The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About993074 ittt MEMORANDUM Vi`Pe. To: Board of County Commissioners January 26, 2000 COLORADO From: Monica Daniels-Mika, Director of Planning Subject: Changes to Z-528 The Department of Planning Services request the following changes: Page 1: Request line to read: Change of Zone from Agricultural to PUD for(Residential R-1, R-4 and Commercial C-2)for a maximum of 637 residential units and no more than 20 acres of commercial. Page 5: Change#J(1) to read, "The PUD shall consist of a maximum of 637 lots approved for Residential (R-1 and R-4) and no more than 20 acres of Commercial (C-2)Zone District uses, and common open space." Page 5: Add the following notes to #I: 16. The location of the existing Floodplain and Floodway shall be clearly identified on the plat. 17. The location of the existing and possible future oil and gas locations shall be delineated on the plat. The setback requirements shall maintain compliance with Section 32.7.12.2.6 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance unless specifically exempted with appropriate conditions and safeguards by the Board of County Commissioners at the Final Plat. 18. The reference to equestrian trails shall be deleted from the plat. 19. The number of animal units per lot shall be consistent with R-1 and R-4 requirements for all lots proposed. Page 7: Add the following conditions to #J: K18. Bridge 28/9A: This bridge spans Rural Ditch #3. The applicant shall share the cost to widen this bridge to accommodate the typical cross section identified for Weld County Road 28. This shall be included in the Road Maintenance and Improvements Agreement (Off-Site), along with the upgrading of Weld County Road 28. The owner of adjacent St. Acacias Subdivision shall share the cost of this project. K19. ADA Requirement: All new development in Weld County must meet ADA requirements. These will include, but are not limited to, sidewalk ramps at all intersections, sidewalk rest areas for streets with grades over 5 percent, SERVICE.TEAMWORK,INTEGRITY,QUALITY EXHIBIT accessible parking at all public buildings, crosswalks with a maximum vertical deflection of one-quarter inch. Please provide details of how you will address these issues. Page 8: The following shall be added to the end of#3.A, "and also satisfies Ordinance #211 of the Transportation Impact Fee Study for Southwest Weld." Page 8: Add case numbers to condition#4.8. to read, "The applicant shall vacate or amend USR-489; SUP-441 and AmSUP-441; USR-642 and USR-639,which currently exist on the site." Page 9: The following Conditions shall be added to #5: 5.C. Walls and floors separating dwelling units within the same building shall not be less than one hour fire resistive construction. If individual dwelling units are to be located on separate parcels and sold, additional UBC regulations shall apply. 5.D. The applicant shall submit to the Department of Planning services a utility agreement for each lot, if the utilities are shared. 5.E. The applicant/owner shall be responsible for meeting compliance with the Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance#211 regulations. SERVICE.TEAMWORK,INTEGRITY,QUALITY 1 a. Aglaia Sae a Ilia, alagar aa sa lbttleApplegate,lnc. Ptanning Del' Consultants for Land, Mineral and Water ri f.ountl MN 2.4 2000 January 24, 2000 E® \L.:, s,CEW Ms. Monica Mika-Daniels Weld County Planning Department 1550 North 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80634 RE: RiverDance PUD--PUD Change of Zone: Information for the BOCC Hearing Dear Monica: Please find enclosed the information for the Board of County Commissioner's hearing. The following information includes: 1) Original agreements with Little Thompson Water Districts and Saint Vrain Sanitation District regarding the supply of services for the project. The applicant is obtaining another letter from Little Thompson Water District addressing additional taps for the residential component within the development and the water supply for the commercial area. I am anticipating that I will receive this letter(s) later today where upon I'll fax a copy to you. 2) A revised site plan of the development illustrating the removal of the equestrian center and equestrian labeling. Large suburban lots have replaced the equestrian center. Please note that all equestrian trails will also be eliminated from the development. 3) Plan indicating the existing and proposed 100-year floodplain boundary within the subject property.. 4) Revised typical building envelope setbacks. EXHIBIT I 11990 Grant St. • Suite 304 • Denver, CO 80233 5441 Boeing Drive. • Suite 200 • Loveland, CO 80536-8855 (303) 452-6611 • Fax (303) 452-2759 (970) 461-9884 • Fax (970) 613-1177 RiverDance PUD—BOCC Hearing Page 2 of 2 5) RiverDance PUI) Density - Range from 650 to 680 units. Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, TUTTLE APPLEGATE, INC. 2'19 j cet,t tef - '�Lt Molly Orkild-Larson, AICP cc: Mike Siegrist,File 99-122x ( Rain cSanitation Hattlet (cSaint cSan) gzia zfionz J2 CO.Lax 905 (303)776-9570 436 Co//own ct.Suite 200 (303)774-2349 5nx I'on9nzont,CC 80502-0908 June 11, 1999 Mr. Glen Blackburn Tuttle-Applegate, Inc. 11990 Grant Street Suite 304 Denver, CO 80233 Re: Riverdance Subdivision Located generally in NE %4, Section 35 &NW %4, Section 36, T3N, R68W Dear Mr. Blackburn, Saint Vrain Sanitation District will provide sanitary sewer service to the proposed development, Riverdance Subdivision, subject to the following conditions: • Completion of the District's trunk line to the development, • Completion of facilities to increase treatment capacity, if needed, • Completion of necessary connection agreements, and • Receipt of applicable fees. Service will be subject to the rules and regulations of the Saint Vrain Sanitation District. Sincerely, Saint Vraic Sanitation District ark A Peterson anager cid County Planning Dept.. JAN 24 2000 RECEIVED LITTLE THOMPSON WATER DISTRICT DIRECTORS: Telephone(970)532-2096 Tom Reynolds 635 E.Highway 56 President July 1, 1999 Drawer G Leo Bakal Berthoud,Colorado 80513 Keith Croonquist Glenn W Gibson • Dean Anderson Carey J.Selomonson James W.Stroh MANAGER: Richard H.H.Whittet . cid County Planning Dept. Mike Siegrist 875 West 64th Ave . JAN 24 2000 Denver, CO 80221 RECEIVED Dear Mr. Siegrist; This letter is in response to your request for a water service commitment for up to 512 lots residential lots, in the proposed subdivision described as follows : PORTIONS OF SEC. 35, T3N, R68W -- WELD COUNTY, CO Riverdance (second phase) Little Thompson Water District will commit to provide service to these residential lots via one standard residential 5/8" X 3/4 " water tap per lot , with the following conditions : 1 . In August of 1993 the Little Thompson Board implemented a "system impact" fee of $1050 per lot for all lots to be added to the system. This is due upon completion of the main line extension agreement . 2 . All improvements to District facilities required to provide service will be the financial responsibility of the developer in accordance with the District Rules and Regulations . All improvements must conform to District Specifications . 3 . Little Thompson Water District requires the transfer of one share of Colorado Big Thompson water for each lot in the commitment . The cost of this water is subject to rebate from the tap fees paid from the development . 4 . The installation of a fire hydrant requires payment of a $2 , 000 fire hydrant fee prior to final approval of the subdivisions lines . 5 . In order to provide the required flows to the subdivision you will be required to install a minimum of a 12" Dia . water line connecting the existing 24" Dia. water line located at I-25 and WCR 38 to the water lines in the area of your subdivision. The exact location of the Southern end of the line will depend on the timing of your project and the extent of water lines installed in the area at the time you want to begin service . The District may wish to oversize this line for future needs . 6 . You will also be required to provide the needed water lines in the proposed subdivision. 7 . The design, installation and total cost of the project will be the responsibility of the developer. It is possible that some of these required water lines may be required, built or are being designed by other developers in the same area. If they are in place when you need them then you may be able to utilize them to serve your development ( subject to LTWD rebate policy) . It would be wise to work with the other developers in the area to ensure that the water lines installed would be sized to meet the needs of both developments to reduce the amount of duplication and minimize future water line replacement . This commitment will expire one year from the date of this letter if the taps have not been purchased and installed by that date . The current fee for the domestic 5/8" X 3/4 " tap is $7, 500 . 00 . These fees area subject to change without notice . If you have questions, please contact me in our office . Regards, Michael T. Cook P .E . District Engineer LITTLE THOMPSON WATER DISTRICT DIRECTORS: Telephone(970)532-2096 Toni Reynolds 835 E.Highway 56 President June 14 , 1999 DrawerG Leo Bakal Berthoud,Colorado 80513 Keith Croonquist Glenn W.Gibson Dean Anderson Carey J.Salomonson James W.Stroh MANAGER: Richard H.H.whi"el old County Planning Dept. Mike Siegrist JAN 24 2000 875 West 64th Ave . Denver, CO 80221 RECEIVED Dear Mr. Siegrist ; This letter is in response to your request for a water service commitment for up to 125 lots residential lots, in the proposed subdivision described as follows : PORTIONS OF SEC. 35, T3N, R68W -- WELD COUNTY, CO Riverdance ( formerly Waterside) Little Thompson Water District currently has a 12 " Dia . water line located along Hwy 66 and an 8" Dia. Connection to the existing 18" Dia . LTWD - CWCWD transmission line at WCR 9 fz and WCR 28 with additional capacity available Therefore, we will commit to provide service to these residential lots via one standard residential 5/8" X 3/4" water tap per lot, with the following conditions : 1 . In August of 1993 the Little Thompson Board implemented a "system impact" fee of $1050 per lot for all lots to be added to the system. This is due upon completion of the main line extension agreement . 2 . All improvements to District facilities required to provide service will be the financial responsibility of the developer in accordance with the District Rules and Regulations . All improvements must conform to District Specifications . 3 . Little Thompson Water District requires the transfer of one share of Colorado Big Thompson water for each lot in the commitment . The cost of this water is subject to rebate from the tap fees paid from the development . 4 . The installation of a fire hydrant requires payment of a $2 , 000 fire hydrant fee prior to final approval of the subdivisions lines . 5 . In order to provide the required minimum flows to the subdivision you will be required to install a minimum of a 12 " Dia. water line connecting to the existing 8" connection along WCR 28 at WCR 9 :4. This connection will require construction of a metering/pressure reduction vault at WCR 28 & WCR 9 i4. 6 . You will also be required to provide the needed water lines in the proposed subdivision. 7 . You will need to loop a minimum 12" Dia. Line from the existing 12" line along Hwy 66 south to your proposed subdivision to ensure that the fire flows will be available during peak hour demands on the water system. 8 . The design, installation and total cost of the project will be the responsibility of the developer. It is possible that some of these required water lines and metering vault (WCR 28@ WCR 9 ;4 ) may be built or are being designed by other developers in the same area. If they are in place when you need them then you may be able to utilize them to serve your development ( subject to LTWD rebate policy) . It would be wise to work with the other developers in the area to ensure that the water lines installed would be sized to meet the needs of both developments to reduce the amount of duplication and minimize future water line replacement . This commitment will expire one year from the date of this letter if the taps have not been purchased and installed by that date . The current fee for the domestic 5/8" X 3/4" tap is $6 , 000 . 00 The tap fee will increase to $7, 500 . 00 on July 1, 1999 . These fees area subject to change without notice . If you have questions, please contact me in our office . Regards, Michael T. Cook P . E . District Engineer Agreement for Water Main Extensions This agreement, made and entered into this 1 1 day of Jarntarrj ,}iN 2000,by and between LITTLE THOMPSON WATER DISTRICT,hereinafter called the"District"and RiVer'danee Land Co, LLC. hereinafter called "Customer", is upon the following terms and conditions, to-wit: I. The District is organized as a special district under laws of the Stateof Colorado serving treated water within the District as may now be established,or as hereinafter established.The Customer is either a taxpaying elector within the District,or desires to receive water service and to join the District. 2. The Customer desires to obtain water service for the ,'property" described in this Agreement. 3. The Customer shall pay for and provide all water mains either within or without the boundaries of the District in order to provide water service to the property; but the District may construct said mains,or the District may approve construction by the Customer,or the Customer's contractor upon terms approved by the District. A. The District must approve such construction by the Customer,or the Customer's contractor by written agreement providing for the terms of such installation, including requirements that the materials used shall meet all standards of the District and that provides for inspection by the District of the construction of such water mains. The cost of all construction shall be paid by the Customer to the District. B. A deposit in the amount hereinafter provided shall be paid by the Customer to the District as an advance towards theconstruction cost of the District for such installation.After completion of all construction and acceptance by the District, a final adjustment of costs will be made, if necessary. In the event that it is determined that the deposit is insufficient to cover the estimated cost of construction. then the Customer shall pay to the District, on demand, additional advances towards the cost of construction. C. If the installation is constructed by the Customer, or the Customer's contractor, the Customer shall transfer all right, title and interest in and to the facilities installed as well as all easements and appurtenances and other necessary property rights to the District by good and sufficient assignment or bill of sale or general warranty deed. Such transfer shall be made free and clear of all liens and encumbrances. and the Customer shall furnish sufficient evidence of title or a"form 100" title policy if required by the District. The Customer shall furnish mechanic's lien releases or a good and sufficient performance and payment bond pursuant to the Colorado Mechanic's Lien Law in order to insure that all construction costs have been paid in full. All labor and materials shall be warranted for defects of any kind by Customer and Customer's contractor for one year from the date of acceptance of such facilities by the written acceptance of such facilities.The District,upon receipt of the documents of transfer and evidence of title, shall consider whether to accept or reject the installation. If the Customer has complied with this Agreement and all other conditions precedent to the acceptance of the facilities, the District shall approve and accept the transfer and shall thereafter assume operation and maintenance of the lines. In no event shall the District assume ownership.operation or maintenance of any installation on the sen ice side of the metering installation for the property. 4. The District will provide service in accordance with its rules and regulations and line extension policies as now adopted or as may be hereafter adopted by the District.The Customer shall commence payment of established rates of the District,including minimum fees,on the date of installation of a tap and water is available for use at the tap. 5. The District, pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. will only be obligated to serve the tap size shown on this Agreement. 6. The terms of this Agreement shall apply to the property described herein,and the taps hereinafter provided may be used only upon said property. The parties hereto agree that this Agreement shall be treated as personal property and not real property. 7. The Customer shall pro%ide the District with an accurate copy of the final plat of the property to be served by the District.If the plat must be approved by the County Commissioners,then a recorded copy of the plat with the Clerk and Recorder of the Colorado County in which the development is situated must be provided to the District. 8. Customer hereby grants to the District the right to enter upon the land of the Customer and on the property as herein described to construct, operate and maintain the facilities herein described, together with the full right of ingress and egress,and to cut and trim trees and shrubbery to the extent necessary.The Customer shall obtain and convey to the District all easements required by the District,and the District shall not be responsible for any delay in providing service in the event of failure to provide such easements.Furthermore,failure to pros ide easements required by the District will cause this Agreement to become null and void and of no further force and effect,and the Customer shall forfeit all money or rights theretofore transferred to the District. 9. The facilities herein described are required by the Customer by date hereinafter stated. In the event the District installs the facility,the District shall use reasonable diligence in providing said facilities by that date. If said facilities cannot be installed because of act of God, governmental authority. action of the elements, accident, strikes, labor trouble, inability to secure materials or equipment, or any cause beyond the reasonable control of the District, the District shall not be liable therefore or for damages caused thereby. 10. In the event the District installs the facilities, the District shall install the facilities described herein in accordance with good engineering practice after the Customer has established property lines, cut streets, alleys and easements to final grade and prior to the paving of streets, and the construction of curbs and gutters.The Customer shall reimburse the District for any expense due to subsequent changes by the Customer. II. Water service shall he provided to Customers located within the property at the District's applicable rates, and upon terms and conditions now in effect or at the rates and under the terms and conditions as may be hereafter beadopted by the District and upon the rules and regulations as now established or as may hereafter be established by the District.No water service maybe obtained except upon property included within the boundaries of the District. Customer agrees that no other person shall be permitted to use water provided by the taps ''erein described. 12. In the event that construction of the water mains is not completed by the Customer or the CusbcPlie ;pylptfctdtfiMlgi6goDe[years from the date of this Agreement, then this Agreement shall become null and void.In such event,the District may set off against the deposit herein provided for the amount of its expense and return the balance of such deposit, if any,to the Customer. Customer agrees to pay all expense incurred by the District in excess of such deposit. JAN 2 4 200 LTwr) FORM 210 (Rev.May 861 Page 1 of 2 RECEIVED Agreement for Water Main Extensions 13. (Delete if inapplicable.)In order to off set the cost of water to supply the property herein described,the Customer agrees to sell to the District the number of acre-foot-units of the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District, Loveland, Colorado, water rights at the (mount for each unit,hereinafter described.Customer shall not receive cash for such units transferred to the District,but the total value of ach units as herein stated shall be applied to the tap price established by the District upon the date of installation of each such tap. 14. The District agrees toallowinstallationof the number of taps hereinafter providedwithin the above-described property,and each tap shall not exceed 3/4 inches. No taps will be served by the District until all of the terms andconditionsof this Agreement have been fulfilled by the Customer,including transfer of the above-described water rights.The taps may not be used on any property other than that described herein without the express prior written consent of the District to such transfer.Any such transfer shall be made to property owned by the Customer, and such property, and the Customer, shall net all rules, regulations and requirements of the District in order to achieve a requested transfer. Any right to receive a tap option or water rights credit under this Agreement, whether upon the above-described property,or at any other place shall expire and become null and void 20 years from the date of this Agreement.Customer may not encumber, mortgage or collaterally assign the taps without the prior written consent of the District thereto.In all other respects the taps or water rights credit shall be treated as personal propene. 15. Because installation of certain facilities to the below described property may benefit property owned by other Customers of the District, the District may pay tap rebates to the Customer upon receipt of a fully paid tap fee from another party to serve property not included within the below described property.These tap rebates will be paid in accordance with the District Rules and Regulations and the Customer should familiarize themselves with this portion of the aforementioned Rules and Regulations. The parties hereto agree that refunds will be made fora period of 5 years from the date of this Agreement and that upon expiration of said 5 year period,the District shall have no further obligation to make refunds.The total amount of the tap rebates will not exceed the Customer's cost for the improvements. 16. The Customer agrees to abide by all rates established and rules and regulations of the District as now established or as may hereafter be established by the District.District shall not be liable for any injury or damage for failure to deliver water for any reason including but not limited to war. riot, insurrection, Act of God, or breaks or failure of the water system. 17. No agent or representative of the District has the power to amend, modify, alter or waive any provisions of this Agreement. Any promises, agreements, or representations made by any agent or representative of the District not herein set forth shall be void and of no further force and effect. 18. The Customer understands and agrees that all amounts due under the terms of this Agreement, as well as all fees, rates, tolls. penalties. or charges for services, programs, or facilities furnished by the District constitute a perpetual lien on the property herein described, and that such lien may be foreclosed in the same manner as provided by the laws of the State of Colorado for the foreclosure of mechanic's liens.§32-1-1001(1)(j),C.R.S. 1973 (1981 amendments). In the event Customer fails to abide by any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, Customer agrees to pay all costs and expenses incurred by the District as a result of the breach including direct and consequential damages, loss of revenue. attorney fees, court costs, expert witness fees and other expenses. 19. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, personal representatives,successors and assigns of the parties hereto. Except as provided herein, the Customer may not assign all or any - y interest in this Agreement to any person. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their signatures the , and/year fi above written. L.IF I'HOMRSON W'ATE DISTRICT 'USTOMER � By <- Viri L Mailing Nddress: 875 West 64th Ave. Ratified by LTWD Board of Directors on: Denver, Colorado 80221 Telephone: (303) 427-8472 1) Real Estate Description for Agreement ("property"): Pt of section 35 and part of west 1/2 of section 36, township 3 north, range 68 west of the 6th pm, Weld County Colorado 2) Amount of Deposit: $ _. 3) Date Customer needs facilities. Pending final approval of PUD change of zone & final plan 4) Number of Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District units transferred to District: 5) Price per unit of Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District water: 6) Tap Size: 5/8 x 3/4 inches. 7) Number of taps to be installed: Plat Provided? —Yes No 9) Number of new fire hydrants: —. 10) Fee for hydrants: $ " See attachment A for detail of improvements LTWD FORM 210 (Rev_May 86) Page 2 of 2 Attachment A Agreement for Water Main Extension Summary of Estimated Costs Little Thompson Water District & RiverDance Land Co. LLC. 1.0 Cost of Improvements: Estimated costs for infrastructure improvements are detailed in Attachment B. Estimated costs for Phase 1 of the development, detailed in Little Thompson's water service commitment dated June 14, 1999 are $519,545.78. Estimated costs for infrastructure improvements for Phase 2, detailed in the Little Thompson water service commitment dated July 1, 1999 are $2,024,653.32. In accordance with 3(C) of the Agreement for Water Main Extensions, the customer will be responsible for all costs of said improvements, subject to monetary rebates established by the Little Thompson Water District and cost sharing agreements between other customers and the District which may be negotiated at a later date, and approved by the Little Thompson Water District. 2.0 Estimated Costs. The amount set forth herein are good-faith estimates calculated by the District's staff based upon current construction costs based upon commonly accepted industry standards and are expressly subject to final adjustment based upon actual construction costs. Attachment B Off-Site Infrastructure Improvements - RiverDance Development PHASE 1, New vault at WCR 28 and WCR 9 1/2 and 12" loop from SH 66. 1 12" DIP 7,000.00 Foot $27.00 $189,000.00 2 12" Valve 1.00 Each $650.00 $650.00 3 Air Release Valve 1.00 Each $2,500.00 $2,500.00 4 Blow-off Hydrant 2.00 Each $1,800.00 $3,600.00 6 Ditch Crossings 1.00 Each $8,000.00 $8,000.00 8 Hwy 66 Crossing 120.00 Foot $230.00 $27,600.00 10 Pressure Reducing Vault 1.00 Each $30,000.00 $30,000.00 11 Connect to Existing Lines 1.00 Each $5,000.00 $5,000.00 Subtotal $266,350.00 Contingency © 15% $39,952.50 Construction Costs $306,302.50 Engineering Cost (5.5%) $16,846.64 Legal/Administrative Costs- 3.3% $10,107.98 Construction Observation - 2.2% $6,738.66 Easements 1.33 Miles $135,000.00 $179,550.00 Total Cost Phase 1 $519,545.78 Phase 2 -WCR 38 to WCR 28 1 12" DIP 29,040.00 Foot $27.00 $784,080.00 2 12" Valve 6.00 Each $650.00 $3,900.00 3 Air Release Valve 7.00 Each $2,500.00 $17,500.00 4 Blow-off Hydrant 6.00 Each $1,800.00 $10,800.00 5 RR Bore 100.00 Foot $230.00 $23,000.00 6 Ditch Crossings 5.00 Each $8,000.00 $40,000.00 7 Road Crossing 5.00 Each $3,000.00 $15,000.00 8 Hwy 66 Crossing 120.00 Foot $230.00 $27,600.00 9 I-25 Crossing 300.00 Foot $230.00 $69,000.00 10 Pressure Reducing Vault 1.00 Each $30,000.00 $30,000.00 Subtotal $1,020,880.00 Contingency © 15% $153,132.00 Construction Costs $1,174,012.00 Engineering Cost (5.5%) $64,570.66 Legal/Administrative Costs- 3.3% $38,742.40 Construction Observation - 2.2% $25,828.26 Easements 5.50 Miles $135,000.00 $742,500.00 Total Cost Phase 1 $2,045,653.32 S r + MI :Fr dI r S S F. 4 i a • 4 ii MINIMUM SETBACKS TYPICAL 100' 100' 80' 55 LOT (TYPICAL) m (TYPICAL)Ns FRONT 1� t FRONT I FRONT 1 • FRONT O 0 0 0 0 N N N N a y 1 10' I I '� w 10' _ w 5�� o F N BLDG. N ENVELOPE 0 N ENVELOPE o ENVELOPE N O ENVELOPE N 10 (4800 sf.) N (3900 sf.) 0 (2700 sf.) LLI N (6400 sf.) 10" N N n 1 1 0' N 0 0 N N I REAR / REAR REAR 6 0 b N MINIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN 2` REAR 1 ADJACENT BUILDINGS IS 15'. pm Sm LAKE FRONT LARGE SUBURBAN SUBURBAN PATIO 50 II TYPICAL LOT BUILDING ENVELOPES N.T.S. G 4III P a 0 0 0doo m D c n z1/44 fge M N "0 E O s A G' 9 / N 7 Au 7 ` o 7 t m an L• a CD REDUCED PRINTS ARE ISSUED FOR CONVENIENCE ONLY 73 a CONSULT FULLSIZE DRAWINGS IN CASE OF CONFLICTS rn g v flOMAGE ROAD i, ill - . \ I 1 t \ ' ' • I �A I I a o � b o; -------A"'"*-1 <1> 0 41 II 7_..) \\ , ' , `yi S a naa n o N \ ' �� , t7 M a Mit ] ;14 5 • •\ \,......., \ ______ \ , _ ‘ \ , ' 1 '' \ - - _/ \\\ . \ ..' , • I )1 0 0 0 COLLECTOR ROM \i_ I. Z \ /f/. k. —.I 1il L ___N___. N. , i \ w . z „,,, • \ • Date: 1/t9/00 --- Sheet. Job A. 99-1222 -- -- -- TuttleApplegate,Inc. c,c — SIEGRIST COMPANIES,INC. 100-YEAR FLOOD LIMITS D°epn: ueoL — 119900me Meet Samna of Checked: MSC, RIVERDANCEP.U.D. °m ' °°'°° ° rk utgchmet NO DATE er crvR D DEscawnory = avail:wwiaq,.w..., ere:Sp.me.w.Alew.99i. Scale: 1 =250 REVISIONS REDUCED PRINTS ARE ISSUED FOR CONVENIENCE ONLY - CONSULT FULLSIZE DRAWINGS IN CASE OF CONFLICTS a 1-26 IC 8 woorn -0. -o ,` < O E.. Zi Cy to '\ i II.,,1 lit'\ I '----- „�. 133 • • i RR j l -�J i go • ss RN \ \ 8m 3 Iu\ -'\ , , ' f _ In \ i I ^ .) �.' 1 • -• �� fl � •• H�1 `t I- �' I � i ' N I tl.$ ) ,,_.] \ , \' \ \ \ \ \ / ! ,' • • \ 1 ----L ) • • • )''\ \ , \ • .-. it _ li)l-,I - \ t ! ' ' / •.,;i� I I ,, \ 7 ® I.U� ill ,� �� • • R. gnu re ' �,. - v Date 1/19/00 Sheet TuttleApplegate,lnc. J.No: 99-ISSX � 1 wD SIEGRIST COMPANIES,INC. CHANGE of ZONE _= cm kw Laal Nm.N.mdwtler ST: Checked: POOL RIVERDANCE P.U.D. ll�s�Sams,s� 1 TOT NigEeMblil NO DATE BY CNK'D DESCRIPTION sea MO33 6611 CKIJX4 NFrrTLS]fts mg91 Pot(3 MS2 75.9 luv hugpk 5uN: 1 nD' REVISIONS JAN- 24-CD MCN 02 :36 PM WELD COUNTY PUBLIC WKS7 FAX:9703046497 PAGE Jeccnd r %cc ma; 4,4 Mg - INVOICE Number: WELD COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. Date: 9/24/99 P.O.BOX 758 GREELEY,CO 80632 970-356-4000,EXT.3750 To: TUTTLE APPLEGATE,INC. 11990 GRANT STREET, SUITE 555 DENVER, CO 80233 Q ..L..---- -L...... _ TY DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE TOTAL For Professional Services rendered by Felsburg,Holt, and Ullevig for Waterside Traffic Review(River Dance) 2 Hrs. Sr.Engineer Labor $100.00 $200.00 8.5 Hrs. 7 Engineer I Labor $ 55.00 $467.50 I � /9� zY /,.[t 7 � — SUBTOTAL tlaq ieo TOTAL DUE $667.50 Post-it.Fax Note 7671 Data 61- 14 paoges" M i lMt 1't_ From -1Jo rt.q Co./Dept.'p Co. ? w m:ID0na;1rlV0iC¢.51CIn Phone N —Phone k Fax Fan k EXHIBIT 002 sa8 • I:_ TUTTLE APPLEGATE, INC. Weld County Public Works Dept Check Number: 19287 Date: 1/18/00 Check amt: 15862.867 Voucher invoice Type Date Reference Balance Discount Fay Amount 2829 Felsburg,Holt Invoice 11/03/99 U99-232 $667.50 $0.00 $667.50 cr ctA cc c w cr. cm " t' O m O L----- ON -- >C L.-. T Y' w.� 3 r �. h ! Sad ,?j��gp f�.- j co . TUTTLE APPLEGATE,'INC.., 11990 GRANTSTREET SUIrt6.$04 HGk1TAGE 19ANX x 13�,&7a U i - LAFAYETiE "F+ — ICJNY�R C6--90233 LAFAYEflE CCLDpA0010026 +, v CC' 452 !}11 BPOO1D20 }rs Ate- QPEF(STINl3AEcbUNT _ o H 2 Exactly,'Six hundred sixty seven'�and ,50 / 100 Dollars ,= o DATE AMOUNT q . 1/18/00! $6.67.50 t w PAY Weld County Public Works Dept - TO THE - P.O. $ox 75$ i ORDER GreeleyCo 800'32 - - g OF AJ7ité -g • z 11 0 Z9 28711° �� 1O70060041. �:�. 036 8311 (TWD SIGNATURES RE(�1 IRID) O CV I -C AN-24-0C: M0N 02 : 37 PM WELD COUNTY PUBLIC WKS7 FAX:9703046497 PAGE 3 dFELSBURG HOLT & ULLTVIG • engineering paths to transportation solutions January 5, 2000 Mr. Frank Hempen Jr. Director, Weld County Public Works Department P.O. Box 758 Greeley, Colorado 80632.0758 Re: Riverdance P.U.D. Traffic Engineering Review FHU Reference No. 98-257 Mr. Hempen: We have completed our traffic engineering review of the traffic Impact analysis tor the Riverdance P.U.D. which is planned to be located east of the 1-25 eastern frontage road, west of WCR 11, and south of WCR 23. The study was prepared by Eugene Coppola for TuttleApplegate, Inc., submitted December 1989: In general, the traffic study prepared for the Rivardance P.U.D. is complete and was prepared using the most recent trip generation and intersection capacity techniques. We offer the following comments: 1 . Trip generation information for the development, shown on page 11 of the study, is . approximately 15 percent lower when compared with our calculations. For the office and shopping center uses, appropriate ITE Land Use Codes were used from the' 6h Edition Trip Generation. However, average rates, instead of equations, were used to estimate projected daily and peak hour traffic volumes. The equations yield higher traffic volume estimates. The study analysis is conservative in that no reductions for internal trips (between office/shopping center/residential) were considered. It is likely that the trip generation estimates are still slightly low, even considering some reduction tor internal trips. 1-lowever, the conclusions of the study are still considered valid and a new analysis is not needed. 2. If unslgnalized,the critical movements at the intersection of the Frontage Road and the site Access Road are expected to operate at LOS C or better during both peak hours, with the exception of the westbound left-turn from the site Access Road, which is expected to operate at LOS E during the PM peak hour. The analyses assume refuge for one vehicle in a center two-way left-turn lane south of the intersection; this allows the westbound left-turn movement to be made in two stages. 303.72 I..1440 fax.303.72 2.0832 fhweflweng.coa Orecnwood Corpora¢PAa�t 7951 E.Mrplewood Ave.Ste.tat Englew x'd,CO 80111 JAN-24-0' MON 02:37 PM WELD COUNTY PUBLIC WKS7 FAX: 9703046497 PAGE 4 ' January 5, 2000 Mr. Frank Hempen Jr. Page 2 • However, peak hour signal warrants were analyzed for this intersection under long-terrn (year 2020) total traffic conditions. The peak hour signal warrant for a major street with a posted speed limit above 40 mph is projected to be met during both AM and PM peak hours. Additionally,the standard peak hour signal warrant(with no reductions for population or speed limit) is projected to be met during the PM peak hour. Therefore, the County may want to consider requesting a financial contribution from the applicant toward a future signal installation. 3. The unsignelized intersection of the Frontage Road and WCR 28 is also expected to operate at LOS C or better during both peak hours with one exception, the westbound left-turn from WCR 28 is expected to operate at LOS E during the PM peak hour. The analyses at this Intersection also assume a center two-way left-turn lane refuge for one vehicle. However,this intersection will be unable to function this way since it is a four- way intersection, Without the center two-way left-turn lane, the critical movements are projected to operate at LOS D or better during both peak hours, with the same exception of the westbound left-turn trom WCR 28 which Is expected to operate at LOS F during the PM peak hour. However, If the intersection of the Frontage Road and the site Access Road is - . signalized, this will create gaps in Frontage Road traffic at the Intersection of the Frontage Raad and WCR 28, allowing some of the left-turns to be made during these gaps in traffic. Therefore, it is expected that this Intersection will operate adequately with some delay to the left-turn traffic. No revisions to the study are necessary. 4. In the study, the Frontage Road is assumed to be widened to four lanes based upon Map 2.2 of the Weld_&ounty Mixed Use Developrpent Standards (February 1997). The County may want to consider requesting a financial contribution from the applicant toward the widening in proportion to the property's frontage of the roadway. 5. The following off-site intersection improvements are included In the traffic analysis as improvements expected to be completed apart from the proposed Riverdance development. Additionally, at each of the locations we have estimated the percent of traffic that is a result of the Rivordance development. ''pliii9 R , 2;k (00 10i e yr . O NJetk RA I kr w STATE OF COLORADO I Department of Transportation ',n,[,`1—/,1 an I/i11v �� Region 4-Engineering F I OT \f An 11i 11..6'V f 1420 Second Street ,... Greeley, Colorado 80631 --- �/�7�� (970) 350-2225, FAX(970)350-2178 ?ALL V � it Richard V. Barker Y �/( I}.) Gl Real Estate Specialist W 'AP(/COL (LLC/Let (.4uu' . / /kip,5t b, Cfil(i ais- e'lAn9. r (UU Iv H71?( ld-iiG2I 4/ i /tz&( C er e t c e,/& tv'il 41 rie iii /it?h. g-u awatki le1ot c;Thc. /Ft 02,41 ihdju/ IT Coal row 5 il �0t. -. f- J Ct 4 i d/( Lt, 19-(4 (12 /9 — l-'hb9, igt) ro f & p0S5) bzic b/& btz) dicta . ( Hz L.) C'.e c2e,e__- 4_4-1-x[1/Led ) . t fit„i a Mc (L/?,n - EXHIBIT PAISae (V)M-t t f4 cillieL ea4- e-t 6.' 343 U- did-?-5--- I T J4- r2)- /2L-nu. A KK f 11Gr/L 4-e. wee (/)-706 1.e2 tc1 , ` COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION i =:.. ""� __ _ cOOT OF WAY o" ONSTRJUOI.PROJEi`. 1 PLAN SHEET 1071 MEPE A -� Greta, flea, — Hs a RD vRu, NH IRCX 025 311091 -R's .L: ROJK.CDDE RIC3 S H 3 0 wmeowm 6 RIGHT OF WAY PLANS UNIT Myron Hora ---- - ---11 --- ;KT...an 91032 '',•i-;ii T. 3 N., R. 68 W., 6th P.M. I '1I I Ir 1 SE 1/4 1ce,�"k. ,,a m a,,, se, SW 1/4 SEC. 34 Aa M". I SEC. 35 hE 3 e tint mWw*Igo,Longmont — 1'61° ,4 1 vmm L Neel am U a,Trustee m uk aele'Mellon — Lot' w co e (5-_, rangy a"'° — t5 /Loaf mom wxrA Penm�nA A9 4 5 Al 9� :„G.; I 1/44 / / in 8\ c {' P fl- :ajar, A !A? / r e , aaxm.�t .Ir e L fom�r�u-_,,, o —i—_I NB9lni_� // �� aza 3 lee• — ui ew,e,m 800. BMn r Fe seA ` n+mMw/ per Row ^°- v +,c. Icu� Y w Pal I_�� Y 6 zz,, f av, sa� T z I- f. _ Zv ,A ��:••• I I 7 asawv. a . T. 2 N., R. 68 W., 6th P.M. I .� ' g1 NE 1/4 bi 5—, I�. wd NW 1/4 SEC. 3 C '1 II SEC. 2 3., j I Igsi II ® SEAS A came oeoaemna a _�"l 1 I) wee co.*,.a mar�wm,. Na,um Re-WC" D'''''' I I a,�L / AS .a oaac el,ne stm.a,colaom park,ad Culbaa Pevwloi 1 m R, ' Zn 9'4 i J•o— - I. � 1—w,.,�.l E, r�i chine]. Revlsons NOTE ' I RIGHT 0 Y I 'El' COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT N ,01„, owwy�emm —, PROJECT: _ PLAN Sh. CONSTRUCTION nit,Region 4 02/99 Mid m3,e,Lm v !8-. 1420 Second Street 'M 0253 154 NH-@CX 025-3009) Greeley, CO 80631 EAST FRONTAGE RD (ST VRAIN R) ' o Phone: (970) 350-2157 FM (970) 350-2178 S.H. 7 TO 5.H 66 PROJECT CODE: 12109 — 'LsRIGHT OF WAY PLANS UNIT: Myron flora - - - A ,0a. PROJECT CODE: 91032 SHEET NUMBER: 6 Y` pT «'1 &a ' psi y.3 N., R. 68 W:=, 6th P M. P_ / � wc� It' ARC 11111 b.m0000:6 52') / a-I Scale one iraller SE 1/4 ! PP l 7 4 WAUS ;034 ( 9.260 SW 1 4 — p A Me Ch 111.6 12`e 7 I II fi6lm (36634') SEC: 34_ h f 1 111 SEC. 35 ci 31.1]1dga j j i o, OThe First National Bo of Longmont — 4�. �� O Robert L Siegrist and as Trustee, and a Edwin Anderson tI i' St. Vrain Land Co., A ,. Family Trust _ ' x7 s� Colorado General Partnership 119 11 19 O ® �r .) 5 1 $6 3.e" 198 fi4 �� 17,2 1212) ^1 722-- _ of�� —M �' Nr36 Nor n f '� F r .+3aa.�Dse, r) 1 �( v trig"p..e a a PE 1 I'� ti nac a�sa6m n f ��'I ts] N 6 'YE �' i � ati �.��,<�,J __.� �yat4t \tom C5�.(rO695Tfz5��1483 .�7s₹ssfn9 " �F- z � g ''Ys ' ' --11-1-11 _ _11-1 'A>, '' -- S3 S'2]^N 1‘,."--`----';-'47-4__ a4]1U' lot TP 4E ® � — i OOrn(FJ 3 "--- _ 1 n dl' m 056 9SA"Of 7ff'E r x j - /�3` - -a lln,.f-A- __.TAbJ�""jIPO„'2"� '8,.; y — - - PPk.3YA - f m(67;- EPO N - � r� J _ 1203" 335"-6 T r Pkt _ i" -fWNSHIP (INE „_804�787� -�— N.89'1.527T 1t� i7 1s 894 ^]�4t On]ei -µ@4.A'00;.>>,W “9 , p pgL Y .P2� waz ofi'a'r /��- L6 3` �+v Izm'��0792:577_..., e]9 s y "Y� 3 - _ /� t; P5um /98.261 ad Ap- r 8447# ' o69ra- 5�7] 'RO.W. �Y'aT i 4 aW. -- l3fi 143.90 � y..' _z � ys ,r"pp--J./ g 40.3519�140V 1.1t,7<---,: 14-----, "sn�-_ =- - _" �. a of O40-35) U o. "" � T2 i i I I i. ' 7 :a. ?d ,�' s t. 71§1 8.69'sr(114 o x ' J I "s 36.44Uvr 014932 I I 516 ��` ._ �a y" T. 2 N., R. 68 W., 6th P.M. j I S =I .,, _ 00 NE 1/4 0 1 t) .56 ' ',,, I NW 1/4 It via{ SEC. 3 - SEC. 2 3, ; l Jlry I I.. 31I ZI r'i (TE State of Colorado Department of ° �ri ) I Weld County, a body corporate 2 Natural Resources, Division of I I and pditic of the State of Colorado Parks and Outdoor Recreation r 84.811m 4506 JJ) go, R U5=303000Dm ;994093') 1 an an Ch '4].4"N '"I33' 1184782m (606.24) I I I la- o—'nsz i i l I A', —Appmzimnle I00 year ncoa pain P. ' 4i per map no 080266 0850 C / . Page 1 of 1 .;.' t p p uc i°�a ' ,s2°'i F �.�P'Sx'� a .�'$ f x✓18FR'c �'f J� a � i ;mssn' Z, irra (tiy% 62 att.() Z l lE 1/20/)0 file://A:AM V C:-014F.JPG Weed Management Plan RIVERDANCE P.U.D. Prepared For: Siegrist Companies,Inc. 875 West 64'h Avenue Denver,CO 80221 Prepared By: lbttleApplegate,lnc. Consultants for Land,Mineral and Water Development 11990 Grant Street,Suite 304,Denver,CO 80233 TFLEPIIONE: (303)452-6611 FAX:(303)452-2759 July 1999 TA Job #99-122 EXHIBIT Weed Management Plan Site Location The RiverDance PUD development is 486.75 acres in size and is located north of St. Vrain Creek and east and adjacent to the I-25 frontage road. Objective To control undesirable plants in Weld County and on the property, a Weed Management Plan is proposed. Plants identified through the Colorado Weed Management Act (CRS§35-5.5-101, et seq.) as undesirable and designated for management on-site include Canada Thistle, Musk Thistle, Diffuse Knapweed, and Russian Knapweed. Subareas The site varies in topography and vegetation. Since physical variations exist on the property, the management of these undesirable plants will be site dependent. Under this plan, subareas are created to assist in identifying specific management practices for these specific areas on the parcel. These subareas are Riparian Corridor (includes St. Vrain Creek and lakes on-site), Wetlands, Sloped Terrain, and Uplands (see Figure 1). Methods of Control The methods of control are cultural, mechanical, biological, and chemical. These methods are defined as follows: Cultural - The method or management practices that encourage the growth of desirable plants over undesirable plants. Mechanical - The method or management practices that physically disrupt plant growth including but not limited to tilling, mowing, burning, flooding, mulching, hand-pulling, and hoeing. Biological - The use of organisms such as sheep, goats, cattle, insects, and plant diseases to disrupt the growth of undesirable plants. Chemical - The use of herbicides or plant regulators to disrupt the growth of undesirable plants. An integration of one or more of these methods can be applied to these subareas. Weed management of undesirable weeds for the subareas are as follows: Riparian Corridor and Wetlands Please note that any herbicide that is used in this subarea is not to be harmful to aquatic wildlife or vegetation. I. Canada Thistle A. Mechanical and Chemical Control - Mowing can occur throughout the growing season in order to keep the plants from going to seed. Mowing RiverDance PUD #99-122 Page 2 of 4 should be terminated in late August followed by a herbicide treatment during late September through October, before a hard frost. B. Cultural and Chemical Control - Use a short residual herbicide followed by a seeding with a competitive grass such as smooth brome or other sod forming species (natives preferred). C. Chemical Control Only - Herbicide applications can be applied from rosette to bud stage and if needed, retreated in the fall. 2. Musk Thistle A. Mechanical and Chemical Control - Mowing to occur throughout the summer to address the bud stage of the thistle. Apply a herbicide in October to new rosettes and any bolted plants. B. Mechanical Control Only - Conduct multiple mowings during the summer (two to four) to keep seeds from being produced. C. Chemical Control Only - Use a herbicide that is not harmful to aquatic wildlife and vegetation in the spring and fall. 3. Diffuse Knapweed A. Cultural and Chemical Control - Apply herbicide in early summer when knapweed is in the rosette through bolting stage. Reseed area with competitive perennial sod forming grasses. Another herbicide application utilized the following year as needed to prevent plants from going to seed. B. Mechanical and Chemical Control - During the growing season, mow when the knapweed is in the bud stage to prevent seeding. If necessary, a herbicide application to any plants that have re-bolted will be made in the fall. C. Mechanical Control Only - To reduce seed set, mow throughout the summer season. D. Chemical Control Only - The herbicide application is to be made during the rosette stage (spring or fall) and while bolting. 4. Russian Knapweed This weed is typically not found in riparian or wetland areas. However, if this undesirable plant is detected the following control techniques can be applied. A. Cultural and Chemical Control - A herbicide application, using short residual herbicides can be used followed up by seeding the area with a competitive grass such as smooth brome or other sod forming species. B. Mechanical and Chemical Control - Mowing can be carried out throughout the season with the first and successive mowing cycles carried out at the bud stage. A herbicide treatment can then be made in the fall before a hard freeze. C. Mechanical Control Only - Mowing can be carried out throughout the season, which will reduce seed set. RiverDance PUD #99-122 Page 3 of 4 D. Chemical Control Only - Herbicide applications can be made to the knapweed during the bud stage and in the fall if necessary. Sloped Terrain 1. Canada Thistle A. Mechanical and Chemical Control - See Riparian Corridor and Wetlands, #IA. Maximum slope to be mowed by a lawn mower is 3:1. Undesirable plants on slopes steeper than 3:1 should be removed by hand. B. Cultural and Chemical Control - See Riparian Corridor and Wetlands, #1B. C. Chemical Control Only - See Riparian Corridor and Wetlands, #1C. 2. Musk Thistle A. Mechanical and Chemical Control - See Riparian Corridor and Wetlands, #2A. B. Mechanical Control Only - See Riparian Corridor and Wetlands, #2B. C. Chemical Control Only - See Riparian Corridor and Wetlands, #2C. 3. Diffuse Knapweed A. Cultural and Chemical Control - See Riparian Corridor and Wetlands, #3A. B. Mechanical and Chemical Control - See Riparian Corridor and Wetlands, #3B. C. Mechanical Control Only - See Riparian Corridor and Wetlands, #3C D. Chemical Control Only - See Riparian Corridor and Wetlands, #3D. 4. Russian Knapweed A. Cultural and Chemical Control - See Riparian Corridor and Wetlands, #4A. B. Mechanical and Chemical Control - See Riparian Corridor and Wetlands, #4B. C. Mechanical Control Only - See Riparian Corridor and Wetlands, #4C. D. Chemical Control Only - See Riparian Corridor and Wetlands, #4D. Uplands 1. Canada Thistle A. Mechanical and Chemical Control - See Riparian Corridor and Wetlands, #1A. Maximum slope to be mowed by a lawn mower is 3:1. Undesirable plants on slopes steeper than 3:1 should be removed by hand. B. Cultural and Chemical Control - See Riparian Corridor and Wetlands, #1B. C. Chemical Control Only - See Riparian Corridor and Wetlands, #1C. RiverDance PUD #99-122 Page 4 of 4 2. Musk Thistle A. Mechanical and Chemical Control - See Riparian Corridor and Wetlands, #2A. B. Mechanical Control Only - See Riparian Corridor and Wetlands, #2B. C. Chemical Control Only - See Riparian Corridor and Wetlands, #2C. 3. Diffuse Knapweed A. Cultural and Chemical Control - See Riparian Corridor and Wetlands, #3A. B. Mechanical and Chemical Control - See Riparian Corridor and Wetlands, #3B. C. Mechanical Control Only - See Riparian Corridor and Wetlands, #3C D. Chemical Control Only - See Riparian Corridor and Wetlands, #3D. 4. Russian Knapweed A. Cultural and Chemical Control - See Riparian Corridor and Wetlands, #4A. B. Mechanical and Chemical Control - See Riparian Corridor and Wetlands, #4B. C. Mechanical Control Only - See Riparian Corridor and Wetlands, #4C. E. Chemical Control Only - See Riparian Corridor and Wetlands, #4D. Conclusion Weed management by cities and counties is becoming more common in Colorado and through this type of management, undesirable plant species have been reduced. Not unlike other parcels along the Front Range, this development has varying landscapes and site conditions. With this in mind, this plan was formulated and by implementing one or more of the above applications, weeds can be managed and reduced in the RiverDance development. REDUCED PRINTS ARE ISSUED FOR CONVENIENCE ONLY - CONSULT FULLSIZE DRAWINGS IN CASE OF CONFLICTS 1-25 FRONTAGE ROAD ) I 5 (--- ' tr,,, \% f,.� , jy )/ 1 I I II \\ \ li. A g II 0 ii i I CI li c>• � -----J 111 I ' • / N I 1 L__ _ LT -- g il g m 8 g g Cat<. 06/03/06 Sheet: Job No 09-,ii TuttleApplegate,lnc. SEIORIST COMPANIES,INC. CHANGE of ZONE p<v0n: N c-uXm.N5aL Mieeeq-Jam Of: «<6 o RIVERDANCE P.U.D. WNW MANAONMNNT PLAN = = C5 Reset Sum. (J0]µ526611 f..:dOJµJ2ElJ9 ROM de. wenaa p.g NO DATE 89 HK'p DESCRIPTION � ��.py0pyEy.<t p5p.IpoJ..<5Awn.Fe00Pk scam. NT.E. C REVISIONS a TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS RIVERDANCE SUBDIVISION Prepared For: Siegrist Companies,Inc. 875 West 64th Avenue Denver, CO 80221 Prepared By: mttleApplegate,lnc. Consultants for Land, Mineral and Water Development 11990 Grant Street,Suite 304,Denver,CO 80233 TELEPHONE 303-452-6611 FAX 303-452-2759 June, 99 TA Job#99-122 EXHIBIT V ar INTRODUCTION Riverdance is a PUD proposal for residential and commercial development. The parcel is bounded to the south by the St. Vrain Creek, to the west by Interstate 25 and to the north by Weld County Road 28. The parcel is two miles north of State Highway 119. Figure 1 shows the general location of Riverdance. The property is located in Sections 35 and 36, Township 3 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. Riverdance is approximately 467 acres in size. For the purposes of this report it has been divided into an east and west section. The west section contains an area for commercial use, townhomes, and single family homes. The east section contains townhomes and single family homes. This report will include an analysis of the following: • An analysis of the existing surrounding roadway system. • The daily and peak-hour traffic that would be generated by the development. • The directional distribution of the generated traffic. • Projected traffic growth, based on projected current background volumes and this sites impact only. • Anticipated CDOT Access Requirements. EXISTING ROADWAY AND TRAFFIC CONDITIONS The roads in the area that will be directly affected are the I-25 frontage road and Weld County Road (WCR) 28. These roads will ultimately feed to WCR 11, State Highway (SH) 119 and SH 66. Existing traffic count information was taken from Felsburg, Holt, and Ullevig "Weld County Roadway Improvement Plan" dated 3/4/99 and information received from the Colorado Department of Transportation. For existing traffic count information refer to Figure 2. WCR 28 and 11 are two lane gravel roads with no posted speed limits. The 1-25 frontage road is a two lane, undivided, highway with a posted speed limit of 45 miles per hour (mph). SII 119 is a 4 lane highway with a posted speed limit of 45 mph, the speed limit west of the frontage road reduces to 35 mph. SH 66 is a 2 lane undivided highway with a posted speed limit of 65 mph. The only existing signalized intersection is at SH 119 and the frontage road. According to the Weld County Comprehensive Plan WCR 28, from WCR 11 and west, will be a 2 lane collector. The frontage road is proposed to be a 4 lane undivided f Pr.),09] doc I secondary access. SH 66 will be a 4 lane undivided highway and SH 119 will be a 6 lane major arterial west of the frontage road intersection. East of the frontage road intersection, SH 119 will be a 4 lane undivided secondary access. The intersection of SH 66 and the frontage road will be signalized. TRIP GENERATION The site was divided into the east and west section for this report. The east section will contain 447 single family lots and 88 townhome units. The west section will contain 58 single family lots, 57 townhome units, and approximately 75,000 square feet of commercial property. Trip generation rates were estimated using the 5th Edition Trip Generation, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (1TE) dated 1995. The following tables depict the total trips generated and the A.M. and P.M. peak hour trips generated for the new subdivision. TABLE 1 West Section Trip Generation Type of Lot Weekday Weekday Weekday Saturday Saturday Sunday Sunday A.M. Peak P.M. Peak Peak Peak Single Family 505 10 50 540 50 490 45 Townhome 585 30 35 380 35 325 35 Commercial 1140 N/A* 145 100 N/A* 50 N/A* Total 2230 40 230 1020 85 865 80 * Data was not available TABLE 2 East Section Trip Generation Type of Lot Weekday Weekday Weekday Saturday Saturday Sunday Sunday A.M. Peak P.M. Peak Peak Peak Single Family 4095 290 415 4350 410 3970 370 Townhome 405 40 55 570 50 485 50 Total 4500 330 470 4920 460 4455 420 TRIP DISTRIBUTION The project, when developed, will access directly onto WCR 28 and the frontage road. It has been estimated that 35 % of the traffic generated from the east section will access WCR 28 and the remaining 65 % will access the frontage road. Ninety five % of the ( 'No3A99113VecgUraffcVIrallle dare 2 traffic from the west section will access the frontage road and 5 % will access WCR 28. The following table represents the distribution of traffic on the roadways directly effected by the subdivision. TABLE 3 West Section Tri Distribution Road % Distribution EDT Total _ Frontage Road 95 2119 _ Frontage Road Northbound 35 741 Frontage Road Southbound 65 _ 1377 2119 WCR 28 _ 5 _ 112 WCR 28 Westbound 100 112 112 TABLE 4 East Section Trip Distribution Road % Distribution EDT Total Frontage Road _ 60 _ 2700 _ Frontage Road Northbound 35 945 Frontage Road Southbound _ 65 _ 1755 2700 _ WCR 28 40 1800 WCR 28 Westbound 100 _ 1800 1800 Figure 3 illustrates the assignment of project-generated traffic for the development and the surrounding roads. PROJECTED TRAFFIC GROWTH A study was conducted by Felsburg, Holt & Ullevig dated 3/4/99. The study indicated the projected traffic growths for Weld County. The site was included within the MUD GAPro1991?2ecbalTdTaflicdoc 3 area with a growth factor of 12.4%, refer to Figure 4. Figure 5 depicts estimated year 2020 daily traffic forecasts per the above study. TABLE 5 f Existing Daily 2020 Forecasted Projected Growth Due %of Forecasted Road Traffic Traffic to Site Development Traffic Frontage Road 850 N/A 4819 N/A WCR28 55 700 1912 273% WCR 11 90 160 190 119% SH119 2170 15200 3132 21% SH 66 5450 13100 3788 29% The site was included as a part of the MUD in the study. Therefore, the 2020 forecasted traffic included development of the site. The frontage road was not included in the study. As seen in the table above, the projected growth due to site development is higher on WCR 28 and WCR 11 than the forecasted growth. The projected growth due to site development on the state highways is lower than the 2020 forecasted traffic. Therefore, the proposed expansions shown in the Weld County Improvement Plan will be sufficient for the highways. To better handle the projected traffic volumes on WCR 11, it should be paved with a minimum width of 24 feet, based upon a design speed of 80 kilometers per hour (km/hr). WCR 28 is proposed to be a two lane collector. According to the "Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 1994" by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, WCR 28 as a two lane collector should manage the excess capacity due to development. ANTICIPATED CDOT ACCESS REQUIREMENTS A CDOT Access Permit is required to obtain permission to construct, modify, relocate or close a vehicular access. An access permit will be required if SH 119, SH 66, or the frontage road require modification. According to the 1998 CDOT State Highway Access Code, modifications will be necessary as the DHV (10% of EDT) from the site to SH 199, SH 66, or the frontage road appear to exceed Code limitations. The proposed improvements per the Weld County Structural Transportation Network should be sufficient to manage the excess capacity due to the development at the frontage road intersection at SH 66 and SH 119. A permit will be required at the intersections of WCR 28 and the frontage road, WCR 11 and SH66, and the intersection of the frontage road and the west access of the subdivision. f,ProjA99122\ecy4rnl➢cVFralnc doc 4 CONCLUSION The following summarizes the traffic impacts to the surrounding roadway system, due to development of the Riverdance property. 1. At buildout, the Riverdance Subdivision is expected to generate 6,730 vehicle-trips during an average weekday. The A.M. peak hour is expected to generate 370 trips while the P.M. peak hour is expected to generate 700 trips. 2. Access permits will be required at the following intersections: WCR II and SH 66, WCR 28 and the frontage road, the subdivision's west access and the frontage road. 3. Due to the development, the intersection at SH 66 and the frontage road will require a minimum 200' left turn lane to turn onto SH 66. A minimum 435' right turn lane will be required to turn onto SH 66. An accel lane will also be required on SH 66 with a minimum length of 1590'. 4. WCR 28 and the frontage road will require the following improvements: A left turn decel lane with a minimum length of 635', a right turn lane with a minimum length of 535', and a right turn accel lane with a minimum length of 550'. 5. The west access from the subdivision and the frontage road will require the following improvements: A left turn decel lane with a minimum length of 735', a right turn lane with a minimum length of 635', and a right turn accel lane with a minimum length of 550'. 6. Due to the development, the intersection at SH 66 and WCR 11 will also require improvements. The improvements should include a left turn decel lane with a minimum length of 600'. 7. WCR 28 and WCR 11 should be paved. The proposal to upgrade WCR 28 is sufficient to handle excess traffic due to development. WCR 11 was not included in the Structural Transportation Network to be paved, however the development of this site will require upgrade to the road. 8. The site falls within the projected growth area of 12.4 and traffic will be accommodated with the improvements recommended above and the improvements proposed by Weld County Comprehensive Plan. ( Pro'A99 rPecgUre@cATrattic.dcc 5 I I Joe lead /,f-1 LARIME 3* 11,100 s r%'I kacn ✓ i�e 68 WC fl 4800 —I--��/ 1 0 95 0 ill FELSBU RG in "' 145 130 145 55 105 80 T (/ H O LT & u0i ti/> 25 N ULLEVIG ` In m CO N C• 170 ^,-c 165 O I 115 in 210 ` a n Longmont :V/i/ a /®a 1D 2110 1,000 WCfl 24 13,700 14,200 T N CO O O N W C 0 U, / 100 N 555 ^90 90 i 0 U 700 605 90 N m roes o ,✓///m `Q1, 355 m 425r J,� 200 in Y �/` i a 0 o I 1051— N r//7-, f !777 / 135 33 175 in 0 40 'ee � m V1 150 m S - O min 52 O an 9050 ,/.�r 125 WCR 1� 0 8700 8300 V liL C no '\8350 o_ e m . /� N O1 150 a 0, n3?°4 �� 40 ^4T' in 220 M in ! to ./ N 7 50 a 50 30 � T�1 60 rou N / 30 0 N N / a O WCR B• 1175 595 865 1680 °% 415 240 65 25,+- I . N0c / �✓ 320 975♦�/ 1/ N" coAo.\ Nco in WCR2 /I6800 � 111 0r1 Broolenn ¢ ¢ ¢ o ¢ O 3 o U� 3 LEGEND SOUTHWEST STUDY AREA = Sludy Area Boundary ( EXISTING DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES Sources : Weld County, Erie, CDOT FIGURE 2 and Counter Measures Date. 6/24/99 _ Job No 99 177 SIEGRIST COMPANIES, INC. = TuttleApplegate,lnc. Drawn: 1::4 CmdlnYfvr lNmv.I,.codR',tr 9a RIVERDANCE P.U.D. = — - „ �„Steel Coeb CM1ade,t DJ = I ,a Co. t33 File Figures n1Nc EXISTING TRAFFIC COUNTS (30300-661i 119 ovyn m Err 11paamA.n,o i. Score M]s. (tea spas o I °T► %--- SHEA 3022 , ' 15 38 i 26c% P7 J 04. X38 - 9 / / o I ___( 0 26 3 � �� LL 109 27 � 8 if \36 / 1 ;_-33 \ WCR28 1912 . WCR 28' 7 — .---,— s.. X12 --- 2 h1 49 1. _ '` �`� _ / va , r cc � ` 11 _ �12 W. FART SFIVISIO j \ --------2N - 2u .:O - . SUBDIVISION/ \ w � wa,28 12, 132 I y ..eb a it 54 I • 6 80 '12 ii co k J M, 80 I �_. _ CHANCE ' u 120 ,-- is ihma5. , l I - Est 48t*i, r kr9:�1 o I 'iieaz 82 Wea I a Sz WEST ACCESS I W > � �_ g `4'154 4839 -� _ ic83< . g 322 • aeao .. /145 8, V 1 _ 12975 � 157 3094 c16sH ii 157 Ow 109 AM PEAK-HOUR TRAFFIC 236 PM PEAK-HOUR TRAFFIC �� 152 ESTIMATED PROJECT GENERATED ADT AND FLOW DIRECTION FIGURE 3 Dole. 6/29/99 Job No: 99-122 SIEORIST COMPANIES,INC. _..tt TuttleApplegate,Inc. Ueoxo: FCC _ Comb®Or Laid,?tomb,vI WON oesigo.. FCC RIVERDANCE P.U.D. _ = u999a.uau.. Sone304 Checked: DJ Omv.CO.BMll Fie: O.SSIG,.F6l.owc TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENTS ,(3021)45 xesu Fa:(303)452a,fl Scale. r-2000• I / e', Mead , 4 LARIMER COUNTY 26,600 /1.... :7 .`" -a06 i�W Q — WCR303 I 0 o�—y;/,r r� z2 11,500 't2oy\ ' m Cto FELSBURG 1800 1600 " 1800 700 190 140 �' HOLT & � ��• ULLEVIG N =J a o 0 25 $ / o $ CO 7 ,y 2100 '� 2100 •-• \__., o _J 210 o a 500 0 0 0 ? s Longmont :////, /®g co WCR 24 40 15,200 1600 16,400 17,000 0 $ r $ N m 180 g _ �. 160 160 m 8700 7500 1100 o 0 0 $ 0 0 cl a 01/a:1 400 io $ 300 �— I r 7` / n' 500 a r/, r,rr�1, k1, I 240 o 8 1100 / / � 400 O e / co V 52 12,700 / / ./../ 300 WCR 14 p a 12,200 11,600 Kill's V 11,7do W W o o $ D : 'o o A' 3 0 to�� o C m 400 .N 80 t 200 " 600 $ 0 8 0 ign in 130 0 60 -(01-7—..-k120 g i S 0 0 ' 60 0o 0 PI 0 PI WCR B.2 13,0 23,000 24,00C 25,000 500 6500 180o 0 400 a 0 \ 0 0 N T � �f b, 0 1600 4900 ,� o o §10 ��\ L. ' 2100 800 �col �\� ' .3, '• . \ CO 01$ In ,l•..° ,. �`j WCR 2 7 .... 2aao lsoo- r 21,00007) rE Broomfield - Northglenn cc o cc cc cc 3 3 0 0 3 SOUTHWEST STUDY AREA 7K� LEGEND YEAR 2020 DAILY TRAFFIC FORECASTS Study Area Boundary 1/4-1-1 FIGURE 5 Del,. 6/24/99 Job No: 99-122 SIEORIST COMPANIES, INC. TuttleApplegate,Inc. ECG DesRIVERDANCE P.U.D. - rmmm s.Vae,�a.awm Check: ECG —mor - i,9voo Co 00213 eme 3w GhttkeC. W = Dwyer Co Mt33 Fa.: Ewes DWG 2O2O DAILY TRAFFIC FORECASTS 003N3266" Fa 003N3lil39 Scole. I /7, Mead A LARIMER- COUNTY 26,600 "/�" • r"'' ,1A0 �f �1" WCR 30 0 oL , 66 11,500120 m ,j . FELSBURG • 1800 1600 • 1800 700 r 190 140 (4 HOLT & o ULLEVIG L E V I G n `:��'+ ≥ 0 00 25 0 m o N .- w 2100 �: 210 2,66 0 _J 7./A/ / 0 m 500 0 0 Longmont ///J� a WCR 24 I/ !/ l m /�� w 15;200 1800 16,400 17,000 0 00 O 0 ti. / Le /Lei: N. b 180 O 160 7gii 8700 7500 1100 0 o o v N 160 o et 0. v 400 Co 0 300 r-- J0 ',/,,„771:Z .f _ N. 0 ` 240 500 e��1' k / m a o E 0 110 ! ! 400 or/ . F 0 0 ^ o ._ sr 52 12,760 / ,/ m 300 WCR 14 o ,2,2000 11O,600 IeI•/ . �,e D pgCp 0 w 0 o /�/1/Qp// O\11,7C0 •• '3 a 400 4' :/ !/ . /4J 80 m 600 0 LLr0 200 0 0 /� co o # O y 1 T - to 333333 130 0 60 —/T-r 120 0 O N 0 60 O a OD 0 / 0 a N WCR 8. 13,0 23,000 24,00C 25,000 /`6500 " 6500 I 1800 400 oo 0 0 0 N ,n 0 1600 4900 ,_ i/g JO N //� N O //i0 , .� \ 2160 800p / \ O a S N m3• b N m 3 / 3, C �` WCR 2 7 2400 1600' + 21,000 CE Broomfield - Northglenn - ¢ U m cL m SOUTHWEST STUDY AREA 44DLEGEND YEAR 2020 DAILY TRAFFIC FORECASTS = Study Area Boundary FIGURE 5 Dale: 5/24/99 Job No, 99--122 SIEGRIST COMPANIES, INC. TuttleApplegate,Inc. om.m ECG - -_ C 3I.o,fur l Mta.l.ad We Dael9a E�� RIVERDANCE P.U.D. _ ,,,,0�,ga„-Suste,,, Chckec: DJ = = Now a.WllJ File: Figures DWG 2020 DAILY TRAFFIC FORECASTS MH524621 Pc,O0'Mf2-2759 e" email:us,p.®o..oa 217:fb.slMAmsbaF9lr Score K1.5- Preliminary Drainage Report and Water Quality Management Plan Change of Zone Submittal for RiverDance PUD Prepared For: SIEGRIST COMPANIES 875 West 64th Avenue Denver, Colorado 80221 Prepared By: 7luttleApplegate,Inc. Consultants for Land, Mineral and Water Development 11990 Grant Street,Suite 304,Denver,CO 80233 IEI.EPHONE 303-452-6611 FAX 303-452-27`;9 July 1, 1999 TA Job #99122 EXHIBIT rr This Preliminary Drainage Report for the Riverdance PUD Change of Zone Application, Weld County, Colorado has been prepared under my direct supervision upon the request of the property owners, expressly for their use. Daniel P. Giroux Date Colorado Registered P.E. #25721 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 1 Project Description 1 GENERAL l TOPOGRAPHY 1 SOILS 3 IRRIGATION 3 DRAINAGE PATTERNS 3 Hydrology 3 EXISTING HYDROLOGY 3 ST VRAIN HYDROLOGY 6 PROPOSED HYDROLOGY 6 DESIGN STORM FREQUENCY 8 Major Drainage Design Components 8 ST. VRAIN FLOODPLAIN 8 MAJOR EXISTING DRAINAGE PATIIS 12 FLOOD INUNDATION LIMITS 12 Minor Drainage Design Components 12 PROPOSED SOUTHERN PORTION DRAINAGE 12 PROPOSED NORTHERN PORTION DRAINAGE 13 EROSION CONTROL 14 Summary and Conclusions 16 References 16 ATTACHMENT A: Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) A-1 1. PURPOSE A-1 2. CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT PHASE WOMP A-1 2.1 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES A-2 2.1.1 SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL A-2 2.1.2 CONTROL OF OTHER CONTAMINANTS A-3 3. POST CONSTRUCTION WQMP A-4 3.1 EQUESTRIAN FACILITY A-4 3.2 URBAN RUNOFF A-5 3.3 LAKE DESIGN AND MANAGEMENT A-5 3.4 EXISTING WETLANDS A-6 3.5 POST CONSTRUCTION LAKE QUALITY MANAGEMENT A-6 4. REFERENCES A-7 i i i LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1: Total Existing Area Hydrology 5 TABLE 2: Existing Area Within Property Limits 5 TABLE 3: Existing Areas Flowing Through Property Limits 6 TABLE 4: Corps Hydrologic Data for St. Vrain Creek 6 TABLE 5: Proposed Basin Hydrology 8 TABLE 6: Design Storm Frequency 8 TABLE 7: HEC-RAS Water Surface Elevations 9 "CABLE 8: Required Detention for Proposed Developed Basins 13 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1 : General Location Map 2 FIGURE 2: Existing Drainage Basins and Flow Paths 4 FIGURE 3: Proposed Drainage Basins and Flow Paths 7 FIGURE 4A: 100-Year Floodplains and Proposed Spillway Locations (West) 10 FIGURE 4B: 100-Year Floodplains and Proposed Spillway Locations (East) 11 FIGURE 5: Typical Erosion Control Details and BMP's 15 LIST OF CHARTS CHART 1: 100-Year Storm Volumes 14 iv Introduction RiverDance is a Planned Unit Development (PUD) proposal for residential and commercial development. The development provides a range of residential densities and a commercial area. Key amenities within the development include; two lakes (to be used for water sports and fishing), a clubhouse, riding stable, swimming pool, wildlife viewing areas, and several miles of hiking, biking, and equestrian trails. The parcel is bounded to the south by the St. Vrain Creek, to the west by Interstate 25 frontage roads and to the north by Weld County Road 28. The parcel is two miles north of State Highway 119. Figure 1 shows the general location of the proposed RiverDance development. The legal description is presented in Exhibit A of the Change of Zone application. This drainage report is preliminary, to a detail level consistent with the Change of Zone application submittal. It is intended to address issues that arise concerning existing and developed hydrology, drainage patterns, detention, and water quality. The intent was to confirm the proposed development is feasible while meeting drainage requirements. Presented herein are the concepts proposed to address drainage concerns. A final drainage report will be submitted with the final plat. The final drainage report will present the technical details and designs of the drainage features for each phase and filing of the development. Project Description GENERAL RiverDance is approximately 486 acres in size, of which 227 acres will be dedicated as open space. The majority of the open space is located on the southern portion of the property, around the lakes created from previous, completed sand and gravel extraction. The open space component is intended to tie the entire development together as the center recreational area for all residents to commonly enjoy. The common areas will consist of landscapes low in maintenance and will be designed to serve multiple functions ranging from recreational to water quality. TOPOGRAPHY The property is situated within the Colorado Piedmont section of the Great Plains physiographic province. Relatively flat uplands and broad valleys characterize the present day topography of the Colorado Piedmont in this region. The property slopes slightly to the east and the south. The northern portion of the property is relatively flat. The southern 1 portion slopes to meet the St. Vrain Creek with an elevation change of approximately 80 feet. SOILS The property contains five soil types as identified by the US Department of Agriculture Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS). The soil types are as follows: 1) Aquolls and Aquents, gravelly substratum, 2) Colby loam, 1 to 3 percent slope, 3) Kim loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes 4) Tassel fine sandy loam, 5 to 20 percent slope 5) Wiley- Colby complex, 1 to 3 percent slopes. The soils on-site are listed by the NRCS as being hydrologic groups B and D. Geologic hazards due to mass movement, such as landslides or mudflows, are not anticipated. Proper grading for roads and building sites to encourage adequate drainage should keep erosional problems to a minimum. IRRIGATION An existing lateral from the I-lighland Ditch currently irrigates the northern portion of site and is situated west of and adjacent to the existing residence on-site. The water delivered to the site, via the lateral, services the proposed property and does not continue to adjacent property owners. The water will he conveyed through the property and used to irrigate common areas of the proposed development. DRAINAGE PATTERNS There are three main drainage paths for off-site drainage that carry flow from the north and pass through the property. Two of the paths are on the western portion of the property and trail from existing ponds located just north of the property. The historic drainage paths have been altered due to the grave] mining activity in the area. The proposed drainage paths in this area will generally align with the wetlands that have formed along the diverted paths. The largest drainage path is aligned near the eastern boundary of the property and drains approximately 900 acres. This drainage path discharges directly to the St. Vrain Creek via an off-site outfall. Wetland areas line much of the existing drainage path. The drainage path will remain and may be expanded to provide additional wetland area and detention. Figure 2 shows the existing drainage basins and flow paths used to compute times of concentration. Hydrology EXISTING HYDROLOGY The off-site area to the north of the proposed development is relatively flat and used for agricultural purposes. The peak flows were calculated using the Urban Drainage program, Colorado Urban Hydrograph Procedure (CUHP). This program develops storm hydrographs and peak flows given basin characteristics. Existing drainage basins were delineated and flow travel paths were drawn. Table 1 lists the peak discharges of the existing basins show in Figure 2 for various design storms. 3 ;! �--, e u,.. 0 j ',. • \ , , • 000 500 0 000 O / f LEGEND/ : SCALE IN FEET 7 ii - - PROPERTY BOUNDARY t �� • - �'� I EXISTING BASIN �.1 ``, STATE-/ HIG WAY 68,---� 7 EXISTING TRAVEL PR , •76 \_ . _ - ' DESIGN DINT f `" BASIN ID i ,i D p. ,--.. f'A / ` NIP ON ACRES) _ fc - °"° Imperviousness , 1,,, __ _ ,./ \---- il } ,..-- \ h / ,- r f ! I _. t I1i ic38:2E, / ,______ ....,-,----1 ,, LD0UNTY� ;'• • �.....ry � fl barge°602 cf ' RQ D 28 "' \ .------ '''' . 4., 101 1" , ice• \\......s..........".....•L , , , . •,-. F — ,8.5 �.A `O 1 0� Yea , r"� +�" :1 Y C ,, oD'scNrge: 637 ` C_ -_ ,,1----7,-7.-_—.7'....2-. . n a ~► �x ^� horg cfs. _ �( LAKE / �� kt a'I r.. LAKE ` s { I. LAKE t' I \ , ,,--, . ,. .. .. ..,.. BP TEE 48x2 �,. . » . ` VR R — - ANN ,.;. : ... _.. .,:. � ...-._. _. �.- ...__._ ... ._. � -ma .�- Date aI/99 Sheet: Job No Y9-122 _ TuttleA le ate Inc.SEIGRIST COMPANIES,INC. FIGURE 2i - ___ PP 8 I Design. CBF r - �....r.Va m...uw.- oo ka uac RIVERDANCE PALM mamma mammal MOM = °ti9°°.- Street 9e1°'a The area proposed to be developed is situated within these existing drainage basins. Therefore, only portions of the existing basins will be developed as a part of this land use proposal. To determine the amount of detention to be developed, it was necessary to consider the amount of runoff generated from the portion of the existing basin to be developed. Table 2 tabulates the areas and resulting peak discharges of the existing basins within the proposed development. Table 3 depicts the amount of area and peak discharges that are generated off-site and will be assumed to remain undeveloped by this development. These runoff values will flow through the development and no detention will be considered. I Table 1: Total Existing Area Hydrology 5-Year Storm 10-Year Storm 50-Year Storm 100-Year Storm Area Peak Flow Volume Peak Flow Volume Peak Flow Volume Peak Flow Volume Basin (acres) (cfs) (ac-f) (cfs) (ac-f) (cfs) (ac-f) (cfs) (ac-f) Basin A 681.6 37 4.57 139 17.85 337 44.14 602 82.60 Basin B 101.8 9 0.68 31 2.67 70 6.59 122 12.33 Basin C 34.6 4 0.23 16 0.91 35 2.24 62 4.19 Basin D 9.6 I 0.06 5 0.25 10 0.62 18 1.I6 Basin F 44.8 3 0.30 13 1.17 29 2.90 51 5.43 Basin F 180.5 13 1.21 49 4.73 113 11.69 195 21.87 Basin G 22.4 I 0.15 5 0.59 11 1.49 20 2.71 Basin 1-1 359.7 27 5.19 71 14.64 138 27.46 241 48.49 Table 2: Existing Area Within Property Limits (On-Site) 5-Year Storm 10-Year Storm 50-Year Storm 100-Year Storm Area Peak Flow Volume Peak Flow Volume Peak Flow Volume Peak Flow Volume Basin (acres) (cfs) (ac-f) (cfs) (ac-f) (cfs) (ac-f) (cfs) (ac-f) Basin A 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 Basin B 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 Basin C 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 Basin D 9.6 I 0.06 5 0.25 10 0.62 18 1.16 Basin F 33.6 2 0.23 10 0.88 22 2.18 38 4.07 Basin F 108.2 8 0.73 29 2.84 68 7.01 117 13.11 Basin G 3.0 0 0.02 I 0.08 I 0.20 3 0.36 Basin I4 328.8 25 4.74 65 13.38 126 25.10 220 44.32 5 Table 3: Existing Areas Flowing Through Property Limits (Off-Site) 5-Year Storm 10-Year Storm 50-Year Storm 100-Year Storm Area Peak Flow Volume Peak Flow Volume Peak Flow Volume Peak Flow Volume Basin (acres) (cfs) (ac-f) (cfs) (ac-f) _ (cfs) (ac-f) (cfs) (ac-t) Basin A 681.6 37 4.57 139 17.85 337 44.14 602 82.60 Basin B 101.8 9 0.68 31 2.67 70 6.59 122 12.33 Basin C 34.6 4 0.23 16 0.91 35 2.24 62 4.19 Basin D 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 Basin E 11.2 I 0.08 3 0.29 7 0.73 13 1.36 Basin F 72.3 5 0.48 20 1.89 45 4.68 78 8.76 Basin G 19.4 1 0.13 4 0.51 10 1.29 17 2.35 Basin Fl 30.9 2 0.45 6 1.26 12 2.36 21 4.17 ST. VRAIN HYDROLOGY The St. Vrain Creek flows adjacent to the proposed development on the south. In July of 1981, the Army Corps of Engineers produced an unpublished report for the Colorado Water Conservation Board detailing a study performed by the Corps. The Corps modeled the St. Vrain Creek hydrologically and hydraulically. The Corps used a SWMM run to create peak flows at several locations and at several recurrence intervals. The program routes multiple hydrographs to develop composite hydrographs at each defined node. The model was then calibrated using known recorded flows at gauging stations along the creek. Table 4 shows the values the Corps calculated for points near the proposed development at several recurrence intervals. The location of the RiverDance development lies between Corps nodes of"Below Idaho Creek" and "Above Right Bank Tribs". Table 4: Corps Hydrologic Data for St. Vrain Creek Drainage Distance Area from Mouth 10-YR 50-YR 100-YR 500-YR Station (Sq. mi.) (miles) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) Below Idaho Creek 849 13.45 6070 12500 16510 41960 Above Right Bank Tribs 850 11.3 5760 12350 16350 41360 PROPOSED HYDROLOGY A general grading plan was established for the proposed development. Proposed on-site drainage basins were delineated using the general grading plan. Drainage paths for the proposed basins were established to compute times of concentration and the information was used to develop CUHP input. Resulting peak discharges are tabulated in Table 5. Figure 3 displays the proposed general grading plan with the proposed drainage basins, drainage paths and areas reserved for detention development overlaid. 6 LEGEND: 4 _ ___��__- PROPERTY BOUNDARY trt WELD COUNTY ROAD 28 _ :---- oN LINES DRAINAGE BASIN i6 a ��,_,�� =---_ DesmNATiON �g 600 300 0 600 fi O��- � �� EXISTING RCHrsor-wAY C 1 a i a n • EXISTING fENCEL NE a ` Q J s - '. Ex Sr NG CONTOURS qP ACREAGE ≤ EA" EXISTING SPOT ELEVATIONS RS_ SCALE�N FEET NI Im PROPOSED BA.DE.NCA-ON Dery ousness ��"' PROPOSED BASIN TRAVEL PATH S ^ SURFACE FLOW DIRECTION �� - - Z' DESIGN POINT \. . -"'_----' "---_- PROPOSED DETENTION AREA a\ PA 11(.1'dill I I ♦ . sue g ®11 r P, ,.; I ji. _Ali 0- + A _ , ._______r...i..., i 2 I - _ 1 ill ,i,, wicii, .___ _ __ :_.. No zas log 1.6 4 NI O e 1I�il � �� o CC a 04-till 0K I Dan LAKE m �� _____------� N { 1 ��j ' o•,._- 'li----- Table 5: Total Proposed Basin Hydrology 5-Year Storm 10-Year Storm 50-Year Storm 100-Year Storm Area Peak Flow Volume Peak Flow Volume Peak Flow Volume Peak Flow_ Volume Basin (acres) (cfs) (ac-f) (cfs) (ac-f) (cfs) (ac-f) (cfs) (ac-f) Basin PA 89.0 65 4.26 104 6.63 160 9.85 239 14.92 Basin PB 10.9 10 0.59 16 0.89 24 1.28 35 1.90 Basin PC 33.9 25 1.59 40 2.49 62 3.72 94 5.65 Basin PD 22.4 22 1.05 35 1.64 54 2.46 81 3.73 Basin PE 10.9 10 0.51 16 0.80 25 1.19 37 1.81 Basin PI,' 5.1 5 0.28 8 0.42 12 0.60 18 0.89 Basin PG 54.4 51 3.06 78 4.58 115 6.52 170 9.63 Basin PH 24.3 22 1.27 35 2.00 52 2.85 76 4.26 Basin PI 12.2 II 0.57 18 0.89 28 1.33 42 2.03 Basin PJ 10.9 10 0.51 16 0.80 25 1.19 37 1.81 DESIGN STORM FREQUENCY Design storm frequencies are supplied in Section 10.13.4 of the Subdivision Ordinances for Weld County, Colorado dated October 6, 1997. Table 6 lists the design storm frequencies from Section 10.13.4. Table 6: Design Storm Frequencies Area Design Storm Period Residential 5 Open Space 5 Commercial 10 Public Buildings 10 Industrial 10 Local Road Crossing 10 Collector Road Crossing 25 Arterial Road Crossing 50 Natural Drainage 25 Major Drainage Design Components There are two major drainage design components. One major drainage design component is determining the 100-year floodplain of the St. Vrain Creek. The other major drainage design component is attributed to establishing the three drainage paths that carry off-site drainage through the site. ST. VRAIN FLOODPLAIN The southern portion of the property, including the existing ponds created by gravel mining, lies within the 100-year floodplain of the St. Vrain Creek. Currently, the 100- year floodplain has been mapped by the National Flood Insurance Program for Weld County, Colorado Unincorporated Area in Panels 850 and 855. The floodplain has been designated as Zone A, which means the floodplain has been determined using 8 approximate methods and base flood elevations and flood hazard factors have not been determined. Additionally, the hydrologic data produced by the Army Corps of Engineers was used to develop a water surface profile of the St. Vrain Creek using HEC-2. HEC-2 is a hydraulic computer model used to develop water surface elevations given cross sectional and channel profile information with design flows. The cross sections input in the Corps's HEC-2 model were surveyed in 1977. It is proposed that the cross sectional information provided in the Army Corps of Engineers HEC-2 model be input into HEC-RAS. The resulting water surface profile is to be used as a beginning or historic water surface elevation. HEC-RAS provides a more state-of-the-art approach to determining the water surface profile and is accepted by FEMA in Zone A flood designation areas. The original Corps cross sections were then updated for the current existing topography and rerun to establish an existing conditions water surface elevation. Finally, the cross sections will be modified to include the proposed topography of the developed property to produce the future conditions water surface profile. The intent is to submit the required information to FEMA to obtain first, a Conditional I Setter of Map Revision, CLOMR and once construction is complete, follow with a Letter of Map Revision, LOMR. The development will be designed such that no buildings will be constructed below the future 100-year water surface elevation. The historic and existing conditions water surface floodplains for 100 year design storm, the cross section locations input into the HEC-RAS model, as well as side channel spillways are displayed in Figures 4A and 413. Table 7 tabulates the water surface elevations for the various cross sections displayed in Figures 4A and 413. Table 7: HEC-RAS Water Surface Elevations Minimum Historic Existing Channel Water Surface Water Surface River Discharge Elevation Elevation Elevation Station (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) 70650 16510 4820.56 4832.02 4832.02 70610 16510 4820.66 4829.25 4827.93 70000 16510 4819.16 4827.23 4826.68 69640 16500 4818.26 4826.96 4826.3 68595 16500 4816.46 4826 4823.36 67700 16450 4814.76 4824.68 4822.06 66525 16400 4813.46 4822.74 4821.45 65750 16400 4812.86 4821.29 4820.88 64715 16400 4811.96 4819.58 4818.63 63630 16400 4810.86 4817.8 4817.47 9 "Ile existing water surface elevations for the reach of the St. Vrain Creek that flows past the development are lower than the historic water surface elevations. This is due to the extensive gravel mining in which large amounts of material have been removed. The removal of material allows a greater carrying capacity for the flood waters entering the overbank area. Side channel spillways will be designed for the existing lakes to be hydraulically linked to the river. The spillways allow water that historically flowed in the overbank area to continue and the spillways provide a protected point for flood flows to enter and exit the lakes. MAJOR EXISTING DRAINAGE PATHS The two drainage paths on the western portion of the property will continue to carry the off-site and some of the on-site flow to the ponds created by gravel mining. The drainage paths from the upper ponds will be designed to most efficiently carry water to the gravel ponds. It is anticipated that the drainage paths will be designed to incorporate water quality features such as wetlands lined ditches. The drainage path crossing the eastern section of the development will continue to flow along the same path it historically flowed. Existing wetlands that may be impacted by roadway or lot embankments will be replaced by enlarging the existing drainage bottom in areas where possible. INUNDATION LIMITS The two drainage paths on the western portion of the development originate from two separate ponds north of the proposed development. The existing ponds may be found to be jurisdictional dams by the State Engineer because each appears to exceed the limiting normal water depth of 10 feet at the dam centerline. The areas downstream of the jurisdictional dams are delineated to show inundation limits in the event of a dam failure. There are not any state laws nor State Engineer restrictions against allowing development of property below a jurisdictional dam. The inundation limits are shown in Figure 4A. Minor Drainage Design Components The minor design components of this development are the design of the on-site storm drain system, detention, and water quality structures. It was assumed that the off-site flows generated on the existing basins would be conveyed through the development and no detention would be required for the off-site flows. Future development of the off-site areas should require that detention be provided to release the storm water at a rate not to exceed existing conditions. PROPOSED SOUTHERN PORTION DRAINAGE The proposed grading of the development encourages storm runoff to remain in the same basins as existing conditions. Therefore, a portion of the developments runoff is directed towards the two lakes a1: the south edge of the property. The lakes are large enough to 12 fully retain the 100-year developed flows for the development and the 100-year existing off-site flows with a water surface rise of less than six inches. The lakes are to be used for recreational purposes, therefore, water quality is a large issue. Space along the edges'of the lakes has been reserved to incorporate several water quality structures. Water quality capture ponds, wetlands lined channels and settling basins will be designed near the lakes in the reserved areas. Storm water will be directed to these facilities to encourage sediments to drop out before entering the lakes. PROPOSED NORTHERN PORTION DRAINAGE The storm runoff directed to the channel towards the eastern edge of the property will need detention before being released from the property. The on-site basins that contribute to the channel include: existing basins D and parts of E, F and G; and proposed basins PA, PC, and PD. Detention will be provided for the on-site developed 100-year flows and will be released at the existing 100-year rate. Detention volumes were calculated using several methods. The hydrograph of the 100- year existing conditions stone was compared to that of the developed storm. It was determined that the maximum difference in the hydrograph volume between the two storms was 10.38 acre-feet. This represented the required amount of detention to be provided. Chart 1 shows the hydrograph volumes per time interval. The maximum difference between the two curves occurs at a time of 75 minutes. Several municipalities outline an "equation detention method" to compute the required amount of detention storage to be developed. The equation is based on the developed basins' % imperviousness. Adding the contributing developed basins, PA, PC and PD together, the detention required was calculated to be 10.53 acre-feet. Table 8 shows the amount of detention required for the 10-year and 100-year events using the "equation detention method." Table 8: Required Detention for Proposed Developed Basins EDM EDM EDM EDM Basin Basin Storage _._ Storage Storage Storage Basin Area Impervious Factor Factor VIO V100Designation acres % KIO K100 acre ft acre f1 PA 89.0 45% 0.04085 0.07249 3.64 6.45 PC 33.9 45% 0.04085 0.07249 1.38 2.46 PD 22.4 45% 0.04085 0.07249 0.92 1.62 Total 5.94 10.53 'EDM =Equation Detention Method Several road crossings of the eastern channel provide three areas in which detention can be developed. Preliminary investigation of one of the areas revealed approximately 20 acre-feet of storage could be developed with a storage depth of less than 10 feet. With the use of three areas in which detention can be developed, many grading options can be explored during final design to provide the necessary detention. The road crossings will be designed with inlet and outfall protection to discourage erosion. 13 Chart 1: 100-Year Storm Volumes 30 25 a- lull 20 X u ♦•. . . •-•-•.•.•.•-•-•••-• •••• is f •. • I o' s' to • fr 5 • / • r : 0 sr 0 50 100 150 200 250 Storm Time(min) -♦--Existing ---n---Proposed The detention areas will provide additional areas to develop wetlands to mitigate the impacted wetlands. The impact to wetlands was kept to a minimum by keeping roadway crossings to a minimum. When the roads did cross through wetland areas, the layout of the roads was designed to cause the least amount of impact and remain within roadway design criteria. EROSION CONTROL During construction, the development will need to employ several "Best Management Practices", BMP's, to control the effects of erosion. It is envisioned that silt fence, hay bales, milk crate gravel curb inlet filters, outlet protection and vehicle tracking control will be employed as well as sediment entrapment ponds to control erosion during construction. Landscaping will be placed to control long term erosion and once the vegetation is established, many temporary BMP's will be removed. The erosion control details are provided as Figure 5. A more in depth discussion on erosion control, BMP's, and water quality can be found in the Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan, presented as Attachment A. 14 rCURB INLET SEDIMENT and EROSION CONTROL NOTES i oPR0X`;/ �`��r� ti ' CONTROL AT THE SITE THROUGHOUT THEE FPR0JECT ENT AND EROSION (APPROX. N CONCRETE (d a THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE R SEDIu WIRa SCREEN MESH? 2. SILT FE a 1 s DISTURBING ACM.(STOCKPILING,STRIPPING.GRADING.EEG.). O /L-ly 42.6- �- 3 3. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES(BMP'S SHALT.BE USED AS NECESSARY TO Y S p poi Q °' 1 ADDRESS SEDIMENT AND DUST M SITE DISTURRANCE. ADDIRONAL ra WOOD s,UO A' •1 1$aa MEASURES MAY BE REQUIRED AiTHE OI ECTIDN OF THE ENGINEER. O V ,..y.::::20'9 p 8 \\\ 0�8- a- DMPS MAr INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO, _ PP g GRAVEL CONSTRUCTIONMINIMAL BANEFOORRT MINIMIES AL TIME EIIPERIODS ICLE TRACKING CONTROL 4 S M/A, ' 2_ FENCE. TRW BALE O RS ROC CHECK , SILT CAPTURE PONDS RLETSW0R4 dG FILTERS GRAVEL FILTER 'III SITE W TERIG R DUST SUPPRESSION WIRE SGR� \ pIl' s BMWS SHALL BE MAINTAINED AND KEPT IN GOOD REPAIR FOR THE DURATION PLAN VIEW '. Il TRACTOR SHALL INSPECT TRAP'S WEEKLY n MMAINTENANCE IER NT THE SIGNIEICnM(GREAREPAIR SHALL B COMPLETEPRECIRD STORM EVENTS.D FILTERED WATER IIIIIIIII' uc«M'nuoAoEBre SIR a I0H REMOVED oFEo'wHEH IiHCY TIME, rM MANNER. FFR_HE eMP MAKFI cu "RncK HEIGHT OR IMPACT THE FUNCi IN HE BMP. LAVER CLASS 8 - B. IL STOCKPILES SHALL BE FROM SEDIMENT TRANSPORT Br ROAD aASE WATERING.EAND PRIMETER SILT FENCING. SOILS THAT r WELL SURFACE STOCKPILEDDD WITH A 5 ROUGHENING, MOR COVER ET THAN 30 DAYS Tx DA,SHALL BECPIMULCHED CONSTRUCTION WI CURB INLET `' T THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSURE THAT ALL LOADS OF CUT AND FILL SOILSWOOD aTUD 55 VEHICLE TRACKING CONTROL IMPOCOVERTED OP OR EXPORTED FROM R. PROPERLY LOADED AND SF(:TION R 5 N.I.S. p D LOSS SITE ARE P h THE NTRACTOR HALL B DEBRSORESULTING SFROM THIS VPROJECTE ALL F ROM FLOWLINES AND PAVEMENT OF INSPECTGI AND REPAIR FILTERS AFTER EACH STORM EVENT. h PUBLIC STREETS IN A TIMELY MANNER REMOVE SEDIMENT WHEN ONE HALF OF THE FILTER DEPTH HAS BEEN ILLED.REMOVED SEDIMENT SHALL BE DEPOSITED 9. SOOILS EXPOSED DURING LAND DISTURBING ACM.SHALL BE KEPI IN Y TO A SEDIMENT FUSIN OR OTHER UGHENED BY ING OR DISCING G LAND RS ,THE N OR AWAY 'MUEowiELY REMwEo 2 ALL OREMAINF0S HEOO BY LAND DISTURBING ACmm FOR MORE THAN C THIRTY 305 DAYS BEFORE REQUIRED TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT EROSION EROSION CONTROL CURB I CONTROL INSTALLED UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED. ()INLET INLET GRAVEL FILTER �+ la vEHICLE TRACKING CONTROL.INLET/OUTLET A N WILL HTS u_ BE USED TO CONTROL EROSION DURING NSTRUCTIGN AS SHOWN. WALE R II LETS/OUTLETS WILL BE INSTALLED WITHIN FIVE DAYS -_- 20 I 12 ALL AFTER CONSTRUCTION. SED KENT CONTROLSACHIEVED O ASTEFRRLSTRRFPTOETOADSITDS 30 MEASURES �S III ARE AFTER o ONGLR�NEEDED.WH IS ICHEVER OCCUR FIRS D WITHIN CHAD (TAKER H D OPEINC FENCE POST z.- Z 13. NATO B E VEGETATION SHALL RETAINED AND PROTECTED WHENEVER STAKED A W NMN (D.-12RIPRAP Q. I z o-.1.0 V fi % SURE OF SOIL Rio ERO ION Vu OR DISTURBANCE OF wATE POSSIBLE. SHALL BE LIMITED To THE AREA REQUIRED FOR IMMEDIATE WITH RUNOFF BEDDING TIME. CTIDN oPERARONS AND FOR THE SHORTEST PRACTICAL PERIOD OF OR R wines wE IRE = d cDNsmu T 0 CFIEVECNTTEDRIPw FILTERED RUNOFF WATER G W SEEDING AN O PL GROLMEEM SEED WHICH HAS BECOME WET,MOLDY.OR OTHERWISE • .)OUTLET PROTECTION DETAIL CONTAMINATED OR DAMAGED IN TRANSIT OR IN STORAGE WILL NOT BE FL Nis ACCEPTABLE AL L BE MIXED IN THE PROPORTIONS -- W TO OBTAIN THE SHALL RATE SPECIFIED. SUBMIT ' NECESSARY CERTIFICATION OF COMPOSITION of MIXTURE.PERCENTAGE OF 12 "IMIN K G ≥r�coEFRD�no Me MAXIMUM PERCENT WEEDS of EACH SEAL MAX A 0 HON RIRAG SMOOTH BROME B Ibbs IV BFAIRWAY CRESTED WHEAT GRASS Iq LUE CRAW. GRASS O STRAW BALE BARRIER S OEOATS GRMAlbs ALEALFA(UDAC) I I b s IF HIS COMBINATION NOT A AVAILABLE, ONE PARTICULAR RN�R SILT FENCE - A'L'TERNnirvESNTHAT WIL,RESULT IN A SIMILAR STAND of GRASS HER , EXCAVATE TRENCH D TARE STRAIN PLACE S I I/z'SQUAKILRE DRIED POSTS I X �\ SIL T's MODEL 10100 FENCE MPAT A0. .' (�► .._..._-._i!Ir D,RANCH o ( DL MORE .� ,�. t NATION V` .RAIN BACNEILL NOD CORE,' SLOPE �_ ��v BmvEEN BALES THE EXCAVATED s - ' \ INSPECT 0,140 REPAIR FENCE AFTER EACH STORM EVENT.REMOVA SEDIMENI WHEN \ HE HT OP THE FENCE HAS BEEN FILLED.REMOVED SEDIMENT SHALL = BE PLACED IN TORSO,PILE. _ '- s INLET/OUTLET PROTECTION DETAIL FOR CULVERTS s STRAW BALE BARRIER INSTALLATION a SEDIMENT CONTROL FENCE M NT NT r o Summary and Conclusions Chis preliminary drainage report presents the major concepts to address drainage concerns with the proposed development of RiverDance. Design was taken past the conceptual level and used to insure the concepts presented could be employed while remaining within the given criteria. Final drainage reports will include detailed technical information as well as details of hydraulic structures used in the drainage design. Two components of drainage were considered and discussed. Major drainage design components included floodway analysis, proposed methods and designs, and major existing drainage paths. It was determined that the major drainage paths will continue to flow in the historic paths where historic paths were present. Minor drainage design components included proposed on-site drainage paths. Detention for developed flows was investigated. It was determined enough detention could be provided using some of the open areas of the development to satisfy criteria. Finally, on-site erosion control was investigated and suggested BMPs presented. References "Colorado Urban Hydrograph Procedure Computer Program—PC Version (CUHPF/PC) User Manual," Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Denver, CO. July 1995. Fritz, Hermann M. and Hager, Willi I-I., "Hydraulics of Embankment Weirs," Journal of Hydraulic Engineering September 1998. "HEC-RAS River Analysis System Users Manual Version 2.0," U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Hydrologic Engineering Center, April 1997. "Planned Unit Development Ordinance 197," Weld County, CO. January 26, 1998. "St. Vrain River and Boulder Creek Floodplain Study," Weld County, Colorado, Unpublished, December 1981. "Subdivision Ordinance 173-E," Weld County, CO. October 6, 1997. "Technical Review Guidelines for Gravel Mining Activities Within or Adjacent to 100- Year Floodplains," Urban Drainage and Flood Control District in Cooperation with Adams County Colorado Rock Products Association, December 1987. "Urban Drainage and Storm Water Management Using the Personal Computer Model UDSWMM," Developed by Environmental Protection Agency and Revised by Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Denver, CO. January 1995. "Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual Volume 1," Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Denver, CO. March 1969. 16 Attachment A RiverDance PUD Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (QWMP) The Riverdance PUD Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan has been compiled and appended by Tuttle Applegate, Inc. from original work by Water Engineering Technologies, with their knowledge, consent and cooperation. The intent was to best apply technical information from Water Engineering Technologies to address the specific requirements of the Riverdance PIJD Weld County Change of Zone application submittal. I. PURPOSE A Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) has been recommended for the RiverDance PUD which is intended to reduce or eliminate degradation of water quality in the project area resulting from completion of the project. A Final WQMP would be provided with specific layout and details for construction and installation of water quality facilities. This document should address concerns regarding potential impacts of the project identified during County initial Sketch Plan review. The Water Quality Management Plan consists of a series of Best Management Practices (BMPs) which are prescribed specifically for the project. They include both structural and non-structural BMPs which, when integrated into the project, should address the comments expressed by Weld County Health Department and the Longmont Soil Conservation District and allow the project to proceed on schedule. The purpose of this preliminary plan is to provide a description of the various BMPs that can be incorporated into the RiverDance PUD. During the initial review of the PUD Sketch Plan, several comments were received related to potential impacts of the proposed development upon surface and ground water quality. Specifically, the Weld County Health Department expressed concerns related to the equestrian facilities and their effects upon water quality. They also expressed concerns related to potential sedimentation of existing water bodies during development and construction. The Longmont Soil Conservation District expressed concerns involving water quality degradation from runoff from the project and the potential for increased fertilizers and chemicals leaching into shallow ground water. The management plan outlined in this memorandum provides strategies to mitigate potential impacts to water quality and to address the concerns presented above. In the discussion that follows, features incorporated into the project which minimize the potential fbr water quality degradation are presented. In addition, numerous mitigation measures and Best Management Practices (BMPs) applicable to the RiverDance PUD are prescribed. These prescriptions are presented for both the construction/development phase and the post-construction phase. 2. CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT PHASE WQMP Prior to the commencement of construction, a permit to discharge stormwater associated with A-1 construction activities (Stormwater Discharge Permit) must be obtained from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. The permit is required in compliance with the Colorado Water Quality Control Act, (25-8-101 et seq., CRS 1973 as amended) and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). The permit requires control and elimination of the sources of pollutants in stormwater through the development and implementation of a Stormwater Management Plan(SWMP). The SWMP would include Best Management Practices (BMPs), which would include pollution prevention and source reduction measures. This must constitute Best Available Technology (BAT) and Best Conventional Technology (BCT) and should achieve compliance with water quality standards. The permit would also include prohibitions against discharges of non-stormwater (e.g. process water). Adherence to the requirements of the Discharge Permit would minimize potential contamination of existing water bodies from construction-related sediment and other contaminants. Measures to control erosion and sediment loss could include both structural and non-structural BMPs. 2.1 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Numerous BMPs could be implemented to minimize erosion, soil loss, and subsequent degradation of water quality during the construction and development phase of the RiverDance PUD; including the following: 2.1.1 SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL Vegetative Buffer Strips: Vegetative buffers or filter strips could be maintained at the base of slopes and along water courses to retain construction-related sediment on site and minimize off-site transport of sediment. They would be maintained around each lake, along St. Vrain Creek, and the unnamed channel draining the eastern portion of the project. In areas where existing vegetation is sparse or inadequate, buffer strips could be created through hydro-seeding or standard seeding practices. Design of buffer strips can be integrated into the final design of the project (Section 3). Natural Vegetation: To the extent practical, natural vegetation could be preserved, particularly along and within existing waterways. Disturbance of existing wetland vegetation will be minimized. Fences or flags would be provided during construction to keep equipment and construction debris out of these areas. Phased Construction: Construction could be phased to minimize the amount of area disturbed at any given time. A-2 Dust Control: Dust from disturbed areas can be controlled during construction activities. Disturbed areas would be sprinkled with water until the surface is wet and repeated as necessary. Diversion Measures: Temporary ditches could be built to divert runoff from exposed slopes during construction. Ditches should be designed at slopes which would be erosionally stable (generally less than 2%). Specific locations have not been determined at this time. However, candidate locations include south facing slopes along the northern shores of both lakes while earthwork and construction is occurring in these locations. Sediment Filter Fence Sediment filter fence could be placed at the downslope perimeter of all disturbed areas. The purpose of the filter fence is to trap small amounts of sediment under sheet flow conditions during construction. It is important to note that the fence must be properly installed to be effective. The bottom of the fabric should be properly keyed into ground and backfilled. No loose fabric should exist at any places along the bottom length of the fence. Sediment Check Dams: Small dams could be constructed across swales or drainage ditches to reduce velocity of concentrated flows and allow retention of sediment. Temporary check dams would be constructed of rock or landscape timbers and spaced in proportion to the slope of the swale or channel. Check dams could he built such that the center of the dam is lower than the edges,the dam is properly keyed into native ground, and rock is sized to be stable during design discharges. Straw Bale Barriers: Straw bales would be used to temporarily enhance effects of other sediment control measures. Bale barriers should be properly installed to be effective. They should tightly abut each other, be entrenched and backfilled to prevent underflow, securely anchored (at least 2 stakes per bale), and maintained following runoff events. 2.1.2 CONTROL OF OTHER CONTAMINANTS The Stormwater Management Plan would contain provisions to protect surface and ground water quality from contamination from other construction related activities. These provisions generally involve "good housekeeping" practices to reduce the potential of contamination by removing or protecting a contaminant source. Concrete Wash Water: Concrete wash water would not be discharged to state waters or to storm sewer systems. A-3 Bulk Material Storage: Bulk storage structures for petroleum products and other chemicals shall have adequate protection so as to contain all spills and prevent any spilled material from entering State waters. Added Chemicals: Chemicals could be prevented from entering the stormwater discharge without permission from the State of Colorado Water Quality Control Division. Sampling: At the request of the State of Colorado Water Quality Control Division, stormwater samples may be obtained. Waste Materials: All wastes composed of building materials could be removed from the site for disposal in licensed disposal facilities. No building material caste would be buried, dumped, or discharged at the site. Off-site sediment: Off-site vehicle tracking of sediment could be minimized. Structure Disposition: All temporary sediment control features could be removed within 30 days of final site stabilization is achieved or after the temporary measures are no longer needed. 3. POST-CONSTRUCTION WQMP The RiverDance PUD integrates several water bodies into its design as amenities. It is, therefore, in the best interest of the developer to maintain the quality of the lakes, wetlands, and ponds to provide the maximum aesthetic appeal to property owners and users of RiverDance facilities. As a result, numerous BMPs and design features have been incorporated directly into the PUD which will specifically minimize contamination of water resources and maximize the aesthetic value and quality of the project's water resources. These features are presented in the following sections. 3.1 EQUESTRIAN FACILITY • All horses would be boarded at the Equestrian Center. In accordance with the Weld County Zoning Ordinance for, no horses are permitted on individual lots. • The Equestrian Center has been sited at the most hydrologically remote location of the RiverDance PUD. This placement would provide maximum protection of the lakes and St. Vrain Creek from contamination. • Runoff from the Equestrian Center could be conveyed to the unnamed swale in the eastern portion of the project. This swale currently contains wetland vegetation throughout its course to St. Vrain Creek. The flow characteristics and wetland features of this swale could be enhanced A-4 upon completion of the project (see Section 3.4). Wetland vegetation and ponding along this swale would reduce the nutrient content of surface runoff from the Equestrian Center through physical (sedimentation, filtration, and adsorption), chemical (precipitation and adsorption), and biological (plant uptake and plant adsorption) mechanisms. 3.2 URBAN RUNOFF • Stormwater detention ponds could be incorporated throughout the PUD. An objective of the developer and design engineer is to route as much stormwater runoff as possible through these features. Wetland vegetation can be incorporated within wet ponds to enhance water quality. • Stormwater runoff for the subdivision could be prevented from entering the lakes by diversion. • Stormwater runoff could be conveyed, wherever possible or practical, via grassed swales. • Sediment check dams can be incorporated within the grassed swales and stormwater conveyance features. The check dams could be constructed across swales or drainage ditches to reduce velocity of concentrated flows and allow retention of sediment. Check dams could be constructed of rock or landscape timbers and spaced in proportion to the slope of the swale or channel. Check dams would be built such that the center of the dam is lower than the edges, the dam is properly keyed into native ground, and rock is sized to be stable during design discharges. • A vegetated buffer strip could be maintained along St. Vrain Creek and all major water courses. The buffer strips could consist of native vegetation (where it exists) or an established planting which could provide a living filter to reduce sedimentation and degradation of water quality. The buffer strips could be established, at a minimum, along St. Vrain Creek and on the upslope side of each lake. The buffer zones could be incorporated into the landscaping plan for the PUD. • PUD covenants could include requirements for fertilizer and chemical usage. The covenants would not ban use of these materials but would provide guidance and prescribe limitations to their use. An objective of the covenants is to minimize over fertilization and chemical applications on lawns and landscaping. 3.3 LAKE DESIGN AND MANAGEMENT • The two lakes will be used as locations for water skiing activities,therefore, there is the potential for shoreline erosion from wake/wave action. Wave erosion from wind generated waves is also a concern. To mitigate the shoreline erosion potential, shorelines could be stabilized using structural shoreline protection measures. The specific measure has not been determined at this time, however, several options would provide adequate protection. These options include retaining walls, riprap, interlocking blocks, vegetated mats and geosynthetic erosion control mats. • Lake shore protection measures could be designed to extend a sufficient distance above and A-5 below the water line to provide a margin of safety for wave protection. • Slopes of the lake shores could be configured with slopes designed to reduce wave roll up. • Boat ramps could be designed to facilitate easy boat launching and loading without disruption of lake bottom sediments. Ramps could be constructed of concrete or wood and could extend a sufficient distance into the lake to allow launching without trailer wheels entering the lake bottom. • A gravel runout above the boat ramp could allow boat trailers and vehicles to drain over a porous surface and thereby prevent oil and grease from entering the lakes. • A "No Wake" zone could be imposed for the area surrounding the boat launch and dock areas for the purposes of safety and to minimize shore and lake bottom disturbance. 3.4 EXISTING WETLANDS • To the extent possible, existing wetlands would not be disturbed. Portions of the existing wetlands in the unnamed drainage located on the eastern portion of the PUD might be disturbed during construction and wetland enhancement activities. This drainage could be reconfigured to provide a series of wetland detention features which would increase the water treatment capability of the drainage. Existing coversoils could be stockpiled and replaced when earthmoving activities are finished. This would provide a source of live seed and allow maximum wetland reestablishment. • All wetland modification or dredge/fill activities within waters of the US would be covered through a EPA Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit(administered with the US Army Corps of Engineers). 3.5 POST CONSTRUCTION LAKE QUALITY MANAGEMENT Following completion of the project, implementation of the recommended BMPs should result in the reduction or elimination of contaminants entering the lakes as a result of the project. In the event that the lakes experience elevated trophic status or excessive algal and weed growth, further management strategies could be employed. The following management techniques and actions are generic in nature; specific strategies would be contingent upon site-specific lake study. • Implementation of Water Quality Monitoring Plan. A water quality monitoring plan could be implemented which would develop a nutrient budget for the lakes and prescribe a management plan to optimize their quality. Samples could be obtained from the St. Vrain, ditch water, and alluvial water to determine the best water management strategies to minimize nutrient inflow. A-6 • Weed Harvesting. Nuisance aquatic weeds can be removed via physical harvesting methods. Any number of methods, including mechanical weed harvesters, manual labor, dragging, or netting could be used. • Chemical Algae Control Methods. Chemical applications could be investigated. Use of chemical agents such as buffered alum or copper based compounds could be applied pending further evaluation of the lakes. • Aeration / Circulation. Artificial aeration of the lakes could be implemented. Numerous aerators are on the market which could be investigated and the proper size / capacity pump be selected. 4. REFERENCES Terrene Institute, 1993. LakeSmarts - The First Lake Maintenance Handbook. Washington State Dept. Of Ecology, 1992. Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin. USEPA, 1988. The Lake and Reservoir Restoration Guidance Manual, First Edition. EPA 440/5-88- 002 Schueler, Thomas R., 1987. Controlling Urban Runoff: A Practical Manual for Planning and Designing Urban BMPs. Prepared for Washington Metropolitan Water Resources Planning Board. A-7 t _• \ r � o � \ �- �!' �` •e -.\C:'1.1 \ • \-1 o\ \ o \ %\ \ *N----__.A\ \ \ \\ \ \\ 8 c \\ \ ''',, O \\\ \% d 66525 sect°II / j..I. ----- ' C'' in \\`‘ 6550 1 t�or `l Sec 1 \... o 0 0 1 1 \ 1 0 I . 1 1 1 6q� �5 \i Sect\on 1 I` I I ! '- I , i_ I;f I m I \\44S� .;I II 11, ./ )\\ 1 F,o ,z i \4 5P/4 Wq it o t-t08 I 0 -,- \ m, -, ti irq, I r_...._,\,_ 1 ?- ---- t .. 0,,0.,99 Sheet Job N. 99 TuttleApplegate�Inc. 11 0.., SEIORIST COMPANIES,INC. FIGURE 46e __ ca,,,,-,,,.,htema,and w„x Of: cn<«�a eeeee T . .c.. sm.�o. RIVERDANCEP.U.D. 1SS•TNLLWAYLOIATANDPROPOSSD _ _ (,o,,,,;,,,„ .�:(wwx-2,s9 ray. o SATE BE AESCRIPT OE SPILLWAY LOCATIONS(EAST) nr:fp.©M.tB vu.rw REVISIONS 7/ •- Section 706(19' --------1 lil I —7"--=------ -�� I \ � \ sB9P 1 \ \ '6 ' L__-, \ti 7 I \ . i' ‘ I , 1 , . \‘) \\ ,ie,____ _ _ \ i ......„-: a \\, Section,640 . , �,t \ � I 1 0 1 !A ` 1 , I 1 \til r ,....__,. 7 1i) x \\ ".......,„,, ....„,,,,„ I I 1\\ \ ''. r\o I ) \ I 95 �.: a I Section 6g5 o Sp\ (. t. 4.--............_,-....---m '-'st \ ,\\\ r t; N.., 1 ,� 170v 1 ect,or 6 \ o_0I , \ \I. \ 0:,0, o \. ° \ t \ \ \\ '',;;. In." o ! I 11 t ` No \\\ I o I HP v 1N \\ 66525 m Section i i . )\---; ---- .e V/0'/99 Sheet Job N0 99 22 TuttleApplegate,Inc. 10 Down SEIORIST COMPANIES,INC. FIGURE 4A: - .= c..m.....0ea,,....amew.. oe. or: RIVERDANCE P.U.D. 1Oa __ _ °•••".YR PLOODPLAINS AND PROPOSED a m.w.11990 ..,d..9 99b:p ,e: e.0.9 No DATE 80 C DES.,ON SPILLWAY LOCATIONS(WEST) pu,. ,F aais9 same. =soo' REVISIONS �$ W > 1 pare - o•f ., • /h� .a I - : / Li bens 1 °u° STATE H t WAY 6600 \ e Q� 45 9- G•ange Hal= ry- i a980,:.s�. . -_�� _-# / —.� _:� _� • �` jjp I- ��t, • I � i iii,, .r �iIII r ) 1 sJ III III I a I • — I III �ii�� , SanLrrrn Rl ,n. .tio it _ Res i ayo° — oo IWELD�60U , • F ;TY 28 1' ,, , Kirkland _ o . 49Si _' f� -_ % / ,.,,,,..,„,,0" :. - Q 89] 28 -t is I f5 B •'� ` T 3 N� ` - cc.u) ,. 1 � , CR ,I ; W 6`\_,-,_97-.-4`,1 z �f i • a -5 iii ,rate,t, • I t I t ' a. CHANCE 813 I- LI -2 aew�l' - a839 - , @ . 91 a3SJl _ m �• 464O �� IY. .= 'sr--- STA TE HIGHWAY 1 �� _ I � 2000 1000 0 2000 C C C " " " 1 N SCALE IN FEET o Legal Description A tract of land located in Section 35 and the West half of Section 36, all in Township 3 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point which lies South 00°42'37" East 29.97 feet from the North quarter corner of said Section 35, said point being at the intersection of the southerly Right of Way line of Weld County Road No. 28 and the West line of the northeast quarter of said Section 35; thence NORTH 89°16'17" EAST 2655.48 feet along said southerly Right of Way line to the East line of said northeast quarter of said Section 35; thence departing from said southerly Right of Way, SOUTH 00°15'51" EAST 1307.64 feet along the East line of the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter of said Section 35 to the southwest corner of the northwest quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 36; thence NORTH 88°43'28" EAST 1322.30 feet along the South line of said northwest quarter of the northwest quarter to the northeast corner of the southwest quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 36; thence SOUTH 00°17'42" EAST 1332.00 feet along the East line of said southwest quarter of the northwest quarter of said Section 36 to the northeast corner of the northwest quarter of the southwest quarter of said Section 36; thence SOUTH 00°17'28" EAST 1334.81 feet along the East line of said northwest quarter of the southwest quarter to the southeast corner of said northwest quarter of the southwest quarter of said Section 36; thence SOUTH 88°21'20" WEST 1323.82 feet along the South line of said northwest quarter of the southwest quarter to the southeast corner of the northeast quarter of the southeast quarter of said Section 35; thence SOUTH 89°15'46" WEST 523.21 feet along the South line of said northeast quarter of the southeast quarter of said Section 35; thence SOUTH 72°39'18" WEST 825.84 feet; thence SOUTH 66°34'06" WEST 1420.67 feet to the West line of the southeast quarter of said Section 35; thence NORTH 00°42'39" WEST 21.71 feet along said West line to the northerly line of the property as recorded in the Weld County records in Book 1309 at Reception No. 2261418 and Reception No. 2261419; thence SOUTH 77°43'20" WEST 2395.14 feet along said northerly line to the easterly line of the CDOT Right of Way; thence along said easterly Right of Way line the following courses: NORTH 00°01'30" WEST 119.72 feet SOUTH 89°58'30" WEST 114.85 feet NORTH 00°01'30" WEST 186.00 feet 366.58 feet along the arc of a curve to the left, said curve having a radius of 3379.77 feet and a long chord which bears North 03°07'56" West 366.40 feet NORTH 06°14'22" WEST 602.07 feet 288.25 feet along the arc of a curve to the right, said curve having a radius of 3182.89 feet and a long chord which bears North 03°40'24" West 288.15 feet NORTH 01°04'44" WEST 463.50 feet thence departing from said easterly line of the CDOT Right of Way, SOUTH 88°39'48" EAST 82.41 feet NORTH 00°11'21" WEST 379.20 feet NORTH 88°10'49" EAST 185.78 feet NORTH 00°56'35" WEST 172.26 feet NORTH 82°52'58" EAST 590.65 feet NORTH 04°19'08" WEST 264.10 feet NORTH 89°31'10" EAST 1708.33 feet to the West line of the northeast quarter of said Section 35; thence NORTH 00°42'37" WEST 2327.59 feet along said West line to the Point of Beginning. Contains 486.75 acres, more or less. i MEMORANuUM fat IIIR r TO: Ben Patton, Planner DATE: October 8, 1999 IFROM: Frank B. Hempen, Jr., Director of Public Works/County Engineer C. SUBJECT: River Dance PUD, Traffic Impact Analysis (Z-528) COLORADO The revised traffic study submitted by Tuttle Applegate for River Dance PUD is rejected. In lieu of a detailed commentary on the traffic analysis, I have attached a copy of the most recent study review completed by Felsburg, Holt, and Ullevig (FHU). It is firmly recommended that the developer/consultant follow the outline recommended by FHU in their review of the last study effort. Addressing the eleven items noted in that outline should result in a timely transportation referral review with appropriate improvement recommendations cc: Planning Department Monica Mika-Daniels, Director of Planning Services Glenn Blackburn, Tuttle Applegate, Inc. Z-528 'li' , . ; EXHIBIT (:, !\ c7g3CI g E STATE OF COLORADO OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER woe col Division of Water Resources /4" �\ Department of Natural Resources I`-�� ' II I 1313 Sherman Street, Room 818 � �Yi Denver,Colorado 80203 �'tape Phone:(303)866-3581FAX:(3O3)866-3589 August 3, 1999 Hill Owens hup://waterstatam.us/defaulthim it/c.;;.:' CountyPlanning Dept. eovitmor Grey,E.\Nal(HI I xet utive fin -i tar Mr. Ben Patton AUG 06 1999 Hai t) Simps"n Weld County Planning Dept. State En"'n`ci 1400 N. 17t"Ave. n c r` E B \b4 E D Greeley, CO 80631 fl RE: RiverDance P.U.D., Z-528 Sections 35 & 36, T3N, R68W, 6"' P.M. Water Division 1, Water District 4 Dear Mr. Patton: Per conversation between Heidi Frey of this office and Mr. Michael Cook of the Little Thompson Water District on August 3, 1999, I have reconsidered the above referenced preliminary proposal to subdivide 486.75 acres into 600 to 800 residential and commercial lots. The proposed water source is Little Thompson Water District (District) and a letter of commitment for service has been submitted for 125 lots in phase one and 512 lots in phase two. The District will supply treated water to the development. As a condition of activation of the taps, the applicant must transfer 1 unit of Colorado-Big Thompson (CBT) raw water (1 acre-foot per unit) for each lot, administered by the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District, to Little Thompson Water District. The applicant must provide evidence that the CBT water has been transferred to the District prior to final platting. Pursuant to Section 30-28-136(1)(h)(II), C.R.S., the State Engineer's Office offers the opinion that the proposed water supply will not cause material injury to existing water rights, and with the District serving the proposal, the supply is expected to be adequate. Should you have any questions, piease contact Heidi Frey of this office. Sincerely, Kenneth W. Knox Assistant State Engineer CC: Richard Stenzel, Division Engineer Water Supply Branch Little Thompson Water District KWK\HCF:word\riverdance CF:word\riverda nce tiEXHIBIT RUG 11 '99 10:05 FR FHU 303 721 0832 TO 19703046497 P.02?/00 4FELSBURG ri HOLT & ULLEVIG engineering paths to transportation solutions August 11, 1999 Mr. Frank Hempen, Jr. Director, Weld County Public Works Department P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632-0758 RE: Riverdance Subdivision Traffic Impact Analysis Review FHU Reference No. 98-257 Dear Mr. Hempen: We have completed our traffic engineering review of the traffic impact analysis for the Riverdance Subdivision, which is planned to be located east of the 1-25 eastern frontage road, west of WCR 11, and south of WCR 28. The traffic analysis is an update of the previous submittal from December 1998. We offer the following comments on the study prepared by Tuttle-Applegate, Inc., submitted June 1999: 1. The existing traffic volumes shown on Figure 2 include daily volumes for a "global" area. It would be of more interest to provide daily, AM and PM peak hour volumes on the roadways immediately surrounding the site, specifically on the 1-25 frontage road, WCR 28, and SH 119 east of 1-25. 2. The study states that the trip generation rates are from the ITE 5" Edition Trip Generation publication dated 1995. ITE has published a 6th Edition Trip Generation dated 1997. However,the rates for the three proposed land uses included in this study changed very little between the publications and this is not a significant concern. 3. Trip generation estimates shown in Tables 1 and 2 of the study could not be replicated using either the average rates or equations found in the 5th or 6t" Editions of Trio Generation. Using ITE 6th Edition average rates, the proposed site is expected to generate approximately 8,733 vehicle-trips per day (vpd). Summing the totals shown in the study, the site is expected to generate approximately 6,730 vpd. The study projection is only 77 percent of the site generated traffic volumes based on ITE 6`" Edition Trip Generation. ITE 6th Edition AM and PM peak hour estimates are 443 vehicles per hour (vph) and 783 vph, respectively. The projected volumes in the study are, respectively, approximately 84 percent and 71 percent of the trips estimated using ITE 6th Edition rates. 303,721.1440 fax 303.721.0932 fhu@flmeng.com Greenwood Corporate Plaza 7951 E.Maplewood Ave.Ste- ZOO ZalL Englewood,CO 80111 RUG 11 '99 10:05 FR FHU 303 721 0832 TO 1.9703046497 P.03/08 August 11, 1999 Mr. Frank Hempen, Jr. Page 2 It is recommended that a table documenting the ITE land uses codes used, ITE rates or equations used, and the resultant trip generation estimates be included in the report. As presented, it appears that the site trip generation has been underestimated. 4. The Trip Distribution description, which begins on page 2, states that 35 percent of the traffic generated by the east section of the development will access WCR 28 and the remaining 65 percent will access the frontage road. However, Table 4 indicates that these distribution percentages are 40 and 60 percent to WCR 28 and the frontage road, respectively. The distribution percentages should be clarified. 5. Figure 3 of the report shows traffic volumes at several intersections in the vicinity of the development, one of which is WCR 28/WCR 11. This intersection is not mentioned in the text as far as distribution assumptions are concerned. Furthermore, it appears that site trips are assumed to access the site via WCR 11, which is not mentioned in the report. The assumptions surrounding this access need to be addressed in the text • of the report. 6. The traffic volumes shown on Figure 3 show only volumes /eavino the proposed development site. ITE Trio Generation documents entering and exiting percentages for the AM and PM peak hours. These estimates should be used to calculate inbound and outbound turning movements. The entering and exiting volumes should be included in Trip Generation Tables 1 and 2 and shown on Figure 3. Also, the volumes in the revised graphic should be combined with background turning movement volumes to illustrate total projected turning movement volumes at the intersections in a separate graphic. 7. The layout of Figure 3 is confusing as the bubbles illustrating traffic at the surrounding intersections are not connected to the intersections on the graphic. This graphic should be revised to either connect the bubbles to the intersection, or to show the volumes at the appropriate intersections (which may require showing only the roadways and not including the contour lines and other geographical features). 8. It would be helpful to have the proposed site location be identified on Figures 2, 4, and 5, as this would help the reader focus on information relative to the development site. 9. Figure 5, taken from the Weld County Roadway Improvement Plan submitted in draft form by Felsburg Holt & Ullevig (FHU) in March 1999, illustrates proposed 2020 traffic volumes based on existing traffic volumes and a general growth factor(shown in Figure 4) for the purpose of developing roadway impact fees. It is important to understand that these volumes do not necessarily represent a scenario that specifically accounted for this development or any other specific development,just general growth in the area. AUG 11 '99 10:06 FR FHU 303 721 0032 TO 19703046497 P.04/00 • August 11, 1999 Mr. Frank Hempen, Jr. Page 3 The applicant needs to understand that a more detailed traffic impact analysis is required to evaluate the effects of this specific development at the critical intersections and the surrounding roadways. The "Projected Traffic Growth" section of the report should be revised to include sufficient detail identifying the long-term traffic volumes along the key surrounding roadways, and it should provide information beyond the report submitted by FHU in March 1999. 10. Although the frontage road was not included in the study submitted by FHU, other research should be done to document existing traffic volumes on this road in the vicinity of the site. This may require that the applicant do some traffic counts adjacent to the proposed site and apply growth factors to obtain "background traffic volumes". • 11. On page 4 of the study, it is explained that since the projected volumes shown in Figure 5 on SH 66 and SH 119 are higher than those projected by the proposed development, no additional improvements are necessary to these highways, The validity of this statement depends on the extent of development in the surrounding areas. Also, the traffic study did not include any detailed intersection and roadway level of service analyses to support this claim. These analyses are required and the text should be modified appropriately, 12. It may be relevant to relate the projected development traffic as a percent increase of existing traffic to give the reader a sense of the development's impact. Also, it is important to point out that Table 5 shows that the proposed development traffic will constitute approximately 29 percent and 21 percent of the future projected traffic on SH 66 and SH 119, respectively. These percentages may be useful in determining if or how much the proposed development should contribute to improvements made to these roadways and/or related intersections. The text of the report should be revised to better explain impacts generated by this development. • 13. The middle paragraph on page 5 explains that WCR 28 and WCR 11 should be paved with a minimum of 24 feet. As mentioned on page 1 of the report, WCR 28 is planned to be a two-lane collector at build-out of the area. (This information is found on Map 2.2 in the Weld County Mixed Use Development (MUD) Plan, February 1997, not the Weld County Comprehensive Plan as stated in the report.) Figure 2.10 of the Weld County MUD Plan shows a typical two-lane collector with an 80 foot right of way (ROW) . Included in this ROW is 50 feet of paved roadway including a driving lane and a bike lane in each direction, and a center median/turn lane. The text should be revised to reflect this information and make recommendations as appropriate. RUG 11 '99 10:06 FR FHU 303 721 0832 TO 1.9703046497 P.05/08 August 11, 1999 Mr. Frank Hempen, Jr. Page 4 14. The Anticipated CDOT Access Requirements section of the study refers to the need to obtain an access permit if SH 119, SH 66 or the frontage road require modification. Improvements to one or more of these roadways would be as a result of traffic volumes exceeding the Access Code limitations. CDOT will likely request additional analyses including volume projections to determine what improvements will be necessary. The Access Code limitations/thresholds should be stated in the text and appropriately referenced. 15. In the last paragraph on page 4, SH 199 is referred to. It is assumed that SH 119 is intended; the text should be revised. 16. The Conclusion section of the study includes several items which state required turn- lane lengths as a result of the proposed development traffic. The standard referenced to evaluate the need for these turn-lanes is not given in the text. Additionally, the specific intersection approach requiring an acceleration/deceleration lane improvement should be clearly stated in the text. Perhaps a figure showing recommended improvements would help clarify the location of the recommended improvements. • 17. It is unclear if the applicant considered improvements approaching the proposed site access along the surrounding roadways since only the outbound site generated traffic volumes were shown on Figure 3, and turn-lane lengths are often determined using turning movement volumes. The study should clearly re-analyze intersection improvements on approaches both within the proposed site and on the surrounding roadway network once the turning movement volumes have been revised (see comment 7). 18. The Weld County MUD Plan Map 2.2 indicates that the intersection of SH 66 with the frontage road is a candidate for future signalization. The traffic volumes generated by the proposed residential development may contribute toward signal warrants being met at this location. It may be reasonable for the County to request a financial contribution from the applicant toward a future signal installation. 19. No level of service analyses, existing or future, were conducted at any of the intersections related to the proposed development. We recommend that capacity analyses be performed at the two site accesses on WCR 28 and the frontage road, and at intersections of the frontage road/WCR 28, WCR 28/WCR 11 (for a future year scenario), SH 66/frontage road and SH 119/frontage road.. 20. No internal roadway analyses were done or recommendations made. These should be included in the study as well as a graphic which clearly shows the proposed site plan and internal roadway structure (including projected daily traffic volumes at the site accesses). RUG 11 '99 10:06 FR FHU 303 721 0032 TO 19703046497 P.06/00 August 11, 1999 Mr. Frank Hempen, Jr. Page 5 This traffic study should be revised based on the above comments and resubmitted to the County. We suggest that the consultant follow the attached outline for clarification. If you have questions, or require additional information, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG abLA.-412-41/201,4-1 rtV>14499 1— F Debra L. Nelson, E.I. Christopher J. Fasching, P.E. Transportation Engineer Associate attachment AUG 11 '99 10:07 FR FHU 303 721 0832 TO 19703046497 P.07/08 SUGGESTED OUTLINE FOR RIVERDANCE TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 1 . Background Describe development proposal Where, what, when, proposed access, etc. 2. Existing Conditions Description of existing roadways surrounding site(including SH 66 and SH 119) Existing traffic volumes on surrounding roadways (daily, AM peak hour, PM peak hour) including turning movements at all key intersections. 3. Trip Generation Details on trip estimate calculations, daily, AM peak hour, PM peak hour, inbound and outbound, presented in table form. A table was done in the June study, but the entries in the table are difficult to follow and recreate. 4. Trip Distribution - Details on the directional orientation of trips onto the surrounding roadway network and the reasoning behind these assumptions. - Present a table or figure clearly showing assumptions (which was done reasonably well in the June study) 5. Site Trip Assignment The trip distribution assumptions should be applied to the trip generation estimates and the traffic volumes (for just site trips) should be shown on a graphic for daily, AM peak hour, and PM peak hour. The June study does present a graphic of this nature, but it does not include any of the inbound site traffic. 6. Background Traffic Projections - The consultant will need to estimate long-term traffic volumes along the surrounding roadways (including the frontage road, SH 66, and SH 119) if the proposed development site remained vacant ground. The FHU report from March 1999 may provide some insight, but the consultant will have to provide more detail in the surrounding area. Again, daily, AM peak hour, and PM peak hour volumes/turning movements should be prepared. 7. Total Projected Traffic A graphic should be presented showing the total daily, AM peak hour, and PM peak hour traffic volumes/turning movements in the surround area. This is developed by summing the background volumes and the site trip assignment (number 6 and number 5 above). AUG 11 '99 10:07 FR FHU 303 721 0832 TO 19703046497 P.09/00 8. Traffic Operations Given the total traffic projections,the consultant should conduct pertinent level of service analyses for the surround roadways and intersections (again including the key intersections at SH 66 and SH 119). The results of these analyses then begin to indicate what improvements are necessary to accommodate future traffic demands. CDOT Access Code should be reviewed given the total projected traffic volumes; this too may drive certain improvements. The June 1999 study did include a section on CDOT requirements, but it is not possible to verify whether improvements are needed since total peak hour turning movements are not presented at the intersections and access points. 9 Improvements From the analysis through number 8, one can determine the necessary roadway and intersection improvements. This should be clearly indicated in this section. The June 1999 report does identify a lot of improvements (albeit the exact location of some is difficult to follow), the means of how the consultant determined these improvements is not clear. A graphic displaying the improvements can be helpful. 10. Summary This section should be a series of bullets which highlight the report findiings. This section should be written with an understanding that it may be the only section that some people will read. • 11 . Appendices Traffic Count Data collected by consultant, or otherwise obtained. All level of service worksheets. Other relevant analyses. ** TOTAL PAGE.08 fl From: Martha Schrepel <mschrepel@excelonline.com> To: c harding <charding@co.weld.co.us> Date: 1/25/00 4:35pm Subject: Docket#: 2000-04 Dear Sir or Madam; The concerns I mention to you by e-mail yesterday has been resolved. Please disregard the letter you received from Wolfe and Masid, attorneys and the e-mail message I sent to you on Monday, 1/24/2000. Thank you, Martha Schrepel tel. # (970) 686-7366 EXHIBIT 01-26-26-2000 07:57ft1 FROM LITTLE_TN0NPS0N_IJRTER TO 19703520242 P.01 FA CTMI , I f . Little Thompson Water District 835 E F-wv 56 Telephone: (970 ' =1_-2096 DrawerG Ent:: ;973 , 5-_-_3 BerrhoudC050:t3 li To: Li76 - GES.Z,:k Fax. 97O 3Sz—Ozq z From: /0301046 T caSc Date: Z G - oop Subject: R2yV66WXG/ - of Pees including covA.r 3 U AM,;.r"6ar Fort Mzh' 'Y 0an-7 Rsv«0NI/ . 4.-‘11111„ (IC EXHIBIT 01-26-2000 07:57F11 FROM LITTLE:_THOMPSON_WOTER TO 19703520242 P. LITTLE THOMPSON WATER DISTRICT DIRECTORS. Telephone(970)534.•2096 Torn Reynold: 035 E.Highway 56 pretwant Dtw(G Lea Bakd January 25, 2000 Berthoud,;:olorado 80513 Keith Croorpuiat teem W.Gibson bean Anderson Cuss'J.Stdommson 1m,a w Stroh MANAGER: R"idwd tt It WAiItet Mike Siegrist 875 West 64th Ave. Denver, CO 80221 Dear Mx. Siegrist; This letter is in response to your request for an updated water service commitment for up to 531 residential and commercial lots, in the proposed subdivision described as follows : PORTIONS OF SEC. 35, T3N, R68W -- WELD COUNTY, CO Riverdance (second phase) Little Thompson water District will commit to provide service to these lots via one standard 5/8" X 3/4" water tap per lot, with the following conditions : 1. In August of 1993 the Little Thompson Board implemented a "system impact" fee of $1050 per lot for all lots to be added to the system. This is due upon completion of the main line extension agreement . 2 . All improvements to District facilities required to provide service will be the financial responsibility of the developer in accordance with the District Rules and Regulations. All improvements must conform to District Specifications . 3 . Little Thompson water District requires the transfer of one share of Colorado Big Thompson water for each lot in the commitment. The cost of this mater is subject to rebat, from the tap fees paid from the development._ 4. The installation of a fire hydrant requires payment of a $2, 000 fire hydrant fee prior to final approval of the subdivisions lines . You will be responsible for any improvements needed to meet the required fire flows in your subdivision. 01-26-2000 07:50AM FROM LITTL.E_THOMPSON_WRIER TO 19703520242 P.03 5. In order to provide the required flows to the subdivision you will be required to install a minimum of a 12" Dia. water line connecting the existing 24" Dia. water line located at I-25 and WCR 38 to the water lines in the area of your subdivision. The exact location of the Southern end of the line will depend on the timing of your project and the extent of water lines installed in the area at the time you want to begin service. The District may wish to oversize this line for future needs_ 6 . You will also be required to provide the needed water lines in the proposed subdivision. 7. The design, installation and total cost of the project will be the responsibility of the developer. It is possible that some of these required water lines may be required, built or are being designed by other developers in. the same area. If they are in place when you need them then you may be able to utilize them to serve your development ( subject to LTWD rebate policy) . It would be wise to work with the other developers in the area to ensure that the water lines installed would be sized to meet the needs of both developments to reduce the amount of duplication and minimize future water line replacement. This commitment will expire one year from the date of this letter if the taps have not been purchased and installed by that date. The current fee for the domestic 5/8" X 3/4" tap is $10, 000 and looks like it will go to $13 , 000 . 00 on the 1st of February. These fees area subject to change without notice. If you have questions, please contact me in our office. Regards, / ae T Coo P.R. District Engineer TOTAL P.03 (Jan 22 ,20Gi ' 9 : 57AM TUTTLE APDLEOATE 010 . ' 105 /1 mttleApplegate,Inc. Consultants for Land, Mineral and Water Development January 21, 2000 Re: RiverDance Floodplain Analysis Monica Daniels-Mika Department of Planning Services 1555 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 Dear Ms. Daniels-Mika: This letter is in response to our conversation on Friday January 21, 2000. The total area for the RiverDance site is 486 acres of which 227 acres will be designated as open space. Currently the floodplain encompasses 205.75 acres. However, only 8.92 acres are planned for development. The site is currently in the process of receiving a Conditional Letter of Map Revision from FEMA, which would officially remove the buildable lots from the floodplain. This portion of the St. Vrain would be changed from an approximate floodplain to a detailed floodplain. If I can be of any further assistance please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Kallie Sampish E.I.T. TuttleApplegate,Inc 4 EXHIBIT LY C 5441 Boeing Drive Suite 200 • Loveland, Colorado 80538-8855 • (970) 461-9884 • (Fax) (970) 613-1177 bradflorentin@tuttleapplegate.com Hello