98CW255, Water Division No. 5, the Court amended the decree in Case No. 84CW212 to include additional wells as alternate points of diversion for the Basalt Conduit water right. Exhibit 0. These wells are the ASR Well No. 13-16, together with up to 20 Additional Wells that could be developed on the Spring Valley Ranch PUD. These decrees provide that the wells and springs will operate under their own priorities as decreed; under the 1957 priority associated with the Basalt Conduit; and when neither of such priorities are in priority, under the augmentation plans decreed in Case No. 87CW155 and 98CW254, described below. There are no other water rights in the Spring Valley. Aquifer with priorities senior to the 1957 priority date of the Basalt Conduit water right. Therefore, with this 1957 priority, the wells and springs serving the development are junior only to water rights located on the Roaring Fork and Colorado Rivers. • 6 • E. Reservoirs The largest water storage reservoir on the Spring Valley PUD will be the Hopkins Reservoir, located at the upper end of the property. This reservoir has historically been used for irrigation. The Hopkins Dam must be rehabilitated for the reservoir to be fully operational. Once the dam is rehabilitated, the reservoir will be used primarily for aesthetic, wildlife and recreation purposes. It will be used for irrigation only as immediately necessary on an emergency basis. In Case No. 98CW257, Water Division No. 5, the Water Court decreed water storage rights to the ASR Reservoirs 1-3. Exhibit P. These reservoirs will be located to allow for irrigation of the golf course and open space, and as golf course features. Up to 29 acres of surface evaporation from these reservoirs is covered under the augmentation plans described below. F. Augmentation Plans The water rights to serve the Spring Valley Ranch PUD have been decreed to operate under two separate augmentation plans. These decrees will operate to ensure that the water supply for the project can be provided without causing injury to any other water rights. Both augmentation plan decrees contemplate that water will be released from Ruedi Reservoir and/or Green Mountain Reservoir in an amount equal to the out of priority depletion to the Roaring Fork and Colorado Rivers by the in-house, pond evaporation and irrigation requirements of the project. The first augmentation plan was decreed in Case No. 87CW155, Water Division No. 5. Exhibit Q. This augmentation plan contemplates water service for up to 2,642 residential units and 150 acres of irrigation, for a total annual water requirement of 1371 acre-feet and a total annual consumptive use of 453.6 acre-feet. See, Exhibit Q, Table II - 3. This augmentation plan contemplates water service to the Spring Valley Ranch from the following water rights: Hopkins Spring No. 1 Hopkins Spring No. 2 Spring Valley Well No. 1 Spring Valley Ranch Well Nos. 2-3 SVH Well Nos. 5-10 The second augmentation plan was decreed in Case No. 98CW254, Water Division No. 5. Exhibit R. This augmentation plan is decreed as being supplemental to the decree in 87CW155. This supplemental decree was entered to allow for additional irrigation, and also to add new sources of supply for the project. The water rights added to the water supply were ASR Well Nos. 13-16 and up to 20 Additional Wells, the ASR Ditch No. 1, and treated effluent from the Spring Valley Sanitation District. This augmentation plan contemplates water service for up to 577 residential units (91 of which 7 • would be on ISDS systems, and the remainder of which would be treated through the Spring Valley Sanitation District central system), and 420 acres of irrigation. The total annual water requirement covered under this augmentation plan is 1,457 acre-feet, with a total annual consumptive use of 974 acre-feet. A significant portion of the annual consumptive use will occur at times when there is no water rights call on the Roaring Fork River system. The overall augmentation requirement for the Spring Valley Ranch PUD is set in the augmentation plan at 420 acre-feet in a dry year, which is the total of the two Basalt District allotment contracts. The decree in Case No. 98CW254 provides that the numbers of EQRs and amounts of irrigated acreage described in the plan are subject to modification so long as the estimated consumptive use resulting from diversions from the water rights serving the development does not exceed 974 acre-feet annually. Therefore, the PUD plan may be modified and provided with a legally adequate water supply without amending the existing water rights decrees, so long as the total consumptive use does not exceed this amount. Finally, the decree in 98CW254 provides that it can allow for water service not only to the Spring Valley Ranch PUD, but also to "any related development at or near the same location." See, Exhibit R, Para. 10.a, p. 7. This provision will allow properties such as the owners of the BR Hopkins Spring and contiguous properties served by domestic wells to be served from the development's water supply as necessary. G. Potential Service to Offsite Properties •As part of the decree in Case No. 98CW256, the Spring Valley Ranch development entered into an agreement with the other owners of the water rights to the BR Hopkins Spring (Spring Valley Holdings owns a 10% interest in the BR Hopkins Spring). Exhibit M. The other owners of the BR Hopkins Spring are or were Peter and Jackie Cabrinha, Louis and Donnalyne LaGiglia, Marvin L. Claridge, Troy and Becky Lange, Carol Rothrock, and Stanislaw and Gretchen Wroblewski. The agreement obligates Spring Valley Holdings to protect the spring flow to which the other owners are entitled from diminution by development activity. In addition, the other spring owners are entitled to connect to the central water supply system for the development, upon specified terms, for a potential total of 15 EQRs of additional service from the central water supply system for the development. Additionally, Condition 20 of Garfield County Commissioner's Resolution 2005- 84 provides terms and conditions under which the PUD would provide water service from the central water supply system to the owners of permitted domestic wells in use for single-family residences as of October 29, 2001, that are located on the properties contiguous to the boundaries of the PUD. Wright Water Engineers has identified 26 such properties. Exhibit H. As discussed above, the augmentation plan decree in 98CW254 provides that it can allow for water service not only to the Spring Valley Ranch PUD, but also to "any • 8 • • • related development at or near the same location." See. Exhibit R, Para. 10.a, p. 7. This provision will allow the owners of the BR Hopkins Spring and of adjoining properties to be served from the development's water supply as necessary in accordance with the terms of the agreement in Case No. 98CW256 and Resolution 2005-84. H. Treated Effluent Municipal wastewater treated at the regional wastewater treatment facility of the Spring Valley Sanitation District that will serve Spring Valley Ranch (not including lots served by ISDS) may be used for golf course and open space irrigation. This regiMountaional wastewater treatment facility also serves Lake Springs Ranch, Colorado College, Los Amigos Ranch, the Pinion Pines Apartments, the Auburn Ridge Apartments, and other development, existing and future, in the vicinity. All of the treated effluent from water usage at these areas will be available for irrigation use. Pursuant to contract with the SVSD and other developments, Spring Valley Ranch PUD has available to it the use of treated effluent in an amount at least equal to the effluent generated by the development. As noted above, the augmentation plan decree in Case No. 98CW254 provides for the use of treated effluent on the development. The pumping and transportation facilities necessary to convey this tertiary treated effluent from the SVSD plant to the Spring Valley PUD will be constructed by SVSD at such time as there are sufficient quantities of treated effluent to make irrigation practical. The use of treated effluent will provide an additional source of physical supply for the irrigation of the development at full development, so that withdrawals from the Spring Valley aquifer can be correspondingly reduced. In addition, the irrigation use of effluent will recharge the aquifer with the same water that was originally withdrawn from it, providing a partially closed and self-sustaining system. Use of municipal effluent for irrigation is supported by the various landowners in the Spring Valley area as a means of further ensuring the sustainability and longevity of the aquifer as a water resource. The Spring Valley Ranch PUD cannot legally commit to the use of treated effluent at present since the effluent will not be produced in sufficient quantities for many years, and it is presently unknown what regulatory requirements will be in place at the time that reuse of effluent is economically reasonable. However, Spring Valley PUD intends to utilize treated effluent for irrigation on the development to the extent feasible in the future. I. Adequacy of the Legal Water Supply to Provide for the Spring Valley Ranch PUD As described in the Wright Water Engineers' report, Exhibit H, a comparison of the allowable diversions and depletions under the existing water rights decrees for the Spring Valley Ranch PUD demonstrates that the water requirements and consumptive use for the project are less than was approved in the 2002 plan and are within the allowable amounts in the decreed plans for augmentation for the project. 9 VII. Conclusion On behalf of Garfield County, in 2000 Colorado River Engineering, Inc. reviewed the water supply for the Spring Valley Ranch. Exhibit S. This report concludes that "[o]ur review of available data and reports has indicated that the proposed water supply plan can provide a reliable water supply given the PUD water demand levels, available water rights, and physical supplies available from surface and groundwater sources." Also in 2000, the Colorado State Engineer reviewed the physical and legal water supply for the project and concluded that "the proposed water supply can be provided without causing material injury to decreed water rights and is adequate so long as: (1) the claimed water rights are dedicated to the project, and (2) the plan for augmentation is operated according to its decreed terms and conditions." Exhibit T. The water requirements for the Spring Valley Ranch PUD are less than the water requirements of the PUD as currently approved and as reviewed by the County and the State in 2000. The projected consumptive use associated with the current development plan for the Spring Valley Ranch PUD (not including agricultural irrigation in the Lower Meadow) is 545 acre-feet per year, as compared with 974 acre-feet per year under the currently approved plan that was analyzed in 2000. With the elimination of a golf course, the development is able to support continued irrigation of the valley floor. This irrigation component allows a "buffer" of water supply that can be used, or reduced, depending on climatic conditions and project water demand, to assure the continued sustainability of the aquifer, and a dependable water supply for the development. Therefore, a physically sufficient water supply, sustainable over the foreseeable future, exists to support the proposed residential and commercial development of the Spring Valley Ranch PUD. This conclusion is supported by extensive geological and hydrological investigation. In addition, all of the required water rights are owned by Spring Valley Holdings, and augmentation plans have been approved and decreed by the Water Court. These augmentation plans provide for a full legal water supply to the development while assuring that no injury is caused to any other water rights. 10 • • • 1.44-tis'A'SeEei Arc— CREEK METROPOLITAN DISTRICTS NO.1ANDNO.2 SERVICE PLAN Garfield County Service Plan — Auaust14, 2001 LANDIS CREEK METROPOLITAN DISTRICT No. 1 LANDIS CREEK METROPOLITAN DISTRICT No. 2 GARFIELD COUNTY COLORADO PREPARED BY LANDIS CREEK DEVELOPMENT, INC. STAN BERNSTEIN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Deriver and Vail, Colorado Holland & Hart LLP, ATTORNEYS Aspen, Colorado • • TABLE OF CONTENTS • CHAPTER I - INTRODUCTION 1 A. GENERAL OVERVIEW 1 1. Dual District Structure 2 2. Benefits of Dual District Structure 4 a. Coordinated Services a b. Uniform Mill Levy 6 c. Bond Interest Rates 6 3. Configuration of Districts 6 4. Long Term District Plan 9 5. Existing Services and Districts 9 6. Property Owner Associations 10 B. GENERAL FINANCIAL INFORMATION, ASSUMPTIONS. AND LIMITATIONS 10 C. CONTENTS OF SERVICE PLAN [§ 32-1-202(2), C.R.S] 15 D. MODIFICATION OF SERVICE PLAN [§ 32-1-204(4), C.R.S.]. 15 CHAPTER II - NEED FOR NEW DISTRICTS AND GENERAL POWERS 17 A. NEED FOR METROPOLITAN DISTRICTS [§ 32-1-203(1), C.R.S]. 17 B. GENERAL POWERS OF DISTRICTS (§ 32-1-1001, C.R.S.J. 17 1. Water 18 a. Potable Water 13 • b. Raw Water for Irrigation 18 2. Wastewater 19 3. Streets, Paths and Landscaping 19 4. Drainage 70 5. Parks and Recreation 20 6. Transportation 20 7. Mosquito Control 70 8. TV Relay and Translation •)1 9. Fire Protection and Vegetation Manipulation and Managernent '1 10. Legal Powers '7 1 11. Other 22 CHAPTER III - DESCRIPTION OF FACILITIES AND IMPROVEMENTS 13 A. GENERAL 24 B. GENERAL DESIGN STANDARDS ' 4 C. I_MPROVEMENTS 24 1. Public Improvements 24 2. General Operation and Maintenance '5 3. Irrigation Systems and Water Rights '6 CHAPTER IV - COSTS AND REVENUE SOURCES 23 • A. COST OF CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION 28 1. Development - CapitaI Costs 28 2. Annual Operation and Maintenance Costs 28 3. Debt Service 28 • B. REVENUE SOURCES 29 1. Property Taxes 29 2. Potable Water System Investment Fees 29 3. Raw Water Irrigation System Investment Fees 29 4. Specific Ownership Taxes and Interest Income "9 5. Interest Earnings " 9 6. Water User Fees " 9 7. Other Fees " 9 CHAPTER V.- FINANCIAL PLAN SUMMARY [§ 32-1-202(2)(b), C.R.S.) 30 CHAPTER W - PROPOSED AND EXISTING AGREEMENTS 34 A. MASTER INTERGOVERNTAL AGREEMENTS [PERMITTED UNDER § 32-1- 1001(1)(D)(I), C.R.S] 34 B. AGREEMENT WITH MASTER ASSOCIATION 35 C. PLANT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DATED DECEMBER 15. 1999. 35 D. OTTER AGREEMENTS/AUTHORITY [PERMITTED UNDER § 32-1-1001(1)(D)(I), C.R.S.]. 36 CHAPTER VII - OTHER REQUIREMENTS AND CONCLUSIONS 36 A. REQUIREMENTS 36 B. CONCLUSIONS 36 • EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND MAP OF DISTRICTS 1 EXHIBIT B FINANCIAL PLAN FOR DISTRICT NO. 1 AND FOR DISTRICT NO. 2 1 EXHIBIT C STATUTORY CONTENTS OF THIS SERVICE PLAN 1 EXHIBIT D INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT 1 • CHAPTER I - INTRODUCTION • A. General Overview This Consolidated Service Plan (hereinafter defined as "Service Plan") for Landis Creek Metropolitan Districts No. 1 and No. 2 constitutes a combined Service Plan for two special districts proposed to be organized to serve the needs of a portion of a residential and recreation community to be known as "Sprin Valley Ranch Planned Unit Development" (the "PUD"). The PUD, located in Spring, Valley, is approximately six miles south of the Town of Glenwood Springs, Colorado. It consists of approximately 5948 acres comprising 577 residential units planned for the residential component of the development; the affordable housing. component of the PUD is in an area that consists of 75 units that will not be included within the Districts as defined herein. The PUD less the affordable housing, units and area and the commercial area will • be the area included within the boundaries of the Districts as defined herein and as described on Exhibit A and will be referred to herein as the "Project". Figure I - 1, at the end of this Chapter, contains a general "Development Plan" for the development to be included within the Districts as defined herein, followed by Table I - 1, containing, development projections. The public infrastructure to be constructed by the special districts will include some or all of the following,: certain roads/signag,e, public trail system, potable and non -potable water lines and associated facilities, wastewater collection lines and associated facilities, water tanks, administrative and office facilities, weed and pest control, fire protection facilities and service, fire hydrants, vegetation manipulation and • management, drainage, transportation facilities, public recreation irnprovements, and such other public improvements and facilities that may be necessary and appropriate. Landis Creek Metropolitan District No. 2 will serve as the Service District and pay for the operation and maintenance of the public infrastructure through intergovernmental agreement or agreements ("IGAs") with Landis Creek Metropolitan District No. 1 substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit D. This Service Plan addresses the public improvements that will be provided by the special districts and demonstrates how these two districts propose to serve the needs of the Project. 1. Dual District Structure [permitted under § 32-1-1001 et seq., C.R.S.]. This Service Plan is submitted in accordance with Part 2 of the Special District Act (§ 32-1-201, et seq., C.R.S.) ("Control Act"). It defines the powers and authorities of, as well as the limitations and restrictions on, Landis Creek Metropolitan Districts No. 1 and No. 2. For purposes of clarification in this Service Plan, Landis Creek Metropolitan District No. 2 shall be referred to as "the Service District," and Landis Creek Metropolitan District No. 1 shall be referred to as the "the Financing District." The Service and Financing Districts are sometimes collectively referred to as "the Districts" and individually as "the District." Each District will stand on its own with respect to its statutory powers and authority under Title 32, Article 1, Part 10, including but not limited to such general powers as the authority to enter into contracts and agreements affecting the affairs of the special district, § 32-1-1001(1)(d)(I), C.R.S., the power to borrow money, incur indebtedness, and issue bonds, § 32-1-1001(1)(e), C.R.S., and the power to furnish services and facilities outside the special district and to establish fees for such services • and facilities, § 32-1-1001(1)(k), C.R.S., all as set forth and as may be limited by the previsions of this Service Plan. The use of a consolidated Service Plan for the Districts will help assure proper coordination of the powers and authorities of the independent Districts and will help avoid confusion regarding the separate, but coordinated, purposes of the Districts which could arise if separate service plans were used. Unless otherwise specifically noted herein, general provisions of this Service Plan apply to both Districts. Where necessary, however, specific reference is made to an individual District to help distinguish the powers and authorities of each District. The "Financial Plans" discussed in Chapter V refer to the financial plans for each District. They are to be read as separate financial plans, which may be used for public improvements and services for the PUD. The Service District will be responsible for, or contracting for, managing the construction and operation of public facilities and improvements needed for the Project. The Financing District will be responsible for providing the funding and tax base needed to support the Financial Plans for such capital irnprovements. IGAs are expected to be executed by the Districts clarifying the nature of the functions and services to be provided by each District. The IGAs will be designed to help assure the orderly development of essential services and facilities resulting in a community which will be both an aesthetic and economic asset to Garfield County (the "County"). It is anticipated that the Service District will construct, or will contract for construction of, the public infrastructure, and the Financing District will finance the construction of such infrastructure, some of which may be conveyed to the 3 County, or Spring Valley Sanitation District ("SVSD") as to sewer infrastructure, as appropriate. The Districts may also contract with a qualified entity to operate the Districts' water systems and wastewater faciiities and otherwise provide water or wastewater service or both. The Districts may also operate their own water systems and wastewater facilities through the Service District. Landis Creek Metropolitan District No. 2 as the Service District wiII initially own and operate certain public facilities and infrastructure throughout the Project. Subject to the mill levy limitations set forth herein, Landis Creek Metropolitan District No. 1 as the Financing District will generate the tax revenue sufficient to pay the costs of the capital improvements as described herein and associated operations and maintenance. The formation of these Districts will create several benefits for the residents of the development and the County. In general, those benefits are: (a) providing for the construction, administration and operation of public improvements, and delivery of those improvements in a timely manner; (o) maintenance of reasonably uniform and limited mill levies and reasonable tax burdens on all areas of the Project through proper management of the financing and operation of public improvements; and (c) assured compliance with state laws regarding taxation in a manner which permits the issuance of tax exempt debt at the most favorable interest rates possible. Each of these concepts is addressed in greater detail in the following paragraphs. Benefits of Dual District Structure. a. Coordinated Services [permitted under § 32-1-1001 et seq., C.R.S.]. As presently planned, development of the Project will proceed in several phases, each of which will require the extension of public services and facilities. The 4 dual district structure will assure that the construction and operation of each phase of public facilities will be primarily administered by a single board of directors consistent with a long term construction and operations program. Use of the Service District as the entity responsible for providing for the construction of each phase of improvements and for management of operations will facilitate a well-planned financing effort through all phases of construction and will assist in assuring coordinated extension of services. The dual district structure assures the financing of the construction of the infrastructure for the final phases of the Project through the Financing District. The Service District will be obligated to provide the construction services to the Financing District and the Financing District will be obligated to pay for such services pursuant to the IGA and subject to the provisions and limitations set forth herein. As a • result, the landowners of the first phases of the Project cannot alter the overall financial structure for the Project through the board of directors of the Financing District. Since the control of the Service District remains with the owners of the small parcels that make up the Service District boundaries, the financial commitments made through the IGA and this Service Plan guarantee that the required level of quality of construction for such infrastructure will be maintained throughout the project. As noted in Section I.A.4, upon completion of the construction of the infrastructure and the issuance of all bonds or other debt instruments, the Districts will be consolidated for the on-going services to be provided, subject to existing agreements for services such as the agreement with the affordable housing homeowners association for services to be rendered to the affordable housing component of the PUD and the agreement with the Glenwood Springs Rural Fire • Protection District and the City of Glenwood Springs. 5 The dual district structure will also help assure that public facilities and services needed for future build -out of the Project will be provided when they are needed, and not sooner. Appropriate development agreements between the Service District and the developer will allow appropriate timing of financing and construction of improvements within the Project and PUD as may be required in subdivision improvement agreements between the Developer and Garfield County. This, in turn, allows the full costs of public improvements to be allocated over the build -out of the Project. b. Uniform Mill Lew. Allocation of the responsibility for paying debt for capital improvements will be managed through development of financing plans for those improvements and through development of an integrated operating plan for long term operations and maintenance with a uniform and limited mill levy. c. Bond Interest Rates. The dual district structure is less risky and will allow bonds or other obligations to be issued to finance public improvements at lower rates than if a single special district is organized. This situation is created by the developer retaining control of the Service District and therefore the control of issuing limited tax obligation bonds with the result that the Financing District does not issue such bonds until the assessed valuation of the property can actually support such obligation bonds. Because the debt to assessed valuation ratio are favorable when the limited tax obligation bonds are issued, the Finance District benefits from the probable lower interest rates. 3. Configuration of Districts. In order to implement the dual district structure, the boundaries of the Service District and the Financing District need to be 6 • carefully configured. A map showing the boundaries of the Districts is provided in Exhibit A. The Service District will contain approximately 5.8 acres, and the Financing District will contain approximately 5916.7 acres. The combined acreage of the Districts includes all acreage within. the Project. Legal descriptions and a map of the property within the boundaries of the Districts are attached to the end of this Service Plan as pa: of Exhibit A. The "service area" (the area legally permitted to be served within the Districts) for the Service District will consist of over 6000 acres. The service area of the Districts shall include the Districts and shall extend to the outside boundaries of all properties contiguous to the Districts' boundaries as such properties are presently configured and shall include all enclaves. The services that may be provided within the service area but outside of the Districts may be limited based upon the infrastructure, equipment and resources that may be available. Any such limitations shall not apply to the affordable housing property or village center which have been included in the infrastructure, equipment and resource planning for the Districts. The Service District will have power to impose taxes only within its legal boundaries, and will be permitted to provide public services within the two Districts as well as to property or individuals outside of the Districts and of the Project which are not presently being provided by others, if requested and approved. The Financing District will have power to assess taxes subject to the limitations set forth herein and other charges permitted by law and to obligate the remittance of general obligation collections and operating moneys to the Service District. 7 No residential units will be located within the Service District. The Financing. District will contain all residential properties within the PUD (except for the affordable housing property), expected to consist of approximately 502 residential dwelling units as well as two 18 hole golf courses, a clubhouse, a golf pro shop, a family center and an equestrian center. The projected population of the Project (less the affordable housing component) at full build -out is approximately 1500 persons (including. permanent and second home residents, assuming 3.0 persons per living unit), and the projected total residential valuation is approximately S1,024,750,000, at an average 32,041,335 per unit. It is possible that additional property may be included in the Districts. Under Colorado law, the fee owner or owners of one hundred percent (100%) of any property proposed for inclusion may petition the Boards of Directors of the Districts for inclusion or annexation of property into the Districts. Additionally, less than one hundred percent (100%) of the owners of an area may petition the Districts for an inclusion election, or the Boards may adopt a resolution calling for an election on inclusion of the property. The Board of Directors shall approve any annexation petition by any enclave property, the affordable housing property, or village center/commercial area within the PUD, provided that any annexation by an enclave property shall be conditioned upon the provision of an adequate legal and physical supply of water to support water service to the enclave property, as may be required by the Districts in their discretion. Except as provided herein, the annexation to the District of any property in excess of five acres in the aggregate shall be considered a material modification of this 8 • Service Plan. Wastewater facilities and services will not be provided by the Districts to included or annexed parcels without the prior consent of SVSD. 4. Lona Term District Plan [permitted under § 32-1-601 et seq., C.R.S]. After all bonds or other debt instruments have been issued by the Districts and adequate provision has been made for payment of all debt of the Service and Financing Districts, the Districts shall consolidate the Service and Financing Districts into a single entity, subject to the approval of the electorate of the Financing District and subject to existing agreements for services such as the agreement with the affordable housing homeowners association for services to be rendered to the affordable housing component. The Service and Financing Districts will consider consolidation as permitted by statute under Title 32, Article 1, Part 6, at the time each District's debt has been paid • and adequate provision has been made for operation of all District facilities and final buildout is completed. ultimately, control of these decisions will rest with the electorate in each District. However, any Consolidated District would continue in perpetuity to operate and maintain the same services to the residents of the District. 5. Existing Services and Districts [§ 32-1-203, C.R.S.]. There are currently no other entities in existence in the PUD area that have the ability and/or desire to undertake the design, financing and construction of improvements needed for the Project. The County does not consider it feasible or practicable to pay for all the necessary services and facilities contained in this Service Plan for the Project. Consequently, use of the new Districts is deemed necessary for the provision of these • public improvements in the Project. 9 The Service District can enter into agreements, including IGAs, with other entities for operations and maintenance beyond those operation and maintenance services identified within this Service Plan to be done by existing entities. 6. Property Owner Associations [permitted under § 32-1-1001(1)(k), C.R.S]. In addition to the Districts, it is intended that there be a master property owner association and, possibly, sub-associations which will, to the greatest extent possible, integrate functionally and operationally with the Districts. Also, the Districts will integrate functionally and operationally with the property owners association. It is further anticipated that the Service District will contract with other property owner associations of properties outside of the boundaries of the Districts to provide services as appropriate, particularly those properties within the PUD and outside of the Districts. B. General Financial Information. Assumptions. and Limitations The 2000 certified assessed valuation of all taxable property (classified as agricultural) within the boundaries of the PLD is estimated to be approximately S115,000. The initial assessed valuation of property within the Service District is expected to be approximately 55,000, and the initial assessed valuation within the Financing District is expected to be approximately S110,000. The Districts shall not issue or incur any debt, bonds; notes, contracts, or other obligations for the payment of which the Districts will be contractually obligated to impose an ad valorem property tax, except as described in this paragraph. The Districts may contractually obligate themselves to impose an ad valorem property tax for the payment of any bonds, notes, contracts, or other obligations (including without limitation obligations issued or incurred for the payment of capital costs, operations and 10 • maintenance costs, or any other costs), only in an amount not in excess of fifty (50) mills for all of such obligations; provided however, that in the discretion of the obligated District, such obligations may provide that, in the event the method of calculating assessed valuation is changed after the date of the original approval of this Service Pian, the mill levy limitation provided herein may be increased or decreased to reflect such changes, such increases or decreases to be determined annually by the board of directors of the obligated District in good faith (such determination to be binding and final) so that to the extent possible, the actual tax revenues generated by the mill levy, as adjusted, are neither diminished nor enhanced as a result of such changes. The Districts shall be subject to the following additional limitation relating to its mill levy: of the fifty (50) mills limit set forth in the foregoing sentence, the Districts may contractually obligate themselves to impose an ad valorem property tax for the payment of any bonds, notes, contracts, or other obligations for debt service, only in an amount not in excess of thirty- five (35) mills for all of such obligations for debt service; provided however, that in the discretion of the obligated District, such obligations may provide that, in the event the method of calculating assessed valuation is changed after the date of the original approval of this Service Plan, the mill levy limitation provided herein may be increased or decreased to reflect such changes, such increases or decreases to be determined annually by the board of directors of the obligated District in good faith (such determination to be binding and final) so that to the extent possible, the actual tax revenues generated by the mill levy, as adjusted, are neither diminished nor enhanced as a result of such changes. For purposes of the foregoing provisions, (i) a change in the ratio of actual valuation to assessed valuation shall be deemed to be a change in the method of calculating assessed 11 valuation; and (ii) 2001 shall be the base year for the ratio for actual valuation to assessed valuation. The lesser of the following alternative limitations shall apply to any bonds, notes, or other evidence of borrowing issued by the Districts: (a) the maximum principal amount of any bonds, notes, or other evidences of a borrowing issued by the Financing District shall not exceed thirty percent of the valuation for assessment of the taxable property in the Districts, as certified by the assessor or (b) the Service District revenue bonds shall be limited to a maximum of 532,300,000 and the Financing District limited tax obligation bonds shall be limited to a maximum of 538,375,000. The anticipated cost of improvements borne between the Districts and the developer are contained in Chapter IV. Subject to the limitations set forth herein, the Districts may obtain financing for the capital improvements needed for the Project through the issuance of limited tax obligation bonds or other debt instruments by the Financing District and from revenue bonds or other instruments issued by the Service District. Limited tax obligation debt will be payable from revenues derived from ad valorem property taxes and from other sources. It is currently anticipated that significant credit enhancement and security for debt issued by the Service District will be provided by the developer or possibly that debt obligations will be issued to the developer in exchange for improvements. The Financing District will issue limited tax obligation debt after determination that the assessed valuation is sufficient to pay debt service with reasonable mill levies that do not exceed the limitations set forth herein thereby reducing risk to property owners. The preliminary financial forecasts for the Districts are contained in Exhibit B to this Service Plan. These "Financial Plans" 12 • • • • demonstrate one method which might be used by the Districts to finance the cost of the public infrastructure. At the time bonds or other debt instruments are proposed to be issued, alternative financing plans may be employed and may be utilized by the Districts subject to the limitations set forth herein. Due to the credit enhancement and other support expected to be received from the developer, the Financial Plans demonstrate that the cost of public infrastructure described herein can be provided with reasonable mill levies that do not exceed the limitations set forth herein, specifically established at 24.00 mills for debt service and 21.00 mills for all operations, including without limitation administrative; operating and maintenance services, for a total of 45.00 mills overall. The specific mill levy allocations between debt service and operations will vary annually as budget decisions are made annually by the Board of Directors of the Financing District. The figures contained herein depicting costs of infrastructure and operations will not constitute legal limits on the financial powers of the Districts subject to the mill levy limitations se: forth herein; provided, however, that the Districts shall not be permitted to issue bonds which are not in compliance with the bond registration and issuance requirements of Colorado law. The financial structure contemplated in the Financial Plans demonstrates that the risks associated with development of the Project may be borne initially by the developer of the project by providing security behind the bonds or taking bonds in return for capital improvements. At such time as limited tax obligation debt is issued, the responsibility for payment of the costs of infrastructure needed for the Project will be shifted, incrementally, to the Financing District. Limited tax obligation debt issued by the Financing District will limit the responsibility for repayment of such debt to the 13 Financing District. All financial obligations issued or incurred by the Districts shall state therein that they are solely the obligation of the issuing or incurring District, and that Garfield County is not in any way liable for the District's obligation. Mill levies paid by the Project residents are expected not to exceed 45.00 mills. Any bonds, notes, contracts, or other financial obligations issued to the Developer as consideration for a loan or advance shall be subject to redemption, at the option of any District which is obligated for the payment thereof, on any date after issuance, at a price of par and accrued interest, without redemption premium, and shall not be issued at a net effective interest rate higher than 3.5% in excess of the rate per annum determined on the date of issuance pursuant to the most recent "Bond Buyer Weekly Yields 20 G.O." index (the "Index") published in the "Bond Buyer" as the general obligation bond yield for 20 year maturity general obligation bonds, or if such Index becomes unavailable, such other index as may be determined by the District to be comparable to the Index. The foregoing shall not apply to obligations issued or sold in a public offering. As used herein, "Developer" includes Spring Valley Development, Inc., its successors and assigns, and any entity which owns or controls Spring Valley Development, Inc. or which is owned or controlled by Spring Valley Development, Inc. All improvements, facilities, and other properties paid for or financed by either of the Districts shall be public improvements, owned by the District or another appropriate political subdivision of the State. 14 • C. Contents of Service Plan [§ 32-1-202(2), C.R.S]. This Service Plan includes a preliminary financial analysis set forth in Exhibit B. Numerous other items are included in this Service Plan in order to satisfy the requirements of law for formation of special districts. Those items are listed in Exhibit C attached hereto. Due to its vast size, the preliminary engineering. survey for the Project is not attached hereto, but instead contained as Exhibit 25 in the Preliminary Plan submission for the PUD which shall be filed by Spring Valley Development, Inc. simultaneously herewith or shortly thereafter and is incorporated herein by reference. The engineering survey shows how the facilities and services for the Project can be provided and financed by the Districts. Each of the requirements of law are satisfied by this Service Plan. The assumptions contained within this Service Plan were derived from a variety of sources. Information regarding the present status of property within the Districts, as well as the current status and projected future level of services, was obtained and provided by the developer. Construction cost estimates were assembled by the developer's personnel who have experience and access to experienced consultants in the costing and construction of similar facilities. Financial advice has been supplied by Stan Bernstein and Associates. Inc., which has extensive experience with Colorado local governments. Legal advice in the preparation of this Service Plan was provided by the law firm of Holland & Hart LLP, which represents numerous special districts. D. Modification of Service Plan [§ 32-1-204(4), C.R.S.]. This Service Plan has been designed with sufficient flexibility to enable the Districts to provide required services and facilities for the Project under evolving 15 circumstances without the need for numerous amendments. While the assumptions upon which this Service Plan are generally based are reflective of current zoning for the property within the Project, the cost estimates and Financial Plans are sufficiently flexible to enable the Districts to provide necessary services and facilities without the need to amend this Service Plan as zoning changes. Modification of the general types of services and facilities, and changes in proposed configurations, locations, or dimensions of various facilities and improvements shall be permitted to accommodate development needs consistent with then -current zoning for the property. FIGURE I-1 DEVELOPMENT PLAN Residential Dwelling Units 91 Ranch Lots 134 Estate Lots 171 Golf Lots 30 Duplex/Townhome Units 1 Meadow Lot 75 Cabins 502 Two 18 Hole Golf Courses, Clubhouse of approximately 40,000 square feet, and Attendant Facilities (e.g. parking, maintenance, recreation) and attendant administrative and support facilities Equestrian Center and Attendant Facilities (e.g. riding rings, parking, stalls, sheds) Open Space 16 • • • • Landis Creels Metropolitan Financing District TABLE I-1 DEVELOPMENT PROJECTIONS Number of Units 2003 2004 2005 2006 200" 20' 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 iota: Units 18 42 54 70 87 73 60 41 22 2 13 482 The total assumes that 20 lots will not be built upon. CHAPTER II - NEED FOR NEW DISTRICTS AND GENERAL POWERS A. Need for Metropolitan Districts L3 32-1-203(1), C.R.S]. The current use of the property in the PUD is undeveloped ranch land. No other governmental or quasi -governmental entities exist which will finance the construction of the facilities described herein. The agreements referred to in Chapter VI • hereof will address and define the activities to be undertaken by various entities with regard to public improvements and their operation and maintenance. B. General Powers of Districts [§ 32-1-1001, C.R.S. j. Each District will have power and authority to provide the services and facilities described.in this Chapter both within and outside its boundaries in accordance with law. The powers and authorities of each District relative to each other will be allocated and further refined in "master" IGAs between the Districts which may be voted upon and approved by their respective electorates. For purposes of the Control Act, the IGAs shall not constitute an amendment of this Service Plan. They will, however, constitute binding agreements between the Districts regarding implementation of the • powers contained in this Service Plan. 17 Each District shall have authority to, but may not necessarily unless specifically stated, provide the following services and facilities. In any event, each District shall provide or be responsible for the provision of at least two of the following services pursuant to the statutory requirements of a Metropolitan District as defined in § 32-1-103(10), C.R.S.: 1. Water. a. Potable Water. Potable water shall be provided and shall include the design, acquisition, installation, construction, operation and maintenance of a potable water system, including, but not limited to, water rights, water supply, storage, treatment, transmission and distribution systems for public or private purposes, together with all necessary and proper reservoirs, wells, water rights, equipment and appurtenances incident thereto which may include, but shall not be limited to, transmission lines, distribution mains and laterals, storage facilities, land and easements together with extensions of and improvements to said systems. There will be dual water systems, one for potable water and one for raw water for irrigation. b. Raw Water for Irrigation. Raw water for irrigation shall be provided and shall include the design, acquisition, installation, construction, operation and maintenance of an irrigation water system, including, but not limited to, water rights, water supply, storage, transmission and distribution systems for public or private purposes, together with all necessary and proper reservoirs, ponds, wells, water rights, equipment and appurtenances incident thereto which may include, but shall not be limited to, transmission lines, distribution mains and laterals, storage facilities, land and easements, together with extensions of and improvements to said systems. 18 • • • • 2. Wastewater. Wastewater collection facilities shall be provided and shall include the design, acquisition, installation, construction, operation and maintenance of a wastewater system or portions thereof including, but not limited to, collection equipment and appurtenances incident thereto which may include, but shall not be limited to, collection mains and laterals, land and easements together with extensions of and other improvements to said systems. All wastewater facilities to be dedicated to SVSD shall comply with the SVSD's Rules and Regulations, as adopted and amended from time to time, to the extent the Rules and Regulations so not conflict with the December 15, 1999 Plant Development Agreement as hereinafter defined ("SVSD's Rules and Regulations"). To the extent that these improvements are not dedicated to the Spring Valley Sanitation District, the Service District shall own, operate and maintain • them. The Service District shall provide for the capability of providing contractual maintenance services for ISDS facilities within the Project. Wastewater collection facilities shall not be construed to mean a wastewater treatment plant so long as a wastewater treatment plant is owned and operated by SVSD and SVSD has not breached the Pre-Inclusion and Wastewater Treatment Plant Development Agreement dated December 15, 1999 between Spring Valley Sanitation District, the Developer, and landowners within SVSD's boundaries as is may be amended from time to time ("Plant Development Agreement"). 3. Streets. Paths and Landscaping. Public Roads CR114 and CR115 shall be improved as required by Garfield County in connection with the approval of the PUD. Public paths shall include the design, acquisition, installation, construction, • operation, and maintenance of such paths and landscaping improvements together with 19 all necessary, incidental, and appurtenant facilities, land and easements, bike and pedestrian paths, and signs together with extensions of and improvements to said facilities. 4. Drainage. Drainage shall include the design, acquisition, installation, construction, operation, and maintenance of drainage systems and improvements together with all necessary, incidental and appurtenant facilities, land and easements together with extensions of and improvements to said facilities. The system will consist of culverts, selected storm sewers, ditches, swales, ponds, detention swales and curbs and gutters and maintenance of the same. 5. Parks and Recreation. Parks may include the design, acquisition, installation, construction, operation and maintenance of District parks, land and facilities and recreation facilities, if any, together with all necessary, incidental and appurtenant facilities, land'and easements and all necessary extensions of and improvements to said facilities or systems. 6. Transportation. Transportation facilities and services may include without limitation the following: a. Bus shelters and benches b. Bike and pedestrian paths c. Possible provision of an intra -District transit system and associated facilities and equipment and a transit system which would provide services to areas outside of the Districts, the cost of which could be shared with third parties 7. Mosauito Control. As appropriate, mosquito control will be undertaken. 20 • • • • • • 8. TV Relay and Translation. The Service District may operate a cable television system or may franchise it out to a third party. 9. Fire Protection and Vegetation Manipulation and Manacemen:. The Service District shall provide fire protection services subject to the agreement of Developer with the Glenwood Springs Rural Fire Protection District; fire hydrants and related incidental and appurtenant facilities, equipment, improvements, and a sub -station will be designed, installed, constructed, operated, and maintained by the District. The Service District shall have the powers and duties and shall be authorized to provide all fire protection services permitted by C.R.S. Section 32-1-1002. Fire protection services will initially be provided by Glenwood Springs Rural Fire Protection District pursuant to that certain agreement with such district and the City of Glenwood Springs. As a part of the fire protection service in the Districts, extensive vegetation manipulation and management shall be conducted by the Service District pursuant to that certain Wildfire Hazard Mitigation and Vegetation Management Plan for the PUD and consistent with the Fuelbreak Guidelines for Forested Subdivisions by the Colorado State Forest Service, as it may be amended from time to time. 10. Legal Powers. The powers of the Districts will be exercised by their Boards of Directors to the extent necessary to provide the service contemplated in this Service Plan subject to the limitations set forth herein. The foregoing improvements and services, along with all other activities permitted by law, will be undertaken in accordance with, and pursuant to, the procedures and conditions contained in the Special District Act, other applicable statutes, and this Service Plan, as any or all of the same may be amended from time to time. 21 11. Other. In addition to the powers enumerated above, the Boards of Directors of the Districts shall also have the following authority: a. To amend this Service Plan as needed, subject to the appropriate statutory procedures, including, by written notice pursuant to § 32-1-207, C.R.S. notice of actions which the Districts believe are permitted by this Service Plan but which may be unclear. The County shall be deemed to agree that any such actions or activities are within the scope of this Service Plan if it does not seek to enjoin any such actions or activities under the statute. The Districts shall have the right to amend this Service Plan independent of participation of the other District; provided, that the Districts shall not be permitted to amend those portions of this Service Plan which affect, impair, or impinge upon the rights or powers of the other District without such District's consent; and b. To forego, reschedule, or restructure the financing and construction of certain improvements and facilities, in order to accommodate better the pace of growth, resource availability, and potential inclusions of property within the Districts, or if the development of the improvements and facilities would best be performed by another entity; and c. To provide all such additional services and exercise all such powers as are expressly or impliedly granted by Colorado law and which the Districts are required to provide or exercise or, in their discretion, choose to provide or exercise; and d. To exercise all necessary and implied powers under Title 32, C.R.S. in the reasonable discretion of the Boards of Directors of the Districts. This 22 • • • • • • Service Plan is intended to be flexible so that modifications which are not significant or material will not necessitate amendment of the Service Plan. CHAPTER III - DESCRIPTION OF FACILITIES AND IvIPROVENIENTS The Service District and Financing Districts will be permitted to exercise their statutory powers and their respective authority set forth herein to finance, construct, acquire, operate and maintain the public facilities and improvements and provide the services described in Chapter II of this Service Plan either directly or by agreement. If appropriate, the Districts may contract with various public and/or private entities to undertake such functions or perform responsibilities related thereto. The descriptions contained in this Chapter show the conceptual plan for the public facilities and improvements described in Chapter II hereof. Detailed information for each type of public improvements needed for the Project is set forth in the following pages. It is important to note that the descriptions contained in this Chapter are general and conceptual in nature only, and that modifications to the type, configuration, and locations of improvements will be necessary as development proceeds. Facilities will be designed in such a way as to assure that the facility and service standards will be compatible with those of or required by the County and of other entities which may be affected thereby or as otherwise set forth in the PUD approval by the County and any applicable annexation agreements. The following_ sections contain general descriptions of the contemplated facilities and improvements which will be financed by the Financing District. 23 A. General Construction of all planned public facilities and improvements will be scheduled to allow for proper sizing and phasing to keep pace with the need for service. All descriptions of the specific facilities and improvements to be constructed, and their related costs, are estimates only and are subject to modification as engineering, development plans, economics, and applicable legal requirements, and construction scheduling may require. B. General Design Standards Improvements within the Districts will be designed and installed by the Service District in general conformance with current standards adopted by the Service District and established through the PUD requirements or as may be further required, if appropriate, in an applicable subdivision improvements agreement or an IGA. All wastewater facilities to be dedicated to SVSD shall comply with the SVSD's Rules and Regulations. C. Improvements 1. Public Improvements. The primary improvements to be operated and maintained by the Service District on an on-going basis include those associated with water service, residential drainage and other services as described herein. District coordination with the Spring Valley Sanitation District regarding wastewater systems and services and with the golf courses on the integrative aspects of the residential irrigation systems will be necessary. Other associated improvements that will be operated and maintained by the Service District or by the Master Association will be landscaped entrances and other common open areas (such as parks) and recreation 24 • • • • • • facilities, transportation facilities, bike/recreation/pedestrian paths, right-of-way maintenance, street lighting, street signs, safety protection facilities, parking facilities, and other improvements set forth in this Service Plan. Only public improvements will be constructed by the Service District. The Districts' capital cost recovery will be based solely upon the financial capability of the Districts effecting such recovery. Ongoing maintenance and operation and administration costs will be recovered based solely on the Districts' ability to pay within the confines of established fees and charges as contained herein, subject to the use of tax revenues for non -fee based services such as maintenance of drainage facilities, and wildfire -related vegetation. 2. General Operation and Maintenance. Once constructed, these improvements often become the responsibility of either the general purpose government or a homeowners association to operate and maintain. When operated by a property owners association, neither the benefits of tax exemption or of governmental immunity become available to the property owners association responsible for the ongoing operations and maintenance. This is the reason that this Service Plan proposes that the Service District is empowered to take control, where applicable, from the developer the aspects of capital improvements which may include the design, acquisition, installation, ownership, as well as the operation and maintenance of these and other public improvements, depending on the determination of the Boards of Directors of the Districts and the Master Association concerning the appropriate allocation of these responsibilities as Iimited by this Service Plan. 25 3. Irrigation Systems and Water Rights. An irrigation system or systems will be used at all the development parcels for golf course irrigation, the residential irrigation, and open space/streetscape irrigation. The existing water rights historically used to irrigate these lands will supply the non -potable irrigation water together with additional adjudicated water rights. Water will be diverted at existing head gates or wells or such other decreed diversion facilities and feed a series of ditches, other delivery facilities, and operational and esthetic ponds throughout the Project. Water will then be delivered to the respective irrigation systems. TABLE III -1 SPRING VALLEY PUD WATER RIGHTS Available for potable and non -potable irrigation for the Project and PUD 1. Kendall and Stricklett Ditch, as described in the decree dated April 18, 1890, in the matter of the adjudication of the priority of rights to the use of water for irrigation in Water District No. 38, Garfield County, Civil Action No. 304, for 0.1 c.f.s., with appropriation date May 15, 1882. Landis Ditch No. 1, as described in the decree dated April 18, 1890, Civil Action No. 304 described above, for 1.6 c.f.s., with appropriation date June 1, 1882. 3. Landis Ditch No. 2, as described in the decree dated April 18, 1890, Civil Action No. 304 described above, for 1.6 c.f.s., with appropriation date June 1, 1882. 4. Ditch, as described in the decree dated April 18, 1890, Civil Action No. 304 described above, for 1.2 c.f.s., with appropriation date May 15, 1884. 5. Forker and Gibson Ditch, as described in the decree dated April 18, 1890, Civil Action No. 304 described above, for 5.5 c.f.s., with appropriation date April 30, 1885. 6. Frank Chapman Ditch, as described in the decree dated April 18, 1890, Civil Action No. 304 described above, for 2.0 c.f.s., with appropriation date April 25, 1886. 7. Hopkins Ditch, as described in the decree dated September 20, 1977, in Case No. W -3298-A, Water Division No. 5, for 3.0 c.f.s., with appropriation date 26 • • December 31, 1940. 8. Hopkins Spring No. 1, as described in the decree dated May 19, 1978, in Case No W-3121, Water Division No. 5, for 0.0614 c.f.s., with appropriation date June 30, 1900. 9. Hopkins Spring No. 2, as described in the decree dated November 7, 1977, in Case No. W-3122, Water Division No. 5, for 0.0924 c.f.s., with appropriation date June 30, 1900. 10. A one-tenth (1/10) interest in the B -R Hopkins Springs, as described in the decree dated March 20, 1975, in Case No. W-2395, Water Division No. 5, for 0.11 c.f.s., with appropriation date May 15, 1930. 11. Hopkins Reservoir, as described in the decree dated April 30, 1910, in Civil Action No. 1419, for 5,208,305 cubic feet, with appropriation date May 18, 1909. 12. All rights adjudicated by the decree in Case No. 84CW212, Water Division No. 5, dated October 7, 1985. 13. All rights adjudicated by the decree in Case No. 87CW155, Water Division No. 5, dated December 10, 1992, and any subsequent amendments. 14. Sorine Valley Well No. 1 (Well Permit No. 051362-F) is located in the SW'/4NE1/4 of Section 29; T6S, R88W of the 6th P.M. at a point whence the Northeast Corner of said Section 29 bears N45°00'E 2,800 feet. 15. Sorine Valley Ranch Well No. 2 (Well Permit No. 051363-F) is located in the SW'/4NE% of Section 29, T6S, R88W of the 6th P. M. at a point whence the Northeast Corner of said Section 29 bears N51°30'E 2,050 feet. 16. Sorin Valley Ranch Well No. 3 (Well Permit No. 28961-F*) is located in the SE'/4NW% of Section 29, T6S, R88W of the 6th P. M. at a point whence the NAV Corner of Section 29 bears N54°01' 16"W 3005.98 feet. 17. S V H Well No. 5 (Well Permit No. 051364-F) is located in the SW' NE% of Section 29, T6S, R88W of the 6th P. M. at a point 1,600 feet South of the North line and 1,500 feet West of the East line of said Section 29. 18. S V H Well No. 6 (Well Permit No. 051365-F) is located in the SW'/4NE'/4 of Section 29, T6S, R88W of the 6th P. M. at a point 2,200 feet South of the North line and 2,400 feet West of the East line of said Section 29. • 19. S V H Well No. 7 (Well Permit No. 051366-F) is located in the NE'/4NT'/4 of Section 29, T6S, R88W of the 6th P. M. at a point 800 feet South of the North line and 1,200 27 feet West of the East line of said Section 29. 20. S V H Well No. 8 (Well Permit No. 051367-F) is located in the NW1ANW'/4 of Section 27, T6S, R88W of the 6th P. M. at a point 800 feet South of the North line and 700 feet East of the West line of said Section 27. 21. S V H Well No. 9 (Well Permit No. 051368-F) is located in the NWY4NW'/4 of Section 27, T6S, R88W of the 6th P. M. at a point 1,100 feet South of the North line and 1,050 feet East of the West line of said Section 27. 22. S V H Well No. 10 (Well Permit No. 051369-F) is located in the SE' NWY4 of Section 27, T6S, R88W of the 6th P. M. at a point 1,600 feet South of the North line and 1,550 feet East of the West line of said Section 27. * Expired; however, application for renewed permit pending. CHAPTER IV - COSTS AND REVENUE SOURCES A. Cost of Construction and Operation. 1. Development -Capital Costs. The development -capital costs of the Districts are estimated to be 535,114,302 in 3% inflated 2001 dollars. 2. Annual Operation and Maintenance Costs. At full development (2015), the annual operation and maintenance costs of the Service District totals 53,573,709 in 3% inflated 2001 dollars as shown on Exhibit 1 of the Financing Plan. 3. Debt Service. It is yet to be determined whether to issue bonds or instead to issue a limited general obligation note to the developer for reimbursement of a portion of the approximately $35,114,302 of costs. This general obligation note will provide for a total mill levy of the District of 24.00 mills for debt service so that no unexpected burden will occur to the residents of the Project. Accordingly, the debt service schedule would depend upon the ability of the Districts to produce funds available for debt service at the established rates from the revenue sources detailed in the following subsection. 28 B. Revenue Sources. • 1. Property Taxes. A mill levy of 45.00 mills is proposed to be assessed by the Districts generating approximately S4,118 per year for each $1,000,000 of residential value. This property tax (which will be in addition to any homeowners association dues or fees) will be income tax deductible to the property owner. The tax will be used to pay for all the Districts' operation and other associated expenses. 2. Potable Water System Investment Fees. The potable water system investment fees are expected to be approximately $13,000 in 2001. 3. Raw Water Irrigation System Investment Fees. The raw water irrigation system investment fees are expected to be $2,000 in 2001. 4. Specific Ownership Taxes and Interest Income. Specific ownership • taxes are expected to be 5% of property tax revenues. 5. Interest Earnings. Interest earnings are projected to be 5% of beginning funds available. 6. Water User Fees. Domestic and irrigation water user fees are expected to average approximately S50 per month per residence for 2001. 7. Other Fees. Other fees will include service contracts for services for properties located outside the boundaries of the Districts. No wastewater system improvement fee (tap fee) or any other periodic wastewater service charge denominated as such shall be imposed by the Districts; provided however, that periodic service charges may be imposed in connection with maintenance and management of ISDS systems or as otherwise agreed to in writing between the Districts and SVSD. Subject to ill the foregoing sentence, the Districts shall be limited to imposing a mill levy for the 29 recoupment of expenses associated with the installation, operation, maintenance„ repair and replacement of its wastewater facilities. CHAPTER V - FINANCIAL PLAN SUTARY [§ 32-1-202(2)(b), C.R.S.] Attached to this Service Plan as Exhibit B are Financial Plans which show how the proposed services and facilities may be financed and operated by the District. The Financial Plans include the proposed operating revenue derived from ad valorem property taxes to be used by the Service District. The Master IGAs are expected to provide that the obligation of the Service District to pay the Service District for operating expenses incurred for provision of services to property within the Service District shall constitute "debt" of the Service District. Accordingly, mill levies certified to make necessary payments to the Service District will be characterized as debt service mill levies notwithstanding that they are imposed to pay contractual obligations for operations and maintenance services provided by the Service District. The Service District anticipates borrowing its initial operating funds from the developer until such time as it is able to generate operating revenues from the Financing District. The Financial Plans include the proposed debt issuance by the Service District and the Financing District and shows how the financial operations of the Districts will be coordinated. The Financing District is expected to issue limited tax obligation debt supported by ad valorem mill levies as limited herein from the revenue available from a 45.00 mill levy including operating costs. This mechanism will help assure the transition of appropriate tax revenue to the payment of debt issued to provide services for the Project. It is presently anticipated that the Service District will issue 30 • revenue bonds to the developer or secured by the developer and by financial commitments received from the Financing District. Other structures may be used. All dollars are presented assuming an average annual inflation factor of 3%. The Districts shall be entitled to modify the proposed structure of the Financial Plans by causing the Service District to obtain funding directly from the developer, its lender, or assigns of developer, provided that all such borrowing shall comply with the requirements of state Iaw and this Service Plan regarding limitations on the amount of limited tax obligation debt which may be issued. For example, the Service District will be entitled to obtain funding from the developer rather than issuing revenue bonds and agree to repay the developer from revenue sources to which the Service District might otherwise become entitled pursuant to the Master IGA or other agreements. Subject to the limitations set forth herein, the Districts shall have the ability to utilize excess debt capacity which may be developed within the Districts if the assumptions contained in the Financial Plans are more conservative than what actually develops within the Project. The balance of the information contained in this Chapter of this Service Plan is preliminary in nature. All dollars are stated in 2001, 3% inflated dollars. Upon approval of this Service Plan the Districts will continue to develop and refine cost estimates contained herein and prepare for bond issuances. All cost estimates will be inflated to current dollars at the time of bond issuance and construction. Engineering and other contingencies as well as capitalized interest and other costs of financing will be added. All construction cost estimates assume construction to applicable local, state or federal requirements. 31 The maximum general obligation indebtedness for the Financing District is not expected to exceed $38,375,000 (in 2001 dollars including 3% inflation). The Districts shall have authority to finance and construct all facilities contemplated herein without the need to seek approval of any modification of this Service Plan. The Districts shall also be permitted to seek debt authorization from their electorates in excess of this amount to account for contingencies provided that any such authorization shall not exceed the mill levy limitation of 50.00 mills. Reasonable modifications of facilities and cost estimates shall likewise be permitted. Subject to the limitations set forth herein, final determination of the amount of debt for which approval will be sought from each District's electorate from time to time will be made by the Board of Directors of each District based on then -current estimates of construction costs, issuance costs, and contingencies. Authorization to issue bonds as provided herein and enter into various agreements described herein will be sought from each District's electorate pursuant to the terms of the Special District Act and the Colorado Constitution as amended from time to time. In addition to ad valorem property taxes, and in order to offset the expenses of the anticipated construction and the Service District operations and maintenance costs, the Districts will also rely upon various other revenue sources authorized by law. These will include the power to assess fees, rates, tolls, penalties, or charges as provided in § 32-1-1001(1), C.R.S., as amended. The Financial Plans assume various sources of revenue including ad valorem property taxes, specific ownership taxes, utility plant fees, and user charges together with interest earnings on retained amounts. It is possible that a metered system of user charges will be established. 32 • The Financial Plans do not project any significant accumulation of fund balances which might represent receipt of revenues in excess of expenditures under the TABOR Amendment. It is anticipated that certain of the operations of the Service District will qualify as "enterprises" under the TABOR Amendment. If its operations do not qualify as enterprises under TABOR, revenue from all sources which exceed the permitted level of expenditures in a given year will be refunded to taxpayers unless a vote approving the retention of such revenues is obtained. To the extent annual District revenues exceed expenditures in this manner the Districts will comply with the provisions of TABOR and either refund the excess or obtain voter approval to retain such amounts. The estimated costs of the facilities and improvements to be constructed and installed by the Districts including the costs of acquisition of land, and engineering services, legal services, administrative services, initial proposed indebtedness, and other major expenses related to the facilities and improvements to be constructed and installed are not expected to exceed S35,115,000 in 2001 dollars assuming 3% annual inflation. Organizational costs will be reimbursed to the developer by the Districts out of their initial revenue sources including debt instruments. The maximum voted interest rate for bonds will be eighteen percent (18%); but the expected issuance rate is much lower. This maximum rate is set at this level just to accommodate some currently unforeseen market conditions. The proposed maximum underwriting discount will be voted at five percent (5%) although it is expected that the actual discount will be closer to 2-3% for the limited tax obligation bond issues. It is estimated that the limited tax obligation bonds or other forms of indebtedness, when issued, will mature not more than forty (40) 33 years from date of issuance pursuant to state statutes. (These statutes were recently revised to allow 40 year g.o. bonds, although the district's debt is being planned for 20 years, and to not require any mandatory principal reduction in the early years.) In the discretion of the Boards of Directors, the Districts may set up other qualifying entities to manage, fund, construct and operate facilities, services, and programs. To the extent allowed by Iaw, any entity created by the Districts will remain under the control of its Board of Directors. The Financial Plans demonstrate that each District will have the financial capability to discharge the proposed indebtedness with reasonable mill levies as limited hereby assuming reasonable increases in assessed valuation and assuming the rate of build -out estimated in the Financial Plans. CHAPTER VI - PROPOSED AND EXISTING AGREEMENTS A. Master Intergovernmental Agreements [permitted under § 32-1- 1001(1)(d)(I), C.R.S]. As noted in this Service Plan, the relationship between the Service District and the Financing District, including the means for approving, financing, constructing, and operating the public services and improvements needed to serve the Project will be established by means of Master IGAs to be executed by the Districts. The Master IGAs will establish extensive procedures and standards for the approval of the design of facilities, transfer of funds between the Districts, and operation and maintenance of the facilities. The Master IGAs will also provide for coordinated administration of management services for the Districts. 34 • • The Service District will be responsible for initial review and approval of plans for construction of public improvements within the Project, except as to wastewater facilities to be dedicated to SVSD, in which case, the provisions of SVSD"s Rules and Regulations apply. The Service District will be responsible to submit any plans necessary for such improvements which it will construct and plans for such improvements which developers will construct. The purpose of this structure is to eliminate any need for the County to be involved with developers in the day-to-day review and approval of the District or developer improvements within the Project and to minimize the number of individuals with whom the County must deal in any review and approval process or may be required beyond the annexation agreement or PUD approval process. B. Agreement with Master Association It is anticipated that the Service District will enter into an agreement with a Master Association for the integration of functions to the greatest extent legally possible to minimize costs and maximize benefits to both entities and their constituents. C. Plant Development Agreement dated December 15, 1999. Developer entered into the Plant Development Agreement with SVSD and other landowners within SVSD's boundaries regarding the construction of a wastewater treatment plant to serve the region, including the Project. The Districts shall comply with SVSD's Rules and Regulations, as adopted and amended from time to time, to the extent the Rules and Regulations do not conflict with the Plant Development Agreement. In addition, the Districts shall not take any action that would directly or indirectly 35 modify, breach, or alter in a material way the rights and obligations of the parties under the Plant Development Agreement or SVSD's Rules and Regulations. D. Other Agreements/Authority [permitted under § 32-1-1001(1)(d)(I), C.R. S.J. To the extent practicable, the Service District may enter into or assume assignment of additional intergovernmental and private agreements to ensure better long- term provision of the improvements and services and effective management. Agreements may also be executed or assignment of agreements may be executed with other service providers. All such agreements are authorized to be provided by each pursuant to Colorado Constitution, Article XIV, Section 18(2)(a) and Section 29-1-201, et seq., Colorado Revised Statutes. The Service District will enter into service agreements to provide services to the affordable housing and commercial area within the PUD that are outside of the boundaries of the Districts. CHAPTER VII - OTHER REQUIREMENTS AND CONCLUSIONS A. Requirements The Financing and Service Districts shall be subject to the following additional requirements: 1. Submission of annual reports as described in § 32-1-207(3), C.R.S. 2. Material modifications of this Service Plan shall be subject to approval by the County in accordance with the provisions of § 32-1-207, C.R.S. B. Conclusions It is submitted that this Service Plan for Landis Creek Metropolitan Districts No. 1 and No. 2 as required by § 32-1-203(2), C.R.S., has established that: 36 • 1. There is sufficient existing and projected need for organized service in the area to be served by the Districts; 2. The existing service in the area to be served by the Districts is inadequate for present and projected needs; 3. The Districts are capable of providing economical and sufficient service to the area within their boundaries; 4. The area included in the Districts does have, and will have, the financial ability to discharge the proposed indebtedness on a reasonable basis; 5. Adequate service is not and will not be available to the area through any other existing municipal or quasi -municipal corporations including existing special districts within a reasonable time and on a comparable basis; 6. The facility and service standards of the Districts are compatible with the facility and service standards of Garfield County. 7. The proposal is in substantial compliance with the Garfield County Master PIan adopted pursuant to § 30-28-108, C.R.S. 8. The proposal is in compliance with any duly adopted county, regional, or state long-range water quality management plan for the area; and 9. The ongoing existence of the Districts is in the best interests of the area proposed to be served. Therefore, it is requested that the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, which has jurisdiction to approve this Service Plan by virtue of § 32-1-204.5, C.R.S., et seq., as amended, adopt a resolution which approves this 37 consolidated "Service Plan for Landis Creek Metropolitan Districts No. 1 and No. 2," as submitted. 38 • • • Spring Valley Ranch / Landis Creek Metro District --- Water System Financial Projections 10/18/2007 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 2010 2011 2012 Beginning Cash Balance Cash Receipts: Unmetered Water Revenue Metered Water Revenue Other Water Revenue Total Water Revenue 2013 2014 0 234,350 523,728 608,638 733,990 0 0 0 0 0 19,013 49,973 75,817 106,748 143,1.57 1 0 0 0 0 0 Connection Fees Interest and Dividends Other Income 19,013 49,973 75,817 106,748 143,157 475,336 759,718 608,619 716,431 830,165 0 4,687 10,475 12,173 14,680 0 0 0 0 0 Total Cash Revenues 494,350 814,378 694,910 835,352 988,002 Transfers in / Additional Revenue Needed 0 0 0 0 0 Loans, Grants, Other Cash Injection 0 0 0 0 0 Total Cash Receipts 494,350 814,378 694,910 835,352 988,002 Total Cash Available 494,350 1,048,728 1,218,638 1,443,990 1,721,992 Operating Expenses: Salaries and wages Employee Pensions and Benefits Purchased Water Purchased Power Fuel for Power Production Chemicals Materials and Supplies Contractual Services - Engineering Contractual Services - Other Rental of Equipment / Real Property Transportation Expenses Laboratory Insurance Regulatory Commission Expenses Advertising Miscellaneous Total Cash O&M expenses Replacement Expenditures Total OM&R expenditures Loan Principal / Capital Lease Payments Loan Interest Payments Transfers Out Capital Purchases 90,000 135,000 18,000 27,000 0 0 15,000 40,000 0 0 1,000 2,000 5,000 10,000 0 6,000 0 6,000 0 0 12,000 12,000 3,000 4,000 1,000 1,000 0 12,000 0 5,000 150,000 10,000 160,000 0 0 100,000 0� 157,500 180,000 180,000 31,500 36,000 36,000 0 0 0 60,000 80,000 100,000 0 0 0 3,000 4,000 5.000 10,000 10,000 6,000 6,000 12,000 18,000 0 0 12,000 6,000 18,000 0 12,000 24,000 24,000 5,000 6,000 6,000 1,000 2,000 2,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 0 0 0 0 45,000 40,000 22,000 24,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 425,000 25,000 50,000 100,000 100,000 325,000 400,000 500,000 525,000 0 0 0 0'* 0 0 0 0 * 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 ** 0 10,00o 10,000 I 10,000 Total Cash Paid Out Ending Cash Position 260,000 525,000 610,000 710,000 735,000 234,350 523,728 608,638 733,9901 986,992 Number of Customer Accounts Average Annual User Chargper Customer Coverage Ratio Operating Ratio 29 74 109 149 194 656 675 696 716 738 n/a n/a n/a 0.12 0.15 0.19 End of Year Operating Cash 100,000 n/a n/a 0.21 0.27 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 End of Year Reserves: Debt Service Reserve !Bond Retirement Reserve Capital Improvement Reserve Replacement Reserve Total Reserves 0 0 0 0 0 100,000 134,350 223,728 134,350 323,728 Footnotes: 0 0 100,000 308,638 408,638 0 0 * 0 0 * 100,000 100,000 433,990 686,992 533,990 786,9921 Debt service for entire Metro District repaid by property tax revenues (not water revenues). Transfers out are used to support Metro District bond debt service.