HomeMy WebLinkAbout20182710.tiffUSA BY SPECIAL REVIEW (IJSR) APPLICATION
DEPAR ENT OF PLANNING SERVICES 1555 N. 17TH AVENUE GREELEY, Co 80631
www_weldnov.corn ' 970-353-6100 Ma 3540 * FAX 970-304-6498
1
FOR PLANNING DEPARTMENT USE
AMOUNT $
APPLICATION RECEIVED BY
DATE RECEIVED:
CASE t# .ASSIGNED►:
PLANNER ASSIGNED;
Parcel Number 0 -64 - E ( -
Address of site:
Legal Description:
Zone District:
o
Lowr A - 3/40 c
Acreage: 9I.D2. to. Flaodpla r3: Y'�� Geological Hazard: YN) Airport p+Erlay; Y irsCi
VA 12 d ig is minter on Tax I D.
iinformation, obtainable at
w ww v e Idgov . corn .
Section: I 1 To vnship: N Range: 671
FEE DA/NEWS) OF THE PROPERTY:
Name
RiCeirk i4 r11i7'
I
ling gel I C t
Company.
Phone _ ' ' - "5"4-1. r (.1to 44“
Street Address:
City/State/Zip Code:
Name
ihrliarrnnitStrie
Ennesii.
1r
(-sire et CD reo
Company:
Phone
Street Address:
Email:
City/State/Zip Code:
Name:
Company:
Phone #:
Email:
Street Address:
City!State!Zip Code:
APP LICNT OR AUTHORIZED AGENT (See below Authorization must acconpanyall applications signed byAuTor'zed Agents)
Name.
Company:
Phone #:
A
Street Address:
City/SLate/Zip Code;
PROPOSED USE:
Email:
\2:41r seratkot 41/4E6-4
*Pau
I (We) hereby depose and state under penalties of perjury that all statements, proposals, and/or plans submitted with or
contained within the application are true and correct to the bests f nny (our)knowledge. Signatures of all fee owners of property
mustsign this application, If an Authorized Agent signs, a letter of authorition from all fee owners must be included with the
plication, If a corporation is the fee owner, notarized evidence must be Included indicating that the signatory has to legal
uthority to ,ign for the corporation.
(2‘a-ALAL_Areinr--x
0''?O Wt
Signature: Owner or Authorized Agent Date Signature: Owner or Authorized Agent Date
Print Name
( es Iw s..) 1"4.x-rti^rZ_
Print Name
Rev 4/2016
Authorization to Act
June 22, 2018
Weld County Planning Department
1555 N 17th Aye,
Greeley. CO 60631
Attn: Kim Ogle, Planner
This letter is being sent by Richard Dumm and Jean C Dumm on behalf of Richard Dumm,, JR and Marcie
Harrison-Dumm_ We grant full permission and authorization for them to act on our behalf in the
development of the property and proposed USR at the location 10027 Well 70, Windsor, Colorado
80550.
Kind Regards,
Richard Durrn
Jean C Dumm
Date
Date
(ern 2:2-4 it3
Pre -Application Review Request (Additional Pages)
This is the existing property shown as Parcel 080711300039 11 6N 67W
10027 WCR 70 at the intersection of WCR 21 and 70
Planning Questions:
1. Proposed Use of the Property: Owner is the current proprietor of Dairy Tech Inc located 4 miles
East at 34824 WCR 29, Greeley. At this location we received a USR for this Ag Zoned property so
that we could engage in our business of developing and manufacturing small machines and
consumable products to be used by the dairy industry for the feeding and husbandry of calves.
In the past few years since that approval we have outgrown the capacity of our building and we
are also limited by the number of employees we can have on the premises due to the septic
system limitations. The owner also resides at the CR 29 location and does not wish to expand
the buildings further on this property. The 3.02 acres at the CR 70 location offers plenty of space
for the growing needs of the company. The existing small home on the property will be utilized
for security housing for an employee. The existing garage and horse stalls/coop may persist
directly to the north of the home but the remaining structures on the property would be
demolished to make room for a new facility. The rendering below shows an approximate detail
of the proposed use.
2. Weld County Code Comprehensive Plan:
The proposed USR is an exciting addition to the agricultural comprehensive plan for Weld County.
First and foremost, Weld has a long tradition of protecting the property rights of the owners and
offering a broad protection so that owners can work within reasonable limits to secure their future
by using their property as they see fit. Equally important in this hugely agricultural county is the
drive to protect the farmers,ranchers and other agri-businesses as they grow and diversify.
Unfortunately it is difficult for all existing farms to stay in business without expansion or access to
larger parcels of ground. The farm that this property is located on was recently developed into
housing and schools but still part of a patchwork of other ag properties that continue to offer crops
and small farms a chance to thrive. By creating our agribusiness at this location, we can continue the
trend set in Weld county to protect this way of life. This small 3 acre parcel is useless for farming or
creating CAFO for livestock, but still offers plenty of space for a supportive business such as ours. We
cherish the Ag zoning of our property which enables us to build products critical to the dairy
industry while also maintaining the small but important touches with the animals we represent. By
being able to have a calf or two on property for demonstrations, education and product
development, we can continue to be a valuable resource to weld county agriculture without having
to cut up some larger, more valuable property elsewhere. It is also reasonable to project that small
agri-businesses such as ours will become an even more important teaching tool for future
generations to remember where their sustenance comes from.
Of course agricultural development must also consider the need for some areas to become utilized
for urban development. As our industries grow so does our need for homes and schools. We feel
that our proposed usage for the property will maintain the feel and look of agriculture without
posing any risks to our urban neighbors. We suspect that there will be opportunities to educate the
children of the neighboring school about what it is we do in that large barn outside their fence. Our
company currently does such classes with students from CU animal science and veterinary
programs. The chance to learn about calf husbandry and to see a live calf or two could be a rarity for
some of these students. We look forward to being good neighbors for the community and already
have a track record for such at our current location only a few miles away.
Chapter 23: By working with the planning department through the various requirements and
goals outlined in Chapter 23 Section 2 of the Weld County Code, we are pleased to know that
our intended business use for this property falls well within the goals set forth in this section.
4. Surrounding Land Uses: The section of ground immediately west of the property is agricultural
farm ground mostly growing corn, wheat and sugar beets for the past decades. Immediately
East of the property is the track field for the Severance Middle School, which then gives way to
more small farms and farmland as you continue East. To the south is agricultural property that
was most recently a hog farm with some crops but currently not in production or obvious
development. To the north is open space for the school followed by urban housing
development. Our proposed use is an efficient blend of surrounding uses as we seek to
incorporate our agri-business into the community while offering no objectionable impediments
to the urban development.
Business hours are typically Mon -Friday 8-5.
Employee numbers will range from 12-20 full time although some sales positions will rarely
office at this location.
7. At the current time only a single shift is proposed
8. Only employees will use this site. There will be from time to time visitors to the business but
current levels do not exceed 1 visit per day. Shipment vehicles deliver and retrieve packages
daily and we expect to have approximately 2 tractor trailers per day and 4 visits by smaller size
delivery trucks per day. There are not routine retail sales from the location.
9. Our current location houses small pens for dairy calves that are used from time to time in the
development of new products. These will continue to be housed at the CR 29 location and we
do not expect to have regularly housed cattle on the CR 70 property. Currently there are a
couple of beef animals on the property and from time to time we may find it necessary to bring
a calf or two onto this property for pictures, short videos or training sessions. The Ag
designation of this property is important to us. No production -level animal use is proposed for
this property. Dairy animals will not be milked, bred or raised in large numbers on this property.
10. The proposed new building will be 12,600ft2, gambrel barn wood framed construction with
concrete floors. Existing house is 1,160ft2 block construction built in 1909 in very good
condition. Building total square footage on property = approx. 14,000ft
Proposed parking and drive and turn lots of crushed asphalt = approx. 32,500ft
Remaining dirt and grass = approx. 84,000ft
11. Proposing 20 parking spaces with 2 spaces ADA compliant
12. Existing landscaping consists of mature trees, mowed lawn and fenced pasture. Proposed
landscaping for the completed project will consist of a mowed/irrigated lawn at the property
entrance and surrounding the existing residence. Remaining landscaping will include deciduous
trees around the building, any required retention area as well as fenced in remaining pasture
area.
13. Fencing for the property will include 2 rail board fencing 4' high centered 12' on posts.
14. No proposed screening for parking areas other than planted trees and shrubs for windbreak
15. No reclamation requirements at any time for the proposed use. The facility will have multiple
possible uses.
16. Windsor -Severance Fire Protection District ... Severance Fire hall is closest.
17. Improvements: we will remove the two existing tractor sheds upon approval of USR and then
commence with construction of the new building, landscaping to include removal of old trees
and planting of young trees and shrubs around the building. Grass to be planted in the front
entrance where signage will be located. Remaining landscaping TBD.
Engineering Questions:
1. We expect average of 2 round trips per day for semi -trucks and 3 round trips per day for tandem
delivery trucks such as typical UPS vehicles. Passenger cars of employees and visitors will
number 15-20 round trips per day.
2. There are currently 2 access points from the south entrance to the property from CR 70. We
expect to maintain the east entrance only for the security residence. All truck and employee
traffic would enter the property from the west entrance where we can ensure a safe distance
from the crossroads as well as prevent any tree obstructions. Once on the property we will
create a lot large enough for trucks to turn on the property so that there will be no requirement
for backing onto or off of the property.
3. We predict that the predominant travel routes will be 50% from the West on CR 70; 25% from
the south on CR 21 and 25% from the north on CR 21.
4. Our highest traffic will occur with employees coming and going at Sam and 5pm
5. The property does not have a low spot where water accumulates. There is a gentle but distinct
slope from west to east. Drainage exists along the entire west border of the property as a well
defined and maintained irrigation ditch and directs water further west on the north side of CR
70 until it goes under the road in the large culverts placed for the development of the Middle
School property.
6. Drainage plan included along with design of retention pond.
Environmental Health Questions:
1. The property is already supplied by a water tap serviced by NorthWeld Water. There is an
existing well on the property the status of which is not known but not currently in use.
Currently there is a septic system servicing the home and we would propose to leave this system
active for this purpose only. This would not be adequate for the new facility and we would
therefore need to redesign a larger septic system or tap into the sewer system if it is within
reasonable range of the property.
3. Storage and warehousing would exist only within the confines of the proposed building.
4. N/A
5. N/A
6. N/A
7. Floor drainage to be designed on the plumbing layout per current code. TBD upon approval of
USR
R. No air emissions
9. N/A
10. N/A
Building Questions:
1. Proposed new building would be @12,600ft2. Pole barn construction with concrete floors.
Offices housed on the second floor of the gambrel barn style architecture. Existing home would
be salvaged for on -site employee/security 1,160ft2 block construction 2 brrn/1 ba home along
with detached single car garage.
2. Only the home and its single car garage will be used with this USR. All other buildings including
the 2 main tractor sheds will be demolished.
3. Security house for the existing home and the new large building would be used for
manufacturing of dairy equipment. Our manufacturing processes do not require any specialized
equipment that would create noise or other pollutants. There are no harmful gases, liquids or
other hazardous products used in our processes. Only hand tools and routine packaging
processes.
Above is an approximate image of the style building we propose to build. It is suited for our business and
also will bring an attractive rural view to the area that will be pleasing to our neighbors.
Notice of Inquiry
Development within a Coordinated Planning Agreement
or Intergovernmental Agreement (CPA or IGA) Boundary
Date of
Inquiry
10/612017
Municipality
with
CPA or ICAO
Windsor CPA
Name of
Person
Inquiring
Richard Dumm
Property Owner
Richard Dumm, et.
al*
Planner
Kim
Ogle
kogle@weldgov.com
Legal
Description
Lot A RE
3615
Parcel
Number
7.1143'OO039
Nearest
Intersection
CR 21 at
CR 70 -
ASR
for a Commercial
Agricultural
Business
The above person inquired about developing a property inside your designated CPA or IGA boundary. This person
has been referred to community by Weld County Planning to discuss development options on this site, visit
chapter 19 of the Weld County Code for specifics on your agreement.
Weld County Comments
Name/Title of Municipality Representative algri9 Ili � of � � O996re abarl 01/4 r'`�06
CAM TM:44SC-
Municipality Comments
Ea-els M'FuCtttOk!l paR CFA a sit -Vasa- Y0IA
Kim Ogle
siened by lam 000
Dale 2017a31 tt3;39.6"00'
Signature of Weld CountyPlanner Signature of Municipality Representative
Please return the signed form by to:
Weld County Planning Department
155$ N 17th Avenue, Greeley, CO 80631
(970) 353-61004540 ^' (970)304-6498 fax
Notice of Inquiry
Development within a Coordinated Planning Agreement
or Intergovernmental Agreement (CPA Cr- GA) Kc ttndar-y
Date of Inquiry
10/6/2017
Municipality
with
CPA
or IGA
Severance CPA
Name
of
Person
Inquiring
Richard Dumm
Property
Owner
Richard
Du 11.r . et,
r
a1.
Planner
Kim Ogle
_9
kogle@weldgov.com
�
e@weldgov.com
Legal
Description
Lot
A
RE -3615
Parcel
Number
0807-11-3-00-039
Nearest
intersection
CR
21
at
CR 70
Type
of
I
qu
r
IUSRfora
Commercial
Agricultural
Business
The above person inquired about developing a property inside your designated CPA or IGA boundary. This person
has been referred to community by Weld County Planning to discuss development options on this site. Visit
Chapter 19 of the Weld County Code for specifics on your agreement.
Weld County comments
Name/Title of Munieipalaty Representative r'
Municipality Comments
\Jrc$ Nat,a r -u,
rir
t----i,c.i 7 O I tib , -4 &HI% I i�� �,riej-j of S; LAI t. ffe ; r
Kim Ogle
it . 9, e Fast_ '- , -
flquay signell by Kim Ogle
Date 2017.0831 &Z;a9 MIN'
Signature of Weld County Planner
Signature of Municipality Representative
Please return the signed form by to:
Weld County Planning Department
1555 N 17th Avenue, Greeley, CO 80531
(970)353-6100 x3540 a (970)304-6498 lax
FINAL DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT
FOR
DAIRY TECH INC.
FINAL DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT
FOR
DAIRY TECH, INC
Prepared for:
Rick Dumm
PO Box 250
Severance, CO 80546
Prepared by:
North Star Design
700 Automation Drive, Unit I
Windsor, Colorado 80550
(970) 686-6939
March 7, 2018
Job Number 383-01
North Star
a.■,. design
700 Automation Drive, Unit I
Windsor, CO 80550
Phone: 970-686-6939
Fax: 970-686-1188
March 7, 2018
D o n Dunker
Weld County Public Works Department
PO Box 758
Greeley, CO 80632
RE: Final Drainage Report for Dairy Tech, Inc.
Dear Don:
I am pleased to submit for your review and approval, this Final Drainage Report for Dairy Tech,
Inc. I hereby certify that this report for the drainage design of the Dairy Tech site was prepared
by me (or under my direct supervision) in accordance with the provisions of the Weld County
Storm Drainage Criteria for the owners thereof.
I appreciate your time and consideration iii reviewing this submittal. Please call if you have any
questions.
Patricia Kroetch, PE
North Star Design, Inc.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE of CONTENTS
1. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
1 1 Location 1
1.2 Description of Property 1
2. DRAINAGE BASIN
2.1 Basin Description
2.2 Sub -Basin Description 2
3. DRAINAGE DESIGN CR
TERIA
3.1 Regulations 2
3.2 Development Criteria Reference and Constraints 2
3.3 Hydrologic Criteria 3
3.4 Hydraulic Criteria 3
DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN
4.1 General Concept 3
4.2 Specific Flow Routing 4
4.3 Drainage Summary 4
5. CONCLUSIONS
5.1 Compliance with Standards .4
5.2 Drainage Concept 5
6. REFERENCES S
APPENDICES
A Site Maps
I Hydrologic Computations
Detention Calculations
D Figures and Tables
1. GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
1.1. Location
The Dairy Tech site is located in Weld County at the northwest corner of the intersection
of Weld County Road 21 and Weld County Road 70. More specifically, the project site
is located in the Southwest Quarter of Section 11, Township 6 North, Range 67 West of
the Sixth Principal Meridian, Weld County, Colorado. The site is bounded on the south
by Weld County Road 70, on the east by the Law Ditch, on the west by Weld County
Road 21 and on the northeast by Rangeview Elementary School. See the Vicinity Map in
Appendix A.
1.2. Description of Property
The entire site consists of approximately 2.38 acres of land, most of which are to undergo
development. The proposed improvements on this site consist of a single building for the
Dairy Tech operation, gravel drives, a truck loading area, a parking lot on the north side
of the building and a detention pond. Two of the existing garages will be removed and
the existing house will remain. No new accesses are proposed on the south from Weld
County Road 70 and the two existing access points will remain. The site is currently
covered with existing buildings, gravel drives and a livestock corral. The existing
drainage pattern is to the east at slopes ranging from approximately 4% to 9%. The
runoff then enters the Law Ditch on the east side of the site.
There are no major drainages within or adjacent to the site. No portion of the proposed
project is within a FEMA designated floodplain area (see the FEMA Firmette in the
appendix). The soils on site are Kim loam per the Natural Resources Conservation
Service soils maps for this area. The soils have a Hydrologic soils classification of A
which indicate Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when
thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands
or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Groundwater
conditions are not significant on this site and will not inhibit development.
1
2. DRAINAGE BASIN
2.1. Major Basin Description
There is no known Master Drainage Plan for this site. The flow pattern within the
subject drainage basin is primarily from the west to the east and into the Law Ditch east
of the site. The flows eventually are conveyed to the main branch of the Law Ditch and
then south to Windsor and eventually into the Cache la Poudre River. This site is not
included in a FEMA floodplain, refer to Firmette included in Appendix A.
2.2 Sub -Basin Description
Based on the USGS mapping for this area and the topographic survey of the site, there
does not appear to besignificant offsite flows entering this site. The borrow ditches
along Weld County Road 21 will intercept the runoff from the west and the ditch will
intercept flows from the north and east. See the offsite drainage map in Appendix A.
3. DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA
3.1. Regulations
This report was prepared to meet or exceed the specifications set forth in the Weld
County Storm Drainage Criteria Manual. Where applicable, the criteria established in the
"Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual" (UDFCD), 2001 has been used. The only
deviation from the criteria being requested at this time is the to reduce the freeboard in
the detention pond from 1' to 0.40'.
3.2. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints
There are no known previous drainage studies for this site. The Rangeview Elementary
School exists on the northeast side of the ditch which is the most recent development in
the area but this site was not included in that drainage report. The proposed development
will not impact the existing drainage patterns around the site or increase the runoff into
the Law Ditch. Refer to the drainage plan for this site.
2
3.3. Hydrologic Criteria
Runoff computations were prepared for the 10 -year minor and 100 -year major storm
frequencies utilizing the Rational Method and the Town of Severance rainfall data. All
hydrologic calculations associated with the basins are in Appendix B of this report.
Storm water detention is required for this site and is being provided by a proposed
detention pond in the east side of the site. The detention pond was sized using a 5 year
historic runoff for the site and the FAA Method. Refer to Appendix C for on -site
detention calculations.
3.4. Hydraulic Criteria
The detention pond will have a concrete outlet structure that provides a plate for water
quality release and an orifice on the back wall that will restrict the release rate to the 5
year historic runoff which discharges into the Law Ditch. The 100 year water surface
elevation in the pond will be at 4816.60 with 0.40 of freeboard. In the event that the
outlet becomes plugged, the water will spill to the east, over the berm between the ditch
and the pond and into the Law Ditch as the runoff has historically done. Refer to
Appendix C for on -site detention calculations.
Permanent erosion control measures include riprap at the detention pond outlet into the
Law Ditch and grassed lining in the detention pond. Other erosion control methods will
be employed as the need arises.
4. DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN
4.1. General Concept
The drainage patterns for the offsite flows are generally to the northeast and into the Law
Ditch along the east boundary of the site. Runoff from WCR 70 will flow east over the
proposed gravel drive and into the Law Ditch as it has historically done. No driveway
culvert is proposed under the proposed driveway as there is no borrow ditch on the east
side of the driveway to accept the road runoff, The existing drainage patterns will be
maintained as much as possible.
3
4.2 Specific Flow Routing
A summary of the drainage patterns within each basin is provided in the following
paragraphs.
Basin 1 contains the entirety of the proposed development including the existing and
proposed buildings, concrete and gravel parking, landscape areas, the gravel drives and
the proposed detention area. The entire basin will either drain Swale B or to the detention
pond and be attenuated to the 5 year historic runoff. The 5 year historic runoff accounts
for all existing improvements on site including the existing house, three garage structures
and the gravel access areas.
The detention pond and all storm pipes and structures on site will be owned and
maintained by the owners of the Dairy Tech. The grass in the detention pond will be kept
mowed and any sediment will be removed on an annual basis. The outlet structure and
pipe will be inspected and cleaned on an annual basis. The roadside ditches will be
maintained by Weld County.
4.3 Drainage Summary
The drainage plan for the site will maintain historic drainage patterns to the greatest
extent possible. Drainage from the site will be conveyed to the proposed detention pond
via overland flow. The detained runoff will then be released into Law ditch at the
historic 5 -year release rate.
5. CONCLUSIONS
5.1. Compliance with Standards
All computations that have been completed within this report are in compliance with the
"Weld County Storm Drainage Criteria Manual" and the "Urban Storm Drainage Criteria
Manual".
4
5.2. Drainage Concept
Conveyance elements have been designed to convey developed runoff to the proposed
detention pond and to the Law Ditch using historic drainage patterns whenever possible.
The pond has been sized to attenuate the developed runoff to the 5 year historic runoff.
No off -site runoff will enter the site except for flows from the adjacent County Roads.
If, at the time of construction, groundwater is encountered, a Colorado Department of
Health Construction Dewatering Permit will be required.
6. REFERENCES
1. Resource Consultants, Inc., "Weld County Storm Drainage Criteria Manual",
dated April 1979.
2. Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, "Urban Storm Drainage Criteria
Manual", Volumes 1 and 2, dated June 2001, and Volume 3 dated September
2001.
r
5
APPENDIX A
SITE MAPS
'I INIT Y MAP
i
I1
III
in, inc.
tomation Drive, Unit I
ir, Colorado 80550
970-686-6939
f0-686-118$
�i
48 '.
�
N_f
i�\
j' /
f•
_-- •
\\ (
f ( I
30 15 0
l'' 1
30 60
I
a
I
I
+
\\
�\
\;`:
!
\`Y 4
\•\,
•. ��i I,t 1l 11 SCALE, 1" =
i.
f \ ,\ ti, \�• lt, LEGEND
R `.
�.
3C"
Ld
Q
n
I
\ x,'' \ APPROXIMATE
`� \ , cF,\ ', - ULTIMATE PROPERTY 90UNDARY
I
` t• \ 1- `,-' RIGHT (}F 1 DESIGN POINT
'
\ ti' WAY LINE RIGHT -Dr -WAY
+
I
_
• \ `� '• BASIN CRITERIA
\ •- EASEMENT LINEco
�`•.. �- -% \ •''ti
I
t
I
I
I• `�`•;~\} .\\\` ',
w'`;_ -• ' `.
0.26
6-95
5 -NR RUNOFF COEFFICIENT EXISTING 1' CONTOURS
AREA IN ACRES
Z
2
W
. • \ • ,\,
1 � -.\
49W EXISTING 5' CONTOURS
} 1-f . •\�`•
FLOW DIRECTION
I
I 1
-�
I `\,.�,,,1 PROPOSED I' CONTOURS
1
,` \
II #% '` \``� .`. %. ...-, MP FLARED END SECTION
- PROPOSED
4 I
'- 4910 5' CONTOURS
ICI
I l
Y'
11 I,"
I \m-i-c.�\\♦�‘,
I \-\\.\
PROPOSED BUILDING PROPOSED DRAINAGE PIPE
rj
EDGE OF
1
GRAVEL.`-..
' `
A
EXISTING DRAINAGE PIPE
'
'
II.
��
I{ 'y `\' PROPOSED 9ASIN 9OUNDARY
II
I
1
I
i
I
i753•9181
I
e
N.
E OF NI'
L
III
C
I N
f
Z
I:'
f...
C-41
\IIII.
OD
N
O
r7
II
Designed by: PPK
Drawn by: PK
•�
'
OD
' ,I FLOIWNE
DETENTION POND SUMMARY
1
•l t, _
4
Wq VOLUME REQUIRED
4,033 AC. FT.
:�
WO VOLUME PROVIDED
0.433 AC.FT.
LL
01/
(1
N1? ELEVATION
4815.40
5
1•f'
.---" 0 / jkgr k k
DETENTION REQUIRED
0.15 AC, FT.
)
DETENTION PROVIDED
0.15 AC,FT,
�j
100 YR HWEL
4815.60
1
I
t
1
I
1. v
}
MAX RELEASE RATE
1.6 CFS
et
j.
I
I
1
'
1
y` \ ity
11 \_..f\'
ttc,�,�,l},i�
ttw tc.-1,
`
.R` t
\q 4
.
,
1 1
y_
100 YEAR
CI
1
1
1 �'
�, HWEL=4516.60
DRAINAGE SUMMARY TABLE
co
1
I,
FLOWIJNEIiFrrr,..rt.",
p
W
�
O 1
BASIN
DESl_(ACRES)
AREA
C5
C100
Tc 5
(MIN)
Q5
(CFS)
Q100
(CF5)
J
I
I
N11
fi�
1
2.38
0.15
@A6
5.O
2.5
12.4
LLI
�"
I
° a-
HIST 1
2.38
4-06
0.41
5.4
1,6
1O,9
i el-
J'
c6(p]�
Qti'.�P K'k,ti
qEXISTING
A v,,
r��l�
EDGE OF
ASPHALT
1
1
c7
I
'I ,\hL1
t
FLOWLINE
�. F ,,
•
PROPOSED BUILDING
ION'I\I)"
01
' �. O
0
1f
8
\
�l
1
l
�
�
ff
x
R OF
B
� EERM 4817.00
K
NTROL PLAN
r
i
I
1'
ti '
/�}} q
2, 38'
/� rr}�
O.23 f' a
i t :, 4. } e
s �
— 20' SPILLWAY
�'�A • l ELEU=4 16 60
EXISTING
SHED
VII,
e
I'
'
x1
,.
e --.. _ } Y, L� "},�" f t �'.
..7\.!•
ry Tx,Y i COY' rf .,...1, 11 11
ir�r: a
; I
,.\ I;. , , 1
WATER QUALITY
OUTLET
4• STRUCTURE.
SEE DETAIL
I
`
\
\ I I
c I
1
'1 l
16.2 LF 12°
PVC AT 1.0%
SLOPE (LENGTH
r
/ /e-7-
e-7-1
/
1ix
l INCLUDES FES)
eryl
\ti,
V
CC CC EL
1
f•.
cri,
�-y
CD
_
I
:1?
BERM=4817.04
'
/LJ
x
1 EDGE6F 1
GRAVEL
. I J 5 1
—
RIGHT OF
EXISTING
HOUSE
I '
i
I
1�
f
•1
-
1 l ;
4
\ „
0 l 1 � \
WAY LINE
'1
'.
---
lit•
.�:`-�+-'
Ij
9.
i
O
EDI
1
I
•
4+
I
1
' `
I
, Ir
x ,
�$ t
{
, d \ .
VEHICLE TRACKING CONTROL SHALL CALL UTILITY NOTIFICATION
DE INSTALLED AND MAINTAINED
— r
- — o� CENTER OF COLORADO
�
+
- THROUGHOUT THE LIFE OF THE 517E
I
j
I
, t
t
y
I
i 1" +
I
I.
J
f
,}
�_~ � CONSTRUCTION PREVENT NTRACKING 1-800-922-1987
* Y OF DEBRIS ON THE COUNTY ROADWAY.
Y '' '~~ VEHICLE TRACKING IS REQUIRED
CAI 2 -BUSINESS DAYS IN ADVANCE
SHEET
! \
I I
ACROSS BOTH LANES
BEFORE YOU DIG,
.., ' + GRADE, OR EXCAVATE
'y ,\
++i';' FOR THE OF ERGRWN6
5
5
OF 7
i
:
FO
r..„
y / — EMBER UTILITIESARKING
` '
'�
" I\ t t J -
-�-- - '�?
ice
-.
..__._ ... .__ __
._, __..___._
___ .__
___....
M1
.. F
*
Y
M
Jo, {
l�1, ...r w (fly.'
^.i-ry
C,
EDIGEING OF WELD COUNTY ROAD 70
ASPHALT
"N
Job No. 383-01
Oh�E c1HE
OHE �E
en
N
40° 29 4511N o
40° 29' 38' N
0
0
N
A
Hydrologic Soil Group —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part
(Dairy Tech)
511030
5110W
511070
511090
Map Scat: 1:1,020 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet.
Meters
0 15 30 60 90
Feet
0 45 90 180 270
Map prujetion: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGSB4 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGSB4
511130
104° 52' 6" v
0 400 2945"N
iztT
0
104° 52'6"0/
40° 29' 38" N
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey
a Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey
3/11/2018
Page 1 of 4
Hydrologic Soil Group —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part
(Dairy Tech)
MAP LEGEND
Area of Interest (AOI) O C
Area of Interest (AOl) 1:24,000.
D CID
Soi is
Soil Rating Polygons
n A
I
A/D
B
B/0
C
C{0
0
Not rated or not available
Soil Rating Lines
�y
A
,duto A/D
B plows BID
r 0 C
,�• C!D
D
• Not rated or not available
Soil Rating Points
0
0
■
■
A
AID
B
B/0
0
0 Not rated or not available
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
. Rails
sarao
Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
Aerial Photography
MAP INFORMATION
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil
line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of
contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed
scale.
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts
distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the
Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more
accurate calculations of distance or area are required.
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as
of the version date(s) listed below.
Soil Survey Area: Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part
Survey Area Data: Version 16, Oct 10, 2017
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales
1:50,000 or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Mar 20, 2015 —Oct
15, 2016
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were
compiled and digitized probably differs from the background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor
shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.
USDA Natural Resources
a Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey
3/11/2018
Page 2 of 4
Map Unit Description: Kim loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes ---Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Dairy Tech
Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part
33 —Kim loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 362c
Elevation: 4,900 to 5,250 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 17 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 52 degrees F
Frost -free period: 125 to 150 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance
Map Unit Composition
Kim and similar soils: 90 percent
Minor components: 10 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of
the mapunit.
Description of Kim
Setting
Landforhm: Alluvial fans, plains
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Mixed eolian deposits derived from sedimentary
rock
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 12 inches: loam
H2 - 12 to 40 inches: loam
H3 - 40 to 60 inches: fine sandy loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 3 to 5 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Very I ow
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):
Moderately high to high (0.57 to 5.95 inlhr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent
Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 9.0 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Ecological site: Loamy Plains (R067BY002CO)
Hydric soil rating: No
USDA. Natural Resources Web Soil Survey
a Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey
3/11/2018
Page 1 of 2
Hydrologic Soil Group —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part
Dairy Tech
Hydrologic Soil Group
Map unit symbol
Map
unit name
Rating
Acres in AOI
Percent of AOI
32
Kim loam,
slopes
1 to 3
percent
A
0.0
0.3%
33
Kim loam,
slopes
3 to 5
percent
A
2.8
99.7%
Totals for Area of Interest
2.8
100.0%
Description
Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are
assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the
soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive
precipitation from long -duration storms.
The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and
three dual classes (AID, BID, and C/D). The groups are defined as follows:
Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when
thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively
drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water
transmission.
Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These
consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well
drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture.
These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission.
Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist
chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or
soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of
water transmission.
Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when
thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink -swell
potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay
layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious
material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission.
If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (AID, BID, or CID), the first letter is
for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in
their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes.
Rating Options
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey
r Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey
3111/2018
Page 3 of 4
LE
BASE INE
County
Y�
orated Areas
.0266
•
kaiva
SdisthZ
• a .. • It i •
4 • is • / • • "r. • • • ■
t • • • • t • Iit • a ■
i-s e a a• oat
• i a■ a Ste ♦
0 NE
• •f•;.,
} •4,+1,i.
r b s * ;e
T it, • • a `1
ft ■ . • • '• ■
• 1 , • • •
III • ■ • • •
*VIM •
M• 4 • • • • •
• * �I • • • *
• 4 Y 4 • 4 •
• s' i • • • *,
*Ratify
4 4 0 4 4} 4
k t 4 i • a a •
• Y aria • d • 1i
mama
• • ■ • • a ♦ a
si s a • • • • a s. ♦
Italia • • ♦ • •
• 4 M • • • • •4 s
i- t
r • a • I 1 e ea
4 a 6• 4 • ' 4 • R a
4.•4♦1' a I If ► W
♦
1 4 4 44 • �.
.P ,4. a * ■ i S i•
• • set • • • el
M T • ••• • 4 a,
r a • q • • Y+ •
s • • • •
a • a a in
Prie• t¢
1 4 4.•
4 • • t. V .i ♦ • V
I •_ 4
• q. It
■ a f
• • • • - --' •
• • • • • it 4 •
4 4 a 4 4 4 991
• • i ■ • • • •
■ s
a s r
• a • • .
• a. • .4 • • • 0 •
• a • • a • - • •
■ • S • 4 • • • •• •,
i • • t t ■ •/ • • • i
'a wean,'
ma a 6a gala
444164 4
f -P r • 4 • 4 •• 4 • •
n• a • ■ • t • • • •
ill -•••••••••
• • • • • • ■ •
.O • ■ • • •' • 1 •
d PROW as
a ■ • • • i • a 1
r r •
•• ■ 4
IF f
P
• St •
lit
• • • ■
St
■ • •
• n Sal
■ Si • a • ■
• • 4 • •
S. .. a
• a
4 ! N' •
• •, • 4 • 4
• • Or 4
■ e R• 4
IF •
• i i •
ewe - •
■ • .1 f
• , ■ ■
• ■ % •
i • • J •
• • I •' •
a • 4 4 • 4 a
a - • i :• •: a •
I! a • • • •• 4 .p •
44 ■ • • ' •I -• • •
4 4 • t• a •° i •
• i• i i i 1 k
a r • i •
S • • , •
• • ■ • • •
• • a , • • • • •
• • • •• • • • • • • •
• •r t •• Janata
• • 4 • • • • 4 94P
•
• • • •• • • • • • 4 • •
• • • ! '1 • • • 4 4 • •
■ • •• • t • • • k f • •
a■ a I i a■ a t• •.
f i f • • a ■ • a, • t • ■ •
• • • t a • • • t a t • f
• • •' • a ■ • a a' s Napa
• • • • •• • • • • • • • •
• • a • a a ■ • a a • • • •
• a ■ • • a • • i r. • a 4 • �•
a s s .a• •• • • • a i f • a •
# • • • a as • • 4 • 4 4 a • •
•• • f k 4 4• •• • • • i • 14 • • 4
I ■ 4 • •• • i • • • •• 4 4 • 4
i' s■ 4- i i i• k it -ins
a f■•••■ i 1 i a Sit •
• • ••bi a 4-94 i
•
cast'
• f 4• 4
• • 4 • •
• 4 'r
Ira
a ■
• M ■
rim
• a- --
• r
4 c #
4 • a ' P s 4.
• r e r r •
Oros T •4 r • s
• ■ ■ a • • • e
a • tit • • •
• • • • • • • •
• • t • • r •
• • • • • • 4
• • a a a- s
i • i t ✓' S I
4• • • 4 * a
I • • i •
at.
4.0 4 •
+ i a •
• r • • *
■ • t ■ •
• e a• ■ • •
it s f T • ! •
a • • SOUS
■ a • s ■ BOO
• • a • 4 • • •
r • • • ;i IN • • •
• • • E • ♦ • •
P• 4 4- •• • 4. 4
4 • • k I •• • • 4
■ i * i •• • i r • • •
• ■ • a a a • • ■ ■ in
■ ■ 'a ■ • s marl
p ■ • a. • a a • • ■ a P ■
■ • • • a a • • • a • ► •
• • * • • a
* PS
isti
4 M 4 I •
•••o
•
1 1 9 • IF • • • r • • f * 4
• • • •• 4 4 • • f a 4. •• • • 4
• i s i- i• s i• i r r• k i r s a
• • • • • • irs saws i • s Se
• ■ • s t i a • • s an " • • • • t •
4817
'41-4181.
• a a J i P • • • ♦ • •R•
• a.7112. '°� • 64066 44 • a •'.4
•� 4 Y•• a a t• 4S.
al t • 4 • i - • • IF
+ � ar R • ? f
• ■ e f a •• a • a
a: a a • • 4
leases
as a a • •
MAP SCALE 1" = 50x'
50 0 500
1000
FEET
hJl —TIRO
-+ a r • • a r'
C
•
PANEL 1501E
E
FIRM
FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP
WELD COUNTY,
COLORADO
AND INCORPORATED AREAS
PANEL 1501 OF 2250
(SEE MAP INDEX FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT)
GONJTAINS�
COMMUNITY
SEVERANCE, TOWN OF
WELD COUNTY
WINDSOR, IOh F t OF
NUMBER PANEL SUFFIX
080317 1501 E
MOM 1501 E
04024,1 1ra41 E
Notice to User: The Map Number shown below
should be used when placing map orders: the
Community Number shown above should be
used on insurance applications for the subject
community.
MAP NUMBER
0812301501E
EFFECTIVE DATE
JANUARY 20., 2016
Federal Emergency Management Agency
This is an official copy of a portion of the above referenced flood map. It
was extracted using F -MIT On -Lane_ This map does not reflect changes
or amendments which may have been made subsequent ent to the date on the
title book. For the latest product information about National Hood Grrsnrance
Program iced maps c=heck the FEMA rood Map Store at www.mse.fema.gov
APPENDIX B
HYDROLOGIC COMPUTATIONS
B
North Star Design, Inc.
700 Automation Drive, Unit I
Windsor. CO 80550
RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS & % IMPERVIOUS
LOCATION:
PROJECT NO:
COMPUTATIONS BY:
DATE:
Dairy Tech, Inc.
383-01
PPK
3/11/2018
Recommended % Impervious and c -values from Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual (2001)
Table RO-4, RO-4 and RO-5 included in Appendix F
Streets (concrete):
Gravel:
Roofs:
Lawns (Clayey soil):
Impervious
90%
40%
90%
2%
SUBBASIN
DESIGNATION
TOTAL
AREA
(ac.)
TOTAL
AREA
(sq.ft)
CONCRETE
AREA
(sq.ft)
GRAVEL
AREA
(sq.ft)
ROOF
AREA
(sq.ft)
LAWN
AREA
(sq. ft)
%
Impervious
RUNOFF
COEFF.
(C2)
RUNOFF
COEFF.
(C5)
RUNOFF
COEFF.
(C100)
BASIN 1 (PRO)
2.38
103,673
3,360
27,787
12,709
59,817
26%
0.15
0.23
46
BASIN 1 (EX)
2.38
103,673
1,030
11,876
5,229
85,538
12%
i
0.06
0.15
0.41
Fnaw.xis
Cva Q
TIME OF CONCENTRATION
LOCATION:
PROJECT NO:
COMPUTATIONS BY:
DATE:
SUB -BASIN DATA
DESIGN SUBBASIN
POINT DESIGNATION
(1)
Dairy Tech, Inc.
383-01
PPK
3/11/2018
Area
(ac)
(2)
INITIAL 1 OVERLAND FLOW
(t�)
C5
(3)
Length
(ft)
(4)
Slope
(5)
ti Length
(min) (ft)
(6) (7)
CHANNEL FLOW
at)
Slope
(%)
(8)
V
(Ws)
(9)
C,
Table
RO-2.
tt
(min)
(1 0)
to
4.4
t, CHECK
NOT URBANIZED
Total L
(ft)
(12)
tt=(L / 180)+10
(min)
(13)
FINAL
to
to
(min)
(14)
REMARKS
1 BASIN 1 (PRO)
;8
0.23
1.37
335
1
1.8
15.0
3.04
1 BASIN 1 (EX)
0.15
1 46
ski
2 J1
213
10.0
2.58
5.4
EQUATIONS:
=t.+t�
ti= [0.395 (1.1 -05)L ` ]/S'
tt=L
where V=C,* S,,„15
final t0 = minimum of t1 + t1
(Equation RO-2)
(Equation Rte -3)
(Cti, from Table RO-2 i.n Appendix F)
North Star Design, Inc.
700 Automation Drive, Unit I
Windsor, CO 80550
RATIONAL METHOD PEAK RUNOFF
(5 -YEAR)
LOCATION:
PROJECT NO:
COMPUTATIONS BY:
DATE:
Dairy Tech, Inc.
383-01
PPK
3/11/2018
DIRECT RUNOFF
CARRY OVER
TOTAL
inlet Capacity
REMARKS
Design
Point
SUBBASIN
DESIGNATION
A
(ac)
C5
T005
(min)
I
(in'hr)
(l;
(cfs)
from
Design
Point
Q5
(cfs)
Q5 Total
(cfs)
cck)
I
BASIN 1 (PRO)
2.38
0.23
5.0
4.61
2.5
2.5
Area needing detention
BASIN 1 (EX)
2.38
0.15
5.4
4.51
1.6
1.6
Allowable release rate
( =CiA
= peak discharge (cfs)
C = runoff coefficient
i = rainfall intensity (inlhr) from NOAA Atlas 14, Volume 8, Version 2
A = drainage area (acres)
Flow.xls Q5
North Star Design, Inc.
700 Automation Drive, Unit I
Windsor, CO 80550
RATIONAL METHOD PEAK RUNOFF
(10 -YEAR)
LOCATION:
PROJECT NO:
COMPUTATIONS BY:
DATE:
Dairy Tech, Inc.
383-01
PPK
3111/2018
DIRECT
RUNOFF
C- ' RI OVER
'Ii) nt1.
Inlet Capacity
REMARKS
Design
Point
SUBBASIN
DESIGNATION
A
(ac)
C5
TOC;
(min)
i
( i n.` hr)
Q{
(cis)
from
Design
Point
Q{
(cfs)
Q5 Total.
(cfs)
(cfs)
1
BASIN 1 (PRO)
2.38
0.23
3.0
5.77
3.1
3.1
BASIN 1 (EX)
2.38
0.15
5.4
4.51
1,6
1.6
= CiA
= peak discharge (cfs)
C = runoff coefficient
i = rainfall intensity (inlhr) from NOAA Atlas 14, Volume 8, Version 2
A = drainage area (acres)
Fl ow. xis 010
North Star Design, Inc.
700 Automation Drive, Unit i
Windsor, CO 80550
RATIONAL METHOD PEAK RUNOFF
(100 -YEAR)
LOCATION:
PROJECT NO:
COMPUTATIONS BY:
DATE:
Dairy Tech, Inc.
383-01
PPK
3/11/2018
DIRECT RUNOFF
CARRY OVER
TOTAL g
Inlet Capacity
REMARKS
Design
Point
SUBBASIN
DESIGNATION
A
(ac)
Clop
T005
(min)
i
(in'hr)
Qua
(cfs)
from
Design
Point
QI00
(cfs)
Quo Total
(cfs)
( c s )
1
BASIN 1 (PRO)
2.38
0.46
5.0
11.40
12.4
12.4
BASIN 1 (EX)
2.38
0.41
5.4
11.14
10.9
10.9
Q=CiA
C = peak discharge (cfs)
C = runoff coefficient
i = rainfall intensity (inlhr) from NOAA Atlas 14, Volume 8, Version 2
A = drainage area (acres)
Flow.xls O100
APPENDIX C
DETENTION CALCULATIONS
MINIMUM DETENTION VOLUME REQUIRED
FAA METHOD
(100 -YEAR)
LOCATION: Dairy Tech Inc
PROJECT NO: 383-01
COMPUTATIONS BY: PPK
SUBMITTED BY: NORTH STAR DESIGN, INC.
DATE: 3/11/2018
QD = CiA
Vz=T*CiA=T*' Q
V. =1 * Po#T
S = Vi -
Rainfall intensity from NOAA Atlas 14
A Crib. To pond
r
loo
Developed C*A
QPO
K
2.38 acre
0.46
1..1 acre
1.6 cfs
1 from flu, 2.1)
Storm
Duration,
(min)
T
Rainfall
Intensity,
(in/hr)
i
QD
(cfs)
Vol.
Of
In
V1
)
Vol.
V0
(ft)
Out
Storage
S
(ft)
Storage
(ac
S
-ft)
5
11.40
12.5
3744
480
3264
0.07
10
8.31
9.1
5459
960
4499
0.10
20
6.52
7.1
8566
1920
6646
0.15
30
4.49
4.9
8848
2880
5968
0.14
40
3.75
4.1
9853
3840
6013
0.14
50
3.16
3.5
10379
4800
5579
0.13
60
2.79
3.1
10996
5760
5236
0.12
70
2.49
2.7
11449
6720
4729
0.11
80
2.28
2.5
11981
7680
4301
0.10
90
2.06
2.3
12179
8640
3539
0.08
100
1.90
2.1
12481
9600
2881
0.07
110
1.77
1.9
12789
10560
2229
0.05
120
1.67
1.8
13164
11520
1644
0.04
130
1.56
1.7
13322
12480
842
0.02
140
1.46
1.6
13427
13440
-13
0.00
150
1.38
1.5
13597
14400
-803
-0.02
160
1,31
1.4
13768
15360
-1592
-0.04
170
1.26
1.4
14070
16320
-2250
-0.05
180
1,21
1.3
14307
17280
-2973
-0.07
Required Storage Volume: 6,646 ft3
0.15 acre -ft
Northstar Design, Inc
700 Automation Drive, Unit I
Windsor CO, 80550
(970) 686-6939
Det Pond.xls
WATER QUALITY POND OUTLET SIZING - NORTH POND
LOCATION:
PROJECT NO.
COMPUTATIONS BY:
SUBMITTED BY:
DATE:
Dairy Tech Inc
383-01
PPK
North Star Design, Inc
3/11/2018
From Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual, June 2001
(Referenced figures are attached in Appendix D)
Use 40 -hour brim -full volume drain time for extended detention basin
Water Quality Capture Volume = WQCV = (required storage/12)*(tributary drainage area)
MAJOR
BASIN
II
Trib.
area
(ac)
% Imperv.
Req.
(in.
from
Storage
of runoff)
Fig. SQ-2
WQCV
(ac -ft)
I
Dm]
(ft)
req.
WQCV
(ac
vol
*1.2
-ft)
req.
(in2/row)
from
area/row
Fig. EDB-3
AI
.
1
North Pond
2.38
26.00
0.138
0.027
0.90
0.033
0.30
Required Storage = 1*(0.91 *I^3-1.19*I"2+0.78* I )
WQ outlet sizing
.
From Figure 5,
for 5/8 in. hole diameter
Area of hole = 0.31 in2
# of columns = 1
Area provided/row = 0.31 in2
Area Required/row = 0.30 in2
Use 1 column of 518" diam holes
WQCV - REVISED 12.17.09
1
STAGE -STORAGE TABLE
LOCATION: Dairy Tech Inc
PROJECT NO: 383-01
COMPUTATIONS BY: PPK
SUBMITTED BY: North Star Design, Inc
DATE: 3/12/2018
PROPOSED POND VOLUME
100 year volume req'd=
Water quality volume req'd=
Total volume req'd=
WQ-SEL
100 -Year WSEL
0.15
0.033
0.19
ac -ft
ac -ft
ac -ft
Stage
(ft)
Surface
Area
(IC)
Incremental
Storage
(ac -ft)
Total
Storage
(ac -ft)
4814.36
0
4815.00
1,721
0.008
0.01
4815.40
3,589
0.024
0.033
4816.00
6,344
0.080
0.09
4816.60
8,109
0.099
0.19
4817
9,285
0.228
0.31
Detention Pond Outlet Sizing
(100 yr event)
LOCATION: Dairy Tech Inc
PROJECT NO: 383-01
COMPUTATIONS BY: PPK
SUBMITTED BY: North Star Design, Inc
DATE: 3/12/2018
Sub u erged Orifice Outlet:
release rate is described by the orifice equation,
Q. = CoAu sqrt( 2g(h-EO))
where = orifice outflow (cfs)
C0 = orifice discharge coefficient
g = gravitational acceleration = 32.2 ftls
A0 = effective area of the orifice (ft2)
E„ = greater of geometric center elevation of the orifice or dg's HL (ft)
h = water surface elevation (ft)
1.6 cfs
outlet pipe dia. = D = 12 in
Invert elev. = 4814.4 ft
E„— 4814.6 ft
h= 4816.6 ft - 100 yr WSEL
Cf, — 0.64
solve for effective area of orifice using the orifice equation
A0 = 0.222 ft'
31.9 in2
orifice dia. = d = 6.38 in
Check orifice discharge coefficient using Figure 5-21 (Hydraulic Engineering )
d /D = 0.53
kinematic viscosity, u =- 1.22E-05 ft2Is
Reynolds no. = Red = 4Q/(pdu) = 3.14E.+05
C (K in figure) = 0.68 check
Use d= 6.40 in
A. = 0.223 ft -
Q max = 1.6 cfs
32.17 in
act Pond.x s
Emergency Overflow Spillway Sizing
LOCATION: Dairy Tech Inc
PROJECT NO: 383-01
COMPUTATIONS BY: PPK
SUBMITTED BY: North Star Design, Inc
DATE: 3/12/2018
Equation for flow over weir
CLH3 2
where C = weir coefficient =
H = overflow height
L = length of the weir
3.1
V top bey
= 1
b
1
4-
pilID ellevation
V 100
The pond has a spill elevation at the maximum water surface elevation in the pond
Spillways will be designed with 0.4 ft flow depth, thus H = 0.4 ft
Size the spillway assuming thatthe pond outletis completely clogged.
Q100
Spill elev =
Top of berm elev =
Weir length required:
12.4 cfs
4816.6 ft
4817.0
L= 15.8 ft
UseL= 20 ft
1.24 Ws
100yrWSEL= 4816.6
SEL
Det Pond.xls
APPENDIX D
FIGURE AND TABLES
D
Precipitation Frequency Data Server
Page 1 of4
NOAA Atlas 14, Volume 8, Version 2
Location name: Johnstown, Colorado, IJS*
Coordinates: 40.3498, -104.9215
Elevation: 4841ft*
' source: Googte Maps
POINT PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY ESTIMATES
Santa Perica, Deborah Martin, Sandra Pavlovic, Ishani Roy, Michael St. Laurent, Carl Try+paluk. Dale
Unruh, Michael Yekta, Geoffery Bonnin
NQAA, National Weather Service, Silver Spring, Maryland
PF tabular! PF araohical I Macs & aerials
PF tabular
PDSbased point precipitation frequency estimates with 90% confidence intervals (in incheslhour)1
Duration
5 -min
10 -min
I15 -min
2 -hr
3 -hr
6 -hr
12 -hr
24 -hr
I 2 -day
3 -day
• _
I 4 -day
i-day
10 -day
20 -day
30 -day
45 -day
60 -day J
Average recurrence interval(years
1
2.88
(2.24-3.71)
2.41
(1.64-2/2)
1.72
(1.34-2.21)
1.14
(0.890-1.47)
0.708
(0.551-0.912)
0.422
(0.332-0.538)
0.309
(0.244-0.391)
0.183
(0.145:0.229)
0.107
(0.086-0.1.32)
0.064
(0.052-0.079)
0.037
(0.030-0.045)
0.027
(0.022-0.033)
0.022
(0.018-0.026)
0.014
(0.012-0_017)
0.011
(0.009-0.013)
0.007
(0.006-0.008)
0.005 ....
(0.005-0.006)
3.46
(2.69-4A5)
2,53
(1.96-3.26)
2.05
(1.60-2.65)
1.37
(1.06-1.76)
0.837
(0.651-1.08)
0.495
(0.388-0.632)
0.359
,(0.283-0.456)
0.212
(0.169-0.266)
0.127
(0.102 -0.157)
0.076
(0.062-0.093)
0.044
(0.036-0.054)
0.032
(0.026-0.038)
0.025
(0.021-0.030)
0.016
(0014-0.019)
0.004
(0.004-0.005)
0.013
(0.011-0.015)
0.008
(0.007-0.009)
0.006
(0.005-0.007)
0.005
(0.004-0.006)
0.004
(0.003-0.004)
0.004
(0.004-0.005)
L
5
4.61
(3.56-5.95)
3.37
1 (2.61-4.36)
2.74
(2.12-3.54)
1.82
(1.41-236)
1.11
(0.859-1.43)
0.653
(0.510-0.836)
0.471
(0.370-0.599)
0.276
(0.219-0.347)
0.165
(0.132-0.206)
0.097
(0.079-0.120)
0.056
(0.046-0.069)
0.040
(0.033-0.048)
0.031
(0.026-0.038)
0.020
(0.017-0.024)
0.016
(0.013-0.019)
0.010
(0.008-0.011)
0.008 (0.006-0.009
0.006
(0.005-0.007)
0.005
(0.004-0.006)
10
5.77
(4.45-7.50)
4.22
(3.26-5.50)
3.44
(2.65-4.47)
2.28
(1.76-2.97)
1.39
(1.07-1.81)
0.820
(0.638-1.06)
0.591
(0.462-0.756)
0.343
(0.27170.434)
0.203 .
(0.162-0.254):
0.118
(0.095-0.146)
0.067
(0.055-0.082)
0.047
(0.039-0.058)
0.037
(fl.Q34-0:045)
0.024
(0.020-0.029)
0.018
(0.015-0.022)
0.011
(0.009-0.013)
0.009
(0.007-0.010)
0.007
(0.006-0.008)
0.006
(0.005-0.007)
25
7.69
(5.88-10.8)
5.63
. (4.30-7.91)
4.55
(3.50-6.43)
3.04
(2.32-4_27)
1.87
(1.43-2.63)
1.11
(0.858-1.55)
0.798
(0.624-1.11)
0.458
(0.361-0.629)
0.263
(0.207-0.352)
0.150
(0.118-0.196)
0.084
(0.067-0.108)
0.059
(0_047-0.075)
75)
0.046
(0.037-0.058)
0.029
(0.023-0.036)
0.022
(0.018-0.027)
0.013
(0.011-0.016)
0.010
(0_008-0.012).
0.008
(0.006-0.009)
0.007
(0.005-0.008)
50
9.41
(6.96-13.3)
6.59
(5.09--9.73)
5.60
(4.14-7.91)
3.72
(2.75-5..25)
2.30
(1.70-3.26)
1.37
(1.02-1.92)
0.990
(0.746-1.38)
0.564
(0.429-0.777)
0.317
(0.241-0.426)
0.177
(0.136-0.234)
0.098
(0.076-0.127).
0.068
(0.053-0.088)
0.053
to.oa7-a.osa
4
0.033
(0.028-0.042)
0.025
(0.020-0.032)
_.....0.015`
(0.012-0.018)
0.011
(0.009-0.014)
0.009
(0.007-0.010)
0.007
(0.006-0.009)
100 �
11.4
(8.09-16.4)
5.31
(5.92-12.0)
6.76
(4,82-9/8)
4.49
(3.20-6.50)
2.79
(1.99-4.05)
1.67
(1.20-2..40)
1.21
(0.879-1.73)
0.685
{0.502.0:985}
0.375
(0.276-0.518)
0.207
(0.153-0.280)
0.113
(0.084-0.150)
0.078
(0.059-0.103)
0.060
(0.046-0.079)
0.038
(0.029-0.049)
0.028
(0.022-0.036)
0.016
(0.013-0.021)
0.012
(0.010-0.015)
0.009
(0.007-0.012)
0.008
(0.006-0.010)
200
13.5
(9.24-20.1)
9.91
(6.77-14.8)
8.06
(5.50-12.0)
5.35
(3.66-7.97)
3.35
(2.29-5.00)
2.01
(1.39-2.97)
1.46
(1.02-2.14)
0.823
(0.578-119)
0.441
(0.312-0.625)
0.240
(0.171-0.334)
0.129
0.093-0.176)
0.089
(0.064-0.121)
0.069
,(0.050-0.093)
0.042
(0.031-0.056)
0.031
(0.023-0:041)
0.018
=(0.013-0.023)
0.013
(0.010-0.0171.
0.010
(0.008-0.013)
0.009 .
(0.006-0.011);
500
16,8
(11.0-25.6)
12.3
(8.05-18.8)
9.98
(6.54-15.3)
6.63
(4.35-10.1)
4.18
(2.74-6.40)
2,52
(1.67-3.82)
1.84
(1.23-2.T7)
1.03
(0.695-1.53)
0.537
(0.365-0.781)
0.287
(0.197-0.411)
0.152
(0.105-0.213)
0.104
(0.073-0.146)
0.080
(0.056-0.111)
0.049
(0.034-0.066)
0.036
(0.025-0.048)
0.020
(0.014-0.027):
0.015
(0.011-0.020)
4.011
(0.008-0.D15)
0,009
(0.007-0.012)
1000
•
19,5
(12.3-29.8)
14.2
(9.01-21.8) ,
11.6
(7.33-17.7)
7.70
(4.87-11.8)
4.88
(3_09-7.47)
2.95
(1.89-4.46)
2.16
(1.39-3.24)
1.20
(0.782-1.78)
0.617
(0.405-0.900)
0.326
(0.216-0.469)
0.170
(0.114-0.241)
0.117
(0.079-0.164)
0.090
(0.061-0.125)
0.054
(0.037-0.074)
0,039
(0.027-0.054)
0.022
(0.015-0.029)
0.016
(0.011-0.021)
0.012
(0.008-0.016)
0.010
(0.007-0.013)
Precipitation frequency (PF) estimates in this table are based on frequency analysis of partial duration series (PDS).
Numbers in parenthesis are PF estimates at lower and upper bounds of the 90% confidence interval. The probability that precipitation frequency estimates (for a given
duration and average recurrence interval) will be greater than the upper bound (or less than the lower bound) is 5%. Estimates at upper bounds are not checked against
probable maximum precipitation (PMP) estimates and may be higher than currently valid PMP values.
Please refer to NOAA Atlas 14 document for more information.
Back to Top
http://hdso.n s.noaa.govth.d.sc/pfds/pfds_printpage.htr.l?lat=40.349 .lon=-1 04,9.1 &data... 2/7/2014
Precipitation Frequency Data Server
Page 2 of 4
Precipitation intensity (in!hr)
100.000
10.000
000
1.000
0_100
0.1)10
0SO1c
ear
PE graphical
PDS-based intensity -duration -frequency ODE) curves
Coordinates: 40_3498 n1O4,9215
•
a
e
4
4
•
;
0 ► f t S
f s s • a a a a l a a a
P * I't i d t 4 a' 1 t s
1'rits •wavs" rawa wain a•a• aoravaw.a•!yw a'ha aalr s.-a.raaa it's aaAi, a4aeatIra r.L - --
a r r a I a a f a f 1 )
f + • i s t • a i a
1 it I
a 'a a
r r 4 4 i 4 a 5 4 a
i ) a 1 • t f 1 fi 1
• a • a a a r f + )
! r t a t a i ♦ i
• •' - T • S !' 4 a P
• . a.Ir . a.. asaraa• a•`.via r•!.1• a a N... 'b sr. stra
t a r I • 4 a 1 a
f t I a i s I
a t 4 i • 1 4
ai a • a a a a a
• I a
a I a
a • 4 I
a a a a
a a a aAa a s at • Y a 3• a■ a a a • a a 4
5 4 a • a •
• I a ) a 1
t 4 a a i a
I a I 4 s 4
r • r a a a
ar 4 s I It s
4 • a a a t
a a a 4 It i
t • + a • r sc 4
aa-as#a. aria. a loan a I. apa .i wrap .p p am? ra1'
I a •'a••4. a.r • a p.. ♦ra
t I I s f a f a
r ? a 4 r a iA
4 f 1 i 4 ♦ s
a v a a s ►
4 r i t s 1 s
4 • 5 1 r
a a a Q 5 I a
a r I e• r a V
I t
100.000 as _
10_000
L000
03.00
0.010
o.i 1
NOANNWS/OHDIHOSC
-__._____ - -------'--SSG:.:: '-- _ -' -.__ :_: - - i. - - .: .. : __
i
r4
C C
r iMR f aar
PI 43
•
I
a •
a e•. .sa -*.ads* s •.
us
Duration
r
a.
a
e
a a
► • r • • 3 • r • r •
• •
a
I
a
•
a
a •
• a
• a
• • I•i• • 4 a a t a as! a 1-
* 1 >
a a ti
r S 1 I
. • . •
• a a I I
• a a 4 a
1' a I" I
a 1' - r •
ID to
to to
rint 0
a
•
•
•
a
a
I
I
1
a
t
to 03' a7 7 t
o 1 ¶0
6
N 10
r..ra • an
r
•
I
I
I ..
a
1 - • a •I
a
7
a
s
a
a
M a • a Y 4 J Aka. a a
♦
3
1
•
a
I I 1
I a • a a
+ i 4 ; 4
a s a i
a a a a 0
a a w a a
4 . • 1 r
4 a . 6
ve
�. .. •,_ss. ...tom
t.r •."v • .r - .�.•.. • g.
•
I
a -
r
a
I MP RIII a I
•
gassetaaari• nkr""" •
• • .., - _ "same•`"•!•
a . . . a
• r IIr r a• c• • I
• .• w 4 a •_ + as
a
I
emerthahlaala
4
•
a
•
a
2 5 10 25 50
•
•
I,
a
•
1
a
4
a
t ._.- - t
100 200
4
•
Y
a
500
1000
Average recurrence interval (years)
Created (GMT): Sat Feb 8 00:34:55 2014
Back i9.14≥
3. a—
RIap
ato stax J
mesa� '; s.
ter' ?'
. ...- F.-._.... r.- - --re_ _ .. _ .- .. .•! IT _
.. r. ..
s-- ...... _ ::!•• •--. • _ - . •- a„s -gs 3
•
-` - - -
.. 2 •S• _ .. .._ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ r a - . • ••• _
•
Average recurrence
Interval
(years)
SOS
:Tarawa s
Bassos
2
S
. lm. 10
25
50
--a 100
ass 200
..-mew 500
now 1000
Duration
"la Sal
M'#
3O -min
a•�es6040,1
!�I 2
tathr
T Para, Tv
aria
. 2tea,
3aday
xamia 304a
as 4�y'� #}a1I
N4.0-0 50 YLY j
- - ..te• =a- ' .. - -
•
http;/lhd c.n s.tioaa.gov dscipfd pfdsaprintpage.1 tmi l .t=40a349 1on=' 1 ►4a9 15&data... 2/7/2014
DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) RUNOFF
2.4 Time of Concentration
One of the basic assumptions underlying the Rational Method is that runoff is a function of the average
rainfall rate during the time required for water to flow from the most remote part of the drainage area
under consideration to the design point. However, in practice, the time of concentration can be an
empirical value that results in reasonable and acceptable peak flow calculations. The time of
concentration relationships recommended in this Manual are based in part on the rainfall -runoff data
collected in the Denver metropolitan area and are designed to work with the runoff coefficients also
recommended in this Manual. As a result, these recommendations need to be used with a great deal of
caution whenever working in areas that may differ significantly from the climate or topography found in
the Denver region.
For urban areas, the time of concentration, tt, consists of an initial time or overland flow time, 4, plus the
travel time, 4, in the storm sewer, paved gutter, roadside drainage ditch, or drainage channel. For non -
urban areas, the time of concentration consists of an overland flow time, 4;, plus the time of travel in a
defined form, such as a swale, channel, or drainageway. The travel portion, t,, of the time of
concentration can be estimated from the hydraulic properties of the storm sewer, gutter, swale, ditch, or
drainageway. Initial time, on the other hand, will vary with surface slope, depression storage, surface
cover, antecedent rainfall, and infiltration capacity of the soil, as well as distance of surface flow. The
time of concentration is represented by Equation RO-2 for both urban and non -urban areas:
(RO2)
in which:
tc = time of concentration (minutes)
t = initial or overland flow time (minutes)
4 = travel time in the ditch, channel, gutter, storm sewer, etc, (minutes)
2.4.1 Initial Flow Time. The initial or overland flow time, 4, may be calculated using equation RO-3:
0.395(1 1- C5
5
(RO-3)
in which:
= initial or overland flow time (minutes)
Cs = runoff coefficient for 5 -year frequency (from Table RO-5)
06/2001
Urban Drainage and Flood Control District
RO-5
RUNOFF DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL 0./. 1)
L = length of overland flow (500 ft maximum for non -urban land uses, 300 ft maximum for urban
land uses)
S = average basin slope (ft/ft)
Equation RO-3 is adequate for distances up to 500 feet. Note that, in some urban watersheds, the
overland flow time may be very small because flows quickly channelize.
2.4.2 Overland Travel Time. For catchments with overland and channelized flow, the time of
concentration needs to be considered in combination with the overland travel time, tt, which is calculated
using the hydraulic properties of the swale, ditch, or channel. For preliminary work, the overland travel
time, tf, can be estimated with the help of Figure RO-1 or the following equation (Guo 1999):
cvs.,"
(RO-4)
in which;
V = velocity (ft/sec)
C,, = conveyance coefficient (from Table RO-2)
= watercourse slope (ft/ft)
TABLE RO-2
Conveyance Coefficient, C,
Type
of
Land
Surface
Conveyance Coefficient
C.
Heav
meadow
2.5
Tills
elfield
5
Short
pasture
and
lawns
7
Nearly
bare ground
-
10
Grassed
waterway
15
Paved
areas and
shallow
paved
swales
20
The time of concentration, to is then the sum of the initial flow time, t,, and the travel time, t1, as per
Equation RO-2.
2.4.3 First Desk n Point Time of Concentration in Urban Catchments. Using this procedure, the time
of concentration at the first design point (Le., initial flow time, ti) in an urbanized catchment should not
exceed the time of concentration calculated using Equation RO-5.
L
t^ +10
L 180
(RO-5)
RO-6
06/2001
Urban Drainage and Flood Control District
DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) RUNOFF
in which:
to = maximum time of concentration at the first design point in an urban watershed (minutes)
L = waterway length (ft)
Equation RO-5 was developed using the rainfall -runoff data collected in the Denver region and, in
essence, represents regional "calibration" of the Rational Method.
The first design point is the point where runoff first enters the storm sewer system. An example of
definition of first design point is provided in Figure RO-2.
Normally, Equation RO-5 will result in a lesser time of concentration at the first design point and will
govern in an urbanized watershed. For subsequent design points, the time of concentration is calculated
by accumulating the travel times in downstream drainageway reaches.
2.4.4 Minimum Time of Concentration. Should the calculations result in a to of less than 10 minutes, it
is recommended that a minimum value of 10 minutes be used for non -urban watersheds. The minimum t
recommended for urbanized areas should not be less than 5 minutes and if calculations indicate a lesser
value, use 5 minutes instead.
2.4.5 Common Errors in calculating Time of Concentration. A common mistake in urbanized areas
is to assume travel velocities that are too slow. Another common error is to not check the runoff peak
resulting from only part of the catchment. Sometimes a lower portion of the catchment or a highly
impervious area produces a larger peak than that computed for the whole catchment. This error is most
often encountered when the catchment is long or the upper portion contains grassy parkland and the
lower portion is developed urban land, -
.5 Intensity
The rainfall intensity, I, is the average rainfall rate in inches per hour for the period of maximum rainfall of
a given recurrence frequency having a duration equal to the time of concentration.
After the design storm's recurrence frequency has been selected, a graph should be made showing
rainfall intensity versus time.. The procedure for obtaining the local data and drawing such a graph is
explained and illustrated in Section 4 of the A INFALL chapter of this Manual, The intensity for a design
point is taken from the graph or through the use of Equation RA -3 using the calculated to.
2.6 Watershed lmoerviousness
All parts of a watershed can be considered either pervious or impervious. The pervious part is that area
where water can readily infiltrate into the ground. The impervious part is the area that does not readily
drly
allow water to infiltrate into the ground, such as areas that are paved or covered with buildings and
06/2001
Urban Drainage and Flood Control District
RO=J
RUNOFF DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1)
sidewalks or compacted unvegetated soils. In urban hydrology, the percentage of pervious and
impervious land is important. As urbanization occurs, the percentage of impervious area increases and
the rainfall -runoff relation changes significantly. The total amount of runoff volume normally increases,
the time to the runoff peak rate decreases, and the peak runoff rates increase as the area urbanizes.
in=a. --5;:a . . L._.! Anal _ - -
i �_L maw _L_Y - r ...••..••Boa —_ L. u•..• _ ••
imp•st.:r :. - •r. •..- •.. ..
m•
._sr s --� •••••••••••••• .
agar
.•c. . -...... nail • r -- -- a
•
s ..W. .Y.i.L.r arr.. as ammo ..
... .....,- .i. 1. .... ... . • , .....
- -'- - '-'-
LIPL
— _ ---_mac:
r:�-- S
.•-•.._....•. .• .. .. .. .. .. . . .. - r - . _ _ Y ZY
Tom"� 3 V•G S _
'. air
r.....Y.i. Lr !ma -
.bow.-_ TTr•.•-- _ T -• •. -' T 3J— Z-Si�S
ailemaim.lawsaa. =Isis
vs
• ..• .•� . . .. •'�T.. .. r. -r-r•. •..._•.-.•. •.. _-nw-.r... MII•IMAMILmalk .r•.� •. .• r.L•iYLr...L• _
•
TT�e+-.+' TTTT-I--r .. •... •
• boar .... _. _-_.r _.r -r -.•••..r. ..-. a:
.Trdy.T
.
_ .• .• .... -� ..
a
sag VS VS INF SW •
allshlalakimmollimal
vs as
aranamasaliimilim-Ti ! —Err- iT'.'T-.I-•=rw...+ii..fL•ii
.WY. lila.lislilmiLailohdla !Lam Y Ida 'r -W Les sin Liable Y WIii. Y -L. -L.. -.- am: :mar boy a •.. . • .•
ww r •. r.._r. u..u.
..-_. _ ___. _ • ....
. r ..•r. r
_ _ _ _ _ _-P� ____ __u i.._.T_.•r.r _ raw _ _ _ _•
.r.!. - .r..- ..-•�..r..-•..••.•........ .. .r •- .n..•.._..._ - ._... ... • .._.__rata._ .. ..-manna. ..__ ..r.
alliMilimiMmuu
. . tabor. may.•. ....... ...., .....r-.. ... ....... r. tar arau ar.rata r
..:.....:.. .L .:. .• .a r S _ .—boar w...r r..rr_—_r • .• .• .a r• .• An. •r --._—.—Mai ar.r r. war—.S--rrrrrr r.r V•6..v. YE r• we so boa r._--sabot-r.r.rarr
_ r��...Y•L.. _ _ _ uar• _ .r• _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _____ _ _ ___ __ _ _ _ _
�� m.. - _ .... - �....._ _ wr.r ... .. y -
sm. G.Tom— ?TT .-•..____. _•mama _..�.�. _ .-.. _._._...__. ....._ ._._ .._ -alai..mama ;.r -r• •••••••. •• _._ •._.. •._.-_...........r -r ._ _. _ ___ •.•..____
Photograph RO-2
Urbanization (impervious area) increases runoff volumes, peak discharges, frequency of
runoff, and receiving stream degradation.
When analyzing a watershed for design purposes, the probable future percent of impervious area must
be estimated. A complete tabulation of recommended values of the total percent of imperviousness is
provided in Table RO-3 and Figures RO-3 through RO-5, the latter developed by the District after the
evolution of residential growth patterns since 1990.
2.7 Runoff Coefficient
The runoff coefficient, C, represents the integrated effects of infiltration, evaporation, retention, and
interception, all of which affect the volume of runoff. The determination of C requires judgment and
understanding on the part of the engineer.
RO-8
06/2001
Urban Drainage and Flood Control District
P
DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) RUNOFF
TABLE ROs3
Recommended Percentage Imperviousness Values
Land
Surface Characteristics
Use or
Pm
Percentage
#erviousness
Business:
Commercial
areas
95
Neighborhood
areas
85
Residential:
Single-family
Multi
-unit (detached)
6o
M
Multi
-unit
(attached)
75
Half
-acre
lot
or
larger
*
Apartments
80
Industrial:
L
Light
areas
80
Heavy
areas
' 90
Parks, cemeteries
5
Playgrounds
10
Schools
50
Railroad
yard
areas
_ R 15
Undevelo•ed
Areas:
Historic
flow
analysis
greenbelts,
agricultural
Off
when
--site
land
flew
u.se
anal
not
sis
defined
-
45
Streets:
P
Paved
100
Gravel
(packed)
40
Drive and walks
90 qc
Roofs
90
Lawns, sandy
soil
0
Lawns, clayey
soil
0
* See Figures RO-3 through RO-5 for percentage imperviousness.
Based in part on the data collected by the District since 1969, an empirical relationship between C and
the percentage imperviousness for various storm return periods was developed. Thus, values for C can
be determined using the following equations (Urbonas, Guo and Tucker 1990).
CA _ A + 1.31/3 —1.44i2 + 1.135i -- 0.1 for CA?, 0, otherwise CA _(RO-6)
cry+0.85$13-0.78612+0.774i+0.0 RO
-7)
CB = {cA + cCD )I z
in which:
I _ °%4 imperviousness/100 expressed as a decimal (see Table RO-3)
06/2001
Urban Drainage and Flood Control District
RO-9
RUNOFF
DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1)
CA = Runoff coefficient for Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Type ieht soils
CB = Runoff coefficient for NRCS Type B soils
Co) : Runoff coefficient for NRCS Type C and D soils
KA = Correction factor for Type A soils defined in Table RO-4
Kao = Correction factor for Type C and D soils defined in Table RO-4
TABLE RO-4
Correction Factors K4 and Ka) for Use With Equations RO-6 and RO-7
NRCS
Soil
Type
Storm
Return
Period
2 -Year
5 -Year
10
-Year
l
25 -Year
A
50 -Year
100
-Year
C and
D
0
-0.101+
0.11
-0,18i+
0.21
; -0.281+ 0.33
-0.331+ 0.40
-0.391 + 0,46
A
0.081+0.09
-0.14i+0.17
-0.191+0.24
-0.22i+0.28
0.251+0.32
The values for various catchment imperviousnesses and storm return periods are presented graphically in
Figures RO-6 through RO-8, and are tabulated in Table RO-5. These coefficients were developed for the
fr
Denver region to work in conjunction with the time of concentration recommendations in Section 2.4. Use
of these coefficients and this procedure outside of the semi -arid climate found in the Denver region may
not be valid.
See Examples 7.1 and 7.2 that illustrate the Rational method. The use of the Rational method in storm
sewer design is illustrated in Example 6.13 of the STREETS/INLETS/STORM SEWERS chapter.
1
I
Ro-10
06/2001
Urban Drainage and Flood Control District
DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL (V. 1) RUNOFF
TABLE RO-5
Runoff Coefficients, C
Imperviousness
Percentage
Type
C and
D
NRCS
Hydrologic
Soil
Groups
5- r
10-
r
25- r
50- r
100-
0%
0.04
0.15
0.25
0.37
0.44
0.50
5%
0.08
0.18
0.28
-- 0.39
0.46
0,52
10%
0.11
0.21
0.30
0.41
0.47
0,53
15%
0.14
0.24
0,32
0,43
0.49
0.54
20%
0.17
0.26
0.34
0,44
0.50
0.55
25%
0.20
0.28
0.36
0.46
0.51
0.56
30%
0.22
0.30
0.38
0.47
0.52
0.57
35%
0.25
0.33
. 0.40
0.48
0.53
0.57
40%
0.28
0.35
0.42
0.50
0,54
0.58
45%
0.31
0.3t,
0.44
0.51
0,55
0.59
50%
0.34
0.40
0.46
0.53
0.57
0.60
55%
0.37
0.43
0.48
0.55
0.58
0.62
60%
0.41
0.46
0.51
0.57..._
0.60
0.63
65%
0.45
0.49
0.54
0.59 .. --
- 0.62
0.65
70%
0.49
0.53
0.57
0.62
0.65
0.68
75%
0.54
0.58
0.62
0.66
0.68
0.71
80%
0.60
0,63
0.66
0.70
0.72
0.74
85%
0.66
0.68
0.71
0.75
0/7
0.79
90%
0,73
0.75
0.77
0.80
0.82
0.83
950/0
0.80
0.82
0.84
0.87
0.88
0.89
1000
0.89
0.90
0.92
0.94
0.95
0.96
Type
B
NRCS
Hydrologic
Soils
Group_
00
0
0.02 I 0.08
0.15
0.25
_
0.30
0.35
0.04
0.10
0.19
0.28
0.33
0,38
100
0.06
0.14
0.22
021
0.381
----0.40
150
0.08
0.17
0.25
0.33
0.38
0.42
20%
0.12
0.20
0.27
0.35
0.40
0.44
25%
0.15
0.22
0.30
0.37
0.41
_.._
0.46
30%
0.18
0.25
0.32
0.39
0.43
0.47
35%
0.20
0.27
0.34
0.41
0.44
0.48
40%
0.23
0.30
0.36
0.42
0.46
0.50
45%
i
0.26
0.32
0.38
0.44
0.48
0.51
50%
0.29
0.35
0.40
0.46
0.49
0.52
55%
0.33
0.38
0.43
0.48
0.51
0.54
60%
0.37
0.41
0.46
0.51
0.54
0.56
65%
0.41
0.45
0.49
r 0.54
0.57
0.59
70%
0.45
0.49
0.53
0,58
0.60
0.62
75%
0.51
0.54
0.58
0,62
0.64
0.66
80%
0.57
0.59
0,63
0.66
0.68
0/0
85%
0.63
0,66
0.69
0.72
0.73
0.75
90%
0.71
0.73
0.75
0.78
0.80
0.81
95%
0.79
0.81
0.83
0.85
0.87
0.88
100%
0.89
0.90
0.92
0.94
0.95
0.96
06/2001
Urban Drainage and Flood Control District
RO-11
RUNOFF
DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL N. 1)
TABLE ROe5 (CONTINUED)
Runoff Coefficients, C
1 mperviousness
Percentage
T re A
NRCS
-
H
drnlo
s is Soils
-
Grou
----
2-yr
5- r
-10-yr
25-yr
50-yr
100-yr
0%
0.00
0.00
0.05
0.12
3,16-
0.20
-
5%
0.00
0.02
0.10
0.16
0.20
0.24
10%
0.00 ---
0.06
0.14
0.20
0.24
0.28
15%
0.02
0.10
0.17
0.23
0.27
0.30
20%
0.06
0.13
0.20
0.26
0.30
0.33
25%
0.09 ...
0.16
0.23
0.29
0.32
0.35
30%
0.13
0.19
0.25
0.31
0.34
0.37
35%
0.16
0.22
0.28
0,33
0.36
0.39 =
40%
0.19
0.25
0.30
0,35
0.38
0.41
45%
0.22
0.27
0.33
0.37
0.40
0.43
50%
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.42
0.45
55%
0.29
0.33
0.38
0.42
0.45
0.47
60%
0.33
0.37
0.41
0.45
0.47
0.50
65%
0.37
0.41
0.45
0.49
--0.53
0.51
0.53
70%
0.42
045
0.49
0.54
0.56
75%
0.47
0.50
0.54
0.57
0.59
0.61
80%
0.54
0.56
0.60
0.63
0.64
0.66
85%
0.61
0,83 --
-- 0.66
0.69
0.70
0.72
90%
0.69
0.71-
0.73
0.76
0.77
0.79
95%
0.78
0.80
0.82
0.84
0.85 ...
0.86
100%
0.89
0.90
0.92
0.94
0.95
0.96
RO-12
06/2001
Urban Drainage and Flood Control District
MEMORANDUM
TO:
DATE:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
PR.E17-0264; Case File, pre -application
October 6, 2017
Michelle Wall, Office Technician
Pre -Application Meeting prior to submitting
USR
Attendees:
Richard Dumm, Applicant
Evan Pinkham, Public Works
Jose Gonzalez, Building
Kim Ogle, Planning
Hayley Balzano, Engineering
Michelle Wall, Planning
On Friday, October 6, 2017 an informal discussion took place at the Greeley Administrative Offices
Conference Room regarding the proposed expansion of Dairy Tech Inc - a business that develops and
manufactures small machines and consumable products to be used by the dairy industry for feeding the
husbandry of calves. (The Legal description is Lot A RE -3616 being part of SW4 of Section 11, T6N, R67W of
the 6th P.M.; Situs Address is 10027 County Road 70.)
Background Information:
Dairy Tech Inc is proposing to expand their business that develops and manufactures small machines and
consumable products to be used by the dairy industry for feeding the husbandry of calves. They have a
current USR at 34824 WCR 29 and have outgrown their capacity at that location; therefore, the applicant
would like to expand their business on this property.
The applicant is proposing to build a 12,600 sf pole barn with concrete floors. There is an existing 1,160 sf
home and a garage on the property that will be utilized for security housing for an employee. The applicant
plans to demolish the other existing structures on the property to make room for the for the new facility.
Hours of operation are Monday - Friday from 6:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. There will be 12 - 20 full-time employees.
On occasion, the applicant may need to bring a couple beef animals on the property for pictures, short videos
or training sessions, but they will not be housed on the property.
Building Department
Demolition permits are required for any structures that are removed from the property.
Buildings over 12,000 sf may need to have a sprinkler system.
Building permits may be required, per Section 29-3-10 of the Weld County Code. Currently the following has
been adopted by Weld County: 2012 International Codes; 2006 International Energy Code; 2014 National
Electrical Code; A building permit application must be completed and two complete sets of engineered plans
bearing the wet stamp of a Colorado registered architect or engineer must be submitted for review. A
geotechnical engineering report or an open -hole inspection report performed by a registered State of Colorado
engineer may be required for new structures and or additions.
Pre -Manufactured non-residential structures may be required to comply with state Resolution 35.
A complete code analysis prepared by a registered design professional may be required, and shall be
submitted with Commercial Permit Applications to Weld County.
A Fire District Notification letter may be required and shall be submitted with Commercial Permit applications.
Building Staff recommends a pre -submittal meeting with Building Department to verify all requirements are
present.
Current Plan Review time is 20-25 working days. Incomplete applications may delay plan review timelines.
All building permit requirements can be found on the Weld County web -site:
www.weldgov.com/departments/building/building perm it/permit applications/.
Please contact Jose Gonzalez at 970-353-6100 ext. 3540 for further direction.
Health Department
Staff was unavailable; however please contact Lauren Light at 970-400-2211 for further direction.
Waste handling: Waste materials shall be handled, stored, and disposed in a manner that controls blowing
debris, and other potential nuisance conditions. The applicant shall operate in accordance with Chapter 14,
Article 1 of the Weld County Code.
Please answer the following if applicable; indicate if there will be washing of vehicles or equipment, fuel
storage, maintenance of vehicles or equipment, floor drains in shop, air emissions permit.
Onsite dust: Fugitive dust should attempt to be confined on the property. Uses on the property should comply
with the Colorado Air Quality Commission's air quality regulations.
Sewage disposal information: Include in application how sewage disposal will be accommodated. If using a
septic system provide a copy of the septic permit. Either utilize the County website
www.co.weld.co.usimaps/propertvportali or call (970-304-6415) or stop by EH front counter and request a
copy.
Potable water information: Include in application how potable water will be provided. Provide a will serve
letter or water bill from the water district or provide a copy of well permit.
Portable toilets and Bottled water can be used for employees and customers per policy below:
TO DEFINE WHEN PORTABLE TOILETS AND COMMERCIALLY BOTTLED WATER ARE ALLOWED
Purpose: To define when portable toilets and commercially bottled water are allowed.
Policy: Bottled water from a commercial source is allowed in the following circumstances:
1. Temporary or seasonal uses that are utilized 6 months or less per year (for example
recreational facilities, firework stands, farmers markets )
2. Gravel mines
3. 10 or less customers or visitors per day
And/or one of the following:
4. 2 or less full time (40 hour week) employees located on site
5. 4 or less part time (20 hour week) employees located on site
6. Employees or contractors that are on site for less than 2 consecutive hours a day
Policy: portable toilets are allowed in the following circumstances:
1. Temporary or seasonal uses that are utilized 6 months or less per year (for example
recreational facilities, firework stands, farmers markets )
2. Gravel mines
3. 10 or less customers or visitors per day
And/or one of the following:
4. 2 or less full time (40 hour week) employees located on site
5. 4 or less part time (20 hour week) employees located on site
6. Employees or contractors that are on site for less than 2 consecutive hours a day
Public Works
Staff comments for pre -applications are provided as a courtesy to the applicant. While we strive to help
identify as many potential issues upfront during the pre -application meeting we cannot anticipate every issue
that may come up during the formal application process.
This project is north of and adjacent to CR 70 and is east of and adjacent to CR 21.
ADT:
Latest ADT on CR 70 was taken on 5/20/2016 which counted 2747 vpd with 7% trucks.
ROADS AND RIGHTS -OF -WAY:
This portion of County Road 21 is under the jurisdiction of the City or Town (municipality) of Severance. The
municipality has jurisdiction over access to the road. Please contact the municipality to verify the access
permit or for any additional requirements that may be needed to obtain or upgrade the permit.
This portion of County Road 70 is under the jurisdiction of the City or Town (municipality) of Severance. The
municipality has jurisdiction over access to the road. Please contact the municipality to verify the access
permit or for any additional requirements that may be needed to obtain or upgrade the permit.
SITE MAP REQUIREMENTS:
A Site Plan will be required identifying the following (if applicable):
o Show and label location of existing road, existing road right-of-way, future road right-of-way, and
easements
o Show and label the unmaintained section line right-of-way
Show and label location of the access(es) and label with access permit number
o Show and label the access turning radii (Residential - 25' Commercial - 60')
c Show and label the approved tracking control
Please contact the following staff regarding the following Public Works issues:
Access Permits: Morgan Gabbert rngabbert weldgov.com 970-400-3778
Improvements Agreements: Evan Pinkham epinkhamweldgov.com 970-400-3727
MS4 Areas: Lyndsay Holbrook Iholbrookweldgov.com 970-400-3788
Right -of -Way Permits: Amy Joseph ajosephweldgov.com 970-400-3764
Engineering Department
DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS:
Weld County has recently adopted a new stormwater drainage code located under Chapter 23, Article 12
Storm Drainage Criteria.
A list of professional engineering consultants is available if you need help finding an engineer to assist you
with your project at the following link http://www.co.weld.co.us/Departments/PlanningZoning/Engineering.html.
Please contact the Department of Planning Services/Development Review Engineering for questions or
assistance 970-353-6100.
URBANIZING VS NON -URBANIZING DRAINAGE AREA:
This area IS within an Urbanizing Drainage Area: Urbanizing Drainage Areas generally require detention of
runoff from the 1 -hour, 100 -year, storm falling on the developed site and release of the detained water at the
historic runoff rate of the 1 -hour, 5 -year storm falling on the undeveloped site.
Detention pond summarized in a drainage report is required unless the project falls under an exception to
stormwater detention requirements per code section 23-12-30 F.1. To avoid holding up case processing, a
minimum of either a preliminary drainage report or a drainage narrative with exception as shown below must
be submitted with 7 -day case submittal information.
Detention Pond Requirements:
1. A Drainage Report and Detention Pond Design shall be completed by a Colorado Licensed
Professional Engineer and adhere to the drainage related sections of the Weld County Code. The
Drainage Report must include a Certification of Compliance, stamped and signed by the PE, which
can be found on the engineering website. A. general Drainage Report Guidance Checklist is available
on the engineering website. A Preliminary Drainage Report or a qualifying exception and Drainage
Narrative shown below must be submitted for review at the time of the application.
OR
2. Drainage Narrative requirements with exception from detention pond.
The Drainage Narrative must describe at a minimum:
i. Which exception is being applied for and include supporting documentation
ii. Where the water originates if it flows onto the property from an offsite source
iii. Where it flows to as it leaves the property
iv. The direction of flow across the property
v. If there have been previous drainage problems with the property
DRAINAGE CODE REQUIREMENTS (informational only):
Section 23-12-30. Drainage Policy. F. Exceptions.
Exceptions to stormwater detention shall not jeopardize the public health, safety, and welfare of public and
private property and shall be limited to the following:
No stormwater detention will be required for sites that meet any of the following conditions.
Requirements of the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (M54) areas remain applicable.
1. Use by Right or Accessory Use in the A (Agricultural) Zone District.
2. Zoning Permits in the A (Agricultural) Zone District.
3. A second dwelling permit in the A (Agricultural) Zone District.
4. Towers including, but not limited to, cell, wind, and telecommunication towers.
5. Pipelines or transmission lines.
6. Gravel pits if the stormwater drains into the gravel pit.
7. Residential developments where all the following conditions exist:
i. Nine (9) lots or fewer.
ii. The average lot size is equal to, or greater than, three (3) acres per lot.
iii. Downstream roadway criteria are not exceeded.
iv. The total post -development imperviousness for the rural residential
development does not exceed ten percent (10%), assuming that all internal
roads and driveways are paved, or will eventually be paved.
8. Development of sites where the change of use does not increase the imperviousness of
the site.
9. URBANIZING areas where the total project stormwater runoff of less than, or equal to, 5
cubic feet per second (cfs) for the 1 -hour, 100 -year, storm event.
10. NON-URBA►NIZING areas where the total project stormwater runoff of less than, or equal
to, 10 cfs for the 1 -hour, 100 -year, storm event.
11. Parcels with total area less than, or equal to, a 1.0 gross acre.
12. Individual parcel with an unobstructed flow path and no other parcel(s) between the
Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) regulatory floodplain channel and
the project.
13. A parcel greater than 1 gross acre and less than, or equal to, 5 gross acres in size is
allowed a onetime exception for a new 1,000 sq ft building or equivalent imperviousness.
14. A parcel greater than 5 gross acres in size is allowed a onetime exception for a new
2,000 sq ft building or equivalent imperviousness.
15. Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO), Animal Feeding Operations (AFO) and
Housed Commercial Swine Feeding Operation (HCSFO) which are covered and approved by
the Colorado Discharge Permit System (CDPS) regulations. Portions of the site not included
or covered by the CDPS permit, shall comply with the Weld County Drainage Code
requirements.
16. Approved by a variance. - See Section 23-12-150 Stormwater Drainage Criteria
Variances
Historic Flows:
The applicants will be required to maintain the historic drainage flows and run-off amounts that exist from the
property.
GRADING PERMIT:
A Weld County Grading Permit will be required if disturbing more than 1 acre. Grading Permit applications are
accepted after the planning process is complete (map recorded). An Early Release Request Form may be
entertained only after the applicant and Planning Department have reviewed the referral and surrounding
property owner comments. The Early Release Request may or may not be granted depending on referral
comments and surrounding property owner concerns. Contact an Engineering representative from the
Planning Department for more information. Application Fees: 1-5 Acres/ $50, 5.1 20 Acres/ 100, 20.1 Acres
or Greater/$200 + $1 per acre over 20.
A Construction Stormwater Permit is also required with the State for disturbing more than 1 acre. Contact:
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Water Quality Control Division, Rik Gay, 303-692-
3575.
GEOLOGIC HAZARD AREA:
This site IS NOT in a Geologic Hazard Area.
FLOODPLAIN:
This site IS NOT in a FEMA regulatory floodplain.
SITE MAP REQUIREMENTS:
A Site Plan will be required identifying the following (if applicable):
• Show and label location of drainage related features i.e. detention pond(s), ditches, etc... Detention
ponds shall be labeled as "No Build/Storage Area" and include design volume
• Show and label the drainage flow arrows showing how the stormwater flows across the property
• Show and label the parking and traffic circulation flow arrows showing how the traffic moves around
the property
CONTACT INFORMATION
Hayley Balzano
Department of Planning Services Engineer
hbalzano@weldgov.com
970-400-3552
Planning Department
Additional fees may be included with the Building Permit such as Road Impact, County Facilities and Drainage
fees. Please refer to the handout provided.
Screening of the parking area or outdoor storage may be required from any adjacent landowners or public
rights -of -way.
Weld County has a Coordinated Planning Agreement (CPA) with the Town of Windsor and the Town of
Severance. The Planning Director will contact the Town Managers to give notice of this pre -application
meeting. Staff advised the applicants to contact the Town of Windsor and the Town of Severance regarding
possible land use permitting including possible annexation. The Notice of Inquiry form was provided to the
applicant to take to each of the municipalities for signature.
Please identify any proposed lighting or signs on the Site Plan. Lighting needs to be downcast and shielded.
A 16sf sign is allowed in the Agricultural Zone District; however if there are potentially any additional or larger
signs please include those in the application.
Prior to submittal of the County land use application, please submit evidence of State permits as in the case of
Mining permits.
Staff urged the applicant to contact staff for any questions:
Planner on Call available Monday through Friday 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. or contact Kim Ogle at 970-400-3549
or kogleweldgov.com.
The applicant may be eligible for the Small Business Incentive Program (SKIP). Staff provided information
regarding the program. Please visit
https://www.weldgov.comldepartmentslplanninq and zoning/small business incentive program/ or contact
Michelle Martin at 970-400-3571 or Tom Parko at 970-400-3572, for further direction.
Staff provided information on Colorado's Enterprise Zone (EZ) program which provides state income tax
credits to encourage businesses to locate/expand in designated economically distressed areas of the state.
The Weld County EZ program is administered by Upstate Colorado Economic Development.
Staff explained the USR process. The applicant shall submit 1 packet for a 7 day completeness review. After
the 7 day completeness review the applicant will be informed of what items are still required to make the
application complete. Staff requested that the applicant submit the remaining material in electronic form.
Upon submittal of a completed application it will be sent out for referral for 28 days. The applicant will then
meet with their Planner to discuss the referrals and address as many of the referrals as possible. At that
meeting the Planning Commission hearing will be scheduled. The Board of County Commissioners hearing
typically follows approximately 3 weeks after the Planning Commission hearing.
The above notes are provided as a courtesy to the applicant. While we strive to help identify as many
potential issues upfront during the pre application meeting we cannot anticipate every issue that may come up
during the formal application process. The information contained herein has been placed on file with the
Department of Planning Services. The pre -application is valid for a period of one (1) year from the date of pre -
application. If a formal application is not received following the time period specified herein the Planning
Department reserves the right to require a new pre -application meeting. Please note that all land use, building
and impact fees are subject to change throughout this time period.
End memorandum.
Hello