HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.0 Staff Report BOCC 12.11.06I
I
Exhibits for Public Hearing held on December ll,2006
6
0i (.9./.
L" ,r4-l {,1, 1.1, ,
1 @,/h f^ ,?i lw'
q 0/ - t- -rw /*t/{
f fir,r fnl
_),,
It
+
A Mail Receipts
B Proof of Publication
C Garfield Subdivision of 1984, as amended
D Garheld Resolution of 1978, as amended
Garfield County Comprehensive Plan of 2000E
F Application
G Staff Memorandum
Letter from Carbondale Fire Protection District dated 8119106H
I Letter from DOW dated 8109106
J Letter from the CGS dated 8130106
K l-etter from Mountain Cross Engineering dated 8l3l106
Letter from DWR dated 8130106L
Email from the County Road and Bridge Department dated 8130106M
N Letter from the Colorado State Forest Service dated 8128106
o Email from the Colorado Department of dated 8113106
P Letter from the Bureau of Land Management dated 8t22t06
o Letter from County Vegetation Manager dated 9101106
Letter from SGM dated September 21,2006R
S Letter from HP Geotech dated September 29,2006
T Conditions to Staff Report
U Revised Traffic lmpact Study
Email from CDOT dated LOllllO6v
Fire Protection District Letter from Bill Gavette dated October 6,2006w
x Letter from Mountain Cross Engineering da1.r;g f]!2J!99
Y Fire Protection District lrtter from Bill Gavette dated December 5 2006
Letter from Garfield & Hecht dated December 5,2006Z
d/kh )
Pl^ ( gl)-
W.$i&ffi*rW
BOCC 12111106
FJ
PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS
REOUEST
APPLICANT / OWNER
REPRESENTATIVE
ENGINEER
LOCATION
PROPERTY SIZE
WATER
SEWER
ACCESS
EXISTING ZONING
Preliminary Plan review for Pinyon Mesa
Pinyon Mesa DeveloPment' LLC
John Elmore
Schmueser Gordon Meyer (Debbie Duley)
Spring Valley, approximately 1. mile east of the
ftigt *uY 82 / CR 1 14 intersectton
60.49 acres
Central Water SYstem
Central sewer SYstem
CR 114
Los Amigos Ranch PUD
,t
o ,
!
?
n
s
i!:i":i!*#8:t';"
-i
D
-l
L
A. General ProPertY DescriPtion
The 60.49-acre property is generally located in the Spring Valley '"l lpPloiimately
7 miles south
of Glenwood Springs and ipproxirnut.iy i *,. easr;f t[. Hi;-h;v s,z i cr.
114
inrersection' The
property is borderei",l',ir"T"nt *a "'ur,
;;;*11;^"ra ittJ-*rrei phases of Los Amigos Ranch
pUD: bordered to the south by BLM; *a Uoia"'ed to the west by Garfield County property'
physically, the property sjts- 9i T upper bench above the Roaring Fork River valley floor on the
south side of county Road 114. There u." ,*o significant allf orulnuge channels that begin in two
separate places which merge at approximatery the center oi tt. prop".ty and then drain to the west'
Additionally, there is a signifi"unt toou in the center.;;;;-p;y.*ith steep slopes on the
eastern edge of the properry. T!" ,"gOLi* con.ist. or rug.,-ir'niwr11{ pinyon pine' [The photo
below presents u ri"i*li"f.ing from 'h;;;p"'"d
main "nt"*""
near CR t t+ to the south east'l
B. ProPosal
The Applicant proposes to subdivide the property according to the uses and densities as approved
bv the Board in Resolution 81-358 *itr' ir'"'otiiina I-"t X;got Ranch PUD which calls for 80
ltrigtr densit,l singre-rarn,V lots on tt'" OO-*'"s'is will U" ai'Jt"t"d' the development is proposed
to be served by exrsting centrar watel and sewer systems ";;;;;rr is provided directly from CR
114. The lots have a minimum tot, ,ir. or rb,ooo sq. ft. d;6;".imately fiftv percent (30 acres)
of the properry wi, be placed in open ,0u"" u*ompanied iv;;-*"nity iacilities approved in the
puD such as picnic areis, small ""-*Y#;;;;;,il-6eneratty,
the proposal intends to develop
three separate areas of the site in two phases'
2
d
l
T
C. Background
The original Los Amigos PUD (approved by the BOCC in 1981) zoned the subject property for
80 single-familY lots in the following configuration
AdditionallY , this ProPertY was approved as Phase
Los Amigos with a submission of the PreliminarY
and a comPletion of the SIA by December 31,20
design of the ProPertY almost matches the design ProPosed in 1981
3F to be the last phase to be developed in
Plan to the County by Decembtt -31: ?908
10. Interestingly, the proposed subdtvtsron
I
Staff referred the application to the following State agenc.ies and / or county Deparrments for their
review and comment. comments ,"""ii"o-*: T:1, mentioned below or are more
comprehensively ir;;;;r","d wittrin,h. uppropriate section of this memorandum'
A. Town of Carbondale (No cofi)ments Received)
B. City of Cr"'*L"Jspiingt (No comments Received)
C. Carbonad" fi'" Protect[n District (See Exhibits H and Y)
D. Spring vdl; J;iu'ion District (No comments Received)
E.ColoradoStateForestService(SeeExhibitN)
F. Colorado Department of Transportation (See Exhibits O and V
G.ColoradopivisionofWildlife(SeeExhibitI)
H. Colorado Department of Public Heatth and Environment (No comments Received)
L Colorado piii'io' of Water Resources (See Exhibit L)
J. Colorado Geologic Survey (See Exhibits D
K. Bureau of Land-Management (See Exhibit P) rn
L. County nouO and Bridge Department (See Exhibit tt[)
M. County Vegetation Management (See Exhibit Q)
N. Coonty Striiff (No comments Received)
O. Mountai, i'ot''gngineering (See Exhibits K and' X)
-1
j--'-'-..
TO
The property is located in Study Area 1 which has the designation of PUD since the PUD was
approved 15 years prior to the Comprehensive Plan designulo*-*"re.establishedin 1997 The
proposal is to develop the property aclorAing to the orig-inal PUD which is consistent with the
m.
rV
Comprehensive Plan.
The folrowing is an analysis of the proposed development with the required zoning regulations of
the PUD zone district.
f;"ffi,,n*,.poSeSsingle-fami1yresidentialdeve1opmentona11ofthe801otswhichis
contemprated as a ..use by right,, in the puD and is theiefore consistent with the underrying
StafffindsthatsinceFARisspecificallycalledout-asFARoverthetota]HDSFarea,FAR
is to be calculated by total area dlvoted to HDSF zone district which results in
apProximatelY 60.64 acres'
C. OPen SPace
Resolution g6-34required the following condition regarding open space:
10. Common opcn spsoc aceas shall bc dedicatcd by the Applicant to thG Ior Aurigos
Ranch Homqoumcls Agsociatiin ln'sn amount that maintains a 50:50 ratio or SIEdcf'
dcdicatod open spscc to dcvclopEd lad- Tbc ilcdicatios of oPctr qpscc sball coincidc with
the approtrat of rbc applicable fuial plat'
,
The total acreageof the property is 60.49 acres with 5o7o of that acreage being 30'24 acres' yet the
ffu, propor", i0.2t u"r"r. Thi' upp"*s to generally satisfy this requirement'
zone district.
B. Common Dimensional Requirements
o Front Yard:
o Rear Yard:
o Side Yard:
10,000 sq. ft.
257o
25 feet
25 feet
10 feet
28 feet
1:0.10 of total HDSF area (3,294 sq' ft' per lot)
4
v
The fonowing section addresses coflrmon subdivision components that are required as part of the
PreliminarY Plan.
A. Water / Water Ouality / Irrieation Water
B. Waste DisPosal
The Apprication proposes to provide_water to the deveropment from the Elk Springs Homeowners
Association (formerly Los Amigo, HOA, *ni"n o*" ih" water system serving the rest of the
PUD. The water system is operated by Red Canyon Watel Company' The eiEhrinch water main to
the subject property has already pt V.. ilfV U""n installed' 1't'" ptoposed water system in the
development is a ""itfi *uter systerndesign to be constructed in two phases'
The Application contains an ..Ability to Serve,, letter from Red Canyon Water Company to provide
domestic and irrigation water to a1 lots within the development. The lar€er existing contral water
suppty system tras t-*o farle water tanks with a storage capacity of 620'000 gallons served by two
wers pumping at 270 garons pel minute and a water'treatment fac,ity. This rast phase of
development was includei in the .ur"urutions for the overall system capacity and ability to serve' In
this case, the developer would construct, own, and operate ihe internal components of the water
system serving pinyo'nMesa which is to be later transferred to the Pinyon Mesa HOA'
The Application contains an opinion regarding the legal proof of water for the development from
patrick / Miller / Kropf which ultimffip"ir,r 9,it.it9 iegal approval for water was established
with other filings of th" Los Amigor" puD which included a court approved Basalt water
conservancy Disrrict augmentation plun providing for a total of 3zi SFRs (which includes 80 SFRs
in pinyon Mesa). Stafi refened ,rr" ipprrcuti6' to the Division of Water Resources which
responded with a determination that tt "
pilpo,"d-**1'l supply is physically adequate and will not
cause a materiar injury to decreed *r*'.ig'n s. (Exhibit z) riris Jystem appears to satisfy county
requirement, u, urr'o rtoo uv Mountain cross Engineering. @xhibit K)
TheApplicationproposestoprovide.centralsewerservicetothedevelopmentfromspringValley
Sanitation District. rn" piroi"t instalreJ a lift station and 4-inch force main on the l0west portlon
of the property when the District .onr*i"J recent upgrades to the District's wastewater treatment
plantapprovedbyCDPHEwhichincludedthefuturqdevelopmentofthisproperty.Thedeveloper
pfoposes to install S ir"t gravity tir". tt"o'ghout the development to carry wastewater to the lift
station in a typical central wastewater collection system configuration' once the mains are
constructed, the system will be dedicated to the District'
The Application contains a ,.can and win Serve" retter from the District's legal representatives'
Leavenworth & Karp, p. c. This r"tt., "*p1uir.
the District has the capacity and ability to serve the
project. The Applicuiion ut'o "ontuin'
ti" 1,n'y' *. from CDPi{E for the lift station on the
property. This system appeafs to satisfy County requirements' This system appears to satisfy
County requiremeni, u, ui* noted by Mountain Cioss Engineering' (Exhibit Ig
5
ThesiteplanshowsthedevelopmentwillhaveonemainaccesspointontoCRll4whichisa
public right-of-way. The develbpment also proposes a-secondary emergency access onto CR
114 from the end of the internal ioad called "Paintbrush way".
Thesiteplanprovidesforaninternalroadsystemthatwillbeownedandmaintainedbythe
Homeowners Association (HoA). The
-or".u11
design incrudes five roads with a secondary
emergency access out to CR 114 from Paintbrush Way'
The total trips generated from the development are 766 (80 units x 9'57)' As such' the
subdivision regulations require the internar road system to be in the "minor collector" category
which generally requires the ROW *iOit, to be 6b feet with 2 twelve foot driving lanes and a
chip-seal surface. In this case, hower"iirr. ."ire Los Amigos PUD has beendeveloped so that
the internal roads that carry fewer ,ript *"t" designed tJ a lesser standard which has been
acceptable to the Board. This approu.t'i, simply being applied to this phase of Los Amigos as
C. Roads /Access / Traffic
well.
manner:
Additionally, the main drive (Pinyon Mesa Drive) results in a cul-de-sac design that is
approximately g00 iil* feet long which is 300linear feet longer than the 600-foot maximum'
Asyoualeaware,theBoardcanapprovelongercul-de-sacsifthefotlowingtwo-prongtestcan
be met by the design: 1) That it is neceJs;t"* topographical reasons and 2) it can be proved
that fire protection and emergency egress und u"."i, is provided as a part of the longer design'
This is discussed in greater detail in the Fire protection section of this memorandum' The
carbondare Fire protecrion District provided a retter that states the rength and design (width and
t rrn-arornd radius) is acceptable for their needs'
ffing80,il4:-f1*lydweI1ing.(1-f**,i1d-out)wil1generateapproximately
766 average daily trips (ADT). The Application contains. a Traffic Impact Study prepared by
schmueser Gordon Meyer which ,uriii.ir"s the off-site traffic impacts in the following
A. of the766ADT, the development will generate approximately 60 trips in the AM peak
hour and 81 triPs in the PM Peak hour;
B. The intersection of the site driveway and cR- 114 will operate at acceptable LoS
through the long-term time period (over the next 20 years);
C.TheintersectionofSHs2andcRll4isexpectedtooperateataLos.E',inthelong
term, with or without this development;
D. capacity improvements may-be necessary at this
-intersection
by others if the forecast
trafficgrows'attheratecDoTurro-"tr-tn"sHs2corridornearcMCroad(cR114);
E.NoturnlanesarenecessaryalongCRll4attheintersectionofCRll4andthemain
entrance into the development. The driveway approach will be constructed to allow two
6
exiting turn lanes (one in each direction) and an entering lane for inbound traffic' This
approach will be controlled by a stop sign;
F. Adequate sight distance is provided for turning and stopping maneuvers at the primary
drivewaY to the develoPment'
cDoT reviewed the Apptication and provided the following comments:
This development will Senerate 81 trips on PM peak hour' Based upon the Pinyon'"o,
trffic impact study dated May 2006, this devilopment will impact sH 82/GCR 114 by
approximately 18.5 percent, therefore, an access permit would not be required' (See Exhibit
o)
TheCountyRoadandBridgeDepartmentreviewedtheproposalandprovidedthefollowing
comments. (See Exhibit M)
All accesses to cR l 14 shall have driveway access permits issued by Garfield County Road
& Bridge Department with conditions specific to each permit'
Each entrance to cR 114 shall have a stop sign placed at the entrance to cR 114' The signs'
posts and location shall be as required uy tli uuTCD (Manual on Untfurm Trffic Control
Devices). An intersection sign it ott be-placed on both stdes of the main entrance to the
subdivision alerting uphitl and downhitt tra7c to the entrance' The signs' posts and
installation shall be as required in the twUrco (Manual on Unifurm Trffic Control
Devices).
A turn lane should be installed on the uphill lane to the main entrance to the subdivision'
With the wide shoulder that exists this should not be a problem to install'
D. FloodPlain Issues
There are no known live watercoufses on the property. As such there are no floodplain issues
regarding this ProPertY.
E. Fire Protection
The property lies within the carbondale Fire Protection District. The Applicant proposes to provide
fire protection through 1) the installation of fire hydrants throughout the subdivision served by the
central water system and 2) construction of a secondary emergency
-
act)ss in / out of the
development off the end of Paintbrush Way back out onio CR it+' tft" District reviewed the
proposal and provided the following .o**.ni, as also contained in Exhibit H attached hereto:
Accgss +t^^- 2A ,,-itc * internn
Two separate access road.s should be provided for subdivisions more than 30 units & internal
roads should provide signage prohibiting on-street parking based on their width'
,7
Water Supplies.for Fire Protection
The proposrd rrntrol *otr, ,yrtem is adequate; however, the proposed location and spacing of
the hydrants is adequate'
Wildfire Haz.ards
The slopes and sage / pinyon vegetation on the property present a potential wildfire hazard' The
Applicant shall need'to use fuil breaks, defeisibie spaces, and /or fire resistant materials to
ifrfgor, hazards. The deveiopment shoutd Tottow the recommendations of the State Forest
Service.
Impact Fees
The development is required to PaY
the District at the time of final plat.
the fire impact fee of $437 per dwelling unit to be paid to
The Colorado State Forest Service reviewed the Application and provided the following comments
regarding wildland fte (Exhibit l'l):
The primary vegetation is iuniper and pinyon trees, and sagebrush' The combination of
vegetative ,p"riJ, poses o ;gn;firotion wildfire hazard to parts of the proposed subdivision',
The lots at the highest lre ,tit< are: lots |Z-ZO and lots 36-48. These are located in the
northeast section i7 rt , proposed subdivision and includ.e pinyon and iuniper trees on a slope
that is greater than l0 perient. Any homes built on these lots need to have defensible space
which is an area around. a structure'where fuels and vegetation are treated, cleared or reduced
to slow the spread of wildftre towards the itructure. Also, homes should be built using firewise
materials that are fire-resistive (class c or better rating).
The next area of increased wildft.re risk is located on either side of the ravine, the lots
surrounding this"area are tots 66-72 and lots 59-65. The vegetation in the, ravine is comprised
of dense, mature pinyon and iuniper trees. Trees and understory shrubs should be thinned and
the removat oy ilaalr fuels Lnd dead material should be completed before any homesites are
built on. The final area of higher wildfire risk is the lots surrounding a small knoll where
pinyon and juniper trees are growing. TLe lots are 49-54 and l-5. The size of the trees and the
increased slope make this portion oi the property prone to higher wildfire hazards and should
be treated as lots 17-20 and 36-48.
the to
s
and Materials,2000) would decrease for a wildfire event,(added emphasis)
Written standards for defensible space management zones published b1^the^Colorado State
Forest Service can be fiund in tie recent rivision of publication 6.302, Creating Wildfire
Defensibte Zones. Obviously, removing any type of vegetation considered as ladder fuels'
undergrowth that could bring a fire into"tree'cr;wns,- any dead or dying trees or shrubs should
be removed.
8
I found no current signs of the ips bark beetle (Ips confusus) colonizing pinyon pine trees on the
froprrty. But they are aitiv, on the hillsid,e, evident across CR 114. It is recommended to plan
'any
coniftr/evergreen tree cutting or pruning activities in late September or October which is
wirn tlri ips baik beetles over winters and would not attack any new trees. Any construction or
thinning work done in the summer that creates sap flow on pinyon trees will attract the ips to
the area and could result in the death of a large number of the pinyon trees on the property'
Please refer to publication 5.558, Ips Beetles for further information.
F. Wildlife
The Application contained a "Wildlife Analysis I knpact and Mitigation Report" prepared by
Rocky-Mountain Ecological Services, Inc. Habitat on the property can be generally characterized as
sagebrush flats, crested wheatgrass and limited areas of pinyon and Juniper tree growth. No state or
federal threatened or endangered species were identified on the property. A site visit was conducted
with the Division of Wildlife to discuss potential impacts to wintering big game which consist of
Elk, Mule Deer, and Black Bear.
Of noted importance is the Elk and Mule Deer use of this property particularly during the winter
months. The conversion of a portion of this property to development will eliminate areas of
wintering habitat as well as further impact remaining deer and elk by domestic dogs in the
subdivision. The report suggests a fairly lengthy set of recommendations to minimize impacts to elk
and deer specifically retated to fencing, lighting, roads, domestic dogs, landscaping and
revegetation.
The Colorado Division of Wildlife (DOW) reviewed the proposal and conducted a site visit to the
property and provided comments found in Exhibit I. Ultimately, the DOW agrees with the
;Wifaflf" Anaiysis / Impact and Mitigation Report" prepared by Rocky Mountain Ecological
Services, Inc. Additionaily, the DOW strongly recommends 1) the Applicant prepare an Elk
Management plan due to the amount of critical wintering habitat being eliminated with
develJpment, 2) cites the occurrence of bears and mountain lions in the area which should be made
aware io residents, and 3) disclose to future residents that hunting could occur on the adjacent BLM
property.
9
Becau*e the area wi1 tikely receive use by mdE deer and elk during the night,-nighttirne lighting of
tfre property and excesslve lighting of drtveways (beyond what is required q PF driving conditions)
is nbt rbcsrnrnended in ordeito ditryy nig garire use of the area" Further, lighting of existing winter
.ani* heyond the buirding envelope areiJ is strorrgly dismuraged (for instancn; lrom bright back-
G.u ligh6 iltuminating ao]aoent at-u lanos). vegatation shor.rtd be planted 10' .ry of roadsldes in
areas fonere Freadligh*e ;rom vehicles ilNuminate dnter range area$ in order to minimize unintended
.spotlighting" of furaging gasle at night.
o F*nces a*ong tfie rnads should not he at*ornred"
o Cut andlor fill slopes along the roads should be designod to faciFtate wildlife movement this
includes using native pfint materials that rnimic local native vegetetion species and
distribution.
o Large on extanElve retaining wallc should not be utillzed.
s Fences rnay consist of two rcils, yyfth the upper rail 44 incfres above tire grournd, and the top
of th€ bottom rail 24 inches eboue the grcund. This will allow adult anirnals to easily iurnp
ovsr fenms, Bvefl in deep spottr, atrd will allow cahes and fawns to crawl under or pass
through the rai[s, sr
o Buck and rail fenms are prautica*ly impossihle for ryuildlife to cross, therefore buck and rail
fences sre sfipngly d*acouraged.
G If ca6h or dornestic sheep grazing resufftss in the area" and fe*cing livestock out becornes
a necessity, th* prspgrty o*}ers should ccnsult with CDOW & tsLfut personnel to deve{op sn
aeceptrble fence Atisign. There are variuus types Bf fences Srat are compatible with femcing
out horrea, dcttwstic -rhe*p, and cattle ar,rC still dbw for witdlife mov6rnEnb acros8 fence
lines.
s prisr to construction in or adjacent to winter range habitats, snow fencing or silt fencing shall
be ereeted at tlre edge of ttrb nu*uing envelopes to contain distr*rhance to native vegetation
by indirect construd#n activities (i.e. trprnpling of vegetation h,y equipmer( etc.)"
* Dogs strould be r*ot be alloued outside sf fenced yards during the winter months
{Novernber lSthrough March 15}.
o This includes dogs ovuned b-y contractors, subcontractors, delivery personnel, home owners
and their gues6. Loose or uncontrolled dogs can have a signiticant impact to big gern€
through Oiie{f; and indirsct rnortality, increased stres$, and displaoenmnt frorn preferred
raog&. Contrul of dogs is vital when living within an elk rnigration canidof.and adiaoent to
elk-winter range. In the past, CDOW has had numerous reprts of dogt brought to
construction pifes by workers whlch chase and harasc wildlife. Due to &re location and
proxirnig of thls parcelto sensttiue w:ildlife habitat araas, csn$trudion workers should not
be allowed to brirrg dogs on site"
G. Drainage
Generally, the property appears to be traversed by two separate westbound drainages originating in
the center of the property ihut "orr"rge to create one large steep drainage cut which exits the west
boundary of the
-property. It appears there are four contributing drainage basins to the subject
property. 1.ne eppfcition contains a drainage plan prepared by SGM which ultimately indicates
pori-O"u"top111"n1- flow will not exceed historic flows off the property due to a previously
ionstructed detention pond further up-basin from the property that controls flow onto this property.
Even so, the plan intends to construct water quality inlets to minimize impact from the
10
development. Mountain cross Engineering reviewed the drainage plan finding that the topography
appears to concentrate Jlows onti Paintbiush Way in a few locations. Inlets may be warranted at
tli yor* main crossing and at the first turnaround. (Exhibit 19.
staff finds the ..up stream detention pond" to be interesting and a condition that is seldom reviewed'
Staff asked the Applicant to clarify how this works so that we are sure that that stormwater is
adequately -*ug.d upstream as Los Amigos has developed and also adequately mitigate flows to
the subject property. Their response is as follows:
The ,,upstream detention pond" is part of the stormwater manaSement system of the original
Los Amigos Ranch pUD as appioved-by the county in 1999. This detention basin was
designed to reduce runoff 1oi quU build out of Los Amigos Ranch in the contributing
watershed to design potii i, loiated directly above Pinyon Mesa. -The
calculations in the
original drainage report show an historic 100 year Jtood peak of 121 cfs, and 1a0 cfs fuuy
developed. while the pond only detains runoff from a portion of the total drainage, it
reduced the developed flood peak to I 12 cfs'
Wen we look at runoff on a watershed basis, flow from Pinyon Mesa exits ahead of this
reduced upstream proii. The flood peak at the ultimate outlet of the watershed is reduced as
a result of the mitigated upstream runoff'
Mountain cross Engineering has not reviewed this as of the drafting of this report but will have
reviewed by the time of the hearing.
H. Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
The property adjoins a small parcel of BLM land to the south. As such the parcel could serve as a
valuable addition of open ,pu"" for recreation and wildlife value to the residents of the project' The
BLM reviewed the priposai and provided several comments regarding impact to wildlife, potential
of disposal of prop".ty through ixchange, wildfire, tle:qass, recreation I travel, hunting I target
shooting, and mineral rights. Important io note, the BLM indicated they may exchange / remove
this parcel from its public lands inventory which means private ownership could follow' Staff
suggesrs the six pointi made in their letur (Exhibit P) be included in the ccRs to place residents in
the PUD of these issues.
L Soils / Geolosy / Radiation
The soils encountered on the property include Almy Loam (1 - 12 percent slopes) which indicates
it is well suited for home site development and Gypsum land - Gypiorthids complex (12 - 65
percent slopes) which indicates the soiis are poorly ioit"O for home site development due to slope,
Lrosion hazards, piping, and low soil strength during wet periods'
The Application contains two geotechnical reports prepared by HP Geotech that provide an analysis
of the soils, their suitabllity for development, potential challenges to development,
recommendations to mitigate the issues. A total of 17 borings were take_n throughout the property to
support the findings in the report. The geotechnical_challenges identified on the property include
collapsible soils, slope instability, storriwater runoff and flooding, sinkholes, regional evaporate
deformation and earthquake considerations'
11
The report ultimately indicates that development of the project as proposed should be feasible based
on geitechnical conditions and so long as certain recommendations are followed which are
identified in the reporrs. Specific site dJsign engineering will be required on all individual lots
within the development.
staff referred the Application to the Colorado Geologic Survey (cGS) for their review and
comments which ar" i*loded here as well as can be found in Exhibit J '
We have reviewed the HP Geotech reports and gene rally concur with their content. It
appears that the develoPment plan has been well thought out and Planned, and avoids the
higher risk areas. The geologic hazards we consider this site exposed to are
hydrocollapsible soils, dissolution of sol'uble bedrock and sinkhole formation, and localized
slope instability in those ravtne areas.HP
ev s on
buildine .fo otp rint s .for
lot and 74 are
suitabbt o.ffset from
the escarDment to
avoid potential sloPe
instabilitv for the
desisn lifetime o.f the
residence.(Lots in
question shown on the
righr.)
HP Geotech reviewed
the CGS comments
and submitted an additional letter concurring with moving I'ot 73 building envelope back
from the top of slope and that the building enve lope for Lot 74 was adequate. (See Exhibit
s)
e
The HP Geotech recommendations for surface drainage are extremely important.
Prevention of wetting of the subgrade soils or near-surface soluble bedrock will best insure
the long term perfotmance of wet utility lines,foundation elements, slab-on- grades, and
pavement,s,
Such a potentiallY,t
wider-spread wetting into thicker columns of potentially hydrocompactive soils could result
in downwarping and settlement of wider areas and impact not onlY foundation but
utilities,which could then leak and cause
will not preclude the development has it is
potential hazards that need to be ProPerlY
addressed during construction.all open
potentially strain and cause the breakage of wet
additional distress.
In closing, we concur that the geologic hazards
intended, but there are geologic constraints and
.s
The
t2
sho be sure
hat
and
recommendations.
Mountain cross Engineering also commented that generally, foundation drains are run to
dayltght or drain i o, infittration drywetl. In light of the evaporite' drywells may be
unacceptable and some lots may not Le abte to drain to daylight. Means of conveying
foundation drains to a suitable daylight location may be warranted' (Exhibit K)
J. Noxious Weed manasement / Revegetation
Staff referred the Application to the county vegetation Manager who provided the following
comments (Exhibit Q).
Regarding noxious weeds, the Application provided a weed inventory and weed
management plan and noxiou, *iid, orc oidrrssed in the covenants and that the
Homeowners Association will manage common area noxious weed concerns'
Regarding revegetation, the Application nrovi*d .a reveSetation plan that includes a plant
materials lxt fi review whici i, orrrptible. The Applicant shall be_required to quantify the
area, in ,"i, of acres, to be disturbed and subsequently reseeded on road cut and utility
disturbances. This would be areas outside of the iuilding envelopes. Thts information will
help determine the amount of security that will heldfor revegetation by the County'
Regarding the soil Plan, the county requests the Appticant provide a soil Management
plan that includes l) provisions for ialviging on-site topsoil, 2) a timetable for eliminating
topsoil and/or aggregate pites, ind 3) a plan-that provides for soil cover if any disturbances
oi stockpiles will sit exposed for a period of 90 days or more'
K. Easements
The property has a number of existing easement and the development proposes a.number of
easements which includes modifying soire of the existing easements' As a general requirement' all
easements of record shall be shown on the final plat. Presently, the property is encumbered by the
following easements:
25' Powerline easement on the far western portion of the property;
30' Sewer line easement serving the lift station easement;
30' Access easement serving the lift station easement; and
Existing powerline to be eliminated and relocated (not located in an easement depicted
on the propertY).
Proposed additional easements include:
1) Emergency access easement from the end of Paintbrush Way to CR 114; and
2) 25' diunage easement between lots 20 - 36'
L. Minerals
It is not clear if the Applicant owns all the minerals estate. This shall need to be clarified at the
hearing. If not, Staff suggests a plat note providing notice of a severed estate'
13
1)
2)
3)
4)
M. Required DeveloPment Fees
The Applicant is responsible for paying the following fees at the time of final plat:
1) School / Land Dedication
In this case, Resorution 96-34 memoriarized that the obrigations for all of Los Amigos Ranch PUD
were satisfied by the dedication of a certain parcel shown berow. The condition satisfying this
requirement is set out here:
!
?o.fuccastsball,hlialoftheP8lrlcnt.ofanimpactfec,dedicltgtorhcRE-lScbool
pistricr Er th. filing of the "* noi pf*' , *1o1 ptt'i if Uoa'ideoti'ed uqoo tbc PUD Plrn
as tlc ,schoor shc-parcer" Ttc drddr# of this pr"pffiiprassty ntifes dl obligatioat
ofAppricant ;-d;;;*r"*b,#;;6;thr d"ddttaj;f tt t pioptntv, Prvmcot of tu
io liar or pt"p#iotai*tiio *g* Pqvmsst of school fce'
It is presentl y reflected as "School Site" on the Assessor's County parcel maps but the Parcel has
not been conveYed by deed to the RE-1 School District as was required in Resolution 96-34' As a
result, this obligation has not been satisfied and this will need to occur Prior to any approval of
Final Plat.
2) Traffic ImPact Fee:
Resolution g6-34."quir., the following condition of approval for this development:
?," At thc dme of each Fiual PIat approval, a fee shall be paid to tbc Cornty i" ** q
amount as'shall be established by the Board Pursuant to a road impacl .*l{ti:.1o be acccfrfod
5, * County at the time of each Prcliminaryflan approval. Such fcc rhsll bE assc,sscd ts
"
p**tt rorO irrp."a fe? based upon the esdmaied cost ofnilo lane'improvemcn8'to Cornty
nLa I14 Aorn itjirnersccrionwith the highway frontage road,adjacent to ffigbway 82.to its
iri;r*i"n with th.e entry road to Auburn Ridge trousine pmj.ct. flt roaa .i-n1n11"na!a:
accepted by thc cpqnry abovq as the sirmc may be som time to tirne rnodificd to rCfIGGt
,r-rot *r&, stnll be incorponated into all future analyses used b: tbu Coy4 ia gurntiffi
road impact fe"s inthe County Road 114 corridor, Payrncnt of said road impact f99 stn[
;;;#;:;o[
"onaitioned
,poo the assessroent by thc-Cpunty, at thc timc of Final Plu' of
propohonurrfy
"q,rsl
road irnpact fees upon all zu-bsequentty dcvcloped pnopcrties apccssed
in wtrols or part by County Boad 114.
o,o
+
&. l4+'
dgwEllD,'
AC.+-
OPEN SPACE
52.1 AC.+-
As such, the property is located in Traffic Study Area 10 which requires a payment of $195 per
ADT generated frorn the development. In this case, the development will generate 766 ADT which
results in a fee of approximatety $t+9,292.00. Only half of this fee (approximately $74'646'0O) is
required to be paid i rina prat with the remaining harf to be amortized by way of individual
UuitOing permits as the project develops over time'
3) Fire Protection Impact Fee
The property i, lo"ut"d in-th. carbondale Fire Protection District which requires a fee of $437 per
tot to Ue palh to the District at the time of final plat. In this case the fee is $34,960'
vI.OF
A. Soils / Site Geoloey
Both Hp Geotech *J-tn. Colorado Geologic Survey found that development is possible;
however, serious consideration should be tiken regarding the shrink / swell characteristics
of the soils on the property and site specific engineering and careful water use need to occur
to prevent subsoil challenges to the life of the project'
cGS notes the evidence of shallow slope failures on the colluvial slope along the south bank
of the ravine below lot73. CGS recommends that the County require either further setbacks
or the geotechnical consultant verify, in writing, that the back boundaries of the building
footprints for lot 73 and 74 are suitably offset fiom the escarpment to avoid potential slope
instaUitity for the design lifetime of the residence. This has been satisfied'
HP agrees with CGD (Exhibit s) and recommends the building envelope for-Lot 73 be set
back a minimum of 30 feet fro the top of the steep slope and the footing depth be at least 3
feet below existing ground surface but fills be no deeper than 2 feet within the setback
distance. The buildin! envelope on Lot 74 appeats to be adequately setback'
B. Internal Road System
Length of proposed cul-de-sac of "Pinyon Mesa Drive" is 300 feet longer than the 600 foot
standard and the Application has not demonstrated that it 1) is necessary for topographical
reasons and /).un'b" proved that fire protection and emergency egress and access is
provided as a part of the iong., design. Again, while the Fire Protection District has deemed
the road acceptable for their needs, the noarO needs to approve this specific length'
The Planning Commission requires that the entire area of the bulb of the cul-de-sac at the
end of Pinyon Mesa Drive be paved with no island in an effort to assist with emergency
vehicle turn-around.
C. Wildlife
The Dow agrees with the.'wildlife Analysis / Impact.and Mitigation Reportl submitted by
the Applicant (prepared by Rocky Mountain Ecological Services, Inc') Additionally' the
15
DOW strongly recommends 1) the Applicant pfpTe an Elk Management Plan due to the
amount of critical wintering habitat U"irg iti-inut"O with development' 2) cites the
occurrence of bears and m6untain lions i-' tt't area which should be made aware to
residents, and 3) disclose to future residents that hunting could occur on the adjacent BLM
propertY
VI
VM. RECOMMENDATION
o
1. That proper publication, public notice, and posting was provided as required by law for the
hearing before tt" pi*ning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners'
2. That the public hearing before the Planning Commission and Board of County
Commissioners was exteisive and complete; alipertinent facts, matters and issues were
submitted; and that all interested parties were heard at those hearings'
3. The application is in compliance with the standards set forth in Section 4:00 of the Garfield
a;rr.i Subdivision Regulations of 1984' as amended'
4. That the proposed subdivision of land is in compliance with the recommendations set forth
in the Comprehensive Plan for the unincorporated areas of the county'
5. The proposed subdivision of land conforms to the Garfield county zoning Resolution of
1978, as amended'
6. The proposed use is in the best interest of the health' safety' morals' convenience' ordef'
-
ptorp"riiy and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County'
The Planning commission unanimously recomm€nded. the Board of county commissioners
approve the Preliminary Plan request subjlct to the following conditions of approval:
l.ThatallrepresentationsmadebytheApplicantintheapplicationandastestimonyinthe
public hearings before the- Pianning it Zoning Commission and Board of County
Commissioners shall te conditions of"approval, oril"r, specifically altered by the Board of
CountY Commissioners'
z. Arl internar roads sha, be designed to have a road surface of two r2-foot driving lanes with
curb and gutter throughout the subdivision'
3. The length of the cul-de-sac represented as Pinyon Mesa Drive shall be allowed to be
designed, as shown, to 900linear feet'
4. The Applicant shall furnish a design and specifications for the secondary emergency point at
the end of Paintbrush way that indicates the ability to handle laqe I heavy emergency
vehicles and methods of ur"ut-u*uy gates or othei appropriate ^mechanism
to deter use
unless fo, "-".i.ncy.
This shall be pi"fur"O and provided prior to final plat'
l6
5. Applicant shall obtain a driveway access permit for both the main entrance into the projects
and for the secondary emergency access point onto cR 114 these shall be obtained prior to
final plat.
6. The Applicant shall install a stop sign at each entrance to cR 114' The signs' posts and
location shall be as required by the l'iurcp (Manual on Uniform Traffic control Devices)'
An intersection sign shall be placed on both sides of the main entrance to the subdivision
alerting uphill and-downhill triffic to the entrance. The signs, posts and installation shall be
as required in the MUTCD (Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices)'
T.Arighrhandturnlaneshouldbeinstalledontheuphilllanetothemainentrancetothe
subdivision.
8. The Applicant shall pay the appropriately calculated Traffic Impact Fee for Study Area 10
which results in a fee of approximately
'$149,292.00. Only half of this fee (approximalgly
$74,646.00) is required to Le paid at Final Ptat with the remaining half to be amortized by
way of individualtuilding permits as the project develops over time'
g. The Applicant shall cause the conveyance of the School Parcel by deed to the RE-l School
District Prior to Final Plat.
10. A11 development of this property shall follow the recommendations of the colorado State
Forest Service as stated in their tetier dated August 28,2006, (attached as Exhibit N to the
Staff report) which shall be in.orplrut"d ilto it " CCRS as a requirement of the BoCC
particularly as they relate to lots |7 -20, 36-48, 66-7 2 and lots 59.65 .
11. The Applicant shall pay-in-full the fire impact fee of $437 per dwelling unit to carbondale
Fire protectlon pist.ict'at the time of rinal Plat. (This fee shall be $34,960'00)
l2.T\eApplicant shall incorporate the recommendations contained in the "Wildlife Analysis /
Impact and Mitigation Report" prepared by Rocky Mountain Ecological Services' Inc'
contained in the Application and shali be incllded as a component in the CCRs'
13. prior to the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners, the Applicant shall meet
withtheDowinordertoprepareanElkManagementPlanduetotheamountofcritical
wintering habitat being eliminated with development' (This was not completed')
14. The Applicant shall cause the open space tracts to be deeded to the Homeowners
Association as part of the Final Plat'
15. The Applicant shall provide a security for revegetation in the amount to be determined by
the County Vegetation Manager (basei on distuibed acreage) for all areas to be disturbed in
connection with the final plat *o ,t " obligations of said security which security shall be
incorporated into the Subdivision Improverients Agreement' The security shall be held by
Garfield County until vegetation his been successfully reestablished. according to the
Reclamation Standards in the Garfield County Vegetation Management Plan'
16. The Applicant shall provide a Soil Management Plan that includes 1) provisions for
l7
salvaging on-site topsoil, 2) a timetable for eliminating topsoil and/or aggregate piles' and 3)
a plan that provid", fol. soil cover if any disturbances or stockpiles will sit exposed for a
period of 90 days or more. The Applicunt ,hull prepare this plan to be submitted with the
final plat documents so that the County can review prior to final plat approval'
17. The Applicant shall follow all of the recommendations provided in the geotechnical analysis
prepared by HP Geotech (reports in the Application and Exhibit S to the staff Report) as
well as the follow the recommendations proria"a by the Colorado Geologic Survey in their
letter dated August 30, 2006 also attached as Exhibit J to the staff report)'
ls.AlleasementsofrecordshallbeshownontheFinalPlat.
1g. The Applicant shall include the six points provided in the letter from the Bureau of land
Management dated August 22, 2OO6'(and attached to the Staff report as Exhibit P) in the
CCRs to place residenti in the PUD on notice of these issues' The CCRs shall be provided
as part of the Final Plat submittal'
20.Thefollowingplatnotesshallbeplacedonthefinalplat.
a. ',Control oJ'noxious weeds is the responsibility of the properry owner'"
b.,,one(1)dogwillbeallowedforeachresidentialunitandthedogshallberequiredto
be confi,nediitni, the owners property boundaries'"
c. ,,No open hearth solid-fuel fireplaces will be allowed anywhere within the subdivision'
one (1) new solid-fuel burning stove as defied by c'R's' 25-7-401' et' seq'' and the
regulationspromulgatedthereu'nder,willbeallowedinanydwellingunit,Alldwelling
units will be allowed an unrestricted number of natural gas burning stoves and
apPliances".
d.Nofurthersubd'ivtsionshallbeallowedofasubdividedlot.,,
e. "AlI exterior lighting shall be the minimum amount necessary and that all exterior
lighting be diicted inward and downward, towards the interior of the subdivision,
except that provisions may be mad'e to allow for safety lighting that goes beyond the
proPertY boundaries" '
f. ,,colorado is a "Right-to-Farm" state pursuant to c.R's' 35-3-l0l' et seq' Landowners'
residents and visitors must be prepired to accept the activities' sights' sounds and^
smells of Garfield CounQ's agriiultural operations as a normal and necessary aspect of
living in a County with a strong rural character and a healthy ranching sector' Those
withanurbansensitivitymayp"erceivesuchactivities,sights,soundsandsmellsonlyas
inconvenience, eyesore, noise and odor. However, state law and counQ policy ryou-id-e-
that ranching, farming or oth;;-'o-[riruhrrol acti.vities and operations within Garfield
County ,lralinit be cinsidered to be nuisances so long as operated in conformqnce with
the law and in a non-negligent manner' Therefore' all must be prepared to encounter
noises, odor, lights, mud, dust, smoke chemicals, machinery on public roads' livestock
18
on public roads, storage and disposal of manure, and the application by spraying or
othirwise of chemicat fertitizers, soil amendments, herbicides, and pesticides' any one
or more of which iay naturally occur as a part of a legal and non'negligent
agricultural operations.
g. "All owners of land, whether ranch or residence, have obligations under State law and
county regulations with regard to the maintenance of fences and irrigation ditches,
controlling weeds, keeping livestock and pets under control, using property in
accordance with zoniig, and other aspects of using and maintaining property'
Residents and landowners are encouiaged to learn about these rights and
responsibilities and act as good neighbois and citizens of the County' A good
introd,uctory source for such-information is "A Guide to Rural Living & Small Scale
Agriculture,, put oui by the Colorado State University Extension Office in Garfield
CountY."
h. *All lots shall require site specific geotechnical studies before a building permit will be
issued by the Cointy Building Department and all foundations shall be designed by a
professional engineer licensed to practice in Colorado'
i. Zone District Parameters:
Floor fuaa
3,294 sq. ft.28 feetFront / Rear: 25'
Sides: 10'10,000 sq. ft.257"Home
OccupationSingle Family
High
t9
lJaes
)
a
AUG 3 O 2006
FIRE.EMS .RESCUE
August 19,2006
Fred Jarman
Garfietd County Building & Planning
108 8th Street, Suite 201
Glenwood SPrings, CO 81601
RE: Pinyon Mesa Preliminary PIan
Carbondale & Rural Fire Protection District
300MeadowoodDriveoCarbondale,Cos|623o970-963-2491Fax970-963-0569
Dear Fred:
I have reviewed the application for the proposed Pinvon M:-sa Subdivision' The application was
reviewed for compliance with the rnternairinal Fire bode (IFC) 2003 edition, adopted by the
County. I would offer the following comments'
ffi.p*u,e access roads should be provided for the subdivisions of more than 30 residential
units. iFC Section D107, One or Two-Family Residential Developments.
The subdivision roads should be provided with appropriate no parking signs based upon their
width. IFC D103.6 Signs
Water Supplies for Fire ProtectigB
A central wate*yrffiilpo-r.a ror the subdivision utilizing the existing-Elk Springs water
system. The proposed water supply r.* ttt. Elk Springs Subdivision should be adequate for fire
protection. rn. propo..a to.uti* and spacinq-"tlh: fiie hydrants is inadequate' Hydrant
spacing and location shall be in accordance wlth IFC Appendix C. Fire hydrants should
generally be located at road intersections whenever po.tiUtt' It appears to me that at least four
additional hydrants will be necessary'
Wildfire Hazards
The proposed subdivision predominately has with slopes of grass and sage with areas of pinion
and juniper forest, which present a potential wildfire iazud. Fuel breaks, defensible spaces
and/or fire resistant U"ifai"g construction features may be necessary to mitigate the hazard' Fuel
breaks and defensiur. ,pu.J, should fouow the recommendations of the colorado State Forest
Service.
BEDs
o
r'l
f,rl : '
u
Pinyon Mesa Prelirninary rrun, Page 2
P,.u"**-entissubjecttodevelopmentimpactfeesadoptedbytheDistrict..Thedeveloper
will be required to entei into an agreement with the District for the payment of development
impact fees. Execution of the ugr""-"rri*Jfuy-"nt of the fees are due prior to the recording
of the final plat. fu", .. Uur.irpo, th" t-ft; fees-adopted by the District at the time the
agreement is executed. The current fee for residential development is $437'00 per unit'
please contact me if you have any questions or if I can be of any assistance'
SincerelY
Bill Gavette
Deputy Chief
Carbondale & Rural Fire Protection District
300 Meadowood Drive o carbondale, co 81623 o 970-963-2491Fax970-963'0569
STATE OF GOLORADO
Bill Owens, Governor
oiplnrnenr oF NATURAL REsouRcES
DIVISION OF WILDLIFE
AN EOUAL OPPORTUNITY EMFLOYER
RECEtr\IEB
AUG 1 6 2006
GARFlf,i-$ COUI\*TY
BU ILDING & PLANI,llf,lG
ForWldlife-
For PeoPle
Bruce McCloskeY' Director
6060 BroadwaY
Denver, Colorado 80216
Telephone: (303) 297-1 I 92
August 9, 2006
Fred Jarman
Garfield County Planning Department
108 8th Street, Suite 201
Glenwood SPrings, CO 81601
RE:PinyonMesesubdivision'PreliminaryPlan
Dear Mr. Jarman:
The Colorado Division of wildlife staff has reviewed the request to subdivide 60'5
acres into 80 single-familY lots'
This areacontains several important habitat areas for wildlife, including elk, mule
deer, occasionuily rorntain lions, bears and numerous bird species' The
property has been identified ,, nig game winter range by the Division of wildlife'
Mule deer and elk use this area fo-riesting, foraging and to move between
different habitat areas. studies have shown tnat ninitat loss, conversion and
fragmentation ane the most serious issues facing wildlife'
The colorado Division of wildlife concurs and supports.thg recommendations
that the wildlife ffnalysis ,"port by Rocky Mountain Ecological services, lnc. has
included in this aPPlication.
The developer and future residents need to be aware the hunting may occur on
the adjacent Bureau of Land Management.plooerty. Despite this development'
the Division berieves this prop"rty Jourd stiil be used to manage the elk herd. that
winters in this region. Developm-ent often removes management options but
provides few arffiatives to dear with probrems. Arthough safety is a concern with
the pending development, the DOW would recommeno tnat an elk management
plan be considered'as an option ty the developers. The damage created by
protecting this herd could have substantial impacts to residents, landscaping and
DEPARTMENT oF NATURAL RESOURCES, RussellGeorge, Executive Director
WILDSFE COMMlSSloN,l"m"V Co*ford, Chair. Tom Burke, Vice Chaip Claire O'Neal' Seoetary
Members, Robert Bray ' nicX fnitrom ' PhilipJames ' Ken Tones o Richard Ray r Robert Shoemaker
fx officO Members, Russell George and Don Ament
the agricultural buslnesses in the area' The DOW would be willing to a
facilitating an ugr"dr"nt with the future owners.
Mountain lions, altllough rarely seen, frequent this area' There are preventive
measures that residents can take to reduce the potential for conflicts. Brochures
with this intorma-tioh ,r" ,rriruoi" through tne Dbw and should be distributed to
all residents and visitors.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide lf'"t9 comments. lf you need additional
lntoimJtion, pleaie'contact DWM KellyWood at 963-6523'
ssist with
SincerelY,
ill
agerArea Wildlife Man
Cc:DOW-J.Bredehoft,R'Velarde,K'Wood'file
COLORADO G ICAL SURVEY
Department of Natural
1313 Sherman Street, RoPm 715
Denver, CO 80203
Phone: (303)86G2611
Fax (303) 86G2461
STA TEO F COLO
CGS LUR No. GA-07-0001
Legal NE%, Sec.7,
NWTaNWYI, Sec. 8, T7S, R88W
COLORADO
DEPARTMENT OF
NATURAL
RESOURCES
August 30,2006
Mr. Fred Jarman
Garfield County $uilding and Planning Department
109 8t Street, Sui(e 401
Glenwood SPringi, CO 81601
SF.P I Z ZAII(,Bill Owens
Governor
Russell George
Executive Director
Vincent Matthews
Division Director and
State Geologist
RE: PinYon l{esa
Dear Mr. Jarman,
Subdivision Geologic Hazards Review'
Thank yo1r for the land use application referral. At your request and in accordance to Senate
Bill 35 irqiaihip office has reviewlt the materials submitted by your office. lncluded in your
;;td;.ru**t to this review were two geotechnical reports from HP Geotech: a preliminary
reoort dated November rr,zoo5 and a supplemental study dated April 10, 2006 (Job No' 105 652)'
- -r
please consider ttre foilowing observations and recommendations as you review the proposed
subdivision aPPliPation.
The property is on the south side of CR 114 where it climbs from the Roaring Fork Valley
to**ar-iprirg VA1.v and Colorado Mountain College. The site occupies a dissected bluff where
two mrnor O.urrrag"*'uys meet and outlet through a steep ravine to the floor of the Roaring Fork
vrfr"v.'it. ;db?dft t"dr"ck is Eagle Valley Evaporite. Glpsum, claystone, and siltstone are
exposed in portiOnsofitre property, primarily on the hilltops in the center of the property'
We have feviewed the
development
HP Geotech rePorts and generallY concur with their content. It
appears that the plan has been well thought out and planned,and avoids the higher risk
areas. The geologic hazards we consider this site exposed to are hydrocollapsible soils, dissolution
of soluble and sinkhole formation,and localized slope instability in those ravine areas. One
observation we that was not in the HP Geotech report is the evidence of shallow slope failures
on the colluvial along the south bank of the ravine below lot73. We recommend that the
county requrre further setbacks or the geotechnical consultant verify, in writing, that the back
boundaries of building footprints for lot 73 and74 ate suitably offset from the escarPment to
avoid potential instability for the design lifetime of the residence
The HP recommendations for surface drainage are extremely important' Prevention
of wetting of subgrade soils or near-surface soluble bedrock will best insure the long term
slab-on-grades, and pavements. krigationperformance of utility lines, foundation elements,
Pinyon \'lcsa Strb. Page I
SincerelY,
Jonathan L.White
Senior Engineering Geologist
Pinl-on lr4esu Sub, Pagt ?
MOUNT
ENGINEE a
August 31,2006
Mr. Fred Jarman
Garfield County Planning
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
RE: Review of Preliminary Plan Submittal for Pinyon Mesa Subdivision
Crvtt lr.ro EuvtnoNmtlrll CoNsutnNc aNo DrsGN
stP 0 5 2tJ06
Dear Fred:
A review has been performed of the documents for the Preliminary Plan Submittal for Pinyon Mesa
Subdivision. The package was found to be thorough and well organized. The following comnients,
questions, or concerns were generated:
Attachments:
- 1. Sewer and water requirements appear to be satisfied.
2. Generally, foundation drains are run to daylight or drain to an infiltration drywell. In light ofthe
evaporiti, drywells may be unacceptable and some lots may not be able to drain to daylight.
Means of conveying foundation drains to a suitable daylight location may be warranted.
3. The SCS Soils map designates soil type 55 as belonging to the Type D Hydrologic soils group.
The drainag. r.port buris Curve Number selection on type C soils. This distinction mayhave an
impact o., ih, peak flows calculated and also on the existing vs. proposed flow rates' The flow
ratls and proposed detention should be verified in light of the Type D soils.
4. No corresporrd.rr.. was submitted showing that the appropriate fire protection district has
reviewed the fire protection plan per Section 9:70. Specifics on the mechanism for locking the
gate on the secondary/emergency access, acceptability of the tumarounds, and fire hydrant
spacing should be addressed.
5. The site will disturb more than one acre and will require a discharge permit for construction
activities from the State.
. 6. The project may require an air pollution permit for construction activities from the State.
Preliminarv Plat:
--pr"p"r.d
drainage and utility easements are not shown near the north east comer and l-ot 17 ,per
Section 4:50.
Drainase Plan:
n-ropogruphy appears to concentrate flows onto Paintbrush Way in a few locations. Inlets may be
. warranted at the force main crossing and at the first turnaround.
Plan and Profile Sheets:g. Turnaroundr-uo. ,.q,rired to be designed with 50' turning movements and room for snow
storage per Section 9:33. Verify that tuming movements accommodate emergency response
apparatus with snow storage.
10. Verif, sewer and water services to all Lots. With the slopes of the lots, sanitary services on the
826 1/2 Crand Avenue ' Clenwood Springs, CO 815O1
PH: 97O.945.5544 . FAX: 970.945.5558 . www.mountaincross-en8,.com
!.
08/3 l/06
Pinyon Mesa Page 2 of2
uphill side should be evaluated for adequate fall'
r r. frrrrorr will be captured and flow at the toe of the roadway slopes instead of in the curb and
gutter. Cunentty the west side would drain, but drivewuyt "orrid
create a series of problems'
Tr,. .urt side crJates a pond at the intersection with Sage Meadow.
kP2
12. The 36" storm drain line is shown directly in conflict with the 8" water line'
13. The 36" storm drain line discharges to the west through a smaller line size'
14. Sewer manhole #5 appears to have a significant internal drop, a drop manhole may be
warranted.
rs. flnJrror,,,ur crown of the road wil create a low point on the inside road edge of the island that
will not drain.
16. The sanitary sewer line and storm drain line are shown in conflict' Also the electric line' fire
hydrant, and the storm inlet are all in close proximity, potentially causing conflicts'
W5
17. Guardrail or barrier curb may be warranted when crossing the 48" culvert'
rg. flhJ,..*ination of the curb and gutter will be concentrating a significant amount of runoff at
t
high velocities onto roadway frll slopes; erosion is a concem'
, ,. ffij 3"a fire hydrant rocation may be better suited to the north or the south in light of the plowed
snow tikely to be stored at the end of the road'
20. ffir'"*off valve, a hydrant or a water service rine may be warranted at the low point of the
water line.
UTI
21. overhead utilities should be removed along with appurtenances. Abandoning in place should
not be allowed.
zz.lt ro"talock bearin garcashourd be verified against anticipated soil bearing capacities and line
pressures.
D2
23.Yalley pan in the plan sheets is 6'in width and the detail shows a 4' width'
Feel free to call if any of the above needs clarification or if you have any questions or comments'
SincerelY,
Cross Inc.
,J
Chris Hale, PE
C: Dean Gordon, Schmueser Gordon Meyer
MOUNTAIN CROSS ENGINPPRINq.fN9'
c-iil"rannrnot*entalconsultingand-D91!sn-
826 /, Grand Avenue, Glenwood Springs' CO 8 I 60 I
P : 97 0.9 45.5 544 F : 970.945 5 5 5 8 www'mountaincross-eng'com
lr
STATE OF
OFIICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER
Division of Water Resources
Department of Natural Resources
1313 Sherman Street, Room 818
Denver, Colorado 80203
Phone (303) 866-3581
FAX (303) 866-3s89
www.water.state.co. us
lr
:ri ,...:. '.::
'
','
' l_i
[rF.P u I ztil.iii
August 30, 2006
Fred Jarman
Garfield County Building and Planning Department
108 8th St Ste 401
Glenwood Springs CO 81601
Bill Owens
Governor
Russell Ceorge
Execu.tive Director
Hal D. Simpson, PE.
State Engineer
Re: Pinyon Mesa Subdivision Preliminary Plan
Sections 7 & 8, T7S, R88W, 6th PM
W. Division 5, W- District 38
Dear Fred:
We have reviewed the above-referenced proposal to subdivide a parcel of approximately
60.49 acres into g0 single-family residential lots and two open space lots. The applicant proposes
to supply water through-an exisiing central system operated by the Red Canyon Water Company
tComdairy). SewagJdisposal is t5 oe provided by the Spring Valley Sanitation District. The
submittallnduded agreements to serve from both entities.
The Company operates a central system that provides water service to the Los Amigos
Ranch pUD and tne Ltf Springs PUD. TG proposed subdivision is a part of the Los Amigos
Ranch pUD which, at full buildout, will include 327 single-family homes and 96 apartments. Total
annualwater demand will be 1g4 acre-teet, and total Consumptive use will be approximately 68
acre-feet including transit losses. The depletions are to be augmented by a water allotment
contract for 7S acre-feet with the Basalt Water Conservancy District and pursuant to a plan for
augmentation approved by the Division 5 water court in Case No' 87CW155'
The central system is supplied by two wells, the Los Amigos Ralch Well No' 5 (Permit No'
s4045-F-R) and the Rancho Los Amigoi Weil No. 6 (Permit No. 40906-F). Both permits are valid.
permit No. 40g06-F limits the use of the well to a water supply for the Los Amigos Ranch PUD'
with the maximum pumping rate limited to 300 gpm, and the average annual-amount to be
appropriated limited to igdacre-feet. Permit No. 54045-F-R limits the use of the well to
municipal, commercial, domestic and industrial purposes, with the maximum pumping rate limited
to 300 gpm, and the average annual amount to be appropriated limited to 483 acre-feet. Well No'
b was decreed in Case Uo]W-Zts6 for 0.66 cfs (300 gpm) for municipal, commercial, domestic
and industrial use. Well No. 6 was decreed in Case Nos. W-3873, W-3893 and 94CW36 for 0'66
.fr ISOO gpm) for all municipal uses, including without limitation, irrigation, domestic,
manutaciuring, commercial, industrial, mechinical, fire protection, power generation, flsh and
wi6life propagation and recreation. The Pump lnstallalgn-a1d Test Report submitted for Well No'
5 indicates that the well pr:oduced 300 gpm on August22, 2000. The rPump lnstallation and Test
Report submitted for Well No. 6 indicates that the well produced 400 gpm on December 5, 1979'
lf these wells continue to produce at these rates, and with sufficient storage capacity, the water
supply should be physically adequate.
I
Fred Jarman
Pinyon Mesa
August 30, 2006
Page2
Based on the above, it is our opinion, pursuant to.CRS 30-28-136(1XhXl)' that the
proposed water rrppriJ, p-nvri."rrv ao'equatb'and will not cause material injury to decreed water
rights, so long as tne lppricani maintaint rrrio *"rr permits' and the plan for augmentation is
operated according to its decreed terms.nJ *nJitibns. rf you or the appricant has any questions
concerning tnis matti, pr""t" *.tict Cynthia Love at this office for assistance'
SincerelY
Craig M. Li E
Water Resources Engineer
CMUCJUPinYon Mesa'doc
cc: Alan Martellaro, Division Engineer' Division 5
Bill Blakeslee, \lVater Commissioner' District 38
GARFIELD COUNTY
Building & Planning DePartment
Review AgencY Form
Date Sent: August 7,2006
Comments Due: August 30,2006
Name of application: Pinyon Mesa subdivision
Sent to ' Garfie ld Corrnfv Road ,& Rridoe T)ent,
#ffi;;;il;;;;;;;;; ;;;ffiil;;,*;;;;;'L; - -
planning Department in the event you are unable to respond by the deadline. This form
may be useilfor your fesponse, or you may attach your own additional sheets as
necessary. Written comments may be mailed, e-mailed, or faxed to:
Garfield County Building & Planning
Staff contact: Fred Jarman
109 8th Street, Suite 301
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Fax: 970-384-3410
Phone: 970-945-8212
General Comrnents:Garfield County Road &Bridse no obiection to this
with the commentsSU
ses to Cr.ll4 I have driveway permits bv Garfield CountyAll
dse with conditions soecific to eachRoad &
to Cr. 114 have a stop si olaced at the to Cr. 11 4.TheEach
and be U
An S1 S
AS
Devices)
A be the to
wide that exists thi s should not a nrohlem to all.with
Cr.a2-to
la be tt4 line t
2OO-feet rrnhi.l.l of the main e.nfrrnee fo fhe st 1\,IrS1rrn
Name of review agency:ld Countv and Bridee
By: JakeB.Mall Date @
Revised 3l3OlOO
i:
AUG $ (} 2006
Grand Junction District
222s.6th. st., Rm.#416
Grand Junction, CO 81501
(97O)248-7325
August 28,2006
Fred Jarman
Garfield County Building and Planning Deparfrnent
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
RE: Pinyon Mesa Subdivision
Mr. Jarman
I have reviewed the pretiminary plan application for the Pinyon Mesa Subdivision. There was no
wildfire hazardmap or review-included in the application; therefore I met with IvIr. Kjell Vanghagen at
the property on August 23rd,2006. I also spoti wittr Bill Gavette, Deputy Chief for Carbondale and
Rural Fire irotectiJn Disnict about his concerns for wildfire hazar:dfor the property. I have the
following comments regarding wildfire hazardon this proposal.
The primary vegetation is juniper and pinyon trees, and sagebrush. The combination of vegetative
*p."i", por!, a signification wildfire nazarato parts of the proposed subdivision. The lots at the
highest ine risk aie: lots 17-20 and lots 36-48. These are located in the northeast section of the
pripor"O subdivision and include pinyon and juniper trees on a slope that is greater than 10 percent.
,A,'y
no*". built on these lots ,r""d to have defensible space which is an area around a strucfire where
fueis and vegetation are treated, cleared or reduced to slow the spread of wildfire towards the structure.
Also, homeJrt oota be built using fuewise materials that are fire-resistive (Class C or better rating).
The next area of increased wildfue risk is located on either side of the ravine, the lots surrounding this
area.Lre lots 66-72and lots 59-65. The vegetation in the ravine is comprised of dense, mature pinyon
and juniper trees. Trees and understory rh-br should be thinned and the removal of ladder fuels and
dead material should be completed before any homesites are built on. The final area of higher wildfire
risk is the lots surrotrnding a small knoll where pinyon and juniper trees are growing. The lots are 49'
54 and l-5. The size of the Eees and the increased slope make this portion of the property prone to
higher wildfue hazards and should be treated as lots 17-20 and 3648-
I believe the best methods to reduce wildfire lrrzaxdon this property would be to thin the pinyon and
3uniper trees to Colorado State Forest Service standards along the edges of the property and in the
ravine. Also enforcing defensible space standards around all permanent structures, and encourage or
require the use of firefrse building materi als (Firewise Construction, Design and Materials, 2000\
would decrease the potential for a severe wildfire event'
Wriuen standards for defensible space management zones published by the Colorado State Forest
Service can be found in the recent revision of publication 6.302, Creating Wildfire Defensible Zones.
obviousry, removing any type of vegetation considered as ladder fuels, undergrowththat could bring a
fire into tree crowns]*i d:";d or dyLg trees or shrubs should be removed'
I found no ct'rent signs of the ips bark beetle (Ips confusars) colonizing pinyon pine tees on-t}t"
property. But they aie active on th" hillside, evident across CR 114' It is recommended to plan any
conifer/evergreen tree cuffing o. pronir,j activities in late September or october which is when the ips
bark beetles over winters and would nolattack any new rees. Any construction or thinning work done
in the surlmer that creates sap flow or piryoo trees will atmct thi ips to the area and could result in
the death of a large number of the pinyon t "", oo the property. Please refer to publication 5'558' /ps
Beetles for furttrer information'
Thank you for the opportunity to review this proposal. please call with any questiorc at970-248'7325
Sinperely,
l/Mw
Itamie Long
Forester
Cc: Pinyon Mesa DeveloPment,LLC
,
Pinyon Mesa Development on rnty Road 114
Fred Jarman
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Dan Roussin
Colorado Department of Transportation
Region 3 Permit Unit Manager
222 South 6th, Suite 100
Grand Junction, Co 81501
970-248-7230
970-248-7294 FAX
Roussin, Daniel [Daniel.Roussin @ DOT'STATE'CO' US]
SundaY, August 13,2OOO 3:00 PM
Fred Jarman
Znamenacek, Zane; DraYton, Devin
Subiect: Pinyon Mesa Development on County Road 114
Fred - Thank you for the opportunity to review the Pinyon Mesa developT.e.nt on Garf ield County Road 1 14' As
vou are aware, this project wi, have an irp;;i;GcH r'r + and s-H ad. rnir deveropment witt generate 81 trips
bn pM peak hour. gas'eO upon the Piny^on ftfesa trattic impact stui, JateJ May 20O'6' this development will
imoact sH 82IGCR 114 by more than 20 percent, therefore, "n ""IL"t
plimit wouto b,e required' The TIS
identified the need for capacity improvemeni. r"i'tiiii intersection however does not provide any
recommendations. who wi, provide *rese im-pr&;;;tr? prease submit an access application for GCR 114'
lf you have any questions, please let me know'
an"nnn6
m
United States Department of the Interior
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
Glenwood Springs Field Office
50629 Highway 6 and24
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
August 22, 2006
.fiAKE PRIDH.rrYatlMHFlICA
]N REPLY REFER TO:
1780
(co-14000)
Fred Jarman
Garfield County Building and Planning Department
108 8th Street, suite 401
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81501
Dear Fred:
RECEIVED
AUG Z S 2006
GAhr r,-.U UOUNTy
BUILDING & PLANNING
Thanks for the opportunity to comment
DevelopmenE (PuD) Preliminary P1an.
have some specific comments and some
PUD.
on the Pinyon Mesa Subdivision Pfan of
The Bureau of Land Managements (BLM) does
general comments retating to the proposed
The ApplicanE states in SecEion 4:50 - Open Space, Public Facil-ities that
"Whi]a no formal- park facifities are planned for this development, the open
space areas within the property and the adjoining Bureau of l,and Management
pioperty will provide abundant opportunities for actj-we recreation, enjolrment
of wildlife and quiet enjoyment of nature"'
The concl-usion that a sma11 parcel of public 1and, with already high use, will-
meets the recreation needs of hundreds of additional residents is unrealistic
and inappropriate. The high density development will impact wildlife on the
adjoining public l-ands and result in a decrease in wildlife viewing
opportunities for all adjacent l-andowners and public land visitors. The
cuirent OHV activities prevent opportuniEies for the quiet enjoyment of
nature.
The BLM recommends maximizing open space areas and park facilities within Che
pUD to fessen the impacts of new residents on: public l-ands, existing public
land users and wildl-ife. The BLM also recommends keeping open space areas
along the public l-and boundary to create the largest possible parcel of
undeveloped 1ands. The Towns of Eagle and New Castfe have recently taken
simil-ar sEeps to fessen the impacts of development on public land resources
and users.
Due to its smalf size and l-ocation in an urban area, the public fand parcel
has also been considered as a parcel for disposal tshrough exchange. If
exchanged, the recreation opportunit.ies and open space the applicant is
counting on wiLL be Lost. As such the applicant shoul-d plan adequaEe open
space and park facil-ities within the PUD for future residents.
Generally it should be noted that traditional public l-and uses somet.imes
confl-ict wit.h the expectations of new residenEs and developers. The applicant
should be aware of, and respect, the foflowing values and existsing uses of the
adjacent BLM lands:
1. Wildfire. Protecting homes from witdfires is a concern in the
wildfand-urban interface areas' -l'l"aityjng design plans or reducing
fuels to create a defensible space on private propLrty is- recommended'
Future fuel reduction actions ""-p"lii.l 1r"9? _"rro"ra not be considered
"= tir. preferred remedy for mitigation of wildfire concerns '
2.Trespass.Theapplicantshouldbemindfu]-ofthelocationofBLM
propertyboundariesEoensurenoencroachmentoccursonpublic]-ands.
Improved.fencingi"'""o**endedtoidentifytheboundaryandcontrof
access and tresPass.
3.RecreaEion/Travel.Theadjacentpublic.landsofferavarietyof
dispersed r."r".lional activities (mo-torized and non-motorized) '
Motorized and non-moEorized travlr is managed in accordance with the
GfenwoodSpringsFieldoffice-ResourceManagementPfan.Thisbroad
rangeofactiviEieswi]-llikelycontinueEooccurcontiguoustothe
privat,etands.ourofficecanprovideaddiEionalinformaEionon
iecreation, travel and access as necessary'
4- Hunting and Target Shooting' The adjacent BLM l-ands
hunting and targel ihootittg' if'e nl,u does not estabfish
no-sho6ting zones to restrict hunting'
5.Right-of-ways.Anyroads,carttrails'paEhs'orutilitiessuchas
water,electric,phoneorotherwi=".'o==ingBLMwouldrequirerights-of-
way (ROW) permits'irom this office. An environmental- assessment of the
impactsofthoseuseswou]dbeneededasapartoftheRoWpermitsting
process.
are open to
safeEY zones or
6. Mineral Rights.
determine if t.heY are
l-ands.
We are open to work with the
identified concerns. If You
Brian HoPkins of mY st.af f '
2829) .
The Bureau has not researched the mineral rights to
reservedtothefederafgovernmentonthesubject
developer and Garfield County to address the
or the developer has questions, please contact
He can be reached at (970) 947-2840 (Fax: 94'7-
SincereIY,
Jamie E. Connel-f
Field Manager
>/(,-/-';
MEMORANDUM
To: Fred Jarman
From: Steve AnthonY
Re:CommentsonthePinyonMesaSubdivisionPreliminaryPlan
Date: September 1,2006
Thanks for the opportunity to review the preliminary plan'
My comments are as follows:
Noious Weeds
The applicant has provided a weed inventory and weed management plan. Noxious weeds are addressed
in the covenants. The applicant states that the Homeowners Association will manage common area
noxious weed concerns.
Revesetation
The applicant has provided a revegetation plan that includes a plant materials list for review'
The plant list is accePtable.
Please quantify the area, in terms of acres, to be disturbed and subsequently reseeded on road cut and
utility disturbances. This would be areas outside o! the building "nuilop"t' This intormation will help
determinetheamountofsecuritythatwillheldforrevegetation.
Staff recommends a revegetation security once this information is provided.
Soil Plan
ItisrequestedthattheapplicantprovideaSoilManagementPlanthatincludes:
Provisions for salvaging on-site topsoil'
A timetable for eliminating topsoil and/or aggegate piles'
a prun irrut provides for solil ctver if any disrurbances or stockpiles will sit exposed for a
Period of 90 daYs or more'
,
- - - ffi llr,vretrn i ionooN i r"reren ;-t:Nr^'.,\:r' 'FO:N'': ^ffi --: '..'-l ... .... : " r rB w. 6rx, surE eoo
fuffi ENGiNEERs & sURVEYoR's
GLnw€oosmrNcs.coer6ol
A1!:'i: N
P.o. Box 2l 55
ASFEN,coBl6l2
97c.925-67?7
rx: 970-9?5-4157
CRESTED BUTE, CO
970-349-5355
FX: 970-349-5358
The following comments, questions, or concerns were generated by Chris Hale of Mountain Cross
it gir""ti"g rin his review letter datedAugust 3l'2006'
X*,ip**ruuop"#Iffi o$'{.l.f#rrp#$#e S{}r.dfl$ff ,Bfal-l'*r .d'l,x].* wt"{t{tx't b*f *vt' itr rct{ iseifir's'
Attachments:
- 1. S.** and watff requirements appear to be satisfied'
&e'sgf"*a'ed
2. Generally, foundation drains are run to daylight or drain to an infiltration drywell' In light of
the evaporite, drywells may be unacceptabi. ulra some lots may not be able to drain to daylight'
Means of conveying foundation Arum, io u suitable daylight location may be warranted'
{.,*w**x*pa{ sr4*{*r{.,t pr/nre *F: t';#e{ey&a{.yat dxir t*&ttre{s t* ^{rtinik*ixrE $r',itts' t:*$rdist{'!{*rt witls {l'te:
ge$ttr:ixwi*nl ,,us,,.tucr:,{anfl} rt'rdf fu* pr*s*ttI,*t{ ttl &'{vc{r{ Pfsar ssr&ru'lr*srarm'
3. The SCS Soits map designates soil type i5 as belonging to the Type D Hydrofoeig soils group'
The drainag. ,.pJrt buri", C.r*" Number selection o" typ" C soils' This distinction may have
an impact on the peak flows calculateJand also on the existing vs' proposed flow rates' The
flow rates unO prJpor"d detention should be verified in light of the Type D soils'
fld**sa: ra*,r*,p+, #s* cx{Et&ril*$ Fi3'#.r'tt{tt#i*l f;n**p, m**"g uurop-fil*u*{!a*' N*{i*aa*f fl"*rryrrrr*ffv* Sot,,
"$s*r'ts"tr' /,'\'tr{;q} tl*gti*"tioeg saif 4yt* 55 I'rsfnvts'rp ry r# Nr# T"l:yt* {iif::!r*{*Xjy svrrJs gr'*#3t
4. No corresporo.n.i *ar'r.rbmitted showing'that the appropriate fire protection district has
reviewed the fire protection plan p., S..tiorr"l:70. Specifics on the mechanism for locking the
gate on the secondary/emergency u.."tt, u""eptability of the turnarounds' and fire hydrant
spacing should be addressed'
{' t.} ?Y&#s { Nr{\; k *v r: fu *e rc * ddt us s e d'
5.Thesitewilldisturbmorethanoneacreandwillrequireadischargepermitforconstruction
activities from the State.
4 $isrfe*r'g*. Swrruelt v+,ilf {tt: te*tgx'xit.t:ti gsrirw {tt r:tswstr;a*tittzt' $ff'$ is wtt{ tt yctswit"r;wex{ t$
F3 r{ { iwiaaall, f}i *'Pe.
6. The project may require an air pollution permit for construction activities from the State'
Arq *iy p*{fwtiuw ytwwrit ysif{ ht *trya$ri*{ sx'i*r f* {:t;,,tsirtat:'{:irvat, i{'r*,xwft'etf, urut{ {s pc{P{ ("r
re q w ire enemt ffi ' {t t"*{ittt i tc {fi v\: i'*{ #ffi "
R.E: Review of PreliminarY Plan Submittal for Pinyon Mesa Subdivision
Dear Fled:
Prel imPlanRespones-09-27-06'doc
. cxrsdrr4g sxc.'fer#-
Plan and Profile Sheets:
ffiequiredtobedesignedwith50,tumingmovementsandroomforsnow
apparatus with snow storage.
Fsrr srra*A $r*.s.rrsrw*s#rds err"rr rj'.c,si.igsr+rrJ*,re,r.{pgr*r,ssis d} r4/'eJsc' ?#d}.i &crssxlesfss,'}srcf flfr* Crurfc-
10. Veriff sewer and water services to all Lots. With the slopes of the lots, sanitary services on the
f.f**u**"dyfu#+" erf#vec##yc$ drrs ##f fr;rre,rrp,*s *rmd sovrrs gpve,rd*r$ gr re*drreg e,t *rrfrr:epecd#d" S#isr# ddly'e
{prisf,{,rt*/nrJ"r' f#r.rdgecf {}s? f*# enm*'dfe ^u*d#c ei/'e/rei *srJ-(d{,-.Ed}ri ffr#t'r-#ryil{r"r'grfuerfrir prrrmps.firr
s*r*rlfnr"1."$rx.rrr, *sspnsnf" d.*rs f&nl rmnl.'r"e*yr*rrrpr*rrgrircg p*,fdf &{'sffirdr*ddfrrd {}ll 'qfrrsfl {r?"J nf
fdmcar r,oj' ftrrrsfl Sfsry ssrf:vprd.c.\ic.Iff.
RPI
1 1. Runoff will be captured and flow at the toe of the roadway slopes instead of in the curb and
gutter. Currentlyihe west side would drain, but driveways could create a series of problems'
The east side creates a pond at the intersection with Sage Meadow.
{iirwd,e'rrg *r rrErer"5#r:ddapms fesis &s*er r#vc.q'd'ed $# s#sver* prl;srdrive'.$n*'^/i"**+c ffsdl /d'}fs nrrds ffee srur&
**cfgrrff*r-".,,$dflstfr)$$,ds{j},.5**c/tr&e,rrrgner*rdf47ppnl,J#urrrrnsifrreu/rurr*rregefcr#ts('rdI"l.}(7}rdf.g6dffs.l'
cc$ fx;flfl of r&cir.$n*f cv*rrdoun grddddff$S'
RP2
12.The 36" storm drain line is shown directly in conflict with the 8" water line.
f hs 3S ". .qf$r ,ra r$r srlEr frs.q frscrrr s-*r[,fsg# $r* r-'r o,s;q Pt]uu.tru,r* ,]{#.s{d f.}J-fyr.r gd e;y*3lr"rl"ui*rrnrc'{u ,S"r*.' 5-1-ddl
nr*rt' o;,affrff dm$rl dfss flnl,c;rc r.rrc f&* cres$ sd{ds r:rf"#rmy*rr ,'/i#c.sdr f}r'ft'#.
13. The 36" storm drain line discharges to the west through a smaller line size.
.$*si rsri.sxi# sfis*r ff SJ
14. Sewer manhole #5 appears to have a significant intemal drop, a drop manhole may be
warranted.
,$#)s,#r rffnradr#f{, #$ /trx^( Its*ff rsri,res.{ fsr Sr"*vids rfr*l ssnrrdnrrf rdrrrp.
RP4
15. The normal crown of the road will create a low point on the inside road edge of the island that
will not drain.
ffir+_v13rr,,},f*:sc* f)$"lvar f**.q,freeru cJenrug*d {* * }{il,,tr*pcr"*rfel+'nfrirrr fn ff*el mrrf'qf#r r**d *t{g*.
16. The sanitary sewer line and storm drain line are shown in conflict. Also the electric line, fire
hydrant, and the storm inlet are all in close proximity, potentially causing conflicts.
flfi*,qrrlrrs $#!+,#;" fa*s &eele rsf+r:sfsed t* t;tvu#d{t fofs 7"$ xv*d 74'
2Preli mPlan Respones-09-27 -06.doc
IRPS
il T.,Guardrail or barrier curb may be warranted when crossing the 48" culvert.
i ,f-$r{r+*i*lr' {:{rr"f,l escdr$stf {rr sJac c'r"n.tsr"rr.q'
RP7
--'18. The termination of the cuib and gutter will be concentrating a significant amount of runoff at:
,high velocities onto roadway filI slopes; erosion is a concern.
,#rS r:ur.g: sn'rx*x* frsve, dle#js cer$edrd rn p;r"*l,rtmf sr'*sd*la *f rfi*" rertr*1.ffd;',
RPT2
i9. ttre ehd fire hydrant location may be better suited to the north or the south in light of the
plowed snow likely to be stored at the end of the road.
r -Ff*'s de+r#rserufl rsarire,dJ tt {fut tt.r,r"{it {ts pr"*r'rrCc, ;'*t;m .{itt' s'rr#}t's"fld}rdrg*'.
RPL3
20. rA blowoff valve, a hydrant or a water service line may be warranted at the low point of the
water line.
, $ng*r ;!Ser*d* m l /{ * rardrlf re re t rrr f f: *# f, *nrl err f *r.sc'*'fl r *re"
WI
21. Overhead utilities should be removed along with appurtenances. Abandoning in place should
not be allowed.
;\trfe, llgs ,&ecr* r:&nrr"q*uf fm rl,t3l*dre rgrm$r,*vf af *vex'la*rs*E dryry/rv#Y#p?rrsrdi#^q"
D1
22. Thrust block bearing area should be verified against anticipated soil bearing capacities and line
pressures.
"$e,e rcsfl's# F?djtrr #d? rfererr/ sfuec{ E}l
D2
23.Yalley pan in the plan sheets is 6' in width and the detail shows a 4' width.
{ -- -- ------..".. ^ i P -.. --'t ---- -.i- --.; E! tii#{: i ('yr3d"dd {lt:i{f tt {.fi1 sffdi{'f d.fJ.
Sincerely
Nick Kilboum, EI
CC: Chris Hale, PE;Mountain Cross Engineering,Inc.
3PrelimPlanRespones-09-27-06.doc
HYDROLOGIC GROUP RATING FORASPEN-GYPSUM AREA' COLORADO' PARTS OF EAGLE' GARFIELD' AND
PITKIN COUNTIES
+__IIIIMCTETSo roo 200 400
Feet
0
911912006
Page 1 of 4
Natur.l Resoulces
Conservalion Service
TISDAY
Web Soil SurveY 1 l
National CooPerative Soil SurveY
3oo 600 1'200 1,800 2,400
HYDROLOG]C GROUP RATING FORASPEN-GYPSUM AREA' COLORADO' PARTS OF EAGLE' GARFIELD' AND
PITKIN COUNT]ES
MAP LEGEND
Hydrologic GrouP
(Dominant Condition, <)
Wx
fiiffi-Gl ruo
ffie
MAP INFORMATION
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
WLu Soif Su rvey U RL: http ://websoilsu rvey'nrcs' usda' gov
Coordinate SYstem: UTM Zone 13
B/D
C
Soil SurveyArea: Aspen-Gypsum Area, Colorado' Parts of
Eagle, Garfield, and Pitkin Counties
Soatial Version of Data: 1
Soil MaP ComPilation Scale: 1:24000S cro
Wo
Not rated or not available
Soil Map Units
Cities
Detailed Counties
Detailed States
lnterstate Highways
Roads
Rails
Water
HydrograPhY
Oceans
o
t-J
---l----+
itl. tl
-:
Map comprised of aerial images photographed on these dates:
1 993
The orthophoto or other base map n wh ich the soil ines were compiled and
digjitized probablY differs the background magery displayed on these maps.
As a some minor
from
of unit boundaries be evide nt.
Web Soil SurveY l.
National CooPerative Soil
1
Survey
911912006
Page 2 of-4USDAffiNatur.l Resurcg
ConscrYalion Sefli.e
Group
Tables - HYdrologic GrouP
summary by Map Unit - Aspen-Gypsum Area, colorado, Parts of Eagle, Garfield' and Pitkin counties
Soil Survey MaP Unit Name
Area Map Unit
Symbol
t3
35
89
104
Rating Total Acres Percent of AOI
in AOI
iri
iii' I ,il
Atencio-Azeltine comPlex, 3 to 6 B
percent slopes
Empedrado loam, 6 to 12 Percent B
slopes
Mussel loam, I to 6 Percent B
15 percent sloPes
Torriorthents-Camborthids-Rock D
outcrop comPlex, 6 to 65 Percent
l,
l;
90.1
7.0
Web Soil SurveY 1.1
National CooPeratrve Soil SurveY
36.1
3.7
5.3
t:l ',i
0.5
lr lr
i,'iili
sloPes
fl''',. '-ry*ntbam."tto6pqrcent ; . " l'9', ,0'1-,.
94 Showalter-Morval complex, 5 to C 9'0 l'3
13.3
1.0
,b7-," .- r "' t Southaee ooUfty'ranayloLm,6to "' ts ,
+"" "" ^", , 1 ' 19 Percent*glapT :tllt $ [:tff ll. ili il ],tffi ti" i
DescriPtion' HYdrologic GrouP
Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff-potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the
rate of water infiltration when the soils are nor p.oi".i.o'uv ,eg"tation, are ttror8ugtrty wet' and receive precipiration fiom
long-duration storms.
The soils in the united states are placed into four groups A, B, c, and D, and three dual classes' A/D' B/D' and c/D'
Definitions of the classes are as follows:
The four hydrologic soil groups are:
Group A. Soils having a high infiltrarion rare (low runoft potential) when thoroughly wet' Thes: -Tl^ti:::"i'ly of deep' well
;#;5i i;;;;;;;;T; d;i;;;;;il;;;H;;i, sands. rhese soils have a high rate of water transmrssron'
Group B. Soils having a moderate.inhltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep'
9t19t2006
Page 3 of 4NatuEl Rewrcs
(]onsflation Senice
I.JSDAY
Rating
moderatelY well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture' These soils have
a moderate rate of water transmission.
Group c. Soils having a slow inhltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes
the downward movemenr;i*"t.ioiriilr or.oo".uiJii nii.i.itr.. "i fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water
transmission.
Group D' Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff.potential).11hen thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of
clavs'rhar have a high ,#;ilri""il ffiffiil;ir d;-i;; a high water.tabie, soils thit have a clavpan or clav laver at or
near the surface, and soils that are shallow or", nruifr ffi;ffi;;ui"tiuf' tf'"t" soils have a very slow rate of water
transmission.
If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic grogp !AP,B/D, or c/D), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for
undrained areas. Only roift it Jt ur" iit"dp in theiinatural condition are assigned to dual classes'
Parameter Summary - Hydrologic Group
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Component Percent Cutoff:
Tie-break Rule: Lower
Web Soil SurveY 1
Natronal CooPerative Soil
9t1912006
Page 4 of 4N{tuml Resourc6USDA--fr CoNerYation Senice
1
Survey
i;;
H
September 29,2006 RECEnfEI)
John A- Elmore
253 Silverlode Drive OCT 3 2006
Aspen, Colorado 81611 SGIVfl Job No. Lo5 652
Subject: Review of Steep Slope Setback of Building Envelopes, Lots 73 and74,
Pinyon Mesa, Garfield County, Colorado
Dear Mr. Elmore:
_-As r-equesteilby Debbi. ry*, with Schmueser Gordon Nteyer, y9^L*" reviewed our
.
pr.r,o*!"ot"6nri"ur .t"di";iH;;;il:P;;lrk Grott"h*,i"u1,2005 and 2006) for
U"1oi"e 5"i.i"p"1".tu"tk EHi6 trc.p slope- below Lots 73 and74 shown on the
current ali;lfiffi ;lr* th;."qu"rt ii uaseo onthe review comment letter bv Jonathan
White of the Colorado A*orogi"iS*u.y (CGS) dated August 30,2006'
we concur with the cGS that a setback of the building envelope.is needed for the
building site improvements i;; rd;i"fy i-p*t tlie ct'nent slope stability' We
,"".-,iJrii iilffiffi;;;;il;; s"t ui"t< u *i"i*,r- 30 feet fr9q the top of the
steep ,l;;; ;J tnritr,."root.iiiffitf,8.;{i"^li f."i t"to* the existing sound surface
at thar -"Jri"tt-ati*"" Er^aiie c,in include excavation below existing gounq surface
but fi-lls should be no deeper,t ir-ii.?,-*i,ni, the setback distance. we should review
the actual setback conditions prior to construction. Based on these criteria, It appearslhat
Lot 73 building envelope *iif,;;;;" iluaj"tt"a u*y fromthe top of slope and that Lot
74 building enielope his adequate setback distance.
Ifyouhaveanyquestionsorneedfurtherassistance,pleaseletusknow-
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL
SincerelY,
HEPWORTH - PA
Steven L. Pawlak, P-E.
SLP/vad
cc: Schmueser
References
Fax, 9?0'945'8154
ernail: hpgeo@hPgeotech'com
INC.
Duley
Heoworth-pawlak Geotechnical,2005, Prelimtnary Geotechnical study, Proposed' R "'id;;;;;;;;i;;;;;1' fir'iiii"g1 R91c!.Lo1ver BenchArea' counry
no oa' i'i i' Ciririi C ounty,' b-i or a'ilo, ! obNo' I 05 652 dated November
I 1, 2005.
Heoworth-Pawlak Geotechnic a1,2006, supplemenral Geotechnical study' Proposed
' it ,tid;;;;; D;;;iip*'nr, ft* ip'ngt n9\c!,Lo1ter Bench Area' Countv
n oa'i'ii'ciriiii to"ity," coioirTo. JobNo- 105 652 datedApril l0'
2006.
Parker 303.841-7119 . Colorado Spring s 719'633'5562 ' Silverthorne 970'468'1989
r---l
.-,
Wildlife Protection
13. The Applicant shall incorporate the recommendations contained in the "Wildlife Analysis /
tmpaci and Mitigation deport" prepared by Rocky Mountain Ecological Services' Inc'
contained in the,ipplication ana strAi be included as a component in the CCRs'
14. Prior to the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners, the Applicant shall meet
with the Dow in order to prepare an Elk Management Plan due to the amount of critical
wintering habitat being eliminated with development'
Ooen Soace
15. The Applicant shall cause the open space tracts to be deeded to the Homeowners
Association as part of the final plat.
Revegetation
16. The Applicant shall provide a security for revegetation in the amount to be determined by
the County Vegetation Manager (based on distuibed acreage) for all areas to be disturbed in
connection with the final plat and the obligations of said security which security shall be
incorporated into the Subdivision Improvements Agreement. The security shall be held by
Garfield County until vegetation has been succeisfully reestablished- according to the
Reclamation Standards in the Garfreld County Vegetation Management Plan'
17. The Applicant shall provide a Soil Management Plan that includes 1) provisions for
salvaging on-site topsoil, 2) atimetable for eliminating topsoil and'/or aggregate piles' and 3)
a plan that providei fo, soil cover if any disturbances or stockpiles will sit exposed for a
period of 90 days or more. The Applicant shatl prepare this plan to be submitted with the
hnal plat docurnents so that the County can review prior to final plat approval'
Soils / Geotechnical Issues
1g. The Applicant shall follow all of the recommendations provided in the geotechnical analysis
pr.p.li by Hp Geotech (reports in the Application and Exhibit S to the Staff Report) as
well as the follow the recommendations p.ouia"a by the Colorado Geologic Survey in their
letter dated August 30,2006 also attached as Exhibit J to the staff report).
Easements
19. Alt easements of record shall be shown on the final plat'
ZO. The Applicant shall include the six points provided in the letter from the Bureau of land
Management dated August 22,2006 iand aitached to the Staff report as Exhibit P) in the
CCRs to place residenti in the PUD on notice of these issues. The CCRs shall be provided
as part of the final Plat submittal.
Zl.The Applicant shall meet with the county's Engineer (Mountain cross Engineering) to
review / resolve issues raised in his letter ilated August 3l,2006 and attached to the Staff
18
Report as Exhibit K) prior to the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners'
Plat Notes
22.Thefollowing plat notes shall be placed on the final plat.
a. ,,control of noxious weeds is the responsibiliry of the property owner'"
b. ,,One (l) dog will be allowed for each residential unit and the dog shall be required to
be confi,ned within the owners property boundaries'"
c. "No open hearth solid-fuel fireplaces witt be allowed anywhere wit-\in the subdivision'
one (1) new solid-fuel burning stove as defied by c.R.s. 25-7-401, et' seq'' and the
regulations promulgated thereinder, will be allowed in any dwelling unit' All dwelling
units will be allowed an unrestritcted number of natural gas burning stoves and
appliances".
d. No further subdivision shall be allowed of a subdivided lot"'
e. "All exterior lighting shall be the minimum amount necessary and that all exterior
lighting be diricted inward and downward, towards the interior of the subdivision'
except that provisions may be made to allow for safery lighting that goes beyond the
propertY boundaries".
f. "colorado is a "Right-to-Farm" state pursuant to c.R.s. 35-3-101, et seq' Inndowners'
residents and visitors must be prepired to accept the activities, -sights, sounds and^
smells oJ'Gaffield County's agriiultural operationi ot o normal and necessary aspect of
living in a County with a strong rural ctaracter and a healthy ranching sector' Those
with an urban sensitivity may p"erceive such activities, sights, sounds and smells only as
inconvenience, eyesore, noise and odor. However, State law and County policy prouidl-
that ranching', firming or other agricultural activities and operations within Garfield
County snatinit be cinsidered to be nuisances so long as operated in conformance with
the law and in a non-negligent manner. Therefore, all must be prepared to encounter
noises, odor, lights, *ui, iust, smoke chemicals, machinery on public roads' livestock
on public road"s, storage and disposal of manure, and the application by spraying or
otherwise of chemicat"fertilizers, soil amendments, herbicides, and pesticides, any one
or more of which may naturally occur as a part of a legal and non-negligent
agricultural oPerations.
g. "All owners of land, whether ranch or residence, have obligations under State law and
County regulltions with regard to the maintenance of fences and irrigation ditches'
controlin[ weeds, keeping livestock and pets under control, using property in
accordanc,e with zoning, and other aspects of using and- maintaining property'
Residents and landowners are encouraged
-to learn about these rights and
responsibilities and act as good neighbois an^d citizens of the County' A good
introductotry source for such-informati"on is "A Guide to Rural Living & Small Scale-
Agriculture,, put out by the Cllorado State University Extension Office in Garfield
CountY."
t9
h.
i. Zone District Parameters:
,,All lots shall require site specific geotechnical studies before a building permit will be
issued by the County Building Department and all foundations shall be designed by a
professilnal engineir licensed to practice in Colorado'
3,294 sq. ft.28 feetFront / Rear: 25'
Sides: 10'25%10,000 sq. ft.Home
OccupationSingle FamilY
20
ASPEN OFFICE
601 EastHYmanAvenue
Asoen, Colorado 8161 I
Teiephone: OTO! 925-1936
Facsimile: (970) 925-3008
GLENWOOD SPRINGS OFFICE
The Denver Centre
420 Seventh Street, Suite 100 '
Glenwood SPrings, Colorado 8l 601
Telephone: (97 0) 9 47 -193 6
Facsimile: (97 0) 947 -1937
GARFIELD &HECHT, P.C.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Since 1975
www.garfieldhecht com
October 6,2006
AVON OFFICE
Avon Town Square, Unit 104
0070 Benchmark Road
Post Office Box 5450
Avon, Colorado 81620
Teleohone: (97 0) 9 49 47 07
Fucsimile: (970) 949-l 8 l0
BASALT OFFICE
110 Midland Avenue, Suite 201
Basalt, Colorado 81621
Teleohone: (97 0) 927 -1936
Facsimile: 07 0) 927 -17 83
David H. McComughY, Esq'
Glenwood SPrings O{fice
dmc c o n au' ht' (a'tl. c t r fi eklhe c ht' c o m
Daniel Roussin
Colorado Department of Transportation
Via e-mail Daniel.Roussin@dot'state'co'us
Re: Pinyon Mesa Subdivision' Garfield County
Dear Mr. Roussin:
Irepresenttheowner/developeroftheproposed?inyonMesaSubdivisionin
Garfield County, and I write in response io yo*'"*uil to Fred Jarman dated August 13'
2006.
As I understand it, your position is that an access permit would be required for the
intersection of county Road 114 and state Highway. 82 pursuant to section 2'6(3) of the
State Highway Access Code, which prov;;ti; existing legal access does not require a
modifrcation of an existing permit .rnr...-u "rru"g.
in iu.rJ use would ii:-r:T: traffic
volume by Zlpercent oI more. If you are relying on some other code provision' please
let me know.
TheMay2006trafficstudyplepaledbySchmueserGordonMeyerindicatesthat
peak traffic .rofume impacts to the dffdZCnfi4 intersection would increase by less than
2O%. Specifically, that report 11d]t"t*' ; Figurg 5' tul projected PM peak volume
without the project ii inzi *ould be +Oi itipt'" PinV91 Mesa is projected to generate a
pM peak volume "iii;p..
gr divided ilv +oo:,ilr-o:^re.e57o, which is less than the
threshold. Additionally, that calculation assumes that 100% of the 81 trips would impact
the Highway SZ inte;;tion. Realistiffi, ut t"nttttd.in the report' at least a few of
those trips may be expected to be headiig'i, olttt' Oittctions' Thus' even the May 2006
;;;; ;f"*s tirat the iraffrc impacts are b;low the20oh threshold'
Additionally,theMay2006reportwasbasedontrafficcountsconductedin
March of 2005 and May of 2006. SGIvt conducted a more recent traffic count this week'
Daniel Roussin
Colorado Department of Transportadon
October 6, 2006
Page2 of2
and an updated report is enclosed. signifrcantly, the traffic study this week was
conducted on a rainy day when tlrer. "*at visibiy less traffic generated from the
contractor offices neal the Highway 82lCR114 intersection as well as less construction
traffic to and from the numero=us active .o"t1*.,ion sites up CR114' Even despite those
factors, the study f";J that existing b*Gr;;d traffic hud in"..uted since the prior
studies in 2005 and 2006. Using ,fr" ."ril assumptions for projected impacts from
pinyon Mesa, again *itt out acco-unting for traffic volume thai would not impact the
intersection, the resulting increase is now ,rro*r, tobe 16o/oduring the AM peak hour and
Accordingly, under either study, the development is below the 20%o trigger for an
access permit under ,rr" s*,. Highway Access code' Please let me know if you concur'
Because this matter i;;; i;; u piuti. ilearing on october ll, 2006' your prompt response
18% during the PM Peak hour
would be very much aPPreciated'
Thank You.
DHMjac
Cc: Fred Jarman
Debbie DuleY
John Elmore
Very trulY Yours,
GARFIELD & HECHT, P.C.
lslBy
135807-1
Pinyon Mesa
Traffic ImPact StudYdftM%#
APPENDIX A
Schmueser Gordon MeYer
lie west 6th, Suite 200
etenwioJsPrings' CO 81601
Page 1
Site Code: 10
Station lD:
CMC Road
of Thunder River MarketPlaceEast
0'0.000Latitude:
Totals
Hour Totals
Hour TotialsWB
203127
110
17
0
0
0
0
900
0
74
66
751
75
57
33
13
50
71
65
55
49
38
2A
:
3
10
8
I
12
21
18
18
18
17
30
20I
7
I
't4
15
18
13
15I
Sr
5
7I
1
5
12I
11
6
10
11
11
201
13
12
12
7
6
39
27
29
29
25
20
30
20
40
2A
151
26
17
17
22
18
17
22
16
15
22
23
17
22
13
14
1
16
12
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
781
56
96
83
92
76
75
71
25
74
48
43
57
23
31
Start
12:.15
12:30
't2'.45
01:00
01:15
01:30
01:45
02:@
02:15
02:30
02:45
03:00
03:15
03:30
03:45
M:00
M:15
M:30
O4:45
05:00
05:15
05:30
05:45
06:00
06:15
06:30
06:45
07:00
07:15
07:30
07:45
08:@
08:15
08:30
08:45
09:00
09:15
09:30
09:45
10:00
10:15
10:30
10:45
11:00
1 1:15
11 :30
15
10
16
13
21
24
12
14
11
11
7
11
15
10
16
14
16
11I
29
't7
8
27
22
8
13
7
\7
19
25
23
28
20
24
lSl
19
21
19
18
29
261
25
21
17
13
13
141
23
25
32
24
7I
10
6
4
3
I
11
38 185
124
56
69
40
21
124
11S
'112
1'11
108
5
6
6
3
1
2
1
?
1
0 29.2Yo 70.8%
:45
Percent
27.7o/o 72.3o/o
J0.7o/o 69.3%
0 152
122
171
158
182
0
0
0
0
0
vvB
Schmueser Gordon MeYer
118 West 6th, Suite 200
Glenwood SPrings, CO 81601
Totals
Page 2
Site Code: 10
Station lD:
CMC Road
East of Thunder River MarketPlace
Latitude:0'0.000
Hour T&ls Combined
Aftemoon
5 144
143
'147
29 174
74 147
125 113
123
113
130
35.9o/o il.1Yo
Start
Thu
12'.15
12:30
12145
01:00
01:15
01:30
01:45
02:00
02:'15
02:30
02:45
03:00
03:15
03r30
03:45
04:00
04:15
M:30
M:45
o5:00
05:15
05:30
05:45
06:00
06:15
06:30
06:45
07:0O
07:15
07:30
07:.45
08:00
08:15
08:30
08:45
09:00
09:15
09:30
09:45
10:00
10:15
10:30
10:45
'11:O0
11:15
11:30
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
3
1
1
0
1
1
2
1
3
4
14
18I
19
o
't2
14
20
21
17
14
16
11
15
14
15
14
12
12
20
15
20
19
2
26
38.4% 61.6%33.5o/o 06.5%
'1455
9
6
21
12
23
17
19
13
21
17
17
1g
20
20
17
20
't3
14
16
34
13
27
20
13
19
1sl
11
14
20
11I
't2
13
7
7
I
4
4l
6
6
7
20
8
3
0
3
5
62
67
59
22
Percent
723
3
3
2
7
28
721
73
70
95
8319
58
81
65
*
68J
35
4
1
0
1
1
I
a
0
0
2
0
0
0
2
1
1
3
4
5
5
5
18
7
16
17I
30
22
21
1B
16
11
20
14
o
11
20
17
16
10
0
1
1
1
0
1
2
141
7
5
2
4
1
2
3
101I
14
7
5
11
20
5
8
181
26
22
20
15
17
25
16
1sl
23
16
18
15
25
14
19
18
17
13
22
19
24u
14
20
18
10
19
22
2
0
2
6
4
'rr1
70
73
70
77
7922
55
67
58
58
59
641
45
27
23
31
12
Tra{Iie Data
AltTraffic Data Seruices' lnc
',fif:Yii:{"![z 'oo"ww w. al lt r af fi c d ata' n et
File Name : CMC&SH82AM
Site Code : 00000000
Start Date :312312005
Page No '.2
Hour
to
Begins at
0 298
30s
250
07:30 AM 510
541
449
40
34
37
0
1
0
6
6
7
14
25
25
38
39
12
B
5
0
0
0
0
147
177
124
5
4
11
23
21
21
Peak Hour lor Entire lntersection
07:30 AM 30 250 ,t8
15 AM 220 9-
0
0
0
07:45 AM 52 235 '18
08:00 AM 38 197 15
34
Total VohJme
%fotsl
94
9
18
I 133
14 157
11 106
11 130
5
3
5
12
11
17
26
0
0
0
0
,91
ln Total
f{i361Out
l--@t
Elet9-t-J
SlNlFU
r-l-].iol9totorel-EE
t
ri6r6l
Totali1@l
Out
lL++
Ir'
Peak Hour Data
t
I
North
mThruThruPeds
Peds
23.1
1
16.9 59.2 0,8-n-ffi--6-o 603l#034.6. 13.4
ffitzt
013.8 80.8
30 22 77
Alt Tratric Data Services' lnc
WfSY:i{"![Z'oo"
www. atltraffi cd ata' net
File Name : CMC&SH82PM
bite Code :00000000
Strtt D.t" : 3/23/2005
Page No :2
Peak Hour for Entire lntersection Begins at O4:45 PM 278
306
310
270
19
23
23
27
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
179
218
191
197
4
I
12
62
5'l
51
5
I
14
11
97 460
433
370
360
12
15
212
16
302
337
t47
308
0
1
0
0
7I
7
4
I
o
12
15
571
640
630
28
34
41
3504:45 PM 21 1
05:00 PM 23 t89 6
05:15 PM 31 151 3
PM 34 156 7
TotalVdwe
%Total
51 7 1
6tl
Totalffr€\Out
ri5eTi
I
Eclel
1-
_raoltsl
-olNIF-u
J-il.
ialBlel-t6l
6\l
tl
ClA
Out ln
r-01Tl"Totat
ir
Peak Hour Data
^
I
North
nd
Peds
PedsThru
ThruStart
?EA 7En 250 .84 1
138 I
.9
1 164
7.1 03
72.6 114.8 11.2
2.914.6 0s2.4
-.
DataTralfic
0.747.1 19.6
OVUTOt/gv"vo Vu*
118 West 6th, Suite 200
Ctenviood SPrings' CO 81601
tt''tt't t" s gl t t t' i tt c' c o n t
File Name
Site Code
Start Date
Page No
:100306,
:000000(
110131201
'.1
07:15 Alrt'l
07:30 AM
AM
08:00 AIvl
08;15 AM
08;30 AM
Grand Total
Apprch %
Total %^Uns-hified
18
16
t8
140
50.2
7
7
5
42
14.2
11
7
10
53
34.9
17
14
16
89
58.6
17
23
20
150
5E.4
27
5
7
6
45
17.5
0
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
33
3
6
3
45
16.3
28
36
32
228
a?.6
0
1
0
3
1.1
0.3
1,
1'
5,
1
1.
1
9,14
19I
105
35.6
0
0
0
1
0.7
0-1
0
1
o
a
5.9
0
0
0
0
0
I
6
6
62
24.1
0
00
00
0
9,
1'0.7
%u
0
00
0 0o/" Bank 1- -- $ni2
o/o Bank 2
0
00
0
0o0
0 0
---Fis-Fil ThruLeftRiqhrT-I!I9-ThruRight
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
34
36
7
t3
o
0
0
9
7
3 1
15
31
I
1?
11
1?
I
11
,|
0
0
0
6
5
0
0
0
0
4
4
19
29
4
14
22
3
100
I
10053
100
00
42
100
0
0
0
0
0
0
O tl t l t ltlV/J (/g Vlut$t'' t''r rvqtru e
1'tB West 6th, Suite 200
Gtenwood SPrings' CO 81601
'tt'tt lr''s g tt t'i tt t" c o m
File Name : 1003061
Site Code : 000011
Start Date i 10l3l20l
Page No : 1
lnt. To
04:15 PM
04:30 PM
04:45
Grand Total
Apprch 70
Total %
- Unaiirfted
% Unshifted
6;;iia
0
0
0
0
15
19
14
18
0
4
0
10
6
7
0
00
00
02
2
39
19
21
16
5
6
22.8 1.4
5
15
11
17
17
13
--'1
1
,|
,|
11
0
1
o
0
0
0
7
03
0
1
a4
30
26
JO
1
1,
I
1
6
11
( ou,oo *
EA(I3:iI3EM
I os,+s PM
Total
137
49
39
29
?76
23.6
10
17
18
1E
63
0
0
4
I
4
6
26
64
26.9
5
1.9
414
33
3.9
2.8
66
54
0
0
7:0.t.8
24.4
'104
4?.7
8.9
12
5
198
83,5
16.9
6
2.5
56
12.8
100 114
44.4
9.7
138
53.7
0
0
0
0
0
00
00
0 0o00o00
Bank
-Le{t
I Pe
--@=-rht9
PedsLeftThruqht 5
7
4
19
16
?4
25
5
0
0
0
1
0
0
9
3
5
13
17
13
12
9
0
1
0
0
0
0
E2
21
18
1
11
19
0
2
0
0
I
9
I
8
30
39
58
COUNT DATE:
COUNT TIME:
5/4i2006 SGM
7:45-8:45 AM
COUNT DATE:
COUNT TIME:
OUT
98
IN
157
CMC ROAD
25o/o LEFT
17% THRU
57% RIGHT
SH 82 UV APPrach
NB 38'3o/o
SB 61,7YO
SH 82 Distribution
NB 35'70/o
sB il.3oh
7Yo 89% 4%
3t2312005 & 10/3/06
7:00' 8:00 AM
SOUTHBOUND SH 82
IN
1067
3o/o
RIGHT
85%
THRU
OUT
662
120/,
LEFT
IN
593
2-WaY DHV
1M8
AADT
13733.33
CMC ROAD
IN
182
OUT
184
CDOT AADT
23000
53Yo
13%
35o/o
CMC ROAD ADT
WESTBOUND
EASTBOUND rflr
OUT
1 055
NORTHBOUND SH 82
EB APProach Distribution
NB 25'5o/o
EB 17 '2o/o
sB 57 '3oh
WB Approach Outbound
NB 52'7o/o
WB 12-60/o
sB 34.6%
WB APproach lnbound
From
'hi 71.7o/o
From W 14'7o/o
From S 13'6%
SH 82 DV APProach
NB 36.0%
SB 64'OYo
13290233 96
40 23
T7 63
90
--5-264r.
2O1t FORECAST TRAFFIG
IN
3o/o
2024
OUT
1256
12%
LEFT
CMC ROAD ADT
OUT
WESTBOUNDiTm-lr
EASTBOUND
85%
THRURIGHT
7% 89% 4o/o
RIGHT
IN
322
352
CDOT2O11 AADT
CDOT 2011 DHV.factor
DHV
26243
0.12
31 49
LEFT
THRU
RIGHT
OUT
2001
IN
1125
25017 1163 -112
46
54 2011 AM
186
99880
1
86
3l23t2oo5 & 10/3/06
5:00 - 6:00 PM
SOUTHBOUND SH 82
COUNT DATE:
COUNT TIME:
CMC ROAD ADT
WESTBOUND
EASTBOUND
5/3/2006 SGM
4:45-5:45 PM
127
COUNT DATE:
COUNTTIME:
OUT
108
IN
118
CMG ROAD
IN
775
OUT
1357
't5lo
LEFT IN
228
ZYo 83%
THRU
RIGHT
2-WaY DHV
2027
AADT
16891 .67
WB APProach Outbound
NB 61.0%
WB 12'3o/o
SB 26.80/o
CMG ROAD
OUT
215
CDOT AADT
23000
46% LEFT
32% THRU
22% RIGHT
SH 82 UV APPrach
NB 63.6%
SB 36'4Yo
SH 82 Distribution
NB 62.50/o
SB 37 '5o/o
SH 82 DV APProach
NB 63.8%
SB 36'20/o
RIGHT
5o/o 90% 5!o
61o/o
12%
27o/o
OUT
NORTHBOUND SH 82
EB APProach Distribution
NB 45-8o/o
EB 32'2Yo
sB 22.0o/o
734
IN
1293
WB APProach lnbound
From N 53.0%
From W 17 -7o/o
From S 29.3o/o
11464714
139542838
6126
63--1-6466
2011 FORECASTTRAFFIC
IN
1 180
2o/o
RIGHT
83%
THRU
OUT
2066
15o/o
LEFT
CMC ROAD ADT
OUT
346
WESTBOUND
EASTBOUND
204
IN
300
CDOT 2011 AADT
CDOT 201 1 DHV factor
DHV
26243
0.12
3149
LEFT
THRU
RIGHT
5o/o 90% SYo
OUT
1118
IN
1969
-ltq
18521
196
56
76 48
2011 PM
85
-1773101
COUNT DATE:
COUNT TIME:
5/4/2006 sGM
7:45-8:45 AM
COUNT DATE:
COUNT TIME:
OUT
IN
157
CMC ROAD
25lo LEFT
17% THRU
57% RIGHT
3t2?t2oo5 & 10i3/06
7:00 - 8:00 AM
SOUTHBOUND SH E2
IN
1067
3o/o
RIGHT
85"/o
THRU
OUT
662
1ZYo
LEFT
2-WaY DHV
'1648
AADT
13733.33
CMC ROAD
IN
182
our
184
CDOT AADT
23000
CMC ROAD ADT
WESTBOUND I-58-lt-
EASTBOUND rTll-
98 53Yo
13o/o
35Yo
7Yo 89%4o/o
IN
593
OUT
1 055
NORTHBOUND SH 82
EB APProach Distribution
NB 25.5%
EB 17 '2o/o
SB 57 '3o/o
WB APProach Outbound
NB 52.7%
WB 12-6Yo
sB 34.6Y'SH 82 UV APPrach
NB 38.3%
SB 61'70/o
SH 82 Distribution
NB 35'7Yo
SB 64'30/o
SH 82 DV APProach
NB 36.0%
SB U'Oo/o
WB APProach lnbound
From N 7'l'7Yo
From W 14.7%
From S 13'6%
13290233 96
23
27 o5
90
-
czo42
2026 FOREGAST TRAFFTC
IN
3%
2650
OUT
16M
12o/o
LEFT
IN
1473
CMG ROAD ADT
IN
419
OUT
85%
THRURIGHT
7oh 89% 4o/o
RIGHT
CDOT 2026 AADT
CDOT 2026 DHV factor
DHV
34351
0.12
4122
LEFT
THRU
RIGHT 457
OUT
2620
328-224082 225
113
58
67.5 137
2026 AM
243
1306104 @
WESTBOUND
-
11341
COUNT DATE:
COUNT TIME:
5/3/2006 SGM
4:45-5:45 PM
COUNT DATE:
COUNT TIME:
OUT
IN
118
CMC ROAD
46% LEFT
32% THRU
22% RIGHT
SH 82 UV APPrach
NB 63.6%
sB 36'4%
SH 82 Distribution
NB 62'50/o
sB 37.5vo
5!o 90% iYo
3123t2005 & 10/3/06
5:00 - 6:00 PM
SOUTHBOUND SH 82
IN
775
2!o 83%
THRU
OUT
1 357
15o/o
LEFT
2-WaY DHV
2027
AADT
16891.67
GMC ROAD
OUT
215
CDOT AADT
23000
CMC ROAD ADT
WESTBOUND I-1
EASTBOUND
RIGHT
IN
228
108 61%
12Yo
27%
ttrlt_
OUT IN
1 293734
NORTHBOUND SH 82
EB APProach Distribution
NB 45.8ok
EB 32.2o/o
sB 22.0%
WB Approach Outbound
NB 61.0%
WB 12'3!o
sB 26.8%
WB APproach lnbound
rrom N 53'0%
From W 17 '7o/o
From S 29'lo/o
SH 82 DV APProach
NB 63'8%
sB 36.2Yo
11464714 139
-54 28
3B
26
E6
-lr
2026 FOREGAST TRAFFIC
IN
1545
2o/o
RIGHT
83%
THRU
OUT
2705
15o/o
LEFT
CMC ROAD ADT
OUT
,Nr WESTBOUNDi;; r@GHT
CDOT 2026 AADT
CDOT 2026 DHV factor
DHV
34351
o.12
4122
LEFT
THRU
RIGHT
EASTBOUN D
429
5o/o 90%5o/o
IN
2577
OUT
1463
227-429028
56
76 -62
2026 PM
-111 2320-712
Pinyon Mesa
Traffic Study
APPENDIX B
Impact
gffi_
\./
Page 1-1
Thu Oct 5,2005 0'7"37:40
AI"1 Exieting
Scenario RePort
AM ExistingScenario:
Command:
Vohime:
GeometrY:
IFpact Fee:
TriP Generatlon:
Trip Distributron:
Paths:
Routes:
Conf iguration:
Default Command
AIvl Existing
Default Geometry
Defaul't ImPact Fee
Default TriP Generation
Existing Distribution Atvl
Default Paths
Default Routes
Default Configuration
Traffix 7.8.0115 (c) 2006 Dowling Assoc' l'icensed to SCHMUESER GORDAI'I MEYER
Page 5-1
Thu Oct 5, 2006 O7t37"4O
Atrt Existing
Impact AnalYsis Report
Level Of Servlce
Intersection
# 1 SH 82 & CIVIC Road
# 4 Pinon Mesa & CltC Road
Base
oet/ v /
LOS veh c
B L2.3 0-318
Future
Del/ \1 /
LOS veh C
B 13.2 0.346
Change
in
+ 0.834 D/v
+ 9.sso D/vA 0.0 o.ooo A 9'5 0'000
Traffix 7.8.0115 (c) 2005 Dowling Assoc' Licensed to SCHMUESER GoRDAN MEYER
Page 5-1
Thu Oct 5, 2OO5 O'7 :3'7 t4O
AM Existing
Leve 1 Of Service ComPuts ation RePort
2ooo HCIVI opera tions Method (Base volume AItse rnative)
****************************
******************************************
Intersec cion #1 SH 82 &CMC Road t**l**********************
****************r**************************0 .318Critical Vo,1 . /caP. (x) :.a ?
Cycle (sec)(sec/veh):
B
75
(Y+R=4.0 sec) Average DeIaY
Level Of Serv l::i**.********************Loss Time (sec):I
optimal CYcle
**************l*********
60 *****************************CMC Road
sH 82 East Bound
North Bound South BoundStreet Name
ApProach:
Permiuted Permitted
lnclude Inc]'ude
WeEt Bound
T R
0
63 23 96
015
10010
T RIJ
T gL
L T pL
Movement ll--
Control:
RighEs:
Min. Green:
Lanes:
Initial Bse
PHF AdJ:
Einal' vo1 '
Adj DeI /veh:
ProtsecEed Protected
rncludeInclude
01102
015
01100100 30 o0 30 0
102 il-il
Volume Module:>> Count Date 23 Mar 2005 << AI'4 Peak Hour
90
.Growth Adj 1.oo 1.oo l-'00 1.00 1-00 1.00 1. oo 1 ' 00 1 .00 1.0o 1. oo 1 ' 0033 40 2'7L32 902
Base VoI 90
User Adj:1. oo 1.00 1 ' 00 1.00 1.00 1.oo 1-oo l-'00 l- .00
0 .95
1.oo 1.oo 1'00
0.95 0.95 0'95
42 s26 25
. 42 526 25
44 554 26
00
. 44 554 26
1.00 1. oo 1 ' 00
0.95 0.95 0'95
35 42 28
63 23 96
66 24 1010.95 o'95 0'9s 0.95 0 ' 9s
139 949
33 40 21132 902
00
139 949 35
139 949 35
90
42 28 95
oo 1.00 l" - 00
0O
66 24 101
66 24 101
1.oo 1.o0 1'00
1. oo 1.00 1 ' 00
95
0 0
PHF Volume:0Reduct VPl'
eeduced VoI
PcE Adj:1.oo 1.oo 1'00
MLF Ad1:
0
1
1
1.oo 1.oo 1'00
0o 1.oo l"'00 1.oo 1.oo 1'00
42 28 95
44 554 25 ll ilI
Satura tion Flow
Sat/Lane .19
Adjustment
Lanes:
Module:
o0 L900 1900 19oo 19oo 1900
0.95 0.95 0'85
1.oo 2.oo 1'00
Fina1 Sat.: 1805 3610 1515
CaPac ltY AnalYs is Module:
vol/Sat 02 0.15 0
190O L9Oo 1900 1900 19oo L900
o.95 o.9s 0'85 0.55 0.89 0'89 0.5s 0.88 0.88
1.oo 2.oo 1'00 1.oo 0.23 o'77 1. oo 0.19 0 ' 81
1805 3610 L515 1,041. 388 a293 1049 323 7347
Crit Moves
Green/cYc1
Volume/caP:0.59 0.32 0
Uniform DeI
IncremntDel
lnitsQueuDef
DelaY Adj:
DeIaY/veh:
User DelAdj:
0
e: 0.04 0'48 0
35.3 Ll-.9 10
z L!.4 O'1 0
, 0.0 O'0 0
1. o0 1.00 1
46.7 a2.o 1
1. oo 1,00 1
46 .'7 12 - O l-0
4a 0.24 o'68 0 58 0.24 o.24 0'2
03 o.1? o'31 0'303 0.32 o-39 0
2 23.3 5.3.9 22.8 23 -6 23 6
il
02 o-08 o'26 o'02 o'04 o'07 o.07 o-05 o'08 0'08****
ll-
4 o .24 0.24 0 '24
i o.2, o.z' o'32
23.4 23 -7 23 '7
0.6 o-5 0'5
O.O 0,0 O'0
1.oo 1.oo 1'00
24.o 24 .L 24 'L
1.oo 1.oo 1'00
24.o 24 .! 24 't
C C
3 1 3 3
1
o 0.4 0
o 0.0 0
oo 1.00 1 oo 1.00
0.3 o-4 0'4
o.o 0-o 0'0
1.00 L.oo 1'00
23 .2 24.1 24 'L
1.oo 1.oo l-'00
23 .2 24 .l 24 -L
t_ 0.0
o 0.0
o.2 23 -8
oo 1.00
2 23.8
t-. oo 1.00
5.2 3 -9
5.2 3-9
5BBA A o
3
c
LOS bY Move
4 0 3 0
***************f ***************+*****HCM2kAwgQ
of cars Per lane *****************************Note: Oueue reported is the number
************t*t*************
:D 1 **********************a
***t****i
Traffix 7.8.011-5 (c) 2006 Dowling Assoc Licensed tso SCHI'/IIJESER GORDAN MEYER
--ll
-ll
--ll
Traffix 7'8'0L15 (c) 2005 Dowlj'ng Assoc' Licensed to SCHMUESER GoRDAlr MEYER
Page L-1
sting Thu Oct 5'2OO6 O?:38:05
PM Exr
Scenario:
Command:
Volume:
Geometsry:
lmpact Fee r
TriP Generatlon:
TriP Distributron:
Paths:
Routses:
Conf igurat ion:
Scenario RePorr'
PM Existing
Default Command
PM Existing
Default GeometrY
Defaul-E LmPacE Fee
,"i"":'a TriP Generation
""i".i"g
oiitriuution PM
Default Paths
Default Routes
Defaults Configuratron
Traffix 7'8'ol-15 (c) 2006 Dowling Assoc LiceNSCd TO SCHIVTTJESER GORDAN MEYER
Page 5-1
Thu OcE 5, 2005 0?:38:05
PM Existing
Impact Analysis RePorE
Leve1 Of Servace
IntersecE.ion
# 1 sH 82 & CMC Road
# 4 Pinon Mesa & CMC Road
Base
Der/ v /
LOS Veh C
B 11.7 0'533
Future
oel/ T /
LOS veh C
B 13 .1 0 .571
Change
in
+ 1,.458 D/v
+ 9.989 D/vA o.o o.ooo A Lo'o 0'000
Traffix 7.8.0115 (c) 2OO5 Dowling Assoc' Licensed to SCHMUESER GORDAN MEYER
Page 5-1
Thu Oct 5,2006 07:38:05
PM Existing
Leve 1 of Service Computat ion RePort
2ooo Hc'lvl OPera tions Method (Base vorlume AlLerna tive)
********************************************
****************************s1 SH 82 & CMC Road
********************criti caI Vol ./CaP. (X) :Intersecti"on *************0 .533**
75 11 .7
Cycle (sec):
Loss Time (sec) :(Y+R=a.O sec) Average
Level Of
Delay (sec/veh
******************t****
3 Service B
, - ^--^1 6.ODt].mar uYUre '*i*****************t****
50 **** ** * ****** * ** * **'**** * **** ****
CMC ROAd
We sE BoundSH 82Street Name North Bound South Bound East Bound
T RL T R
0
Approach RL T
Protected
Include
pL ll
0
Movement L T -ll
Permittsed
lnclude
Permitsted
lnclude
ConErol
Rights:
Min. Green
Base Vol:
Growth Adj:
PHF Volume:
Reduct. Vol:
Protected
Include
-ll-
0
015
01102
015
01Lo01oil-
54 38 2
0
s4 38 26
51 40 27
1001'0-ll
6 6L 2A 139
51 28 139
54 29 a46
0 30 Uo 30
Lanes:
Volume Module >> Count DaEe:23 I'lar 2005 << PM Peak Hour
1. oo l-. oo 1' 00 1.oo 1.00 1'00
102
65 LL64 63
1.oo 1.00 1'00
00
= 69 !225 66
114 647 1-4
1.oo 1.o0 1'00
User Adj:1.oo 1.oo 1.00 1.oo 1.oo 1'00 1.oo 1-00 1'00 1.00 1.o0 1'00
lnitial Bse 66 lL64 63
0.95 0.95 0-95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 o'95 0'95
PHF Adj o.95 o.9s 0'9s
069 ],225 66
114 547 !4
1-20 5 81 15
0
120 6 81 l-s
r20 581 15
O0
51 40 27
51 40 2'7
00
54 29 146
54 29 L46
1l
i o.G 1.5 L'6
o o.o 0-o 0'0
o 1.00 1.00 1'00
0 00
Reduced Vol
MLF Adj 1.oo 1-o0 1'00 L.o0 1.oo 1'00 1.OO 1.00 1'00 1.oo 1.00 1'00
PCE AdJ:1.oo 1.o0 1'00 1.oo 1.oo 1'00 1.oo 1.oo 1'00 1.oo 1.oo 1'00
Final Vol ' :69 a225 66 ll
Satsuratsion Fl ow Module:
Sat/Lane 19oo 1900 1900 19oo 1900 19oo 1900 1900 1
ll-
Lanes:l-.00 2-00 1.oo 1.00 2'00
Final Sat. : 1805 3510 161-5 180s 3510 1615 7?0 1059Adjustment: 0.95 0'95 0.85 0.95 0'95
CaPaci ty Analys is Module:
vo1/Sat:0 04 0.34 0.04
Crits Moves:64 0.64 o'12 0'69
Green/CYcIe
volume/cap 0.58 0.53 o.06 0.53 0'27 0
o.07 0.19 o'01 0'07 o'04 o'04 o'05 o'LL 0'11
20 o.20 0.20 0'20
o.es o-41 0'94 0
1.oo 1-oo 0'59 0
-ll-
0.59 o.20 o'20 0
01 0.37 0.19 0
eoo 1900 1900 1900
-94 0.55 o'88 0'88
.+r 1'oo 0.1? 0'83
72s L237 279 1384
Uniform De1: 34 '
lncremntDe
lnit0ueuDe
DelaY adj:1 . o0 1.00
DelaY/veh:
User DelAdj
: 0.07 0
o ?.5
l: 6-8 0'2
1: 0.0 0'0
40.7 7 .a
: 1.00 1'00
40.7 7 -8
3
5.2 30.8 4 '3
o.o 2-5 0'1
o.o o-0 0'0
1.oo 1-'o0 l-'00
s.2 33.3 4'4
1.00 l-. oo 1 ' 00
5.2 33.3 4'4
1
o.o l-.5 o'3 0
o.o o.o o'o 0
oo 1.oo 1.oo 1'o
6 27.4 25-2 25
1.oo 1.oo 1'00
25.9 28.4 28 '4
1.oo L-o0 1'00
ig 0.26 o.s3 o's3
9 25.3 26-s 26'83.6 25 -g 24'9 24
1.00
1
3.6 21 .4 25 -2 25 '2 25.9 28.4 28 '4
L (.C C C
t4Adj DeI,/veh:
DLOS bY Move
9HCM2kAvgQ*****************
a A
3 3
***********************
2 1 1 4
***********************0
Note: Queue report
*i**+***t*********
ed is the number of cars Per lane
****************t*****************************
Traffix 7.8.0115 (c) 2O06 Dowling Assoc LiCCNSCd EO SCHIVruESER GORDAN MEYER
il
It
Page 8-l-
Thu Oct 5' 2006 07:38:
PM Existing
Level Of Service ComPut ation Report
2OOO HCM Unsignal ized Method (Base volume A1t ernative)
**************************************************t**************t********
Intsersection #4 Pinon Mesa &CMC Road ******************************
*********************************************
Average Delay 1 ggglveh)0.0 vilorst Case Irevel of Service: A[ 0'01
********************************************************CMC Road
We st BoundStreet Namer Pinon Mesa East Bound
North Bound SouE h Bound
T T R
ApProach T T
*t*******************
RI,RL
00001
RL,-ll-
001000
IvlovemenE :
ControL:StoP Sign StoP Sign
Include Include
Rights:
L
Uncontrolled Uncontrolled
Include Lnclude
o o 1! 0 00000Lanes:ll
Volume Module : >> Count Date: 3 MaY 2006 << PM Peak Hour
n
o0 1.oo 1.00 1'00
0
0 o L27
0 75
076
00
080
0
0 o 127
0
1 .0o L. oo 1.00
00
1.OO 1.oo 1.00 10
Base VoI:
Growth Adj 1. o0 1.00
Initial Bse
User Adj:
PHF AdJ:
00
00
00
0
0
.00
95 o.95 0.95 o'95 0
0 134
0
1.oo 1-o0 1'00 1
0 00
00 1.oo 1.00 1'00
95 0 .95 0 .95 o'",
g08o(1. oo 1. o0 1' 0o 1' 00 l-
o.gs o.gs o'95 0'95 0
0 0 0
0PHF Volume:00 0
00Reduct Vo1:0 0 13400000 llFinal Vo1. :ll
Critical GaP Module:
Critical GP:rc<xxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx
FollowUPTim xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx
xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
xxxxx xxxxx x'<xx xxxxx
ll ll--
Capac ity Module:xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx
x-xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxxPotent CaP : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx
xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx
Move CaP xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx
volume/CaP : X)()<,<xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx
ll ll
Level of Service tlodule:xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx
xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
Control Del:xxxxx xxxx
IJTR - RT LT I,TR
xxxxxx xxxxxx
*
RT LT
**
I,TR
xxxxxx
RT 1,7 I,TR - RT
xxxxxx
Shared CaP': xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
MovemenL:I,T
xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
SharedQueue: xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
Shrd CorrDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
LOS bY Move:
Shared LOS:
ApproachDel
Approachl'OS***********
Note: Oueue reporte d is the number of cars Per lane
****a**********t*************
l************************************
*******************+*****l***********t******************************
Traffix ?.8-0115 (c) 2005 Dowl"ing Assoc' Licensed to SCHMUESER GORDAN IqEYER
ll
ll--
00
ll
--ll
Page 1-1
Thu Oct 5, 2006 08:05:L2
2011 AM
Scenario:
Command:
Volume:
Geometry:
Impact Fee:
TriP Genera!Ion:
TriP Distributlon
Pattrs:
Routes:
Conf iguraEion:
Scenario RePorE
2011 AM
Default Command
2011 Aljl
Defaufts Geometsry
Default ImPact Fee
Sinqle FamilY Home AM
n*Iiai"g Distribution Nvl
DefaulE Paths
Default Routes
Oetauft Configuration
Traffix ?'8'011-5 (c) 2005 Dowling Assoc LiCCNSEd tsO SCHMUESER GORDAN MEYER
Page 2-1
Thu Oct
2011 AM
Trip Generation RePorE
Forecast for Sing1e Family Home AIvl
Ratse
IN
Rate
OUE
TriPs TriPs
In Out
Total t Of
TriPS Total
Zorle
# Subzone Amount Units
1 Pinon Mesa 80'00 Single Family
Zone 1 Subtotal
0.19 0'56 15
15
45
45
60 100-0
5o 100.0
15 45 60 100'0
TOTAI,
Traffix 7.8.011-5 (c) 2006 Dowling Assoc LiCCNSEd EO SCHMUESER GORDAN MEYER
Page 3-1
2011 NvI
Thu OcE 5,2006 08:05:12
Trip Distribution Report
Percent Of Trips Existing Distribution AM
To Gates
3 41
zole
1 50.o 10.o 30'0 10'0
Traffix 7.8.0L15 (c) 2005 Dowling Assoc Licensed to SCHIVIUESER GORDAI{ MEYER
Thu Oct 5, 2006 08 :05 Page 4-1
l LZ
Turning MovemenE RePort'
Single FamilY Home AM
Southbound Eastbound
L"ri"irrt"-nignt Left rhru Right
wesEbound Total
Left Thru Right volume
volume
TyPe
#1 sH 82
BAEE
Added
Total
Northloound
Left Thru Right
& CMC Road
80 998g0
8o 998 258 L'7].r
2
56
o 150
60
0 150
0
85
0
86
63
0
63
46
5
E1
54 185
0
L85
104
l4
118
L12
23
L95
319'l
57
38544'1
5
ta
250
6
7l1 1
#4 Pinon Mesa & CT'1C
Base
Added
Totsal
Road
0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1i
L4
o 105
2O
2 ao5
256
62
318
0
0
00
4l
41-
0
0
0
5
5
Traffix ?'8'0115 (c) 2005 Dowling Assoc LiCCNSCd tsO SCHIVIIIESER GORDAN MEYER
Page 5-1
Thu oct. 5, 2oo5 o8:05 : l-2
2011 AM
rina.t- Analvsis Report'"*ilr"r of service
BASC
InEersection
# 1 SH 82 & CMC Road
# 4 Pinon Mesa & CMC Road
PeI/ \I /
LOS Veh C
B L'7 .1 0 -6L2
FuEure
Del/ v/
LOS Veh C
B :j-7.4 0.624
Change
in
+ 0.288 D/v
+to.299 Dlv
A o'o o.ooo B 10'3 0'000
Traffix 7'8'0115 (c) 2006 Dowling Assoc LiceNSEd tsO SCHMUESER GORDAN MEYER
201L AI4 Thu oct 5, 2
Level Of Service Comput ation Report
2OO0 HCI{ OPera tions MeEhod (Base Volume Alternative)
**********t***********************t******************
***************************
Intersect ion #1 SH 82 & CTVIC Road *****************i*****************
*********************************************o.6l.2
'75 criti cal VoI . /CaP ' (X) :
17 .1-Cycle (sec).:Defay (sec/veh
Ltss Time (sec (Y+R=4 .0 sec) Average
Level Of
006 08:05 :12 Page 5-1
3 B
************************Servrce
opE imal CYcle
Movement
60
******i********************* **********t*******t*t*
CMC ROAd
Stsreet Name:sH 82
Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
T R I.,T R
RIJ T RLLT
Protected
Include
Protected
Include
Permitted
lnclude
Permitted
IncludeControl:
Rights
Min. Green:
0
01100
015
10L001o01L02
-il
0
00 15 0
0 30 0 30
1,02
1711 53 86 s4
oo 1.o0 1-00 1'00
7ra 63 85 54
0o 1.oo 1-00 1'00
95 0.95 o-95 o'95 0
801 66 91 57
00
66 91, 57
1. oo 1.00 1.00
--ll
186 104 46 L72
oo 1.o0 L.o0 1'00
85 104 46 ].72
Lanes
volume Module : 2OlL Forecast AM
Base Vol:250
Growth Adj r-.00 1
Initial Bse 250 L
User Adj:r- . oo 1.00 1.00 1.00 1
PHF Adj:0.95 o.9s 0.95 0.95 0
PHF Volume:263 t
8o 998 47
: 1.00 1'00 1'00
8o 998 4'7
84 1o5l- 49
00
1
1
1 oo l-.o0 L-o0 1'00
95 0.95 0.95 0'95
1 96 109 48 181
00
196 109 48 181
00000
Reduct Vol:0
Reduced Vo1: 84 1051 49 263 1801
PCE AdJ:1.00 1.OO 1.oo 1'00 1'00
MI,F AdJ 1.00 r. . oo 1. oo l-.00 1 ' 00 L.oo 1-o0 l--00
66
Final Vol ' :84
1 . oo l-. oo 1.00 l- ' 00
1302 625 354 L322o 2.OO 1.oo 1'00 0'23
805 3510 151s 180s 3610 l-615 703 3't8
1.oo 1.oo 1.00 1'00
195 109 48 181
ll-
o.77 1.O0 o-2L o"79
91 571os1 49 263 1801-ll il--
Sat/Lane t9 oo 19oo 1900 l'90 o l-9oo 19oo l-900 1900 19oo 19oo 1900 1900Saturation FIow Module:
0.88 0.33 o-88 0'88
Adjustment: 0 95 0.95 0.85 0 ' 9 5 o.9s 0.85 0'37 0'88
0o 2.OO 1.00 1'0Lanes:
FinaI Sat. : 1 rl_----tt ll-
is Module:
05 0.29 0-03 o'15 O'50 o'04 0'l-3 0'15* o'15 o'18 0'14 0'14
o.61 0.71 o-56 0'55
Capac ity AnalYs
vol/Sat 0
Green/CYc1e:0 06 0.48 0.48 0'2 4 0.65 0.65 0'25 0'25 o.25 0.25 o.25 0'2sCrit Moves:
Volume/CaP: 0
Uniform DeI: 3
IncremntDel: 2
InitOueuDel
DelaY Adj:
DelaY/Veh: 6
User DelAdj: 1
AdjDel/veh: 6
LOS bY Move:E B B
HCM2kAvgQ
76 o.6A 0'05 0'5
4.'1 L4 .5 10 .5 25 '5
6.6 o.'7 o-0 2'6
o.o o'o o.o 0'0
1.oo 1.OO 1.oo 1'00 1
L.3 15.2 to.7 28'1 l-
oo 1.00 1-oo 1'00 1
t.3 a5 .2 10 .7 28 't !
t o.76 o.06 o'52 0'61
9.o 4-1 24'5 25'1
1.5 o.o 2-9 2'1
o.o 0.0 o.o 0'0
oo 1.oo 1.00 r'00
0.5 4.'t 27-4 2'7'a
oo 1. oo L.00 1 ' 00
0.5 4.'7 27.4 27'a
25 .L 25 .9 24 '7 24
"77 L4-5 L.1 L"7
o o.o 0.0 0'0
1.00 1-o0 1-00 1'000
27 -8 40 -4 26.4 25 '4
1.oo 1-oo 1'00 1'00
27 .a 40.4 26 '4 26 '4
(.D c C
5 5BA
3 5 *6 46a714lo***************************1
*****************
Note: Queue rePo rted is the numbe r of cars Per lane *****************************
***********************************************
Traffix 7.8.0115 (c) 2005 Oowlirig Assoc' Licensed to SCHMUESER GORDAI{ MEYER
Page 7-1
Thu Oct 5, 2006 08:05:12
20Ll' AM
Ire1re 1 of service ComPuts ation Report
2OOO HCM OPera tions Method (Future Volume AIt ernat ive )
Protected ProEected
Include
Permitstsed
lnclude
**************
T R
Permitted
fnclude
************************
Interse ction +l- SH 82 &
*****************
Cycle ( sec)
Loss Time (sec)
*************************************
CMC Road *********************************************************o.621,
Optimal CYcle*************
15 Critical Vo I . /caP. (x) :
L7.4
3 (Y+R=4.0 sec)Average De1 ay (sec/veh)
B
60 Level Of Service:
*******************************************l******************
CMC ROAd
North Bound South Bound East Bound West BoundsH 82Street Name
ApProach L T
T RIJTgLRL-ll -ll
0
Movements
Control:
Rig}.ts:
IrIi.n.Green:
Include
0
01102 01100
015
101oo1o
0
0 015o 300 30
102 il ltIJaneS:ll
Volume Module z 2O:-! Forecast AM
1.oo 1.00 1'00 1.Oo L.o0 1'0080 998 47 250 :-77L 53
250 17L1 63
86 54 185
86 54 185
O2
104 46 L'12
104 46 172
L4523
Base Vol:
crowEh Adj 1.oo 1'oo 1'00 1.oo 1'oo 1'00
rnitial Bse 80 998 47 0
, 80 998 52
84 1o5l- 55
00
258 L'7t7 53
1.o0 1.o0 l-'00
00
85 55 185
91 59 196
00
00
118 51 195
],24 54 205
5 80 0
0
000
00
: 84 1051
0Added Vo1:
PasserBYVoI
0
IniEial Fut 1.oo 1.oo 1'00 r-. oo 1.00 1 ' 00
PHF Adj:o.9s o-95 0'95 o.95 o.95 0'95 o .95 0 .95 0 .95 0.95 0.95 0'95
User Adj:1.oo 1.oo 1'00
272 t80:_ 56 0O 00PHF Volume:
Reduct Vol:
Reduced Vo1
PcE Adj:1. oo 1.00
MI,F AdJ 1. o0 1.00
0
55 272 LgO!
0
66 91 59
r,.oo 1.oo 1.00 1
Lg5 124 54 205
-oo 1.oo 1.oo 1'00
00
1.oo l-.oo 1'00
l-. oo 1. oo 1' 00 1 oo 1.oo 1.00 1'0
66 91 59 195
1.oo 1.oo 1'000
Einal Vol 84 L051 55 272 780]-
'7 0.47 0.24 0'55
2 0.o7 0.62 0 '77
t24 54 205
0.25 o-25 0'25
0.67 0.62 0 '62
25.4 25 -o 25 ' 0
0.55 0.25 0'25 0'25
05 o.50 o.6l- 0'61
4.8 24.L 24'9 24-9
o 2.2 2-6 2'6
o.o o.o 0'0
r-.oo 1.OO 1'00
ll llll
Sat/Lane
Satsura tion Fiow Module
1900 1900 190 0 l-900 l-900 1900 19oo 19oo 1900 1900 19oo 1900
Adjustment : 0.95 0'95 0'85 o.95 o.95 0'85 o.38 o.89 0'89 0.39 0.88 0'88
IraneS 1.oo 2-o0 1'00 1.oo 2.oo 1'00 1 .00 o .23 0 '77 1.oo 0.21 0'79
Final saE. : 1805 3510 1-61-5 1805 3610 1515 '728 389 1292 739 347 1327
CaPacitY AnalYsis Ivl0du
vol/Sat:o.05 0.29
Crit Moves:
Green/CYc1e
volume/CaP:
Uniform Del
IncrernntDel
InitoueuDel
ll-
Ie:
o.03 o-15 0'50 o'04 o'12 o'15 o'15 o'17 o'15* 0'15
: 0.05 0'4
o.7'7 0 -5
: 34-'t !4'9
27-2 0-7
0.0 0-0
1. oo l-. 00 1
6t.g L5 .7 L
: l-.00 1'00 1
61 .9 75 -'7 l-l-
B
410
11.0 25-3 9'2
0.0 2-7 1'6
o.o 0.0 0.0
oo 1.oo 1.00 1'00
1.o 28-llo''l 4'a
oo 1. o0 1 . oo 1'09
o 28.1 10 .7 4 '8
1.oo 1.o0 1'00
34.9 27 .9 2'7 '9
1.oo 1.oo 1'00
9.5 2-9 2-9
o.o o-0 0'0
34.g 2'7 -9 27 '9
6
26.3 27 -5 27 .5
1.00 l".oo 1.00
26.3 2'7 .5 27 '5
c
0
0
0.0
Delay Adj
DelaY/veh
User DelAdj
AdjDe 1/veh
LoS bY Move: E
HCM2kAvgQ:***************
B (,B
(.C C
4 6
************************
c
l-3 6 6
1*********************
Traf f j.x 7 ' 8 ' 0 115 (C) 2006 DOWfi-Ng ASSOC. LiCCNSCd EO SCHIVIUESER GORDAI{ MEYER
ll--
00
li--il
Page 8-1
Thu Oct 5, 2OO5 08:05:12
2011 AI{
2OOO IICM Unsignal
**************************
ApProach
ized Method (Bas e Volume Alterna
****************
Level Of Service ComPu tation RePort tive)*******************
Intersectsion #4 Pinon Mesa &CMC Road ***************************
****************************
Worst Case Level Of Service At 0.01
Average DelaY (sec/veh):0.0 ****************** * * * * * * * * ** * *
************************************************CMC Road
west BoundPinon Mesa East BoundStreet Name NorLh Bound Sou th Bound
Rl,il-
00001
*
T T D
-ll
UnconErolled UnconErolled
Include Include
RII
RI,Tt,TMovemenE --ll
00
00
00
00
ConErol:
RightE
TJaneS:
StoP Sign SE.oP Sign
IncludeInclude g01000-llo o 11 0 00000
lnitial Bse
PHF Adj:0.95 0.95 0'95 o.95 o-95 0'95 o - 95 0.95 0 .95
0 150 0 o 105
1.oo 1-oo 1'00 1.o0 1.oo 1'00
o .95 o .95 0 .95
0
Volume lvlodule:
Base Vol
PHF Volume:
Reduct Vol
2011 ForecaEt AIvl 0
0
0 0
Growth Adj 1. o0 1.00 0 150 0 o 106 0
User Adj:1.oo 1.oo 1'00 1.oo 1-oo 1'00 t.oo 1-oo 1'00 1.oo l--oo 1'0000
1.00 L.00 1'oo 1'00
0oo0
o o ].L2
0 o 158
0
0 o 158
00
g0LL2
tl--tl
000
00
00
0 90 0
0 0-llFinal VoI':-il-
Critical GaP Module
Cr itical GP:x>cxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xx)(x xxxxx
xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
FoIlowUPT im:xxxxx xxxx ll-
CaPac iEy Module'xxxx xxxxx xxxxCnflicE vol: xxxx
Potent CaP': xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx
xxxx xxxxx xxxx
xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
xxxx xxxx xxxxx
xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx
xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxMove CaP': xxxx
Volume/ CaP: .
XxxX xxxx xxxx xxxx llil
Leve1 Of Servic e Module:
2WaY95 thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx
Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx
xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
**
RT IJT
*
I,TR RT
LTR - RT LT I,TR xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx
xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
xxxxxx xxxxxx
xxxxxxShared LOS
ApproachDel xxxxxx
APProachLO c.
***************i**
*
I,T ],TR
*
RT LT
Movements:
Shared CaP : :(KXX X)(l(X XX}()(j< ,(X.x]{'
SharedQueue :X.xl(Xj{ XJ<)(j{ X]<.x}{.x X.xX'x)(xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx
shrd conDel : X)(){]<,<xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
LoS bY Move:
Notse: Queue
*i*********
**
of cars Per lane *******************reoorted is Ehe number
**ii************************************
Traffix 7.8'0115 (c) 2o06 Dowling Assoc' ficensed to SCHMUESER GORDAN MEYER
ll I
0
il--
ll--
Thu oct 5 2005 08:05: l-2 Page 9-1
2011 AM
ooo HCM Unsignalize d Method (FuEure
****************
volume A1 ternative)Leve 1 Of Serrrice ComPut ation RePort
********************
Pinon l4esa & CMC Road
****i**************
*************
*******************+********
)
Average OeIaY (sec/veh)1.5
*****t*********************************
Street Name:Pinon Mesa
North Bound South Bound
**************e: B[ 10'31
Worst Case Leve1 Of Servic ***********************************
CMC Road
East Bound West Bound
T T R
T
Intersection #4
***************
ApProach
*****************
RLRi,l,T RL
Movement ll il-Uncontrolled Uncontrolled
Include lnclude
Contsrol :
Rights
Lanes:
Base Vol
StoP Sign StoP Sign
lncludeInclude ooo01 001000
o o 11 0 ooo00 ll ll
volume Module : 2011 Forecast AI"1 0 l-05
.00 1.oo 1.oo 1.00
0 0 106 01.oo 1.oo 1'00 1
0 150
-ll
0
0
0
: 1.00 1
0
00
4]-0
00
4L0
41 0
00
430
O0
00
00
00
O0
00
0 o 150
0
0
ZO
O0
00
0
o0 L.oo 1'00 l-'00
crowth Adj
rnitial Bse:
Added Vol
PasserBYVol:
lnitial Fut:
PHF Volume:
Reduct Vo1
o0L4
00
o 150 14
0 158 15
g0
o l-58 15
0
0
User Adj:1. oo 1.00 1
PHF Adj o .95 0.95 0 95 0.95 0.95 0 ' 95
o 2 1,06 0
r.. oo 1. oo 1' 00 1.oo 1.00 1'00
o.9s 0-9s 0'95 0.95 0.95 0-95
2 Lr2 o
0
5
0 00
oo 1. oo l- ' oo 1'09
05
5 U
0
0
2 ll2 00
Final VoI. :5
Critical GaP Module:xxxxx 4'1 xxxx xxxxx
xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2'2 Y'xxx xxxxx
Critical GP 6 .4 xxxx 6 '2 xxxYJ<'
3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx
FoltowUPTim:
xxx)C]( xxxx xxxx xxxxx 173 xxxx xxxxx
CapacitY
cnflict.Vo]: 2A
Modu1e:1 xxxx 165 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
1416 xxxx xxxxx1416 xxxx xxxxx
PoEent CaP 3 xxxx 884 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.00 xxxx xxxx
Move CaP '7]-2 xxxx 884 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx
Volume/CaP : 0-05 xxxx O.O1 xxxx xxxx
ll--ll-
Level Of Servi ce Module
2WaY95thot xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx
Control DeI:xxxxx x:<xx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx
-ll
xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx
llll-
LOS bY Move:*
Movement I,T I,TR . RT LT LTR
shared CaP xxxx 728 xx>(XX xxxx
SharedQueue ;xr(xxx o '2 xxv'><X xxxxx
I,TR I,TR - RT
xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx O.O xxxx xxxxx
xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.5 xxxx xxxxx
A
>(xxxxx xxxxxx
xxxxxx **
xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.5 xxxx xxxxx
A*
RT I,T RT I,T
*
shrd ConDel
Shared LOS:*Bt*
ApProachDel:
ADProachLOS:*_*-************
B******I**********************
10 .3
Notse:Queue rePorted is the number of cars Per lane
Traffix 7.8.0115 (c) 2oo6 Dowting Assoc Licensed to SCHIVIUESER GORDAN MEYER
ll
0
00
--ll
Page 1-1
Thu Octs 5, 2006 08:07:45
201.1 PM
Scenario Report
Scenario:
Command:
Volume:
GeometrY:
Impact Fee:
TriP Generatron:
TriP Distribut:-on:
Paths:
Routes:
Conf i.guration:
2011 PM
Default Command
2011 PM
Defauft Geometry
Default fmpact Fee
Sinqfe FamilY Home PM
nxiitinq DisEribution PM
Default Paths
Default Routes
Default Configuration
Traffix 7.8'0115 (c) 2Oo5 Dowling Assoc' Licensed to SCHMUESER GORDAN MEYER
Page 2-t
Thu Oct 5, 2005 08:07:45
2oLL PM
Trip Generation RePort
Zone
# Subzone
Forecast for Single FamilY Home PM
Rate RaEe rriPs rriP" :::i'- * ot
Amount units rn ouE 'iJ- o"t- Trips Total
o .54 0 .31 51
51
30
30
81 100 .0
81 100.0
1 Pinon Mesa , BO ' OO Single FamilY
zone 1 Subtotaf
81 100 .051 30
TOTAI,
Traffix ?'8'0115 (c) 2006 Dowling Assoc LiceNSCd TO SCHIVII,ESER GORDAN MEYER
Page 3-1
2011 PM
Thu Oct 5, 2005 08:07 :45
TriP Distriburion Report
Percent of Trips Existing Distribution PM
1 3
To Gates
2
Zone
1 50.0 Lo'o 30'o 10'0
Traffix 7.8.0115 (c) 2005 Dowling Assoc Licensed Eo SCHMUESER GORDAN MEYBR
Page 4-1
Thu OcE. 5, 2006 OB :07 :45
2011 PM
Volume
TyPe
Northbound
i,eft Thru Right
Turning Movement Report-si"gr! FamilY Home PM
Southbound Eastbound
l,"ti"iit" nigr't Left rhru RighE
westbound Total
Left Thru Right Volume
f1 SH 82 & C}IC Road
::";-- Lot :-773 e6
iii"u s o -1:
Totsat 101 1773 rrf
9B
o
98
48
9
5/
1,'7 4
26
200
98s
0
985
55
3
59
0 111
50
5 11.1
196
rtr
2Ll
3709
t5
3782
2L
0
a1
15
5
81
0
85
85
*4 Pinon Mesa & CIVIC Road
Base
Added
Total
0
27
27
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
3
o 202g0
o 202
0
46
46
313
81
3940
0
0
Traffix 7'8'0115 (c) 2005 Dowling Assoc LiCENSCd tsO SCHMUESER GORDA}i MEYER
Thu Oct 5' 2006 08:07:45 ---:i:::.-i -
lmpact AnalYsis RePorE
Level Of Service
IntersecEion
# 1 sH 82 & cMC Road
# 4 Pinon Mesa & CMC Road
B 10 .8 0 .000
Change
in
+ 2.25:- Dl]J
+10.812 D/v
Base
oel/ v /
LOS veh C
B 18 .0 0 .809
A o.o 0'000
FuEurer,e.r/ \I /
LOS Veh C
c 20.2 0'874
Traffix'7'e'orts (c) 2006 Dowling Assoc Licensed tso SCHMUESER GORDAN MEYER
....-....-.
--;;'i ;;-;';t;" computation Report
2ooo HCw, 5p.,urio,= y:::::ljiii:l*:*:.tl:::X:::il * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
******************+*****t**i*********
,.a"r=..at"" ti_:T.:1.:-:T:.i::t**********************.*********************************************iI**************""*--;;;-tica:. vor ./9un.1*) :, ti::9o
cycle (sec),:^^, . '? ,"**=n. o sec) ;;;;;. -':1i]-- (sec/veh) ' '"
"itss t:.me (sec): .i t'-"-"- Level of t.t't'19:i**.****r*******r*****t*
:iii::1.:l:1:;.**...**1?****************i************** cMC Road
street Name: ,.n
"o.,rrd=H
82
so,rah Bound- , "ttr"ol*;* u
*i"tt'oltu*
Approach: ,*o'_ r _ R L - r - R L - :_-__-']-ll---------------lill.il".,, L ----ll ---- --'--------tt--------"--"-ll--------:
I _------l-. _--,-l l---r...""a"u permirred Permitted
..".'.r, ' "?:,:i::: "il:;;; ^ '"'i"a' 6 o '";'r"u o
Rights:--_ o 30 o o 30 I o^ l', o" 1 o o 1 o
Mii. er."t,, - oo i" o 1 1 o 2 o L 1 0 : :__:-ll-:-------------l;;;=,- ll-------'-"-----tt ll--------'
i:*:Hr'=,lll i;ii ;il ';ii ';li f ?i : *i , n , i: ,:i ,ll ;,'fi":-.i"r Bse: -'9: i'l; ,.;; rloo r-oo r-'oo 1':::.. 0.e5 o.es o.vs o'esi'il,^^i:;- : :l l Bl l:33 1 33 ; ;; o gs o:?? o ;; 8e s1 se 206
PHF Adj: o ''z "r;z; -,,;i 183 103? "o 'o'o "; s o o
pHF volume' l"0o -'"; - o o -^g .: .,, nl .[ u, s]- se 2o5
Reducc voI. - ..,? ,r.l ,oi rei ros, 22 '91 " .;; ,.6-o 1 . oo 1 .0o 1. oo
i:[liil,;ti' ,i:: l::: liii 11fi 1::! l,ii l::: l::: i,', i;;; ;; ;;i:
il; iii, r.oo 1.00 1.oo ':91 i;!i '';; -i;i Bo .? ,__u_1____------- I
Final vo,. : ,;; i;;; -ior,
, i:: i::l -- ??l I -i:i ---::------ 1 I -------
'--'_:______-- l- r r----
saturation t'?:#"tl;'ri' ,roo leoo leoo leoo 1'99 l'3: l:3: l?:? l::: l:!!
'^:;ll?H. i::: :H 1':: l.;: ;.;: i,ii l,il :il: iri:^ ;;31
"?"
i;13,i"',""' 1^l? i;li i;;; itou ,.'o 161s, , u" -::"----'---l l --------------- IIi',li '"''' ":: 1:i: i:i:''iili-:::: Il-----
;;;;;;;;-*"1"t=Plodule'o o.2s o'01 o'18 0'10 o'r-o o'05 o'15* o'16
;:ii;;;i
-0.060's2*o'05 o;t***
o.2o o.2o 0.200.20 0.20
critMoves' -.,n0..n"0..n 0.120'66 o'66 919;;; o.+e o-2eo'7s o"7e
Er".r/.r.r.e: 0-r-o 0'54 o'64 o';;.;; o.o, 2:r1 ,u., 26.6 25.s 2a.s 28.s
x#:*l'4, l,:i l,,i ';,i h,i
':ll "i,i
?i,i 't,i 'r t ":,i ia : ti,!
iffiH:3:l, ,i.; ;'; ;; ';3,1;3 ,1,! .'{ ll:l ',-;i6, };13 i;ll l;l!
B:l1},+:n i;l! i;l? ltll :t,: ,:,t l:,1 i','zi'r'i ,,'2;i:: l.:g lii:
m#lat'i;l! l;19 ';:: l;i!';li -;; "ti ""1 '''on '";; -";. 'D
l*rH"Xii-__..1r....'1:....11...-11-.-l:-.**?*****?****I*****i******************
************l'
Note: Queu" 4ili:;t.li":::.*X::.::.:i::-*I.l?::;******************************************xxx ' ^ ^ " '-
Traffix 7'8'0115 (c) 2006 Dowling Assoc LiCENSCd IO SCHMUESER GORDAN MEYER
Page ?-1
2011 PM
Thu Oct 5, 2006 08:07:45
Leve I of Service Compu tation Report
Volume AlEe
200 O HCM OPerations Method (Future
***********!
************************************
lntersection #1 sH 82 & cMc Road
*i*****************************
opt imal CYcle:
*****t******
Street Name North BoundApproachLTMovements:
Control:Protected
Rights fnclude
rnaEive)******************
******************************
Criti.cal vo]/cap. (x)0 .874
Service:
South Bound East, Bound West Bound
*
'75 DelaY (sec/veh):20.2
Cvcle (sec):
r,tss time (sec)
63
************** ****************l**
(Y+R=4.0 sec) Average.
Level ur
*l*t****l**************
C}!C Road
ca
sH 82
T R L T R1,T R
Permittsed
Include
RL-il
0
ProEected
lnclude
PermiEtsed
Include 0
01100
015
101ool-0o 15 00 30 00 30Min. Green:01102 ll102Iraneg:
Volume Module t 2OLL Forecast PM 98 76 85 48 55 196
Base Vol:o0 1. oo 1.00Growth Adj
Tnitial Bse:
1.00 1'oo 1'00 98 75 85
g5
90
98 81 85
1.oo l-.oo L'00
1
L01, L'173 96
101 1773 96
oo15
0
L74 985 2L
L74 985 2l
260
O0
200 985 21
O0
1. oo 1,.00 l- ' 00 1.oo 1-oo 1'00
48 56 L96
931s00
0
g0
5',7 59 2L7
00Added Vol:
PasserBYvol
Initiaf Fut:
User Adj:
PHF Adj
PHF Volume:
Reduct VoI
tot 7773 111
0o 1.oo 1'00 1.oo 1'oo 1'00
95 o.9s 0.95 0.95 o.9s 0'95
106 1866 LL't 2LL LO37 22
O0
O0
0.95 0.95 0.95
1.oo 1.oo 1'00
0.95 0.95 0'9s
50 62 222
U 103 85 89
60
103 85 I
1.oo 1-oo 1'0
1.oo 1.oo L.00
103 85 89
s eo 62 222
o r.oo r'oo 1'00
1.oo 1.oo L'00
60 62 222
ll
0o00
n
Reduced Vol:l-06 1865 LL1 2!1 LO37 22
MI,F AdJ:1.00 1.00 1'00
1.oo L.oo 1'00
1.oo 1.oo 1'00PCE Adj:1.oo 1.oo 1'00
Final Vol 105 1866 LL',7 2LL LO37 22
ll-
Sat/Lane L9
0.95 0.95 0'85oo 19oo 1900
Adjustment:
0.95 0.95 0'85 o.26 o.92 o'92
1.oo 2.oo 1'00 1.00 0.49 0'51
1805 3510 1615 502 856 898Lanes:
SaturaEion Flow Module:19oo 1900 1900 1900 19oo 1900 19oo 19oo 1900
0.45 0.88 0'88
1.oo 0.22 0'78
854 367 1311
24 0.24 0-24 0'24
42 0.30
4.4 23 -6 26 -4 26.4
1-00 2.00 1'00
1805 3610 161-5Final Sat ' :
CaPaci Ey AnalYsi s Module
Vol/Sac:0.0 5 0.52
Crits Moves:
Green/CYcIe : 0.09 0'59
volume/CaP 0.53 0-87
Uniform De
IncrernntDel
fnitQueuDel:
DelaY Adj:1 .00 1 .00
DelaY/veh 40.4 l7 -3
User DelAdj
AdjDel/veh 40.4 :l.'7 .3
IJOS bY Move
ll ll-ll-
o.2g o.ol- o'21 0'10 o'10 .o'o? o'1? 0'17
lt 32.8 13 ' 0
; 't.'1 4-3
0.0 0.0
: l-.00 1'00
:D 423
o. 07 0.12
0.59 0.13 0'53 0
o.tz 0-87 o'45 0
5 .8 31.9 7 'l
0.1 21 -a 0'1
o.o 0.0 0'o
1.oo 1-oo 1'00
5.8 59-1 'l'3
L.oo 1.oo 1'00
6.8 59.7 7'3
63 0-24 0'24 0
02 0.8'1 0'42 0
5.2 27 -5 24 '4 2
0.0 45.5 0'7
0.0 o-o 0'0
o.7 0.8
0.0 0.0
25 .L 24 .4
c
4
o.72 0 -72
6 -4 6.4
0.0 0'0
1. oo 1.00
o
1.00 1.oo 1'00 1.00 1.00
25 .t 24 .4 32.8 32.8
1.oo 1.o0 1'00 1.00 L.00 1.oo 1'00
32.a 32.8
(-
5.2 '74 'L 25:!
5.2 74.L 25'L
A E a A E
5 4 1
0
*******************************i**********7t_
HCM2kAvgQ **********************
Traffix 7'8'0115 (c)2OO5 Dowling Assoc' Licensed Eo SCHIVIIIESER GORDAN I{EYER
Page 8-1
Thu oct 5,2006 08:07:45
2011 PM
Leve 1 Of Service Computa tion Report
Volume A1t ernative)
2oOO HCItt Unsignal
******i**************************************t**lntersection *4 Pinon Mes a & CMC Road
***{r*********************************
0.0
*******************
Worst Case Level ********************ofs eruice: A[ O'01
Average DelaY ( sec/veh)
****************************+i****************** ********
Pinon Mesa East BoundStreeE Name North Bound Sou th Bound
****************
CMC Road
West Bound
T T R
ized Method (Base
******t********t*
nLApProachT
MovemenE
control:StoP Sign
Right s ;lnclude
T pLRI,il-1,
1l-Uncontrolled Uncontrolled
StoP Sign
Include rnclude Include
60001 g01000
o o 1! 0 g0000 llLanes:ll-ll
0 o 202
1.oo 1.oo 1'00
0 111
1.o0 L.oo 1'00
o 111
0
Volume Module 2oLL Forecasts PM
Base Vol:0
0
0
1-oo 1.oo 1'00
0 00
00l-.oo L.o0 L'00 0
Growth Adj:o 2O2
User Adj:I.oo 1.oo 1'00 1.oo 1.oo 1'00 1.oo 1.oo 1'00 1.oo L-oo 1'0000000rnitia] Bse:
Pr{F Adj 0.95 0.95 0'9s 0.95 0.95 0'9s 0.95 0.95 0'95 0.95 0.95 0'95
0o 2L300
00
o 1l-7
00
0 117
0 0
0 0O0
00
0 O0PHF Volume:0 0o 213 0Reduct Vol:0 00 ll60llFinal Vol 'il
Cri tical GaP Module:
Crit ical GP:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx
xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
FollowUPT im:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx -ll
xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
ll--ll-
Capaci ty Module xxxx xxxx xxxxx
Cnf ] ic t vol : x){,<X xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
Potent cap xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
Mowe CaP': xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx
VoIume /CaP: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx ti--il
Levet Of Servi ce Module xxxx xxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
2WaY9 5thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xKxxx
xxxx xxxxx xxro(x xxxx xxxxx *
Contro,1 DeI : xxxxx
LOS bY Move
Movement IJT 1,TR
Shared caP
SharedQueue ::oo{xx
shrd conDel:xxxxx
xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx
xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
RT LT
*
],TR RT LT I,TR RT I,T I,TR RT
xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
xxxxxx
Shared LOS:xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxApProachDel:
ADProachlos:*'*_*************ed is the number of cars Per lane **********************Note: Queue report
******i***********
******************
Traffix 7.8'0115 (c) 2006 Dow)-ing Assoc' Licensed to SCHMUESER GORDAN MEYER
ll--
Page 9-L
Thu Oct 5'
011, PM
2O06 OB : 07 :45
)
Level Of Service Compu tation Report
20oo Hctil Unsignal ized Method (Future
*************************************Volume A1 Eernative)
***************************
Intersect ion *4 Pinon Mesa & CMC Road
***********************
Average Delay (seclveh
*****ti*******************
Street Name:Pinon Mesa
Approach NorEh Bound South Bound
*************
*******************************************
0.9 Worst Case Level of
*************i*******
Service: B[ 10'8]
******************t*******CMC Road
East Bound West Bound
):
*
RIJ RL
-11-
00001
Uncontrolled Uncontrolled
Include fnclude
RI,
-11-
s0L000
T R
TT
Movement:IJ T
Control:
Rights
StoP Sign StoP Sign
Include Include
o 0 1! 0 ooo00 ll ILanesil
Volume Module 2011 Forecast PM
0 0 2O2
1.oo 1'oo l-'00 1 oo L.oo 1.00 L'00
0
0
oo46
0
o 202 46
o 2L3 48
00
o 2L3 48
0 1-11
50
00
5 111
0O
5 tt1
0
00
: 1.00 1'00
00
2'1 0
00
,270
280
00
280
0 00
00
00
00
o0
00
00
Base VoI
crowth Adj
lnitial Bse:
Added VoI:
PEF Vo1ume:
1.oo 1.oo 1'00
0
o 202 0 0 111
0 0
o3
0
0
0 0
PasserBYvoI 3rnitial Fut
User Adj:1. o0 l-. o0
PHF AdJ:0.95 0 - 95 o.95 0.95 o'95 0
oo 1. oo 1. oo 1'09 1.oo 1.o0 1'00
gs 0 .95 0 .95 0'9:o.95 o-95 0'9s
5 LL1 0
0 0
00
1.oo l-.oo 1'00 1
3 0
0Reduct Vo1
3 0
Fi-na1 Vol xxxxx 4.1- xxxx xxxxxCritical'GaP Module:
xxxxx 2'2 xxxx xxxxxCriticalGpr 5 '4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx
FolIowUPTim : 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx
ll
CaPacitY Module:xxxxx 261 xxxx xxxxx
CTIf Iict Vol: 364 xxxx 231 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx
xxxxx 1315 xxxx xxxxx
Potents CaP.: 639 xxxx 807 XXX:<xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1315 xxxx xxxxx
Move caP 53'7 xxxx 807 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx O.O0 xxxx xxxx
volume/cap xxxx O-00 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx
-|-ll-
: o.o4 il
Level Of Serv ice Module:
2waY9 5rhQ;xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx
Contsro I Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx
xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx o.O xxxx xxxxx
xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.7 xxxx xxxxx
LOS bY Move: *
Movements lrT ],TR
SharedQueue ::{l(xxx o'2 xxxxX xxxxx
Shrd ConDel : xxx'xx 10.8 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx
LTR IJTR - RT
LTR xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx O .0 xxxx )<xxxx
xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 1.7 xY,Y.x xxxxx
RT LT RT I,T
xxxxxx
RT l,T
A
xxxxxx
Shared CaP : xxxx 551 xxXXX xxxx
xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx
A
Shared LOS B
APProachDel 10 .8 xxxxxx
BAPProachLOS********************************t******************************
Note: Queue reporEed is the number of cars Per lane
Traffix 7.8.0115 (c) 2006 Dowling Assoc LiCENSEd TO SCHI.{IJESER GORDA}I MEYER
00
00
il ll
Page 1-1
2026 ?$l Thu Oct 5, 2OO5 OB :08:38
Scenario Report
Scenario:
Command:
Volume:
GeomeErY:
lmPact Fee:
TriP Generatron:
TriP DistribuEron
Paths:
Routes:
Conf iguration:
2025 AM
Default Command
2025 AM
Default GeomeEry
Default Impacts Fee
Sinqle FamiIY Home AM
n"i-"ti"s Distribution AM
Default Paths
Default Route6
Oefault Configuracion
Traffix 7.8.0115 (c) 2006 Dowling Assoc Licensed to SCHMUESER GORDAN MEYER
Page 2-1
Thu Oct 5, 2006 08:08:38
2026 AM
TriP Generation RePort
Forecast for Single FamilY Home N{
Rate
In
Ratse
Out
rriPe TriPs
In OUE
Total t of
Trips TotaI
Zor].e
# Subzone Amount Units
0.19 0 ' 56 L5
15
45
45
6o 100.0
6o 100.01 Pinon Mesa 80'00 Sing1e FamiIY
zone 1 Subtotal
15 45 60 l-00 - o
TOTAT,
Traffix 7'8'0115 (c) 2005 Dowling Assoc Licensed Eo SCHI'fl'ESER GORDAN MEYER
Page 3-1
2026 tM Thu Oct 5 ' zoOG 08:08:38
Trip oistribution Report
Percent of Trips Existing Distribution AM
To GaEes
")3 4
Zorle
1 50.0 10'o 30'o 10'0
Traffix ?.8'o1l-5 (c) 2006 Dowling Assoc LiCCNSCd TO SCHMUESER GORDAN MEYER
Page 4-1
Thu Oct 5, 2006 08;08:38
2026 AM
Turning Movement RePort
SingIe FamilY Home AJ"1
wesEbound ToEal
Left Thru Right volume
Volume Northbound
il; - Left rhru Risht
Southbound Eastbound
l.ri"iit
-nigr't lJeft Thru Right
+1 sH 82
Base
Added
Total
& CMC Road
104 1305
gO
104 1306
328 2240g0
336 2240
62
5
67
82
0
82
L13
0
113
58
70
0 195g0
0 195
243
0
243
137
!4
151
58
5
63
o 137
2O
2 L37
aaE
)a
248
4966
57
5023
#4 Pinon Mesa &^CMC Road
;;";-- s 0 0ffi;qil ::ToEal 41 u
0
o
0
U
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
L4
L4
332
62
2Ad
Traffix ?'8'0115 (c) 2OO5 Dowling Assoc Licensed to SCTMUESER GORDAI'I MEYER
Page 5-1
Thu oct 5' 2006 08:08:38
2026 a*r
lmpact AnalYsis Report
Leve 1 of Service
Intersect'ion
# l- SH 82 & C1i4C Road
# + Pinon Mesa & CMC Road
Base
DeI/ v /
LOS Veh C
D 41.0 1.050
Futureoe:rl v /
i,OS Veh C
D 48.5 L.084
Change
in
+ 7 .528 D/'n
+r.o .909 D/vA o.o o.ooo B 10'9 0'000
Traffix ?.8.0115 (c) 2006 Dowling Assoc'Licensed to SCHMUESER GORDAN MEYER
Thu
2026 pJnl
Page 6-1
ation Report
Volume AlEernat ive)
*****************************
*****************************1.050
oct 5, 2005 08 :08:38
Irevel Of Service ComPut
20OO HCM Opera tions Method (Base
***************
lnter section #1 SH 82 & CMC Road ********************************l***Critical Vol /cap. (x) :
41 .0
DeIaY (sec/veh):
Df Service:****************I *
CMC Road
East Bound We sE Bound
T T R
**********
75Cycle (sec) :
3
IrOSS Time (sec)(Y+R=4.0 sec) Average
Leve1 O
90ootimal CYcle:
*i*r*****************************t********
Street Name
ApProach r
sH 82
NorLh Bound South Bound
1,T T
gLRI,pl,ll-Movemeot ll---ll Permitted
lnclude
Permitted
lnclude
Contsrol:
Rights:
Min-Green:
Protected Protected
Include
011oo10
015
10010
0IncLude01500 30 00 30
102o1
: 1.OO 1'00 1'09
: 104 1305 62
000
: 109 1375 65
1. oo 1.00 1
1. : 109 1375
328 2240 82
1.oo L-oo 1'00 1.00 1. oo '1 ' 00
328 2240 82
1.00 1-o0 1'00 1.oo 1'oo 1'00
113 58 243
113 68 243
119 't2 256
00
119 72 255
1r,9 '12 256
ll-
is sge 367 L31
L37 58 225
L37 58 225
1-44 61 237
00
L44 61 23'1
90 .9 2.8 2 '8
0.0 o.o o'0
0
102 llLaneS:
volume Module 2026 Forecast AIVI
Base Vol:104 1306 62
Growth Adj
PHF Volume:109 1375 65
-ll
1.oo 1-oo L'00
Initsial Bse
User Ad1:1.oo 1.oo 1'00
PHF Adj 0.95 0.95 0'95 0.95 0.95 0'9s 0.95 0.95 0'95
1.00 1.oo 1'00
0.95 0.95 0.95
345 2358 86 0
00
ReducE VoI
Reduced Vol
PCE Adj:1.oo 1'oo 1'00
MLF Adj:
Final vo
Adjustmen t: O.95 0'95
Lanes:1. o0 2 .00 1.00
Final saE. : 1805 3510 1515
345 2358 86
1.oo 1.oo 1'00 1.OO l--oo 1'00
.00 1.oo 1.oo l-'00 1.oo 1.oo L'00
65 345 2358 86 !44 61 23'7
ll
i ngo 343 1331
1.o0 1.o0 L'00
1.oo l-'oo 1--00
1. 05 0.53 0 ' 63
21 .o 23 .6 23 '6
ll
Sa turation Flow Module
Sar/lane 19 o0 1900 1900 19oo 1900 1 eoo 19oo l-9oo 190
-es 0.30 0'88 0'8o.es 0.95 0'9s 0
1. OO 2 .00 l-
o 19oo 19oo 1900
8 0.25 0.88 0'88
e r.oo o.zo o'80oo 1.oo o'22 0'7
18os i51o 16
ll
1
-ll
CaPac ity nnalYs is Module:20 0.20 o'29 o'18 0'18
****
vol/Sat:06 0.38 0
Green/CYc1e o.06 0.46 0'46 o.22 o.62 o '62 o .28 o .28 o '24 0.28 0.28 0'28
Crit Moves
volume/CaP:1.05 o-83 0'09
Uniform Del
04 o.L9 0.55 o'05 o'21 0
*
28.2 14.2 s '7
0.8? 1-05 0'09 o.74 o.70 0'70
24 -5 24.L 24 'L
0
:F
IncremntDel
1nitsQ',ueuDe1 r
DelaY Adj: 1
Delay/veh: L3
User DelAdj I 1
Adj Del /veh:13
\o2.4 3.6 0'L
o.o o.o 0'0
35.3 l'7 .7 11 ' 4
18.3 33.9 0'0
0.0 o'o 0'0
t-. o0 1. oo 1' 00
45.5 48.0 5'7
!7.2 4.5 4'5
o.o o.o 0'o
oo 1.oo 1'00
oo 1.oo 1.00
7.7 21 .3 11'5
.00 1.oo 1'00 1
7.7 2l-3 11'5 46
1.oo 1.oo 1'00 1.00 l'.00 1'00
4L.8 28 .6 2A '6 L77 .9 26 -5 26 's
1.oo 1-oo 1'00
L-a 28.6 28 '6 Lt7 .9 26 -5 26 '50o 1.oo l'.00 1
5 48.0 5"7 4
1,1 43
F
C B D D A D C
1 ****t*************
C
7 7
6 I
LOS bY Mowe
Notse: Queue***********
HCM2kAvgO:********************************
*t**********************
of cars Per lane *****************************************
6 l'7
reoorted is the number
*-*i-* * * ** * * *** * ** *** ** * *
Traffix ?'8'011-5 (c) 2OO5 Dowling Assoc Licensed to SCHMUESER GORDAN MEYER
0
It--
0
ll
4 I
Page 7-L
Thu Oct 5,2006 08:08:38
2025 Fltt
Leve I Of Service ComPuts ation Report
20 OO HCIVI OPerations Method (Future volume A1t ernat ive )
*************************************t*********************************
****************************lntersection************
Cycle (sec):
Loss 11ms (sec):
#1 sH 82 & cMc
*********r*****
Road ********************1.084
75 Critical Vo1 /cap. (x) :
48 .5
3 (Y+R=4 o sec) Averag e Delay (sec/veh
D
Levef Of Service:*****t*****************
**********
90
*************************t*CNIC ROAd
West BoundsH 82 East Bound
oDEimal Clcle:
*'* * * * * * * * * * * * *
Street Name:North BoundApProachLTMovemenE:
Controf ProtecEed
Rights:lnclude
south Bound
T pL T Rl,T R
Permitsted
Include
RL ll-
Protected
Include
Permitsted
lnclude
-ll-
0
015 00150
0 0 30
01100 1010o1o0 30Min- Green:ol-102 il102llLanes:I
Volume tvlodule 2026 Forecast AM
Base Vol:104 1306 62
crowEh Adj:
104 1305 62IniEial Bse 5
Added Vol;
328 2240 a2
1.oo 1.oo 1'00
328 2240 82
0o 1.00 1.00 1.oo L.o0 1'00
0
0
1
il
L37 s8 225L13 61 243
113 68 243
g2
00
113 ?o 241
119 74 256
60
119 74 256
0
L31 58 225
L4523
O0
151 53 248
159 66 26L
00
1.oo 1.oo 1'00
0.95 0.95 0'95
l-. oo L.0o 1' 00
00
00
109 1375 '7L
e0
00
00
PasserByvol:
0
336 2240 a2
rnitial Fl.lE:104 1306 67
o .95 0.95 0 ' 95 o.95 0-95 0'95l-.00 1.00 1' 00 1.oo 1.oo 1'00 r..00 L-oo 1'00
User Adj 0.95 0.95 0'95
354 2358 86PHF AdJ:U
PHF Vo1ume:00 0 159 66 26Lg00
Reduced Vo1:1.oo 1.oo 1'00
PcE Adj o0 1,. oo 1' 00 1.oo 1.oo 1'00
MLF AdJ:354 235A 86
Fina1 Vol
s aturation Flow Modu1e
Sat/Lane:L9 oo 1900 190 o 1900 19oo 1900
0-95 0.95 0'8s
1.oo 1-oo 1'00 1.oo 1.oo 1'00
1.oo 1-oo 1'00 159 65 26L
ReducE Vol:354 2358 86
1.oo 2.oo 1'00
109 13?5 '7L
.oo 1.oo 1'00 1.oo 1.00 1'00
119 '14 255
: 109 1375 1l il
Adjrrstment 0 .95 0.95 0'85
oo 2.oo 1'00
19OO LgOO 1900
o .26 o .88 0 .88
1.oo 0-22 0'78
19oo 19oo 1900
0.25 0.88 0'88
1.oo o.20 0'80
48'7 339 1333
1 4g2 375 1304Lanes:
Final Sat. : l-80 5 3610 1615 18os 3510 16L5 llll
capaciEY
Vol/Sat:
AnalYsi
0.0 6 0.38 0 04 0.20 0.55 o'05 o'24
****
o.20 o.20 0'33 o'20 0'20
****s Module:
Crit Move
Green/ CYcle : 0.06
volume/CaP 1 .08
Uniform De 1: 35'4 18.9 L2.2 28'6 L4
IncremntDel :114 .0 46
1.08 o-09 0'80 o .65 0 .65 1.08 o'55 0'65
22.8 22.8 26.2 22.8 22 '8
s: ****
o.44 0.44 0 '22
0.86 o.10 0'90
5.1 0.1 23'8
o-o o.o 0'0
1.oo 1.oo 1'00
23 .9 L2.3 52 '5
: 0.0
: 1.00 1'0
3.0 3-0
o.o 0.0
1. oo 1.00
25.a 25.8
98.s 3-o 3'0
o.o o-o 0'0
L24.'7 25 .7 25 '7
:.24 .7 25 .7 25
"11.oo 1.oo 1'006
o 1. oo 1.00 1
9 a2.3 52 '5 6
o .30 0 .30 0.30 o.30 0'30
o,50 o-50 0'30
.9 6'3 24't
4 o.o 26'0
o.o o.o o'0
1.oo 1'00 1'00
1.3 6-3 50'2
0o 1.oo 1'00
r-.3 6 .3 50 '2
1. oo 1.00 1.oo 1.oo 1'00
lnitOueuDel
DelaY Adj:1.00
DelaY /veh:L49.4
UEer DelAdj
AdjDel/veh ]-49 .4 23
LOS bY Move F
25.8 25 .a
CCF
B D E A D
1
9 I
**********************
I oC
718
5
1 L2 46
HCM2kAvgo
*******i****
***+*****************
Traffix 7'8'01-15 (c) 2005 Dowling Assoc' Licensed tso SCHMUESER GORDAN I4EYER
ll--
ll--
ll--
I
2025 AM -T:::-l: illl-11.::-1: - --:i:: i-i --
.-.--------....
;";'i ;; ;";;" com,utaEiol *:P?i'
2 o o o Hc:l,r u,,= isnar i "q T::::l'ili;i.l:i:::.*:::X::I: I * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*************************************
,"..r"""tt?1 tl-:lHl.T:::.:-:T:.1:?1..-..***********:.:i.;;-;.;i:::"11..;l;i...-******"*************:;."" 0.0 l^lorsEcase"uY?:.;;-;i******************;;.;;" r"r?y
- I :::{I:ll :..... *l *l * * * * * * *'iI'* i I * * * * * * * * * *
;:;;;;.---***********"..;[::.;:::..-----'. r,.or Bou#c*otu*.". Bound
srreer Name: -- rrh ,o*Iil"n
M"=suo..-,ah Bound- , "1"t*--]---* L - T - R
eppro."rt' ,I"_ r - R r, - T - R L' - l_----:-ll---------------lm'o'".*"ta, ,o ll---- -ll--:-----._r.ff"a Uncontrolled'------ I ---;;"-;;;; srop sisn u""?::i;;;'" rncruder;r:l: ^=:?::il$ s o=.?ti:#, . :::: i : ,-:--i-: -:-: ,i"i"", ,o -:--:'--1------l l--------- ll-------
l---.;"-;;."cast'Al'l ^ ^ 1sq g o 13't o
,.i"*" r"u"le: 2026 Forecast AIvl s 0 o ? "t;; 1.oo 1.oo 1.oo 1.00
::ru"*,t "l '''l ''ol '"06''oo ':! ::i :H ;..: ,.:,:: 'ol
i:::'il,:="' I :g l:B: t Bl l:gi l.g: 1 33 t BB I BI ; ;;''tl't?i''l
pHFAdj: o'';-'n s o P o : ""; 6 opeFvot,,*"' : ; ; : I 3 : rol ;. o L4_4____:l
Reduct.vol: ; ; s 0 o 0,,
-_"_-'_:'-__----ll--------rinarvol.', __:---:- -ltt------- ll------
;;;;; ;lri::*,' -- xxxx xxxxx *"*i1 ffi ffi ffi E ffi,
;:iffilfnffi,ffi ffi ffi ffi il;rrT - -'::---r r'---- -
;;;;;r;;;?11=' cxxxxxxxxx -I11 ffiffi ffiffiffi#;il'vo1 : xxxx xxxx xxxxx *i; xxxxx *|Y o..r. xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
Potents cap': xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxx)
Move cap. : ",fi
';; xxxxx ry * xxxxx * ;; -xxxx xxxx
vorume/cap,,*,5_ry ;;t lYi-Ti Ti,,Ti-l::'-'::--l \ ---- ---'---'-'-l
;; ;; ;llit. Modure' --.-.* xxxx xxxxx *ia ffi ffi -ry ry ryiiuvs'gr'q'-.ffiffiffi"ry*f -T * *
ControlDe1 :xx* * * * i_ -: ,,1 _lte-nr LT-LTR-RT
i:?#t"i" -"i - o"* - *' -"-L ,,lI} -,.L "ffi ffi ffi ffi ffi ffi
Shared Cap'; xxxx xxxx xxxxx -ru it-" """** xxxxx ry
==
ffi'**** *****
SharedQueu"'*** xxxx xxxxx "oa *]t** ***** *,t"Y -ti- *Tt *T' * *"rita-"""ot''*T "T '*T * *
shared T'os: -;
: -
*
xxxxxx xxxxxx **'1-
fji:::lnli....::***********'l*l****************l**********************i***'*-********-.-:::::;'r" an. number of cars ptt.11::;-************r**************
NoEe : Queu' :T:*:i.::.:::.iI*::.;;.;;;;*'********************
Traffix 7'8'0115 (c) 2006 Dowling Assoc Li.censed to SCHMTIESER GORDAN MEYER
2026 AM - lT-:::- ?''-''"i1-li-li-ii -::::-:-i---
;";"i ;; ;"":;rru:::::'iilh#::::i: ll:l. * * * * * * * * * * * *
2 O0 o HcM unsignal iz"9
. Y?lt- - - - * t * * * * * * * * * * * t x
***********;;::"::::"";:::.:..lir:-li::..-.****************r**********************
Il::::::::?l.ti-lI;***l*****************"::..;.":";";.i;r service:'!.1:''l
Averase ,"rlr-l:::i[li:.::.*.1t1**.....T:I::.:i::.::It i.::"i;;I:::"....
-***********************t pinon Mesa
srreet Name: ai^rrh eouna -sor.h"BoldR o "l"t"'olt{ "::--:l"yt"ippi"""n, ,so'_-"f -- e . , r, __ I l--__ _--'-------- 1 l--_- _--::------ I
;;;;;;i= ';:1"*p ^ ^':?::il#. ,.-;:t5 : 1_::l::-:RighEs, ^ o 1l o o ,, o o__:__:__l_tt
Lanes: ,' ------------ll-----------'-----l----^-^---:-^- ^^".'in, ^ 1oE 6 0 ].3'1 0
;;i;;; Module t 2on26 Forecast AIvl 6 0 . f .i3: r.o[ r.oi r]oo r"oo
a:-="*l;,' ''03 ''ol "l ''oi ''oo ''o! "l 'tBi ' ,:
-
2 "1 :
ini.iurt""' "? : ; o o s o ; 6 o s o
*:::;;l;a, .^\: : : : !.^:,i;i ,t: ,.'.,i'.;,e!'li:-f*"1"''
t,g:;.g: t B? t'gg t:gg t 3? t 33 l Bl ;'li
"t? 't?i "':
pHFAdl , "'-^i- o 5 0 u : ; 6 0 0ptr"u"i"*". ntn : ; o o s o ,ol ,i z L44 o
n.irr.t vor' .: n 5 g o o o
final VoI': 45
l"'i?i""i nlo *:1'--*
i.? ==
xxxx xxxxx *Y ffi ffi i,i E ffi,
iritical G!' 1.; ; ,.r,foa-:a_:T,'iiT :::- -'----- I l------FollowupTim', t.
- ------------ I I ---
I - -,
.
- - - -
vyyx xxxx xxxxx 22Q vs<s<x xxl(xx
:X?i:::'#1"'i;'-"** 2r3 -*Tffiffi ffiffiffi il:. ffiffi
i::::"*::t' ^:ii ffi ":ii ffi ffi ffi ,ffi E ffi ,,:,::
.**-k'
'.ilii*"7b"p,,o-11-Ti--l-li',14-:--* I l----
1--------:-- I I o-o xxxx xxxxx
i.'"' ot,service Modure' ----** xxxx xxxxx aY. ffi ffi ?,? '*f *T
Iiluyer.no'. ffiffiffi,;s*f -*f ,w- * * A
corrtrorDer:xr* * * * 1_ -: ,.1 -ur*-*" 1,T-LTR-RT
l,os bv Mo"t' ui - ,r* - *, -:L -* o.T,,. -xl-; xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
H:::r:;, , ,,IL-i;l:H -ffiffiffi -ffi;;.""""" 3 ? ffiffi
sharedgueue:xxxxx 0'2 xxxxx -*r. xxxx xxxxx *T* '*i" *Y ';" * *
!iii-""*tI :xxxxx 10 ' e xxx:x * *
shared l,os: T' .^"" * * **i- *"tT-
"oolt""tn"'t 10 ' 9 ^-**l*************************flp"pt""lr''o" t ' **--*-.?******************t*****************************'*i**********
Notse: Queut t:;";t;"t= tnt number of cars per lane'
Traffix 7'8'0115 (c) 2O06 Dowling Assoc Licensed to SCHIVIUESER GORDAN MEYER
Thu oct 5, 2006 08:08:10
2025 PM
S cenario Report
Scenario:
Command:
Volume;
Geometry:
lmPact Fee:
TriP Generatlon:
TriP Distributron
Paths:
Routes:
Conf iguration '
2025 PM
Default Command
2026 PM
Default Geometry
Default ImPacE Fee
ii"ci. PamilY Home PM
i"Iiil"s Distribution PM
Defaults Paths
Default Routes
oeia"ft Configuration
Traffix 7'8'o1l-5 (c) 2o05 Dowling Assoc ],iceNSCd TO SCHMUESER GORDAN MEYER
Page 1-l'
Page 2-1"
Thu OcE 5, 2005 08:08:10
2026 Pl',q
TriP GeneraEion Report
Forecast for Single Farnily Home PM
Rate
IN
Rate
Out In Out
TriPs triPs Total & Of
Trips Tota1
zorre
# Subzone Amount Units
1 Pinon MeEa 80 ' OO Single FamilY
zorte L Subtotal
o .54 0 .37 51
51
30
30
81 100.0
81 100 .0
81 100-051 30
TOTAI,
Traffix 7.8.0115 (c) 2O06 Dowling Assoc Licensed to SCHMUESER GORDAN MEYER
Page 3-1
Thu oct 5, 2OO5 08:08:10
2026 PNI
TriP Dist
Percents of TrrPs
ribution Report
rxi.sting DistribuEion PM
To Gates
23 41
Zone
1 50.o l.o.o 30'o 10'0
Traffix 7'8'0115 (c) 2O05 Dowling Assoc LiCENSCd TO SCHMUESER GORDAN MEYER
Thu Oct 5' 2006 08:08:10 - :::: i-.i-
-- ;;';;;n-'o"*.',t RePgI-t
Single FamilY Home PM
vorume'o'-lho"l.lln. o"r=.'iiy,"[lln. "":T;?:"lt'n' ""'l';iT"llnn'
#:1"
TyPe LefE Thru h
#1 sH 82 o Tg^lotdrze 22i L29o 28 L28 '76 "'o ", t: '?'? ^"\:'
?:::" t32o 232oo -;; 26 g ,o, ,.rB ,? ,rl ',i ss 27L 4B8s
t:Hi '=l' "'o 141 253 tzeo
#4 Pinon Mesa
Base
Added
Totsa1
& CMC Road
0
0
0
o
0
0
0
3
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
o 252
60
o 252
o 140
50
5 140
20,
81
473
0
46
46
0
0
00
Traffix ?'8'0115 (c) 2005 Dowling Assoc LicCNSCd IO SC!{MI,ESER GORDAN MEYER
Page 5-1
Thu OcE 5 ' 2006 08:08 : l-0
2026 Pl'tl
ImPact Analysis RePort
Level Of Service
Intersection
+ 1 54{ 82 & CMC Road
# 4 Pinon Mesa & CMC Road
Base
oe]-l \1 /
LOS Veh C
E 70-o 1.185
Future
Del/ v /
IJos veh c
E 66 -6 a 'a7L
Change
in
-3.386 D/v
+1,L.504 D/v
A o-o o'ooo B 11'5 0'000
Traifix 7.8.0115 (c) 2O05 Dowling Assoc LiCENSEd IO SCH}iIIJESER GOPDAN MEYER
Page 6-1
Thu Oct 5, 2006 08:08:L0
2026 PM
2OOO HCM OPera Eions Method (Bas
Eation RePort
,e Vo1ume A1ternatl ve)Leve 1 Of Service ComPu
**************+*****************************
*******************************************************lntersec tion #1 SH 82 &CMC Road *****************r, .185*********Critical vol./CaP. (X):70.0
Cycl e (sec) :'75
Loss Time (sec):3 (Y+R=4 ' O sec) Average DeIaY (sec/veh E
Leve1 Of Servj-ce:***********************ootimal CYcle:
*'***********************
90
*************************t*******CMC Road
V{eEt BoundSH 82Street Name:North Bound South Bound East Bound
T RI,ApProach
Movement
Control:
Rights
Min' Green:
IraneS:
Protected
Include
Protected
Include
Permi.tted
lnclude
T R
Permitted
lnclude
0
0
1.oo 1-o0 1'00
1.00 1.00 L'00
T pL
l,T
0 30
RL ll--ll
0 0
01100
015
r.01001001500 30
102 01102 il ll
0
ll
Volume Module z 2026 Forecast PM
1.oo 1.oo 1'00 1.oo 1.oo 1'00
Base Vol:132 2320 L26 22't t290 28
Growth Adj t-. oo 1- 00 1' 00
1.oo 1.oo 1'00Initial Bse 732 2320 1'26 227 L290 28
User Adj 1. oo 1.00 1 ' 00 1.oo 1.oo 1'00
PHF Adj:0.95 0.95 0'95 0.95 o-95 0'95 0.95 o'95 0'95 0.95 o.95 0'95
1 . oo 1.00 1" 00
t28 76 111
a2A '16 111
135 80 l.:l.7
O0
29 L35 80 11
62 56 2s6
62 s6 256
r..oo 1.00 1'00
55 59 259
O0
'7 65 59 269PHF volume:L3g 2442 133 239 1358 29
00 0000Reduct Vo1:
Red.uced VoI t39 2442 133 239 1358
Fina1 vo1 : L39 2442 L33 239 1358 29
Saturation Fl ow ModuLe:
SaL/I'ane:1900 1900 1
Adjustment 0.95 0.95 0
1.oo 2-00 1Lanes:
Final sat.: 1805 3510 15
CaPac ity enalYs is Module
vol/sat 0 o8 0.68
**Crit Moves:
Green/CYc1e
oo 1.oo 2-00 1
ll--
85 0.22 0 -9L o
.oo L.o0 o'41- 0
515 409 '?03 10
o 1.00 1--00 1'0
135 8o LL7
-ll-
2'7 .1 22.t 22't
t42-7 o.6 0'6
0.0 o.o 0'0
1.00 1-oo L'00
1.00 l'.oo 1'00
ig 1.oo 0.18 o'82
2'7 815 299 L36i
65 59 269
o.29 0.71' 0'71
15 1805 3510 1
0
PCE Adi:
MI,F AdJ:
1.00 1.00
1.o0 1-00
1. oo 1.00 L ' 00
r-.oo 1.o0 1'00
1.0
1.00 1.00 1. oo 1 ' 00
llll-
900 19oo 1900 1
.85 o'95 0.95 0
9oo 19oo 1900 1 eoo l-9oo 1900 1900
-sr 0.43 0.88 0'88
0 .08 0 .13
-ll-
0.38 o.02 o'.33 o'11 o'11 o'08 o'20 0'20
: 0.1-1 0-57 0'5
0.70 1.19 0'l'4
z 32.2 A6 '! 7 '5
7 0.L
: 0-0 O'O 0'0
42.7 105 7 ',6
l-.oo 1-oo 1'00
42.7 105 7 '6
F
1.19 o.66 0'03 1.19 o.41 0'417 0.1'1 0.57 0'5
33 .3 l'1. o '7 'o
L22.4 o'8 0'0
o.o 0.0 o'0
155.? 11.8 7'0
1.00 1. oo 1 ' 00
1ss .7 l-1 .8 7 'o
'7 0.28 0.28 0 ' 28 o.28 o.28 0'28
2r.3 24.4 24 '4
volume/caP'
Uniform DeI
IncremntDel : 10.5 88 '
0.7 5.1 5'1
o.o o.o 0'0
L.oo l-.oo L-00
C
lnitQueuDel
DelaY Adj:1.oo 1.oo 1'00 1.o0 1.00 1'00 1.oo 1.oo 1-'00
a69 -8 22 -6 22 '6 22.o 29 -4 29 '4
DelaY/Veh:
User DefAdj
AdjDel/veh:
LoS bY Move L)
L69.a 22.6 22 '6 22.o 29 -4 29 '4
C
F B A F C IAI1I
*******************
*l-13 L2
HCM2kAvgo************
Note: Queue reported is Ehe number of car s Per lane
***************+*******i*****t*********************
5 5'7
Traffix ?'8'0115 (c) 2oo5 Dowling Assoc' Licensed to SCHIVIUESER GoRDAN MEYER
ll
ll
40
Thu octs 5, 2006 08:08:11 Page 7-1
2026 Pr4
2ooo HCM operati ons Method (Future
*f*****************
Volume Alt ernative)Level Of Service ComPut ation RePort
**************
******************************f*********
Intersect ion #1 SH 82 & CIVIC Road
Critical VoI /cap- (x)*****************************************************
Cycle (sec)3 (Y+R=4 ' 0 sec) Average DeIay (sec/weh) :'75
Loss Time (sec):Leve] Of Service:
*********i*****************
1 .171
66 .6
E
***********i***********90octimal CYcIe:
*'*************************************
street Name:sH 82
ApProach North Bound South Bound pL
CMC ROAd
*
PIr T pl,
East Bound
T
West Bound
T R
Permitted
Include
L T ll--Movements:
Protectsed ProtecEed
Include
Permitsted
lncludeControl:
Rights:
Min. Green:
oL5
r-0010
Lze 75 111
1.00 1. oo L ' 00
L2A 76 1L1
0
05
O0
L28 8l- 111
t-.oo 1.oo L'00
015
10010
0Tnclude00o 30o 30
102 0110201
IJaneS:
volume Module t 2025 Forecast PM
Base vo1:l.32 2320 t25
Growth Adj:1.oo 1'oo 1'00
Initial Bse !32 2320 L26
22'7 ].290 28
1.oo L.oo 1'00
227 ]-290 28
62 s6 2s6
1.oo 1.oo 1'00
ool'5
0
260
O0
0
0 0
o.9s o.9s 0'95
0
l-35 85 ]-L7
O0
135 85 117
135 85 117
62 55 256
o?15
g0
't\ 59 277
O0'75 62 285
0
Added VoI:
PasserByvol:
lnitial Fut L32 2320 l-41 253 1290 28
User Adj:1.oo 1.oo 1'00 1. oo L.0o 1 ' 00
95 0.95 0-95 o .95 0.95 0.95
PHF Adj:L39 2442 148 266 1358 29
PHF Volume
0
00
00
1.oo 1-oo 1'00
0.95 0.95 0'95
15 62 285
00
0 0
266 L358 29
1.oo 1.oo 1'00 1.oo L.oo 1'00
1.oo 1.oo 1'00
75 62 28s
g0
Reduct Vol
Reduced Vo1 t3g 2442 148
PCE AdJ:1.oo 1-oo 1'oo
MLF Adj:
1.00 1.oo 1'00
1.oo L.oo 1'00 1.oo L.o0 1'00 1.oo 1'oo 1'00
Final VoI -: L39 2442 148 256 1358 29
Il-ll
saturation Flow Modu1e:
Sau/Lane:19 oo 1900 l-900 19oo 1-9oo 1900
Adjustment 0.95 0.95 0'85
1.00 2.oo 1'o0Lanes:
Final sat. : l-805 3610 L6L5
CaPac ity enalYs is Module;
voI / sat '
08 0.68 0 09 0'15 0
19oo l,9oo 190 o 19oo l-9oo 1900
o.95 0-9s 0'85 0.24 0.91 o'9 i o.as o.ee o'89
1.oo 2.o0 1'00 r-.oo o.42 0'58 1.oo o-18 0'82
1805 3510 1615 44g 'r.32 1003 854 298 1368
ll ll
.38 o.02 o'30 o'12 o'L2 o'09 0'21 o'21
*
9 0.26 0 .26 0 '21criE Moves
Green/CYc1
volume/caP
Uniform DeI
IncremntsDel
InitQueuDel
Delay Adj:
DeIaY/veh:
User DelAd
Adj De1 /veh:
LOS bY Move D
HCM2kAvgQ
0
e: 0.11 0'58 0
: 0.68 1'17 0
: 31.9 L5'8
: 8.8 82'5
: 0.0 O'O 0'0
1.00 1.OO 1'00
40.1 gB-4 7'4
1.00 1.oo l-'00
40.'7 98-4 7'4
F
58 0.13 o'59 0'5
t.L7 0.64 0'0
32.8 Lo.1 6'4
113.7 o.7 0'0
o.o o.o 0'0
1.17 o-45 0'45
o.26 0-26 0'26
o.34 o.81 0'81
22.7 26 .2 26 '23
45.5 10.B 6'4
1.oo 1.oo 1'00
15
'7 -4 27 .g 23 .5 23 '5
12'? 1 O.7 0.7
o.o o.o 0'0
1.oo 1.oo 1'00
0.9 LL.3 11'3
o.o o-0 0'00.1
1.oo 1.oo 1'00
1. oo l-. oo 1' 00
165 .o 24 -2 24 '2
1.oo 1.oo 1'00
146 .5 10.8 5 '4 765 .o 24 -2 24 '2
F B A F C
1
23.1 3'7.5 37'5
1.oo 1.oo 1'00
23 .'7 3'7 .5 37 '5
D
2 10 l-0
C D
0 I 4
**************
*******************)74 115 56
*
Traffix 7'8'0115 (c)2006 Dowling Assoc' l'icensed to SCHMLESER GORDAI'I MEYER
ll--ll
--ll il
ll
Page 8-1
Thu Oct 5, 2005 08:08:L1
2026 Pvl
Irevel Of Service Compu tation RePort
ized Method (Base Volume AIt ernaEive)
lntersecti on #4 Pinon Mesa &
***************l***
ApProach
*********************************
CMC Roadi*I*li**** ******+********************************
Serrice: A[ o'0]
*********************
2ooo HCl4 Unsignal
***********************
CMC Road
***********i**
WesE Bound
T RRI,
**********0.0 Worst Case Leve rof
Average ucrdy ( sec/veh)
**********************************************************
Pinon Mesa East BoundSLreet Name:North Bound Sou Eh Bound pL TpLT llMovemenE:L T I Uncontrolled Uncontroll-ed
lnclude Includell
Control:
Rights:
StoP Sign
Include
stop Sign
lnclude ooo01 oo1o00
0 o 11 0 60000 ll llLanesll
Volume Module t 2026 Forecast PM
Base Vo]:0 0
1.oo 1.00 1'00 1'00
ooo0
00 0 o 252
1.oo 1.oo 1'00
0 140 0
1.oo 1.oo L'00
Initial Bse:
User Ad1:1.oo L.oo 1'00
PHF Adj:0.95 o-95 0'95
o 252 o 140
1.oo 1.oo 1'00 1.oo 1'00 1'00 1.oo 1.oo 1'00
0.95 0.95 0'95 o.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0'95
0
: 1.00 1'00
90
00
00
90
U0Growth Adj
PI{F Volume:
ReducE Vol:
Final Vo1
Shared LOS:
o 265 o 1470 0
0
0
0
o
oo0
60 o 255 0
60 0 00
o 1,470
00 n
0 ll-11ll-
Cri tical GaP Module:xxxxx xxxxx xxl(x xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
xxxxx xxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
Cri Eical GP:xxxxx xxxx
xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
FollowUPTim xxxxx xxxx
xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
CaPac itsy Module:xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxxCnfIict vol: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
PotenE CaP.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx
xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xx)g xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxxxxx xxxx xxxxx
Move CaP .: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx
Volume/CaP : xxxx xxxx -ll
Level Of Serv ice Module xxxx xxxx xxxxx
xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
xxxxx xx)<x xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
ll-il-
ll-
I,TR - RT I,T
xxxxxx
*
ll--
2WaY95thQ:
ConErol DeI **
RT I,T
*
xxxxxx
RT I,T
xxxxxx
I,TR RT
xxxxxx*
LOS bY illove:
Movement IJT LTR
shared CaP
SharedQueue : xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx
Shrd ConDel rxxxxx xlqx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx
I,TR
xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx
xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx
xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx
xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
ApProachDeI
APProachLOS***********
*************************************************************
Note: Queue rePortsed is the number of cars Per lane
*****************t***********
****************i ****************************
Traffix 7'8'0115 (c) 2005 Dowling Assoc' Licensed to SCHMUESER GORDAN MEYER
0
il--
Page 9-1
2025 PM
Thu OcE 5, 2OO5 OB :08 :11
2ooo HcM Unsignal ized Method (FuE ure Volume A1 ternative)Leve 1 of Service Compu tation Report
**************************i*t *
i*************************
Average DelaY (sec/weh):
**********************
SEreet Name:
Intersect ion #4 Pinon Mesa & CMC Road
***********************i********************************i****
0.8 I{orst Case Level of Service: B[ 11 sl
t*****************************************CMC ROAd
Pinon Mesa
North Bound south Bound
Rl,
East Bound
T RL
WesE Bound
T R
ApProach Rl,T il-L T llMovemenE Uncontrolled Uncontrolled
sEoP Sign StoP Signil
rnclude lncludeControl r Include fnclude 00001 oo1o00Right.s o o 11 0 ooo00 llLanes:il ll
Volume Module t 2026 Forecasts PM
oo L.0o 1.00 L'00 1.o0 1.oo 1'oo 1'00
002520
0 0 252 0 140 00
Base VoI
Growth Adi
Initial Bse
Added Vol:
PasserBYvol
PHF Volume:
Reduct Vo1:
: 1.00 1
0 U 0
0
3
o0
00g0
o0
1.oo 1-oo 1'00
0 140 0
00
270
O0
,270
280
00
280
0
0
0046
O0
o 252 46
o 26s 48
O0
o 265 48
5 L40 0
50o0 0
0
3
1.00 1.oo L'00 1.oo 1.oo 1'00 1.oo 1.oo 1'00
5 t41 0
0 0
00
00o0
00
0
Initial Fut'
PHF Adj 0.95 o-95 0'95 0.95 0.95 0'95 0.95 o-95 0'95 o.95 o.95 0'95
User Adj:1.oo 1.OO 1'00
?
0
0
00
5 r47 00
3Final Vol
critsical GaP Module:
Critical Gp: 5.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4-1 xxxx xxxxx
xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2'2 ]/.YJJ- xxxxx
FollowUPTim:3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx _rl-tt -ll--tl-
CaPacitY Module:
CnfIict,Vo]: 44 7 xxxx 2A9 xxxx xxxx
xxxxx xxxx xxxx
Potent CaP. : 5'7 3 xxxx '754 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx
Move CaP 57 L xxxx 154 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx
Volume/caP ' 0.05 xxxx O.OO xxxx xxxx
xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 314 xxxx xxxxx
xxxxx 1258 xxxx xxxxx
xxxxx 1258 xxxx xxxxx
xxxx O.OO xxxx xxxx
ll
Level Of Servi ce Ivlodule:xxxxx O-O xxxx xxxxx
2WaY95thQ:xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx
xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.9 xxxx xxxxx
Control Del:xxxxx
LOS bY Move:
Movement I,T l,TR
Shared LOS:B
11.5
B
IJTR - RT I,T
*
A
RT I,T hTR RT
xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx
?.9 xxxx xxxxx
A *
xxxxxx
**
xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx
Shared CaP xxxx 585 XXXXX xxxx
xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx
SharedQueue :x.rKj(xx 0.2 xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
shrd ConDel : xxx)<x l-l-.5 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx
RT I,T
xxxxxx
],TR
xxxxxx
ApproachDel:
Approachlos:
*
**i*********
NoEe: Queue
************
reported is the nuTnber of Cars Per lane
Traffix 7-8'0115 (c) 2005 Dowling AEsoc' l'icensed Eo SCHMJESER GORDAN MEYER
ATR2005s/oSH 82
GLENWOOD SPGS
7.A24
ActualMI EJOON SH
Table 5 - 2005 Existing Traffic
Table 6 - 2011 Forecast Traffic
Table 7 - 2026 Forecast Traffic
2005sH 82 0.1
GLENWOOD SPGS
s/o7.8?42.194
133ON SH MI
1Mt
GLENWOOD SPGS
082A 1.699
Source: CDOT Webslte
DailY
Vehicle
Miles
Traveled
AAOT
igiqule
Tlucks
Trnffle
..AADT
;Bstivatlo*ADT
Yaar Truckr Factor (% of
AADT
Comb.
Trucks
Deslgn
Perceat -20 Year Hoilr Vol
2.
11
:Deeign
'Hour
Valume
{7o of
, AADI)ztt1
Trucks
Slagl+$ingle
Truckg
2011
AAST .AADT AADT
CotIlb,
Trucks
201 1
.AiqDT AANT
.{oftb,
trru6kg
34,
Design
AADT
z0fr
.AAD1
8ofib.
AAET
Single
Trucks Trusks
20?6
: :iAADT AidtrT }{AUT
.': ' . Val,lme
Single Gomh. {V" of
Trucks Trucks AADT)
133
e
SCHMUESER I GORDON I MEYER
.ENCINEERS I SURVEYORS
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC.
l1E W. 6th Street, Suite 200
Glenwood Sorinos. Colorodo 816O1(970) 94s-1004' FAX (s70) 94s-s948
Aspen, Colorodo (970) 925-6727
Crested Butte, CO (970) 349-5355
Figure I
Pinyon Mesa Vieinity Map
Job No. 1502-F ootc: 5r/26r/06 Dom by LMB Filq Figs,
{
rii,
l
I
I.I
:"l gl'
;.
J,
!.
:1iil
i.
.1
It
I
S/IE
ACCESS
a E\
lr
a
a
:-:\ l a aa
a
t,=
a
l.
lrt-
a
a
a
a
atl
-J
Ia
J
,
a
a
il l:l
Figure 2Site Plan
SURVEY
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC.
Crested
Colorodo (t
Butte, CO
5948
349 53s5
6W.
,b ttto. 1502-F DrvJt 4/: LMB Fllq
TruMEIEI
DiEE
a
r,]
a
-)
r:{Elr_rlr!{i_-ili:r
LEGEND
W rRAFFtcs/GNAL
:ll' E)(/SI/NG LANEAGE
00 (oo) - 2oo5 AM (PM) PEAK HOUR THROUGH VOLUMES ON SH 82
oo (00) - 2006 AM (PM) PEAK HOUR TURN1NG VOLUMES TO/FROM CMC RD AND CR 154
@oqi- zooa 24-HouR TRAFFrovoLUME
Figure 3
Pinyon Mesa Existing Traffie
Fltq Figsooto: 10//4/06 Dom 4c LMB,td tto. 1502-FSURV
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC.
1lE W. 6th Street, Suite 2O0
Glenwood Sorinos. Colorodo 616O1(070)-51s:roo4' FAx (s70) s4s-ss46
Aspen, Colorodo (970) 925-6727
crested Butte, co (970) 349-5555s
LEGEND
000 @0q - 2011 AM (pM) qEAK HOUR TRAFFTC*
*Source: CDOT Forecasts
Figure 4
201 1 Background Traffice
SURVEYORS
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC.
1lE W. 6th Street, Suite 200
Glenwood Sorinos.' Colorodo 816O1(970) 94s-1004' FAX (s70) 945-s948
Aspen, Colorodo (970) 925-6727
Crested Butte, CO (97O) 349-5355 ,tob No. 1502-F Dotc:onm g LMB FIlq
LEGEND
000 (000) - 2026 AM (pM) qEAK HOURTRAFFTC.
*Source: CDOT Forecasts
e
SURVEYO
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC.
116 W. 6th Street, Suite 200
Glenwood Sorinos.' Colorodo 816O1(970) 94s-1004' FAx (97O) 945-s94E
Aspen, Colorodo (970) 925-6727
Crested Butte, CO (97O) 349-5J55
Figure 5
2026 Background Traffie
Job lb.15o2-F lootc: 10/4/06 Omm by: LMB Ftb: flgs
,1i...:
.t
i,,f
.i.
.1
:
)'
LEGEND
!r'PROPOSED LANEAGE
000 (000) - AM (pM) qEAK HOUR S:TE GENERATED TRAFFTC
OO% - SITE TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION
.Figure
Mesa Trip
6Piayon tenAssignm
G N E ,tob tto. l5O2-F Drom by: LMB Fb
SCHM
W.
LEGEND
000 (000) - 2011 AM (PM) PEAK HOUR TOTAL TRAFFTC
e SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC.
SURVEYORS
EW.Figure 7
2011 Total Traffie
Job Nd tsoz-r lur., to/4/o6 lonm o1c tuB FtL: FigsIN
LEGEND
000 (000) - 2026 AM (pM) qEAK HOTJR TOTAL TRAFFTC
Figure I2026 Total Traffie
RS
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC.
1lE W. 6th Street. Suite 200
Glenwood Sorinos. Colorodo 81601(970) 945-1004' FAX (970) 94s-s948
Aspen, Colorodo (970) 925-6727
Crested Butte, Co (970) 349-5J55 ,b t'to. 1502-F Ootc:10/4/06 O@an ry: LMB Ftb
FIRE TURNAROUND
ID|I IXIGOS ITPHITC PBOTEI eJ
766 ADTa-FIRE TURNAROUNDa746 ADT
a \::: \
T il]a
al
a ,\It aSECONDARYSECI/ONS al tr:,a a
_J a
,
'$r '"?^l *l
I
u
tl
a
a
a
a a
SECONDARYSECI/ONS
FIRE TIJRNAROUND 508 ADT
306 ADT
144 ADT BEGIN MINOR COLLECTOR SECI/ON
MAIN ACCESS DRIVEWAY TO PINYON MESATO BE CONSIRUCTED TO MINORCOLLECTOR STANDARDS. ATt OTHER ROADWAYS TO BE COTVSTNUC TED TOSECONDARY A CCESS STAN DARDS. F/RE TRU CK TU RNARO U N DS ARE S HOWNAS REQUESTED BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT.
.Figure 9Forecast ADT & Road Sectioas
EYOs Job No. 15O2-F tutc:Dmyn 4r: LMB Fllq
M'EIrE
a
:t
fl
PNYON MESA
TRAFFIC IMPACT STTJDY
Garfield County, Colorado
prepared for
JOHN ELMORE tr
Aspen, Colorado
prepared by
Schmueser Gordon Meyer
Glenwood Springs, Colorado
May 2006
Updated: October 2006
I r,.F*;+v ,e,4ar
*;r:
.\- -- :. : ' t,:
""::.1:);., t-
.t
sWl-
. "e43r4&r$_
. ,.. '\4t,
.&t"&\-d
Pinyon Mesa
Traffic Impact Study
PII{YON MESA
TRAFF'IC IMPACT STTIDY
Garfield County, Colorado
CONTENTS
2.0
3.0
4.0
1.0 INTRODUCTION..........
1.1 Project Overvrew
1.2 Site Location and Study Area Boundaries1.3 Description of Site
EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS ......
FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WMHOUT PINYON MESA
FORECAST PROJECT TRAIFIC
Traffic Generation
Adjusknents to Trip Generation
Trip Dishibution
Proj ect Trip Assignment
Traffic Forecasts with pinyon Mesa
5.0 PROJECT IMPACTS
5.1 PeakHour Intersection Level ofService
5.2 Turn Lane Storage Requirements
Site Distance at Pinyon Mesa Dri5.3
6.0
5.4 Internal Roadway Sections
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ..........
REFERENCES ..........
TABLES AND FIGURES
4.t
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
Rates...............
veway
7.0
APPENDD( A - Traffic Count Information & Forecasts
APPENDD( B - Traffix Output
I
1
1
2
2
4
5
5
5
5
6
6
6
6
7
7
1
8
8
"^t€fte\*f Pinyon Mesa
Traffic
List of Tables
Table 1.
Table 2.
Table 3.
Table 4.
Table 5.
Table 6.
Table 7.
List of f ieures
Figure 1.
Figure 2.
Figure 3.
Figure 4.
Figure 5.
Figure 6.
Figure 7.
Figure 8.
Figure 9.
Existing Intersection Level of Service Summary
Future Background Traffic Level of Service Summary
Estimated Traffi c Generation
Future Total Traffic Level of Servrce Summary
2005 Existing Traffic (CDOT)
2011 Forecast Traffic (CDOT)
2026 F orecast Traffi c (CDOT)
Pinyon Mesa Vicinity Map
Site Plan
Existing Traffic Conditions
2011 Background Traffic
2O26Background Traffic
Pinyon Mesa Trip Assignment
2011 Total Traffic
2026TotalTraffic
Forecast ADT & Road Sections
ii
Pinyon Mesafrc*A\*d Traflic
PINYON MESA
TRAF'F'ICIMPACT STUDY
Garfield County, Colorado
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Overview
This report assesses the expected traffic demands of the proposed pinyon Mesa developmentplanned to be located on cMC Road (County Road l la) aboui a mile east of state Highway g2(sH 82) in rural Garfield county. The approximately 60.5-u.r" site is located alongihe southside of CMC Road and is proposed to contain 80 single-family homes. Access to the site will beprovided at one drivew^ay located along CMC RoaJ. e secona access on cMC Road locatedcloser to SH 82 will be for emergency purposes only and will not typically carry daily traffic.
This report was prepared in accordance with Garfield County standards and follows nationallyaccepted traffic engineering procedures. This report contains the following analyses:
r An analysis of existing (2005-2006) roadway and traffic conditions in thevicinity of the site.
o A determination of the volume of daily and peak hour kaffic that would begenerated by the proposed development.
r A forecast of short-term (2011) and long-term (2026) background trafficvolumes on the adjacent street system
o An evaluation of future traffic impacts caused by the proposed development.These impacts are based on the total volume or t um" on the surroundingroadway system and the resulting revers of service (Los) at the a jaceni
intersections and site access driveway.
o A determination of intersection and access improvements that would benecessary to mitigate the traffic impacts caused by the proposed
development.
Ttus traffic impact analysis supports the information necessary to compute the road impact feecalculations provided in Appendix A of the Garfield county De'velopment standards.
7.2 Site Location and Study Area Boundaries
The proposed PinyonlVlesa development will be located 1.25 miles east of the intersection ofState Highway 82 & 9M.C l."d (county Road 114). The viciniry map is shown on Figure l.The limits of the study include the interse*ion of State nigh;ay g2 & CMC Road and theintersection of the site's primary access dnveway and cMC Ro-ad.
Major roadways in the immediate vicinity of the site are described below:
o CMC Road/Co-Pnl.v Road-I14 is the pnmary twolane roadway that connects the RoanngFork Valley/Highway 82 comdor -with
Spring Valley, which houses the Colorado
1 Schmueser Gordon Meyer
Studv
Ag^Ab
\-cf Pinyon Mesa
Traffic Impact Study
Mountain college.campus and mostly limited residential development. The speed limiton cMC Road in the vrciniry of the site is 35 mph. ft;;";;uy provides rwo 12, raverlanes and 2' gravel shoulders.
ii state Highway 82 is a fourJane median divided highway with a posted speed of 55 mphin the vicinity of the cMC Road intersection. ctas-smea u, ui
"*pr".sway (category E_X) bv the state Highylv Access category Assignment Schedule (SHACAS), sH g2provides two 12' travel lanes in each direction wiih acceleration and deceleration lanesrequired at intersectiont:]1" existing westbound acceleration lane for westbound cMCRoad traffic at the sH g2 intersecflo, i.
"pp.oximately 400, Iong, providing ress thanstandard acceleration.fl44 janp1ox1malet1,- ttSO,; fo, tlri. ctass"ifrcation ;; l,il*"y.rhe,Sxisfrhe eastbound oiceleraion t"r. io, I"ft tu"; torn'sn g2 r,o cMC Road is
:qqry-+grt,providing 400'of storage for-vehicresqr"r"a t" ,"* r"i.-c#Jot"J**R'oad 154 is the other minor leg at trrle crr,rc in."*"iiltil ur...r", il;;;,"ridii82.
1.3 Description of the Site
The proposed Pinyon Mesa will be located in rural Garfield county about half-way off theRoaring Fork valley floor on the way up to spring Valley
-Figure
2 shows the site plan. Theapproximately 60'5-acre
-site is propoied to contain 80 single-family homes. The site,stopography slopes down, from west to east, and has limited build;bre-;;;g" fb;;;"r."
The primary access point to the site is located approximately 1.25 miles from the intersection ofcMC Road and SH 82' It is located along a curve in the rladway, but provides adequate srghtdistance for vehicles tuming to and from the site.- A ,;;"Jrry;ccess point is proposed to belocated approximately 1,000' west of the prirnary driveway. This will function u. ", "-og"r"yaccess and will be gated.
2.0 E)(ISTING TRAF'F'IC CON[DITIONS
24-hour tube traffrc counts were collected from May 4 - ll,2oo6on cMC Road, about a quartermile east of the intersection with sH 82. T: volurne .."o.JJ Ly trre 24-hotx counter could beconsidered the volume that passes in front of the access ; p;;;;ir{esa, since there are no access
il:::"|"#"en
the counter rocation and the site driveway. o"'il;; 34:z,z4g""hi"i;;;.sed by
A recent turning movement count was obtained from All rraffic Data, Inc. for the rntersection ofsH 82 and cMC Road that included counts from March zi,-i6os.-"n;*-;il;u"r""_!nt.o*twalused f'or,t[e existrns- sE 82 through volumes only. "r rpari.n tqning motement,count wasperformed on Tuesday october 3,2006 that recordea ar ,r.iirg;;;";;;'ffiffi#;i;;:sH 82 conidor at the intersection. This w.s p-saf6,rlrca r" g"i;-uiiiffi"#tJ"#rrrn*,count for the, .in., r"e" (i,mL- f;ri ;;;i I 54) of the intersiction.
The existing peak hour turning movements, cMC Road 24-hour volume, and the currentgeometry of the study intersections are shown on Figure 3. AM and pM level of seryiceestimates were prepared in accordance with t1e lisEww capacity Manual (TransportationResearch Board, 4s Edition, 2000). For signalized iitersections, the HCM measures level ofservice in terms of seconds of delay per vehic-le. This is "r* u -u.*e of driver discomfort, fuelconsumption, and lost travel time. For signalized intersectio".,-a"ruy can be quantified by a
2 Sch mueser Gordon Meyer
sfr&\.*d Pinyon Mesa
Traffic Impact Study
number of vanables including cycle length, green time, and volume-to-capacity ratio. The tablebelorv relates the LoS to seconds of delay pei vehicle ai a signalized intersection.
LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA
SIGNALZED INTERS ECTIONS
Level of Service Detay (seconds)
A (Highly Desirable) < 10.0
B (Desirable) 10.1 to 20
C (Acceptable) 20.1 to 35
D (Acceptable in Urban Areas) 35.1 to 55
E (Unacceptable) 55.1 to g0
F (Unacceptable) > 80
Source: I*gfr way Capacity Manual, 20C[
For unsignalized intersections, the Highway Capacity Manual defines level of service and delayfor unsignalized intersections in terms'of ri"ordr of stopped delay per vehicle, which is based onthe number of acceptable gaps in the conflicting traffic .t "u*. In general, the traffic movementsanalyzed are those controlled by stop signs or yield signs, and the left turn movements from theuncontrolled major steet. The following table reiresents the level of service cnteria forunsignalized intersections :
LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERI-A
I.INSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
Level of Service
A (Hiehly Desirable)
B (Desirable)
C (Acceptable)
D (Acceptable in Urban Areas)
E (Unacceptable)
F (Unacceptable)
. Source: Highwoy Capacity Manual,ZW
Delay (seconds)
< 10.0
10.1 to 15
15.l to 25
25.1 to 35
35.1 to 50
>50
The "overall" intersection level of sen ice at unsigrralized intersections corresponds with thehighest delay experienced on a minor street approa"h. 1.h" results of the capacity anatysi, uaseaon existing volumes counted in winter zooilia112006 are shown in the followi"g tuuf". Theintersection of SH 82 and cMC Road was the only intersection analyzea uiaei lxistingconditions.
Table I
Existing Intersection Level of Service Summary
AM PM
Intersection LOS DELAY I
(s)
LOS DELAY (s)
SH 82 &CMC Road B 12.3 B tt.7
I - Delay expressed as average delay per vehicle in secondVvehicle.i Overall LOS and Delay based on weighted average of all movements
3 Schmueser Gordon Meyer
Pinyon Mesa
Traflic Impact Study
As shown in Table 1, the signalized intersection currantly operates at acceptable levels of serviceduring the moming and afternoon peak hours. ttre acceptaule level of service standard used bymost junsdictions is Los "c" in rural/suburtan areas and Los ..D,, in urban areas. eDorcowidersthetos l'D"ratitg ur'aac+ati;f"i",h; #i;;ffiffi u r, uroan areas'
3.0 FUTTJRE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITHOUT PII{YON MESA
For this analysis, background traffic forecasts for short-term and long-term time periods weredeveloped based on the forecast sH 82 traffic volumes fourJ on cDoTs website. Trafficvolumes were compared with the existing and future forecast traffic volumes presanted inworking Paper #2 of the Garfield county iransportation Mastei plan (LSC, 2005 Draft). Thevolumes presented in this document were not specific, but rather provrde a range of trafficvolumes' The cDor forecasts for long-term traffic fall into the.*g", of daily future volumes inLSC's draft report' cDor volumes were used for this analysis because they provided specificvolumes for the short- and long-term forecast years. These forecasts are attached to the end ofthis report as Tables 5 - 7.
The forecast Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) for this section of SH g2 was found to be26'243 vehicles per day in 2011 and 34,351 vehicles p". a"y *i026, compared with the 2005AADT of 23,000 vehicles per day. Using the existing counts and tuming distributions at the SH82 & cMC Road intersection, the AADT volumes "g*",. tv coor w"ere ,ai".i"j-i" prod,r""morning and aftemoon peak hour turning movement volumes at the signalized intersection"f;il;short- and long-term years' The short-tirm background peak hour vol.r-". are shown on rig*"4' while the long-term background peak hour volumes-are shown on Figure 5. The resultingintersection level of service for background traffic operahons i- "r." shown on the figures.
The intersection of sH 82 & cMC Road was analyzedin both future years assuming the existinggeometric conditions (laneage) at the intersection. capa"itv u"riv.ir tr tn. ,nort- JrJlong-termbackground traffic volumes were conducted in accord*"" *itrr'a" Highway capacity Manualand are shown below on Table 2.
As the table shows, the study intersections are all forecast to operate within acceptable standardsin the AM and PM peak hours through the short-term lzoriy.-rn the long-term (2026), theintersection of SH 82 & cMC Road is iorecast to operate at LdS ..D,, in the AM peak and Los"8" in the PM peak. The LoS "E" rating is atrituted to it "-go*tl, in the mainline sH g2
Table 2
Future Background Traffic Level of Service Summary
AM PMIntersectionLOSDELAY
(s)
LOS DELAY (s)
Short-term 20tt
SH 82 & CMC Road r B 17:l B 18.0
Mesa &CMC Road 2 A 0.0 A 0.0
2026
SH 82 &.CMC Road I E 41.0 E 70.0
Mesa &CMC Road 2 A 0,0 A 0:0
I - Intersection analyzed as a signalized intersection
2 - Intersection analyzed as a stop-controlled inlersection
4 Schmueser Gordon Meyer
^^he\*d
.&gfif\
L-#Pinyon Mesa
Traffic Impact Study
Table 3
Estimated Traffic Generation
Land Use #of
UNMS
DAILY
TRIPS
AM
IN
AM
out
PM
IN
PM
OUTFDetached Homes r 80 766 l5 45 51 30
Total Traffic Generation 766 t5 45 51 30
4.3 Trip Distribution
volumes, combined with additional side street traffic growth. LSc,s draft report shows that thesection- of eR:154 west of sH 82 is forecast to operate in the LoS '.E/F,, range in the year 2025.According to this same report, the section or iruc noua eusi or sn g2 (to pinyon Mesa) isforecast to operate "' ]-os- "B" in the year 2025. I'he resulis of the future tackgrotura trafficcapacity analyses are also shown on Figure 4 and Figure 5. - - -
4.0 FORECAST PROJECT TRAFFIC
4.1 Traflic Generation
Trip generation rates for the proposed land use for the Pinyon Mesa development were based onTrip Genera'ioz (Institute of Transportation Fngineer., z" rJitior, 2003). Trip eshmates shownon Table 3 summarize the total trips expected tJbe generatJu, ii;" development ilil the AMand PM peak hours and on an average weekday.
r _ ITE Land Use Code #210, trip rate based on number of dwelling units
As Table 3 shows, the single-family homes proposed in Pinyon Mesa will generate approximately766 dally trips on an average weekday. rnd 1it3 is expecti io g"io*" approximately 60 rips inthe AM peak hour and g1 trips in the pM peak ho,r rp"" uriia*Tiorth" site.
4.2 Adjustments to Trip Generation Rates
Estimates of the directional distribution of site-generated traffrc were based on existing fafficpattems in the vicinity of the site ' The existing traffic split (ratio of traffic turning right and left)from cMC Road onto State Higtrway 82 was used to
".tirrr"i" the distribution of site traffic. Forthis analysis, l0o/o of site traffic was assumed to be oriented toward spring valley or east oncMC Road' 50% was oriented toward Glenwood Springs on SH g2,3oo|was oriented towardcarbondale on sH 82, and the remaining 10Yo was orienied ;;;i sH g2 on county Road 154.
ffir,:':::lTlal.distribution
assumptions were used to evaruate both short- una --ig-i"L totur
5 Schmueser Gordon Meyer
and lot size
tnp generation rates used to account for second homes or
No adjustments were made to the
vacation homes. All faffic generated
be external taffic;meaning that each trip generated will enter oraccess point. No trips were reduced to account for hansitofproject traffic generation.
use,
ffi\#Pinyon Mesa
Traffic Impact .Study
PROJECT IMPACTS
Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service
Table 4
Future Total Traffic Level of Service Summary
AM PM
Intersection LOS DELAY
(s)
LOS DELAY (s)
Short-term T'otal Traflic 11
SH 82 & CMC Road r B t7.4 C 2A.2
Mesa & CMC Road z B 10.3 B 10,9
Total Traffic
SH 82 &.CMC Road I D 4g,5 E 66.6
Mesa &CMC Road 2 B 10.9 B 1 1.s
I - lntersection analyzed as a signalized intersection
2 - Intersection analyzed as a stoprontrolled intersection
4.4 Project Trip Assignment
The assignment of site-generated ftaffic to the study intersections was made by applying thedirectional distribution percantages to the trip geniation estimates found in Table 3. Theresulting assignment of traffic to the study intersections including distribuhon percentages isshown on Figure 6.
4.5 Traffic Forecasts with the proposed Development
Traffic forecasts with the proposed Pinyon Mesa developmort were derived by combining thesite-generated traffic depicted in Figure 6 with the short- u"Jlorg-tr.- future background trafficvolumes depicted in Figures ! u\a 5, respectively. The resiting total taffic forecasts aresummarized on Figure 7 for the short-term scenarit (20il)
"na on=rig*" 8 i;; #;;"g-termscenario (2026).
5.0
5.1
Buildout AM and PM level of service estimates, which include pinyon Mesa traffic demand, wereprepared in accordance with the latest edition of the High;;y capacity Manuai and, aresummarized on Table 4 for the short-term and long-term totat
-t aiirt scenerios. The pinyon Mesaapproach to the stop-controlled intersection at cMc Road is assumed to contain exclusive left-turn and right-tum lanes' No tum lanes on cMC Road at the site access point were assumed.
As the table shows, each study intersection is forecast to operate within acceptable standards rn2011 with the buildout of the Pinyon Mesa development. Tiie l,ong-r"r* operational results showthat the intersection of SH 82 and cMC Road is forecast to remaii at Los ..E,, with the additionof site traffic to the background volumes. The decrease in or"rutt uu"*ge delay per vehicle (70.0tt"^l"d: in 2026 baskgrrcund vs. 66.6 seconds in the t.t r-t"r[c rcanano) is a result of addingtraffic to.aleg-or movement that had a better tl,a, arrerage dJ;.- s;"" overall delay is calculated1 a weightld average lf Bffi:..deray p,er leg, ada''rng--;Iii,r-I";-;,i;;;-dfu"-l*."r,(comparatively speaking) will ultimately- lowei the ovJralr uroug. delay calculated for the
6 Schmueser Gordon Meyer
Pinyon Mesa
Traflic Impact Study
interseation' capacity. improvements along sH 8? performed by others would be necessary toachieve acceptable level of service ratings prior to the rong-lsrm.J"ou.io.
'w'ifithe'ibuildofi+ of,Pinyon,Mesa,,tlre SH 8z/cr,tc intersection,will see an rg%oincrease;in pMpeak houi trafFrc volumes * ;h;-CMC il;;;;;,'#n l ,o.rared to existing rafricvolumes 9n this trg- ^T_g. erur p"r-[ io;, ;; #iffiilr rr,"tirv* Mesa site increases thefaffic volume on the CMC apprruitn,Uv iOzo.
5.2 Turn Lane Storage Requirements
Right and left turn dece-llation lanes are not required along cMC Road at the pnmary access toPinyon Mesa' The need for these lanes was basid on inroriratl* rourra in the State of coloradostate Highway Access code, assuming cMC Road is classilieJ as a 35 mph NR-B highway(Non-rural Artenal Roadway). Right turn deceleration tunrs "r" required when the peak houentenng volume exceeds 50 ph. Left turn deceleration tur,", *" required when the peak hourentering volume exceeds 25 vph. During the PM peak hour, tt
"
ior"cust turning volumes into thesite are below the stated requirements for tum lanes, so ,o t r* i-"s will be constructed at theprimary access driveway to pinyon Mesa.
5.3 Site Distance at pinyon Mesa Driveway
The sight distance along cMC Road for vehicles entering the highway is adequate as a result ofthe site's topography and existing conditions aloSs_1h9 hi;il"y.'A. .tut"d inihe state HighwayAccess code,the required sight distance for Single unit rir"t. o"e. 10,000 lb GVM along a two-lane roadway is 455'' This distance is factored by 1.35 to account for the s-7%o downgrade oncMC Road for westbo,nd kaffic (615'). vehicres p."p;;;i; t- orro cMC Road from thesite will have over 455' of clear sight lines to the wesi and ov} 615, to the east along cMC Roadto make safe turning maneuYers from the site. For.vehicles along cMC Roud, the required sightdistance is less than that required for vehicles entering the roadway, so sight distance is sufficientfor all traffic ingress and egress movements.
5.4, 1 tnternat floadwCy:section$
T 9 trres,of loadways yrlt ue constructed within Prnyon Mesa. The threshold at which a minorco.llggtor sec{on is needed w.er a secondary ro
^awiy,"otion ij when the ADT exceeds 400vehicles per day (vpa). esjigure 9 shows, this occr:rs ,iti" *"rrilA#";#;;r;;
S3in driyewav entrance sn cMC Road. Fiomth" iblrfr;;;r;;;ili;iir;*s;c}*ii-,r," cr,acRoad entrance, a minor collector roadway section rh"tib"';;;;;;. T#iffiffi#-toi"ril
YITI Pinyon Mesa should u. .on.t r"i"it ''s".o,arry e""".r; standards since the forecastADT's on these roadways are all below 400 lpd.
rqruasD D.ruE urtr I
7 Schmueser Gordon Meyer
ffiffiqdf
-^#*tAh\#Pinyon Mesa
Traffic Impact Study
7.0 REFERENCES
Garfield County Transportation Master plan, (LSC, Draft 2005)
Highway capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board, 46 Edition, 2000)
state of colorado state Highway Access code (colorado Department of rransportation, August1ee8)
Trip Generarion (Institute of rransportation Engineers, 7ft Edition, 2003)
6.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The proposed Pinyon Mesa residentral developmeat is an approximately 60.5-acre site planned tocontain 80 single-family homes. The entire divelopment rs'estimated to generate approximately766 vehicle trips on an average weekday..__oi trris.aaity vorum., ih" .rt" *itt g"nerareapproxirnately 60 trips in the AM peak hour (55 of,which,a#b"d;:t" *.ir* su'grl and gltrips in the pM peak hour (7,7 of which are,,e4pectedrt;ta"a"r.in"az1.
The intersection of the site driveway and cMC Road is shown to operate at acceptable levels ofservice through the long-term time period (2o-years). The intersection of CMC Road and SH g2is expected to operate at LoS "E'i in the long-term y"; ;rrh; without the deveropment ofPinyon Mesa' capacity improvements may G ,"""..ury "i irri. intersection by others if theforecast traffic grows at the rate cDoT assumes for the sllg2
"or.iao. near CMC Road.
No turn lanes are necessary along cMC Road at the intersection of cMC Road and the pinyonMesa primary driveway'.. [e dlveway approach will be constructed to allow two exihng turnlanes (one in each directioQ and an entering lane for inbounJ taffic. This approach will beconfolled by a stop sign. Adequate sighl -distan"" ;. ;;;;ed for tuming and stoppingruneuvers at the primary driveway to pinyon Mesa.
8 Schmueser Gordon Meyer
a
RE: Pinvon Mesa Developmen. County Road 114I
David H. McGonaughy
Roussin, Daniet IDaniet.Roussin@DOT.STATE.CO.US]
Wednesday, October 11, 2006 4:42 pM
Fred Jarman
Znamenacek, Zane; Drayton, Devin; LeeB@sgm-inc.com; David H. Mcconaughy
RE: Pinyon Mesa Development on County Road 114
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject
Dan Roussin
R3 CDOT Traffic
From: Roussin, Daniel
Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2006 3:00 pM
To: 'Fred Jarman,
Cc: Znamenacek, Zane; Drayton, Devin
Subject: pinyon Mesa Development on County Road 114
lf you have any questions, please let me know
Dan Roussin
Colorado Department of Transportation
Region 3 Permit Unit Manager
222South 6th, Suite 100
Grand Junction, Co g.1501
970-248-7230
Fred - I want to_ get with you and give you more comments on pi
received a traffic study from sGrVtdated october o iooo.- in"vtheir counts, they appbar to be impacting the cR 114 intersectiofiowever, the traffic stuoy Jio indicate tnat tnii-inierbelieve cDor and the county shouroitart pranning f;id.l;i;114.
inyon Mesa Deveio pment on CR 114. ljust
n
ted the intersection and based upon
it
have delays of more than m ute, I
solution based upon possible future growth of CR
There was some confusion on when an access permit is required. yes, an access permit would be required if theintersection increases by 2oo/o. It doesn't mean each individual development has to be less then 20%. what itmeans is a cumulative effect. Therefore, on cR r r+, ii flr"re [',ior" t\e1t z. w"nrn!"-in traffic at the intersection,then an access permit will be required. so the mean' traffic *irr o" for cR r r+ wtrf bS 7qs vphin the pm peak.
This site isn't an easy fix and it will require cooperation with landowners, county, and cDor to come up with aneffective solution for long-term solutions. Long{erm solutions witt neea to be implemented in the near future ifother major developments come.
If you have any questions, please let me know.
Fred - Thank you forthe opportunity to review thePinyon Mesa development on Garfietd county Road 114. Asyou are aware' this project will have an impact to GCR tM aiA s1 ei ,i1i!-0"@9n*"nt wiu generate 81 tripson PM peak hour' B,,"."9 upon the Pinyon Mesa traffic irpr"i.i.,oy dated May 2006, this devetopment willimpact sH 82IGCR 114 by more than z'o fercent, therefore, ,n ,.""", permit would be required. The Tlsidentified the need for capacity improvements for this intersection however does not provide anyrecommendations who will provide these improvements? Please submit an access application for GCR 114.
18.3%
10n1/2006
FIRE.EMS .RESCUE
October 6,2006
Fred Jarman
9:^rqe]dCounry B ui lding & pl anning
108 8th Street, Suite 201
Glenwood Springs, CO gl60l
RE: Pinyon Mesa preriminary pran, Revised water System Drawings
Dear Fred
I have reviewed the revised utility Master PIan drawings for pinyon Mesa dated october 2,
ex',x. i.ru:ns:iffiy:r:::*;ti:1 ;; ;;ilffi' ;;" rhe revised nre hvdrant,avout
Please contact me if you have any questions or if I can be of any assistance.
sin"".rty---
Bill Gavette
'Qgp-3ty chief
cc: Nick Kilbourn, SGM
Carbondale & Rural Fire protection District300 Meadowood Drive. carbondare, co g1623 . g7o-g$:;49r Fax9T0_963_0569
Mr. Fred Jarman
Garfi 9,ld County planning
108 Sth Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO g160l
MOU
ENGINEE
Crvrr nruo EruvrnoxurNrnr Corusurrruc nto DrsrcN
ifllffi3c}':'l?!
9002 GU AoN
(IflArflJ[u
November 21,2006
A reviewhas been performed of the letter dated September 27,2006from Shmueser, Gordon, Meyerand the revised plan sheets' Provided all the moiificutions are incorporated as discussed in theircorrespondence, all questions, concems, or colRments have been addressed.
Feel free to call if any of the above needs clarification or if you have any questions or comments.
RE: Pinyon Mesa Subdivision
Dear Fred:
Sincerely
C: Nick Kilbourn, Schmueser Gordon Meyer
Inc
PE
826 .t /2 Grand Avenue . Glenwood Springs, CO Bl GOlPH: 97o.94s.ss44' FAX: g7o.g4s.sss' . ***.n,-orrrrin".'rllr'-eng.com
FIRE. EMS . RESCUE
December 5,2006
Fred Jarman
,$g{ela_Counry Building & planning
108 Sth Srreet, Suite 201 a
Glenwood Springs, CO gl60l
RE: Pinyon Mesa Subdivision, Cul-de_sac
Dear Fred,
Sincerely,
Bill Gavette
Deputy Chief
Nicholas Kilboum with Schmueser Gordon Y.{.Lh3l requested that I comment specifically onthe cul-de-sac for th9 proposed pinyon Mesa suuari.ior]iie proposed cul_de_sac isapproximately 900 feet long uro *itt -*
aooitionut rr*;;;; rocated approximatery 400 feetfrom the end' The cul-de-slc i. #;'r;ly designed,"rrfi;il-foot traver lanes, and a 45 footradius at the inside edge. The r""gri, ;i'dth a; th" ;;;g;dius are all acceptabre.
Please contact me if you have anyquestions or if I may be of any assistance.
cc: Nicholas Kilbourn, Schmueser Gordon Meyer
Carbondale & Rural Fire protection Distric t300 Meadowood Drive o Carbondate, CO StOZ 3 o 970_963_iiy Fl*970_963_0569
ASPEN OFFICE
601 East HymanAvenue
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Telephone (9j 0) 92 5 - tg 3 6
Facsimile (9j0) 925-3008
GLENWOOD SPRINGS OFFICE
The Denver Centre
420 Seventh Street, Suite 100
Glenwood Springs, Colorado g1601
Telephone (9't 0) 9 47 -1936
Facsimile (97O) 947 -1937
GARFIELD &HECHT, P.C.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Since 1975
www.garfieldhecht.com
Post Office Box 5450
Avon, Colorado g1620
Tel ephone (97 0) 9 49 _07 O7
Facsimile (97 0) 949- lStO
BASALT OFFICE
1 I 0 Midland Avenue, Suite 201
Basalt, Colorado g I 62 I
Telephone (970) 927 _1936
Facsimite (9j 0) 927 _17 83
December 5,2006
Hand Delivered
Mr. Fred Jarman, Director
Garfield County Building & planning
108 - 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, Colorado gl60l
Re: LARP pUD / pinyon Mesa Subdivision
Dear Fred:
Da,'id H. McCon,zughy. Llsq
. Clenwood Springs Ufiice
d r.rt'
"
p,L!;! Ugly@&alt Sllt fu e h_! -eo il r
As you know, I represent pinyon Mesa Deveropment, r,LC, the deveroper of theproposed Pinyon Mesa Subdivision. 4t your sugge;;iJn, the pu{pose of this rerter is ttrrequest a staff interpretation regarding the- applica"bT"liuroura, for road design \4,ithin theLos Amigos Ranch. Partnershi-p f ii.Rt";'i,uo, ;ii;i; incrudes the subject properry.Specifically, may the Boarci or bo""ty commissioners^approve a proposar to appryseparate standards to separate road segments within pinyon Mesa Subdivision asdescribed in the pending pieliminary ptan application?
The pinyon Mesa preliminary pran application ir.r:h:tr,"d for a pubric hearingbefore the Board of county co*-irioners on December 11,2006.
The Pinyol^Y:*^Pleliminary Plan was co,sidered at a public hearing of thePlanning commission on octob er 11,20.06 Ih; ;ppli;;", inclucles plans to de6icare aright of way of 60 feet for a portion ornirryon Mesa iiri* ,"u. the main entrance, and 50feet for the remaining road segments. at ttre l.uringltrr"-d.r.lop"r,s representati'e JohnElmore offered to construct all of the roadways with two l2-foot criving lanes asprovided by the "minor corector" standard, ,o rorrg ;;. Row could be reduced to 50feet as proposed in the application.- wirt ou, this ac"com-idutior, the setbacks from a 60foot Row would render-many oirt. iors unbuildabre. ihe ptanning commission voted:?tH#fS*H[:#lof this request subject to urv n.."rrury pro""dures by the Board
section 9:35 of the county Subdivision Regulations sets forth road standardsbased upon traffic counts' In your staff report for thebctober l l hearing, you stated that
RECEIVED
DEC 0 5 2006
'",fff1,1?rtff^Iil
O P.int"d on recycled paper
GARFIETD &HECHT, P.C
Mr. Fred Jarmarr, Drrector
91fid9 Counry Buitding & ptanning
December 5, 2006
Page 2 of 3
the County has interpreted this section to apply a single, uniform standard for the entireroad svstem within i subdivision *1r,.r'tr,;;6ifaratysis of traffic counts for eachindividual road section' You,oi"a, however, that the-county has approved reductions inroad widths as part of the pUO prtcess.
LARP r11s zgned PUD pursuant to Resolution gl-35g, which was amended byResolution 96-34' Both befor" *a after the tgqi ;uo amendment, the county hasconsistently allowed road standard, to ,*y throughouithe project based on traffic countsfor individuar road segments.
-t---"*tor"
"'."il;-;;;; map of the existing firings withinLARP showing the vaiious.oua riura*a, u, ufpro"ri *a constructJ.--f,, yo, w,r see,::Hrl, standards incrude -inor .oI".*, .".".,LTrry access, rurar access, and primitive
rn 1992' Los Amigos Ranch.Partnership submitted a preliminary plan applicationfor Filings ,, ,, ?lo 4.."Th^;;;;rication ini#;;';'rettei dated ani;zfrom DeanGordon' the Project :'gil""^', q.ilrirg trrr"r Jirr.r"rit standards for road design basedupon varying traffic counts forlndividui r"g-*i;. ^il
Ietter specificaly references therecent adoption of road standards bv the co"rniy.-rie'application was approved by theCounty with the different ,,*J*a#r each segment.
rn 1996, after the current zoning.llas adopted, LAry appried for preriminary pranapproval for Filings 5 and 2A. ri ifiotg; #ff;ilrt for the planning commissionreflects, on page 4, that diff...;;-;oad standara, *'"rr,r be appried to-separate .c,adsegments based on the traffic counts applicable ,o .urr,-r.gment. ine sttztg6 staff reportfor the Bocc includes tr" t'-. .oll"rtr, and the minutes of that pubric hearing reflectspecific discussion of this issue. itre apprication was approved.
rn 7999' LARP applied for amendment to the preriminary pran approval forFilings 6 through rg Ag;;,1rr. ilr r/99 staff r*n ..a*ts, on page 5, that differentroad standards would be ippliedr". oqn"r9"i;d;;;r:"'The 9/2r/ig stanreporr for theBoard of county commissii'"^ -""i"g inctuaZ; the ,*" comments. The applicationalso included another tttt"t r.t-;;;, bordon dated
-itgtgg,which
incruded a chartshowing the basis for applying-aiH** standards for individuar road segmenrs. Theapplication was approv.a prrr.ilnt to-R.ror, tion 99_102.
Copies of the documents referenced above are enclosed.
As you know' I have discussed.this issue with Larry Green, who represents theo*,er and deverooel of mo;t orranp, includingthJ;rr* unplatted phases of the puD.Lany has confirmed that arrr "u.io* road wijth, *;;;;pproved in the already finarplatted phases of Elk Spri'gt' urJ-d"i were arso upproulo in the preriminary pran for the;ffi :?il-,Xli;::"*L',:'.XlU**mi;:H:H#:,111;i;,;'#ffi ;,'o'bebinding
138436-2
GARFIELD &HECHT, P.C.
DHMjac
cc: Larry Green, Esq.
Carolyn Dahlgren, Esq
John Elmore
Debbie Duley
Dean Gordon, p.E.
Mr. Fred Jarman, Director
Garfield County Building & planning
December 5, 2006
Page 3 of3
Based o" tl: foregoing, the county has consistently allowed different roadstandards to be applied foi diferent road segmenrs within each filing of LARp puD.Accordingly, I believe that the Board of couniy corn-irrioners has the authority to take
iffffiJrr.r_Tach
for the pending appricati"" *iirr"ri uny n..a for amendment of the
issue.
Please let me know if you agree. Thank you for your time and attention to this
Very truly yours,
P.C
138436-2
601
scHittuEsEA 60Poo,v UEYER
co/Ysut TING ttE,rrG/,VE€AS
Vsu8'EYO
June 22,1gg2
Yr. Cr"g Boecker
,r1,r^" r,: Rep rese nta tive
: ii; 8:"nxi::: Pa rtn e rs h ip
,.:renwood Springs, CO g1601
RE: prelimina rY Plat Submittal
Dear Greg:
The purpos,pprl,Iffi ij,Jfl:,,:";1"'^l:,o address
Regulations w*,'."^:::T1t urainage plan.
discussion .I'3 ;;;;,; ,ii'1"n"""ffi 'lt requirements^ or section 4:8o',rthe,;;;;;;i:ffi lii:;'#;"::o'l:.i:i:'Ti:,,::iX*,#idt
The propertV undor ^^-_! t .From a ar"i,{
under consideratjon does not co,courses ,rr,i,lgt standpoinr, i, ir dl"rllr';:;ffl"in existins water courses or rakes.the propo""il-91tt, d#;;rt ts characterized bv small, ;;lr;;;
Hy::#tl}{::'':{,'il":r.tii{d."-:{Gr,",:{,i:i"+,',:.:'*ii":fiil5ff tr3;
hh:,;:ili[[f:':',#ti:+ii[ri,::;r,lii,,:rffi ,#,Ti#
: r"'",:,;L ii: 3f I il:*':lilT T :,: a re p ro p o s ed d ra i n a s e c u r vep,pes. The natcurvert;;;,;iil:i j',ff *1",:in",'#';ff ,il"*I11,.,*r#HtrA,"*#ifu
ir,#It is.anticipated that there will be rhinim^r _.profile of the ,o.i*,.. l=;.:.:,,j be minimal overlot or^Ai^^ ..
*u ful'nilffffl""x ff #[-:"'""f 'J:: v ::ll s u po n d
;r'r1,.?"*;,irffi nr;:J*i*,lll*Xfu xtxl*'};*i:t
t in a se p*. #., I'i,I j.,::? ff ::The roadway and access system v#'ffi
",::''[1lJ'',',}l[";jxli;*1f :ifll]",y,1'I:;flli:,"#.,?j;
I
I
t
I
I
l
June 22,1gg2
Yr. Crrg Boecker
rage 2
RE: Drainage plan
1I
I
I
2.
constructed
standard is
1O units.
1OO VPD
Eaeh o I these road ways will be
to the Semi.pr imitive
of 1O VpD
Standard.The cap acity for this, or at the rate per unit,a maximum ofI
I
I
3. lot Acceeo D^_:_-;: jl":n"*#"{iHIIl ,H:,,;;_T,:
I remain avairabre to provide further input as required on the above.Respectfully submitted, r-"
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC.
I
I
,
I
ordon, p.E.
DWG:tecl 1SO2_O2.1
Dean W
SCHMUESER GOBDON MEYER,,NC,
I
!E
"l
.l
itr
I
ir
Il
J
ti
it
I
I
I
I
I
_J
I$
I
I
=-c
\
oc>-
|--
E
d
\
LO
\oc
s\h
\
\
C)o\
LO
LO
\
S\
\ooh
!o14
\
\
s
-t\
\
N
\oo
\It/)
Fr
F'.'
\
(,^
N
tu
H
U?
H
q
I
I
li
ti
hl
Ir
*
$
I
n
$
tl
ffi
$r
Ifi
Pil
I a
ss
iE\\
=N
iilr
ls,;
ti
F
I
Ii*l
sl
8i
N
\q
ll
Hi
--.3\
5
\B
it
fl
I
I
I
lI
t
I
I
6
rl
f\
v)
OF COLORADO
WARRANTYDEEI)
TIIIEDEED, Iada on thls dry of brtram b. s-ELK IIESA PROPERTIES , EI,C, A CIOI.ORI.DO r.rt(ITE LI}BITJITT COUPAI{Y # sa.*of th. _ cdrty o, OIBEIEIJD
PrNYoNt4sADtlyEIoP#l,,"ffi-ardstateofC!troRADo,ofthaGr!ntor(e),gnd
xhose legal eddrees iEof thc
WIThIESII, Ihlt the Grantor(.), tor .nd in consldcrltion of th! tu of ($3,000,000.00
Thrce Million and 0O/tfil *+.
IX}LLAXII
i ncd.totd .nd corwey.d, etrd by th!t.lnd esslgns forwer, ati thohel rs
th!Comty ot
SEE EIBTEIB 'Atr ATTAqEED EERE:TT' A}ID ITDE A PTX,T EENEO'
atso kng$n as itrtet Mbcr
TOGEIIIER Hlth al,l and singutar ard hcr.ditment8.rd.pFJrteEncGs thercto trLmglng. or lh myHls. aFlrttining*d the rcrcrsim rtd rcvlrrloB, r.*indcr;nd-;;;;;;;, rcirir,. ireuor "rra-piiirG'ir,.rcoi; end rrt'ttre eilic,-irght;l*i"^:lj'lI;'#i!._:_f.ffif :H':H:[.*:::ji;.'i;ii'r, "iir,."-in-r.ii .i ;q,ilv; ;;-;; il ;;'.;:="t;:'[i"larnra
ToEAVEANDToHoLT' th!. "tia iiemii-:'o&o bargalnea lird dlrcrib.d rrth .Furtensccg. oto th. crant.!(.),hls hcirs snd €sslsns forevcr- Th. c""iiti'"i"i, r."'irillii, trr"-rt"r"i-ii.iJlrliniitHil"*t.tivc!. door covcmnt, grrnt,bsrEain. and asree to ard rith the Grantccisil ii; ;;;;;';d";;";;;; ;il;.";l1iI..ill,", the .nscaune ryrd dcrivcrvof thes!_pre6ents, he is rerr scizcd or iti-ii..iiii"J-iiliriGsrate or inherttincc, i. iay, in rec.siopre, ana hee sooj :?Hi5;,tt*llf;^i"[]irli*."t, aoooiute-anJ-inJiiii.iur"
setr, 8nd coruev itre ei""'tn-"inr.. ano ri,ii-is-a?oi:ilriilena-tit ii; I;'"ili;;'il':l!::tllJ".ii"?l;r3i"lll'6.n*grants' barglins, 6416, licn3,-tarer. e."rcamnti,-iiiilt.rn""e qrd rentrlctlma oi ri,"tev." kind or nature rocvor.rErD' aEtlrrL z'zt M BE$,EEE ma tzt tll iooe to dtqow" t rnt rD tw,,,d, p ffia, r?ru E st' ,oE,B uIEDE B ,BtcE'D [Rrzio lr@ In qrsorE ,rtrBr.
The Grlntor(s) rhall and ritt gARrAllr ArD FonEvER DEFEtto thc rbore bargalncd praltar ln thc qui.t .rd Fac.abl,eposcerrion of thr Grantee(E), hls helm
"na ""iii*,'iii-"tret.att.end il"t-;;;';jrsrre taxfutty ctrtntng thc xholeor rnv pBrt th'reof' Thc alnsutsr nu6er rhati incird;I;; pru"it,'ana-iil;iffid;i.:i"c,rr.r, snd th. r*c of any gendcr'n"1,*Tnffahrffo##rtlnt:il3"[iinto.t.> ;"" ",;;;;;,s dccd or tha dere sat rorth abov!.
u.c,UMITED LIABILITY
E.
SIATE OF ooLoPtDO
)8s-Countv of GmPfgf.n i
fhc lBtthent xra b.fore m on thisby of
ily c.mrl
lJltnosa ry
h82
Llhcn Rqcordcd l.turn tol ltASOtJ AltD XmSE tEA[ ESTAIE
0290 [rcHt'tAy t!3, crnBoxoAlE, co rl6zr
Escrord cg249tt7rittr# ct1249117
v\!/
c1.'
$D r:.,1
i
o
a.
I.AilDMll
.Jv
lulf ill!;I!I-luq!:l|[H:;|rlru r.uln]2oJ3R15.00D3OO.O
EXEIBTT A
A TRf,CT OI IJITTD SITUATE IN SEqrIOilg 7 AIID 8, TONNSETP 7 SOIIIH, RArICE 88 EESE OrIEE 5Tg PRrt{crPAr uEBrDr'Nt, GAntrEr.D couttrlE, eoLoRADo EErNe uoBE plRrrcrrr,anLyDBACRIBED AS FOLEOiIST
BEGTNNTNG Ar lEE s'w conNrR oP tJor 11 or aArD 8rc':rroN 7 TEENcB N oo DESREES 32r01' E 576'97
'EET AIoltG TEE wEsT rJrNB or stID r.oT t1 To ruE gE coRtrEB or vArilnlND PART, COUIrry OF GITB'IETD, STATE OB COEORI.DO ACCORDIITO EO TEE PI,AE IEEREOI,RECURDE .rs REcEprroN NO. 255177 Or EEE BEOOnDS OE rHE Cr.rnr em ilconDER OrciAn'rEr'D cllrilTr, @EoRlDor tErNeB N o0 DIdIIEE 36. 97, a 3oz.zs
'EEB lr()Nc rEEElsr LrNE or atrD ven n'lrtD prRf,' alrD A lroprEnEy pno,rrc=rox rIIEnEor, rt A poflrrEEING 30 EEEE solr:mrRr,v ot rEE cEtrEERrJrtIE o, TEr prwo suaree or courrr noAD11'[r rEBtfcE AEoNe A r.rNE 30 tEE'! sourEERr,y or rzE crrrrururrar o, TsE pAvEDSI,'RIACE OP COI'NIY ROID 11{ TEE FOIJLOT9ING COIIBSEE:
TmICE S {0 DBGnEES 1gI 31r E 166.87 rEEr, TEE{CE 515.89 PEEE AI.ONC TEE rRC OFA 33{'71 rBEE RADTUE cLIvE ro TEr IrEFT IlAvrNc A CENTnAIJ AlIErrE ot 88 DEGREES 1El{otr AlfD SI'ETBIDING A CEORD BEIRI]NG S 8{ DEGREES 27' sLI E {65.32 rE8r, TEENCE N51 DECAEBS 2Zt 49, E 132. t7 t:'jrrt TEEI|CE 2g7.BA rrru ar,OnO TBE eRe Or A2805.91 rEtrT RTDIUS SI'BVE TO TBE RIC}E'IE, IIA\EIIrG' T CE!!T8TI. Er,COr Or 5 DEGREES O{,58n lllD SLETENDTTIG A cEoRD EElRrrirc N E{ DacREEs zsr ri"J-zgl.ltL !EETr TEENCE N57 DEcnEBs 27t 47q E 129.76 ttEt; rErNcB 2o7.77 rrer uoxe TEE r.Rc or A 299.84FEEI R4Drus cIrR\XE TO TEr RrcET, EAVTNG A CElirTtuf,r. MoIrE O' 5{ DEGBEES 59r 28rAIrtD srrBrENDD{c A cEoRD BEARrue N B{ DEGREE8 57r 31r E 226.g5 rEEr; THE}rcB s d7DleREEs 32r '[s' E 61.03 ,EET; rE{cE 162.a0 lEEr Ar.oNG rgc ^*c op r {{s.95 ,EETR.[DrU' euRv' !o uE Brolrr, EA''TNG A CT![:rn& -,CLE OE rO rionrrs 51' 53r rilDsLErElrDrNe A cEoRD BErx,rNG s 52 DE6REE' 06r a9n E 161.s0 rrsr, ramrcre sr reDEGREES ll0r 52' E 196,{0 EEE!; TEENCE 265.{5 BEET Ar.oNc rgg ARC Or A 388.35FEET RADIUS CT'R'.E TO TIIE IJE,T, EAVING A CEITRAT, T.TOTTB OP 39 DECREES 09' 55T ANDstBr*rDr*c A CEORD EEARTH. S 55 DE.BEBA 15r 50r E 250.33 igrr, rulrcs s gsDE.REES 50r '{8' E 156'83 FEEB, rEEtrcE 239.95 rrrr eroni-m Anc oE A 1082.20PEEI RADrua eunuE To TEE EErB, EAvrNc A cEnl!.nr. AlrerrE o, ii oranrrs {2, 18n.f,lrD
'UBrEr'DrNe A cEoRD AEli.rNc r 87 DEORI,aS a8' oa" x zlg.li rirr, rrrncs x arDECREES 26t 56' E 32?.OE pEEtr TEEITCE lZl.TS rrff ef,OXC UfS rRC Op A 30{,23rEEt RADIUE CURVE TO tEE RrqET, EAVIlfo A cElttTAL.Aneau or-zg rrcnrrs 17' 50'IND SI'BTENDING T CTIORD BET*ING S 58 DTCREES 5{r O9r " S'i.ig EAE', TEETICT 8 19DE.REES Isr 1{r E gs'23
'EET, TEEileE 1s6.71 !E!T Ar.ot{o m"
".nc or A 3{1.{5 FEETRADrus cmv= ro lHr nr-r'rr nwrNc A cEttr* L ANer,E ot 26 DacBEEs 1?, {9n eNDSI'BTEIIDING A CEORD EETRING S 06 DEEREES O6t 19T E 155.3{ Pi"r, ZggUCU S 07DEGEEES 02r 3'tr W L76.g7
'EET; TEEICE 269.26,EET AIJOI'C rg".*" OE A 2{0,05REEI RTDTUS C.^oE "O TEE LEET HAVTNO I (ETBR,AIJ AI*GLE OF ii_OgENETS 161 O8N AND
'I'BBENDT,'G
A CEORD.BEIRINC S 25 DEERETS O5I 29' , ZSS.iO-rrrT, TEE{CI S 57DEcaEBs 13r 33r E 38.39 pEEr !o A Dorlrr oN rgE sourE r,Drr or ror G o, sArDsEqtroN 8r TTTENCE S 89 DEeBElg 32, zzi tt 1011.21 rcrr ^rono Trr sou* r.rNE OEEoT 6 oE sArD sEefrot[ 8 ro rEB sr conrgn o, rror ro o, siio-"Ecrrot( z, TBEN.E N;: ffi*#Jr;r.il"I*ii:.26 ,EEr eiouo rm sou,:rE rJrNB or-sero r.ors 10 AlrD 11
COI'![IY O' GARTTEIJD
STAIE OP C9EORADO
Fonn EXlitBtTA Oltl|t\f
crr2491 t7
0*-
Ililil ilil ililIllll lllllil llllllllllllllll |lllLl_lltoiogiottzttAowt o3:33? B1E2s P111 n nLSDoRF
3 of 3 R 16,00 D 3oo.oo GnRFIELD .offiL
"OurHerNo. G1YU9ll74
R]GHT OF WAY FOR DITCHES OR CANAJ.S @NS"TRUCTBD BY TTIB AI,MHORTTY OF THE
UNIIED STAIE.SAS RESBRVBD IN IJNTTD STATES PATB\IT RBCORDBD DBGMBBR
20, I9II, IN BOOK 7I AT PAGB 523, RB@RDED II'LY 3, I92:I IN BOOK 112
AT PAGE56E, RBCORDED NO\IBMBR 11, 1916 IN BOOK v2 AT PL@291.
TB.MS, @NDITIONSAI{D PROVISIONS OF GARFIH,D @T.INTY RESOLUTION NO
79-15 RBCORDBD IT'LY IO, 1979 IN BOOK 53I AT PAGB 250.
TERMS, @NDTflONS AND PROVISIONS OF RESOLUIION NO. 83.274 RE@RDED
AUGUST 23, 1983 IN BOOK 633 AT PAGB 85I .
IERMS, C])NDITIONS A}.ID PROVISIONS OR @IiISENT TO VACATB PI.AT R.ECORDM
II.'NE 05, 1984 IN BOOK 65I AT PAGB 70.
TBRIUS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF AGREBIT{B{T REOORDP SMTEMBB, 14,
1992 IN BOOK 84I AT PAGB 5I2.
TER,MS, OONDNIONSAND PROVISIONS OF RBSOL(MON NO. 96-34 REG)RDED II'NB
18, T996 IN BOOK 982 AT PAGE IO3.
TERMS, @NDMONSAND PROVISIONS OB DBVBI-OPMR{T AGREBMENT RB@RDD
ruLY 16, 1996 IN BOOK 985 AT PAGB 479.
EASEI\,IEVTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY FOR DITCXIES, PIPH.INBS AND UTILITY LINES
AS CONSTRUfiBD AND IN PI/A.CB.
TB.MS, @NDIIIONS /C,I.ID PROVISIONS OF RIGIIT OP WAY BAStsI\,IBNT RECORDED
April 25, 2002 IN BOOK 1349 AT PAGB 542.
TBRMS, @NDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF RICHT OF WAY EASEMENT RBOORDBD
Dccrmbcr 19, Zn2 IN BOOK 1416 AT PAGB 359.
ENCROACIIMENT OF BQI,IIPMENT IN TIIB NORPTWTSTTNTV @RNBR OB ST'BJBCT
PROPERTY AS SHOWN ON BOIJNDARY SI,IRVEY DATBD SEPTBMBER,7,2OO5
PREPARED BY SGIMUBSBR GORDON MEYER" INC.
POSSESSORY RIGHTS OUTSTDB OF FENCB ALONG THB SOUTHERLY BOT'NDARY ASSHoWN ON BOIJNDARY SLJR\rEY DATED SETEVIBBR z, 2(ni pREARBD By
SO{MUBSER @RDON MBYR, INC.
TtsRMs' coNDmoNs AND PRovIsIoNs oB BAsEr,tE{T AGREHVIENT RBCoRDBD Moy
14, 2092 IN BOOK 1354 AT PAGB 600.
U