HomeMy WebLinkAbout20020698.tiff e—Ni/ism PC lea
y,f 3(?r._ ��1
56O it
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION S —596 -
PLANNING DEPARTMENT USE ONLY:
Case Number Application Fee:
Zoning District Receipt Number
Date Application Checked By:
Planner Assigned to Case: C A w)
To BE COMPLETED BY THE APPLICANT: (Print or type only except for required signatures).
I(we),the undersigned,hereby request hearings before the Weld County Planning Commission and the Board of County
Commissioners concerning the
proposed PUD rezoning of the following described unincorporated area of Weld County.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Gvtg B0ie 2/94 Pr/E2 S—/-69/o O r 5579F1,e AvE) ERIE CO
(If additional space is required, attach an additional sheet of this same size or a copy of the deed)
PARCEL NUMBER: / 4/'f¢ 0. / O 0 C 2 0(12 digit number-found on TAX I.D.or obtained at the Assessor's
Office)
NAME OF PROPOSED PUD SUBDIVISION Sy/'1M/r ✓`}T/401/ k/E/e/
EXISTING ZONING /f 6rR I CULTUR/4L PROPOSED ZONING E6rnre Re5/Pa r/4L
TOTAL ACREAGE 2 9.."--q9- OVERLAY DISTRICTS N/�i
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT GUIDE SUBMITTAL(Specific or Conceptual) Co/VCEPTU/9'L
PROPERTY OWNERS OF AREA PROPOSED FOR PUD REZONING:
NAME Oh l7L fr t/PAIENT Z Lr C _ PHONE (1q 651-362 ?
ADDRESS `437 al S r Al/C , Lim) Co Bosof
NAME PHONE
ADDRESS
alEtleflittarAUTHORIZED AGENT(if different than above;}
NAME p,eiviP a-, f G-/S// I erv�/ /off< /z `5�>: AZI�AGfiETP L `7TEk
ADDRESS C.62.CFoX -/FILL ,Q_�
HOME TELEPHONE (3o$n57 7 4.--51 BUSINESS TELEPHONE (7c7)657—3 8 19
CE/2.-: 7 75✓r5 8�
• If agent is different from the property owner, please submit written documentation from the property owner
authorizing said agent to represent the owner.
Signature: ror orized Agent
2002-0698
•FROM :•TekNotions Corp. FAX NO. :303-651-3829 Feb. 25 2002 09:23PM P1/6
451 21°Avenuo,Longmont,CO 80501
Voice/Fax:(303)651-3829 DNS Development,LLC
Fax
To: Weld County Planning Offices From: David Dalglish
Far- 970-304-6498 Pages 6,Including this page
Phone; 970-353-6100,ext.3540 Date: 02/25/02
Re: Z-568 Additional Items CC:
d Urgent ❑ For Review O Please Comment O Please Reply ❑Please Recycle
ATTN: Carla Angell
Here is the response to your recommendation letter,and the request for Administrative review.
Let me know is you need anything else for the COZ package.
Do you have a time for the hearing,yet? I need to let my partner know as soon as possible.
Thanks for your prompt attention to this request
Dave
EXHIBIT
. FROM ;TekNotions Corp. FAX NO. :303-651-3829 Feb. 25 2002 09:24PM P2/6
•
DNS Development, LLC
451 21"Avenue, Longmont, CO 80501
David Dalglish, Project Manager, (303)651-3829
February 25, 2002
Ms. Carla Angell, Planner
Weld County Planning Department
1555 N. 17th Ave.
Greeley, CO 80631
RE: Z-568, Summit at Mountain View PUD COZ Submittal
Dear Carla:
Assuming the Planning Commissioners recommend approval for Change of Zone
at our March 5, 2002 hearing, and assuming that the Board of County
Commissioners (BOCC) also approve the request, I intend to submit the PUD
Final Plan & Plat shortly thereafter.
It is my understanding that, upon request, the BOCC can authorize review of the
Final Plan & Plat by the Planning Staff. From my discussions with the Planning
Staff, I believe this approach would be to the benefit of both parties.
I, therefore, request that the Weld County Commissioners authorize the
Department of Planning Services to review case Z-568 for the Final Plan step.
Thank you f r your consi eration.
r
Dave Dalglish
FROM :TekNotions Corp. FAX NO. :303-651-3829 Feb. 25 2002 09:24PM P3/6
DNS Development, LLC
451 21'd Avenue, Longmont, CO 80501
David Dalglish, Project Manager,(303)651-3829
February 25, 2002
Ms. Carla Angeli, Planner
Weld County Planning Department
1555 N. 17th Ave.
Greeley, CO 80631
RE: Z-568, Summit at Mountain View PUD COZ Submittal
Dear Carla:
I have reviewed your Change of Zone recommendation letter and all responses
from referral agencies. I have also reviewed and discussed these items with all
DNS Development partners (DNS). Although the Department of Planning
Services' staff recommends approval of the COZ application, that approval is
based on meeting all conditions contained in your recommendation letter. My
partners and I are requesting that certain requirements be waived as conditions
of the COZ approval. The issues associated with these conditions are
summarized below, along with our response to each issue:
1. URBAN SCALE DEVELOPMENT.
Document References:
- Carla Angeli Administrative Recommendation letter, Section 2. A. 2)—final
sentence.
- Referral Response letter from Drew Scheltinga, P.E., Engineering Division
Manager, Weld County Public Works Department, dated 1/29/2002
- Carmacar resident, Larry Leatherman's letter, dated 2/1/02 —attached.
ISSUE:
Your letter states that "..urban scale development standards shall be
imposed", because the subject site is "located within close proximity to
existing PUDs, subdivisions,..". You go on to point out that this Code
requirement applies because of the existing adjacent subdivisions of
Carmacar Ranchettes and the Peaks at Mountain View.
FROM ,:TekNotions Corp. FAX NO. :303-651-3829 Feb. 25 2002 09:24PM P4/6
RESPONSE:
1) GENERAL: Because this PUD will only add 6 lots to the existing 74
adjacent lots (1 existing, 68 Carmacar, 5 Peaks), and is located in a rural
area, the only part of"urban scale development standards" that pertains
to this PUD, is the section requiring paved roads with sidewalks, curbs
and gutters. The roads in the adjacent subdivisions, Carmacar
Ranchettes and Peaks at Mountain View, are not paved, nor do the
residents desire paved roads (see attached letter from Larry Leatherman).
All three subdivisions are set in a rural atmosphere, with the closest
municipality being the city of Erie, approximately 1 % mile away. The area
is highly populated with horses and other farm animals.
2) NEIGHBORS: Contrary to Drew Scheltinga's letter, the majority of
Carmacar residents do not want the roads paved in their district.
According to Larry Leatherman's letter, fourth paragraph, he doesn't
believe the Carmacar residents will "ever get a majority to pave". We held
meetings with the Caramacar Ranchette residents to make it clear that we
would participate in the cost of paving, if they approved the proposal, but
they voted it down.
3) COSTS: The cost per household for paving the whole district would have
come out to be approximately $4.68 per sq. yd. of asphalt. The street for
this PUD (Summit Way), is only 7% of the total district road area. To only
pave Summit Way would cost approximately$11.61 per sq. yd., almost 2
%times the cost of doing it for the whole district. The "urban scale"
requirement of having curbs, sidewalks, and gutters, would add
approximately $39,304 to the cost of Summit Way (quotation available
upon request).
4) MAINTENANCE: If Summit Way was the only paved road in this district,
the pavement would get abnormal abuse from traffic that must travel over
gravel roads to get to and from Summit Way. The maintenance costs
would be impractical, and the result would be tom-up pavement, which
would be worse than having a well-maintained gravel road.
5) FUGITIVE DUST: Even though the Caramacar residents do not want to
pave the roads, some of them are concerned about fugitive dust control.
This PUD application addresses that issue in the Development Guide. In
essence, the PUD's covenants will require every owner to share equitably,
with the Caramacar and Peaks residents, in the periodic dust abatement
costs. In fact, the applicants have already shared in those costs — see
Larry Leatherman's letter.
FROM :TekNotions Corp. FAX NO. :303-651-3829 Feb. 25 2002 09:24PM P5/6
6) CONCLUSION: My partners and I respectfully request a waiver of the
"urban scale development standards"for the above-mentioned reasons,
until such time that the local residents desire paved roads.
2. SCHOOL DISTRICT.
Document Reference: St. Vrain School District letter, dated 1/9/2002.
ISSUE:
Glen Segrue, Planning Specialist for the St. Vrain School District, states the
they are "OPPOSED to the approval of this application due to this
development's impact on already overcrowded school facilities."
RESPONSE:
This PUD will add 6 residences to the existing 74 residences. According to
the St. Vrain School District's formula, this would POTENTIALLY add 4
students to the total district enrollment, My partners and I think it would be
unacceptable to hold up this development until new schools are developed to
accommodate 4 new students. However, we have addressed this issue in the
Development Guide, which essentially states that the PUD will participate in
the School District Cash-In-Lieu Contribution of$645 per unit.
Thank you for your c nsi eration.
Dave Dalglish
eTh
DNS Development, LLC
451 215`Avenue, Longmont, CO 80501
David Dalglish, Project Manager, (303)651-3829
November 5, 2001
Robert Anderson
Weld County Planning Department
1555 N. 17th Ave.
Greeley, CO 80631
RE: Summit at Mountain View PUD COZ Submittal
Dear Robert:
The purpose of this letter is to explain the status of the Oil/Gas Well setback
impact on this PUD.
The Well is owned by North American Resource Company, or NARCO (soon to
be called Pan Canadian Energy). I have been communicating with Dale
Hayhurst at NARCO, 303-839-3024.
The main issue for the PUD is the current location of the tank, which is shown on
the enclosed Change of Zone plat. The well and separator locations are not an
issue, because they are located close to the north property line, and the building
envelopes for Lots 2 & 3 can be located beyond the 150' setback. The current
location of the tank, however, is a problem, because it is located nearly 200'
south of the north property line. The 200' setback arc from the tank imposes a
significant impact on the possible location of buildings on Lots 2 & 3, and may
even make Lot 3 not suitable for building.
Mr. Hayhurst and I have arrived at a proposed solution to the problem. The tank
can be moved to the location shown on the enclosed COZ Landscape Plat. With
the tank located in the Northwest corner of the PUD, the 200' setback has little
impact on the Lot 2 & 3 building envelopes.
Please contact me if you have any further questions or comments regarding this
issue.
Thanks for your help and cooperation.
Dave Dalglis
Minutes of DNS Development LLC,
A Colorado Limited Liability Company
WHEREAS, an organizational meeting was held November 1, 2001; and
Whereas, the members are David G. Daglish,
Karla I. Daglish
Robert D. Niemeyer
Robert D. Scholten,
Elizabeth J. Scholten, and
WHEREAS, the manager of the LLC is Elizabeth J. Scholten, and
WHEREAS, a quit claim deed was executed from the individual members to DNS
Development LLC; and,
WHEREAS, the organization is interested in changing the use of property acquired by the
organization known as 5579 Fir Ave, Erie, CO 80513,
It is hereby resolved that David G. Dalglish shall have the authority to sign for the
organization on any documents, contracts, requiring signature to accomplish this change
of zoning and platting.
Res e Ily submitted, Q442
Eliz eth J. Scholten /9L
Manager
EJS/
r
Foothills Engineering
420 Twenty-first Avenue, No. 113
Longmont, Colorado 80501
(303) 851-7212
October 10, 2001
Director, Department of Planning Services
Weld County Administrative Offices
1555 N. 17th Avenue
Greeley, CO 80631
Re: Summit at Mtn. View, a proposed 7-lot PUD residential subdivision, located 3 mi. NE of Erie
Greetings:
The developers of Summit at Mtn. View would like to request an exception to Weld County's
requirements to pave the internal streets of this proposed PUD.
Summit at Mtn. View is a 28.6-acre parcel which is being subdivided into 7 residential horse-
properties of over 3 acres each. Carmacar Ranchettes lies to the east, and the Peaks @ Mtn. View
PUD subdivision adjoins the property to the south. To the west are open fields, and to the north
lies another vacant parcel. The character of the area is rural, with large residential lots and a lot of
livestock, including many horses.
Access to the subdivision is from Weld County Road 5, through Carmacar Ranchettes. There will
be only one internal street, Summit Way, consisting of a cul-de-sac approximately 750 feet long
extending west from Fir Avenue, which is not paved. None of the streets in either Carmacar
Ranchettes or the Peaks @ Mtn. View are paved, but they are well-gravelled. Dust control, when
needed, is accomplished by the application of dust-abating chemicals.
In keeping with the rural character of the area, and to match the surrounding street system, the
developers would prefer to surface Summit Way with six inches of compacted CDOT Class 5 or
Class 6 base course. Dust-abating chemicals such as magnesium chloride would be applied on a
regular schedule to control fugitive dust.
The developers would be willing to participate in any future paving project involving streets in
Carmacar Ranchettes and The Peaks @ Mtn. View. At the present time, however, the paving of
this one short street in an area of gravel roads would not seem to be an effective use of resources.
Sincerely,
Jo (Jack)Myers, P.E.
cc: Dave Dalglish
The Summit at Mountain View
DEVELOPMENT GUIDE (27-6)
(Conceptual)
November 5, 2001
Description
The Summit at Mountain View is a Planned Unit Development (PUD) in
southwestern Weld County, Colorado approximately 2 miles northeast of the
Town of Erie. The general concept for the PUD is to create smaller lots than what
currently exists (one home with 28.594 acres). Since there is no irrigation water,
this plan will make better use of the existing dry land by creating smaller more
manageable parcels for a total of 7 single-family residences. The plan allows for
horses and 4H projects, and for energy efficient houses in a rural environment.
The existing single family home would have 3.285 acres. The newly created
additional six parcels would range from 3.224 to 3.370 acres each. This
application will require a zoning change from agricultural zoning to estate
residential use.
Perimeter open space, commonly available to all lots, offers a recreational area
for owners and their animals, and provides a buffer for existing property owners
to the East (Carmacar Ranchettes). This common area comprises 4.445 acres
(15.5%).
This proposed low density living environment will be controlled and managed via
a Homeowners Association with an Architectural Control Committee and an
appropriate Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CCR's).
The Summit at Mountain View is sited to afford stellar views of Longs Peak, the
Indian Peaks Wilderness and Boulder's Flatirons. Ready access to Boulder and
Longmont is available from its close proximity to Colorado Highway 52 and to
Denver, Loveland, and Fort Collins, via the North 1-25 corridor.
Location
The Summit at Mountain View is located approximately one-half mile northwest
of Weld County Roads 12 and 5, immediately west of Carmacar Ranchettes,
directly north of the Peaks @ Mtn View, and South of Colorado Highway 52
approximately one-half mile.
Size
The PUD size is 28.594 acres with 7 lots ranging from 3.224 acres to 3.370 acres
in size, plus 4.445 acres of open space (15.5%).
Legal Description
The PUD parcel is described as Lot B of Recorded Exemption 2196 being a part
of the east half of Section 5, Township 1 North, Range 68 West of the 6th Prime
Meridian, Weld County, Colorado.
Zoning
Present—Agricultural
Proposed - 7 Lot, Estate Residential PUD
Utilities and Services
Water: Left Hand Water District
Sewer: Individual Septic
Gas: KN Energy
Telephone: Qwest
Electric: United Power
School: St. Vrain Valley School District RE-1J
Fire: Mountain View Fire Protection District
Law Enforcement: Weld County Sheriffs Department
Ambulance: Tri-Area Ambulance Service and American
Medical Response, Longmont, CO
Access: Privately maintained Summit Way to Fir
Avenue to Spruce Drive or Mountain View
Street to Weld County Road 5 to Colorado
Highway 52 or Weld County Roads 8, 10 or 12
to Interstate 25.
Legal Status
The parcel is owned by DNS Development, LLC, 451 21st Ave., Longmont, CO
80501. The proposed Listing Company for the lots at The Summit at Mountain
View will be Coldwell Banker Residential Brokerage, 451 21st Ave., Longmont,
CO 80501, (303) 772-7478. Marketing is planned for winter, 2001/2, and sales
and closings subsequent to infrastructure development (i.e., roadway, utilities,
signage, etc. and formation of the Homeowners Association, etc.).
2
The Summit at Mountain View
DEVELOPMENT GUIDE (27-6)
(Conceptual)
November 5, 2001
Following are explanatory statements addressing how the Summit at Mountain
View will address the following impacts:
Component One - Environmental Impacts (27-6-40)
The small scale, low-density nature of the development, by definition, strives to
generate minimal environmental impacts both internally and externally.
A. Noise &. Vibration (27-6-40,B.,1.):
Except during authorized construction, gardening and mowing, no
offensive or detrimental noise or vibration generating activities will be
permitted that would negatively affect lot owners or the adjacent neighbors
and the general public. Control responsibility shall lie with the
Homeowners Association and/or the Architectural Control Committee. The
speed limit on Summit Way shall not exceed 25 miles per hour.
B. Smoke, Dust & Odors (27-6-40,B.,2.):
No exterior fires (except barbecue fires within appropriate containers) shall
be permitted unless specifically authorized by the Homeowners
Association and appropriate governmental jurisdictions. No conditions
which create a fire hazard or which are in violation of fire prevention
regulations shall be allowed.
Appropriate landscaping, including natural grass vegetation will be
required on all lots and open space.
Appropriate surface treatment and a 25 mph speed limit on Summit Way
will prevail to minimized fugitive dust. All lot owners of the development
will be required to pay an equitable share of the cost of surface treatment
applied to the unpaved roadways, which provide access to the PUD. This
would apply to the roadways where the vehicle trips exceed 200 per day,
according to state Regulation Number 1, Subpart III, D Fugitive Dust. The
most effective method for this treatment is to apply magnesium chloride.
This information was obtained in an email from Robert Jorgenson at the
�. state regulations department, dated 9/25/01.
3
F- ,-m
Composting of yard/animal refuse will be encouraged. Manure shall be
periodically removed or incorporated into the soil on a regular basis to
mitigate odors and insect and pest propagation. Gardening and mowing
may generate some dust.
C. Heat, Light & Glare (27-6-40,B.,3.):
No highly reflective window coating, such as metal foil, which acts as a
light reflector will be allowed within the development, unless specifically
authorized by the Homeowners Association and appropriate governmental
jurisdictions. Any exterior lighting installed shall be indirect or of such
controlled focus or intensity as not to disturb the residents of adjacent
properties. No street lighting is planned.
D. Visual/Aesthetic Impacts (27-6-40,B.,4.):
The Summit at Mountain View will permit single family residences of
design type ranch, two story, or split-level. Out buildings will be permitted,
but they will be constrained to be consistent with the residences.
This low-density development encourages high quality, energy efficient
construction. The owner's intent for the visual character of this
development is that it be consistent and harmonious with all adjacent
properties, but keeping with modern design standards. Weld County
Controls and Homeowner Association Covenants will demand mature
landscaping, underground utilities, sheltered satellite dishes and veiled
storage.
New two story residences will have some impact on the Western view of
the Carmacar subdivision along Fir Avenue. However, meetings with the
Carmacar residents have led to the creation of a large portion of the open
space being relocated to the eastern portion of the proposed PUD, thus
maximizing the view for the two residences adjacent to the PUD on the
East Side of Fir Ave. Also, the angle of the access street to the cul-de-sac
has been designed to avoid headlights shining directly at either of these
residences. Building envelopes are designed to preserve vistas and view
planes internal and external to the project. The PUD will also be within
site lines of one residence to the north.
Architecture controls will insure congruence of finishes, colors, materials
and amenities. Building height shall not exceed 35 feet. No building,
fence, barn, corral, paddock or other permanent structure will be permitted
without written approval of the Architectural Control Committee.
Only temporary on-street parking will be allowed, such as that needed for
4
visitors or service vehicles. And all mobile equipment (including disabled),
supplies, equipment, etc. must be completely sheltered from eye level
view.
Notwithstanding the foregoing; during periods of construction, not to
exceed twelve (12) months/lot, temporary structures and equipment shall
be allowed upon the individual lots, but not on Summit Way.
Landscaping and grasses shall be maintained and periodically mowed or
grazed to present an aesthetically appropriate presence.
Xeriscape landscaping and/or grasses will be utilized upon the open
space. An eight (8) foot wide fine crushed gravel pathway will border all
lots. Scheduled maintenance of this path, such as grading and repair, will
be the responsibility of the Home Owners Association. Total open space
will be 4.445 acres (15.5% of the total PUD).
A subdivision name sign and landscaping will identify the entrance to The
Summit at Mountain View and will compliment the transition from
Carmacar Ranchettes.
E. Electrical Interference (27-6-40,B.,5.):
r
Except for law enforcement, and fire and medical service providers, only
normal consumer-based electrical and electronic equipment will be
allowed on the site, without written approval of the Architectural Control
Committee. Examples of allowed equipment are garage door openers,
home security systems, cellular telephones, Internet dishes, and citizen
band or amateur radios. No commercial power transmitters will be
allowed on the site.
F. Water Pollution (27-6-40,B.,6.):
No wells for the production of water, oil or natural gas shall be dug or
operated within the development except upon the authorization of the
Homeowners Association and the appropriate governmental jurisdictions.
No mining occurs presently, nor is anticipated in the future.
G. Waste Water Disposal (27-6-40,B.,7.):
The site slopes slightly from southwest to northeast at 2% to 5% grade.
Storm water runoff coefficients will increase very slightly from current non-
irrigated agricultural uses, because of residential and ancillary
development on the 6 new lots and installation of a gravel surfaced
roadway (Summit Way). A storm water retainage basin will be
5
constructed, if required. However, in any case, runoff will largely be
absorbed by the soils with minor runoff migrating to the existing earthen
borrow ditch along the west side of Fir Avenue.
Sewage disposal will be via individual septic systems on the respective
lots.
H. Wetland Removal (27-6-40,B.,8.):
No wetlands exist on the site.
Erosion & Sedimentation (27-6-40,B.,9.):
Landscaping and natural grasses will minimize wind and sheet water
erosion. Negligible sedimentation in the Fir Avenue borrow ditch is
expected.
J. Excavating, Filling & Grading (27-6-40,B.,10.):
The site is very flat. Minor filling and grading associated with construction
of Summit Way will occur.
Normal excavation associated with home/outbuilding construction, septic
systems, common pathways, and the access road and underground
utilities is expected. Surplus soil will be stockpiled and/or reused for
landscaping.
K. Drilling, Ditching or Dredging (27-6-40,B.,11.):
See F. and J. above. Normal soils drilling and testing associated with
foundation and septic design and construction will be required. No
dredging will occur. Ditching for the installation of underground utilities will
be required and joint trench installations will be encouraged.
L. Air Pollution (27-6-40,B.,12.):
See B, J and K above.
M. Solid Waste (27-6-40,B.,13):
See B. and G. above. Construction and household solid waste removal
will be via private waste removal service providers, contractors or lot
owners.
N. Wildlife Removal (27-6-40,B.,14):
6
Not required. Native grasses will be planted on the open space to provide
habitat for small mammals and birds. Sturdy, tightly closed containers for
household refuse will be mandated by the CC&R's to rebuff pests.
O. Natural Vegetation Removal (27-6-40,B.,15):
This will be negligible, since all vegetation is either agricultural products or
weeds and grasses.
P. Radiation/Radioactive Removal (27-6-40,B.,16.):
None, except for radon mitigation measures that will be considered
relative to home design and construction.
Q. Drinking Water Source (27-6-40,B.,17.):
Potable water will be supplied by Left Hand Water District. See
Development Guide, Component Two - Service Provision Impacts,
(6.3.1.2.1.9), following this section.
R. Traffic Impacts (27-6-40,B.,18):
pr- See Development Guide, Component Two - Service Provision Impacts, F,
following this section.
7
The Summit at Mountain View
DEVELOPMENT GUIDE (27-6)
(Conceptual)
November 5, 2001
Component Two - Service Provision Impacts (27-6-50)
A. Schools (27-6-50,B.,1.):
The PUD lies within the St. Vrain Valley School District, RE1J. Students
will attend Erie Elementary School or the Erie Middle/Senior High Schools.
Potential area growth could eventually mandate attendance elsewhere per
St. Vrain Valley School District letter of June 27, 2001.
The District's impact formula results in an additional 4 students incidental
to the addition of 6 lots to this project.
An agreement will be executed with the School District which will include a
"cash-in lieu of land dedication fee" of$645 per lot, payable either by the
developer or owners prior to building permit issuance.
A pullout waiting area for buses and mailboxes will be created at the
intersection of Fir Avenue and Summit Way - see Notes on the Landscape
Plat.
B. Law Enforcement (27-6-50,B.,2.):
The proposed PUD will be served by the Weld County Sheriff's
Department.
C. Fire Protection (27-6-50,B.,3.):
The proposed PUD will be serviced by the Mountain View Fire Protection
District. Two hydrants will be required on Summit Way, to satisfy spacing
and access requirements. A Fire Flow Field Test was performed for the
adjacent property (Peaks @ Mtn View) on May 11, 1999, which indicated
available fire flow of 1,565 gallons per minute (gpm) at 20 psig at Weld
County Road 5 and Spruce Drive. According to the referral from the
Mountain View Fire Protection District, dated June 25, 2001 (see Sketch
plan referrals), the minimum water requirement for one- and two-story
single family residences up to 3,600 gross sq. ft. is 1000 gpm and 20 psig.
Subsequent conversations with the fire district have resulted in the
following guidelines: the requirements for buildings, including residences,
8
which exceed 3,600 gross sq. ft., are highly dependent on the type of
construction, and are therefore subject to review by the fire district. For a
reference point, most buildings from 3,600 to 4,800 sq. ft. would require a
minimum of 1500 gpm, and larger than 4,800 sq. ft. would require a
minimum of 1750 gpm. If, upon review, the fire district deems the
pressure is not sufficient, mandatory sprinkler systems shall be required.
D. Ambulance (27-6-50,B.,4.):
The ambulance service providers for the area are Tri-Area Ambulance
Service and American Medical Response, Longmont, CO. A formal
"Petition for Inclusion" must be tendered to each company before service
can be initiated.
E. Transportation (Circulation & Roadway) (27-6-50,B.,5.):
Access to the PUD is directly from unpaved Fir Avenue (60 feet R.O.W.)
which runs along the west side of Carmacar Ranchettes subdivision.
Direct routes through Carmacar are Mountain View Street and Spruce
Drive, both unpaved, which lead from Weld County Road 5.
Access within The Summit at Mountain View will be via an unpaved,
privately maintained roadway (Summit Way) approximately 750 feet in
length. Its 60 foot right-of- way and construction will comply with Weld
County standards and those of the Town of Erie since the PUD lies within
3 miles of the Town's incorporated limits. Both lane widths will be 12 feet,
respectively, with 4 foot wide shoulders. The single cul-de-sac will have a
driven radius of 50 feet within a 65 foot right-of-way radius.
Summit Way will intersect Fir Avenue at 90 degrees with a standard stop
sign and street sign. The intersection with Fir Avenue is placed to
minimize auto headlights shining into existing houses within Carmacar.
The speed limit shall be 25 mph. No parking will be allowed on the road,
shoulder or within the right-of-way of Summit Way.
F. Traffic Impact Analysis (27-6-50,B.,6.):
Given the low density of adjacent Carmacar Ranchettes, the low additional
traffic impact of this proposed 6 additional lot estate residential PUD, and
the fact that Fir Avenue and this PUD are essentially at a "dead-end" from
a vehicular flow perspective, a Traffic Impact Analysis by the Weld County
Public Works Department is not required — see letter from Drew
Scheltinga, P.E., Engineering Division Manager.
G. Storm Drainage (27-6-50,B.,7.):
9
See Component One - Environmental Impacts, G — Waste Water
Disposal.
A Storm Water Drainage Study prepared by a licensed professional
engineer in the State of Colorado will be submitted with the Detailed
Development Guide and required submittals for the Planned Unit
Development Final Plan and Plat.
H. Utility Provisions (27-6-50,B.,8.):
Utility easements to be shown on the Final Plat will provide not less than
15 feet front lot width and not less than 20 feet side and rear lot width. All
open space shall be available for utility installations, as well as the Summit
Way right-of-way.
Water - See Section I. below.
Sewer- See Section J. below.
Electric: A proposal letter was received from United Power, Inc.,
dated April 3, 2001. Power is available adjacent to the site
and no capacity problems are anticipated. Electric lines will
be underground with pad mounted transformers located in
the Summit Way right-of-way. Joint trenching with other
utilities will be encouraged.
Natural Gas: Contact has been initiated with KN Energy, Inc. Natural gas
is available in Carmacar Ranchettes and no capacity
problems are anticipated. Natural gas lines will be
underground and joint trenching with other utilities will be
encouraged.
Telephone: Contact has been initiated with U. S. West Communications.
Service is available adjacent to the site and no problems are
anticipated. Telephone lines will be underground and joint
trenching with other utilities will be encouraged.
Cable TV: Contact has been initiated with Comcast. Service is available
in Park Lane Estates and Comcast is "building toward
Carmacar." No problems are anticipated and joint trenching
with other utilities will be encouraged.
Dish Ant: Satellite dishes will be allowed within the proposed PUB if
screened from eye level view.
r
Water Provisions (27-6-50,B.,9.):
10
es. ..
Contact has been initiated with Left Hand Water District. The Subdivision
Agreement for 6 additional single family residential taps has been
approved and signed. (see letter attachments dated March 15 & 16,
2001,). Adequate capacity exists via an 8" line extension at the owner/
developer's cost from Fir Avenue. The extension will be installed
according to Left Hand and Weld County specifications. Two fire hydrants
will be required, spaced not more than 500 feet apart. The hydrants will be
located in the Summit Way right-of-way, or close to Summit Way on Fir
Ave.
Six tap applications and associated fees have been tendered to Left Hand
Water District (6 @ $25.00 each). A Subdivision/Multiple Tap Purchase
Agreement (copy attached) has been signed. Plant investment fees in the
amount of $16,224, and Line Participation Fees in the amount of $15,000
will be paid prior to activation of any taps.
In lieu of Raw Water Transfer, the owner/developer intends to pay the
"Water Acquisition Fee," the "Water Reserve Rqmt," and the "Meter/Pit
Charge," less credits, if applicable, in the amounts of $5,560 per lot prior
to activation of any taps.
Two Fire Hydrant Fund Fees totaling $2,400 will also be paid to Left Hand
Water District.
All water lines and meter/pits will be located underground.
J. Sewage Disposal Provisions (27-6-50,B.,10.):
Sewage disposal will be provided via private septic systems on the 6
additional individual lots. The systems will be designed and constructed to
meet all applicable rules and regulations set forth by the Weld County
Health Department.
A "Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report", which includes
Percolation Test Results and Septic System Recommendations, dated
March 20, 2001, by Terracon, Longmont, CO, Project No. 22015041 is
available upon request.
K. Structural Road Improvements Plan (27-6-50,B.,11.):
Not Applicable.
r
11
The Summit at Mountain View
DEVELOPMENT GUIDE (27-6)
(Conceptual)
November 5, 2001
Component Three - Landscape Elements (27-6-60)
More definitive landscaping plans will be brought forth in the Specific
Development Guide to be submitted with the Final Plan & Plat.
A. Intent (27-6-60,B.,1):
The intent of the Landscape Plan for The Summit at Mountain View is to
insure that the landscaping and aesthetics of the site are compatible with
and complementary to those of surrounding land uses and that the site will
afford an attractive, inviting living environment for those inside the PUD.
Goals of this Plan include:
Adopt a rural, open space theme
Provide an esthetically pleasing transition from the adjacent Carmacar
Ranchettes and the Peaks @ Mtn View to the PUD.
Project a rural image, which focuses on the stellar views available of
Longs Peak, the Flatirons and the Indian Peaks.
Enhance westward views by defining building envelopes, thus maximizing
views from each lot.
Provide an open space, natural buffer around The Summit at Mountain
View.
Minimize maintenance demands, energy requirements, and water usage.
Concepts of this Plan include:
• A subdivision entry statement.
• "Clustering" of landscaping elements
�-. • Xeriscaping and low maintenance (once established) materials and
natural grasses.
12
• Low emittance and drip irrigation techniques.
•. Through the efforts of the Homeowners Association: 1) encouraging
residents to utilize sprinkling systems "off-sun" hours to minimize
evaporative losses and 2) mandating not less than 10 mature (3"-4" trunk)
trees on each of the 7 lots within 3 years of occupancy.
B. Landscaping Compatibility (27-6-60,B.,2):
See foregoing Section Intent, (27-6-60,B.,1.).
C. Landscape Maintenance Schedule (27-6-60,B.,3.):
All plantings will be specified to require minimal supplemental irrigation
once established. Periodic fertilizing, watering and care will, however, be
required for approximately the first three years subsequent to installation.
The Homeowners Association will insure appropriate landscape
maintenance occurs.
The entryway will require minimal maintenance and will be kept in good
order (cleaning, weeding, repair and maintenance) by the Homeowner
Association. Similarly, maintenance of the open space and pathway will be
by the Homeowners Association.
D. Landscape Improvements Agreement (27-6-60,B.,4.):
A Landscape Improvements Agreement will be submitted with the Final
Plan & Plat.
E. Landscape Irrigation (27-6-60,B.,5.):
Potable water, provided by Left Hand Water District through an 8"
distribution line in Summit Way will provide irrigation water.
13
The Summit at Mountain View
DEVELOPMENT GUIDE (27-6)
(Conceptual)
November 5, 2001
Component Four- Site Design (27-6-70)
A. Intent (27-6-70,B.,1.):
In considering various design, lot layout, building envelope, access and
landscaping issues, numerous alternatives have been reviewed.
The site is a flat, dryland agricultural parcel currently planted in winter
wheat. Minimal relief exists across the land and slopes of 2% to 5%
prevail, generally to the northeast. A single large cottonwood tree exists
at the west edge of the property in the northwest quadrant. The tree will be
retained.
The parcel is dominated by stellar views of the Front Range to the
southwest, west and northwest, as the parcel is slightly higher in elevation
than adjacent lands. Surrounding uses and view planes include:
• Directly south and adjacent to the PUD is The Peaks @ Mtn View, which
has 5 estate residential lots, which range from 4.5 acres to 8.5 acres in
size.
Views from The Peaks looking North will be impacted slightly, but every
effort will be taken to minimize that impact using building envelopes in the
PUD.
• Open fields, scattered development, the Town of Erie, the Boulder Valley,
the Flatirons and Back Range to the southwest. Minimal view impacts will
exist upon development when viewed from the southwest.
• The rear of a house and a large storage/equestrian arena to the west and
slightly south, which encumbers that view plane. The house and arena are
situated on an agricultural site. This development will be seen from the
rear of the house some 1/4+ mile away.
• Delightful views of Longs Peak and the Indian Peaks to the northwest
across an open field. Negligible impact will be perceived when viewed
from the northwest.
14
r
• Looking north, two houses and outbuildings immediately adjacent to the
site and scattered farms and houses down the Boulder Creek drainage to
Longmont and beyond. The view plane from the north will be impacted
only slightly, essentially only from the immediately adjacent two houses.
• Easterly and southeasterly vision is dominated by Carmacar Ranchettes.
Two residents along Fir Avenue will be impacted by low density
development on the 6 additional lots as they look to the west, but
meetings with them have resulted in incorporating their requests into the
PUD, as much as feasible.
• Building envelopes are designed to minimize visual obstruction from
Carmacar and within The Summit at Mountain View as much as practical.
The Intent of the Site Design is to:
• Capture mountain views from the site.
• Protect mountain views for Carmacar Ranchettes as much as practical.
• Create an attractive, rural, energy efficient oriented development.
• Screen, enclose and veil eye level views of equipment, stored materials,
etc., as viewed from both within and external to the PUD.
• Provide a private open space amenity surrounding the site for use by lot
owners.
B. Comprehensive Plan (27-6-70,B.,2.):
In response to requests from adjacent property owners in the Carmacar
Ranchettes, this PUD was set at 7 lots, rather than the maximum of 9
allowed in the Weld County PUD process. This was done to reduce the
building density that will impact westerly views from Carmacar houses.
A Sketch Plan response from Erie indicated that the proposed PUD does
not meet their Comprehensive Plan of 1 Dwelling Unit per 5 acres density
requirement. A subsequent phone conversation with Hallie Sawyer, The
Town of Erie, resolved this issue. She thought the PUD was in a different
area than where it actually is located. It is actually located in the 1 DU/2
ACRES area of the Erie Comprehensive Plan. She indicated that Erie will
not oppose the PUD proposal.
15
r
C. Uses Allowed Within Zone District (27-6-70,B.,3.):
The proposed PUD Zone District will provide 6 new building sites for
single family housing, gardening and minor livestock activities. The
individual lot sizes proposed in the Development Guide range from 3.224
to 3.370 acres allowing construction of residences, utility buildings for
animals/equipment and appropriate grazing and exercise areas for
allowable livestock. Livestock will be limited to horses, 4H animals, and
household pets. Covenant controls to prevent overgrazing will be enforced
by the Homeowners Association. Out buildings and animal enclosures
must be approved by the Architectural Control Committee.
D. Uses Allowed and Compatibility With Surrounding Uses (27-6-70,B.,4.):
The areas surrounding this PUD include a mixture of residential housing
on large lots, dryland and irrigated farming, stock grazing and stock
impoundment.
The "Right to Farm" covenant will be stated in the PUD's CC & R's and
incorporated on all pertinent land use plats. Residents will be made aware
of historical agricultural use of lands surrounding The Summit at Mountain
View, that agricultural uses may change to other types of uses and that
neighbors' longstanding practices and rights to protect their livelihood shall
be protected.
The proposed development will be compatible with surrounding land uses.
F. Flood Hazard, Geologic Hazard, Airport Overlay District (27-6-70,B.,5.):
None.
16
The Summit at Mountain View
DEVELOPMENT GUIDE (27-6)
(Conceptual)
November 5, 2001
Component Five - Common Open Space UsageJ27-6-80j
A. Intent (27-6-80,B.,1.):
Common open space is an essential element for creating an attractive
living environment within The Summit at Mountain View and for providing
a buffer with surrounding neighbors and land uses. This common open
space will be permanent, and maintained by the Homeowners Association
in perpetuity.
Perimeter open space around the development, which is accessible from
all 7 lots, totals 4.445 acres, or 15.5% of the 28.594 acre parcel. Walking,
biking, running and horseback riding will be encouraged. No motorized
vehicles will be allowed, except for occasional mowing and the
maintenance of an 8 foot wide pathway. The open space will be 25 feet in
width along the north and south sides of the PUD. A larger open space
area will be along the East Side of the property. This was done to
accommodate requests from Carmacar Ranchette owners that they have
a large buffer area between them and the Summit at Mountain View. The
largest open area is on the West Side, creating a private buffer to the
west.
B. Open Space Regulations (27-6-80,B.,2.):
Consistent with Planned Unit Development Ordinance 197, permanent
common open space managed and owned by the Homeowners
Association will be a part of this PUD. The Homeowners Association will
be established before any residences are sold and membership is
mandatory for each owner. The Association shall assume responsibility for
liability insurance, taxes, and maintenance of the open space.
C. On-Site Improvements Agreement (27-6-80,B.,3.):
An On-Site Improvements Agreement will be submitted with the Final Plan
and Plat.
17
The Summit at Mountain View
DEVELOPMENT GUIDE (27-6)
(Conceptual)
November 5, 2001
Component Six - Signage (27-6-90)
Signage shall include a standard stop sign and 2 street signs (Summit
Way and Fir Avenue) on Summit Way at its intersection with Fir Avenue.
Two standard 25 mph speed limit signs will be installed approximately
midway on Summit Way, one for westbound traffic and one for eastbound
traffic.
Small residential address signs will be allowed as well as standard real
estate sales signs or placards.
Entry signage for The Summit at Mountain View will be incorporated into
the Site Design and Landscape Plan elements.
All other requirements contained in this section shall be adhered within the
development.
r
18
r-. The Summit at Mountain View
DEVELOPMENT GUIDE (27-6)
(Conceptual)
November 5, 2001
Component Seven — MUD Impacts (27-6-1001
Not Applicable.
T
19
r-. DEVELOPMENT GUIDE (27-6)
(Conceptual)
November 5, 2001
Component Eight— Intergovernmental Agreements Impact (27-6-110)
Not Applicable.
r
r-�
20
Drainage Report:
Summit at
Mtn. View
Foothills Engineering Co.
October 12, 2001
Jeeeloe•. .... 9
N fQ.S
c ; 18596
0 iZ aJ. .
.
.:J5.•. 90,ESSiO
9J f;Ify!o.o-QO�
-" �
" .pf ico
...q tats ...
— Foothills Engineering
420 Twenty-first Avenue, No. 113
Longmont, Colorado 80501
(303) 651-7212
October 12, 2001
Drew Scheltinga, P.E.
Engineering Division Manager
_ Weld County Department of Public Works
Greeley, CO 80631
Dear Mr. Scheltinga:
The enclosed Drainage Report for the proposed Summit at Mtn. View PUD, located
approximately 2 miles north-northwest of Erie, Weld County, Colorado, was created by me.
The Boulder County Drainage Criteria Manual was used as the major reference. All calculations
and conclusions herein are based on the rules and procedures contained in that Manual. Specific
charts, graphs, tables, and equations used in drainage calculations are cited in the text and
reproduced in the Appendix. Rainfall tables for eastern Boulder County were used, since the site
is within two miles of the county line. The Appendix contains all computations used in the design.
Thank you for accepting this Report for review, and call at any time if you have questions or
comments.
Sincerely,
John(Jack)Myers, P.E.
Contents:
Section Page
General Legal Description 1.
General Location of Subdivision 1.
Adjacent Developments 1.
Description of Property 3.
Drainage Basin 3.
Drainage Facility Design 4.
Conclusions 4.
Appendix 5.
Maps
Location Map
USGS Map 2.
Appendix
Drainage Calculations
References, tables &graphs
Drainage Plan Map
In Map Pocket
.1
Summit at
Mountain View
_. .r.,_
--1 I- _ _
r"-Ir
I I W }
st
DI I
9 �. I Ia
i II
l , I ,
•
•
i' a �l R _- --J L_Er MA ---. , I
I I..J I : - _ I CAWu'M
;. , ..._ ...J 1- - _�a�se.eo•-II -I R� L <
_ t 5 Walti6 7
Ii II
I �, II t P�1I�1!ltl.lfd'n
a I ..Tr,; I I —I
A— L 1 JL J i- J
•sante,M.. I
.I.
f\ PEAKS AT MgMTMI ME.
31 it; 11 32 It 1 N 33
— .`EDP•
lb• i\ � \
?
/ MOW*6SZ -'. WOK WO.
11 , / / \
DED lava
...
O
l / /
\ 1
g \ '\ \ sd / 4
\\ — E '
r' SITE
§,o
-COUNTY ED. 12
\ I o u ,' a u T
SA
.0. y.. —Alt
Ia- SA
•\ /�«!�ge.11 �_ _ll
Ii• /i!I 1// €t is ill i 0 9
—
VICINITY MAP
Drainage Report: Summit at Mountain View
1. General Leaal Description.
A tract of land located in the east Y of Section 5, Ti N, R68W, of the 6th P.M.,Weld County,
Colorado, being more particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the center north 1/16th corner of said Section 5;
Thence N00°23'07°E, 121.70 feet along the north-south centerline of said Section 5 to the True
Point of Beginning;
Thence continuing along said north-south centerline, N00°23'07"E, 1039.67 feet;
Thence leaving said north-south centerline, S81°50'06"E, 1335.49 feet (deeded S81°50'45"E);
Thence S26°04'02"W, 60.45 feet (deeded S26°12'W, 60.59 feet);
Thence S63°53'31"E, 105.02 feet (deeded S63°48'E, 105.00 feet);
Thence S26°09'55"W, 121.67 feet (deeded S26°12'W, 121.73 feet);
Thence along the arc of a curve to the left, radius of said curve being 330.00 feet, chord of said arc
bears S13°03'04"W, 149.41 feet;
Thence S00°04'59"E, 493.31 feet (deeded S00°00'E, 493.16 feet);
Thence S89°56'20"W, 1309.97 feet (deeded N90°00'W, 1308.58 feet) to the True Point of
Beginning,
Said tract containing 28.594 acres, more or less.
2. General Location of Subdivision
The proposed subdivision is located on the west side of Fir Avenue,which is the westernmost
street in Carmacar Ranchettes. Summit Way, the sole internal street in the subdivision, connects
with Fir Avenue.
Access to Fir Avenue is from Weld County Road 5, approximately one-quarter mile to the east,
— through the Carmacar subdivision on gravel-surfaced streets (Mountain View Street, Spruce Drive,
and Fir Avenue). State Highway 52 lies V2 mile to the north.
3. Adiacent Developments
Nearby developments include:
1. Carmacar Ranchettes, directly to the east;
2. Peaks @ Mtn. View, immediately to the south.
1
7_3a - o;' G •
19 ( i ,vi, � 2 )Idaho Cre k 2I ^ f �
Yriltia I
' . \ L •1��/ -: • 1/945
Clem q -
- w Pleasant ie — ,�, i/ \ y J •
t
"40 ii
so z e •°29 "/ 4927•
— sHr•-----
•-------:____-22
•. " 1
fv° f� ff_ __,_ , ,__, )
•
courz__ ,
8p N ��
u / . •
,2 ) � ii:CM
,'t/ Eri� /
/' � Mie .
31 / / � /� •�� -7_t) / / -
32 rs7 a / 33 o �' 34
Z �- /v ip N. \ �� \ r FiC
✓ z / v/Plu b� ' �A��� : 1. A Q11 I
o Q �, J c r
a5z 0 . .`� /i �— _ � --Qcr • .
:n � L 1 ' RO D
4957 / 0 / f _' ��_,..�\\\-
y 511
0 /� / 22- ���
i
SITE
.. i
3•jJI • itv r
T • /1 i/ /5a
N ' j �. �� _� '
� � • l' i
(
u /i
P N • _.Jarr �-
435 ��
-- ' - �— L: • II
5100
• y % . _�jkAJ3 : r ; NI
//
.,-- • r ::
._ • ., ,
••• \ , __N._
,.
/ - . . . . _a _ �n �n 5070
HIL'r.l�� xx��
, t 1 16 15
C 1 \ic' Y r 7. Natiorl'
�11� 1��■ \ -- Mgt►
60 L._ .' ln 11�rIll � . /568 �1 Ole o
Ef 4-_ 50
/554 -• .4.._ -. 50•: _ 5/4 � / 5200/585 .•..
I
\, �� ) USGS MAP S :7
S.. in
r
4. Description of Property
a. Area : 28.6 acres
b. Ground Cover:
This tract has been under cultivation, so there is now no established ground cover. The
original ground cover would have consisted of short prairie grasses. There is a small lawn
area around the existing residence and outbuildings.
c. General Topography:
The land slopes uniformly from a high point at the southwest corner to a low point at Fir
Avenue on the northeast corner of the property.The total elevation difference is about 24
feet.
d. General soil conditions:
Surface soils at the site consist of clayey sand and silty sand, suitable for farming.
Underlying materials consist of claystone, sandstone, and siltstone bedrock. The depth to
bedrock varies from 8 to over 25 feet. Groundwater was encountered at depths of from 11
to 19 feet (from Preliminary Geotechnical Report, by Terracon, Longmont, CO).
e. Irrigation ditches&laterals
There is an existing concrete-lined irrigation ditch lateral running north-and-south just inside
the western boundary of the tract. However, it is no longer in use.
f. Drainage ways:
There are no existing drainage ways on-site. There are existing roadside ditches on Fir
— Avenue, directly east of the site.
— 5. Drainage Basin
This parcel lies in the tributary area of Boulder Creek,which is located approximately two miles to
the northwest. The runoff pattern is complicated by the presence of several irrigation ditches which
have historically intercepted a large part of the overland flow. These include the Lower Boulder
Ditch and the Boulder and Weld County Ditch.
Historically drainage from this parcel has been intercepted by the roadside drainage network in
Carmacar Ranchettes, specifically the ditches along Fir Avenue.These discharge to Weld County
Road 5, on the eastern boundary of Carmacar.
Runoff onto the property from off-site is strictly overland flow and minor in nature, arising on a
small area of farmland (about 20 acres)west of the site. A natural drainage divide one-quarter mile
west of the site keeps the contributing area for off-site flows small. There are no defined
drainageways entering the site. Off-site runoff from this area is calculated at 0.3 and 10.8 cubic
feet per second (cfs) for the 5-year and 100-year storms, respectively.
3
The use of on-site detention will limit downstream runoff to pre-development levels, minimizing the
effects of development on downstream properties
6. Drainage Facility Design
On-site detention will be used to limit runoff from this site to pre-development levels. The Equation
Detention Method from the Denver-area Urban Drainage criteria will be used to calculate the
required detention volumes for the 10- and 100-year storms.
The required 10-year detention volume is 1,183 cubic feet, and the 100-year volume is 2,195 cubic
feet. The detention pond will be located at the northeast corner of the property, in the common
open space area. A modified Type 4 outlet structure will be used to limit discharges to calculated
pre-development rates of 7.2 cfs and 39.4 cfs for the 10-year and 100-year storms, respectively.
Runoff will be routed to the detention basin by roadside ditches on Summit Way and by 18" berms
along the property line.
7. Conclusions
This is a small parcel,with very large lots (3 acres plus). Most of the land will be left in a natural
state or planted with grass,which will minimize runoff from the site. The use of a detention pond
will limit runoff peaks to pre-development levels. This should eliminate deleterious effects on
downstream properties.
4
Appendix: Calculations, References
5
- °raki & Calctl zop,s 10 -/Z-07
5 e4«-icn/ _ _rat fh -V ew
A'r'ea',- Z . 04 /
'CP arcs
b- c., 545, = l�oa (9, 0/50 = /, Co Z
PLrGGh f /i-n
�.a orr,-�1aale- 3,0 a &3 /u/U,)
— -- ti ni L X000 5 i rod
2000 5 7z /3 er cd do v&eAt y,
� a,rGg Ca_ �-�o7t
0-000 �� /rn. �r v��
1chiaBc-viaas arca = 7x 5-000 = 55;000 s I
t-t t f_1tryJGr z$ 6-000
r o
d _v`o /OD l s x 45,5zaO/
C�
% u_: _
_ noff
- a) QfF - ifs coic7`6'iJ1,74i:ig arca Zd
/= aorz l
/ ? s.frtynG goo / UVGrhhol ilk by , ./000
c of /PAigi o f-irn
." Cf FY 66- - at o)
35.
r11 /ti
� 1C: ZoQ/ ,
Q vGrl� of -F1��. _��ri
� - 00O
-' w 70/116 (00 X 55,25 _ X30 rnik,
C /G! Lo&z rG<<`ot )
nn ^
Otra -C�` fi a GLV _ 2./f
off- s/fG eG
- .38# 3a _ s _'G8 mph
Fu J 'y
/. ¢ i° Air } 04i/r _ (G 'nva)
° '
- G�ao - Z, 7 �ncG,cs �,-_hi
by 7:6/G 6,d/i �hs2 Sa.e oj- . sv/Z)
0,D/ t7
Rio Z.0
o- f11 Z0 - -
A - ,pl x 1,4x Zr? 2 3 Gds
- /Oo = O. ZO X Z:7 X ZO /O. c.
/ori -va� ----
8°y 4-7 °f a-74-/n 1-2 A 1/04,07.t._
A Y& /C1 o = (D. 05 -1 I, '9P)//OOO
/< Q = (2. 05'x3 -1. Q)/o00 0. 00!0
V, 0 = 0. 00/0 Z
183 '_
1100 6; 751 - 0,00z1Z -v, 6-6)AOGO
_
8x 3 - p00Z X
i
d. _doig
rn/77fz7` 1 >`s-1. /saw
main ,e CO`G‘ afz ark
V/oo CLOD!B x Z8,
2_,- .
G) Q e..tLin.fzgH o e.,,tAf._
Gc��l/orNa6l�--- `O- .
-- -------- ----------
�. Z4 kA S ol{sete lb yr —naf
(7.2$X Z8. o r _ 'O. 3 7. Z _
- . A'Jlowa6/e l00 - yr a,ls��a -� L
lOX% !O. S 59 . 4 ,c7C,
YSG a rO O( -217), /G7 yl &o • J _
a hr 000�_. Gres ted -w4i/ /rrr /O9 - r w
conc., r od4..Pll� weir-
goo-y vo%?nice loo/
/O- Air, volcgrnt /Gvd
pane- ivi veer "_
- /0;.-yr.
/ p� ' an L -Si Zw, Q?' •C21 e rCG L � Gf/.. _Gtr
'war--�✓i l?
r6_3/9er..1iv0 /'1Bad� ;A/a
'G,.G '10-yr I1t2D yr- valun-,� / -v /
4.
BOULDER COUNTY
STORM DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL FIGURE 502
_ , TIME-INTENSITY-FREQUENCY CURVES ZONE
10.0 �▪ � � °�' f.. ?fi:: . usr mmr.:r_' .: ::' . r-l..: r"':e.oomraiiiiiiiiiii
; _-_-__ °iiiiir'riiiI: •
: -u '•i°___11�1�11Nil 1 :, ���I6 u I4 �NI lf. !!!:t s3lpgr sunus.....uni!!!!
' ^ii i__ifir t 'itflF%1 Is i eke:fiiiirr11i5r.IF: un-nr'°' -:-
- ..iislily, °u Ili r f ''ii°�i iiiii'ifiiiir'ii'i1'ipisisi I"wlrw...:Ap-
:::- !!! -i�lIl i:Apr
i— '.a• Pa. • nfl I -N : L 1 maa.... :: :1.::i ..n. `efera:_dla'
=19'0' ==Elise's"„i a .0 u°' Ei u;4' S rx—'elEERIE.: i.... a:ke:
N i s s e-:...sn'--'
cc�� Vii:uannuus: e::ii...�itl.-.... .•c.
�Mu-7: --9°:r .�i°?E es1 �S°:3:cs°e�i ANN. ! '!_Ir• 3�� =F-zc�a_—a° _iF .. IIII i I II
-Thaptre—duni i �_-•,-„e 31.iii:ii-w ',r r"pace-n—' u?F?l:e:.-•'•�.ae :nu niiml.
[pn annum
_ w.w:i.-...,.....°ian ii-i, :.. e: i:Lg. �swe;"1"1:i.'-.rm..m �.E, .: I n:°:L'....
— , 8 T ---" `.i EIM� 1111 IM '' Iir n1!III� lCNiErlrupII!"ffl fi�irii
-`iru l—wapitYrrm.EN T""',�.+a,Giss..— pm AIhIp111eIIl!'rmunumigmis
----n rsau 1.111-..sari 111=I� a=s -r NIn _ -
aCtl Cu::::e:IME:H;n.r.•: :ei:— e-4.:131. Ira: {-F,-^ ;ir_' r'n: innnrrnnnininirliNil Inn
- - rN_.fl I-I Ia1kl iNI Nlrlwli ii1._.i�1 F., ? i.N11,aNINNINIIIIIMI I,I,I'iNN11W°I°..y
• -. s s •I r i Ea s'I .:1•:!!!!!.,,+ - ? 7 u.ia.•.....•Rlr�-: 1 it - s :
7• .9 Irwiiil lN6iiinliINI111gIi�lnINNIr I °NIiI 11 I npipr ilrwnli nuuse !!!!!!..'llnil'Y:....rirrlrixiw'.t
_-s .. ,y 4:i:' i "-.0:ll:i.iiwrr.rl7LL,..i°e.y:.F.:FWe.1.................'W.e..'
- mu . Iii rlllrN NNiN?_ir.'i.:....-.la N?am:..s...W..... a ---------......▪........
F ,- ,Sr-•a'�i+I.I Ci 's :u....-..Nl-...I. a n..— iir??--.--....................... ............
i.N I r eL a «r::e -' g
6 0 r�i gym!! emEs ,,, N?NYaININNNININIIMINNNrnnNINNIINIMIIIII111111
i„;W Nirici mum a• ' IMIIII�'IHI1i'I iiImIIIRI°HIpIIIImm°hIIIII Ilnilm-
_?j_^ -r rnll rli,I„MI „I 1 I.1 1 1 NI 11 7
�•7 r^.. I.i,!M. LIJ I a•,iiilliIIUIN?i°wll.lrr...osurie II "°Nrsxxnnere
`;-:Y- i-aI■uINNNi NNE ITd'.. j IlJll iI NMIIMI11N113NIIWNUMIHIIUNHIillakIIIUI?ii"
'!�.,5.0 T° IIn1irawil i1 E Ia II ___mui R Y ig nnlrnlalllr H1..l a"IC..... 71' '
'— r --2--Lars .-....� C....rl ...:.^.'�2:::.:l :::...................!HEMMER
R
• • _ a--....... ..................' au—.. .7raIINE: ai.:::?'•:�I- s...ael..... . ..... I?::I is::
--- _ 1.,.m. =I1 Ir:1p 3▪ "ph ;ar°a"6q�;ie ▪.............-i.I ....... ....!i°l!imam
jL-. • —.........�Y ,i 'I mon' nY-1l'.N'?:I'.yi:r°::7r:r••'•:.:w::Na?�.
- :• :?ei ; IP. 'h,"'• :til i Lai�'y :ie.:6:::Eir--.. ::::...:::Iiii..............-
?i i .Rai llia'r.:s' ..... ....
y�� _. ...ye ?iri: ilrii� e... a:.. 1111..
_ '4:a •^e i:s:e!'; ' :air :ue'sn xl .. oa...e:-gl-rs-: ............:----.....:.................
�'aI.k.m▪il: ' pis:-N?rip'I:? `le�eunr algr??1-xei'i-::�:uarr IIII:IIII:le:::::: e:::::a:::Alas:
iNi::ri.1 i! it ilk e.......0:"1.i?i3llll:1.i?rllir9i:lull?i
— iii?iiiii IIII,V /ra un n : Fi3,'1 ••eino-Iiar akiiIiii=III.......":••'ullliiii viii IIII
::::-1- T-=-?-_ICI::: '........_.�9-3?:i IIII s?IINIi a. ° '`ii�il ....iieeimi??e ell?iiilee iii :il?l:?ll:Ill!?!l?
Erini :a. r.'es.:u'�'t::▪ isiti�1II' Nrsrue?iie ri:riiiiii?ii tilliiiii:rrili
.,-. '•'LINsil.nnu:si:..._s r'L.- iu. .'k•:i.'11 I l rr:r i:L'NI.'. ..i::llli:.: ::I:N:atlil-Ne:li::
'-Q- _ .Ismrah '.7.CliN':a.HIS ..Y ..y..lN'a1.i -10.-- ... ::e:l �lm.::.eK:eel.
•
— _W':. .Q ,:,...„—:.... ...... . .,• � �i�`':7. . •• rill:rr:Nl
.r:rnee:O --"''Iiilli isaX.:S zW III '1.i y...
ea N:h::uali'e: a ... - r isie.. .e:: IIII:i ::�+? eiei's.a:u"�v:: I I°-sa.-FiY ..
-Q iL?i :ur; ::°°rsitilt ey�'e•pf;:I..n! ,1.i i I li::r.'�Irn�ti iilii:" ....'cell
•s?Bi!:ai
"= _iii! •iiN���j�yli, fl3il -'L : �r •3 er?'�riiliyiiiilr ei:ii4 air:urE•
_ 41; —'1:..-i o'N u:l••.:bk.... i-du- le..
`is"llir..:ae
°MT 'ts i n il�IllNu... EH HilWerai ..sii ? ruiningl :i: ..:... ....1....
ie a
2L0 i..-.. ea . ;qii rri I Irn?Iwnn°r• .�i�us.;
. e Sri 'Y3:YIf :�Il�ipll igi. ill N::i in--i&:yl it. 4,0 -F.. ::::
i "Vl I.�nt"INRr..- aia:l ::'- I' �.'7.i
i :..iii Nll:ilr--°ilini; 'e:.
= rag,. °I? •"Mill°e Is-°iseg i? lia.11nllu._ .a. su. ::I'el?aun S:Ieii nuns ::liullInu7nieu
a1 'i:irunn-nu r �iri'ilII I Ni:--Y.'::r".._- -f �l' :7 N:I:
i e.-'it: ..i::mkPalGR RIA n ag41 7 1...7.. Ile::.:... i-1.:
-_-_ u-°elder-ni .r �ie:.:I :: ill:if inflhti NNi:pMR= I 7.:ef:i i!li!.urdi r._... . ,▪W_s:
ll':+ R:iI :N 1111. —'—,�7..iilN:i;ir v e_r
Iw s 3 1r. -ilI Nl Litt
e-. e-ill:',>4 Y•li:
-- ,1 a ee epEiiiiii I_il L ii MINI iinni:►•:!::.':r.:.....:
_ -.- - ---I - sis era. a e'.:'Isle N. s'"• . °`:rr
��' ee ms:�ei' u fensunsi " r, reiu ply .yur ss:u a—F—
_- :_ T Ira
'ice li -:aur•:reli:• Ili 1.i: i' sW IIur I...: :
-- _ 111 1. a LlilmrC:='•lilt! iili.....�ihilill?iN9Ninili°.ihMliilNiiia
__ •
_ _ , rP3"ra Se imi i.:;ii ulir ie'.r{T •'I �u.. 1 i
Hu sulsi SEBUM 1....: e
s a Ili Il•i"is I Iir?ld% •e e---W. p s NE:�?Nri+iru Il °e...•iif ng , e m::e:u:::::
:iejii? I�;i1IIILi.. ' a7• Illrr�l▪�l: -: i : .......▪........:
- • = -.- :IIN°:e.� a :IflI h.ll�lesl.....i_::NNE II'is u::uuc:r:
ru %. s'••::.s'
r� IIIill �NTIi TION, INI •�l �i�fl IN�I ���Il�lil
_ i , :it deli tttkhii I,ti 4 A!AIM.i$a{T, f ••• 1111
WRC ENG. REFERENCE: WRC TM-1 NOV. 1983
-510-
BOULDER COUNTY
— STORM DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL I TABLE sot
�-'' RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS AND PERCENT IMPERVIOUS
I
RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS
LAND USE OR PERCENT FREQUENCY
SURFACE CHARACTERISTICS IMPERVIOUS 2 5 10 100
—
Business:
ommercial Areas 95 .87 .87 .88 .89
Neighborhood Areas 70 .60 .65 .70 .80
—
Residential :
Single-family Figure-603 .40 .45 .50 .60
— Multi-Unit (detached) 50 .45 .50 .60 .70
Multi-Unit (attached) 70 .60 .65 .70 .80
1/2 Acre Lot or Larger Figure-603 .30 .35 .40 .60
Apartments 70 .65 .70 .70 .80
—
Industrial :
Light Areas 80 .71 .72 .76 .82
— Heavy Areas 90 .80 .80 .85 .90
Parks, Cemetaries 7 .10 .10 .35 .60
s
Playgrounds 13 .15 .25 .35 .65
\,_.., Schools 50 .45 .50 .60 .70
Railroad Yard Areas 40 .40 .45 .50 .60
— Undeveloeed Areas:
Historic Flow Analysis 2 (see "Lawns")
Greenbelts, Agricultural
Offsite Flow Analysis 45 .43 .47 .55 .65
(when land use not defined)
—
Streets:
Paved 100 .87 .88 .90 .93
Gravel 13 .15 .25 .35 .65
Drives and Walks 96 .87 .87 .88 .89
— Roofs 90 .80 .85 .90 .90
Lawns, Sandy Soil 0 .00 .01 .05 .20
Lawns, Clayey Soil 0 .05 .10 .20 .40
— NOTE: The Rational Formula coefficients do not apply for larger basins where
the time-of-concentration exceeds 60 minutes.
WRC ENG. REFERENCE: USDCM DRC0G Rev. May 1, 1984
,-,
-. BOULDER COUNTY FIGURE 601
STORM DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL
L OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW
500 70
:..i.:ilfiiltiii :�lje 1■ilf;■ 1'■I■/N�/i I1114ap.■ %' ■ii:ii■:: r ■
.5.••QIIi-l=III : .r , irlt lt•.N,■O I•iilt 1!rltlt■11I ■
■■
■■. _ _ i'I'� i ,lie . .viol'4°del ... . ' •e
Le ■ A , .■ AWN�. M ■! .
rJ ■ .■N'A M ■'' b 400 ■EMOOM MMMMM ISE ■rap •.■■■■
.I.I .I..I■raltilflae1.•INY■'A
e■■. ■11/11►.■■..I.sN.
C
■ ■■■s ■ EI'. r,■■.'I.UUJ■■fls'4 . ■
_ 1- ■C■■■■I•■ELIII!,■■I■■0.11■■■■'A
ULr. II ■'• ■ !O
yWj 90D AU.■n{� . '
IL MI 'tin •i'..If�t�Y 0 :apapi
▪e ■ m... ...e .,. _ .. .!s M sr:
U Nr. Isar/ee% .5.I■■%NBP i.,,(1 ■ _ 10
Z la.4 t.r�a. a. 4.a '• W
t-In 200 =s■.r„IMI: INO■�n..r,s/.ra.lr:N■ G mOUSPAMPSO: . 0 s•- !.i■ 40
c .rair,il° . r;w#7NNi. G.N . i ■
' . n'au. r: ' • ■ ,i...raNL■ I: a
crompAramor�.0 arr,ap z■fl I0' .: sap Z
•4
■e..r//I/..I:N I'fl■.I.,rAMM Y !'�r.Nss.NIMM MOP:. W
■■ !■■.r..■■Y4■.■./i.N■ G ■..■N■■PA■■■■■.■■■.■ 3 Z
_ 100 • • .!■s,I.� ■■■II=. ....sr:1■.■s!.s.Na .G■'^.•UP. r•is r
/ r,i. 'd■ei■.14.11■�1.4 ■i.N■• .N
,ll... .L , '..:■
•obi%�' c' ��" w r.■■�.c ■ I-
... - •■rNP,.pr■aN:..Irsi s■I!.
J� MEOW' - . u'dl aspr,.�apui.■-.7s N..i..N.N■C - ■
e■ri■■■■flap■r. so
0 - . Om S1/'/flap■■.I'" •:
• T. rraN■flap.' .!.■... ■
■■■ .!OVItzi;r,ip;1fr.l.miuraii I, a�''' 00. ui.■UU -
■■ !!
.i
Iir.r: 4i!,ir�■s■•. ...:0■ •_...s■H 4i ■.!'-...s.i o SIMIPTASOP: .= ...--
_.g.sern
■▪■■r MMM...
MM. - ._'_.,Vp-!'G .ape es.. ■s■fle
iv --. ■..flaps■ ■
-. O
THE ABOVE CURVES ARE A SOLUTION OF THE FOLLOWING EQUATION:
ti = 1.8 (1.1 - 05) -/
MI-
,...
where: ti = initial flow time (min.)
S = slope of basin (%)
Cs = runoff coeficient for 5 year frequency (Table 601)
L = length of basin (ft)
Notes: I. The curves are for use with the Rational
Method, see Text Section 602.
2. The curves shall not be usqd for
distances in excess of 500.
WRC ENG. (REFERENCE: "Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual" DRCOG,
Denver, Colorado 1969
_(!I _
BOULDER COUNTY I FIGURE 802
- STORM DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL
TRAVEL TIME VELOCITY FOR RATIONAL METHOD
50 - - -
30
3
0
F- 20 3 tv
Z o e
- w v�O .W
It
w r -ir • V
e. 3=
a 10 wee 04 e 0
4. O o a. .,
"' Z J r or v
w rW 4, 2 Yea 4,=
a .h v ',e 0 t V
�. 0 5 0e0 ?~ 4r re 03 3
4r
W
a1 =e ?�2 ?e ev ` ~
¢ 3 0 4,, 0 44,
W4,
D .... . r r
O I 0 e $`e
0
cc2 10 COOI
w 00 r r
1- 0e 4
4. o
3 ,,
— 1
aT
.5
.1 .2 .3 .5 1 2 3 5 10 20
— VELOCITY IN FEET PER SECOND
"" WRC ENG. REFERENCE: "Urban Hydrology For Small Watersheds" Technical
Release No. 55, USDA, SCS Jan. 1975.
Hello