The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About791009.tiff RESOLUTION RE: APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR HIGHLAND PARK WEST INVEST- MENTS. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, pursuant to Colorado statute and the Weld County Home Rule Charter, is vested with the authority of administering the affairs of Weld County, Colorado, and WHEREAS, on the 1st day of October, 1979 , the Preliminary Plan of Highland Park West Investments was submitted to the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado for approval in accordance with the Subdivision Regulations of Weld County, Colorado, and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners heard all of the testimony and statements of those present, and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners had evidence presented in support of the approval of said Preliminary Plan for the following described real estate, to-wit: A tract of land located in the Southwest Quarter of Section 15, Township 5 North, Range 66 West of the 6th Principal Meri- dian, Weld County, Colorado, being more particularly described as follows : Commencing at the Southwest Corner of said Southwest Quarter of Section 15 and con- sidering the South line of said Southwest Quarter Section 15 to bear North 89°58 ' 14" East with all bearings herein being rela- tive thereto: Thence North 0°10' 55" West, 40. 90 feet to the True Point of Beginning: Thence North 0°10' 55" West, 2598. 77 feet to the Northwest Corner of said Southwest Quarter of Section 15 : Thence North 89°37 ' 14" East, 2617. 65 feet to the Northeast Corner of said Southwest Quarter of Section 15: Thence South 0°15 ' 56" East, 1519. 67 feet along the East line of said Southwest Quar- ter of Section 15. Thence South 89°40 ' 04" West, 489. 60 feet: Thence South 0°15' 56" East, 771. 05 feet: Thence South 64°23 ' 56" East, 544. 11 feet to a point on the East line of said Southwest Quarter of Section 15 : Thence South 0°15' 56" East, 94. 00 feet along the East line of said Southwest Quarter of Section 15 to a point on the North right-of- way line of U. S. Highway 34 by-pass : Thence along said North right-of-way line by the following two (2) courses : 791009 North 89°46' 38" West, 1794. 56 feet: South 89°58' 14" West, 826. 94 feet: to the True Point of Beginning Said tract contains 146. 92 acres more or less. WHEREAS, the petitioner was present, and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has studied the request as submitted, and having been fully informed, is satis- fied that the Preliminary Plan conforms in all respects with the requirements of Section 5 of the Weld County Subdivision Regula- tions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Com- missioners of Weld County, Colorado that the Preliminary Plan of Highland Park West Investments located in the Southwest Quarter of Section 15, Township 5 North, Range 66 West of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado be, and hereby is, approved. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners that the reasons for approval contained in the Planning Commis- sion recommendations dated September 4 , 1979 be , and hereby are, adopted as the findings of fact of the Board of County Commis- sioners in this matter. The above and foregoing Resolution was, on motion duly made and seconded, adopted by the following vote on the 1st day of October, A.D. , 1979. �1Mti. 2uvw,Gin„, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTEST: ' ELD COUNTY, COOLORADO Weld County Clerk and Recorder C24-� (Aye) and Clerk to the Boa d Norman Carlson, Chairman (BY:, ° (' AA y� (Ave) Deputy Coun Clerk(92-\\ Ly Dun ar APP ED AS TO FORM: ee; i/ Le'7, (Aye) C. W. Kirby 41 1O County Att rney k&& u�. ci . Oct_ (Aye) Leonard L. Roe (ABSTENTION) June K. Steinmark DATE PRESENTED: OCTOBER 3, 1979 BEFORE E WELD COUNTY, COLORADO PLANNIACOMMISSION • RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Date September 4, 1979 Case No. S162 :79 :7 1c # I ; APPLICATION OF Highland Park West Investments c/o Dick Weber ADDRESS 3835 West 10th Street, Greeley, Colorado 80631 Moved by Frank Suckla la that the following resolution be introduced for passage by the Weld County Planning Commission: Be it Resolved by the Weld County Planning Commission that the Subdivision Plat Prel. Plan—Highland Park West located on the following described pro- perty in Weld County, Colorado, to-wit: See attached be recommended (favorably) (uNlaoarxidy0 to the Board of County Commissioners tXxIkicA 7tmcktcxim Q]4xx. Also request that the City of Greeley be more explicit regarding their street pattern and design. NE+l rt'}'i' ft'"'+ .y'�EiS '� ____ SLP 1 .,, ,.j79__________i J GREELEY. COLO. Motion seconded by Don Billings Vote: For Passage Frank Suckla _ Against Passage Don Billings Abstained Bob Eh 'lich Chuck Corlson Irma White Fred Otis Jerry Kiefer The Chairman declared the motion passed and ordered that a certified copy of this Resolution be forwarded with the file of this case to the Board of County Commis- sioners for further proceedings. CERTIFICATION OF COPY I, Shirley A. Phillips , Recording Secretary of the Weld County Planning Com- mission, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing Resolution is a true copy of the Resolution of the Planning Conmi„ior, of Weld County, Colorado, adopted on September 4, 1979 and recorded in Book No. VI of the proceedings of the said Planning Commission. -� Dated the 10 day of September, 19 79. Secretary \ �� LEGAL DESCRIPTION A TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 5 NORTH, RANGE 66 WEST OF THE 6th PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, WELD COUNTY, COLORADO BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER (SW COR) OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW 1/4) OF SECTION 15 AND CONSIDERING THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW 1/4) SECTION 15 TO BEAR N 89 58' 14" E WITH ALL BEARINGS HEREIN BEING RELATIVE THERETO: THENCE N 0 10' 55" W, 40.90 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING: THENCE N 0 10' 55" W, 2598.77 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER (NW COR) OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW 1/4) OF SECTION 15: THENCE N 89 37' 14" E, 2617.65 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER (NE COR) OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW 1/4) OF SECTION 15: THENCE S 0 15' 56" E, 1519.67 FEET ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW 1/4.). OF SECTION 15. THENCE S 89 40' 04" W, 489.60 FEET: THENCE S 0 15' 56" E, 771.05 FEET: THENCE S 64 23' 56" E, 544.11 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW 1/4) OF SECTION 15: THENCE S 0 15' 56" E, 94.00 FEET ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW 1/4) OF SECTION 15 TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT-OF- WAY LINE OF U.S. HIGHWAY 34 BY-PASS: THENCE ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE BY THE FOLLOWING TWO (2) COURSES: N 89 46' 38" W. 1794.56 FEET: S 89 58' 14" W. 826.94 FEET: TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING SAID TRACT CONTAINS 146.92 ACRES MORE OR LESS. Y�t _ f�^ 7 Date : 5"-- tember 4 , 1979 CASE NUMBER: S-162 : 79 : 7 NAME : Highland Park West Investments REQUEST: Preliminary Plan - Highland Park West LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pt . SW4, Section 15, T5N, R66W LOCATION: i mile southwest of Greeley, south of Highland Hills Municipal Golt Course and north of U. S. Highway 34 Bypass THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THIS REQUEST BE continued FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS : It is the opinion of the Department of Planning Services staff that some issues regarding this request are unresolved and need further clarification before a final recommendation can be formulated. The Department of Planning Services staff is requesting that the following issues be addressed by the applicant : 1 . The City of Greeley has indicated city water is available to the site providing the developer meet and initiate all city requirements. The Greeley Planning Commission has recommended approval conditional upon the development meeting City standards . The applicant ' s intent as to whether or not ( the development will be built to City of Greeley standards which includes curb, gutter and sidewalks is not clear at this ime. The present proposal does not include standards for curb, cutter and sidewalk. If the development is not to be built to City standards, it is the opinion of the staff that the City will not provide water service. If this occurs, the Preliminary Plan submittal will not be consistant with Section 5-4 A. (1) (a) of the Subdivision Regulations. Said Section requires determination by the Planning Commission that water service will be available prior to Preliminary Plan approval. 2. Section 5-4 A. (1) (b) of the Weld County Subdivision Regulations requires that before approving a Preliminary Plan the Planning Commission shall determine that the subdivision will be served by a public sanitation system or on-lot sewage disposal system that will not result in water pollution. The Weld County Health Department has questioned the suitability of the septic systems proposed for this subdivision. It has stated that underground lateral migration of septic effluent is highly probable which could be a significant health hazard to existing homes located adjacent to the property under consideration. In addition, the West Greeley Soil Conservation District has recommended a central sewer system be installed to serve the subdivision. The City of Greeley has indicated that sewer service can be made available to the site. In light of these referral responses, the applicant should indicate whether or not the development will be served by sewer or septic systems . If septic systems are still proposed to be used, the applicant needs to sufficiently demonstrate that no adverse impacts will result from the use of the septic systems . In the opinion of the Department of Planning Services Staff, this has not been done at this point in time. 3 . It is the understanding of the Staff that the applicant is changing the street design of the Preliminary Plan to comply with the City of Greeley' s requests for access to the 14 acre outlot and a second access to connect with 27th Street located in the Westridge Subdivision, Second Filing. These revisions will require additional review from the Weld County Engineering Department, State Highway Department and the Weld County Utility Board. The revised plans should be submitted to the Staff as soon as possible so that it may begin the review process. i ? �' ii -, :� .t t, DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES t •N ic• �� _.� PHONE 1303135E-4000 EXT. 400 ,� 91L RA 80631Da. REET GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 COLORADO NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The Weld County Planning Commission will conduct a public hear- ing on September 4 , 1979 at 1 : 30 p.m. to review a request for approval of a preliminary plan for Highland Park West Subdivision from Highland Park west Investmenton a parcel of land described as Pt. SW., Section 15, T5N, R66W of the 6th p.m. , Weld County, Colorado containing 146 . 92 acres more or less. This public hearing to be held by the Weld County Planning Commis- sion for the consideration of the above referenced request will be conducted in the Weld County Commissioners' Hearing Room, First Floor, Weld County Centennial Center, 915 10th Street , Greeley, Colorado. Comments or objections related to the above request ' should be submitted in writing to the Weld County Department of Planning Services, 915 10th Street, Greeley, Colorado 80631, before the above date or presented at the public hearing on - • September 4, 1979 Copies of the application are available for public inspection -"- the Department of Planning Services, Room 310, Weld County NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Centennial Center, 915 10th Street, Greeley, Colorado (35 mssion`wilo conducts an9public extension 404 ) . hearingon September 4,1919 at 1:30 p.m. to review a request for for approval of a preliminary D Highland Park West Subdivision - Carlson , Chairman am ona arc Park WestInvest- Chuck cribefrem Highland I a l ardel of land est- Weld County Planning Commission as Pt.SW4•.5eclion 15.T5N,RMW of the 6th p.m.. Weld County Colorado containing 146.92 acres To be published in the: Platteville Herald/LaSalle Leader more or public This public hearing to be held Dy the Weld County Planning Commis- sion for the considerate,n f;e To be published one time by: August 2, 1979 (publication di above referenced regue� conducted in the Wel County I , Commissioners' Nearer Room. - First Floor. Weld Counts entsCen o- R '�yn 1 nial Center. 915 10th Street. (/ lC•l�` objections Colorado. Comments yr Received b](/� rejections related to the above _ Firstrequest should be submitted i- • writing to the County Department of Planning Services.91510th Seere . Date: 7 G Greeley,Colorado 00631.befo Me 7 � ?a — / � _ above date or presented at the public hearing on September 4, Copies 19Copies of the application are available for public insnecfion ill the Department of Planning Ser vices, Room 3111, Weld Count)Centennial Center,115 10th Street Greeley. Colorado (3514000 wide' sion 406). Chuck Carlson.Chairmai Weld County Planning CeSSID• Published in MB Plmmi Leadel Herald and La Saneq� Thursday, August 3ea�At X PRrLIM4., UH1 PLAN . BDIVISION APPLICATION Department of Planning Services, 915 - 10th Street , Greeley, Colorado PHONE : 356-4000 Ext . 404 FOR PLANNING DEPARTMENT USE ONLY: CASE NO. _ APPL. FEE 414 8 S. 0O` ` ZONING DISTRICT E, RECORDING FEE tl.J l DATE `ii\ t , ,Crkcl _ RECEIPT NO. '10(.05'] APPL. CHECKED BY A-0_, TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT: (Print or type only except for required signatures) : I (we) , the undersigned, hereby request a hearing before the Weld County Planning Commission concerning proposed subdivision of the following described unincorporated area of Weld County. LEGAL DESCRIPTION : SEE ATTACHED LEGAL DESCRIPTION (If additional space is required, attach an additional sheet of this same size. ) NAME OF PROPOSED SUBDIVISION HIGHLAND PARK WEST EXISTING ZONING ESTATE PROPOSED ZONING ESTATE TOTAL AREA (ACRES) 146.92 + NO. OF PROPOSED LOTS 114 LOT SIZE: AVERAGE 33,000 sq. ft. MINIMUM 29,000 sq. ft. UTILITIES: WATER: NAME City of Greeley • NAME REA and Home Light & Power . GAS: NAME Greeley Gas Co. • PHONE: NAME Mountain Bell DISTRICTS: SCHOOL: NAME FIRE: NAME Western Hills DESIGNERS ' NAME ARIX ADDRESS 2021 Clubhouse Drive; Greeley, Colorado 80631PHONE 356-44Q# ENGINEERS' NAME ARIX ADDRESS 2021 Clubhouse Drive, Greeley, Colorado 80631 PHONE 356-1,'v',/i FEE OWNER OF /SEA PROPOSED FOR SUBDIVISION NAME Highland Park West Investment ADDRESS 3835 West 10th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 PHONE 353-11 50 NAME ADDRESS PHONE NAME ADDRESS PHONE I hereby depose and state under the penalties of perjury that all statements, proposals and/or plans submitted with or contained within this annlication are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. COUNTY OF WELD ) STATE OF COLORADO) / / Signat re: Owner or Authorized Agent Subscribed and sworn to before me this / /tiday of 1l[1 19 7? SEAL 01 818 oc, k) 4 i.13 skAt.al JUL 1979 NO,.r_. Y P. _LIC RECEIVED /O WS W'S N, My commission expires: 2 timing assist Q. d? `a' 804-79-028 „,. WCDPS-78-1 4. LEGAL DESCRIPTION A TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 5 NORTH, RANGE 66 WEST OF THE 6th PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, WELD COUNTY, COLORADO BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER (SW COR) OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW 1/4) OF SECTION 15 AND CONSIDERING THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW 1/4) SECTION 15 TO BEAR N 89 58' 14" E WITH ALL BEARINGS HEREIN BEING RELATIVE THERETO: THENCE N 0 10' 55" W, 40.90 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING: THENCE N 0 10' 55" W, 2598.77 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER (NW COR) OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW 1/4) OF SECTION 15: THENCE N 89 37' 14" E, 2617.65 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER (NE COR) OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW 1/4) OF SECTION 15: THENCE S 0 15' 56" E, 1519.67 FEET ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW 1/4) OF SECTION 15. THENCE S 89 40' 04" W, 489.60 FEET: THENCE S 0 15' 56" E, 771.05 FEET: THENCE S 64 23' 56" E, 544.11 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW 1/4) OF SECTION 15: THENCE S 0 15' 56" E, 94.00 FEET ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW 1/4) OF SECTION 15 TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT-OF- WAY LINE OF U.S. HIGHWAY 34 BY-PASS: THENCE ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE BY THE FOLLOWING TWO (2) COURSES: N 89 46' 38" W. 1794.56 FEET: S 89 58' 14" W. 826.94 FEET: TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING SAID TRACT CONTAINS 146.92 ACRES MORE OR LESS. yam, 4. ¢ 5 L s at- / y k - - -- � z �F ______ /+#'_T .- 1. ,,,_ -.�,.--,.'-,_ .-,^„— j . .ar-"3 ARIX GREELEY CIVIC CENTER GFEEELHONEO 303, 35 -86623 1 July 16, 1979 JUL 19 1979 . Weld County Planning 915 - 10th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Attn: Ms. Vickie Traxler Dear Ms. Traxler: This is to notify you that water can be served to Highland Park West. The developer would have to meet and initiate all City requirements. Sincerely, OF GREELEY Y aSA4 — Darryl D Alleman, Director Water & ewer Department DDA:cec (,5,�Q2526?I? -Yo? Cti Cr; J\'�AJ d W "A COMMUNITY OF PROGRESS" ;i < < ebhha CORP. CONSTRUCTION —LAND DEVELOPMENT June 22, 1979 To wham it may concern: Highland Park West is a proposed Residential Subdivision located in West Greeley Colorado in the County of Weld. It contains 146.95 Acres plus and is bounded on the North by West 24th Street, East by 52nd Avenue, South by U.S. 34 By-Pass and by Westridge Subdivision on the West. There are 114 proposed Single-family attached dwelling units to be built in this subdivision. To the best of my knowledge there will be no non-residential floor space assigned to this subdivision. There will be no additional off-street parking spaces, the only off-street parking will be associated with a Single-family residential development. Based on an average family (3-1 persons) at 245 gallons per capita per day; the total number of gallons per family will be 857.5 gallons per day. There being 114 lots times 875.5 gallons will equal 99,807 gallons per day for the entire development requirement when it is completed. All units will be serviced by individual septic systems which will not require central sewage treatment. Estimated Cost and method of financing of streets and related facilities: 6,450 LF Street 1400 12 80' Street 5050 IS 60' Street The estimated construction cost of dirt work, water installation, paving, gas and electric installation is approximately $313,700.00 and will be financed by the principals through their line of credit with the local Greeley banks. Sincere 27320526e, 411 jot... 4N Neal bC�WCE,1979- Webhan Corporation Ne, Eci fint nuahOtis 0A _ se5�11016aL� 3835 W. 10th St. • (303)353-1150 • Greeley, CO 80631 paula biael weld county school district director of facilities and planning service center +� 2204 5th avenue greeley, colorado 352-1543 x 53 July 20, 1979 Chuck Cunnelief County Planning Commission 915 Tenth Street Greeley, CO 80631 Subject: Highland Park West Subdivision Dear Mr. Cunnelief: The school district is constructing a new elementary school on 47th Avenue just off of 20th Street, which will be able to serve the proprosed subdivision. This building will be ready for occu- pancy in the fall of 1980. The existing middle schools, junior highs and senior highs have adequate space for students at those levels. Yours sincerely, 7 Paul C. Bisel, Director Facilities and Planning 2232t$ Ql. * 6:'� cFi� 9a�ein"owl Nby fiioleg, .9 `v mss. - sl • r k j/� ka Western Hills Fire Protection District 18D4 CHERRY AVENUE GREELEY,COLORADO 80631 - (303)356 1424 July 12, 1979 Weld County Planning Commission 910 10th Street Greeley, CO. 80631 Re: Highland Park West Preliminary Plat Dear Commission Members The Western Hills Fire Protection Districts Board of Directors, and the Fire Chief have reviewed the preliminary plat and would like to make the following recommendations; 1.) all cul-de-sacs meet the standards in the Weld County Subdivision Regulations. 2.) all fire hydrants are located through-out the sub- division per the W.H.F.P.D. Fire Protection Standards for Placement and Spacing of Fire Hydrants. ( a copy is enclosed ) If there are any questions concerning the above, please contact the Fire Chief. Sincerely, Carl A. Luther Board Chairman Gayawnb P \\213141S766� .00 CC F01/44• o at4e`__'et agog 4 x - WESTERN HILLS FIRE PROT. DIST. -- FIRE PROTECTION STANDARDS for PLACEMENT AND SPACING OF FIRE HYDRANTS 1. Distance between fire hydrants: A. Zone R-1 & R-1E - Residential structures shall be no further than 500 feet from a fire hydrant. • B. Zone R-2 to R-4 - Fire hydrants'shall be placed no m^re than 500 feet apart. No structure shall be further than 250 feet from a fire hydrant. C. Zone R-5A & R-5B - Mobile home spaces or buildings shall be no further than 500 feet from a fire hydrant. D. Zone B-1, B-2, B-3, M-1, M-2, and M-3 - Fire hydrants shall be placed no more than 350 feet apart. Buildings shall be no further than 250 feet from a fire hydrant. E. In accordance with Div. 3, Sec . 13.301 (c) of the Uniform Fire Code, all premesis where buildings or portions of buildings other than dwellings are located more than 150 feet from a public street, access to such premesis shall be provided with approved fire hydrants connected to a water system capable of supplying the fire flow required by the Chief. The location of such hydrants shall be approved by the Chief of the depart- ment. Paved access to fire hydrants shall be provided and maintained to accomodate fire fighting apparatus. 2. Hydrants shall be placed at intersections whenever possible. 3. When on a divided highway, a hydrant shall be placed on each side of said highway. 4. Fire hydrants shall be placed so that they are readily visible from the curb. 5. Hydrants shall be placed no further than five feet from the curb. 6. Fire hydrants shall be installed and maintained so that the center of the lowest water outlet shall not be less than twelve inches nor more than thirty inches from the ground. 7 . The location of all hydrants shall be approved by the Fire Chief. 8. All fire hydrants shall be in operational condition before construction of any building is started, and the streets shall be able to support fire apparatus in wet weather. 9. An inspection by the Fire Department and the contractor shall be made. The fire hydrant will be operated and foreign material flushed out. All valves and threads will be checked, and the hydrant checked to see if it X will drain. This will be done before construction starts. • WE TERN HILLS FIRE TROT. DIST. _ FIRE PROTECTION STANDA-DS FOR FIREFLOW O The required volume of water for fire flow is to be delivered ' at not less than 20 pounds PSI residuel pressure to the fire pumper. Residential Dwellings - One (1) family and small two (2) family dwellings not to exceed two (2) stories in height. Exposure Distances Fire Flow Over 100 feet 500 GPM 31 ft. - 100 ft. 750 - 1000 GPM li ft. - 30 ft. • - 1000 - 1500 GPM 10 ft. or less 1500 - 2000 GPM Dwellings 21 or 3 stories high No Exposure 1000 GPM. Mild Exposure 1500 GPM Moderate Exposure 2500 GPM Severe Exposure t, 5000 GPM • • • X Greeley, Colorado Date 7 - ..E) - 73 Weld County Planning Commission Centennial Center 915 10th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Dear Sirs, The Mountain Bell Company will provide telephone service to the /7/C,-///9/✓D /7.9R: J-I-ES % / ?/)✓)/ /Olv 41GPir-/ lF //S G 6'7y ,r/c7.5-5 *5----? 2v 74 3 9 _' .194/tit/,/,c A review of the subdivision plans relative to the design of the utility easements is in progress and our comments will be presented to the utility board representative. Yours truly, Engineer 71i Q2-i �'- n , /2 ,g, co . foe 38 g4. go 8/ 0618 �11�i JUL 1979 ^ RECEIVED Q' ivzo Well Couary 6-40 Mania`Conissioa ` } La c9�sz riric�`u° ,AJat ` POUDRE VALLEY < Poudre ' . . RURAL ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION \Valley ,A ': P. O. BOX 1727 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80522 PHONE 226- 1234 July 9, 1979 Mr. William Neal Webhan Corporation 3835 West 10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 Dear Mr. Neal : Re: Highland Park West Subdivision Poudre Valley Rural Electric Association, Inc. , is willing and able to provide electrical service to a specified portion of your planned Highland Park West Subdivision. This is in accordance with a terri- torial apportionment that we recognize in conjunction with Home Light and Power. We are now in the process of establishing an acceptable (and economical ) agreement for joint servicing of the subdivision. At the present time, we are preparing to offer service to the following lots only: Block 1 Lots 22 through 30, inclusive Block 5 Lots 1 through 11 , inclusive Block 6 Lots 7 through 13, inclusive Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact either Richard Larm, Commercial Department, or myself. S' ce ly, MtB. Malmgren Field Engineer JBM/als cc: Home Light and Power _�e� VI- 1919 v R£C ' vt 4L, ar stit 1r9 ,Ars1415 16 7,7, x Jv NO J O o. G v LC 0''"itt� ti ' � Oltl� �i�lf SIX criel«6£fi7�Z, -1 July 10, 1979 Weld County Planning Commission Weld County Planning Department 915 - 10th Street Room 310 Greeley, Colorado 80631 SUBJECT: HIGHLAND PARK WEST Gentlemen: This is to advise that Home Light and Power Company is prepared to supply electrical utility requirements of that part of Highland Park West which lies within our certificated area. Specifically, we are prepared to provide electrical service for Lots 1 thru 21 Block 1, all of Blocks 2, 3 and 4, Lots 11 thru 22 in Block 5, Lots 1 thru 6 in Block 6 and all of Blocks 7 and 8. Our proposed electrical service will be primarily front lot line construction and we do not require any additional easements. If you require additional information, please advise. Sincerely, Richard H. Fennelly(17 Manager of Operations RF/gs Enclosure • Ec. HOME LIGHT AND POWER COMPANY • P.O. BOX 8 • 810 NINTH STREET • GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 • TELEPHONE (303) 353-1144 GREELEY GAS COMPANY r910j17��July 6 , 1979 .� 2iL 1919 n� L' RECEIVED �K_________Ig trams �' e Whin . 47 SZ GCZ ��I Weld County Planning Commission Centennial Center- 915 10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 Dear Sirs : I have reviewed the preliminary plat of Highland Hills West. Greeley Gas Company has mains in this general area and can serve this subdivision. The easement as shown on the plat will meet our needs . Very/ my ours , i Ray outs As . Manager, Operations RF:ng 4PP C Neel Carpenter P.esldent A Professional Corporation N Kenl Baker Eugene R Brauer AR Engineers Architects Planners Gordon w.Bruchn r PBober' J Shreve Rated J Shreve Dale J Steichen 0-Thomas Robert D.Thomas 2021 Clubhouse Drrve Gary R.Windolph Greeley Colorado 80631 303 356 4444 August 16, 1979 Mr. Charles Cunliffe Assistant Zoning Administrator Weld County Post Office Box 758 Greeley, Colorado 80631 Dear Mr. Cunliffe: SUBJECT: HIGHLAND PARK WEST, PROJECT NO, 79 1 ENG 0130 In response to the memo dated August 7, 1979, from Mr, John Hall , Director of Environmental Health Services, I would like to comment on a few items that are of concern: 1 . I appreciate and share Mr. Hall 's concern as to the area underlain by bedrock. Bear in mind that we are in the conceptual stage of development and these specifics will be addressed during final design. We have had good experience with evapo-transpiration beds and the size of the lots are ideal for this situation. 2. and 3. Prior to final design, Greeley sewer service will be investigated. It has been our understanding that sewer was not available due to the capacity of the lift stations, and this was discussed with the City of Greeley staff as early as November, 1978. The notes of this review are available at the City's Planning Department. It is felt that there is ample opportunity to review the subdivision plan prior to final design. As previously stated, each individual site must pass Weld County Health requirements prior to issuing a building permit. Therefore, adequate checks are built into the procuedre to minimize an unacceptable environment. t ^\ Mr. Charles Cunliffe Page 2 August 16, 1979 If there are any questions regarding our comments, feel free to contact our office. Respectfully, ARIX, A Pr fessional Corporation c..?.- ZCL.S. Project Director AFU/njw cc: Mr. Richard D. Weber, Webhan Corporation Mr. John G. Hall , Weld County Health Department Director, Environmental Health Services 1,Z02122pp h p‘)G1919 r6 CEwED ; 0`e° s' de Alitit` 7-" -st, r x STEWART TITLE OF GREELEY 916 10 TH STREET GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 REAL ESTATE OWNERS SURROUNDING HIGHLAND PARK WEST 1 . Richard L. & Darlene I . Jones 1746 Juniper Avenue Torrance, CA 90503 2. Charley & Penny Ann Graham 2609 52nd Avenue Court Greeley, CO 80631 3. Meta C. Shore 2611 52nd Avenue Court Greeley, CO 80631 4. Paul & Pearl K. Bilihorn 2623 52nd Avenue Court Greeley, CO 80631 5. Josephine B. Jones 2631 52nd Avenue Court Greeley, CO 80631 6. Josephine B. Jones 2631 52nd Avenue Court Greeley, CO 80631 7. Velna Lou Miller 104 East 81st Street New, NY 10028 8. Lenhardt L. & Darlene M. Kungel 2655 52nd Avenue Court Greeley, CO 80631 9. Michael J. & Ethyl L. Gimmestad 5220 27th Street Greeley, CO 80631 10. Frances C. & Sayra C. Compertive Address cannot be found 11 . Timothy S. & Dianne G. Cole 1134 34th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 12. James D. & Joan M. Beemer 5232 24th Street Greeley, CO 80631 13. Howard Lee & Nancy Lee Gruthjan Address cannot be found 14. Frank E. & Darlene M. Keppeler 1832 26th Avenue Place Greeley, CO 80631 15. James D. & Joan M Beemer 5232 24th Street Greeley, CO 80631 16. Burl & Elsie M. Huitt 5312 West 24th Street Greeley, CO 80631 17. Donald G. & Geraldine Fichenscher Address cannot be found 18. International Church Gospel Address cannot be found 19. Frank L. & Melita J. Martinez 1757 30th Street #1 Greeley, CO 80631 20. Faye L. Lundvall 2201 95th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 Page 1 • • Page 2 21 . Charles A. & Joan M. Orin 5322 24th Street Greeley, CO 80631 22. Robert L. & Beem Dragich Address cannot be found 23. John L. Shupe 5427 24th Street Greeley, CO 80631 24. John L. & Maxine Shupe 5427 24th Street Greeley, CO 80631 25. Michael R. & Daura J. Swanson 5516 24th Street Greeley, CO 80631 26. Michael R. & Daura J. Swanson 5516 24th Street Greeley, CO 80631 27. Van G. & Dianne K. Kratzenstein 5520 West 24th Street Greeley, CO 80631 28. Charles C. &Bessie B. Miller 5600 West 24th Street Greeley, CO 80631 29. William E. & Susan E. Hurt Address cannot be found 30. Harry S. & Helen E. Cross 2300 51st Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 31 . Barry A. & Victoria J. Williams P. O. Box 1112 Greeley, CO 80631 32. Barry A. & Vicki J. Williams P. O. Box 1112 Greeley, CO 80631 33. Donald G. & Ethel L. Miller 5722 24th Street Greeley, CO 80631 34. Rene C. & Georgia M. Morgan 5728 24th Street Greeley, CO 80631 35. George R. & Barbara A. Conger Address cannot be found 36. Jack H. & Ruth S. Stephenson 2 Denver Avenue Johnstown, CO 80534 37. Allen L. & Linda K. Weber 4343 3rd Street Greeley, CO 80631 38. Bryan D. & Claudia Shaha 5907 West 28th Street Greeley, CO 80631 39. Thomas Michael & Lorenza Sena 1908 34th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 40. David E. & Leola M. Gibson 3004 West 6th Street Greeley, CO 80631 41 . Timothy L. & Beverly C. Dhooge 617 40th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 42. Robert C. Hummel , etal 5910 24th Street Greeley, CO 80631 'rV Page 3 43. William W. Ezell , etal Address cannot be found 44. Richard C. Cutshall , etal 5948 23rd Street Court Greeley, CO 80631 45. Josephine B. Jones 2631 52nd Avenue Court Greeley, CO 80631 NOTE: The above owners are verified by Weld County Records at Security Abstract Co. of Weld County, as of August 23, 1979 at 7:45 A.M. 0262J2B5 p/41:9o. CFA ro 441/4 O) Stewart Title of Greeley Security Abstract Co. of Weld Co. BY �2 ',Do1 .Q-_ ��a h ',Dot:2a signature a . ete 9' • STEWART TITLE OF GREELEY 916 10TH STREET GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 MINERAL OWNERS 1 . Highland Park West Investment 3835 West 10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 2. The Union Pacific Railroad Reser. for coal only 1416 Dodge Street Omaha, NE 68179 3. The State of Colorado #1550811 1313 Sherman Street Denver, CO 80202 4. Union Pacific Land Resource Co. 1416 Dodge Street Omaha, NE 68179 NOTE: The above owners are verified by Weld County Records at Security Abstract Co. of Weld County, as of August 23, 1979 at 7:45 A.M. Stewart Title of Greeley Security Abstract Co. of Weld Co. 252621� (94 BY )27 ,4 /✓ �. 0 4U�e authorized signature En▪ - CE/ 979 y .. 1/ O3 co Sege wee, FD /a • s(ipelet 110‘6‘e 4 f . • • ` REFERRAL" LIST Z • Ho APPLICANT `Hiohland Park West Investments H P CASE /F S-162 : 79_ 7 . REFERRALS,.SENT OUT ON: July' 25 , 1979 * ?- : En Z L REFERRALS= yo BE RECEIVED BY August 17, 1979 t - F' z '7 ' Cy' U] s --: . o v .. ¢` ii; z REFERRALS RECEIVED, n c Fn ¥ } ti.. h n W ri41 is • ..Ars-- - ' d. i t• Att orney • (plat only) -- ,{ '204F-4 Aus.. -.,'•-' '' 1979 >" County Health-, K >. .1j �'h₹,«,nl°iii- A i sy .� .5 rt^,.s k, ' "'w�" rp atr ,1 .,} 3' �:t AUG' 211 ,1979: -1' a " County Engineer z . }r fi s Ia )' X r r{f 'ii- "' Yt '& -art h, >. �v s F 4 r . ,4 i rvr� s f a`3. X' '1<' ,` _ R' - z ' •![B x x.> ';'i r s, . ,...,44.„. . ,4 i:i`F 4 ,, . s br,Paul"raC $1se1 � . `� .: JUL 24 1979 School District 6 X 4 1; r Y 3 , ff.'s -811'4,1.51:1-1 ,'St reef; t,-,514 ,-,,S,,, y ".7-1.1.•:,,-;--:1,':',.-`:•,',, " 0�c 0- „ , Greeieyx''''7-e-1.1-''''orado • 'QS O ...-,.51-1,)!2..,. i`' ".+ .� 5 • t .Fx z, + ,,,„17,G,, reeley Planningt. mm15S on , " s. .+ ,..4-4,-,.` 'o ` ':,. C o xJohn 'Given 'K " - p-' vs , �" : Greeley Planning 1epartmen s yr4 $ ' � • "� tMw -47.'1.4•4,1i-ys > •p. y� fta, `'�". . X +' •L�,�1V1'C�'I enteT�wCOmpleX T.w�9"# �4��""�y{''�' r 1< i* 1F� X i 3�,a-'e` A gfr �S',7 5 T ' "" xx i a• ' ,:1' °1,`.,f A, ,t 1 �- •a lath treeta, 0' '°" x'c r 6, '-;02-'.-4. -.?',.::'' • j e ,,.s", : ree ey olorado,••.',,,,,,8063 x` 7,-,-..• -•'•;?,-.. ' , a -_,•:','•%, ,pff„ N gi , o".�'Ora O olo.l al'T'sur w. • -- �A rd,,"j," �'r ,, �.. � .r 3 sF f f k k f" 4N '# v r Ti�#"y y . e'y" , :*?to ' 7 .4`• ', F 'gee- 1e'ff£3• n• r_'rG`a.i4 ,;: ,f;,;; ./7::r: � y "�t 1 '3.•], CG et A _ 'k`4v.'. •"' "'"A �# a.: s. •1�W.arxe. N: • k4 b a -.4y.4tgc.' Sr "u ":" . briNer "ai Q• •r • • 1' ! "kc kwe : re,-,4_ , fir ' '1 t <r,.;.:;-,.:: t : x.,, }-I :.c •'t. :'s �f�'..-r. . . '#,"' -, ` ``_' 5: < oloracio r r m n i. w ys ••;:l...1:: I,: •ra. 4 1 ,'a. ,t44-4*Y: Y 4 t � 2D ,2nd t"rte t :_'� , . y ',� r } ,,;�. X a. S7. q. * * z' " ` a"3-`>�..�4, ,-2,� .% ,- rep-ley",,,. • .•r • s- 1 • x ,¢c " r 14:-/-r„," r ' . aZ"Sr: ", ' ..c F ''- S-.:J.:"&:-.1.-2.-'!c• t:Sb x% i-1•,-5•11k1;.-..71,. wT It i r t4,.2....,,,-,,,,,l-,,:t. [ry. wit,•y_�"+, - 2 ' �� -. of onseruat on •ervi-•-- . a o; X.. , ,' N,, ` fida; v 4 , y 73 sae: .^" xs tree L..np j ,.i- . %*.'6Y. K a4,iF'a'efy 3 es_ tAStreet Road , ,t i, r' w4% e3ey p ora" o� 80fi31 >< �ja >;' y�.r * y s,'+ rs zf . Nf- 7- , „%,-;,;,...1.,•:_,,,- 1:1q^: a � r • i. 1a_, 'a- ; " �+ r v fl r �4"' + ; $1 1 ar e]Y_ *s, ttw - y," 1 ; ;': ra " c ,i" �,_ ,. �, ' "''' -. ''Colo`radot Department ,of -Hea th . , ' ` kr -r •'.••• " , ' ..„ -:„ f _ , z xt t,I.,,. > # ,- 14.03,-!...1'-''' e st1Mounta in:A' - 49 .i J,d > 3 ?`'al's <4 dZ ay I'- }.b°I� '`y#." iF .Suite 7 Yri a t'„y , r �"Pe ;.1 s i } ; a ,r.,. ' s 11 f t?t. y fits `a'/ ? p + -a-; ar5!•,q»',wJ 0, ` fk -- a • Fort Collars, rGolo_rado fi:s "80 2Ntl s "' " -i. i'.sp. ' . Lv- -,-..„.,14*:... .x w., "v , > ,• 4•, Sa- I.S! s �:'Yr ,4;',",....,fp''.•''", , Ct ,_R]"•.� j ^x3 S-!*. 4.dr ,: ., .t ar,Y�z+•�; * F .-.X T,y a J,_ . f W . ;"',•••.'",..-4-•-i 7 ' c �. ` ` ` _'' s Y - ,�S`ira '^"s5yp� th 'i bT 'a c4,-.534!-- 3i's Y 4.h. ? " Y,-C'- �,4{"e 4" i. tza �F- h ,24!,r� , 5m iettA+^a. .-;E7 .:r4 - , �P R } 'K ' * `�CK'4G k- w •.'s }3 rt :-.014;;;;.: k %A:: A,t µ' ,# x .yYnr� , -,. i�yy� wing , ',",1. r�i- '. ''.1. a .. 'r S"^`2. ' r ;� _"2:4t,;1:;:?'-'4":", " + � { #>_ Yj r r :.,,,,r ?t x{„�V1 ,....,t.;,,,-;FR" ..r'" „i' '.:�> ar� 4'� .�d'� '`" aaS •'4,4.,4{4. ,' mss.c.Y n,4"' 3f 4 H 4 "F S Y7 > %ti: ,,. .".pi' ,� 'S" > 1 x�- - P 02.- �,� t x �" ' `3Cr�g 4$ " /::zt, '�'? y V. it•r;•i 1 'µ}it T?-•;;; ' �^ h ,S � y� T y "+,,. 5> 0:2 :, i+ Y "S,. �, r Ty.',{y•. .. . r.# • e.1',4 x.,4',1" •"c ,'; .t 4 e xa k „ii` n 5 i yy ✓ :,,477' T may b?r` i . '>. i-,t, -cctt d r4 ^ fYe 3 H an i -- N I _ . �r *x„..-z-a ; /...—,..1e3...-c, i 94„ - j r; tI • y N . i { c ,-,a,77:—.- of ll i� la-ji _ II ><{ .—J A_t i , �� # ^ `� i�ea .4 ' lir il tll i i h r 'p j p ` jY 0 _eft.w 1 - '11 —_ s" 1 d iit, NZ a f 4.- 1 4 A k4t y GREELEY CIVIC CENTER GREELEY. COLORADO 80631 PHONE (303 3536123 August 30 , 1979 Chuck Cunliffe Weld Department of Planning Services 915 Tenth Street Greeley, CO 80631 Dear Chuck: Re: Highland Park West Subdivision Preliminary Plat At its August 28 , 1979 meeting the Greeley Planning Commission reviewed the preliminary plat for Highland Park West Subdivision and recommended approval of the preliminary plat conditioned upon the development meeting City standards . Specifically , the Com- mission referred to development of curb , gutter, and sidewalks ; access to the 14 acre outlot ; and provision of a second access to connect with 27th Street located in the Westridge Subdivision Second Filing. It was also noted that the municipal sewer is available to serve the development. It was also noted that the area is likely to be annexed into the City in the near future . Should you have any further questions , I would be pleased to provide you with minutes of the Planning Commission' s two public hearings and work session which was also held in regard to this development. The Commission appreciates the opportunity to provide comment on development in the County . Since ely, �o�h.��2128! >>c� n qUG hn Given RwCE//9�9 Current Planner pa'anBie,,$o JG :ka ka �\t.9 wet \co "A COMMUNITY OF PROGRESS" `yam. I£L >- a West Greeley Soil Conservation District P.O. Box 86 - Greeley, Colorado 80632 August 21, 1979 Mr. Gary Z. Fortner, Director Weld County Planning Commission Weld County Centennial Center 915 10th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 RE: Preliminary Plan Review-Highland Park West Subdivision The Board of Supervisors has reviewed the above request and are in agreement with review comments prepared for us by the USDA Soil Conservation Service. Those comments are attached and reflect the District' s recommendations. Sincerely, a1 C41. "Arthur V. Briggs, Secretary West Greeley SoilConservation District AB:jb ti�r,2k 2425?s�j�� 1019 c'e, pVGNfp tifi w P • �sf' s' r nmccg aTinN rIFVFI rIPMFNT CFI F (OVPRNMFNT Jr___- (:..z.,, United States Soil p Department of Conservation Agriculture Service 4302 W. 9th St. Road, Greeley, CO. 80631 August 21, 1979 Milton Baumga n , President West Greeley So' Conservation District P. 0. Box 8 Greeley, C or 80632 J The following comments are in regard to a request for review of the Preliminary Plan-Highland Park West Subdivision, located in a portion of the SWY of Section 15, Twp. 5N, Range 66W, Weld County, Colorado. Soil Suitability for Planned Land Uses: The Preliminary Soils and Geological Report attached as part of this request seems adequate and complete for the intended subdivision. However, the intended construction of individual septic systems for each lot seems inconsistent with the soils report which states, on page 3, under main topic "Ground Water" : "The bedrock elevation is relatively high, and could create a "perched" water table as this area is developed and lawn sprinkling becomes heavy. Therefore, we recommend that perimeter drains be located around deep footings with basements." It seems that adding an extra 99,807 gallons per day to the ground water through septic tank leach fields will compound this problem, as well as increase the incidence of surface water appearance on the steeper slopes within the subdivision. I would strongly recom- mend a central sewer system be installed during subdivision development. The soils within the subdivision area above the irrigation canal are susceptable to wind erosion. I recommend an erosion control plan be prepared to address the need for baring only small areas at one time during development to keep the erosion potential to a minimum. If the total grading plan is followed, provisions for providing temporary soil cover should be made to protect the surface soil from wind erosion. Grass seedings or use of cereal grain crops could be used to provide the necessary cover. Adequacy of Planned Surface Drainage System: Realizing that this is only the preliminary plan, there are several questions that have come to mind and they should be addressed in the final plat. (a) Concerning the grade and size of the drainage channel to be installed along the northern edge of the subdivision. The present plans show no specific channel being constructed. Natural flow will not occur from west to east without a constricted channel to divert water to the northeast corner detention pond. Lack of such a channel could expose property to the north causing it to receive storm flow runoff which will be in excess of present limits. O 44 i .e . Page 2 - Review, lli&, ,Add Park West Subdivision (b) The proposed roadway side channels should be vegetated to reduce erosion potential. As presently designed, with 30 CFS flow on a grade over 0.5%, the flow will exceed the velocity a bare earthen channel can withstand without erosion. The maximum velocity a bare earthen channel of these soil-types can withstand is 1.5 feet per second. With proper vegetative cover, channel velocities can be increased to 2.5 to 3.5 feet per second. Even with vegetative cover, the presently designed channel flow velocities ' will be exceeded on grades in excess of 3% slopes. (c) The channel cross section as shown by Section AA on page 6 of 6 in the drainage plan with a 5.6 CFS flow exceeds maximum velocity for bare earthen channels. Recommend this channel also be vegetated to decrease erosion potential. It is also recommended that the side slopes be increased to 4:1 to increase the chances of establishing vegetation. Here again, a channel velocity of 2.5 to 3.5 feet per second is the maximum for a vegetated condition. This channel, as shown, empties into a barrow ditch along U.S. Highway 34 bypass. The path of the drainage water must then flow westward to a culvert that crosses under the highway. The present condition creates an erosion problem on the south side of the highway, and any added flow will certainly aggravate the present condition. I recommend that this situation be addressed to determine if this unsatisfactory condition can be corrected. Other portions of the proposed plan seem to be in order. Sincerely, • on d D. Mil er District Conservationist Greeley Field Office RDM:jb c: Weld County Planning Commission • mEMORAnDUm 1U(-1111die. To Chuck Cunliffe Date August 17, 1979 COLORADO From Drew Scheltinga, Engineering Manager Subject: Highland Park West Preliminary Plan The Engineering Department has reviewed the submittal nad found it complete and well prepared. However, some concerns should be noted that will need clarification at the final plat stage. They are as follows: 1. Page 3 of the "Preliminary Soils and Geological Report" indicates in the second paragraph, "The bedrock elevation is relatively high and could create a "perched" water table as this area is developed and lawn sprinkling becomes heavy." Aside fiun watering the proposed individual septic systems are anticipated to add 857 gallons per day to each lot. I would think a "perched" water table would create basement and foundation problems. Basement restrictions or snhlrain requirements should be addressed. Test borings near the irrigation canal that were preserved with plastic tubing should be checked for ground water the results reported. 2. The release frun the north basin retention pond is on to a Highland Hills Subdivision Lot. It should be shown what will happen to that release flow. Swales, ditches, pipes, or whatever system is used to convey the flow should be shown. 3. In the northwest corner the existing drainage flows north across developed lots along 24th Street. Increase runoff due to development will create problems on those lots. Grading and drainage improvements should insure that residents along West 24th Street will not be damaged. 4. Connections from the existing streets adjacent to Highland Park West to 24th SLreet and West 26th Street should be made along with this development. S. - 2-21 Drew L. Scheltinga Engineering Manager DIS:sar n*32200'2122_5,, ro1� 4-() �s AUG 1979 RECEiVED a Niten Weld C000q r % e6 CuAsiee stsu b�� y • • Weld e!d County t r BOARD OF HEALTH Health Department David Werking, DD5, Greeley 1516 HOSPITAL ROAD William Blink, Roggen Charles W. Judie, MD, MPH Fran Christensen, Eaton Director GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 A.M. Dominguez, Jr., SD, Greeley (303)353-0540Annette M. Lopez, Greeley Herschel Phelps, Jr. MD, Greeley Kathleen Shaughnessy, PHN, Ault Arthur G. Watson, Platteville John M. Wheeler, Greeley August 7, 1979 TO: Chuck Cunliffe Assistant Zoning Administrator ra FROM: John G. Hall, Director Environmental Health Services SUBJECT: Highland Park West Investments The preliminary plan for Highland Park West has been reviewed by Environmental Health personnel, and the following comments are submitted: 1. This department has reservations about the suitability of septic systems for this subdivision. Portions of the proposed subdivision are underlain by claystone and sand- stone, which makes underground lateral migration of septic effluent highly probable. This could be a significant health hazard to existing homes on 24th Street which are located 6 - 12 feet down grade from the northern portion of the subdivision. 2. It is unclear at present whether the city of Greeley can provide sewer service. This question should be resolved before septic tanks are approved. 3. Northern portions of the subdivision lie within 400 feet of an existing community sewer. Paragraph 3.12 of Weld County Individual Sewage Disposal System Regulations states that under certain conditions this department cannot grant authority to construct septic systems. This issue is not resolved as of this writing. 4. An emission permit for fugitive dust emissions is required from the Air Quality Control Division, Colorado Health Department, 4210 E. 11th Avenue, Denver, Colorado, - before any construction, land grading, excavation, and road building can commence. ��06149> Y%\ JGH:dr AUG 1979 "Q Y RECEIVED Q, hid Coolly Nam* Gaintia ot.co raja 9c COLORADO STATE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS A � o +* i ** DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS Weld County 1876 SH 34 July 31 , 1979 Highland Park W SWa of Sec. 15, T.5N. , R.66W. DOH FILE 45100 Mr. Chuck Cunliffe Department of Planning Services Weld County 915 Tenth Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Dear Mr. Cunliffe: We have reviewed the Preliminary Plat of Highland Park West Subdivision, and we have the following comments. Access to the area south of the Greeley-Loveland Ditch is not shown on this plat. U.S. Highway 34 Bypass is access-controlled, and no direct public access is to be permitted, except at those points designated in the Freeway Agreement. Therefore, some means of access other than the highway should be planned for this area. Thank you for the opportunity to review this plat. Very truly yours, DWIGHT M. BOWER DISTRICT ENGINEER Albert Cho acs Assistant District Engineer AC:da cc: D. M. Bower F. N. Fraser (2)File: Crier-Jacobson 1z via ��S 6 Rames-Finch-Graham w/encl . ` cP A, AUG 1979 -fl`? o' �, RECEIVED �' u'e uetl ceosry tir aPMSt coseisse' ��w� P.O. BOX 850 GREELEY, CO 80632 (303) 353-1232 of co , *13: 9 • 0 O RICHARD D. LAMM ; * JOHN W. BOLD GOVERNOR ♦ �F Directa1 J$76 COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 715 STATE CENTENNIAL BUILDING —1313 SHERMAN STREET DENVER,COLORADO 80203 PHONE (303)839-2611 July 30, 1979 Weld County Department of Planning Services 915 10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 Department Members : RE: HIGHLAND PARK WEST We have reviewed the preliminary plat and supporting documents for the pro- posed Highland Park West subdivision. The Preliminary Soils and Geological Report by Arix Corporation (Project No. 79-1-EN6-0130, May 8, 1979) provides an excellent description and evaluation of those geologic conditions that will affect the proposed development of this property. Based upon the percolation test data, we concur with Arix that standard leach field systems are suitable for the proposed density of 0.88 units per acre. Therefore, if the recommendations made in the above report regarding foundation design, floor slab construction, surface and subsurface drainage, treatment of foundation soils , and the need for inspection of excavations are followed, we feel that this property can be safely developed as proposed. If we can be of further assistance, please contact our office. Sincerely, James N. Price Engineering Geologist JNP/dks cc: Land Use Commission A�BLg3032‘)12.rt x, co on o N O.., PI*coo th -='saint Comm Sao „NV o la 9l 90\ GEOLOGY E514 x Oa STORY OF THE PAST . . . KEY TO THE FUTURE • • Gticist tie teee cu d�ua2e rAutch yJ sd .�� . 3 110 25/A eve. �/ (6eee/e�, �ec7c tack 8063 (303) 352-0163:::,..:.::-.0.,,;„ . ;.. N August 22, 1979 rrrrrr Al'', .Q a, fO 1' end sot! . z .r - f "Department of�Planningtand Zoning `-' '� Weld County r ti .J . .' .' . 915 10th Street Greeley`, Colorado x'80631 x ' . D •ear sirs-',,1•;•74k,,,,-.41„,-(--.42*,;*" 1 "' k r rze. ' L 4sL „d Rya 4� _' F _. w YES I' amwriting to 'you on;.beh•alf. of the Greeley Foursquare Church. 4 , " 'who owns property at 5316 24th Street, just north of the proposed ' ' h y f r r, lii:Highland lark West subdivision °fit k} 1 t fi . I F, 'F`. .�' `WL``.-w'X. • 7₹c•t..,,,u .CJs. r r w;; it v.;. It '}:= r''..'r tvk '21°1' C N t y »L+Itt asrome to our attention that Aigh7and Park West Invest1,� ,, 'a ', >F- -dents wish to develop,thi•s property' with the use of septic systems _ kik ' • - 'we are opposed to the='use of septic 'systems because of the very " . ,•' x eal possibility of a health hazard to existing homes in the ' a• -.,L%. � .« a ed ate 'are a3 Ada n ` •"+ :1-."-;.44-''':* $ ' m'. `- 4,,,:„4, ,,,,,,,,,, xw' + �� 'j• <,„ STT 'r " 44 4 ,-",pa m a r ,t4/0;44�a t1v, Y,m {"F°r.>• ';r7R..f,;•4_,,- rb'''": E.,.. ta, ?v a t• r, p4 mr ions o the pr ar Y te''''''';,a 5 t k � and' ' . onions*of 'the proposed u_•,‘ 4-,7;,,,,,,,--r.1,, , , r s, `* - f'rTiip.Son , re n' er ai y c'� ,ystone and sandstone which makes` a. ' ,t•: , t�' '�. ; a ex `very .ossible olhave -a lateralxmAigzation',pfNe tic"'dis osais 1� 'w';, Sc K a 6.,s t e r .> .1 e sa tap emca P �: 4 T x w , ,< � ; � ,y �Therefore,� we .ale opposed to the use .of septic systemsx n is '�r� '7 ` !�` v. '"vwsubdivision a ; • � +4 �.w. NA 5 •t74-.Y., �` >" f� Y:�..�S a<«� s ,! iw.i kw r,^td- # d ak x•' 2. &,..:4"-,I �'� ax ' .xi7� 5�-ta,tis rq,. h a� .r4.4-r.. es ectfu ' _ .i' . 4• .wh t'.°- .. 8 .1/241,-,_ SY�e 1 '' n I• 4:.. +P� a .v l;t^ , }p -,-;-.-:-:.7,-;',';,N r "5's}" '.G. ;t, 4e , a,:;. 7i v -M'z a�' f rr v fF ? ri - ,k l k ? -s3 '75,37- 4'it": "o5 a • , .z.. a t- s_.-.';',•$:,'S- a. '< ` » k� ' -per Z2 5,37-I A .'i y '' ,, ,�^ �� Ths;11`,,,,,,,,,k,,,,„..,,,,,,, - t. a�1, 6' �.: c r #'`" ;,' .c. o f x'''t { ' f ,, , t' qq ". '��:5wi '-, ,+ ` n.: re i 'N . y{i 4 Jerry Iyaug'han sIr.�,.#"F" ! ' S #v}&' `• f a k., � � 4i$ ..,4.. �'4€ '�� ''`' ' 'y�'"wt't t Pastor .. f Y , +f lm t i . .`'�� '7:,.•-. S gg '� " .- 4 gat yS�`l y t �(• ' t o , v fri-, F�i •It 7 € p.,4. e , lip ' yr,.:5,4_,,'.--,,,k-3 •.x - ,- ,y {�,. �rt v..#(a„ RE.c`kpbth��w,v{ •k tiS kr r,��. +J+," s• f'S}, • y.tow „. k 1^"'�, ' • h s. t-4 :'" r,A'to'�aC is 4 ' 8 $;, X of » �ns; ''.. . 2'- tg; i ,...w..' t;it' n.° e , s'.. ffai...c'sc l%' ��tti iY�a'4il. Jr. `� ` kp"Y °,i F,' ,';;t »- rl.,7'@' ¢ r ' -"--t., Cl r 4 • -•4.,l`'g2 Y • 7, ky ' < e .-. "+, : •p :,.*,� f£rR 'hair' C ` _sa".."1:: 41 .aS to y{� � iffi r. .5.--4.,,,, O:,,,,“, z = M ''y. ,F y' ' I x +. _ , 'v �,dx, .al v� at'i2€h'l sr./.-,s m:,*� r�' ai' !_4(--:::i!•;44••4:511;;;;11,...._?,.!t,? - ,h b « � �'. c }Y' h F { i 4 k�yo�vk y rp +-.s� �-? k '�-k' �+ dY.= 4 New Life Center"ftiia • `' F = c�armcn ��ie= �ou2 �uahe �vo �ie•1��rw �r-.r ii" � �,�' "v J t„.•,._,k ..e Air °s4 t.:: 7.: • 7. s' ..h'h ' 1 a 1 , 2 _ / - i / - i i /om t.. ✓/./ t , ^ -�:�✓ _ ,i.��1-t-! �� - . �/ I J`/ vA / // 7 22:4 Y A 41: / ! � 6�1\g1920�je� ate` 4` , 2 .3 2 AUG 19)9 �N et RECEIVFp cn WIN tou�jk 2 �' G %anniot fee MAW. 'o� / gtij C9stiEV. ' x August 17, 1979 Weld County Planning and Zoning RE: Re-Zoning Highland Park West These are our primary concerns: The developer should not proceed until street access meets all requirements. With 130 building sites, approximately 260 cars, on the average, must be accommodated per day. The proposed ingress and egress would not be sufficient. The developers should state whether or not there will be city water and sewer. Septic tanks would not be acceptable. Sincerely, ad 77211c _,.. '� E��_Z� Francis Compest Sayre Compestine SC:dttc ex, 4181g % AUG 1979 w o RECEIVED A rnMid buts ti Banning Co�enissian �s 41> z I E6ti£ isso • • 5203 W . 25th St . Rd . Greeley, Co . 80631 August 10, 1979 Mr . Chuck Cunliffe, Assistant Zoning Administrator Dept . of Planning Services 915 10th St . Greeley, Co . 80631 Dear Mr . Cunliffe : In regards to your letter informing us that our home located at the above address, is within 500 feet of a proposed subdivision develop- ment, please be advised that we do not object to the development of the subdivision . However, it has been brought to our attention by means of a petition circulated throughout the neighborhood that the developers plan to build a holding pond/septic tank arrangement in order to avoid the water and sewer tap fees . The holding pond/ septic tank developments will obviously be quite offensive because of the odors , flys and insects, and appearance . We are quite proud of our neighborhood bordering the Highland Hills Golf Course . We feel that the . 8 acre estates proposed for development will add to the distinction of our area . However, the holding pond-sewer part of the development will ruin the attractiveness of the area, will endanger the safety of our children, and be a real eyesore for the entire neighborhood. If these lots are selling for $25, 000 . 00 and the homes are to be custom-built, why should the developer be so concerned about an extra $1 , 000-$2, 000 for tap fees? How does the water district feel about losing this source of revenue? One final thought : I think your letter of announcement should carry more complete information . It is difficult for homeowners to judge whether or not they are opposed to a proposed development without some manner of detail . Most of the information I have has been related to me by neighbors . Your letter did not explain the development very well . I hope that this procedure will be reviewed, so that homeowners are given more information upon which to base their decision . Sinc ely,415�2,31 1B17�B?ei Gs4 fe pUG19l9ci) D \ Li da Vasenius SW ES) r- RE w,ta ceadt toy a� �� ,�Pt*a com* ti l'� C r age 1 of 3 PETITION PETITION TO OPPOSE CONSTRUCTION OF SEPTIC TANK AND LEACH FIELD BY WEBHAN CORPORATION IN THE AREA OF HIGHLAND PARK WEST: Pt. SW4 Sec 15, T5N, R 66 W of the 6th Principal Meridian. We, the undersigned property owners within 500 feet of above forementioned property, oppose the construction of septic tank and leach field sewage system for the following reasons: 1. Topography of proposed development creates potential surface and sub- surface seepage onto adjacent properties to the North and East. 2. Sanitary and odor conditions are of concern. 3. Several property owners during the Spring of 1979 experienced water seepage into basements and septic systems flowing to the North and East would surely aggravate this condition. 4. Approximately ten feet from the surface of properties along W. 24th Street, there is shale and clay which would not allow adequate percolation in order to flow under existing basements. It is therefore the opinion of those whose signatures and addresses appear below that adequate sanitary sewer be provided for the development described above by Webhan Corporation. In addition, we request surface drainage be provided on the North side of the proposed development by Webhan Corporation for Highland Park West. NAME ADDRESS DATE 4/11.1-‘,..-- 2 . ' ,, 5-63o W. L ¢e, S� 7- 30 -7y J c -{V/s,.}- 5636 `L2 .24/ j,1. 7-J0-79 c� s7 /0 Li a o7tishr....I 7/30179 t. • 3 7/6 ee-ad c-Q #.114 7/B,/i f 57/4! (lid c2 f ,g. 2/3o /n9' ,/- ( , -'-� - v -i �y7 / ,-_' i !. ,<, 7 i�' k� .C y . - rez s'200W. zhF - .5 r_£T-r 7- 30 7 q ,,__A--Cl.+ 7, D-co c zJ ).y _L c(' 1 - 5c -7Q I _ , tU. '-`t,c~w a Iu/}e c-c,.20i— a315 2ac.u,c,a aticc 7 -3C-79 x ,,cinc' D'?l—u-� „_:____ S 3 )6 zqr4 1 - 2' 79 age 2 of 3 • NAME ADDRESS DATE 1u -• RR ibee.L., ... 3/2 Fay.a X., ,e_ 741/7? Meee_e> A Oil �� ; �,i,,wd � �� Lo f a 0 , /6/oc k (9. AL Add tos 2 -7/ 77 ,� 'e ir 2,7-7,3 szocie19 .FH°4_,r, i‘ z‘, 7-,l-z7 4 H'da 3 3C F4beah9 Y /Mille- 1 3/ - 77 / at a it it , /t // l - - t2 <uL 3;; z- : 3±.-): 552,0 0 .5/0/12:. k/// 79 %% G A0 'fie-, c 60O L./ 07-'7/5 T 8--/- i � a-v 7,v -.7ViZt ?-/ - 79 • 'lAahc 1 _ S5 ) , -- g IDI-19 43aL0-ivittr0orc- 65 I L 34th 3- 861'7q ow 37 /) 0 .= r 9-2 . C,i sYoV 67/1/ ST 3-- - 79 1_e, .IV • � 53 ;.,2 6va//1 `` 7.2 - 9 � c-a—10, 53 /F 1O gy 'h5,7_ j//z/7 9 .h 5 3;y lei a Yaa/ '.4-L,4_,_, ,..6- 3 2_ c:4---zi'l a.3.-- I y "XC��. gc9/ 0 � � 11 r� a3a/ — sl p - 3 - 7q -ec- - �o -"t- (73 a a - <C) _ g - 77 6)-v„, 75) - 2`//6 - 52 Cf . 8 - 3 - '7ti ` `4r. r Age 3 of 3 NAME 'rte ADDRESS DATE !.� J t� � 2 Yo/ .�- &* :p' V- 3 -79/ Q-5/0 / Sa ,CL,C$ P- 3 - 72 I y) , �:�� ,51/4 �and G',.;. ci. ,A,/,,t 117:_ekL.„( //(c g 5 ,� - .j Z r.1.-6 YY 3/ 7 ir•/r-/' s 37Q3 4; asp SY, ec , Y. (242,7c_ /dj tt .3",2c/ ,26i, Y-L- g/3/79 AtLOOVVY3 42tl 7L. ` S-� 613)79 rd.r/\ ,./ ?1/4)7S fr5( i S.\ dlii s L l-t �✓ s'laX /7 5. J/ it / /3/77 o�6X-- ci—Vie 7 - 2- V *alST. a-7?/2 S 7? 4 �-,7c;? on/ / J7 �9 / __�/ V" �( 10 cy-hey 73 -Fair- irtyro�/ 144 • 5' /Apt) T eX V /a,e4 .24piae j,,),i a &al 1 Ale31 CC cf/ 741 — //.7 / /.na+F C z403 S? /lac er F /‘,-79 02131415 445 , co er RECeiv7g `v yr rill ED ti 7d ��►h� w �ti • Highland Park West Investments S-162 :79 :7 SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS August 3 , 1979 Lawerence Levenson Harry and Helen Cross 3405 16th Street 2635 49th Avenue Court Greeley, Colorado 80631 Greeley, Colorado 80631 Gilbert and Paula Sydney NNN4 Charles and Bessie Miller 2317 58th Avenue 5600 West 24th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Greeley, Colorado 80631 John and Carol Bartlett Ni Van and Diane Kratzenstein 1418 30th Avenue 5520 West 24th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Greeley, Colorado 80631 \Walter and Grace Cole .f Michael and Dawna Swanson 2335 Fourway Lane 5576 West 24th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Greeley, Colorado 80631 \V George Bargelt Nj John and Maxine Shupe 2341 Fairway Lane 5427 24th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Greeley, Colorado 80631 Jack and Ruth Stephenson N Glenn and Joanne Hansen 2 Denver Avenue 304 19th Avenue Court Johnstown, Colorado 80534 Greeley, Colorado 80631 Frank and Roberta Carter Charles and Joan Orin 1904 33rd Avenue 5322 24th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 • Greeley, Colorado 80631 \ Rene and Georgia Morgan v'Faye Lundvall 5728 24th Street 2201 95th Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 Greeley, Colorado 80631 Donald and Ethel Miller "Frank and Melita Martinez 5722 24th Street 1757 30th Street , #1 Greeley, Colorado 80631 Greeley, Colorado 80631 Robert and Frances Gilbert Donald and Geraldine Fickenscher 1318 47th Avenue 5314 24th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Greeley, Colorado 80631 Barry and Victoria Williams \Burl and Elsie Huitt c/o Empire Savings 5312 West 24th Street P .O. Box 1122 Greeley, Colorado 80631 Greeley, Colorado 80631 ZZ r � � - Nancy Hartley '-,I Francis and Sayra Compestine 5232 24th Street NNJ - 2110 23rd Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Greeley, Colorado 80631 Frank and Darlene Keppeler Richard and Mary Lantz 183226th Avenue Place c/o Northern Colorado Savings Greeley, Colorado 80631 P.O. Box N Greeley, Colorado 80631 Erna Eberle 2318 54th Avenue Glen and Wilma Palmer Greeley, Colorado 80631 2410 52nd Avenue Court Greeley, Colorado 80631 Paul and Marjorie Huber 2322 54th Avenue Fred and Gloria Keil Greeley, Colorado 80631 2416 52nd Avenue Court Greeley, Colorado 80631 Kenneth and Rosalind Olds 5629 West 24th Avenue John and Velda Hornberger Greeley, Colorado 80631 2420 52nd Avenue Court Greeley, Colorado 80631 Hollis and Kathryn Stone 2518 16th Avenue William and Lucy Hopkins Greeley, Colorado 80631 2424 52nd Avenue Court Greeley, Colorado 80631 JER 26th Street and Greeley Bypass Dennis and Tara Frank Greeley, Colorado 80631 2428 52nd Court Greeley, Colorado 80631 James and Jacquelyn Calhoon ?� 5719 West 24th Street Dan and Ruth Weitzel Greeley, Colorado 80631 2500 52nd Avenue Court Greeley, Colorado 80631 Edward and Shirley Manz 2131 25th Street Dale and Linda Vasenius Greeley, Colorado 80631 5203 25th Street Road Greeley, Colorado 80631 Jerry and Moneth Piper 2320 58th Avenue Ray and Margaret Speaker Greeley, Colorado 80631 5217 West 26th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Henry and Helen King 2316 Fairway Lane Charley Graham Greeley, Colorado 80631 dba Cobra Construction 5201 26th Street James and Joan Beemer Greeley, Colorado 80631 5232 24th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Richard and Darlene Jones LP 1746 Juniper Avenue Timothy and Diane Cole fG"`'. Torrance, CA 90503 1134 34th Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 Conrad and Edna Smith 5937 West 28th Street Highland Park, Inc. Greeley, Colorado 80631 2249 13th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 fi Mark and Sharyl McKinley Robert and Carole Hummel 5927 West 28th Street \ 5910 24th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Greeley, Colorado 80631 Albert and June Renfro Robert and Laura Belleau 5917 West 28th Street Box 1148 \ ' Greeley, Colorado 80631 Estes Park, CO 80517 • N1 Bryan and Claudia Chaha Harold and Nicole Potter 5907 West 28th Street 5940 24th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Greeley, Colorado 80631 \v Thomas and Lorenza Sena Richard and Nancy Mollandor 1908 34th Avenue \ 2503 West 18th Street Road Greeley, Colorado 80631 Greeley, Colorado 80631 James and Priscilla Dech Robert and Francis Gilbert 6012 West 26th Street 1318 47th Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 Greeley, Colorado 80631 David and Leola Gibson Josephine Jones 3004 West 6th Street 2631 52nd Avenue Court Greeley, Colorado 80631 Greeley, Colorado 80631 Timothy and Beverly Dhooge School District #6 617 40th Avenue 1416 9th Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 Greeley, Colorado 80631 William and Nancy Waller Howard and Nancy Grothgan 5991 West 26th Street 5216 26th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Greeley, Colorado 80631 Neil and Claudia Keddington William and Susan Hurt 6048 23rd Street Court 5630 West 24th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Greeley, Colorado 80631 Richard and Carole Cutshall Melvin and Katherine Prothe 5948 23rd Street Court 2326 54th Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 _ Greeley, Colorado 80631 Jeffrey and Susan Hancock Neil and Mildred Maxwell 1401 38th Avenue 5317 West 24th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Greeley, Colorado 80631 Wayne and Loretta Webster Samuel and Myrtle Telep - 6017 24th Street- 2315 54th Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 Greeley, Colorado 80631 Herman and Dorothea Kliewer Hjordis Wolfe 2501 20th Street Road 2321 54th Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 Greeley, Colorado 80631 �lti Jerry and Patricia Pope Heirs of Harry and Emma Lesser 8 th—tive., 232-5 VAS I} .UV 30 49th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 L'feeley, Colorado 80631 Floyd and Opal Cummings 5515 West 24th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Emanuel and Emanuel , Jr. and Eleanor Gangaware 1948 29th Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 Jerry and Linda Mor 5629 West 24th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 International Church Gospel 5316 24th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Robert and Jackie Sigg 2205 27th Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 Leroy and Janice Learitt 5207 25th Street Road Greeley, Colorado 80631 City of Greeley Civic Center Complex 919 7th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Robert and Frances Gilbert 1318 47th Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 \v School District #6 1416 9th Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 Josephine Jones 2631 52nd Avenue Court Greeley, Colorado 80631 JAR Group 2628 Belair Greeley, Colorado 80631 V Century Corporation P.O. Box 1850 Greeley, Colorado 80631 Highland Park West Investments S-162 :79 : 7 MINERAL OWNERS August 29, 1979 Highland. Park West Investment 3835 West 10th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 The Union Pacific Railroad Reser, for coal only 1416 Dodge Street Omaha, NE 68179 The State of Colorado 1313 Sherman Street Denver, Colorado 80202 Union Pacific Land Resource Company 1416 Dodge Street Omaha, NE 68179 0* nor co 0 e walla COLORADO STATE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS / O �7 7 `, *,,i DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS Weld County 1876 SH 34 Bypass September 21 , 1979 Highland Park We SW'; of Sec. 15, T. 5 N. , R. 66 W Mr. Chuck Cunliffe DOH FILE 45100 - Department of Planning Services Weld County 915 Tenth Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Dear Mr. Cunliffe: In response to your request of September 18, 1979, the Division of Highways would like to reaffirm its comments on the proposed Highland Park West Subdivision. It is our intention to comply with the Freeway Agreement for U.S. 34 Bypass. , This agreement was made between the State Department of Highways and Weld County for the purpose of maintaining a high level of safety and service on this highway. The number and proximity of public access points were specified in this Free- way Agreement as a means to maintain the integrity of this roadway (see attached document) . No such public access points exist to serve this property and, there- fore, other means of access must be found. We suggest that a service road connection be made by Highland Park West Subdivision to tie onto the service road located west of this property. If this could be accomplished, an indirect means of access to U.S. 34 Bypass would be avail- able for the property south of the Greeley-Loveland Ditch. Please let us know if you have any further questions or concerns about our position with regard to access to the highway from this subdivision. Very truly yours, E. N. HAASE CHIEF ENGINEER r 2-1. , / !, ' Dwight M. Bower ' District Engineer DMB:da Attachment oL2`?223C42S cc: E. N. Haase /NJ 4 <j≥\ D. N. Fraser /^. A),...85,0 d',` Crier-Jacobson via Rames-Finch-Graham )^ FC 919 0 in *a,BlS`/�CDe�3�eO [z . en C) P.O. BOX 850 GREELEY, CO 80632 (303) 353-12321�768 L9 co . - October 11 , 1966 F 007-1(11) Weld County FREEWAY AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, dated this 11th day of October, A. D. 1966, by and between the DEPARTMENT OF HIQIWAYS of the STATE OF COLORADO, hereinafter called the "Department" , and the COUNTY OF WELD, herein- after called the "County" , WITNESSETH: • WHEREAS, under authority of the laws of the United States and of the State of Colorado, by and with the concurrence and approval of the United States Bureau of Public Roads, certain State and Federal funds have been allocated for the purpose of improving portions of relocated State Highway No. 16, which passes through the County, said improvements being currently known as Project F 007-1 ( 11) , the route and general plan of such project being shown on Exhibit A, which is attached hereto, and by reference incorporated as a part hereof, and WHEREAS, by reason of the volume and speed of traffic on said highway and the particular danger to the safety of the traveling public by collisions between vehicles proceeding in opposite directions thereon or between vehicles at intersections of said highway with other public highways or at approaches to said highway from private property abutting thereon, the State Highway Commission has designated said portions of said highway to be a Freeway in accordance with the Statutes of the State of Colorado duly made and provided, and • • October 11 , 1966 F 007-1 (11) Weld County WHEREAS , pursuant to said statutes, the County having juris- diction over the County highways to be affected, desires to agree upon the character and extent to which said County highways are to have ingress to and egress from the arterial lanes of said highway. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and of the mutual covenants and agreements herein contained and the faithful performance thereof, the parties hereto promise and agree as follows: I. The Department agrees: A. To make plans and specifications for the project currently designated as F 007-1 (11) , but which designation is subject to change , and will let the contract for and supervise the construction of the project, all with funds allocated by the State and Federal Governments and without any expense to the County for such construction. II. The County agrees: • A. That when and to the extent requested by the Department, it will assist the Department in procuring the necessary rights of way and access rights required for Project F 007-1(11) by either purchase or condemnation in accordance with 120-6-11, CRS ' 63, provided, however, that payment for said rights of way and access rights is made from State and Federal• funds. -2- • October 11, 1966 F 007-1 ( 11) Weld County III. The Department and County mutually agree: A. That public ingress to and egress from the arterial lanes on said Freeway to and from County highways to be affected shall be permitted only at the following locations shown on Exhibit A. 1. At the intersection of the County road on or near the section corner common to Sections 14 , 15, 22 and 23, T. 5 N. , R.• 66 W. , Sixth Principal Meridian (Freeway Survey Station 446-}) 4s5± to and from both sides of the Freeway. 2. At the intersection of the County road on or near the 1/4 section corner common to the $E4 and SW4, Section 16 and the NE4 and WW1/4' Section 21, T. 5 N. , R. 66 W, , Sixth Principal Meridian (Freeway Survey Station 535±) to and from the South side only of the Freeway. • 3. At the intersection of the County road on or near_ the section corner common to Sections 16, 17 , 20 and 21 , T. 5 N. , R. 66 W. , Sixth Principal Meridian • (Freeway Survey Station 561_) to and from both sides of the Freeway. • 4. At the intersection of the County road on or near the section line common to Sections 17 and 18, T. 5UN. , R. 66 W. , Sixth rincipal Meridian (Freeway Survey Station ,624_) to and from both sides of the Freeway. 5. At the intersection of the County road on or near the section corner common to Sections 7 and 18, T. 5 N. , R. 66 W, . and Sections 12 and 13, T. 5 N. , R. 67 W. , Sixth Principal Meridian (Freeway Survey Station 683±) to and from both sides of the Freeway. October 11 , 1966 F 007-1 ( 11) Weld County B. All other County highways, streets , avenues, boulevards, alleys or other public ways presently in existence and use within said County which may be affected will be closed at or near the point of their intersection with the Freeway. C. Except as may be provided by law, no city street, County highway, or other public way of any kind shall hereafter be opened into or connected with said Freeway, unless the Chief Engineer, with the approval of the Governor and the approval and concurrence of the Bureau of Public Roads consents in writing thereto. D. That if the designation of the project is changed as indicated in Paragraph I (A) hereof, this change in no way shall affect the terms of this Agreement. IV. Public ingress to and egress from the arterial lanes of said Freeway to and from other State Highways to be affected, subject to modifications by the Department, shall be permitted only at the following locations shown on Exhibit A. A. At the intersection of State Highway No. 257 on or near the section corner common to Sections 10, 11, 14 and 15, T. 5 N. , R. 67 W. , _ Sixth Principal Meridian (Freeway Survey Station 783 ) to and from both sides of the �9 Freeway. ' V. Ingress to and egress from the arterial lanes of the Freeway as described above in this Paragraph III and Paragraph IV has reference only to public ingress and egress with respect to County and other State Highways under County and Department juris- diction. The matter of private access to the arterial lanes of the Freeway from private property abutting thereon will be taken care of either by providing . a local service road, outer highway, or frontage road leading to points of public access by providing . a private access or by acquisition of the access rights, as may be found most expedient by the Department. -4- October 11 , 1966 F 007-1 (11) Weld County VI. All of the covenants and agreements herein contained shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns of the parties hereto respectively. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused the foregoing Agreement to be executed the day and year first hereinabove written. ATTEST: THE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS STATE OF COLORADO By Chief Clerk Chief Engineer THE COUNTY OF WELD BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Chairman Commissioner Commissioner County Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:. • DUKE W. DUNBAR Attorney General • By Deputy Attorney General Governor -S- CONVENTIONAL SIGNS � 'i i-1 6 i_P. U-• C O I NI S-U' •,•• ,,,.r s.tlt CENIER LINE --el-2 , I L-• .--•'-Th - - - PLAN AND PROFILE 0 COUNTY LINE - - - - — I1 F TOWNSHIP OR RANGE LINE - rr `:J�vU�CaE PAD PR.OL�CT -1 AND LINES ?1211°- p., - HEIDEN tor( aSala',\•in -CITY LIMIT$ Pia. 1.11T -.-- . ..,.T STATE HIGHWAY RAIL H04D .......o......._=-........= BARRED WIRE FENCE r —• WOVEN WIRE - COMRWAIION FENCE - • -- • — WELD COI. IEEE D 1r LEG LILAC O C 0 G • POWER LINE • • • • PRESENT ROAD (PLAN SHEETS) - - - - RIGHT OF WAY LINE - '-' - �faD . _- -'- ACCESS POINTS I FREEWAYS) 0 0 /"] 5(.NI or DDIGI%AI L' C Of A LINE (CONTROL OF ACCESS) „ - - -e•,•„ I.-I-I •r ON PLAN. 11w . Ion I ACCESS DENIED BY DEED —----•-��I-----• 1`l--a' O.4 root at. 1 FIN • IecI TOP OF CUTS — - GRADE liN( OA PREY IL( IS .-El.II K (- TOE OF FILLS - ---.-----.- - - - - - -'- -. GROSS IINGn. Or r°vI(I DETOUR rr - __. -.___._ °E1 lEW.140' r°nlllt TABULATION OF LENGTH 8 DESIGN DATA • - ROADWAY MAJOR i STATION STRUCT's LIN. FT. LIN.FT. • • R.67W. _ ;N. R.E la •o.r. 't..�'__ S.•roq .r t • ls, l.. t r :C t t I/! 1. DTI l ra • f."_.^1J:..gr.ii. ",i . I r R....L..t2:% tt .. .• l E • - R�1J — Y I.° I t .- \ F .( �` 10'_ �._t t I. • - • .I , a. : •. .4' ..» I y 31 .2 . ' ) I . .-�,, . . II I I� / ` -1 . r• • -- 57`a.TOTALS 5T`a. •562.+ _EndF0G7-i(/5/ / L SUMMARY • LIN. FT. MILES OADWAY • • AJ0R STRUCTURE • ET LENGTH O.W. LENGTH • - • DESIGN DATA ' lAIIMUM DEGREE Of CURVE - ILXIMUM GRADE • - • SUIE OF MILEY /ININUM 9 S O HORIZONTAL O T »rr_ - +iNiuIJp M S 5 D VERTICAL ' ..._L- '-'AIIMVM DESIGN SPEED - .----_- ..___-_-.------- i Y i l i G H Vi AY 3 • tos.C•By r DDT-1051 I GLOIcZADO - INDEX OF SHEETS . is OF PROPOSED SHEET ND CT NO. F007- 105) . AY NO. 16 I . OUNTY• - • • 'NIL PP_iw.S • I . 1N II . II 1T. V ISfl Ov1Il /p//`%l/ /_ ,.; • II IT vl Dlga( • .Cr .\ IS GPIDL DI IIPgMID PDID - n� E /7‘..";:2[2-C2..:::::/....:71/r . • /O-�//-ll . . R.6 6 W. • R.63 W. • L..,' o f1 "---. t -.,-" � I 1 ,cr1 iiikkkF " IIr( . '.II•j .. .1* ,HI. ...• �r GREELE• o• �� FFp 1 �•_ • f• rl L.C.. \ � 4 Nlu i - yy \� —'�'• ��. SEE SPECIAL PROVISION'S FOR ▪ ' Q .I • b Ir:�•• .. l Fcl : - NOTICE TO BIDDERS ...y :2 ..I :� \. •-- "\--1 .vN/V�r /r • -- - 5.111 OF COLOPI.DD �- ' - .1.n P5 I' .P1-11- [a ) . .ro+u: Std• 396 50 &e9in FOO7-fiL — LIP!, 1.1•+17• mt A • D(PoPUSEPTDW 1D..Y(PR • - BIYiL1u DI PUBLIC 0*D5 ....ORS: Dart iP.OtD• IwPgP t t `s ��t' 11 �' ' NI" 1 i.- . I 1 4,A.4,‘,'N t l rpr) } t/ •I [ x+ M a*.o - !warn .'. Wirt,'‘,. 'I•d y' ' A y ,., , '`r{ yt .• - - .. .. t� _ 1. li _ `ay I Y �.,,1 .,�__ 111 4 nO l `re.. i ,'1 , A I- ( � MVV, +'t +'.q • _ GREELEY CIVIC CENTER C0. GREELEY. COLORADO 60631 �elw' 1i_ PHONE i 303' 353-6123 tt JJr L c CWT �j 1 ;i,>. \ September 13, 1979 '11f\� r t`\; StQ 14 �9 Goo, Tom Honn Weld Department of Planning Services GREG 915 Tenth Street Greeley, CO 80631 Dear Tom: In response to your inquiry , I am writing to clarify and explain the position of the Greeley Planning Commission with regard to the designation of 24th Street as a collector . The concept of a collector street is set forth in the Transportation Element of the Greeley Comprehensive Plan. The Street and Highway Map proposes a collector between 71st Avenue (arterial ) and SOth Avenue (collec- tor) and between 20th Street (arterial ) and the U . S. 34 Bypass (freeway) . The collector is a street that gathers traffic from local neighborhood streets and thereby links neighborhoods to the cross- town arterial grid system. Typically , collectors run between arterial streets and other collectors . The 80 foot right- of-way has been dedicated as 24th Street in all subsequent filings of the Westridge subdivision. Over a year ago the City and County considered subdivisions fronting along 71st Avenue and it was determined that the extension of 24th Street to 71st Avenue should be routed north of the Nells Brothers Reservoir and thereby serve the section most efficiently . Pursuant to this discussion at a meeting of the Greeley and Weld County Planning Commissions , 24th Street was not dedicated in either the Bird or Peterson Subdivisions . The proposed location of 24th Street in the Allison Farms plan conforms to the plan for the col- lector. The Highland Park West preliminary plat picks up the 80 foot collector as it had been dedicated in Westridge Fourth Filing on the west and carries the street through to 26th Street in High- land Park, which connects to 50th Avenue , a collector, "A COMMUNITY OF PROGRESS" Tom llonn September 13, 1979 • Page 2 The 24th Street collector serves Sections 15 and 16 which have unique topographic , land ownership and circulation patterns which dictate the present and proposed routing of 24th Street . The Westridge development has a very limited local street system . This is due to the large lot sizes . The Highland Hills Golf Course and residential development precludes collector street development in the north half of Section 15 . The access to U . S 34 Bypass is limited to the existing arterials . As a result of these circum- stances , the east-west collector is especially needed to route neighborhood traffic to the arterial system. You will notice that the collectors which run parallel to 34 Bypass are by necessity larger than other proposed collectors . It is also extremely important that collectors run continuously between arterials and other collectors to allow for direct access by emergency vehicles . While the Comprehensive Plan suggests that local streets serving a neighborhood within a section may be varied , short , cul - de- sated , and/or circuitous , the collector should allow for direct linkage of a neighborhood to the transportation system. The residents have raised several concerns with 24th Street which the Planning Commission has addressed. 1) The collector is not offset at 59th Avenue . This is an existing circumstance created by the limitations of topo- graphy , the golf course and the manner in which Westridge filings were submitted. The Street and Highway Map also suggested the existing four-way intersection. The inter- section can be improved with turning lanes , signs and other traffic engineering measures . 2) 24th Street is not an arterial and it does not connect traffic generating activity centers . 3) Although the Highland Park West and Allison Farms developments are proposed as estate subdivisions , their densities range between two and four times the existing Westridge subdivisions . Both subdivisions will use 24th Street. The City has exper- ienced several other situations in which large subdivisions have become isolated and limited to single points of ingress and egress . Not only is this a public safety problem , but it causes inefficient dispersal of traffic , poor accessibility to neighborhood facilities (schools , parks $ shops) , ineffi- cient transportation routing , and disincentives to pedestrian and bicycle travel . Tom Honn September 13 , 1979 Page 3 As indicated in the attached minutes , the Planning Commission has reviewed the 24th Street situation and has decided that the concepts of the Comprehensive Plan and subsequent actions are still valid and should be carried out in the subdivisions presently being platted. The concept of placing a cul de sac at each end of 24th Street was considered an inadequate alternative to meeting the performance requirements of a collector street in the area. I have brought the concerns of the Weld County Planning Commission to the attention of the Planning Commission. They would be happy to meet in a worksession , We will he in contact to arrange a time and date . I hope this adds some clarification. Please contact me if I can be of further assistance . Sincer 1y , J n Given C rrent Planner JG : ka Enclosure o1p111r.'11j �s S R ep y� eO� 1g�3 'n Ke/ tee V O ‘j 4144 ��f6�8cM9t5L� • Weed Cargoes **, iNilewenr A Professional Corporation N.Nero Baker Eugene R.Brauer M Engineers Architects Planners W. Gordon °roamer PatrRobin CJ. Dwyer Robed J.Shreve 0 X . Dale J.D. ohan Thomas D. 2021 Clubhouse Drive Gary R.Wigdpiv Greeley,Colorado 80631 303 356 NN May 25, 1979 • Mr. Sherwood W. Neal Webhan Corporation 3835 West Tenth Street Greeley, CO 80631 Dear Mr. Neal : • _ SUBJECT: HIGHLAND PARK WEST, PROJECT NO. 79 1 ENG 0130 Submitted are the results of our preliminary percolation rate tests at the captioned site. Four 3-foot deep borings were made at the locations of four soils exploration borings. These locations are shown on the accompanying Location Map. The shallow borings were pre-soaked fora 24-hour period prior to the performance of the percolation rate test. The tests were run in compliance with the Weld County Health Department requirements, the results are tabulated as follows: Percolation Rate Boring No. Minutes/Inch Depth of Test 1 40 3 4 40 3 14 13 3 16 20 3 Groundwater was not encountered during our investigation, depth of bedrock is shown on the accompanying Boring Log Exhibit. In general , we do not foresee any problems in the construction of leach fields at this site. Naturally, every site will require percolation rate tests in order to adequately size their septic tanks and leach fields to suit their needs. If there are any questions or you are in need of further information, please call . Respectfully, ARI A Professional Corporation Arthur F. Uhrich Project Director Enclosure: Exhibits 1 & 2 HIGHLAND PARK WEST -- -- 4 + 1 tSre3/44 ` ) -- / DaL _ _ • C� 4 . 4C « ti v_ i ', LJ l L } Nwtwe.w41 G!C l ,714 r ,eat • _ - 1 °f11. 13 1 " 1 flt , i ; 7 y� .. i � _ t r � it 4 1 , �:_ r __• 12 n _ w 1 , S �, JJI. k 1 I . H.7, ,_ } ` ♦ • „ 1 ' 8 ' ti I i - ,i_._- - Tl.[.-? !v 11111. i 4 H. I .,-;„ `'i 1 I -1\V-- --'-'\--N, i J T2} ... . .. .�.. t '.. 0 PERCOLATION HOLES PERCOLATION TEST LOCATION MAP 791-ENG 0130 EXHIBIT No. T.N. 4 ...� E1 . 4902 4900 3 ' :. TEST BORING LOGS -. 7/12 ... 4895 8 T.H.1 T.H.2 / - E1 . 4890 El . 4890 T.H. 3 4890 El ; 4889 /0 14 7 1 20/7 3-1/2 14/12 3 211 3/12 3 2 ..4885 ••. 8-1/2 15/12 17/12 8 , • • 13 14 ''x'123/12 13 1 -14-1/2 ,1 14 ' 4870 791 - ENG- 0130 EXHIBIT No. 2 • • • TEST BORING LOGS 4935 T.H.5 El . 4933 4930 i'117/12 • i .• 4925 • 8 A 21/7 4920 14 / 128/9 T.H.8 El . 4918 4915 • 10/12 • 4910 T.H.6 8 . . . El. 4909 23/12 _ 3 4905 ••;.12./12 T.H.7 - / El . 4904 14 A • 4900 8 .21 21/9 3 26/12 11 7 µ� 4895 14 /118/6 8 7 23/12 48n014 74-1124/12 791 - ENG-O13O EXHIBIT No. 2 TEC BORING LOGS l� 4975 T.H.9 El . 4932 'T" 4930 3 7/12 • 4925 8 7 ; T.H.10 _ - 18/9 . El. 4923 4920 /.- 3 f l•� 12/12 14 4915 T.H. 11 T.H.15 8 17/12 El. 4914 El. 4914 7 3 Ai 4910 • 14 21/12 '8/12 3 /. ' 6/17. ' 6 4905 8 223/12 8 7 137/12 j 49nn 14 127/12 14 133/12. 4895 791-ENG-0130 EXHIBIT No.. 2 • TEST BORING LOGS 4915 4910 4905 T.H. 14 El. 4901 T.N. 12 7 4900 El. 4900 3 )5/12 /1 8/12 4895 T.11.13 / / E1.4892 8 A 21/9 - • / 4890 28/12 3 "112/12 / / 2' / 14 I23/9 /% 4885 // 8-1/2 17/12 4880 - /. 14 4870 791-ENG-0130 EXHIBIT No. 2 TEST BORING LOGS 4955 T.H.16 El . 4951 � T 4950 DQ 3 ' R 118/12 4945 8 4940 _ 14 / 40/12 4935 _ LEGEND 4930 [/9 Sand, Silty Gravel , clay w/sand /1 Clay VALayered or varying CL-SC la Alternate layers of Claystone and Sandstone Weathered Claystone Nal Gravel IStandard Penetration Test Shelby Tube Sample 791 -ENG - 0130 EXHIBIT No. 2 of i s t the W iet/7 You4a yuatie W/iu2c/i o s �e4 - eke 770 S 25i% dye. &l Cee/ey, Wo/ciado 80634 `'� ao (303) 352-0163 ve D 3 August 22, 1979 mg ea ta 4,10 "' and tote Mr. Norman Carlson, Chairman Board of County Commissioners P. 0. Box 758 Greeley, Colorado 80632 Dear Sir: I am writing to you on behalf of the Greeley Foursquare Church who owns property at 5316 24th Street, just north of the proposed Highland Park West subdivision. It has come to our attention that Highland Park West Invest- ments wish to develop this property with the use of septic systems. We are opposed to the use of septic systems because of the very real possibility of a health hazard to existing homes in the immediate areas. It is our understanding that portions of the proposed sub- division are underlain by claystone and sandstone which makes it very possible to have a lateral migration of septic disposals. Therefore, we are opposed to the use of septic systems in this subdivision. Respectfully, Jerry Vaughan Pastor JV/se 4 "New Life Center" fooc/arming Me Seuuyuane &4e/ Mrs . Carol '.Kelly 6215 ': 24 Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 August 16, 1979 'field County Commissioners 915 10th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Dear Sirs: I have been informed recently that !1eld County and the city of Greeley are planning on widening Pest 24 Street in the future. I , also , understand that this may become a thru street . e moved into this area less than a year ago , as we wanted more privacy and the quiet of the country. Ve really would like to keep it this way as much as possible . Since 59th Avenue borders us on the north, we feel widening west 24th street and making it a thru street would create more traffic and noise . So my family and myself are opposed to this project . Besides 59th Avenue being a high traffic street, there is by-pass 34 to the south of us to carry the traffic . Also 20th street would carry this traffic and the possibility of 71st Avenue carrying traffic . Je feel these streets and roads can adequately carry the traffic . So we feel that it is unneccessary' to bring a flow of traffic on our country road-known as west 24th Street. Sincerely, (51)241-6 i ettft S Gfr ELG� GR� COPY r Mfg [ORMAK ►ERS DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING WELD COUNTY 915 10th STREET GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 IN VIEW OF THE TABLING OF THE ALLISON FARMS AND HIGHLAND PARK WEST REQUESTS FOR REZONING DURING THE AUGUST 14 MEETING OF THE C!':MMISSION, AND IN VIEW OF THE SUBSEQUENT STUDY SESSION SCHEDULED FOR AUGUST 21, IT IPPEARS DESIRABLE TO RESTATE IN WRITING THE REQUEST MADE OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION BY THE WEST RIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS, AS WELL AS THE RATIONALE FOR THIS REQUEST. THE REQUEST AND THE RATIONALE FOLLOW. IT IS REQUESTED THAT THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THAT 24th STREET BE DESIGNED TO REACH A DEAD END EAST OF 59thtJENUE WHERE 24th STREET CURRENTLY DEAD ENDS, AND THAT 24th STREET BE DESIGNED AS A DEAD END WEST OF 59th AT LOT 31, WESTRIDGE FOURTH FILING, OR AT LOT 32 ALLISON FARMS SUBDIVISION, SECTION 4, WITH ACCESS TO WESTRIDGE FIFTH FILING ACHIEVED THROUGH THE ALLISON FARMS SUBDIVISION IF 24th STREET IS DEAD�ENDED AT LOT 31, OR THROUGH 24th ST. IF DEAD-ENDED AT LOT 32, ALLISON FARMS SUBDIVISION. THE RATIONALE FOR THE ABOVE APPEAR TO BE COMPELLING: 1. THE INTERSECTION OF 24th ST. AND 59th AVE. IS ALREADY HAZARDOUS. THE HAZARDS ARE UNALTERABLE; 59th SOUTH APPROACHES 24th WITH A BLIND HILL AT THE INTERSECTION. TO THE WEST, THE INTERSECTION INCLUDES A HILL, A CURVE, AND AN INTERSECTING STREET, AS WELL AS TWO PRIVATE DRIVEWAYS, ALL WITHIN ,DANGEROUS PROXIMITY OF THE INTERSECTION. TO THE EAST, 24th STREET INCLUDES A CURVE AT THE INTERSECTION. SINCE 59th AVENUE IS ALREADY A MAJOR ARTERY, THE PROBLEM WOULD BE EXACERBATED ACUTELY IF 24th ST. CARRIED SUBSTANTIALLY MORE TRAFFIC THAN IT CURRENTLY CARRIES. 2. WESTRIDGE WAS DESIGNED TO INCLUDE ADHERENCE TO COVENANTS STIP- ULATING BRIDLE PATHS BETWEEN AND AMONG PROPERTIES. THE COMMUNITY, BY ITS VERY NATURE, IS CHILD AND ANIMAL ORIENTED. THE DESIGNATING OF 24th ST. AS ANYTHING OTHER THAN A MINIMAL TRAFFIC STREET--I.E. , LOCAL TRAFFIC ONLY--POSSESSES THE POTENTIAL FOR TRAGEDY. WHILE THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISIONS WOULD NOT POSE A THREAT TO THE SAFETY OF THE PRESENT RESIDENTS OF WESTRIDGE AND HIGHLAND WEST, THE ALTERING OF 24th ST. WOULD POSE SUCH A THREAT. 3. MAJOR THOROUGHFARES ALREADY EXIST IN THE AREA OF THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISIONS. BOTH 20th ST. AND 34 BYPASS PROVIDE QUICK ACCESS TO THE EAST AND TO THE WEST. BOTH ARE ALREADY MAINTAINED AND ARE PROJECTED TO BE MAINTAINED BY THE COUNTY AND/OR THE CITY. BOTH THOROUGHFARES, WHERE THEY INTERSECT WITH 59th (65th) AVENUE, WILL PROBABLY REQUIRE TRAFFIC LIGHTS BECAUSE OF THE VOLUME OF TRAFFIC CARRIED BY 59th (65th) IN SERVING AIMS COLLEGE AND THE PROPOSED ROLLER RINK. AN INCREASE IN THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC Ott 24th STREET WOULD NECESSITATE AN ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC LIGHT AT/a ALREADY POTENTIALLY HAZARDOUS INTERSECTION, AS WELL AS UNECESSARY MAINTENANCE OF AN EAST-WEST STREET WHEN TWO FOUR-LANE MAJOR ARTERIALS WILL ALREADY EXIST WITHIN APPROXIMATELY ONE MILE OF ONE ANOTHER. 4. SHOULD THE HEWLETT-PACKARD PLANT AND A PROJECTED TECHNOLOGICAL CENTER BECOME A REALITY, IT IS NOT UNLIKY.LY THAT A 24th STREET WHICH IS NOT DEAD-ENDED WOULD BECOME A SHORT CUT FOR THOSE COMMUTERS WISHING TO AVOID TRAFFIC ON 20th, 34 BUSINESS, OR 34 BYPASS. SUCH A "SHORTCUT" WOULD VIOLATE NOT ONLY SAFETY STANDARDS; IT WOULD ALSO THREATEN THE CHARACTER OF THE PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOODS BETWEEN 71st AVENUE AND 59th AVENUE, AS WELL AS THE CHARACTER OF THE FUTURE. COMMUNITIES IN THE AREA OF THE HIGHLAND PARK WEST PROPOSED SUBDIVISION. IN SUMMARY, THE RESIDENTS OF WESTRIDGE BELIEVE THAT GROWTH NEED NOT DESTROY THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN GREELEY AND IN WELD COUNTY, PROVIDED THAT THE CONCEPT OF THE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY IS MAINTAINED THROUGH THOUGHTFUL PLANNING PROVIDED BY THE VARIOUS PLANNING BOARDS WHO SHARE THE CONCERNS OF THE CITIZENS OF THE CITY AND OF THE COUNTY. WE DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THE CONCEPT OF THE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY IS SERVED IN THE CITY OR IN THE COUNTY IF THE SAFETY AND THE LIFESTYLE OF CITIZENS ARE THREATENED BY VOLUMINOUS TRAFFIC THROUGH RESIDENTIAL AREAS. THE HILLSIDE AREA IN GREELEY WAS WELL SERVED WHEN TRAFFIC FROM THE MALL WAS ROUTED ONTO MAJOR ARTERIALS. CAREFUL PLANNING CAN PRECLUDE SUCH A PROBLEM ON THE WESTERN EDGE OF THE CITY. THE CITIZENS OF THE AREA WEST OF THE HIGHLAND HILLS COMMUNITY THANK YOU FOR YOUR CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF THEIR REQUEST. SINCERELY, fi/7, /74;t7 DR. ARNI BURRON COMMUNITY REPRESENTATIVE CC: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 6491 West 24th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 August 15, C gN19C,M1SSN'1_ 11 s? e'n 199' '13 Weld County Planning Commission BUG, 915 10th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 4�- Dear Commissioners: We are Westridge landowners responding to the notification of the rezoning request by Sears Realtors of Allison Farms. Our lot, number 31, is on 24th Street adjacent to the proposed zone change. We feel that any change in zoning, other than to greenbelt or very low density (estate), would seriously deny the lifestyle for which we moved into this area, that being a quiet, peaceful country atmosphere that is semiprivate, relatively safe and free for our children and ourselves. John Givan and the city planning staff have expressed to us that the proposed site should be developed after the city sewer passes through the property, and then with a very much higher density, comparable to the Bittersweet Subdivision. this does not follow the guidelines set down in the Greeley Comprehensive Plan in reference to building on lands adjacent to existing estate developments. "The Plan does propose that existing estate developments be given appropriate consideration when adjacent lands are developed. Care should be taken to assure compatibility of land usage by any of the following means: 1. Gradual reduction of lot size and/or increase in density as distance increases from the estate development. 2. §eparation by public or private open space."1 1. Greeley Comprehensive Plan, p.35_36. 2// 7 (2) The minimum lot size in Westridge is two and a half acres. We believe that a gradual reduction in lot size to one acre, and then on down, would be desireable for adjoining developments. Avery major concern of ours deals with the future of 24th Street. In the Greeley Comprehensive Plan, the following goal is stated: "1. Streets and highways shall be developed to serve future growing transportation needs, however, they shall not predominate the com- munity environment. Land developments shall be geared to meet the needs of the pedestrian, with the automotive concerns being secon_ dary."2 Any new development in the land section in which we live will pose traffic problems on 24th Street, which is designated as a "collector street.' +he definition of collector street is as follows in the Greeley Comprehensive Plan: "Unlike the categories of streets mentioned above, the collector street is generally not a through street. It collects traffic from within the neighborhood areas and routes the traffic to arterial streets. The design of the collector should be such that through traffic is discouraged. This will tend to keep traffic volumes at a low level, reducing to a similarly low level the quantity of ad- jacent land use conflicts." "Unlike the past policy of forcing the collectors into a grid system, the Plan proposes that collectors be considerably set off the half_ mile section line in an irregular fashion. The collector is then located to serve the needs of the neighborhood--not to sever the neighborhood, as is the case under present practices."3 Please refer to the map on page 101 showing the desireable off-set collectors, which do not cross arterial streets, and then please refer to the map on page 106, which shows the future 24th Street. Note that 24th Street cuts across 59th Avenue, the only major north-south arterial west of 35th Avenue. This intersection is just below the crest of a hill 2. Greeley Comprehensive Plan, page 104, Goals. 3. . Greeley Comprehensive Plan, page 107-108, Collector Streets. (3) on 59th Avenue, and 24th Street has a curving hill right before the approach. It is a dangerous intersection now; it could become very dangerous with a higher volume of traffic. Notice also that 24th Street extends all the way from 71st Street to almost 47th Street. This makes for one heck of a long "drag," double meaning intended; Its proposed length is approximately two miles long. We submit to you that 24th Street future plans donot conform to the intent of the Comprehensive Plan, and that the street design should be changed, such that new neighborhoods have their own collector streets, and not cut through ours. Westridge is already severed by 59th Avenue. Must we be severed again by 24th Street? Please give consideration to a sol- ution to this problem soon. If the AllisonFarm property must be developed, we would certainly back the estate zoning proposed by Sears Realtors. We cannot support anything denser. It seems to us that the City of Greeley Planning Stafi (osp. John Givan) is not responsive to the people's wishes and rights to a choice and freedom of individual lifestyle, and that they themselves are encouraging urban sprawl by not filling in open building spaces that now exist within their present boundaries. Thank you for your time, patience and consideration. Sincerely yours, , Lr•. :� ^e . M. G. Smith 225 o•, eh. Avenue • Greeley , CC. ci0f.3 .: • W • eld County Planning. Commission ��0. , �, 915 1Oth Street Greeley, CC. 606ji C }r �_•y `" ��'.. ;1 Board of County Commissioners P. C. Box ��56 Greeley, CO. 00652 August i6, 1979 Subject: Proposed re-zoning of Allison Farms to state & Hi Density Dear Commissioners : • As residents and property owners of Westridge, we would like to strongly object to the proposed re-zoning of the Allison Farms and to the proposed Plat Plans as offered by Sears Realty. This pro- posed development, which will include 160 acres North and West of Westridge , has several aspects which we fines unacceptable--listed in their order of importance to us include: 1, We strongly object to the use of West 24th Street as a feeder street to the Southern portion of this development. At the present time, West 24th Street is a dead-end narrow road wnicn enters 59th Ave. in, what is generally considerea , and extremely dangerous intersection. At the present time only 11 families use this West end of West 24th Street and that is about all the road can handle. If this development is allowed to use Aest 24th Street, our neighborhood will be significantly eroded by the tremendous increase in traffic . We therefore propose that both ends of West 24th Street remain as they are with no ex- tensions. This would mean that both ends of this street would continue as dead end streets . We do not wish that anyone go to the expense of paving these roads and then have a situation that presently exists at 17th Avenue near the Greeley Mall, where 17th Avenue is barricaded at 34 bypass. We feel that the traffic volume on 59th Ave. is already exorbitant and the proposed extensions of W. 24th Street wculd just add the the volume of traffic . Fifty-ninth Avenue already has a • dangerous curve and hill where many accidents and close-calls have occured in the past. 2. We object to the presence of the High Density rezoning aspects of the proposal. Single and multiple family apartments seem out of • place next to the 2.5 acre minimum lots which exist in Westridge. • The proposed use of septic tanks seems hard to believe in view of the negative :Meld County Health Department recommendations . 3. We object to the estate rezoning on the basis of several aspects . In planning any new development it is vital that the development enhance and compliment the surrounding existing areas . The residents of Westridge originally moved to this area because of the large, open lots (minimum 2.5 acres) where horses and other animals could be kept. Surrounding this area with apartments and small lot single family V dwellings would significantly compromise our existing area. The pro- posed recreational vehicle parking area on 59th Avenue would probably resemble a used car lot. The use of a septic tank system for over 1OO individual homes seems impractical. In conclusion, we object to many aspects of the proposed Allison Farms rezoning. We do not feel it represents a good development. The time has passed when developers can buy corn fields and build anything that will make a buck: The concerns of surrounding residents who must live with the development must be considered in future plans. Sincerely, / 7, of *PA*PA ^u�t :. • AuG20 A979 August 16, 1979 ELEY coli> Dear Commissioner, - pRE. I-live at 2205 64th Ave. Westridge 4th filing, Lot 35 by choice - part mine, part yours. We moved here eight years ago from a conjested Southern California area. We chose to reside in Weld County because it was an agriculturally oriented area and would therefore not be subjected to the malignant growth pattern so like many other communities. We planned on buying a few acres zoned Agriculture to attain our long planned dream - a place for ourselves and our children to enjoy clear skies, the cry of wild geese and the few animals we have always been prohibited in the city. Suddenly, there was a Land Use Bill prohibiting the sale of less than 35 irrigated acres. We were forced by this bill into buying an estate sized lot "in the country" where we were assured by covenants and lot size that our dreams would not be threatened. Now, knocking on our back door (literally in our particular case) is the planned Allison Farm Subdivision, to include a High Density zoning which I feel will destroy the life style myself and my neighbors have sought to achieve. Obviously the Land Use Bill has many benefits, which I can certainly understand. What I cannot comprehend is the differentiation between the private individual and the developer when prime agricultural land is plowed up and paved over - forever. I truly believe there are other alternately desireable lands to subdivide that would be more benificial to everyone than this particular parcel. &notions are *said to have no place in the progressive world of business, and let's face it, city growth is big business. Therefore, allow me to state some "logical" reasons this proposed development should be denied: �1 i1 1) Contrary to the expertise of Doug Sears ' engineer, the water table is quite high - to the point of being swampy in some locations, thus making the land unsuitable for the proposed septic systems. 2) Page 35 of the Greeley Comprehensive Plan states "existing estate developments be given appropriate consideration when adjacent lands are developed" - if indeed they must be developed. 3) The Colorado-Wyoming Gas pumping station on the southwest corner of 59th Avenue and 20th St. is at best "smelly". Can you guarantee that it is not also a health hazard? 4) Increased traffic will create unsafe conditions on roads not engineered for the influx of additional motorists (i.e. blind spots at intersections, sharp curves, insufficient width and poor maintenance, especially in the winter.) 5) Does the city wish to destroy it's primary source of revenue by crowding out the farmer that made Weld County one of the most prosperous in the nation? Or is. the Land Use Bill indeed just a farce? Thank you for the time you took in listening to my thoughts. Respectfully, • Sharon P. Clifton 2205 64th Ave. Greeley, Colo. 80631 • 353-5633 Imo, \lw'/^\ Kry 4\22' O August 15, 1979 l � V Dear Commissioner; In reference to the proposed zone change from "A" agricultural zone district to "E" estate zone district with a unit development and preliminary plan designated Allison Farm Subdivision, I wish to convey my adament opposition to such a zone change. Let me first discuss my personal reasons for disapproval: (1) We originally purchased Lot 35, 4th filing Westridge, for the purpose of build- ing our own home in a semi-rural setting. After two years of constructing our "dream home" by ourselves, we are now nearing the completion of a 15 year longing for a piece of land and peace and quiet. (2) As lovers of the equine species we enjoy the latitude which we now possess to exercise our horses relatively uninhibited by residential crowding. (3) A copious amount of perspiration, numerous blisters and smashed thumbs have given us title to the right to defend the life style which we are now only beginning to enjoy. (4) We are not gregarious by nature and do not desire more adjacent neighbors. (5) We are opposed to annexation by the city. I realize that we are only two souls and are insignificant in the planning for the masses, but we divorce ourselves from the concept that America is a "nation of sheep" and refuse to follow the dictates of mammon. We do not hold in high status the increase in property values but rather prefer the pheasent call, the rustle of corn leaves and fresh air. You may now say "they're right, they are only two votes" but please, we ask you to consider: (1) The immense drain on the city water system as near acre size lots attempt to keep their place green. (2) The water table in much of the proposed plat is high and regardless of what the engineers for a/2154/7f Sears and Co. relate, proper septic systems along our northwestern border will have to be elevated close to or above present ground level. Mr. Doug Sears testified on August 14, 1979 to the city planning commission that leach fields in the surrounding area had requirements of 800 sq. ft. or less - our seepage bed was required to be 1040 sq. ft. minimum (permit# 210 Weld County Health Dept.). Also not mentioned was the fact that some West- ridge homeowners have been required to re-dig their leach fields, specifically lots 30,36,39,26, and 27. (3) The Land Use Bill which prevented us from living as "rural" as we really wanted to, prohibits residences on less than • 35 acres without rezoning from Agriculture. Thus there is a demand for acreage in the two to five acre lot sizes. Has this been considered? Lots of the size proposed in the Allison Farms Subdivision are incongrous with adjacent residences. Even the Greeley Comprehensive Plan recognizes the demand for acre size lots or more. The Land Use Bill was intended to prevent the loss of agricultural land. The Westridge development utilized land unsuitable for farming, whereas the Allison Farms Subdivision will consume a vast amount of prime agricultural land. Alternatives are available. (4) Should preference be given to unknown persons who may by all likelihood come from other counties and states, rather than to those who now reside here? (5) On Page 35 of the Greeley Comprehensive Plan we find the statement that "existing estate developments be given appropriate consideration when adja- cent lands are developed". (6) Although the issue of 24th St. may be con- sidered another item, it is of much importance as to whether any residential growth can be tolerated west of Westridge. Once again, we notice the Greeley Comprehensive Plan setting forth guidelines and note in particular that "collector" streets are not to be through, nor are they to "sever the S neighborhood". The present plan is contrary to both of these philosophies. Expansion of 24th St. would require a stop light at 59th Ave. This would not alleviate the dangerous situation existing due to the hill between Lots 30 and 53. The curve adjacent to Lot 46 is also bound to take its toll- it's only a matter of time and traffic density. (7) The Colorado-Wyoming Gas relief station at the corner of 59th Ave. and 20th St. has possibly recieved less consideration than it deserves. We understand that it may be hydrogen sulfide that is used to give that "desired" obnoxious odor. If so, the question is then raised, "How safe is it for chronic, inhalation?" We know that one part of H2S in 200 parts of air can be lethal. But what about the long term intake of even minute doses? Has the study of the carcinogenic effect of H2S been undertaken? Is it documented? The insidious effects of carcinogens have much too often delayed their discovery at the expense of untold thousands of lives. Many irritants that were considered harmless a decade ago are now known to be carcinogens. Hydrogen sulfide is definately an irritant! If you decide to allow development in this area, can you with a clear conscience guarantee that the hundreds of people moving in will not suffer? We ask that you give very serious thought to this proposed development known as the Allison Farm Subdivision. With trust in the "system", I thank you. P-a1 (94- Dick Clifton 2205 64th Ave. Greeley, Colo. 80631 353-5633 �� 2210 64th Ave RPI 7n Greeley, Colo 1‘1 °°1/4 August 17, 1979 GR To : Weld County Planning and County Commissioners: Subject: The proposed zoning change of Allison Farm from Agriculture to Estate "E" and High Density "H" . We as home owners of 3 acres in Westridge singly and coll- ectively want to retain the Green Belt and our privacy that we have worked hard for over the past six ( 6 ) years to enjoy. The property owners of Westridge and Highland Hills (approx , 90) in all including the writer are very vefy concerned regarding the proposed zone change . Cur protests are as followes: (A) 24th St. being proposed .-to become a collector ,street. This 'sill only result in becoming a high traffic problem and . a hazard as our life style consists of country not city living! ( B) The High Density zoning! High Density in this area does not constitute the surrounding area! We wish to have High Density spelled out so R-1 cannot be changed at a later date . ( C) The R.V. parking lot, that will only become a "Eye Sore " and in time , if not soon, .,will':be a;junk` heap ! ( D) At least once a week we smell gas at our home which is over a 1 /2 mile Southwest of the pumping station. This morning it was very bad ! Has anyone checked into this environmental problem? As it is obvious we do not want any building to go on out here , if the various agencys approve the proposed change we know Mr. 'Doug Sears will compliment Westridge and do his best to keep to our high standard of environment. /ay-e - a/ - 7Y 6491 West 24th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 August 15, 1979 Weld County Planning Commission 915 10th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Dear Commissioners: We are Westridge landowners responding to the notification of the rezoning request by Sears Realtors of Allison Farms. Our lot, number 31, is on 24th Street adjacent to the proposed zone change. We feel that any change in zoning, other than to greenbelt or very low density (estate), would seriously deny the lifestyle for which we moved into this area, that being a quiet, peaceful country atmosphere that is semi-private, relatively safe and free for our children and ourselves. John Givan and the city planning staff have expressed to us that the proposed site should be developed after the city sewer passes through the property, and then with a very much higher density, comparable to the Bittersweet Subdivision. this does not follow the guidelines set down in the Greeley Comprehensive Plan in reference to building on lands adjacent to existing estate developments. "The Plan does propose that existing estate developments be given appropriate consideration when adjacent lands are developed. Care should be taken to assure compatibility of land usage by any of the following means: 1. Gradual reduction of lot size and/or increase in density as distance increases from the estate development. 2. Separation by public or private open space."1 1. Greeley Comprehensive Plan, p.35-36. • (2) The minimum lot size in Westridge is two and a half acres. We believe that a gradual reduction in lot size to one acre, and then on down, would be desireable for adjoining developments. A..very major concern of ours deals with the future of 24th Street. In the Greeley Comprehensive Plan, the following goal is stated: "1. Streets and highwayys shall be developed to serve future growing transportation needs, however, they shall not predominate the com- munity environment. Land developments shall be geared to meet the needs of the pedestrian, with the automotive concerns being secon- dary."2 Any new development in the land section in which we live will pose traffic problems on 24th Street, which is designated as a "collector street." The definition of collector street is as follows in the Greeley Comprehensive Plan: "Unlike the categories of streets mentioned above, the collector street is generally not a through street. It collects traffic from within the neighborhood areas and routes the traffic to arterial streets. The design of the collector should be such that through traffic is discouraged. This will tend to keep traffic volumes at a low level, reducing to a similarly low level the quantity of ad- jacent land use conflicts." "Unlike the past policy of forcing the collectors into a grid system, the Plan proposes that collectors be considerably set off the half- mile section line in an irregular fashion. The collector is then located to serve the needs of the neighborhood--not to sever the neighborhood, as is the case under present practices."3 Please refer to the map on page 101 showing the desireable off-set collectors, which do not cross arterial streets, and then please refer to the map on page 106, which shows the future 24th Street. Note that 24th Street cuts across 59th Avenue, the only major north-south arterial west of 35th Avenue. This intersection is just below the crest of a hill 2. Greeley Comprehensive Plan, page 104, Goals. 3. Greeley Comrrehensive Plan, page 107-108, Collector Streets, (3) on 59th Avenue, and 24th Street has a curving hill right before the approach. It is a dangerous intersection now; it could become very dangerous with a higher volume of traffic. Notice also that 24th Street extends all the way from 71st Street to almost 47th Street. This makes for one heck of a long "drag," double meaning intended: Its proposed length is approximately two miles long. We submit to you that 24th Street future plans donot conform to the intent of the Comprehensive Plan, and that the street design should be changed, such that new neighborhoods have their own collector streets, and not cut through ours. Westridge is already severed by 59th Avenue. Must we be severed again by 24th Street? Please give consideration to a sol- ution to this problem soon. If the AllisonFarm property must be developea, we would certainly back the estate zoning proposed by Sears Realtors. We cannot support anything denser. It seems to us that the City of Greeley Planning Start (esp. John Givan) is not responsive to the people's wishes and rights to a choice and freedom of individual lifestyle, and that they themselves are encouraging urban sprawl by not filling in open building spaces that now exist within their present boundaries. Thank you for your time, patience and consideration. Sincerely yours, biol. and / ,,, � � el+-Q.n.Jot Dr. & t . M. C. Smith 2250 b4;.n Avenue Greeley , CO. 60631 Weld County Planning Commission 915 10th Street Greeley, CO. 60631 board of County Commissioners F. 0. Box 75i Greeley, CO. 60652 August 16, 1979 Subject : Proposed re-zoning of Allison Farms to 't:state & Hi Density Dear Commissioners : • As residents and property owners of Westridge, we would like to strongly object to the proposea re-zoning of the Allison Farms and to the proposed Plat Plans as offered by Sears Realty. This pro- posed development, which will include lb() acres North and West of Westridge, has several aspects which we find unacceptable--listed in their order of importance to us include: 1. We strongly objeot to the use of West 24th Street as a feeder street to the Southern portion of this deveJ.oprnent. At the present time, West 24th Street is a dead-end narrow road which enters 59th Ave. in, what is generally considered , and extremely dangerous intersection. At the present time only 11 families use this West end of West 24th Street and that is about all the road can handle. If this development is allowed to use West 24th Street , our neighborhood will be significantly eroded by the tremendous increase in traffic . We therefore propose that both ends of West 24th Street remain as they are with no ex- tensions . This would mean that both ends of this street would continue as dead end streets . We do not wish that anyone go to the expense of paving these roads and then have a situation that presently exists at 17th Avenue near the Greeley Mall , where 17th Avenue is barricaded at 34 bypass . We feel that the traffic volume on 59th Ave. is already exorbitant and the proposed extensions of W. 24th Street would just add the the volume of traffic . Fifty-ninth Avenue already has a dangerous curve and hill where many accidents and close-calls have occured in the past. 2. We object to the presence of the High Density rezoning aspects of the proposal. Single and multiple family apartments seem out of place next to the 2.5 acre minimum lots which exist in Westridge. The proposed use of septic tanks seems hard to believe in view of the negative Weld County Health Department recommendations . 3. We object to the estate rezoning on the basis of several aspects . In planning any new development it is vital that the development ennance and compliment the surrounding existing areas . The residents of Westridge originally moved to this area because of the large, open lots (minimum 2.5 acres) where horses and other animals could be kept. , Surrounding this area with apartments and small lot single family v dwellings would significantly compromise our existing area. The pro- posed recreational vehicle parking area on 59th Avenue would probably Pq resemble a used car lot. The use of a septic tank system for over 100 individual homes seems impractical. In conclusion, we object to many aspects of the proposed Allison Farms )\ rezoning. We do not feel it represents a good development. The time has passed when developers can buy corn fields and build anything that will make a buck: The concerns of surrounding residents who must live with the development must be considered in future plans . Sincerely, August 16, 1979 Dear Commissioner, I-live at 2205 64th Ave. Westridge 4th filing, Lot 35 by choice - part mine, part yours. We moved here eight years ago from a conjested Southern California area. We chose to reside in Weld County because it was an agriculturally oriented area and would therefore not be subjected to the malignant growth pattern so like many other communities. We planned on buying a few acres zoned Agriculture to attain our long planned dream - a place for ourselves and our children to enjoy clear skies, the cry of wild geese and the few animals we have always been prohibited in the city. Suddenly, there was a Land Use Bill prohibiting the sale of less than 35 irrigated acres. We were forced by this bill into buying an estate sized lot "in the country" where we were assured by covenants and lot size that our dreams would not be threatened. Now, knocking on our back door (literally in our particular case) is the planned Allison Farm Subdivision, to include a High Density zoning which I feel will destroy the life style myself and my neighbors --have sought to achieve. Obviously the Land Use Bill has many benefits, which I can certainly understand. What I cannot comprehend is the differentiation between the private individual and the developer when prime agricultural land is plowed up and paved over - forever. I truly believe there are other alternately desireable lands to subdivide that would be more benificial to everyone than this particular parcel. Emotions are -said to have no place in the progressive world of business, and let's face it, city growth is big business. Therefore, allow me to state some "logical" reasons this proposed development should be denied: 1) Contrary to the expertise of Doug Sears' engineer, the water table is quite high _ to the point of being swampy in some locations, thus making the land unsuitable for the proposed septic systems. 2) Page 35 of the Greeley Comprehensive Plan states "existing estate developments be given appropriate consideration when adjacent lands are developed" - if indeed they must be developed. 3) The Colorado-Wyoming Gas pumping station on the southwest corner of 59th Avenue and 20th St. is at best "smelly". Can you guarantee that it is not also a health hazard? 4) Increased traffic will create unsafe conditions on roads not engineered for the influx of additional motorists (i.e. blind spots at intersections, sharp curves, insufficient width and poor maintenance, especially in the winter.) 5) Does the city wish to destroy it's primary source of revenue by crowding out the farmer that made Weld County one of the most prosperous in the nation? Cr is. the Land Use Bill indeed just a farce? Thank you for the time you took in listening to my thoughts. Respectfully, Sharon P. Clifton 2205 64th Ave. Greeley, Colo. 80631 353-5633 JU744° • August 15, 1979 Dear Commissioner; In reference to the proposed zone change from "A" agricultural zone district to "E" estate zone district with a unit development and preliminary plan designated Allison Farm Subdivision, I wish to convey my adament opposition to such a zone change. Let me first discuss my personal reasons for disapproval: (1) We originally purchased Lot 35, 4th filing Westridge, for the purpose of build- ing our own home in a semi-rural setting. After two years of constructing our "dream home" by ourselves, we are now nearing the completion of a 15 year longing for a piece of land and peace and quiet. (2) As lovers of the equine species we enjoy the latitude which we now possess to exercise our horses relatively uninhibited by residential crowding. (3) A copious amount of perspiration, numerous blisters and smashed thumbs have given us title to the right to defend the life style which we are now only beginning to enjoy. (4) We are not gregarious by nature and do not desire more adjacent neighbors. (5) We are opposed to annexation by the city. I realize that we are only two souls and are insignificant in the planning for the masses, but we divorce ourselves from the concept that America is a "nation of sheep" and refuse to follow the dictates of mammon. We do not hold in high status the increase in property values but rather prefer the pheasent call, the rustle of corn leaves and fresh air. You may now say "they're right, they are only two votes" but please, we ask you to consider: (1) The immense drain on the city water system as near acre size lots attempt to keep their place green. (2) The water table in much of the proposed plat is high and regardless of what the engineers for • Sears and Co. relate, proper septic systems along our northwestern border will have to be elevated close to or above present ground level. Mr. Doug Sears testified on August 14, 1979 to the city planning commission that leach fields in the surrounding area had requirements of 800 sq. ft. or less - our seepage bed was required to be 1040 sq. ft. minimum (permit# 210 Weld County Health Dept. ). Also not mentioned was the fact that some West- ridge homeowners have been required to re-dig their leach fields, specifically lots 30,36,39,26, and 27. (3) The Land Use Bill which prevented us from living as "rural" as we really wanted to, prohibits residences on less than 35 acres without rezoning from Agriculture. Thus there is a demand for acreage in the two to five acre lot sizes. Has this been considered? Lots of the size proposed in the Allison Farms Subdivision are incongrous with adjacent residences. Even the Greeley Comprehensive Plan recognizes the demand for acre size lots or more. The Land Use Bill was intended to prevent the loss of agricultural land. The Westridge development utilized land unsuitable for farming, whereas the Allison Farms Subdivision will consume a vast amount of prime agricultural land. Alternatives are available. (4) Should preference be given to unknown persons who may by all likelihood come from other counties and states, rather than to those who now reside here? (5) On Page 35 of the Greeley Comprehensive Plan we find the statement that "existing estate developments be given appropriate consideration when adja- cent lands are developed". (6) Although the issue of 24th St. may be con sidered another item, it is of much importance as to whether any residential growth can be tolerated west of Westridge. Once again, we notice the Greeley Comprehensive Plan setting forth guidelines and note in particular that "collector" streets are not to be through, nor are they to "sever the neighborhood". The present plan is contrary to both of these philosophies. Expansion of 24th St. would require a stop light at 59th Ave. This would not alleviate the dangerous situation existing due to the hill between Lots 30 and 53. The curve adjacent to Lot 46 is also bound to take its toll- it's only a matter of time and traffic density. (7) The Colorado-Wyoming Gas relief station at the corner of 59th Ave. and 20th St. has possibly recieved less consideration than it deserves. We understand that it may be hydrogen sulfide that is used to give that "desired" obnoxious odor. If so, the question is then raised, "How safe is it for chronic inhalation?" We know that one part of H2S in 200 parts of air can be lethal. But what about the long term intake of even minute doses? Has the study of the carcinogenic effect of H2 been undertaken? Is it documented? The insidious effects of carcinogens have much too often delayed their discovery at the expense of untold thousands of lives. Many irritants that were considered harmless a decade ago are now known to be carcinogens. Hydrogen sulfide is definately an irritant: If you decide to allow development in this area, can you with a clear conscience guarantee that the hundreds of people moving in will not suffer? We ask that you give very serious thought to this proposed development known as the Allison Farm Subdivision. With trust in the "system", I thank you. 9-41 ((-71>e- Dick Clifton 2205 64th Ave. Greeley, Colo. 80631 353-5633 WEC1DN ‘ \\ 1D 2210 64th Ave !�� 1 � 0 sue' , T'3 '\U .. 04 Greeley, Colo co'o. August 17, 1979 To : Weld County Planning and County Commissioners: Subject: The proposed zoning change of Allison Farm from Agriculture to Estate "E" and High Density "H" . We as home owners of 3 acres in Westridge singly and coll- ectively want to retain the Green Belt and our privacy that we have worked hard for over the past six ( 6) years to enjoy. The property owners of Westridge and Highland Hills (approx, 90) in- all including the writer are very ven concerned regarding the proposed zone change . Our protests are as followes: (A) 24th St. being proposed.:to become a . collector :street. This will only result in becoming a high traffic problem and . a hazard as our life style consists of country not oily living! ( B) The High Density zoning! High Density in this area `does not constitute the surrounding area! We wish to have High Density spelled out so R-1 cannot be changed at a later date. ( C ) The R.V. parking lot, that will only become a "Eye Sore" and in time , if not soon, .,will'.be a junk heap ! ( D) At least once a week we smell gas at our home which is over a 1 /2 mile Southwest of the pumping station. This morning it was very bad ! Has anyone checked into this environmental problem? As it is obvious we do not want anv building to _ag on out here , if the various agencys approve the proposed change we know Mr. 'Doug Sears will compliment Westridge and do his best to keep to our high standard of environment. // T."-..re 1 of 3 PETITION / %ISTITION TO OPPOSE. CONSTRUCTION OF SEPTIC TANK AND LEACH FIELD BY FEDHAN CORPORATION IN THE AREA OF HIGHLAND PARK WEST: Pt. SW4 Sec 15, TSN, R 66 W of the 6th Principal Meridian. N1� c��"E cW� �r *E�o ).ii ,�` 14\n �` U We, the undersigned property owners within 500 feet of abov oreg\ ione property, oppose the construction of septic tank and leach f se system lot the following reasons: 1. Topography of proposed development creates potential surface and sub- surface seepage onto adjacent properties to the North and East. 2. Sanitary and odor conditions are of concern. 3. Several property owners during the Spring of 1979 experienced water seepage into basements and septic systems flowing to the North and • East would surely aggravate this condition. 4. Approximately ten feet from the surface of properties along W. 24th Street, there is shale and clay which would not allow adequate percolation in -order to flow under existing basements. -2t is therefore the opinion of those whose signatures and addresses appear ;below that adequate sanitary sewer be provided for the development described ..above by Webhan Corporation. In addition, we request surface drainage be provided slon .the North side of the proposed development by Webhan Corporation for Highland .Bark West. k -NAME ADDRESS DATE -✓121;;..- 2 . 1214.th, ccjD W. Z ¢t� 5 . 7- 10 -77 C -Wt.4., le 4630 r1 o 4 jjJ. 7-Jo-?9 J7/O cJdu 14 544...1 7/30)79 cli. 6 7 Ica (,d, 9.4� Sfr«.f 7/30/77 c i. 4 ' 4_7 is— _ 2 9.x- -'-`/j2- r �. s —crt.---, S 7.71 Al Y iii:7/.7.0/70 _ `� S8ea id. .24 - s��,,p�rT 7-30 q • ru- `� j-fju v 0y � u'eF y - 3 0 .-79 (C-/LrLl+l S&2`/ lv C/7`l 9 - In - )5 ..ittu • 1�tppl��t/'4-CC,,Ap-�crr��hCL e.c.c,�tcw a?3l a- �i�G Gu c n awG 7 3C-7 a„-/,' A2e)/>2 %:age 2 of 3 0 NAME ADDRESS Daft R JiJ-P.c� A. 3/2. F e z. 7 a/AS r % Aa4/ 43i,. ,.ate ; w1 7- v- 77 IS,/ Lo f. ao, bloc k Ny a - Add its 7 7/ 77 /ar l,3 Fier-le/7 ,r='°, cc r• Id± . 0 3V/ FA, - / y L4}z- c 7 31-7 ? d . /� a 3 3S f4,�A AX�t 13/ - 77 a a n „ II „/. a ! ,,`i$3_ ,p.,/ a ,,, -/. 7 - 31- 7, act, ,`I3\r - LLJQJ a. A. 7 - 11- 77 ,, fty' -,,,k 43x6 aktiwa.�.�r ? 91 11 � 5 GO a5'`''��U M/79 64 a ≤ iov . tJ a Y5 r- e=/- 7 �J7c, e4 .c3Z ire 70 -al. S-J - 79 krnikehro D , 3,O6uto 5.5,140 taklih 6- Z W79 4/ 37 41O/_> ' 9-2 - 77 eQ .,..4:4„,.7. c5i$ 9i/ 2y75'37 7 1- 2 - 77 �d <s�o4 aW' ST 1-.2 - 79 � .fil a 53 a.2 L'v pr. 72 - 7 � kP 4.ti 5,3 /P to. av4-hs*. 1/279 r9ona.M 53iy w ayes sil— Va/ J Sc 3 Z o2cz+*, D 51- dal eyal 7 7,_ ..„...„,„ a3ia-- - ,/i/79 MPCL-e•-• 0130/ - s-11 Q(14 , 8 - 3 - 77 .e.H- 23aa - Q4_, f_ 3 - 77 fin-trA elith.J 024 / I -- . 5.- sz-ol-f-t-e: ' ?__ ,g - 27 . 6- 9. ytt y • tafrighti 2416 - 52 Cat Ck . 8 -3 -79 Page 3 of ,3 NAME ' ADDRESS DATE ri ,n n 2 2 Vo/ .5.z.J7a€A1 at V 3 -79' trio / Sa Qr. 8`- 3 - 7 _ALectn-04 ,N4 (39 "Y)'-'d @.-ti1/4e a-er S-`5- 9( lam`- l- . -29/o .5,42/91/e ill, W3/7y . Q.(QZiet 6.411, ti1/1/4 Sand C- 1. o -e` u , - ,-z Lictioit ec 0/K c2.1/46-0--0 - ,52,- c(/3/ it . cjed, 5203 wi?sst &' ed, I SUOvkam 57.0 / w sd- 4.5)-79 i'^ ,.i:47 ,46, S2 / 7 W - .26 vi Sal . /3/7/ ste-7 w As 4'/3175 7 £ 4-o-„1_ 3 22._ 51/ g GLce �/3/7 i Pa L4_ I 14,4,6y- '=�. d Z J-S/O d/.r4 & . f/5/79 �1a7 a47 ) r5/79 ç / ti. AtiI0 61r1ne71 73 I7 Sett. y ivi • 14/1/1 m` el ,z 2utl 4piai LAAs 1 Aish6rne cr4 rhl . -1— it, 4/n' , /7a`f°o ` 1-'1- 71 RECORDING DATA - MAPS 8 PLA_T,`—� NAME OF SUBDIVISION Highland Park West ------ Highland Park West Investment NAME OF SUBDIVIDER tract of land located in the Southwest quarter of Sec 15, T 5 N, R 66 W of the 6th Principal cipal Meridian, Weld County Color_ado. LOCATION OF SUBDIVISION — 1843933 DEC 1 0 1980 BOOK 922RrCFPT I ON M DATE OF RECORDING — MARY ANN FEUERSTEIN WELD CO NTY CLERK AND RECORDER BY : DEPUTY COUNTY CLERK & RECORDER r r r r PRELIMINARY SOILS AND GEOLOGICAL REPORT FOR r HIGHLAND PARK WEST r r r rA Professional Corporation ARIX I Engineers Architects Planners r 2021 Clubhouse Drive Greeley,Colorado 83631 r r pD,e,Wy,rµr antes' A Professional Corporation , N.Item Baker Eugene R.Breuer Engineers Architects Planners Gordon lJ Brucrmar — Patrick CJ. reve Robert J.Shreve Dale J.sleicMn Robert D.Thomas 2021 Clubhouse Drive Gay a 1Mndogh Greeley,Colorado 80631 303 358 MM May 8, 1979 Mr. Sherwood W. Neal Webhan Corporation '— 3835 West 10th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Dear Mr. Neal : SUBJECT: Highland Park West Project No. 79 1 ENG 0130 We are submitting our report of a subsoil investigation as you requested, located in the Southwest Quarter (SW 1/4) of Section 15, Township 5 North, Range 66 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, Weld County, Colorado. Our report explains the existing subsoil conditions and suggests methods of handling the planning and construction for the proposed single family residences. If you have any questions or are in need of further information regarding this report, please feel free to contact us. Respectfully, ARIX, A Professional Corporation rthur F. Uhrich Project Director AFU/kav TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Scope 1 Field Investigation 1 Laboratory Investigation 2 Site Conditions 2 Groundwater 2 Subsoils 3 Building Foundations 3 Floor Slabs and Other Slabs on Grade 4 Treatment of Foundation Soils 5 Sulfate Resistant Cement 6 Limitations 6 Test Boring Locations EXHIBIT 1 Test Boring Logs EXHIBIT 2 Consolidation Tests EXHIBIT 3,4,5,6 & 7 Summary of Laboratory Tests EXHIBIT 8 T SCOPE This report presents results of our subsoil investigation located in the Southwest Quarter (SW 1/4) of Section 15, Township 5 North, Range 66 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, Weld County, Colorado. The purpose of this investigation was to determine those soil conditions and characteristics which would affect the utility of the soils and foundation design of the proposed structures. Data gathered through field and laboratory work are summarized and tabulated in Exhibit Nos. 1 through No. 8 attached. FIELD INVESTIGATION Test borings were made April 5, 1979, at the locations shown on Exhibit No. 1, to obtain data concerning existing soil conditions and to obtain samples for laboratory use. Sixteen holes were drilled with a truck mounted power auger equipped with a four-inch bit. Penetration data were gathered using the Standard Penetration Test, ASTM D 1586. This test is made by driving a two-inch split spoon sampler with a 140-pound weight falling 30 inches. The blows required to drive the sampler 12 inches are referred to in Exhibit No. 2 as blows per foot. The test borings were located to best reflect representative general conditions at the site, and to obtain specific data at each location sampled. Test borings were taken to the approximate depths below the surface shown on Exhibit No. 2. Disturbed samples of each soil type encountered were obtained for laboratory analysis. As each boring progressed, a log was kept on which was recorded such information as field classification of soils, sample locations, depth to groundwater table, if any, and other pertinent data. These logs are reproduced on Exhibit No. 2. -1- 1 LABORATORY INVESTIGATION The laboratory phase of the investigation included the verification of field soil classification, determination of soil gradations by mechanical . analysis, Atterberg Limits, natural moisture content, and consolidation- swell characteristics of foundation material . These test results are summa- rized on Exhibit No. 8. SITE CONDITIONS The 160 acre parcel under investigation is situated on a ridge that separates the drainage between the Cache La Poudre River Basin and the South Platte River Basin. 95% of the drainage is toward the South Platte River Basin. The site is presently uncultivated pasture land located west of Greeley, Colorado. It is surrounded on the north and east sides by Highland Hills and Highland Park Subdivision, Westridge Subdivision is along the west side. It is bounded on the south by U.S. Highway 34 By-Pass. The Greeley- - Loveland canal traverses through the southern portion. The topography is considered gently rolling with the majority of surface drainage in a southerly direction. Adequate drainage is available provided that proper grading and landscaping are observed. GROUNDWATER Evidence of groundwater was not encountered at the time of the investigation. However, no borings were made below the Greeley-Loveland Canal due to the wet condition of the area from the heavy snows a few days prior to our drilling. - 2 - 7I We must bring to your attention, that the canal is dry during the winter months and we anticipate that groundwater will be present in those borings adjacent to it. Plastic tubing was inserted in two borings adjacent to the canal to verify groundwater depths during the irrigation season. The bedrock elevation is relatively high and could create a "perched" water table as this area is developed and lawn sprinkling becomes heavy. There- fore we recommend that perimeter drains be located around deep footings with basements. The cost of a perimeter drain is negligible compared to the expense of ruined household articles and providing some means of relief after a house is completed and lived in for a number of years. SUBSOILS Our analysis reveals the soils to be relatively uniform over the area investigated. They consist primarily of silty to clayey sands over the Laramie Formation of sandstone-claystone bedrock. The upper mantle of clayey and silty sands range from non-plastic to slightly plastic. These soils are generally quite stable at moisture contents appreciably below optimum, however, they become very unstable and lose bearing capacity at moisture contents above optimum. The claystone portion of bedrock which is laminated with sandstone is expansive, with swell potentials from 500 to 6,000 pounds per square foot. �- BUILDING FOUNDATIONS Our analysis of field conditions and test results indicate the use of conventional footings located below maximum frost penetration and on natural ground. Shallow footings at 3 to 4 feet in depth should be - 3 - designed for a maximum allowable bearing capacity of 1,000 pounds per square foot including live load. Basement footings located in the silty to clayey sands should be designed for a maximum allowable bearing capacity of 2,000 pounds per square foot including live load. Footings located in the bedrock should be either caissons or isolated pads supporting grade beam walls. A maximum allowable bearing capacity of 15,000 per square foot including live load has been assigned to this material with a recommended dead loading of 5,000 pounds per square foot to be maintained on the foundation soil in order to minimize uplift pressure if a water source becomes available. It is also recommended that the footings extend at least 3 feet into the unweathered portion of bedrock. A four inch void form should be placed underneath the grade beams between caissons or isolated footings to minimize uplift forces causing damage to structural members. FLOOR SLABS AND OTHER SLABS ON GRADE The foundation soils are subject to volume change and since little uplift pressure or differential settlement is required to cause unsightly cracks in floor slabs, the following precautionary measures are deemed necessary: 1. Over excavate areas where floor slabs will be located on the Laramie Formation at least 3 feet and replace with non-swelling granular backfill . Backfill should be placed in loose lifts not to exceed 8 inches and compacted to at least 90% of maximum dry density as established in accordance with ASTM D698. 2. Preclude the entrance of an outside water source underneath slabs. - 4 - 3. Eliminate underslab plumbing where possible and where unavoidable, thoroughly pressure test and take other precautions necessary to minimize leaks. 4. Separate floor slabs completely from bearing walls, columns and footings. 5. Appropriate provisions should be made in large floor slabs for shrinkage cracks. TREATMENT OF FOUNDATION SOILS Precautions should be taken to assure that the moisture content of the foundation soils is maintained at a relatively constant level . Excava- tions shall not be allowed to remain open long enough to allow appreciable drying below natural moisture content, and the exposed foundation material should be protected from wetting from any outside source. The conventional method of water settling backfill should be avoided at this site. Backfill should be placed in loose lifts not to exceed 8 inches and compacted to at least 90% of maximum dry density as established in accordance with ASTM D698. This procedure should be followed until backfilling has been placed in such a manner that there is at least a 10% grade away from the foundation wall for the first 20 feet. Plantings and shrubbing requiring heavy watering should be placed in beds well beyond the limits of backfill in order to minimize the migration of groundwater to the footing level . Wetting of foundation soils should be prevented after construction. Methods of accomplishing this include thorough compaction of all backfill around structures, provisions for discharge of roof downspouts and other water - 5 - • ■ collection systems well beyond the limits of all backfill, and any other procedures deemed necessary to maintain a stable moisture content. Exca- vations should be made only large enough to provide necessary working space in order to hold the area requiring backfilling to a minimum. SULFATE RESISTANT CEMENT Analysis indicates a sulfate concentration in excess of 0.10 percent water soluble sulfate (SO4) in the soil samples. Therefore, Type II cement should be used in concrete exposed to this soil . LIMITATIONS The exploratory data presented in this report were collected to help develop designs and cost estimates for this project, and thus may not represent ri adequate information for indicating underground conditions for contractor bidding or construction. We recommend considering exploratory work to reveal underground conditions well enough to enable contractors to more accurately evaluate conditions for bidding and execution of work after designs have been prepared. Professional judgements on design alternatives and criteria are presented in this report. The judgements are based upon our evaluation of actual conditions encountered at the location indicated herein, and upon our extrapolations thereof, together with our interpretations of conditions generally characteristic of this area. We do not warrant the accuracy of such extrapolations and interpretations beyond the limits of the tests performed or where actual physical conditions were not observed. Test borings drilled for this investigation were spaced to obtain a reason- ably accurate respresentation of subsurface conditions for design purposes. - 6 - Ti Variations from the conditions disclosed which were not indicated by the test explorations frequently occur and quite often these variations are sufficient to necessitate modifications in design. Therefore, if different materials are encountered the owner or builder should be certain that the foundation conditions are adequate and within the scope of this report prior to proceeding with any construction. Under the above conditions, it is important that we inspect the subsurface materials exposed in excavations to take advantage of all opportunities to recognize differing conditions and minimize the risk of having undetected conditions which would affect the performance of the facility. If you have any questions or are in need of further information regarding this report, please feel free to contact us. Respectfully, C-E MAGUIRE, INC. Prepared by: 041._ 7. 41.2 Arthur F. Uhrich �. Approved by:/30-19n---1,0e •. �Sr& E F �40 `EG 41 George B. Kellison, P.E. O RFo �Oy * A 10130 �9TF. VAL ENG.�/O/// 11 _ H/GHLAND PARK WEST _ -E +_ I I r ' f� N/3v[/IG'fH[L.S '9C d,4 .4.▪ s. -.. ` sf- • wl 1 1 , - - • - - ---r . b I IIII ' ( �e I a 'I- ,i,, III F v :�� l a , y tfi II ?t I '� -. ' `, 1TH:'I2 , �,I - , v , 1 'I . r --i1 ; _ i a 6 � h�-- 111 I �I ...... a .)Ii.rb. '\ I `1 _ it�� , e t l H.7 �. / , A\� S 1 s, 1 - �� ..� 'n L '� � l- NTH — �- TH,4 ,J•. .r--a . I �, I 0 ... MVP TEST BORING LOCATION MAP 791-ENG-0130 EXHIBIT No. I _ - T.H. 4 -- 4900 El. 4902 TEST BORING LOGS /17/12 - 4895 8 T.H.1 T.H.2 4890 El . 4890 El. 4890 T.H. 3 El . 4889 0 / 14 f 1 20/7 / • 3-172 3 14/12 21 3/12 3 .4885 - 8-1/2 • 15/12 17/12 8 13 -14-1/2 ;1 14 x//123/12 13 14 $ .. - 4870 791 - ENG- 0130 EXHIBIT No. 2 I ■ TEST BORING LOGS .4935 T.H.5 El . 4933 p .4930 • 17/12 4925 8 A 21/7 . 4920 14 / ,28/9 T.H.8 r• - El . 4918 . . 4915 _ � 3 10/12 4910 T.H.6 8 - _ • El . 4909 23/12 7 I /3 _ 4905 ' • 12/12. T.H.7 / • El . 4904 14 A 4900 8 '21/9 3 :711 26/12 11 7 4895 14 ,18/6 8 ;:.123/12. r — 4 48n0 14 /'/4 24/12 791 — ENG- 0130 EXHIBIT No. 2 . TEST BORING LOGS 4975 T.H.9 El . 4932 _ - •••••4930 7 3 •. '+ 1 7/12 4925 8 / T.H.10 s _ 1118/9 _ E1. 4923 4920 /- 3 f1-j12/12 14 N j .-4915 // T.H. 11 T.H.15 _ 8 • ' 17/12 El . 4914 E . 4914 3 4910 '8/12 3 f' 6/12 • 14 .: 121/12 � 6 j 4905 8 /3/12 8 /'37/12 4900 14 -.: 127/12 14 133/12 4895 791-ENG-0130 EXHIBIT No. 2 TEST BORING LOGS --4915 4910 I-4905 - T.N. 14 El. 4901 T.N. 12 4900 El . 4900 • 3 / "15/12 8/12 I- 4895 T.H.13 -- _ E1.4892 8 /121/9 „- -4890 _ Al 28/12 / 3 "'I12/12 14 I 23/9 _ --4885 8-1/2 17/12 4880 / 14 4870 791-ENG-0130 EXHIBIT No. 2 TEST BORING LOGS 4955 -- _ T.H.16 E1 . 4951- 4950 pP 3 • AI18/12 4945 ' _ 8 4940 _ 14 / 140/12 4935 _ LEGEND 4930 Sand, Silty Gravel , clay w/sand ,1 Clay VALayered or varying CL-SC Alternate layers of Claystone and Sandstone �i /, Weathered Claystone Nei Gravel "- I Standard Penetration Test - El Shelby Tube Sample 791 -ENG - 0130 EXHIBIT No. 2 • , CONSOLIDATION TEST — — — — -- -- 1 � 1 Fxoan. dn ,I nO2r Constant 're st re die; to Wettitng 1-IN' Ot��- -� -�r.--� __� -f-� : ! z grj i =_kk: O I _Lt ' `j 0 2.0 ! r-- - y-1 + t- 0 -- I - II - - � ! i F i i E -- _ u _ t ,� - - 1 = r _�_- - i ti ►{ _ -_- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 89 1 2 3 4 5 6 78 91 2 3 4 5 6 7 891 (x 100) (x 1,000) (x 10,000) Pounds per square foot APPLIED LOAD --TH 1 @ 13-1/2' In-place dry density 112.7$/ft3 Natural mositure 17.6% .,Voids Ratio 0.50 Soil Type CL 79 1 ENG n130 Exhibit #3 • CONSOLIDATION TEST El , Exar s orb finder Constant 1 i ' 1 .0 r - prpsie into wetting 41 f i it _ —T xo 0.0 O� -• - 1,1 f I , w i_ O__—�__ }.T7—__-- -.- I I _ 1 i fat ---EN7±1 --H U - _._ - -i --} , 1-t-t1 +-- a Y —• I y I - —T - -- _I l 1 ,II -C 11_, � -- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 89 1 2 3 4 5 6 78 91 2 3 4 5 6 7 891 (x 100) (x 1,000) (x 10,000) Pounds per square foot APPLIED LOAD ^TH408' In-place dry density 117.6#/ft3 Natural Moisture 15.0% _.Voids ratio n.43 • Soil Type CL 79 ENG 0130 Exhibit #4 • • - CONSOLIDATION TEST — — __ — I - Ti 1.0 -- — >ro�f �! ier_ Consant . _ Prssure_ lu -1 to ilett4inq — i I - _______T - - -4Th -I g 1 .0 --- a --� - __ -; -_- l _ H I ii il - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 89 1 2 3 4 5 6 78 91 2 3 4 5 6 7 891 (x 100) (x 1,000) (x 10,000) Pounds per square foot APPLIED LOAD TH 12 P 13' --In-place dry density 107.0#/ft3 Natural moisture 20.6% Voids ratio 0.58 .—Soil Tyne CL --79 1 ENIG 0130 Exhibit #5 CONSOLIDATION TEST 1 _ __ -- I .-- - --- ----- -- - -- 1.0 9_NIE -- } a --r r— z 2.0 — + fi ! i o � Settlement!, ender Constant jy r Pres5udefdm to lletino f i 3.n r," _ ---_ -��-r� - I \ - --ri-t i : c"i 4.0 ----—T -i - --- 1 +4---- --- $__ i ' 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 89 1 2 3 4 5 6 78 91 2 3 4 5 6 7 891 (x 100) (x 1,000) (x 10,000) Pounds per square foot APPLIED LOAD TH 13 0 13' -in-place dry density 99.7#/ft3 Natural moisture 12.4% Voids Ratio 0.66 —Soil Type SC 79 1 ENG 0130 Exhibit #6 I 1 • • - CONSOLIDATION TEST C■ _ ■• _■ __ - ■..■B _ ••l - -- I _ _ �1 I i I III I Tn I ' C■■ ■ nansi n ilie nsTarit j — es ur: due th WettingI I --r--�- - z 0.0 <•►' r- � -r + ± I1 — .__ ■� CI o 2.0 -ti � �t - - --- - -a_ -1-t-i-1---- — ---CC I- K - - - - - ' I i• - - i--- r. _d' . l -f-�l�;, 1 -_-- ■� 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 89 1 2 3 4 5 6 78 91 2 3 4 5 6 7 891 _ (x 100) (x 1,000) (x 10,000) Pounds per square foot — APPLIED LOAD TH1608' ^ In-place dry density 101 .5#/ft3 Natural moisture 22.1% Voids Ratio 0.66 Soil Type Cl. — 79 1 ENG 0130 Exhihit I+7 1i • 01i o _ >, ^� 0~ C) J J E J U JOe- N U C) to U N C.) O Z O W N r I . 0) a • Y W t` tD O n to u c • . •" I N I a ON .-r -- I •-•1 N I 0 01 O Y O • U I >,0 1• •- . L D- b 0 0 e7 OD tD t0 lamo Y L•e- 1 u) v I in tD t0 4 Y 1—` 1 • I Y 0 .0 1 0 0 I O 0 O C>. K H r W Y 0)> a C C I)) O V N N 0 O N O In I 1 h I- L N O M 0) d' n I I ... CC W 0) 10 O en 0) 0) N CO 1 1 CO W CL 0- 0 •-•1 2 N in CO it 0 N In W >- • • a a ct Y s Z a Y X N N 0 In U C) .--1 r J N LI•.- D t- e-1 tD • I I 1--I 4-1 C • 0- Ill I I IO n- 0) E b— t\ t- .^•1 a .--1 I I t — O J— W 0. 0) y C N � O .0 1-1 C d 10 3 C J-1 O )•0 N•.-- Y N Q J••-• N .-1 O 0) I I In 0• E • 7 • I 1 N N LL) to N. Z N. I I L l0 '.... J J N 1.) ct M O. N V L O) o_ VI J l0 0 -- S. Irt N 0 iy 0 •— = 43 7 0 t0 O ID a .•-1 s 0 S-44 N ' I I C) J 1A i+ I n M) I 0 N N L b I 0 0 N e1 I N .-I N 0) 0) U C)S. S- r E 3 +-1 C N J - 1+ 0 IA U 4 C) M co en M CO 14 IL O O v .--I .--1e ~ N . d N - W C Z Y I• 4-1 .0 Y Y s ^ .- O •-•1 .- fl e- �. 1 e-1 CV C) tO a1 X O Z •••4e-1 N N 0 W 2 a 1 1 Geologic Hazard Investigation On Highland Park West for WEBHAN CORPORATION SCOPE This report is the results of our geologic hazard investigation of the Highland Park West, The SW 1/4 of Section 15, T 5 N, R 66 West of the 6th P.M. , Weld County, Colorado. The purposes of this investigation was to find which, if any, of the geologic hazards named in H.B. 1041 are present at this site and to determine their effects on the proposed development for single family residences. LOCATION The 160 acre site under investigation is approximately 1 .5 miles west of Greeley. It is bounded on the north by Highland Hills Subdivision, on the east by Highland Park Subdivision and on the west by Westridge Subdivision. U.S. Highway 34 (28th Street) forms the south boundary line. FIELD INVESTIGATION The site was investigated on April 5, 1979, and sixteen test borings were made to obtain information on the subsurface strata. The logs of the borings and the results of the laboratory analysis of the subsurface materials may be found in our separate Subsoils Investigation for Webhan Corporation. TOPOGRAPHY The site is a gently rolling prairie near the top of the divide between the Cache La Poudre and South Platte Rivers at an elevation of approximately 4,950 feet. Slopes are in the 3% to 5% range. Drainage is to the south towards the South Platte. Total relief of the area is 90 feet. -1- GEOLOGY The surface geology of the area consists entirely of a mantle of light brown eolian silts and clays containing some fine grained sand. This loessial layer varies from six to sixteen feet in thickness. The undulating contact between the eolian sediments and the underlying claystone-sandstone represents a previous erosional surface. The brown-gray claystone-sandstone is slightly weathered and of varying thickness and is assumed to belong to the basal part of the Laramie formation. Our borings encountered inter- mittent layers of soft sandstone and claystone throughout the area. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS A Geologic Hazard is defined in H .B. 1041 as "a geologic phenomenon which is so adverse to past, current, or foreseeable construction or land use as to constitute a significant hazard to public health and safety or to property." Several of the specific hazards listed in H.B. 1041 are not applicable to this location because of its gentle topography. A. Seismic Activity - All of Colorado is in Seismic Risk Zone 1 (Minor Damage) . There is no history or evidence of seismic activity in this vicinity. B. Ground Subsidence (Hydrocompaction) - Ground surface collapse can occur in wind deposited silts as a result of excessive wetting of dry soils with a high void ratio. The thin eolian deposits on the surface of this site are not expected to pose any hazard of this nature. Some slight settlement is expected during the course of construction as the dead load of the structure is applied. C. Expansive Soil and Rock - The volumetric expansion of "swelling clays" is usually a result of increasing the water content of the clay. If the -2- 11 water content remains uniform no expansion or shrinkage will occur. The weathered claystone found beneath the wind deposited mantle exhibits a high swell potential in the upper portion. The lower portion does not indicate this because of the naturally higher moisture content. The entire claystone layer has the potential to swell and shrink if the water content fluctuates. If foundation designs are properly engineered, potential damage can be avoided. Landscape planting and site grading for drainage should follow the recommendations of a competent soils engineer. D. This site does not, at present, display a water problem due to its classification as pasture land. However, as irrigation of lawns increases as the area is developed, groundwater may become "perched" over bedrock creating problems after construction has long been completed. Therefore, groundwater stability should be initiated early enough to avoid any serious problems. CONCLUSIONS A. The geology of the site is a relatively thin mantle of wind-deposited fine grained alluvial material overlying a layer of weathered claystone- sandstone with a high swell potential . B. The only significant geologic hazard at this location is the presence of a highly expansive material in the subsurface that can cause damage to structures. Groundwater may become significant later, during development. C. The swelling soil hazard can be prevented if foundations are designed properly. D. No hazards exist to preclude the use of this site for residential homesites. -- -3- 1 REFERENCES Hamilton, Judith L. , and Owens, Willard G. : Geologic Aspects, Soils and Related Foundation Problems, Denver Metropolitan Area, Colorado; Colorado Geological Survey, 1972. Hart, Stephen S. : Potentially Swelling Soil and Rock in the Front Range Urban Corridor, Colorado; Colorado Geological Survey, 1974. Rogers, W.P. , Ladwig, L.R., Hombaker, A.L. , Schwockow, S.D. , Hart, S.S. , Shelton, D.C. , Scroggs, D.L. and Soule, J.M. : Guidelines and Criteria for Identification and Land Use Controls of Geologic Hazard and Mineral Resource Areas; Colorado Geological Survey, 1974. r r r r PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT FOR HIGHLAND PARK WEST r r r r r r A Professional Corporation ARIX I Engineers Architects Planners r 2021 Clubhouse Drive Greeley.Colorado 80631 r r r C Nei Cupeiser. A Professional Corporation Nsetdent N.Kent Ewer*R Brauer W 1BrutI w MON Engineers Architects Planners Gordon Robert C.Dwyer Robert J Shreve OS.J OSM Swollen 2021 Clubhouse Drive Rater DS Greeley.Colorado 30631 O Goy 303 3543 June 7, 1979 Weber Realty Company 3835 West Tenth Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Gentlemen: • SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT, HIGHLAND PARK WEST SUBDIVISION, PROJECT NO. 79 1 ENG 0130 We have prepared a preliminary storm drainage report for the proposed subdivision in the Southwest Quarter' (SW 1/4) , Section 15, Township 5 North, Range 66 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian. THE SITE The site is located on the summit of three separate drainage basins. The basin in the northwest corner of the subdivision is only 3.2 acres and will only drain the back yards of the lots on the cul-de-sac. No change in flow volumes is expected in this basin. The other two basins are the north basin that exits the subdivision at the northeast corner of the tract and the south basin that exits across bypass Route 34 in a culvert. The north basin is a 58.3 acre drainage area that leaves the tract on the northeast corner and flows east through Highland Park Subdivision and across Highland Hills Golf Course. Most of the south basin flows into the Greeley-Loveland Ditch which traverses the southern portion of the site. Approximately 63 acres of the southern basin is above the ditch. The tract is unirrigated rangeland with sandy soils. The Soil Conservation Service indicates soils at the site have high infiltration rates ranging from 6 to 20 inches per hour. DESIGN CRITERIA The City of Greeley drainage design criteria was used in the computation of the drainage facilities. The detention ponds were sized by limiting outflow from the pond to the peak dis- charge from a 5-year undeveloped flood on the site, while a 100-year flood on a developed site is flowing into the pond. The difference in these flows is stored in the pond until the storm passes. • Weber Realty Company Page 2 June 7, 1979 The relative small size of the basins permitted use of the rational method for the computation of the peak discharge rates. - The modified rational method was used in the computation of the storage volumes of the detention ponds. In the rational compu- tations, the following variables were used: Undeveloped land "C" factor = 0.10 Developed land "C" factor = 0.30 Frequency "C" factor = 1.25 Intensity = 2.10 inches/hour The culverts were sized for a 5-year storm except where exceeding the capacity of the culvert would create undesirable results. ANALYSIS The peak discharge rate for the north basin for a 5-year unde- veloped storm is 4.41 cubic feet per second (cfs) . The modified rational hydrograph indicated on Exhibit Number 3 indicated a duration of 180 minutes as the one producing the critical detention pond volume of 4.15 acre feet. This pond shown on Exhibit No. 2 is one that has the required volume and discharges into Highland Park Subdivision. The peak discharge rate for the south basin for a 5-year storm on the undeveloped site is 5.60 cfs. Allowing this release rate yields a total storage volume of 4.01 acre feet for a 100-year storm on the developed site. The best site for the proposed detention pond is in the southeast corner of the subdivision. The south basin detention pond outlets under the Greeley-Loveland ditch into a drainageway that conveys the discharge to the Route 34 bypass ditch. The runoff then flows west in the roadside ditch to a 30 inch culvert under the highway. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Two detention ponds with controlled release rates will conform to the City of Greeley's criteria for releasing storm water from the proposed subdivision. The proposed culverts that have been indicated on Exhibit Number 2 are adequate to convey the 5-year storm. Streets are to be graded according to the typical section on Exhibit Number 1 with a 15-foot drainage easement along the roadway to permit the construction and maintenance of a roadway ditch. Respectfully, ARIX, A Professional Corporation 9j� E E'' rs, . i�t('�( 9851 �1�` i Gerald F. Worrall, P.E. \ ?. /-_ Colorado Registration No. 9857 „ PA- cw t GFW/pi �., d ,c0,5_1____,// \ \ � 1 /// / :Li,-` 1(l) /1 j Q ^ / ' VOA Jam- sH alto , .. %\ �\ o / � •`te re / ,aver Cis _ \\\..) 11 gyp. %.)].-$'4' --.. (-). ( ' ,—__:::_\„ 'B 1 r "59-- ';\ „no o -y:y. o z Ile l we)it A I (S. ) ti O. < 3 4,.. l .�4e2J > e "l '' \ ' 11 • \ ZDy.• ,80• (. 1. I 5 ♦ c;) _ •• oa O • 4 bikr,c • 4 4 -R enioi • tij i. . . _--;--..\-- --,/--rj---/ •'\\--I\'',,\\H•s° -\\---\'''‘I\--,_\---N-Th, r \IIL `. .• ' -. . ...) 7),?_... 0, .Th_iic _ (-coo .. ------------\C D L~ Y .� ��LP., �` C c �•A _ c 1 � r;w � 1 • o _ . � „ 1 p 2 23 20 „ • cxj -- 4 , )1:ii -r,„ \,. ST\ 05 1 ri <...,s— y-- _ Ee{{ekaon , aw. 1) i ms •1 "ea0�. ) si/ ,--•mesa 4864 As tonal 4829b � 0 7 29 �� / > �� chool > � 2g � 61 GENERAL LOCATION MAP HIGHLAND PARK WEST SUBDIVISIOI`I EXHIBIT tti NORT I-1 BAST N CALCULATIONS • CLIENT I,W f�i. %/////�l/- n / JOS NO 79'�'CNG- O1 /J MAGUIRE PROJECT /T/G�L//�D/'/9/ CALCULATIONS FOR Architects• Engineers •Planners MADE BY 77;f DATE c-ia-79 CHECKED BY DATE SHEET OF MD.21H BASIN S YO11Z 9��cvEG c/� Nag" t,/.9-54,-, _ C__ ,P.u,00ip Qoe /cle-r; = /li/✓/cf/t-c /ec-T siTy . - = /bet?, .7A) tf is /-_ 42 /1e/ C- = O. /o r/eO,, Pilo' ....27--/e p-6/254.7 .t3'44 r ,27 9 = , 9i// a D45c72 cw ]%( of ct W Cci4/7/2,4)?.),J / 8 0./ -c) L1// 5 %j T /, S (/. / -./o ) Z')wa/2.G T= / 23 (1.. o )(47.,>) //57 . 63 M/.'comes Cz/a 9 - ./on 9X 4-9 9 = 44-1 ccs RzIK 0ISC4-41A1.CsS QJ CLIENT IJ/r(3V/4/J JOB HO. 79-f -F).JG —0)33 MAGUIRE PROJECT HH.M.P2c) PAPA- (,rsr CALCULATIONS FOR PRPI,)Rar _ Archiacb• Engineers •Planners MADE BY 37,F DATE Stn 79 CHECKED BY DATE SHEET OF 1102SN 13AS N icA%/o,JAt r16m9P Joo YR. : IEVELo/0ED - ,voe)P. 23gsi,) - vs/,v4 _ 9 = crA 101.167e.erC= . 35 f1-_ Sia ;... .. ._ r. _ /A4 5/7 /N 3O y,.vuT /.vacctlesv73 1 = 35 Ni.) 97 e,q 0v/z/977oJJ iAfTE7J5/7y .49e7?-/t RvwoFic. 3S 2.93 64.57 40 2.68_ 59. o7 .60 2,03 44:74 9O /. 5 Z 33.5-0 . / t o 1. 2-3 22 11 /So 403 22.90 /30 . 9a- ?_O,ZB zip _.. .80 )7.63.. 240 . 70 15.45 Z-2o (oO 13. ZZ . CLIENT tlJ tF- - JOB No7)-/---F=/k-)fn -0i3a MiqMAGUIRE PROJECT }}/(.) )O PARK IA,P5T CALCULATIONS FOR DPA;13Pfo! — Architects• Engineers •Planners MADE BY J C+F DATE -S'/1'7� -CHECKED BY DATE SHEET OF P15a1M.C4E /n) C/5 NV1 f's 0O O o O 0 1 I $ . . 1 I. P, t- H.... h �_ ._ ._ o I r • • • i, OM ._ 1 : ' ! . - ' --- - . I Iii . r. _ } 4,41 {k. . rv4x . gasp is I . .. i. I fi P 1 SCI 6 ir CLIENT ith5:13 rreN JOB No. -/-EKG -OI'JJ MAGUIRE PROJECT 1}/4HLRNn PARR, 4.oft.7— CALCULATIONS FOR n Res,/JA4r Architects• Engineers •Planners MADE BY 36 F DATE ¶)i-7°J CHECKED BY DATE SHEET OF (M. Fr) (Ac. Fr) (Ac.Fn) 5TogM Dultm'noA) SToR44 RuNoFF REt4zose Ft.ow REguJReD. STo24GE. 3S _ 311 .053 3.06 4O _ 3.2 5 ' .00 3.36 3.70 .15'7 3.54 90 4.)r .34- 3. 3 I 4.4S . S2- 3.9C :J Sd 4.O . 70 3. 99 150 5.03 .88 `t, JS EJa S10 1.07 4,03 Z4v . S.)0 .. 1.25 3,8S- Z.7 0. 4.9Z 1,43 3.49 0 0 L In F u d us 4 L o (sdi) O AUao-mk ,L a- & Ode) r', c_eCI , (cdd) O ti ALIoa)3A - N Y (cdo) In rnSad L Z (4 ) - Alroa'a VJ u i w fro i! I a 0. 3/215 _-- -- i O4 (cda) F.. /aI-D.iebn Wan,,,none ! i ,i) 3do7C i ii (I,opdaNnJ • {I (vo(jbWNnS - , j(% )d>bnnd Z 20+110 CL (cs!&ddac'Ing N� a T Ln Ln 1g o le s H N od 12 IQ tl ui 4 O fM lV l+i 4 ; lrtZi; $ N1' PA in ll r.. MI c� r A� .r y,� I_^ �m yam. to a I .1115N3LNl tl t t roc NI vi ct ¢ t r%t t w 1 6 L I J� m In m m 0 03 m m d1 m d1 90.3 'dd.' ran H I^1 ♦1 .^ M A At N' A d to , al of ��ric$9• ✓3J M7J (4 I 0 `O M rr. In o O ^i 0 t • 4 C L do 'WIJ. aol 'N ct4. N a • - -:- '33 I do12 (raw) -- - . 3 w 3dld o z ('M W) L L33t/1S I Iv N f v I Ivls 1 ,.i I ('Niw) tJ — 0. r' N 0 tA h o N1 Om, 0. 1 ^I l O (1u) Rr r 31 w SNI5vfl �' a 3 ¢� R .vc a v V v S%) u e-; '411S..,c Cz 3 J 2 2 ° 2 2 1 ( P c a a ti N dl •cf- N 0 cc 6\ p .-Ia 1 J W° ° D SOUTH BASIN - CALCULATIONS CLIENT tor IJ,!AA) ring JOB NO. 17,-I -EJJ6 - 0130 MAGUIRE PROJECT H,WT}ILAAM) PRRk. IocEr CALCULATIONS FOI1 0RAIJ WE: Architects• Engineers •Planners MADE eT Tr*F. DATE.S-3D-79 CHECKED ST DATE SHEET OF .5ouTb+ 1045/1%) (//`i6O 5 - -79 ._ . a Fr 9 S _Y ER2 vPP JCLOP6D 9 c., ft, ,4 s 60 ACRD — -r_ 57.Osa1N .94 a.s (1.1-JOa-�y 3o I J L53o Is -e1•sho LENGTH" . ... -11-74:70- 1.tij 'xSo.3o 5s9 57.05 ,w°. Q 7- crR 9 = _ . 1 X .94 X60 9 = 5. 6o a.F-5 HA V. RELetse RATE CLIENT W E1J Fhtr,) Jo!NQ. 79-I- - 01-s C — EN MAGUIRE PKOJCCT kl&Nca lie PAR 1G wccr CALCULATIONS YOB nDA.ti)4GFF Mdhbc4• E.gin••rs•Marmon MADE BY .SLp DAT<s-14-?9 CHECKED ET DATE miter 1 or 3 RATID C METh01) J 44 t _ /00 YR.. OEVEGOPE77 — S c..O B9su1—RgDoE Dirt*, as/I/04 9= csfl — P.11/Re— C= _ . 3e _: -_ . A 39.5 AGac3 /.JTFiv.S/7 /N '70 N/NvTF /Al Ci2E JEeJZ5= .53 .yivv7e-> .5rogn oue09774o 1Nrrv'nv P62-A. Ru.oeF� 3S 2.93 a.zS - 40 Z.G B 00.39 Co 2.v,7 45.90 — 90 1.3-t- 34.32 . ._.__ _. 420 .. - __ -_- /.2S _ _ ._.. 29.51 L JSo ,-_ ha 23.29 /30 .9z 20,so Zjo e 3 18•09 _ Zffo .70 /S.83 2?0 _ ho 13.57 - CUCNT WEPWAa JOS No 79-I-@.JG -naks EINMAGUIRE PROJECT HVC.F1LAP0 PARK L2CST' CALCULATIONS FOR DRAMA94E MChHIICtS• Engineers•Planners MADE Sv T/-C DATE C-14-19 CHECKED ST DATE (J' SHEET Of V O O O W t O1 O i • i - E0 _ t o sc0oa wt ax o p o '- t L D' D to rn a o �� • U • w i A w W L V CLIENT L-"0 Ftitei Jos roo 79-I-r ci- l3o •-.. lert:g MAGUIRE .wo1ECT )}I sits A-17 PAI,e._ C-- 7 CA LCULJAY10Nf /01. DI2P ld•-)AC•,"" Architects• Engineers •Plannera MADE ST -El,1P DATE c-14-?9 C1tECKED s' - DATE ,SHEET-_oFy • DoTH 13$5i•-) --- A 00 c DITCH ' i - _ _ __.._....__. _ - 4. •i __l _$ToRm DuRArn - - _-S Marl RoAnsPP R.c °t3t Ft_ow ._.. _ Rc9ulREP . .5T H- _,._... �� _ I ! i i I i i s Air i i __fir l _1__ os. i 24_.. _ ._ . i i 79 ZZ. i t '— — _. ._ :._ x_...._13. �. ..! _i. . - ).417_,'. 1---b 1 ; i4 �44_ _ .._ _3.30.._ � - i • tio.. �_.. __. __ _ _ ._ .......• __1.3.9.0 i , i fi f° .— 3.� , 59 i ; I ' �!�_ SJL _ J.'S _ _ ,o i i • .` ! t -: H - °1 J•42:1_ ..- _: — �_. i __. .x.23 ._.. ._ --- _.__. ...._ 41, __,.._ _3 i _.. + .._ ...--- 1 rt 1 Z 4 i , Is • ' i i i i i I I I I 1._ _ _ _.- ._. .._.. - E . : , i r I t , t ' i i _. __...._. : I , 1 , 5 `?EA DEVE LOPED CA LCU LAT I OLDS jc I I p' o a I ^ ' ,ntiial 30. A 1 N E :: �� of o� o a _t it N I + N 0 t W e� 3e . ..it .ii... o (47 IC.aed u upon . . 11.... I .. : 11 (5 SO) i in p.11530 Tt wove led AI ta 610 fl .of 4 (5f2) S S R W 97cvr�on p h 3dois d` clowlHuns p � i ...of itio 11__JJ c O Adoring-CIn2l v'/ I t\I`t. N.i. N .e _ _L-2971 la ! Di 53b�V ..d, c. _ N �•t a 0 _. 1 I b'9?!V ;69,t ° V—' P h[IsnsLr/f • 30D 0 n P 03 ;419 n �0- i l r (MII>•nao(vo n J 0 4a 1p A J dO zmI.I. „1 cj 0 M to ..) .J N n — (`MW)W o I I I I I I o 3 Hdld t I I I I -.H ern W) N m r 13 a 1.992t.15' N, (" tit " m 1- 3N11 ./.31NI col eJ "it A. a i 14H17N3 7 . ..a. -. N. ,9 a ^l a ? 3 -N vh r- ¢y Q int- 0 �l�o I e �..l C ¢ o a m c w .. I ° 2 2 . J 0 O File contains oversized map Please see original file Hello