Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0 ApplicationTHE LANDS WO INC, landscape architecture land planning communlly planning 365 River Bend Way • Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 • Tel 970 927 3690 • landstudio2@comcast.net December 22, 2017 Mr. David Pesnichak Garfield County Community Development Department Senior Planner 108 8th Street, #401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Re: Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application Dear Mr. Pesnichak: Enclosed is the December 21, 2017 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application and supporting documents per the requirements identified in the included November 7, 2017 Pre -Application Conference Summary. The contents of this package include three bound copies of the 8.5" x 11" Application each with an 11" x 17" Sketch Subdivision Plan Concept Map bound in the back, a 24" x 36" large format copy of the Sketch Subdivision Plan Concept Map, a CD containing a digital copy of these documents, and a $325.00 check for Sketch Plan Application review fees. Please let me know if you have any difficulty reading the digital data, and call or email with any additional discussion. We look forward to continued efforts with you, Garfield County Community Development, and the Garfield County Planning Commission regarding this project. Best regards and Happy Holidays! THE LAND STU A , INC. Afff ("Pr / ', By: Douglas Pratte The Land Studio, Inc. Flying M Ranch Garfield County, Colorado Parcels 218535415002 and 218535315003 Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application Prepared December 21, 2017 for: Dunrene Group Contact: Robert Macgregor 710 East Durant Avenue, Suite W-6 Aspen, CO 81611 970.925.9046 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application Table of Contents Application Team 3 1. General Application Materials 4 a. Detailed Project Description 4 b. Application Form and Fee 8 c. Agreement to Pay Form 10 d. Copy of Deed or Title Commitment as Proof of Ownership 11 e. Assessor Map Indicating Location of Properties 32 f. Pre -Application Conference Summary 34 2. Vicinity Map (4-203 C) 51 3. Sketch Plan Map (5-402 C) 52 4. Visual Analysis (5-402 H) 53 5. Garfield County Standards, Article 7, Divisions 1, 2, 3 & 4 55 6. Exhibits 61 2 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 Application Team Applicant Dunrene Group Contact: Robert Macgregor 710 East Durant Avenue, Suite W-6 Aspen, CO 81611 970.925.9046 Land Owner Eastbank, LLC Contact: Robert Macgregor 710 East Durant Avenue, Suite W-6 Aspen, CO 81611 970.925.9046 Legal Counsel Balcomb & Green, P.C. Contact: Chad Lee 818 Colorado Ave Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 970.945.6546 Civil Engineering/Survey High Country Engineering, Inc. Contact: Roger Neal 1517 Blake Avenue, Suite 101 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 970.945.8676 Land Planning The Land Studio, Inc. Contact: Doug Pratte 365 River Bend Way Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 970.927.3690 Traffic Engineering Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Contact: Christopher J. Fasching 6300 South Syracuse Way, Suite 600 Centennial, CO 80111 (303) 721-1440 3 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 1. General Application Materials a. Detailed Project Description The Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Application is proposed for Lots 2 and 3 of the previously platted Eastbank, LLC Minor Subdivision. Lot 2 (Garfield County Parcel 218535415002) is approximately 16.983 acres in size and Lot 3 (Garfield County Parcel 218535315003) is approximately 16.944 acres in size. This 33.927 area will be subdivided into 10 lots via the Major Subdivision Application and review process. Subsequently, the Applicant plans to combine a Planned Unit Development and Major Subdivision Preliminary Plan Application after review of this Sketch Plan Application. This Application will allow Garfield County Community Development Staff and the Planning Commission provide feedback on both the Subdivision and conceptual parameters of the Planned Unit Development before preparing detailed engineering and reports. This site is a portion of a former gravel quarry that was mined in the mid 1980's through the mid 1990's. This property is contiguous to an adjoining FedEx distribution facility and the new RFSD PK -8 Riverview School. The Orrison Distribution Center and L & Y Jammaron Family LLLP property reside to the north, the Roaring Fork River, Structural Associates and Westbank Neighborhood reside to the south, Highway 82 and County Road 154 and the Rio Grande Trail reside to the east, and Eastbank Parcel 2 Lot Split Parcel 2B is located to the west. The property is accessed from Flying M Ranch Road and County Road 154 from a controlled access intersection at Colorado State Highway 82. The site can also be accessed by pedestrians and bikers from the Rio Grande Trail via County Road 154 and Flying M Ranch Road. In the future Preliminary Plan/PUD Application the Applicant will provide a traffic analysis to address County Road 154 and State Highway 82 access issues. Proposed uses within the Flying M Rach Subdivision include expansion of an existing business park, eco -efficiency homes, residential lofts, and opportunities for a Continuing Care Retirement Community (CCRC) with a variety of multi -family unit types. The attached Sketch Plan Map includes concept illustrations for the 10 proposed parcels and the uses proposed within them. The following is a summary of these potential land uses for this project: Parcel A - 4.28 Acres Business Park Parcel A is a proposed 4.28 -acre parcel that consists of two existing businesses with additional proposed business uses. These proposed uses include an additional 20,000-25,000 SF of business space that may 4 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 include, but not be limited to, a veterinary clinic, professional offices, retail/wholesale businesses, service businesses, vehicle and equipment businesses, fabrication businesses, storage facilities, park and ride, recycling facilities, and accessory uses. Parcel B - 6.93 Acres Eco -Efficiency Homes Parcel B is a proposed 6.93 -acre parcel that will consist of small two/three bedroom homes with parking and small storage sheds at a density of 5-6 residential units/acre. These small detached single-family homes will be built using eco -friendly building materials and solar panels, and high efficiency plumbing fixtures, lighting, heating, cooling, appliances, insulation and glazing. Gardens and recycling will also be a community focus with a public community path along the Roaring Fork River. Parcels 01, C2, & C3 - 5.55 Acres Residential Multi -Family / Residential Lofts Proposed Parcels 01, C2, and C3 will consist of multi -family residences at an overall Parcel C density of 10-12 residential units/acre. As a concept, these residential structures will include underground parking, surface guest parking, and elevator access. These multi -family units could range from small studios to larger three-bedroom units. The loft units will offer a contemporary design of one level living with riverfront views and river access via a public community path. Parcel D - 4.19 Acres Community Service Facility - Hospice of the Valley HomeCare & Hospice of the Valley is a locally -based, non-profit provider of services that prevent and relieve suffering, restore dignity and provide comfort for those living with a life -limiting disease. The proposed Hospice of the Valley facility will consist of approximately 26,500 SF of patient and support space, 8,500 SF of administration space, 5,000 SF of mechanical and storage space, and surface parking for clients and guests. Parcel E - 2.87 Acres Multi -Family Residential — Potential Assisted Living Facility Conceptually, the multi -family residential facility will offer a variety of residential options for seniors who require various levels of care. Services provided to residents could range from communal housing and social activities to medical assistance and intervention. This potential facility will consist of approximately 25,000 SF of living units, approximately 7,500 SF of administration and support, and 5,000 SF of mechanical/storage with 5 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 potential underground parking and additional resident/guest surface parking. Parcel F - 4.8 Acres Multi -Family Residential - Independent Living Patio Homes These patio homes will provide easily accessible outdoor spaces with comfortable floor plans and access to amenities such as transportation and dining within the Flying M Ranch community at a density of 5-6 residential units/acre. The concept includes opportunities for two/three bedroom one-story homes with garage and driveway parking spaces and additional guest surface parking. The multi -family patio homes will be linked to the remaining Flying M Ranch PUD via a river path overlooking the Roaring Fork River and the agricultural lands below. Parcel G - 2.83 Acres Hillside Open Space Parcel G is a hillside open space parcel that provides a natural buffer between the Flying M Ranch PUD and the Flying M Ranch agricultural parcel below. Parcel H- 2.46 Acres Access/Parking/Utilities Parcel H is an access/parking/utility parcel that provides a corridor for access, parking, and utilities for the Flying M Ranch Subdivision parcels. Portions of this parcel contain an access/utility easement to the new Riverview Elementary/Middle School and may also contain pedestrian paths with parking. Each of the represented uses will be located on their own parcel and a corresponding zone district for each parcel will be developed within the future Planned Unit Development. At the time of Preliminary Plan, the uses identified within each of the PUD zone districts and subdivision will be analyzed based on their compliance with the review standards identified in Division 7, Sections 1-4. The Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application also illustrates an amendment to Lot 3 of the Eastbank, LLC Minor Subdivision and the adjoining 35+ acre Roaring Fork School District Riverview School Parcel. Approximately .55 acres of land will be exchanged between Lot 3 and the RFSD parcel in order to locate Flying M Ranch Road entirely on Eastbank property. Each parcel will remain the same size after the lot line between the two parcels is adjusted on either side of Flying M Ranch Road. The Amended Final Plat and Boundary Line Adjustment will be completed prior to submittal of the Planned Unit Development and Preliminary Plan for the Major Subdivision. 6 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 Affordable housing requirements as outlined in Article 8 of the LUDC are applicable to any subdivision proposing 15 or more lots. As this development is creating 10 lots, these standards are not applicable. This project will however focus on a diversity of housing types to promote residential living opportunities for senior citizens, eco -efficiency attainable workforce housing opportunities, and service and living opportunities provided by Hospice of the Valley. 7 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 b. Application Form and Fee Garfield County Community Development Department 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 945-8212 www.garfield-county.com DIVISIONS OF LAND APPLICATION FORM TYPE OF SUBDIVISION/EXEMPTION • Minor Subdivision • Preliminary Plan Amendment Major Subdivision • Final Plat Amendment 0 Sketch • Preliminary • Final • Common Interest Community Subdivision Conservation Subdivision • Public/County Road Split Exemption • Yield • Sketch • Preliminary • Final • Rural Land Development Exemption • Time Extension INVOLVED PARTIES Owner/Applicant Name: Eastbank, LLC Phone: ( 970 ) 925-9046 Mailing Address: 710 E. Durant Avenue, W-6 City: Aspen State: CO Zip Code: 81611 E-mail: aellis@dunrene.com Representative (Authorization Required) Name: Chad J. Lee, Esq.Phone: ( 970 � 945-6546 Mailing Address: Balcomb & Green, P.C., 818 Colorado Avenue City: Glenwood Springs E-mail: clee@balcombgreen.com State: CO Zip Code: 81601 PROJECT NAME AND LOCATION Project Name: Eastbank PUD Assessor's Parcel Number: 2185 _ 353/354 - 15 _ 003/002 Physical/Street Address: Approximately 2.5 miles south of Glenwood Springs Legal Description: Lots 2 and 3, Eastbank, LLC Minor Subdivision, according to the Plat thereof recorded September 8, 2015 at Reception No. 867716 Zone District: Rural Property Size (acres):Lot z-,s.sasacres/Lot s-,s.saaacres 8 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 Project Description Existing Use: Commercial, Agricultural, Speaal Use Permit See Attached. Proposed Use (From Use Description of Project: See Table 3-403): See Attached. Attached. Proposed Development Land Use Type Area # of Lots # of Units Acreage Parking Single Family Duplex Multi -Family 5 Commercial 2 Industrial Open Space 1 Other 2 Total REQUEST FOR WAIVERS Submission Requirements ❑ The Applicant requesting a Waiver of Submission Requirements per Section 4-202. List: Section: Section: Section: Section: Waiver of Standards CI The Applicant is requesting a Waiver of Standards per Section 4-118. List: Section: Section: Section: Section: I have r corre the statements above and have provided the required attached information which is accurate to the best of my knowledge. )(wrik-4/ 26/1-, Signatur of T roperty • wner Date OFFIC1: L USE ONLY File Number: Fee Paid: $ 9 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 c. Agreement to Pay Form g Garfield County PAYMENT AGREEMENT FORM GARFIELD COUNTY ("COUNTY") and Property Owner ("APPLICANT") Eastbank, LLC agree as follows: 1. The Applicant has submitted to the County ari application for the following Project: Flying M Ranch PUD 2. The Applicant understands and agrees that Garfield County Resolution No. 2014-60, as amended, establishes a Fee schedule for each type application, and the guidelines for the administration of the fee structure. 3. The Applicant and the County agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. The Applicant agrees to make payment of the Base Fee, established for the Project, and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to the Applicant. The Applicant agrees to make additional payments upon notification by the County, when they are necessary, as costs are incurred. 4. The Base Fee shall be in addition to and exclusive of any cost for publication or cost of consulting service determined necessary by the Board of County Commissioners for the consideration of an application or additional County staff time or expense not covered by the Base Fee. If actual recorded costs exceed the initial Base Fee, the Applicant shall pay additional billings to the County to reimburse the County for the processing of the Project. The Applicant acknowledges that all billing shall be paid prior to the final consideration by the County of any Land Use Change or Division of Land. I hereby agree to pay all fees related to this application: Billing Contact Person: Audrey EIAs Billing Contact Address: 710 E. Durant Avenue, W-6 Phone: (970 ) 925-9046 City: Aspen State: CO zip Code: 81611 Billing Contact Email: aellis@dunrene.com dunrene.com Printed Na e 1 f Person Authorized to Sign: Robert Igor Zo((i- (Sig ature) (Date) 10 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 d. Copy of Deed or Title Commitment as Proof of Ownership WI Land'Title Gum onedwory — S ncr 190— PREVENT FRAUD - Please remember to call a member of our closing team when initiating a wire transfer or providing wiring instructions. Customer Distribution Our Order Number: ABH63012356 Date: 11-10-2017 Property Address: LOT 2 EASTBANK MINOR, GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 For Title Assistance SUSAN KOPPMAN 5975 GREENWOOD PLAZA BLVD GREENWOOD VILLAGE, CO 80111 303-850-4105 (phone) 303-393-4842 (fax) skoppman@ltgc.com PLEASE CONTACT YOUR CLOSER OR CLOSER'S ASSISTANT FOR WIRE TRANSFER INSTRUCTIONS Seller/Owner BALCOMB & GREEN EASTBANK LLC Attention: CHAD LEE, THOMAS HARTERT, BRITT CHOATE Delivered via: Delivered by Attorney PO DRAWER 790 818 COLORADO AVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602 970-945-6546 (work) 970-945-8902 (work fax) clee@balcombgreen. com,thartert@balcombgreen.com,brittc@balcombgr een.com Delivered via: Electronic Mail 11 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 12 P. Land Title 6LMRAN1EE oU F,NY - !Vila' x$ - Land Title Guarantee Company Estimate of Title Fees Order Number: ABH63012356 Date: 11-10-2017 Property Address: LOT 2 EASTBANK MINOR, GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 Buyer/Borrower: Seller: EASTBANK, LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY Visit Land Title's website at www.ltgc.com for directions to any of our offices. Estimate of Title Insurance Fees TBD Commitment $211.00 If Land Title Guarantee Company will be closing this transaction, the fees listed above will be collected at closing. Total $211.00 THANK YOU FOR YOUR ORDER! 12 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule A Order Number: ABH63012356 Customer Ref -Loan No.: Property Address: LOT 2 EASTBANK MINOR, GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 1. Effective Date: 10-12-2017 At 5:00 P.M. 2. Policy to be Issued and Proposed Insured: "TBD" Commitment $0.00 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is: A FEE SIMPLE 4. Title to the estate or interest covered herein is at the effective date hereof vested in: EASTBANK, LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY 5. The Land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: LOT 2, EASTBANK, LLC MINOR SUBDIVISION, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 AT RECEPTION NO. 867716 COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO Copyright 2006-2017 American Land Title Association. All Rights Reserved The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. 13 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part! (Requirements) Order Number: ABH63012356 The following are the requirements must be met: This proposed Insured must notify the Company in writing of the name of any party not referred to in this Commitment who will obtain an interest in the Land or who will make a loan on the Land. The Company may then make additional Requirements or Exceptions. Pay the agreed amount for the estate or interest to be insured. Pay the premiums, fees, and charges for the Policy to the Company. Documents satisfactory to the Company that convey the Title or create the Mortgage to be insured, or both, must be properly authorized, executed, delivered, and recorded in the Public Records. THIS COMMITMENT IS FOR INFORMATION ONLY, AND NO POLICY WILL BE ISSUED PURSUANT HERETO. THE FOLLOWING WILL BE REQUIRED SHOULD THE COMPANY BE REQUESTED TO ISSUE A FUTURE COMMITMENT TO INSURE: 1. RELEASE OF DEED OF TRUST DATED MAY 09, 2017 FROM EASTBANK, LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY TO THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE OF GARFIELD COUNTY FOR THE USE OF ALPINE BANK TO SECURE THE SUM OF $400,000.00 RECORDED MAY 16, 2017, UNDER RECEPTION NO. 892445. 2. RELEASE OF DEED OF TRUST DATED MAY 04, 2016 FROM EASTBANK, LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY TO THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE OF GARFIELD COUNTY FOR THE USE OF ALPINE BANK TO SECURE THE SUM OF $2,350,000.00 RECORDED MAY 09, 2016, UNDER RECEPTION NO. 876951. 14 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part II (Exceptions) Order Number: ABH63012356 This commitment does not republish any covenants, condition, restriction, or limitation contained in any document referred to in this commitment to the extent that the specific covenant, conditions, restriction, or limitation violates state or federal law based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, handicap, familial status, or national origin. 1. Any facts, rights, interests, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records but that could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or that may be asserted by persons in possession of the Land. 2. Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records. 3. Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and not shown by the Public Records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the Public Records. 5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date of the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 6. (a) Taxes or assessments that are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records; (b) proceedings by a public agency that may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the Public Records. 7. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water. 8. EXISTING LEASES AND TENANCIES. 9. RIGHT OF PROPRIETOR OFA VEIN OR LODE TO EXTRACT AND REMOVE HIS ORE THEREFROM SHOULD THE SAME BE FOUND TO PENETRATE OR INTERSECT THE PREMISES AS RESERVED IN UNITED STATES PATENT RECORDED MAY 20, 1899, IN BOOK 12 AT PAGE 508, AND RECORDED JUNE1, 1899 IN BOOK 12 AT PAGE 510 AND AT PAGE 511 AND AT PAGE 512. 10. RIGHT OF WAY FOR DITCHES OR CANALS CONSTRUCTED BY THE AUTHORITY OF THE UNITED STATES AS RESERVED IN UNITED STATES PATENT RECORDED MAY 20, 1899, IN BOOK 12 AT PAGE 508, AND AS RECORDED JUNE 1, 1899 IN BOOK 12 AT PAGE 510 AND AT PAGE 511 AND AT PAGE 512. 11. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF RESOLUTION #97-92 RECORDED OCTOBER 07, 1997 IN BOOK 1037 AT PAGE 381. 12. ANY QUESTION, DISPUTE OR ADVERSE CLAIMS AS TO ANY LOSS OR GAIN OF LAND AS A RESULT OF ANY CHANGE IN THE RIVER BED LOCATION BY NATURAL OR OTHER THAN NATURAL CAUSES, OR ALTERATION THROUGH ANY CAUSE, NATURAL OR UNNATURAL, OF THE CENTER THREAD, BANK, CHANNEL OR FLOW OF WATERS IN THE ROARING FORK RIVER RIVER LYING WITHIN SUBJECT LAND; AND ANY QUESTION AS 15 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part II (Exceptions) Order Number: ABH63012356 TO THE LOCATION OF SUCH CENTER THREAD, BED, BANK OR CHANNEL AS A LEGAL DESCRIPTION MONUMENT OR MARKER FOR PURPOSES OF DESCRIBING OR LOCATING SUBJECT LANDS. 13. RIGHTS AND EASEMENTS FOR NAVIGATION AND FISHERY IN FAVOR OF THE PUBLIC WHICH MAY EXIST OVER THAT PORTION OF SAID LAND LYING BENEATH THE WATER OF THE ROARING FORK RIVER. 14. ANY RIGHTS OR INTERESTS OF THIRD PARTIES WHICH EXIST OR ARE CLAIMED TO EXIST IN AND OVER THE PRESENT AND PAST BED, BANKS OR WATERS OF THE ROARING FORK RIVER. 15. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT RECORDED FEBRUARY 02, 2001 IN BOOK 1230 AT PAGE 47. 16. EASEMENTS, CONDITIONS, COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATIONS AND NOTES ON THE MAP OF EASTBANK LOT SPLIT RECORDED JUNE 30, 2009 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 770436. 17. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, BURDENS, OBLIGATIONS AND EASEMENTS AS SET FORTH AND GRANTED IN ACCESS AND UTILITY EASEMENT AGREEMENT RECORDED JUNE 30, 2009 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 770443. 18. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, BURDENS, OBLIGATIONS AND EASEMENTS AS SET FORTH AND GRANTED IN AGREEMENT RECORDED SEPTEMBER 04, 2015 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 867635. 19. EASEMENTS, CONDITIONS, COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATIONS AND NOTES ON THE MAP OF EASTBANK PARCEL 2 LOT SPLIT RECORDED JANUARY 18, 2012 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 813402 AND EASTBANK, LLC MINOR SUBDIVISION RECORDED SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 AT RECEPTION NO. 867716. 20. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, BURDENS, OBLIGATIONS AND EASEMENTS AS SET FORTH AND GRANTED IN ACCESS AND UTILITY EASEMENT AGREEMENT RECORDED JANUARY 18, 2012 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 813409. 21. TERMS, CONDITIONS, AND PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT AFFIDAVIT RECORDED JULY 23, 2015, UNDER RECEPTION NO. 865784. 22. TERMS, CONDITIONS, AND PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN EASTBANK, LLC LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT RECORDED JULY 23, 2015, UNDER RECEPTION NO. 865787. 23. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, BURDENS, OBLIGATIONS AND EASEMENTS AS SET FORTH AND GRANTED IN EASEMENT AGREEMENT RECORDED JULY 23, 2015 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 865788. 24. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, BURDENS, OBLIGATIONS AND EASEMENTS AS SET FORTH AND GRANTED IN DECLARATION OF ACCESS EASEMENT RECORDED AUGUST 20, 2015 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 867040 AND 867041. 25. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF MEMORANDUM OF WATER ALLOTMENT RECORDED JULY 21, 2016 AT RECEPTION NO. 880064. 16 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part II (Exceptions) Order Number: ABH63012356 26. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF DECLARATION RECORDED SEPTEMBER 20, 2016 AT RECEPTION NO. 882643. 27. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF PERMITS RECORDED SEPTEMBER 15, 2016 AT RECEPTION NO. 882419 AND 882420. 28. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, BURDENS, OBLIGATIONS AND EASEMENTS AS SET FORTH AND GRANTED IN EASEMENTS TO PUBLIC SERVICE RECORDED OCTOBER 07, 2016 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 886222 AND 886223. 17 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 ida i11r{114/ .t —.Since ryb#— JOINT NOTICE OF PRIVACY POLICY OF LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY OF SUMMIT COUNTY LAND TITLE INSURANCE CORPORATION AND OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY This Statement is provided to you as a customer of Land Title Guarantee Company and Meridian Land Title, LLC, as agents for Land Title Insurance Corporation and Old Republic National Title Insurance Company. We want you to know that we recognize and respect your privacy expectations and the requirements of federal and state privacy laws. Information security is one of our highest priorities. We recognize that maintaining your trust and confidence is the bedrock of our business. We maintain and regularly review internal and external safeguards against unauthorized access to non-public personal information ("Personal Information"). In the course of our business, we may collect Personal Information about you from: ► applications or other forms we receive from you, including communications sent through TMX, our web -based transaction management system; ► your transactions with, or from the services being performed by, us, our affiliates, or others; ► a consumer reporting agency, if such information is provided to us in connection with your transaction; and ► the public records maintained by governmental entities that we either obtain directly from those entities, or from our affiliates and non -affiliates. Our policies regarding the protection of the confidentiality and security of your Personal Information are as follows: ► We restrict access to all Personal Information about you to those employees who need to know that information in order to provide products and services to you. ► We maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards that comply with federal standards to protect your Personal Information from unauthorized access or intrusion. ► Employees who violate our strict policies and procedures regarding privacy are subject to disciplinary action. ► We regularly access security standards and procedures to protect against unauthorized access to Personal Information. WE DO NOT DISCLOSE ANY PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU WITH ANYONE FOR ANY PURPOSE THAT IS NOT PERMITTED BY LAW. Consistent with applicable privacy laws, there are some situations in which Personal Information may be disclosed. We may disclose your Personal Information when you direct or give us permission; when we are required by law to do so, for example, if we are served a subpoena; or when we suspect fraudulent or criminal activities. We also may disclose your Personal Information when otherwise permitted by applicable privacy laws such as, for example, when disclosure is needed to enforce our rights arising out of any agreement, transaction or relationship with you. Our policy regarding dispute resolution is as follows. Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to our privacy policy, or the breach thereof, shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association, and judgment upon the award rendered by the arbitrator(s) may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. 18 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 IF" Land Title` GUARANTEE COMPANY —.St'mer r947— LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-122, notice is hereby given that: A) The Subject real property may be located in a special taxing district. B) A certificate of taxes due listing each taxing jurisdiction will be obtained from the county treasurer of the county in which the real property is located or that county treasurers authorized agent unless the proposed insured provides written instructions to the contrary. (for an Owner's Policy of Title Insurance pertaining to a sale of residential real property) C) The information regarding special districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained from the Board of County Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County Assessor. Note: Effective September 1, 1997, CRS 30-10-406 requires that all documents received for recording or filing in the clerk and recorder's office shall contain a top margin of at least one inch and a left, right and bottom margin of at least one half of an inch. The clerk and recorder may refuse to record or file any document that does not conform, except that, the requirement for the top margin shall not apply to documents using forms on which space is provided for recording or filing information at the top margin of the document. Note: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-2 requires that "Every title entity shall be responsible for all matters which appear of record prior to the time of recording whenever the title entity conducts the closing and is responsible for recording or filing of legal documents resulting from the transaction which was closed". Provided that Land Title Guarantee Company conducts the closing of the insured transaction and is responsible for recording the legal documents from the transaction, exception number 5 will not appear on the Owner's Title Policy and the Lenders Policy when issued. Note: Affirmative mechanic's lien protection for the Owner may be available (typically by deletion of Exception no. 4 of Schedule B-2 of the Commitment from the Owner's Policy to be issued) upon compliance with the following conditions: A) The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single family residence which includes a condominium or townhouse unit. B) No labor or materials have been furnished by mechanics or material -men for purposes of construction on the land described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months. C) The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against un -filed mechanic's and material -men's liens. D) The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium. E) If there has been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased within six months prior to the Date of the Commitment, the requirements to obtain coverage for unrecorded liens will include: disclosure of certain construction information; financial information as to the seller, the builder and or the contractor; payment of the appropriate premium fully executed Indemnity Agreements satisfactory to the company, and, any additional requirements as may be necessary after an examination of the aforesaid information by the Company. No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured has contracted for or agreed to pay. Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-123, notice is hereby given: This notice applies to owner's policy commitments disclosing that a mineral estate has been severed from the surface estate, in Schedule B-2. A) That there is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased, or otherwise conveyed from the surface estate and that there is a substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other minerals, or geothermal energy in the property; and B) That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owners permission. Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-1-128(6)(a), It is unlawful to knowingly provide false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to an insurance company for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the company. Penalties may include imprisonment, fines, denial of insurance, and civil damages. Any insurance company or agent of an insurance company who knowingly provides false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to a policyholder or claimant for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the policyholder or claimant with regard to a settlement or award payable from insurance proceeds shall be reported to the Colorado Division of Insurance within the Department of Regulatory Agencies. Note: Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-3, notice is hereby given of the availability of a closing protection letter for the lender, purchaser, lessee or seller in connection with this transaction. 19 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 * * Commitment For Title Insurance * cit Issued by OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY r NOTICE -OK * IMPORTANT—READ CAREFULLY: THIS COMMITMENT IS AN OFFER TO ISSUE ONE OR MORE TITLE INSURANCE POLICIES. ALL CLAIMS OR REMEDIES SOUGHT AGAINST THE COMPANY INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT OR THE POLICY MUST BE BASED SOLELY IN CONTRACT. THIS COMMITMENT IS NOT AN ABSTRACT OF TITLE, REPORT OF THE CONDITION OF TITLE, LEGAL OPINION, OPINION OF TITLE, OR OTHER REPRESENTATION OF THE STATUS OF TITLE. THE PROCEDURES USED BY THE COMPANY TO DETERMINE INSURABILITY OF THE TITLE, INCLUDING ANY SEARCH AND EXAMINATION, ARE PROPRIETARY TO THE COMPANY, WERE PERFORMED SOLELY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMPANY, AND CREATE NO EXTRACONTRACTUAL LIABILITY TO ANY PERSON, INCLUDING A PROPOSED INSURED. THE COMPANY'S OBLIGATION UNDER THIS COMMITMENT IS TO ISSUE A POLICY TO A PROPOSED INSURED IDENTIFIED IN SCHEDULE A IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS OF THIS COMMITMENT. THE COMPANY HAS NO LIABILITY OR OBLIGATION INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT TO ANY OTHER PERSON. COMMITMENT TO ISSUE POLICY Subject to the Notice; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and the Commitment Conditions, Old republic National Title Insurance Company, A Minnesota corporation (the "Company"), commits to issue the Policy according to the terms and provisions of this Commitment. This Commitment is effective as of the Commitment Date shown in Schedule A for each Policy described in Schedule A, only when the Company has entered in Schedule A both the specified dollar amount as the Proposed Policy Amount and the name of the Proposed Insured. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met within 6 months after the Commitment Date, this Commitment terminates and the Company's liability and obligation end. COMMITMENT CONDITIONS 1. DEFINITIONS (a) "Knowledge" or "Known": Actual or imputed knowledge, but not constructive notice imparted by the Public Records. (b) "Land": The land described in Schedule A and affixed improvements that by law constitute real property. The term "Land" does not include any property beyond the lines of the area described in Schedule A, nor any right, title, interest, estate, or easement in abutting streets, roads, avenues,alleys, lanes, ways, or waterways, but this does not modify or limit the extent that a right of access to and from the Land is to be insured by the Policy. (c) "Mortgage": A mortgage, deed of trust, or other security instrument, including one evidenced by electronic means authorized by law. (d) "Policy": Each contract of title insurance, in a form adopted by the American Land Title Association, issued or to be issued by the Company pursuant to this Commitment. (e) "Proposed Insured": Each person identified in Schedule A as the Proposed Insured of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment. (f) "Proposed Policy Amount": Each dollar amount specified in Schedule A as the Proposed Policy Amount of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment. (g) "Public Records": Records established under state statutes at the Commitment Date for the purpose of imparting constructive notice of matters relating to real property to purchasers for value and without Knowledge. (h) "Title": The estate or interest described in Schedule A. 2. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met within the time period specified in the Commitment to Issue Policy, Comitment terminates and the Company's liability and obligation end. 3. The Company's liability and obligation is limited by and this Commitment is not valid without: (a) the Notice; (b) the Commitment to Issue Policy; (c) the Commitment Conditions; (d) Schedule A; (e) Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; [and] (f) Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions[; and (g) a counter -signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. 20 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 4. COMPANY'S RIGHT TO AMEND The Company may amend this Commitment at any time. If the Company amends this Commitment to add a defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim, or other matter recorded in the Public Records prior to the Commitment Date, any liability of the Company is limited by Commitment Condition 5. The Company shall not be liable for any other amendment to this Commitment. 5. LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY (a) The Company's liability under Commitment Condition 4 is limited to the Proposed Insured's actual expense incurred in the interval between the Company's delivery to the Proposed Insured of the Commitment and the delivery of the amended Commitment, resulting from the Proposed Insured's good faith reliance to: (I) comply with the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; (ii) eliminate, with the Company's written consent, any Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; or (iii) acquire the Title or create the Mortgage covered by this Commitment. (b) The Company shall not be liable under Commitment Condition 5(a) if the Proposed Insured requested the amendment or had Knowledge of the matter and did not notify the Company about it in writing. (c) The Company will only have liability under Commitment Condition 4 if the Proposed Insured would not have incurred the expense had the Commitment included the added matter when the Commitment was first delivered to the Proposed Insured. (d) The Company's liability shall not exceed the lesser of the Proposed Insured's actual expense incurred in good faith and described in Commitment Conditions 5(a)(i) through 5(a)(iii) or the Proposed Policy Amount. (e) The Company shall not be liable for the content of the Transaction Identification Data, if any. (f) In no event shall the Company be obligated to issue the Policy referred to in this Commitment unless all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have been met to the satisfaction of the Company. (g) In any event, the Company's liability is limited by the terms and provisions of the Policy. 6. LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY MUST BE BASED ON THIS COMMITMENT (a) Only a Proposed Insured identified in Schedule A, and no other person, may make a claim under this Commitment. (b) Any claim must be based in contract and must be restricted solely to the terms and provisions of this Commitment. (c) Until the Policy is issued, this Commitment, as last revised, is the exclusive and entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Commitment and supersedes all prior commitment negotiations, representations, and proposals of any kind, whether written or oral, express or implied, relating to the subject matter of this Commitment. (d) The deletion or modification of any Schedule B, Part II—Exception does not constitute an agreement or obligation to provide coverage beyond the terms and provisions of this Commitment or the Policy. (e) Any amendment or endorsement to this Commitment must be in writing [and authenticated by a person authorized by the Company]. (f) When the Policy is issued, all liability and obligation under this Commitment will end and the Company's only liability will be under the Policy. 7. IF THIS COMMITMENT HAS BEEN ISSUED BY AN ISSUING AGENT The issuing agent is the Company's agent only for the limited purpose of issuing title insurance commitments and policies. The issuing agent is not the Company's agent for the purpose of providing closing or settlement services. 8. PRO -FORMA POLICY The Company may provide, at the request of a Proposed Insured, a pro -forma policy illustrating the coverage that the Company may provide. A pro -forma policy neither reflects the status of Title at the time that the pro -forma policy is delivered to a Proposed Insured, nor is it a commitment to insure. 9. ARBITRATION The Policy contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Proposed Policy Amount is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Proposed Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. A Proposed Insured may review a copy of the arbitration rules at httn://www.alta.org/arbitration. Issued by: Land Title Guarantee Company 3033 East First Avenue Suite 600 Denver, Colorado 80206 303-321-1880 Authorized Officer or Agent Old Republic National Title Insurance Company a Stock Company 400 Second Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612)371-1111 Mark Bilbre� President - • Ranee Yeager Secretary AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance Old Republic National Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; and Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions(; and a counter -signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form] Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. 21 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 IF" Land Title' GUARANTEE COMPANY —.Sime ry6y— PREVENT FRAUD - Please remember to call a member of our closing team when initiating a wire transfer or providing wiring instructions. Customer Distribution Our Order Number: ABH63012357 Date: 11-10-2017 Property Address: LOT 3 EASTBANK MINOR, GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 For Title Assistance SUSAN KOPPMAN 5975 GREENWOOD PLAZA BLVD GREENWOOD VILLAGE, CO 80111 303-850-4105 (phone) 303-393-4842 (fax) skoppman@Itgc.com PLEASE CONTACT YOUR CLOSER OR CLOSER'S ASSISTANT FOR WIRE TRANSFER INSTRUCTIONS Seller/Owner BALCOMB & GREEN EASTBANK, LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY Attention: CHAD LEE, THOMAS HARTERT, BRITT CHOATE Delivered via: Delivered by Attorney PO DRAWER 790 818 COLORADO AVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602 970-945-6546 (work) 970-945-8902 (work fax) clee@balcombgreen.com,thartert@balcombgreen.com,brittc@balcombgr een.com Delivered via: Electronic Mail 22 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 23 rg Land Ttle GUARANTEE COMPANY —,c17CE lydy— Land Title Guarantee Company Estimate of Title Fees Order Number: ABH63012357 Date: 11-10-2017 Property Address: LOT 3 EASTBANK MINOR, GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 Buyer/Borrower: Seller: EASTBANK, LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY Visit Land Title's website at www.ltgc.com for directions to any of our offices. Estimate of Title Insurance Fees TBD Commitment $211.00 If Land Title Guarantee Company will be closing this transaction, the fees listed above will be collected at closing. Total $211.00 THANK YOU FOR YOUR ORDER! 23 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule A Order Number: ABH63012357 Customer Ref -Loan No.: Property Address: LOT 3 EASTBANK MINOR, GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 1. Effective Date: 10-12-2017 At 5:00 P.M. 2. Policy to be Issued and Proposed Insured: "TBD" Commitment $0.00 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is: A FEE SIMPLE 4. Title to the estate or interest covered herein is at the effective date hereof vested in: EASTBANK, LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY 5. The Land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: LOT 3, EASTBANK, LLC MINOR SUBDIVISION, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 AT RECEPTION NO. 867716 COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO Copyright 2006-2017 American Land Title Association. All Rights Reserved The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. 24 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part I (Requirements) Order Number: ABH63012357 The following are the requirements must be met: This proposed Insured must notify the Company in writing of the name of any party not referred to in this Commitment who will obtain an interest in the Land or who will make a loan on the Land. The Company may then make additional Requirements or Exceptions. Pay the agreed amount for the estate or interest to be insured. Pay the premiums, fees, and charges for the Policy to the Company. Documents satisfactory to the Company that convey the Title or create the Mortgage to be insured, or both, must be properly authorized, executed, delivered, and recorded in the Public Records. THIS COMMITMENT IS FOR INFORMATION ONLY, AND NO POLICY WILL BE ISSUED PURSUANT HERETO. 25 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part II (Exceptions) Order Number: ABH63012357 This commitment does not republish any covenants, condition, restriction, or limitation contained in any document referred to in this commitment to the extent that the specific covenant, conditions, restriction, or limitation violates state or federal law based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, handicap, familial status, or national origin. 1. Any facts, rights, interests, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records but that could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or that may be asserted by persons in possession of the Land. 2. Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records. 3. Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and not shown by the Public Records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the Public Records. 5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date of the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 6. (a) Taxes or assessments that are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records; (b) proceedings by a public agency that may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the Public Records. 7. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water. 8. EXISTING LEASES AND TENANCIES. 9. RIGHT OF PROPRIETOR OFA VEIN OR LODE TO EXTRACT AND REMOVE HIS ORE THEREFROM SHOULD THE SAME BE FOUND TO PENETRATE OR INTERSECT THE PREMISES AS RESERVED IN UNITED STATES PATENT RECORDED MAY 20, 1899, IN BOOK 12 AT PAGE 508, AND RECORDED JUNE 1, 1899 IN BOOK 12 AT PAGE 510 AND AT PAGE 511 AND AT PAGE 512. 10. RIGHT OF WAY FOR DITCHES OR CANALS CONSTRUCTED BY THE AUTHORITY OF THE UNITED STATES AS RESERVED IN UNITED STATES PATENT RECORDED MAY 20, 1899, IN BOOK 12 AT PAGE 508, AND AS RECORDED JUNE 1, 1899 IN BOOK 12 AT PAGE 510 AND AT PAGE 511 AND AT PAGE 512. 11. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF RESOLUTION #97-92 RECORDED OCTOBER 07, 1997 IN BOOK 1037 AT PAGE 381. 12. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT RECORDED FEBRUARY 02, 2001 IN BOOK 1230 AT PAGE 47. 13. EASEMENTS, CONDITIONS, COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATIONS AND NOTES ON THE MAP OF EASTBANK LOT SPLIT RECORDED JUNE 30, 2009 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 770436. 26 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part II (Exceptions) Order Number: ABH63012357 14. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, BURDENS, OBLIGATIONS AND EASEMENTS AS SET FORTH AND GRANTED IN ACCESS AND UTILITY EASEMENT AGREEMENT RECORDED JUNE 30, 2009 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 770443. 15. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, BURDENS, OBLIGATIONS AND EASEMENTS AS SET FORTH AND GRANTED IN AGREEMENT RECORDED SEPTEMBER 04, 2015 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 867635. 16. EASEMENTS, CONDITIONS, COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATIONS AND NOTES ON THE MAP OF EASTBANK PARCEL 2 LOT SPLIT RECORDED JANUARY 18, 2012 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 813402 AND EASTBANK, LLC MINOR SUBDIVISION RECORDED SEPTEMBER 8, 2015 AT RECEPTION NO. 867716. 17. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, BURDENS, OBLIGATIONS AND EASEMENTS AS SET FORTH AND GRANTED IN ACCESS AND UTILITY EASEMENT AGREEMENT RECORDED JANUARY 18, 2012 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 813409. 18. TERMS, CONDITIONS, AND PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT AFFIDAVIT RECORDED JULY 23, 2015, UNDER RECEPTION NO. 865784. 19. TERMS, CONDITIONS, AND PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN EASTBANK, LLC LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT RECORDED JULY 23, 2015, UNDER RECEPTION NO. 865787. 20. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, BURDENS, OBLIGATIONS AND EASEMENTS AS SET FORTH AND GRANTED IN EASEMENT AGREEMENT RECORDED JULY 23, 2015 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 865788. 21. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS, BURDENS, OBLIGATIONS AND EASEMENTS AS SET FORTH AND GRANTED IN DECLARATION OF ACCESS EASEMENT RECORDED AUGUST 20, 2015 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 867040 AND 867041. 22. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF MEMORANDUM OF WATER ALLOTMENT RECORDED APRIL 1, 2016 AT RECEPTION NO. 875479. 27 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 Land Title JOINT NOTICE OF PRIVACY POLICY OF LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY OF SUMMIT COUNTY LAND TITLE INSURANCE CORPORATION AND OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY This Statement is provided to you as a customer of Land Title Guarantee Company and Meridian Land Title, LLC, as agents for Land Title Insurance Corporation and Old Republic National Title Insurance Company. We want you to know that we recognize and respect your privacy expectations and the requirements of federal and state privacy laws. Information security is one of our highest priorities. We recognize that maintaining your trust and confidence is the bedrock of our business. We maintain and regularly review internal and external safeguards against unauthorized access to non-public personal information ("Personal Information"). In the course of our business, we may collect Personal Information about you from: ► applications or other forms we receive from you, including communications sent through TMX, our web -based transaction management system; ► your transactions with, or from the services being performed by, us, our affiliates, or others; ► a consumer reporting agency, if such information is provided to us in connection with your transaction; and ► the public records maintained by governmental entities that we either obtain directly from those entities, or from our affiliates and non -affiliates. Our policies regarding the protection of the confidentiality and security of your Personal Information are as follows: ► We restrict access to all Personal Information about you to those employees who need to know that information in order to provide products and services to you. ► We maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards that comply with federal standards to protect your Personal Information from unauthorized access or intrusion. ► Employees who violate our strict policies and procedures regarding privacy are subject to disciplinary action. ► We regularly access security standards and procedures to protect against unauthorized access to Personal Information. WE DO NOT DISCLOSE ANY PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU WITH ANYONE FOR ANY PURPOSE THAT IS NOT PERMITTED BY LAW. Consistent with applicable privacy laws, there are some situations in which Personal Information may be disclosed. We may disclose your Personal Information when you direct or give us permission; when we are required by law to do so, for example, if we are served a subpoena; or when we suspect fraudulent or criminal activities. We also may disclose your Personal Information when otherwise permitted by applicable privacy laws such as, for example, when disclosure is needed to enforce our rights arising out of any agreement, transaction or relationship with you. Our policy regarding dispute resolution is as follows. Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to our privacy policy, or the breach thereof, shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association, and judgment upon the award rendered by the arbitrator(s) may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. 28 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 Jr" LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY Land Title GUARANTEE OOMPANY Sinc rylSp— DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-122, notice is hereby given that: A) The Subject real property may be located in a special taxing district. B) A certificate of taxes due listing each taxing jurisdiction will be obtained from the county treasurer of the county in which the real property is located or that county treasurers authorized agent unless the proposed insured provides written instructions to the contrary. (for an Owner's Policy of Title Insurance pertaining to a sale of residential real property) C) The information regarding special districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained from the Board of County Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County Assessor. Note: Effective September 1, 1997, CRS 30-10-406 requires that all documents received for recording or filing in the clerk and recorder's office shall contain a top margin of at least one inch and a left, right and bottom margin of at least one half of an inch. The clerk and recorder may refuse to record or file any document that does not conform, except that, the requirement for the top margin shall not apply to documents using forms on which space is provided for recording or filing information at the top margin of the document. Note: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-2 requires that "Every title entity shall be responsible for all matters which appear of record prior to the time of recording whenever the title entity conducts the closing and is responsible for recording or filing of legal documents resulting from the transaction which was closed". Provided that Land Title Guarantee Company conducts the closing of the insured transaction and is responsible for recording the legal documents from the transaction, exception number 5 will not appear on the Owner's Title Policy and the Lenders Policy when issued. Note: Affirmative mechanic's lien protection for the Owner may be available (typically by deletion of Exception no. 4 of Schedule B-2 of the Commitment from the Owner's Policy to be issued) upon compliance with the following conditions: A) The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single family residence which includes a condominium or townhouse unit. B) No labor or materials have been furnished by mechanics or material -men for purposes of construction on the land described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months. C) The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against un -filed mechanic's and material -men's liens. D) The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium. E) If there has been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased within six months prior to the Date of the Commitment, the requirements to obtain coverage for unrecorded liens will include: disclosure of certain construction information; financial information as to the seller, the builder and or the contractor; payment of the appropriate premium fully executed Indemnity Agreements satisfactory to the company, and, any additional requirements as may be necessary after an examination of the aforesaid information by the Company. No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured has contracted for or agreed to pay. Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-123, notice is hereby given: This notice applies to owners policy commitments disclosing that a mineral estate has been severed from the surface estate, in Schedule B-2. A) That there is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased, or otherwise conveyed from the surface estate and that there is a substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other minerals, or geothermal energy in the property; and B) That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owners permission. Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-1-128(6)(a), It is unlawful to knowingly provide false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to an insurance company for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the company. Penalties may include imprisonment, fines, denial of insurance, and civil damages. Any insurance company or agent of an insurance company who knowingly provides false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to a policyholder or claimant for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the policyholder or claimant with regard to a settlement or award payable from insurance proceeds shall be reported to the Colorado Division of Insurance within the Department of Regulatory Agencies. Note: Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-3, notice is hereby given of the availability of a closing protection letter for the lender, purchaser, lessee or seller in connection with this transaction. 29 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 * * Commitment For Title Insurance IC* * Issued by OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY yF NOTICE � of IMPORTANT—READ CAREFULLY: THIS COMMITMENT IS AN OFFER TO ISSUE ONE OR MORE TITLE INSURANCE POLICIES. ALL CLAIMS OR REMEDIES SOUGHT AGAINST THE COMPANY INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT OR THE POLICY MUST BE BASED SOLELY IN CONTRACT. THIS COMMITMENT IS NOT AN ABSTRACT OF TITLE, REPORT OF THE CONDITION OF TITLE, LEGAL OPINION, OPINION OF TITLE, OR OTHER REPRESENTATION OF THE STATUS OF TITLE. THE PROCEDURES USED BY THE COMPANY TO DETERMINE INSURABILITY OF THE TITLE, INCLUDING ANY SEARCH AND EXAMINATION, ARE PROPRIETARY TO THE COMPANY, WERE PERFORMED SOLELY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMPANY, AND CREATE NO EXTRACONTRACTUAL LIABILITY TO ANY PERSON, INCLUDING A PROPOSED INSURED. THE COMPANY'S OBLIGATION UNDER THIS COMMITMENT IS TO ISSUE A POLICY TO A PROPOSED INSURED IDENTIFIED IN SCHEDULE A IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS OF THIS COMMITMENT. THE COMPANY HAS NO LIABILITY OR OBLIGATION INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT TO ANY OTHER PERSON. COMMITMENT TO ISSUE POLICY Subject to the Notice; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and the Commitment Conditions, Old republic National Title Insurance Company, A Minnesota corporation (the "Company"), commits to issue the Policy according to the terms and provisions of this Commitment. This Commitment is effective as of the Commitment Date shown in Schedule A for each Policy described in Schedule A, only when the Company has entered in Schedule A both the specified dollar amount as the Proposed Policy Amount and the name of the Proposed Insured. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met within 6 months after the Commitment Date, this Commitment terminates and the Company's liability and obligation end. COMMITMENT CONDITIONS 1. DEFINITIONS (a) "Knowledge" or "Known": Actual or imputed knowledge, but not constructive notice imparted by the Public Records. (b) "Land": The land described in Schedule A and affixed improvements that by law constitute real property. The term "Land" does not include any property beyond the lines of the area described in Schedule A, nor any right, title, interest, estate, or easement in abutting streets, roads, avenues,alleys, lanes, ways, or waterways, but this does not modify or limit the extent that a right of access to and from the Land is to be insured by the Policy. (c) "Mortgage": A mortgage, deed of trust, or other security instrument, including one evidenced by electronic means authorized by law. (d) "Policy": Each contract of title insurance, in a form adopted by the American Land Title Association, issued or to be issued by the Company pursuant to this Commitment. (e) "Proposed Insured": Each person identified in Schedule A as the Proposed Insured of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment. (t) "Proposed Policy Amount": Each dollar amount specified in Schedule A as the Proposed Policy Amount of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment. (g) "Public Records": Records established under state statutes at the Commitment Date for the purpose of imparting constructive notice of matters relating to real property to purchasers for value and without Knowledge. (h) "Title": The estate or interest described in Schedule A. 2. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met within the time period specified in the Commitment to Issue Policy, Comitment terminates and the Company's liability and obligation end. 3. The Company's liability and obligation is limited by and this Commitment is not valid without: (a) the Notice; (b) the Commitment to Issue Policy; (c) the Commitment Conditions; (d) Schedule A; (e) Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; [and] (f) Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions[; and (g) a counter -signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. 30 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 4. COMPANY'S RIGHT TO AMEND The Company may amend this Commitment at any time. If the Company amends this Commitment to add a defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim, or other matter recorded in the Public Records prior to the Commitment Date, any liability of the Company is limited by Commitment Condition 5. The Company shall not be liable for any other amendment to this Commitment. 5. LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY (a) The Company's liability under Commitment Condition 4 is limited to the Proposed Insured's actual expense incurred in the interval between the Company's delivery to the Proposed Insured of the Commitment and the delivery of the amended Commitment, resulting from the Proposed Insured's good faith reliance to: (I) comply with the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; (ii) eliminate, with the Company's written consent, any Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; or (iii) acquire the Title or create the Mortgage covered by this Commitment. (b) The Company shall not be liable under Commitment Condition 5(a) if the Proposed Insured requested the amendment or had Knowledge of the matter and did not notify the Company about it in writing. (c) The Company will only have liability under Commitment Condition 4 if the Proposed Insured would not have incurred the expense had the Commitment included the added matter when the Commitment was first delivered to the Proposed Insured. (d) The Company's liability shall not exceed the lesser of the Proposed Insured's actual expense incurred in good faith and described in Commitment Conditions 5(a)(i) through 5(a)(iii) or the Proposed Policy Amount. (e) The Company shall not be liable for the content of the Transaction Identification Data, if any. (f) In no event shall the Company be obligated to issue the Policy referred to in this Commitment unless all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have been met to the satisfaction of the Company. (g) In any event, the Company's liability is limited by the terms and provisions of the Policy. 6. LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY MUST BE BASED ON THIS COMMITMENT (a) Only a Proposed Insured identified in Schedule A, and no other person, may make a claim under this Commitment. (b) Any claim must be based in contract and must be restricted solely to the terms and provisions of this Commitment. (c) Until the Policy is issued, this Commitment, as last revised, is the exclusive and entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Commitment and supersedes all prior commitment negotiations, representations, and proposals of any kind, whether written or oral, express or implied, relating to the subject matter of this Commitment. (d) The deletion or modification of any Schedule B, Part II—Exception does not constitute an agreement or obligation to provide coverage beyond the terms and provisions of this Commitment or the Policy. (e) Any amendment or endorsement to this Commitment must be in writing [and authenticated by a person authorized by the Company]. (0 When the Policy is issued, all liability and obligation under this Commitment will end and the Company's only liability will be under the Policy. 7. IF THIS COMMITMENT HAS BEEN ISSUED BY AN ISSUING AGENT The issuing agent is the Company's agent only for the limited purpose of issuing title insurance commitments and policies. The issuing agent is not the Company's agent for the purpose of providing closing or settlement services. 8. PRO -FORMA POLICY The Company may provide, at the request of a Proposed Insured, a pro -forma policy illustrating the coverage that the Company may provide. A pro -forma policy neither reflects the status of Title at the time that the pro -forma policy is delivered to a Proposed Insured, nor is it a commitment to insure. 9. ARBITRATION The Policy contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Proposed Policy Amount is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Proposed Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. A Proposed Insured may review a copy of the arbitration rules at http://www.alta.org/arbitration. Issued by: Land Title Guarantee Company 3033 East First Avenue Suite 600 Denver, Colorado 80206 303-321-1880 Authorized Officer or Agent ' ' r r t 4.0 Old Republic National Title Insurance Company a Stock Company 400 Second Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612)371-1111 Mark Embrey PresiOent - • Rand* Yeager Secretary AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance Old Republic National Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; and Schedule B, Part Il—Exceptions[; and a counter -signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form] Copyright 2006.2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. 31 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 e. Assessor Map Indicating Location of Properties Garfield County Garfield County Land Explorer Garfield County, Colorado 218534402005 218534402008 0 239603400968 Garfield County Land Explorer Printed by Web User 1 inch = 752 feet 1 inch = 0.14 miles 0 0.1 Garfield County Garfield County Colorado www.garfleid.county. tom Colorado Disclaimer 011558 compilation of records as they appear In the Garfield County Offices affecting the area shown. This drawing Is to be used only fm reference purposes and the County is not responsible for any Inatturacies herein conpined, © Copyright Garfield County, Colorado 1 All Rights Reserved Printed: 11/7/2017 at 12103:02 PM 32 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 Garfield County Land Explorer Garfield County Garfield County, Colorado 215536113081 t Garfield County Land Explorer Printed by Web User 1 inch = 752 feet 1 inch = 0.14 miles 0.1 2 0.4 Mlles Garfield County Colorado Garfield County www.garfield-county.com Colorado Disclaimer This is a compilation of records as they appear in the Garfield County Offices affecting the area shown. This drawing Is to he used only for reference purposes and the County'Ls not responsible for any inaccuracies herein contained. © Copyright Garfield County, Colorado 1 All Rights Reserved Printed: 11/7/2017 at 12:03:39 PM 33 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 f. Pre -Application Conference Summary Garfield County Community Development Department 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 945-8212 www.Rarfield-county.com PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY TAX PARCEL NUMBER: 218535315003, 218535415002 PROJECT: Eastbank OWNERS/APPLICANT: Eastbank LLC REPRESENTATIVE: Robert McGregor and Chad Lee, Balcomb and Green DATE: November 7, 2017 PRACTICAL LOCATION: Eastbank Minor Subdivision, Lots 2 and 3 —Approximately 2.5 miles south of the City of Glenwood Springs ZONING: Rural TYPE OF APPLICATION: Major Subdivision — Sketch Plan COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: City of Glenwood Springs Urban Growth Area I. GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is requesting to create a Major Subdivision of 10 lots from Lots 2 and 3 of the Eastbank Minor Subdivision. Following conversations with the Applicant, it appears that there is a desire to pursue the optional Sketch Plan review for the Major Subdivision. This meeting with the Planning Commission would allow the Applicant to obtain feedback on both the Subdivision and PUD applications before preparing detailed engineering and reports. Access to the subdivision and PUD is proposed to be shared with the Riverview School off County Road 154 just southeast of the intersection with the RFTA Rio Grande Trail. With the development of the Riverview School, the development is anticipated to be served by Roaring Fork Water and Sanitation District (RFWSD) water and wastewater lines. While the exact development to take place within the subdivision and PUD has not yet been finalized, from representations made in the pre - application meeting and the attached site concept plan, the range of development consists of hospice and assisted living facilities, a rental tiny home community, three condo buildings, and patio / independent living homes. 34 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 Each of the represented uses are anticipated to be on their own parcel which is contemplated to correspond with the relevant zone district within the PUD. As a result, following Sketch Plan review, this Major Subdivision application is anticipated to be accompanied by a PUD application to create the necessary zone districts. At the time of Preliminary Plan, it is anticipated that this Major Subdivision application and the PUD application would be processed concurrently. Regarding access, it is understood that the right of way easements for the Riverview School, which would also be the primary access for the proposed development, have not yet been finalized. The applicant will need to demonstrate legal access to each of the parcels at the time of Preliminary Plan that would be created by the subdivision and each development area within the PUD. For Sketch Plan, access simply needs to be discussed along with any steps that need to be accomplished in order to achieve legal access. With the Preliminary Plan, the characteristics of these internal roads will be evaluated to the highest traffic impact use as identified within the PUD. Further, the access points onto CR 154 and Highway 82 will need to be evaluated for necessary upgrades based on the traffic impact study. Regarding affordable housing requirements as outlined in Article 8 of the LUDC, these are applicable to any subdivision proposing 15 or more lots. As this development is understood to only be creating 10 lots, these standards are not applicable. In addition, should the condominium buildings be processed as a Common Interest Community Subdivision, as represented and as interpreted at the time of this Pre -Application Conference Summary, Article 8 is not applicable to this type of subdivision as it wound not create 15 or more Lots as defined in the LUDC. At the time of Preliminary Plan, the uses identified within each of the PUD zone districts and subdivision will need to be analyzed to their most impactful extent for traffic, water, and wastewater, as well as the review standards identified in Division 7, Sections 1-4. As discussed, while Sketch Plan review is not required, it is Staff's opinion that the review of the subdivision in conjunction with the conceptual parameters of the PUD could be beneficial to both the applicant's review process and for the Planning Commission. The process and submittal requirements for Sketch Plan are outlined in Table 5-103 and Table 5-401 (excerpted below). It is understood that an Amended Final Plat and Boundary Line Adjustment will need to be completed prior to submittal of the Preliminary Plan for the Major Subdivision that will swap approximately .55 acres between Lot 2 and Lot 3 in order to locate the access road entirely on Eastbank property. 2 35 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 Subject Parcels 11. REGULATORY PROVISIONS APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO ADDRESS • Garfield County Comprehensive Plan 2030 • Garfield County Land Use and Development Code, as amended • Section 4-101— Common Review Procedures • Section 5-302(B) - Major Subdivision, Sketch Plan • Table 5-501 and Section 5-402 — Submittal Requirements • Applicable provisions from Article 7, Standards (Article 7, Divisions 1-4) 3 36 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 III. PROCESS Common Review Procedures 4-101. A B I able -1113: smmmo C D E i i Z4 z A a a ici 000=00M0 Review ProoedUrr. and Rayuir.•d Nubrx F G H 1 8 667 1 q II g 4 p 1 e b$Additional g v Required Notice Additional RequRequirementsenMn ii IE BOCC Bead of County Commissions i 0 (enactor 17 PC Manning Cammisscn i Peri Mtn rM77We RWrew ereaben a-103. Erempt'mns rlil PUgCiCpprly Road Split IMINE 5-203 Rural Land CevewPmerrt '.. 10 Lot] a Fewer] 1111 - BOCC . . a 5-2C3 Korai Man tO[.nlslWeiolmxnc bore-ter S •• -- . PC BOCC S . a ' lila All typo of notioe fireball PC and BOCC. Mrwr Srodlvdsn 101��1• r�'' " 7;R".�EP'�^'i66 I� Isl EMEMEM Mayor &Swenson 540213 B Sket h Plan 10prmnd i a ' - • -_ PC -1.1- —y viii 5-302.0 Preliminary Plan MERMEN." .'PC BOCC . - -IIIIIIIR� All types of notice for bath PC and BOCC. 5-302-D Final Plan' Plat — ' -a-- BOCC ' v all til Conservation Subdivraon a ' _a-_MIEM- Mai 5-303 B. Sketch Plan (Optional) 5-303.0 Yield Pan S . — ' PC•a . ©111 - 5-303-D. Preliminary Plan - 00 ' 111111- BOCC . In MEI liiiil AI types of notice for both PC ad BOC C. um Amendments. Final Plan'Plat ReSubdmsons PNI Vacabon - - BOCC EEO li 0 EMI Per Amended Piersoncry Pon Section 5-301. S . . -- 5-304 Amended Prelsnmay Plan 5-305 Amended Final Plat ' a ' aMO D . PerAdn-elbtradve Review Section 4-103. MI.Common Interest Canmcruly -I� v v Illlsl- D ISI -10 Per Adn-.,istratine Review Section 4-103. 5-307 ERFEREESIE - - ' - - 1111 BOCC -■-si - Sketch Plan does not require any public notice before moving to a meeting with the Planning Commission. The comments provided by Staff and the Planning Commission are non-binding. Written comments from the meeting with the Planning Commission will be provided to the Applicant within 10 days following the meeting. VI. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS As a Major Subdivision, Table 5-401 outlines the submittal requirements for both Sketch Plan and Preliminary Plan (See Below). In addition, the application should include documentation to address all required review criteria and development standards. Please refer directly to Table 5-401 and the list of General Application Materials in section 4-203 for the full description of this information: 1. General application materials a. Detailed project description (Descibe subdivision and proposed PUD to allow for a full scope review by the Planning Commission) b. Application form and fee c. Agreement to pay form 4 37 Section M703 EICDEFGSIJKI 1 1911 e K I 1 .11 ra tifilli Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 d. Copy of Deed or Title Commitment as proof of ownership e. Names and mailing addresses of mineral owners of the subject property (Not applicable to Sketch Plan) f. Names and mailing addresses of all owners of property within 200' of the subject property (Not applicable to Sketch Plan) g. Assessor map indicating location of the above properties h. Copy of this pre -application form 2. Vicinity Map (4-203 C) 3. Sketch Plan Map (5-402 C) 4. Visual Analysis (5-402 H) 5. Recommended: Discussion Response to Standards in Article 7, Divisions 1, 2, and 3, and 4 - including discussion of legal and physical water, adequate wastewater disposal, legal and physical access, adequate parking, etc. Table 5401: Application Submittal Requirements Ain/11,1110n Tip,: Baernpeons 5.202 Publio7Ccunry Road Split V V V V Swollen 5-4162 BCDEFGB I t t Section B-201 Wlilien DarlatnrelAdditiOnaI 5ubmittaions V Demonstration of access, water and sewer. 5-203 Rural Land Development 1 V V sr 1111 111 V Eng,neenng reports and plans: A, B, C. D. E. RIOT $ppdmsrpelr—I 1 1 1 V 1 1 1 Pre! in nary engineering reports and plana: A, C, E. H -301 Minor Seddiv.pren Ne}nr Subdl .,. A- 6-302.8 Sketch Plan 11 .4 V 5.302.0 Preliminary Plan V V V V V V V V./ V V V V Preliminary engineering reports and plans: A. B. C. 8.302.0 Final Plan/Plat 1 V V V V V Er,grncenrsg reports! plans: A. B, C, D, E. F, G. 14101t J _ _ 'MEMO&u�17 V L V r d 1 5-303.6 Sketch Plan 1 V 6-303.C. Yield Plan V V V 8-303.0 Preliminary Plan V V V V V V♦ V V V V V V Preliminary engineering reports and plans: A..13.. C. 8-303.E Final PlanrPlat V V V V V I V V Engineering reports and plans: A, B, C, D. E, F, G. 5 38 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 Submit three paper copies and one digital copy of the application. Additional copies will be requested upon determination of completeness, if necessary. See the land use code for additional information on submittal requirements. IV. APPLICATION REVIEW a. Review by: b. Public Hearing: Staff for completeness recommendation and referral agencies for additional technical review None (Director's Decision) _X_Planning Commission _ Board of County Commissioners _ Board of Adjustment c. Referral Agencies: Application Submittal 3 Hard Copies 1 Digital PDF Copy (on CD or USB stick) Both the paper and the digital copy should be split into individual sections. Please refer to the list included in your pre -application conference summary for the submittal requirements that are appropriate for your application: • General Application Materials • Vicinity Map • Site Plan • Grading and Drainage Plan • landscape Plan • Impact Analysis ▪ Traffic Study • Water Supply/Distribution Plan • Wastewater Management Plan • Article 7 Standards May include Garfield County Road and Bridge, Fire Protection District, City of Glenwood Springs, Roaring Fork Water and Sanitation District, Colorado Department of Transportation, Garfield County Vegetation Management, Roaring Fork Conservancy, and Garfield County Designated Engineer. V. APPLICATION REVIEW FEES a. Planning Review Fees: $ 325.00 Preliminary Plan ($325 Sketch Plan) b. Referral Agency Fees: $ N/A c. Total Deposit: $ 325 (additional hours are billed at $40.50 /hour) Disclaimer The pre -application meeting summary is only valid for six (6) months from the date of the written summary. The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the County. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. This summary does not create a legal or vested right. Pre -application Summary Prepared by: November 7, 2017 David Pesnichak, AICP, Senior Planner Date 6 39 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 Flying M Ranch Flying M Ranch Final Plat Amendment and Sketch Subdivision Plan Pre -Application Concept Statement prepared 11/3/17 by The Land Studio, Inc. The proposed Flying M Ranch Subdivision is located on a 33.9 -acre parcel of land in Garfield County, Colorado at the intersection of County Road 154 and Flying M Ranch Road, between the new Riverview Pre-K/Elementary/Middle School and the Roaring Fork River. Proposed uses within the Subdivision include expansion of an existing business park, eco -efficiency homes, residential lofts, and opportunities for a continuing care retirement community with a variety of multi -family unit types. The following is a summary of these potential land uses for this project: Parcel A - Business Park - 4.28 Acres Parcel A is a proposed 4.28 -acre parcel that consists of two existing businesses with additional proposed business uses. These proposed uses include an additional 20,000- 25,000 SF of business space that may include, but not be limited to, a veterinary clinic, professional offices, retail/wholesale businesses, service businesses, vehicle and equipment businesses, fabrication businesses, storage facilities, recycling facilities, and accessory uses. Parcel B - Manufactured Home Park / Eco -Efficiency Homes - 6.93 Acres Parcel B is a proposed 6.93 -acre parcel that will consist of small two/three bedroom manufactured homes with parking and small storage sheds at a density of 5-6 residential units/acre. These small detached single-family homes will be built using eco -friendly building materials and solar panels, and high efficiency plumbing fixtures, lighting, heating, cooling, appliances, insulation and glazing. Gardens and recycling will also be a community focus with a public community path along the Roaring Fork River. Parcels C1, C2, & C3 — Residential Multi -Family / Residential Lofts— 5.39 Acres Proposed Parcels C1, C2, and C3 will consist of multi -family residences at an overall Parcel C density of 10-12 residential units/acre. As a concept, these residential structures will include underground parking, surface guest parking, and elevator access. These multi -family units could range from small studios to larger three-bedroom units. The loft units will offer a contemporary design of one level living with riverfront views and river access via a public community path. 1 40 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 Parcel D - Community Service Facility - Hospice of the Valley - 4.36 Acres HomeCare & Hospice of the Valley is a locally -based, non-profit provider of services that prevent and relieve suffering, restore dignity and provide comfort for those living with a life -limiting disease. The proposed Hospice of the Valley facility will consist of approximately 26,500 SF of patient and support space, 8,500 SF of administration space, 5,000 SF of mechanical and storage space, and surface parking for clients and guests. Parcel E — Multi -Family Residential -- Potential Assisted Living Facility - 2.87 Acres Conceptually, the multi -family residential facility will offer a variety of residential options for seniors who require various levels of care. Services provided to residents could range from communal housing and social activities to medical assistance and intervention. This potential facility will consist of approximately 25,000 SF of living units, approximately 7,500 SF of administration and support, and 5,000 SF of mechanical/storage with potential underground parking and additional resident/guest surface parking. Parcel F — Multi -Family Residential - Independent Living Patio Homes - 4.8 Acres These patio homes will provide easily accessible outdoor spaces with comfortable floor plans and access to amenities such as transportation and dining within the Flying M Ranch community at a density of 5-6 residential units/acre. The concept includes opportunities for two/three bedroom one-story homes with garage and driveway parking spaces and additional guest surface parking. The multi -family patio homes will be linked to the remaining Flying M Ranch PUD via a river path overlooking the Roaring Fork River and the agricultural lands below. Parcel G - Hillside Open Space - 2.83 Acres Parcel G is a hillside open space parcel that provides a natural buffer between the Flying M Ranch PUD and the Flying M Ranch agricultural parcel below. Parcel H — Access/Utilities - 2.45 Acres Parcel H is an access/utility parcel that provides a corridor for access and utilities to the Flying M Ranch Subdivision parcels. Portions of this parcel contain an access/utility easement to the new Riverview Elementary/Middle School and may also contain pedestrian paths and parking. Final Plat Amendment The attached Exhibit illustrates an amendment to Lot 3 of the Eastbank, LLC Minor Subdivision and the adjoining 35+ acre Roaring Fork School District Riverview School Parcel. Each parcel will remain the same size after the lot line between the two parcels is adjusted on either side of Flying M Ranch Road as illustrated. 2 41 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 42 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 t6OILL690g1 " �' C z 0 ca V/ 0 4 1iot W ++ I XVYrw A.0 Iw, 1400'19N11....N.M OOVNO1O0' A.HflOO CrI3idifiVO fMotNn4 (OLIO VIA .OLO•pB apHa N0IBNIOBf18 dONIN I OMB OD 'OSHOI•10 i aLS.DONsn. 311,-.61 Gi P all MNV B1H'/'H ONI '9NI6133NION3 AN1Nf1OO HOIH E� 6y 8: 8 1 woTr• rao • W l▪ S OmMO U▪ NOJ U YW�O Zm4 W �o6.1 pp Dm a. Ouch° Z�U yao Ea 1 s 8s lOg 111 111 B�aY a 2 �9W 9114 141 104 !;SFR I 4X1 4 Li 4r,ili1ppi. Iii i!f!!IEEI @1 �: a� R9 @ 1 i 1 .8 ai i 11 p3 1 1n ° 1 II 6° f ¢ n 1 iii' a:R 1 ° "Po I -1k 1 i 17� 1 118 Ie ii Vi y b p 10 01111 LC !ii 11 4 ! 8p 5 Bbl.! 61 Pill11! .II'AI Y 9 II! iii i' it 11 2 . i i 1 !11 vi V; 1" 01 - i9f9 i it �n 1; 21 y- 91 :n 8 pit iib ;a ee11lie&f.� -; yr v Al si Ili xigQ81 k it : 8z 1,1 iik188g 1; l'i r hi ii eY5 28 1 : of !IIsi �� r .1 ili 11 li p Vi 11 e 1111 ! I Igil Ig's % 8i 41 13 !ii q Igk Fg lobi gI /-9/Z 43 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 36. LB61ZZ6C0&I veo g ]1M CM NOO'ON3ON•MMM rMIMOn110441 va-acsene 10.1 aNOHa MOM OD 99NItlffi OOONJOID 1013111911MAYSWIS 4I21 •0N1'9N11133NION3 AM1N1107 H91H W1210100 d.u.Nnoo O131UEIY9 NOIYVI[OYf18 001•11W §N OTl )INYG1iY3 OCIYUC OoA1Nf1D7m3Li0V0 E N »�•uNveiso3 N k'si1%@«=.ex 4.r:xis_i-o1€$1* rt .d 7 1 ssss:yse l.V.SP 3.3553§'925555=535!5 P. dEEEEEREEEEEE ViEFEEE 147NYN INH3Nd ■ u I11 `1' y1o�1 11111 I1I1 I10 11!!1 Ep ■ 44 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 Garfield County Garfield County Land Explorer Garfield County, Colorado 218534102001 1, 218535200021 21853520002 /16534102003 218535200015 218534402005 218534402004 218535304002 218535415002 218534402007 218534402008 Garfield County Land Explorer Printed by Web User 239502206051 1 inch = 752 feet 1 inch = 0.14 miles 0 0.1 0.2 0A Mlles Garfield County Colorado Garfield County www.garfleld-county. corn Colorado r Disclaimer This Is a compilation of records as they appear In the Garfield County Offices affecting the area shown. This drawing Is to be used only for reference purposes and the County is not responsible for any Inaccuracies herein contained, © Copyright Garfleld County, Colorado 1 All Rights Reserved Printed: 11/7/2017 at 12:03:02 PM 45 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 Garfield County Assessor Data Site Jim Yellico, 109 8th Street, Suite 207, Glenwood Springs, CO, 81601 (P) 970.945.9134 1 (F) 970.945.3953 1 (E) (warder@garfield-county.com Account Information Account: R083596 Parcel: 218535315003 Owner Name: EASTBANK LLC Owner Address: 710 E DURANT AVE UNIT W6, ASPEN, CO, 81611 Property Address: , GLENWOOD SPRINGS Legal: Quarter: SW Section: 35 Township: 6 Range: 89 Subdivision: EASTBANK, LLC MINOR SUBDIVISION Lot: 3 PARCEL 2A, EASTBANK, LLC LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PLAT RECEPTION # 865787 AND EXHIBIT C-1 OF THE BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT AFFIDAVIT RECEPTION # 865784 Tax Area: 006 Subdivision: 2289 Taxable Values History Year Land Actual 2017 390 2016 360 2015 360 Property Details Imp Actual Total Actual Land Assessed Imp Assessed Total Assessed 390 110 110 360 100 100 360 100 100 Model Attribute Name Attribute Value LAND 0 ABSTRACT CODE AREA ACRES AG GRAZING LAND -AGRICULTURAL 16.944 46 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 218'534100014 218531402008 239503400966 2395111130064 Garfield County Land Explorer Printed by Web User 1 inch = 752 feet 1 inch = 0.14 miles 0.1 0.2 0.4 Miles yr Garfield County Garfield County Colorado www.garfleld•county.com Colorado Disclaimer This Ise compilation of records as they appear In the Garfield County O0ice s affecting the area shown. This drawing Is to he used only for reference purposes and the County Is not responsible for any inaccuracies herein Contained.. © Copyright Garfield County, Colorado I All Rights Reserved Printed: 11/7/2017 at 12.0339 PM 47 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 Garfield County Assessor Data Site Jim Yellico, 109 8th Street, Suite 207, Glenwood Springs, CO, 81601 (P) 970.945.9134 1 (F) 970.945.3953 1(E) (warder@garfield-county.com Account Information Account: R083595 Parcel: 218535415002 Owner Name: EASTBANK LLC Owner Address: 710 E DURANT AVE UNIT W6, ASPEN, CO, 81611 Property Address: , GLENWOOD SPRINGS Legal: Quarter: SW Section: 35 Township: 6 Range: 89 Subdivision: EASTBANK, LLC MINOR SUBDIVISION Lot: 2 PARCEL 2A, EASTBANK, LLC LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PLAT RECEPTION # 865787 AND EXHIBIT C-1 OF THE BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT AFFIDAVIT RECEPTION # 865784 Tax Area: 006 Subdivision: 2289 Taxable Values History Year Land Actual Imp Actual Total Actual Land Assessed Imp Assessed Total Assessed) 2017 988,260 27,340 1,015,600 286,590 7,930 294,520 2016 943,910 91,560 1,035,470 273,740 26,550 300,290 2015 50,550 92,770 143,320 14,660 26,900 41,560 Property Details Model Attribute Name Attribute Value COMM'0 ABSTRACT CODE SPEC.PURPOSE-IMPROVEMENTS UNITS 1 BUILDING_TYPE SPEC PURPOS ACT_YEAR_BLT 196& NEIGHBORHOOD ACTUALAREA 3880 FINBSMTAREA 0' HEATEDAREA 19201 AREA_UNITS 1 LIVEAREA 19201 BASEMENTAREA 0 ARCH_STYLE SERV/GARGE FRAME STEEL. AIRCOND NONE EXTERIOR_WALL PREFAB MTL HEATING FUEL GAS HEATING__TYPE FORCED AIR INTERIOR WALL DRYWALL. INTERIOR__WALL MINIMUM ROOF_COVER PREFAB -MET ROOF STRUCTUR PREFAB -MET' y STORIES STORIES 2.0 48 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 Garfield County Assessor Data Site Jim Yellico, 109 8th Street, Suite 207, Glenwood Springs, CO, 81601 (P) 970.945.9134 1 (F) 970.945.3953 1 (E) (warder©gartield-county.com Model Attribute Name Attribute Value COMM 1 ABSTRACT_CODE SPEC.PURPOSE-IMPROVEMENTS UNITS 1 BUILDING_TYPE SPEC PURPOS ACT_YEAR_BLT 1974 ACTUALAREA 1200 NEIGHBORHOOD FINBSMTAREA 0 HEATEOAREA 0 AREA_UNiTS 1 LIVEAREA 0 BASEMENTAREA 0 ARCH_STYLE WAREHOUSE AIRCOND NONE FRAME MASONARY EXTERIOR_WALL CON BLOCK HEATING FUEL NONE HEATING__TYPE NONE INTERIOR WALL MINIMUM ROOF_COVER BUILT-UP ROOF_STRUCTUR FLAT STORIES STORIES 1.0 LANG 0 LAND 1 XFOB 0 ABSTRACT_CODE GRAZING LAND -AGRICULTURAL AREA_ACRES 9.713 AREA_SQFT 0 NEIGHBORHOOD HWY 82 & ROARING FORK RIVER -AG AG ABSTRACT_CODE SPEC.PURPOSE-LAND AREA_ACRES 7.27 AREA_SQFT 0 NEIGHBORHOOD HWY 82 & ROARING FORK RIVER -AG ABSTRACT_CODE SPEC.PURPOSE-IMPROVEMENTS BUILDING_NO 2 ACT_YEAR_BLT 1972 NEIGHBORHOOD HWY 82 & ROARING FORK RIVER -AG XFOB_CODE SHED AREA UNITS 0 49 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 Model XFOB 1 Property Images Garfield County Assessor Data Site Jim Yellico, 109 8th Street, Suite 207, Glenwood Springs, CO, 81601 (P) 970.945.9134 1 (F) 970.945.3953 1 (E) (warder©garfield-county.com Attribute Name BUILDING_NO ABSTRACT_CODE ACT_YEAR_BLT XFOB_CODE NEIGHBORHOOD AREA_UNITS Attribute Value 2 SPEC.PURPOSE-IMPROVEMENTS 1972 CONC/PAVE HWY 82 & ROARING FORK RIVER -AG 0 50 Flying M Ranch 2. Vicinity Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application Map (4-203 C) December 21, 2017 51 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 3. Sketch Plan Map (5-402 C) 52 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 4. Visual Analysis (5-402 H) The following three-dimensional massing model illustrations depict the conceptual land uses, access, and context for the Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision. As illustrated, all of the proposed uses are located on the valley floor well below adjoining ridgelines. Non -reflective materials and dark sky lighting will be utilized to reduce the visual impacts of the project to adjoining property owners. The property sits below Colorado State Highway 82 with sightlines from the highway extending over the top of the project. Parcel A will contain uses that are visible from Highway 82 and care will be taken to utilize non -reflective surfaces with neutral colors and quick cutoff lighting for these proposed uses. Aerial View Looking North Aerial View Looking Southeast 53 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 Aerial View Looking Southwest Google Earth Aerial Plan View Looking West Aerial View Looking Northwest 54 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 5. Garfield County Standards, Article 7, Divisions 1, 2, 3 & 4 The following narrative addresses Garfield County Standards that affect the Flying M Ranch Subdivision including but not limited to the legal and physical water supply, adequate wastewater disposal, legal and physical access, and adequate parking. As this is a Sketch Plan Application, these responses to the Standards in Article 7, Divisions 1, 2, and 3, and 4 are general in nature. The Applicant will provide additional detail to these responses at the Preliminary Plan/Planned Unit Development Application stage. Zone District Use Regulations The Flying M Ranch Subdivision Applicant will utilize the Sketch, Preliminary, and Final Plat process to create the subdivision. The Flying M Ranch Subdivision property is currently zoned Rural in Garfield County. As the area surrounding this parcel has changed recently with the addition of new businesses, residential neighborhoods, and a new school, the Applicant intends to utilize Planned Unit Development zoning to permit greater design flexibility than is allowed by the Rural base zone district or Subdivision regulations for this project. The Flying M Ranch Subdivision Planned Unit Development will be prepared with a Preliminary Subdivision Plan Application in the next stage of the subdivision process. The Applicant will utilize the Zone District Use Regulations to guide this process. Comprehensive Plan & Intergovernmental Agreements The Garfield County 2030 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates this parcel as Residential Medium (6 TO <10 Ac/Du) and within the City of Glenwood Springs 3 -mile area of influence. The proposed residential, hospice, assisted living, and business park uses and densities are a response to changing surrounding land use in the south Glenwood Springs area. The uses are intended to be compatible with the surrounding area, will result in a logical and orderly development pattern, will have significant public benefit, and are consistent with the goals and policies of the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan. This area is also mapped as an Urban Growth Area in the City of Glenwood Springs Comprehensive Plan, March 2011. The Urban Growth Area is defined as an area between the Glenwood Springs city limits and the urban growth boundary, within which urban development is encouraged that is in conformance with the Future Land Use Map and Comprehensive Plan, and outside of which development should be rural in character. The project strives to meet the community goals and objective outlined in the City of Glenwood Springs Comprehensive Plan. High Country Engineering has provided an Engineering Utility Report that is included as an Exhibit to this Application and that demonstrates the adequacy of utilities for this project. The site has been included within the Roaring Fork Water and Sanitation District's (RFWSD) service plan area. Water and sewer will be provided by the RFWSD. 55 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 Compatibility The nature, scale, and intensity of the prospective residential, hospice, assisted living, and business park uses are intended to compliment the adjacent land uses. The Flying M Ranch Subdivision will provide a variety of housing types to accommodate a diversity of residents potentially including senior citizens, students, families, regional employees, and Roaring Fork School District teachers. A public community path will connect all residents of the Flying M Ranch subdivision to the Roaring Fork River and the Riverview School. The path will also connect Riverview School students and teachers to the Roaring Fork River for river watch projects and science studies. The 20,000-25,000 SF of business space proposed within the existing business park will provide service opportunities for Flying M Ranch Subdivision residents and the regional community Source of Water High Country Engineering has provided an Engineering Utility Report that is included as an Exhibit to this Application. The following information is summarized from this report: With the construction of the new Riverview School, the Roaring Fork water and Sanitation District extended their water service to include the Flying M Ranch Area. The entire site is now within the service Area for the District. Site specific line extension agreements would still need to be completed with new development. Commitment to serve letters will be provided with the PUD Submittal. The work that was completed by the district with the School District, as well as the Owner of these parcels is shown on the map included as an Exhibit. The waterlines are shown in blue, and the primary extension was a 12" main. Much of the infrastructure is currently located on Lot 2 including water and sewer mains and the Sewer Lift station, which was installed to accommodate the new school and future development. Central Water Distribution & Wastewater Systems High Country Engineering has provided an Engineering Utility Report that is included as an Exhibit to this Application. The following information is summarized from this report: Sanitary Sewer System With the construction of the new Riverview School, the Roaring Fork water and Sanitation District extended their sewer service to include the Flying M Ranch Area. The entire site is now within the service Area for the District. Site specific line extension agreements would still need to be completed with new development. Commitment to serve letters will be provided with the PUD Submittal. The work that was completed by the district as well as the owner of Lot 2 is shown on the map in the Exhibit. These extensions were completed in anticipation of line extensions for development that may occur in this area. Much of the infrastructure is currently located on Lot 2 including water and sewer mains and the Sewer Lift station, which was installed to accommodate the new school and the future development. 56 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 Local Sanitary Sewer System The Roaring Fork Sanitation District extension into the proposed PUD has been anticipated and would simply be an extension to the now existing gravity lines that are serving the Riverview School. A map showing the existing lines and the potential anticipated extensions is attached in the Exhibit. It can be seen on the map that sewer can extend to the west from the line that serves the school and easterly from the lift station to serve the Eastern side of the development. The Commercial/Industrial area has the sewer mains in place for expansion and inclusion into the District. Public Utilities High Country Engineering has provided an Engineering Utility Report that is included as an Exhibit to this Application. The following Public Utilities information is summarized from this report: Electric Currently there is an Xcel Energy three-phase power that has been extended from the overhead electrical feeder on CR 154 and was extended down the new access to the Riverview School. This line has been looped through the upper commercial/industrial area and back out to CR 154. We are proposing all connections within the PUD to extend off of this main line. The developer will be responsible for costs associated with extending the electric utility to through the PUD. Gas Gas has also been extended to the school and is in the same access corridor. Black Hills Energy designed a new gas main that was installed from the intersection of CR 154 and CR 109 to extend to the school and eventually the surrounding areas. This line is currently installed in the access road and stubbed out to serve future properties. Cable Comcast Cable has also been extended to the school and is in the same access corridor. New extension lines were designed and installed from the intersection of CR 154 and the new access into the school and eventually the surrounding areas. This line is currently installed in the access road and stubbed out to serve future properties. Telecommunications Centurylink telephone has also been extended to the school and is in the same access corridor. New extension lines were designed and installed from CR 154 and the new access into the school and eventually the surrounding areas. This line is currently installed in the access road and stubbed out to serve future properties. 57 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 Access & Roadways Felsburg Holt & Ullevig has prepared the November 2017 Flying M Ranch Traffic Assessment that is attached as an Exhibit. The following summary has been prepared from this report: The proposed development is expected to generate approximately 80 new vehicle -trips during the weekday AM peak hour and about 100 new vehicle -trips during the weekday PM peak hour. The estimated weekday new daily trip generation potential would be about 1,100 trips. The potential traffic impacts due to this additional traffic has been evaluated under both Short Range Future (year 2020) and Long Range Future (year 2040) scenarios. In general, the adjacent roadway system and intersections would possess capacity to accommodate the projected traffic volumes. The Rio Grande Trail crosses CR 154 approximately 550 feet south of the intersection with SH 82. Two potential queuing issues were analyzed related to the trail crossing: (1) queue lengths exceeding the available lane storage lengths, and (2) excessive queues blocking the trail crossing. SimTraffic queuing analyses have been conducted to evaluate the potential for queuing along CR 154 interfering with the trail crossing. The analyses indicate that site generated traffic related to the school is not anticipated to routinely interfere with the Rio Grande Trail crossing. The access permit for SH 82 / CR 154 is Permit No. 316048 which was issued in relation to the Riverview School. The access permit is for 600 design hour vehicles (DHV) along CR 154. The highest peak hour for the development is 100 vehicles of which 80 percent are expected to use the intersection of SH 82 and CR 154 for 80 design hour vehicles needing access during the PM peak hour. This translates to an increase of 13.3 percent of the permitted 600 design hour vehicles. Based on these calculations, a new access permit will not be required. Based on the SHAC, speed change lanes are needed at the SH 82 / CR 154 intersection both with and without the proposed development. Two of the lanes are currently provided and no changes are recommended to these lanes. A third lane, a northbound to eastbound right turn acceleration lane would be ideal. However, due to physical constraints adding complexity and cost to providing this lane, it is recommended that the northbound right turn movement be converted to a protected only movement, thereby avoiding the need for the acceleration lane. The northbound right movement is light during peak times and not expected to create significant delays with the suggested restriction. No additional turn lanes or extensions of existing turn lanes are recommended with this development. Fire Protection Per the following 2012 Colorado Wildfire Risk Assessment, the Flying M Ranch site has a low to moderate fire intensity rating. Fire demands were determined in the design and construction of the waterline extension to the adjoining Riverview School and there was 58 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 a minimum of 2000 GPM provided to the school. All structures proposed would be required to work within these parameters for on-site fire protection. Fire Protection is provided by Glenwood Springs Fire Protection District. Flying M Ranch Fire Intensity Scale Quantifies the potential lire intensity by orders of magnitude. 7 Moderate Intensity . Highest Intensity Report Created: 12/06/2017 9:58 AM Colorado Wildfire Risk Assessment 2012 www.coloradowildfirerisk.com Ing trier assumes the entre reek related W their use al the Coloraeo State wdW a Risk Assessment and ermgr me published or cleaved proWclstern mese dale. The Colorado Stela Forest Service is providing mese data as ns' end disdains any end all warranties whamer expressed or implied incpiding *Mout Ynitationl wry implied warrantes of rnesrnantaterty or Riles fora parliculer purpose. In no event will Gatorade Stale Forest Service be liable to you or to any lhird parry Sr any direct. indirect, incidertail. oonsequemia}. spacial or exemplary damages or 55 profit eittAih g tem any 003 or misuse al Ih989 data Ari f. 4.* iraclo yt.>Iti- Agricultural Lands There are no agricultural lands within the proposed Flying M Ranch Subdivision and there will be no adverse effects to agricultural operations on adjoining lands. Wildlife Habitat Areas The following Colorado Parks and Wildlife Species Data has been mapped at the Flying M Ranch Subdivision Site as researched on December 6, 2017 per the following link: (http://www.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?url=https://services5.arcgis.cont/ttNGmDvKQA7oeDQ3/ArcG IS/re st/services/CPWSpeciesData/FeatureServer&source=sd) Bald Eagle Winter Range Black Bear Fall Concentration and Overall Range Elk Overall Range Canada Goose Foraging Area, Production Area, and Winter Range 59 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 Great Blue Heron Foraging Area Mountain Lion Overall Range Mule Deer Highway Crossings, Summer Range, Overall Range Osprey Foraging Area Bull Snake Overall Range Terrestrial Garter Snake Overall Range River Otter Overall Range An Ecological Assessment of Eastbank Property for Minor Subdivision and Major Impact Review was prepared by Jonathan Lowsky, MS of Colorado Wildlife Science, LLC on February 18, 2015. For reference this report is attached as an Exhibit to this Application. Protection of Waterbodies The Roaring Fork River borders the southern edge of the Flying M Ranch site. Based on the November 23, 2016 Revised Preliminary Floodplain information provided by FEMA for this area, it appears that the 100 -year floodplain is contained within the Roaring Fork River channel per the illustration below. The Applicant is aware that the 100 -year flood plain and setbacks need to be addressed and will provide additional detail with the Preliminary Plan/PUD Application. SPECIAL FLOOO HAZARD AREAS (SFHAs) SJBIECT TO INUNDATION BY THE 1% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD TM 111..nW fl eweChores hma— A111.T1M Ve Nee ewt, k U. ema.I Nu •L%Oa ow u or etleeed vc�eadhtb arq(hm set, t1K ynapd b..�] aRtk d. e.tl. mss.E.sn,no, ns,.W9, T ee. YE.. me Base xm Bernm evlewa[eswhoe a..aNde. 1%....i w,x wte. FIDODWAT AREAS IN ZONE Al M..ea.ay w Tcd.rb d. scum p,..ril.g.m. ewt1 oil= COY mK N Iew BmM ati�.r��a a e, ba.,o. ee m.Iw.Ielwl weu.�e1S vae *1 N.tne: OTHER FL000 AREAS nE>< sand 0.i%4ervel usec. Mee etas el l%aneewxr lbw rM "Ale 44:01. Y kMTb. 1 tet 0.11, naNe.e. I. OW 1 MPS nue; Psi .4i awet.e ba Was Inn l%.wsSNmte Nee. Drainage and Erosion NP(P 11 1 li w+Wf IIIII1 0 I I. TlI�T 111111 IIIA 11111' �l[ PANEL1585E 'FIRM FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO :1 ND INCORPORATED AREAS PANEL 1585 OF 2075 (SEE MAP INDEX FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT) =Mims- carantrr risam .N Bea& SHEDS ammo cor. MIMSE 01.Xt tats E REVISED PRELIMINARY NOVEMBER 23, 2015 Notice to User The Map Number shown below ■hOUM 00. Lean when Plating nap ceders: the Community Number shown show should be .WOO On insutst111 spGepbons 0011 It* eobp,C1 community. MAP NUMBER 08045C15BSE EFFECTIVE DATE Federal Emergency M.sagemest Agency, Drainage, stormwater run-off, erosion control, and water quality standards will all be addressed at the Preliminary Plan/PUD Application stage. Care will be given to design systems that do not negatively impact the water quality in the adjoining Roaring Fork River. 60 Flying M Ranch Major Subdivision Sketch Plan Application December 21, 2017 Off -Street Parking and Loading Standards All proposed uses within the Flying M Ranch Subdivision will have adequate access, off street parking, and loading areas. As a concept, the Sketch Plan illustrates surface parking for the additional business park floor area, surface parking for Hospice of the Valley, surface and underground parking for the multi-family/retirement facility, underground parking with surface guest spaces for the lofts, surface parking for the Eco -Efficiency homes, and garage/driveway parking with additional gest spaces for the patio homes. Landscaping Standards All disturbed areas of the Flying M Ranch project will be revegetated with a mix of grasses, ground covers, trees and shrubs to prevent erosion and the invasion of weeds. Where appropriate a xeriscape design of native plants will be considered to blend in with the native habitat surrounding the site. Non-native or ornamental plant materials may be used in some areas of the project as accents. Riparian habitat may be utilized in areas that adjoin the Roaring Fork River or adjoining drainage ways. Healthy plant materials will be sized per the sizes established in Garfield County's Landscaping Standards. Lighting Standards The Flying M Ranch Subdivision project will utilize downcast, shielded lights with appropriate heights for the neighborhood and surrounding area that meet the Garfield County Lighting Standards. Lighting details will be developed at the Subdivision Preliminary Plan/Planned Unit Development Application stage. Snow Storage Standards Garfield County Snow Storage Standards including minimum area, appropriate location, and drainage will be provided in detail at the Preliminary Plan/PUD stage of this project. Trail and Walkway Standards Garfield County Trail and Walkway Standards will be utilized to develop the community path that links the Flying M Ranch Subdivision together, to the Roaring Fork River, and to the new Riverview School. Design, safety and maintenance considerations will be detailed at the Preliminary Plan/PUD stage of this project. 6. Exhibits High Country Engineering Utility Report Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Flying M Ranch Traffic Assessment Colorado Wildlife Science, LLC Ecological Assessment of Eastbank Property 61 Flying M Ranch Subdivision Sketch Plan PRELIMINARY UTILITY REPORT PREPARED FOR: EASTBANK, LLC 710 East Durant Avenue, W-6 Aspen, CO 81611 Prepared By: HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING, INC. 1517 Blake Avenue, Suite 101 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 945-8676 HCE Project No. 2151005.00 November 21, 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS FIGURES Vicinity Map .2 INTRODUCTION 3 Location 3 Existing Land Use 3 WASTEWATER SYSTEM 3 Sanitary Sewer System 3 Local Sanitary Sewer System 4 WATER DISTRIBUTION 4 Water Distribution 4 System Demand 4 System Requirements 5 Fire Demand 5 RAW WATER IRRIGATION 6 DRY UTILITIES 6 Electric/Gas 6 Cable 7 Telecomunications 7 CONCLUSION 8 Water and Sewer 8 Dry Utilities 8 EASTBANK SUBDIVISION COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO PARCEL ID: 218535304001 ■ICPI 1 1 MAP SCALE 1- - 1000' 2 LS • -ti � r 111 l� f IJ 1 JJ,',,/ `cN rf ^ Ih �```l �?I F { �Ji 7 •_ f . i„ N. �/r', '•' if jy .� i��{► II,. I�• '' I 1 Jfi tiJ ;•. vz.,.,,....\ ._... f ` t..„.„„). L'� ,LCL D „.„,„ _„,, ...., .... N. k s- .., • }1.. •v -If 1 '� € 5g5 �— J S .y E 1" a f ti h 4 -kyr. ware . , ,; _-Y Q . .00 _. ......___, . 36 om. `j - •• wj' '+ '4� ! ' 4 : • _ _�.F+�•- , • • - rr JS ..v '. --tip •. _. „� 4� . t -- •:..., L y .. x.3`1 f 1J n, x yt ��i ;- :. { .`• . •r [-�Z .ter: tip _. I.� `.- • _ ..._ . 4 .�. .,,., `,. I 1 I :fry ; ;1 . I ( �rAk� . - . i ■ICPI 1 1 MAP SCALE 1- - 1000' 2 INTRODUCTION Location The 33.9 -acre Flying M Ranch Subdivision is a proposed development that consists of residential, and commercial/industrial use. The site is located in Section 35 of Township 6 South, Range 89 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, Garfield County Colorado. The project is bounded to the north by private properties, on the south by private property and the Roaring Fork River, on the east by County Road 154, and to the west by private property. State Highway 82 is located adjacent to County Road 154 to the east and access is approximately 800 -ft on County Road 154 to Highway 82. Existing Land Use The project site consists of an existing Equine Hospital and Diesel Automotive shop on Lot 2 and undeveloped land for Lot 3. Lot 2 additionally encompasses the site access road which will serve the development and currently serves the Riverview School. The site historically was a gravel pit and concrete company. Much of the site has experienced former excavation from the gravel pit operations and other industrial uses over the years. Currently a portion of Lot 2 is being used by Gould construction for storage, crushing and other material operations. A waste and recycling operation also spent a number of years on the site. Lot 3 is undeveloped land and currently has minimal use and is covered with grasses and sagebrush. WASTEWATER SYSTEM Sanitary Sewer System With the construction of the new Riverview School, the Roaring Fork water and Sanitation District extended their sewer service to include the Flying M Ranch Area. The entire site is now within the service Area for the District. Site specific line extension agreements would still need to be completed with new development. Commitment to serve letters will be provided with the PUD Submittal. 3 The work that was completed by the district as well as the owner of Lot 2 is shown on the map on the following page. These extensions were completed in anticipation of line extensions for development that may occur in this area. Much of the infrastructure is currently located on Lot 2 including water and sewer mains and the Sewer Lift station, which was installed to accommodate the new school and the future development. Local Sanitary Sewer System The Roaring Fork Sanitation District extension into the proposed subdivision has been anticipated and would simply be an extension to the now existing gravity lines that are serving the Riverview School. A map showing the existing lines and the potential anticipated extensions is attached on the following page. It can be seen on the map on the following page that sewer can extend to the west from the line that serves the school and easterly from the lift station to serve the Eastern side of the development. The Commercial/Industrial area has the sewer mains in place for expansion and inclusion into the District. 4 WATER AND SEWER MASTER PLAN FOR RFWS❑ EXPANDED SERVICE PLAN AREA ROARING FORK WATER AND SANITATION DISTRICT SERVICE EXTENSION 2017 5 WATER DISTRIBUTION Water Distribution With the construction of the new Riverview School, the Roaring Fork water and Sanitation District extended their water service to include the Flying M Ranch Area. The entire site is now within the service Area for the District. Site specific line extension agreements would still need to be completed with new development. Commitment to serve letters will be provided with the PUD Submittal. The work that was completed by the district with the School District, as well as the Owner of these parcels is shown on the map on the previous page. The waterlines are shown in blue, and the primary extension was a 12" main. Much of the infrastructure is currently located on Lot 2 including water and sewer mains and the Sewer Lift station, which was installed to accommodate the new school and future development. Fire Demand Fire demands were determined in the design and construction of the waterline extension to the school and there was a minimum of 2000 GPM provided to the school. All structures proposed would be required to work within these parameters for on-site fire protection. Fire Protection is provided by Glenwood Springs Fire Protection District. RAW WATER IRRIGATION No raw water irrigation is proposed for the subdivision. All irrigation use shall be provided by the Roaring Fork Water and Sanitation District. In general terms the Glenwood Ditch that runs off-site along the northeast side of the properties is owned by a formal, incorporated Ditch Company. Eastbank, LLC owns shares in that Ditch Company and has certain surface use water rights for irrigation and related activity. On site "ditches" are historic lateral conveyances and generally subject to relocation. This development and subdivision does not impact any active irrigation conveyances. 6 DRY UTILITIES Electric Currently there is an Xcel Energy three-phase power that has been extended from the overhead electrical feeder on CR 154 and was extended down the new access to the Riverview School. This line has been looped through the upper commercial/industrial area and back out to CR 154. We are proposing all connections within the PUD to extend off of this main line. The developer will be responsible for costs associated with extending the electric utility to through the PUD. Gas Gas has also been extended to the school and is in the same access corridor. Black Hills Energy designed a new gas main that was installed from the intersection of CR 154 and CR 109 to extend to the school and eventually the surrounding areas. This line is currently installed in the access road and stubbed out to serve future properties. Cable Comcast Cable has also been extended to the school and is in the same access corridor. New extension lines were designed and installed from the intersection of CR 154 and the new access into the school and eventually the surrounding areas. This line is currently installed in the access road and stubbed out to serve future properties. Telecommunications Centurylink telephone has also been extended to the school and is in the same access corridor. New extension lines were designed and installed from CR 154 and the new 7 access into the school and eventually the surrounding areas. This line is currently installed in the access road and stubbed out to serve future properties. CONCLUSION Water and Sewer This preliminary utility report was prepared in compliance with the Garfield County standards and specifications. This report identifies the respective utility companies that will provide service to the PUD and the location of the lines for connection to the PUD. The proposed utility lines will provide adequate capacity to serve the proposed residential and industrial development and are already in place in the access corridor into the PUD. Dry Utilities Dry utilities to service the site are already in place down the access corridor to the school. This includes electric, phone, cable TV and gas. 8 FLYING M RANCH TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT Prepared for: Dunrene Group 710 East Durant Avenue, Suite W-6 Aspen, CO 81611 Prepared by: Felsburg Holt & Ullevig 6300 South Syracuse Way, Suite 600 Centennial, Colorado 80111 (303) 721-1440 Principal: Christopher J. Fasching, PE, PTOE Project Engineer: Philip Dunham, PE FHU Reference No. 17-349-01 November 2017 Flying M Ranch Traffic Assessment TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. INTRODUCTION 1 II. EXISTING CONDITIONS 4 A. Land Use 4 B. Roadway System 4 C. Traffic Volumes and Operations 4 III. FUTURE CONDITIONS 7 A. Site Trip Generation 7 B. Trip Distribution And Traffic Assignment 7 C. Background Traffic 9 D. Total Traffic Conditions 13 IV. QUEUING EVALUATION 16 V. STATE HIGHWAY ACCESS CODE CRITERIA 18 A. Access Permit 18 B. Speed Change Lanes 18 VI. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 20 LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX A TRAFFIC COUNTS APPENDIX B EXISTING CONDITIONS LOS WORKSHEETS APPENDIX C BACKGROUND TRAFFIC LOS WORKSHEETS APPENDIX D TOTAL TRAFFIC LOS WORKSHEETS APPENDIX E QUEUING REPORTS piFELSBURG (II HOLT & UL LE V iG Flying M Ranch Traffic Assessment LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1. Vicinity Map 2 Figure 2. Conceptual Site Plan 3 Figure 3. Existing Conditions 6 Figure 4. Trip Distribution and Site Generated Traffic Assignment 8 Figure 5. Short Range Future Background Traffic Conditions 10 Figure 6. Long Range Future Background Traffic Conditions 12 Figure 7. Short Range Future Total Traffic Conditions 14 Figure 8. Long Range Future Total Traffic Conditions 15 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Site Trip Generation Estimates 7 Table 2. SimTraffic 95th Percentile Queue Results — CR 154 NB approach to SH 82 16 Table 3. Existing and Required SH 82/CR 154 Turn Lane Lengths 19 111 FELSBURG (II HOLT & UJ. LEVJG Flying M Ranch Traffic Assessment I. INTRODUCTION The Dunrene Group is proposing to construct the Flying M Ranch, a new mixed-use site on an undeveloped parcel of land in Garfield County. The proposed site is located southeast of the intersection of State Highway (SH) 82 and Garfield County Road (CR) 154. Figure 1 illustrates the location of the site and the adjacent primary roadway network. The proposed development of the site would consist of a 35,000 square foot (35 KSF) assisted living facility, 76 townhomes and condos, and 35 single family homes. Figure 2 shows the current site plan concept for the development. Full -movement vehicular access to the site would be provided to CR 154 at the southeast end of the site sharing existing access with Riverview School and an additional full -movement vehicular access further south on CR 154. The purpose of this report is to provide an evaluation of the potential traffic impacts related to the Flying M Ranch development and to identify any roadway or traffic control improvements required as a result. The analyses consider two future scenarios: ► Short Range Future. This scenario examines the traffic impacts of completion of a 35 KSF assisted living facility, 76 townhomes and condos, and 35 single family homes in the near-term future (year 2020). ► Long Range Future. This scenario examines the traffic impacts of a 35 KSF assisted living facility, 76 townhomes and condos, and 35 single family homes within the context of a year 2040 horizon. IIFELSBURG (II HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 1 Flying M Ranch Figure 1. Vicinity Map To Glenwood Springs Traffic Assessment C) 0 0 V) 0 1 PROJECT SITE 0d For k�Ver To Carbondale FELSBURG (4 HOLT ULLEViG Page 2 Flying M Ranch Traffic Assessment Figure 2. Conceptual Site Plan .FELSBURG (d HOLT & ULLEV10 Page 3 Flying M Ranch Traffic Assessment II. EXISTING CONDITIONS A. Land Use The proposed site is currently undeveloped land. There is a nearby Federal Express (FedEx) sorting and distribution facility and Riverview school along CR 154 on parcels of land adjacent to the site. CR 154 also serves other businesses and residential neighborhoods. B. Roadway System State Highway 82 (SH 82) — SH 82 is a regional highway that connects to Interstate 70 (1-70) to the north and Highway 24 to the southeast. The speed limit varies along SH 82 between 55 and 65 miles per hour (MPH). The roadway has two lanes in each direction with existing auxiliary left and right turn lanes at the SH 82 / CR 154 signalized intersection. SH 82 has been categorized as an E -X (Expressway, Major Bypass) for the purposes of evaluating access control. County Road 154 (CR 154) — CR 154 is a two-lane roadway that provides access to various businesses and residential neighborhoods off SH 82. The posted speed limit is 35 MPH. CR154 is also crossed by the Rio Grande Trail between the site access points to the south and SH 82 to the north. C. Traffic Volumes and Operations AM and PM peak hour turning movement counts were collected in September 2017 at the SH 82 / CR 154 intersection, with count data sheets included in Appendix A. It should be noted that the AM peak is higher than the PM peak due to the proximity to the new Riverview School. The school start coincides with the adjacent roadways AM peak hour but the school dismissal is likely earlier than the PM peak hour of adjacent roadways and is not captured in turning movement counts. For purposes of these analyses, the projected PM school volumes are analyzed assuming that they do in fact occur during the adjacent street peak hour as to provide the worst-case scenario for operations. Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT), Region 3 staff provided traffic counts for the intersection of SH 82 and the Orrison Access (west of the intersection of SH 82 and CR 154). The Orrison Access traffic counts were conducted on March 7, 2012. Based on coordination with CDOT, the SH 82 / CR 154 intersection, the SH 82 / Orrison Access, the CR 154 / FedEx access, and the proposed shared site access with Riverview School, and the new proposed south site access have been analyzed. Figure 3 illustrates the existing traffic volumes within the study area. Existing traffic volumes at CR 154 / FedEx access and the proposed shared site access with Riverview School are vehicle -trip estimates associated with the proposed FedEx facility were taken from the FedEx Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by Rick Engineering Company (March 2015) and the Eastbank Property— New Roaring Fork School Traffic Assessment prepared by Felsburg Holt & Ullevig (March 2016). Traffic operations within the study area were evaluated according to techniques documented in the Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board, 2010) using the existing traffic volumes, intersection geometry, and traffic control. Level of Service (LOS) is a qualitative measure of traffic operational conditions based on roadway capacity and vehicle delay. LOS is described by a letter designation ranging from A to F, with LOS A representing almost free-flow travel, while LOS F represents congested conditions. For signalized intersections, LOS is reported as an average for the entire intersection. For stop -sign controlled intersections, LOS is FELSBURG (111 HOLT & ULLEViG Page 4 Flying M Ranch Traffic Assessment calculated for each movement that must yield the right-of-way. In urbanized areas, LOS D is typically considered to be acceptable for peak hour traffic operations. Figure 3 shows the existing traffic control, intersection geometry, and LOS analyses results, with analysis worksheets included in Appendix B. In general, traffic operations within the study area are currently acceptable. The signalized intersection of SH 82 and CR 154 operates at LOS B during the AM and LOS A during the PM peak hours. The unsignalized intersection of CR 154 and the FedEx access operates at LOS B during the AM and LOS A during the PM peak hours. The unsignalized movements at the intersection of CR 154 and the shared site and Riverview School Access operates at LOS B during the AM and LOS A during the PM peak hours. The unsignalized intersection of SH 82 and the Orrison Access currently operates at LOS D during the AM and LOS C during the PM peak hours. FELSBURG (I HOLT & ULLF V iG Page 5 Flying M Ranch Traffic Assessment Figure 3. Existing Conditions LEGEND 0 61 J 0(19 Fedex Access Riverview School Fath River oaC�n� XXX(XXX) = AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes x/x = AM/PM Peak Hour Signalized Intersection Level of Service x/x = AM/PM Peak Hour Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service = Stop Sign = Traffic Signal 4,c Access (d FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEV1G Page 6 Flying M Ranch Traffic Assessment III. FUTURE CONDITIONS A. Site Trip Generation As previously discussed, the proposed Flying M Ranch development would consist of a 35 KSF assisted living facility, 76 townhomes and condos, and 35 single family homes. The number of vehicle trips generated by the school was estimated based on the information and procedures documented in Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Tenth Edition, 2017. The trip rates contained in the manual are developed primarily through field observations of similar land uses throughout the nation. Table 1 shows the future trip generation estimates for the proposed mixed-use site. Table 1. Site Trip Generation Estimates Land Use ITE Code Quantity Daily ips AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total Assisted Living 254 35 KSF 147 11 3 14 5 12 17 Multifamily Housing (Low -Rise) 220 76 dwelling units 534 9 28 37 29 17 46 Single Family Detached Housing 210 35 dwelling units 396 8 22 30 23 14 37 TOTAL 1,077 28 53 81 57 43 100 As indicated in Table 1, the proposed Flying M Ranch development is expected to generate approximately 80 new vehicle -trips during the weekday AM peak hour and about 100 new vehicle -trips during the weekday PM peak hour. The estimated weekday new daily trip generation potential would be about 1,100 trips. B. Trip Distribution And Traffic Assignment The estimated site trips were distributed to the adjacent roadways based on existing traffic count data and employment in the surrounding communities. Figure 4 illustrates the estimated distribution of site generated vehicle trips, based on the following distribution assumptions: ► 60% to and from the northwest via SH 82 ► 20% to and from the southeast via SH 82 ► 20% to and from the south via CR 154 Figure 4 also illustrates the assignment of net new site generated traffic to the study area intersection. Site traffic is not expected to have significant impacts upon the roadway network and operations at all driveways and adjacent signals are projected to operate at an acceptable LOS for both Short Range and Long Range Future conditions. FELSBURG (I HOLT & ULLEviG Page 7 Flying M Ranch Traffic Assessment Figure 4. Trip Distribution and Site Generated Traffic Assignment 60% Fedex Access Riverview School Access FoYk River oai�x+$ LEGEND xxx(xxx) = AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes xx% = Site Trip Distribution C e South' , 1- 82 piFELSBURG (II HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 8 Flying M Ranch Traffic Assessment C. Background Traffic Short Range Future Background traffic is the component of roadway volumes that would use the adjacent roadway system regardless of site development. Future traffic growth estimates from the CDOT Online Transportation Information System (OTIS) indicate an annual growth rate of 1.36 percent to apply to existing traffic volumes along SH 82. Figure 5 shows the forecasted Short Range Future (year 2020) background volumes. The Short Range Future background traffic volumes were used as the basis for intersection capacity analyses, the results of which are also shown on Figure 5, with LOS worksheets included in Appendix C. The signalized intersection of SH 82 with CR 154 has been analyzed assuming a northbound "no right turn on red" and is projected to operate at LOS B during the AM and LOS A during the PM peak hours. The "no right turn on red" was assumed based on analysis indicating the need for an acceleration lane that cannot reasonably be provided given geographic limitations presented later in this report. The unsignalized intersection of CR 154 and the FedEx access is projected to operate at LOS B during the AM and LOS A during the PM peak hours. The unsignalized movements at the intersection of CR 154 and the shared site and Riverview School Access are projected to operate at LOS B during the AM and LOS A during the PM peak hours. The unsignalized intersection of SH 82 and the Orrison Access is projected to operate LOS D during both peak hours. FELSBURG (4111 HOLT & ULLE V IU Page 9 Flying M Ranch Traffic Assessment Figure 5. Short Range Future Background Traffic Conditions I— 'y 82 R/ 0 w��r°�g �� ��oro r j )\'\'\ J 6�96J��,;'J39J9�jc�6k 51 1_5)911ww�,t'�ryo �, J ��ii &R 22151"'y / ti`�� B/A LEGEND �s 1���) Q " `t.%� VVIIP Pedexcce„ Riverview School Access 11.gvotk River voa` XXX{XXX) = AM{PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes XIX = AM/PM Peak Hour Signalized Intersection Level of Service x/x = AM/PM Peak Hour Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service = Stop Sign = Traffic Signal .FELSBURG (d HOLT & ULLEV1G Page 10 Flying M Ranch Traffic Assessment Long Range Future The Long Range Future (year 2040) background traffic volumes, shown on Figure 6, are also based on the annual growth rate estimates from OTIS. In addition to applying an annual growth rate to existing traffic volumes, discussions with CDOT Region 3 staff indicated that the Orrison Access to SH 82 will likely be closed by 2040. When the access is closed, Orrison traffic will be expected to have access to SH 82 via the intersection of SH 82 and CR 154 and access to CR 154 via the intersection of CR 154 and the FedEx Access; traffic from the access has been reassigned to both intersections for 2040 Long Range Future conditions. The resulting Long Range Future background traffic volumes were used as the basis for intersection capacity analyses, the results of which are also shown on Figure 6, with LOS worksheets included in Appendix C. The signalized intersection of SH 82 with CR 154 has been analyzed assuming a northbound "no right turn on red" per previous discussion on need for an acceleration lane, and is projected to operate at LOS B during the AM and LOS A during the PM peak hours. The unsignalized intersection of CR 154 and the FedEx access is projected to operate at LOS B during both peak hours. The unsignalized intersection of CR 154 and the shared site and Riverview School Access is projected to operate at LOS B during the AM and LOS A during the PM peak hours. FELSBURG (4111 HOLT & ULLE V IU Page 11 Flying M Ranch Traffic Assessment Figure 6. Long Range Future Background Traffic Conditions LEGEND O`0� �_ B/AA/ rfi5C41/h 79 �� ,h` J 44"i— Riverview ii Riverview School Access ingF°ik giver XXX(XXX) = AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes X/X = AMIPM Peak Hour Signalized Intersection Level of Service x/x = AM/PM Peak Hour Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service = Stop Sign = Traffic Signal v• FELSBURG (I HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 12 Flying M Ranch Traffic Assessment D. Total Traffic Conditions Short Range Future The site generated traffic volumes (Figure 4) were added to the corresponding background volumes (Figure 5) to produce the Short Range Future total traffic volumes shown on Figure 7. The Short Range Future total peak hour volumes were used as the basis for intersection capacity analyses, the results of which are also summarized on Figure 7, with analysis worksheets included in Appendix D. For the year 2020, the signalized intersection of SH 82 with CR 154 has been analyzed assuming a northbound "no right turn on red" per previous discussion on need for an acceleration lane, and is projected to operate at LOS B during the AM and LOS A during the PM peak hours. The unsignalized intersection of CR 154 and the FedEx access is projected to operate at LOS B during both peak hours. The unsignalized intersection of CR 154 and the shared site and Riverview School Access is projected to operate at LOS B during the AM and LOS A during the PM peak hours. The unsignalized intersection of SH 82 and the Orrison Access is projected to operate LOS D during both peak hours. The unsignalized intersection of CR 154 and the south site access are projected to operate at LOS B during the AM and LOS A during the PM peak hours. No operational issues are evident in the analysis with respect to the Short Range Future time frame. Long Range Future The Long Range Future site generated traffic volumes (Figure 4) were added to the Long Range Future background traffic volumes (Figure 6) to produce the year 2040 total traffic volumes shown on Figure 8. Intersection capacity analyses were conducted using the Long Range Future total peak hour volumes, as summarized on Figure 8, with analysis worksheets included in Appendix D. For the year 2040, the signalized intersection of SH 82 with CR 154 was again analyzed assuming a northbound "no right turn on red" per previous discussion on need for an acceleration lane, and is projected to operate at LOS B during both peak hours. The unsignalized intersection of CR 154 and the FedEx access is projected to operate at LOS B during both peak hours. The unsignalized intersection of CR 154 and the shared site and Riverview School Access is projected to operate at LOS B during both peak hours. The unsignalized intersection of CR 154 and the south site access are projected to operate at LOS B during the AM and LOS A during the PM peak hours. The new access approach should consist of a single lane with STOP control. The access should be designed to meet all roadway design and sight distance requirements as specified by Garfield County Access and Roadways Standards (2013). FELSBURG (II HOLT & UJ. LEVJG Page 13 Flying M Ranch Traffic Assessment Figure 7. Short Range Future Total Traffic Conditions B/A ..x SITE LEGEND XXx(xXx) = AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes XIX = AM/PM Peak Hour Signalized Intersection Level of Service xlx = AM/PM Peak Hour Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service = Stop Sign = Traffic Signal Q Fedex Access Riverview School FaCk River 1 Access Soutt' ACC (d FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEV1G Page 14 Flying M Ranch Traffic Assessment Figure 8. Long Range Future Total Traffic Conditions r9,�J `srS Q�js � h Riverview School vzoN votk River LEGEND XXX(xXX) AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes X/X = AM/PM Peak Hour Signalized Intersection Level of Service x/x AM/PM Peak Hour Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service = Stop Sign Traffic Signal Access SouthShe Acc°' ro FELSBURG (I HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 15 Flying M Ranch Traffic Assessment IV. QUEUING EVALUATION The Rio Grande Trail crosses CR 154 approximately 550 feet south of its intersection with SH 82. Two potential operational issues may arise related to the trail crossing: (1) queue lengths exceeding the available storage lengths of the left turn bay, and (2) queues blocking the trail crossing. SimTraffic analyses have been conducted to evaluate the potential for queuing along CR 154 to interfere with the trail crossing. For the purposes of calculating a conservative condition, it has been assumed that the peak hour volumes for the various land uses in the area would occur during the same hour. This is unlikely to be the case because the peak hours that correspond with each land use are unlikely to coincide exactly. To take into account the likelihood of the school related traffic to occur in a more concentrated time period within a fraction of a single hour, the Peak Hour Factor (PHF) for the corresponding movements have been adjusted to 0.80. It has also been assumed that the FedEx facility will generate a higher percentage of truck traffic at the intersection of SH 82 with CR 154. As such, a rough conservative estimate for percent heavy vehicles of 8 percent was applied to the Synchro / SimTraffic models. Multiple runs were conducted using SimTraffic to generate a queuing information reports (queuing reports are included in Appendix E). Table 2 summarizes the results. Table 2. SimTraffic 95th Percentile Queue Results — CR 154 NB approach to SH 82 Analysis Scenario Left -Turn Lane Queue (ft) Thru-Left Turn Lane Queue (ft) Right -Turn Lane Queue (ft) Short Term Total AM 172 214 104 Short Term Total PM 115 145 29 Long Term Total AM 204 247 160 Long Term Total PM 129 159 87 Max Queue 204 247 160 Issue #1: The existing lane configuration provides approximately 180 feet of dual lane storage for left turns with one lane being a shared thru lane and approximately 50 feet of right turn storage along CR 154. The predicted maximum queue lengths would exceed the currently available lane storage along CR 154 approaching SH 82, creating blockages of the turn lanes. As a result, lane utilization imbalances may occur that would reduce the efficiency of the intersection, but the mild spill-over will not be a major issue. Issue #2: There is approximately 550 feet of available storage length before a queue would back up and block the trail crossing. Though the results indicate that queues will not block the trail crossing, the trail crossing may be vulnerable to intermittent fluctuations in traffic flows that are not fully reflected in the modeling. FELSBURG (4111 HOLT & ULLE V IU Page 16 Flying M Ranch Traffic Assessment Based on these traffic modeling results, site generated traffic volumes related to the Flying M Ranch development are not anticipated to interfere with the trail crossing. FELSBURG (I HOLT & ULLE V iG Page 17 Flying M Ranch Traffic Assessment V. STATE HIGHWAY ACCESS CODE CRITERIA A. Access Permit The current access permit for SH 82 / CR 154 is Permit No. 316048 which was issued in relation to the Riverview School. The access permit is written for 600 design hour vehicles (DHV), along the CR 154 approach to SH 82. SH 82 has been categorized as an E -X (Expressway, Major Bypass) for the purposes of evaluating access control. The SHAC states: Unless there are identified safety problems, existing legal access to the state highway system shall be allowed to remain or be moved or reconstructed under the terms of an access permit...as long as total daily trips to and from the site are less than 100, or as long as only minor modifications are made to the property or as long as the access does not violate specific permit terms and conditions. Minor modifications are defined as anything that does not increase the proposed vehicle volume to the site by 20 percent or more. The intersection of SH 82 and CR 154 will see increased traffic with the proposed construction of the Flying M Ranch development. The projected short term site generated traffic volumes are estimated to add an additional 100 vehicles to the roadway network during the design hour, the PM peak in the case of the Flying M Ranch site, of which 80%, or 80 vehicles are expected to need access via the intersection of SH 82 and CR 154. This translates to an increase of 13.3 percent over the permitted volume of 600 design hour vehicles. Based on these calculations, a new access permit application will not need to be submitted to CDOT Region 3 to allow for a change in use. B. Speed Change Lanes The CDOT State Highway Access Code (SHAC) outlines criteria for requiring acceleration and deceleration lanes along state highways. The criteria are based on facility access category, posted speed limit, and turning movement volumes. Based on these criteria, it has been determined that each of the three acceleration and deceleration lanes are needed under existing conditions and future conditions both with and without the added traffic from the proposed development. Further description of these lanes is provided as follows. Northbound Right Turn Acceleration Lane One of the required speed change lanes, the northbound to eastbound right turn acceleration lane, does not currently exist although it is warranted. The right turn from the minor approach is currently a permissive movement with a yield condition and no right turn acceleration lane is provided. SHAC criteria indicate that a right turn lane with acceleration and taper length is required for any access with a projected peak hour right turning volume of greater than 10 vehicles per hour. A right turn acceleration lane would be required based on existing traffic volumes. At 65 MPH, a 1,380 -foot acceleration lane would be required including a 25:1 transition taper ratio equating to a 300 -foot taper. While the SHAC requirements indicate the traffic volume criteria for a right turn acceleration lane would be met without development of the proposed school, the unique orientation and location of the intersection present physical challenges to constructing the lane. Providing the lane would require modification to existing roadside grading, likely creating the need for a new FELSBURG (4111 HOLT & ULLE V IU Page 18 Flying M Ranch Traffic Assessment retaining wall system for some length along the southwest edge of SH 82. Given the physical constraints of this location, it is recommended that the right turn movement be converted to a protected only movement (no right -turn on red). This condition has been represented in the LOS analyses contained within this report. By converting the right turn movement to a protected only movement, the right turn movement could be completed without conflict from the through movement, thereby avoiding the need for an exclusive acceleration lane. Operational analyses of total year 2040 conditions indicate that acceptable traffic flow can be provided with a protected only movement. Left and Right Turn Deceleration Lanes Two of the needed turn lanes already exist along SH 82 at the intersection. A review was conducted to ensure that the existing lanes are appropriately dimensioned to accommodate background and total future traffic volume forecasts. The measured and SHAC required lane lengths are described in Table 3, as required by Year 2040 forecast traffic volumes. It should be noted that traffic volumes generated by Flying M Ranch do not change any of the required lane lengths. Table 3. Existing and Required SH 82/CR 154 Turn Lane Lengths FELSBURG C, HOLT & ULLEVIO Page 19 Storage Plus Deceleration Length (ft) Taper Length (ft) Turn Lane Required Required Required Required Measured Without Site With Site Measured Without Site With Site (Shortfall) (Shortfall) (Shortfall) (Shortfall) WBLT Decel Lane 715 650(0) 650 (0) 200 225 (25) 225 (25) EBRT Decel Lane 690 600 (0) 600 (0) 275 225 (0) 225 (0) FELSBURG C, HOLT & ULLEVIO Page 19 Flying M Ranch Traffic Assessment VI. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS The Flying M Ranch is a planned mixed-use development on an undeveloped parcel in Glenwood Springs, Colorado. The proposed site is located southeast of the intersection of SH 82 and Garfield CR 154. The proposed development of the site would consist of a 35 KSF assisted living facility, 76 townhomes and condos, and 35 single family homes. Vehicular access to the site has been identified via two full movement access to CR 154, at the southeast end of the site. The first being shared with the existing access to Riverview School and an additional proposed new access further south along CR 154. The proposed development is expected to generate approximately 80 new vehicle -trips during the weekday AM peak hour and about 100 new vehicle -trips during the weekday PM peak hour. The estimated weekday new daily trip generation potential would be about 1,100 trips. The potential traffic impacts due to this additional traffic has been evaluated under both Short Range Future (year 2020) and Long Range Future (year 2040) scenarios. In general, the adjacent roadway system and intersections would possess capacity to accommodate the projected traffic volumes. The Rio Grande Trail crosses CR 154 approximately 550 feet south of the intersection with SH 82. Two potential queuing issues were analyzed related to the trail crossing: (1) queue lengths exceeding the available lane storage lengths, and (2) excessive queues blocking the trail crossing. SimTraffic queuing analyses have been conducted to evaluate the potential for queuing along CR 154 interfering with the trail crossing. The analyses indicate that site generated traffic related to the school is not anticipated to routinely interfere with the Rio Grande Trail crossing. The access permit for SH 82 / CR 154 is Permit No. 316048 which was issued in relation to the Riverview School. The access permit is for 600 design hour vehicles (DHV) along CR 154. The highest peak hour for the development is 100 vehicles of which 80 percent are expected to use the intersection of SH 82 and CR 154 for 80 design hour vehicles needing access during the PM peak hour. This translates to an increase of 13.3 percent of the permitted 600 design hour vehicles. Based on these calculations, a new access permit will not be required. Based on the SHAC, speed change lanes are needed at the SH 82 / CR 154 intersection both with and without the proposed development. Two of the lanes are currently provided and no changes are recommended to these lanes. A third lane, a northbound to eastbound right turn acceleration lane would be ideal. However, due to physical constraints adding complexity and cost to providing this lane, it is recommended that the northbound right turn movement be converted to a protected only movement, thereby avoiding the need for the acceleration lane. The northbound right movement is light during peak times and not expected to create significant delays with the suggested restriction. No additional turn lanes or extensions of existing turn lanes are recommended with this development. FELSBURG (4111 HOLT & ULLE V IU Page 20 Flying M Ranch APPENDIX A TRAFFIC COUNTS Traffic Assessment FELSBURG (4111 HOLT & ULLE V iU Appendix A All Traffic Data Servloee Inc. (303) 216-2439 www.alltrafficdata.net Peak Hour - All Vehicles (2,109) 1,095 0.96 803 (1,413) CR 154 (OLD SH82) (255) 168J N 170 W 0.91 E 0 191 y 0 s r 0 (276) 1 1 A 0 0 0z`JILL, SH 82 SH82 21 n7 t rC0 w rn V W (1,930) 986 0.87 672 Location: 1 SH82 & CR 154 (OLD SH82) AM Date and Start Time: Wednesday, September 27, 2017 Peak Hour: 07:30 AM - 08:30 AM Peak 15 -Minutes: 07:45 AM - 08:00 AM (1) 0 0.25 (1) CR 154 (OLD SH82) (1,213) Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Traffic Counts Interval Start Time Peak Hour - Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk �0 0 CR 154 (OLD SH82) CR 154 (OLD SH82) SH82 SH 82 Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Rolling Pedestrain Crossings U -Turn Left Thru Right U -Turn Left Thru Right U -Turn Left Thru Right U -Turn Left Thru Right Total Hour West East South North 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 0 15 0 30 o39 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 85 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 120 0 0 0 1 r r 1 0 0 261 17 381 1,844 0 0 0 0 0 261 15 431 1,941 0 0 0 0 0 248 34 492 1,958 0 0 0 0 252 Al 8:00 AM 0 59 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 3 141 0 0 0 234 33 478 1,755 0 0 0 0 8:15 AM0 28 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 3 162 1 0 0 230 21 448 0 0 0 0 8:30 AM 0 23 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 2 148 8:45 AM 0 11 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 177 0 0 0 205 22 403 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 211 22 426 0 0 0 0 Count Total 0 249 0 27 0 0 0 1 1 48 1,163 1 0 0 1,902 207 3,599 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour 0 170 0 21 0 0 0 0 1 37 633 1 0 0 964 131 1,958 0 0 0 0 All Traffic Data Servloee Inc. (303) 216-2439 www.alltrafficdata.net Peak Hour - All Vehicles (1,507) 803 0.94 1,083 (2,155) 1 t SH 82 CR 154 (OLD SH82) -‘ O O (183) 0 �.1 l L Li` 0 98 88 N . 0 0.74 W 0.97 E 99 — 0 S r 0 11 fic (172) SH82 _111tr 0 6, 1 �0 0 L.r11 ■ Location: 1 SH82 & CR 154 (OLD SH82) PM Date and Start Time: Wednesday, September 27, 2017 Peak Hour: 04:30 PM - 05:30 PM Peak 15 -Minutes: 05:15 PM - 05:30 PM 0 0 0.00 0 0 CR 154 (OLD SH82) (1,364) 722 0.95 1,001 (2,023) Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Traffic Counts Interval Start Time Peak Hour - Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk I_0 0�► 0 N o i W0 1 s 1 0 _0 0 CR 154 (OLD SH82) CR 154 (OLD SH82) SH82 SH 82 Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Rolling Pedestrain Crossings U -Turn Left Thru Right U -Turn Left Thru Right U -Turn Left Thru Right U -Turn Left Thru Right Total Hour West East South North 4:00 PM 0 17 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 265 0 0 0 150 15 452 1,872 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 16 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 4 248 0 0 0 185 22 481 1,895 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM '15 0 0 20 0 0 31 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 5 241 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 259 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 225 0 0 0 174 28 472 1,903 0 0 0 0 171 16 467 1,900 0 0 0 0 194 21 475 1,830 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 14 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 260 5:45 PM 0 13 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 239 0 0 0 174 18 469 0 0 0 120 20 397 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Count Total 0 148 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 16 2,007 0 0 0 1,340 167 3,702 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour 0 88 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 6 995 0 0 0 711 92 1,903 0 0 0 0 Flying M Ranch Traffic Assessment APPENDIX B EXISTING CONDITIONS LOS WORKSHEETS PiFELSBURG (111 HOLT & ULLE V iG Appendix B HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 1: CR 154 & SH 82 10/10/2017 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt ri 11 tt 11 4 ri Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 964 131 37 633 0 170 0 21 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 964 131 37 633 0 170 0 21 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 0 1827 1759 1759 1827 0 1759 1759 1759 1900 1863 1900 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1048 0 46 688 0 212 0 0 0 0 0 Adj No. of Lanes 0 2 1 1 2 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.80 0.80 0.92 0.92 0.80 0.92 0.80 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 4 8 8 4 0 8 2 8 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 0 2214 954 57 2626 0 454 0 135 0 168 0 Arrive On Green 0.00 0.64 0.00 0.03 0.76 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3563 1495 1675 3563 0 3351 0 1495 0 1863 0 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 1048 0 46 688 0 212 0 0 0 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 0 1736 1495 1675 1736 0 1675 0 1495 0 1863 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 14.8 0.0 2.6 5.7 0.0 5.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g c), s 0.0 14.8 0.0 2.6 5.7 0.0 5.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2214 954 57 2626 0 454 0 135 0 168 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.47 0.00 0.81 0.26 0.00 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c a), veh/h 0 3581 1543 124 4131 0 790 0 285 0 374 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 8.9 0.0 45.3 3.5 0.0 41.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.7 0.0 29.9 0.2 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 0.0 7.2 0.0 1.7 2.8 0.0 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 9.6 0.0 75.3 3.7 0.0 42.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A E A D Approach Vol, veh/h 1048 734 212 0 Approach Delay, s/veh 9.6 8.2 42.8 0.0 Approach LOS A A D Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s Change Period (Y+Rc), s Max Green Setting (Gmax), s Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s Green Ext Time (p_c), s Intersection Summary 11.2 8.0 7.0 4.6 0.0 67.8 7.5 97.5 16.8 43.5 15.5 *7 * 19 0.0 0.0 79.0 7.5 112.5 7.7 24.6 15.5 7.0 18.0 7.8 0.7 HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 12.6 HCM 2010 LOS B Notes Flying M Ranch Existing AM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 2: FedEx Access & CR 154 10/10/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.3 Movement NBL NBT SBT SBR NEL NER Lane Configurations 4 Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 161 138 30 30 5 Future Vol, veh/h 5 161 138 30 30 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 Peak Hour Factor 80 92 92 80 80 80 Heavy Vehicles, % 8 3 3 8 8 8 Mvmt Flow 6 175 150 38 38 6 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 188 0 - 0 356 169 Stage 1 - 169 Stage 2 - - 187 - Critical Hdwy 4.18 - 6.48 6.28 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - 5.48 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - 5.48 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.272 - - 3.572 3.372 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 1351 - 630 860 Stage 1 - - 846 - Stage 2 - 831 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 1351 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Approach NB SB NE HCM Control Delay, s 0.3 0 10.9 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NELn1 NBL NBT SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 652 1351 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.067 0.005 HCM Control Delay (s) 10.9 7.7 0 HCM Lane LOS B A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 0 Flying M Ranch Existing AM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 3: CR 154 & School Access 10/10/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.7 Movement EBL EBR SET SER NWL NWT Lane Configurations ' r r 1' Traffic Vol, veh/h 54 54 77 66 66 112 Future Vol, veh/h 54 54 77 66 66 112 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 100 0 - 100 50 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 59 59 84 72 72 122 Major/Minor Minorl Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 350 84 0 0 156 0 Stage 1 84 Stage 2 266 - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 647 975 - 1424 Stage 1 939 Stage 2 779 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 614 975 - 1424 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 614 Stage 1 891 Stage 2 779 Approach EB SE NW HCM Control Delay, s 10.2 0 2.8 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NWL NWT EBLn1 EBLn2 SET SER Capacity (veh/h) 1424 - 614 975 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.05 - 0.096 0.06 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.7 - 11.5 8.9 HCM Lane LOS A - B A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - 0.3 0.2 Flying M Ranch Existing AM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM 2010 TWSC 4: SH 82 & Orrison Access 10/10/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations vir 111 14 Traffic Vol, veh/h 2 2 0 803 1093 1 Future Vol, veh/h 2 2 0 803 1093 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None None Storage Length 0 - 300 - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 2 2 0 873 1188 1 Major/Minor Minor2 Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1626 595 1189 0 - 0 Stage 1 1189 Stage 2 437 Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 4.14 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 2.22 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 93 447 583 Stage 1 251 Stage 2 619 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 93 447 583 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 93 Stage 1 251 Stage 2 619 Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 29.1 0 0 HCM LOS D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 583 - 154 HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.028 HCM Control Delay (s) 0 - 29.1 HCM Lane LOS A - D HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.1 Flying M Ranch Existing AM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 3 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 1: CR 154 & SH 82 10/10/2017 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt ri 11 tt 11 4 ri Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 711 92 6 995 0 88 0 11 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 711 92 6 995 0 88 0 11 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 0 1827 1759 1759 1827 0 1759 1759 1759 1900 1863 1900 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 773 0 8 1082 0 110 0 0 0 0 0 Adj No. of Lanes 0 2 1 1 2 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.80 0.80 0.92 0.92 0.80 0.92 0.80 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 4 8 8 4 0 8 2 8 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 0 2271 978 14 2641 0 381 0 91 0 113 0 Arrive On Green 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.01 0.76 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3563 1495 1675 3563 0 3351 0 1495 0 1863 0 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 773 0 8 1082 0 110 0 0 0 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 0 1736 1495 1675 1736 0 1675 0 1495 0 1863 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 8.1 0.0 0.4 8.8 0.0 2.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g c), s 0.0 8.1 0.0 0.4 8.8 0.0 2.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2271 978 14 2641 0 381 0 91 0 113 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.59 0.41 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c a), veh/h 0 4163 1793 144 4803 0 919 0 331 0 435 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 6.2 0.0 40.2 3.4 0.0 37.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.4 0.0 46.3 0.5 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 0.0 3.9 0.0 0.4 4.2 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 6.7 0.0 86.5 3.8 0.0 37.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A F A D Approach Vol, veh/h 773 1090 110 0 Approach Delay, s/veh 6.7 4.5 37.7 0.0 Approach LOS A A D Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s Change Period (Y+Rc), s Max Green Setting (Gmax), s Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s Green Ext Time (p_c), s Intersection Summary 8.7 8.0 7.0 2.4 0.0 60.7 7.5 97.5 10.1 28.4 11.9 *7 * 19 0.0 0.0 69.4 7.5 112.5 10.8 51.1 11.9 7.0 18.0 4.6 0.3 HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 7.2 HCM 2010 LOS A Notes Flying M Ranch Existing PM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 2: FedEx Access & CR 154 10/10/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.5 Movement NBL NBT SBT SBR NEL NER Lane Configurations 4 Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 79 68 30 20 5 Future Vol, veh/h 5 79 68 30 20 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 Peak Hour Factor 80 92 92 80 80 80 Heavy Vehicles, % 8 3 3 8 8 8 Mvmt Flow 6 86 74 38 25 6 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 112 0 - 0 191 93 Stage 1 - 93 Stage 2 - - 98 - Critical Hdwy 4.18 - 6.48 6.28 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - 5.48 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - 5.48 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.272 - - 3.572 3.372 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 1441 - 784 948 Stage 1 - - 916 - Stage 2 - 911 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 1441 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Approach NB SB NE HCM Control Delay, s 0.5 0 9.6 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NELn1 NBL NBT SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 810 1441 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio HCM Control Delay (s) HCM Lane LOS HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.039 0.004 9.6 7.5 0 A A A 0.1 0 Flying M Ranch Existing PM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 3: CR 154 & School Access 10/10/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.3 Movement EBL EBR SET SER NWL NWT Lane Configurations ' r r 1' Traffic Vol, veh/h 40 40 41 32 33 44 Future Vol, veh/h 40 40 41 32 33 44 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 100 0 - 100 50 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 43 43 45 35 36 48 Major/Minor Minorl Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 165 45 0 0 80 0 Stage 1 45 Stage 2 120 - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 826 1025 - 1518 Stage 1 977 Stage 2 905 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 806 1025 - - 1518 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 806 Stage 1 954 Stage 2 905 Approach EB SE NW HCM Control Delay, s 9.2 0 3.2 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NWL NWT EBLn1 EBLn2 SET SER Capacity (veh/h) 1518 - 806 1025 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.024 - 0.054 0.042 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.4 - 9.7 8.7 HCM Lane LOS A - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - 0.2 0.1 Flying M Ranch Existing PM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM 2010 TWSC 4: SH 82 & Orrison Access 10/10/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations vir 111 14 Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 5 5 1078 798 5 Future Vol, veh/h 5 5 5 1078 798 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None None Storage Length 0 - 300 - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 5 5 5 1172 867 5 Major/Minor Minor2 Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1466 436 872 0 - 0 Stage 1 870 Stage 2 596 Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 4.14 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 2.22 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 119 568 769 Stage 1 370 Stage 2 513 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 118 568 769 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 118 Stage 1 367 Stage 2 513 Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 24.5 0 0 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 769 - 195 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.007 - 0.056 HCM Control Delay (s) 9.7 - 24.5 HCM Lane LOS A - C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.2 Flying M Ranch Existing PM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 3 Flying M Ranch Traffic Assessment APPENDIX C BACKGROUND TRAFFIC LOS WORKSHEETS PiFELSBURG (111 HOLT & ULLE V iG Appendix C V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.49 0.00 0.80 0.27 0.00 0.48 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 1: CR 154 & SH 82 10/12/2017 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt ri 11 tt 11 4 ri Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 1004 136 39 659 0 177 0 22 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 1004 136 39 659 0 177 0 22 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 0 1827 1759 1759 1827 0 1759 1759 1759 1900 1863 1900 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1091 0 49 716 0 221 0 28 0 0 0 Adj No. of Lanes 0 2 1 1 2 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.80 0.80 0.92 0.92 0.80 0.92 0.80 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 4 8 8 4 0 8 2 8 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 0 2234 962 61 2641 0 456 0 139 0 173 0 Arrive On Green 0.00 0.64 0.00 0.04 0.76 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3563 1495 1675 3563 0 3351 0 1495 0 1863 0 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 1091 0 49 716 0 221 0 28 0 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 0 1736 1495 1675 1736 0 1675 0 1495 0 1863 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 16.2 0.0 2.9 6.2 0.0 6.3 0.0 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g c), s 0.0 16.2 0.0 2.9 6.2 0.0 6.3 0.0 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2234 962 61 2641 0 456 0 139 0 173 0 Avail Cap(c a), veh/h 0 3418 1473 118 3944 0 755 0 272 0 357 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 9.2 0.0 47.3 3.6 0.0 43.6 0.0 41.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.8 0.0 27.6 0.3 0.0 1.1 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 0.0 8.0 0.0 1.8 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 9.9 0.0 75.0 3.8 0.0 44.8 0.0 42.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A E A D D Approach Vol, veh/h 1091 765 249 0 Approach Delay, s/veh 9.9 8.4 44.5 0.0 Approach LOS A A D Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s Change Period (Y+Rc), s Max Green Setting (Gmax), s Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s Green Ext Time (p_c), s Intersection Summary 11.6 8.0 7.0 4.9 0.0 71.2 7.5 97.5 18.2 45.5 16.2 *7 * 19 0.0 0.0 82.8 7.5 112.5 8.2 26.1 16.2 7.0 18.0 8.3 0.8 HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 13.5 HCM 2010 LOS B Notes Flying M Ranch Short Term Background AM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 2: FedEx Access & CR 154 10/10/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.3 Movement NBL NBT SBT SBR NEL NER Lane Configurations 4 Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 169 145 30 30 5 Future Vol, veh/h 5 169 145 30 30 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 Peak Hour Factor 80 92 92 80 80 80 Heavy Vehicles, % 8 3 3 8 8 8 Mvmt Flow 6 184 158 38 38 6 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 196 0 - 0 373 177 Stage 1 - 177 Stage 2 - - 196 - Critical Hdwy 4.18 - 6.48 6.28 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - 5.48 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - 5.48 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.272 - - 3.572 3.372 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 1342 - 616 851 Stage 1 - - 839 - Stage 2 - 823 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 1342 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver - Stage 1 Stage 2 Approach NB SB NE HCM Control Delay, s 0.3 0 11 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NELn1 NBL NBT SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 639 1342 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio HCM Control Delay (s) HCM Lane LOS HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.068 0.005 11 7.7 0 B A A 0.2 0 Flying M Ranch Short Term Background AM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 3: CR 154 & School Access 10/10/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.6 Movement EBL EBR SET SER NWL NWT Lane Configurations ' r r 1' Traffic Vol, veh/h 54 54 84 66 66 120 Future Vol, veh/h 54 54 84 66 66 120 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 100 0 - 100 50 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 59 59 91 72 72 130 Major/Minor Minorl Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 365 91 0 0 163 0 Stage 1 91 Stage 2 274 - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 635 967 - 1416 Stage 1 933 Stage 2 772 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 603 967 - 1416 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 603 Stage 1 885 Stage 2 772 Approach EB SE NW HCM Control Delay, s 10.3 0 2.7 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NWL NWT EBLn1 EBLn2 SET SER Capacity (veh/h) 1416 - 603 967 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.051 - 0.097 0.061 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.7 - 11.6 9 HCM Lane LOS A - B A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - 0.3 0.2 Flying M Ranch Short Term Background AM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM 2010 TWSC 4: SH 82 & Orrison Access 10/10/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations vir 111 14 Traffic Vol, veh/h 2 2 0 836 1138 1 Future Vol, veh/h 2 2 0 836 1138 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None None Storage Length 0 - 300 - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 2 2 0 909 1237 1 Major/Minor Minor2 Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1693 619 1238 0 - 0 Stage 1 1238 Stage 2 455 Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 4.14 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 2.22 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 84 432 558 Stage 1 237 Stage 2 606 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 84 432 558 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 84 Stage 1 237 Stage 2 606 Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 31.3 0 0 HCM LOS D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 558 - 141 HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.031 HCM Control Delay (s) 0 - 31.3 HCM Lane LOS A - D HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.1 Flying M Ranch Short Term Background AM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 3 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 1: CR 154 & SH 82 10/12/2017 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt ri 11 tt "i 4 ri Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 740 96 6 1036 0 92 0 11 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 740 96 6 1036 0 92 0 11 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 0 1827 1759 1759 1827 0 1759 1759 1759 1900 1863 1900 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 804 0 8 1126 0 115 0 14 0 0 0 Adj No. of Lanes 0 2 1 1 2 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.80 0.80 0.92 0.92 0.80 0.92 0.80 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 4 8 8 4 0 8 2 8 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 0 2315 997 14 2668 0 375 0 92 0 115 0 Arrive On Green 0.00 0.67 0.00 0.01 0.77 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3563 1495 1675 3563 0 3351 0 1495 0 1863 0 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 804 0 8 1126 0 115 0 14 0 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 0 1736 1495 1675 1736 0 1675 0 1495 0 1863 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 8.6 0.0 0.4 9.5 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g c), s 0.0 8.6 0.0 0.4 9.5 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2315 997 14 2668 0 375 0 92 0 115 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.35 0.00 0.59 0.42 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c a), veh/h 0 3961 1706 137 4570 0 874 0 315 0 414 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 6.2 0.0 42.2 3.4 0.0 38.9 0.0 38.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.4 0.0 46.9 0.5 0.0 0.7 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 0.0 4.2 0.0 0.4 4.6 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 6.6 0.0 89.1 3.9 0.0 39.6 0.0 39.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A F A D D Approach Vol, veh/h 804 1134 129 0 Approach Delay, s/veh 6.6 4.5 39.5 0.0 Approach LOS A A D Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s Change Period (Y+Rc), s Max Green Setting (Gmax), s Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s Green Ext Time (p_c), s Intersection Summary 8.7 8.0 7.0 2.4 0.0 64.5 7.5 97.5 10.6 30.1 12.3 *7 * 19 0.0 0.0 73.2 7.5 112.5 11.5 54.2 12.3 7.0 18.0 4.8 0.4 HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 7.5 HCM 2010 LOS A Notes Flying M Ranch Short Term Background PM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 2: FedEx Access & CR 154 10/10/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.4 Movement NBL NBT SBT SBR NEL NER Lane Configurations 4 Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 83 72 30 20 5 Future Vol, veh/h 5 83 72 30 20 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 Peak Hour Factor 80 92 92 80 80 80 Heavy Vehicles, % 8 3 3 8 8 8 Mvmt Flow 6 90 78 38 25 6 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 116 0 - 0 199 97 Stage 1 - 97 Stage 2 - - 102 - Critical Hdwy 4.18 - 6.48 6.28 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - 5.48 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - 5.48 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.272 - - 3.572 3.372 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 1436 - 776 943 Stage 1 - - 912 - Stage 2 - 907 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 1436 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver - Stage 1 Stage 2 Approach NB SB NE HCM Control Delay, s 0.5 0 9.7 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NELn1 NBL NBT SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) HCM Lane V/C Ratio HCM Control Delay (s) HCM Lane LOS HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 802 1436 0.039 0.004 9.7 7.5 0 A A A 0.1 0 Flying M Ranch Short Term Background PM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 3: CR 154 & School Access 10/10/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.1 Movement EBL EBR SET SER NWL NWT Lane Configurations ' r r 1' Traffic Vol, veh/h 40 40 45 32 33 48 Future Vol, veh/h 40 40 45 32 33 48 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 100 0 - 100 50 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 43 43 49 35 36 52 Major/Minor Minorl Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 173 49 0 0 84 0 Stage 1 49 Stage 2 124 - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 817 1020 - 1513 Stage 1 973 Stage 2 902 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 797 1020 - 1513 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 797 Stage 1 950 Stage 2 902 Approach EB SE NW HCM Control Delay, s 9.3 0 3 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NWL NWT EBLn1 EBLn2 SET SER Capacity (veh/h) 1513 - 797 1020 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.024 - 0.055 0.043 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.4 - 9.8 8.7 HCM Lane LOS A - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - 0.2 0.1 Flying M Ranch Short Term Background PM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM 2010 TWSC 4: SH 82 & Orrison Access 10/10/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations vir 111 14 Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 5 5 1123 831 5 Future Vol, veh/h 5 5 5 1123 831 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None None Storage Length 0 - 300 - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 5 5 5 1221 903 5 Major/Minor Minor2 Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1527 454 908 0 - 0 Stage 1 906 Stage 2 621 Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 4.14 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 2.22 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 108 553 745 Stage 1 355 Stage 2 498 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 107 553 745 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 107 Stage 1 353 Stage 2 498 Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 26.4 0 0 HCM LOS D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 745 - 179 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.007 - 0.061 HCM Control Delay (s) 9.9 - 26.4 HCM Lane LOS A - D HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.2 Flying M Ranch Short Term Background PM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 3 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 1: CR 154 & SH 82 10/12/2017 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt ri 11 tt 11 4 ri Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 1315 180 50 864 0 234 0 31 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 1315 180 50 864 0 234 0 31 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 0 1827 1759 1759 1827 0 1759 1759 1759 1900 1863 1900 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1429 0 62 939 0 292 0 39 0 0 0 Adj No. of Lanes 0 2 1 1 2 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.80 0.80 0.92 0.92 0.80 0.92 0.80 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 4 8 8 4 0 8 2 8 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 0 2324 1001 78 2704 0 472 0 160 0 199 0 Arrive On Green 0.00 0.67 0.00 0.05 0.78 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3563 1495 1675 3563 0 3351 0 1495 0 1863 0 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 1429 0 62 939 0 292 0 39 0 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 0 1736 1495 1675 1736 0 1675 0 1495 0 1863 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 29.4 0.0 4.7 10.4 0.0 10.8 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g c), s 0.0 29.4 0.0 4.7 10.4 0.0 10.8 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2324 1001 78 2704 0 472 0 160 0 199 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.61 0.00 0.80 0.35 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c a), veh/h 0 2660 1146 92 3069 0 587 0 212 0 278 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 11.8 0.0 60.1 4.3 0.0 55.6 0.0 52.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 1.2 0.0 35.4 0.4 0.0 1.9 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 0.0 14.3 0.0 2.9 5.1 0.0 5.2 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 13.0 0.0 95.5 4.6 0.0 57.5 0.0 53.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS B F A E D Approach Vol, veh/h 1429 1001 331 0 Approach Delay, s/veh 13.0 10.2 57.0 0.0 Approach LOS B B E Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s Change Period (Y+Rc), s Max Green Setting (Gmax), s Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s Green Ext Time (p_c), s Intersection Summary 13.9 8.0 7.0 6.7 0.0 92.7 7.5 97.5 31.4 53.8 20.6 *7 * 19 0.0 0.0 106.6 7.5 112.5 12.4 40.3 20.6 7.0 18.0 12.8 0.8 HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 17.3 HCM 2010 LOS B Notes Flying M Ranch Long Term Background AM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 2: FedEx Access & CR 154 10/10/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.2 Movement NBL NBT SBT SBR NEL NER Lane Configurations 4 Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 231 199 31 34 5 Future Vol, veh/h 5 231 199 31 34 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 Peak Hour Factor 80 92 92 80 80 80 Heavy Vehicles, % 8 3 3 8 8 8 Mvmt Flow 6 251 216 39 43 6 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 255 0 - 0 499 236 Stage 1 - 236 Stage 2 - - 263 - Critical Hdwy 4.18 - 6.48 6.28 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - 5.48 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - 5.48 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.272 - - 3.572 3.372 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 1276 - 520 788 Stage 1 - - 789 - Stage 2 - 767 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 1276 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver - Stage 1 Stage 2 Approach NB SB NE HCM Control Delay, s 0.2 0 12.3 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NELn1 NBL NBT SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 541 1276 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.09 0.005 HCM Control Delay (s) 12.3 7.8 0 HCM Lane LOS B A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 0 Flying M Ranch Long Term Background AM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 3: CR 154 & School Access 10/10/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.1 Movement EBL EBR SET SER NWL NWT Lane Configurations ' r r 1' Traffic Vol, veh/h 54 54 138 66 66 182 Future Vol, veh/h 54 54 138 66 66 182 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 100 0 - 100 50 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 59 59 150 72 72 198 Major/Minor Minorl Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 492 150 0 0 222 0 Stage 1 150 Stage 2 342 Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 536 896 - 1347 Stage 1 878 Stage 2 719 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 508 896 - 1347 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 508 Stage 1 831 Stage 2 719 Approach EB SE NW HCM Control Delay, s 11.2 0 2.1 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NWL NWT EBLn1 EBLn2 SET SER Capacity (veh/h) 1347 - 508 896 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.053 - 0.116 0.066 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.8 - 13 9.3 HCM Lane LOS A - B A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - 0.4 0.2 Flying M Ranch Long Term Background AM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 1: CR 154 & SH 82 10/12/2017 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt ri 11 tt 11 4 ri Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 970 131 13 1357 0 125 0 20 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 970 131 13 1357 0 125 0 20 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 0 1827 1759 1759 1827 0 1759 1759 1759 1900 1863 1900 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1054 0 16 1475 0 156 0 25 0 0 0 Adj No. of Lanes 0 2 1 1 2 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.80 0.80 0.92 0.92 0.80 0.92 0.80 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 4 8 8 4 0 8 2 8 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 0 2502 1078 23 2794 0 355 0 102 0 127 0 Arrive On Green 0.00 0.72 0.00 0.01 0.80 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3563 1495 1675 3563 0 3351 0 1495 0 1863 0 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 1054 0 16 1475 0 156 0 25 0 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 0 1736 1495 1675 1736 0 1675 0 1495 0 1863 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 13.9 0.0 1.1 16.5 0.0 5.2 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g c), s 0.0 13.9 0.0 1.1 16.5 0.0 5.2 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2502 1078 23 2794 0 355 0 102 0 127 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.68 0.53 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c a), veh/h 0 2965 1277 103 3421 0 655 0 236 0 310 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 6.4 0.0 56.0 3.8 0.0 52.0 0.0 50.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.5 0.0 40.2 0.7 0.0 1.2 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 0.0 6.8 0.0 0.8 8.1 0.0 2.5 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 6.9 0.0 96.2 4.5 0.0 53.2 0.0 52.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A F A D D Approach Vol, veh/h 1054 1491 181 0 Approach Delay, s/veh 6.9 5.5 53.1 0.0 Approach LOS A A D Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s Change Period (Y+Rc), s Max Green Setting (Gmax), s Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s Green Ext Time (p_c), s Intersection Summary 9.6 8.0 7.0 3.1 0.0 89.8 7.5 97.5 15.9 44.1 14.8 *7 * 19 0.0 0.0 99.4 7.5 112.5 18.5 73.4 14.8 7.0 18.0 7.2 0.6 HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 9.2 HCM 2010 LOS A Notes Flying M Ranch Long Term Background PM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 2: FedEx Access & CR 154 10/10/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.5 Movement NBL NBT SBT SBR NEL NER Lane Configurations 4 Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 115 104 40 30 5 Future Vol, veh/h 5 115 104 40 30 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 Peak Hour Factor 80 92 92 80 80 80 Heavy Vehicles, % 8 3 3 8 8 8 Mvmt Flow 6 125 113 50 38 6 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 163 0 - 0 275 138 Stage 1 - 138 Stage 2 - - 137 - Critical Hdwy 4.18 - 6.48 6.28 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - 5.48 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - 5.48 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.272 - - 3.572 3.372 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 1380 - 702 895 Stage 1 - - 874 - Stage 2 - 875 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 1380 - 698 895 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver - - - 698 - Stage 1 - 870 Stage 2 - - 875 - Approach NB SB NE HCM Control Delay, s 0.4 0 10.3 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NELn1 NBL NBT SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 721 1380 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.061 0.005 HCM Control Delay (s) 10.3 7.6 0 HCM Lane LOS B A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 0 Flying M Ranch Long Term Background PM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 3: CR 154 & School Access 10/10/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.4 Movement EBL EBR SET SER NWL NWT Lane Configurations ' r r 1' Traffic Vol, veh/h 40 40 77 32 33 80 Future Vol, veh/h 40 40 77 32 33 80 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 100 0 - 100 50 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 43 43 84 35 36 87 Major/Minor Minorl Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 243 84 0 0 119 0 Stage 1 84 Stage 2 159 - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 745 975 - 1469 Stage 1 939 Stage 2 870 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 726 975 - 1469 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 726 Stage 1 916 Stage 2 870 Approach EB SE NW HCM Control Delay, s 9.6 0 2.2 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NWL NWT EBLn1 EBLn2 SET SER Capacity (veh/h) 1469 - 726 975 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.024 - 0.06 0.045 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.5 - 10.3 8.9 HCM Lane LOS A - B A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - 0.2 0.1 Flying M Ranch Long Term Background PM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 2 Flying M Ranch Traffic Assessment APPENDIX D TOTAL TRAFFIC LOS WORKSHEETS FELSBURG (4111 HOLT & ULLE V iU Appendix D HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 1: CR 154 & SH 82 10/12/2017 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt ri 11 tt 11 4 ri Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 1004 153 44 659 0 209 0 33 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 1004 153 44 659 0 209 0 33 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 0 1827 1759 1759 1827 0 1759 1759 1759 1900 1863 1900 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1091 0 55 716 0 261 0 41 0 0 0 Adj No. of Lanes 0 2 1 1 2 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.80 0.80 0.92 0.92 0.80 0.92 0.80 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 4 8 8 4 0 8 2 8 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 0 2196 946 69 2613 0 492 0 157 0 195 0 Arrive On Green 0.00 0.63 0.00 0.04 0.75 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3563 1495 1675 3563 0 3351 0 1495 0 1863 0 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 1091 0 55 716 0 261 0 41 0 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 0 1736 1495 1675 1736 0 1675 0 1495 0 1863 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 17.1 0.0 3.3 6.5 0.0 7.7 0.0 2.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g c), s 0.0 17.1 0.0 3.3 6.5 0.0 7.7 0.0 2.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2196 946 69 2613 0 492 0 157 0 195 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.79 0.27 0.00 0.53 0.00 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c a), veh/h 0 3328 1434 115 3840 0 735 0 265 0 348 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 10.0 0.0 48.3 3.9 0.0 44.2 0.0 41.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.8 0.0 24.5 0.3 0.0 1.3 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 0.0 8.4 0.0 2.0 3.2 0.0 3.6 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 10.8 0.0 72.8 4.2 0.0 45.5 0.0 43.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS B E A D D Approach Vol, veh/h 1091 771 302 0 Approach Delay, s/veh 10.8 9.1 45.2 0.0 Approach LOS B A D Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s Change Period (Y+Rc), s Max Green Setting (Gmax), s Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s Green Ext Time (p_c), s Intersection Summary 12.2 8.0 7.0 5.3 0.0 71.9 7.5 97.5 19.1 45.2 17.6 *7 * 19 0.0 0.0 84.1 7.5 112.5 8.5 26.1 17.6 7.0 18.0 9.7 1.0 HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 15.0 HCM 2010 LOS B Notes Flying M Ranch Short Term Total AM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 2: FedEx Access & CR 154 10/11/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.1 Movement NBL NBT SBT SBR NEL NER Lane Configurations 4 Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 212 167 30 30 5 Future Vol, veh/h 5 212 167 30 30 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 80 92 92 80 80 80 Heavy Vehicles, % 8 3 3 8 8 8 Mvmt Flow 6 230 182 38 38 6 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 220 0 - 0 443 201 Stage 1 - 201 Stage 2 - - 242 - Critical Hdwy 4.18 - 6.48 6.28 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - 5.48 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - 5.48 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.272 - - 3.572 3.372 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 1314 - 561 825 Stage 1 - - 819 - Stage 2 - 784 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 1314 - 558 825 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver - - - 558 - Stage 1 - 815 Stage 2 - - 784 - Approach NB SB NE HCM Control Delay, s 0.2 0 11.7 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NELn1 NBL NBT SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) HCM Lane V/C Ratio HCM Control Delay (s) HCM Lane LOS HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 585 1314 0.075 0.005 11.7 7.8 0 B A A 0.2 0 Flying M Ranch Short Term Total AM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 3: CR 154 & School Access 10/11/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.2 Movement EBL EBR SET SER NWL NWT Lane Configurations ' r r 1' Traffic Vol, veh/h 91 59 87 85 69 126 Future Vol, veh/h 91 59 87 85 69 126 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 100 0 - 100 50 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 99 64 95 92 75 137 Major/Minor Minorl Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 382 95 0 0 187 0 Stage 1 95 Stage 2 287 - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 620 962 - 1387 Stage 1 929 Stage 2 762 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 587 962 - 1387 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 587 Stage 1 879 Stage 2 762 Approach EB SE NW HCM Control Delay, s 11.1 0 2.7 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NWL NWT EBLn1 EBLn2 SET SER Capacity (veh/h) 1387 - 587 962 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.054 - 0.169 0.067 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.7 - 12.4 9 HCM Lane LOS A - B A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - 0.6 0.2 Flying M Ranch Short Term Total AM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM 2010 TWSC 4: SH 82 & Orrison Access 10/11/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations vir 111 14 Traffic Vol, veh/h 2 2 0 868 1155 1 Future Vol, veh/h 2 2 0 868 1155 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None None Storage Length 0 - 300 - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 2 2 0 943 1255 1 Major/Minor Minor2 Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1728 628 1256 0 - 0 Stage 1 1256 Stage 2 472 Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 4.14 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 2.22 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 79 426 550 Stage 1 232 Stage 2 594 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 79 426 550 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 79 Stage 1 232 Stage 2 594 Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 33 0 0 HCM LOS D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 550 - 133 HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.033 HCM Control Delay (s) 0 - 33 HCM Lane LOS A - D HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.1 Flying M Ranch Short Term Total AM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 3 HCM 2010 TWSC 13: CR 154 & South Site Access 10/11/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.4 Movement EBL EBR SET SER NWL NWT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 5 143 3 3 189 Future Vol, veh/h 6 5 143 3 3 189 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 7 5 155 3 3 205 Major/Minor Minorl Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 368 157 0 0 158 0 Stage 1 157 Stage 2 211 Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 632 889 - 1422 Stage 1 871 Stage 2 824 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 631 889 - 1422 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 631 Stage 1 869 Stage 2 824 Approach EB SE NW HCM Control Delay, s 10 0 0.1 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NWL NWT EBLn1 SET SER Capacity (veh/h) 1422 - 727 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.002 - 0.016 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.5 0 10 HCM Lane LOS A A B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.1 Flying M Ranch Short Term Total AM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 4 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 1: CR 154 & SH 82 10/12/2017 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt ri 11 tt "i 4 ri Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 740 130 17 1036 0 118 0 20 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 740 130 17 1036 0 118 0 20 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 0 1827 1759 1759 1827 0 1759 1759 1759 1900 1863 1900 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 804 0 21 1126 0 148 0 25 0 0 0 Adj No. of Lanes 0 2 1 1 2 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.80 0.80 0.92 0.92 0.80 0.92 0.80 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 4 8 8 4 0 8 2 8 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 0 2256 972 31 2639 0 410 0 109 0 136 0 Arrive On Green 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.02 0.76 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3563 1495 1675 3563 0 3351 0 1495 0 1863 0 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 804 0 21 1126 0 148 0 25 0 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 0 1736 1495 1675 1736 0 1675 0 1495 0 1863 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 9.2 0.0 1.1 10.0 0.0 3.7 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g c), s 0.0 9.2 0.0 1.1 10.0 0.0 3.7 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2256 972 31 2639 0 410 0 109 0 136 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.36 0.00 0.68 0.43 0.00 0.36 0.00 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c a), veh/h 0 3896 1679 135 4496 0 860 0 310 0 407 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 6.9 0.0 42.4 3.7 0.0 39.1 0.0 38.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.4 0.0 32.0 0.5 0.0 0.8 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 0.0 4.5 0.0 0.8 4.9 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 7.4 0.0 74.4 4.2 0.0 39.8 0.0 39.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A E A D D Approach Vol, veh/h 804 1147 173 0 Approach Delay, s/veh 7.4 5.5 39.8 0.0 Approach LOS A A D Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s Change Period (Y+Rc), s Max Green Setting (Gmax), s Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s Green Ext Time (p_c), s Intersection Summary 9.6 8.0 7.0 3.1 0.0 63.9 7.5 97.5 11.2 30.1 13.3 *7 * 19 0.0 0.0 73.5 7.5 112.5 12.0 54.0 13.3 7.0 18.0 5.7 0.6 HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 9.0 HCM 2010 LOS A Notes Flying M Ranch Short Term Total PM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 2: FedEx Access & CR 154 10/11/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.1 Movement NBL NBT SBT SBR NEL NER Lane Configurations 4 Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 118 117 30 20 5 Future Vol, veh/h 5 118 117 30 20 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 80 92 92 80 80 80 Heavy Vehicles, % 8 3 3 8 8 8 Mvmt Flow 6 128 127 38 25 6 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 165 0 - 0 286 146 Stage 1 - 146 Stage 2 - - 140 - Critical Hdwy 4.18 - 6.48 6.28 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - 5.48 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - 5.48 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.272 - - 3.572 3.372 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 1378 - 692 885 Stage 1 - - 867 - Stage 2 - 872 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 1378 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver - Stage 1 Stage 2 Approach NB SB NE HCM Control Delay, s 0.4 0 10.2 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NELn1 NBL NBT SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 721 1378 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.043 0.005 HCM Control Delay (s) 10.2 7.6 0 HCM Lane LOS B A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 0 Flying M Ranch Short Term Total PM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 3: CR 154 & School Access 10/11/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.2 Movement EBL EBR SET SER NWL NWT Lane Configurations ' r r 1' Traffic Vol, veh/h 70 44 51 71 39 53 Future Vol, veh/h 70 44 51 71 39 53 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 100 0 - 100 50 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 76 48 55 77 42 58 Major/Minor Minorl Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 197 55 0 0 132 0 Stage 1 55 Stage 2 142 - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 792 1012 - 1453 Stage 1 968 Stage 2 885 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 769 1012 - 1453 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 769 Stage 1 940 Stage 2 885 Approach EB SE NW HCM Control Delay, s 9.6 0 3.2 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NWL NWT EBLn1 EBLn2 SET SER Capacity (veh/h) 1453 - 769 1012 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.029 - 0.099 0.047 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.6 - 10.2 8.7 HCM Lane LOS A - B A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - 0.3 0.1 Flying M Ranch Short Term Total PM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM 2010 TWSC 4: SH 82 & Orrison Access 10/11/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations vir 111 14 Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 5 5 1149 865 5 Future Vol, veh/h 5 5 5 1149 865 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None None Storage Length 0 - 300 - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 5 5 5 1249 940 5 Major/Minor Minor2 Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1578 473 945 0 - 0 Stage 1 943 Stage 2 635 Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 4.14 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 2.22 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 100 538 722 Stage 1 339 Stage 2 490 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 99 538 722 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 99 Stage 1 337 Stage 2 490 Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 28.1 0 0 HCM LOS D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 722 - 167 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.008 - 0.065 HCM Control Delay (s) 10 - 28.1 HCM Lane LOS B - D HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.2 Flying M Ranch Short Term Total PM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 3 HCM 2010 TWSC 13: CR 154 & South Site Access 10/11/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.7 Movement EBL EBR SET SER NWL NWT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 4 89 6 6 87 Future Vol, veh/h 5 4 89 6 6 87 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 5 4 97 7 7 95 Major/Minor Minorl Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 210 101 0 0 104 0 Stage 1 101 Stage 2 109 - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 778 954 - 1488 Stage 1 923 Stage 2 916 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 774 954 - 1488 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 774 Stage 1 918 Stage 2 916 Approach EB SE NW HCM Control Delay, s 9.3 0 0.5 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NWL NWT EBLn1 SET SER Capacity (veh/h) 1488 - 845 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.004 - 0.012 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.4 0 9.3 HCM Lane LOS A A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 0 Flying M Ranch Short Term Total PM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 4 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 1: CR 154 & SH 82 10/12/2017 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt ri 11 tt 11 4 ri Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 1315 197 55 864 0 236 0 42 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 1315 197 55 864 0 236 0 42 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 0 1827 1759 1759 1827 0 1759 1759 1759 1900 1863 1900 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1429 0 69 939 0 295 0 52 0 0 0 Adj No. of Lanes 0 2 1 1 2 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.80 0.80 0.92 0.92 0.80 0.92 0.80 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 4 8 8 4 0 8 2 8 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 0 2310 995 86 2705 0 473 0 161 0 201 0 Arrive On Green 0.00 0.67 0.00 0.05 0.78 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3563 1495 1675 3563 0 3351 0 1495 0 1863 0 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 1429 0 69 939 0 295 0 52 0 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 0 1736 1495 1675 1736 0 1675 0 1495 0 1863 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 30.1 0.0 5.2 10.5 0.0 11.1 0.0 4.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g c), s 0.0 30.1 0.0 5.2 10.5 0.0 11.1 0.0 4.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2310 995 86 2705 0 473 0 161 0 201 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.80 0.35 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c a), veh/h 0 2637 1136 91 3042 0 582 0 210 0 276 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 12.2 0.0 60.2 4.3 0.0 56.0 0.0 52.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 1.3 0.0 38.5 0.4 0.0 2.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 0.0 14.7 0.0 3.3 5.1 0.0 5.3 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 13.5 0.0 98.7 4.6 0.0 58.0 0.0 54.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS B F A E D Approach Vol, veh/h 1429 1008 347 0 Approach Delay, s/veh 13.5 11.1 57.5 0.0 Approach LOS B B E Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s Change Period (Y+Rc), s Max Green Setting (Gmax), s Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s Green Ext Time (p_c), s Intersection Summary 14.6 8.0 7.0 7.2 0.0 92.9 7.5 97.5 32.1 53.4 20.8 *7 * 19 0.0 0.0 107.5 7.5 112.5 12.5 40.3 20.8 7.0 18.0 13.1 0.8 HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 18.1 HCM 2010 LOS B Notes Flying M Ranch Long Term Total AM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 2: FedEx Access & CR 154 10/11/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.1 Movement NBL NBT SBT SBR NEL NER Lane Configurations 4 Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 244 221 31 34 5 Future Vol, veh/h 5 244 221 31 34 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 Peak Hour Factor 80 92 92 80 80 80 Heavy Vehicles, % 8 3 3 8 8 8 Mvmt Flow 6 265 240 39 43 6 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 279 0 - 0 537 260 Stage 1 - 260 Stage 2 - - 277 - Critical Hdwy 4.18 - 6.48 6.28 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - 5.48 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - 5.48 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.272 - - 3.572 3.372 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 1250 - 495 764 Stage 1 - - 770 - Stage 2 - 756 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 1250 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver - Stage 1 Stage 2 Approach NB SB NE HCM Control Delay, s 0.2 0 12.7 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NELn1 NBL NBT SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 516 1250 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.094 0.005 HCM Control Delay (s) 12.7 7.9 0 HCM Lane LOS B A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 0 Flying M Ranch Long Term Total AM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 3: CR 154 & School Access 10/11/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.9 Movement EBL EBR SET SER NWL NWT Lane Configurations ' r r 1' Traffic Vol, veh/h 91 59 141 85 69 158 Future Vol, veh/h 91 59 141 85 69 158 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 100 0 - 100 50 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 99 64 153 92 75 172 Major/Minor Minorl Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 475 153 0 0 245 0 Stage 1 153 Stage 2 322 - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 548 893 - 1321 Stage 1 875 Stage 2 735 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 517 893 - 1321 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 517 Stage 1 825 Stage 2 735 Approach EB SE NW HCM Control Delay, s 11.9 0 2.4 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NWL NWT EBLn1 EBLn2 SET SER Capacity (veh/h) 1321 - 517 893 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.057 - 0.191 0.072 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.9 - 13.6 9.3 HCM Lane LOS A - B A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - 0.7 0.2 Flying M Ranch Long Term Total AM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM 2010 TWSC 8: CR 154 & South Site Access 10/11/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.3 Movement EBL EBR SET SER NWL NWT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 5 197 3 3 221 Future Vol, veh/h 6 5 197 3 3 221 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 7 5 214 3 3 240 Major/Minor Minorl Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 462 216 0 0 217 0 Stage 1 216 Stage 2 246 Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 558 824 - 1353 Stage 1 820 Stage 2 795 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 556 824 - 1353 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 556 Stage 1 818 Stage 2 795 Approach EB SE NW HCM Control Delay, s 10.6 0 0.1 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NWL NWT EBLn1 SET SER Capacity (veh/h) 1353 - 652 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.002 - 0.018 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.7 0 10.6 HCM Lane LOS A A B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.1 Flying M Ranch Long Term Total AM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 3 HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary 1: CR 154 & SH 82 10/12/2017 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt ri vi tt vi 4 ri Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 970 165 24 1357 0 151 0 29 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 970 165 24 1357 0 151 0 29 0 0 0 Number 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 0 1827 1759 1759 1827 0 1759 1759 1759 1900 1863 1900 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1054 0 30 1475 0 189 0 36 0 0 0 Adj No. of Lanes 0 2 1 1 2 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.80 0.80 0.92 0.92 0.80 0.92 0.80 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 4 8 8 4 0 8 2 8 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 0 2449 1055 37 2764 0 388 0 118 0 146 0 Arrive On Green 0.00 0.71 0.00 0.02 0.80 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3563 1495 1675 3563 0 3351 0 1495 0 1863 0 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 1054 0 30 1475 0 189 0 36 0 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 0 1736 1495 1675 1736 0 1675 0 1495 0 1863 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 14.9 0.0 2.1 17.4 0.0 6.4 0.0 2.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g c), s 0.0 14.9 0.0 2.1 17.4 0.0 6.4 0.0 2.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2449 1055 37 2764 0 388 0 118 0 146 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.43 0.00 0.82 0.53 0.00 0.49 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c a), veh/h 0 2921 1258 101 3371 0 645 0 232 0 305 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 7.2 0.0 56.4 4.2 0.0 52.1 0.0 50.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.6 0.0 44.9 0.7 0.0 1.4 0.0 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 0.0 7.2 0.0 1.4 8.5 0.0 3.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 7.8 0.0 101.3 4.9 0.0 53.5 0.0 52.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A F A D D Approach Vol, veh/h 1054 1505 225 0 Approach Delay, s/veh 7.8 6.8 53.3 0.0 Approach LOS A A D Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.5 89.2 16.1 99.8 16.1 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 8.0 7.5 * 7 7.5 7.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 7.0 97.5 * 19 112.5 18.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.1 16.9 0.0 19.4 8.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 43.8 0.0 72.8 0.7 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay HCM 2010 LOS 11.0 B Notes Flying M Ranch Long Term Total PM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 2: FedEx Access & CR 154 10/11/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.3 Movement NBL NBT SBT SBR NEL NER Lane Configurations 4 Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 150 149 40 30 5 Future Vol, veh/h 5 150 149 40 30 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 Peak Hour Factor 80 92 92 80 80 80 Heavy Vehicles, % 8 3 3 8 8 8 Mvmt Flow 6 163 162 50 38 6 Major/Minor Majorl Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 212 0 - 0 362 187 Stage 1 - 187 Stage 2 - - 175 - Critical Hdwy 4.18 - 6.48 6.28 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - 5.48 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - 5.48 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.272 - - 3.572 3.372 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 1323 - 625 840 Stage 1 - - 831 - Stage 2 - 841 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 1323 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver - Stage 1 Stage 2 Approach NB SB NE HCM Control Delay, s 0.3 0 11 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NELn1 NBL NBT SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 646 1323 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio HCM Control Delay (s) HCM Lane LOS HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.068 0.005 11 7.7 0 B A A 0.2 0 Flying M Ranch Long Term Total PM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 3: CR 154 & School Access 10/11/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.7 Movement EBL EBR SET SER NWL NWT Lane Configurations ' r r 1' Traffic Vol, veh/h 70 44 83 71 39 85 Future Vol, veh/h 70 44 83 71 39 85 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 100 0 - 100 50 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 76 48 90 77 42 92 Major/Minor Minorl Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 266 90 0 0 167 0 Stage 1 90 Stage 2 176 - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 723 968 - 1411 Stage 1 934 Stage 2 855 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 701 968 - - 1411 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 701 Stage 1 906 Stage 2 855 Approach EB SE NW HCM Control Delay, s 10.1 0 2.4 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NWL NWT EBLn1 EBLn2 SET SER Capacity (veh/h) 1411 - 701 968 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.03 - 0.109 0.049 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.6 - 10.8 8.9 HCM Lane LOS A - B A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - 0.4 0.2 Flying M Ranch Long Term Total PM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM 2010 TWSC 8: CR 154 & South Site Access 10/11/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.5 Movement EBL EBR SET SER NWL NWT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 4 121 6 6 119 Future Vol, veh/h 5 4 121 6 6 119 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 5 4 132 7 7 129 Major/Minor Minorl Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 279 136 0 0 139 0 Stage 1 136 Stage 2 143 - Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 711 913 - 1445 Stage 1 890 Stage 2 884 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 707 913 - 1445 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 707 Stage 1 886 Stage 2 884 Approach EB SE NW HCM Control Delay, s 9.6 0 0.4 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NWL NWT EBLn1 SET SER Capacity (veh/h) 1445 - 786 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.005 - 0.012 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.5 0 9.6 HCM Lane LOS A A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 0 Flying M Ranch Long Term Total PM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Synchro 10 Report Page 3 Flying M Ranch APPENDIX E QUEUING REPORTS Traffic Assessment FELSBURG (4111 HOLT & ULLE V iU Appendix E Queuing and Blocking Report 10/12/2017 Intersection: 1: CR 154 & SH 82 Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB Directions Served T T R L T T L LT R Maximum Queue (ft) 265 231 32 166 155 138 213 262 148 Average Queue (ft) 147 113 2 72 69 41 100 134 20 95th Queue (ft) 233 205 17 148 129 102 172 214 104 Link Distance (ft) 1051 1051 1350 1350 647 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) 700 700 175 75 0 48 0 0 82 0 Flying M Ranch Short Term Total AM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig SimTraffic Report Page 1 Queuing and Blocking Report 10/12/2017 Intersection: 1: CR 154 & SH 82 Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB Directions Served T T R L T T L LT R Maximum Queue (ft) 170 139 8 76 182 156 149 182 58 Average Queue (ft) 78 47 0 19 85 53 51 83 2 95th Queue (ft) 144 112 6 55 151 119 115 145 29 Link Distance (ft) 1051 1051 1350 1350 647 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) 700 700 175 0 26 0 26 75 Flying M Ranch Short Term Total PM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig SimTraffic Report Page 1 Queuing and Blocking Report 10/12/2017 Intersection: 1: CR 154 & SH 82 Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB Directions Served T T R L T T L LT R Maximum Queue (ft) 322 288 53 165 180 165 243 268 150 Average Queue (ft) 212 164 5 86 90 58 121 160 47 95th Queue (ft) 309 278 28 159 162 132 204 247 160 Link Distance (ft) 1084 1084 1350 1350 647 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) 700 700 175 75 3 56 0 6 113 0 Flying M Ranch Long Term Total AM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig SimTraffic Report Page 1 Queuing and Blocking Report 10/12/2017 Intersection: 1: CR 154 & SH 82 Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB Directions Served T T R L T T L LT R Maximum Queue (ft) 252 217 13 101 225 205 147 180 147 Average Queue (ft) 128 78 0 32 128 99 71 100 15 95th Queue (ft) 221 174 6 75 199 180 129 159 87 Link Distance (ft) 1084 1084 1350 1350 647 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 700 700 175 75 Storage Blk Time (%) 32 0 Queuing Penalty (veh) 42 0 Flying M Ranch Long Term Total PM Felsburg Holt & Ullevig SimTraffic Report Page 1 Ecological Assessment of Eastbank Property for Minor Subdivision and Major Impact Review Garfield County, Colorado February 18, 2015 Report for: Kevin Kiernan % Davis Farrar Western Slope Consulting, LLC 0165 Basalt Mt Dr. Carbondale, CO 81623 Colorado Wildlife Science Report By: Colorado Wildlife Science, LLC Jonathan Lowsky, MS 0100 Elk Run Drive, Suite 128 Basalt, CO 81621 Page left intentionally blank. Wildlife & Ecological Assessment - Eastbank FedEx February 18, 2015 Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 METHODS 1 3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION & VEGETATION 1 4.0 LAND SUITABILITY ANALYSIS: Natural Habitat & Migration Routes §4-502(D) 2 4.1 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES 2 4.2 OTHER SPECIES OF INTEREST 5 5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS §4-502(E) 8 5.1 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES 8 6.0 PROTECTION OF WILDLIFE HABITAT AREAS §7-202 9 7.0 LITERATURE CITED 11 8.0 BACKGROUND & QUALIFICATIONS 13 MAPS 14 PHOTOS 18 APPENDIX A: CPW SAM mule deer and elk seasonal activity area definitions 25 APPENDIX B: State of Colorado Threatened & Endangered Vertebrates 26 APPENDIX C: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Consultation Letter 28 Maps Map 1. Aerial view & vegetation 15 Map 2. CPW mapped bald eagle & black bear seasonal habitats 16 Map 3. CPW mapped mule deer & elk field verified seasonal habitats 17 Photos Photo 1. Property is comprised of a series of terraces or benches 19 Photo 2. Dirt access road 19 Photo 3. Lower dirt access road to Parcel 2B 20 Photo 4. Higher quality sagebrush shrubland 20 Photo 5. Poor quality, disturbed sagebrush shrubland with no understory vegetation 21 Photo 6. Due to disturbance, rabbitbrush approaches co -dominance in remnant sagebrush stands 21 Photo 7. Scotch thistle is a problem on the property 22 Photo 8. Elk pellets were common on the February site assessment 22 Photo 9. Elk tracks were observed during the site visit 23 Photo 10. The property is highly disturbed with large areas of bare soil and weeds 23 Photo 11. Non-native, invasive species and bare ground dominate large portions of the property 24 Photo 12. Russian olive stand on the northwest end of the property 24 COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 111 Page left intentionally blank. I�ildlife & Ecological Assessment - Eastbank FedEx February 18, 2015 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents an evaluation of the wildlife, wildlife habitat, and ecological resources of a parcel of land known as Parcel 2A of the Eastbank Parcel 2 Lot Split (Parcel ID # 2185- 353-04-001) in unincorporated Garfield County and assesses the effects of the proposed minor subdivision and development on those resources. This analysis addresses significant wildlife use of the property, evaluates potential effects of development on wildlife, plants, and other important ecological resources, and recommends actions to reduce ecological impacts. This report specifically addresses potential impacts to wildlife, plants and plant communities per the Garfield County Land Use Code (LUC) — specifically, Land Suitability Analysis, Impact Analysis, and Section 7-202 Protection of Wildlife Habitat Areas. The applicant is proposing to subdivide the property for development of a commercial building, parking lots, and associated infrastructure. 2.0 METHODS This assessment is based on: (1) a February 11, 2015 site assessment; (2) a review of current Colorado Parks & Wildlife (CPW) Species Activity Mapping (SAM) (Colorado Division of Parks & Wildlife 2014); and (3) the author's experience in recognizing, avoiding, minimizing, and mitigating potential impacts of development on wildlife and other ecological resources in Garfield County and western Colorado. 3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION & VEGETATION The property is situated in the North-Central Highlands and Rocky Mountain Section of the Southern Rocky Mountains Steppe - Open Woodland - Coniferous Forest - Alpine Meadow Physiographic Province (Bailey 1976, Omernik 1987, Bailey 1995, Bailey et al. 1998). Elevation of the property is approximately 5,940 feet above mean sea level and lies within the southwest quarter of Section 35 of Township 6 South, Range 89 of the 6th Principal Meridian. The property is dominated by a series of relatively flat terraces situated at a prominent bend in the Roaring Fork River (Figure 1) approximately 5 miles south-southwest of downtown Glenwood Springs, CO on the site of an old gravel pit. Each terrace is separated by a small, relatively steep slope that is characteristic of such river terraces in the Roaring Fork watershed (Photo 1). A dirt driveway (Photo 2) passes through the property providing access from Old Highway 82 to Parcel 2B of the Eastbank Parcel 2 Lot Split. The upper terrace (on the east side of the property) is dominated by a flood irrigated hay field on the north with commercial development and the remnants of the old gravel operation. Another dirt driveway passes through this portion of the property paralleling the river to the west of the developed area. This driveway also leads to Parcel 2B of the Lot Split (Photo 3). Outside of the hayfield and the developed areas, the vegetation is disturbed and quite sparse with large areas of bare soil. The slopes between the terraces are the most intact and the native plant communities that persist on those sites are likely remnants of the vegetation that once dominated the property — Big Sagebrush Shrubland (Photo 4). This COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 Surveys Conducted? Effect Wildlife da Ecological Assessment - Eastbank FedEx February 18, 2015 association occurs on moderate slopes between 4,500-6,900 feet. Big sagebrush is the dominant shrub with antelope bitterbrush, mountain -mahogany, and rabbitbrush occurring as well. Grasses such as needleandthread, Idaho fescue, bluebunch wheatgrass, and prairie junegrass are expected to occur within the sagebrush shrubland at this elevation but understory plants on the property are largely absent (Photo 5). Given the degree of disturbance on the site, the seral stage varies from patches of late successional versions of the big sagebrush plant community with nearly pure stands of sagebrush to larger areas where rabbitbrush is co -dominant or dominant (Photo 6). Although a thorough weed assessment has not been conducted, it is clear that there are serious weed infestations on the property. Again, this is largely due to past land uses on the property. Scotch thistle (Onopordum acanthium; Photo 7), cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum), houndstongue (Cynoglossum officinale) are among the more common Garfield County listed Noxious Weeds observed on the property. Numerous other non -natives and invasive species occur. 4.0 LAND SUITABILITY ANALYSIS: Natural Habitat & Migration Routes §4-502(D) 4.1 Threatened and Endangered Species1 Species protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) that may occur in Garfield County are listed below in Table 1. Also included are species listed as Endangered or Threatened by the State of Colorado that occur in Garfield County. Some of the species listed below are typically found within habitats that do not occur on the property or within areas that cannot be affected by actions associated with the project. There will be no effect on these off-site species. A brief rationale for the "no effect" determination for each of these species is included in the following paragraphs. Table 1. Threatened or Endangered Species that may occur in Garfield County, Colorado or may be affected by the project. Common Name Latin Name Occurrence Habitat Status Potential Habitat on the property? BIRDS Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Burrowing Owl Athene cunicularia Mexican Spotted Owl Strix occidentalis lucida In Colorado, statewide along rivers, lakes, reservoirs. All of the conterminous United States and Alaska. Two-thirds of breeding sites west of Continental Divide. Concentrations include the Yampa. White, and Colorado Rivers (Kingery 1998). Open water bodies, prairie dog colonies important food source during the winter. Breeding: Usually nests in tall trees or on cliffs near water. Winter: Preferentially roosts in conifers or other sheltered sites in winter in some areas; typically selects the larger, more accessible trees. Perching in deciduous and coniferous trees is equally common in other areas (NatureServe 2005). British Columbia east to Saskatchewan south through most of western US, Mexico, Central America, and South America. Found primarily in eastern Colorado as a summer resident but also on west slope, primarily in Mesa County, but also Delta, Garfield, Montrose, and Montezuma (Kingery 1998). Nest primarily in near prairie dog and other ground squirrel burrows. Prefer sparsely vegetated habitat particularly shortgrass prairie in eastern Colorado and semi -desert shrubland on the west slope (Kingery 1998). Southern Utah and Colorado, through Arizona, New Mexico, and west Texas, to the mountains of central Mexico (Rinkevich et al. 1995). Complex forest or rocky canyons that contain uneven -aged, multi-level and old- FT, ST No aged, thick forests. below 9,500 feet elevation. Nests in standing snags and ST Yes ST No 1 See Appendix B for the list of Colorado Threatened and Endangered species No No Effect No No Effect No No Effect COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 LAND SUITABILITY ANALYSIS: Natural Habitat & Migration Routes §4-502(D) 2 Wildlife & Ecological Assessment - Eastbank FedEx February 18, 2015 Table 1. Threatened or Endangered Species that may occur in Garfield County, Colorado or may be affected by the project. Common Name Latin Name Western Yellow -Billed Cuckoo Coccyzus americanus Occurrence Habitat hollow trees (Rinkevich et al. 1995) In Colorado west of the Continental Divide, the species was probably never common (Bailey and Niedrach 1965, Kingery 1998) and is now extremely rare (Kingery 1998). One confirmed nesting observation occurred along the Yampa River near Hayden during the Breeding Bird Atlas surveys conducted from 1987- 1994 (Kingery 1998) and one cuckoo, representing a probable nesting pair in surveyed lowland river riparian habitat along six rivers in west -central Colorado (Dexter 1998). Nest in deciduous woodlands associated with wetlands or streams. Require combination of dense willow understory for nesting, a cottonwood overstory for foraging, and large patches of habitat (Laymon 1980, Gaines and Laymon 1984, Kingery 1998). Feed on grasshoppers, caterpillars, beetles and other insects (Dillinger 1989). Status Potential Habitat on the property? FT, SC No Surveys Conducted? Effect MAMMALS Canada lynx Lynx canadensis North American river otter Lontra canadensis Colorado is the southern limit of the North American distribution of the species, and the population is considered isolated from those in the Northern Rockies (McKelvey et al. 2000). Engelmann spruce/subalpine fir is the habitat used by lynx with a mix of spruce, fir and aspen second. Riparian and riparian -mix areas used heavily too. Lynx in Colorado increasingly using riparian areas beginning in July, peaking in November, and dropping off December through June (Shenk 2009). 2003 CDOW statewide river otter survey found 3 viable populations: Gunnison, Piedra, and Green river populations. In addition, evidence of otters was on the Cache la Poudre, South Platte, Michigan, and Illinois rivers and also reported additional individual sightings. River otters are found occasionally in the Roaring Fork and Crystal River. Water bodies and riparian areas within a broad range of ecosystems from semi - desert shrubland to montane and subalpine forest. The primary habitat requirement for river otters is permanent water with abundant fish or crustacean prey and relatively high water quality (Boyle 2006). FT, SE No ST Yes No No Effect PLANTS Ute ladies' -tresses Spiranthes diluvialis Eastern slope of Rocky Mountains in southeastern Wyoming & Nebraska, north central and central Colorado; in the upper Colorado River Basin, particularly the Uinta Basin; and in the Bonneville Basin along the Wasatch Front and westward in the eastern Great Basin, in north -central and western Utah, extreme eastern Nevada and southeastern Idaho. Nearest location is near Catherine, CO. FT No No Subirrigated, alluvial soils along streams, and in open meadows, in floodplains. No Effect 4500 to 6800 ft. *Status: T = Threatened ; E = Endangered; P = Proposed; FC = Candidate for federal listing; SC = State species of concern Of the 6 state and federal listed, candidate, and proposed species potentially occurring or potentially affected by actions on the property only bald eagles have habitat within proximity of the project area. 4.1.1 Bald Eagle (ST) Background Bald eagles were listed as endangered under the ESA in 1978 but had recovered sufficiently by 1995 to be downlisted to threatened status. This species is also state -listed as threatened. Because of its successful recovery, there is a current proposal to delist bald eagles from the ESA, but protections would remain under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), and the Bald Eagle Protection Act. Bald eagles are listed as Threatened by the state of Colorado (Colorado Division of Parks & Wildlife 2015a). According to CPW data, in 2014 there were 120 known nesting pairs in Colorado, and approximately 400-1,000 bald COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 LAND SUITABILITY ANALYSIS: Natural Habitat & Migration Routes §4-502(D) 3 I�ildlife da Ecological Assessment - Eastbank FedEx February 18, 2015 eagles winter in the state (Colorado Division of Parks & Wildlife 2015b). Bald eagles depend on large roost trees that allow them a wide field of vision for prey. Food sources include fish, small mammals, waterfowl, and carrion. Known sensitive habitats in the project area include winter range, winter foraging habitat (Figure 2A). No known bald eagle nests occur in or adjacent to the project area. Effects of Proposed Action The closest active nest is at Aspen Glen, approximately 4 miles to the south-southeast. There are no active roost sites on or adjacent to the property. The property lies within bald eagle winter range and adjacent to bald eagle winter forage habitat (Colorado Division of Parks & Wildlife 2014). Winter forage and winter range, however, are broadly defined habitat areas that occupy very large areas (Colorado Division of Parks & Wildlife 2014). Winter Forage: Foraging areas frequented by wintering bald eagles between November 15 and March 15. May be a large area radiating from preferred roosting sites. In western Colorado preferred roosting sites are within dominant riparian zones. Winter Range: Those areas where bald eagles have been observed between November 15 and April 1. 4.1.2 Canada Lynx (FT/SE, G5/S1) The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service published a final rule on March 24, 2000 listing the Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis) in the coterminous United States as a "threatened" species under the Endangered Species Act (Federal Register: 65 FR 16052). In 1999 and 2000, the State of Colorado began releases of lynx in southwestern Colorado in order to reestablish a viable lynx population within the state. The property is not situated within proximity to potential lynx habitat and no lynx have been documented on or within close proximity to the property (J. Mao, CPW, pers. comm.). Lynx denning habitat is comprised of spruce -fir forests, north -facing lodgepole pine forests, and Douglas -fir forests with complex multi -storied conifer stands, large quantities of downed woody debris and or dense understory conifer that provide den sites in close proximity to habitat for foraging on snowshoe hares. Winter foraging habitat is all denning habitat plus conifer stands that lack structure for dens sites but provide optimal winter foraging conditions of dense (35% or more) horizontal conifer cover at or above the snow (USDA Forest Service 2002). On November 9, 2006, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service released a proposed critical habitat plan for lynx (Federal Register: 50 CFR Part 17 66008) which omits Colorado, New Mexico, and southern Wyoming (United States Fish & Wildlife Service 2006). The habitat types on and adjacent to the proposed activity envelope are not suitable lynx winter foraging or denning habitat and should be considered "unsuitable private lands" (USDA Forest Service 2002, Shenk and Kahn 2010, USFWS and USFS 2010, Theobald and Shenk 2011). 4.1.3 Ute Ladies' -tresses Orchid (FT, G2G3) The Ute ladies' -tresses orchid (Spiranthes diluvialis) was listed as threatened under the ESA in January 1992, and is ranked as imperiled both globally (G2G3) and in the state of COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 LAND SUITABILITY ANALYSIS: Natural Habitat & Migration Routes §4-502(D) 4 Wildlife & Ecological Assessment - Eastbank FedEx February 18, 2015 Colorado (S2) (NatureServe 2015). This orchid is a perennial that grows up to 20 inches tall and has a distinctive spike of white flowers (USFWS 2010). It is known from British Columbia southwards to Colorado. Utah has the largest number of element occurrences, followed by Colorado (NatureServe 2012). In Colorado, it is known from Boulder, EI Paso, Garfield, Jefferson, Larimer, Moffat, and Weld Counties (NatureServe 2015). The closest known occurrence, however, is along the Roaring Fork River at Catherine near Carbondale which is approximately 9.5 mi to southeast of the property (Durkin 2009). The Ute ladies' -tresses orchid generally blooms from late July through the end of August (USFWS 2010b). Depending on location and climatic conditions, however, the blooming timeframe can vary considerably (USFWS 1992). It is adapted to early- to mid-seral site s with moist to wet conditions, where competition for light, space, water, and other resources is normally kept low by periodic or recent disturbance events (NatureServe 2015). In Colorado, the orchid is found along perennial streams or rivers, or in groundwater -fed spring or sub -irrigated meadows at elevations ranging from 4,560 feet to 6,260 feet (Fertig et al. 2005). The habitat types on and adjacent to the proposed activity envelope are not suitable. The property is entirely upland habitat, and the correct hydrology is not present to qualify the site as potential Ute ladies' -tresses orchid habitat. 4.2 Other Species of Interest This section addresses present use of the study area by significant wildlife not listed by the state or federal government. The 'significant' wildlife use described herein refers to those wildlife species that are of ecological, economic, regulatory, social, and/or political importance. 4.2.1 Ungulates Rocky Mountain Elk & Mule Deer Mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus hemionus) are present on the property throughout the year but elk (Cervus elaphus nelsoni) only occur in winter. CPW mapping correctly maps the property solely as mule deer winter range (Colorado Division of Parks & Wildlife 2014). Limiting Factors Limiting factors are influences that determine whether a wildlife population increases, decreases or remains stable. It is important to understand that there is seldom one factor that, by itself, causes a reduction or an increase in the population of a given species. It is usually the interaction of several factors that determine the fate of a population. For example, predation may seem to be a factor causing an elk population to decline when in fact restricted winter habitat, deep snow or the lack of alternate prey may be what allows predation to have a major impact. Traditionally, we have looked at the concept of food, water, cover and space as the primary components that determine how suitable a habitat is for wildlife. While this is true, it oversimplifies our understanding of how various factors affect habitat. Several other factors may not be as important on their own, but when they are combined with the four primary habitat components, the value of the habitat may be COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 LAND SUITABILITY ANALYSIS: Natural Habitat & Migration Routes §4-502(D) 5 Wildlife & Ecological Assessment -Eastbank FedEx February 18, 2015 immediately enhanced or reduced. For example, other land uses can greatly impact elk use of suitable range. In the Roaring Fork Watershed the limiting factors for bighorn sheep, elk, and mule deer most affected by residential development are winter habitats, production areas, and migration habitat. Winter Range, Severe Winter Range, Winter Concentration Both elk and mule deer on winter range continuously seek the most moderate ambient weather conditions, and other factors influencing habitat selection are secondary. In winter, elk move between foraging and bedding sites in response to changing ambient temperatures, increasing snow depths, and to enhance control of body temperature. On the coldest days and/or when snow depths are greatest, both species seek southerly and westerly facing slopes where snows typically melt quickly. Snow depths greater than 12 inches begin to reduce the winter range (USFWS 1982). In general, mule deer and elk do not tolerate snow depths greater than chest height and are impeded when snow is knee- deep (Loveless 1967, Kelsall and Prescott 1971, Parker 1984, Toweill et al. 2002, Ungulate Winter Range Technical Advisory Team 2005). Consequently, winter range of larger elk covers a greater areal extent of lands with greater snow depths than that of mule deer (Parker 1984). As stated above, the property is not used by elk in winter. Both deer and elk (Photo 8) pellets and tracks (Photo 9) were observed throughout the property. The property provides marginal winter range, suitable only in relatively light winters. In an average to heavy winter, these areas do not provide good winter range due to the accumulation of snow. CPW mapped winter range lies to the east across SH -82 and the west across the Roaring Fork River (Figures 2A, 2B). The higher quality winter range, however, lies across further east on the slopes and lower reaches of Spring Valley and further west on the slopes west of Prehm Road and Westbank Road where deep snows do not accumulate. Current CPW Species Activity Mapping (SAM) data does not delineate the property within or adjacent to deer or elk severe winter or winter concentration habitat. These habitat types for mule deer occur on the slopes west of Prehm Road and Westbank Road and across SH -82. Production Areas Elk calving grounds or production areas are carefully selected by cows and are generally in locations where cover, forage, and water are in close proximity (Seidel 1977a, Phillips and Alldredge 2000, Barbknecht et al. 2011, Rearden et al. 2011). Calving sites occur in the lower to middle portions of summer range and often occur in the same general area each year. Although selected sites are used for a brief period in the spring or early summer, elk production habitat often a limiting factor for a given population. Sites must provide security from harassment and be within or adjacent to high quality summer range. Elk are considered a hider species because the calf remains bedded at a location and responds to threats by remaining prone while the female moves away to forage, returning periodically to nurse. Seidel (1977b, 1977a) studied elk calving habitat at various sites in the White River National Forest. He found that cow elk prepare a distinct birthing bed and, for the most part, return to that bed each year. All birthing beds examined were in mature aspens COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 LAND SUITABILITY ANALYSIS: Natural Habitat & Migration Routes §4-502(D) 6 Wildlife & Ecological Assessment - Eastbank FedEx February 18, 2015 with a thick understory of shrubs such as chokecherry and snowberry. All beds were located on southeast -facing slopes within 183 m (200 yd) of a water source. Personal observation by CWS of calving behavior in the Roaring Fork watershed has largely confirmed Seidel's assessment with the following additions: (1) the aspect variable described by Seidel seems to be less important than the understory variable. Active elk calving habitat in the Roaring Fork watershed is known to occur on variable aspects, but there is always significant woody understory vegetation which provides calves with hiding cover; (2) very young spotted calves and probable birthing beds have been observed in narrowleaf cottonwood riparian habitat that has a dense willow, alder, and/or chokecherry understory; and (3) although some elk cows do indeed exhibit strong calving site fidelity, others do not. Recent research supports Seidel's conclusions (See Phillips and Alldredge 2000, Barbknecht et al. 2011, Rearden et al. 2011). There is no mapped or field verified elk production habitat on or within proximity to the property. The nearest known production habitat is more than 4 miles to the southwest. Migration Corridors There are no mapped or field verified migration corridors on or near the property. Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep There is no mapped (Colorado Division of Parks & Wildlife 2014) or field verified bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis) habitat on or immediately adjacent to the study area. 4.2.2 Other Species Black Bears Black bears (Ursus americanus) use the river corridor west of the property for daily and seasonal movement. Although CPW maps the property (Figure 2B) within a black bear fall concentration area (Colorado Division of Parks & Wildlife 2014), this is likely a mapping error due to scale since the property supports little bear forage with very few chokecherry, Gambel oak, serviceberry or other fruit or mast bearing shrubs. Raptors CWS conducted a raptor nest search during the site assessment. No raptor nests were found. No breeding or nesting activity was observed. No peregrine falcon activity areas, nests, or potential nesting areas are located in the vicinity of the Ranch (Colorado Division of Parks & Wildlife 2014). Greater Sage -Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) No greater sage -grouse are known or suspected to occur on or within proximity to the property. No historic leks occur on or near the property (Colorado Division of Parks & Wildlife 2014). COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 LAND SUITABILITY ANALYSIS: Natural Habitat & Migration Routes §4-502(D) 7 IF//NO' da Ecological Assessment - Eastbank FedEx February 18, 2015 5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS §4-502(E) The physical removal of vegetation or other habitat features is known as direct habitat loss. Disturbance resulting from human activity associated the proposed development will decrease the effectiveness of habitat that remains physically undisturbed. This is known as indirect habitat loss. As with most development in western Colorado, the implementation of the proposed project will have some direct and indirect effects on wildlife and wildlife habitat. The property, however, is embedded in a highly developed landscape. It is currently occupied by mixed agricultural and commercial operations. Neighboring properties are a mix of commercial and residential development. Although the proposal will result in the direct loss of vegetation and habitat, given the surroundings and indirect impacts of the existing development and the disturbed nature of the vegetation, this loss will be negligible. 5.1 Threatened and Endangered Species As discussed above, there are no ESA listed or Candidate species known to occur on the property. As such, it is highly unlikely that the proposed development will have any effect on federal Threatened, Endangered, or Candidate vertebrate species (See Table 1, above). 5.1.1 Bald Eagle The portion of the property proposed for development occupies a tiny fraction of the CPW mapped bald eagle winter forage area and winter range. The winter forage area and winter range in which the Ranch is situated are 187,470 acres and 4,669,528 acres, respectively. As such, it is unlikely that the proposed development will have significant impacts on these habitat areas. Given that there are no active or historic nest sites or roosts within close proximity to the property and the area occupies negligible portions of the winter range and winter foraging areas, the project will have no effect on bald eagle habitat. 5.1.2 Canada Lynx Bald Eagle There is no suitable Canada lynx habitat on or within proximity to the property. As such, the project will have no effect on Canada lynx. 5.1.3 Ute ladies' -tresses Orchid There is no suitable Ute ladies' -tresses orchid habitat on or adjacent to the property. As such, the project will have no effect on Ute ladies' -tresses orchids. 5.2 Other Species of Interest 5.2.1 Ungulates Given the analysis above (4.2.1) the proposed development may affect, but not likely to adversely affect mule deer and elk. There will be no effect on bighorn sheep. COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 IMPACT ANALYSIS §4-502(E) 8 Wildlife & Ecological Assessment - Eastbank FedEx February 18, 2015 5.2.2 Black Bears The proposed development will not result in the direct or indirect loss of black bear foraging habitat or fall concentration habitat. Consequently, there will be no effect on black bears. 5.2.3 Raptors The proposed development will not result in the loss of any known raptor nests, nest stands, or any unique habitat attributes. Loss of undeveloped land will reduce hunting acreage for some generalist species such as American kestrels, great -horned owls (Bubo virginianus) and red-tailed hawks. The proposal may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect raptors. 5.2.4 Greater Sage -Grouse Greater sage -grouse do not occur on or within proximity to the property nor do they have the potential to occur. Consequently, there will be no effect on greater sage -grouse. 5.3 Alteration of Existing Native Vegetation The proposed development will result in the loss of negligible acreage of native vegetation. The highest quality native shrublands occur on the slopes on the west side of the property. The applicant does not propose any development in that area. The balance of vegetation is comprised of highly disturbed patches of native vegetation, invasive species and noxious weeds (Photos 10, 11) including a stand of Russian olive trees (Elaeagnus angustifolia) in the northwest portion of the property (Photo 12). 6.0 PROTECTION OF WILDLIFE HABITAT AREAS §7-202 The following measures will reduce the impacts of the proposed development on wildlife. 6.1 Site planning 1. Clustering - Clustered development and infrastructure minimizes impact by overlapping the zone of influence resulting from human activity associated with residential development. The proposed development is highly clustered on a previously developed parcel adjacent to dense residential and commercial development. 2. Fencing — Fencing that is incompatible with wildlife movements can result in direct wildlife mortality, restricted or blocked movement, and reduction of habitat effectiveness. a. No fences should be placed below the crest of the west -facing slope on the west side of the property. b. Other than those necessary for facility security, fences should meet the standards for wildlife -friendly fencing described in the CPW Fencing with Wildlife in Mind publication (Available online at COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 PROTECTION OF WILDLIFE HABITAT AREAS §7-202 9 I�ildlife da Ecological Assessment - Eastbank FedEx February 18, 2015 https://cpw.state.co.us/Documents/LandWater/PrivateLandPrograms/Fencing WithWildlifelnMind.pdf). 6.1 Native vegetation 1. Native vegetation should be preserved to the maximum extent possible except where management is necessary to reduce wildfire hazards. 2. Native vegetation should be preserved on the slopes at the western end of the property. 6.2 Other Measures to Minimize Impacts 1. Noxious Weeds should be managed by means of an Integrated Weed Management strategy in compliance with the current Garfield County Weed Management Plan. COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 PROTECTION OF WILDLIFE HABITAT AREAS §7-202 10 I�ildlife & Ecological Assessment - Eastbank FedEx February 18, 2015 7.0 LITERATURE CITED Bailey, A. M., and R. J. Niedrach. 1965. Birds of Colorado. Denver Museum of Natural History, Denver, CO. Bailey, R. G. 1976. Ecoregions of the United States. USDA Forest Service, Washington, D.C. Bailey, R. G. 1995. Description of the ecoregions of the United States. 2nd edition. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service, Washington, DC. Bailey, R. G., United States Geological Survey, and United States Forest Service. 1998. Ecoregions of North America. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service, Washington, D.C. Barbknecht, A. E., W. S. Fairbanks, J. D. Rogerson, E. J. Maichak, B. M. Scurlock, and L. L. Meadows. 2011. Elk parturition site selection at local and landscape scales. The Journal of Wildlife Management 75:646- 654. Boyle, S. 2006. North American River Otter (Lontra canadensis): a technical conservation assessment. Available online at http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/northamericanriverotter.pdf. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region.. Colorado Division of Parks & Wildlife. 2014. CPW All Species Activity Mapping Data. Available online at http://www.arcgis.com/home/group.html?owner=rsacco&title=Colorado%20Parks%20and%20Wild life%20-%20Species%20Activity%20Data. Colorado Parks & Wildlife, , Fort Collins, CO. Colorado Division of Parks & Wildlife. 2015a. Colorado Listing of Endangered, Threatened and Wildlife Species of Special Concern — Species Pages. Available online at http://cpw.state.co.us/learn/Pages/SOC-ThreatenedEndangeredList.aspx. Colorado Division of Parks & Wildlife. 2015b. Colorado Wildlife Species Profile Page - Bald Eagle. Available online at http://cpw.state.co.us/learn/Pages/SpeciesProfiles.aspx. Colorado Department of Natural Resources, Division of Parks & Wildlife, Fort Collins, CO. Dexter, C. 1998. River survey of west -central Colorado, for yellow -billed cuckoo and riparian weeds. Report prepared for the Bureau of Land Management. Bureau of Land Management, Grand Junction, CO. 26 pp. Durkin, P. 2009. Spiranthes diluvialis (Ute Ladies' -tresses orchid) 2008 Survey Report, Glenwood South Bridge Environmental Assessment. State of Colorado Department of Transportation, Grand Junction, Colorado. Fertig, W., R. Black, and P. Wolken. 2005. Rangewide status review of Ute ladies' -tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis). Prepared for the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and Central Utah Water Conservancy District. 101 pp. Gaines, D., and S. A. Laymon. 1984. Decline, status and preservation of the yellow -billed cuckoo in California. Western Birds 15:49-80. Kelsall, J. P., and W. Prescott. 1971. Moose and deer behaviour in snow in Fundy National Park, New Brunswick. Canandian Wildlife Service Report 15. Kingery, H. E. 1998. Colorado breeding bird atlas. Colorado Bird Atlas Partnership : Colorado Division of Wildlife, Denver, Colo. Laymon, S. A. 1980. Feeding and nesting behavior of the yellow -billed cuckoo in the Sacramento Valley. Loveless, C. M. 1967. Ecological characteristics of Mule Deer winter range. Technical Publication 20. Colorado Department of Game, Fish and Parks. McKelvey, K. S., K. B. Aubry, and Y. K. Ortega. 2000. History and distribution of lynx in the contiguous United States. Pages 207-264 in L. F. Ruggiero, K. B. Aubry, S. W. Buskirk, G. M. Koehler, C. J. Krebs, K. S. McKelvey, and J. R. Squires, editors. Ecology and conservation of lynx in the United States. University Press of Colorado, Denver, CO. COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 7.0 LITERATURE CITED 11 I�ildlife da Ecological Assessment - Eastbank FedEx February 18, 2015 NatureServe. 2005. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 4.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available online at http://www.natureserve.org/explorer. NatureServe. 2015. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe Web Service, Arlington, Virginia. Available online at http://www.natureserve.org/explorer. Omernik, J. M. 1987. Ecoregions of the conterminous United States. Map (scale 1:7,500,000). Annals of the Association of American Geographers 77:118-125. Parker, K. L., Charles T. Robbins, and Thomas A. Hanley. 1984. Energy expenditures for locomotion by mule deer and elk. Journal of Wildlife Management 48:474-488. Phillips, G. E., and A. W. Alldredge. 2000. Reproductive success of elk following disturbance by humans during calving season. Journal of Wildlife Management 64:521-530. Rearden, S. N., R. G. Anthony, and B. K. Johnson. 2011. Birth -site selection and predation risk of Rocky Mountain elk. Journal of Mammalogy 92:1118-1126. Rinkevich, S. E., J. L. Ganey, J. L. W. Jr., G. C. White, D. L. Urban, A. B. Franklin, W. M. Block, and E. Clemente. 1995. General biology and ecological relationships of the Mexican Spotted Owl,. Pages 19-35 in K. J. Cook, editor. Recovery plan for the Mexican Spotted Owl. Vol. I. USDI Fish and Wildl. Serv., Albuquerque, NM. Seidel, J. W. 1977a. Elk calving behavior in west central Colorado. Pages 38-40 in Colorado Division of Wildlife, editor. Proceedings of the Western States Elk Workshop. Colorado Division of Wildlife, Denver. Seidel, J. W. 1977b. Elk calving habitat. USDA Forest Service Handbook 2509.25 - Watershed Conservation Practices Handbook, zero code, Ch. 10, and Ch.20. Region 2 Amendment No. 2509.25 - 99 - 1. Effective March 22, 1999. Colorado Division of Wildlife and USDA Forest Service, Grand Junction, CO. Shenk, T. 2009. Lynx Update, May 25, 2009. Available: http://wildlife.state.co.us/NR/rdonlyres/1E7C95D0- 53F3-41EB-82DD-26134C0FF261/0/LynxUpdateMay252009.pdf. Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fort Collins, CO. Shenk, T. M., and R. H. Kahn. 2010. The Colorado lynx reintroduction program. Colorado Division of Wildlife, Denver, CO. Theobald, D. M., and T. M. Shenk. 2011. Areas of high habitat use from 1999-2010 for radio -collared Canada lynx reintroduced to Colorado. Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO. Toweill, D. E., J. W. Thomas, and D. P. Metz. 2002. North American elk: ecology and management. 1st edition. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington [D.C.]. Ungulate Winter Range Technical Advisory Team. 2005. Desired conditions for Mule Deer, Elk, and Moose winter range in the Southern Interior of British Columbia. B.C. Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection, Biodiversity Branch. Victoria, BC. Wildl. Bull. No. B-120. 18pp. United States Fish & Wildlife Service. 2006. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for the Contiguous United States Distinct Population Segment of the Canada lynx; Final Rule. November 9, 2006. 71 FR 66008-66061. USDA Forest Service. 2002. Lynx habitat parameters, White River National Forest. Unpub. Forest Service document. Glenwood Springs. CO. 3pp. plus LAU spreadsheet (subject to further revision -last available update 02/11/2005). USFWS. 1982. Habitat Suitability Index Models: Mule Deer. Draft. USFWS, and USFS. 2010. Inter -Agency Southern Rockies Lynx Project Decision Screen. Unpublished Report of Southern Rocky Mountain Lynx Conservation Interagency Team. 22 pp plus attachments. U.S. Forest Service, Denver, CO, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Grand Jct, CO. Oct. 2010. COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 7.0 LITERATURE CITED 12 I�ildlife & Ecological Assessment - Eastbank FedEx February 18, 2015 8.0 BACKGROUND & QUALIFICATIONS Colorado Wildlife Science, LLC (CWS) is a small wildlife and ecological consulting firm based in Basalt, Colorado, specializing in wildlife research, management, and monitoring, ecological assessments, baseline inventories, ecological planning, habitat management, and ecological restoration. CWS applies a scientifically sound approach to biological resource studies and management. Our work combines professional integrity and strong academic training with extensive experience working for government, private, and non- profit clients. With an extensive network of professional collaborators that includes plant ecologists, foresters, hydrologists, and soil scientists, CWS leverages the collective knowledge of experienced professionals working toward practical, effective and cost saving solutions. CWS provides expert services to a diverse array of clients. Since we are a small company, personal attention is ensured. We combine full in-house GIS (ArcGIS) with real-time, sub- meter GPS to provide state-of-the-art spatial data, analyses, maps, and presentations. We have prepared Biological Assessments and Biological Evaluations, and contributed to EAs and EISs. CWS has worked with large private firms such as Jacobs, Carter and Burgess, Parsons, CH2MHILL, and SAIC as well as city and county agencies and governments such as City of Aspen, City of Glenwood Springs, Pitkin County, Colorado Department of Transportation, and Roaring Fork Transportation Agency. Owner and Wildlife Biologist Jonathan Lowsky, M.S. Wildlife Biology, Colorado State University, has a broad range of knowledge. With more than 20 years of professional experience with federal (US Forest Service), state (Colorado Division of Wildlife), and county agencies as well as two major universities (Colorado State University and University of Washington), Jonathan's career has focused on a diverse array of wildlife from bighorn sheep, elk, and songbirds to northern goshawks, flying squirrels, small mammals, and spotted bats. Mr. Lowsky's experience includes biological assessments and evaluations for NEPA compliance, conservation planning, GIS mapping and modeling, wildlife research, and ecological monitoring design and implementation, as well as wetland and riparian delineations, evaluations, and restoration. He has authored management plans and conservation easement baseline inventory reports and published scientific papers. An expert birder, experienced tracker, certified wetlands delineator, and passionate observer of wildlife, Jonathan has spent countless hours studying and appreciating Colorado's diverse ecological communities. Jonathan Lowsky completed the US Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineator Certification Program in 1999 and the Wildland Hydrology (Dave Rosgen) Applied Fluvial Geomorphology Course in 2001. This training has contributed to the quality and success of the wetlands delineations and wetlands and stream restoration projects Mr. Lowsky has completed and contributed to over the last 12 years. Prior to the inception of Colorado Wildlife Science, Jonathan served as the Pitkin County Wildlife Biologist for more than 6 years. In that role, he acted as the County's wetlands, stream, and riparian expert. A detailed description of Mr. Lowsky's professional experience and references are available. For additional information, please visit our website at co loradowildlifescience.com. COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 8.0 BACKGROUND & QUALIFICATIONS 13 Wildlife dam' Ecological Assessment - Eastbank FedEx February 18, 2015 WILDLIFE ASSESSMENT OF DEVELOPMENT FOR COUNTY SITE PLAN REVIEW MAPS EASTBANK FEDERAL EXPRESS PROPERTY COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 MAPS 14 107°18'10"W 107°18'0"W 107°17'50"W 107°17'40"W 107°17'30"W .+ zy►..:4'�R .:• 51 • bit z Zo ao M• ' ' 'teYynr. "`T� _•-,•'r-�; _ '•A - � ^ ` { ' f N 1i} C�O - 'J� �. � WU`=^`amu .,.r.kgyttoW 016 kb 2.ns ades,0O 9 O 0... 107°18'0"W 107°17'50"W 107°17'40"W 107°17'30"W Ecological Assessment of Commercial Development for Minor Subdivision Application Eastbank Federal Express Facility Figure 1. Aerial View & Vegetation Area of Detail Copycig�h� © 2013 Nationa`I; Geographlc`So5)ply;,1-cubed. raj Legend: Parcel Boundary Disturbed - Commercial Development/Road Disturbed Vegetation/Bare Soil Hay Field Pavement Riparian Shrubland Riverine Sagebrush Shrubland 0 50 100 200 300 1 in = 250 feet 400 JF t 500 Coordinate System: NAD83 State Plane Colorado Central Basemap Source(s): Bing Maps Project No 1500202 Date Prepared: 2015-02-23 Note: Not a survey. Parcel boundaries are approximate. Colorado Wildlife Science COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE LLC 0100 Elk Run Dr, Ste 128, Basalt, CO 81621 970.927.4549 info@coloradowildlifescience.com http://coloradowildlifescience.com I / / .4v t / / / / / .// / 1 / r 11/ / / Ecological Assessment of Commercial Development for Minor Subdivision Application Eastbank Federal Express Facility Figure 3. CPW Species Activity Mapping - Bald Eagle & Black Bear Ar,:t or TX:1ml • : • - Copyright© 2013 1\10_9(11.- qeogrOhiC Sdciety, i -cubed • Legend Parcel Boundary Bald Eagle Winter Range Bald Eagle Winter Foraging Area SIP Black Bear - Human Conflict Area g-rab Black Bear Fall Concentration 0 250 500 1 inch equals 625 feet Coordinate System: NAD83 State Plane Colorado Central Project No 1500202 I Feet 1,000 Date Prepared: 2015-02-23 .00 Colorado Wildlife Science Basemap Source(s): Bing Maps Note: Not a survey. Parcel boundaries are approximate. COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE LLC 0100 Elk Run Dr, Ste 128, Basalt, CO 81621 970.927.4549 infogeoloradowildlifescience.com http://coloradowildlifescience.com Ecological Assessment of Commercial Development for Minor Subdivision Application Eastbank Federal Express Facility Figure 3. CPW Species Activity Mapping - Mule Deer & Rocky Mountain EIk Sr- �Q Arca or octal _�.... opyrigIt?r 01,3 National.- Geogrp4h accSociety i -cubed 0 0 tyiritiKitiktal N Legend Parcel Boundary Winter Range Severe Winter Range Winter Concentration Area EIk Production Area Summer Range Migration Corridor 0 250 500 1 inch equals 625 feet Coordinate System: NAD83 State Plane Colorado Central Project No 1500202 (Feet 1,000 Date Prepared: 2015-02-23 V1°r244,6e e 25.iira*yog.-`e e -.e 43100 Colorado L4'ildlite Science Basemap Source(s): Bing Maps Note: Not a survey. Parcel boundaries are approximate. COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE LLC 0100 Elk Run Dr, Ste 128, Basalt, CO 81621 970.927.4 549 info@coloradowildlife scie nc e. com http://coloradowildlifescience.com Wildlife Assessment - EASTBANK FEDERAL EXPRESS PROPERTY February 27, 2015 WILDLIFE ASSESSMENT OF DEVELOPMENT FOR COUNTY ACTIVITY ENVELOPE & SITE PLAN REVIEW PHOTOS EASTBANK FEDERAL EXPRESS PROPERTY Wildlife dam' Ecological Assessment - Eastbank FedEx February 18, 2015 Photo 1. Property is comprised of a series of terraces or benches Photo 2. Dirt access road COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 PHOTOS 19 Wildlife dam' Ecological Assessment - Eastbank FedEx February 18, 2015 Photo 3. Lower dirt access road to Parcel 2B Photo 4. Higher quality sagebrush shrubland COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 PHOTOS 20 Wildlife dam' Ecological Assessment - Eastbank FedEx February 18, 2015 Photo 5. Poor quality, disturbed sagebrush shrubland with no understory vegetation Photo 6. Due to disturbance, rabbitbrush approaches co -dominance in remnant sagebrush stands COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 PHOTOS 21 Wildlife dam' Ecological Assessment - Eastbank FedEx February 18, 2015 Photo 7. Scotch thistle is a problem on the property Photo 8. Elk pellets were common on the February site assessment COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I PHOTOS 22 Wildlife dam' Ecological Assessment - Eastbank FedEx February 18, 2015 Photo 9. Elk tracks were observed during the site visit Photo 10. The property is highly disturbed with large areas of bare soil and weeds COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 PHOTOS 23 Wildlife dam' Ecological Assessment - Eastbank FedEx February 18, 2015 Photo 11. Non-native, invasive species and bare ground dominate large portions of the property Photo 12. Russian olive stand on the northwest end of the property COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 PHOTOS 24 Wildlife Eco logicalAssessment -Eastbank FedEx February 18, 2015 APPENDIX A: CPW SAM mule deer and elk seasonal activity area definitions ROCKY MOUNTAIN ELK HIGHWAY CROSSING: Those areas where elk movements traditionally cross roads, presenting potential conflicts between elk and motorists. MIGRATION CORRIDORS: A specific mappable site through which large numbers of animals migrate and loss of which would change migration routes. PRODUCTION AREA: That part of the overall range of elk occupied by the females from May 15 to June 15 for calving. (Only known areas are mapped and this does not include all production areas for the DAU). RESIDENT POPULATION: An area used year-round by a population of elk. Individuals could be found in any part of the area at any time of the year; the area cannot be subdivided into seasonal ranges. It is most likely included within the overall range of the larger population. SEVERE WINTER: That part of the range of a species where 90 percent of the individuals are located when the annual snowpack is at its maximum and/or temperatures are at a minimum in the two worst winters out of ten. The winter of 1983-84 is a good example of a severe winter. SUMMER CONCENTRATION: Those areas where elk concentrate from mid-June through mid-August. High quality forage, security, and lack of disturbance are characteristics of these areas to meet the high energy demands of lactation, calf rearing, antler growth, and general preparation for the rigors of fall and winter. SUMMER RANGE: That part of the range of a species where 90% of the individuals are located between spring green -up and the first heavy snowfall, or during a site specific period of summer as defined for each DAU. Summer range is not necessarily exclusive of winter range; in some areas winter range and summer range may overlap. WINTER CONCENTRATION: That part of the winter range of a species where densities are at least 200% greater than the surrounding winter range density during the same period used to define winter range in the average five winters out of ten. WINTER RANGE: That part of the overall range of a species where 90 percent of the individuals are located during the average five winters out of ten from the first heavy snowfall to spring green -up, or during a site specific period of winter as defined for each DAU. MULE DEER CONCENTRATION AREA: That part of the overall range where higher quality habitat supports significantly higher densities than surrounding areas. These areas are typically occupied year round and are not necessarily associated with a specific season. Includes rough break country, riparian areas, small drainages, and large areas of irrigated cropland. HIGHWAY CROSSING: Those areas where mule deer movements traditionally cross roads, presenting potential conflicts between mule deer and motorists. MIGRATION CORRIDORS: A specific mappable site through which large numbers of animals migrate and loss of which would change migration routes. RESIDENT POPULATION: An area that provides year-round range for a population of mule deer. The resident mule deer use all of the area all year; it cannot be subdivided into seasonal ranges although it may be included within the overall range of the larger population. SEVERE WINTER: That part of the overall range where 90% of the individuals are located when the annual snowpack is at its maximum and/or temperatures are at a minimum in the two worst winters out of ten. SUMMER RANGE: That part of the overall range where 90% of the individuals are located between spring green - up and the first heavy snowfall. Summer range is not necessarily exclusive of winter range; in some areas winter range and summer range may overlap. WINTER CONCENTRATION: That part of the winter range where densities are at least 200% greater than the surrounding winter range density during the same period used to define winter range in the average five winters out of ten. WINTER RANGE: That part of the overall range where 90 percent of the individuals are located during the average five winters out of ten from the first heavy snowfall to spring green -up, or during a site specific period of winter as defined for each DAU. COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I APPENDIX A: CPW SAM mule deer and elk seasonal activity area definitions 25 Wildlife Ecological Assessment - Eastbank FedEx February 18, 2015 APPENDIX B: State of Colorado Threatened & Endangered Vertebrates COMMON NAME LATIN NAME STATUS Boreal Toad Northern Cricket Frog Great Plains Narrowmouth Toad Northern Leopard Frog Wood Frog Plains Leopard Frog Couch's Spadefoot Whooping Crane Least Tern Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Plains Sharp -Tailed Grouse Piping Plover Bald Eagle Mexican Spotted Owl Burrowing Owl Lesser Prairie -Chicken Western Yellow -Billed Cuckoo Greater Sandhill Crane Ferruginous Hawk Gunnison Sage -Grouse American Peregrine Falcon Greater Sage Grouse Western Snowy Plover Mountain Plover Long -Billed Curlew Columbian Sharp -Tailed Grouse Bonytail Razorback Sucker Humpback Chub Colorado Pikeminnow Greenback Cutthroat Trout Rio Grande Sucker Lake Chub Plains Minnow Suckermouth Minnow Northern Redbelly Dace Southern Redbelly Dace Brassy Minnow AMPHIBIANS Bufo boreas boreas Acris crepitans Gastrophryne olivacea Rana pipiens Rana sylvatica Rana blairi Scaphiopus couchii BIRDS Grus americana Sterna antillarum Empidonax traillii extimus Tympanuchus phasianellus jamesii Charadrius melodus circumcinctus Haliaeetus leucocephalus Strix occidentalis lucida Athene cunicularia Tympanuchus pallidicinctus Coccyzus americanus Grus canadensis tabida Buteo regalis Centrocercus minimus Falco peregrinus anatum Centrocercus urophasianus Charadrius alexandrinus Charadrius montanus Numenius americanus Tympanuchus phasianellus columbianus FISH Gila elegans Xyrauchen texanus Gila cypha Ptychocheilus lucius Oncorhynchus clarki stomias Catostomus plebeius Couesius plumbeus Hybognathus placitus Phenacobius mirabilis Phoxinus eos Phoxinus erythrogaster Hybognathus hankinsoni SE SC SC SC SC SC SC FE, SE FE, SE FE, SE SE FT, ST ST FT, ST ST ST SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC FE, SE FE, SE FE, ST FE, ST FT, ST SE SE SE SE SE SE ST COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I APPENDIX B: State of Colorado Threatened & Endangered Vertebrates 26 Wildlife Ecological Assessment - Eastbank FedEx February 18, 2015 COMMON NAME Common Shiner LATIN NAME Luxilus cornutus STATUS ST Arkansas Darter Mountain Sucker Plains Orangethroat Darter Iowa Darter Rio Grande Chub Colorado Roundtail Chub Stonecat Colorado River Cutthroat Trout Rio Grande Cutthroat Trout Flathead Chub Gray Wolf Black -Footed Ferret Grizzly Bear Preble's Meadow Jumping Mouse Lynx Wolverine River Otter Kit Fox Townsend's Big -Eared Bat Black -Tailed Prairie Dog Botta's Pocket Gopher Northern Pocket Gopher Swift fox Triploid Checkered Whiptail Midget Faded Rattlesnake Longnose Leopard Lizard Yellow Mud Turtle Common King Snake Texas Blind Snake Texas Horned Lizard Roundtail Horned Lizard Massasauga Common Garter Snake Etheostoma cragini Catostomus playtrhynchus Etheostoma spectabile Etheostoma exile Gila pandora Gila robusta Noturus flavus Oncorhynchus clarki pleuriticus Oncorhynchus clarki virginalis Platygobio gracilus MAMMALS Canis lupus Mustela nigripes Ursus arctos Zapus hudsonius preblei Lynx canadensis Gulo gulo Lontra canadensis Vulpes macrotis Corynorhinus townsendii pallescens Cynomys ludovicianus Thomomy bottae rubidus Thomomys talpoides macrotis Vulpes velox REPTILES Cnemidophorus neotesselatus Crotalus viridis concolor Gambelia wislizenii Kinosternon flavescens Lampropeltis getula Leptotyphlops dulcis Phrynosoma cornutum Phrynosoma modestum Sistrurus catenatus Thamnophis sirtalis ST SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC FE, SE FE, SE FT, SE FT, ST FT, SE SE ST SE SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC I APPENDIX B: State of Colorado Threatened & Endangered Vertebrates 27 Wildlife dam' Ecological Assessment - Eastbank FedEx February 18, 2015 APPENDIX C: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Consultation Letter COLORADO WILDLIFE SCIENCE, LLC 1 APPENDIX C: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Consultation Letter 28 United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Western Colorado Ecological Services Field Office 445 WEST GUNNISON AVENUE, SUITE 240 GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81501 PHONE: (970)243-2778 FAX: (970)245-6933 URL: www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/es/Colorado/; www.fws.gov/platteriver/ Consultation Code: 06E24100 -2015 -SLI -0070 Event Code: 06E24100 -2015-E-00096 Project Name: Eastbank LLC Minor Subdivision u.s. FISH .R WILDLIFE SERVICE February 20, 2015 Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project location, and/or may be affected by your proposed project To Whom It May Concern: The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as well as proposed and final designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. The species list fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 etseq.). New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list. The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangered species and/or designated critical habitat. A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2) (c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a biological evaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to determine whether the project may affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 CFR 402.12. If a Federal agency determines, based on the Biological Assessment or biological evaluation, that listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected by the proposed project, the agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR 402. In addition, the Service recommends that candidate species, proposed species and proposed critical habitat be addressed within the consultation. More information on the regulations and procedures for section 7 consultation, including the role of permit or license applicants, can be found in the "Endangered Species Consultation Handbook" at: http://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/TOC-GLOS.PDF Please be aware that bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668 et seq.), and projects affecting these species may require development of an eagle conservation plan (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/eagle_guidance.html). Additionally, wind energy projects should follow the wind energy guidelines (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/) for minimizing impacts to migratory birds and bats. Guidance for minimizing impacts to migratory birds for projects including communications towers (e.g., cellular, digital television, radio, and emergency broadcast) can be found at: http://www. fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/towers/towers.htm; http://www.towerkill.com; and http://www. fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdlssues/Hazards/towers/comtow.html. We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Tracking Number in the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project that you submit to our office. Attachment 2 United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Project name: Eastbank LLC Minor Subdivision Official Species List Provided by: Western Colorado Ecological Services Field Office 445 WEST GUNNISON AVENUE, SUITE 240 GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81501 (970) 243-2778 http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/es/Colorado/ http://www.fws.gov/platteriver/ Consultation Code: 06E24100 -2015 -SLI -0070 Event Code: 06E24100 -2015-E-00096 Project Type: Development Project Name: Eastbank LLC Minor Subdivision Project Description: The applicants are proposing a minor subdivision in unincorporated Garfield County, CO. Please Note: The FWS office may have modified the Project Name and/or Project Description, so it may be different from what was submitted in your previous request. If the Consultation Code matches, the FWS considers this to be the same project. Contact the office in the 'Provided by' section of your previous Official Species list if you have any questions or concerns. http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 02/20/2015 11:50 AM 1 United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Project name: Eastbank LLC Minor Subdivision Project Location Map: Project Coordinates: MULTIPOLYGON (((-107.2987182 39.4832561, -107.2982758 39.4832662, -107.2978429 39.4833376, -107.2974335 39.4834678, -107.2971597 39.4835955, - 107.2963994 39.4840748, -107.2966856 39.4842622, -107.2953007 39.4852885, -107.2946157 39.4851162, -107.2946275 39.4850018, -107.2943813 39.4847753, -107.2931959 39.4838864, - 107.2927251 39.4835863, -107.2918394 39.4830974, -107.2926094 39.4822911, -107.2938882 39.4825088, -107.2949875 39.4827522, -107.2964821 39.4827132, -107.2966276 39.4827468, - 107.2970222 39.4827114, -107.2970482 39.4830426, -107.2979104 39.4828825, -107.2980423 39.4828263, -107.2980309 39.482776, -107.298361 39.4826853, -107.2989444 39.482464, - 107.2994829 39.4821912, -107.3002298 39.482081, -107.3015895 39.4822653, -107.301664 39.4825349, -107.3016692 39.483101, -107.3017915 39.4838232, -107.3019264 39.4841698, - 107.3020894 39.4844609, -107.3022381 39.4849312, -107.3020285 39.4850761, -107.3017994 39.4854635, -107.3017742 39.4858113, -107.3016081 39.4861594, -107.3015361 39.4863927, - 107.3010098 39.4867729, -107.3010092 39.4849134, -107.3008636 39.4844708, -107.3005864 39.4840676, -107.3001935 39.4837272, -107.2998361 39.4835248, -107.2992981 39.4833382, - http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 02/20/2015 11:50 AM 2 United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Project name: Eastbank LLC Minor Subdivision 107.2987182 39.4832561))) Project Counties: Garfield, CO http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 02/20/2015 11:50 AM 3 United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Project name: Eastbank LLC Minor Subdivision Endangered Species Act Species List There are a total of 10 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on your species list. Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species list because a project could affect downstream species. Critical habitats listed under the Has Critical Habitat column may or may not lie within your project area. See the Critical habitats within your project area section further below for critical habitat that lies within your project. Please contact the designated FWS office if you have questions. Birds Status Has Critical Habitat Condition(s) Greater sage -grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) Population: entire Candidate Mexican Spotted owl (Strix occidentalis lucida) Population: Entire Threatened Final designated Yellow -Billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus) Population: Western U.S. DPS Threatened Proposed Fishes Bonytail chub (Gila elegans) Population: Entire Endangered Final designated Colorado pikeminnow (Ptychocheilus Lucius) Population: Entire, except EXPN Endangered Final designated Greenback Cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki stomias) Population: Entire Threatened http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 02/20/2015 11:50 AM 4 United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Project name: Eastbank LLC Minor Subdivision Humpback chub (Gila cypha) Population: Entire Endangered Final designated Razorback sucker (Xyrauchen texanus) Population: Entire Endangered Final designated Flowering Plants Ute ladies' -tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis) Threatened Mammals Canada Lynx (Lynx canadensis) Population: (Contiguous U.S. DPS) Threatened http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 02/20/2015 11:50 AM 5 United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Project name: Eastbank LLC Minor Subdivision Critical habitats that lie within your project area There are no critical habitats within your project area. http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 02/20/2015 11:50 AM 6 Orrison Distributin Flying M Ranch Sketch Subdivision Plan Summa Parcel A - Business Park - 4.28 Acres 0,000-25,000 Additional SF Parcel B - Eco -Efficiency Homes - 6.93 Acres -6 Residential UnitslAcre Parcels C1, C2, C3 - Multi -Family Residential' Residential Lofts - 5.55 Acres 10-12 Residential Units/Acre Fork School District Potential CR 1541Hw 82 Interchan Parcel F Multi -Family Residential cf` Independent Living .,Patio Homes x.,4.8 Acres. FedX Existing Business Riverview School Parcel D - Community Service FaciIit Hospice of the Valley - 4.19 Acres approx. 26,500 SF - patient and suppo approx. 8,500 SF - administration pprox. 5,000 SF - mechanical/storage surface parkin• NParcel E - Multi -Family Residential ssisted Living - 2.87 Acre approx. 7,500 SF - administration and suppo approx. 25,000 SF - residential living units 5,000 SF - storage/mechanical under round and surface parkin• Parcel F - Multi -Family Residential Inde • endent Livin . Patio Homes - 4.8 Acres 5-6 Residential Units/Acre Parcel G - Hillside Open Space - 2.83 Acres Parcel H - Access/Utilities - 2.46 Acres Parcel E t' Multi -Family Residential `t \Assisted Living Facili \� 2.87 Acres Hos ice of the valley / 4.19 Acres ,Parcel C3 Multi -Family Residential ( `Residential Lofts,-- 1.34 Acres.; 1.xParcel C2 Multi -Family Residential Residential Lofts 1.O4 Acres 'Parcel H �* Acce sslUti I iti es�,,. _Parcel C1- _2.48 Acres Fl m Multi -Family Residential =* 7.7 _ Residential Lofts_�J� it 4=0.17 Acres Ilk r Parcel G''• . Hillside Open Space 2.83 Acres Flying M Ranch • estbank Nei, hborhoo Flying M Ranch Garfield County Properties Final Plat Amendment and Sketch Subdivision Plan Concept Flying M Ranch 120 240 Seo y updated December 21, 2017 by The Land Studio, Inc. 800 norm